Is the word ******** offensive?

[Patroklos]

Again, the point isn't censorship- it'd be piss-poor censorship if it was- it's a deliberate gesture on the part of the speaker to show that they are aware that the word can cause offensive, and that they are considerate enough of the feelings of others not to go about doing so willy-nilly. It's a form of communication in itself, not just an attempt to obscure some existing form of communication. It's just polite.

It's not polite, it's insulting. Insinuating that a group of people are so uptight, immature and hypersensitive that the mere sight or hearing of a word in a non offensive context will instinctively send them into a self righteous rage or self pitying depression is a not at all subtle comment on the intelligence of your audience.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

Hear, hear!

 

[NovaKart]

So have you all ever been called out for saying something offensive which you didn't expect? Once my aunt said it was sexist because I used the word housewife.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

It's not polite, it's insulting. Insinuating that a group of people are so uptight, immature and hypersensitive that the mere sight or hearing of a word in a non offensive context will instinctively send them into a self righteous rage or self pitying depression is a not at all subtle comment on the intelligence of your audience.

I think the fact that you're insulted by someone being considerate towards you says a lot more about you than it does the person who's choosing not to use certain words around you.

 

[luiz]

Perhaps this is just a cultural thing- I don't know if they do "letter-word" in Brazil- but I don't think that you're interpreting the practice at all correctly. It's not intended to disguise the word, because, as you say, everyone still knows full what what you mean; that is, in fact, the whole point of saying it. Rather, the purpose is to explicitly acknowledge that you are aware of and sensitive to the offence that can be caused by the word, and are considerate enough to make sure that they are aware of this. It's quite simply good manners.

Or would you call someone who said, say, "I'm just going to visit the restroom" an Orwellian censor, because they didn't have the good democratic decency to just stand up and say "I'm off to the crapper"?

We don't do "letter-words", nope. My point was that censoring the word is no good, because the word in itself is not the problem. I don't think that reading correctly a text by Mark Twain is offensive towards anyone. But I can use strictly politically correct terms and be tremendously offensive.

 

[luiz]

So have you all ever been called out for saying something offensive which you didn't expect? Once my aunt said it was sexist because I used the word housewife.

Yep, I've found out that in Chile the term "indio" (indian) is a bit offensive. In Brazil it isn't offensive at all. In fact the mixed ancestry of chileans is treated as a bit of a taboo, while in Brazil it is entirely normal.

 

[bombshoo]

It's offensive, but it's becoming progressively less so. Soon it will just be another synonym for stupid. People often forget that just like the word "", "idiot", "moron" and 'imbecile" all were once scientific definitions.

 

[Traitorfish]

It's not polite, it's insulting. Insinuating that a group of people are so uptight, immature and hypersensitive that the mere sight or hearing of a word in a non offensive context will instinctively send them into a self righteous rage or self pitying depression is a not at all subtle comment on the intelligence of your audience.

Do you also make a habit of farting in company, so as not to allow any of them to believe that you think so little of them as to assume that they would be to uptight to enjoy the fragrant scent of your arse-burps?

We don't do "letter-words", nope. My point was that censoring the word is no good, because the word in itself is not the problem. I don't think that reading correctly a text by Mark Twain is offensive towards anyone. But I can use strictly politically correct terms and be tremendously offensive.

You're exactly, right, which is that is self-evidently not the point. Only the most addle-brained individual would seriously believe that offence consists in a particular cluster of syllables, as if the offence was simply aesthetic, so it's clear that the function of these euphemisms is to express an awareness of and sensitivity to the cultural status of the word, and a willingness not to just go blundering in assuming that everyone knows you're neither ignorant nor pig-headed. That depends on company, obviously, but so do a lot of things. That's kind of one of the functions of manners, to provide a structure in which the appropriate level of intimacy can be acknowledged and expressed.

 

[Communisto]

I understand the point about finding the appropriate level of intimacy in a conversation, but what Im saying is that if the intimacy level of the conversation is not one that can handle "the n-word," as in, the actual word, then whatever topic is carrying the need to say that probably shouldnt be being discussed in that environment.

Abbreviating the word doesnt make the idea of calling someone ******** any less offensive, it just soaks the conversation in childish absurdity. We all know what 'the r-word' is, just say the word. Changing letters around doesnt change the word, it still exists and we know what it is and in fact you are now putting that word in our minds. If you say 'the r-word' youre still saying '********.' The only thing that has changed is that you now sound ridiculous and as if youre afraid of the word.

 

[GamezRule]

It's offensive, but not that big of a deal.

 

[Traitorfish]

I understand the point about finding the appropriate level of intimacy in a conversation, but what Im saying is that if the intimacy level of the conversation is not one that can handle "the n-word," as in, the actual word, then whatever topic is carrying the need to say that probably shouldnt be being discussed in that environment.

Abbreviating the word doesnt make the idea of calling someone ******** any less offensive, it just soaks the conversation in childish absurdity. We all know what 'the r-word' is, just say the word. Changing letters around doesnt change the word, it still exists and we know what it is and in fact you are now putting that word in our minds. If you say 'the r-word' youre still saying '********.' The only thing that has changed is that you now sound ridiculous and as if youre afraid of the word.

The assumption is that you wouldn't be using the word in that sense at all, but only quoting or what have you. If you're not actually able to avoid thinking of people who are mentally disable- or black, or gay, or whatever- without using a slur, then your problems are more fundamental than the word itself, whether or not you mince it. If you don't have the basic self-discipline to catch yourself when you're thinking like that, then obviously no amount of polite word-choice is going to save you from acting in an offensive manner. I honestly though that was so obvious as to go without saying.

 

[imperialman]

This reminds me of what Stephen Fry once said;

"It's very common to hear people say 'I'm rather offended by that' as if that gives them certain rights; it's actually nothing more... it's simply a whine. It's no more than a whine. 'I find that offensive,' it has no meaning, it has no purpose, it has no reason to be respected by a phrase. 'I am offended by that,' well so <snip> what?"

Moderator Action: Please do not use words blocked by the autocensor.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Traitorfish]

This reminds me of what Stephen Fry once said;

"It's very common to hear people say 'I'm rather offended by that' as if that gives them certain rights; it's actually nothing more... it's simply a whine. It's no more than a whine. 'I find that offensive,' it has no meaning, it has no purpose, it has no reason to be respected by a phrase. 'I am offended by that,' well so <snip> what?"

True, and that's why you distinguish between what is genuinely hurtful, and what merely twists people's bollocks. On the one hand, Fry is right that a lot of "offendedness" at language is just petulant whinging, but at the same time I doubt that he would just shrug it off if you called him a "[f-bleep-t] kike". There's a certain heavy dose of common sense that needs to be employed, here.

Moderator Action: Please do not quote words blocked by the autocensor.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[ParkCungHee]

Not a thing.

That's because you didn't get audited.
I tell you, it is seriously difficult to provide proper documentation for the words you used for the past year.
I should have just paid them what they asked when they arrived, instead, I think I spent more money going through and having an accountant certify my use of ethnic slurs in reference to myself.

 

[wolfigor]

Unfortunately we attached a strong negative value to a word (the R-word) that we cannot anymore use it as a synonym for stupid.
Depending on the context it can be really offensive.

If you call a "mentally challenged" person "********" or "Mongoloid" (quite common offense in Italy instead of R-word) it's quite detrimental to the person addressed by the word.

However it's normal speak to say that an idea is "********" or a person who has no mental handicap is being "********".
This is a very quick and direct way to say that somebody has expressed a stupid idea or that he has been acting in a stupid way.

Essentially you say: you idea appear to be made by somebody with mental handicap.
You are not trying to offend people with mental handicap but you try to express your opinion on a specific idea.
There is no point to consider the R-word offensive for the people with mental handicap in this context (your friend can be still upset because of your judgment, but that's a different matter).

I think it's childish and immature to consider the R-word so offensive that has to be banned from common speech.
Any word associated to mental illness, sooner or later, it will become a way to express that something or somebody is stupid.

As bombshoo wrote other words had the same fate: "moron", "imbecile", "Mongoloid", etc. etc. until the current "********".

Soon enough the politically correct time-wasters will start complaining about the word "Challenged".

 

[Traitorfish]

Yes, if we're to make any progress then piling up euphemisms has to be a secondary project to learning not treating the disabled with contempt, which is what disability rights advocates are actively trying to convince us to do. Just because us privileged jackoffs only feel like listening to the language politics doesn't and has never meant that there's nothing more to it.

 

[warpus]

If you use it correctly, it is not offensive.

If you call a douchebag the r-word - that is fine.

If you call a mentally handicapped person the r-word - that is offensive because mentally handicapped people are usually not ********.

 

[Traitorfish]

If you use it correctly, it is not offensive.

If you call a douchebag the r-word - that is fine.

If you call a mentally handicapped person the r-word - that is offensive because mentally handicapped people are usually not ********.

But the very construction of the world as insulting is in itself denigrating to mentally disabled people, so using it in reference only to non-mentally disabled people is like saying that it's ok to call people the n-word, as long as their white. (And, yes, I know that "r-word" is an ambiguous place where it's half minority slur, half synonym for stupid, but half is enough to make this problematic. When there's been a full divergence between the two, then we can talk.)

 

[warpus]

Meh, language is a funny thing. I was half-kidding anyway, a reference to the South Park episode about fags (motorcycle gang members)

 

[Traitorfish]

Oops. You got me in over-serious mode, sorry.