However I don't see the need to allow foul language here.
Ask the poster if he would be prepared to use it in a face to face converation...........Probably not, but no doubt it would say it would.
Face to face conversation...........that's what it is all about.
Don't say here what you wouldn't be prepared to say to someones face
unless you think you are big enough to stop your face getting filled in.
I accept your apology.
And the suggestion is noted - although in my experience, there are many areas of the country - such as London, where swearing is considered a normal part of conversation, almost part of the dialect. But I have also lived in areas where it's considered abhorrent, and the idea of a female swearing a complete disgrace.
And the suggestion is noted
Jumps up and down at back of class - I dropped a suggestion into the suggestions box.
Re:- Foul Language
However I don't see the need to allow foul language here.
It's a lovely little things called Freedom of Speech. Plus, as pointed out elsewhere - different people find different things offensive. Language, devoid of context, is never inherently offensive. Even something which gets a knee-jerk reaction like "nigger" is not, in itself, an offensive formulation of syllables. It's offensive when it's used by racists because it's loaded with derogatory intent and implications of inferiority because of skin colour. If a baby or a small child just strung the letters together though, we wouldn't gasp and take offence.
If someone calls me a "cunt", 90% of the time I'll consider it offensive. 10% of the time I'll appreciate that it's no different to a comradely usage of "bugger", "git", or "bastard". It's the intent which lies behind it - language is just a vehicle by which we convey meaning and intention.
We're all adults here (as far as I am aware at least?), and I'm sure we're all big enough and ugly enough to weather a few "offensive" words :wink:
If they're directed at other posters in an abusive manner, however, it's a whole different ballgame.
Long live Free Speech and non-prissiness in our use of language :wink:
And a merry arsegravy and beef curtains to you, old son :smt023
RIP old George, too.
One of our senior senior managers has changed the acronym for Objectives from SMART (specific, measurable etc...) to SMART ARSE.
It goes down really well in teaching sessions.
Though one is a pregnant fish
That's a joke / myth – there is no usage of 'twat' which has anything to do with fish. For a start, fish don't get pregnant, they lay eggs.
Ovoviviparous fish and animals give birth to live young, Sea Horse and dog fish being two types of such animal.
True, a small minority of fish are ovoviviparous (mostly sharks) and give birth to live young but most, including goldfish, lay eggs, so would not be described as pregnant (a goldfish full of eggs is called 'ripe' not pregnant).
Twit is a name they experts use for a pregnant goldfish and twat is a term often used to refer to a pregnant fish. Whether rightly or wrongly.
No, I used to believe this one as well, but it just doesn't seem to be true; it's an urban myth. I suppose that the myth may have been around so long that even some experts may be starting to erroneously use the words, but there's no history to support this usage at all; it is entirely modern and most likely made up as a joke.
If you can find any source which uses either twit or twat to describe a fish, pregnant or otherwise then I would be interested to see it (etymology is a bit of a hobby of mine, and I'm always looking out for more little nuggets of wisdom).
Puke, in that case I suppose you know the (for once, true) story of how Robert Browning got caught out by a twat?
And an old nun's twat at that!
Not forgetting - Vanity of Vanities:
They talk't of his having a Cardinalls Hat
They'd send him as soon an Old Nuns Twat
I also like the acronyms for TWAT:
The World At War
The War Against Terror
The World According To
There Was A Time
They Were All There etc...
How do you define 'bad language' though? Any word for sex organs, sexual acts or bodily excretions? Just the slang words for those things? Why not all slang words? What's bad about it anyway?
I've never understood it; words are just words, there's nothing bad about them, that's just Victorian prudery.
If you really believe what you wrote about these words then why use them?
Why not use them? They are just words; terms for expressing emphasis, abuse, anger and emotion.
Why do you not call your mother a dear C**T or tell her F**K OFF?
Because I don't think she is a cunt or want her to fuck off, obviously. I don't see why some words should have this taboo status, but that doesn't mean I am compelled to start randomly insulting people for no reason.
The truth is that if bad language was not classed as offensive you could not be charged with using abusive language in a Doctors surgery or anywhere in the NHS. You can tell someone they are as deaf as a door post and shout it at them but not get charged with using abusive language. But call someone a deaf C**t whilst shouting at them and you can be charged with being abusive.
Well, now you are just trying to say that it's offensive because it's illegal; that's not a useful argument. Certain words take on a special status, and are made illegal because they are considered extra offensive, but I would say that while I think verbally attacking people (swearing or not swearing) should be generally discouraged in public, I don't think that these words should have a special status and be considered extra offensive or illegal; they are just words after all.
Judders Lady... wrote:
Why do you not call your mother a dear CUNT or tell her FUCK OFF?
Don't try arguments which your actions show you do not believe or practice.
I do, I have done, I will do so again....
It's a term of endearment in my family!!!
Now FUCK OFF you CUNT...
Thought I had..
You're a CUNT.. now FUCK off..
I preached it - now why don't you practice it...
Or does it reaffirm your 'messiah, complex?
In that case; please stay and force everyone away...