No, the key is not to offend people who don't particularly need to be offended. You aren't talking about "freedom", you're talking about being abrasive for no good reason. There are rude words that you may freely use to describe that sort of person, should you wish.

I like Mr. Fry and agree with part of your and his message. What bothers me, though, is that it sounds as if you are trying to say that there is only one type of word, and that there is really no such thing as "profanity". But that robs profanity of its usefulness (for example, some recent research shows that swearing can actually alleviate physical pain - but if no words are considered "bad," this probably wouldn't work any more).

The whole idea of a swear word is that it's supposed to be strong, and, yes, offensive in some way. That means that there will be contexts in which profanity will be inappropriate, and there is nothing prudish about knowing this. Good writing means using the right word for the right purpose, and sprinkling swears inside a technical article usually comes off as cheap and lazy.

Your attitude changes when you have children. I used to use more colorful language more routinely. But there are various reasons you don't want to hear those words coming out of your little ones' mouths, yet.

Without the prudes the word would lose its power, so maybe we should keep them around.

Yes, I am a prude. And I have no problem with Stephen Fry thinking poorly of me.

Stephen Fry doesn't just curse. He curses well. He curses (most importantly) when appropriate. Unlike you, and unlike most of the rubbish that gets posted.

> It's really only prudes and people who need to feel morally superior have a problem with it, and they can fuck right off, frankly.

Kinda like how you need to feel superior to them about this particular issue?