Hello Pottsie:
A lot to reply to in your post, I want to give your own reply all the
time and careful attention that I think you deserve, as a (you)
conscientious person. /nominal9
Don't get me wrong. I use the F. word probably at least a dozen times
a day, so I 'm not looking down my nose at anyone who uses it.
However, I wish I didn't. It is merely laziness on my part. There
are hundreds of ways to more suitably express oneself without being
offensive. "Profane" means useless, and "Vulgar" means common. In
other words, Profanity consists of word of "common" uneducated
people. I don''t consider myself to be either, but my language belies
the fact./ Pottsie
My point is not to correct you. Actually, Pottsie, the definition of
"profane" usually means that something is somewhat "sacrilegious" as
in un-Godly. In this sense "profanity" gets closer to "sounding" like
something that should be made "illegal" as compared to something that
is just considered "vulgar", as in uneducated or... low-class.
(profanity is a "stronger" word) But then, my actual point is....
what's wrong with being "common" or even low-class, anyway.... are you
making a "Classist" or an "Elitist" arguement?.... maybe even without
realizing it? This "theme" of Classism or Elitism carries through in
the other comments that you make in your post.... about Art and
such... Goethe , although not being "ribald" or 'in-your-face'
offensive, actually was quite.... socially revolutionary in some of
his attitudes toward less that favorable social conventions.... just
think of Faust.... the story of the wayward soul tempted by the devil
(Mephisotheles) with all sorts of "licentious" possibilities. Granted
that the play has a "Good" ending for Faust (at least the Goethe
bversion does, as compared to Marlowe's Dr. Faustus that is more
ambiguous ...so they say... to me he is damned. My point here is that
I know of a lot of literary "greats" who dealt in "vulgarity" or
"profanity".... and did it "well". Whether or not their "content" is
liked or not by any given reader.... that varies with the reader. So,
questions of "taste" or "commonality" or "sophomoric juvenilitiy"....
depends on whom you ask, don't you think?
1. I live in North Carolina and am a Southerner by birth and am not a
racist. I am only using this as an example.
2. "n*gger" is not offensive in itself. I've heard many a black man
use the word when applying it to another black man. It is only when a
white man uses the word toward an African American that it becomes an
issue. Here in Charlotte the Original QB of the Charlotte Panthers
used it in reference to his team mates in what he thought was a
statement of comraderie because he had heard BLACK team mates use it
toward other team mates. He was drawn and quartered for this
mistake. And his career never recovered.
So what would you say to me, if I used that word and got stabbed for
my error and what would you say to the person who stabbed me?
Should we use words regardless of the effect they have on other
people? / Pottsie
Now this is the tough part. I personally go out of my way NOT to
"offend" people along racial lines.... Believe it or not, that is one
reason why I go more for the so-called scatologigal words.... they
tend to "offend" everyone and yet, in an odd way, no-one in
particular. But, not to evade your question.... Yes, I think that the
word "N*gger" should be open to use by , actually, anyone. But, as you
say, it is sometimes (very often, in fact) considered a "fighting"
word... so if it leads to that.... a fight... then there could be
other "legal" consequences..... I know, it sounds like a cop-out...
but what I mean to say is, there are different ways in which the word
can be used, it depends on the persons involved and on their intent.
Some accomodation can (or should) be made. If it is used as an insult
or as a racial slur, seriously, or in an exclusionary or a defamatory
manner (say, on the job or broadcast out in public) then that should
be punishable by law. But if two "friends" use it.... or is it is used
objectionably by someone, but that is not what the actual intent
was....some accomodation should be made to either not-take it
seriously... or to just let the thing slide, as long as it does not
happen again, by the same people. But no.... words are words.... not
deeds...no matter how "offensive' those words may be.... they still
serve many purposes in a lot of different ways.
nominal9
On Jul 24, 3:14 pm, Pottsie <pottsie...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hello Pottsie....
> It lookslike you and I are "exactly" the same age.... I was born in
> 1953. That means that we both share some experience of the Viet Nam
> War era and the "politica; protests" trhereto. Remember Country Joe
> and the Fish?.... how about the Fish Cheer? I have updated it and
> altered the lyrics to the actual song, in the recent past (two to five
> years back) and tried to get it placed on the net mesage boards... the
> attempt usually bot me banned. Just trying to "refute" your own point
> as to the "applicability" of the "profane" "word" F*CK to the serioes
> discussion of Fredom of Speech..... I disagree, matter of fact, I
> think you are way off..... F*CK is a very apt word to express
> displeasure or ridicule... in politics or in other ares of serious
> discussion, I think.
> (Pottsie)
> Don't get me wrong. I use the F. word probably at least a dozen times a day, so I 'm not looking down my nose at anyone who uses it. However, I wish I didn't. It is merely laziness on my part. There are hundreds of ways to more suitably express oneself without being offensive. "Profane" means useless, and "Vulgar" means common. In other words, Profanity consists of word of "common" uneducated people. I don''t consider myself to be either, but my language belies the fact.
> Don't take offense.....because I'm labeling the charge at myself as well....your position is very juvenile.
> (nom)
> As to your point about...."Your right to throw a
> punch ends at the tip of my nose." ... well, we are mixing up apples
> and oranges, are we not? The difference there is between Words and
> Deeds... And as for people "spitting" in other's faces.... well,
> figuratively, I've been on the "receiving" end of that, myself.... I
> usually say... "If you spit in my face, sooner or later I will spit
> right back at you"....
> (Pottsie)
> I don't think I am mixing apples and oranges at all......based on the fact that we are talking about civility here, not Revolution or Physical Harm. No REAL harm comes from using profanity, just as no REAL harm comes from spitting.
> The harm comes from living in a society that has the sort of community spirit that spits instead of hugs.
> (nom)
> B!
> Gimme an U!
> U!
> Gimme an S!
> S!
> Gimme an H!
> H!
> What's that spell ?
> FVCK!
> What's that spell ?
> FVCK!
> What's that spell ?
> FVCK!
> Yeah, come on all of you, big strong men, (or ...REPUBLICANS)
> Uncle GEORGE needs your help again.
> He's got himself in a terrible jam
> Way down yonder TO FIGHT ISLAM
> So put down your books and pick up a gun,
> We're gonna have a whole lotta fun.
> And it's one, two, three,
> What are we fighting for ?
> Don't ask me, I don't give a damn,
> Next stop is TO FIGHT ISLAM;
> And it's five, six, seven,
> Open up the pearly gates,
> Well there ain't no time to wonder why,
> Whoopee! we're all gonna die.
> Well, come on generals, let's move fast;
> Your big chance has come at last.
> Gotta go out and get those A-RABS -
> The only good MUSLIM is the one who's dead
> And you know that peace can only be won
> When we've blown 'em all to kingdom come.
> And it's one, two, three,
> What are we fighting for ?
> Don't ask me, I don't give a damn,
> Next stop is TO FIGHT ISLAM;
> And it's five, six, seven,
> Open up the pearly gates,
> Well there ain't no time to wonder why
> Whoopee! we're all gonna die.
> Huh!
> Well, come on HALIBURTONt, don't move slow,
> Why man, this is war au-go-go.
> There's plenty good money to be made
> By supplying the Army with the tools of the trade,
> Just hope and pray that if they drop the bomb,
> They drop it on ALL OF ISLAM.
> And it's one, two, three,
> What are we fighting for ?
> Don't ask me, I don't give a damn,
> Next stop is TO FIGHT ISLAM.
> And it's five, six, seven,
> Open up the pearly gates,
> Well there ain't no time to wonder why
> Whoopee! we're all gonna die.
> Well, come on mothers throughout the land,
> Pack your boys off to FIGHT ISLAM.
> Come on fathers, don't hesitate,
> Send 'em off before it's too late.
> Be the first one on your block
> To have your boy come home in a box.
> And it's one, two, three
> What are we fighting for ?
> Don't ask me, I don't give a damn,
> Next stop is TO FIGHT ISLAM.
> And it's five, six, seven,
> Open up the pearly gates,
> Well there ain't no time to wonder why,
> Whoopee! we're all gonna die.
> Well, there it is.... let's see if this "takes" now. Censorship is a
> Shameful thing.... you never really know what you are missing, as an
> "audience". I would hate to have to pack up and leave.... bring my
> Hall of Shame to another venue and have to add Google to it.
> nominal9
> (Pottsie)
> Pretty good knock off.
> NOW what you are talking about here is something entirely different. You are talking about Art. IOW....is profanity appropriate in art? And I'm not sure where I stand on that.
> On the one hand, the essence of art is symbolism.....to speak or communicate something to the inner man.
Noo.. not an N-word discussion! Why do you want to be able to use
that word? Even the supposed 'friendly' usage causes problems within
the black community. I don't really get the white man's fascination
with the damn word.
> Noo.. not an N-word discussion! Why do you want to be able to use
> that word? Even the supposed 'friendly' usage causes problems within
> the black community. I don't really get the white man's fascination
> with the damn word.
>How did this become a problem of the white
> race, and specifically the male gender? Isn't it an ideological
> problem?
> On Jul 25, 8:29 am, Lonlaz <lonlaza...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Noo.. not an N-word discussion! Why do you want to be able to use
> > that word? Even the supposed 'friendly' usage causes problems within
> > the black community. I don't really get the white man's fascination
> > with the damn word.- Hide quoted text -
> On 25 Jul, 17:03, Kierkecraig <craigatkin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > White man's fascination?
> You forgot that Lonlaz is Hispanic. (Note, I didn't use the 'S'
> word) ;-)
> >How did this become a problem of the white
> > race, and specifically the male gender? Isn't it an ideological
> > problem?
> > On Jul 25, 8:29 am, Lonlaz <lonlaza...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Noo.. not an N-word discussion! Why do you want to be able to use
> > > that word? Even the supposed 'friendly' usage causes problems within
> > > the black community. I don't really get the white man's fascination
> > > with the damn word.- Hide quoted text -
> > > > Noo.. not an N-word discussion! Why do you want to be able to use
> > > > that word? Even the supposed 'friendly' usage causes problems within
> > > > the black community. I don't really get the white man's fascination
> > > > with the damn word.- Hide quoted text -
I think its telling of the popular opinion that everything is white
men's fault and white men's problem. If we are going to be racial and
gender sensitive, then we should do so consistently.
On Jul 25, 10:14 am, Pat <PatrickDHarring...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Noo.. not an N-word discussion! Why do you want to be able to use
> > > > > that word? Even the supposed 'friendly' usage causes problems within
> > > > > the black community. I don't really get the white man's fascination
> > > > > with the damn word.- Hide quoted text -
I claimed no such thing about white men. I was addressing the
subcatagory who think it's no fair that they can't use the N word.
This is not the case, of course, they can use the N word as much as
they want, it's just if THEY (white men/women, but mostly men, who
want to use the N word) were considerate and respectful, they wouldn't
want to use it.
As far as I can tell, it's some sort of forbidden fruit syndrome.
On Jul 25, 11:20 am, Kierkecraig <craigatkin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think its telling of the popular opinion that everything is white
> men's fault and white men's problem. If we are going to be racial and
> gender sensitive, then we should do so consistently.
> On Jul 25, 10:14 am, Pat <PatrickDHarring...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On 25 Jul, 17:10, Kierkecraig <craigatkin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I didn't have to forget that in order to be astonished by his
> > > response.
> > I suppose not, but it does help to explain the turn of phrase.
> > > On Jul 25, 10:08 am, Pat <PatrickDHarring...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Noo.. not an N-word discussion! Why do you want to be able to use
> > > > > > that word? Even the supposed 'friendly' usage causes problems within
> > > > > > the black community. I don't really get the white man's fascination
> > > > > > with the damn word.- Hide quoted text -
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Lonlaz,
I don't think the problem is they WANT to use it, I think the problem
most people have is they think its disgusting that they are forbidden
to use it because of the color of their skin. Its a sort of double
standard that tells a group of people that you are different, and so
you don't get the privilege. If a group of people doesn't want to be
called a certain word, then they shouldn't call themselves such a
word. Otherwise, don't be offended when someone else calls you what
you call yourself. It would be like saying, hey my name is Craig, but
since you're Hispanic, your not allowed to call me that. You may not
care what you call me since you probably don't care to talk to me.
However, you would probably be offended that I would forbid you from
doing something just because you are a particular ethnicity.
On Jul 25, 11:44 am, Lonlaz <lonlaza...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I claimed no such thing about white men. I was addressing the
> subcatagory who think it's no fair that they can't use the N word.
> This is not the case, of course, they can use the N word as much as
> they want, it's just if THEY (white men/women, but mostly men, who
> want to use the N word) were considerate and respectful, they wouldn't
> want to use it.
> As far as I can tell, it's some sort of forbidden fruit syndrome.
> On Jul 25, 11:20 am, Kierkecraig <craigatkin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I think its telling of the popular opinion that everything is white
> > men's fault and white men's problem. If we are going to be racial and
> > gender sensitive, then we should do so consistently.
> > On Jul 25, 10:14 am, Pat <PatrickDHarring...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 25 Jul, 17:10, Kierkecraig <craigatkin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > I didn't have to forget that in order to be astonished by his
> > > > response.
> > > I suppose not, but it does help to explain the turn of phrase.
> > > > On Jul 25, 10:08 am, Pat <PatrickDHarring...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > Noo.. not an N-word discussion! Why do you want to be able to use
> > > > > > > that word? Even the supposed 'friendly' usage causes problems within
> > > > > > > the black community. I don't really get the white man's fascination
> > > > > > > with the damn word.- Hide quoted text -
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Here's my follow-up, making generalizations about white men (admitting
this doesn't apply to every white male, just enough of them to make
the phenomena commonplace). White men in white majorities have the
luxury of being 'normal'. Knowing in your heart of hearts that you
ultimately 'belong'. This 'confidence' is noted by the designated
minorities, who feel that they have to prove that they belong, and is
interpreted as arrogance. Also, the ordinary person isn't born
sensitized to these issues, leading to behaviour that can be
interpreted as offensive, but is usually just oblivious.
This sounds an awful lot like certain a political situation that
exists in the world today.
