Vulgarity Part III

What spurred this examination of "cussing" was a conversation I had on Facebook with some younger folks, one in particular. Throughout the conversation, the gist of his justification for using "bad words" was this: (1) The context and use is not as a vulgar expression; (2) Their use is as a figure of speech or expression used for emphasis, not as an  insult;  (3) A Facebook reader has the choice of who they "friend" and what they read; and (4) Since the person speaking/writing has the right of personal expression, and since its impossible to not encounter something that offends you, the reader/hearer needs to learn to be mature enough to ignore it.

1. The context and use

The argument was that they do not employ the "vulgar" uses of the words in question. A typical example used for this argument is "the B word". When used to describe a female dog, especially one used for breeding, it's not "bad". While other uses would be (see below). Another used is "the A word." Even the KJV bible uses this more traditional word for donkey. But actually talking about a person's rear end would be potentially considered crude.

I doubt anyone would argue with there being a proper use of these words, so there seems to be a clear precedence that their are "OK" uses and "not OK" uses for some words. The next step is logically and reasonably placing a specific use of the word into the "OK" category.

The real question here is who gets to decide those categories and uses? And that is the real issue at hand. What makes a "bad word" bad? Languages change and adapt with the times. As cultures cross paths and influence one another and subcultures create new slang, principles and values of cultures change. New definitions gain wider use, while more antiquated definitions are forgotten altogether. And that doesn't even include spelling changes.

So who is to say what is "good" or "bad" language?

That question often leads into his #2 point, how/why a word is used ...

2. Figure of speech or used for emphasis, not as an insult

Most people agree that it is wrong to direct negative, insulting slurs at people, and the further argument is that using "cuss words" in this form is the very thing that makes them "bad". The idea being that it is not the word, but the attitude behind the word that is bad. The idea is that if your attitude is not negative, then it is then OK to use the word as an expression for emphasis. "Oh s___!" instead of "Oh wow!" or adding "F___ing" to "Awesome!" to show something is even more than plain "awesome".

"I'm not using it in a "bad" way, so therefore it's not a "bad word".

I have to tell you, this is a very convincing argument. Even when you figure in verses teaching against using "vulgar" or "coarse" language. The definitions are themselves very subjective.

Why is a word bad? Who said so? Is there really something intrinsically evil about this particular arrangement of syllables? Is this progression of letters inherently offensive in the sight of God? Really?

Even a basic application of reason and logic seems to say, no. That there is nothing inherently evil about these words. We just don't like them, how they sound, or what we perceive they represent. We prefer the more innocent sounding euphemisms:

"My neighbor's dog keeps 'doing his business' on my lawn." vs "My neighbor's dog keeps ____ing in my yard."

Certain uses may sound crude or offensive to some people, but just because someone else dislikes it, does that make it "wrong" or "bad"?

Your grandma may consider it crude, but when you're just 'with the boys', it's 'just telling it how it is'.

Who is right?

For many years I have taken, a " 'technically' it's not a sin" stance on this issue. And I am still not convinced that "those words" are inherently sinful.

However, as you may imagine, a "technically" statement also usually involves a "BUT" statement as well. We will take a look at cussing's big "BUT" another time.