Conference turris::womannotes-v2

>Is using the f-word sexual harrassment?   

Not when I do it.

>    However, if
>    we're discussing some bug which is delaying our ship date, and I
>    shappen to say 'I don't f---ing know why the f---ing thing doesn't
>    work', am I being sexist?  

Don't see why. All combinations of genders can do something resembling F---ing,
if they so chose.
	Mez-the-flip

    I don't mind occasional profanity in a meetings.  What I DO mind is
    those folks who use profanity and then turn around and apologize to
    the "Ladies" or "Women" present.  If you're gonna swear, swear.  Don't
    single out a part of your audience for special treatment.
    
                                    cathy
                                    

    I wouldn't say it's automatically harrassment.  Offensive, yes. 
    Harrassment, seldom.
    
    I've used the f-workd a time or two in meetings.   I was angry,
    rude, and offensive -- and that's what I intended.  I didn't
    intend it as harrassment of anyone of either sex.  (I hold by Miss
    Manners' theory that politeness lies in never offending anyone by
    accident.)
    
    --bonnie

    
    	Maybe the basis of the f word being considered harrassment
    	against women is because (I've read this) some consider
    	"f*ck you" to be a rape insult.
    
    						nancy b.
    

    re:.4
    
    Yes, and Nigel acknowledged that that particular expression
    ("*u** you") can be seen as harrassment. He's talking about
    the general use of the f-word, though).
    
    I suppose that if someone regarded *any* expression as being:
    
    (a) offensive
    (b) sexually-oriented
    
    that they might consider its using to be harrassing. I' might say
    they were being silly, but that would be "invalidating their feelings",
    wouldn't it?
    
    --- jerry

    RE .2
    
    I agree totally!
    
    By the way, although I've been known for my creative (and not so
    creative) use of the "F-word" in and out of business settings, Lately
    I find myself much less favorably impressed by its use at meetings. 
    I don't get offended, just feel like it's uneccessadry/tacky in most
    cases.
    
    Am I getting old or just growing up?
    
    Polly

 I haven't knowingly used the f word in any of my meetings. I _know_ I haven't
used it at any of the meetings I attend which include pseudo-bigwigs, though
these same pseudo-biogwigs have used it (and usually apologized to the women).

 I don't find it offensive at all. Then again, words don't bother me nearly
as much as intentions.

 Sometimes I feel strange when I hear someone saying "F this" or "F that" when 
it seems unnecessary. I have felt that the person using it in that instance
was merely uneducated or linguistically lazy. Then I remembered the umpteen
billion times I have used the F word unnecessarily, and it's quite humbling.

 I think there are times when using the F word is the best way to convey the
thought with appropriate emotions and impact.

 The Doctah

    
    I'd like to put in my two cents....I don't believe the f word should be
    considered as an offensive remark toward women.  There are some women
    that talk like the proverbial "truck driver", myself included !  I do
    agree that it should probably not be used in meetings though.  Then
    again it depends on the nature of the meeting and who attends it.  Of
    course, anyone with an ounce of professionalism won't use that word or
    any other profanity for that matter, in a meeting with bigwigs.  That
    same person though could be in a soft room with a couple of people in
    their immediate group and let out a few profanities.  I guess it all
    depends on the person's judgement in any given situation.

    Re: "mixed company"
    
    It's pure chauvinism and a put down to women to apologize to the women
    in a group because the speaker thinks his words has or will offend them. 
    It is saying in effect, "Men can stand this kind of talk, but women are
    too fragile to hear these words."
    
    (Frankly I think anyone who can't express themselves more appropriately 
    in a meeting has a major career-limiting defect.)
    
    Bruce

	Well, as someone who used the F-word in a meeting yesterday (and I
didn't apologize to anyone about it), I feel it has its place.  I get lazy
sometimes and use it more than necesary, but  I usually need to be pretty
pissed to use it in a meeting.

	I would consider FU to be potentially harrassing, but not the
F-word itself under most circumstances.  (All I need now is for some WAG
to say - "How about in this context? 'Hey babe, wanna...'")

	The one time I got myself in deep and made a potentially  (no, to
be honest, much more than potentially) harassing remark, I knew the minute 
it came out that 1) it was a stupid thing to say, 2) I was too tired to still
be at work & 3) the person I said it to was going to take it badly even though
I apologized immediately and profusely.  A week or so later (a suitable 
cool-down period), we sat in a conference room and talked the whole incident
out, and we never had any more problems along those lines.

	I also think that in order to be considered harassment, the "offendee"
must tell the "offender:" that they consider the action to be harassment.


						--D

    Re:9
    
       I agree !!  If any apology is to be offered it should be to the
    entire room and not just the women !!  To me, it's like a bunch of
    women having a meeting, there's a couple of guys in there, and one of
    the women says, d_ckh__d, and then.....she apologizes to the guys for
    it !  Am I way off base or am I right girls ??

    re: .9
    
    Well, I can't remember hearing a man swear and then apologize only
    to the women present since I've been grown up and on my own, but
    if it did happen, I think I would reply, "F*** you, buddy!"
    
    That's bordering on a deliberate insult to both sexes -- implying
    we're too delicate to take delicate language and that the men
    present are too insensitive or whatever to care.
    
    --bonnie

I don't think it's harassment of anyone, particularly, but I think
it's unprofessional and insensitive, since it's probably offensive
to some individuals.  

I'm not much of a cuss-word-er, except under
duress and usually under my breath or in the 'privacy' of my own
cube, but I don't care what language others use in private conversation.
But in a meeting (which, in my case, is usually with customers), I 
wouldn't consider either showing that I was under *such* duress that
I had to swear, or in any case using less-than-professional language.
(Being in front of customers all the time has probably influenced me
in this.)

	MKV

I don't care if it is harrassment or not. I just personally don't like it,
rarely use it,(only in real anger) and find that I can express myself better 
in other ways. IMHO 4-letter words show a certain lack of communication skills
when that is all the speaker can come up with.

Besides I can manage to offend people with unintentionally sexist remarks
often enough. :-} :-} but there is usually someone around to remind me :-}

Amos

    1) The f word is bound to offend someone, which is why I would never use 
       it in a meeting.  That goes for any vulgarities, swearing or
       otherwise.  I don't know if *it* is unprofessional, but I wouldn't 
       want anyone to label *me* as unprofessional.  Not that they don't 
       roll easily off my tongue in any and every other type of situation
       when I'm with *people who know me*.  (Except in front of Mom!)  
       Then again, I've lodged a sexual harassment complaint against 
       someone who, when asked to simply change his obviously-sexually-
       connotative personal name in a notes file, didn't do so.  (Oh no, 
       does that make me a hypocrite?)
    
    2) Etymologically speaking (or is that redundant?) I don't think the f
       word retains any sexual connotations when used as "the f-ing thing".
       Although my mind tends to turn words into pictures like a
       never-ending game of "Concentration", which makes for some pretty
       absurd images of those "f-ing things".  "F you" does seem to conjure
       up a literal (?) (therefore sexual) meaning in some uses and in any 
       case is clearly to be taken personally.
      

Is it really not allowed to say "fuck" in a notesfile?

Are people really more offended by the actual word than the phrase "the f-word"
or "f*ck", when they know exactly what those euphemisms stand for?  Does the
presence of a "*" instead of the middle vowel really soften the word so that
it is okay to write in "polite company"?  How close exactly can you get to 
the word before it is considered "too close" and therefore offensive...is
"f-u-ck" okay?  How about "fnck"? (since 'n' is 'u' upside down.)  How
about "fYOOck"?

Does that mean if I can't say "fuck you" in a meeting, I *can* say "eff
star uck you" or "eff splat uck you"?

If the word is so offensive, then why aren't *very* close approximations
to the word similarly offensive.

And I hope you all remember to refer to the "limbs" of the couch, not the
"legs".

D! (who expects this note to go away pretty quickly)

	 RE: .16 (D!)


	 Exactly the reason that obscenities AND representations
	 thereof are no longer allowed Soapbox.


         I'm not quite sure what people actually think they're doing
         when they deface words like that.  I mean, do they really
	 think they are "hiding" the word?

	 After all, if you're going to say it, then SAY
	 it....otherwise don't.  Any representation of the word is
	 STILL the word.


	 kath

    It is a matter of courtesy, purely and simply.  Anyone can be
    gratuitously insensitive, so why bother?  On the other hand, not
    everyone has the courage to do something even though mommy would
    approve.
    
    						=maggie

    I grew up and completed college in an environment
    where obscenities were almost never used in the
    presence of women, though I was accustomed to hearing
    a few of the milder profanities (damn..) used in 
    moments of anger.  (I realize this may seem 
    unbelievably sheltered to some!!).
    
    The first place I heard the "F-word" used frequently
    in casual conversation was at Digital.  About the
    same time it became common in novels, movies, and 
    later in other media.
    
    Seeing or reading the actual words created a strong 
    negative emotion in me.  It was a physical response
    in the pit of my stomach as well as a negative thought
    in my head.  Representations with one or two asterisks 
    had exactly the same impact.  So if your intent is not 
    to offend those who object to the word, my input is to 
    avoid x**y as well as the word in question. 
    
    I do not recall having a similar strong response to
    descriptions like "obscenity", "four letter word",
    "excrement", "sexual reference".  
    
    Now I am more blase and respond with distaste, rather
    than strong disgust to these words used casually.  As
    others have said, the practice seems to display a 
    limited vocabulary.
    
    Pat
    

    Bascially, from what I have been told, Corporate strongly
    disaproves of the use of obscenities in notes files Period.
    
    and as to men appologizing to women for using 'bad language',
    I raised this issue once in a valuing differences workshop.
    
    I mentioned that I felt uncomfortable with men appologizing for
    using 'swears' infront of me and tried to explain that it made
    me feel like I was a child or needed to be protected. One man
    who had done so said that he did it automatically because that
    was how he had been brought up. I asked him if he would think
    less of me if I told him that he could use what ever language
    he chose infront of me without appologizing. He was obviously
    surprised that I even asked that question, but came to the
    conclusion that he would not.
    
    Perhaps what women need to do is talk privately with the men who
    do this, and develop a dialogue with them.
    
    Bonnie

I have been asked as a co-mod to refrain from using obsenities without watering
them down. As a co-mod, I see that a reasonable request from a member of the
community, and so I do so.

It really bothers me that two people (D! and kath) who have called time and
time again for understanding about their and others points of view would
summarily blow off this one.
	Mez

>It really bothers me that two people (D! and kath) who have called time and
>time again for understanding about their and others points of view would
>summarily blow off this one.

Blow off what point of view?  My note was intended to be semi-humorous, with
the base message that I was guessing that most people don't find "fvck" any
more or less offensive than the real thing, and that people in this discussion
(and one a few months ago on the use of 'bad words') were simply using such
euphemistic spellings because it was what everyone else was doing.  No one
yet has come forward to say that they find such spellings less offensive...
in fact, so far, the only response at all has said that she finds such 
representations equally offensive.

I do understand the necessity to get by corporate rules that perhaps forbid
the actually spelling out of four-letter words (which is why I expected my
note to be deleted.)  But aside from that, it seems silly to me to use
those representations if they aren't *really* softening the words...and I,
for one, can't understand how a *really* close representation like "f*ck"
or "fvck" could soften the word that much.  If someone cares to enlighten
me, fine, but no one has.  So I fail to see how I am "blowing off someone's
view".

D!

    I did have somebody say, "Oh, ef splat you" once -- he intended it
    to be humorous, and it provided the right touch of the ridiculous
    to defuse a situation where we were all ready to start swearing at
    each other in good earnest.
    
    --bonnie

>No one
>yet has come forward to say that they find such spellings less offensive...

Of course not. It's a ridiculed point of view (you think it's 'silly'). I told
you I was contacted off-line. Does that count?

	Mez

    Actually, I do prefer the euphemestic touch of adding the 'comic
    strip' characters rather than spelling out the full swear word.
     I'm not really sure why, but find it less jarring and offensive
    than seeing the word spelled out.  The more 'comic strip' characters,
    the better.  I dislike *seeing* the word more than I dislike *hearing*
    the word, which is really kinda weird.
    
    Possible explanation.  Speaking is a more immediate activity than
    writing.  Writing for me requires more thought, and provides the
    opportunity to go back and edit what I have said in order to provide
    clarity.  Writing in notes files is done to a *very broad* audience,
    and to at least attempt to soften the edges of rough language seems
    a small price to pay for the value of the discussion.  
    
    Even as a baby-boomer, I regret the loss of civility that was inherent 
    in refusing to use foul language.  The shock value has been lost,
    and the emphasis is less when we do use such language now.
    
    Alison

>     <<< Note 949.21 by ULTRA::ZURKO "We're more paranoid than you are." >>>


>It really bothers me that two people (D! and kath) who have called time and
>time again for understanding about their and others points of view would
>summarily blow off this one.

	 Mez, I don't "blow off" anyone's point of view. And it really
	 hurts me to read what you just wrote......(even though I'm
	 coming to expect it in this file.)

	 To me, if I am going to be offended by a word, then it
	 doesn't matter how it's represented, I'm still going to be
	 offended.  Water it down as you will, but it won't make a me
	 difference to me.

	 Now, most people that know me know that I don't get offended
	 by obscenities.  But also most people that know me know that
	 I *DO* respect the fact that other's do find it offense.  I
	 rarely use them in public writing...Period.  I'm very
	 courteous about my language and how I use it around others
	 who might take possible offense.

	 I have a very hard time understanding how a person could take
	 offense to seeing the word written out in whole, and not
	 take offense when it's defaced.  That concept is foreign to
	 me, because it's not the word itself that is the offending
	 factor to me, but rather the tone of the sentence and the
	 reason it was said.

	 Words are just characters on a page.  It's the meaning behind
	 the words that offends/doesn't offend me.  I am curious to
	 see how demarcation makes it "less offensive."

	 I'm not exactly sure what you're complaining about, Mez.
	 What exactly is it that I'm "blowing off"??


	 kath

    I think the insertion of various non-numeric or non-alphabetic
    characters in a pseudo-swear gets the point across less jarringly, is
    more acceptable to the general public (when I was editor of our college
    creative arts magazine, several times I had to contact people to insert
    such characters in their graphic language, and they generally nodded
    assent, and the response was positive fromthe reading comunity), and is
    probably more acceptable to the corporation.
    
    I'm sure the company doesn't demand we never swear, but by "filtering"
    it that way it not only jars our perception and makes us aware we ARE
    using strong words (in many people's eyes), but also seems to me to
    reduce the IMPACT of those words (IMO) and enable whatever message
    surrounds them to get across more smoothly because the jarring strong
    language is "toned down".  I don't feel it's self-censorship - I feel
    it contributes to better noting communication.
    
    -Jody
    

>Of course not. It's a ridiculed point of view (you think it's 'silly'). 

Mez, really, I expected better.  You misquoted me.  What I said was...

.22>it seems silly to me to use
.22>those representations if they aren't *really* softening the words...

I said it was silly to use it *if* it doesn't decrease it's offensiveness.
If it *does* decrease it's offensiveness, then it isn't silly.  If someone
wrote to say they are offended by the spelling out, but not by the misspellings,
then clearly, as least to the extent that their offendedness is decreased,
it isn't silly.

I still have trouble believing that it *is* less offensive, but if it is,
it is.  As I said, I am open to enlightenment as to *why*!

>I told you I was contacted off-line. Does that count?

I didn't see that.  (Still don't, you just said someone asked you as co-mod
to use the watered down spellings, not that they find them less offensive.)
At any rate, no one expressed that view here, so I was not attacking anyone's
view. I can't be expected to know of the existence of views told to you in
private.  What I was ridiculing was the use of such euphemisms if they
don't do any good, and stating that it seemed *unlikely* that they did.
(You will note that my original posting was in question form..."Do people
really find 'F*ck' less offensive than the real thing?"  Perhaps you were
mistaking my incredulity for ridicule.)

If my original note sounded a little mean (I wouldn't doubt it, I was in a
pretty rotten mood yesterday afternoon) I apologize.  But I still say it's
silly to do something that doesn't matter.  It might indeed matter, but 
that doesn't change the orginal assertion.

D!

    It's not a porblem anymore as we've been given a TLA to replace
    #$&$. FLW (four letter word) would fit right into the Digital
    culture as we love TLAs.

    As to the original question, no I don't see a certain FLW as sexual
    harrassment and have been known to use it myself on occasion.

    An aside, the most I've ever insulted someone in a meeting was when
    I told a man his word was meaningless and his track record on
    keeping promises sucked. Is sucked a swear word? At any rate it was
    quite deliberate and intended to shock and dismay. If I insult you
    in a meeting it's usually intentional and has a definate purpose. liesl

    I don't find the F-word all that offensive, if it's used in the
    usual office context of "F***-ing program doesn't work!" after
    someone's been debugging it for hours, and the like.
    
    However, I've found during the last few years, that when one works
    in an harrassing *environment* one becomes more sensitive to things
    in general. At that point, one may see (hear?) the F-word in a whole
    different light and be more bothered by it.
    
    RE: apologizing
    
    Having been the person who requested that certain men refrain from
    sexist remarks and harrasing remarks, I was treated in one group to
    the absolutely marvelous behaviour in which:
    
    a) The offending type of remarks continue unabated
    b) A guy says d*mn, h*ll, F*ck, or any other garden-variety swearword,
       and he turns *TO ME* and apologizes.
    
    So not only doesn't he "get it" , but he points me out as the
    malcontented b*tch that complains, and places me in less-than-the-guys
    status. Neatly done, eh?
    
    Oh yeah, it still happens, Bonnie.
    
    

    re:.29
    
    Well, the expression "It sucks" (and variations thereof) have made
    it into network television dialogue (see WISEGUY) -- as has "ass"
    (meaning derriere rather than donkey) -- so I suppose it's no longer
    considered a swear. The same, I suppose, can be said for "screwed".
    
    --- jerry

    re: .30
    
    I didn't mean to imply that I thought it didn't happen, Dawn, only
    that since it didn't happen in the groups I work in, I didn't know
    how I personally would deal with the situation.  
    
    Perhaps because I have been fortunate enough to work in
    nonharrassing environments and know how productive and healthy
    they can be, I think I'd overreact badly to something like that
    that was intended in a harrassing or sexist way.
    
    --bonnie

    RE: .32, Bonnie
    
    Egad. This is going to sounds like serious recursion, but: I didn't
    mean to imply that you were denying my experience, just wanted
    to emphasize that it still *does* happen. Until it happened to *me*
    I thought it was pretty much out of vogue. (I mean it *is* 1990,
    right?!) 
    
    With any luck at all, I'm moving into a better environment, myself.
    
    --DE
    

    It is 1990, but I'm becoming rather cynical about whether that's
    going to be an improvement.
    
    --bonnie

    [I have used "the f-word" twice in this note in a meta-discussion. It was
    essential to the distinction I was drawing and not intended to shock or
    offend. If its use offends you, please hit next unseen now.]




    I'm slightly surprised by some of the reactions to this topic. I think I
    have a pretty good vocabulary, and I don't think I have a hard time
    expressing myself. There are times when I am angry or frustrated where "oh
    goodness gracious me" just doesn't express what I mean. I realize that
    some listeners may not react the same way that I do, some may not realize
    just how upset I am, others may be shocked and offended. This is part of
    the problem with using such "thalamic" terms, they are very subject to
    misinterpretation. On the other hand, they are part of my working
    vocabulary and I decline to remove them either because someone might
    disapprove or that I might accidentally offend someone. We have a delicate
    balancing act between supressing me and offending you. My personal take is
    that the Supreme Court was right, "community standards" must govern. Just
    as I would not use "f*ck" in front of my grandmother (since I *know* it
    would simply offend her and not convey my meaning) if this community
    decides that "f*ck" is obscene, I will stop using it here. Please,
    however, don't confuse local ordinances with universal law.

    There was a day, not too long ago when I had been fighting a bug in my
    C code for literally hours. I finally discovered that I had used "="
    instead of "==" in an "if" statement. I came out of my office shouting at
    the top of my lungs "F*CK 'C'! F*CK UNIX!". I could be heard throughout
    the floor, and I probably gave the "Little Old Lady" outside my office a
    coronary. In those circumstances "rats" or "Oh dear oh me" just wouldn't
    have done. Was I clear and precise in my meaning? Yes. Was there any
    chance for misunderstanding? I doubt it. Was I offensive? Probably. Did it
    make me feel better? You bet. Would internalizing the anger and
    frustration have eventually caused me an ulcer? Perhaps.

    I'm coming to treat the work "professional" as a red flag. It never seems
    to be used without the prefix "un-". It seems to be used by people when
    they disapprove of a behavior but can't or won't express an objective
    reason why. In this it seems to me to be as lazy and inarticulate as using
    indiscriminate obscenity. All too often it seems to be a way of saying "I
    don't like it and you shouldn't do it."

    A slightly discursive but perhaps illustrative story: In Orthodox Judaism
    the ineffable name of G*d is NEVER pronounced aloud (well once a year, but
    only by the priests and only under cover of masking sound from the
    congregation, and never in modern times). The Name is so holy, that only
    part of it is even written (YHWH). That written representation has become
    so holy that even it is not written in general anymore. There are a number
    of "titles" that are used instead, "Elohim" being one. Over time, the
    titles too become "too holy to use" since everyone KNOWS what they mean,
    and some start using other circumlocutions like "Elokim" and "Adoshem".
    I am NOT trying to ridicule the practice, given the belief that some
    things are too holy to use in mundane applications but that SOME way of
    talking about holy things is needed, it is not at all surprising that the
    "substitutes" eventually take on the attributes of the thing they are
    substituting for.

    I hope the parallels are clear. If we outlaw "fuck" because it is
    offensive, and use something else instead "f*ck", "f-word", "FLW", or
    whatever, either everyone knows what is meant and the euphemism eventually
    becomes as offensive as the original (e.g. legs and limbs). This said, I
    believe that substituting euphemisms is ultimately futile, or at least
    interminable. Of course the process works in the other direction as well.
    "Offensive" words, if used too often and an even more offensive term is
    eventually needed, if we allow "fuck" it will eventually lose it's impact
    and yet another term (I shudder to speculate... [ ... no I don't :-) ])
    will come to be used. Isn't language WONDERFUL?

	-- Charles

    re : .35
    
      Larry Niven (well known science fiction author) used to write stories
    set in Earth's future.  The words "censor" and "censored" had become
    swearwords in their own right (own write???) as in "It's all censored
    up!"
    
    
    						Nigel

    Autocoder anyone?
    
    				Charlie.
    
    Those special locations 1-132, 201-280, and 301-380.
    
    And I'm only 22 years old!
    
    Believe that one and I've got a good bridge for sale!

    My autocoder SPIs (green and white manuals) were contributed to the
    Boston Computer Museum some years ago.
    
    Grins

    The AT&T folks who found the C bug that caused the "all circuits busy"
    problem last week would probably agree with your estimation.
    
    Marge

    Well, Am*s (.14), if we st*p using f*ur letter words (thank goodness
    for th*t was plural!), wh*t w*ll we do?  Our writing w*ll l**k silly!
    ;-)
    
    And FWIW, D!, I laughed out loud when I read your note.  I thought it
    was very funny, except for one line.  And this *might* be where the
    confusion started regarding both you and Kath.  You said something
    about expecting this note to be deleted - not this *reply*.  When I
    read that, I wondered for a moment if you really were trying to be
    funny (and succeeding).  For a minute, I thought you might mean that
    you expected your reply to be an end to the entire discussion.  Then
    Kath's reply agreed wholeheartedly (and quite seriously) with your
    note.  If others read the note in that light, they may have felt you
    were ridiculing their opinions.  I'm not attacking you.  I really did
    laugh out loud (the cleaning crew thinks I'm nuts!).  I just wanted to
    point out how this might be construed.
    
    And Charles, I was not offended by your note.  I think you gave us all
    something to think about.  English is a living language, and you are
    right.  I've noticed the general acceptance of the formerly-forbidden
    expletives (since Nixon, as a matter of fact).  I've even heard *both*
    my parents use (gasp!) "THE F-WORD!"  I told them that they would have
    washed my mouth out with soap had I used such language around them!  I
    think you might be feeling a little sensitive about the
    "unprofessional" stuff, though.  If you only use the word in the
    context of your original example (C and UNIX), then I don't think most
    people would consider you unprofessional.  What has been expressed in
    some replies here, I think, is the belief that there *are* better ways
    of expressing ourselves in daily conversation.  There are people who
    use expletives constantly, and *that* is unprofessional.
    
    Well, there's some pretty heavy @#*! going on here! ;-)
    
    As for the original question, way back in .0, I don't think this
    constitutes sexual harassment at all.  I think that it would be rude to
    use such language around someone you *know* finds it offensive,
    however.  But definitely not harassment.
    
    Susan