Before I start, this is an IMPORTANT NOTICE (capitals and everything). This blog post contains uncensored language which may offend. This post is inspired by this one from Bloggerheads.
In an era in which Frankie Boyle can publish a book called My Shit Life So Far, and have this book prominently displayed, uncensored, in the windows of High Street Booksellers nationwide, it would be reasonable to assume that we, as a society, are no longer shocked by four-letter-language. To my mind, this is no bad thing, since, as George Carlin put it, there are no "bad words", just bad contexts. To assume that it shows a limited vocabulary would be to assume that Shakespeare, a man who introduced over 1000 words into the English language, suffered from a limited vocabulary. However, there is one word that still has the power to shock and offend most people, and it remains problematic because of its association with women.
It has recently been my pleasure to get to know many members of Exeter University's Gender Equality Society, and I asked two of them where they stood on the word "cunt". (Since this was an informal conversation I shan't name them, but they're welcome to comment either on the blog or to me personally if they feel misrepresented.) Both had no qualms about its use descriptively, both expressed a regret that society has deemed its greatest insult to be so associated with women, but one admitted that there were times when no other insult seemed appropriate.
This is the main problem. There are times when you really need to shock, when no other word seems to quite have the power to convey the disgust you feel at something or someone. A brilliant example would be Richard Littlejohn, the Daily Mail columnist whose apparent lack of any shred of human decency would make him a worthy recipient of the title "cunt". His Wikipedia page nicely sums up his failings as a human being, but his most heinous article, undoubtedly one of the nastiest things I have ever read, was this vile piece (and in case you think that that was a one off many years ago, this post was less than two months ago). His inability to see the person behind the label of "prostitute" marks him as a foul, putrid groveling excuse for a human, and a festering genital wart on the carcass of journalism.
Stewart Lee also took offence at Littlejohn, and conveyed this in a very funny section of his live show, but once again, relied on the power of the word "cunt" to convey his anger. Yet, as the top article puts it,
[A]sk yourself who really wins when you call a notorious woman-hater like Richard Littlejohn a 'cunt'.The replacement suggested by that piece "cloaca", seems a suitable alternative, and has been used at the b3ta.com image challenge on Littlejohn, but will probably remain an in-joke whilst "cunt" stays known and used in society, which is a great shame. I can't say that I shall never label a person as a "cunt", even though I almost never use it as such anyway, because it really is the only word sometimes with enough power. But if you feel differently, please feel free to leave a comment.
UPDATE, 16:39: Something wrong with the previous template prevented commenting on this, or any other post. This should now have been rectified.
Interesting stuff, Chris. I stand by a belief that cunt is a word that should never be used as an insult, but merely as a (relished) descriptor.
ReplyDeleteYou say "when no other word seems to quite have the power to convey the disgust you feel at something or someone.", but this is exactly the problem - why should using the word cunt convey disgust? This needs to change. I'm so sick of the worst insults being related either to women or sexuality, and there's no excuse for it - I would argue that it really is a lack of vocabulary if the only way you can think to describe someone is as a 'cunt'...and also a misuse of vocabulary.