Yeah, any viable list of swear words has to include "damn" (and derivatives), "hell", and "ass" (and derivatives). I'd even go so far as to say that "crap" and "retard" (and derivatives) are sufficiently unprofessional that they belong on the list.
Also was fuck searched as a word on its own? Because if you include compound words with fuck you are going to catch a long tail of interesting profanity, especially amongst programmers.
You'd want to whitelist against the Scunthorpe Problem though.
And if one goes that far, one would have to include variant spellings, because in the heat of the moment of cursing an opaque or broken piece of code, a programmer is likely to froth at the keyboard.
Hmm, that's not very comprehensive for this purpose.
Years ago at a former employer, we discovered just after shipping a large quantity of quite sensitive demo materials that an outside contractor had managed to slip a hidden profanity into it. Oh, the joy that caused....
The immediate reaction though was that a few of the less polite and proper members of the organisation were tasked with producing as close to an exhaustive profanity list as they could so we could do a relatively thorough sweep. From memory that list was pushing 40 terms - I think I might still have a copy somewhere but the last thing this discussion needs is more swearing!
Years ago I developed a custom CRM for a client that included reminders. While testing the production version of the system pre-launch, I added many fake reminders, for users who happened to be real, along with a lot of other test data. I then cleared all of the test data...except I accidentally skipped the reminders table.
For weeks afterwards, my clients would receive profanity-laden reminders, helpfully labeled as "from Adrian".
Luckily, they had a good sense of humour about it. But since then, I've never used profanity in any kind of test data.
I never use anything remotely non-serious in my test data. I even try make comments type on forms in tested seem at least close to real. Silly names are out too. You never know when some fool is going to show a visiting client a development system instead of one of the official demos, and I've been stung by someone not being amused by the existence of Don Kiddick and Mike Hunt in my sample dataset.
We have a table full of unsavory words due to generating more than one password that upset someone. At one point someone decided we needed "pronounceable" passwords for our new users without considering the consequences.
I had a brief play once for this sort of thing with doing stem-based pronounceable word generation based off a starting dictionary; the idea being that it broke them into fragments marked as beginning, middle or end and used intersections of these to build words that followed letter use rules of known words but yet weren't known words themselves. You start getting distance problems though - a lot of words it generates are too close to or are trivial encapsulations of existing words, so that'd need taking account of. One day I'll have a proper play and do something more comprehensive for this.
Tip for anyone cacheing unsavoury words - from memory the bulk of what we ended up checking for were racial slurs, of which there's an astonishing (and unsurprisingly heavily localised) variety.
Why is it not misogyny? Would you drop the phrase "Sorry, niggers." so casually into conversation? Probably not (after all, it's racist), but it still uses a segment of society in derogatory fashion.
It's not misogyny because, according to Merriam-Webster's 11th edition, misogyny means "a hatred of women," and the original comment wasn't about that at all.
And it has nothing to do with a segment of society. You're complaining about someone half-jokingly calling us all whiny babies.
"damn" is no longer an issue because most people aren't terribly religious nowadays, at least not enough for people to censor themselves. That's not the case for "bitch".
What your argument tries to do is sneak a false dichotomy onto the table.
It's absolutely true that people are responsible for their feelings. But that doesn't mean you aren't also responsible for your choice of words. By saying that I am responsible for how I feel when I hear the word "bitches," you are trying to imply that you aren't also responsible for choosing to say it. It's perfectly valid to say that we are BOTH responsible for our choices. I should choose to ignore you, and you should choose another word. There is no need to say that one or the other but not both of us should be responsible.
I find your arguments along these lines to be passive-agressive. If you want to hurt other people with words, own up to wanting to hurt other people with words. Don't pretend that it's everyone else's fault. Because surely, if nobody took offense to these particular words, you would hunt around until you could find words that would cause offense.
You choose to use these words and phrases precisely because they have shock value. It's not like you use the word and are surprised it carries some special meaning that offends people. I see elsewhere you have told people to "fuck off." Are you seriously suggesting you weren't trying to give offense? Because if it isn't possible to give offense, why are you trying so hard to offend people??
Greeting groups of people as "sup bitches" is a popular culture phenomenon. It's not used for shock value or to give offence (at least in my social circles....).
My use of both "profane" and non-profane offensive comments in my comments is to drive home my point. It is not intended to hurt others, but merely make them think to themselves "frack it, I'm ignoring him.""What he says would normally offend me, but I'm going to have a nice evening with my wife and kids instead" ...or something along those lines.
If I get anyone to that point then maybe they'll know that in the future, if some anonymous dude dares use the dreadful word "bitch" on the internet, it's best for the sanity of everyone to let it slide.
"Because if it isn't possible to give offense, why are you trying so hard to offend people??"
-gets back in character...- Well I'd say there is a keen difference between "giving offence", which I am of course not doing, and "presenting others the opportunity to take offence". The choice is theirs.
Well I'd say there is a keen difference between "giving offence", which I am of course not doing, and "presenting others the opportunity to take offence". The choice is theirs.
That's the most cowardly thing I've heard all day. But it's only lunch time, so we'll see how it goes.
So much for my attempts to discuss this intelligently, instead of emotionally. I going to consider this one more point of data in support of my hypothesis...
That's hair splitting terminology. If you say or do something which you know the majority of people will find offensive, then that's effectively giving offense.
You didn't answer the original question, either: would you drop the phrase "Sorry, nigger." into casual conversation? If not, why not?
Hardly irrelevant - it's called reductio ad absurdum. If you limit yourself by not using certain words in conversation, then you're confirming that those words are generally offensive, and that using them would give offense.
It's why the legal system has the concept of the "reasonable person", but I prefer "Do you talk to your mother with that mouth?"
The only reason I do not casually use the word nigger in public is because unlike god, HR departments appear to be omnipresent.
"Do you talk to your mother with that mouth?"
Yes, I do. And if that bothers you, kindly fuck off. You have no place telling me what I may or may not say in the presence of my mother.
If an adult loses their temper in public, they are rightfully looked down upon. If an adult publicly becomes offended, I similarly look down upon them.
Right - so you're a racist, misogynistic idiot who'd rather put up pithy one liners and tell me to fuck off than address the point. Glad we got that cleared up.
Says the poster who was previously complaining about ad hominems...
No, I'm just an adult who recognizes that words only have the power that you give them. If you wish to continue to allow your emotions to be a slave to the language of others, that is your prerogative; but don't expect others to follow you.
And yes, I addressed your question. Read the parent comment of your post again.
You didn't address the question, you dropped a pithy one liner about HR departments. And you're still avoiding the issue by playing silly philosophical games. Of course words have meaning and power, particularly ones which are derogatory towards sections of society.
And that's all I'm going to say - this thread has gone on long enough.
The meaning of my "pithy one line", which you seem to be completely blinded to for some reason, is that I do not say the word "nigger" casually, but not out of concern for anybodies feelings. Rather, I avoid the word solely because I am paranoid of HR departments, and all things associated. This meaning seemed clear enough to other observers/participants.
Says a lot about you that the inclusion of minorly offensive words or implications can cloud your ability to critically interpret what others are saying. When you allow somebody else to offend you, or make you angry, you are allowing them to impair your thought processes. You are giving others the power to control you.
In order to defend yourself, you must realize that although somebody says something mean, it is up to you if you get angry, and although somebody may say something offensive, it is up to you if you become offended. In the real world, people are going to say shit you don't like. Trying to "correct" their behaviour is the wrong approach.
Not sure the HR department point is a 'pithy one liner'. If they didn't have their power I'd be singing along with Kanye too (there's a difference between using the word 'nigger' which is not racist, and calling someone a 'nigger', which is).
You're showing your disconnection with popular vernacular with your assertion. I'm 22 and girls around me call each other bitches casually (in a friendly, fun way) all the time.
You certainly don't speak on the behalf of any women I know.
Is it because your post is a bunch of poorly conceived bullshit? Is it because you don't really give any time to consider the intent of what's being said and the social context of the terms employed? Is it cause you're looking to be offended?
If you can't provide some analysis of the origins of thoughts and feelings which are presumably your own, maybe you should keep them to yourself till you can.
That set only includes [shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, motherfucker, tits], so these are probably not meaningful results.
I have personality commented "asshole forgot to increment the counter" 527 times in 4 different languages.
[EDIT: 528 times in 5 different languages. Sorry, bitches.]