Empty signs
I wrote to the women’s studies list yesterday to ask for thoughts on sexist epithets, especially pussy and cunt. Here is a sampling from replies.
“Recently, I was standing at the bus stop with a young man who was singing along to rap music. Suddenly, he yelled “Bitch!” and I almost ran for cover. But he was just singing along to the music. Can anyone wonder why young women are treated so badly when the music kids listen to describes them as bitches, evil, and mean?”
“I’m not sure who your informants are but I can absolutely disabuse you of their misinformation. “Cunt” is seen as one of the worst possible expletives that can be used. “Twat” is aged and falling out of fashion currently. “Pussy” has a little ambiguity as (now very old) comedies occassionaly play on the dual usages as a colloquial for cat and for genitalia. I’d be surprised to see any evidence that the meaning of these words isn’t known – what evidence do your informants proffer for that view?
In my opinion is it explicitly sexist but for slightly different reasons – its implication is that the worst possible thing is to be penetrated and that penetration is a sign of weakness in that instance. It relies on a belief that penetration is synonymous with strength and masculinity and to be penetrable is a sign of weakness. It also (certainly in the UK) is often used in the trope which asserts that female genitalia are dirty and smelly.” [That one is from someone at Oxford, so she’s not clueless about UK usage.]
“I had a discussion about “pussy” in my psych of women class recently, and the students insisted that when Jon Stewart and others use the word they mean “weak as a kitten.” Of course, that is sexist, especially when men apply it to each other to suggest they are not macho enough. But I think they are wrong in their understanding.”
Katha Pollitt refused to believe that the British are ignorant of the word ‘cunt.’ Well I sympathize, I can’t believe it either, and yet people insist – not quite exactly that they’re ignorant of the meaning, but that that’s no longer what the word means. In particular John Meredith in comments on Knowing what words mean.
“‘Slag’ is, nearly always, a sexist term…It means a woman who is disgusting by dint of having more sex than is approved. It is sexist because it can only be applied to women and evinces disgust simply because she is a woman and behaves like one. But ‘cunt’ which can really only be applied to men, just means (in its sweary sense) ‘bastard’ and does not imply any hostility towards women as women, so is not sexist. It is an empty sign, really, that just indicates ‘I feel extreme hostility towards you to the degree that I will use a taboo word for you’. The word itself could be one of dozens used pretty much interchangeably.”
I find that completely incomprehensible, and hard to believe. Just for one thing, why is the word taboo if it’s an empty sign? What is it that makes the word taboo if it is just an empty sign? What are the dozens of other words that could be used interchangeably? I don’t think there’s even one, let alone dozens. As far as I know, cunt is right at the top of the heap of Bad Words to call someone, and it is there because it is the most vicious hate-filled word for the female genitalia, while ‘pussy’ is a little less vicious and ‘twat’ is comparatively mild.
But there’s also a thread on Shiraz Socialist:
The word “cunt” is a highly effective insult precisely because of its shock value – nothing is more guaranteed to upset the secretary of the local WI than such a word. It’s no more endemically “oppressive” than any other word, the point is the context in which it is used. As Rosie said, it’s simply nonsense to claim that most people who use the word these days are referring to female genitalia, any more than when they call someone “posh” they are referring to Port Out Starboard Home. When they use the word “cunt”, they just mean that they really really disapprove of or dislike the individual to whom they’re referring. Like the word, dislike it, use it or don’t – I should care. But don’t invent a hierarchy of oppression amongst swear-words which is simply a false excuse for some left-wing version of parochial moralism.
I don’t buy it. If the word has shock value, then the shock value comes from somewhere. If the shock value comes from somewhere, where does it come from? I submit that it comes from the fact that it is a word that 1) equates women to their genitals and 2) expresses hatred for both. If that’s not where the shock value comes from, then where does it come from?
More later.
In response to that last person, is it worth pointing out that posh doesn’t come from abbreviating “Port Out Starboard Home”?
This may have been explained before, but, honestly, in England, these are interchangeable with cunt and twat- dick, nob (penis), bollock, bellend, plonker, prick, scroat, et cetera. Also, cunt has ceased to shock and appal. If believed in taboo-busting, I’d be flinging smegma everywhere. Sorry, very, very, sorry. Am I barred too?
Nonsense – Monty Python did a smegma joke decades ago.
And Shakespeare probably did one too.
I don’t know if the issue is whether “cunt” or “pussy” have shock value or not. After discussing them for so long, they shock me not. The point is that the words offend women, whether they are shocked or not. As a Jew, I’ve heard a lot of anti-semitic remarks in my days, and they don’t shock me: they offend me.
The stupidity behind anti-semitism and sexism (and here the sexism, as OB says, has to do with the “idea” that being penetrated is sign of inferiority and cowardice, a terribly adolescent “idea” to base your life on) irritate me. That’s all.
Can I clarify something? Is it being claimed that using the word “cunt” labels you as a sexist?
Not necessarily; it depends how you use it.
Actually I guess it’s more than that – even if you use it in a way I consider sexist that doesn’t necessarily label you a sexist, partly because the word does seem to have become detached from its meaning.
But the point isn’t in fact to label anyone as a sexist, it’s to consider whether the use of sexist language is a bad harmful thing. I think it is. I don’t necessarily blame people who do it, but I wish they didn’t want to.
Wait – that sounds crazy-egomaniacal. I mean ‘even if you use it in an arguably sexist way’ – I don’t mean my view of what’s sexist determines whether people are labeled sexist or not.
Ah, right. That makes some sense.
But if: “the word does seem to have become detached from its meaning”, then how is it still (necessarily) “sexist language”?
Further, if a word is detached from its meaning, then surely that implies its meaning has changed: it’s not the same word any more, no?
Oops, that last crossed in the e-post.
The “empty sign” account doesn’t work for me. The commenter provides evidence that it is NOT empty at all, by providing a translation of what it means. Being replaceable does not make a word an empty sign.
I also don’t quite follow that cunt “can really only be applied to men” Is this a UK thing? I thought I was pretty profane with a big vocabulary. But I don’t know that cunt is exclusive to men in the US. What’s up with that?
I have worked with some extreme American sexist men who would never ever permit a Bad Word to cross their lips. And they were quite hostile and angry and disrespectful to women just the same, and boxed in women and told women their place. Being “a sexist” is not about sexist words. Or not only about them.
I can’t believe no-one has put up the Derek and Clive (Cook and Moore) sketch that put this word into the Pythonesque recital repertoire of many a sophomoric wit in the english-speaking world.
http://www.phespirit.info/derekandclive/live_02.htm
That was 1976, folks. It had some shock value then. I was travelling in the back of an army truck with a bunch of other personnel, two female, discussing the shock value of swear words. One of the ladies said “I can cope with all this F stuff, its the C word that gets me.”
One of the wittier souls then recited this sketch.
“Mm… Thanks for that, I may be cured.”
After all this time it is still just as offensive, unlike some other things.
OB, I think you are spot on in item 1.
I am not sure that hatred is the right word in item 2 though. Degrading, filthy contempt might be more accurate.
“I find that completely incomprehensible, and hard to believe. Just for one thing, why is the word taboo if it’s an empty sign?”
I haven’t explained myself very well.
I don’t mean to suggest that the literal signifieds of words like ‘cunt’ are not understood and that their taboo nature does not derive from the fact thqat they describe obscene things (things considered obscene in the culture). It is just that when used as insults the signifieds are very different, they are empty of their literal significance for all intents and purposes and just signify the willingness to use a strogly taboo term to describe someone. This indicates the low esteem you hold that person in. A person shouting ‘cunt’ is not expressing any more meaning or any other nuance than if she or he shouted ‘prick’ (or ‘twat’ or ‘wanker’ or ‘bellend’ etc, etc)except in some measure of intensity which differs according to context. That means that the words cannot be sexist when used in their sweary sense. If someone calls me ‘cunt’ (you will be shocked to learn that this has happened) all I hear is that they dislike me intensley. There is no additional meaning or nuance conveyed by the knowledge that ‘cunt’ means ‘vagina’ or ‘genitalia’ in its literal, non-figurative usage. The insult carries no implied hatred or disgust of women. It would be just as insulting if they had called me a ‘prick’. If we accept that ‘cunt’ used in an abusive sense implies some disgust at or denigration of women, don’t we have to accept that the same holds true of words like ‘prick’ or ‘dickhead’? And there are far more insulting words (in the UK at least) derived from taboo words for male genitalia than from women’s which would imply that our culture holds a much more negative view of male sexuality than female, a conclusion that I think most people would find counter-intuitive.
I think there may be some interference here caused by a slightly different usage in the US where (I believe) ‘cunt’ is often used to mean ‘woman’. I have never heard it used like that in the UK, and I am pretty sure it can’t be. If I said I said there were two ‘cunts’ in the bar, it could only mean two people (men, actually) that I really despise are in the bar. The same is true for ‘bitch’ and ‘ho’.
“I also don’t quite follow that cunt “can really only be applied to men” Is this a UK thing? “
I think it may be, and it may just be where I am in the UK. It would just sound strange to call a woman a ‘cunt’, like calling her ‘bastard’ or ‘dick’ or ‘wanker’. In the UK, it seems that a lot of swear words are reserved for the boys, presumably because it was socially unaccaptable for women to indulge in profanity until quite recently, although I am pretty sure this is changing. You need to talk to some yooves.
In Australia, “cunt” can only be applied to men. Its meaning is simply, “someone I hate so much/feel so much anger towards that I am motivated to inflict physical violence on them.” School children learn the word long before they learn the meaning “female genitalia”. It’s the most hostile/threatening possible insult but is NEVER applied to women. The nearest equivalent for a woman would be “fucking bitch” (i.e. the strongest available intensifier attached to the slang for “arrogant or inconsiderate (or treacherous) female person”); but “cunt” is strictly a word tied up with inter-male violence and posturing.
It’s still sexist, though. Why choose the word for female genitalia as the word to have THAT meaning? I would never use it to mean anything other than “genitalia”, because I can’t imagine ever feeling sufficient hatred or anger towards someone do so, but that’s probably because I’m (ahem!) a pussycat (i.e a surprisingly sweet-natured and gentle person). But the other reason is that I consider it a highly sexist usage.
There IS another usage (other than the obvious one), which as a term of endearment: “I love you cunts.” But this is rare, and we’d usually say “bastards”. If I were drunk and maudlin enough to say that to my friends, well, I’d probably just say “guys” (which, as far as I know, can apply to people of either sex in all countries concerned).
Okay, so that’s Australian usage. But I’m surprised to hear it suggested that “cunt” is not applied to women in the UK. It is certainly applied to women all the way through Caryl Churchill’s popular play, Serious Money. When I saw it in London, 20+ years ago now, it surprised me in that respect (it wasn’t a usage that I’d ever encountered in Australia), but I think it’s generally agreed that the play is true to the foul-mouthed argot of London financial traders of the time (and, I assume, still).
“It’s still sexist, though. Why choose the word for female genitalia as the word to have THAT meaning? “
For the same reason we use words for the male genitalia to have that meaning. I don’t see how it is sexist, therefore. I agree that ‘cunt’ is probably the strongest insult, in England at any rate (although it seems to be softening and can be heard from time to time on the BBC), but that isn’t too releveant as far as I can see, some word has to be the strongest and the weight of the insult seems to be designtaed pretty arbitrarily (it is worse to be called a ‘prick’ than a ‘cock’, although they refer to the same thing). I think it is stange to assume some intentionality to the use of ‘cunt’ but to no other swear word.
“There IS another usage (other than the obvious one), which as a term of endearment: “I love you cunts.” But this is rare”
Less rare in Scotland where ‘cunt’is quite often used in the way of ‘bloke’: ‘Either of you cunts want another drink?’/ ‘Some cunt sold me this for a fiver’.
“When I saw it in London, 20+ years ago now, it surprised me in that respect … but I think it’s generally agreed that the play is true to the foul-mouthed argot of London financial traders of the time”
I haven’t seen the play and it might be true that traders speak like this, but I have never heard ‘cunt’ used for a woman, and it sounds odd to my ears. It goes to show, though, that usage varies massively even within a country. It is very hard to pin down.
Oh yes – ‘cunt’ is certainly applied to women here. I have a vivid (and unpleasant) memory of the first time I ever heard it in a ‘mainstream’ movie, decades ago. It was I think ‘Harry and Tonto’: Adam Arkin (I think) told his aunt, let’s call her Sally because I don’t remember her name, ‘I like you, Sally, but you’re a cunt.’ He said it very calmly and evenly, and it was like a bomb going off.
I hated it. I still hate it.
“I think it is strange to assume some intentionality to the use of ‘cunt’ but to no other swear word.”
Well could that be because you’re not a woman?
From my point of view it’s strange not to. It’s not a matter of assuming, though – not in this discussion, where obviously it’s not possible to assume anything, since putative assumptions are exactly what we’re looking at.
But to me there’s something terribly disingenuous about saying Yes it means female genitalia and it’s the worst possible insult but it has nothing to do with women. That just doesn’t fly.
Here’s one reason. If that usage is so normal – why is it that I’ve never once heard Jeremy or Julian call anyone a cunt? Why do none of my male UK correspondents (and I have lots of them) call people cunts in correspondence with me?
That must be for a reason, right? It’s not likely to be just arbitrary? Well if it’s for a reason – what else could the reason be?
What does it mean in that context OB? Does it just mean ‘woman’? That is the impression I got from a US movie I watched once where some frat boys (I think) called the girls they were inviting to their party ‘cunts’. I would agree that that is a straightforwardly sexist use. It confused me for a good five minutes.
Is Adam Arkin Alan Arkin?
“But to me there’s something terribly disingenuous about saying Yes it means female genitalia and it’s the worst possible insult but it has nothing to do with women. That just doesn’t fly.”
It is the worst possible insult in some contexts. But there are other words that mean female genitalia that are mild (‘twat’) compared with words that mean male genitalia (‘prick’), so the weight seems to be arbitrary and is probably changaeable (remember whan ‘bastard’ could get you the sack from a TV job?). Why should it be just funny to call someone a ‘cock’ but fighting talk to call him a ‘prick’? The words refer to the same thing. It can only be that usuage and intention is all, and the weight we give taboo words is arbitrary or accidental. ‘Cunt’ may be stonger than other words, but it needn’t have been.
“Here’s one reason. If that usage is so normal – why is it that I’ve never once heard Jeremy or Julian call anyone a cunt?”
Do they use other profanities freely?
“Why do none of my male UK correspondents (and I have lots of them) call people cunts in correspondence with me?”
I don’t know but there may be many reasons. They may not tend to call people names (you will know) so the occasion may not arise, and they may know that you will be offended, a good enough reason to avoid. Personally, I tend to swer freely enough in speech, but rarley in writing. Also, your corrspondents may avoid expressions like ‘Jesus Christ’ (in an expleteive sense) when talking to churchmen, but that does not mean that those expressions contain anything sinister.
While I certainly agree that in Australia that ‘cunt’ is the most hostile and threatening insult you can use, I (and any number of women I know) can absolutely refute the fact it’s never directed at women. I generally lead a pretty boring life, and I’ve been called a cunt at least twice in the last six months alone, once for bumping into someone in a crowded bar, and once for walking down a well-lit and busy inner city Melbourne street on my own after 12am.
Turning this whole conversation over in my head for the past few days, the thing that strikes me about my own reaction to the use of ‘cunt’ is that most other female-gendered insults include the notion of female plus another quality (bitch = female plus nasty/mean, slag = female plus sexually promiscuous, etc) which creates the warped the illusion that that they’re some how disputable in a stick and stones kind of way (‘Right, yes, I am a woman, but I’ve been in a monogamous relationship for five years, so HA, not a slag after all, nyah, nyah!’). Cunt, however, reduces me to a simple biological fact, and if that is the single most offensive thing about me–and offensive to the point of needing to make a public issue of it–it means I’m dealing with something close to a pyschopath and not a reasonable human being at all.
Another approach to this is to consider other languages where ‘cunt’ has much less strength. Do we think that Spain is less sexist than the UK/USA? It doesn’t seem likely to me. When I was thre some years ago there was a national debate about whether a woman who had been forced into sex by some policemen had been raped given that she was a prostitute who had come to them to make a complaint. Not exactly progressive on this issue.
In Spain the worst insult you can apply to someone, the one you had better not use in front of your mother is ‘cabron’. This literally means ‘big goat’, but goats are not held in especially low esteem. It is an insult because it originally meant ‘cuckold’ but its force does not depend on any knowledge of that (I never met a Spaniard who could explain it and had to look it up in a big dictionary). Its weight as an insult is arbitrary, languages need taboo words of differing strength.
John, no, in that context (and any context, as far as I know) it meant woman of a certain kind – the bad kind – troublemaking, vicious, hypercritical, unsweet, difficult – everything a woman is not supposed to be. It was and as far as I know still is a profoundly sexist word in the US – a shut up word, a how dare you be so uppity word. Like ballbreaker but much much worse.
No, Adam Arkin isn’t Alan Arkin! He’s his son – had a recurring role on ‘Northern Exposure’ – and another as a prosecutor on ‘Boston Legal’ – played a shrink on ‘The West Wing.’ Used to live in my neighborhood; I saw him once at the bookstore. Didn’t demand an autograph (or call him a cunt).
Where does the offense come from? Well to quote Lenny Bruce (who to be fair, knew where of he spoke):
“it’s the suppression of the word that gives it the power, the violence, the viciousness”
Cunt is offensive because it is still the one word censors baulk at more than any other. The more we use it, the less powerful and offensive it becomes. What the word really means, and is that word truly sexist is a different debate entirely. Words change meaning over time, and mean different things in different contexts. To say that “cunt” or “pussy” 100% can only relate to female genitalia is, i think, being incrediably simplistic about it and delibrately skewing the meaning in your favour. Put it this way – If i kept claiming “Gay” can only mean “happy” would people think that was correct?
PS: I’m in the UK, and can confirm we really do know what cunt means. I disagree it is an insult exclusively used for men though. Oh, and why is it always an insult? I know people who use it as a term of affection as it “oi you old cunt, how you doing?”
hmmmm… maybe words are inherently meaningless?
“Cunt, however, reduces me to a simple biological fact, and if that is the single most offensive thing about me–and offensive to the point of needing to make a public issue of it–it means I’m dealing with something close to a pyschopath and not a reasonable human being at all.”
But Kate, why does this not follow when we call a man a ‘dick’? Isn’t that entirely analogous?
Obama Pussy has 276m hits on google. Bush Pussy has 22m, because Bush wasn’t a pussy.
Great are the sorrows attending the passing of the Bush-Blair Axis.
John:
I’m glad you said that. Should we (as men) view being called a cock/dick/penis/nob as horribly offensive and sexist? Seems to me that we (both men and women) make far less fuss about that. Perhaps we are all simply “talking bollocks”.
(sorry, couldn’t resist!)
Kate, yeah. That’s certainly what it feels like to me.
“they may know that you will be offended”
Yes…but not just offended, I would claim. If they thought the likely offense was just arbitrary and irrational, they might not want to indulge it. (Leaving aside considerations of how difficult and bad-tempered I can be and how terrified of me they are, which are inappropriate and beside the point. Ha!) I suspect there is some sense that the potential offense is not unreasonable (or maybe a lot more than that, but I’m being minimal for the sake of argument). If so – then there’s a reason for that.
Oh god. No, the reason cunt is offensive is not ‘because it is still the one word censors baulk at more than any other.’ Fucking hell.
“Leaving aside considerations of how difficult and bad-tempered I can be and how terrified of me they are, which are inappropriate and beside the point. Ha!”
I suspect, OB, that you are more intimidating than you realise, but I agree that isn’t to the point (and it isn’t meant as an insult, by the way).
“I suspect there is some sense that the potential offense is not unreasonable (or maybe a lot more than that, but I’m being minimal for the sake of argument).”
But when it comes to these words it is always reasonable to object. If you don’t like the word, I would be careful not to say it in front of you too, unless my main intention was to insult and outrage you, but I would use it with a clear conscience elsewhere.
Sigh. Tartovski, we’ve had the dick/prick etc discussion – I said yes, we should, from the beginning, and added that that’s why I don’t use the words any more (which admittedly is a considerable loss).
But all the same, there is the issue of situated power, here. Honky is not as insulting as nigger. Shaygets is not as insulting as kike. Straight is not as insulting as faggot or dyke. Und so weiter.
“But when it comes to these words it is always reasonable to object.”
That’s interesting. What words? You mean epithets (for want of a better word)? Name-calling type words?
But then…if you really think it is always reasonable to object, would you really use it with a completely clear conscience elsewhere? Taking elsewhere to mean everywhere except around people who have explicitly objected? Would you never under any circumstances (apart from those stipulated) hesitate, or choose another word?
“I suspect, OB, that you are more intimidating than you realise”
Intimidating! Moi? Not intimidating, just obnoxious.
I agree that situated power is an important consideration (and I take seriously your point earlier about that fact that this might all have a different colour for me if I were a woman), but it strikes me as significant that all the the pairings you make above are epithets that are explicitly used to denigrate a particular type of person, but ‘cunt’ isn’t in that catagory (in the UK at least). You can’t use the word ‘kike’ or ‘nigger’ with any force unless directed against a Jew or a black person. But ‘cunt’ (to slightly paraphrase Arletty) is international, so it doesn’t belong in that company, it is a different sort of thing. Aslo, some of the words in your pairings are different because they are not intended as insults.
‘Dyke’ has lost a lot of force in the UK, too, by the way (just mentioning it for sociological reasons), I would use it without too many worries in some contexts, just like ‘gay’.
Backing up a bit (this is a speedy discussion) –
“Another approach to this is to consider other languages where ‘cunt’ has much less strength.”
Yeah, and I have an interesting contribution on that from the WMST list, but I don’t think it’s all that helpful for this discussion. I’ll concede that it can be different in other languages, because I don’t know enough to dispute it, but let’s focus on Anglophone usage.
“That’s interesting. What words? You mean epithets (for want of a better word)? Name-calling type words?”
Yes, that’s what I meant, words that are only used to try to insult someone or for gnerating a sort of subversive (in its weakest sense) group identity.
“But then…if you really think it is always reasonable to object, would you really use it with a completely clear conscience elsewhere?”
I would, as you say, think twice wherever I was, but not because I think the words are sexist, but because I want to be in control of the effect. I don’t want to insult anyone by accident, I want to insult them on purpose.
I have, in the past, agreed not to use the word ‘Turkey’ because it offends some Turks (yes, I know), but I still deny there is any hostility to Turks contained in the word. I was just being polite, as usual.
Apropos … I don’t believe you are ever obnoxious, but I think I would pull Jeremy’s beard before I yanked on yours, if you see what I mean.
Well, cunt isn’t a different sort of thing in the US – but it clearly works differently in the UK. But there still seems to be a lot of disagreement about exactly how that ‘differently’ plays out.
‘Dyke’…hmm…dykes themselves have reclaimed it, but I’m not sure that applies to non-dykes. (There’s a brilliant cartoon series ‘Dykes to Watch Out For’ by Alison Bechdel.)
John–two factors: firstly, ‘male’ is still the default acceptable state in society (add to that white and straight), so while being a dick isn’t very nice, it’s still not as bad as being called a cunt, by the very fact a dick is a male attribute and not a female one. In fact this is so far entrenched that dick has almost, ahem, been neutered as an insult–god knows I’d rather be told I was being a dick than a cunt, simply because it’s clear that it’s not my gender that’s being fixated on, in fact it’s so far from the insulter’s mind that they’re using a nonsensical construct.
Secondly, literal, physical power differential: I’m pretty damn sure that no man I’ve ever called a dick has immediately started calculating the chances that I’d drag him into a dark alley and rape him. For a man to call a woman a cunt immediately flags that fact that he is aware that he is in a position of power over her by virtue of being a man, and is explicitly making her aware of that fact, which is a threat, pure and simple. Man to man, even though the power balance is more equal, shades of the threat are still present in varying degrees, whether it’s a the friendly insult that most people seem to be attempting to sell it as, right through to an outright hostile red rag. It’s why it’s even used as an insult in the first place as it clearly signals not only am I better than you, I also have the strength to prove it.
Myself, I can’t read the use of cunt by a man as anything but a threat, no matter who it’s directed at, or how clear the intention otherwise may be. At the very least, it signals the person using it is painfully unaware of the broader connotations, and is therefore quite likely to be clueless about any other number of things I’d consider basic attributes of a civilised human being.
You honestly think that the supression of a word has nothing to do with offensiveness? I totally disagree. sure, it’s not the *only* reason it’s offensive, but it is a big part of it. As kids we learn that the “bad” words are the ones we aren’t allowed to say.
If people spoke of cocks and pussies and assholes and cunts as freely as they talk about other body parts would they be offensive anymore? The Taboo element is very imporant (why those things are taboo is another argument though).
I dunno. As a white middle class male, i’m not bothered about these things, where-as you clearly are. And maybe that’s partly the point? i.e. offense is in the eye of the beholder.
I’m not saying these words aren’t offensive, but that perhaps people’s intent in useing those words and people’s reaction to these words varies wildly and it’s really not that clear cut.
“John–two factors: firstly, ‘male’ is still the default acceptable state in society (add to that white and straight)”
It really depends on what society you mean, Kate, and where. I think you are better off being born a middle class black woman than a working class white man, but that is a different discussion.
John, well I agree with you about ‘turkey’ at least! Spell it without the capital letter and then maybe your Turkish friends won’t be offended (use gestures if speaking). It refers to the bird!
The crime of ‘Insulting Turkishness’ strikes again.
Tartovski, well you said ‘Cunt is offensive because it is still the one word censors baulk at more than any other.’ You didn’t say partly because, or among other reasons. It wasn’t self-evident that you don’t think that’s the only reason.
But observe – in this discussion we are speaking of cocks and pussies and assholes and cunts as freely as we talk about other body parts. I don’t think the issue here is how smutty the words are.
“As a white middle class male, i’m not bothered about these things, where-as you clearly are.”
Precisely. You’re not bothered, because they don’t threaten you. That’s nice for you, but it doesn’t do the rest of us much good. Callous indifference is all very well, but one can have too much even of a good thing.
“I think you are better off being born a middle class black woman than a working class white man”
But then if a working class man calls a middle class black woman a cunt? Is that somehow not so bad? Or is it as Kate says more like a threat. I would say the latter. Women always have to fear angry resentful men, especially men who feel in some way put ‘down’ by the women – ‘pussy-whipped’ in fact.
Ignorant skill-free men are busy murdering educated women in Afghanistan and Pakistan. That’s no accident.
“But then if a working class man calls a middle class black woman a cunt? Is that somehow not so bad?”
Well here are some more things we can agree on. I don’t think it is necessarily a threat (I mean I don’t think the threat is intrinsic) but it is certainly threateneing and meant to be, which is why, I suppose, it is (generally speaking) much less socially acceptable to use obscenities towards women. I would agree that women have plenty to fear from men and always will have and that the more we do to ‘feminise’ our public intercourse, the better; a less coarse idiom would benefit all of us, although the drift seems to be the other way. I just disagree that the word itself is sexist. I think its threat comes entirely from context. An angry man shouting ‘cunt’ at a woman walking alone at night would be frightening, but more frightening than a man shouting ‘cock’ in the same circumstance?
Yes.
Yeah, seriously – that word screams of loathing, to me – and not just to me. Clearly that reaction is not universal among UK women – but I think it’s pretty common here.
But Jeremy sees it the way you (and others) do. To quote –
We’re not ignorant of the meaning of the [word] cunt, it’s just not how we use it. We’re able to access its obvious meaning, we sometimes might employ it to mean its obvious meaning (though actually not often if we’re using it as an insult), but normally it isn’t what we mean when we use it. (I’m speaking for myself here – not that I use it – but if I were to use it, or if I hear it used, then, etc…).
If someone uses the word cunt as an insult, I would have no images, thoughts, etc., of women’s genitalia, or indeed, anything about women, unless I took time to reflect upon it (or there was a very particular context of use that made it clear that this is what it meant). It’s very different than slag, bitch, slapper, etc., in that regard.
There’s a not uncommon UK compliment: “God, he’s one hard cunt” (or some such – we can substitute bastard, son of a bitch (sorry!), or even motherfucker – though that’s kind of an Americanism – though interestingly not “pussy”)?
Apparently it wasn’t Adam Arkin in ‘Harry and Tonto’ – it was apparently Josh Mostel. Unless it was Adam Arkin in a different movie. I don’t know.
Hmmm. In this discussion, maybe. But I think generally the smuttyness of the word is important to it’s taboo nature.
I don’t think i’m being callously indifferent, I’m just pointing out that for alot of people it’s as big issue as it is to you. I chatted with a female friend of mine about this at the weekend and whilst she agreed these insults maybe sexist in origin, she wasn’t that bothered about it. She agreed with me that spending our time fighting actual abuses against women, rather than verbal ones is probably more important.
You say these things threaten you, but do they really? Does me calling my mate a cunt actually threaten you? Surely unless it’s actually directed at you, it’s not really a “threat”? i.e. what harm is being done?
Isn’t it a bit like a theist saying that all this atheist talk is “threatening” their religious beliefs, and should therefor be banned… Which is something I assume you’d poo-poo.
There are obviously some big differences in the way the words work in different cultures (didn’t Wittgenstein have something to say about thi?). Jeremyt is right that it would be a compliment to describe someone as a ‘hard cunt’ (if you moved in those circles). Loads of room for trouble.
I know I keep banging on about Spain, but this is my last. I got into trouble there by misunderstanding the power of a swear word. In Spain ‘ostia’ means ‘host (as in transubstantiation) and as they are such a foul mouthes race and it had no obscene referent I just assumed it was quite mild. But it isn’t. It is very strong. I nearly caused an incident by saying it in front opf a friend’s mother. Very embarrassing. Oddly, though, she didn’t mind ‘I shit on God’ as an expletive (common in Spain this one). Must be culcha.
If the smuttyness of the word were all that important to the taboo then ‘vagina’ and ‘vulva’ and ‘genitalia’ would work the same way, and they don’t.
“She agreed with me that spending our time fighting actual abuses against women, rather than verbal ones is probably more important.”
No, no, no!! That’s all wrong! How can you say such a thing?! My god, of course it’s more important to fight verbal abuses than it is to fight FGM and murder and rape and legal subordination. What’s the matter with you?!
No I don’t say ‘these things’ threaten me. That’s not what I said. No of course you calling your mate a cunt doesn’t threaten me, but that’s not what I said. I do think it does harm, but that’s not the harm it does.
No, it isn’t like that, and in any case I am not saying anything should be banned.
Sigh. It really does help to address what people actually say rather than an approximation.
That’s hilarious, John!
Ostia ostia ostia!
Oh I’m so sorry – I mean ‘I shit on God.’ Whew – that was close.
Interesting, Kate. In my 50+ years in this country I’ve never heard the word “cunt” used to refer to someone female, let alone directed at someone female. Those years haven’t all been spent in cotton wool – I’m not originally from a snobby background, and I went to a pretty tough school where the word was used freely to intimidate or posture, but always in the way I described. Likewise when I’ve worked in heavy industry.
I’m not doubting your word, just reporting a different experience. It just shows that there’s variation I’m not aware of even in my own country. I wonder whether it’s something we’ve picked up relatively recently from the US (younger people than me have a lot more American influence on their language than us baby boomers do) or whether it’s a regional thing, or what.
Anyway, even without that bit of information it’s a word I would never use as an insult for the two reasons I gave. I’m sure my female friends would be shocked if I ever did so, and justifiably. I have no qualms about using it to mean female genitalia/pubes – but even then I wouldn’t do so in front of someone likely to be offended by mere vulgarities. IMHO it’s really a word best used only in that sense, and only with lovers or very close and trusted friends. You’ll never see me use it on the internet, although I’ve sure been MENTIONING it a fair bit tonight. :)
Actually this whole exercise was just an excuse to talk dirty.
Ha!
I’ve just realized that I ought to start referring to our publisher by its obvious (and purely affectionate) nickname.
snicker
Damn – Jeremy’s and mine, I meant, Russell. Tsk – how to ruin a good joke.
Surely that proves my point? Vulva and cunt mean the same thing, yet the latter is more offensive. Surely that is to do with it’s suppression and therefore more taboo nature?
Ok, if they don’t threaten you, who do they threaten? and how?
I’m just trying to get to the crux of your argument. to me it seems to hang on the interpretation of the words themselves – something i think is much more ambiguous than you are willing to accept.
Did you ever study Semiotics? it seems to me that what is intended and what can be received in these cases can wildy vary from case to case.
And sarcasm aside, i’ve read your site for years and i sincerely do think you talk a lot of sense about a lot of very interesting things – but it seems the amount of time being spent on this issue seems quite disproportionate to the actual question which boils down to “is pussy sexist”?
Maybe that’s just me? I dunno.
“Surely that is to do with it’s suppression and therefore more taboo nature?”
Well how do you know? How do you know it’s not the other way around?
I didn’t say they threaten anyone, in general; I answered a specific question about a specific imagined situation.
“something i think is much more ambiguous than you are willing to accept.”
Yeah. Well I have accepted at least some of that – I do realize it works differently in the UK. But I also think there is a sense in which the testimony of (as it were) bystanders is worth a little less than the testimony of those more directly affected. In other words I think white people who blow off racist insults and straight people who blow off homophobic insults and men who blow off sexist insults…risk being, or seeming to be, smug or callous or both. I don’t think that about anyone here (that I recall), but I do think it about some of the people who commented at Jesus and Mo and at David Thompson’s – and I think you could stand to be a little more aware of the issue. It’s just a little too easy for men to say ‘oh cunt is harmless, get over yourself.’
No, I was out sick the day we did Semiotics.
Sure, the amount of time (and words) is very disproportionate. But it interests me, that’s all – well no, it’s not all; it interests me and I think it matters, even if other things matter more. I like understanding, I like to nail things down; I find this issue puzzling; I want to nail it down. I have thought of putting a disclaimer on the later posts on the subject – but I also assume it goes without saying that if people are bored with a given subject they can just, you know, skip it.
Idle thought on how words can become detached from their original meanings.
Sitting on a bus a few years back, I overheard a conversation between two teenage boys (I’d guess they were about 14)reading a magazine
“That’s so gay”
“What’s wrong with being gay? My brother’s mate Steve’s gay and he’s ok”
“I don’t mean gay as in gay. I mean gay as in, you know, so gay. Like sad…”
And that’s before we get into the original meaning of gay, let alone the way that “sad” means something quite different in context between teenagers (or at least it did last I knew).
Sometimes words do get entirely detached from their original meanings, and given enough time, some speakers will not even remember or know what those original meanings were. While the teenager on the bus who used ‘gay’ to mean ‘risible’ or ‘pathetic’ might have known it once meant (and to most of us still does mean) ‘homosexual’ I wouldn’t bet on him knowing that before that, it meant ‘happy’.
I can honestly say that I’d never given any thought to where the term ‘pussy’ had come from – I would probably have thought of cats – ‘pussy’ as in cute but ineffectual animal that couldn’t put up a fight (though to be honest, anyone who’s spent much time around cats will know that the term ‘spaniel’ would be far more apt – cats are evil…) Thinking about it, though, it is far more likely that the root of the use of the word in this way comes from its meaning as ‘female genitalia’. By the by, where does ‘wuss’ originate from?
True. I don’t know. Just to me I think it’s interesting that two words that mean the same thing vary wildly on the taboo/offense scale.
Personally i like the Mark Thomas joke that women should use “clitoris” as an insult as it’s a word men would never use:
“Fuck off you fucking clitoris!”
“Don’t use words you can’t find”
I see what you mean about the bystanders thing. Though of course we don’t want to go so far down that road as to say “well you can’t even comment about racism, you’re white”. I’d like to think i acknowledge my response is subjective, which is why i’ve been asking my female mates about it.
I’ll see if i still have any notes from my semiotics lectures (unlikely) but the thought i’m failing to articulate i’m sure is something i learnt there: That there is often a gap between what is intended, and what is received.
Well i’m glad i’m not imagining that this subject is banging on a bit, but I guess i’m interested too. Either that or very bored. Hmmmm.
TBH I realised (when walking home) that a) I never use “pussy” in any context, and b) I freely use the word Cunt on a daily basis – as an insult, as a term of endearment, as a random swearword when “fuck” doesnt quite fit.
I have no idea why…
“By the by, where does ‘wuss’ originate from?”
I said on one of the earlier threads on this (some time back in the 14th century) that I’d always assumed it was a euphemism for ‘pussy’ – and then looked it up and what I found seemed to corroborate that, and two or three commenters also thought that was right. The origin is uncertain, and the euphemism is a best guess. (This of course supports the claim that pussy doesn’t just mean kitty.)
No, quite, I was careful not to put it as strongly as ‘you can’t even comment.’ But on the other hand just ‘I’ve never heard it that way’ has obvious limitations in this kind of subject.
Yeah the subject is definitely banging on – but what’s driving that is not at all my sense of its relative importance but rather all the ambiguity and uncertaintly and conflicting accounts. It’s an epistemic issue. I really think it’s worth exploring, as a matter of interest, the pursuit of knowledge and understanding, etc. Several people on the WMST list expressed strong interest too.
Now…if the word were universally used as a term of endearment as well as an insult…that really would do a lot to take the sting out. But that’s not even close to happening here.
Permit me to derail these comments further?
If any of you aren’t sufficiently dirty as of yet, and wish to dive deeper in the Mud, I have an example for you- type ‘Bill Hicks – The Chicago Show 1989’ into Youtube, for an instance of a women being verbally assaulted with Cunt, which does seem to be an epithet innately laden with a vicious hatred.
Well, the desensitization process is nearly complete. The word has lost enough of it’s shock value over the past couple of weeks that when OB said: “Well, cunt isn’t a different sort of thing in the US – but it clearly works differently in the UK.” My first thought was “You mean to tell me that in the UK they actually can make lemonade with their vaginas? Next you’ll be telling me that there is some tasty fudge waiting around the corner.”
Oh come on, we haven’t been at this for two whole weeks! Hardly more than one…
Oh great, I can see my facebook status now: “has been discussing cunt for two weeks”
Poetry corner, some light relief for you foul-mouthed muthafuckas:
“What is it that these crude words are revealing?
What is it that this aggro act implies?
Giving the dead their xenophobic feeling
or just a cri-de-coeur because man dies?
So what’s a cri-de-coeur, cunt? Can’t you speak
the language that yer mam spoke. Think of ‘er!
Can yer only get yer tongue round fucking Greek?
Go and fuck yourself with cri-de-coeur!
‘She didn’t talk like you do for a start!’
I shouted, turning where I thought the voice had been.
She didn’t understand yer fucking ‘art’!
She thought yer fucking poetry obscene!
I wish on this skin’s words deep aspirations,
first the prayer for my parents I can’t make,
then a call to Britain and to all nations
made in the name of love for peace’s sake.
Aspirations, cunt! Folk on t’fucking dole
‘ave got about as much scope to aspire
above the shit they’re dumped in, cunt, as coal
aspires to be chucked on t’fucking fire. “
…
– from Tony Harrison’s poem ‘V’
http://plagiarist.com/poetry/5618/
What really bugs me is that there is no non-medical, non-formal, non-offensive friendly name for a girl’s bits – a set of female counterparts for ‘willy’, ‘balls’ etc….
Insults and swearwords we have plenty of, but on this we are really lost for words.
True OB, the focus on specific words hasn’t been as long as I said. I guess I was thinking more of the wave of general misogyny discussions that swept through scienceblog recently.
Maya, I have heard hoo-hoo and bajingo used fairly commonly in the US when children are present. Would these count? Hoo-hoo seems to be pee-pee’s counterpart. Not even going to guess where bajingo came from, or even if I’m close to spelling it right. I first remember hearing it on the sitcom Scrubs.
(This of course supports the claim that pussy doesn’t just mean kitty.)
Pretty sure nobody here has made that claim. All of this argy-bargy originated in order to counter the contention that it could only mean cunt. It’d be nice if the hammer-wielding created a little less dust.
_____
Oh shut up, Adam.
The problem with sexual meanings of words is that they tend to take over the word. Like “gay”–few if any people use it to mean “happy” any more. Or “queer”–few if any people use it to mean “weird.” The same thing has happened with pussy and cunt, if cunt ever meant anything different, which I don’t believe it did. So, apart from common experience (which tells me that no English-speaker in the US, Canada, or the UK would use ‘pussy’ as an insult to mean ‘cat’), I don’t buy that the sexual meaning of the word can be just one other meaning. The sexual meaning becomes the whole meaning.
And John Meredith: a man wouldn’t shout “cock” or “dick” in the same circumstances, i.e. to another man walking down a dark street. It probably wouldn’t occur to him, though it might occur to him to shout “fag.” The connotations of “cock” are just too different than that of “cunt”. “Cunt” reminds the woman that she is a mere female, and worthless because of it. There are no similar ideas about mere males. Being a dick or a prick means you’re obnoxious or mean; “cock” is just a crudity and rarely used as an epithet. “Cunt” has dehumanizing implications above and beyond that, no matter how it acquired those implications. Being called male genitalia means you’re probably being overly aggressive or unkind, not that you’re worthless.
Why? Well, in a male-dominated culture, being reduced to nothing more than male genitalia is simply not as insulting as being reduced to nothing more than female genitalia. A reference to female genitalia has connotations of weakness and worthlessness and vulnerability that a reference male genitalia does not.
Shorter me: being reminded that you’re just a male is no insult in a patriarchal society. Being reminded you’re just a female is.
Empty signs make the most noise.
To tie this back to an earlier discussion, the rudest word on Tanna is “hambag”. I’ll give you one guess what it means. That’s right! It means “cat”. Because one translation would be “pussy”, and so it must refer to domestic felines even (particularly?) when the force and etymology of the word indicates all but decisively otherwise.
Sorry I’m joining this discussion late. And I apologize in advance if what I’m about to say causes irritation… and for the length of the comment.
First, a historical point of interest: the derogatory sense of ‘pussy’ predates the use of the word to mean either ‘vagina’ or ‘cat’ by some 200 years (source: OED). When the word first appeared it was a term of affection for a woman or girl, with the slang secondary meaning of ‘an effeminate man or homosexual’. Of course the very concept of ‘effeminate man’ as a derogative is sexist – but the insulting sense of the word was (a) originally limited to men and (b) unrelated to the vagina in any way. Very likely the later extension of the word to mean vagina added impetus to the long-established sense of the word, but ‘pussy’ is not a solid data point in the ‘cognates for vagina = insults’ theory.
On the specific subject of ‘cunt’, I’m guilty of the fairly casual use of the word as a derogative (though naturally with awareness of the company in which I find myself). For me, at least, the word has become distanced from its original physiological meaning: I never use it with reference to the vagina, I use it without gender preference, and I also use derivatives of the word which would make no sense if I was taking it is any way as still having its original meaning (the adjective ‘cunting’, for example: there is no verb ‘to cunt’, and no correlating action).
I see the insult ‘cunt’ as meaning ‘viciously unpleasant person’ – and as an insult that is all it means to me. Suggesting that I think of it like this because it also means ‘vagina’ and because I somehow hate women is as absurd as suggesting that I might call a cowardly friend a ‘pussy’ because I think he or she is like an attractive girl (yes, ‘pussy’ is also gender-neutral in my usage).
I actually wonder (and this is a very tentative hypothesis) whether increasing casualness about the use of the word ‘cunt’ is not actually evidence that the taboo significance of the vagina has been/is being largely lost? ‘Cunt’ has legacy taboo value, but no real taboo meaning for me; in this it is akin to, say, blasphemous terms, which I use routinely despite the fact that the historical root of their taboo power has no relevance to me. (I would certainly suggest that when discussing where the taboo value of ‘cunt’ comes from and hence ‘what it says about people who use it’, we should consider the counter-case of blasphemous terms: even born-and-bred secularists like myself use things like ‘Jesus Christ’ as oaths, but it doesn’t mean we are taking anyone’s name in vain. Legacy taboo value, as I said).
Finally, an addendum: I use the word ‘cunt’ as an insult, as I said, but I generally find its use for the female external genitalia very distasteful (Greer’s seminal-ish essay notwithstanding). As it happens, my preferred term for the vagina is ‘orchid’: I consider the organ extremely beautiful, which doesn’t really fit the hypothesis that I use ‘cunt’ pejoratively because of my attitudes to the vagina…
“the trope which asserts that female genitalia are dirty and smelly”
Sorry, but you’ve obviously never been down on a woman in the heat of the moment, before she’s had a chance to shower. To pre-empt your observation, no I don’t think my dick smells of roses either.
Look, I can call another bloke a twat just as I can call a girl a prick and neither have any more significant meaning when the terms are reversed. I think you’re just being a massive prude with this whole sexist epithet thing.
Hey outeast, long time no see.
“Suggesting that I think of it like this because it also means ‘vagina’ and because I somehow hate women is as absurd as suggesting that I might call a cowardly friend a ‘pussy’ because I think he or she is like an attractive girl”
The comment as a whole is admirably lucid but that bit strikes me as confused. My point (at least, and probably that of others) has never been about individual agency or blame – it’s always been about the general connotation of the words. It’s been social, if you like. Intentions aren’t really the point; the point is effects. Whatever X may intend by saying cunt or pussy to mean ‘viciously unpleasant person’ or coward or sneak – the effect can still be different from what X intends.
To return to a multiply-repeated example…it’s interesting that people don’t try to make this claim about ‘nigger’ – that is, comparable people. White people don’t. Yet men make it about a word that some women say is very much about women and very much not complimentary. I continue to find this telling.
“I think you’re just being a massive prude with this whole sexist epithet thing.”
Ah yes – the old ‘feminism is just old-fashioned prudery’ trope. I’m sure you do think that, but you think wrong. The issue is nothing to do with obscenity or prudery, it’s to do with inequality and the use of group-epithets as a way of keeping people down. (No, not down as in ‘down on a woman,’ just down.)
Just a thought but is “Nigger” really comparable to “Cunt”?
Maybe it is, but I just think the history/connotations of the word are worse than “cunt”.
i.e. whilst women have suffered appalling oppression/exploitation down the ages by men, is it the same as the wholesale enslavery and exploitation of an entire peoples?
to pick but one example – just look at the Genocide of the the aboriginals of trinidad & tobago. I can’t think of a comparable situation for women – i.e. where all the women of a certain nation were murdered and supplanted with a new one put there by slavers.
I dunno. Maybe it’s because i’ve never studied womens studies but i have studied (post)colonial writings – I’m just not sure it has the same “weight” as Nigger.
I am more than happy to be proved wrong on this of course.
Oh, fuck.
Yes, hello OB. I’ve missed the erudite (and less-than-!) conversations here…
I know you’re tired of this topic, so I’ll try to keep this brief – I just want to respond to what you said.
I understand the distinction between intent and interpretation, of course, and (very obviously) part of communication is about being aware of the potential for misinterpretation and using language with sensitivity to one’s audience. That’s fine… communication requires compromise. I’m unconvinced that this means that a word which is potentially ambiguous or subject to different interpretations should thus be considered generally off-limits. (‘Cunt’ is of course a very strong epithet regardless of its genital or gendered implications, so its ambiguity is limited to the very specific issues we’re discussing here; arguably it should be considered off-limits for its general offensiveness regardless of its possible sexism, but that’s a distraction).
The user of a word has a responsibility to be audience-sensitive, but in my opinion the listener shares responsibility: we should always be open to the possibility that a given word may not carry the same weight for one user as it does for another, and should not be too quick to judge others for their linguistic choices without first considering this issue.
‘Nigger’ is a poor point of comparison since at least in the modern world it has (as far as I know, and outside of in-group use) no sense other than the racially pejorative. Some other racial labels might bear comparison, though: ‘Paki’, perhaps. As a British English speaker, I consider ‘Paki’ to be a racial slur and I expect people not to use it. It would be irresponsible of me as a listener, however, to be unwilling to accept that an American who uses the term might have no racist intent at all – though equally I would expect said American to accept its implications for me and to avoid its use in conversation with me in future, much as I would not use ‘cunt’ in conversation with anyone I knew or feared might find it offensively sexist. (I can think of other comparable examples, such as gypsy. I can’t really think of any that are especially pertinent to any group of which I am a part, but I can’t help belonging to the liberal-heterosexual-white-male-gentile hegemony – it’s not a membership-by-application club.)
General summation: where I disagree with you is in your claim that ‘Intentions aren’t really the point; the point is effects.’ I agree that effects are important and that people should consider the possibility that they will be misinterpreted, but I think it is the intention that matters most. And I think that we have a responsibility, in communication, to attempt to understand the speaker’s intention. This is a generalization for all communication, not one limited only to obviously fraught words.
I hope that’s not too confused…
“Oh, fuck.”
Was that directed at me?
If so, why? I really don’t see it’s comparable and have said why.
Even if we agree women have been enslaved in the same systematic way (Which I’m not convinced of) Give me some examples where women were only referred to as “Cunts” for hundreds of years and i’ll buy your argument. But as it is, no, I don’t think it’s the same. “Cunt” might mean vagina, but it was never just used to mean “Woman” – whereas “Nigger” only refers to race, not that races genitalia.
Just to be clear:
I’m not saying that women haven’t suffered the same amount of oppression as black Africans (and would you even measure that?!) but that the way that oppression manifested itself is clearly different. “Nigger” has direct reference back to that oppression (ie Slavery/Colonialism) – whereas “Cunt”, whilst a derogatory term, doesn’t.
No I damn well wouldn’t measure that, which is one reason I was repulsed by your measuring it. (Yes, of course ‘oh fuck’ was directed at you.)
Yes ‘cunt’ fucking well does. You just don’t get to be so confident of all this.
This is where second-wave feminism began, all those decades ago – with a lot of women realizing, with shock and surprise and increasing anger, that putatively progressive men just…didn’t…get it.
Men belittling the oppression of women can be very, very annoying.
outeast, sure, I agree with all that. I don’t think I do judge others for their linguistic choices, so much as I judge the choices themselves. (It’s probably different with people I know well in real life, but then such people don’t call people cunts or pussies in my hearing, which perhaps proves my point, whatever my point is, which I forget by now.) I don’t think it’s ever been about ‘YOU are being BAD’; it’s been about the usage. To the extent that it is about particular people, I agree that intention matters, but overall I think it’s the effect (and the shades of meaning) I’ve been interested in.
“Yes ‘cunt’ fucking well does. You just don’t get to be so confident of all this.”
Saying it louder doesn’t make it anymore true… You’d destroy someone elses argument if they didn’t back it up, so why do the same yourself? Why is it the same?
Give me examples of where an entire mass (to be exact, a continent full) of women were called “cunts” exclusively for several hundred years. You can’t, because it didn’t happen. I’m not belittling the oppression of women, i’m pointing out that it is different from the oppression of Black Africans… i really don’t see this as controvesial.
Nigger is a word expressively derived from the colonial times and the enslavery of black africans, which is why it holds so much weight. I think this is self evident. Cunt on the other hand realtes to female genitalia, and the implication is feminine = bad/dirty – but it doesn’t realate directly. Hence, i think it’s different.
To be honest I think this argument is really missing the point. Dirty words aren’t the problem. You can be an evil racist or sexist fuck without ever using the words Cunt or Nigger.
Outeast: Wow. You’re awesome. Your two comments above are some of the clearest writing I’ve ever seen on t’internet. Or anywhere else for that matter.
Ophelia sez: “Yes ‘cunt’ fucking well does. You just don’t get to be so confident of all this.”
To be clear, Ophelia: you’re saying ‘cunt’ has direct reference back to oppression (of women), in the same way that ‘nigger’ does for the oppression of black people, yes?
If that is your point, then I don’t understand how *you’re* so confident.
It makes no sense for me to call you a nigger; you can’t call me a wop. But each of us could call the other a cunt because it’s a general purpose profanity (currently the top rated), whereas the others are specifically aimed at an entire class of people. Nigger, wop et al don’t make sense used in any other context (ignoring reclamations like “my nigga”). To be comparable, there would need to be a history of people using cunt specifically to mean “women” and little else. So far, I’ve seen nothing to support that.
As far as I can tell, the best evidence presented here for cunt being sexist (as opposed to “just” offensive) is that women are generally (very) offended by it and the top rated swear-word is based on the female genitalia, not male. Is there more? Or rather, is that enough?
(For the avoidance of doubt, I have in fact heard women call people cunts. Not particularly low-brow women, either.)
Tartovski – I’ve been backing up my argument for the past nine days over multiple posts and comments; I’m not going to start from scratch just in order to reply to a sloppy offhand unargued comment of yours.
If you mean merely that ‘cunt’ doesn’t refer to colonial oppression and chattel slavery, well no, it doesn’t, but that seems too obvious to be worth saying. I took you to mean it didn’t refer to oppression as such, and I see zero reason to take your word for that. It doesn’t have to mean exactly the same thing as ‘nigger’ in order to work the same way.
You think women aren’t very oppressed. You need to pay more attention (at least if you want to claim that here you do).
Owen, no; see above.
“it’s a general purpose profanity”
Sigh. In the UK it is – in the US it is not. How many times do I have to say that before UK readers manage to take it in? Both ‘pussy’ and ‘cunt’ work differently in the US from the way they work in the UK.
Women (in the US) are more than merely ‘offended’ by it.
I’m getting very very very very very sick of British men parochially insisting that ‘cunt’ has nothing to do with women – in fact it makes me feel like ditching the whole fucking enterprise. So let’s everybody shut up now – before you start calling me a cunt, and then we can see how women take that.
The more I think about this the more pissed off I get. It’s as if it were 1968 and all the men were whinnying with laughter and telling the women to shut up and go make the coffee.
Look – if somebody tells you a word is profoundly insulting and degrading, is emphatically the same kind of thing as being called a nigger – and you’re not part of the group the word degrades (yes I know you say it doesn’t refer to women, but in the US [at least] it does) – then there’s something really…distasteful about insisting otherwise. I keep trying to make that point, and then along come more men who are too rude or thick to get it. You wouldn’t argue this if the word were considered racist, I bet – but if it’s just a woman, hey, go right ahead.
“But each of us could call the other a cunt because it’s a general purpose profanity (currently the top rated), whereas the others are specifically aimed at an entire class of people.”
No we god damn well could not. You, to be exact, could not call me that – because (as far as I’m concerned) the word is indeed, precisely, aimed at an entire class of people. Women. Me.
Just one more thing.
“To be honest I think this argument is really missing the point. Dirty words aren’t the problem. You can be an evil racist or sexist fuck without ever using the words Cunt or Nigger.”
No fucking kidding. You’ve already done the whole schtick about how words are not as important as other kinds of opression, and I’ve done the sarcastic schtick meaning no fucking kidding; why say it all over again? Also, why say it at all? Why keep telling me what to talk about? If you don’t like it, don’t read it, but I get to decide what to talk about on my site. And why say it anyway? You say you’ve been reading B&W for awhile – well do you seriously think I don’t know that one can be an evil racist or sexist fuck without ever using the words ‘cunt’ or ‘nigger’? Do you seriously think I’m that stupid? Have you not noticed previous coverage here of other instantiations of racism and sexism? Why are you so patronizing?
I feel like snarling a lot of insulting epithets, but I’ll restrain myself. I hope.
Just one minor (final from me) comment: I retain my sense of the word ‘cunt’, but as a result of this discussion I intend to be much more cautious of how I use it in future.
When I use an offensive epithet, I do want it to be understood in the sense I intend it: I certainly have no interest in avoiding offense per se, but I would hate for someone to be offended for the wrong reasons.
outeast,
I think that’s precisely what I’m getting at. I’ve belatedly figured out that there’s frequently been confusion between descriptive and normative here, including from me. I can accept the descriptive account – ‘cunt’ is used this way in the UK, that way in the US (and Australia seems to be somewhere between the two – close to the UK usage but with infiltration from the US). I cannot accept the normative account of punkscience and Tartovski and Owen – ‘cunt’ should be used the UK way, in the UK and everywhere else too, and people who think otherwise are prudes or pedants or whiners or point-missers.
There’s also some overlap between descriptive and normative. I think it’s true that the UK usage (given that everybody admits that everybody knows what the word means) conveys contempt for women even if the speakers don’t realize it, and I think that putative fact feeds into my normative opinions about it. I also realize I could be wrong about the putative fact (as could those who disagree with me about the putative fact).
“When I use an offensive epithet, I do want it to be understood in the sense I intend it…”
Well quite! What good is it otherwise?!
:- )
Ophelia: “Owen, no; see above”
I don’t think women aren’t very oppressed; I’m not making the same argument as Tartovski. However bad the oppression of black people has been in the last few hundred years, I consider the experience of women over a much longer period to be much worse. Things may have improved somewhat in the west in recent generations, but for most of recorded history in most societies women have been treated as possessions of, and subservient to, the dominant males. And anyway, any comparison with black oppression has to take into account the fact that black women would have had it worse than black men.
I repeat: I’m not arguing women aren’t oppressed. Your work here alone would have been enough to disabuse me of that notion if I hadn’t already left it behind years ago.
I also understand that many (most) women are very offended by the word, in both the UK and the US. (I didn’t say “merely”).
Ophelia: “No we god damn well could not. You, to be exact, could not call me that […]”
But surely, if I wanted to insult you, I could use it, and you’d be insulted. Deeply so. Conversely, if you — or anyone else — wanted to insult me, you could use it, and I too would be insulted. But if one of us called the other a nigger or wop, we’d be bemused or nonplussed rather than deeply insulted. They just don’t work as insults outside their built-in target groups.
Whether cunt works as a specifically female insult, it *also* works as a general purpose insult. That’s what makes it different to nigger. Over and above its effect on women, it can also insult men in a way that nigger doesn’t for white people.
I’m not arguing the offence felt by women isn’t real, or it should be ignored. I’m trying to see exactly where it comes from. For the record, I wouldn’t use the word around women generally, bar the small handful who have used it themselves in my presence. But I also wouldn’t say fuck, cock, wank, shit etc, without knowing something about the attitudes to swearing of the people around me. I’m not offended by any of these words, but that doesn’t mean I don’t recognise that other people are.
Ophelia: “I cannot accept the normative account of punkscience and Tartovski and Owen – ‘cunt’ should be used the UK way […]”
I can’t speak for the other two named there, but I’m not saying it *should* be used the UK way. I’m actually being rather more arrogant to be honest: I’m claiming it *is* used the UK way, which I accept is outrageously contentious in this context and needs far more than just an assertion. I’ll try and back that up properly later, or withdraw it.
Ophelia: “I think it’s true that the UK usage (given that everybody admits that everybody knows what the word means) conveys contempt for women *even if the speakers don’t realize it*”
This doesn’t scan for me at all. I think there’s some subtle equivocation about “meaning” going on.
Words don’t have an objective meaning. Words are just sounds. “Meaning” is all tied up in the mental map of connections between concepts we keep in our heads. Different people have varying degrees of difference between their internal maps. The closer your upbringing, environment, and so on, the better synced your mental maps will be but there’s always going to be subtle differences.
Words are labels attached to these concepts. There isn’t a one-to-one correspondence, and again, different people will have their labels assigned in variously different ways. To explain something, I first have to convert it into speech — a lossy, low-fidelity form of compression. The words used then trigger connections in your own map, and hopefully the concept I had in my head will now be mirrored in yours. This relies on you having a compatible map to fill in the missing parts caused by the lossy compression. Where the maps are too different to start with the message will get garbled somewhat and allowance has to be made for that. (I give you the never-ending “atheist/agnostic” definition wars as a case in point.)
I don’t think any of that is contentious, and I apologise for perhaps stating the obvious.
To the point: in my mapping “cunt” is associated with female genitalia, and with profanity. It is *strongly* linked to profanity, and only lightly to genitalia. And, until this discussion, not associated at all with “offends women due to history of oppression”. There is a link to “offends women”, but it’s strongly associated with the profanity connection rather than anything else. (There’s probably a better way of stating that last one, but I hope my intention is clear enough.)
So, when the other day my computer played up and I said “fuckbollockswankcuntshit”, I claim it was an example of profanity caused by frustration with my PC, and not a symbol of contempt for women. How could it be otherwise? At that time cunt didn’t have that association in my mental map. Nor was it contempt for women that drove my female colleague to refer to the “fucking cunting football season”. Neither of us have (or rather, had) the associations with “cunt” that you seem to.
Does any of that make me seem less like an arse?
(Oh, and once again, I agree with outeast.)
Owen –
Oh – yeh, it does. I misunderstood you. Whew! I’m glad the list is one shorter.
I agree about meaning. What I meant about conveying contempt for women even if the speakers don’t realize it was that speakers can’t know what meanings can be triggered in other people’s heads – and with a word like ‘cunt’ it’s just way too much to claim that it’s now so neutralized that no one gets another little jolt of contempt-for-women from hearing it. Maybe that will be true in another generation or so – but not yet. (And I have doubts even about that, but I’ll let them sleep.)
“I don’t think women aren’t very oppressed; I’m not making the same argument as Tartovski.”
Where did I say that?! In fact I said earlier I wasn’t sayign that… To be clear: I was discussing the specific point that the words “nigger” & “cunt” are comparable. I said the opression of women was different to the oppression of black africans – and meant precisely that. To my mind, I don’t think the words have the same connotations for the reasons i stated. Though, having thought about it I guess this has alot to do with different ways the word is used in the UK to the US.
Now having read the last few posts I think owen pretty much sums up my position rather well – I don’t see “cunt” as offensive as OB does, because we don’t have the same associations.
Can I be taken off the Arse list too?
One final point about received offense – does this mean we can’t be rude to batshit religions now? I mean, we know we are only attacking the IDEA that sky fairies rule the world, but to the people who hold those views they will think we are attacking them and will get offended…
“Though, having thought about it I guess this has alot to do with different ways the word is used in the UK to the US.”
That’s what I said – about six times.
No, you’re still kind of on the arse list, if only because of not listening and thus wasting my time.
No of course it doesn’t mean that for reasons I have already explained.
Ophelia: “Oh – yeh, it does. I misunderstood you. Whew! I’m glad the list is one shorter.”
Oh thank god. I probably shouldn’t admit this, but I’m a complete fanboi, and the idea that I’d pissed you off quite so thoroughly was causing me some genuine distress!
And relax.
Tartovski: “Where did I say that?! In fact I said earlier I wasn’t sayign that”
My apologies. I’ve tried to keep everyone’s position clear in my head as I’ve gone along, but it’s been getting increasingly difficult.
“different ways the word is used in the UK to the US”
Ack. That bit still gets me. If I build up the nerve, I’m going to try to make a case for the difference not being as large as has being argued here.
But things are calming down now, and I could do without the hit to my blood pressure, so maybe I’ll just pretend I never thought it and move on…
Ophelia: “conveying contempt [because] speakers can’t know what meanings can be triggered in other people’s heads”
If we’re saying it’s possible for contempt to be received where none is transmitted, then I can agree with that.
Owen,
Hey by all means admit the fanboi thing! Why not after all?!
Sorry about the genuine distress.
“If we’re saying it’s possible for contempt to be received where none is transmitted”
Yeh that’s what I mean.
As it happens, I’m just reading this:
“There are only three things the guys let you be if you’re a girl in the military – a bitch, a ho, or a dyke. You’re a bitch if you won’t sleep with them. A ho if you’ve even got one boyfriend. A dyke if they don’t like you. So you can’t win.”
“No, you’re still kind of on the arse list, if only because of not listening and thus wasting my time.”
Time is an illusion… lunchtime doubley so. ;)
To be fair to me, trying to keep up is quote hard. I’ve read most of this whilst distracted at work which might explain the rougness of my posts, so please forgive me?
The whole descriptive/normative thing came in after my main posting at least…
Can you point me to which post where you’ve explained about the religion thing? I’m fairly sure i know why it;s different, but just to be intersted to see how you phrased it.
PS – do you have T-shirts for us fanboi yet?
Okay, okay, I forgive you. (Pesky work, distracting you from commenting on blogs! Bastards!)
I think the explaining about the religion thing was in comments, not a post – probably among the throng of comments on ‘Knowing what words mean.’
That, and many other reasons, is why i should quit!
Hmmm. I shall have a look when I have time…
No, the shock value of ‘cunt’ comes from the fact that it expresses contempt for and hatred of women.
It’s no good starting the argument over again from the beginning after 102 comments. That’s just stupid, and rude.