Fashionistas you have arrived 3-25-03 - 10-3-03

[robustpuppy]

Originally posted by ThurgreedMarshall [C-word discussion]

I was just thinking about Atticus's post, which started this whole discussion by saying "putting aside the c-word."

Then I remembered, didn't somebody once give Atticus a nasty nickname? And did that happen because Atticus was thought to be a woman?

Irony, or coincidence?

r(can't bring myself to write it this morning, just plain hate it, won't try to explain why)p

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally posted by ms. naughty diplomat
:eyeroll: maybe its because you can find men named dick, but you can't find women named cunt.

thus if i call you dick sebby, i could be simply calling you the wrong name, but if you call me cunt, i'd be sure that you are insulting me.

ms. naughty diplomat

You can't be serious.

TM

[ms. naughty diplomat]

Originally posted by ThurgreedMarshall
You can't be serious.

TM

i wasn't

although i do wonder why any guy would voluntarily use the name dick

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by purse junkie
No, I'm dead against allowing someone to sue over defamation for implying a lack of chastity--my whole point is that a woman being sexual should be viewed exactly as positively as it is for a man, so I won't support anything that implies that a double-standard is acceptable.

And Sebby, I'm with Anne Elk on the "c-word." Just like street harassment, it's often used as an implied sexual derogation and threat of violent action. The "d-word" simply doesn't have the same connotations and is generally used as a milder insult in milder situations. It's sexual, but just not used quite the same way.

p(suddenly thought of the implications if the boss walked in to notice a bunch of graphic sexual terms all over my computer screen)j

PJ,

I'm going way out on a limb here... I'm not sure I agree with this, but I'll throw it out there.

You say cunt implies sexual derogation and violence while dick does not? I don't see any violence in cunt at all. Derogation... absolutely, but no more than the derogation in dick. Someone else posted earlier that cunt implied "sperm receptacle" - which, literally, it partially does (that is one of the functions of that particular organ). I sometimes get the feeling that the right to insult is based on power, so is it possible maybe, that some women don't like the connotation of "sperm receptacle" in cunt because it reinforces the fact that women are biologically more passive than males in the sexual act? This is all a bit beyond me, but I seem to notice in society in general that its ok to insult whoever's "doing the fucking" while its tabboo to make fun of whoever's "getting fucked" (that is not sexist in any sense - there's just no way to massage that point in the time I have). I sometimes think that the "violence" you see in cunt is actually its reinforcing a primordial "fucker/fuckee" power dynamic.

I don't think that power dynamic exists any more or should exist - fot that reason, women complaining about cunt is a double standard.

S(Ain't no anthropologists - just throwing out a theory)D

[Anne Elk]

Originally posted by Not Bob
Words have power. It's not so much the literal meaning of the words, but all the cultural baggage that goes along with it. The chicks here have a point that calling someone a cunt is different from calling someone a dick, even though they are both slang words for gender specific and sexually related body parts.

Look at it this way -- the n-word is a disparaging word used to describe black people, and cracker is a disparaging word used to describe white people. Both are slurs directed towards skin color. Would you agree that I am probably less likely to be bothered by being called a cracker than TM would be bothered by being called the n-word?

(edited to add the "probably" part)

And yet, it is aceptable for black people to use the n-word amongst themselves. At least they do up here in the northeast, but if I use it (as a white woman) it becomes a slur.

Can't comment on cracker, never heard that one before.

I think "Dick" is less powerful than cunt or twat or vag etc. because it can be used as a first name (personally, I will never name any of my male children Richard).

There still exists the double-standard. A man with many sexual partners is studly, a woman with many sexual partners is a slut.

Based on our cultural background we all have a different opionion on what we interpret as insulting. That's probably why there are so many cuss words.

If you call me the c-word again, I'll throw my shoes at you!

[greatwhitenorthchick]

Originally posted by soup sandwich

But, if I were to refer to a woman as a cunt, it would mean that she is a really rotten, awful person. NOT that she is simply a sperm-receptacle. Men and women assign different meanings to the word. I was just wondering why.

I'm not sure they do. If I call someone a cunt, it means she is really pissing me off - it doesn't have anything to do with receiving sperm. Just if I call someone a dick, it means they're pissing me off - nothing to do with being a sperm-shooter.

I think one of the arguments is that when you dehumanize someone by reducing them to a body part, it is a grave insult. When you dehumanize them by reducing them to a sexual body part, it is an even worse insult. When you dehumanize them by reducing them to a (gasp) female sexual body part, it is the absolute worst (because in the traditional heirarchy of things, women are below men). So by calling someone a sperm-receiver, you don't have sperm-receiving on your mind, they are just a horrible person and you are searching for the gravest insult you can find (based on what society says is good and bad)

I'm feeling like I just had a Just for Fun moment (explaining something obvious like it was something profound), so please forgive me.

(And don't come home from drinkin' with sperm-receivin' on your mind)

(And go Ottawa. )

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally posted by Not Bob
Look at it this way -- the n-word is a disparaging word used to describe black people, and cracker is a disparaging word used to describe white people. Both are slurs directed towards skin color. Would you agree that I am probably less likely to be bothered by being called a cracker than TM would be bothered by being called the n-word?

Good point. I would concede that "cunt" is a charged word because someone who uses it most likely is expressing their disgust with (i) the woman in front of him and (ii) women in general. So, if you compare "dick" and "cunt" in that context, the actual meanings of the words are similar, but the intention behind the usage differs drastically.

But it is NOT used (as far as I've seen) as a comment on a woman's sexual proclivities. That's where I disagree with PJ.

TM

[Anne Elk]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
PJ,

I don't think that power dynamic exists any more or should exist - fot that reason, women complaining about cunt is a double standard.

S(Ain't no anthropologists - just throwing out a theory)D

It shouldn't, but it does.

[purse junkie]

Originally posted by ThurgreedMarshall
This argument:


doesn't mesh with this one:

"Dick" is just as gender specific as "cunt." And calling someone a "cunt" isn't necessarily a comment about said woman's sexual nature. If I don't know a thing about your sexual history, I can call you a cunt based on how you've interacted with me. It's about attitude. "Slut" demeans a woman based on her sexual experience (perceived or real).

"Dick" is the same as "cunt" as far as the nature of the insult is concerned. "Cunt" may be more extreme or harsh, but you can't say you can't compare the two because one is a more accepted insult.

TM

Sure they do. Yes, they are both insults technically referring to genitalia. No, they are not used remotely in the same way. Calling a guy a dick doesn't imply any judgement in particular about his sexuality--as say, "pencil dick" would. I have never, ever heard the word "cunt" used in a way that did not imply something negative about a woman sexually--usually, that she had stepped out her place and was acting like a guy--and with respect to women, sexual terms implying insult or potential harm are often used to put her back there.

It's like the n-word/cracker distinction Not Bob made--refer to an analogous thing, but has completely different history, meaning and implications.

p(just read that the Joe Millionaire reject posing for Playboy said she refused to do full-frontal nudity because she was a women's studies' major--so glad she got the point of her classes)j

[Bad_Rich_Chic]

Originally posted by soup sandwich
I agree with you regarding how words can have power and how two people can view it differently. My question in this case is why view it differently? Why make the meaning of the word worse than it is intended to be?

In your n-word example, I think the difference is that when the n-word is used, both the user and the recipient know what is being communicated. It is clear. When a white calls a black the n-word, blacks and whites do not assign different meanings to it.

But, if I were to refer to a woman as a cunt, it would mean that she is a really rotten, awful person. NOT that she is simply a sperm-receptacle. Men and women assign different meanings to the word. I was just wondering why.

Time was, blacks and whites had different views of what the N-word meant, too. The fact that a speaker considers it a harmless slang term indicating someone is black doesn't make it less harmful to the person hearing it as a reminder and assertion of generations of domination and oppression.

And, as this discussion has made clear, the gentlemen of the board are well aware that women hear "cunt" as having a rather unique power to convey the objectification and non-personhood of women. So you can't claim as a user of the term that you don't know what is being communicated. Insistence that it only means "rotten, awful person" because you say so just implies that female thoughts or feelings on the matter have no value, further emphasizing the oppressive denial of personhood implied by the word.

BR(don't get particularly worked up about "cunt" myself, but I understand why the historical baggage makes it quite different from "dick," or even "prick," which I consider roughly equivalent to "twat"; I agree with Lester that "slut" should be forcibly reappropriated as a compliment, rather as "bitch" has among some female groups)C

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

[there's just no way to massage that point in the time I have).

Do like Seinfeld and end with the swirl.

Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary defines douche bag (ca. 1963) as an unattractive or offensive person. My question is, have you ever known a male to be called a douche bag?

[purse junkie]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
PJ,

I don't think that power dynamic exists any more or should exist - fot that reason, women complaining about cunt is a double standard.

S(Ain't no anthropologists - just throwing out a theory)D

Sadly, I do think that power dynamic does still exist. Does anyone else remember that famous college lecture where the speaker asked the women what they were afraid of men for, and vice-versa? The women said they were afraid of getting beaten and raped by men. The men said they were afraid that women would laugh at them. I just think the context and implications of sexualized insults remains different.

p(not to get too depressing here--as far as I'm concerned, feminism's all about the joy of equally getting one's freak on)j

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by purse junkie
Sport coat w/ t-shirt leads to outrage in S. Korea parliament:

http://www.boston.com/dailynews/120/..._seeks_:.shtml

And I defend my dislike of "cunt" vs. "dick." The only way to really demean a guy on the basis of his sexuality is to imply that he's not masculine enough--that he's feminine or gay ("pussy", "fag"). "Cunt" and "slut" demean a woman because she's sexual and female--quite different. It's not a question of delicacy--I can swear like a sailor--it's a question of a woman being sexual itself being a negative.

"Dick" is too casual to compare to "cunt"--different levels of insult.

Interesting historical note on the word "faggot." Historically, is was a bundle of sticks, generally used as kindling. In the early part of the 20th century, it was slang for a cigarette in the UK (also elsewhere, but primarily in the UK). It began to be used to refer to homosexuals in Nazi Germany, once homosexuals were starting to be shipped off to the death camps. Its use came about because the unfortunates had a tendency to go up in flames like a .... faggot.

Since running across this little etymological lesson, I have been more inclined to flinch when I hear the word being used. But then, we all know how overly PC I am.

[robustpuppy]

Originally posted by carp
Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary defines douche bag (ca. 1963) as an unattractive or offensive person. My question is, have you ever known a male to be called a douche bag?

I've heard it used against both men and women, and more frequently against men. When you think about the mechanics of it, it makes sense, no?

And as for Webster's, consider these definitions:

Cunt (there, I wrote it): 1. the female pudenda; also: coitus with a women - usu. considereed obscene. 2. WOMAN: usu. used disparagingly; usu. considered obscene.

Dick: 1. chiefly Brit: FELLOW, CHAP 2: PENIS - usu. considered vulgar. 3. DETECTIVE


These differences are interesting, they suggest that dick referred to a man before it referred to his little man, while cunt referred to a woman's genitals before it was used to refer to a woman. This at least partly explains the difference in how demeaning the term is considered to be.

Also note that dick is not considered obscene, merely vulgar, which appears to be the prevailing view of the posters.