Hacker News Reader

Comment by ars | Hacker News Reader

I've heard people advocate for removing the taboo about swearing, and making it socially acceptable in most (or all) circumstances.

What they don't realize is if we did that, the swear would lose all power. "Golly" was at one point a really bad swear.

People who want to swear need conservative people who are against swearing, in order for the swears to retain their meaning/shock value.

View on HN

There's a conjecture (I hesitate to call it theory because it's not very well fleshed out) that profanity tends to reflect the taboo and/or sacred things of a society.

Quebec used to be a highly religious society heavily controlled by the Catholic Church until the 1960s. Quebec profanities are full of slangy modifications of terms that, translated literally, mean things like "chalice" or "eucharist". English used to be like that as well. Damn and Hell were harsh words. With the decline in our religiosity has come a decline in the severity of the words. Most societies have taboos about sex and bodily waste, so little surprise that there's a profane term for those things in most languages.

And what about today? Some of the most profane words in contemporary English are slurs used against racial and sexual minorities. N-word, F-word (no, not that one, the other F-word), and so on. Speaking these words invokes transgression of the most sacred values of society. Some are considered so powerful or dangerous, that simply saying them aloud is believed to have the ability to cause psychic harm, which is more than a little reminiscent of the old beliefs about the risk of supernatural destruction being inflicted on communities by God that tolerate blasphemy.

As you note, I think this is likely a universal human tendency. There's always going to be the sacred and the taboo. And taking a big fat verbal shit on them will always outrage people.

The people I have seen advocate for that absolutely realize that as they want to rob these words of their power to offend.

And then people will create new offensive words, because people sometimes need such words.

So what have they accomplished?

Just another revolution on the euphemism treadmill: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Lifespan

Well, they would accomplish a reverse revolution for once.

While it’s a shopworn example Japanese really does not have something like swear words. There are terms that are considered offensive but they’re generally disfavored terms for ethnic groups or medical conditions or that sort of thing, not things you’d shout if you were upset.

People who're upset might shout e.g. kuso or chikushou.

Those aren’t “swear words.” Nobody would object to their being used in children’s programming, for instance. While most people would be scandalized to hear characters in a children’s cartoon saying “shit!”

I would say the taboo is gone in many places. Like podcasts or youtube, where the existing moderation controls hold no power. I wouldn't call it a great victory. It certainly reveals who has a shallow vocabulary and leans on the f-word like a crutch.

I lived for a few years in a place where no word is taboo.

What you don't realize is that when no word is taboo people tend to invent nontrivial sequences, or entire monologues to regain and further enhance the effect. Which I think is better than inventing pitiful euphemisms. It's almost poetry.

That’s super interesting! Where was this place? Any examples of the sequences?

Various ports in Adriatic back when I was sailing around.

It is not translatable to english I'm afraid. Most probably UK/US guys have their own variants, but I don't know them. Something like rhythmic slang taken to 11. But you have to have a ton of background to fully appreciate the art.

That all depends on how the word is used, no? I swear often, but it's never at people, rather I use them as adjectives or whatnot (eg, "Take the fucking trash out,") or during times of frustration (eg, "God fucking damnit", "Jesus fucking christ"). That's where I think the argument can be made about removing the taboo, because really, at least when I say it (and perhaps that's where this argument falls apart? Because it all boils down to intent...), there's no difference between, "Aww man," and "Oh for fucks sake", or, "Take the stupid trash out," and "Take the fucking trash out".

I feel the same way. Often it comes down to swearing to me vs swearing at me.

Try saying "Golly" instead. Would it work as well?

I suspect not. That's what will happen if you succeed in removing the taboo.

Bloody is pretty satisfying and Ron Weasley can say that in a Pg film.

Golly, I'd never have thought of that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com