| 0 |
Subject: Profanity and Vulgarity on the Boards
Posted by: jedman
- Sustainer [2702357] Wed, Feb 20, 2002, 09:07
First off, if I am way off base here in my thoughts, Guru, go ahead and zap this whole thread.
I have been increasingly bothered by the profanity and vulgarity that is appearing on these boards in an increasing amount. I come here for basketball chatter and info and in many threads that do have some good information, I am treated to profanity laced tirades or vulgar comments that are truly offensive. The changing of a few letters doesn't hide the language or the feeling of the post. There is a very wide range of users on this forum, from very young, like Ender's Middle School students, to old guys like me and Dave R. (sorry Dave, had to get that in). I feel there needs to be some courtesy used in what is posted. I am especially offended when the name of Deity is used in a profane way. Many of us on these boards that I am familiar with and I am sure many others feel that the use of Deity is reserved for prayer or praise, not as an adjective or adverb to try and add importance to what we want to say.
Surely there are other ways to be expressive without resorting to gutter language.
Yes, this is a public forum, but it is Guru's forum and he does have standards. I just can't believe that those standards encourage or accept the use of the profane and vulgar language that seems to be increasing.
My plea is to continue the lively banter, the good natured ribbing, and the dissemination of good basketball information without all the swearing, profanity, and vulgarity. |
Only the 50 most recent replies are currently shown. Click on this text to display hidden posts as well.
[Lengthy or complex threads may require a slight delay before updating.] |
| 127 | Dave R
Leader
ID: 147341310
Wed, Feb 20, 2002, 23:27
|
KKB, Bawler, put the boxing gloves on. Come on, this is a basketball forum, the point was made about what this thread was for and I can only hope everyone can understand.
Take you arguement elsewhere.
|
| 128 | KrazyKoalaBears
Donor
ID: 266182910
Wed, Feb 20, 2002, 23:32
|
Bawler, the point your missing is that every answer points to your opinion. You've yet to recognize that someone (me) can actually view another person who uses profanity as less intelligent than if that same exact person didn't use profanity. You seem to think that I'm comparing one person to another when I'm comparing that person to themselves. For instance, if I met you in person and we talked for an hour or so over lunch and you didn't use any profanity, then I would probably have a general view of your intelligence. But then, if we met again for lunch the next day and you were using profanity and, as Sludge put it, "cursing like a drunk sailor" then I would view you as less intelligent than what I first thought. Do you get it now? You say that I'm taking people at face value yet you have no idea who these "people" are that you're referring to. You don't know if I may have worked along side someone for months and then went out with them for a drink and saw them become that "drunken sailor" and then thought less of their intelligence. You don't know if I had classes with someone for months only to find out that outside of class they become that "drunken sailor" and then thought less of their intelligence. You don't know me, nor how I arrived at my opinions and it's ignorant for you to think you do. The reason you've had to explain it twice is because you keep making assumptions that aren't true. It's hard for me to validate false assumptions, so if you continue on your path of false assumptions, you'll likely be repeating yourself a lot. Again, wake up Bawler. Not everyone holds your opinions. It doesn't mean that the other persons opinion doesn't have a lot of thought and knowledge behind it. They likely just hold different values than you and think differently of different things. It's really not the end of the world that someone thinks differently than you. I promise. And if you think that everyone who thinks different from you is ignorant, then I feel sorry for you because you're missing out on a lot of diverse friendships.
|
| 129 | KrazyKoalaBears
Donor
ID: 266182910
Wed, Feb 20, 2002, 23:34
|
Sorry Dave R, I don't box. In addition to not liking profanity, I'm also not a fighter. But that was discussed in the Hockey Forum, appropriately enough. ;)
|
| 130 | Bawler
ID: 518361923
Wed, Feb 20, 2002, 23:43
|
Sorry, KKB, I didn't realize that you can have an OPINION on someone's "capacity to acquire and apply knowledge". I thought that intelligence was a finite thing, and had no clue that it could vary, depending on outsiders' perceptions. I feel myself losing knowledge applications as I type in your presence on this information highway.
Thanks for setting me straight..
Have a better night...
|
| 131 | KrazyKoalaBears
Donor
ID: 266182910
Wed, Feb 20, 2002, 23:52
|
Bawler, but I can have an opinion on what I perceive their knowledge to be. Without everyone walking around with their IQ on a card around their neck, we all perceive someone else's intelligence based on our interactions with them. But I'm sure you have a different way, right? Please enlighten me as to how you determine if someone is intelligent or not.
|
| 132 | KrazyKoalaBears
Donor
ID: 266182910
Wed, Feb 20, 2002, 23:53
|
Actually, to be completely correct, that first line should say "but I can have an opinion on what I perceive their 'capacity to acquire and apply knowledge' to be".
|
| 133 | Sludge
Sustainer
ID: 113368
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 09:55
|
KKB 121 - I said that someone who does that appears less intelligent than someone who doesn't, IMO.
KKB 132 - but I can have an opinion on what I perceive their 'capacity to acquire and apply knowledge' to be.
Now we're to the heart of the matter. It's not about their intelligence, but your perception of their intelligence. There are many behaviors and circumstances that have an effect on how people perceive someone's intelligence. Profanity is just one of many. It doesn't mean that the perception is correct.
Richard Feynman was a womanizer who liked to hang out in strip clubs. He was also a brilliant physicist and Nobel Prize winner. Imagine the perceptions of someone who doesn't know Stephen Hawking from Stephen Baldwin if they were to see him rolling down the street. But enough about physicists. Mozart (despite the lack of conclusive evidence one way or the other) was known to put back a few and use profanity. Not to mention his alleged extramarital affairs. What about Chaucer's bawdiness in The Cantebury Tales?
I'm a statistician, not a biographer or historian, so my examples may be weak and limited, but I hope they make my point. If I stopped cursing today, it won't make me a better statistician. A better person? A better role-model? That's for you to decide, and I can't argue that decision. Smarter? No.
|
| 134 | KrazyKoalaBears
Donor
ID: 266182910
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 10:33
|
Sludge, you're still missing my point. You, and apparently Bawler also, think that I simply hear someone say a profane word and think they're unintelligent. THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M SAYING! What I'm saying is that if you take Stephen Hawking and there are two versions of him and version A curses and version B doesn't, then I'm going to think that version B is more intelligent than version A. That does not mean that I think version A is a dolt. Let me say it again: That does not mean that version A is completely unintelligent! It just means that I feel version A is less intelligent than version B because of the profanity. Think of it like comparing John Rocker, the clubhouse cancer to John Rocker, the clubhouse angel (if it existed). Who wouldn't want Rocker, the angel? But who really wants Rocker, the cancer, besides TEX? They're the same guy with the same amount of talent (think: intelligence), yet teams would only be crawling all over one another for one of the versions. Why? Because teams place a value on clubhouse behavior much like I place a value (negative) on profanity. For you to say that my perception that someone who uses profanity is less intelligent than that same person who doesn't use profanity is incorrect is the same as you saying my values and beliefs are wrong and I don't think you have enough of an understanding of my values and beliefs and how they were formed for you to make that call. You and Bawler keep thinking that I'm judging a book by it's cover when I've explicitly said the opposite (middle of #128) and yet the both of you continue to judge me based on incorrect assumptions of myself and my beliefs even after I've already said the assumptions were wrong.
|
| 135 | KrazyKoalaBears
Donor
ID: 266182910
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 10:42
|
BTW, I don't appreciate the insinuation that my values with regards to profanity would cause me to think a quadriplegic was unintelligent or anything other than a normal person with the same or greater capabilities for extraordinary knowledge, thoughts, or actions.
|
| 136 | Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 1832399
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 10:54
|
I don't think that any English scholars or any dictionary would ever list use of profanity as a factor in considering relative intelligence. In spite of your opinion KKB (and please, understand I intend no disrespect here), it really just doesn't apply. One has nothing to do with the other. Similarly, John Rocker's demeanor has nothing to do with his talent level. His talent is still there, and while his demeanor might hinder his expression of it, it cannot cannot take it away. His psyche is a different story, consider Rick Ankiel and Chuck Knoblauch, but that would be less apropriate for your argument.
You can have a personal understanding of a word's meaning (intelligence, in this case), but I don't believe definitions for words like that are left open for such loose interpretation. I can say, for example, that in my opinion, people who wear red shoes are less intelligent than they would be if they never wore red shoes, but frankly, my opinion would be wrong.
Some time ago I got into a 200+ post debate with madman and others on the definition of 'terrorism'. We dove deep into the language within various definitions and debated intended meanings of subtle nuances within them. I'd tend to think that 'intelligence' is far more precise a term.
|
| 137 | Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 1832399
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 10:56
|
If you mean to say that 'in your opinion, people who use profanity appear less intellignt', that's a diffetent story and I would say that in many cases I'd tend to agree.
|
| 138 | Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 1832399
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 11:00
|
KKB
OT here, but thought you might be interested that there is another high profile MA sentencing taking place as I type.
|
| 139 | Sludge
Sustainer
ID: 113368
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 11:11
|
KKB - I think I expressed that I understand you perfectly in 133. Please read it again.
Further, I did not even come close to insinuating that you would make a judgement regarding the intelligence of an invalid, only that people do make such judgements, and I think that they fall on the same level as the topic at hand. He's not a quadriplegic (in the medical sense), btw, he has Lou Gehrig's disease.
|
| 140 | KrazyKoalaBears
Donor
ID: 266182910
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 11:14
|
MITH, #137 is what I've been trying to explain for my last 10 or so posts. I even said in #134 about John Rocker, "They're the same guy with the same amount of talent (think: intelligence), yet teams would only be crawling all over one another for one of the versions" and that's exactly my point. I meet Sludge and if there are two versions of him, one that uses profanity and one that doesn't, then I'm going to perceive (again, since we don't all walk around with our IQs posted on our chests) that the one that doesn't curse is more intelligent than the one that does.
|
| 141 | KrazyKoalaBears
Donor
ID: 266182910
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 11:18
|
Sludge, there was still the tone that my opinion was wrong and that I was still "judging a book by its cover" alone. I just wanted to clear it up. With regards to Stephen Hawking, you're still bringing things (physical handicaps) into a debate that were never there and trying to group them with things that were there (profanity) making it sound like I would perceive all in the group as less intelligent. Let's just try to stick to the topic at hand: profanity. Also, I didn't know it was Lou Gehrig's disease. But that doesn't make you more intelligent, IMO. (j/k) ;)
|
| 142 | KrazyKoalaBears
Donor
ID: 266182910
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 11:19
|
MITH (re: 138), I'll be interested to know the outcome.
|
| 143 | deepsnapper
Sustainer
ID: 421144298
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 11:21
|
jedman - Props for bringing up the topic for discussion. As a moderator, I try and limit my interventions to when the profanity becomes explicit and/or graphic. The replacement of a letter with an * or | in a word is not always enough to keep the profanity from being obvious IMO.
I do believe the language can be kept to a "PG13" level in deference to the age of some of our readers. What people say to each other in a private conversation and the language they use is their own business, but when talking (or posting) in a public place or forum, then some decorum is expected.
I very much appreciate this site and the majority of the people who post on it. The reason I keep coming back is my desire to improve upon my fantasy gaming experience, not flame anyone.
Thanks again for the site and all the cool tools Guru.
|
| 144 | deepsnapper
Sustainer
ID: 421144298
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 11:50
|
The local NBC affiliate in D/FW is airing a special report during their 6PM newscast tonight titled "Watch your mouth". They just teased it during their AM broadcast and said it deals with the issue of "profanity in society" and the role it plays in "sexual harrassment".
|
| 145 | TF
ID: 5510373016
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 13:24
|
Profanity itself can not be a sign of ignorance or lack of intelligence. Lets simply break down what a "curse" word is. Its generally comes in noun, verb, or adjective form usually depicting or involving vulgur behavior. Howver, there are other words in the english language that describe the same things, but are not considered "vulgar".
So in the end, isn't it about perception? A word is as vulgar as a person perceives it to be. But, if someone was to make a baseless value judgement on ones background or intelligence based on the fact that one chooses to describe an action or noun in a different way than they choose to, maybe they should go copulate themselves anyways.
Profanity can also be extremely useful as a strong modifier to show extreme emotion. For example, the next time you miss a wide open lay-up try saying "feces!" It doesn't work. There are just occassions where strong language suits the environment or emotion the user is experiencing.
However, profanity can only be used freely when everyone involved is of a mature enough age to understand fully all the meanings and uses of all the words. Only in this environment are the words understood well enough where they can be condensed into meaning and extreme emotion.
Unfortunately, this forum is not such an environment. There are many young readers out there who have no idea what many of these words mean. There is no reason that someone should introduce it to them. The true crime of vulgarity isn't against the person who knows the words, but against those who do not. Who should have the right to impose their free will of language upon someone else unwittingly. If someone's environment has been blessed enough to be without these words, then a basketball forum is certainly not the place to introduce it. Consider this example...a child reads a post, uses the language at dinner, his mother asks him where he got it from, he replies "rotoguru.com". Immediately, the list is banned and if his mom is really strict, then "no fantasy basketball at all, because if these are the types of people who play, you aren't playing"
the poor kid's fantasy basketball experience was ruined because you chose to not use a subsitute word or did not disguise your vulgarity well enough. and you know what, that b**ws. (besides, if you want to insult someone, what can be more fun then trying to make them figure out exactly what you called them...thats gotta be good for a 2 minute laugh)
*example*
s**t-------everyone who knows this words knows what exactly what this means, but for those who are not familar with it, it is left ambigious "soot" "silt"
|
| 146 | Rubalamp
ID: 411014913
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 13:44
|
Does everyone feel better about themselves now? 145 posts is pretty ---- useless. If you don't like the language fine. I think it is a societal issue. I personally only believe the only true swear word is taking God's name in vain. And there is no way you would ever convince me otherwise.
However, let's not be so "holier-than-thou" to think that a person's validity is lost with the use of a "swear" word. It is how the word is used.
For the sake of community, I will sustain from writing words that people are offended by. perhaps a list would help that be possible...
|
| 147 | Mark L
Leader
ID: 4444938
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 13:50
|
A good start: George Carlin's "Seven Words You Can't Say On Television" (with respect to several of which his classification is no longer true). I assume that people my age have this list memorized.
|
| 149 | TF
ID: 5510373016
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 14:04
|
Rubalamp
you are an idiot. i usually don't respond to idiots, but i'll always make an exception for a special idiot.
in my first two paragraphs i specifically outline examples and context where language might have acceptable, but you seemed to have missed that entire part. Instead you focus on the influencing of young children. This appears to be a sore spot for you? Have you been guilty of this infraction? Why are you so sensitive? "Hey timmy, come over here, i got a special lamp for you to rub, come to rubalamp." because if you actually read the first two paragraphs, i agree with you.
its unfortunately that you let your own shortcomings overlook that fact.
cheers rubalamp,
"smile the red,
will go away."
|
| 150 | Gman15
Leader
ID: 44961510
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 14:48
|
rubalamp - I assume you mean "refrain" rather than "sustain" in the last sentence in post #146. Since we are debating word uasge I thought that might draw some inquiries.
|
| 151 | Memphis Fan
ID: 341015260
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 15:05
|
I like Basketball.
I dont like circular arguments or censorship.
Curse words don't bother me near as much as personal attacks. Cursing Elton Brand
for not playing doesnt affect me at all. I'll save the long rantings on sociaital standards
for everyone else, but I figured id at least weigh in =)
MF! (often conveniently confused with a cuss word)
|
| 152 | dv8
ID: 32101916
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 15:11
|
gman15
i assume you mean word "usage"
|
| 153 | CanEHdian Pride
ID: 426351415
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 15:21
|
Rubalamp-
I don't think this thread has been "useless" at all seeing as you just admitted that you will refrain from using profanity for the sake of the community. That is the reason this thread was started, so that individuals who may not think that profanity is that big of a deal in their own setting will realize that younger people or those that are offended by such vocabulary are around in some capacity and shouldn't have to be exposed to such language. As for the rest of the arguement it is merely conjecture that you can decide whether to read or not. Some of it is interesting but the fact that you understand the main message in the thread to me means that it has served its purpose.
Now, onto KKB.
Couldn't agree with you less. 2 version....we get it. But the fact that one swears has no bearing on his intelligence. Your Rocker analogy is awful because you are merely stating that you'd rather have a certain version over the other because that version suits the whole better. Regardless of whether he is a bad person or not his talent remains the same. He is not looked upon as a worse pitcher, just a worse person. I don't know what kinda of rhetorical gymnastics you are going to try to use to prove your point but the fact remains that Rocker's attitude has no bearing on his talent whether you are comparing him to Curtis Leskanic or Bizarro Rocker. If I have a two friends that are equally intelligent (or even if friend A isn't quite up to par with friend B) yet one makes a drunken sailor look sober, I'd probably choose to work in a group with friend A not because he is more intelligent but because he is probably easier to get along with due to the fact that he isn't a giant potty mouth.
Here is a question, if I live most of my life profanity free and then I decide that out of frustration I'm gonna drop an "F" bomb do I become less intelligent immediatley of does this process occur over time?
|
| 154 | gumby
ID: 559211110
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 15:26
|
Mark L., post 147, I have the complete routine memorized. In fact, it was a roadmap for life for many years. I also know the cheese sandwich through the nose of Margaret Mary bit.
|
| 155 | Gman15
Leader
ID: 44961510
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 15:32
|
dv8 - yep, I need to slow down and proofread what I type more closely. Thanks.
|
| 156 | Gman15
Leader
ID: 44961510
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 15:41
|
dv8 - I suspect that you understand that my first post was aimed at possible confusion over the use of a word as opposed to mere misspelling. I also suspect that your post was aimed at trying to put me in my place regarding proposing that correction.
|
| 157 | dv8
ID: 32101916
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 15:43
|
i know dude...just jokin'
|
| 159 | Rubalamp
ID: 411014913
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 15:53
|
TF, you are right I did not read your post, that probably makes me an idiot. I didn't even take the time to read your entire thread calling me an idiot because you mean nothing to me...sorry to break it to you. I didn't even read a third of the 150 posts on this thread, because the point was made in about 5 and the rest was, as Memphis wrote, a circular argument on censorship.
Yes, refrain was a better word for that instance. I believe I was going to write that sentence "sustain the rules" or something and I changed mid sentence and didn't edit carefully.
Oh well, So I am heading to confession now, bye...
|
| 160 | KrazyKoalaBears
Donor
ID: 266182910
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 18:12
|
CanEHdian Pride, I'm going to try to type this so that you can understand what I've already said at least 10 times: I FULLY UNDERSTAND, that the 2 versions that I mentioned have THE EXACT SAME TALENT/INTELLIGENCE AS ONE ANOTHER, but what I am saying is that profanity and attitude can cause certain people, like me, to PERCEIVE ONE VERSION AS BEING LESS INTELLIGENT/TALENTED. I DID NOT say that one version actually WAS more intelligent/talented than the other, just that the PERCEPTION exists. Why can't people understand this? It's so simple if you read it and don't make assumptions based on something you don't know.
|
| 161 | KrazyKoalaBears
Donor
ID: 266182910
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 18:14
|
CanEHdian Pride, as if I hadn't already covered this part also, "Here is a question, if I live most of my life profanity free and then I decide that out of frustration I'm gonna drop an "F" bomb do I become less intelligent immediatley of does this process occur over time?" Try reading the end of post #116.
|
| 162 | Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 3711402623
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 18:40
|
Actually KKB, youdo seem to have changed your tune on that one. One legitimate gripe that Bawler did have in post 123.
From your post #49:
I've always felt that the amount of profanity an individual uses is a direct reflection of the amount of intelligence of that person.
Your post #72:
IMO, those "intelligent" professors aren't all that intelligent if they can't express their ideas in a non-profane or non-vulgar way.
Your post #80:
And yes, I still feel that they're not as intelligent if they have to resort to profanity and vulgarness to express something compared to if they didn't.
Your post #116:
Bawler, intelligence is not just the ability to acquire knowledge. From the dictionary, intelligence is "The capacity to acquire and apply knowledge." My personal opinion is that those who resort to using profanity in a conversation don't have the capacity to apply all of their knowledge in order to avoid having to use profanity or don't have the capacity to learn any other way of speaking.
Some time between there and when you next addressed me in post #140 you apparently changed your stance, which is fine, but the last two sentences in your post #160 would seem unfair considering that. I suppose you could say that you just weren't expressing yourself as you intended to, but your language seems pretty straight forward. At the very least, I can understand why most people here assume you take a more deliberate meaning. In each of these cases you're not saying that your subjects appear less intelligent in your opinion, but that they are less intelligent in your opinion. See the difference?
|
| 163 | blue hen, almighty
Leader
ID: 34937217
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 18:41
|
Wow.
I'm certainly not expecting any new readers to come to the 160's to see my post. I ignored a lot and chances are most of you will overlook my post.
I regularly use the term "Holy scheikees". Seriously. It offsets my anger and informs my listen that while surprised, I am not especially angry.
When I use profanity, there's a place for it. If someone brought drugs or alcohol to a childcare center, you can bet I will say "Get that ____ out of here" substituting the harshest word I can think of for the blank.
But this is a public forum. And not only that, but it's a forum which exists exclusively for its users to express their intelligence. It's public record, and it's permanent (at least until a moderator deletes your shee-ite). Use of profanity in a public forum is stupid. It's just like a job interview. If you've posted more than three or four times, I can probably find out your full name and if I know your full name and you come in for a job interview with me, I reserve the right to use innane comments on the RotoGuru board as a reason not to hire you.
It doesn't happen often. But, as unrealistic as it sounds, it does happen. Two years ago, my next-door neighbor posted a trolling message right on these boards. And I discovered it. And I let him hear it. Are you willing to take that chance?
Change of pace
There, now that I've let all that out, I'd like to direct your attention back to post number 97. Seattle Zen is, in actuality, the only regular Gurupie I have ever met in real life, and if he says it, it must be true.
|
| 164 | KrazyKoalaBears
Donor
ID: 266182910
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 19:16
|
MITH, my entire point is that it's my opinion, which is based on my perception of those people. You'll note that I always used "I feel" and "IMO" and the like. I never once said, "I've studied this and done experiments and it is my scientific findings that people who use profanity are less intelligent than those who don't". I've always stated that what I'm saying is my opinion and my opinion can only be based on my perceptions since we're not all walking around with our IQs hanging on a card around our necks (which I've also stated multiple times). Sure my first post probably wasn't worded as well as it should have been, but I also didn't expect people to start making unfounded and false assumptions of me. But over the last 10 posts or more I think I've been pretty clear about what I'm saying. People, I'm not a scientist and I have absolutely nothing to back up my claims in any sort of factual way or andy sort of data that proves my opinion. IT'S JUST MY OPINION BASED ON MY PAST EXPERIENCES, PERSONAL THOUGHT, AND PERSONAL VALUES. Was I clear that time?
|
| 166 | Micheal
ID: 5815241
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 19:31
|
uhh, that was guru using sarcasm.
|
| 168 | Memphis Fan
ID: 341015260
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 19:39
|
Must be getting close to Baseball season.
|
| 171 | j o s h
ID: 591522118
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 19:51
|
I'll just give the thread a 5 jedman.
|
| 172 | CanEHdian Pride
ID: 426351415
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 21:43
|
KKB,
Read post #137 which I was backing up. Ever since then you've changed your hardline stance on the issue. As MITH pointed out in the post above you've gone from saying that "profanity makes you less intelligent" to "profanity makes you seem less intelligent".
I don't think anyone would argue the point that people who use profanity seem less intelligent....that isn't exactly an earth-shattering revelation but trying to equate someone's intellect to the amount of profane comments they make is what some are taking exception to.
|
| 173 | KrazyKoalaBears
Donor
ID: 266182910
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 21:56
|
CanEHdian Pride, my very first post said, "I've always felt that the amount of profanity an individual uses is a direct reflection of the amount of intelligence of that person." Please show me the hardline stance in that. "I've always felt" is obviously the start of an opinion and "direct reflection" is obviously talking about perception. The problem is that people then twisted my words with their scenarios and examples to make it sound like I was trying to state some sort of factual evidence that proved this point when all along I've said that it's my opinion. Nothing more, nothing less. I'm through with this now because it's obvious that those who get what I'm saying get it and those that don't, just won't.
|
| 174 | beastiemiked
ID: 14821921
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 22:21
|
bh, I read your post and it is scary. The fact that you could be my boss someday scares me. Does ridiculing someone in the chatroom then having it put on the chatroom quote board count?
|
| 175 | azdbacker
Donor
ID: 1832261
Thu, Feb 21, 2002, 22:29
|
Great post jedman. Didn't read this until late, as I am trying to avoid these sort of things. I tend to get overly involved. While I believe your swearing to stealing comparison to be extremely off-base, everything else was right on and timely. Not much to add that hasn't been said already.
Good to see some of the old-timers around.
|
| 176 | quik_ag
ID: 368423022
Fri, Feb 22, 2002, 00:19
|
KKB,
I've gotta wholeheartedly disagree with you here. Certainly you're allowed to "perceive" anybody in whatever manner you wish. I'm not going to get into a debate with anyone on the correlation between vulgarity and intelligence because it seems like everybody's on the same page here. A filthy mouth does not imply that one couldn't possibly be intelligent.. From my own experiences, some of the filthiest things I've ever heard were said here on the campus of an ivy league university from some of the brightest people in the world. Geniuses can't be stereotyped as dry, well-spoken individuals (Think Good Will Hunting.)
But I do think that that is where the issue is - stereotypes. While it may be your opinion, that profane people (can i use that word like that?) are "perceived" as less intelligent, this should not be the case. Qute frankly, it's prejudice. I can perceive that people that talk with a southern drawl are less intelligent or people that wear baggy pants are less intelligent, or even people that joke incessantly are less intelligent. And while these can all be valid "opinions," they're simply not right and are not okay to have. I'm not accusing you of being prejudiced, because I'm 99% sure that you don't really agree with the statement anymore, but that you just love arguing too much to let it go.
Moral: it is improper to "Feel" that the amount of profanity one uses is directly correlated with the intelligence of that person for no reason other than the fact that they are not correlated at all.
|
| 177 | KrazyKoalaBears
Donor
ID: 266182910
Fri, Feb 22, 2002, 00:33
|
quik_ag, post #128, paragraph 1. It's sad when I can answer people just by pointing them to a previous post... If people would just stop twisting my words into something they're not, this would have been finished about 100 posts ago. Southern drawl? Baggy pants? Where in the world did that come from? We're talking about profanity. Something far more offfensive than a southern drawl (is that even offensive?) or baggy pants (again, is that even offensive?). It's gotten so that the examples you people are using are so far off base that it's no wonder you think I'm a prejudiced person who thinks that anyone that utters even the first profane word is a dolt. Now, this time I really am done. If anyone cares to reply to me, simply read back through any of my numerous posts and I'm sure you'll find your answer because everything that is being brought up has already been answered at least twice.
|
| 178 | quik_ag
ID: 368423022
Fri, Feb 22, 2002, 01:16
|
KKB, please don't be so smug. I've read through your posts. I've read through all of the posts. Don't combat my statements with the accusation that i'm twisting your words around. Quite frankly, taht excuse gets tiring.
I used southern drawl and baggy pants as examples of jumping to conclusions. Obviously, there aren't many good parallels with offensive profanity, because it's a pretty unique corner of our language. And again, I'm trying not to accuse you of anything. But quite simply, it's naive to even perceive someone as being of lesser intelligence simply because they have no problem integrating "vulgar" words into their vocabulary. Offensive, perhaps.. but i wear a shirt that sports a hammer & sickle on occasion that may even offend some people out there. I would, however, take great exception if you were to "perceive" me as being less intelligent. There aren't many great examples out there, but just because someone on occasion, or even frequently uses curse words to get their point across, it doesn't mean that they cannot, if they wished, make the same point without the offending words. It doesn't mean that they cannot and their ability to do so shouldn't even come into question. You simply have no basis to allow your perception of a trait be influenced by a factor completely independent of that same trait.
|
| 179 | rockafellerskank
Donor
ID: 359283123
Fri, Feb 22, 2002, 21:01
|
KKB, After reading thru the above 178 posts, I have a question for you:
Do you have an opinion on foul/vulgar language?
:) [tongue in cheek]
rfs ®
|
| 181 | Bungers
ID: 38082016
Fri, Feb 22, 2002, 23:57
|
quik_ag,
While I agree with your points here, I perceive those who use underscores in their handles or team names to be less intelligent and somewhat stuck in the DOS days. ;)
...waiting to hear a reBUTTal from rage.
|
| 182 | rage_22
Donor
ID: 23115622
Sat, Feb 23, 2002, 03:37
|
Man, what you talkin bout fool? :)
|
| 183 | quik_ag
ID: 368423022
Sat, Feb 23, 2002, 15:12
|
don't get me started, bungers :-p
|
| Rate this thread: | If you wish, you may rate this thread on scale of 1-5. Ratings should indicate how valuable or interesting you believe this thread would be to other users of this forum. A '5' means that this thread is a 'must read'. A '1' means that this is a complete waste of time. If you have previously rated this thread, rating it again will delete your previous rating. If you do not want to rate this thread, but want to see how others have rated it, then click the button without entering a rating, or else click here. |
|
|
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)
|
|