Patch 5.3 interview with Ghostcrawler
Mystery of the Unborn Val'kyr
The latest patch 5.3 news
All of the latest Mists of Pandaria newsWhat makes a bad word bad?
by Anne Stickney 
Feb 1st 2012 at 2:00PM
Warning: This post may contain language that is offensive to some.
Our own Fox Van Allen tackled the subject of the odd quirks of the mature language filter last week -- the fact that some objectionable words have been mysteriously left out of the filter, while others of a much less objectionable nature have oddly been left in it. None of this was noticed of course until the mature language filter was bugged so that it reset itself, resulting in a lot of people spewing a lot of random keyboard symbols until they remembered to turn it off again.
Personally? I'm not sure if the mature language filter is at all an effective tool. Since the first days of WoW, Horde and Alliance players have not been allowed to speak to each other. Part of this was because of faction separation, but part of it was to discouraging griefing, which happened all the time in PvP situations. Players of the opposing faction could kill you repeatedly, but they couldn't swear at you -- until, that is, players realized they could communicate with keyboard symbols arranged into letters. This ability was soon squashed.
And that's the problem, isn't it? It doesn't matter how much you block a word. If someone is determined to have their say, they will find a way to say it. If you can't talk to the opposing faction, you roll an alt and cuss them out that way, or over voice chat, or via email, or on Twitter, or wherever they can conveniently contact you. So why try blocking it at all? More importantly, what makes a bad word "bad," anyway?
Our own Fox Van Allen tackled the subject of the odd quirks of the mature language filter last week -- the fact that some objectionable words have been mysteriously left out of the filter, while others of a much less objectionable nature have oddly been left in it. None of this was noticed of course until the mature language filter was bugged so that it reset itself, resulting in a lot of people spewing a lot of random keyboard symbols until they remembered to turn it off again.
Personally? I'm not sure if the mature language filter is at all an effective tool. Since the first days of WoW, Horde and Alliance players have not been allowed to speak to each other. Part of this was because of faction separation, but part of it was to discouraging griefing, which happened all the time in PvP situations. Players of the opposing faction could kill you repeatedly, but they couldn't swear at you -- until, that is, players realized they could communicate with keyboard symbols arranged into letters. This ability was soon squashed.
And that's the problem, isn't it? It doesn't matter how much you block a word. If someone is determined to have their say, they will find a way to say it. If you can't talk to the opposing faction, you roll an alt and cuss them out that way, or over voice chat, or via email, or on Twitter, or wherever they can conveniently contact you. So why try blocking it at all? More importantly, what makes a bad word "bad," anyway?
Apple Cider Mage had an interesting post earlier this week about objectionable terminology of a different kind -- the sexist kind. She takes a look at the disparity between male and female armor, but more importantly, she addresses the term "slut plate," used to describe scanty plate bikinis and other fabulously nonexistent protection from the wrathful elements of the Warcraft world. It's not the armor she's concerned with -- after all, scantily clad women warriors are pretty much commonplace in the fantasy genre. It's the term "slut" that is bothersome, and she does an excellent job of explaining why, even suggesting an alternative term to use.
All of this got me thinking back to Fox's article earlier this week and about words in general. Maybe it's just because I do a lot of writing, or maybe my brain just works in different ways. But to me, words are very odd, powerful little things. Here, we have a random collection of lines we call letters, placed in a certain order, given a certain pronunciation, and then given a collective meaning. All of that out of a little collection of lines.
But those meanings change over the course of years, and a word that meant a bundle of sticks at one point in the distant past now means something entirely different and particularly objectionable to the majority of the public. When did that happen, exactly? How did people take a word with one meaning and give it another -- and more importantly, why did we let it grow and fester into a word that we are now ultimately offended by?
There are words in the English language that I will not use, which is why this post has not been peppered with terms that I don't feel comfortable laying out there for you to read. But as I think about it, I wonder why I am so uncomfortable with saying them, writing them, or even thinking them. They're words. Little collections of lines, put together in a certain way and given a particular meaning -- and apparently that meaning is strong enough that I don't want to even place those words to paper or say them aloud.
Gamers and other people who use offensive language don't particularly care about that meaning in one way or another. What they care about is how people react to the meaning and the words. What they are doing is deliberately throwing a lot of of those collections of lines at people and taking delight when people get upset and take offense because of that meaning. It's a power play, and there are far too many people out there who buy into it on a continual basis.
In short, it's not the words that are harmful; they're collections of lines. Placed in order, and given meaning. The person who gives those words meaning is the person who holds all the power over those words, not the person who is saying them. The person who is saying them is hoping beyond all hope that the ones who are listening are going to give those words the worst meaning possible and have some sort of negative reaction to it.
Maybe telling a person to stop using those words isn't enough. Maybe trying to block that person from saying those words isn't enough. The only thing making a bad word bad is the meaning we attribute to it. Human beings have been around for thousands of years, and in those thousands of years, we've decided that some words are bad and others are good. And over the course of history, we've taken perfectly good words and collectively decided to change the meaning of those perfectly good words into something that is considered bad and wholly reprehensible.
If we have the power to change the meaning of a word from positive to negative, why do we seem to lack the power to stop it from changing at all?
Filed under: Analysis / Opinion
Reader Comments (Page 5 of 7)
Pyromelter Feb 1st 2012 4:41PM
Cursing in general is not against the ToS. Directing a curse at someone is against the ToS (harassment). You could maybe make the argument that someone just dropping F-bombs over and over could be considered harassment or spam, but if I just got back from a raid and had just beat a boss for the first time, and I spouted in trade "Man beating that boss just now was f*%#ing amazing!" that would not be against the ToS.
loop_not_defined Feb 1st 2012 6:08PM
No, it is against the ToS. It does not have to be directed at anybody.
http://us.battle.net/support/en/article/harassment-policy
At no point does the article state that offensive language must be directed at any particular player.
Sarah Bee Feb 1st 2012 2:51PM
I'm of the opinion that if you use the Internet, then you're going to be exposed to sentences that might offend you. Deal with that. Being 'offended' by something is essentially just a whine at the end of the day. It doesn't mean anything. Doesn't contribute anything. All it is is "I want you to stop that because it upsets me."
raingod Feb 1st 2012 3:03PM
This is ridiculous. If you don't know the difference between common sense and repsecting others, and being a selfish prick, kill yourself and do humanity a favor.
Noyou Feb 1st 2012 3:04PM
That's well and fine to a point. But if you are out in public, you have a little responsibility to act in a certain manner. You go to a library or movie, it is considered polite, not to talk. Keep talking and you will probably be shushed by someone. Ignore those shushes and you will likely be asked to leave. Refuse to leave and you will be likely removed by local authorities. Same thing goes in WoW. People pay good money to enjoy their entertainment. If you are simply saying "bad words" in /saychat, Blizzard will probably not do much. You start spewing bad words in /1 or /2 and you might get a ban. Keep doing it and you might get a permanent ban. You can chose to brush words off all you want, it's what the majority of society deems offensive that matters. Sorry. You don't like it, live in a cave or on an island somewhere.
Alysandir Feb 1st 2012 3:09PM
"I'm of the opinion that if you use the Internet, then you're going to be exposed to sentences that might offend you. Deal with that."
I would take it one step further...if you live in the real world, then you're going to be exposed to ideas and actions that might offend you. Deal with that.
As I said in the previous article on this topic, the world is not a nice place, no matter how much we might wish it to be, or rationalize that it should be. (The internet is merely a microcosm of this.) How far you will go in life, and what kinds of opportunities you will have presented to you are very much relevant to your ability to function and persevere in the face of what can be incredible ugliness.
The role of censorship is to protect those who cannot, or do not wish to, deal with the realities of the world. It does have its place. But to try to enforce it on society at large is not only patently insulting, but also a fool's errand. You cannot change the ugly side of human nature.
Tfish92 Feb 1st 2012 3:18PM
@noyou
Being loud during a movie is a terrible example for what we're talking about here because that's unavoidable disturbance. If I was able to simple stop hearing, and seeing any action a person was doing in a theater, then why should the action they are doing that I can no longer be affected by in anyway whatsoever be illegal?
These are words. If you don't like it put a person on ignore. If they go around the ignore to continue harassing you, then it should be against the rules. People feel they have some special right to stop anyone from doing things they deem "offensive", and frankly that's just unacceptable behavior. If someone is not causing you direct inconvenience, or direct harm, then you can ignore it, and protect your delicate little sensibilities.
Alysandir Feb 1st 2012 3:32PM
@Noyou:
"You can chose to brush words off all you want, it's what the majority of society deems offensive that matters. Sorry. You don't like it, live in a cave or on an island somewhere."
Serious question for you: if there are two ways to censor, by either A) controlling what can be said or done, or by B) controlling what you expose yourself to, why is the predominant opinion of those who favor censorship that option A is the correct one?
To wit: if I am listening to the radio, and a message I find offensive is broadcast, I can A) turn off the radio or tune to another station, or B) petition the government to enforce standards of broadcast decency. Which is the easier, least costly, least invasive option? Option A) - hands down. Yet, in America, we've gone with option B. Why? Because to some who are offended by ideas and actions, merely removing themselves is not enough; they need to *control* the behavior. They need to ensure that actions are taken to hinder or outright deny messages that they do not wish to be heard.
The problem with this is that some messages SHOULD be heard, no matter how offensive we may find them. There are times we must become offended enough to act. There are times when exposure to ideas we once considered offended help us see them in a new light and realize that the idea isn't nearly as offensive as we may once have believed. And this is the inherent problem with broad, legislated censorship, that we never have the opportunity to lift our own self-imposed veil of censorship and really tune in to what is being said. Instead, we have to rely on someone else choosing what we are permitted to hear, someone who is merely "looking out for our best interests."
TLDR: The profanity filter is there for a reason: you can turn in on and off at your choice. But to demand that everyone restrict (or have restricted for them) behaviors that you personally deem offensive, goes beyond censorship and into tyranny.
Noyou Feb 1st 2012 3:39PM
The point I was trying to make is that in certain situations there is a reasonable protocol to follow. In public, in certain societies, etc. To simply just say, "deal with it" or "brush it off" is a little inconsiderate.
loop_not_defined Feb 1st 2012 6:12PM
Sarah Bee, what justifies the behavior? The fact that (apparently) everybody else is doing it? Do we really need to have the bandwagons and peer pressure conversation?
Glaras Feb 1st 2012 3:19PM
I used to write, as well. I also wrote and gave speeches. So I completely agree with the idea that words are powerful tools.
I also agree with the *personal concept* that we can choose to be offended or not. But I am seeing far too many people who are willing to use that as a shield to hide their own decision to be an obnoxious ass. "You're choosing to be offended, and it doesn't matter what I do" is a very convenient cover.
There is a critical component missing from MMOs that permits a collective group to apply standards of behavior on its members. There is no way to effectively consequate actions by an individual. You can put a toon on /ignore, but it won't stop the person behind it from rerolling, or using a different account to continue being a dbag. Blizzard could be effective, but they've taken the very understandable position that they won't be heavy-handed, so it takes a fairly substantial amount of poor behavior (language or otherwise) to get the ban-hammer to fall.
In short: my choosing to not feel offended does not remove an individual's fault when they choose to be offensive. And to the author's final question: we *do* have that power, but it's a collective power that must exercised consciously with awareness. The power to allow a word to become negative requires the opposite.
suzurambles Feb 1st 2012 3:20PM
Between the last article and this one I think there is a point I haven't seen brought up.
To me there are two classes of offensive language, general and hateful/slurs. General offense language doesn't have any particular direction, ass, damn, the f-word etc. It usually refer to actions and objects of negative value. Hateful words and slurs on the other hand attack a person's race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, etc.
I admit I swear frequently and with gusto, but I only use the general words. If I was to say to someone "You're an ass" it's a simple remark about their stubborn or foolish behavior. However if I say "You're a bitch" I am now making a more focused attack, if it was to a woman I am attacking her for being a woman, if it was directed at a man I am comparing him unfavorably to a woman.
The second example is what is unacceptable to me, it's degrading to attack a person for who or what they are and that is the kind of behavior that needs to be kept under tight control. People seem to be brushing both kinds of words off with a "Don't let the words have power over you" and I think that those people have never been attacked for what they are.
If someone calls me a fucking dumbass cause I pulled a boss before the group was ready and got us wiped yeah that's gonna roll off, but if they come after me for being gay/black/jewish/female that is a different, and far more offensive, matter.
Nagaina Feb 1st 2012 3:38PM
I cannot up vote this enough and I'm continually astonished by how many people *fail to get your very salient point here* -- namely, the offensive thing is being attacked for *who you are* by someone that thinks *who you are is BAD AND WRONG enough for it to be used as an insult.*
Gordal Feb 1st 2012 3:56PM
Y'know, Ian and Matt have it spot on.
http://threepanelsoul.com/2012/01/02/on-cussing/
"Mild enough to use in public, but ugly enough to get attention. Bloggers can use [it] without being sexist, homophobic, or even ableist."
suzurambles Feb 1st 2012 4:32PM
Gordal, you have hit the nail squarely on the head.
Skarn Feb 1st 2012 6:23PM
That focuses on the meaning that YOU ascribe to the words though. To YOU, "general offense" language isn't that bad. To someone else, it IS "that bad." The words have a different meaning, a different severity to different people. You are attempting to force YOUR opinion on someone else. Whether you are right or wrong isn't the point. It's that you are saying "this is what I think the words mean, so you'd better agree." Saying "you should use this word, it's just fine" is little different from "you can't use this word, I don't like it." It's still one person telling another person what to do.
suzurambles Feb 1st 2012 6:39PM
Well Skarn, it is my view, which I made clear a couple times throughout. I never forced anything on anyone, just stated how I felt.
That said, in regards to wow itself, the words I considered "Ok" are still offense and just cause I fell alright using them and I'm not particularly offended by their casual use doesn't be they are right in any situation. Also they are all on Blizzard's filter list, however many of the words I don't like, particularly LGBT related slurs, are NOT on said list.
rayden54 Feb 1st 2012 6:57PM
I take the exact opposite view. Insults are insults. The intent is more important than the specific word you use. Saying that "bitch" or "gay" or "retard" is worse than "asshole" is just political bullshit.
Arrohon Feb 1st 2012 3:23PM
Curse words are just strange. I can be reprimanded for calling someone an asshole, but it's apparently fine to call them a butthole. I can make old women faint by saying that I stepped in shit, but there's nothing wrong with saying that I stepped in poop. All of these "bad" words are just words that mean something that another non-"bad" word also means (exception with hell). It's not the words that are bad, it's the way they're used. Saying damn it shouldn't be considered any worse that saying darn it.
I'll admit, I'm pretty bitter about it all. I spent years living with people that thought that any four letter word was bad. Hence, butt (derived from the proper term buttocks) is bad, while bottom is fine. Hearing these supposedly great people Christian cussing has brought a bitter resentment to their hypocrisy and everything tied to it. Sorry about the rant...
Soulestream Feb 1st 2012 4:39PM
As a parent, I don't want my kids using either term. There is no difference in calling someone an ahole or a bhole. My daughters often sit with me and play WoW and I really have to watch what they see and hear. I use a chat addon so I can control what words are filtered. That is not the job of Blizzard, the community or society, its solely mine and my wife's job.
As far as the great Christian remark, part of the christian faith is the understanding that we are not great (or perfect) and never will be. Part of not being perfect is we also make stupid comments and mistakes, but we should always remember not to lay blame on someone today, for something we were doing yesterday.
Set your filter how you want, no one is ever going to agree on what is "good" or "bad" language. I just wish blizz would add in the ability to modify it.