On the radio this morning, the hosts were discussing the Mel Gibson incident, in which (amongst other things), he called a female police officer “Sugar Tits.” Yet, on the air, they avoided saying “tits” and instead said “Sugar (pause of hesitation) Boobs.”
Is “tits” considered (by the FCC, or by society in general) to be a more vulgar euphemism for the female bosom than “boobs”? I found it really weird that the hosts had problems with one but not the other; I’d always throught they were roughly the same “vulgarity level” (if such a term exists).
“Tits” is one of the big no-no words for broadcast radio and television. See Seven words.
Specific words aren’t enforced by the FCC. The decisiona are made by each station or network’s Standards and Practices department. When the FCC gets viewer complaints, they evaluate the material in context. CBS gets away with airing “shit” in 60 Minutes interviews all the time, but you wouldn’t be able to pull that off on a sitcom.
“Boobs” has always been entirely un-vulgar, if childish, in my book.
When I was growing up, we could say “boobs” but we couldn’t say “tits.” My mom did not allow swearing. She wasn’t all that keen about “boobs” either, but “tits” was like swearing, like a dirty word.
In general and especially in terms of broadcasting tits was absolutely verboten until about ten years ago, and even then it started gradually. You still won’t hear it on the networks during primetime (cable, sure).
Boobs on the other hand, as someone said, is just silly, even when used as a double entendre. The old gameshow Match Game used it (to mean tits) since the early 70s!
