Subject:
|
Re: Language slipping?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Mon, 20 Dec 1999 02:34:27 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
mattdm@IHATESPAMmattdm.org
|
Viewed:
|
374 times
|
| |
|
|
Christopher Lannan <shakguy@hotspammail.com> wrote:
> This all "eye of the beholder" stuff. For example, the English curse word for
> excrement, that starts with an "S" would be commonly considered to be
Interesting to note that Merriam-Webster marks a lot of often-taboo "curse
words" as "usually vulgar" or "usually obscene" -- not as "always obscene".
And OED doesn't really mention much of anything at all, except to say that
certain senses of some words are often used vulgarly. What is it that makes
these words obscene, vulgar, pornographic, profane, or indecent, exactly?
I certainly understand the spirit of this, but it's not necessarily
something that follows from the Terms of Use. Furthermore, it does put for
the much more clear -- but less "useful" standard of: "IT IS YOUR SOLE AND
INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY TO MONITOR OR FILTER CONTENT TO A LEVEL
APPROPRIATE TO YOURSELF AND/OR YOUR FAMILY." (Caps not mine.)
I dunno -- is a technical "solution" called for? I know that some BBSes I've
used have optional "bleep"-filters, allowing you to not see certain words or
even the messages containing them if you so desire....
--
Matthew Miller ---> mattdm@mattdm.org
Quotes 'R' Us ---> http://quotes-r-us.org/
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Language slipping?
|
| (...) I disagree. Using symbols to replace the letters of a "profane" word is not the same as spelling it out. If a young person who does not know such words reads it, he won't know what it means. basically, it's only profane because you interpret (...) (25 years ago, 17-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
32 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
