Who cares about uncreative people? They're doomed anyway
. In my ever-so-fucking-humble opinion, profanity is the first
refuge of people who are
creative (like for example Kurt Vonnegut
, as mentioned below). Ha! Take that!
I'm joking. It's all meaningless. Look, you're proposing that we eliminate an arbitrarily chosen set of words from our invective
. Why zap
this particular set? Why not preposition
s, or words that begin with 'A'? If you're using only one word, well, you're stuck in any case: They've all been used before, every blessed one
s in particular; they're common as dirt
). If you're using more than one word, then you've got a sentence
, right? If the sentence as a whole hasn't been used before, who cares if it's got "fuck
" in it somewhere?
In any case, I'd rather hear some good, healthy, trite Anglo-Saxon monosyllables
than sit through somebody making a spastic and hopeless
attempt at being "creative
". Furthermore, on E2 "creativity
" is generally defined as "a compulsion to emit incoherent, illiterate bullshit
", and that's got nothing to do with profanity
one way or another. Using words you can't spell or define isn't "creative
", it's annoying.
Tem42: I agree entirely, but refraining from annoying people isn't the subject at hand.
Segnbora-t: You're right too, or rather Kurt is right. On most of the rare occasions when I kid myself into thinking that what I have to say is worth hearing, I do use "clean language". Right now, of course, I had to use "foul language"; how could I not?