The New Profanity
/By Don Varyu
Jan 2025
Note: On this website, we try to avoid profanity. Not because we’re prudes, but because using profanity is just lazy; there are always more meaningful ways to make a point. However, the following article is a glaring exception because its topic is “bad words.” If this offends you, maybe best to just skip it.
here are words you just can’t say. Every culture has had them—they will always be around. But the definition of what’s forbidden can change. In fact, the nature of “swear words” is shifting in a significant way right now. And this says a lot about where we’ve come as a society.
The term profanity is commonly used to describe these words. Across history, profanity has drawn almost exclusively from three specific topics: religion, sex, and the human body. (Think about your favorite swear words or phrases. There’s an almost 100% probability they fall into one, or more, of these three categories).
In the 1970’s, comedian George Carlin had a hugely popular bit where he identified the “seven dirty words” that could never be uttered on television. He identified these for a very specific reason. They were ones that could not be used in any other, non-offensive context. Thus, he excluded “bitch” (also, a female dog), or “bastard” (child of unmarried parents). What he was left with were seven that had no alternative, benign meaning. These were “bad” in every case--through and through. These were: “shit”, “piss”, “cunt”, “fuck”, “motherfucker”, “cocksucker” and “tits”.
These were banished from all polite society, as well as popular media. But in the ensuing half century, some have gained entry, at least into select media, and to virtually all of the Internet.
Among these, most prominent is “fuck,” a word that every GI fighting in World War heard and probably used multiple times a day. But once those guys were back state side, it was never uttered in public. That meant on the street…within a family…or even in private with a wife. Today, “fuck” is second nature in the daily conversations of most young people.
“Shit”, ” piss”, “tits” and even “motherfucker” aren’t even given a second thought when scripts are written for cable TV or movies. However, “cunt” and “cocksucker” remain pretty much off-limits. We’ll get to the reasons in a bit.
The return of presently “unbanned” swear words could be written off to just looser morals, or the fact that anything can become normalized with wider usage. A hundred years ago, a woman walking onto a beach in a bikini probably would have been arrested.
But there’s more at work here in explaining the changing nature of profanity.
f you think back to the three classic categories of profanity—religion, sex, and the human body—two have become far less objectionable. Some may still grimace when they hear it, but “shit” is all around us. And as mentioned, “fuck” has now moved into the polymorphous realms of verb, noun, adjective, and adverb…as well as both exclamation and question. For both sex and the human body, the walls of suppression are crumbling away.
However, for the other category—religion—more rigorous protections are actively being erected. Two common profane phrases for many centuries—“God damn it!” and “Jesus Christ!”—are all but disappearing from public media. God forbid that anyone on the religious right be offended. Profits ight be affected! Once only children were taught not to “take the Lord’s name in vain.” Now, that warning apparenlty applies to everyone.
And religious protections have not only been reinforced, but extended in the realm of public usage. Every newscaster and politician reflexively offers “thoughts and prayers” in the wake of any tragedy—even though presumably the God being prayed to is the same superman who ordered or condoned the disaster in the first place.
n this new definition of profanity, not only religion is awarded special protection. So does every other qualifying identity group. “Cunt” is uniformly derogatory to all women in all situations. And “cocksucker” stays on the no-fly list not because of overt vulgarity, but because it offends some male homosexuals.
In fact, this development creates an entirely new sector to join previous residents religion, sex and body as profanity superstars. Welcome to the the new entry of race and ethnicity porn.
Look, I know this is a touchy area. And I know many will find this topic offensive. But I ask the open-minded to decide if this new development is helpingor hurting our society.
hen I was a kid (and I’m not saying it was OK), every race and ethnicity had multiple nicknames—sometimes used in a demeaning way, sometimes merely in a descriptive sense. For example, Polish people were often branded as “dumb Pollocks,” but at the same time someone could be identified as living “over by the Pollock neighborhood.” When those WWII vets referred to “Japs,” granted it was almost always in a seething tone. But other people would matter-of-factly observe, “the Japs make the best electronics.”
Today, you’re free to accuse someone of raping his own mother, just as long as yhou don’t brand him a “Mick” or a “spic.”
Moreove, it has come to pass that context no longer applies to “identity profanity”—it is wrong in virtually every situation. To put this reductively, feelings must never be violated.
Here are a few questions that make identity profanity so vexing:
Who decides what’s unacceptable? In the early 1970’s, 55 of Stanford’s thousands of students signed a petition. It called on the university’s administrators to banish the school’s nickname and mascot: the “Indians”. It was, they asserted, demeaning to native Americans. The school ultimately agreed. Stanford is now the “Cardinal” and its symbol is a tree.
Over the years, similar high-profile battles erupted. North Dakota State retired its nickname, “the Fighting Sioux,” despite continued support for the name by local Sioux tribes. The NFL’s Washington Redskins changed its name to the “Commanders,” while MLB’s Cleveland Indians became the “Guardians”.
In 2016, in the midst of the “Redskins” furor, a Washington Post national survey found that only nine percent of Native Americans were offended by the “Redskins” name. Other surveys found almost as little concern among Native Americans for use of the words “Indian” or “brave.” In fact, many Native Americans actively support the continued use of these images and names because they believe such displays help build positive “visibility” for their tribes.
In fact, in Seattle, the MLS Seattle Sounders recently announced a new marketing partnership with the Puyallup tribe. On the sign boards surrounding the pitch, the tribe proudly identifies itself not simply as the “Puyallup Tribe”—but the “Puyallup tribe of Indians” (emphasis added). So, to repeat, who gets to decide?
Who is allowed to use certain profanity? Inarguably, the most offensive of all identity profanity is the word “nigga” (you know the full word). And this is for good reason. However, the word is now commonplace in nearly every cable TV show or movie featuring a majority black cast. It also seems ubiquitous in rap music—although I’m no expert. In any case, it seems OK to use for some people, but not for others—and the distinction is made on the basis of the color of one’s skin. College courses are being taught on the proper use of this single word. And in fact, there is far from a consensus among black people as to its whether it is ever appropriate for anyone. When I once mentioned this contradiction to a black friend, she said, “you just don’t understand.” And to that, I plead entirely guilty—I definitely do NOT understand. *
Similarly, young boys from “good families” are taught never to address women as “bitches.” Yet any reality TV show featuring a large group of women will inevitably hear them freely describing each other thisway. Again, I don’t understand.
Why do some areas of America celebrate things that are unacceptable in others? To return briefly to the Native American example, MLB’s Atlanta Braves strongly cling not only to their nickname, but also welcome its crowd’s favorite form of fan support--the “tomahawk chop.” Here, fans stand with one arm extended, palms opened vertically. Then the arm is bent repestedly at the elbow, with forearm rhythmically raised and lowered in time with “Indian” music. Dozens of colleges across the country have abandoned Native American nicknames as violent as “Savages”, or as seemingly benign as “Moccasins”. However, the “Seminoles” of Florida State University continue to fight on. Did I mention that there are things I do not understand?
Is any group immune from profanity protections? Why, yes, there is!—my fellow old white guys! Those last three words individually form the trifecta of permitted mockery and stereotyping. They call us “old farts” and “the white patriarchy”. And do you know how we respond? We don’t. Call us whatever you want. Life goes on.
Does any of this protections really matter? There’s no conclusive answer to this question. But I will note that at Stanford, where those 55 kids petitioned to protect Native Americans, progress is mighty slow. In the most recent school year census, there were some 16,000 students on campus; but the school reports that only 59 were Native American. And the university’s own internal census identified not one faculty member as Native American.
Moreover, in the last election one third of minority voters cast ballots for Trump.
o, what’s the answer here? To me, it’s pretty easy. Stop trying to make people immune from insults, stereotyping and “harmful” language. It will always be with us. It’s not only that it’s pointless, but self-defeating. That’s because MAGA uses this to paint all of the Democratic Party as out-of-touch, “woke” wonks. We’re seen by them as having no emotuional muscle.
To be certain, feelings are real, and no one wants them hurt. But feelings don’t buy your groceries or pay your rent. When expressed as protections for identity groups, feelings are a luxury item. The largest “identity group” in America is, in fact, a majority—the 90%+ of people in the country who think more about bills than blasphemies.
The proper antidote to all this is free speech. Profanity will never go away, so just take the insult and move on.
Fight for rightrs, not feelings.
This is the way forward—I swear.
* CNN on race:
How come White people can’t use the n-word but some Black people say it all the time?
Professor Neal Lester, who teaches a course on the n-word at Arizona State University, explains why this question is so loaded.
There is an undeniable double standard in the use of the n-word. Some Black people freely use it in intimate conversations with one another. Black hip-hop artists use it in their lyrics. Black comedians such as Richard Pryor and Chris Rock have been notorious for using the n-word in their stand-up acts.
So why then, is it okay for Black people to use it and not Whites?
There’s no one answer to that question. Some Black people say the word is too repulsive to use in any context, even by other Black folks. They claim that using it reflects “internalized oppression”: Black people unwittingly accepting racist stereotypes.
But other Black people say they can use the n-word because they have “reclaimed” it and taken the sting out of a slur by using the word as a term of endearment.
If that doesn’t make sense, consider this comparison. Some women who call each other “b*tch” make a similar claim: We use it as a term of affection.
Some Black people who use the n-word follow the same logic. Since we have uniquely suffered from the use of the n-word, we’re the only ones who have the right to use it. When we reclaim it, we can use it any way we want. For them, using the n-word isn’t repeating a racial slur; it’s an act of defiance.
—John Blake
