Excessive profanity in books

[ardeegee]

Originally Posted by Lady Fitzgerald

However, I do that to people all the time, especially when working a Renaissance Festival. I can take almost anything someone says and with just an expression or a leading but otherwise clean word, often one they just used and set their train of thought in a direction I don't even want to know about. The embarrassed looks on their faces are priceless.

Just about anything can be turned into a double entendre if done correctly.

"I'd like to renaissance her festival!"

[Superlucky]

Originally Posted by SameOldStory

In that sentence, you've differentiated yourself, and most atheists, from some of the people who jump from one thread to another pointing out how all catholic priests are pedophiles, and that anyone who believes in a god of some sort is a potential harm to society.

Um, wasn't it you who characterized all atheists as "literally unable to control themselves"? Care to offer an apology for your bigotry now that you've had a change of heart?

[jgaiser]

Originally Posted by SameOldStory

In that sentence, you've differentiated yourself, and most atheists, from some of the people who jump from one thread to another pointing out how all catholic priests are pedophiles, and that anyone who believes in a god of some sort is a potential harm to society

But your original statement was the equivalent to "All Jews are '....'" or "All Christians are '...'". When you start start to lump everyone (Jews, Christians, Atheists, etc.) into a single bucket you've lost the argument.

[Lady Fitzgerald]

Originally Posted by ardeegee

Just about anything can be turned into a double entendre if done correctly.

"I'd like to renaissance her festival!"

No, no, no! It has to be done subtly. That was much too blatant. It's more in the body language and facial expressions than in what's said. Oft times, nothing needs to be said.

[bjones6416]

I've commented a few times in this thread because I think it's actually a pretty timely and interesting issue, and the feedback on this subject could be valuable to writers. It seems to have turned into yet another religion thread, though, and we've got plenty of those going already. I'm outta here...

[brecklundin]

Originally Posted by bjones6416

I've commented a few times in this thread because I think it's actually a pretty timely and interesting issue, and the feedback on this subject could be valuable to writers. It seems to have turned into yet another religion thread, though, and we've got plenty of those going already. I'm outta here...

BINGO...

[simonroyle]

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

and apparently calling someone a cunt in Ireland isn't derogatory

Note: To American Tourists
When in Ireland DO NOT use the above as a guideline unless you are well-armed, could take out Mike Tyson in a fight, or an extremely fast runner.

This is a CIVIL service announcement.

[SameOldStory]

Originally Posted by Superlucky

Um, wasn't it you who characterized all atheists as "literally unable to control themselves"? Care to offer an apology for your bigotry now that you've had a change of heart?

Originally Posted by SameOldStory

And heaven forbid (pun intended) mentioning religion in front of an atheist! It's like waving a red flag in front of an irritated bull. They literally can't control themselves. They just have to attack. To them the word God is THE most offensive profanity around and they'll go to any length to stamp it out or drive the offender away.

To those like JGaiser that I slandered with the above "broad brush", I must indeed apologize. His is not the type of (self avowed) atheist that I find popping up over and over on MR ridiculing people of faith, or even just those with a moral code that they live by.

Although it is too late to repair the damage, I am indeed sorry to offend him, and those like him. My apology to JLeighs for contributing to the trash floating around this thread. And my apology to those like bjones6416 who just wanted to discuss what she describes as "a pretty timely and interesting issue".

[Tattncat]

I tend to agree with Maria. I find it mostly irrelevant and read on.

[ShortNCuddlyAm]

Originally Posted by JLeighs

Thank The "C" word? Forget it. I find it very offensive and even coming across it once in a book is too much --for me. I don't expect everyone else to feel the same way I do about it.

Warning - this is veering off topic and into rant territory, so I apologise in advance

The one thing that really, really bothers me about the c (and the t word, although not as many people seem to know what that actually means) word is the double standard applied to swear words based on male and female anatomy. I find it incredibly offensive that a slang name for a part of me is considered to be more vulgar, more offensive, more derogatory than the slang name(s) for the closest equivilant part of male anatomy. Why are my reproductive organs more offensive than my husband's?

[JLeighs]

Originally Posted by ShortNCuddlyAm

Warning - this is veering off topic and into rant territory, so I apologise in advance

The one thing that really, really bothers me about the c (and the t word, although not as many people seem to know what that actually means) word is the double standard applied to swear words based on male and female anatomy. I find it incredibly offensive that a slang name for a part of me is considered to be more vulgar, more offensive, more derogatory than the slang name(s) for the closest equivilant part of male anatomy. Why are my reproductive organs more offensive than my husband's?

I don't like the "p" and "d" word anymore than I like the "c" word. I just commented on it because someone had posted the "c" word count of a book in progress.

Edited to add: I do find the "c" word more 'jarring' when I come across it, probably because I'm a woman. I hope that makes sense.

[Sparrow]

Originally Posted by ShortNCuddlyAm

Why are my reproductive organs more offensive than my husband's?

I reckon it's a more offensive swearword because it refers to female anatomy; and shows disrespect to women - so shocks on two levels.

[Bilbo1967]

Originally Posted by Sparrow

I reckon it's a more offensive swearword because it refers to female anatomy; and shows disrespect to women - so shocks on two levels.

Not sure I'd agree with that. I think, and I'm aware that this isn't much of an answer, that it's just one of those things.

Some words just evolve into taboo words and some just become more taboo than others. Take s**t and turd. They basically mean the same thing, but one is considered considerably ruder than the other (would we have a user on here called happy_s**t, do you think?). There's no rhyme or reason to these distinctions that is discernable (IMHO).

[bobavey]

I agree. A book doesn't need profanity to make it exciting, or realistic.

Twisted Perception

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/boo...=2940011822049

[Lemurion]

Originally Posted by bobavey

I agree. A book doesn't need profanity to make it exciting, or realistic.

Twisted Perception

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/boo...=2940011822049

You're right, a book doesn't need profanity to be exciting, nor even to be realistic. (Though some dialog is extremely hard to portray realistically without it.)

However, just as the presence of profanity doesn't make a book exciting or realistic, neither does its absence make a book enjoyable and rewarding.

Profanity is irrelevant to quality. Some good books use it, some bad books don't and vice-versa.