Word censorship.

[The Quiet Man]

I think the intent of the profanity filter shows some class on the part of the forum owner. I don't think anyone's rights are being violated by a requirement that we use this horrible "neutered vocabulary". Now, if we could just get a filter to block the little-girly babelization art form language that "texters" use...

 

[spengo]

This is a privately owned forum, if they make it against the rules to post any way other than standing on your head in your underwear they can do it. No one is forcing you to post here you know, when you signed up I think you checked a box that said you agreed to all the rules too. It's not like making you pay $200 to own a safety attachment or go to federal pound-me-in-the-hindquarters prison.

Besides, why is it such a big deal? Profanity is for the unimaginative masses anyway. Just find more inventive ways to express yourself. From now on, whenever you want to use the F-word, you will say "Coitus" instead.

 

[RobertJ.]

How do you talk in the presence of your mom?

I started listening to George Carlin when I was about 15. I'm not offended by words. How they're used can be offensive, however so can any speech, regardless of whether or not it contains "profanity".

When I hear someone speak, and what they're saying is peppered with f'n this and f'n that, my first thought is that they just aren't very bright. And, I wonder, do they speak that way in front of their mother? And if not, then why do they need to at all? Maybe it can be chalked up to limited vocabulary.

One of my very favorite movies is "Pulp Fiction". I have friends from church who think it's horrible, not because of the violence, but because the f-bomb is dropped about 235 times. I'm just not offended by it.

Just my opinion.

 

[Trlsmn]

I think the intent of the profanity filter shows some class on the part of the forum owner. I don't think anyone's rights are being violated by a requirement that we use this horrible "neutered vocabulary". Now, if we could just get a filter to block the little-girly babelization art form language that "texters" use...

Ding, ding ding, we have a winner folks!


Anyone one wishing to see those words unfiltered need only hit the quote button on a post and you will be able to read them unfiltered.

 

[spengo]

I think the intent of the profanity filter shows some class on the part of the forum owner. I don't think anyone's rights are being violated by a requirement that we use this horrible "neutered vocabulary". Now, if we could just get a filter to block the little-girly babelization art form language that "texters" use...

YES. You have a qwerty keyboard, there is no excuse for all those acronyms.

U kno wut i rly haet tho when ppl dont bother to read what they type adn itcoms otu lal goblbledegook wiht no punctaution adn teh entir posst looks liek 1 big run-no sentnce wiht teh gramar of a slow 1st gradder adn teh speling of an autistc child.

Have you ever been so far even as decided to use go want to look more like?

 

[jordanvraptor]

Can Battlestar Galactica fans say Frak?

 

[Trlsmn]

Can Battlestar Galactica fans say Frak?

Frak yes you can!

 

[Trlsmn]

YES. You have a qwerty keyboard, there is no excuse for all those acronyms.

U kno wut i rly haet tho when ppl dont bother to read what they type adn itcoms otu lal goblbledegook wiht no punctaution adn teh entir posst looks liek 1 big run-no sentnce wiht teh gramar of a slow 1st gradder adn teh speling of an autistc child.

Have you ever been so far even as decided to use go want to look more like?

Single, run on, 1000 word sentences are tedious to say the least, to be honest I rarely read them.

Spelling errors don't bother me though, we must consider that for some members English is a second language.

 

[trainsktg]

I'm actually a very profane person at work (construction, what else), but I prefer not to read it in the various forums I peruse. It usually results in threads quickly degenerating into childish banter.

This ain't the AK Files.

I love Pulp Fiction.

Keith ( I do like that we can use frak )

 

[MarkSBG]

That's fraking bull-honkie!

 

[TANSTAAFL]

For the purpose of having an adult discussion I'd like to have this thread exempt from the censorship rules in order to properly discuss the social language taboos. We're all adults and I don't see a reason why there can't be a mature discussion. With that said, I appreciate the tolerance thus so far.

I'll get to my original intention of showing the similarity between language censorship and protection of firearms once I align a few thread derailments.

I fail to see what profanity has to do with freedom of speech. I also must have missed all these types of words that were used in the wording of the constitution. Obviously you can still get a valid point across without the use of colorfull language.

How do you talk in the presence of your mom?

I started listening to George Carlin when I was about 15. I'm not offended by words. How they're used can be offensive, however so can any speech, regardless of whether or not it contains "profanity".

When I hear someone speak, and what they're saying is peppered with f'n this and f'n that, my first thought is that they just aren't very bright. And, I wonder, do they speak that way in front of their mother? And if not, then why do they need to at all? Maybe it can be chalked up to limited vocabulary.

One of my very favorite movies is "Pulp Fiction". I have friends from church who think it's horrible, not because of the violence, but because the f-bomb is dropped about 235 times. I'm just not offended by it.

Just my opinion.

So you're perfectly fine with me walking into your church, home, or place of work cussing up a storm?

How do I speak to my mother? With absolute respect being the highly intelligent and witty human being that she is. Do I hold language back like I'm protecting her fragile developing mind as you would for a child? No, that would be insulting to her. If f:k is the right word for expressing what is needed at that point in time, I will use it.

Deadeye, correct, I do not need colorful language to get a point across. If one were to do a search on my previous posts you'll find I do not use profane language often, and that is by personal preference only. Using words such as f_c_ is for shock value which only derive their power from those who let it shock them. My posts are more or less my natural language.

But sometimes it's absolutely required to convey the emotion and energy behind a message I'm trying to communicate; especially on a medium where you cannot read my body-language. For example, when the Seattle Mayor pushes his chair's former butt-warmer's anti-gun agenda, I want to express it as "Frking dolts!!" vs "Those dummies!"

Ah, church, schools and workplaces. They have their rules, albeit blindly driven, but they have rules we are forced to follow. Some of you may have missed my earlier point, but my intention is not to change this forum's rules. I'll adjust my language and abide by the set rules.

This thread is more of a thought experiment and simply a question of why.

Can Battlestar Galactica fans say Frak?

Frak yes you can!

What is the difference between bubble gum, f***, frak, fu<k, frig, kcuf, FFFFFUUUUUUUU- and Fuzzy-Uber-Cuddly-Kittens? The meaning and intention of the word is still there, you just wrote it differently. Do you not find it odd that the 4 letters F U C K written out is less offensive than F R A K when they both are used interchangeably for the same intended meanings? I do.

 

[trainsktg]

What is the difference between bubble gum, f***, frak, fu<k, frig, kcuf, FFFFFUUUUUUUU- and Fuzzy-Uber-Cuddly-Kittens? The meaning and intention of the word is still there, you just wrote it differently. Do you not find it odd that the 4 letters F U C K written out is less offensive than F R A K when they both are used interchangeably for the same intended meanings? I do.

I see your point. But. Spongebob screams "Bar-na-cles!" when he gets mad. I'm OK with my kids hearing that, even though we all know what he really means. Unless I'm mistaken, there are underage members on NWFA too, so its probably best to keep the adult language reserved for when we know that there are only adults present.

Keith

 

[SonicBlue03]

I see your point. But. Spongebob screams "Bar-na-cles!" when he gets mad. I'm OK with my kids hearing that, even though we all know what he really means. Unless I'm mistaken, there are underage members on NWFA too, so its probably best to keep the adult language reserved for when we know that there are only adults present.

Keith

The only concern is that sometimes there is quite a bit of talk that even other members would categorize as dangerously narrow-minded here. Which is more harmful to a child or underage individual - language they hear at school every day, or a permeating of distrust, angst, and paranoia?

Other than putting that out there, I agree with you Keith.

 

[MarkSBG]

But sometimes it's absolutely required to convey the emotion and energy behind a message I'm trying to communicate; especially on a medium where you cannot read my body-language. For example, when the Seattle Mayor pushes his chair's former butt-warmer's anti-gun agenda, I want to express it as "Frking dolts!!" vs "Those dummies!"

Is it really "absolutely required to convey the emotion and energy"? You seem to be making a fairly rational and thought out argument about the word filter. Why would it be significantly different if the topic was one that you had a visceral reaction to?

IMO, responding with "effing morons" is so trite that it doesn't matter what the emotion or energy is behind it. It is is so overused that I mentally skip that part. Cursing is so commonplace in most forums, why even bother? Doesn't it make your response blend in with all the blather?

The internet is one of the best examples why NOT to curse. Kids use the internet and regularly curse and carry on. This doesn't make their point or opinion more believable or more effective, it just makes them sound like just another "Timmy".

 

[jhc5]

I will grant you (whoever is reading this) that profane language is powerful arbitrarily. In other words, any assembly of letters could become profanity if it is defined as such. I think the real question is, "What is profanity?"

If profanity is, as it is commonly defined, simply anything considered obscene, lewd, abusive, or blasphemous, then isn't profanity subjective? That is, words considered to be profanity may not be universal. I think that profanity is defined by social norms, moral codes, and general opinion on socially acceptable behavior. We are all taught that certain topics (and associated words) are not appropriate, or socially acceptable, in all instances. Most common profanity (that I’m aware of) is rooted in sexuality or religion. Historically in western cultures sexuality is private, not often discussed or displayed publicly, and nobody wants to go to “H-E-double hockey sticks”. Polite conversation topics are similarity defined by social acceptability.

Thus, a "classy" vocabulary is one that is generally accepted by society to be void of subjectively defined "profanity". Because a person’s list of offensive words is likely deep rooted in his/her core belief system (moral code, religion, etc.), it is unlikely that their definition of profanity and its proper use will change drastically over their lifetime (it will change a little probably). This is the short term.

Conversely, the vernacular does change over the longer term. Through constant use of a word, or use of a new word, new definitions and understood meanings emerge. Language is constantly evolving. It might be that in 20, 50, or 100 years children will have today’s profane language on their weekly spelling tests in elementary school. But for this to happen, it will require a shift in core values, belief systems, moral codes, etc. This is a drastic social shift.

BUT… if this does occur, then I posit that the list of adult-only, obscene, vile, blasphemous “profanity” will have also evolved, and that a whole new vocabulary will be filtered on this forum. The OP is correct that we give words their power. I contend that we NEED a special set of ultra-powerful words to express the full range of human emotion, or to discuss those socially taboo topics that will always exist (though the topics might change).

Censorship in this case (this website) is simply the majority’s social norm overruling the minority’s in order to provide a one-size-fits-all experience that avoids emotional and social extremes. In the case of a publicly available ‘gun forum’, this tactic seems appropriate, as it helps to defuse heated discussion (read arguments) and maintain an “upstanding citizen” character (as defined by current social norms) that we’d like to portray to opponents of the 2nd Amendment.

[This is easily my longest post EVER on the internet. If anyone gets this far, here’s an e-cookie.]

 

[Trlsmn]

I always thought "emotion and energy" and intensity was conveyed with an exclamation point!

 

[elsie]

I always thought "emotion and energy" and intensity was conveyed with an exclamation point!

And CAPS... Don't forget CAPS...


elsie

 

[TANSTAAFL]

I see your point. But. Spongebob screams "Bar-na-cles!" when he gets mad. I'm OK with my kids hearing that, even though we all know what he really means. Unless I'm mistaken, there are underage members on NWFA too, so its probably best to keep the adult language reserved for when we know that there are only adults present.

Keith

Judge Curtis Bok said it best since 1949.

"It will be asked whether one would care to have one's young daughter read these books. I suppose that by the time she is old enough to wish to read them she will have learned the biologic facts of life and the words that go with them. There is something seriously wrong at home if those facts have not been met and faced and sorted by then; it is not children so much as parents that should receive our concern about this. I should prefer that my own three daughters meet the facts of life and the literature of the world in my library than behind a neighbor's barn, for I can face the adversary there directly. If the young ladies are appalled by what they read, they can close the book at the bottom of page one; if they read further, they will learn what is in the world and in its people, and no parents who have been discerning with their children need fear the outcome. Nor can they hold it back, for life is a series of little battles and minor issues, and the burden of choice is on us all, every day, young and old. Our daughters must live in the world and decide what sort of women they are to be, and we should be willing to prefer their deliberate and informed choice of decency rather than an innocence that continues to spring from ignorance. If that choice be made in the open sunlight, it is more apt than when made in shadow to fall on the side of honorable behavior."&#8212;Judge Curtis Bok, Commonwealth v. Gordon

Nothing has changed in theory, just the mediums where it applies. You aren't protecting anyone--children, mothers or pastors. Children will hear and see these words in every possible way. Like stated previously, throwing out curse words left and right makes you look unintelligent and boorish. Children can be taught this.

jhc5 is right on every point. Sexually rooted or explicit words are the ones that rattle people to the core the most, at least for the United States. Even the Supreme Court has deemed a difference, repeatedly, between **** used in a general sense and used in a sexual manner. Things do change. **** isn't even today's #1, that's held by the anger-inciting-hair-raising ****. Who knows what's down the road.

While frak was used to navigate around censors, it also suggested how words change and evolve over time. Once upon a time when **** was the lowly word fottere, its synonyms were jape, sard, occupy and swive. Webster and others' **** aversion sealed its fate as a curseword in our culture. It has been since and who knows for how long.

Profanity has everything to do with our 1st Amendment. Landmark cases involving free speech derive from obscenity rulings like the classic "**** the Draft". I understand the desire to dress our best in front of political opposition. In order to be competitive with our rivals we need to not look like uneducated redneck slobs out of touch with modern society. But, in order to be competitive with our rivals we cannot appear to be sacrificing one amendment in order to protect another.

 

[claypigeon]

It is amazing to me that the utility/enjoyment of NWFA could possibly be hindered by the inability to use profanity. Having spent years in professional baseball dugouts and locker rooms, I hardly wilt at the use of hard language. It does not offend me. But seriously, I cannot see how it diminishes the site in the least way.

+1

 

[claypigeon]

Ironically, banning and avoidance of the words is what gives them their very power.

So then if we lift the ban and the words lose thier power what will be the reason for using them. NWFA is protecting the future of these words by banning thier use on this site.