You cunt! I mean, you dick! I mean...

[Brian Peacock]

That sentence reminds me of the plumbers explanation: "The fucking fucker's fucking fucked!"

[charlou]

Also, "tit", "twat", "frig" and "pussy" are not particularly offensive, yet they're female-related words.

Typical dismissive misogynist rape enabling patriarchal apologist.

[charlou]

Oh yes and some words which had no power now have more. Such things fascinate me. I mean which is worse, Nigger or Coon? Is Kike worse than yid? I mean I know they are all offensive terms but I could see a situation where you might get away with using nigger towards a black person (not that I'm saying you should, or), but I can think of none where coon would possibly be acceptable.

Why is "I'm going to rape you" unacceptable but "I'm going to kill you" common parlance and "I'm going to enslave you" heard rarely outside bad HRTotica?

It is obviously about social taboo rather than the words themselves and it does seem these taboos are often politically motivated. This is the contradiction, by making words taboo you give them the power you are trying to stop them having.

That's why I'm bloody minded about free speech.

I've found the interaction between my teen children and their peers refreshing .. they're thumbing their noses at taboos, calling each other (and anyone else if they feel brave enough - I've been called cunt and nikkah, etc, and thoroughly appreciate and accept the rationale behind the sentiment) the epithets they're aware of that have been traditionally been considered offensive and prejudice/agenda motivated, ignoring the social constructs and creating their own. My daughter and her boyfriend call each other cunt, as a term of endearment. It's sweet ... and it's inspiring .. on more than one level.

[charlou]

I'm interested in the roots and the history of the use of genital and sex words as forms of moralistic evaluation, of offense, and of stifling and undermining intellectual and social equality and validity. It's been mentioned that people don't think much, if at all, about the origin of the words they use to those ends ("to those ends" as distinct from their use in parody, in reclaiming*, and in deliberately disarming the words through reinventing their application) ... the implication being that it therefore doesn't matter. I'm not so sure. Cultural mores are, by definition, a strong impetus for how we evaluate and interact with one another as individuals, and the society we function in.



* this often entails its own set of social "rules", but that aside ..

[Brian Peacock]

[charlou]

Another abhorrent one I used to hear at times from the teenagers I used to work with was "Flid". If they expanded that to its fullest extent (the way they could say that "spastic" was the expansion of "spazz") it would be "flidamide" - in other words, it was their mishearing of "thalydomide".

"You're a flid" thus meant something like "you're a grotesquely deformed creature". Ghastly. Not to be tolerated. Not to go unchallenged.

How do those exaggerations and misrepresentations become manifest in a cultural psyche?

Lack of information, understanding and empathy.

[charlou]

Is all this tendency toward suspicion, superstition, taboo ... looking askance at those who we perceive are different ... part of a human evolutionary disposition? Is the constant evaluation, categorisation, labelling and namecalling, part of that?

[charlou]

Father Ted

[rasetsu]

Oh, rats. I'm way behind on this thread.

Well, I'll just say it, as I shant be able to catch up on it. As to Pappa's observation that many of the English terms of derogation refer to the male anatomy, it needs to be kept in mind that, both, homophobia is prominent in adolescent males and the use of harsh language also tends to be more prominent in adolescent males and young men than in their corresponding peers. As such, I suspect many of these references to the male anatomy originate as terms of abuse among male adolescent peers, possibly with homosexual overtones for some of them. (You'll likely find more homophobic slurs referrring to homosexual males than homosexual females.) This also likely reflects the different logistics of the separate sexes both in terms of reproduction and of social roles. With a woman, derogation is reserved for the promiscuous; with males, promiscuity is cause for celebration. Because of the nature of the male role in reproduction, evolutionarily, the male's role has different demands than the woman's. In particular, at least in most societies I'm familiar with, the male is tasked with being aggressive and sexually assertive; and thus, it's possible that the demands of that role create a specifically configured anxiety, which is given expression through homophobia and the other accoutrements of male youth. Women, because of their differing role, have correspondingly different anxieties, and different crises of maturation. This difference is likely mirrored in the type, number, and frequency of terms of derogation betweeen the separate sexes.

[Audley Strange]

Interesting if true. I would say that the derogation is in itself some kind of sexual prowess game which is certainly borne out even now it the Braggadocio of certain Rap subcultures. In fact one could suggest that it is a shockingly honest representation of our primitive courtship rituals and the different values.

"Hey baby don't look at him he fucks other guys, c'mere look at the size of this big cock o' mine"

"I like a big cock, but is your paycheck as big?"

and conversely.

"Yeah don't look at her, she's a miserable bitch and a slut, you'll be looking after other mens kids. Impregnate me!"

So essentially its verbal peacock feathers.

[hadespussercats]

Oh, rats. I'm way behind on this thread.

Well, I'll just say it, as I shant be able to catch up on it. As to Pappa's observation that many of the English terms of derogation refer to the male anatomy, it needs to be kept in mind that, both, homophobia is prominent in adolescent males and the use of harsh language also tends to be more prominent in adolescent males and young men than in their corresponding peers. As such, I suspect many of these references to the male anatomy originate as terms of abuse among male adolescent peers, possibly with homosexual overtones for some of them. (You'll likely find more homophobic slurs referrring to homosexual males than homosexual females.) This also likely reflects the different logistics of the separate sexes both in terms of reproduction and of social roles. With a woman, derogation is reserved for the promiscuous; with males, promiscuity is cause for celebration. Because of the nature of the male role in reproduction, evolutionarily, the male's role has different demands than the woman's. In particular, at least in most societies I'm familiar with, the male is tasked with being aggressive and sexually assertive; and thus, it's possible that the demands of that role create a specifically configured anxiety, which is given expression through homophobia and the other accoutrements of male youth. Women, because of their differing role, have correspondingly different anxieties, and different crises of maturation. This difference is likely mirrored in the type, number, and frequency of terms of derogation betweeen the separate sexes.

Just a couple thoughts, spurred by this--

Gay slurs are general worst for the receiver-- the one being buggered, as opposed to the buggerer. "Taking it up the ass"-- we say this all the time-- in the US, it's most often a reference to paying too much for a service or product and not being able to do anything about it, or being cheated. But it's clearly a rape comment, etymologically. And It think it's pretty clearly a man on man type rape comment, too-- like a prison rape joke. What's interesting it that this is used so much, and so often in far-removed ways like talking about money, that I wonder if people even think about it as either a gay slur or a prison-rape slur.

But going back to the idea of being buggered-- I've read that the man who fucks, it doesn't really matter who he fucks-- if he's in charge, he's straight. (Obviously, this theory doesn't really hold water, but I'm curious what you all think.) He's the Alpha, he's in the position of power, so he gets respect, even if he's fucking guys.

But men who are "bottoms", men who "take it up the ass"-- they're really gay (so the theory goes)-- contemptible. Is it because they're like women? in the traditional sense of women being the ones on the bottom, the ones being fucked (which, as we all know, is also pretty much a horseshit theory-- but we're talking traditional viewpoints here.)

There's even an idea the for a woman to take it up the ass is a special type of debasement-- that a woman who would do that is extra-dirty, not the girl you want to bring home to mama, a skank. What is it about taking a dick up your ass that is so demeaning? Where does this come from? Is it just the association of anal sex with shit? Is it inflicting pain (which isn't necessarily a part of anal sex at all.)

As for slurs about lesbians, well-- I think there may have been an increase in lesbian slurs, coinciding with the general increase in awareness that lesbians exist (I suspect that in many cultures single women aren't noticed much, and women might cohabit as friends or as lovers and few would notice or think to care. But I am talking out my ass right now. heh. so... feel free to offer up some real evidence for something.) But there are definitely some. And they're not all about pretty straight girls making out for men's excitement (the kind of lesbian most men really like.)

I used to get called "dyke" and "carpet-muncher" back in high school. The second is apt enough. But the first-- what is that about? A sturdy woman who can hold back the tides? Plug a leak with her finger?

[hadespussercats]

Is all this tendency toward suspicion, superstition, taboo ... looking askance at those who we perceive are different ... part of a human evolutionary disposition? Is the constant evaluation, categorisation, labelling and namecalling, part of that?

I read an article a while back about "talking to your kids about race." (I will look for it later. I want to get this down first.)

Edited to add: Here it is! http://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2012 ... bout-race/

The sense of the article was that liberal-minded parents may have done their children a disservice by choosing to be "color-blind." Because however little or however much race might matter (I'm thinking of that Morgan Freeman 60 Minutes interview you posted a while back),
Edited to add: This one! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3cGfrExozQ
children do notice when other children have different skin, or hair, or eye shape, or (and I imagine this extends to disabilities and other differences.) And when parents refuse to acknowledge what the kids see, children often (according to the article) decide that it must be some big thing that's too important to talk about. They try to figure it out on their own. Which might work out great, in certain cases. But sometimes, anxiety over those differences make them into a big problem for the children trying to figure them out.

I suspect to some degree there's a sense of 'stranger danger' that many of us were either born with, or trained to have early on. Babies recognize their parents' faces as young as three months or so. They have the capability to determine who is "other." And they prefer who they know.

On the other hand, watching Sprog in action, I can't say I've noticed any difference in his reaction to other children re race. So far, he seems to prefer kids that are older than him, like three year olds. And he loves corkscrew curls. I'm curious to see if/how his sense of people changes as he gets older.

[Audley Strange]

Gay slurs are general worst for the receiver-- the one being buggered, as opposed to the buggerer. "Taking it up the ass"-- we say this all the time-- in the US, it's most often a reference to paying too much for a service or product and not being able to do anything about it, or being cheated. But it's clearly a rape comment, etymologically. And It think it's pretty clearly a man on man type rape comment, too-- like a prison rape joke. What's interesting it that this is used so much, and so often in far-removed ways like talking about money, that I wonder if people even think about it as either a gay slur or a prison-rape slur.

Shhh. Don't talk about prison rape. It really skewers some of the sisters ideology. just accept they are bad and deserve it and institutionalised corrective rape is acceptable as long as we turn a blind eye to it or something.

But going back to the idea of being buggered--

Must we?

:

I've read that the man who fucks, it doesn't really matter who he fucks-- if he's in charge, he's straight. (Obviously, this theory doesn't really hold water, but I'm curious what you all think.) He's the Alpha, he's in the position of power, so he gets respect, even if he's fucking guys.

But men who are "bottoms", men who "take it up the ass"-- they're really gay (so the theory goes)-- contemptible. Is it because they're like women? in the traditional sense of women being the ones on the bottom, the ones being fucked (which, as we all know, is also pretty much a horseshit theory-- but we're talking traditional viewpoints here.)

Yeah, I think it more a sado-masochistic sub/dom thing rather than sociological gender thing. Certainly if you are male and fucking guys up the arse for pleasure you are at the very least bisexual. I think the reason that they are considered contemptible in that environment is because they are perceived not as being feminine necessarily, but being weak enough to allow that to happen.

A lot of self loathing involved though I think and thus denial and blame.

There's even an idea the for a woman to take it up the ass is a special type of debasement-- that a woman who would do that is extra-dirty, not the girl you want to bring home to mama, a skank. What is it about taking a dick up your ass that is so demeaning? Where does this come from? Is it just the association of anal sex with shit? Is it inflicting pain (which isn't necessarily a part of anal sex at all.)

As for slurs about lesbians, well-- I think there may have been an increase in lesbian slurs, coinciding with the general increase in awareness that lesbians exist (I suspect that in many cultures single women aren't noticed much, and women might cohabit as friends or as lovers and few would notice or think to care. But I am talking out my ass right now. heh. so... feel free to offer up some real evidence for something.) But there are definitely some. And they're not all about pretty straight girls making out for men's excitement (the kind of lesbian most men really like.)

I used to get called "dyke" and "carpet-muncher" back in high school. The second is apt enough. But the first-- what is that about? A sturdy woman who can hold back the tides? Plug a leak with her finger?

I'll leave it up to the ladies to discuss that. I only know of dyke, but I get the feeling that the reason no one has made up a slew of words for lesbians is because they're not seen as any kind of threat.

[hadespussercats]

I think a lot of the slurs for lesbians are cute (maybe they're not all slurs?): Sapphic sisters, doughnut bumpers, carpet-lickers, carpet-munchers, fish-kissers, muff divers, muff-bumpers, diesel-Ds, folk-music enthusiasts...

[hadespussercats]

Yeah, I think it more a sado-masochistic sub/dom thing rather than sociological gender thing. Certainly if you are male and fucking guys up the arse for pleasure you are at the very least bisexual. I think the reason that they are considered contemptible in that environment is because they are perceived not as being feminine necessarily, but being weak enough to allow that to happen.

You don't think that that sort is weakness is seen as feminine? I'm trying to get this to jibe with your statements about "pussy" a while back...

I'll leave it up to the ladies to discuss that. I only know of dyke, but I get the feeling that the reason no one has made up a slew of words for lesbians is because they're not seen as any kind of threat.

Not a threat. Yes, I think you might be on to something here. Which is probably why the nastier slang for lesbians is aimed at the less traditionally feminine among them-- bull dykes, butch dykes, diesel dykes-- there is so much more contempt bottled up in those words than we see for "femmes" or "lipstick lesbians." Now, doesn't a lot of this contempt for the butch women and the bottom men stem from discomfort/hate for people who don't conform to traditional gender roles?