> Right. Here's something to get people thinking.
>
> Why are certain words deemed 'unacceptable' or 'rude' and therefore must be censored, not used, substituted, or replaced with the dreaded ****s?
>
> As it's 3am, I will return to this thread after I've slept (enabling me to argue a point and set out my views in a coherent manner) and see if I've got any responses, answers to the question etc. Then I'll start arguing my corner.
>
> Zarn"knows better than to try and argue a point when fatigued"iwoop

I always felt that it wasn't because a word is rude, but because a word is too powerful. Look at how meaningful words like hate, love, need, etc. are so horribly overused as to be robbed of meaning. The common "swear words" we use today could be really insulting to one or one's family, but they've been so mis- and overused by ignorant, unimaginative and/or attention-starved people that they have ceased to have any meaning other than a rude way of saying "I don't like you."

Long ago, when one cursed at someone, one really cursed. Saying, "may your friends desert you and your enemies assail you mercilessly," is an act of calling doom down upon your target. People didn't take these curses lightly, either. I suspect some considered these curses to be a form of sorcery, while others were too slow-witted to put them together, and so they faded into the name calling and ancestor-bashing we hear today.

Censorship can't save the meaningfulness that swearing once had. I blame lax parenting and rebellious youth for that. Some adolescents apparently think that throwing in a cuss every few words makes them sound grown-up, or maybe they do that because that's what they hear at home. Anyway, censorship of these words can help people have real power to express negative emotions, for a little while anyway.

10"blah blah today's youth blah!"Kan