Swearing in the Workplace: To Restrict or Not to Restrict?

[FlexGunship]

OK... see... I might have this little... or not so little... infraction history around cursing, so I'm not trying to taunt the mentors. My point was just with a word that you hear every day on the radio, on TV (I mean, "The N-Word" the phrase), and in print... it's the ultimate dodge.

Everyone is saying it, but nobody takes responsibility for it.

Like Louis C.K.'s frustration with people who say "The N-Word." He tells them "When you say 'the N-Word' I instantly have to say that word in my own head. That's not fair. You say your own sh*tty words, don't make me say them."

 

[JaredJames]

It's the very existence of the taboo that allows us to enhance speech and writing by flirting with, and sometimes acceding to it.

I'm still looking for something that shows profanity improves speech.

A film (modern 'will') uses swearing, does it improve the film? Quite possibly. But, for me it's because it more accurately reflects reality (the way people actually speak). Personally, if I watch something (TV/film) that doesn't have swearing, it doesn't feel believable because I know full well that in that situation they'd be swearing.

I swear, no doubt about that.

But, when it comes to any setting outside being with my mates / home alone, I don't. It just doesn't belong. It doesn't do anything to improve my speech.

I also don't show pain well either. I just shut up and take it, don't make much in the way of sound. I have this thing with not wanting to be a bother to anyone. So shouting when I stub my toe ain't much of an issue for me.

 

[nismaratwork]

I'm still looking for something that shows profanity improves speech.

A film (modern 'will') uses swearing, does it improve the film? Quite possibly. But, for me it's because it more accurately reflects reality (the way people actually speak). Personally, if I watch something (TV/film) that doesn't have swearing, it doesn't feel believable because I know full well that in that situation they'd be swearing.

I swear, no doubt about that.

But, when it comes to any setting outside being with my mates / home alone, I don't. It just doesn't belong. It doesn't do anything to improve my speech.

If you look at the history of language, it's a history of people finding ways to insult each other. On the face of it, Japanese seems to lack the kind of swears found in many other languages... unless "golden balls" really offends you.

BUT... that's the point, because the means of offending and being rude exist within the means of address, slurring r's, and other methods.

I don't know if the question is, "does profanity enhance speech?", but rather: "Is profanity, or rather the essence of profanity a part of human language, and always has been?" Profanity is just change in language... like the history of the word, "bimbo"... it's not good, or bad. When someone uses profanity it's a means of communication; the issue arises if they're inflexible in their communication and can ONLY use curses.

That's just a poor education, or bad behavior, but again... the words aren't doing it. Remember, you want something that's been in languages for thousands of years, to be gone... why? Forget free speech and all of that: swears are constructs used to delineate class in language, and when the "upper class" uses a curse, they are making a gesture by lowering themselves. That's the sociological "umph" behind the notion that cursing is bad, and circumlocution is a virtue in and of itself.

Most of human history has been filled with too much disease, and too little plumbing or toilet paper to worry about polite words; everyone knew which hand to shake if you get the reference, and everyone knew why. The concept of "clean language" is a class construct, and a means by which educated people can essentially, "high five" one another... I don't see that it serves a higher purpose. If you have command of polite language, AND profanity... how have you not expanded your ability to communicate?

If I want to rapidly anger or offend someone, I can, and in a manner that most can understand. When that fails, we have gestures that are literally ANCIENT (the extended finger, or arm... the phallic-attack gesture)... clearly there has been a need to be polite, and a time when rapidly communicating less gentle feelings also became needed. In essence, your answer is: Swearing PERSISTS in language, which is an evolving medium. It seems to have emerged WITH language, and maybe even with primitive gestures, but somehow its value needs to be proven?

The curses of cultures have survived their downfall, and I find that curses in a given culture often help you understand what offends those people... which gives an insight into how NOT to offend. In the meantime what does it add?...

Convenient and universal communication of the intended message... do you realize what an accomplishment that is? You can say one of a few words, or make one of a few gestures that are offensive to a vast majority of people on EARTH, even if they don't understand more than you pointing or looking confused.

 

[nismaratwork]

<SNIP>
I also don't show pain well either. I just shut up and take it, don't make much in the way of sound. I have this thing with not wanting to be a bother to anyone. So shouting when I stub my toe ain't much of an issue for me.

Catharsis is a proven mechanism which is healthy, whereas repressing a reaction to pain and anger causes a spike in BP and stress hormones. One way or another, it's good to express your pains, large and small, in some way.

If you don't, it happens anyway, you just no longer get to choose how.

 

[JaredJames]

Catharsis is a proven mechanism which is healthy, whereas repressing a reaction to pain and anger causes a spike in BP and stress hormones. One way or another, it's good to express your pains, large and small, in some way.

If you don't, it happens anyway, you just no longer get to choose how.

I've done fairly well so far, haven't had much happen in the way of pain though. Seem fairly lucky in that I've never broken a bone.

When I was younger (about 12) I had my fathers swiss army knife in the car. I accidentally left the knife go and it snapped shut, slicing my thumb open. Now that "f****** hurt" to say the least. I sat there and didn't flinch. Just put the knife down slowly, held my thumb tight and just went with it. All the while, he's in the seat next to me. If it wasn't because I was concerned about the blood loss after ten minutes, he would never have known.

Even when someone is a complete arse to me, I just don't react. I just don't find the need to swear. I don't feel like my speech is lacking. I don't feel that swearing is going to add anything to my speech.
When I'm with mates, it just sort of happens. It doesn't make my speech any better though.

 

[Jack21222]

I'm still looking for something that shows profanity improves speech.

What "something" are you looking for? Is there some ancient Golden Tome of Langauge you hope to find? Here's something that shows profanity improves speech.

"Profanity improves speech."

There you go, satisfied? There's "something," just like you requested.

If I'm really angry at somebody, the BEST way to express how I'm feeling is with profanity. Anything short of profanity does not express my emotions properly. Period. End of discussion.

 

[JaredJames]

If I'm really angry at somebody, the BEST way to express how I'm feeling is with profanity. Anything short of profanity does not express my emotions properly. Period. End of discussion.

I whole heartedly disagree.

Firstly, I wanted a source that says profanity improves speech. I Googled about a bit earlier and everything said "avoid profanity" as it has adverse effects. I found nothing showing profanity improves your speech.

Now, being PF, how about a source to show the claim that profanity improves speech? (I believe you know exactly what I was talking about and deliberately played stupid.)

Secondly, to be able to express yourself with clear, concise words that actually describe your feelings and explain the problem ("you are being deliberately flippant and ignoring any factual content of my arguments", said sternly perhaps with a hint of anger) is far better than just shouting "f*** you".

The former indicates my anger and tells you why I'm angry, the latter simply shows anger. The latter is not being articulate and doesn't add to the conversation in any way.
Even adding a few swears to the former doesn't really add anything. It just pads the sentence out. If said with enough conviction and the correct words, without swearing the former can be just as powerful as the latter (if not more I've found) at conveying that emotion.

If you aren't able to express yourself without swearing, that is your problem. I am yet to find a situation that has required me to resort to swearing at someone in anger (a point where I haven't been able to form a coherent sentence), I do my best not to get angry but when it gets to the point I may get angry (or that's all I can see coming - if the other person is angry) I'd rather just let it go and not degrade into throwing proverbial excrement at each other. It's not constructive.

 

[TylerH]

The idea of bi-gender sexual intercourse is the single most prevalent idea in the entire animal and plant kingdom. It's like being offended if someone used "AEROBIC ASPIRATION" as an expletive.

Sexual implies bi-gender. Uni-gender is asexual. :tongue:

 

[Zryn]

You should send around an email saying "I think more use of profanity in the office would be appropriate.".

 

[nismaratwork]

I've done fairly well so far, haven't had much happen in the way of pain though. Seem fairly lucky in that I've never broken a bone.

When I was younger (about 12) I had my fathers swiss army knife in the car. I accidentally left the knife go and it snapped shut, slicing my thumb open. Now that "f****** hurt" to say the least. I sat there and didn't flinch. Just put the knife down slowly, held my thumb tight and just went with it. All the while, he's in the seat next to me. If it wasn't because I was concerned about the blood loss after ten minutes, he would never have known.

Even when someone is a complete arse to me, I just don't react. I just don't find the need to swear. I don't feel like my speech is lacking. I don't feel that swearing is going to add anything to my speech.
When I'm with mates, it just sort of happens. It doesn't make my speech any better though.

Interesting... do you have natural red-orange hair by any chance? There was a study a while back about increased pain tolerance in redheads of EU lineage (Celtic, Anglo-Saxon mixes). I tend to agree with your view, but it's not really about swearing is it, but rather keeping an even temper with friends. I don't think profanity needs to be a part of speech anymore than I enjoy people who overuse the word, "like"... it repetitive and interrupts the flow.

Anyway, my point is that you're talking about being mellow, respectful, and also very calm in crisis. All good things in my view, and they certainly tend to lead to less use of profanity, but I don't think you can reverse that relationship. Let's be honest however, MOST people have a verbal reaction when in sudden pain, and whatever is SAID, the meaning is the same: "This hurts beyond the ability of language to convey. Instead, I use a word that is evocative, rather than descriptive, to enhance the shared impact of this event."

**** is so much EASIER to say though... and if you CAN say both, who cares? Respect other people, follow the law or local rules and regs, and move on with life. I wouldn't offend anyone by swearing at them just to make a point... I'd rather just agree to disagree and move on... because we seem to agree on this at least: adding to the language or not, it's not a major issue in the context of life in general.

 

[JaredJames]

Interesting... do you have natural red-orange hair by any chance? There was a study a while back about increased pain tolerance in redheads of EU lineage (Celtic, Anglo-Saxon mixes).

I have dark brown / orange hair - described as brown with copper tones by most, ginger by my mates.

I don't think profanity needs to be a part of speech anymore than I enjoy people who overuse the word, "like"... it repetitive and interrupts the flow.

That bugs the hell out of me.

Anyway, my point is that you're talking about being mellow, respectful, and also very calm in crisis. All good things in my view, and they certainly tend to lead to less use of profanity, but I don't think you can reverse that relationship. Let's be honest however, MOST people have a verbal reaction when in sudden pain, and whatever is SAID, the meaning is the same: "This hurts beyond the ability of language to convey. Instead, I use a word that is evocative, rather than descriptive, to enhance the shared impact of this event."

One does what one feels they must. I prefer to be emotive and form a sentence that has more meaning than "I'M EXTREMELY PEED OFF WITH YOU!" condensed into two or three words.

**** is so much EASIER to say though... and if you CAN say both, who cares? Respect other people, follow the law or local rules and regs, and move on with life. I wouldn't offend anyone by swearing at them just to make a point... I'd rather just agree to disagree and move on... because we seem to agree on this at least: adding to the language or not, it's not a major issue in the context of life in general.

In a general argument, I think swearing can serve to explode the argument. It's a reason I avoid it. To me, once you are at the point of feeling the need to swear, the discussion isn't going any further. You're now just throwing slurs at each other and there's nothing constructive about that.

I must say, I do find a few swears in a joke can enhance it. I'm not sure why, but just watching TV now and the only reason I found a line funny is because it had a swear in it.

Presenter: "It's in the security companies interest to tell us all the bad things these crazy lock people up with evidence laws help prevent. Instead they choose to say 'we've prevented something but can't tell you what'. If they said 'we prevented a bomb going off and killing 200,000 people', we'd say 'do what you f****** like'.

If I remove the swear from that, it just isn't as funny for me.

 

[Jack21222]

I whole heartedly disagree.

Firstly, I wanted a source that says profanity improves speech. I Googled about a bit earlier and everything said "avoid profanity" as it has adverse effects. I found nothing showing profanity improves your speech.

Now, being PF, how about a source to show the claim that profanity improves speech? (I believe you know exactly what I was talking about and deliberately played stupid.)

It's absurd that you're asking for a source on a matter of opinion. Unless you know of a way to quantify "improves speech," the quality of speech is a subjective matter, and asking for a "source" is as dumb as asking for a "source" for "vanilla is the best ice cream flavor."

Secondly, to be able to express yourself with clear, concise words that actually describe your feelings and explain the problem ("you are being deliberately flippant and ignoring any factual content of my arguments", said sternly perhaps with a hint of anger) is far better than just shouting "f*** you".

The former indicates my anger and tells you why I'm angry, the latter simply shows anger. The latter is not being articulate and doesn't add to the conversation in any way.
Even adding a few swears to the former doesn't really add anything. It just pads the sentence out. If said with enough conviction and the correct words, without swearing the former can be just as powerful as the latter (if not more I've found) at conveying that emotion.

I strongly disagree with everything you said here. The addition of profanity in the first statement would add emotional content to the message. The way you phrased it would be more appropriate if I was merely annoyed with somebody.

If you aren't able to express yourself without swearing, that is your problem.

If you can't handle certain words in the English language, that's your problem, not mine.

I am yet to find a situation that has required me to resort to swearing at someone in anger (a point where I haven't been able to form a coherent sentence), I do my best not to get angry but when it gets to the point I may get angry (or that's all I can see coming - if the other person is angry) I'd rather just let it go and not degrade into throwing proverbial excrement at each other. It's not constructive.

I can agree that swearing at other people is not constructive. However, sometimes it is not my intent to be constructive. It is my intent to express myself or be intentionally destructive.

In another example that has nothing to do with anger, profanity can allow a wider range of other emotions to be expressed as well. For example, if somebody asks me how a concert was, I might respond with "It was amazing," "it was one of the best shows I've ever seen," or "It was F*****G awesome!" You want to deny me that last one for no good reason. I consider myself pretty well-read, but I cannot find a suitable replacement for that word in that context. No other word in the English language carries enough of a punch to express my feelings properly.

TL:DR-- To properly express emotion, you need emotionally charged words.

 

[FlexGunship]

What "something" are you looking for? Is there some ancient Golden Tome of Langauge you hope to find? Here's something that shows profanity improves speech.

"Profanity improves speech."

There you go, satisfied? There's "something," just like you requested.

If I'm really angry at somebody, the BEST way to express how I'm feeling is with profanity. Anything short of profanity does not express my emotions properly. Period. End of discussion.

Heh, I'm okay with this. I would add that there are a lot of other uses. Profanity is just the "limit" of speech. It's the maximum in a particular direction. It's like buying a car and never seeing what it's like to push the pedal all the way to the floor. Sometimes you NEED that. Sometimes the only way out of a situation is full throttle.

Likewise, sometimes the only way to express your internal thoughts and making them available to the rest of the world is by f*cking swearing!

 

[FlexGunship]

"It was F*****G awesome!" You want to deny me that last one for no good reason. I consider myself pretty well-read, but I cannot find a suitable replacement for that word in that context. No other word in the English language carries enough of a punch to express my feelings properly.

It was "face-meltingly" awesome!

 

[JaredJames]

"It was F*****G awesome!"

It was intercourse awesome?

In that situation I can actually see the benefit of the word - my main problem is when the words are used incorrectly.

I'm not saying stop using words, but that words should be used correctly. I don't see these words as profanity unless they are used in the incorrect manner. To me, in your case above it fits quite nicely and makes sense.

F******* is actually a tricky one, it is classed as an intensifier, so even if the above doesn't fit it can be used to 'intensify' your meaning.

 

[JaredJames]

It was "face-meltingly" awesome!

See, now I'd actually prefer to here that instead of the former. Not because of the swearing, but because I see that as quite creative and unique - in fact I may just keep that one for myself.

 

[Jack21222]

It was intercourse awesome?

In that situation I can actually see the benefit of the word - my main problem is when the words are used incorrectly.

I'm not saying stop using words, but that words should be used correctly. I don't see these words as profanity unless they are used in the incorrect manner. To me, in your case above it fits quite nicely and makes sense.

F******* is actually a tricky one, it is classed as an intensifier, so even if the above doesn't fit it can be used to 'intensify' your meaning.

The F word does not have the sole meaning of "intercourse," as you point out later in your post where you say it's classed as an intensifier.

What you're doing is no different than what creationists do when they say evolution is "only a theory." You're applying one definition of a word to another definition, when it should be clear by context which is correct.

 

[JaredJames]

The F word does not have the sole meaning of "intercourse," as you point out later in your post where you say it's classed as an intensifier.

I never said it was the only definition of it. I simply used one of the definitions in your sentence to show how you can have meaning by using the word outside of simply emotional - it doesn't have to just be an intensifier.

What you're doing is no different than what creationists do when they say evolution is "only a theory." You're applying one definition of a word to another definition, when it should be clear by context which is correct.

The context, for the most part is purely emotional. Given they are seen to be offensive to people (and they're actually considered illegal in the UK - if you read the law right - try swearing around a police officer), I don't see what they achieve in a context outside of being with my mates. I don't see the workplace as an area that demands them.

I'm thinking I need to re-evaluate my stance, more to a context based one.

I think some comedy can use it to add an extra punch.
I don't think that it is useful in discussion / debate outside of showing emotion - something I don't believe should be present when things are supposed to be rational and logically based. Like I said, the point at which I feel the need to swear is the point I know things have gone too far. This is not to say I haven't ended up swearing at various people / devices in the past.

 

[apeiron]

We all swear in different degrees (except for this guy)... even our mutual manager gets fairly profane. This is the first time he's expressed displeasure. I am very much opposed to restriction of speech at work.

What you might not be taking into account here is that the brain can treat some words differently. They become emotionally-laden and so your co-worker may actually feel like a swear word is a form of physical threat/assault.

You might feel this is silly if you are habituated to certain words, yet still it is a normal response and not one that can be immediately controlled.

The limbic system in animals is where expressive calls arise - the emotionally driven vocalisations that are strong social signals. The swear words that take up residence in this part of the brain are not just emotionally charged due to their connection to social taboos, but also because they are punctate and abrupt attention-getting noises. Shouting copulation is unlikely to shock anyone, while shouting oi is designed to trigger a response.

As well as swearing - which is aggressive and threatening expressive vocalisation - people make other kinds of expressive noises all the time. Ones of reassurance or bonding. The oh yeahs, right ons, and you knows that punctuate conversation (and can be annoying too if used at the wrong time or inappropriately).

It sounds like you want to frame this as a freedom of speech issue. But it seems fair that neurobiology should be a consideration here. Not all speech is equal so far as brain architecture is concerned.

You may have to be prepared to separate freedom of cognitive opinion from freedom of expressive vocalisation here.

 

[nismaratwork]

I whole heartedly disagree.

Firstly, I wanted a source that says profanity improves speech. I Googled about a bit earlier and everything said "avoid profanity" as it has adverse effects. I found nothing showing profanity improves your speech.

Now, being PF, how about a source to show the claim that profanity improves speech? (I believe you know exactly what I was talking about and deliberately played stupid.)

Secondly, to be able to express yourself with clear, concise words that actually describe your feelings and explain the problem ("you are being deliberately flippant and ignoring any factual content of my arguments", said sternly perhaps with a hint of anger) is far better than just shouting "f*** you".

The former indicates my anger and tells you why I'm angry, the latter simply shows anger. The latter is not being articulate and doesn't add to the conversation in any way.
Even adding a few swears to the former doesn't really add anything. It just pads the sentence out. If said with enough conviction and the correct words, without swearing the former can be just as powerful as the latter (if not more I've found) at conveying that emotion.

If you aren't able to express yourself without swearing, that is your problem. I am yet to find a situation that has required me to resort to swearing at someone in anger (a point where I haven't been able to form a coherent sentence), I do my best not to get angry but when it gets to the point I may get angry (or that's all I can see coming - if the other person is angry) I'd rather just let it go and not degrade into throwing proverbial excrement at each other. It's not constructive.

re: bolded: Jared... I thought you were very much an advocate of unrestricted expression? CHOOSING to swear doesn't mean that you can't express yourself another way, it's just a preference for some. If you're so against it, I think it's incumbent on you to show what harm has been done over the millenia by swearing. *More trouble has come from the almost poetic mumblings of a king, than any swear I can think of.

*"What miserable drones and traitors have I nourished and brought up in my household, who let their lord be treated with such shameful contempt by a low-born cleric?"... didn't end well for Thomas Becket. Would it have been any different, except that the king couldn't have later denied is intent to the pope, if he'd said the equivalent of, "That *******, oooh I hope he gets crabs and dies of the plague"

No... it's the message, and the messenger together. Yeah, if you can only curse it's too bad that your language skills stink, but that's not a universal argument, and certainly not the best to use on this site.

 

[nismaratwork]

What you might not be taking into account here is that the brain can treat some words differently. They become emotionally-laden and so your co-worker may actually feel like a swear word is a form of physical threat/assault.

You might feel this is silly if you are habituated to certain words, yet still it is a normal response and not one that can be immediately controlled.

The limbic system in animals is where expressive calls arise - the emotionally driven vocalisations that are strong social signals. The swear words that take up residence in this part of the brain are not just emotionally charged due to their connection to social taboos, but also because they are punctate and abrupt attention-getting noises. Shouting copulation is unlikely to shock anyone, while shouting oi is designed to trigger a response.

As well as swearing - which is aggressive and threatening expressive vocalisation - people make other kinds of expressive noises all the time. Ones of reassurance or bonding. The oh yeahs, right ons, and you knows that punctuate conversation (and can be annoying too if used at the wrong time or inappropriately).

It sounds like you want to frame this as a freedom of speech issue. But it seems fair that neurobiology should be a consideration here. Not all speech is equal so far as brain architecture is concerned.

You may have to be prepared to separate freedom of cognitive opinion from freedom of expressive vocalisation here.

You're right, but unless she has a major pre-existing condition (PTSD for instance), a history of abuse, etc... MOST swearing in the workplace is brief and expletive (response to pain), or in the context of an "intensifier" to quote Jared. What's the emotional pairing there... I mean, it's like sticking mice into a Skinner box and expect them to learn something without actually OPERATING the box.

I'd add, if she wanted to express a concern about a hostile workplace, or a feeling of threat, etc... there are people to report that to. A mass-email doesn't exactly shout, "I'm traumatized, spare me..."... it's what one person thinks is a call to her version of decency.

 

[JaredJames]

I thought you were very much an advocate of unrestricted expression?

Not as much as you'd think. It's a complicated issue for me. Would take one hell of a post to explain it. Besides - like I said earlier you can get arrested for swearing in the UK.

CHOOSING to swear doesn't mean that you can't express yourself another way, it's just a preference for some. If you're so against it, I think it's incumbent on you to show what harm has been done over the millenia by swearing.

I'm not saying it harms. Not in the slightest. My point is purely that I don't see it adding anything constructive to a sentence and so I don't see the need for it to be there.

If you're out with your mates it's really not an issue, but when in the workplace what good does it do? In the case of the OP, not a lot. A potential lawsuit in the making.

There are a lot of people who don't like swearing because of the connotations that go with it.

 

[JaredJames]

I'd add, if she wanted to express a concern about a hostile workplace, or a feeling of threat, etc... there are people to report that to. A mass-email doesn't exactly shout, "I'm traumatized, spare me..."... it's what one person thinks is a call to her version of decency.

Or it could be an attempt to politely inform people you don't like it before taking things further and it becoming an official matter.

If the case did end up going further with HR, I'd like to see you use the arguments made here in an attempt to win it.

 

[nismaratwork]

I have dark brown / orange hair - described as brown with copper tones by most, ginger by my mates.

Ginger... wow. Well, it's not yet clear what this means in terms of pain tolerance vs. opiate interactions, but...

http://www.eclectica.org/v10n2/kanumalla.html

is a good and brief breakdown of what I'm talking about.

That bugs the hell out of me.

ME TOO! The only linguistic hangup I have that is more profound, is that special time when someone thinks they're about to misuse the word, "good", and instead says, "well" to overcompensate. The issue again, isn't WHAT they say, but the repetition, its lack of a linguistic function; they're just saying, "um", but subbing in "like". Obviously we've all met people who do the same with curses, but again, the issue is the underlying linguistic inability, not the words they choose as filller.

One does what one feels they must. I prefer to be emotive and form a sentence that has more meaning than "I'M EXTREMELY PEED OFF WITH YOU!" condensed into two or three words.

That seems insufficiently emotive, and a little robotic to me. It may be that you're ignoring a natural function cursing has in language because you're focusing on its pathological use. You don't condemn the word, "like," because some misuse it, right?

The other problem is this: what the heck does, "peed off" mean? In the US they'd say, "teed off", and mean the same thing... does it matter? What if you want to add emphasis that is emotionally laden? I am really REALLY REALLY super duper pissed at you? People will laugh, and that is not the point. If you say, "I'm really ******* pissed at you now." EVERYONE gets the meaning, intent, and degree of emotional charge.

In a general argument, I think swearing can serve to explode the argument. It's a reason I avoid it. To me, once you are at the point of feeling the need to swear, the discussion isn't going any further. You're now just throwing slurs at each other and there's nothing constructive about that.

Haven't we seen the same happen here without a single curse? I think repetitive bludgeoning language of any kind is indicative of the end of meaningful discourse. It doesn't really matter what it is; "I'll pray for you" in context is as good as a "**** you."

Speaking of context, in the UK or Ireland, I wouldn't say out to a bunch of people, "So my mate and I had a great ride last night." In the US, that's transport, in Ireland it's coupling. You, "take the piss out of people." We, "are pissed off", or, "my boss pissed all over that idea."

If cursing is bad, there should be universal principles that apply across languages and cultures. Once you identify that however, in doing so, you remove the "mysticism" of the curse that makes it so emotive. I think you should remember the limits of the written word, and the spoken word at conveying extremes of emotion. On the other hand, most people can tell a "**** YES! My team won!", from a "**** my toe!" just from the "****". I call that amazingly potent and efficient communication of an emotional state... I wouldn't underestimate that.

I must say, I do find a few swears in a joke can enhance it. I'm not sure why, but just watching TV now and the only reason I found a line funny is because it had a swear in it.

Presenter: "It's in the security companies interest to tell us all the bad things these crazy lock people up with evidence laws help prevent. Instead they choose to say 'we've prevented something but can't tell you what'. If they said 'we prevented a bomb going off and killing 200,000 people', we'd say 'do what you f****** like'.

If I remove the swear from that, it just isn't as funny for me.

This isn't surprising: most humor in the past has been what we would consider absurdly stylized and vulgar. I'd add, you mentioned that jokes enhance: because they communicate an situational emotional component that is necessary to a lot of human interaction. At a distance, words take the place of body language, tone, etc. So, yes, swears can be hurtful and aggressive, but so can putting on a rictus grin and slowly whispering, "see you tomorrow beautiful" to your girlfriend... then back away slowly, never blinking. The content is to blamed, not the vehicle or the potency of that vehicle.

 

[nismaratwork]

Not as much as you'd think. It's a complicated issue for me. Would take one hell of a post to explain it. Besides - like I said earlier you can get arrested for swearing in the UK.


I'm not saying it harms. Not in the slightest. My point is purely that I don't see it adding anything constructive to a sentence and so I don't see the need for it to be there.

If you're out with your mates it's really not an issue, but when in the workplace what good does it do? In the case of the OP, not a lot. A potential lawsuit in the making.

There are a lot of people who don't like swearing because of the connotations that go with it.

Personally, I don't curse in the workplace, because other people whom I respect find it offensive or unprofessional. They never needed to tell me either, it was clear very quickly, and I acceded. Sometimes I slip, but usually in a language they don't know, and that they don't mind.

I think it's important to delineate between cursing, and cursing AT someone. It's fine to say, "Oh man, I hope the Steelers KILL the Packers in the Superbowl!". It's NOT fine to say, "Oh man, I hope to kill you!"

If I stub my toe and yell, "Oh carp"... everyone still thinks the words I can't type here. NOTHING CHANGES... hence my point with my, "ehn whord" example. We're creatures that can reason by association, and while you're certainly a very mellow guy everyone else isn't you.

So... knowing your preference, I wouldn't curse around you.

Beyond that, "what does it add to the language", has been answered: emotional intensity, content, and context.

 

[Hurkyl]

"It was F*****G awesome!" You want to deny me that last one for no good reason. I consider myself pretty well-read, but I cannot find a suitable replacement for that word in that context. No other word in the English language carries enough of a punch to express my feelings properly.

Just what feelings are you trying to convey that it is not enough to say "awesome" with great enthusiasm, or to use modifiers like "really" or "incredibly", or to heap on adjective after adjective such as "It was awesome! Incredible! Amazing!"

If you were to say that to me, you would not have conveyed any additional feelings about the concert beyond your positive opinion and your tone and body language while delivering the words. The only thing your use of ******* adds is to let me know you are the sort of person who prefers to swear gratuitously.

And TBH, I would generally find "It was ******* awesome" to be much less of a recommendation than a mere "It was awesome".

 

[apeiron]

You're right, but unless she has a major pre-existing condition (PTSD for instance), a history of abuse, etc... MOST swearing in the workplace is brief and expletive (response to pain), or in the context of an "intensifier" to quote Jared. What's the emotional pairing there... I mean, it's like sticking mice into a Skinner box and expect them to learn something without actually OPERATING the box.

I'd add, if she wanted to express a concern about a hostile workplace, or a feeling of threat, etc... there are people to report that to. A mass-email doesn't exactly shout, "I'm traumatized, spare me..."... it's what one person thinks is a call to her version of decency.

Most swearing probably does meet the social norms of the group involved. This may be a case of a clash of norms (religion-based, sex-based, class-based, whatever). But it still seems that free speech arguments ought to take neurobiology into account if you want practical principles tied to the real world rather than over-simplistic principles justified by imaginary worlds.

Now this other person may actually not be emotionally bothered by swearwords and just be seeking to impose her cognitive framework on the situation, such as a set of religious beliefs.

You might then argue that either such an imposition should be resisted (as the workplace has the right to its own collectively emergent societal norms). Or that in the interests of politeness - tolerance of multiple norms in multicultural society - the workplace should try honestly to accommodate this person's intellectual framework.

But if the response is genuinely limbic, then this does shift the practical balance. It doesn't mean jumping all the way over to the other person's side as the workers may in general also claim they are limbically required to swear - who can help expressive vocalisations? But this is why some posters say they swear and apologise. And why they also defend their swearing as it does mean they are acting in an "relaxed" unguarded way, rather than a self-censoring and formal way, as they would have to in a job interview.

So when it comes to free speech, I am still arguing here that it makes good practical sense to take into account the neurobiology of speech (and emotional response) so far as it is an actual factor.

Is it a large factor? Perhaps not huge as mostly people do learn to match their speech to the occasion. But here is a case where there is a problem and this could be a key factor not being taken sufficiently into account.

 

[nismaratwork]

Or it could be an attempt to politely inform people you don't like it before taking things further and it becoming an official matter.

If the case did end up going further with HR, I'd like to see you use the arguments made here in an attempt to win it.

Oh, I'd be slaughtered! Then again, I don't think most workplaces are the models of logical systems, especially around HR. If this is how she's trying to set her case up, she's getting bad legal advice unless the swearing is gender-based.

Obviously that's ANOTHER issue... there are swears, and there are SLURS. The latter ARE an expression of an inability or unwillingness to continue meaningful interaction.

 

[JaredJames]

The use of profanity when discussing something, trying to be persuasive:

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&so...z8MQd&usg=AFQjCNFUf31-j6EQbOHsJ3AqQhLPbu8-dg"

The study looks at using profanity when trying to be persuasive, the conclusions here are (it's pdf have to type them):
1) For females, sexual was most persuasive and religious was least.
2) The person using profanity is perceived to be less credible.
3) For females, sexual was less persuasive and religious was most. Although overall persuasiveness.
4) Nobody became more persuasive using profanity than they were without it.
5) Women suffered less in the way of credibility loss than males.

So basically, by using profanity in a discussion you can expect to lose credibility and you will find no benefit in your own persuasiveness.

 

[nismaratwork]

Most swearing probably does meet the social norms of the group involved. This may be a case of a clash of norms (religion-based, sex-based, class-based, whatever). But it still seems that free speech arguments ought to take neurobiology into account if you want practical principles tied to the real world rather than over-simplistic principles justified by imaginary worlds.

Now this other person may actually not be emotionally bothered by swearwords and just be seeking to impose her cognitive framework on the situation, such as a set of religious beliefs.

You might then argue that either such an imposition should be resisted (as the workplace has the right to its own collectively emergent societal norms). Or that in the interests of politeness - tolerance of multiple norms in multicultural society - the workplace should try honestly to accommodate this person's intellectual framework.

But if the response is genuinely limbic, then this does shift the practical balance. It doesn't mean jumping all the way over to the other person's side as the workers may in general also claim they are limbically required to swear - who can help expressive vocalisations? But this is why some posters say they swear and apologise. And why they also defend their swearing as it does mean they are acting in an "relaxed" unguarded way, rather than a self-censoring and formal way, as they would have to in a job interview.

So when it comes to free speech, I am still arguing here that it makes good practical sense to take into account the neurobiology of speech (and emotional response) so far as it is an actual factor.

Is it a large factor? Perhaps not huge as mostly people do learn to match their speech to the occasion. But here is a case where there is a problem and this could be a key factor not being taken sufficiently into account.

I would say that, for better or worse, hearing swears is a part of life for a grown woman or man. If she is so impaired by words, then like an irrational fear of anything, she should seek treatment. You don't shoot the neighbor's dog because you're afraid of dogs... you seek help. If your neighbor's dog is vicious of course, that's a different issue.

So, if someone uses a curse that is loaded with deprecating implications about some group (gender, race), I'd say that's a slur, not a swear.

Here's one problem: this forum doesn't allow cursing, even in the context of academic examination. Needless to say, this isn't going to change, nor should it given the point of the site and the need for ad revenue and a family friendly air. On the other hand, we're not able to talk about words that degrade a person in general, or words which rely on group-hatred to load them with meaning.

Yes, we could PM, but then we might as well not be on a forum. So, while the forum does what it needs to, it does this because of the prevailing culture, right? Well, that culture is restricting our ability to have a full discussion here about this subject.

The point of language is not to be minimalist, but expressive. We can be aware of, and care for those members of our society who need it, but otherwise it's just a social issue.

As I said to Jared, if it's a no-swear zone, I try not to swear. Adaptability works both ways however, and the reality is that "vulgarity" is often defined as, "the curses used by whatever passes for the 'lower class'" So, most of our curses are germanic or dutch in origin (low english), as opposed to French.

Is it because French can't say **** as well as the Dutch or German? No... it's because those words were made dirty by people trying to separate based on language. You see it today in the, "if you can't think of another way of expressing yourself" straw man... and it's old. As long as humans have a neurological reaction that leads to "BLEGH" curse in their head... or that sentiment, it will find it's way into language.

We GIVE words this power with every tiny act of personal and mass cowardice, and as a way, even here... of trying to get a handle on who is of what, "quality". The title of Penn & Tellers TV show to that.

 

[nismaratwork]

The use of profanity when discussing something, trying to be persuasive:

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&so...z8MQd&usg=AFQjCNFUf31-j6EQbOHsJ3AqQhLPbu8-dg"

The study looks at using profanity when trying to be persuasive, the conclusions here are (it's pdf have to type them):
1) For females, sexual was most persuasive and religious was least.
2) The person using profanity is perceived to be less credible.
3) For females, sexual was less persuasive and religious was most. Although overall persuasiveness.
4) Nobody became more persuasive using profanity than they were without it.
5) Women suffered less in the way of credibility loss than males.

So basically, by using profanity in a discussion you can expect to lose credibility and you will find no benefit in your own persuasiveness.

Unless you're trying to impress people who swear a lot, in which case telling them you're angry at them to the point of pee-anger... is going to lose out. You're building in a bias as to who you WANT to talk to, because of HOW they talk. It's not a bad general rule, but when you fail to apply it responsibly you get problems.


I'd add... curses targeting gender, race, etc... are slurs. They may be swears too, but they fall under a further subset that really is pathetic.

Anyway, I for one don't try to charm ladies with my proficiency at cursing, anymore than I'd expect rambling to most people about the physics and engineering content of this site would make me more persuasive. Frankly, from personal experience, most people seem to prefer hearing a swear to a lecture on why the BB wouldn't haven been, "an explosion in space", but an "expansion OF space."

Oh, and when I'm alone and just stubbed my toe, it's cathartic... I'm not trying to persuade ANYTHING. See Lamaze...

 

[JaredJames]

Unless you're trying to impress people who swear a lot, in which case telling them you're angry at them to the point of pee-anger... is going to lose out. You're building in a bias as to who you WANT to talk to, because of HOW they talk. It's not a bad general rule, but when you fail to apply it responsibly you get problems.

Not sure where this bias stuff came from.

I'd add... curses targeting gender, race, etc... are slurs. They may be swears too, but they fall under a further subset that really is pathetic.

Again, this isn't under the realms of the paper.

Anyway, I for one don't try to charm ladies with my proficiency at cursing, anymore than I'd expect rambling to most people about the physics and engineering content of this site would make me more persuasive.

I agree there, so does the paper.

Frankly, from personal experience, most people seem to prefer hearing a swear to a lecture on why the BB wouldn't haven been, "an explosion in space", but an "expansion OF space."

I'm not entirely sure what this is in regards to the paper either.

I addressed a specific example (do you know how difficult it is to find papers on this matter?). The paper addresses using profanity in discussion, specifically when trying to be persuasive. It shows it doesn't work to improve and can even have a negative effect. This particular example does apply in a work place scenario. And so far is the only real substance that's been put into this thread.

Oh, and when I'm alone and just stubbed my toe, it's cathartic... I'm not trying to persuade ANYTHING. See Lamaze...

I'm currently on a document which discusses swearing and it's ability to relieve pain, I'll try to get that up soon. Still, nothing to do with the paper.

Peed off = p*ssed off. Just a 'polite' way of putting it.

 

[rootX]

He may be building a case for harassment.

I would believe this is likely the case. In case of workplace harassment, that is the first step: confronting the harasser.

just ask him. i suspect it is because he's very religious.

I wouldn't ever swear or talk evil in front of a religious employee :rofl:.

 

[JaredJames]

I wouldn't ever swear or talk evil in front of a religious employee :rofl:.

Talking evil for some people can be saying something truly horrific like "homosexuality is ok".

 

[Hurkyl]

As long as humans have a neurological reaction that leads to "BLEGH" curse in their head... or that sentiment, it will find it's way into language.

Oh, and when I'm alone and just stubbed my toe, it's cathartic... I'm not trying to persuade ANYTHING. See Lamaze...

There isn't a swearing instinct.

An instinct to make an exclamation of some sort I can believe, but not everybody is raised to use vulgarity reflexively.

I don't believe onomatopoeia like "Ow!" or "Aah!" are uncommon exclamations in response to stubbing one's toe. You are likely to hear me follow up with repeated utterances of "Pain! Pain! Agony!" and possibly more "Ow!" mixed in, but uttered more as a word than as a noise.