Take That, Fuckers.

[kyronae]

There's something intriguing about offensive language. Maybe it's the giddy thrill that goes with 'forbidden' fruits, like middle-schoolers snickering behind their hands at a "dirty" word. Maybe it's the catharsis of someone saying those words that circle in the back of your head but, for any number of reasons, never escape your lips

Comments

[attaining]

I feel like I would need to know the context to really comment, because there are instances where I would agree and others where I wouldn't.

[kyronae]

It's definitely a context heavy situation. And there's no avoiding accidentally offending some people. But I was just amazed at how defensive the class got when it was pointed out that things could be taken more than one way.

[attaining]

That IS unfortunate; what ages? I tend to think author or creator intent becomes somewhat irrelevant when something is released into the mass media, whether it's written, filmed, or otherwise, because audience interpretation will always win out in the end. Satire, I think, is the best example - you can point out as many stereotypes as you want, but it's only successful when people realize it's a joke. And at times they don't; take Dave Chapelle's The Chapelle Show.

I'm more prone to critical of bad language when it's directed at or in reference to a marginalized group.

[kyronae]

It's a graduate level, nonfic class. And audience is a huge part of the issue.

With both pieces, it hadn't really been decided, and neither was meant as satire or controversy. One was a profile piece on a professor where the author had called a marginalized group "questionable" without realizing that a large number of her audience might identify with that "questionable" group and take offense. The other was a personal essay about a study abroad trip to England, where the author called someone a "racist bastard" without giving any evidence for the judgment, so it reflected badly on her. In both cases, that was not the intended effect.