[General Battuta]

Because it keeps getting deleted, which is odd, as that's against standing HLP policy.

It's possible someone's making the mistake of splitting the posts and sticking them in the other thread, which is quite peculiar all in all since the discussion belongs here - afaict the other thread was split out for some ridiculous derail about smilies. Whatever the case, it'd be a sad irony if this misstep here was left unflagged in an article about the need to flag a writer's awful misstep.

It is the top post in the split thread. The original "c'mon son" post, that is, not this new one. That must be why it is being deleted.

It's not being deleted. (Posts on HLP are by policy never deleted).

[redsniper]

ummmm... Lords and Ladies?

Well, since we don't really use the title Lord anymore, but lady is still a common term for women, I don't think "****lady" would be a good word to promote. I think people would more readily use "lord" indiscriminately nowadays, as they're already doing in this thread, and using an insult with "lady" in it brings us right back to the same issues with "*****."

[Lorric]

I understand your issue with my very first post. I don't think it's particularly salient, but luckily for you, you had an entire thread to watch me clarify it.

Since you've brought up the parent/child metaphor I'm happy to admit I felt the same way Apollo did when I was his age, and I can definitely empathize with being in that position looking back. I'm not uncomfortable with the knowledge that I understand this issue better than most people - I better, considering the amount of research invested in it in my field.

Let's focus on the discussion.

No. Not me. It is you who is the lucky one. And I think it is an important issue.

I'm not done yet. If you stop with the parent role, that would be good, but the point is you can't just jump on someone and aggravate them for something most people wouldn't take issue with, then expect them to listen to you with an open mind, which is what your first post did. That is the main point.

Since you've brought up the parent/child metaphor I'm happy to admit I felt the same way Apollo did when I was his age, and I can definitely empathize with being in that position looking back.

I love how Tutta subtly trolls people into accepting their inferior status. Perhaps it's a testosterone driven abuse, I should know since I've been there too in some less gently times of my life. But let's focus on the discussion.

So, you see it too, Luis. I see it also, but it's not subtle to me. His posts drip with it. Whether it's the general superior "I am better than you" tone, or overt condescension, or the more subtle type using the word son, or making out a thread is for the big boys, or the I'm starting to think deliberate use of words and topics that other people will struggle with, rather than trying to help people along, making them have to struggle along, or constant mention of his position.

Anyway, it's not going to work on me. If anything, it has the opposite effect.

ummmm... Lords and Ladies?

Well, since we don't really use the title Lord anymore, but lady is still a common term for women, I don't think "****lady" would be a good word to promote. I think people would more readily use "lord" indiscriminately nowadays, as they're already doing in this thread, and using an insult with "lady" in it brings us right back to the same issues with "*****."

New neutral insult could be a fun topic.

[General Battuta]

Just a gentle reminder that the thread is not about you, Lorric.

[Luis Dias]

ahaha, this is getting worse and worse.

[General Battuta]

It's the usual pattern on these threads - a limited opening, an exchange of effortposts and people with tangential arguments, everyone gets tired of it, then some inane tangent that kills it. Possibly we can get back to the really interesting topics at the heart of this debate, though. The effects of language and the extent to which we're privileged in our choice of words is a really cool and really complicated systemic issue.

[redsniper]

And if you come across words and phrases that don't make sense, there's no shame in asking someone to explain them. Or you could just... look them up, educate thyself! I don't think Battuta, or most of the technical people here, would use jargon to intentionally be condescending. Hell, I'm often humbled by how much I don't know reading the really intense space/orbital mechanics threads.

[Lorric]

Just a gentle reminder that the thread is not about you, Lorric.

No, it's not. It's about you. You started it all.

[General Battuta]

And if you come across words and phrases that don't make sense, there's no shame in asking someone to explain them. Or you could just... look them up, educate thyself! I don't think Battuta, or most of the technical people here, would use jargon to intentionally be condescending. Hell, I'm often humbled by how much I don't know reading the really intense space/orbital mechanics threads.

I think one of the broader issues that interests me here - with respect to feminism, sure, but other issues like global warming - is that of increasing complexity. People are cognitive misers; even when they want to think hard they'll eventually fall back on pretty simple heuristics and associative patterns. How do we convey really complex issues to people who matter? Is there something irreducible about these polycausal, context-driven phenomena that the human mind can't easily grapple with?

[Lorric]

And if you come across words and phrases that don't make sense, there's no shame in asking someone to explain them. Or you could just... look them up, educate thyself! I don't think Battuta, or most of the technical people here, would use jargon to intentionally be condescending. Hell, I'm often humbled by how much I don't know reading the really intense space/orbital mechanics threads.

I did only say "starting to think" on that one point. I like expanding my vocabulary. He's the only one I get that impression from though.

Anyway, I'll step aside now, I've said my piece on that subject.

[redsniper]

I think one of the broader issues that interests me here - with respect to feminism, sure, but other issues like global warming - is that of increasing complexity. People are cognitive misers; even when they want to think hard they'll eventually fall back on pretty simple heuristics and associative patterns. How do we convey really complex issues to people who matter? Is there something irreducible about these polycausal, context-driven phenomena that the human mind can't easily grapple with?

Ah man, I made an effortpost a while back on FB () about global warming basically saying just that. It's just such a complicated phenomenon that you need at least a little bit of understanding in so many different fields (optics, heat transfer, thermodynamics, geology, meteorology, omg too much, etc.) that to most people it just seems preposterous. Or hell, even just statistics seems like voodoo if you haven't learned how it works.

[Beskargam]

but other issues like global warming - is that of increasing complexity. People are cognitive misers; even when they want to think hard they'll eventually fall back on pretty simple heuristics and associative patterns. How do we convey really complex issues to people who matter?

What about climate change?

EDIT: question was answered by the above

[The E]

Just a gentle reminder that the thread is not about you, Lorric.

No, it's not. It's about you. You started it all.

No. This thread was about use of language. It got started by a post by Batman, but it was never about him. Learn the difference.

You, Lorric, you are the only one who is trying to get it to be about Battuta, and you are ignoring the general trend of the thread in order to get it there.

[Catecholamine]

Consciousness of the cultural connotations of words enables a person to use them responsibly. If you're around people who you know well and who know you well, I see no problem with using "offensive" language. The main problem is when you're around people who don't know you well and don't know how you, personally, use the word.

Refer to Louis CK's routine on the word "faggot." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fcja4WFFzDw

From an aesthetic standpoint, there's no substitute for some words. Vulgarities, especially the most offensive ones, have a certain "sound," which can't be replicated in other words. Sure, a lot of this is an internal conditioned response, but even still, take two words (one of which Mr. CK has already discussed in-depth) with the EXACT same connotation: "faggot" and "fag." To me, "faggot" has an irreplaceable sound, even a charm in a way. The latter? Not so much.

Yes, some slurs have more impactful sounds than others. However, that's a question of aesthetics, which is purely individual.

[BloodEagle]

***** can also refer to a mean women. This definition is not inherently sexist and is at least as common as its other meanings. Some people still perceive it as sexist, but that is not the fault of the speaker.

But the word ***** [...] can never mean 'a mean woman'. Words can't be stripped of their historical force, and [...]

Dude, the ****ing dictionary would like a word with you. 

If you've read the thread you're already quite aware of why the dictionary is irrelevant to the argument.

The initial argument made was over the most-likely perceived meaning of the word in question.  Apollo (and, as I said, I thought along similar lines) stated that it was something like 'a mean lady'.  You stated it was something else (which doesn't matter to my point).  In other words, the argument is about definition.

You are, as appears to me, stating that the dictionary is irrelevant to the definition of a word and that under no circumstances whatsoever (I believe you used the words "can" and  "never") can the word in question mean what the dictionary states it means.  If this is not the case, please clarify.

I am not arguing against the idea that these terms can (and do) cause harm to groups.  And I am not disagreeing that the use of said language was inappropriate in this context.

--

I'd like to nominate "****lord" as a choice neutral insult. It's like, you're not just calling them a ****ty person, you're saying they're a LORD of ****ty people, they own at being ****ty.

I nominate ****-meister.  It sounds smarmier.

[Phantom Hoover]

oh for-- '****head' is the obvious one that everyone uses

[An4ximandros]

 Can we please chill the fork out here? and if anything, the "insult" of choice would be insipid hack.

[Apollo]

By being racist they have earned racist treatment of the same level. Anyway, which is the greater offense: calling a black man a nigger or laughing at a white man who was almost lynched?

But by being racist you thereby insult all black people including those who had nothing to do with the lynching. So you fail on that level. If you use ***** to simply be the female equivalent to bastard, you're not deliberately using it in that way. If you're using it in the sexual connotation though, you are. In which case you are completely in the wrong because you've chosen to insult 50% of the planet for the actions of one stupid, ignorant person just because that person happened to be a woman.

Perhaps you're right. I hadn't thought it about too much.

This was explicitly what I said to you in the second post on the topic, so I'm glad you're thinking about it now. With the important addendum that ***** is always a gendered, sexualized word, not the female equivalent of bastard. We have no say about this; you cannot decide to use it otherwise. It will always activate those semantic associations.

(Bastard was a pretty serious insult back in the day, when being a bastard was a huge threat to your life and social standing. That's no longer always the case today. Unfortunately, being a ***** is a threat to your physical safety and social standing.)

If we set aside the manufactured arguments about dictionaries and censorship (neither of which have anything in particular to do with the topic) I hope it's clear by now why this isn't an area where you can fight fire with fire.

It's pretty goddamn difficult for anyone other than a black person to use the word nigger without racially insulting somebody. *****, on the other hand, can just as easily be a generic insult in the same way that dick is for a man.

The word "*****" will never go away. However, it has taken on an additional role as a generic insult, not a misogynistic one. You can see this from how several people in this thread thought of the "mean women" meaning before the "woman who doesn't know her place" one. The best thing that can happen is for the former meaning to completely overtake the latter.

Oversexualization, sexual double standards, and men calling their girlfriends "bad *****es" are all issues we should be concerned about. However, taking issue with the "mean woman" meaning of ***** is not combating sexism. It's overblown political correctness.

EDIT: Also where did that monkey badge come from? [/offtopic]

[Luis Dias]

He's been monkeyed. Which is sad. I was having a ball with his condescending troll act.

Seriously though, I have a deeply ingrained skepticism regarding the analysis of words in that hyper-self-aware of the "patriarchy" system we have largely inherited (and ever since tried to tame, curtail, stop, etc.), for it has been my experience that this "kind" of conversation seems to attract dip****s and professional victims of the worst kind (elevatorgate anyone?). However I do recognize the questions themselves as serious and interesting, and given that HLP is void of such aforementioned problematics it could be perhaps the best place to develop such a conversation.

First things first though. No, the Principia of Newton isn't a "Manual of Rape" and the modelling of fluids hasn't been so difficult to tackle because it's a "female" "thing". As long as we keep the thread clean from some post-modernist pseudo-feminist bull****, I'll participate!

[Lorric]

He's been monkeyed. Which is sad. I was having a ball with his condescending troll act.

Seriously though, I have a deeply ingrained skepticism regarding the analysis of words in that hyper-self-aware of the "patriarchy" system we have largely inherited (and ever since tried to tame, curtail, stop, etc.), for it has been my experience that this "kind" of conversation seems to attract dip****s and professional victims of the worst kind (elevatorgate anyone?). However I do recognize the questions themselves as serious and interesting, and given that HLP is void of such aforementioned problematics it could be perhaps the best place to develop such a conversation.

First things first though. No, the Principia of Newton isn't a "Manual of Rape" and the modelling of fluids hasn't been so difficult to tackle because it's a "female" "thing". As long as we keep the thread clean from some post-modernist pseudo-feminist bull****, I'll participate!

Monkey badge? I thought Apollo was talking about the monkey racial slur. What does this "he's been monkeyed" mean?