Hurray!! I think "cunt" is one of the most satisfying words in the language, and one of the most venerable terms (if not THE most) we have for, well, pussy. "Vagina" is fine for Sex Ed class, but for that very reason is awful (brr!) in conversation with normal people.
As for derogation, I figure I use "dick," "prick," and "ass" (to say nothing of metonyms such as "cocksucker" and "buttmunch") as terms of abuse frequently enough that it would be sexist NOT to throw "cunt" into the mix as well.....
Blow it out your already blown-out bunghole, Edhomo.
Libtards like you are a crime against nature. I hope you and your fellow AIDS-ridden fecal freaks choke on your own shit.
Bush rules you fools.
Context may not completely determine meaning, but it certainly plays a major role - especially with words like cunt and n*gger (yeah, I'm squeamish about that one). The fact that the language absolutists don't seem to get that is always what's bugged me most about them.
Terms like cunt, dick, pussy, etc. Can be enjoyable and useful. For my own purposes, when I want to insult someone or talk about how completely stupid something is, I try to use terms that have nothing to do with sex or with the normal human body. Calling people diseases or vermin or predators is usually close to what I mean. When talking about conservatives, especially the ones who operate on emotion instead of reason (that is, all conservatives who are not really wealthy), I like to say 'whipped dogs'. That gets the point across.
All women are beautiful, with the exception of Ann Coulter, for whom the ugly goes clean to the bone (Thank you, Redd Foxx).
Why, Mike Nilsen, you heathen devil!
I don't have a metier, but I agree with you anyway, as usual. I'm not a big fan of the mAnn Coulter adam's apple jokes, but that's only because I don't think they're funny. As a connoisseur of cheap shots, genuinely funny jokes aimed at flaws of appearance of any sort are appreciated, even if they are my own flaws, especially if the target is undeserving of mercy, e.g.,"Doughy Pantload" so wonderfully fits the pantload to whom it's applied. Slings and arrows are just as much a part of life as courtesy and respect, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
"Cunt" is indeed a fun word (just like "dick" only funner) and I understand why it can raise hackles*, but there is a huge difference between calling a woman a cunt because she is a woman and calling anyone a cunt because they are a cunt. As my Brooklyn neighborhood edjicated me, the distinction can lead to fisticuffs.
Thanks for the link that led again to the Derek & Clive sketch. What a refreshing way to start the day.
*speaking of words, how come we never hear much about hackles unless they are being raised at some offense or other? No one ever says "I was so flattered and at ease that my hackles were completely supine."
Interestingly, while the Dutch equivalent of cunt, kut is used liberally by well everybody, it's much much less offensive than cunt is, sort of on the level of shit.
That's because we're evil liberals to a person, of course.
I prefer "twunt" myself.
("Rescue Me" shout out.)
In general, it goes a long way toward overcoming any language sensitivity issues people might have if you endeavor to talk to them instead to trying to put something over on them.
Having spent a week reading various straight-guy bloggers telling me that the use of "faggot" by a celebrated right-wing pundit is no big deal, and that I shouldn't express my revulsion about it for fear of "encouraging" said pundit, and that we should focus instead on "what's really important," I'd like to thank you for this, Roy.
Martin, same for French con.
I am saddened, but mostly resigned, to the disapproval of various uses of "cunt". I've always found it phonetically the most satisfying exclamatory curse, and a useful jesting/serious pejorative. As to the idea of the pejorative usage insulting all women, consider;
1) My dick hurts
2) You are such a dick
That (2) might cast aspersions on males just doesn't register. They are, essentially, two different words. Having said that, as long as "cunt" offends women I respect, I try not to use it, except in quotes.
there is a huge difference between calling a woman a cunt because she is a woman and calling anyone a cunt because they are a cunt.
Couldn't be put better.
It's kind of amusing that Ms. Damen would hold you up as a positive example, when her Feministe chum zuzu, in that very thread, continues to fling shit at TRex for using "cunt." This, the Sadly, No! sanctimony conniption, and equating a joke about a three-legged puppy to jokes about rape, are why I'm never going back to Feministe. I'm sure they're sobbing into their cornflakes at the thought.
And when I call you a "weasel" I mean it in only the most complimentary sense, of course. Because that was your most weasely effort to date at trying to claim that using "cunt" to insult people doesn't mean anything bad about women. But weasels are cute little furry animals who have an important place in the ecosystem, so you shouldn't be insulted when I call you one.
calling anyone a cunt because they are a cunt.
That is to say, that they are as disgusting as that body part which is unique to women, and which is therefore a synecdoche for women.
Because you don't literally mean that some human being is that piece of flesh which I have between my thighs, walking around independently like something out of a surrealist film.
So, explain again how this is not insulting to women? Pack of weasels.
"No normal person gives a rat's ass..."
How dare you slander the hind quarters of our rodent friends!!!!
And when I call you a "weasel" I mean it in only the most complimentary sense, of course...
I know exactly what you mean when you call me a weasel. I would also know what you meant if you called me a dick or a prick, and would not be foolish enough to publicly charge you with man-hatred for the use of it.
What other metaphors do you have trouble with?
Ah, spencer, the guy who called me a bonehead for objecting to the word cunt in a comment thread a few years ago. Still hate the word. Your squeamishness about the word nigger illustrates the point I made at the time. Now that Ann Coulter is back in the news, please tell me how you feel about the word faggot. John Avarosis hates the word. Another bonehead?
Steve Gilliard's blog is full of expletives, with fuck being a big favorite. He knows what it feels like to be called a nigger. Having experienced name-calling, he has banned the word cunt from his site. He explained that in his opinion, it connotes a hostile, degrading attitude toward women, and he wants women to feel respected on his blog. Yet another bonehead? Apparently I'm in very good company.
So you've got righties saying you can't call them "chickenhawks" (BECAUSE OF THE AD HOMINEMS!) and lefties saying you can't make fun of Ann Coulter's man apple (BECAUSE OF THE SWITCHED-ON BACHISM!), and since I disagree with both of those restrictions, does that make me a moderate or someone who just doesn't give a twaddle how anyone else wants me to frame my arguments and/or snark? Or just plain lazy?
Hmmm. I have an ambiguous relationship with "cunt" as a perjorative. It's an ugly, dogbark, Public Sneeze Minus the Sneeze Guard of a word, which should make for fine invective, but I prefer it for more practical matters. Besides, all cunts are beautiful, too.
Midwestern Protestant upbringing of a bygone era? Maybe. "Hell" was the strongest curse ever heard in my extended family, and usually from another room when they forgot the children were nearby. "Dick" and "prick" I arrived at long after my schoolyard contemporaries. "Pussy", as in "You're a..." vs. pussy as in "show me your..." were separate categories.
Then again, it's certainly preferable to "silly prat" for an American, and we'd need to be tone deaf at minimum to miss the utility of that one. And "head up her cunt", as a menu substitution for the usual rectum, should be welcomed on most spice racks. But then (and thanks to Partridge) there's always "she's got her piss flaps over her ears" which is altogether more satisfying, I think.
Also, I am of the opinion that all women are beautiful, even the ugly ones. If you don't understand that, I'm afraid I can't explain it to you. It has something to do with upbringing.
Roy, you say the nicest things. Talk about good home training!
Hmmm...How about "He's a motherfucking cunt"?
There's a lot to unpack there. First, you have the gender issue to work through. Then the incest angle (or is 'motherfucker' too hostile to intrafamily fucker dynamics? Too judgemental?). And only then, at the last, you're calling him out on feminity, despite the fact you think he fucks his ma.
I know I'm in the minority here. But I think "bitch" is a far more pejoritive term for women than cunt.
It's kind of amusing that Ms. Damen would hold you up as a positive example, when her Feministe chum zuzu, in that very thread, continues to fling shit at TRex for using "cunt."
I'm sure it satisfies your sense of wounded victimhood to pretend that I'm simply "flinging shit" at TRex for no apparent reason. However, the truth is that I brought it up to correct a misattribution in Ilyka's post.
This, the Sadly, No! sanctimony conniption, and equating a joke about a three-legged puppy to jokes about rape, are why I'm never going back to Feministe. I'm sure they're sobbing into their cornflakes at the thought.
Indeed. Whatever will we do without your approval?
That is to say, that they are as disgusting as that body part which is unique to women, and which is therefore a synecdoche for women.
No, that is not to say, and thus no therefore. Otherwise, according to you, calling someone a vagina would have the exact same meaning as calling someone a cunt. But it doesn't, and that's the reason no one does that. Now you may call me a prick for saying this, but don't call me an epididymis, because there's a vas deferens between them.
(Personally, I have never found the body part in question disgusting. But a bad pun like the criminal act above, now that's disgusting.)
Remedial courses in figurative language---has it come to this? To sledegehammer home the obvious, bellatrys:
1. Words are symbols. Symbols cannot be what they represent. To confuse a word with its referent is to fall into a variation of what Whitehead called the Fallacy of Misplaced Concreteness, which is itself a special instance of reification (mistaking the abstract for the concrete). Or, as Lenny Bruce informed one of the cops who arrested him for saying "cocksucker" during his stand-up routine, "I said it, man, I didn't do it."
Failure to grasp this simple distinction results in witless defense of "decency" like the one Instaschmuck recently posted where alicublog commenters are accused of using mindless obscenities emananting from some ill-defined "lower level." (Of course, Coulter got a pass for using equally "mindless" terms such as "faggot"---see, with her, it's just an example of "hyperbole and sarcasm," wheras in our case, it's evidence of irredeemable depravity.)
Personally, my response to being called a "faggot" is to either take the sticks-and-stones...but-names-will-never-hurt-me high road or the get-the-fuck-out-of-my-face-or-I'll-show-you-what-
it's-like-to-have-your-ass-kicked-by-a-faggot low road. Provided the abuser has no formal training in the use of fire arms or the more esoteric versions of Brazilian martial arts, I of course prefer the latter.
Continued (HaloScan sucks dick). . .
Continued (and fuck HaloScan again):
2. In Eros Denied, Wayland Young examines the history of those forbidden monosyllables(including "cunt," from the Latin cunnus) and notes the obvious fact that tone and context determine the penumbra of associations that use of a particular Bad Word engenders.
Thus Chaucer is simply using the common Middle English designation for the female pudenda in The Miller's Tale: For certeyn, olde dotard, by your leave/You shall have queynte right enough at eve . . . What aileth you to grouche thus and groan?/Is it for ye would have my queynte alone?
On the other hand, for mates on their third pint at the local pub, "silly cunt" may be uttered simply as a term of endearment.
In any case, "cunt" as used here obviously doesn't carry the same pejorative connotations as it does as used by this Aussie charmer. Rarely has crazed, foaming-at-the-mouth misogyny found a more articulate proponent:
Germaine Greer is a Cunt
There’s no such thing as a patriarchy, Dr. Greer, you stupid cunt. It’s called the Real World, where seven billion strangers are picked to live in a loft and find out what happens when saber tooth tigers start taking bites out of their asses while they’re trying to sleep. It turns out in this Real World, men get to do everything. They do everything and make all the decisions. Call it whatever you want, but what it’s actually called is the truth. Men are better than women. . .
The points Greer wishes to address in her article are irrelevant — just like everything women say unless it starts with a, “Do you think I should,” or a, “I’m so sorry. I fucked up and did something you said you didn’t think I should do.” And obviously proceeded by a blowjob. . .
Germaine Greer is a woman, allegedly a doctor (though I could not find of what. I would guess proctology, but that usually entails extracting things from the butt, not lodging your own head firmly up it), and has been a virulent feminist most of her life. During my research I found the reason Dr. Greer originally entered the field of feminism is because her clitoris is shaped like a male penis and the trauma of being teased for it since she was sexually active at the age of 12 drove her into the insanity. Interesting to say the least.
Wait. Paul's not finished yet...
Or maybe he is.
Paul, and R. Porrofatto; you're talking about the connotations that "cunt" has for you (and, as it happens, me). Fine. But the fact is, for many women (and men), the connotations are different, and always offensive in the pejorative sense. No amount of linguistic history or semiotic theory (whatever the fuck that is) negates that. Now, how you respond to that is up to you. You might say "don't care. I like the usage". Again, fine. But to try to deny that people should be offended is dismissive.
But to try to deny that people should be offended is dismissive.
I don't know what to do with your formulation. I can't deny that they should be offended? Am I supposed to endorse their taking offense?
We who have free souls, it troubles us not. People who don't like alicublog because it has bad words probably wouldn't like the good ones either.
Roy, you're not supposed to do anything. See the preceding two sentences. What I think is worth calling out is someone saying "You say you're offended. Here's why you shouldn't be". By all means say "Don't like it? Don't read it!".
Roy, you're not supposed to do anything
Don't let him get to you Leeds Man, roy's just being nature's weasel: The weasel.
Actually Jay, nature's weasel is the manager (the weasels in "eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines"). The weasel is nature's Misunderstood Gentleman. It can be confusing.
And yeah, my formulation sucked. How about "to tell people that they shouldn't be offended is dismissive"?
Oh, come on, Leeds.
You might say "don't care. I like the usage".
"Like"? In some contexts, I might "like" the usage; in others, I might simply accept or ignore it. I obviously wouldn't "like" the word as used by the above-quoted Down-Under dickhead (that one I do "like," for persoanl reasons). But of course it's what's behind Australopithicus's use of the word---the hatred and stupidity---that I really don't like.
But that doesn't mean I have to invest the word itself with an aura of magical dread. As I've said many times before, words are breath and spit in someone's mouth, or serried armies of ink marching across the page, or squiggles of pixels (or shit, in Conservatard's case) unfurling across the computer screen. Can words nonetheless still hurt or frighten some people? Yes---if you allow them to. I refuse to grant them that power. If that comes off as my sounding like I'm saying "You say you're offended. Here's why you shouldn't be," I guess that kind of shoulder-shrugging stance is just the way I've learned to deal with assholes. (Although the guy who called me a "sperm-slurping lowlife" did win my props for alliteratve inventiveness.)
It's axiomatic that, as we used say in the pidgin Marxese of my youth, once you've internalized the language of the oppressor, you've taken a step toward internalizing the values represented by that language as well. Wittgenstein said, "The limits of my language are the limits of my world," and if the limits of your language are defined exclusively by the use of terms such as "cunt" in the pejorative sense, then your world is, I think,a rather dark, claustrophobic, oppressively airless place.
Pauline Kael tells the story about how she and her friends enjoyed using four-letter words during their college days. Then one day they heard those words being used by two garage mechanics, not as amusingly transgressive naughty-poo's but as expressions of pure hatred. (I think she inferred that the words themselves might also have functioned as precursors to actual physical violence.) I understand and respect her experience. But I prefer Eric Alterman's response to Coulter's recent use of "faggot":
. . .what is it about Ann Coulter that inspires people to behave so stupidly? (Hello, Time editors, TV bookers, book publishers with a scintilla of honor ...) I gotta say, this CPAC flap is really, really dumb. Everyone's playing their assigned Pavlovian role. Look, Coulter wanted her name in the media and she got it. She wanted liberals to look like prigs and she got it. How many times is it going to work when she says "Jump?" Look, the word "faggot" which is a word one hears in private conversation quite frequently; she just said it in public. It's bad manners, but what did you expect? Grow up, everyone. And let Coulter rot in solitude ... (or solitary, as the case may be).
Leeds Man: I don't think I'm telling anyone that they should or shouldn't be offended—human beings tap a limitless keg of indignation all on their own. If I called Jonah Goldberg a scumbag, I'm certain he would be offended. But I think it's quite another thing to say that since a scumbag represents an item used exclusively by men, therefore it's a synecdoche of the male gender and calling Goldberg a scumbag is an insult to all men. If anything, it's this view which dictates that, being insulted, every man should be offended at my calling Goldberg a scumbag. My point is that, while being perhaps uncharitable and in bad taste, at no time was I ever calling him a latex prophylactic.
Jesus H. Christ, do we all have cabin fever or something? With the fooferaw over fat jokes at Sadly No, now this. Am I going to have to quit going to my favorite blogs? Am I actually going to have to get work done?
I'm sure it satisfies your sense of wounded victimhood
Wow, zombie irony has just been killed.
Indeed. Whatever will we do without your approval?
Perhaps launch an attack on another liberal blog? I understand Mr. Edroso has used "cunt" pejoratively. Oh, wait, I suspect you're being sarcastic.
Now you may call me a prick for saying this, but don't call me an epididymis, because there's a vas deferens between them.
The kind of paronomasia---paronomania?---that makes loco logodaedalists like me rejoyce.
Paul, you lost me after "Oh, come on, Leeds".
Actually, you make perfect sense when you're talking about your attitude to words, and I largely feel the same way. But you go further.
1) You conflate offense with witless defense of "decency", which just ain't the case with most of the women objecting to pejorative use of "cunt".
2) You (kinda strongly) imply that anyone taking offense should just lighten up. Not everyone has the choice of adopting your attitude.
If I've misread you, you can call me whatever you want, and I don't know any Brazilian kung fu. With that, I'm done. Same time next year?
R. Porrofatto, you're right. My bad. I saw the Italian name and assumed the worst. I'm a scumbag.
This is where, as the villain of the piece, I tell all of you heroes We are not so different, you and I!
Let's be friends, motherfuckers!
Having seen the smoking ruins and scattered eagle's feathers of the proud monument that was Sadly, No!, lately brought down by an effing sandwich fer chrissakes, I'll stop now.
You've impressed me with your mighty bigness by talking with "them" rather than trying to put something over on "them". Though I, for one, can't get over the fact that you used the "N" word TWICE in the second to last paragraph. I am very offended and can read your blog no more!
But wait, didn't our good new buddy Instapunk make it clear that we are the potty mouthed bad guys of the Blogodrome? So then isn't it our role to be vulgar, just as it is the conservative's role to be moral, upright, erudite and in personal communication with the Lord Of Hosts Himself?
Admittedly, I realize that this hypothesis is, at least seemingly, somewhat flawed, as Ann Coulter's recent use of Low Speech demonstrates. Some may say that the explanation for this discrepancy is hypocrisy, both on her part specifically and on the Right's part in general, but I prefer a much simpler explanation: demonic possession. It only makes sense that Old Scratch would attempt to sully the unimpeachable virtue of God's Own Party through such underhanded methods.
As for the word cunt itself, I prefer to use it in the literal sense, as the word vagina is too cold and clinical for my tastes to refer to that wonderful organ. There are still plenty of other choices, I find, when one wishes to use obsenities, many of which can, conveniently enough, apply equaly to both genders(fuck, shit, ass, piss, damn, etc). Not to mention British cuss words, which I find almost too charming to use sometimes. In the end, though, it's all about personal preference and context, so I am in no position to dictate terms on the matter. Just consider my perspective as offered advice and nothing more. YMMV.
Let's be friends, motherfuckers!
I never lost the love!
And RP; I meant the "My bad". I somehow misread your comment. Working+reading+commenting=hazardous.
That's right, Nick.
We're the motherfucking Party of Death and we're moping around here like a bunch of sandwich-eating, probably fat, definitely vulgar, quasi-retarded, pussies (why go for the trifecta when you can nail the quinella).
Time was, being part of the Party of Death meant something to you people.
I thought the "N-Word" was banned in your fine, jumpsuit wearin, funny-talkin, childless paradise that is "da Big Apple"? Who do I report you to? Does anybody have Mr. Obama's campaign number? I am tryin to dream big dreams and all you do is keep me down man.
I thought the "N-Word" was banned in your fine, jumpsuit wearin, funny-talkin, childless paradise that is "da Big Apple"? Who do I report you to?
Go on down to 1 Police Plaza and fill out a form. The proper form of address is "I smell bacon."
Leeds: See me after class.
1.You conflate offense with witless defense of "decency", which just ain't the case with most of the women objecting to pejorative use of "cunt".
Say wha? "Most of the women"? You polled all of them? Clearly, things are busy across the pond.
OK, so that's an example of me being a prick, but, mon semble et mon frere, I was not, to shift genital gears, claiming that "most of the women objecting to the pejorative use of 'cunt'" are in league with Instapunkers and their "witless defense of 'decency.'" But you raise an interesting point, since such alliances---inadvertent or deliberate---can occur, as witness the appropriation by rightists of the late Andrea Dworkin's critiques of pornography (and her sponsorship of anti-pornography legislation.)
Alas, I agree with the Feminist Anti-Censorship Task Force and others that the cost of such legislation is too high a price to pay for the corresponding loss of free expression. I would likewise say a ban on use of the word "cunt," either as a term of ironic affection or outright opprobrium, wouldn't be worth a similar loss. Some people have legitimate reasons for being offended by pornography and/or the use of the word "cunt," but I'm only willing to go so far in deferring to their sensitivities before muttering "Get over it."
[Fucking HaloScan break follows]
2. Not everyone has the choice of adopting your attitude. True: not everyone can replace thin skin with a titanium carapace, but I've found it helps. As for "choice," it depends on the context in which it occurs.
I recognize that Dworkin's attitude on the issue of pornography was directly shaped by her appalling experiences with some major-league bastards, just as I'm sure that many women's attitudes towards the word "cunt" were directly shaped by their appalling experiences with some equally major-league bastards.
Having worked in various E.R.'s, I've seen many female victims of domestic abuse (there are males, too) whose spouses regularly subjected them to verbal/psychological abuse ("cunt," "whore," "bitch"), often accompanied by its physical counterpart. Dissociating one from the other is therefore difficult. Some (but not all) abused women view tend to view such words not as isolated abstractions but as another weapon in their partner's arsenal of abuse.
The psychological aftermath of this kind of history can't be willed away, but there are different ways of handling it. Obviously, the solution for many of the women in these circumstances would be to terminate the relationship. Of course, many of them feel they cannot, often because there's no money and what's going to happen to the kids and where will we sleep? considerations, but also because in many cases their self-esteem is so low that they learn to believe that at some level they "deserve" the abuse.
But just as they can deny their abusers control by leaving them, so they can deny their abusers' language control by neutralizing the power that their experience has given certain words.
Failing that, many are going to find themselves in a more traumatic version of the Pavlovian situation Alterman spoke of above, twitching reflexively at every mention of That Word. All I can say is that self-programmed desensitization to certain stimuli does sometimes work. Why, these days I can actually hear the word "Christian" without hurling my Oreos across the room.
P.S.: I admire tough women---well, tough and smart (that automatically excludes Coultergeist) or at least honest. After she was initially diagnosed with cancer, Susan Sontag appeared on The Dick Cavett Show and talked about her experiences with radiation and chemotherapy.
"But didn't your hair fall out?," Cavett fairly gasped.
"Yeah," replied Sontag matter-of-factly. "But it grew back."
Exactly.
Eileen Left -
I have no idea who you are, or what you're talking about. You sure it was the same spencer?
Thanks for arguing for context, Roy. It's kinda obvious, but then again groupuscles self-confined to a self-congratulatory echo chamber tend to miss the obvious. Anyway, while you might have reclaimed the the language from misguided newspeaksmiths in the general sense, I'm afraid you have left the subject of 'fat joke: evidence of cartoonish supervillainy unless joker submits to re-education on thread which told him to fuck himself and held his "type" at general fault for the 2000 election results' unanswered.
Another day, perhaps.
I wonder if Plimpton didn't get his schtick from Dear Joe and, through Joe, from Philadelphia Jack O'Brien: "I had heard that the dynamic intensity of the challenger's onslaught was such that it could not readily be withstood, but I figured I could jab his puss off."
Here's to the unexpected choice; long may it be honored.
With kind regards,
Dog, etc.
dog knows i tried
Truly -- context, people, context is key...
My late father called it the "You People" Barrier. As he explained it to his offspring, a newcomer to the bar can often get away with calling a third party a stupid fuckwad. The newcomer might even get away with calling his new drinking friend a stupid fuckwad. But once the newcomer starts a sentence with "Why is it that you people are always such stupid fuckwads about... " or "The trouble with you (stupid fuckwad) people is... " the YPB has been breached. Punches will be thrown, scarring (psychic if not physical) will result, and there will be a bill for breakages that will severely deplete the regulars' beer money.
Most political blogging, of course, consists of crossing the You People Barrier -- sometimes intentionally. The smarter bloggers (and I prefer to believe that those of us reading Alicublog are among them) try to aim most of the YPB insults at our opponents, not our allies.
TO ALL THE COMMENTATORS WHO'VE COMMENTATED BEFORE in this here commentary:
imho YOU GUYS HAVE AUTHORED ABSOLUTELY THE ALLTIME BEST M***** F***** BUNCHA WILD BLOGGY COMMENTARY I'VE EVER HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO PERUSE IN MY WHOLE M***** F***** BLOG-LURKIN' LIFE. Mind you, not that I've ever given the slightest thought of f***** my m*****, who was a nice enough c***, excuse me, b****, if a bit "up-tight" about such word choice.
...a-and just when I was thinkin that generally speakin, this sort of self-referential commentary was primarily authored by an effete cadre of dumf*** a******s who couldn't retain a fresh or interesting thought in their s***-fer-b****s if their very lives depended on it, but who ironically exhibited some weird kind o print-death-wish in displaying the incredible br***th of their ignorance for all the blogw**** to see.
Boy I was certainly a piece of dogshi* j***of* for thinkin this. Please accept my apologies. Ever' last oneoyezz.
I'm coming late to the party here, I see. (I turn my back on you people for a few hours...)
Those old Anglo-Saxonisms as they used to be called are like a lot of words that are at the core of English, you might say: bread, do, fuck, have, be, get, take, shit, cunt. None of them refer to a single thing or action any more. They've got layers and layers of connotation, of suggestion, so much so that when people use the word "fuck," for instance, it could mean any one of several dozen things. Ultimately those meanings may all be traceable back to the act of, well, fucking, but most of the time that's not the one that's intended. Same thing with the word "cunt."
Who decided all of a sudden after a couple thousand years of the English language that the word only means one thing? And how come this word only can only be referring to one thing while other basic English words, like "shit" and "have" are allowed to mean lots of things?
Anybody who thinks that "cunt" in general conversation refers to their own personal actual body part, is, well, suffering from a case of terminal solipsism. I'm as whiny and self-absorbed as the next person but I've never felt that way, and where I grew up there was a whole other local vocabulary of cuss words, usually genital-related, and even nastier than "cunt." It never occurred to me to take them personally. Even when they made me uncomfortable. "Hey, wait a minute, that's my personal vagina you're calling names!" No, it isn't. No, really. It isn't. Now, please kindly take your personal meat off the table so people can continue kicking shit around.
I've been called a cunt before but it's always some dickhead who's calling me that.
Just a couple more words, and I coulda claimed to have inspired a two-haloscan-break paul k comment. Another elite group I'm denied membership to.
I'm late to this thread, but this passage from Ian McEwan's masterpiece Atonement is too good not to post here. Briony, an eleven-year old Edwardian girl, has just read the word cunt for the first time:
"The word: she tried to prevent it sounding in her thoughts, and yet it danced through them obscenely, a typographical demon, juggling vague, insinuating anagrams--an uncle and a nut, the Latin for next, an Old English king attempting to turn back the tide. Rhyming words took their form from children's books--the smallest pig in the litter, the hounds pursuing the fox, the flat-bottomed boats on the Cam by Grantchester meadow. Naturally, she had never heard the word spoken, or seen it in print, or come across it in asterisks. No one in her presence had ever referred to the word's existence, and what was more, no one, not even her mother, had ever referred to the existence of that part of her to which--Briony was certain--the word referred. She had no doubt that that was what it was. The context helped, but more than that, the word was at one with its meaning, and was almost onomatopoeic. The smooth-hollowed, partly enclosed forms of its first three letters were as clear as a set of anatomical drawings. Three figures huddling at the foot of the cross. That the word had been written by a man confessing to an image in his mind, confiding a lonely preoccupation, disgusted her profoundly."
This theme climaxes in the comic scene of Briony imagining herself compelled to speak the word out loud before a solemn court proceeding. But the tragic second half of the novel traces the awesome havoc the power of the word on Briony's mind wreaks on other people's lives.
Cunt is not a word to be fucked with lightly.
I do understand, Roy. I fall in love all the time, and I was reared in house full of women. They never get old to me. Well, in general.
Here's all you need to understand:
When someone does something that OFFENDS me, they have ATTACKED me. See? They have HARMED me. To OFFEND me is to CAUSE ME HARM.
Once I have been offended, by ANYTHING, I have the absolute right to do ANYTHING I WANT IN RESPONSE. Furthermore, I am REQUIRED TO RESPOND. Or I'm not a Manly Man.
See? See?
It's simple. If you hadn't OFFENDED me, then I wouldn't have had to do something about it. So don't OFFEND me. Or I'll get you.
* * *
Okay, now, returning to sanity --
If I want to insult someone, I will address my insults specifically to that person and use whatever fucking words I fucking feel like using, because I'm a grown up and I goddam well can. If the person I am specifically insulting wants to become offended, that is most likely a reasonable response on their part. If some other person I was not specifically addressing wants to take umbrage because I used a word they personally find 'offensive', well, I have an ass and I presume this person has lips, and the application process is obvious. Repeat as necessary until the issue is satisfactorily resolved.
Or, to put it another way -- even if someone addresses a mortal insult directly to you, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO TAKE OFFENSE IF YOU DON'T WANT TO.
Being offended by something is a conscious decision on your part. Try to be a grown up about it.
McEwan hopelessly outclasses this exchange from Boys on the Side, but I think it makes its grubby little point (thank HaloScan for the absence of line breaks):
ROBIN: I just wasn't brought up to
talk about a person's anatomy.
JANE: That's probably because you don't have a word for it.
ROBIN: That's just ridiculous. I do, too. It just doesn't often come up.
JANE: Okay. What is this, below the belly button?
ROBIN: I'm not going to say "pussy" if that's what you're
after, okay, I hate that.
JANE: Okay. So, what do you call it?
ROBIN: Down there.
JANE: Oh, come on! "Down there!"
ROBIN: Well, "vagina" seems so formal.
JANE: But you make it sound like a basement!
ROBIN: Okay. Honestly?. . ."Hoo-hoo" or "cissy."
JANE: You're kidding, right? A "hoo-hoo" or a "cissy," what
is that?
ROBIN: Well that's what my mother called it. I had a hoo-hoo or a cissy and my brother had a "noodle" or a "dingle."
JANE: And that's what you still call it?
ROBIN: Well, it's better than "pussy." Or "beaver." What's
that about? I never got that. Or worse...
JANE: Worse? Did you say worse? Now, what could be worse? I have to hear you say it.
ROBIN: Well, you know. I'm not going to say it.
JANE: Oh, come on! "C-U-N-T." Come on, please?
ROBIN: I don't think so.
JANE: Please? It'll free you. Try it!
ROBIN: There's a policeman within the sound of my voice.
JANE: Give him a thrill.
ROBIN: I don't think so. . .
JANE: Come on.
ROBIN: All right. "Cunt."
JANE:What? What was that?
ROBIN: I said it!
JANE: No, you breathed it! I want to hear you say it.
ROBIN: All right! All right. All right. "C-U-N-T, cunt."
JANE: Yeah?
ROBIN: "Cunt." "Cunt." "CUNT!"
JANE: Free! You've got a dirty mouth.
ROBIN: You were right. I feel...I don't know, different.
JANE:That's because you're free Miss Scarlett! You're free! C'mon, let's go get everybody and tell them!
Or, to put it another way -- even if someone addresses a mortal insult directly to you, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO TAKE OFFENSE IF YOU DON'T WANT TO.
So, you run around telling black folks that they don't have to be offended by "nigger," I take it.
speaking of words, how come we never hear much about hackles
Your hackles are lowered when you're nice and gruntled.
And BTW the dirtiest, most hackles raising word in the American English political dictionary is peace!
You will hear no candidate, no matter how much they claim to oppose the War on Iraq, use the word "peace".
Hey look it up; "peace" means "an immediate and craven retreat from evil agressors, who will thereupon rape our women and take our Playstations"!
I remember the cry "Peace in Viet Nam"
Have you heard a single person call for "Peace in Iraq"?
We will be the only nation to go fascist becuse the process provided a relief from boredom.
A: The unarguable:YOU DO NOT HAVE TO TAKE OFFENSE IF YOU DON'T WANT TO.
B: The SAT-failing analogy: So, you run around telling black folks that they don't have to be offended by "nigger," I take it.
How is A different than B?
Here's another way to look at it: The staggering diversity of opinion on what cunt means just on this thread makes its intent cloudy no? Could mean a lot of things -- thus, like in MOST THINGS, context matters. And the context of nigger does too -- obviously.
But that doesn't even address the fact that blacks can choose all by themselves what they consider offensive, just as everyone else can.
Which separates the statment "A" from the facile response of "B".
A: The unarguable:YOU DO NOT HAVE TO TAKE OFFENSE IF YOU DON'T WANT TO.
I'm unarguable, but you're arguing with me anyway. Which one of us is John Cleese again? I get confused.
B: The SAT-failing analogy: So, you run around telling black folks that they don't have to be offended by "nigger," I take it.
Now, if it turns out that I am actually Black Highlander (brilliant lab tech Bill Foster, who inherited the mystic sword from Hank Pym when Hank retired from the hero game for a time) and I now fly into hysterics and shriek at you for using the 'n' word in front of my deeply sensitive eyes, would you not then respond "jesus fuck, man, I didn't use the word 'nigger' as an insult nor with any intent to offend ANYone, much less you specifically, lighten UP, fuckwad"? And wouldn't you be RIGHT to do so?
Not necessarily. You could be arguing in your spare time.
For what it's worth, I think we can all safely take offense at Ann Coulter's 'faggot' remark, or at any other asininity she lets drop from her lips. When someone intends to offend a specific target audience, members of that audience are being perfectly reasonable when they take offense.
What I am saying is, sometimes no offense is intended, as when Roy uses 'cunt' and I, in a previous thread, advised that the thought of Michelle Malkin and/or Anne Coulter in a burqua, being treated as the property of their closest male relatives, was nearly enough to make me yearn for dhimmitude. I was merely voicing my annoyance at those very specific female persons, and intended no offense to any other person of any gender.
And I continue to maintain, when the offensive word is not directed at you, specifically, you may if you wish choose to take offense at it anyway, on behalf of whichever victim class you choose to self identify with... but such an action is less reasonable than simply choosing to shrug and be about your business. People sling shit all the time, especially on blogs like this one. If the shit isn't slung at you, well, you can jump in the way of it if you want to... but I'll have little sympathy when you ask me to help you change your diapers.
Jay B.,
I'm sorry, you were on my side, weren't you? I apologize. I should have directed my ire at zuzu.
I'm very tired today. My most profound apologies.
I'll stick by everything else I've said, though. Just, you know, redirecting it to zuzu.
And his/her petals.
Oh, basta already.I know the Buswhackers long ago toe-tagged the The Fairness Doctrine, but does that mean we progressive types have to imitate our worsers? Now that cunt has virtually swallowed this string whole, surely the talented Cpl. Matt Sanchez---professional pole-smoker extraordinaire, right-wing flunky, and center of the latest scandal over at Family Values Central---should be given equal time to swallow what he swallows best. Lord knows, he's up, up, up, to the job. Ten-hut
See, that's why I just lay around the shanty drinking cheap wine. You guys don't need me! I'm just lovable old Harry Hope.
Jay, your comments are always welcome, but what I really want is a fucking contract.
Dragging negotiations out in the open, eh edroso?
Anyway, I'll email you. To talk about where things are.
Highlander -- don't worry about it.
donna -- nice one! that would make a great one liner for a lady stand-up comedian.
as for the c-word and n-word, i don't use them b/c they're offensive to me.
as far as a colliquial word for vaginia, how about cooter or quim? or le petit chat?
the equivalent, in my mind, of calling a woman a c-word is calling a man a prick. a prick does something bad, and he knows it's bad. a dick, otoh, does something bad b/c he's dumb/stupid/doesn't know any better.
black -- just use black. african american is a little too p.c. for me.
and i wonder what prelutsky would say if you called him a polack. he's probably a papist, too.
*sigh* I see a lot of people missing the point entirely. Still, excellent post.
A friend of mine once called her feminist 'zine QUEYNT, pronounced "quaint", which she told me was the Chaucerian version of the ancient anatomical term. As for myself, when I want to be offensive, I've yet to hear anybody defend the humble fuckwad as undeserving of insult, so I may just stick with "Yes, our proud free-speech traditions allow anyone to be just as much of a fuckwad as they choose, so long as they don't mind being called a fuckwad for doing so, you simple fuckwad."
Anne Laurie:
The Chaucer quote from The Miller's Tale quoted above adds an "e" to queynt (for the obvious reason that in Chaucer's time English spelling hadn't yet been standardized): For certeyn, olde dotard, by your leave/You shall have queynte right enough at eve . . . What aileth you to grouche thus and groan?/Is it for ye would have my queynte alone?
Christ, another groups of people who don't really understand the difference between "Cunt" and "Nigger".
Ones a swear word that signifies a woman who has no sense of anyone but themselves. A selfish, spiteful human being who believes herself to be the center of the universe. It has a male equivalent in the word "dick" that signifies the exact same qualities in a male. Historically, it has had many meanings from "you're stupid" to "You're a girl" to "female genitalia".
The other is a word that signifies that a person with dark skin is not completely human. It is sometimes used to indicate a person who exhibits stereo-typically black behavior. But historically, it's only really had the "you're subhuman" meaning. There is no counterpart for white people, and what few racial slurs there are for whites are generally built around rape and theft due to slave owners actions during our time as slave-owners. It can't be equated with cunt. Trying just makes you look clueless.
Ah, soullite just cut through all the bullshit to reveal the real problem; we don't use the same imaginary dictionary he uses.
"Christ, another groups of people who don't really understand the difference between "Cunt" and "Nigger".
Ones a swear word that signifies a woman who has no sense of anyone but themselves. A selfish, spiteful human being who believes herself to be the center of the universe. It has a male equivalent in the word "dick" that signifies the exact same qualities in a male. Historically, it has had many meanings from "you're stupid" to "You're a girl" to "female genitalia".
The other is a word that signifies that a person with dark skin is not completely human. It is sometimes used to indicate a person who exhibits stereo-typically black behavior. But historically, it's only really had the "you're subhuman" meaning. There is no counterpart for white people, and what few racial slurs there are for whites are generally built around rape and theft due to slave owners actions during our time as slave-owners. It can't be equated with cunt. Trying just makes you look clueless."
Actually, no. Cunt is a term used to malign women by reducing their worth solely to their genitalia, consequently implying that they're subhuman. Because cunt also means "female genitalia" then using the word as an insult evokes bodily shame. A shame that has been ingrained in women for centuries, and is often the basic justification for our status as second class citizens. Saying that cunt is the same as prick is like saying that Nigger is the same as Cracker. They're not the same, Nigger and cunt are nocuous slurs used to further denigrate an already marginilized class of people and Prick/Cracker, while potentially hurtful do not carry with them the same negative socio-historical connotations.
Try to be respectful and mindful of others. Abandon this tired argument, it's incomplete and quite frankly, it's fucking embarrassing.
Actually, no. Cunt is a term used to title a nifty colouring book.
Commenting by HaloScan
