Bleep. Bleepbleepableepbleep Part II

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.


Welcome back. In case you missed Part I go here -

This is the part where I use words and more concepts which offend people. Here's the opening salvo - Your brain is can be used for more than making your fingers operate a TV remote control.

Offensive concept du jour No. 3

Gimme that thing and let me push some buttons.

On guard! Dysphemism fast approaching! What is the difference between urinate and piss? Hang on, I have only begun to offend.

No less a book than the King James Bible uses the phrase "that pisseth against the wall" five times. So I did not use a dysphemism (but I have made you wonder what that word means.) And yet, the Supreme Court has ruled "piss" is a word which cannot be used on broadcast TV. See the George Carlin decision. Hrm. It's good enough for the majority of Christian churches in the nation but not good enough for TV, the other altar at which so many worship daily.

OBSCENE TREE! Cut it down! Call in the anti-lorax

I was in a Bible study one in which the Shittim tree was discussed. (32 uses. I counted 'em). The preacher said those who objected to the word could use Acacia (according to scholars it is the same thing). One of the lady readers in the study came to Shittim, paused and used Acacia and moved on. What's the difference? Would she object to Shitake mushrooms? Shitepoke? What about the English surname Shithead (pronounced shuh-THEED or sheh-THEED)? Ooo. Since the Bible also has several references to a community named Shittim, wonder what she'da done?

In a business in town a dear friend of mine who is quite devout in her beliefs has no problem using the phrase "goddamn" (your spelling may vary) especially when quoting others. She professes a

Expletive deleted.

belief in Jesus and God, but denies the deity's name is the three letter word G-O-D. Hence, she is not "taking the Lord's name in vain" according to her beliefs. What she sees as misuse of Jehovah will result in at least a LOOK and possibly a verbal excoriation of the offender.

Some are offended by what she has no problem with. Why? If there is no intent to harm, shock or abuse the word, why are some people offended? If an atheist uses the phrase, what does it mean?

Is meaning more important than the sound or word? Who decides meaning?

In this same business another person once took me to task for using the word "shit." I intended it as an expression of dismay and mild disgust. I also use the words "crap" "sheep dip" "sheetrock" "fork" "fudge" and a variety of other words and random sounds for the same thing.

She said "You have something in your mouth I wouldn't have in my hand." Ah. What is the difference between that word and feces, excreta, manure, poop, dung, and the other words we use to describe the semisolid waste product of the digestive tract? Words she has used, I note.

Really, what's the difference?

This second person had enough sense to not accuse me of having a "limited vocabulary." She's been witness to my personal sesquipedalian lexicon unleashed on a hapless soul who attempted to cow me with language. When you pull the bull's tail, you get the attention of his horns.

If it is a meaningless phrase, a mere exclamation devoid of semantic content, why should it offend? Does a loudly exclaimed "ARG!" offend?

Offensive Concept. Your brain is used for more than filling your skull.

Point of order Mr. Chairman: If the word is used to offend, shock, harm, etc. that's another matter. Point accepted. We are not using the word to offend, shock, harm, etc.

Say the word has real meaning. Does using a euphemism or degenerate form of the word provide an excuse? A way out? A way around? If the meaning is the same, what's the real difference?

Purport for a moment the existence of a divine being as described in the Bible. Do you think this entity will see a real difference in an atheist who says "goddamn" as an expletive or exclamation and a Christian who says "laws" - a degenerate form of Lord - as an expletive or exclamation?

Close enough for government work

Why does one collection of letters and sounds offend when another collection of letters and sounds meaning the EXACT SAME THING does not offend? Does this smack of hypocrisy to you? Mental instability? Or is this just being responsible, polite and genteel? Who decides?

Does it matter, as with the word nigger, who says it? Why?

Do the circumstances under which it is said matter?

If you mean the same thing, is there a difference? If what I mean is not what you believe it means, whose meaning is correct?

If you insist I curb my certain parts of my language around you, I have the right to demand the same of you. This extends to anyone who you wish to censor. Do you want to go there? Where are the Knights Who Say Nii?

Here's your herring for the next task.

Why am I responsible for what you think of my words? I take full responsibility for the things I say. How you interpret them is your business, not mine. Arg. Complicated.

Mo betta. I am responsible for what I say, not what you think I said.

So, in closing I say euphemism euphemism euphemism euphemism and euphemism. And if that offends you, dysphemism euphemism.