So I walk up to a couple of fuming and pissed of females (first mistake) and try to be a do gooder. Y'know, your average, altruistic, do gooder who wants to be able to help people vent their frustration. The fact that I want to conclusively prove, that misanthropic, sociopathetic..err, sociopathic, female hater in general I may be, but sexist I am not is besides the point. And I come up with the absolutely inspired suggestion of coming up with a few creative FEMINIST Swear Words. The fact that I myself don't swear (okay fine, I don't swear OUT LOUD in public) hampers the proceedings a bit. Kind of like trying to coordinate a Bollywood dance sequence while sitting on a chair with your hands strapped behind your back.
The more disturbing fact is that my absolutely inspired brainwave isn't, well, inspiring. In fact, there seems to be some serious resistance against the idea. It just wouldnt give the feel I'm told. And its not as simple as gender reversal. For, you see, a good many of them are general neutral. And then, if you happen to be pissed at men, targeting the men they may be close to with the choicest abuse just doesnt tick them off as much as targeting the women in their life. This is applicable even if the uttered swear word is a whisper and unheard by the intended recipient. Apparently the imagined chagrin counts for just as much. Its the thought that counts you see. So, then, stuck with the conventional again. This leaves us with the category of swear words pertaining to the body parts that one generally covers in the name of modesty. Funny word that, modesty. Applies even if the intended appendage/part is nothing to write home about and hence not requiring of modesty. But, moving on - the body parts. That and the canine related words. Notice how the male ones have been carefully cultivated into normal usage and hence sound quite harmless. Dog is quite a normal word you see. Its the female counterpart that is allegedly quite offensive. Same goes for the abbreviation of the name Richard.
Strange how the male counterpart in a lot of cases is a harmless word, and the female version is more potent and offensive. Now that can be construed as sexist or potentially as a complement. Knowing females though, in these debates and arguments, they will act like the best of the pessimists (almost as good as myself. Almost, but not quite). They tend to see the negative aspect in everything. So then there you are. They will view this bias as offensive. And continue to use the conventional swear words too. Ask someone else to bake your cake, have your cake and eat it too. And then refuse to pay the bill to boot. But no more female baiting. I am merely misogynistic. Not sexist.
What it boils down to I guess is this: Its the thought and satisfaction that counts. And nothing riles up men like having the women in their life insulted. Which is mean on the part of the men who came up with these swear words. But a complement in a sense to women seeing as they mean so much. But women will say its typical of men to trade quips and insults on them, thereby objectifying them. They will say this with choice curse words thrown in (yep, the conventional ones. Also, what about if men want to swear directly at women. What swear words then? And what about the fact that some pervs would be turned on if sworn at by women? And what about the MPAA censor that is more lax on same sex activities pertaining to women than the ones between men? And how is that even relevant here in this context, even as an analogy? Oh, get over it, I'm not Freud. If you wanted a semblence of sense and coherence with a modicum of sanity you came knocking on the wrong door. Knock, knock? Who's there? Me. I Kill You, I swear (or maybe, I swear first and then I kill you) - Achkhmed
The more disturbing fact is that my absolutely inspired brainwave isn't, well, inspiring. In fact, there seems to be some serious resistance against the idea. It just wouldnt give the feel I'm told. And its not as simple as gender reversal. For, you see, a good many of them are general neutral. And then, if you happen to be pissed at men, targeting the men they may be close to with the choicest abuse just doesnt tick them off as much as targeting the women in their life. This is applicable even if the uttered swear word is a whisper and unheard by the intended recipient. Apparently the imagined chagrin counts for just as much. Its the thought that counts you see. So, then, stuck with the conventional again. This leaves us with the category of swear words pertaining to the body parts that one generally covers in the name of modesty. Funny word that, modesty. Applies even if the intended appendage/part is nothing to write home about and hence not requiring of modesty. But, moving on - the body parts. That and the canine related words. Notice how the male ones have been carefully cultivated into normal usage and hence sound quite harmless. Dog is quite a normal word you see. Its the female counterpart that is allegedly quite offensive. Same goes for the abbreviation of the name Richard.
Strange how the male counterpart in a lot of cases is a harmless word, and the female version is more potent and offensive. Now that can be construed as sexist or potentially as a complement. Knowing females though, in these debates and arguments, they will act like the best of the pessimists (almost as good as myself. Almost, but not quite). They tend to see the negative aspect in everything. So then there you are. They will view this bias as offensive. And continue to use the conventional swear words too. Ask someone else to bake your cake, have your cake and eat it too. And then refuse to pay the bill to boot. But no more female baiting. I am merely misogynistic. Not sexist.
What it boils down to I guess is this: Its the thought and satisfaction that counts. And nothing riles up men like having the women in their life insulted. Which is mean on the part of the men who came up with these swear words. But a complement in a sense to women seeing as they mean so much. But women will say its typical of men to trade quips and insults on them, thereby objectifying them. They will say this with choice curse words thrown in (yep, the conventional ones. Also, what about if men want to swear directly at women. What swear words then? And what about the fact that some pervs would be turned on if sworn at by women? And what about the MPAA censor that is more lax on same sex activities pertaining to women than the ones between men? And how is that even relevant here in this context, even as an analogy? Oh, get over it, I'm not Freud. If you wanted a semblence of sense and coherence with a modicum of sanity you came knocking on the wrong door. Knock, knock? Who's there? Me. I Kill You, I swear (or maybe, I swear first and then I kill you) - Achkhmed
