I wasn't suggesting that you did.  The point was that insulting someone directly, regardless of what words you use, isn't going to be a feel-good experience for the target.  In your example, direct hostility to other forumgoers was the problem (and as far as I know, that 'is' moderated around here).  The profanity was just incidental.

And sure, it's not unreasonable to 'ask' for something like this but it'd be silly to expect that a gaming forum, where anyone who can type a mostly coherent sentence is welcome, will actually follow through.  I mean really... context matters and this isn't a Harvard lecture hall.  It's a local bar.  The discussion around here is hardly scientific and most of the posters here aren't actively campaigning to the family values crowd. 

Well it made sense to me in any case. What it is with language and action, is that it really should be reasonable to try to not be offensive to people, unless the situation requires it.

Re so-called bad words, "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." Vocabulary choice is a matter of fitting personal style to a given context. I try not to throw in words that might scare parents or offend religious conservatives--unless it seems like the thread, or especially the OP, is not picky about such things. Sometimes my emotions get the better of me and I end up calling a pile of excrement by a much shorter word.

Re censorship, I'm a minority (gay) and I regularly see folks use words that can get you tangled in hate crime laws if you use them in the wrong context. But I'd rather see even open hatefulness addressed with more and better words and not the hammer of censorship.The way to fight that sort of cruel language is to refuse to let it hurt you.

Re the business of being articulate: one of the single best pieces of clever silliness ever put on the net, fword.wav (yes, it's about indoor sporting...)

It was not a rant, just a statement of truth. It doesn't matter what "curses" might have been, which is why I then changed the word to offensive words although the correct term would be "profanities."

Sorry, but I disagree with you on the "origins" of "profanities" and it seems to me that your understanding of "history" is lacking. Do you honestly believe that there were no profanities uttered before England? Profanities were being uttered thousands of years before England was ever even a notion in someone's mind. Don't try to lecture me with your very biased understanding of the topic. There are many kinds of profanities, many of which are not based in religion at all. Actually, not a single one of the words, of which the original poster was probably referring to, has any basis in religion. The "F" word, "B" word, "S" word, etc. have no basis whatsoever in any kind of religious context. Well, you could argue that the "F" word has some basis in religion because of what the original meaning of what the "F" word was. I am talking about what the original meaning was, which was Fornication under consent of the king, that might have taken a negative connotation because fornication is seen as a sin, but the others do not have that basis. Every language has profanities, some of which may be rooted in religion, some of which may not be, what arrogance you have in thinking it all stems from Old England.

Do you think there are no profanities in Chinese, or Greek, or Latin, or any other language that has ever existed before English was created? Have you ever even lived in another country other then I am assuming the US? I have. I lived in Asia for more then 4 years, not to mention all the other parts of the world I have been to. In Most Asian countries, it is extremely rude to use profanities and very much socially unacceptable. That comes from Old England too? No offense but your comments show you to be foolish in this matter.

Cursing is just poor judgement in all scenarios.  It does not matter if it was intended to be offensive.  Only that it was perceived as offensive.  Think along the same lines as sexual harrassment.  It does not matter that you didn't think it was offensive.

People just need to be civil in all cases, and respect each other.  If you couldn't say it to your mother without feeling a twinge of guilt or shame, you should not say it at all.

Sorry if I am perceived as a prude, but no point has ever been made more clear or concise by the use of words that are generally considered unacceptable in civil speech.

My 2-cents.

Ray

I don't believe that was the crux of the discussion at all, unless you were taking it in a different direction. The original poster found it offensive for people to use these kinds of words, however you want to label them. He also thought that there should be stronger moderation of it. Now, I disagree that there should be heavy handed moderation concerning this but I agree with him that using these sorts of words can be rude and mean spirited. It doesn't mean that everyone who uses them are, it just means generally speaking, it is and most cultures and people would agree. 

I don't disagree that there are words which are taboo because of their historical meaning or purpose or based off of certain things that may have happened in the past or based on certain ways of thinking. I don't think that was the crux of this discussion.

I think you worded it well. This is exactly the case.

@Fistalis, I only say this because I think you would want to know, but I think you were looking for the word "etymology" which is the study of the history of words, whereas "entomology" is generally reserved for the study of insects I don't say it to be rude, but it just seems like you would want to know that!

That being said, I don't think words like that are considered "taboo" in the sense that you mean, because our language is fairly open here in the US (unless you aren't from the US?).  It's just that some words are more prone to being used for offensive purposes (several 4 letter words, along with a few B words here and there ), I mean, you generally don't see "kind gentleman" used in an offensive fashion, unless there's a heavy amount of sarcasm behind it   Context is everything though, especially with language, and language is one thing that evolves at such a rapid rate it's hard to even keep up with it when you live in it on a daily basis.  A lot of the words that were offensive a long time ago, are no longer offensive.  I used to get my mouth washed out with soap for saying "fart".  Crazy, right? It wasn't because fart was "taboo" but because my mom didn't want me using "bad language". It's an ambiguous concept for sure.  Even the "N" word, used in a certain way isn't necessarily offensive, you just have to be very careful how and when you use it.  Ideally, we all have the right to use whatever words we want, but sometimes not exercising a right can be the better course, especially on something as trivial as "curse words".

Guess i'll leave it to provide people with a laugh and show how pride can lead to the fall.

"Context is everything though, especially with language, and language is one thing that evolves at such a rapid rate it's hard to even keep up with it when you live in it on a daily basis. "

Is a fair point which i fully agree with. However the OP suggested we should out right ban certain words regardless of context.. one doesn't need those words to denote negative or offensive meaning. Nor does the actual use of those words denote negative or offensive intent. If the argument is simply "some people need to be more judicious with their use of words in certain contexts" i would fully agree... not only for the words in question but many overly used misunderstood words i see thrown around.

However the argument has been "You shouldn't use those words cause they offend me". Or alternatively.. "you shouldn't use those words because It offends me and others" Which i personally find ludicrous and offensive in that someone feels their personal opinion should decide the available vocabulary of this forum.

*btw if you track through all my posts I have ever made here you'll find maybe one or 2 profanities if any. I tend to use more culturally acceptable words when possible. So i'm not simply defending my or anyone elses right to go on profane rants. Its simply a matter of principle for me.

Yep. A little civility goes a long ways.

I think a little swearing is ok. A 4 letter word here and there shouldn't ruin any one's forum experience.

However, if the swear words are directed at a person then it becomes a problem. If I say that your idea is f'ing retarded or that you are a g.d. a-hole then that's unacceptable. That makes for a bad forum experience.

If someone says that the "f'ing game crashed just as I was trying to save after buying equipment to outfit my heroes for ten minutes!" then I don't really have a problem with that. Or saying the naval ai is sh*t at the moment. A timely placed swear word can actually be pretty funny.

Like most things in life, it comes down to common sense. I would prefer if people would articulate themselves well without having to resort to swear words but I also am not going to be draconian about it. Oh, and I still think a swear filter would be indoor sporting eventing funny.

Keeping a civil demeanor in public is definitely a good thing. Respecting people in general, however, is not the same thing as feeling obliged to speak respectfully to someone who is a belligerent twit, and if the twit's behavior includes coarse language, I see nothing wrong with responding in kind--especially if you can do it while also showing generally superior language skills.

Your point about mothers has a degree of stand-up comedy logic to it, but it completely ignores the fact that some mothers can startle sailors when they get going with an extended insult. The thing is to be context-sensitive. If the mothers around are prim and proper, of course you should avoid being coarse. But if the only mother in the room is a profanity scholar or has multiple expletives tattooed on her, well...

Again, I said that some may or may not be based on religion but I think that it is more a matter of what are the important things to people that cause profanities to have power over us and the meanings behind the words. It isn't just the words themselves as you are right in the sense that "GRAB" could have been the word which was associated with a particular notion. That is irrelevant though. Ancestors, religion, our families, friends, whatever may be the origin of these words, they stem from those things which were or are most important to us and that is what makes them so offensive. It could be race, religion, sexual orientation, etc. 

It is rather amusing that you insist people shouldn't use those words regardless of context yet you personally attack me with acceptable words. Lets see So far you have called me arrogant, foolish.. claimed that my understanding of history is lacking, childish and obstinate. Did I leave anything out? How in the world can you claim your usage of language is any better than someone who slips "ass" into a post? Or that the usage of a profane word is somehow more negative in connotation then the words you have used to personally attack me?

So let me see if I can get this straight. Its okay to offend and attack people as long as I don't use any "bad" words?

I always say that you catch more flies with honey than vinegar.  Kill 'em with kindness... In a debate, you will never change someone's point of view with hostility.  You may feel that you "won" with the "generally superior language skills", but by "responding in kind", you in fact, "lost".  All are entitled to their opinions -- that is what I really meant by respect.  Respecting someone's right to feel a certain way, even if I do not agree with them.

I am definitely no comedian.     While I agree that some mothers fit the description that you painted, I would never treat them as anything less than a lady, even if they themselves choose to act / speak otherwise.  I would be willing to bet that a small percentage of mothers are close to fitting your description.

Ray

That's true, but the person hearing can be offended regardless of what the intent is. And in general, that's the important part when it comes to things like this, don't you think?

With exceptions of course, since sometimes you really need to get a point across.

Edit:

As a side note, can you two please learn to debate without dragging eachother down? Maybe it's just me but it seems there's a lot of hostility in those posts, and that can't be good for eaither of you.

Which leads me back to the point that anyone can be offended by any word if they so choose to be. When do you ascribe taboo status to a word.. when one person is offended or when many are? Is it a simple majority.. or is offending one person enough to bar the usage of a word?

For example.. in my first post on this thread i used the term puritanical. Now that may offend puritans. So should I have gone out of my way to find a different word to avoid any possible offense?

Another. In the above post blackrainz stated he felt i was being foolish on my outlook of the subject. I find that rather offensive. As a matter of fact I can't think of many contexts you could use foolish in which it wouldn't be offensive to the subject of it. So should we bar that words usage as well?

If the bar is simply being offensive then we are left with only positive and neutral words. I see no one stating we should ban all words with a negative connotation. Only the ones THEY deem offensive. So we ban those. Then someone else is offended by another word so we ban that one. etc etc. again i hate to use the slippery slope argument but its pretty valid when the bar for banning a word is simply being offensive to someone.

Well one of the things about taboo words is that it's unlikely to be just one person, I think. Certainly the words that are standardly taboo are so because society as a whole doesn't like to speak and/or hear them. Maybe only one speaks up but honestly, judging by how many people have shown up to give some sort of support for the OP, it seems like quite a few people don't like hearing or reading cussing.

But even if it was just one person? Definatly, when that one person is around. Of course it's kind of hard to do in a forum enviroment when you don't know who will read what, but I expect there would still be some times when you could tell.

About the foolish comment? Well that's a case when part of the point was to grab your attention. Like I edited in above, I don't really think it's helpful... but the comment seemed to serve it's intended purpose, anyways.

Stating that your understanding of history is lacking, is not an insult. Many people lack in their understanding of history and that was in response to what you said to me first. In case you didn't realize that. Also, calling the way someone is acting as childish or obstinate again is not a personal attack on you. Your actions and who you are as a person are two different things. We can all act foolishly, childish, arrogant, etc. without actually being those things. I never said you are arrogant, or you are a fool or you are a child, etc. I merely stated that you showed arrogance in your assumptions, that you were saying things which lacked a true understanding of history, that your words were foolish and childish and that you were acting in an obstinate way. I never once passed judgment on you as a person and the things I said were not said in anger but were only observations of the way you were acting or the words you were saying. 

If you want to take that as me insulting you, well then that was not my intent. 

Hmm interesting. So your rules only apply when you deem something offensive? Intent and context  matter when your using words.. why is it any different for anyone else?

However, in society, we have an understanding of which words in particular are most offensive and then varying degrees of which words are offensive. I am also not making a blanket statement, if you read my other posts I said that saying something like "this game is $$$$$ed up" wouldn't be a big thing to me, but it might be to someone else. I also specifically said that I didn't want to see heavy handed moderation on the subject. We should go out of our way to not offend others, of course it is difficult and that is why I clarified further in my last post that I was not trying to insult you. You may have been offended by the things I said but instead of being offended by me making comments about your actions and words, perhaps you should think on it more. I don't know you personally and you might be a real great guy for all I know (or woman) but I know the particular words you are saying and the way you are expressing yourself in this thread and I can and did comment on that. In other threads I have found you to be pretty reasonable, just not this time around.

Come on now, you are over analyzing based on one post, look at others. If someone says, hey "Life is a B@@@" I would not be upset by it but I would prefer my child not to hear that. I wouldn't think that person was stupid or ignorant and I wouldn't take it to be offensive but if someone directed it at me and called me a B**** there really isn't any room there for misunderstanding. Of course if my friend calls me that or if a stranger calls me that also has different meaning but I understand these different meanings because of my experience. However, I would still prefer not to hear those kinds of things at all, but I have certainly said things like that in my life but I am trying to cut that out entirely. 

SO intent and context do matter? Then we have no disagreement.

I never said they didn't matter. Perhaps we had a misunderstanding. However, in most cases, the context of the situation will be what most of us dislike and many people will have misunderstandings about this issue because context is very difficult to understand. It may seem easy for you, but I assure you it is not. Living in different cultures really showed me how difficult context and intent is to understand, so best to be as clear as possible, especially when dealing with strangers.