New York City Councilwoman Seeks to Outlaw "B-word"

So long freedom of speech! It was nice knowing you. We had a fun time while it lasted. At least we will always have the 1900's!!!

It is like when they added the caveat to the pronunciation of "harassment" in some English dictionaries, as far as which syllable has the emphasis.

The joke becomes the truth.

-ax

with a child support hearing judge.
while the word is, in fact, a "legal" term - you will be rebuffed if not found in contempt.

because bastardy has become "normalized"....what with 37% of all US births actually being illegitimate.

oregon dad

(From Wikipedia) -

"Newspeak is a fictional language in George Orwell's novel Nineteen Eighty-Four. In the novel, it is described as being "the only language in the world whose vocabulary gets smaller every year." Orwell included an essay about it in the form of an Appendix (in the past tense)[1], in which the basic principles of the language are explained.

Newspeak is closely based on English but has a greatly reduced and simplified vocabulary and grammar (e.g., 'good' means 'to love Big Brother'; 'bad' is deleted from the language because 'ungood' means 'bad'; therefore there is now no literal concept to express the term, 'Big Brother is bad'). This suited the totalitarian regime of the Party, whose aim was to make any alternative thinking ("thoughtcrime") or speech impossible by removing any words or possible constructs which describe the ideas of freedom, rebellion and so on.

One character says admiringly of the shrinking volume of the new dictionary: "It's a beautiful thing, the destruction of words."

---

A society that bans offensive words is in fact on the path to extinguishing the forms of thought that such "offensive" language makes possible.

It's far easier to manipulate people by employing Doublespeak, using words that disguise the actuality - i.e. "collateral damage" = innocent dead people;"downsizing" = firing many employees; "enhanced interrogation techniques" = torture.

Time to re-read the major dystopian novels?

Or, maybe soon, just the Wall Street Journal after Murdoch's new management takes over?

I thought I saw a post asking when "dick-head" would be removed from "proper" speach.

Well, as it sounds like it is against men, it never will be.

Only those words that can, at any level at any time cast a less than otherworldly reverence towards women will be removed.

they would go after CUNT rather than bitch.
calling a woman a filthy cunt has much greater impact than calling her a filthy bitch.

I think this congresscunt needs to be recalibrated.

oregon dad

A classice example is "equity" as opposed to "equality" It is discussed in Legalizing Misandry. Equity includes things like affirmative act, supposedly to redress past wrongs and "level the playing field". Where the subtle manipulation of words is used with regards to this, is "substantive equality" (equity) versus "formal equality" (equality of opportunity). Feminists use "substantive" and "formal" to imply that substantive equality is what is desired..note that it sounds like "substantial" - as opposed to "formal", which implies something like "in theory" or "basically" (as opposed to "actual").

This abuse of words has enabled them to sneak equity into legislation. In the book, there are other fascinating examples of the manipulative language used by feminists.
-ax

Ha ha, I even heard of political correctness on "do's and dont's when posting" on a board I used to frequent..they said "don't type in caps, because it is like shouting". Not quite the same subject as above but it is loosely related to the Orwellian issue.

I watched one of the Harry Potter movies the other day and one of the characters, a woman noless, used the "b" word. I'm glad to see this councilwoman is ready to force NY businesses to pull the movies from the shelves. Oh wait, she's not going to do that, because this is just an empty, symbolic gesture with absolutely no real power behind it.

... an angry letter, too!

http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2001290023-2007230580_1,00.html

Is this report for real? Mz Mealy making a mealy-mouthed complaint about the use of a word that is commonplace? Seems too much of an obvious pun. Is it April 1 already?

But let's run with it. If it's true, I would have no objection to Mz Mealy getting her way and passing a law that attempts to ban the word. Because it would be a total and dismal failure, and would serve the purposes of the men's movement wondrously well. How would that happen?

Firstly, everyone who believes in free speech and who relishes sticking it to tinpot officialdom (I hope that is about 99% of the population, i.e. everyone who isn't actually a tinpot official) would deliberately use the word at every opportunity, just to show who's boss.

Secondly, there will be the awkward little problem of those legions of women who use the word freely about themselves and other women. We all know that no female would ever be prosecuted, so if a string of men were charged for their use of the word while the women who used it were ignored, how can Mealy and her enforcers avoid being exposed as utter sexist hypocrites?

Thirdly, any attempt to nail a conviction on a man would be all but impossible, and expose Mealy's law for the jackass piece of garbage it really was. Hand women any opportunity to give men a good kicking without impunity, and they will grab it. So we could expect scores of women accusing men: "He called me a b****. Arrest him!" But unless there are witnesses, we will simply have a "he said, she said" scenario. Does that sound familiar? But this time there will be no forensic evidence, no DNA, nothing at all to corroborate the woman's claim. Dare the authorities take it any further in such a case? If so, they will look stupid and vindictive, as case after case falls over in court. But if not, they will be forced to admit that "she said" is no kind of evidence on its own. Which exposes those other more serious situations where they already do believe that "she said" is good enough to put a man behind bars. What a nasty dilemma for them, inadvertently delivered by an ignorant man-hater.

So this could be a blessing in disguise. Any example of feminism over-reaching itself and falling flat on its ugly face in public view, is most welcome. Bring it on.

When I read this article about seeking to legally ban the word "bitch," because it is theoretically derogatory to women, I immediately thought that it would fun for a heterosexual male politician of little repute to propose a similar banning of the word "faggot."

Because that's at least the equivalent insulting term to call a heterosexual male.

Of course, the ensuing controversy would also have to consider that both "bitch" and "faggot" are endearing terms in the gay community, and as another poster pointed out, "bitch" is actually a compliment among feminists. (You see bumper stickers all the time that use the word... no "faggot" decals so far...)

PaulP's post above is very insightful.

A bit of Sun Tzu's "The Art of War," spun for more contemporary and less enlightened times, eh?

All good points, but I am reminded of Imus. He tried to do the same thing as you guys suggest, and he got slammed for it. It will always be ok for niggers to call each other niggers, and bitches to call other bitches ... bitches...

Face it, the avg white boy doesnt stand a snowballs chance in hell of ever uttering either of those words without strong reactions from all sides.

Its a beautifull world we live in! Not!!!

...slavery and racism are things that white people do or did do to other people. It's not like those things are UNIVERSAL and have been done by and to every group of human beings ever in existence. White people did it all and it's all their fault.

And you know, discriminating against a group that you believed discriminated against you makes everything right with the world.

"Slavery in Native Americans"

You will learn that American Indians practiced slavery well before the Europeans arrived.

Tribes captured their rivals -- men, women, and children -- for use in ritual sacrifices, labor, marriage, and even sometimes adopting the children.

There is little historical evidence for the romantic version of the Noble Savage that graces today's pulp female romance novels.

This is not to justify the genocide that took place in America during the Indian Wars.

Feminists, seeing white men as the oppressor class, have always had a fondness for slaves and Indians.... because they "prove" the theory of the Evil Patriarchy.

Too bad feminists lack the integrity to look closely at actual history....

errr .... Herstory?

Curiously, there is a feminist magazine called "Bitch." And don't forget the reclaiming of the "C" word with C***fest.

Strange.

As Jack Kammer has said, "But men know deep in their hearts that one of the greatest shams ever concocted is the notion that by virtue of their gender they enjoy lives of power and privilege while women live lives of degradation and oppression."

-ax

That and the black slaves in America were in large part bought through the sale of white slaves sold to African aristocrats.

There is no group of human beings alive who's ancestors did not participate in the sale of slaves and also has ancestors that were slaves. It is universal.

Check out Darlene's web page at --

http://www.nyccouncil.info/constituent/email_form.cfm?con_id=96

She should be introducing legislation to ban the word -- "fuggly."

Note that all of her sponsored bills are about discrimination against .... herself.

How often have you heard women referring to their so-called "strong friends" as bitches? I hear it all the time. I guess it is only wrong if a man says it?

"the most outrageous aspect is the total and i mean TOTAL silence from women. hell, they could care less. makes me sick." ~ donnieboy5

"Feminism: The most organized form of nagging" ~ Peter Zohrab

*E-Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/No_Feminazis