1
   

The power of words

 
 
Synonymph
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 May, 2005 12:17 pm
...
Setanta wrote:
...and it is only applied to women in private exchanges in which it is the intent of a man to wound a woman's feelings. It's most common use is simply as a vulgarity describing the female anatomy.

It can also be used as a term of endearment.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 May, 2005 12:24 pm
Synonymph wrote:
...
Setanta wrote:
...and it is only applied to women in private exchanges in which it is the intent of a man to wound a woman's feelings. It's most common use is simply as a vulgarity describing the female anatomy.

It can also be used as a term of endearment.


That's a scarey thought . . . you are, how shall i put this diplomatically . . . a bit odd?
0 Replies
 
extra medium
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 May, 2005 12:53 pm
Setanta wrote:
Synonymph wrote:
...
Setanta wrote:
...and it is only applied to women in private exchanges in which it is the intent of a man to wound a woman's feelings. It's most common use is simply as a vulgarity describing the female anatomy.

It can also be used as a term of endearment.


That's a scarey thought . . . you are, how shall i put this diplomatically . . . a bit odd?


Interesting. Is this in the USA? I've never heard of this being used as a term of endearment?

Are we talking about the c word to describe female gen? Not the male c word, right?

Gosh, I guess I should try that with my next girlfriend. Are there any particular circumstances in which I should refer to her with that word, so she will feel endearment? "No, no honey--why are you getting mad? I meant it as a term of endearment! My computer friends said it is so!"
0 Replies
 
JagLep
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 May, 2005 01:23 pm
From Wikipedia:

"In Britain, unlike in America, "c***" can be used as a jovial term of endearment in very limited specific contexts. Most Britons however do find the word extremely objectionable."

Wonder what those specific contexts might be…
0 Replies
 
extra medium
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 May, 2005 01:28 pm
JagLep wrote:


Wonder what those specific contexts might be…


The only thing I could imagine is in the heat of the moment...with a bit of a wild one that wouldn't take it wrong... :wink:

But perhaps there's plenty other moments. Someone enlighten?
0 Replies
 
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 May, 2005 01:36 pm
Nietzsche, I think it was your namesake who said that human thinking is subject to the "tyranny of grammar." We tend to think of our language (and its grammar, in particular) as objectively reflective (as consisting of pictures) of the world. The subject-object (subject-predicate) distinction is language's most powerful cognitive "tyranny"--as useful as it is.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 May, 2005 01:54 pm
It is used in Lady Chatterly's Lover as a term of endearment.I think it is anyway.

From memory Connie says to Mellors-

"What's c***?

He replies-

"Th'ar c***"

Then he gives her one.

I might have made a spelling error there but it will do.

In England the word is almost exclusively directed at men usually as abuse and there is one thread on a site I won't mention to do with football (soccer) where it is a user name.Fully formed.

Frank Harris asked his professor at the Sorbonne-

"What's it all about then Prof?"

The professor looked at him gravely over his spectacles and intoned-

"My boy,the world revolves around a woman's c***."

It is sometimes used by workmen to refer to an item from the toolbox which had inadvertently caused them pain or a large machine that won't start up as in "The f*****g c*** is F*****g f****d."Especially on cold wet Monday mornings.

It has been used in the House of Commons to refer to a honourable member opposite but the speaker didn't hear it.

Princess Anne has been reported as using the word to a servant but that may not be true.

It does appear in our expensive dictionaries.The cheap ones for the proles do not include it.

Does all that clear up the Queen's English side of things?
0 Replies
 
extra medium
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 May, 2005 01:58 pm
spendius wrote:
Does all that clear up the Queen's English side of things?


Thank you spendius.

Well in all honesty, I think thats a great start but someone could probably write a 500 page exploratvie expository on this one word. And that would just be the introduction to the c*** Encyclopedia.

Such is the power of The Word!
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 May, 2005 02:10 pm
We could do tw*t while we are it.Here that is about 10 to 15% more abusive than c***.And if you call a bloke a pu**y you'll probably get a bunch of fives.Maybe two or three if you have an adjective in front of it.

Fann*ing about means acting womanly.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 May, 2005 02:12 pm
I could do you some of the more advanced stuff if you asked me to.
0 Replies
 
extra medium
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 May, 2005 02:57 pm
spendius wrote:
We could do tw*t while we are it.Here that is about 10 to 15% more abusive than c***.And if you call a bloke a pu**y you'll probably get a bunch of fives.Maybe two or three if you have an adjective in front of it.

Fann*ing about means acting womanly.


What is the relative % breakdown of the "Big Girl's Blouse" insult? Razz
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 May, 2005 05:22 pm
Oh gee EM.

That's worse than all the others put together.That is because a c*** or a tw*t does have some useful attributes whereas a big girl's blouse is just an impediment.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 May, 2005 05:27 pm
Generally speaking,when alcohol levels are below those permitted for driving or piloting a jumbo jet,one wouldn't use "big girl's blouse" in the direction of someone bigger than oneself or with threatening exterior symbolisms such as tattoos or associations with big dogs.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 May, 2005 05:28 pm
It's too near the truth for comfort you see.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 May, 2005 05:31 pm
Is this a sitting duck competition.I deserve to be told.
0 Replies
 
extra medium
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 May, 2005 05:37 pm
The other day smorg said she always thought I was a woman because some of my posts were like those of a Big Girl's Blouse!

Then she comes back later and acts like that phrase is almost a term of endearment?! Razz

Well I looked it up on the internet, and it seemed to say that you might say it of say a tough rugby player who was tough on outside but a softie on the inside?

Like not a terribly bad thing, really.

Now with your posts, I'm not so sure...
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 May, 2005 05:40 pm
Smorgs was bein' a complete plank, EM . . .
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 May, 2005 06:05 pm
EM

Well I warned you.It depends what they read last.
Control their reading material.
0 Replies
 
extra medium
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 May, 2005 06:10 pm
now I suppose I gotta look up plank.

Why can't those Brits speak Inglish?

spendius, you are right.

Its probably better if they can't read at all, right?
Power of the word and all that. Razz
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 May, 2005 06:19 pm
I ain't no Brit, and deeply resent the implication.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
  1. Forums
  2. » The power of words
  3. » Page 3
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 1.18 seconds on 05/23/2024 at 06:04:56