http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=78287
I am as big an advocate of free speech as anyone else, but there is no way a hateful, misogynistic, degrading, and offensive word should ever be allowed on the boards.
Coldfire was good enough to change it for us.
Zev Steinhardt
Thank goodness
Let us consider the following thread titles ALSO from MPSIMS, shall we? –
Flaming Meteorite Cock, OR Two Habaneros are definitely enough
Chill out, Gov. Dickwad -OR- I don’t wanna 'nother movie star politician!
“http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=23974”]The ultimate ‘dick flicks’
So the OP of the thread (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=78287) can’t refer to her own girly bits with a word equivalent in specificity and common usage to “dick” and “cock” because it is somehow more offensive?
As has been pointed out in the thread itself, the part she shaves ain’t a vagina.
Let me see if I get this right–the girls are to refer to theirs decorously as “mons veneris” or “pudenda” or perhaps as “hoo hah” or “down there”, while we guys can speak of our cocks and dicks, is that the deal?
My icky-whicky wants to tickle your doodly doo.
I have changed the offensive word to “pudendum.”
And I note that while it’s not my favorite word – and I have gone on the record as saying so – the word itself is not offensive but the use to which it is put has made it so.
I also note that this choice is not much better, as it is shame based, but perhaps it’s easier on the ear than the four-letter epithet.
For those that do not have a dictionary, here’s the Merriam-Webster definition:
How’s that?
your humble TubaDiva
Administrator
AHunter, excellent point.
Out of curiosity, supposing I wished to start a thread asking for opinions about the book *Cunt: A Declaration of Independence*, by Inga Muscio. (I read this book at a friend’s house and found it fascinating). What exactly would I be permitted to entitle the thread?
I think a rather uncomfortable (for me) precedent has been set here.
Perhaps we ought to start substituting G_d for God to keep some of the religious set happy. What about ther word ‘black’? Some are comfortable with this word to describe a certain ethnic group (in their eyes), others less so. Can it be deleted or replaced at the whim of one offended poster?
I do realise that the word we’re considering here is particularly offensive to many people, but there could be no end to this.
I’m not disagreeing with the OP just for arguments sake, but wondering if we’ve considered the implications.
That strikes me as a total con tradiction. You are nowhere near as much of an advocate of free speech as me if you advocate the censorship of particular words. And I regard myself as a moderate. At least I believe there should be limits to what people can say, publish or broadcast wher eas othe rs would say that no idea or information should be suppressed.
So do diffrent fora have different rules concerning language?
I mean the BBQ Pit seems to be pretty much uncensored, but if someone used salty language in a more civilized spot, such as this forum, could they be banned? Or excommunicated???
Who the hell wants to know?
It’s all in context, or at least it should be.
What might be an appropriate word choice in the Pit (where sometimes people do use four-letter words, often in the heat of anger or other high feelings) is not so for some of the other forums, like, say, in this forum (where by nature the tone tends to be milder).
Why the fuck would you need to be otherwise? 
your humble TubaDiva
Adminstrator
who hopes you get the point here.
Excoriated.
Thank you TubaDiva. Your replacement word is fine.
Thank you also to all you posters for helping me refine my OP. I posted it in this forum because the use of the word was extremely offensive, and I posted in a hurried, angry manner. Let me rephrase:
My new title would be:
“Why is this word allowed in this post, on the boards?”
Mersavets, you are absolutely right, I am obviously not as big of an advocate of free speech as everyone else. I actually think speech should be suppressed occasionally, so for that aside, I was wrong. There is always someone who is more of an advocate for free speech than I.
AHunter3,
The post to which I was referring to was written by a troll whose purpose was only to use the word in question. If you think someone whose name is solarphallusman is actually a woman who has a serious concern about her pubic hair, then I would humbly suggest you recheck your common sense. So it is not some person referring to “her own girly parts” it’s a juvenile-minded idiot out to see his words on the computer screen. I would analogize it to a poster with the name KKKCracker posting the term N*****.
Mattmcl,
As TubaDiva so kindly pointed out, it’s not the word itself, it’s the context. Is there, in the realm of possibility, a use for the word that is not offensive…heck yeah, but again, that was not the case here. Hence the change in my title.
Andy,
I have no problem with the slipperly slope of censorship. Could I post a story involving the rape of a 4 year old girl, and describe how she enjoyed it? I certainly hope not. There is censorship that does and should happen, and I would include the use of that word by that poster as extremely offensive.
I have spoken
I find the slippery slope argument to be ridiculous anyway. This is not a new precedent. It is incumbent upon the administration and moderation of the Board to make it an inviting place to as many people as possible. This doesn’t mean becoming needlessly “PC” or whitewashed, it simply means applying some standards of decorum.
And yes, those standards are inherently arbitrary. Cope.
Hamlet, while Solarphallusman may very well have posted the hooha waxing thread as a joke, I think you’re reaching a little far in classifying him/her as a troll.
A quick 30 second search of SPM in the past sixty days yielded no indications of troll behavior in my mind, and besides, if you suspect a troll you should notify Tuba, not “out” them in ATMB.
jarbaby
mea culpa
That’s exactly right.
Look at these defintions in the Merriam-Webster® Collegiate® Dictionary: cock - dick - cunt
You will notice that the word “cunt” is the only one that is described in one of its definitions as usually disparaging. So it seems reasonable to treat that word differently than “dick” or “cock”.
These are obviously all judgment calls. I personally see a difference between (for example) an IMHO thread entitled
“Are all women cunts?” (inappropriate) vs. “What did you think of the novel ‘Cunt: A Declaration of Independence’?” (appropriate). Is the difference unclear to you? In any case, I would recomment that if you’re not sure if a particular word is appropriate, use alternate wording. That should be no hardship for the crowd that hangs out at the SDMB.
But the definition to which you linked does not say that the word is disparaging when used to refer to the pudenda (although it does say “usually obscene”), which is exactly the context to which AHunter was referring. Because a word is disparaging in one context does not mean it is disparaging in all contexts.
Damn, pld beat me to it.
I’ll merely note that there is a difference between the word “cunt” used as an epithet (something I’ve waxed at length against in the past - it is particularly unacceptable for many social reasons) and the word “cunt” to describe the female genitalia, a usage which I think should be reclaimed. Certainly it is the word the kabbess and I use as a matter of course.
pan