Posted by Dave001 on December 31, 2004, at 19:16:07
In reply to Re: Interestingly So, posted by AdaGrace on December 30, 2004, at 7:41:38
Surely, I am not the only one here whom is conscious of the fact that we are not offended by words, per se, but the *meaning* of them in their context. For that reason, I find the concept of censorship by means of transposing a couple of letters in a word to be completely pointless. If I were to write to one of you (for purposes of example only), "f*ck off," how on Earth would that be any less offensive than if I were to use the term in its unadulterated form? I'm quite confident that most of you are capable of interpolating the censored letters in the example above, and would do so subconsciously as you read anyway. So would someone *please* explain to me the point of blipping a couple of letters from common "vulgarities," at least to the extent that it is supposed to reduce the offensiveness of a sentence, phrase, or string of words? ;-) The answer is of course that there is no point; one would have to carefully reconstruct the offensive (which has no real objective value in this sense) context in order to change the meaning.
Just my humble opinion, which is of course the only correct opinion. :-)
Dave
poster:Dave001
thread:434152
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20041226/msgs/436147.html