The moralists have defined “words you aren’t suppose to use”. And in doing so, [we] create ways for people to purposefully violate rules about what is right, pure, and appropriate. We all know the words we aren’t supposed to know—at least by the time we are young adults—and they are “adult words”, words that kids aren’t supposed to be corrupted with, kids aren’t supposed to use or hear, which helps to spread them. Because all kids want to grow up and become adults. And using bad language, while we know it’s not “right”, it’s mature, and gratifying to finally be able to do things that only big people are allowed to do. Well, really they aren’t even allowed, but only adults are allowed to break the rules of what can be said. And the rules are pretty arbitrary.
Let’s take the word “snot”. Snot is gross, and sure, everybody has it (you swallow something like a pint a day), but it’s not usually something discussed in polite company. But it’s not a “bad word”. Just has it’s place, like any other word. But it is just a word, with a meaning (which may vary from state to state). But what if, we decided that sn*t was bad to say? If we defined it as something that “good people” didn’t say in front of kids, and the FCC didn’t let people say it on tv during the day. And you had to use other words to describe what happens when you blow your nose. It would take a while for people to catch on, but eventually, people would start using more. When they want to express their displeasure, or just rebel against being good, they would start sprinkling the sn__ word into their speech. Maybe quite liberally. “What the sn*t? That sn*t-faced sn*t and his sn*tty sn*tting can just sn*t off!” Yay, yet another amoral word made worthless by simply banning it, therefore increasing it’s misuse.
Now, this example was the corruption of a word that already existed, but the same would happen if you coined a new word, and gave it forbidden status as part of it’s definition:
iofdl: (ē-ō’fĭd-l) noun, something kinda bad, but this word has it in the worst connotation imaginable.
*DO NOT USE THIS WORD* However, you can use this similar word “eiffel”, to mean the same thing.
tr.v iofdling, iofdl
intr.v: iofdling, iofdled
adjective: iofdl, iofdlly
So, I don’t think I should use “foul language” (one exception: I quack at ducks, but they rarely respond so I’m probably doing it wrong). However, I don’t think forbidding certain arbitrary words is really helpful–it just gives people yet another rule to break when they feel like lashing out against all that morals stand for and the oppression they imagine moral standards bring.
…but while we argue about what words are good for children, they are dying from other things. The number one cause of death for children under 5 is fumes from inside cooking fires. Snot!
