# Why is this word offensive to Christians.



## .   1

I have a very close friend who among other things is a born-again fundamentalist evangelical Christian.  We decided years ago to not clash on matters of belief so we have agreed to not disagree we simply hold our own views so I do not want to get into this with my friend.

We were recently out for a ride and some fool displayed his ignorance causing me some difficulties.  As we rode away I referred to him as being less than a wonderful person and in doing so I said fuck.  The only person who heard this was my friend who was at that time launching into a diatribe about the fool but when I swore silence reigned down on me and I was informed that by using that word I was excluding my friend from the discussion.  I copped a whole load of judgemental attitude but I let the matter pass and we finished our ride as friends do.

My question is this.
Why do born-again fundamentalist evangelical Christian people take so much offence from such a word as fuck.

.,,


----------



## cuchuflete

The word may be offensive to *some* who claim to be Christian, but a whole bucketload of others who claim that faith use the word, and with great frequency.

I trust your friend would not be your friend were he not in possession of redeeming qualities that offset this silly prudishness.


----------



## .   1

cuchuflete said:


> The word may be offensive to *some* who claim to be Christian, but a whole bucketload of others who claim that faith use the word, and with great frequency.
> 
> I trust your friend would not be your friend were he not in possession of redeeming qualities that offset this silly prudishness.


Yeah she is a pretty good mate on everything other than her certain knowledge of all matters spiritual and I get bored hanging around with people like me.

.,,


----------



## cubaMania

I can assure you that a whole bucketload of people who are not Christians of any stripe find the use of sexual and body-part words as swear words to be rude and offensive.  If you use "fuck" and "cunt" and "ass" and so on to express extreme negative emotions, who is actually the prude?  Think about it.  I will cease being offended the day (fat chance!) that "Fuck you!" comes into general use as an extreme compliment.


----------



## .   1

cubaMania said:


> I can assure you that a whole bucketload of people who are not Christians of any stripe find the use of sexual and body-part words as swear words to be rude and offensive. If you use "fuck" and "cunt" and "ass" and so on to express extreme negative emotions, who is actually the prude? Think about it. I will cease being offended the day (fat chance!) that "Fuck you!" comes into general use as an extreme compliment.


This is a non responsive post and does not even go close to addressing my question.

.,,


----------



## Kelly B

Why? Because if they didn't find that particular word offensive, people would have to try harder to find another way to make each other angry.

My theory is this: swear words exist as a way to let off steam and express -and pass on - anger without doing physical violence to somebody. The point of saying an offensive word is to make the other person just as angry or annoyed as you are. If the words didn't work, well, then, you might just have to haul off and hit someone in the nose to show him just how angry you really are.

What I do not understand is the use of such words when your intent is _not _to deliberately shock and offend someone. If she is your friend, and you know the word is offensive to her, and you don't mean to figuratively poke her in the eye, then why the f**k do you say it?


----------



## Setwale_Charm

Well, it has nothing to do with Christianity. It is just a matter of a word being offensive or not to someone`s ears. For instance, I do not like people cursing in my presence, it is unpleasant and spoils your mood for long. And it demeans both. I also do not particularly enjoy anybody discussing his private life as a matter of fact. I do not think it is a crime but why should I know if I do not feel like I am the sort who cares for poking into somebody else`s privacy. The thing is that most sexual terms have got both perfectly normal "official" names and the vulgar ones And I believe, you are perfectly able to do without the latter one which bring unpleasant associations to many people. So why not simply respect the fact that your friend doesn`t like it as long as you respect her as a person and avoid it in her company? See, the whole point  here is about respecting other people`s feelings.


----------



## Setwale_Charm

cubaMania said:


> I can assure you that a whole bucketload of people who are not Christians of any stripe find the use of sexual and body-part words as swear words to be rude and offensive. If you use "fuck" and "cunt" and "ass" and so on to express extreme negative emotions, who is actually the prude? Think about it. I will cease being offended the day (fat chance!) that "Fuck you!" comes into general use as an extreme compliment.


 True. I shall be extremely aggrieved if it does though. have I had too much of the "good manners" stuff hammered into my head? Am I becoming hopelessly outdated?


----------



## natasha2000

Kelly B said:


> What I do not understand is the use of such words when your intent is _not _to deliberately shock and offend someone. If she is your friend, and you know the word is offensive to her, and you don't mean to figuratively poke her in the eye, then why the f**k do you say it?


 


Setwale_Charm said:


> So why not simply respect the fact that your friend doesn`t like it as long as you respect her as a person and avoid it in her company? See, the whole point here is about respecting other people`s feelings.


 
This is a really pointless question, don't you think?

Because when you're angry, you simply do not think what you say. Yes, you know that X person who you love and respect, does not like when you swear, but you do not spend allyour time with X, and if there is some stupid asshole able enough to make you crazy enough you just have your "block out" and you say it! Fuck! Ooops!  I said it! Sorry, sorry sorry! If your friend is your true friend he will not stop being your friend because of this, and he will not understand this little slip as disrespect towards him, as it was the case with Dots&Commas' friend, he already explained it.

I think that this has a lot to do with religion and literal understanding of religion. Puritanism. Patriachal mentality. Nothing sexual. Body is sin. Only spirit, nothing more. Typical christinism stuff. Nothing new. Sorry if this does not answer to your question, but I really do not see what is there to wonder so much about. 
Not only new-born fundamentalist evangelical Christians take offense to such a word. Every true believer, no matter what religion is in question, takes offense if someone says "bad words" in their presence. From their point of view, it is called decency. and God likes decen people. 

There is a saying in Serbian that children were taught a long time ago.
If a child says "bad word" an adult would usually say: "He who swears, he lies. He who lies, he steals. He who steals, goes to jail. And he who goes to jail, has flies. so do not let the flies bite you all your life."

Of course it is said half joking, but you get my point, don't you?
If there were no such religious mentality, there would be no need for such saying, wouldn't it?


----------



## Tsoman

the word can be unsettling to some people. It may be seen as a violent word.

I don't think it's exclusively a christian thing, although the two probably go hand in hand frequently


----------



## .   1

Tsoman said:


> the word can be unsettling to some people. It may be seen as a violent word.
> 
> I don't think it's exclusively a christian thing, although the two probably go hand in hand frequently


Thanks for that and I value your input along with those before you.
I am fully aware of the reasons taboo words are offensive to people in general. My mother is horrified by such language. My father considered it to be a waste of a good opportunity to use a proper word. My aunt simply refuses to hear any curse word and smiles blandly through claiming defective hearing.
These type of responses are not what I am really interested in. They are obvious to me and I have encountered them for a good part of the past 49 years.
My question relates to a specific type of objection to curse words. Yesterday was the first time that a Christian felt comfortable enough with me to take me to task due to my manner of speach. I am sure that I have sworn in the presence of and at Christians over the years but I have not had hurt feelings displayed as a result of their Christianity being somehow sullied by a curse word. This is the part that I do not understand. I am not Christian and I was not swearing at or about Christ but this was the vibe that my friend gave me and I am confused.

Of course I will ensure that I never use the word again in front of my friend. This is friendship. I make allowances for her quirks and she makes similar adjustments for me and life goes on. I do not want to make an issue of it with her so I will not ask her but if someone out there can give me the right drum I will understand why it is that I have to speak differently around her than I do around other friends who are not Christain.

My use of the word is to blow off steam.  At times that requires that the moron be informed of my dislike and it is my experience that this is almost always sufficient.

.,,


----------



## ireney

Well, I can't really say why Christians find this particular word so insulting. I must however say that I think your friend is a bit over the top. True, I don't know any fundamentalist evangelical Christian  reborn or not. I do quite a few people who belive (I mean truly believe). None of them would have considered that my using the F word (its equivalent that is) was tantamount of excluding them of a discussion, especially if that discussion's subject was "Let's see in how many ways we can describe the utter mindlessness of that driver".

Natasha does have a point however (at least I agree with her). Anything that has to do with sex has to be rarely alluded to and, when it has to be alluded to, in must be made in a way that is as non descriptive and "impassionate" as possible.


----------



## mytwolangs

I have a christian friend, not a hard-core church type, but the only words that bother him are "God damnit" or "Jesus christ" (when taken out of context)

Depending on how they feel, certain words just bother them. 
"Fuck" is the main cuss word of everything in the English language. 
It does seem hard to explain, as anything is just a word, whether it is "pencil" or "fuck".


----------



## Setwale_Charm

. said:


> Thanks for that and I value your input along with those before you.
> I am fully aware of the reasons taboo words are offensive to people in general. My mother is horrified by such language. My father considered it to be a waste of a good opportunity to use a proper word. My aunt simply refuses to hear any curse word and smiles blandly through claiming defective hearing.
> These type of responses are not what I am really interested in. They are obvious to me and I have encountered them for a good part of the past 49 years.
> My question relates to a specific type of objection to curse words. Yesterday was the first time that a Christian felt comfortable enough with me to take me to task due to my manner of speach. I am sure that I have sworn in the presence of and at Christians over the years but I have not had hurt feelings displayed as a result of their Christianity being somehow sullied by a curse word. This is the part that I do not understand. I am not Christian and I was not swearing at or about Christ but this was the vibe that my friend gave me and I am confused.
> 
> Of course I will ensure that I never use the word again in front of my friend. This is friendship. I make allowances for her quirks and she makes similar adjustments for me and life goes on. I do not want to make an issue of it with her so I will not ask her but if someone out there can give me the right drum I will understand why it is that I have to speak differently around her than I do around other friends who are not Christain.
> 
> My use of the word is to blow off steam. At times that requires that the moron be informed of my dislike and it is my experience that this is almost always sufficient.
> 
> .,,


 I undrstand that. probably, it is better to find some other strong word to replace it?  not such a strong one. 
 Don`t you think it is a gift to meet such a person who is radically different from the ones you met before? You`ll have to speak differently, probably to act differently, it is a new experience, a breath of fresh air.
 again, it`s a matter of respecting people, not of objectively deciding what is considered right or wrong in your or public view. You are very right in respecting her "quirks".
   Sometimes what happens is :what you `are talking about brings unpleasant associations connected with some previous experience of that person.


----------



## Setwale_Charm

. said:


> My aunt simply refuses to hear any curse word and smiles blandly through claiming defective hearing.
> .,,


 I like your aunt already!!!  I shall adopt this way too, probably!


----------



## cubaMania

. said:
			
		

> This is a non responsive post and does not even go close to addressing my question.
> 
> .,,


 
??   ? ?  (Translation to your preferred language:  What the fuck?)


----------



## .   1

cubaMania said:


> ??  ? ? (Translation to your preferred language: What the fuck?)


 I will cease being offended the day (fat chance!) that "Fuck you!" comes into general use as an extreme compliment.
.,,


----------



## danielfranco

I haven't practiced Christianity for a long time, but I remember as a child, my elders would pull me aside to chide me for my foul mouth (legendary, even then...) and their main argument was, always:
"Jesus wouldn't have said that!"

During the last part of the Twentieth century, we've seen the coming of age of the phrase "What would Jesus do?"
And so, maybe, that's why "born-again fundamentalist evangelical Christians" find a strong curse such as "f*ck" offensive, since Jesus wouldn't have said that.
Just an opinion.


----------



## .   1

danielfranco said:


> I haven't practiced Christianity for a long time, but I remember as a child, my elders would pull me aside to chide me for my foul mouth (legendary, even then...) and their main argument was, always:
> "Jesus wouldn't have said that!"
> 
> During the last part of the Twentieth century, we've seen the coming of age of the phrase "What would Jesus do?"
> And so, maybe, that's why "born-again fundamentalist evangelical Christians" find a strong curse such as "f*ck" offensive, since Jesus wouldn't have said that.
> Just an opinion.


Thanks mate.
That would fit in with the sermon I had to endure from her.

.,,


----------



## modus.irrealis

..,,

Was there anything in what your friend said to you that made you think she had some special religious reason for being offended? In general, I wouldn't connect such a reaction with a person's religion, so I'm wondering what gave you that impression.


----------



## Nunty

I am a very religious Christian person.  

I find this word extremely offensive, but not for religious reasons. It is, as someone pointed out, a violent word. Even more than that, it uses one term for the act that can be the demonstration of the closest, most loving relationship between two people, and turns it into an attack whose intention is to put someone at a distance. "F*** you." "Get the f*** out of here." "What the f*** do you want" are all agressive expressions that put distance between the speaker and her object. My reaction to it is similar to my sadness when faced with promiscuity.

In summary, it is the perversion of the term and its violence that offends me.


----------



## don maico

Its the Victorians who decided that words associted with sex and certain body parts would be deemed rude and unacceptable- nothing to do with religion. Back in hte middle ages such words were common place in fact there use to be a street in london where a lot of whoring took place called --Cunt lane. Woe betide anyone who said damn or bloody though for that would have been blasphemous.


----------



## .   1

modus.irrealis said:


> ..,,
> 
> Was there anything in what your friend said to you that made you think she had some special religious reason for being offended? In general, I wouldn't connect such a reaction with a person's religion, so I'm wondering what gave you that impression.


It was her tone and the stiff words she chose to use.
He manner became stiff and formal ans she used larger words than she generally does.
She sounded like a priest lecturing a sinner.
I have more than enough memories of life in a roman catholic school to identify the attitude.

.,,


----------



## .   1

don maico said:


> Its the Victorians who decided that words associted with sex and certain body parts would be deemed rude and unacceptable- nothing to do with religion. Back in hte middle ages such words were common place in fact there use to be a street in london where a lot of whoring took place called --Cunt lane. Woe betide anyone who said damn or bloody though for that would have been blasphemous.


I still think that it makes no sense at all to associate the swear word fuck with the colloquial use of the term to denote coitus.
The swear word is a word that hits the person or strikes the person it most certainly does not caress or pleasure the person on the receiving end.

.,,


----------



## don maico

Nun-Translator said:


> I am a very religious Chritian person.
> 
> I find this word extremely offensive, but not for religious reasons. It is, as someone pointed out, a violent word. Even more than that, it uses one term for the act that can be the demonstration of the closest, most loving relationship between two people, and turns it into a attack whose intention is to put someone at a distance. "F*** you." "Get the f*** out of here." "What the f*** do you want" are all agressive expressions that put distance between the speaker and her object. My reaction to it is similar to my sadness when faced promiscuity.
> 
> In summary, it is the perversion of the term and its violence that offends me.



with respect the word itself is not violent but it does enable one to release pent up emotions such as anger and frustration. It can also be used in palyful manner ie pretending to be derrogatory Some people, usually male, use it almost all the time as part of their daily conversation.without actually being violent. " Is the effing thing is in the cupboard" "F me gently, I found my keys"


----------



## maxiogee

danielfranco said:


> I haven't practiced Christianity for a long time, but I remember as a child, my elders would pull me aside to chide me for my foul mouth (legendary, even then...) and their main argument was, always:
> "Jesus wouldn't have said that!"
> 
> During the last part of the Twentieth century, we've seen the coming of age of the phrase "What would Jesus do?"
> And so, maybe, that's why "born-again fundamentalist evangelical Christians" find a strong curse such as "f*ck" offensive, since Jesus wouldn't have said that.
> Just an opinion.



By that note, surely Jesus was so perfect that were he to have stubbed his toe he wouldn't even have said "Bother!"?


----------



## don maico

. said:


> I still think that it makes no sense at all to associate the swear word fuck with the colloquial use of the term to denote coitus.
> The swear word is a word that hits the person or strikes the person it most certainly does not caress or pleasure the person on the receiving end.
> 
> .,,


Sense? No of of course not It certainly almost never used in its proper context but then thats one of the beauties of language. Mind you some couples find the word( and the associated ones) quite stimulating whilst in the throes of coitus


----------



## don maico

. said:


> It was her tone and the stiff words she chose to use.
> He manner became stiff and formal ans she used larger words than she generally does.
> She sounded like a priest lecturing a sinner.
> I have more than enough memories of life in a roman catholic school to identify the attitude.
> 
> .,,


I have to be honest i would've found it difficult to stifle a laugh. I take my hat off to you for showing restraint


----------



## don maico

maxiogee said:


> By that note, surely Jesus was so perfect that were he to have stubbed his toe he wouldn't even have said "Bother!"?


----------



## Setwale_Charm

Don Maico, again, it `s not about what you think of the word, it is what the other person does and we all have our quirks and sore points. Useless trying to explain sensibly why the music of Schnitke is so great and why you adore that if the other only hears no harmony of sounds.


----------



## Nunty

. said:


> I still think that it makes no sense at all to associate the swear word fuck with the colloquial use of the term to denote coitus.
> * The swear word is a word that hits the person or strikes the person* it most certainly does not caress or pleasure the person on the receiving end.
> 
> .,,





don maico said:


> with respect the word itself is not violent but it does enable one to release pent up emotions such as anger and frustration.* It can also be used in palyful manner *ie pretending to be derrogatory Some people, usually male, use it almost all the time as part of their daily conversation.without actually being violent. " Is the effing thing is in the cupboard" "F me gently, I found my keys"





don maico said:


> Sense? No of of course not It certainly almost never used in its proper context but then thats one of the beauties of language. *Mind you some couples find the word( and the associated ones) quite stimulating *whilst in the throes of coitus




Violence, I suppose, is in the eye of the beholder, but Don Maico do you think that someone would use the word in that "playful manner" in my presence? (If you wonder what I mean, look at the photo in my public profile.)

Words in and of themselves are all neutral, but as soon as they are used in discourse they are inserted into, and contribute to, a context. The same word might be used as a figurative bludgeon, as a safety valve to let off steam or as a sexual stimulant. I am the last person in the world to want to censor other people's speech, though I do appreciate a register appropriate to the social context.

I was replying to the initial question, just explaining why I personally find that word offensive. And I hope I offended no one in the process!


----------



## danielfranco

maxiogee said:


> By that note, surely Jesus was so perfect that were he to have stubbed his toe he wouldn't even have said "Bother!"?




Heck, no!
I was raised to believe that He wouldn't have stumbled at all!!!
Dontcha know?

Later, as an angry teenager, I thought maybe the humble object that could conceivably cause the stubbing would have fallen all over itself trying to get the heck out of the way before Jesus would blast it into oblivion. 

Nowdays, I believe Jesus would probably have stubbed his toe on something. And then he would have gotten one of the Zebedee brothers to swear for him.

What do I know?


----------



## don maico

Nun-Translator said:


> Violence, I suppose, is in the eye of the beholder, but Don Maico do you think that someone would use the word in that "playful manner" in my presence? (If you wonder what I mean, look at the photo in my public profile.)
> 
> Words in and of themselves are all neutral, but as soon as they are used in discourse they are inserted into, and contribute to, a context. The same word might be used as a figurative bludgeon, as a safety valve to let off steam or as a sexual stimulant. I am the last person in the world to want to censor other people's speech, though I do appreciate a register appropriate to the social context.
> 
> I was replying to the initial question, just explaining why I personally find that word offensive. And I hope I offended no one in the process!


No i doubt you have offended anyone certainly not me and i can  certainly understand why you might feel offended at such words given your occupation.I am almost always very selective where i use them but then I try not to let too much stean off in public anyway. My wife and I do use expletives but then we both have short fuses and usually reserve our explosive moments for when we are indoors.We also use them playfully ie pretending to insult each other. She tends to object to the C word more though.
BTW i have heard religious people swear from time to time whilst some others who are not seem to refrain from doing so .Guess its the way we have been brought up


----------



## don maico

Setwale_Charm said:


> Don Maico, again, it `s not about what you think of the word, it is what the other person does and we all have our quirks and sore points. Useless trying to explain sensibly why the music of Schnitke is so great and why you adore that if the other only hears no harmony of sounds.


I understand that but it is subjective .Ok we are taught not to use but ,hey, they are plenty out ther would be ok with them.It s just a question of being judicious.


Btw one can just as offnsive using a word like sod ie "sod off" or "what the sod are you doing here"It depends on the tone of voice


----------



## heidita

. said:


> Of course I will ensure that I never use the word again in front of my friend. This is friendship. I make allowances for her quirks and she makes similar adjustments for me and life goes on. I do not want to make an issue of it with her so I will not ask her but if someone out there can give me the right drum I will understand why it is that I have to speak differently around her than I do around other friends who are not Christian.
> 
> 
> .,,


 
I know this thread is not about friendship, even though it really has something do do with it. But I wish there were more people thinking like this. True friendship _does_ make allowances and people shouldn't expect the other person to adapt to one's speech, one's way of being, being the other person the only one to do so. In a true friendship this has to be mutual and only this way the relationship can keep up. Just like in a marriage.

I do not think this word is "religiously" offensive, though I have found several people be offended by such talk, especially being a woman to talk with swear words. My mother in law, very religious, always quenches when hearing four letter words of any kind. I do not think it is a religious problem, but more of an educational kind..


----------



## don maico

heidita said:


> I know this thread is not about friendship, even though it really has something do do with it. But I wish there were more people thinking like this. True friendship _does_ make allowances and people shouldn't expect the other person to adapt to one's speech, one's way of being, being the other person the only one to do so. In a true friendship this has to be mutual and only this way the relationship can keep up. Just like in a marriage.
> 
> I do not think this word is "religiously" offensive, though I have found several people be offended by such talk, especially being a woman to talk with swear words. My mother in law, very religious, always quenches when hearing four letter words of any kind. I do not think it is a religious problem, but more of an educational kind..



sin duda


----------



## natasha2000

Hmmm.. Many of you claim this is not a religious thing, but educational.

But, if this person became a new born Christian in her adulthood, and these kind of words started to affect her in a such violent way AFTER this event, then what education we are talking about?

On the other hand, can you think of any person who is atheist, but will have the same reaction as Dots&Commas friend? These words are unpleasant for ear, yes, and many of us would object its uncontrolled use. I would object! But in an example given to us, most of us would do the same - use the F or whatever bad word as a valve of our anger.

I really do think it has to do with religiousness. Education, yes. But religious education. Which is not the case with Dots&Commas' friend.


----------



## cubaMania

natasha2000 said:


> ...But, if this person became a new born Christian in her adulthood, and these kind of words started to affect her in a such violent way AFTER this event, then what education we are talking about?
> 
> On the other hand, can you think of any person who is atheist, but will have the same reaction as Dots&Commas friend? ...


 
But Natasha, we have no knowledge either way as to whether or not this is something that came to this woman late in life after a religious "rebirth".

As to your second point.  I am a third-generation atheist.  Nobody in my family uses sexual or body-part words for swearing.  Both of my parents were atheists and I never once heard any such words used in their home for swearing purposes.  Your assumption that it is somehow a "natural" response to stress, anger, fear, etc. to suddenly start spouting sexual and body-part words seems to me flawed.  It is not that we are born spouting these words and have to be educated out of the habit by religious training.  Those who have this reaction when experiencing negative emotions had to learn it somewhere; they were educated into it not out of it.  I do find this usage to be rude and offensive, and I prefer not to spend time around people who habitually use these terms.  And the majority of people with whom I socialize feel the same way.  It is not an extreme or violent reaction, it's simply our view of the matter.

I think if the day ever comes when our society no longer harbors a diseased, guilt-ridden attitude toward sexuality and toward the human body, that will be the day when those words will no longer be used as swear words.


----------



## .   1

cubaMania said:


> I do find this usage to be rude and offensive, and I prefer not to spend time around people who habitually use these terms.


It was this type of pontificating that I took from my friend but she has built up a good deal of good will with me over the years and I am prepared to turn the other cheek to her.

You say that you do not like to be around people who use that word yet you felt quite comfortable to use it toward me twice and I find this to be an apparent contradiction or is that just hypocritical thinking.

I used the word in the heat of the moment and accept your criticism but you used it coldly and calculating on a keyboard to a person that you do not know and then go on to say that you do not use the word and neither does your family.

This is a weird word and weirder world.

.,,


----------



## cubaMania

. said:


> It was this type of pontificating that I took from my friend ...


.,, I absolutely do not see what is "pontificating" about saying that I find the usage to be rude and offensive and prefer not to be around people who habitually talk that way.



. said:


> ...You say that you do not like to be around people who use that word yet you felt quite comfortable to use it toward me twice and I find this to be an apparent contradiction or is that just hypocritical thinking...


Baffled again. Where on earth did I use this word toward you, even once, let alone twice? I was discussing
1. whether the origin of this response to these words was Christian fundamentalism and
2. if not, why is there objection to those usages?


. said:


> ...I used the word in the heat of the moment and accept your criticism...


And again, where on earth did I criticize you? I discussed the issues raised about "fuck" as a swear word, negative reactions to it, whether or not it is a Christian fundamentalist thing. That's not a criticism of you.

It would appear to me that you have taken offense where none was offered.

I can assure you that I have heard such words used as swear words many times, and I do not make a fuss about it. But I don't invite that person to my next dinner party. I also do not, as you said, object to the word "fuck". I object to those words when they are used to mean hatred, disgust, anger, fear, etc., not when used to mean "to have sexual intercourse", etc. EDIT: used in a non-negative way, that is.


----------



## don maico

So its ok to ask a woman " do you wanna fuck?" Dont think I'll be going there somehow


----------



## cubaMania

don maico said:


> So its ok to ask a woman " do you wanna fuck?" Dont think I'll be going there somehow


Well....it's probably not a good opening line with a new acquaintance, but if you and your wife have positive associations with the word and the act, then sure, why not?  But do you have positive associations with it?  Most likely not, in this society, especially with all of the "fuck you" going on.


----------



## don maico

cubaMania said:


> Well....it's probably not a good opening line with a new acquaintance, but if you and your wife have positive associations with the word and the act, then sure, why not?  But do you have positive associations with it?  Most likely not, in this society, especially with all of the "fuck you" going on.


As I said before the word itself carries no weight ,its just how people percieve it thats all. Angry retorts can be very unpleasant whatever the vocabulary used. 
Some factory workers builders etc over here use it all the time, its almost expected."Effing this ,effing that" or "C U Next Tuesday" they go. Must admit can be a bit wearing after a while


----------



## maxiogee

don maico said:


> Btw one can just as offnsive using a word like sod ie "sod off" or "what the sod are you doing here"It depends on the tone of voice


of course one can, it's a _rude_ word — and the tone of voice has nothng to do with it.
Check out its etymology!

Is this thread just going to turn into a chance to air our expletives? I do hope not!


----------



## Setwale_Charm

don maico said:


> So its ok to ask a woman " do you wanna fuck?" Dont think I'll be going there somehow


 
 You`re a British gentleman, remember??!!    What will your wife say once she finds out you`ve change so much??


----------



## cubaMania

don maico said:


> As I said before the word itself carries no weight ,its just how people percieve it thats all.


In a way that's right. But one could also see that the word does carry the weight of all of those hundreds of thousands of times we have heard it (or for some used it) to express extreme negativity. Some guy named Korzybski, I think, studied and wrote about the theory that not only does our thinking shape our language, but our language shapes our thinking. I suspect that if a child grows up constantly hearing "fuck you" or "oh fuck" or "that fucking idiot" whenever mommy and daddy are angry or scared, and so on, that child may very well end up associating sexuality with negative things.


> Angry retorts can be very unpleasant whatever the vocabulary used.


So very true.


> Some factory workers builders etc over here use it all the time, its almost expected."Effing this ,effing that" or "C U Next Tuesday" they go. Must admit can be a bit wearing after a while


I'm with you there. There are those people who can't put together three sentences without at least two "fuck" this or that. It's annoying in the same way as an oft-repeated verbal tick such as "I mean" or "ya know", quite aside from the question of whether the terms are rude and/or offensive.


----------



## natasha2000

cubaMania said:


> But Natasha, we have no knowledge either way as to whether or not this is something that came to this woman late in life after a religious "rebirth".
> 
> 
> I assumed from the name of the religion that it was not something that comes from mother milk. New-born Christian. It reminds me of Jehova withesess. But then, I realize how stupid my asumptions are, and I aplologize for my ignorance. It is truth, we do not know if a Dots&Commas friend became religious in adulthood or she took that religion from a very young age. But even if it was from her chldhood, it does not refute completely what I claimed - it is (hasd been, was) her RELIGIOUSLY inspired education, not a secular one.
> 
> As to your second point. I am a third-generation atheist. Nobody in my family uses sexual or body-part words for swearing. Both of my parents were atheists and I never once heard any such words used in their home for swearing purposes. Your assumption that it is somehow a "natural" response to stress, anger, fear, etc. to suddenly start spouting sexual and body-part words seems to me flawed. It is not that we are born spouting these words and have to be educated out of the habit by religious training. Those who have this reaction when experiencing negative emotions had to learn it somewhere; they were educated into it not out of it. I do find this usage to be rude and offensive, and I prefer not to spend time around people who habitually use these terms. And the majority of people with whom I socialize feel the same way. It is not an extreme or violent reaction, it's simply our view of the matter.
> 
> But as I uderstood the initiating post, she DID have overreaction and she did reacted very extremly to the fact that her dear friend used it in front of her. Most of us here DO NOT USE and DO NOT LIKE to use these words. Nobody said that, please do not put omething in my mouth what I didn't say. We all call them BAD words and we do not do it without any reason. The difference between you (or any of us) and her is: If you friend who normally does not use these words, uses this word because he is pissed off by some idiot, and you withess the whole situation, you would not recriminate him for it, even if you felt a little bit unpleasant. Nevertheless, shi did it. We are talking her about the grade of reaction (or shoud I say overreaction) to this word.
> Believe me, I do not like to use these words either. If I discuss with someone, I beat him with arguments, not wirh bad words and insults. For me, when someone turns to insults and bad words in a discussios I do not get offended. I feel satisfied. Why? Because it is a sure sign he ranout of arguments. And that I won the battle.
> 
> I think if the day ever comes when our society no longer harbors a diseased, guilt-ridden attitude toward sexuality and toward the human body, that will be the day when those words will no longer be used as swear words.
> Oh, but these days have already started. I am sure that there are so many words that mean certain parts of the body and are supposed to be bad words, but with time they lost in their weight, and even when you say it, it does not necessarily mean you insult someone. If it is not like this, then how do you explain so wide usage of the word coño in Spanish? The insult is not in the very same word. The insult is in the attitude and the tone in which that word is pronounced. I have seen so many friends (usually men, yes) that say after long time no seeing each other: Cabrón, te he echado de menos! Man, in my language, sometimes people send each other to his mother cu** in order to show how much they missed each other! And nobody gets hurt. That does not mean literally what is said. It means: I missed you so much, man!"


 
It is not the word that insults, but an attitude.


----------



## natasha2000

cubaMania said:


> Well....it's probably not a good opening line with a new acquaintance, but if you and your wife have positive associations with the word and the act, then sure, why not? But do you have positive associations with it? Most likely not, in this society, especially with all of the "fuck you" going on.


 

But "Fuck you" does not mean that the one who said it wants that the other one have sex! Please! It has nothing to do with sexual intercourse!
It means: I do not care about you, you are miserable and I do not giva damn waht you think. you are a dirty discusting rat! 

And many other unpleasant things merged in only one word, said with a certain attitude and certain tone. Without that attitude and tone, the very same word does not have the same meaning.


----------



## natasha2000

don maico said:


> So its ok to ask a woman " do you wanna fuck?" Dont think I'll be going there somehow


 
No, I would not recommend to do that, because at the end, women ARE romantic. And if you care about that certain woman, don't do it. There are so many other ways to take a woman to bed. Really.


----------



## natasha2000

> Originally Posted by *don maico* http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?p=1373008#post1373008
> As I said before the word itself carries no weight ,its just how people percieve it thats all.


 
No, it's just how you say it. Not how people perceive it. At least in case we are not talking about new-borb Christians


----------



## don maico

natasha2000 said:


> No, I would not recommend to do that, because at the end, women ARE romantic. And if you care about that certain woman, don't do it. There are so many other ways to take a woman to bed. Really.



Believe me I  wouldnt even dream of approaching a woman like that
I wouldnt even make any sexual references at all just so they feel safe with me


----------



## don maico

natasha2000 said:


> No, it's just how you say it. Not how people perceive it. At least in case we are not talking about new-borb Christians



yes ok but you can make any word sound nasty if you wanted to. What I meant was that the word is generally perceived to be offensive when once it wasnt - ie back in the middle ages. Its like the n word which refer to black people. Totally unacceptable because of its associations with racism and yet black people often call each other that. It comes from the latin word for black - nigra


----------



## natasha2000

don maico said:


> yes ok but you can make any word sound nasty if you wanted to. What I meant was that the word is generally perceived to be offensive when once it wasnt - ie back in the middle ages. Its like the n word which refer to black people. Totally unacceptable because of its associations with racism and yet black people often call each other that. It comes from the latin word for black - nigra


 
Well... It is not exactly the same, but ....
This is not the topic here, so I wouldn't go deeper into discussion about this issue .


----------



## don maico

natasha2000 said:


> Well... It is not exactly the same, but ....
> This is not the topic here, so I wouldn't go deeper into discussion about this issue .


 Yes Ok but I was simply pointing out that people persceptions also matter thats all


----------



## Maja

I disagree that people swear JUST to piss off (ups, dirty word) others since they are pissed off (here I go again) themselves! I, for one, do swear sometimes, but to let off steam or emphasize smt and I never use such words AGAINST smo else. It is only a matter of habit and bad manners but not some sneaky retaliation against smo else. For instance if I drop a plate or brake a glass or hit my elbow etc., I would swear. I really don't see why would anyone get offended???

 As to connection to Christianity, I actually think that a true Christian, in his/hers spiritual wisdom, SHOULDN'T GET offended by other peoples' words or manners especially if they are not directed toward him, because one can be responsible ONLY for his own actions and "sins". True Christian also DOES NOT PASS judgment on others nor he criticizes them, but rather try to be forgiving and understanding. 
  And THAT is the biggest catch of all! 
It is very easy to behave in a certain way - be polite, go to church, declare oneself (to anyone who would listen) as a "true" and "righteous" Christian etc. But to be forgiving and turning other cheek is very hard and in essence much more important then pure form. 

When it comes to friendship, it is important to accept people as they are. If you VOLUNTARILY choose to make an effort and please your friend, it is a very nice gesture and shows that you care, but by no means any friendship should be CONDITIONED by some rules such as "either you dress like me/talk like me/walk like me... or we're no longer friends"! 
That's a bit...  hmmm...


----------



## heidita

Maja said:


> When it comes to friendship, it is important to accept people as they are. If you VOLUNTARILY choose to make an effort and please your friend, it is a very nice gesture and shows that you care, but by no means any friendship should be CONDITIONED by some rules such as "either you dress like me/talk like me/walk like me... or we're no longer friends"!
> That's a bit... hmmm...


 
I do not agree with you as in any kind of relationship you have to adapt and sort of put the other cheek all the time. All relationships are somehow based on certain rules which cannot be surpassed and for some people some things are important and for others they are just silly. As we can't all think or be the same, which most likely would be very boring, it is important to accept these unwritten "rules". 

We have no idea why this particular friend was offended by the word "fuck". It may be because for her it has some sexual connotation even for us it may not. Any reason will do, if she is offended, the "correct" thing to do if you are a true friend is not to go on offending . So I think Dot&comma's attitude is the most reasonable under the circumstances and shows he really cares. 

Why this person should be judged because she doesn't like swearwords is not understandable. Even in the closest of friendships there can be misunderstandings. So why not judge Dots &Commas for swearing? Shouldn't he have known it was offensive for his friends?
I think it is not reasonable to judge a person for not liking a certain kind of language only because we all (?) are so used to swearing that it sounds so natural to us that we do not think it can offend anybody. 

Here in Spain actually it is SO common that you can see the weirdest words used as swearwords and most of them actually of religious background. so the word "hostia" (host) is used frequently and you "shit" on all kind of religious people, getting very close to blasphemy or actually being such. Being so , one can understand that religious people get annoyed by these kind of four letter words. The word "fuck" (joder) is heard even in children's mouths.


----------



## .   1

cubaMania said:


> Baffled again. Where on earth did I use this word toward you, even once, let alone twice?


Post #4 followed by post #16

.,,


----------



## Victoria32

. said:


> I have a very close friend who among other things is a born-again fundamentalist evangelical Christian.  We decided years ago to not clash on matters of belief so we have agreed to not disagree we simply hold our own views so I do not want to get into this with my friend.
> 
> We were recently out for a ride and some fool displayed his ignorance causing me some difficulties.  As we rode away I referred to him as being less than a wonderful person and in doing so I said fuck.  The only person who heard this was my friend who was at that time launching into a diatribe about the fool but when I swore silence reigned down on me and I was informed that by using that word I was excluding my friend from the discussion.  I copped a whole load of judgemental attitude but I let the matter pass and we finished our ride as friends do.
> 
> My question is this.
> Why do born-again fundamentalist evangelical Christian people take so much offence from such a word as fuck.
> 
> .,,


Well. As a born again evangelical Christian (*but not fundamentalist, they are not necessarily the same thing*) I have to say that the word itself is not offensive to me, but what it implies. 
If some says f*** you to me, it is an indication that they are angry or hostile or bitter enough to choose to cause offence, and because I am a woman and the word implies rape/violent  and possibly not consensual sexual congress, it adds another layer of offence. (It is thought to come from the German word meaning 'to strike'... )


----------



## Victoria32

natasha2000 said:


> But "Fuck you" does not mean that the one who said it wants that the other one have sex! Please! It has nothing to do with sexual intercourse!
> It means: I do not care about you, you are miserable and I do not giva damn waht you think. you are a dirty discusting rat!
> 
> And many other unpleasant things merged in only one word, said with a certain attitude and certain tone. Without that attitude and tone, the very same word does not have the same meaning.


Exactly why I as a Christian find it offensive, Natasha you expressed that very well. 




Maja said:


> As to connection to Christianity, I actually think that a true Christian, in his/hers spiritual wisdom, SHOULDN'T GET offended by other peoples' words or manners especially if they are not directed toward him, because one can be responsible ONLY for his own actions and "sins". True Christian also DOES NOT PASS judgment on others nor he criticizes them, but rather try to be forgiving and understanding.
> And THAT is the biggest catch of all!
> It is very easy to behave in a certain way - be polite, go to church, declare oneself (to anyone who would listen) as a "true" and "righteous" Christian etc. But to be forgiving and turning other cheek is very hard and in essence much more important then pure form.
> 
> When it comes to friendship, it is important to accept people as they are. If you VOLUNTARILY choose to make an effort and please your friend, it is a very nice gesture and shows that you care, but by no means any friendship should be CONDITIONED by some rules such as "either you dress like me/talk like me/walk like me... or we're no longer friends"!
> That's a bit...  hmmm...


On the other hand... sometimes, I find as a Christian, that it gets very wearying that I always have to be the one who has to accomodate, accept, forgive etc. That's what people expect me to do, to accept language and behaviour that they would not expect their non-believing friends to put up with! 
Also, there are times when I have to suppress the urge to say to someone that her/his behaviour etc is ultimately harmful to them or to others. Yet I can't say so, without the risk of being thought (a) to be a fundamentalist bigot (or B) to be being judgemental, unfriendly and unaccepting. It's a trap in a way, in order to not be labelled '_right wing war and capital punishment W., loving fundamentalist', _I have to be ultra-accepting, even of the kind of thing that as a non-Christian, I would be free to say 'Icky, unhealthy and generally nasty, and I am free to not accept that'. I hasten to add that '*hate the sin but love the sinner'* is not as some people think, hypocritical and false, but is in fact, _real_ acceptance!


----------



## .   1

Thanks Victoria32.  Your two posts address my original question directly and I and very grateful for your focus.
I had not actually thought of the compound effect of the difference in interpretation between men and women with regards to the word.
It is really weird but I would imagine that a couple would have to be already very intimate prior to the man using that word to initiate actual intimacy.
I do not think that men use the curse word 'fuck' in any kind of sexual manner.

.,,


----------



## Victoria32

. said:


> Thanks Victoria32.  Your two posts address my original question directly and I and very grateful for your focus.
> I had not actually thought of the compound effect of the difference in interpretation between men and women with regards to the word.
> It is really weird but I would imagine that a couple would have to be already very intimate prior to the man using that word to initiate actual intimacy.
> I do not think that men use the curse word 'fuck' in any kind of sexual manner.
> 
> .,,


Once or twice in my experience, I have had men do so, and it was vile!

 (Also, I had an acquaintance who said he got a 30% success rate from "wanna f***' said to women he wasn't already intimate with. I didn't believe he had even a 1.3% success rate with that, but still..)


----------



## .   1

Victoria32 said:


> Once or twice in my experience, I have had men do so, and it was vile!
> 
> (Also, I had an acquaintance who said he got a 30% success rate from "wanna f***' said to women he wasn't already intimate with. I didn't believe he had even a 1.3% success rate with that, but still..)


It is my experience that braggers are rarely doers and any bloke who makes a big thing of that particular pursuit is not generally to be trusted at all but he is especially not to be trusted when telling you how marvelous he is at doing what he has probably only read about or probably just seen the pictures.

.,,


----------



## heidita

Victoria32 said:


> On the other hand... sometimes, I find as a Christian, that it gets very wearying that I always have to be the one who has to accomodate, accept, forgive etc. That's what people expect me to do, to accept language and behaviour that they would not expect their non-believing friends to put up with!
> Also, there are times when I have to suppress the urge to say to someone that her/his behaviour etc is ultimately harmful to them or to others. Yet I can't say so, without the risk of being thought (a) to be a fundamentalist bigot (or B) to be being judgemental, unfriendly and unaccepting. It's a trap in a way, in order to not be labelled '_right wing war and capital punishment W., loving fundamentalist', _I have to be ultra-accepting, even of the kind of thing that as a non-Christian, I would be free to say 'Icky, unhealthy and generally nasty, and I am free to not accept that'. I hasten to add that '*hate the sin but love the sinner'* is not as some people think, hypocritical and false, but is in fact, _real_ acceptance!


 

I think everybody expects nowadays Christians to be forgiving all the time. I also agree with the fact that a woman looks at words  in a different way than a man does. Even _using _the same words, probably. 

It is so common nowadays to hear everybody swear, men and women alike, that it is hard to think that some women and I might add some men might get offended by the use of these words. 

However, in Spain, words like "fuck" (joder)are not necessarily used violently or in a manner to express displeasure. I can think of people calling their best friend _names _warn: joder qué cabrón ¡qué has ganado en la lotería! ¡Cuánto me alegro!) wanting to express their utter pleasure of something that happened.

Swear words are used in Spain like this, but wouldn't be used in Germany unless for expressing displeasure.


----------



## natasha2000

heidita said:


> However, in Spain, words like "fuck" (joder)are not necessarily used violently or in a manner to express displeasure. I can think of people calling their best friend _names _warn: joder qué cabrón ¡qué has ganado en la lotería! ¡Cuánto me alegro!) wanting to express their utter pleasure of something that happened.
> 
> Swear words are used in Spain like this, but wouldn't be used in Germany unless for expressing displeasure.


 
Exactly the same thing I described in post Nº47 (last paragraph).

It must be temperament or something...


----------



## don maico

Victoria32 said:


> Exactly why I as a Christian find it offensive, Natasha you expressed that very well.
> 
> 
> 
> On the other hand... sometimes, I find as a Christian, that it gets very wearying that I always have to be the one who has to accomodate, accept, forgive etc. That's what people expect me to do, to accept language and behaviour that they would not expect their non-believing friends to put up with!
> Also, there are times when I have to suppress the urge to say to someone that her/his behaviour etc is ultimately harmful to them or to others. Yet I can't say so, without the risk of being thought (a) to be a fundamentalist bigot (or B) to be being judgemental, unfriendly and unaccepting. It's a trap in a way, in order to not be labelled '_right wing war and capital punishment W., loving fundamentalist', _I have to be ultra-accepting, even of the kind of thing that as a non-Christian, I would be free to say 'Icky, unhealthy and generally nasty, and I am free to not accept that'. I hasten to add that '*hate the sin but love the sinner'* is not as some people think, hypocritical and false, but is in fact, _real_ acceptance!



Sometimes my wife and I use expletives where there is no malice intended but use them as a means of expressing our anger and frustration. Other times we are just being playeful eg she likes to call me Señor mister arsehole from time to time or she'll say f--- you but with a non aggressive tone of voice so I take no offence. I dont really take offence when she is angry either for it is telling me she has a grievance which needs addressing.

As to your second point, you are a human being first and foremost therefore you are perfectly entitled to set your boundaries regardless of your faith . I f you find bad language offensive you must explain that to your friends and if they persist then they are not respecting you. I am very careful where I swear ie never in public places ,never in front of my mother or clients just out of respect.Those that dont object, then I do . Simple!


----------



## don maico

Victoria32 said:


> Once or twice in my experience, I have had men do so, and it was vile!
> 
> (Also, I had an acquaintance who said he got a 30% success rate from "wanna f***' said to women he wasn't already intimate with. I didn't believe he had even a 1.3% success rate with that, but still..)



probably even less than 1.3 %. I wonder if he ever shows any non sexual interest - even concern for a woman?Doubt it!


----------



## don maico

heidita said:


> I think everybody expects nowadays Christians to be forgiving all the time. I also agree with the fact that a woman looks at words  in a different way than a man does. Even _using _the same words, probably.
> 
> It is so common nowadays to hear everybody swear, men and women alike, that it is hard to think that some women and I might add some men might get offended by the use of these words.
> 
> However, in Spain, words like "fuck" (joder)are not necessarily used violently or in a manner to express displeasure. I can think of people calling their best friend _names _warn: joder qué cabrón ¡qué has ganado en la lotería! ¡Cuánto me alegro!) wanting to express their utter pleasure of something that happened.
> 
> Swear words are used in Spain like this, but wouldn't be used in Germany unless for expressing displeasure.


yeah saying joder tu or vete a joderte  doesnt quite have the same effect. Maybe "vete a la mierda" would be more appropriate.
I've notice the Spanish say coño a lot even women . Over here men call each other that( cunt)and many women here dislike the word even more than fuck. " You cunt" when someone does something annoying or wrong implies someone is an idiot.


----------



## maxiogee

Victoria32 said:


> Once or twice in my experience, I have had men do so, and it was vile!
> 
> (Also, I had an acquaintance who said he got a 30% success rate from "wanna f***' said to women he wasn't already intimate with. I didn't believe he had even a 1.3% success rate with that, but still..)



Maybe what he considers "success" is to escape with only a mild beating! ;D
If he was *so* successful, why did he need to use the line with women he wasn't already intimate with? Did he get no "repeat business"?


----------



## Victoria32

heidita said:


> I think everybody expects nowadays Christians to be forgiving all the time. I also agree with the fact that a woman looks at words in a different way than a man does. Even _using _the same words, probably.
> 
> It is so common nowadays to hear everybody swear, men and women alike, that it is hard to think that some women and I might add some men might get offended by the use of these words.
> 
> However, in Spain, words like "fuck" (joder)are not necessarily used violently or in a manner to express displeasure. I can think of people calling their best friend _names _warn: joder qué cabrón ¡qué has ganado en la lotería! ¡Cuánto me alegro!) wanting to express their utter pleasure of something that happened.
> 
> Swear words are used in Spain like this, but wouldn't be used in Germany unless for expressing displeasure.


Absolutely, Heidita! German friends have told me that there are no swearwords in German (now I _don't_ believe that) but the fact they say it argues a very different temperament... 


don maico said:


> As to your second point, you are a human being first and foremost therefore you are perfectly entitled to set your boundaries regardless of your faith . I f you find bad language offensive you must explain that to your friends and if they persist then they are not respecting you. I am very careful where I swear ie never in public places ,never in front of my mother or clients just out of respect.Those that dont object, then I do . Simple!


Actually, most of my friends respect my views on this and many share them... The main problem I have is with a very temperamental son (late teens what can I say?)


don maico said:


> probably even less than 1.3 %. I wonder if he ever shows any non sexual interest - even concern for a woman?Doubt it!





maxiogee said:


> Maybe what he considers "success" is to escape with only a mild beating! ;D
> If he was *so* successful, why did he need to use the line with women he wasn't already intimate with? Did he get no "repeat business"?


I am reasonably sure he got no 'repeat business'...I was tolerant of him, because he was a 'friend' of my brother, who had a habit of collecting lost sheep - he and my brother died in 2004, within a few months of each other - both very young... Lindsay was a weirdo, no doubt, and could be quite offensive, but I never took him seriously - as I gather was true of 99% of women who knew him!


----------



## Maja

Victoria32 said:


> On the other hand... sometimes, I find as a Christian, that it gets very wearying that I always have to be the one who has to accomodate, accept, forgive etc. That's what people expect me to do, to accept language and behaviour that they would not expect their non-believing friends to put up with!
> Also, there are times when I have to suppress the urge to say to someone that her/his behaviour etc is ultimately harmful to them or to others. Yet I can't say so, without the risk of being thought (a) to be a fundamentalist bigot (or B) to be being judgemental, unfriendly and unaccepting. It's a trap in a way, in order to not be labelled '_right wing war and capital  punishment W., loving fundamentalist', _I have to be ultra-accepting, even of the kind of thing that as a non-Christian, I would be free to say 'Icky, unhealthy and generally nasty, and I am free to not accept that'. I hasten to add that '*hate the sin but love the sinner'* is not as some people  think, hypocritical and false, but is in fact, _real_ acceptance!


  Well I never said it is  easy!!! But IT IS smt that people who are "in" the faith should aspire to. It is entirely different thing whether they succeed in it or not.
I, for one, often (or should I say TOO often) get tempted to set things straight. Sometimes I succeed to bite my tongue (usually when I know that the person to whom my words are attended won't understand a thing I say and will carry on as before), other times I don't.
I don't have a problem that people expect much from me just because I am a Christian as a lot of people in my surroundings are as well, but I do get nasty and teasing comments from self-declared atheists that some of my opinions are not "consistent" with my faith. And then I just say: " Do you really think that you know that better then me?"


----------



## Maja

. said:


> My question is this.
> Why do born-again fundamentalist  evangelical Christian people take so much offence from such a word as  fuck.


 I really have no idea  as I don't know any member of their church. 



heidita said:


> I do not agree with you as in any kind of relationship you have to adapt and sort of put the other cheek all the time. All relationships are somehow based on certain rules which cannot be surpassed and for some people some things are important and for others they are just silly. As we can't all think or be the same, which most likely would be very boring, it is important to accept these unwritten "rules".


Well you can, of course, disagree with me, but I never said that one should turn the other cheek in every relationship. I am just saying that it is better to change yourself rather then trying to "fix" others to suit you! 



heidita said:


> We have no idea why this particular friend was offended by the word "fuck". It may be because for her it has some sexual connotation even for us it may not. Any reason will do, if she is offended, the "correct" thing to do if you are a true friend is not to go on offending . So I think Dot&comma's attitude is  the most reasonable under the circumstances and shows he really cares.


Who said anything about  that?


heidita said:


> Why this person should be judged because she doesn't like swearwords is not understandable. Even in the closest of friendships there can be misunderstandings. So why not judge Dots &Commas for swearing? Shouldn't he have known it was offensive for his friends?
> I think it is not reasonable to judge a person for not liking a certain kind of language only because we all (?) are so used to swearing that it sounds so natural to us that we do not think it can offend anybody.


 We can, of  course, broaden the theme, but as I understand the subject of this thread is  not whether swearing is a god thing or a bed thing (in any circumstances)  but if the word "fu**" is offensive.
The thread-starter, as  I gathered from his post, didn't say "fu** you" TO his friend but said  "fu**" just as he could've said "damn/shit/bugger/darn/bummer....".  
And he thinks that the  reason why she's got offended is the fact she is a devoted member of the Christian  community.
So if her religion was the reason, in my opinion it was the wrong one as The Good Book teaches us to turn the other cheek and not be judgmental of others!!!
On the other hand, I  really think that taking something like that as a personal insult is a  bit of exaggeration regardless of religion!!! 
To me, swearing is just a bad  habit and part of  someone's speech and I don't see it as smt directed against  me and therefore should be brought before the Inquisition.


----------



## Victoria32

Maja said:


> Well I never said it is easy)!!! But IT IS smt that people who are "in" the faith should aspire to. It is entirely different thing whether they succeed in it or not.
> I, for one, often (or should I say TOO often) get tempted to set things straight. Sometimes I succeed to bite my tongue (usually when I know the the person to whom my words are attended won't understand a thing I say and will carry on as before), other times I don't.
> I don't have a problem that people expect much from me just because I am a Christian as a lot of people in my surroundings are as well, but I do get nasty and teasing comments from self-declared atheists that some of my opinions are not "consistent" with my faith. And then I just say: " Do you really think that you know that better then me?"


I have had that same argument with the "angry atheists", those who feel they have to campaign - distinguished from the average one, who believes in what he wants and doesn't feel he has to try to_ convert anyone to his point of view...  _


----------



## timebomb

It used to be that I would be shocked if I hear the word "fuck" from a woman's mouth.  Good girls don't use vulgarities, or so I thought.  In recent years, however, the word is used so commonly it no longer has any shock value.  I've noticed too that in certain situations, there's no better word to use than "fuck".

In the movie, Constantine, the Angel Gabriel used this word when she told the main character that his life was finished.  These are her exact words:

_Gabriel: You're going to die young because you smoked 30 cigarettes a day since you were 15... and you're going to go to hell because of the life you took.
[pause, Gabriel leans in]
Gabriel: John... You're fucked._

In the movie, Alien 3, Sergeant Ripley said "fuck" too when she discovered that the planet she was marooned on didn't have any firearms.  This is what she said:

_Ripley: This is a maximum security prison, and you have no weapons of any kind?
Andrews: We have some carving knives in the abbatoir, a few more in the mess hall. Some fire axes scattered about the place - nothing terribly formidable.
Ripley: That's all?
Andrews: We're on the honor system.
Ripley: Then we're fucked._

"Fuck" may be offensive to some but under the right circumstances, it's a good word to use.  In fact, sometimes it's the only word.


----------



## Brioche

don maico said:


> As I said before the word itself carries no weight.


 
Yeah, yeah.
Words carry no weight.
Try saying _Nigger_ out loud in the US.

Try addressing a UK police officer of South Asian descent as _Paki,_ or one of Afro-Carribean descent as _Darkie._


----------



## .   1

Brioche said:


> Yeah, yeah.
> Words carry no weight.
> Try saying _Nigger_ out loud in the US.
> 
> Try addressing a UK police officer of South Asian descent as _Paki,_ or one of Afro-Carribean descent as _Darkie._


To be fair it must be said that fuck is not in the same catagory as any of the three ugly words you have linked to it.  Fuck is a swear word pure and simple that makes no judgements or implications.

.,,


----------



## don maico

. said:


> To be fair it must be said that fuck is not in the same catagory as any of the three ugly words you have linked to it.  Fuck is a swear word pure and simple that makes no judgements or implications.
> 
> .,,



Thank you!


----------



## Brioche

. said:


> To be fair it must be said that fuck is not in the same catagory as any of the three ugly words you have linked to it. Fuck is a swear word pure and simple that makes no judgements or implications.
> 
> .,,


 
Now, why are those three words so ugly? Why are they not in the same category?

Or rather, why are the sensibilities of African-Americans, Afro-Carribeans or South Asians worthy of consideration, while those, Christian or not, who feel sullied, abused or assaulted by the f-word are told to get used to it?

Will anybody say that _nigger_  may be offensive to some, but it's the right word to say in some circumstances?

I'm old enough to remember when liquorice squares were labeled "nigger blocks" in the sweet shop, and when saying _fuck_ could land you in court. Why can't we abstain from both, rather than swap outrage?


----------



## natasha2000

Brioche said:


> Now, why are those three words so ugly? Why are they not in the same category?
> 
> Because:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fuck is a swear word pure and simple that makes no judgements or implications.
> 
> 
> 
> While all other three words are not insulting in their pure sematic meaning, but in the meaning given to them by people, and what these words imply.
> This is why they do not belong to the same category, but it does not refute the ugliness of all four words in the same way.
> 
> Or rather, why are the sensibilities of African-Americans, Afro-Carribeans or South Asians worthy of consideration, while those, Christian or not, who feel sullied, abused or assaulted by the f-word are told to get used to it?
> 
> Nobody said this, but here we are talking about the feelings of new born Christians, and not about African Americans or Afro Carribeans or South Asians, or anyone else.
> 
> Will anybody say that _nigger_  may be offensive to some, but it's the right word to say in some circumstances?
> 
> No. Nobody said this.
> 
> I'm old enough to remember when liquorice squares were labeled "nigger blocks" in the sweet shop, and when saying _fuck_ could land you in court. Why can't we abstain from both, rather than swap outrage?
Click to expand...


----------



## .   1

Brioche said:


> Yeah, yeah.
> Words carry no weight.
> Try saying _Nigger_ out loud in the US.
> 
> Try addressing a UK police officer of South Asian descent as _Paki,_ or one of Afro-Carribean descent as _Darkie._
> 
> 
> _and_
> 
> 
> Now, why are those three words so ugly? Why are they not in the same category?
> 
> Or rather, why are the sensibilities of African-Americans, Afro-Carribeans or South Asians worthy of consideration, while those, Christian or not, who feel sullied, abused or assaulted by the f-word are told to get used to it?
> 
> Will anybody say that _nigger_  may be offensive to some, but it's the right word to say in some circumstances?
> 
> I'm old enough to remember when liquorice squares were labeled "nigger blocks" in the sweet shop, and when saying _fuck_ could land you in court. Why can't we abstain from both, rather than swap outrage?


 
These two posts are your total contribution to the thread and they have not gone close to answering my question,

The three words you chose to link with my curse word are not curse words in themselves but they are the words of a bigot.

If I use fuck when I am irritated I am at worst displaying poor manners and a limited vocabulary.

Were I to use any of the three repulsive words you chose I would display myself as being nothing but an empty headed bigot.

I did not ask about any other curse word than fuck and I specifically asked for the reason that a born-again evangelical christian may find it offensive.

Nigger may be offensive to some but it's the right word to say in some circumstances.

Would you like to step into South Central Los Angeles or Chicago and tell a large dark skinned bloke that he can not call his best mate nigger when he wants to do so?

My wife and her family use the word 'wog' with gay abandon yet when I use it eyebrows are raised with many 'skips' who hear me. 

Words are weird and slippery and their use reveals so much about the user but even more about the listener.

.,,


----------



## Victoria32

Brioche said:


> Now, why are those three words so ugly? Why are they not in the same category?
> 
> Or rather, why are the sensibilities of African-Americans, Afro-Carribeans or South Asians worthy of consideration, while those, Christian or not, who feel sullied, abused or assaulted by the f-word are told to get used to it?
> 
> Will anybody say that _nigger_  may be offensive to some, but it's the right word to say in some circumstances?
> 
> I'm old enough to remember when liquorice squares were labeled "nigger blocks" in the sweet shop, and when saying _fuck_ could land you in court. Why can't we abstain from both, rather than swap outrage?


Exactly! While I have seen _Constantine_, and agree that f*** seems like the best word in the circumstances (it is a great film!) I agree Brioche, that we should ideally abstain from both! After all, there are other words which would have had the same impact in Constantine, I can think of one or two without having to use what Kirk in _Star Trek IV_ called 'colourful metaphors'!


----------



## Brioche

. said:


> I did not ask about any other curse word than fuck and I specifically asked for the reason that a born-again evangelical christian may find it offensive.
> 
> Words are weird and slippery and their use reveals so much about the user but even more about the listener.
> 
> .,,


 
OK, let's look at this *from the point of view of a Christian* (of almost any stripe).
Sex is a gift from God, intended for married couples, who use it to express their love for each other, and to participate with God in the miracle of human procreation.

The word _fuck_, with its combination of sex and violence, reduces the act of love and procreation into a violent, loveless action - very akin to rape.

The person who peppers his speech with the word is expressing contempt for the Creator and His plan for humanity.

There may be a couple or two who enjoy a little simulated B&D in the bedroom, and who use the word in this context. 

However, I don't see how_ fuck off, fuck wit, go fuck yourself _can ever be anything but nasty and brutish. _I'm going to fuck you_ is the sibling, [if not the twin] of _I'm going to rape you._

In the current PC environment, using words which cause offence to particular select groups can get you into a lot of trouble. Christians, particularly the born-again variety, are not afforded this protection.


----------



## Victoria32

Brioche said:


> OK, let's look at this *from the point of view of a Christian* (of almost any stripe).
> Sex is a gift from God, intended for married couples, who use it to express their love for each other, and to participate with God in the miracle of human procreation.
> 
> The word _fuck_, with its combination of sex and violence, reduces the act of love and procreation into a violent, loveless action - very akin to rape.
> 
> The person who peppers his speech with the word is expressing contempt for the Creator and His plan for humanity.
> 
> There may be a couple or two who enjoy a little simulated B&D in the bedroom, and who use the word in this context.
> 
> However, I don't see how_ fuck off, fuck wit, go fuck yourself _can ever be anything but nasty and brutish. _I'm going to fuck you_ is the sibling, [if not the twin] of _I'm going to rape you._
> 
> In the current PC environment, using words which cause offence to particular select groups can get you into a lot of trouble. Christians, particularly the born-again variety, are not afforded this protection.


I absolutely agree, Brioche!


----------



## Maja

. said:


> Words are weird and slippery and their use reveals so much about the user but even more about the listener.
> .,,



Here, here!


----------



## maxwels

As the so called 'urban syndrome' shows its high hand in every form of lifestyle and etiquette in this present era, using such offensive words such as 'f#%@k' would be counted indispensable in the days to come.All the dirty works and profanities perpetrated by some accolades for their destructive skills certainly outstrips modesty in its every sense.They make the sin-look fashionable and further crow over it to be a newest benchmark in the market strategy for its grip over economy.The devil it seems is hell bent to envisage this subtle ploy to sweep asmuch people possible of this generation into his swamp in the name of 'Gen-X' and fashion fanfare.Woe to those who fall into fashion rut and its urban makeover.It's well foretold that just as it was in the days of Noah so will also be in the days of second coming of 'Son of Man', people will be drinking,feasting and being given in marriage.Sulphur and Brimstone awaits those foul-mouthed and unrighteous humans who distort God's principles.They might disbelief the events yet to hapen in the end times but they are sure to mourn at the appointed day.
Praise the Lord!!


----------



## maxiogee

maxwels said:


> It's well foretold that just as it was in the days of Noah so will also be in the days of second coming of 'Son of Man', people will be drinking,feasting and being given in marriage.



But surely marriage is "an institution founded by God" and the Christian marriage rite puts it. Were it not to be pursued we would not be in even graver sin than you have decried in previous posts.
What would you have of people — anstinence from all procreation? 

Surely people have been drinking and feasting since before the first coming, so one can always claim that the prophecy is nigh upon being fulfilled. Didn't St Paul expect to live to see it?


----------



## don maico

Brioche said:


> OK, let's look at this *from the point of view of a Christian* (of almost any stripe).
> Sex is a gift from God, intended for married couples, who use it to express their love for each other, and to participate with God in the miracle of human procreation.
> 
> The word _fuck_, with its combination of sex and violence, reduces the act of love and procreation into a violent, loveless action - very akin to rape.
> 
> The person who peppers his speech with the word is expressing contempt for the Creator and His plan for humanity.
> 
> There may be a couple or two who enjoy a little simulated B&D in the bedroom, and who use the word in this context.
> 
> However, I don't see how_ fuck off, fuck wit, go fuck yourself _can ever be anything but nasty and brutish. _I'm going to fuck you_ is the sibling, [if not the twin] of _I'm going to rape you._
> 
> In the current PC environment, using words which cause offence to particular select groups can get you into a lot of trouble. Christians, particularly the born-again variety, are not afforded this protection.


A) partly agree except that many couples cohabit quite happily and see noi need to get married
B) again only partly so. The word fuck can be seen as violent but not necessarily so. I'd associate it with raw lust rather than rape. Many would ask to fuck or be fucked but would not thrust it onto someone who didnt want it
C)Not at all as I said before the owrds fuck and cunt were liberally used in the middle ages maybe not with the same meaning as today ,ie as in swearing, but they were used and no one took offence.
D)Not sure what you mean by B&D
E)I f you tell someone that you are going to fuck them without their consent then that is rape. Do you fancy a fuck is not.
Again its all about how one percieves the word nad the context its used in pure and simple.


----------



## natasha2000

maxwels said:


> As the so called 'urban syndrome' shows its high hand in every form of lifestyle and etiquette in this present era, using such offensive words such as 'f#%@k' would be counted indispensable in the days to come.All the dirty works and profanities perpetrated by some accolades for their destructive skills certainly outstrips modesty in its every sense.They make the sin-look fashionable and further crow over it to be a newest benchmark in the market strategy for its grip over economy.The devil it seems is hell bent to envisage this subtle ploy to sweep asmuch people possible of this generation into his swamp in the name of 'Gen-X' and fashion fanfare.Woe to those who fall into fashion rut and its urban makeover.It's well foretold that just as it was in the days of Noah so will also be in the days of second coming of 'Son of Man', people will be drinking,feasting and being given in marriage.Sulphur and Brimstone awaits those foul-mouthed and unrighteous humans who distort God's principles.They might disbelief the events yet to hapen in the end times but they are sure to mourn at the appointed day.
> Praise the Lord!!


 What it this about?


----------



## don maico

some peole simply love mental gymnastics verbeage ,semantics  etc


----------



## .   1

maxwels said:


> As the so called 'urban syndrome' shows its high hand in every form of lifestyle and etiquette in this present era, using such offensive words such as 'f#%@k' would be counted indispensable in the days to come.All the dirty works and profanities perpetrated by some accolades for their destructive skills certainly outstrips modesty in its every sense.They make the sin-look fashionable and further crow over it to be a newest benchmark in the market strategy for its grip over economy.The devil it seems is hell bent to envisage this subtle ploy to sweep asmuch people possible of this generation into his swamp in the name of 'Gen-X' and fashion fanfare.Woe to those who fall into fashion rut and its urban makeover.It's well foretold that just as it was in the days of Noah so will also be in the days of second coming of 'Son of Man', people will be drinking,feasting and being given in marriage.Sulphur and Brimstone awaits those foul-mouthed and unrighteous humans who distort God's principles.They might disbelief the events yet to hapen in the end times but they are sure to mourn at the appointed day.
> Praise the Lord!!


Come again?

.,,


----------



## Brioche

don maico said:


> A) partly agree except that many couples cohabit quite happily and see noi need to get married
> B) again only partly so. The word fuck can be seen as violent but not necessarily so. I'd associate it with raw lust rather than rape. Many would ask to fuck or be fucked but would not thrust it onto someone who didnt want it
> C)Not at all as I said before the owrds fuck and cunt were liberally used in the middle ages maybe not with the same meaning as today ,ie as in swearing, but they were used and no one took offence.
> D)Not sure what you mean by B&D
> E)I f you tell someone that you are going to fuck them without their consent then that is rape. Do you fancy a fuck is not.
> Again its all about how one percieves the word nad the context its used in pure and simple.


 
I was asked for the *Christian *view point. 
a. I am unaware of any _mainstream Christian_ sect which encourages sex outside marriage, or any form of co-habitation.

c. How does anybody know how liberally these words were used in the Middle Ages? 

d. B&D = Bondage and Dominance.
Look up _BDSM_ (Bondage, Dominance and Sado-Masochism) in Wikipedia

e. Refer to a. and d. 
Born-again Christians do not ask anyone other than their wedded spouse to have sexual relations with them.
A married Christian couple may use such a word in the privacy of their boudoir. You won't hear them saying it to a stranger in the street, or someone they've just met in the pub.


----------



## badgrammar

Brioche, I'm finding you terribly eloquent and wise these days, to the point and accurate, yet restrained and diplomatic...



Brioche said:


> I was asked for the *Christian *view point.
> a. I am unaware of any _mainstream Christian_ sect which encourages sex outside marriage, or any form of co-habitation.
> 
> c. How does anybody know how liberally these words were used in the Middle Ages?
> 
> d. B&D = Bondage and Dominance.
> Look up _BDSM_ (Bondage, Dominance and Sado-Masochism) in Wikipedia
> 
> e. Refer to a. and d.
> Born-again Christians do not ask anyone other than their wedded spouse to have sexual relations with them.
> A married Christian couple may use such a word in the privacy of their boudoir. You won't hear them saying it to a stranger in the street, or someone they've just met in the pub.


----------



## don maico

Brioche said:


> I was asked for the *Christian *view point.
> a. I am unaware of any _mainstream Christian_ sect which encourages sex outside marriage, or any form of co-habitation.
> 
> c. How does anybody know how liberally these words were used in the Middle Ages?
> 
> d. B&D = Bondage and Dominance.
> Look up _BDSM_ (Bondage, Dominance and Sado-Masochism) in Wikipedia
> 
> e. Refer to a. and d.
> Born-again Christians do not ask anyone other than their wedded spouse to have sexual relations with them.
> A married Christian couple may use such a word in the privacy of their boudoir. You won't hear them saying it to a stranger in the street, or someone they've just met in the pub.


As Christianity is divided into so many sects all interpreting "the word" in their own way including modern day gnostics its quite possible there are denominations out there which have liberal outlook and wouldnt oppose cohabitating. After all we do have gay clergy now and even female ones.
how does anyone know anything about history.It was the Puritans (and subesequently Victorian)who because of their disapproval of pleasure made the words unacceptable.


----------



## .   1

Brioche said:


> I was asked for the *Christian *view point.
> a. I am unaware of any _mainstream Christian_ sect which encourages sex outside marriage, or any form of co-habitation.
> 
> c. How does anybody know how liberally these words were used in the Middle Ages?
> 
> d. B&D = Bondage and Dominance.
> Look up _BDSM_ (Bondage, Dominance and Sado-Masochism) in Wikipedia
> 
> e. Refer to a. and d.
> Born-again Christians do not ask anyone other than their wedded spouse to have sexual relations with them.
> A married Christian couple may use such a word in the privacy of their boudoir. You won't hear them saying it to a stranger in the street, or someone they've just met in the pub.


May I add my thanks for this logical post.

.,,


----------



## maxiogee

don maico said:


> how does anyone know anything about history.It was the Puritans (and subesequently Victorian)who because of their disapproval of pleasure made the words unacceptable.



I doubt that.
"Coarse" language existed before the Puritans, and was eschewed by polite society. Public disapproval may have risen because of the Puritans, but I would seek indications to back any assertion that they made the words unacceptable.
And anyway, they didn't hold enough power to make the unacceptability stick if "the public" disagreed with them. Society always agrees to the laws and strictures it observes, otherwise the laws fall into disuse.


----------



## ireney

Do we know the connotations and indeed the exact meaning of the most famous F word in the past? I keep thinking of the word "γαμώ" which translates as F--k. In ancient Greek it meant "I am marrying" so you can bet it was used without insulting anyone.


----------



## Nunty

ireney said:


> Do we know the connotations and indeed the exact meaning of the most famous F word in the past? I keep thinking of the word "γαμώ" which translates as F--k. In ancient Greek it meant "I am marrying" so you can bet it was used without insulting anyone.


Now that is fascinating. The modern Hebrew word for husband is בעל, which has it roots in the transitive verb that refers to copulation, but only to the male role therein. I do not know of a close English word, except the objectionable one that is the subject of this thread. 

I might also add that the small Hebrew-speaking Christian community is not confronted with this issue, because there are not really any "satisfactory" dirty words in Hebrew; Arabic words are used instead.


----------



## Setwale_Charm

Nun-Translator said:


> I might also add that the small Hebrew-speaking Christian community is not confronted with this issue, because there are not really any "satisfactory" dirty words in Hebrew; Arabic words are used instead.


That`s an interesting solution to the problem!


----------



## Setwale_Charm

The Danish earlier version of husband - husbond: literally, "house" + "bond". Makes more sense to me than the Hebrew one.


----------



## don maico

FUCK 

acronym for Fornication Under Consent of King 

This acronym was placed on placards to be posted on doors of couples who had permission from the King to have sex.


----------



## ireney

While we are veering towards a clearly off-topic discussion I think I should mention that, to the best of my knowledge, the acronymic etymologies of the word are considered false (my intention with post #95 was to note that the use in times past of an insulting in modern times word can simply mean that it's meaning or the connotations of it has/have changed)


----------



## Vast

It's quite simple actualy 

Curse, cuss,4 letter or swear words etc. have always bien a *blasphemous* expression for any righteous Christian..

That's Why.. 

Amen

An Agnostic..


----------



## ireney

*Blasphemous* are only the words that deride God, that are disrespectful toward  sacred things.


----------



## Vast

Ok have it your way 



> Sometimes blasphemy is used loosely to mean any profane language


Wikipedia/Blasphemy
(30 posts 4 a link??  )


----------



## maxiogee

Vast said:


> It's quite simple actualy
> Curse, cuss,4 letter or swear words etc. have always bien a *blasphemous* expression for any righteous Christian..
> An Agnostic..





ireney said:


> *Blasphemous* are only the words that deride God, that are disrespectful toward  sacred things.





Vast said:


> Ok have it your way
> 
> 
> 
> 
> from wikipedia
> Sometimes blasphemy is used loosely to mean any profane language
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wikipedia/Blasphemy
> (30 posts 4 a link??  )
Click to expand...


Maybe you should look up the exact meaning of "profane".


----------



## Vast

Is there an Exact meaning?? Of course depending on what dictionary/context you're using. I believe (AFAIK) the English Language doesn't even have an official dictionary.. (The Language is still to young for that)



> *Profane*
> adj. secular, not  consecrated; agnostic, heretical; vulgar; unholy, not sacred; serving to  desecrate what is sacred, blasphemous
> 
> v.desecrate what is  sacred, blaspheme; defile, contaminate, make impure


(Babylon-Oxford)

foi 


> Main Entry:    *1pro·fane*
> Pronunciation:    prO-'fAn, pr&-
> Function:    _transitive verb_
> Inflected Form(s):    *pro·faned*; *pro·fan·ing*
> Etymology:    Middle English _prophanen,_ from Anglo-French _prophaner,_ from Latin _profanare,_ from _profanus_
> *1* *:* to treat (something sacred) with abuse, irreverence, or contempt
> *2* *:* to debase by a wrong, unworthy, or vulgar use
> - *pro·fan·er* _noun_


_
M. Webster

Enough by now i guess.. 
_


> pro-fānus, a, um (pro & fanum, act. ‘decumbent before the holy ground ’)
> 1. unconsecrated, not-holy, profaan [locus; usus; animalia - impure]; Q honores bello facere -os desecrate;
> 2. (poët.) not consecrated [vulgus not consecrated in service o.t. muse];
> 3. (poët.; post class.) godless, criminal, shameful [mens; verba; princeps];
> 4. (poët.; post class.) inauspicious [avis; bubo];
> 5. (eccl.) heathenism, paganism; apostate , heretical.


 Latin Dictionary - Uni Amsterdam..


----------



## GenJen54

Gentle forer@s, 

Might I ask we mince - and parse - words elsewhere and get back to the subject at hand?

Thank you. 

GenJen
Moderator


----------



## .   1

don maico said:


> FUCK
> 
> acronym for Fornication Under Consent of King
> 
> This acronym was placed on placards to be posted on doors of couples who had permission from the King to have sex.


If that is the case why is the word offensive at all as it indicates Royal consent.

.,,


----------



## Chazzwozzer

don maico said:


> FUCK
> 
> acronym for Fornication Under Consent of King
> 
> This acronym was placed on placards to be posted on doors of couples who had permission from the King to have sex.



Hasn't this urban legend already been busted by Snopes?


----------



## .   1

Chazzwozzer said:


> Hasn't this urban legend already been busted by Snopes?


It has also been busted by logic.
According to The Collins dictionary acronym is a modern word originating in the Twentieth Century.  It is therefore logical to assume that acronyms were not used in the society that did not have a word to describe the habit.

.,,


----------



## maxiogee

GenJen54 said:


> Gentle forer@s,
> 
> Might I ask we mince - and parse - words elsewhere and get back to the subject at hand?



I asked, GenJentle Mod, because the meaning of the word is the exact opposite of sacred. It comes from the Latin for "before the temple" - meaning non-Sacred. This means that a profane word is not a "blasphemy", but "blasphemies" may be profane. As such a profanity neeed not be offensive to a Christian. 
Bicycle is a profane word - it is non-sacred.
But by their accepted definition profanities are not automatically blasphemities. Knickers is, for reasons I've explained elsewhere, my favourite profanity but it is now a blasphemity.


----------



## .   1

GenJen54 said:


> Gentle forer@s,
> 
> Might I ask we mince - and parse - words elsewhere and get back to the subject at hand?
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> GenJen
> Moderator


If we are not able to mince and parse words what can we do?
I thought that the main thing that happens here is that words are dissected to the nth degree and at some point understanding may result?
If this is not the case could somebody please tell me what is the purpose of this forum?  
I am now thoroughly confused.

.,,


----------



## don maico

we need to keep things simple. its just a word!


----------



## don maico

Chazzwozzer said:


> Hasn't this urban legend already been busted by Snopes?


In all truthfulness we shall never really know.My guess is that it was a vulgar word in liberal use but the nobility probably dint use it so much as it was associated with the peasantry. Maybe they used baiser


----------



## Victoria32

don maico said:


> FUCK
> 
> acronym for Fornication Under Consent of King
> 
> This acronym was placed on placards to be posted on doors of couples who had permission from the King to have sex.


I am afraid that like the story of 'For unlawful carnal knowledge",(a Van halen record cover I believe)  that is a myth... 


don maico said:


> ...its just a word after all. Fuck fuck fuck ! It derives from the frissian fucken if i am not mistaken


The whole thing is, it's not just a word, or we wouldn't be having this thread! That origin story is far closer... 



don maico said:


> we need to keep things simple. its just a word!


Clearly not!


----------



## Nunty

Vast said:


> It's quite simple actualy
> 
> Curse, cuss,4 letter or swear words etc. have always bien a *blasphemous* expression for any righteous Christian..
> 
> That's Why..
> 
> Amen
> 
> An Agnostic..


Sorry to rain on your colorful little agnostic parade, but... no. Blasphemous is the adjectival form of "blasphemy", the definition of which you can find here. It refers specifically to acts/words that are meant to be anti-religious.


----------



## Vast

Never thought it would come to this, me speaking for the view of a orthodox Crhistian :lol I don't mind you raining down on me and I'm really sorry for my Dunglish and all confusion, maybe i choose the wrong word for the wrong time frame. After all it's also no longer blaspheme to call the earth round, is it?..  Also do not truly know the modern conception of right(eous) behavior in todays Christians but obviously the word FUCK and it's vulgar use, meaning and perception has no part in that..

I understand now that the word i choose may be loaded to much for todays standard little damnation.

But at the end of the story it commes down to one thing only.
And i too understood in my religious upbringing (which didn't work out) that sort of:
Abusing the moral standard by using vulgar obscene language or cussing and cursing can be considered a tempt of faith, a step closer to the evil side and to become sinful, impure and unworthy and so on.

Then who's to "BLAME"?? 
(which origen = also Blasphemo = a.o. indignity, insult, taunt, etc.)


Cheers..


----------



## ireney

Look, there is a difference between saying "You shouldn't do that because it tarnishes your soul/paves your way to Hell/is a sin" and saying "I am personally offended by the fact that you used that word even though it wasn't aimed at me" (see the first post).

Now, I can see why anyone, religious or not, could ask me not to use the F word because he doesn't want to hear such words (or this word in particular); I can't _really_ understand why he/she would find it personally offensive if I used it.

I am also having sex without being married. I don't keep it a secret; I am not advertising it ("by the way, did you know I have sex without being married?") but I don't keep it a secret either. This (the sex buisness) is a sin according to most religions I know about. 
I would and do accept this comment from a religious person although I kindly ask them not to launch into a diatribe about it since, as an atheist, I don't share their beliefs on the matter.

In the same way, if, being really frustrated, I say the F word and a religious person comments on why it's wrong to use it _without_ taking forever about it, I will and have accepted it.

If he said he finds it personally offensive I would be as curious as *.,,*.

Usually things go like this: Person X swears, Person Y says that he doesn't like hearing this word Person X apologises, end of story.
In fact, most religious persons I know either don't mind or, if they mind, make a mild request that I won't use it in their presence (very rarely admonishing me not to use it in general) and that's it really.


----------



## don maico

Victoria32 said:


> I am afraid that like the story of 'For unlawful carnal knowledge",(a Van halen record cover I believe)  that is a myth...
> 
> The whole thing is, it's not just a word, or we wouldn't be having this thread! That origin story is far closer...
> 
> 
> Clearly not!


its completely subjective. People may be offended by its use because they have themselves been indoctrinated into believing it to be so. Even today most wont use it liberally for fear of casuing such offence, but the word itself carries no weight at all otherwise the same word in other languages would be equally offensive which isnt the case . In Spanish- joder- isnt particulalry strong .
Any word or phrase if delivered with sufficient venom could be contsrued as offensive. "You are talking complete and utter rubbish" if sent aggressively enough could offend. Adding the F word wouldnt make it any worse in my view.But as I say its largely subjective and some may take greater offence.
Nasty is nasty whatever the language


----------



## elchivo

That kind of people, that belog in a new group of people, church except catholics), support groups, asumme very radical point of views of a thing, they have a poor open mind, most of them have any psicological problems that were lookin any place to belog because of his problem. I belong a AA group and i know what i'am saying.

than you
Don't talk with them, best thing is ignore them o you can get crazy.


----------



## .   1

elchivo said:


> That kind of people, that belog in a new group of people, church except catholics), support groups, asumme very radical point of views of a thing, they have a poor open mind, most of them have any psicological problems that were lookin any place to belog because of his problem. I belong a AA group and i know what i'am saying.
> 
> than you
> Don't talk with them, best thing is ignore them o you can get crazy.


Thanks for the open view.
My friend is not Roman Catholic but I doubt that I will dump her in the miscellaneous basket.
I am not sure that Non Roman Catholic Christians hold significantly different religious views to those held by Roman Catholics nor do I accept that Roman Catholics are more open minded than Non Roman Catholic Christians.
She is also different to me but I would not go so far as to say that she has psychological problems.

.,,


----------



## GenJen54

elchivo said:
			
		

> That kind of people, that belog in a new group of people, church except catholics), support groups, asumme very radical point of views of a thing, they have a poor open mind, most of them have any psicological problems that were lookin any place to belog because of his problem. I belong a AA group and i know what i'am saying.
> 
> than you
> Don't talk with them, best thing is ignore them o you can get crazy.


Wow, elchivo! How enlightening. 

I'm not an evangelical, nor fundamental Christian. In fact, one could argue that I am not a very "religious" person at all as I do not subscribe to any one religious dogma or tenet. I am offended by several words, including c*nt. Am I, too, therefore lumped into this category of having psychological problems? 

I would argue that there have been several ideas presented here as to why this word could prove offensive to "Christians." The word in question could also prove offensive to agnostics. 

I personally cannot speak for others. I am used to hearing the word in its adjectival form, and for some reason it doesn't bother me. In its verb form, however, I find it a bit on the obscene side, and if someone were to propose "Fancy a f*ck," as don maico suggested, they'd probably receive a good smack in reply.


----------



## Victoria32

don maico said:


> its completely subjective. People may be offended by its use because they have themselves been indoctrinated into believing it to be so. Even today most wont use it liberally for fear of casuing such offence, but the word itself carries no weight at all otherwise the same word in other languages would be equally offensive which isnt the case . In Spanish- joder- isnt particulalry strong .
> Any word or phrase if delivered with sufficient venom could be contsrued as offensive. "You are talking complete and utter rubbish" if sent aggressively enough could offend. Adding the F word wouldnt make it any worse in my view.But as I say its largely subjective and some may take greater offence.
> Nasty is nasty whatever the language


Indoctrinated? How judgemental of you! It is simply a matter of courtesy, to not use 'colourful metaphors' except in a situation where they're warranted or necessary. 
To me the word carries connotations of violence, that's what makes it most unacceptable.


----------



## scotu

Jesus taught that love of God is best expressed in love of your fellow man. 
Angry thoughts lead in the opposite direction of love. If one strives towards being a loving person there is no room in his mind for angry thoughts or words. Perhaps your friend is not offended at the word itself but maybe she questions if you are really a friend when you continue to use words that you know are offensive to her. (_edit: I see you clearly covered this in a previous post, excuse me.)_

Many Christians are guided by the bible...the following references might give you a clue as to the use of words from a Christian point of view:
Proverbs 15:26 Matthew 15:11 Mathew 15:18 Luke 6:45 Romans 8:5-9 Phillipians 1:27


----------



## Nunty

What I find amazing in this thread... well, one of the things I find amazing... is that I can't find any reference to cultural relativism. If j---- is less offensive in a Spanish-speaking context than f--- is in an English-speaking context, that's good and well, but I don't think we can use that to say that _because_ j---- is not so offensive f--- should not be so offensive either.

If I cross my legs in a Church of the Latin rite, so what? I do so in a Church of the Orthodox rite, someone will come over and make me uncross them. Cultural relativism.

There are subcultures within a given society, too. A mark of the truly polite person is that she does not make anyone feel uncomfortable. That means that she must be reasonably well-informed of the dos and don'ts of the local subcultures.

So what does this have to do with this thread? Just this: I don't think anyone has any more right to say that "that word" shouldn't be offensive to Christians (or anyone else) than Christians (or anyone else) have a right to say that people shouldn't say it. And this: if we have reason to believe that using a given word would be offensive to our hearers, it is blatant rudeness to use it.

Am I making any sense? Am I totally off topic?


----------



## cuchuflete

You are making good sense.  I am wondering if *.,,* asked the offended person for her reasons for being offended.  There is, of course, no guarantee that the answer possibily given would have been more enlightening then our own speculations...but now I'm curious.  

It's not a word I use with frequency, just because of the reason you give...it's offensive to lots of people, and there are plenty of other words with which I can express what I think and feel without running the risk of getting someone bent out of shape.  Should it be offensive?  That really doesn't matter if one is offended by it.


----------



## Nunty

P.S. In my student-activist days (well before nunship was on the horizon) I used the word frequently, excessively. I even took advantage of the editorial limitations of live radio to say it Live! On the Air! Looking back, I was using that word to proclaim my rebellion and to shock my elders. I'm not proud of it. I wonder how many people still use it that way.


----------



## .   1

cuchuflete said:


> You are making good sense. I am wondering if *.,,* asked the offended person for her reasons for being offended. There is, of course, no guarantee that the answer possibily given would have been more enlightening then our own speculations...but now I'm curious.
> 
> It's not a word I use with frequency, just because of the reason you give...it's offensive to lots of people, and there are plenty of other words with which I can express what I think and feel without running the risk of getting someone bent out of shape. Should it be offensive? That really doesn't matter if one is offended by it.


I did not press the issue with my friend.  I knew that she was offended and I have no intention of using the word in front of her again.  We still ride together and laugh when I say 'firetruck' under my breath with a smile after I have encountered a cretin.
A word is not worth a friend or even to make a friend uncomfortable and I have plenty of words to choose.
I did not ask her and I will not ask her.  I do not want it to be an issue between us.
I did not start this thread to offend anyone or to challenge anybody's belief system.
I know that my friend was offended on a Christian religious basis and this is a very dangerous thing to offend a person in relation to so I will lose that word and I doubt that it will do me too much harm.
Blasphemy was mentioned as a possible reason as was the word being considered profane and I think that this is close to the bone.
Is the word under consideration blasphemous?

.,,


----------



## Nunty

. said:


> Blasphemy was mentioned as a possible reason as was the word being considered profane and I think that this is close to the bone.
> Is the word under consideration blasphemous?
> 
> .,,


You are among the most polite and considerate people of my cyber acquaintance, and I am certain that your use of "that word" under that circumstance was inadvertant and not intended to shock or hurt or offend your friend. Please forgive me if my post could have been understood otherwise.

Blasphemy? No, I don't think it is blasphemous. Using "bad language" figures in the New Testament among things Christians shouldn't do, like worship idols, commit adultery, tell lies, go to orgies and so on. Not all of these things are blasphemous, I don't think "that word" is blasphemous.

For my part, say it all you want, but please use some euphemism in my presence. For me, it is offensive, but as I said in a much earlier post (that I can't find right now, so I can't give the number) I am not offended for religious reasons.


EDIT: Post #21


----------



## scotu

I think maybe Maja kind of answered your question in post #55. A true christian is not offended by anothers behavior. A true christian loves others the way they are, warts and all. Being offended is all about pride and arrogance which is un-christian like behavior. So the answer to your question is that christians are neither offended by the word fuck or by the person who uses that word. If the person used the word to deliberately offend (as in "fuck-you") then the true christian would forgive that offense. A person who is offended by these words may also be a christian but the offense is probably not because of their beliefs, but for some of the reasons that have been thoroughly explored in this thread.

I only know one person that I'm pretty sure is a true christian, he taught me that a true christian would strive to keep his mind focused in the spritual realm and not in the carnal world, therefore he would try to avoid spending limited mental energies on carnal thoughts. He has also tried to teach me that the use of such words indicates a lack of respect and disrespect is the opposite of love.


----------



## don maico

Victoria32 said:


> Indoctrinated? How judgemental of you! It is simply a matter of courtesy, to not use 'colourful metaphors' except in a situation where they're warranted or necessary.
> To me the word carries connotations of violence, that's what makes it most unacceptable.



Judgemental?? not at all .If you are taught that certain words are unacceptable there is a fair chance you wont use them unless you question that doctrine.It does not need to cvarry connotations of violence but it is a good of letting off steam when needed without actually being violent


----------



## .   1

scotu said:


> I think maybe Maja kind of answered your question in post #55. A true christian is not offended by anothers behavior. A true christian loves others the way they are, warts and all. Being offended is all about pride and arrogance which is un-christian like behavior. So the answer to your question is that christians are neither offended by the word fuck or by the person who uses that word. If the person used the word to deliberately offend (as in "fuck-you") then the true christian would forgive that offense. A person who is offended by these words may also be a christian but the offense is probably not because of their beliefs, but for some of the reasons that have been thoroughly explored in this thread.
> 
> I only know one person that I'm pretty sure is a true christian, he taught me that a true christian would strive to keep his mind focused in the spritual realm and not in the carnal world, therefore he would try to avoid spending limited mental energies on carnal thoughts. He has also tried to teach me that the use of such words indicates a lack of respect and disrespect is the opposite of love.


I have read post 55 again and I am happy that the question has been answered for you but it has not enlightened me at all.
I find posts containing so many words but also abbreviations that I am not familiar with to be difficult to read but I went to the trouble and found that the answer did not assist me to find the answer to the question that I posted.
I did find some snippy comment about true christians but I passed over them as I am not interested in who is a true christian and who is a false or incomplete christian.
Your post confirms that you only know one true christian so your response is valid only when dealing with that one true christian but I am not sure that I have met your one true christian aquaintance and I doubt that I would enjoy the experience and I am positive that your one true christian associate would most certainly not want to meet me as I would definitely test the limited mental energies to which you refer.

.,,


----------

