# Illusionists and "kayfabe" - where is the ethical line?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illusionists-and-kayfabe-where-is-the-ethical-line/652948>\
**Category:** Great Debates\
**Created:** [March 14, 2013, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illusionists-and-kayfabe-where-is-the-ethical-line/652948 "2013-03-14T20:14:42Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![bienville](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4bbf92/32.png) [@bienville](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bienville)\
**Post date:** [March 15, 2013, 10:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illusionists-and-kayfabe-where-is-the-ethical-line/652948/21 "2013-03-15T10:00:46Z")

</div>

> [@TriPolar](#):
>
> I’m not saying he used in incorrectly. I’m saying it makes those who use the word look silly because it’s rarely been used by wrestlers or carnies, and simply used by those who want to connote an insider’s knowledge that they don’t really have.

> [@Smapti](#):
>
> Which, considering that we’re not even _discussing_ wrestling at the moment and nobody is attempting to claim an insider’s knowledge of anything, is a pretty silly objection to levy against an appropriate use of the word.

Yeah, it’s a word that is growing in familiarity- certainly a word that more and more people on this messageboard are familiar with. It is a good word in that names a specific and intricate concept while having no one-word synonym to fully match it in all aspects of its meaning- when it’s the word you want to use, it truly is _le mot juste_.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\
**Post date:** [March 15, 2013, 1:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illusionists-and-kayfabe-where-is-the-ethical-line/652948/22 "2013-03-15T13:16:11Z")

</div>

> [@bienville](#):
>
> Yeah, it’s a word that is growing in familiarity- certainly a word that more and more people on this messageboard are familiar with. It is a good word in that names a specific and intricate concept while having no one-word synonym to fully match it in all aspects of its meaning- when it’s the word you want to use, it truly is _le mot juste_.

Ok, use the word. I have no principle to claim here, I just don’t like it personally. But I am a fan of flexible language, I guess I’m just straying on this one word for some reason.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\
**Post date:** [March 15, 2013, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illusionists-and-kayfabe-where-is-the-ethical-line/652948/23 "2013-03-15T19:36:25Z")

</div>

Back to the OP: I would say that the ethics line is broken when the business model of the illusionist is primarily based on people actually believing the kayfabe.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illusionists-and-kayfabe-where-is-the-ethical-line/652948.md?page=1)