Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by danni_bella)
    Because they don't understand (or shouldn't understand!) what these words mean, and tbh what they mean is often pretty graphic!

    I am determined to make sure my future child (or children) does not (do not) swear, at least in front of me anyway.

    Also it's not very classy to use swear words IMO, unless it's because of an extreme circumstance where it makes sense to use it.
    (Original post by 4_sophia)
    I'm a complete prude, I hate swearing just in everyday chat! So pointless! To me it just shows a lack of class/immaturity...

    So is swearing now a class thing?
    And if it is, is that a good thing?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    OK maybe put it in the wrong way. I think it's trashy to swear. I'm not saying people from a certain so called 'class' swear and those from a different class don't. My bad.
    Mainly I think it shows a lack of intelligence... I did say I'm a bit of a prude though when it comes to swearing!!!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    When I hear children swear, my opinion of whoever the parents are is immeditately lowered.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 4_sophia)
    OK maybe put it in the wrong way. I think it's trashy to swear. I'm not saying people from a certain so called 'class' swear and those from a different class don't. My bad.
    Mainly I think it shows a lack of intelligence... I did say I'm a bit of a prude though when it comes to swearing!!!
    I know this isn't what you meant but this is now an image I can't get out of my head, "YOU SHALL NOT SWEAR!:fuhrer: !"
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I suppose people view children as being true and innocent and a bastion of good in an evil world. Swearing is associated with hatred and violence, and as such these words would serve only to taint the "innocence" of childhood.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Children rarely know how to use naughty words properly, so we should tell them not to.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    (Original post by MSB)
    I think this post has it correctly.

    The whole point of swear words is that they are offensive and that you are told when you are a child not to use them. The whole pleasure of using one of that special collection of 'naughty' words is that you shouldn't be using them. The whole force and satisfaction in a good, loud profanity is that other people are likely to be shocked by it.

    You should censor, discourage, withhold and hide swear words, so that when you do need to pull one out into the sunlight, it will be profane, shocking and unfamiliar, rather than tired and familiar.

    If you like to use swear words, you should discourage their use. It's the game. Anyone who says 'I like to swear, and I don't see why I shouldn't teach children to use swear words regularly' is entirely misguided.
    So you're saying that the restrictions - the censure of parents, the unacceptability in school settings, the restrictions on television and film - are nothing more than part of an elaborate, institutionalised language game?

    People are often punished for (and for letting) swearing on television when children might be watching. Isn't that going too far for a game?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kolya)
    So you're saying that the restrictions - the censure of parents, the unacceptability in school settings, the restrictions on television and film - are nothing more than part of an elaborate, institutionalised language game?

    People are often punished for (and for letting) swearing on television when children might be watching. Isn't that going too far for a game?
    Swearing does seem to have some of the characteristics of a Wittgensteinian language game (namely that it transgresses the rules in most circumstances, but can be allowed in a few).

    I mean, there is a certain degree of paranoia about language in the public arena. Personally I don't believe television companies/presenters or whatever they are in the circumstances should be punished for permitting profanity, but that's probably because I believe the parent has the duty of censor and not the state.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Andy the Anarchist)
    Swearing does seem to have some of the characteristics of a Wittgensteinian language game (namely that it transgresses the rules in most circumstances, but can be allowed in a few).

    I mean, there is a certain degree of paranoia about language in the public arena. Personally I don't believe television companies/presenters or whatever they are in the circumstances should be punished for permitting profanity, but that's probably because I believe the parent has the duty of censor and not the state.
    The problem is that it is incredibly hard for the parent to be the censor when profanity is often everywhere.

    I agree with the principle that parental responsibility is very important but it isn't helping with the amount of profanity out there, is it?
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by Kolya)
    Why are children taught not to swear, and why does children swearing cause uncomfortableness? Swearing plays an important part in most adult's vocabulary, so why are children taught not to do it?
    Interesting question. Swearing comes under those taboos which aren't outright; trivial usage or overusage tends to be the taboo and maybe that's why children are thus guided into recognition that they shouldn't swear. When they start to grow up they still fall into the use of swearing but they've been socialised into the taboo - use swearing sparingly in order to retain the effectiveness. It's a fascinating subject though - I wonder if all human languages/cultures have a taboo-language set? It's also interesting that such taboo words, at least in English, are connected to either sex (or sexual parts), violence ('bloody') or religion.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Don_Scott)
    The problem is that it is incredibly hard for the parent to be the censor when profanity is often everywhere.

    I agree with the principle that parental responsibility is very important but it isn't helping with the amount of profanity out there, is it?
    Well then I can only conclude that the "rules of the game" as it were are altering and that swearing is becoming more socially acceptable. Given the fact that the issue of swearing was only a social taboo, I don't have an especial problem. There will always be environments in which swearing is deemed socially unacceptable (usually in more formal settings) and these will be initially impervious to social change.

    Obviously, parents discouraging children's access to materials containing profanity when they are very young will prevent them misusing it to a large degree. Beyond the early ages, I see no reason why parents can't be honest to their children about the acceptability of swearing within different social environments, rather than treating it as an absolute taboo or pretending it doesn't exist.
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by Don_Scott)
    The problem is that it is incredibly hard for the parent to be the censor when profanity is often everywhere.

    I agree with the principle that parental responsibility is very important but it isn't helping with the amount of profanity out there, is it?
    I think there's something paradoxical about being over zealous with 'bad language' because it inadvertendly helps it actually retain power to offend or shock. It's the same with pornography, the more an attempt is made to hide away representations of human bodies or sexual behaviour the more they become 'a' thing', an unseen force to worry or be curious about.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kolya)
    So you're saying that the restrictions - the censure of parents, the unacceptability in school settings, the restrictions on television and film - are nothing more than part of an elaborate, institutionalised language game?

    People are often punished for (and for letting) swearing on television when children might be watching. Isn't that going too far for a game?
    To continue thinking of it as a 'game' (although the word is more down to by inability to express myself as well as I'd like), then the rules - if there could be any - are in the language itself, rather than in "institutionalised" actions, such as enforcing a TV watershed. The watershed is how Ofcom (or whoever) choose to play the 'game', rather than being a representation of the 'game' in its entirety. I believe the 'game' itself is deeper, and more fundamental, than that, following the rules I described in my previous post. Describing it as a 'game' has the problem of suggesting that it's trivial, or is played with amused detachment, when, instead, it is played with the greatest sincerity and, for the most part, without awareness of it as such. It's a 'game' with real players and real results. People really will be offended if you swear in their presence; they are not only pretending to be so for the sake of the 'game'.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    And nothing could play that part any better!

    One of the points the op has made is that it's through social conventions, which you're agreeing with, that children shouldn't swear, but why should the op force a child he has to conform to those social conventions?
    The OP doesn't have to force anyone, but the reason why children are told not to swear - is generally - it is unpleasant/bad mannered and just simply rude.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    So is swearing now a class thing?
    And if it is, is that a good thing?
    You have a point there, and I guess there is nothing wrong with not having class, fellow TSRian [I just prefer to act classy though than not].

    I hope you're not confusing class with economic class. I'm referring to the way people act and behave - if they have more respect for themselves and others, they're less likely to swear.

    And have anger management problems...
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 4_sophia)
    OK maybe put it in the wrong way. I think it's trashy to swear. I'm not saying people from a certain so called 'class' swear and those from a different class don't. My bad.
    Mainly I think it shows a lack of intelligence...
    This is what I meant too
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kolya)
    what is the nature of its rudeness? ...is the rudeness primarily a mostly_arbitrary social construction that requires us to conform (or otherwise risk social stigma), or is it primarily something intrinsic about swearing that means it is socially unacceptable?

    in other words, should we say "swearing is rude" (does it even make sense to say this or that word is intrinsically unacceptable?), or would it be better to say "others think swearing is rude and therefore we should make our children conform"?
    Swearing is rude because because the words in question have been hijacked and given a negative overtone. In the same way, terms such as 'gay' have been hijacked and given a very different meaning. At one time (not so long ago) if you described person/event as gay, you were basically saying they/it were lively, fun and friendly...now you'd be implying that they/it were homosexual.

    We have reached a point where people from Lesbos cannot even describe themselves accurately, because the term Lesbian has been hijacked.

    It's all a question of language use and perception.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by danni_bella)
    You have a point there, and I guess there is nothing wrong with not having class, fellow TSRian [I just prefer to act classy though than not].

    I hope you're not confusing class with economic class. I'm referring to the way people act and behave - if they have more respect for themselves and others, they're less likely to swear.

    And have anger management problems...
    I think the two concepts go hand in hand most of the time. If one acts "classy" does it not imply they are acting in a way which is "higher" in the economic class?

    (Original post by The Referee)

    We have reached a point where people from Lesbos cannot even describe themselves accurately, because the term Lesbian has been hijacked.
    :rofl:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    I think the two concepts go hand in hand most of the time. If one acts "classy" does it not imply they are acting in a way which is "higher" in the economic class?



    :rofl:
    It's hilarious but true!

    One girl I know described herself as 'Lesbian' in the same way as another of friends described herself as 'Lancastrian'...she spent the next 3 months fending off unwanted advances from other females!
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Referee)
    It's hilarious but true!

    One girl I know described herself as 'Lesbian' in the same way as another of friends described herself as 'Lancastrian'...she spent the next 3 months fending off unwanted advances from other females!
    I always presumed they'd pronounce is les-bos (as in the work place, someone is your boss) bian.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.