[Language warning] The C word.

[Asmodean]

Like, knowing what their insecurities are...and you stab them there?

That there is something I may very well do. Wait for a good opportunity and hack away. I do, however, give some clear cease and desist signals long before I act, so technically, you can stab me in the back "by accident" (a single moment-of-opportunity event) and walk away smug. On the other hand, when infringing upon my interests is a process... Well, I have NO concept of proportional response. I'll fuck you over as hard as I am able within my moral limits.

There is a redeeming quality here though. I do "respect the game". Thus, if walking over my metaphorical corpse is a recognized part of it, the above yields to conduct within the acceptable parameters of that particular competition.

...Derailed me own derail. I like it. 

[hackenslash]

I'm a cunt. If anybody has a problem with that, they're a cunt too, and they can fuck off.

I'll defer to my old mucker, arch-cunt Goldenmane, and the result of some exchanges we had years ago at RDF:

"One of the views shared by many who have posted on the relevant forums over the years was formulated by the user Calilasseia thusly: 'Bad ideas exist to be destroyed.' Indeed, this is the central thread that links this collection of writings, disparate as they may otherwise be.

Many of the essays included in this collection also share another similarity: the use of what may be considered, by some, profanity. Also know as swearing, cursing, and foul or bad language.

The often liberal use of expletives in some of these tracts may appear gratuitous and immature, even offensive. The reader is advised to bear in mind the aforementioned notion: bad ideas exist to be destroyed, in this case formulated as what has become known as Goldenmane's Third Rule of Public Discourse, commonly referred to as Rule #3: swear a lot.

Rule #3 was formulated initially as a joke, the point being that it serves as a way of distinguishing between those conversational opponents who were capable of addressing an argument intellectually, rationally, and logically, and those who were governed entirely by emotion. The key here is to realise that those governed by emotion would be those who would be offended (and loudly) by the use of words like fuck, cunt, shit, piss, arsehole, and sundry others. Such people would tend to leave a debate or conversation in high dudgeon, complaining loudly about the language their interlocutors were using. So much the better. There is little worth in continuing a discussion with someone who bases their entire position on emotion, and it's all to the good if they can be induced to chuck the shits and storm out, since it starkly highlights the intellectual vacuity of their entire approach.

What started as a jest (as all good jests do) rapidly developed more profound ramifications. For example: the words used to refer to swearing (including, tellingly, "swearing") reveal an unholy (or perhaps overly holy) reliance upon certain magical notions. 'Cursing', 'swearing', 'using God's name in vain' and the like all rest upon the rather quaint and somewhat silly notion that words have magical power. Whilst words do have power (the power to communicate ideas being primary), there's no evidence whatsofuckingever to suggest that incantations can make shit magically happen.

The idea that certain combinations of sounds (always culturally determined) can have inherent magically 'bad' properties is, to be blunt, bullshit. Most such words from around the world's different cultures are related to one of two things: fucking and shitting. Why these two essential processes for a complex sexually-reliant species that needs to eat should become the 'bad' words I'm not going to debate here. Suffice it to say that from a rational modern perspective, it's a little bizarre. But I'll work with it. It's my fucking medium, after all.

Bad ideas exist to be destroyed. The notion that words can inherently be bad is a bad idea. It springs from primitive beliefs about words being magical. Similarly, the intellectual coward's retreat from debate under the banner of 'my opponent swears' is rooted in the same notion. It also provides them with an easy escape route, and in this sense it is offered up as a service: allowing them to exit with the personal sense that they have retained the moral high ground, even if they have been unable to support their own arguments.

What renders the whole notion of 'bad language' truly ludicrous is that words are just effectively arbitrary collections of sounds (or letters, if written down). Start with 'c'. Add a 't': 'ct'. Add a 'u': 'cut' Wow, we now have a word that we recognise. There's nothing bad about the word, just as there's nothing bad about the letters it is made from. Now add an 'n': cnut.

That should, properly, be rendered Cnut, it being a proper noun. Chap is famous for arguing with the sea, or something. The sea, of course, ignored him, because words aren't actually magical. Changing Cnut around a little makes him a cunt. Where's the fucking magic?

In writing this, I have been reminded to add a little explanation of Rules 1 and 2. An explanation was posted some time ago. Here it is, and I hope the reader gains some understanding:

Sweet juicy Mohammed on Satan's glistening prong, you want comedy and explanations on demand?

I can give you the explanation, but I can't guarantee the comedy. I've got stage fright, and as everyone knows stage fright causes the balls to shrink and try to hide in the body, and as everyone also knows the balls are where the comedy glands reside, which is why (as Hitchens so rightly pointed out) women aren't funny. Unless they have balls. Evidence of this, in case anyone was wondering, is there to be seen. Just look at the scrotum. Take a long, hard (or flaccid, depending on your proclivities) look, and tell me that the scrotum isn't fucking funny. You'll be lying if you say it isn't. The scrotum is like the world's most honest packaging. It says, "Here be comedy. There is literally and categorically nothing as funny as this.

It's an evolutionary thing. Dick Dawkins even touched on it (well, there's really no other way to put it, is there? No quote mines, please, I won't have it said that Dick touches his, or any other, scrotum any more than strictly necessary) in The Greatest Show on Earth, where he points to the completely ridiculous path the vas deferens takes. It's fucking bizarre and surreal. Any designer who came up with that and was still responsible for the entirety of everything is a joker on a colossal scale. It's the only possible answer that isn't pants-shittingly terrifying. And as it is, it's minor-incident-of-bowel-incontinence scary. You wonder why God is referred to as He? It can only be because the fucker's a sadistic practical joker, with testicles the size of... well, how do you measure such balls?

The other option is that He doesn't exist, of course, but some well-known people have, historically, bet against that.

Anyway, enough (as the sage said) of that guff: Rule #3. The strict name of said rule is Goldenmane's 3rd Rule of Public Discourse, and stackhishash has quoted the short form verbatim: Swear a lot. The reasons are, I hope, obvious, and need no further explanation. Rules #1 and #2 are both the same as, and yet separate from, Rule #3. Simply put, Rule #1 dictates the rules (whilst being identical to Rule #3) and Rule #2 fucks about in the background somehow making globules of retarded effluent seem to mean something that gives Rule #3 its efficacy.

To put it another way, Rules 1,2 and 3 are the same goddamn rule, but invoking Rule #3 is all that is needed to have a cock-suckingly good life, and if you fucking well understand Rule #3, you'll stop asking for explanations. Fuck."

Hope that's clear.

[Asmodean]

I sort of agree.

"Sort of" is only because I see the so-called bad language as a non-issue when I speak or when others speak to me. Do I use words some find offensivve as tools? Yes. But not with the intent of getting rid of my oponent, but rather in order to convey my message in the preferred way. They are words. That's what they are for.

Can I formulate myself without the use of such words? Absolutely. Do you want me to? Fuck off; I don't care.

[Magdalena]

This is great! It's like a Cunt Anonymous Meeting. 

I said, "Hello, I'm Magdalena, and I can become a cunt very fast." Then, The Asmo said, "Hello, my name is The Asmo, and I can become a cunt whenever I want to." Then, BCE said, "Hello, my name is BCE, I take advantage of the "blasé medium." Then, Crow said, "Hello, my name is Crow, he looked around the room and said,
"Something will happen to them..."

...And he left the room.

Then, Ecurb Noselrub said, "Hello, my name is Ecurb Noselrub and I become a region demon." He recommended, wash, rinse, and repeat.
The Asmo raised his hand again and said, "Yes, attack the heart, their feelings and insecurities!" Hackenslash said, "Hello, my name is hackenslash, and I'm a cunt. If anybody has a problem with that, they're a cunt too, and they can fuck off." He attacks the brain and bad ideas, destroys them, and pulverizes them.

This has been a productive meeting. Next week we can discuss:
Penis and scrotum envy, and other things we need to be funny.

Now, let's hold hands...

Amen.

[Asmodean]

Then, The Asmo said, "Hello, my name is The Asmo, and I can become a cunt whenever I want to.

Nono, His gestalt personality is... Cunty. He can, however, turn "mainstream" at will.

[Essie Mae]

In 'The Vagina Monologues' the word 'cunt' is reclaimed because the writers were offended that the word was used as an insult at all.

[Icarus]

^^^That was curiously eloquent post Hack.

[Magdalena]

^^^That was curiously eloquent post Hack.

He is very eloquent, isn't he? He's also very 'down to earth'. 

[Ecurb Noselrub]

Hack said: "It's an evolutionary thing. Dick Dawkins even touched on it (well, there's really no other way to put it, is there? No quote mines, please, I won't have it said that Dick touches his, or any other, scrotum any more than strictly necessary) in The Greatest Show on Earth, where he points to the completely ridiculous path the vas deferens takes. It's fucking bizarre and surreal. Any designer who came up with that and was still responsible for the entirety of everything is a joker on a colossal scale. It's the only possible answer that isn't pants-shittingly terrifying. And as it is, it's minor-incident-of-bowel-incontinence scary. You wonder why God is referred to as He? It can only be because the fucker's a sadistic practical joker, with testicles the size of... well, how do you measure such balls?"

I'd be more inclined to take seriously criticisms of the body's architecture from someone who had himself designed a functioning dick-n-balls, complete with orgasm, ejaculation, and life-giving powers.

That being said, I accept evolution and am not a modern-day IDer.  Just seems like criticisms of the path of the vas deferens is sort of like me, whose greatest architectural achievement was to design and build a playhouse for my grandkids, criticizing the plumbing system in the Burj Khalifa.

[Siz]

Drunk poster - please ignore. Deleted now, move along...

[xSilverPhinx]

Drunk poster - please ignore. Deleted now, move along...

I could use a laugh.