Sunday, December 28, 2008

Excusing profanity

I'm amazed at the lengths that some people would go to do defend profanity. I will heartily agree that profanity can be useful in communicating anger or disgust (though I don't condone its use). However, when people insist that profanity is the most effective way to communicate the depths of one's anger, or even the only way to do so, then that's just absurd. It indicates a complete lack of imagination on their part.

Consider the following exchange I saw in which this topic was debated:

Alright. So you come back from the garage upset about all the stuff in it. How would you express your anger about the situation?


One could launch a litany of insults against whoever caused the mess, or whoever created the stuff. One could wish the longest and most painful of torments on these people, their parents, and their progeny. One could describe the way one wants these people to be hung by their entrails, run through with fiery hot pokers, and forced to consume their own vomit. The list goes on.

I daresay that would be a more effective -- and far less ambiguous -- way of communicating anger than to say "This is all a bunch of sh*t!"

In discussing the use of profanity to convey anger, you said, "What else can convey that meaning?" With all due respect, I daresay that if a person cannot thinks there is no other way to convey the depths of his anger, then this is a reflection of that person's limited imagination and linguistic skill rather than any fundamental limitation of the language itself.


Preach it!