Yodelling Llama

November 21, 2009

Cunt vs. nigger.

Filed under: Language — Chris @ 8:17 am

I have met the occasional easily offended individual that recoils every time I utter one of Carlin’s seven. Well, maybe not “piss.”

But most people seem increasingly comfortable with the taboo vulgarity of the past becoming the mainstream slang of today. “Bitch” has become a term of endearment; “motherfucker” an expression of disbelief (think Marcellus Wallace carrying the box of doughnuts and seeing Butch behind the wheel of Fabienne’s Honda); “shit” an expression of regret; and “fuck”…well, “fuck” has come to mean pretty much anything and everything.

The one exception to the mainstreamization of dirty words is “cunt.” And I say that because I’ve still met an awful lot of otherwise enlightened twenty-first century foxes that hesitate slightly before using “cunt.”

What’s replaced these taboos are the racial and ethnic slurs: “spic,” “kike,” “gook,” and “nigger.” The majority of which, I would admit, I have a problem with. Does that make me “unenlightened”? Or is there a fundamental difference between the objective offensiveness of, say, “cunt” as opposed to “nigger”?

I would submit that there is. The insults I find acceptable, like “dumb cunt,” “sack of shit,” “meathead,” “dumbass,” or “bat-shit-insane motherfucker” all have, at their core, something other than a human. Take “bitch,” for example. Female dog, right? Legitimate word. And essentially what you’re doing when you refer to someone as a “bitch” is characterizing them as similar, in some specified or unspecified way, to a female dog. Perhaps “yappy” is the core characteristic? Or perhaps “vindictive”? Or simply “not very bright”? But the important thing is that the insult is customized to the individual, and highlights negative qualities by reference to something not human.

But, you’re wondering, what about “motherfucker”? Isn’t that a human: a person who has sexual relations with his mother? Well, I think the core of “motherfucker” is the act of motherfucking, not so much the individual involved. I know, I know: it’s a stretch.

So how does that distinguish from racial and ethnic slurs? The core point then becomes, when the word “nigger” is thrown about as an insult, is that the target shares characteristics with “niggers” as a group. And that, on its face, is objectionable. You’re no longer comparing an individual unfavorably to a bucket of feces, a well-worn vagina, or a particularly brainless fanny. Instead, you’re comparing an individual unfavorably to a racial or ethnic group. Big no no. No?

2 Comments »

  1. 1) interesting background for ‘bitch’ here:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitch#History

    2) your idiocy over MFer has got to be a joke or an attempt to upset me. I thought we set you straight almost two years ago:

    http://yodellingllama.com/?p=653

    But you want to insist that Brad Pitt should be insulted when you point out that Angelina Jolie has had children by calling him MFer? Duh!

    3) in recent times I’ve begun to have a problem w/ the use of ‘cunt’ as well as the words ‘pussy’ and ‘dick’. The problem comes from their origins in body parts that should be innocent of wrongdoing but have a bad rep. Why should a penis be compared to a mean person? Penises aren’t mean, their owners are. Why should a vagina (and by extension, a woman) be compared to a coward or a nasty person? So I have moved away from these words so as to help prevent those body parts from being stigmatized.

    4) the word ‘ass’ was originally referring to the frequently stubborn and stupid animal and its use as an insult comes from there. It has been mixed w/ a homonym that is derived from ‘arse’, which refers to buttocks. The insult in calling somebody an arse is pretty clear when one considers what comes out of an arse.

    5) as one who’s around a lot of youth who amicably drop n-bombs on each other I’ve had a lot of thoughts on the matter. The problem with a non-African American person using the word at an AA is that the n-bomb was originally part of a system of racial subjugation. This gives the word a strong derogatory air when used by the non-AA speaker; none of my students were slaves but they know that when a white person calls them that they are being insulting. It’s the same with the word ‘boy’ used towards an AA youth; the difference is that ‘boy’ is so frequently used in non-derogatory ways, many people don’t realize it’s a word of insult in a certain context.

    Comment by FelixP — November 21, 2009 @ 10:49 am

  2. another pro-slang argument:

    http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2009/11/16/in-defense-of-douchebag/

    Comment by FelixP — November 23, 2009 @ 3:06 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

Powered by WordPress