4 ms·

no matter how intelligent or educated you may be, words are just words. if they harm your sensibilities, perhaps try ignoring people. besides, a loud expletive

by imode 10y ago

no matter how intelligent or educated you may be, words are just words. if they harm your sensibilities, perhaps try ignoring people. besides, a loud expletive is sometimes required in certain situations. :P

JustSomeNobody 10y ago
Why do we require shirts and shoes at work? Why do we tell our children to say "Yes, sir" and "No, ma'am"? Why do we not wear hats indoors? Yes, words are just words. It doesn't matter if you replace Fuck with shit or damn or pussy. The expression of the word is, in some situations, completely disrespectful of those around you. Respect. There's a severe LACK of it now-a-days.
- imode 10y ago
  I don't really want to be seeing some person's genitals, mainly because we live in a culture based around hiding your junk (which I'm not opposed to). someone's words, however, are totally transient and I'm free to tune them out. I'm not exactly free to not look at somebody. I can put headphones on. I can't put a blindfold on. hats indoors? really? you think that's disrespectful? there's a severe lack of common sense nowadays, and uppity folks are proof of it. fuck words. :P
  - JustSomeNobody 10y ago
    Yes, hats indoors are disrespectful. Every been to a movie theater?
    - khedoros1 10y ago
      Yes, clothes in public are disrespectful. Ever been to a public bath house? "Hats indoors" is a superset of "hats in a theater" (ignoring outdoor theaters). Saying that something applies to a subset isn't an argument for why it should apply to a superset. There might be a good argument for them being rude. The theater isn't that argument.
- khedoros1 10y ago
  Having expected patterns of behavior smooths interaction between people. Bringing things back to the book: The dude's in a tough situation, with much less reason to self-censor thoughts he might be having. It makes sense that social niceties would be out the window.
  - JustSomeNobody 10y ago
    But the argument here isn't about the character's situation. It's about swear words in schools. It's less censoring and more of an abridgment.
    - khedoros1 10y ago
      Used in a science curriculum, you're studying the science, and may as well get rid of distracting elements. Bowdlerizing it in the context of a language arts curriculum would still be "in schools", and I'd go the opposite direction there. In that context, I'd say they're an important part of the book, establishing the character that the author wanted to portray, and that you'd be losing lessons on contextual appropriateness of different registers of language. The fact that both situations would occur in a school setting is completely irrelevant to me. I don't think that it should play a part in the "abridgement" decision (although I recognize that it would, and that my opinion on the matter is likely to be controversial). It's more important to me how closely it fits the purpose that it's being put to. In the case of my two examples, scientific vs artistic truths.

by imode 10y ago

JustSomeNobody 10y ago

Why do we require shirts and shoes at work? Why do we tell our children to say "Yes, sir" and "No, ma'am"? Why do we not wear hats indoors? Yes, words are just words. It doesn't matter if you replace Fuck with shit or damn or pussy. The expression of the word is, in some situations, completely disrespectful of those around you. Respect. There's a severe LACK of it now-a-days.

imode 10y ago
I don't really want to be seeing some person's genitals, mainly because we live in a culture based around hiding your junk (which I'm not opposed to). someone's words, however, are totally transient and I'm free to tune them out. I'm not exactly free to not look at somebody. I can put headphones on. I can't put a blindfold on. hats indoors? really? you think that's disrespectful? there's a severe lack of common sense nowadays, and uppity folks are proof of it. fuck words. :P
- JustSomeNobody 10y ago
  Yes, hats indoors are disrespectful. Every been to a movie theater?
  - khedoros1 10y ago
    Yes, clothes in public are disrespectful. Ever been to a public bath house? "Hats indoors" is a superset of "hats in a theater" (ignoring outdoor theaters). Saying that something applies to a subset isn't an argument for why it should apply to a superset. There might be a good argument for them being rude. The theater isn't that argument.
khedoros1 10y ago
Having expected patterns of behavior smooths interaction between people. Bringing things back to the book: The dude's in a tough situation, with much less reason to self-censor thoughts he might be having. It makes sense that social niceties would be out the window.
- JustSomeNobody 10y ago
  But the argument here isn't about the character's situation. It's about swear words in schools. It's less censoring and more of an abridgment.
  - khedoros1 10y ago
    Used in a science curriculum, you're studying the science, and may as well get rid of distracting elements. Bowdlerizing it in the context of a language arts curriculum would still be "in schools", and I'd go the opposite direction there. In that context, I'd say they're an important part of the book, establishing the character that the author wanted to portray, and that you'd be losing lessons on contextual appropriateness of different registers of language. The fact that both situations would occur in a school setting is completely irrelevant to me. I don't think that it should play a part in the "abridgement" decision (although I recognize that it would, and that my opinion on the matter is likely to be controversial). It's more important to me how closely it fits the purpose that it's being put to. In the case of my two examples, scientific vs artistic truths.