Swearing

[Kizzie]

A number of members have said that swearing is very triggering for them given that many suffered from CSA and/or emotional abuse in which offensive, demeaning sexually explicit language was used.  As such, we have instituted a new Member Guideline as follows:

Swearing is not permitted because it is triggering and offensive for many of our members who have suffered from CSA and/or physical/emotional abuse which involved aggressive, threatening and/or demeaning language so please be considerate.

A filter has been added to replace offensive words with an *. However, if a word slips by please report the post and it will be edited accordingly. 

Those who want to express anger or frustration may want to consider using one of the angry emoticons instead, for example: 

 

[KayFly]

That's interesting. I'm triggered by being told not to swear because in the midst of my childhood abuse, sexual abuse, mental and physical abuse,, when I tried to speak out angrily and swore, the only way my perpetrators (my parents), could win an argument, was by saying "don't swear" taking the authoritive figure, and therefore oppressing the problem further.

I get being triggered, and I do swear when expressing anger at times in this forum. Sorry if I have personally offended anyone.

We all have different triggers I guess.

[mourningdove]

I'm triggered by being told not to swear because in the midst of my childhood abuse, sexual abuse, mental and physical abuse,, when I tried to speak out angrily and swore, the only way my perpetrators (my parents), could win an argument, was by saying "don't swear" taking the authoritive figure, and therefore oppressing the problem further.

You're not the only one. I understand why swearing upsets people, but I also understand this.^ 

[Dutch Uncle]

A filter has been added to replace offensive words with an *. However, if a word slips by please report the post and it will be edited accordingly.

It's unclear for me if this means that replacing one or more letters from a swear-word is OK to do? Or is that still considered swearing?

Those who want to express anger or frustration may want to consider using one of the angry emoticons instead, for example: 

Is typing #%&! considered an emoticon or  swearing?

I ask because using either (the #%&! and [letter]*) has been earned me warnings at OOTF and led eventually to the extermination of my account there. I don't want that to happen again.
I'm a bit afraid to even ask this, and hope this is not considered a "Fake Question", which has been another offense that added up to my list of misgivings there.

It truly is not clear to me if the extended auto-censor now provides sufficient 'protection' or if this new rule means any word edited by the auto-censor should be edited out completely by the poster.

[Kizzie]

A filter has been added to replace offensive words with an *. However, if a word slips by please report the post and it will be edited accordingly.

It's unclear for me if this means that replacing one or more letters from a swear-word is OK to do? Or is that still considered swearing?

Typing any form of a swear word is not acceptable "f***" or  "f**k" for example. The filter will pick up most full swear words and replace them with an "*" but it will not pick up  "f***" or  "f**k" so these are what may slip by (or swear words that are not in the filter).

Those who want to express anger or frustration may want to consider using one of the angry emoticons instead, for example:

Is typing #%&! considered an emoticon or swearing?

Good question Dutch, and your reason for asking it is a reasonable one.  To my mind  "&*^%" represents swearing to most of us, but as to whether or not it's offensive I'm not sure.  so let's see what others have to say. 

Is "*&^%" an acceptable form of swearing or not? Speaking up is a "good" thing so please weigh in

[Dutch Uncle]

Thanks.

I hadn't realized [letter]*** gets passed the filter. It makes perfect sense though.
Nor had I realized the filter does not 'produce' an 'acceptable' form of a swearword. Which is the case at some other BulletinBoards/fora. Thanks for clearing that up.

I'd say @#$&! is an 'emoticon'/non-offensive. Much as it is in many comics/cartoons. Since it is an generic expression of anger/frustration.
I think I even murmur that in real life sometimes  . Non-intelligable sounds.



[attachment deleted by admin]

[mourningdove]

I agree with Dutch Uncle. Keyboard mashes are not words, so they can't be considered swear words. To me, there is a big difference between doing that and typing an altered expletive that everyone can still recognize.

I think that banning the keyboard mash would be going too far, because that would be essentially saying that no one is allowed to express their anger and frustration except by writing well thought out and sensitive prose that happens to be impossible for many people when they get triggered (or searching for the approved emoticons).

[Kizzie]

Good feedback tks DU and MD.

I'll leave this open for a bit in case anyone else wants to weigh in.

[Lifecrafting]

I grew up in an environment where vocabulary, in terms of learning how to use it effectively, was not important; what I did learn, is how to swear and I learned that very well! As I grew older, I naturally found a love of reading and writing and through that, I found different ways to express myself. I also learned to respect the company I keep and to the best of my ability, use my words appropriately.

I think that banning the keyboard mash would be going too far, because that would be essentially saying that no one is allowed to express their anger and frustration except by writing well thought out and sensitive prose that happens to be impossible for many people when they get triggered (or searching for the approved emoticons).

I agree here as well. Mourningdove, you said that beautifully!

As with all aspects of language, there is a time/place where swearing totally fits my emotional state and is just as valuable as any other word created by that energy. 
Taking others into consideration, if we must alter the way we express ourselves to accommodate the group as a whole, I say it's a good thing but banning the keyboard mash? No...

I read a post here a few days back and someone used "effin" in place of a swear word. And for me, it worked; I felt the energy behind the statement just as if the swear had been spoken.
So "effin" is OK?

[mourningdove]

Thanks, Lifecrafting.

I wrote a version of the following earlier, but then got triggered (see above for why) and scared and erased it:

I am willing to go with the flow, because I don't want to trigger anyone, but my personal preference would be to allow expletives as long they were always preceded (like at the beginning of a post) by trigger warnings for language. That way no one would be taken by surprise by troubling language, and yet people would not have to police their own communication so thoroughly when they are upset. There have been many times that I have not posted here when I was upset and could have used support, because I didn't have the ability to (or didn't want to) censor myself every sentence. And that in turn made me resentful.

[Dutch Uncle]

I think that banning the keyboard mash would be going too far, because that would be essentially saying that no one is allowed to express their anger and frustration except by writing well thought out and sensitive prose that happens to be impossible for many people when they get triggered (or searching for the approved emoticons).

I agree here as well. Mourningdove, you said that beautifully!

I want to add that there are posters here, like me, for whom English is not their native tongue, nor is their culture "English". It's pretty hard to figure out what is allowed.
As an example: for me personally, the whole concept of "bleeping out" whole words or part of it is completely alien.
And so, to find out what is acceptable or not really is a matter of "trial and error". And by that I mean NOT wanton "trial" (as in: let's see if I can get away with this), but of unexpected "error" (as in: "Oops! What happened here?".)

[Lifecrafting]

I am willing to go with the flow, because I don't want to trigger anyone, but my personal preference would be to allow expletives as long they were always preceded (like at the beginning of a post) by trigger warnings for language. That way no one would be taken by surprise by troubling language, and yet people would not have to police their own communication so thoroughly when they are upset.

Yes, I feel the same. I'm wondering though, if it would it work for the group as a whole? If someone couldn't read the post because of swearing, would they then miss the value of such a post?

There have been many times that I have not posted here when I was upset and could have used support, because I didn't have the ability to (or didn't want to) censor myself every sentence. And that in turn made me resentful.

I completely understand. I too, would choose to express myself without censorship; what if we just have a swearing page....HA! Just kidding. That would be so intense!  OK, so I wanted to say freaking intense there....  OK to use that substitute?
Seriously though, would it be helpful to create a circle of friends here who could be of support through PMs at such times? I know that's not ideal but aside from creating a page that allows for mad (p.o. - is that allowed? Gosh this thread has me thinking!)language.... I can't think of anything else. 

I'm a bit afraid to even ask this, and hope this is not considered a "Fake Question", which has been another offense that added up to my list of misgivings there.

Seriously...what is a fake question?

[Dutch Uncle]

I'm a bit afraid to even ask this, and hope this is not considered a "Fake Question", which has been another offense that added up to my list of misgivings there.

Seriously...what is a fake question?

It was not explained to me. Apparently it's self evident.
After some puzzlement I've decided not to try to figure it out.

And I couldn't ask, that message had come through loud and clear. 

[mourningdove]

I think "fake question" is an accusation that is made when someone thinks you are not really looking for an answer, but rather trying to disrupt by asking. I think this is dangerous to do on the internet, especially in settings that are designed for support, without solid evidence of malicious intent.

I was wrongly accused of something like this once on a website that was supposedly for support and it was devastating for me because it gave me massive EFs that came from childhood peer bullying and parental abuse and it was traumatic enough that I still have flashbacks about it. I'm sorry you were accused of asking a "fake question," DU. That question you asked seems reasonable to me.

I am willing to go with the flow, because I don't want to trigger anyone, but my personal preference would be to allow expletives as long they were always preceded (like at the beginning of a post) by trigger warnings for language. That way no one would be taken by surprise by troubling language, and yet people would not have to police their own communication so thoroughly when they are upset.

Yes, I feel the same. I'm wondering though, if it would it work for the group as a whole? If someone couldn't read the post because of swearing, would they then miss the value of such a post?

That's a good point. It could also be problematic if "offensive" language was then quoted by another without the trigger warning. There are definitely pros and cons to every decision.

[Dutch Uncle]

With the caveat that I don't want to 'solve' a problem I am hardly aware of (because I have no idea what the mods encounter during their work), I think that disallowing anything that's in the auto-censor filter is a good way of indicating what's acceptable or not. Posters can then see when they post if it's OK or not, and take appropriate action.

Like mourningdove said, there are pros and cons to any decision:
- There will still be the question what should be in the filter (thus it doesn't 'solve' the question on what should be allowed or not)
- People, certainly here, are regularly already 'nervous', and they might as well forget to check if their post has been 'corrected' by the auto-censor. I do 'fire-and-forget' posts here! (usually not though). So then it might appear as malicious intent, if a poster has left *'s in their post. When it's not.

I think a *trigger warning for language* will defy it's purpose. Who am I to know if the language used below it will be triggering for me? One thing I've learned here is that there is a myriad of triggering language, since we all had so different specific experiences. But the experiences are, in all their diversity, so incredible similar in the effect they had on us: cPTSD.


In general I like the idea of encouraging posters to use emoticons to express anger, frustration, rage etc. , but I think there's too little choice at the moment.
would definitely not work for me, as this is exactly I want to learn to avoid  . Being able to 'vent' my anger in other, more constructive ways is a means to prevent me from blowing up. That's a bit self-destructive, which I've done for so long, too long.
is a great emoticon, that I also use.
But if I really have to/need to say [inappropriate language], I need something stronger than that.  is waaay to well behaved. Some smiley for :over-the-top: could do this community a service, IMHO.


And thanks mourningdove (and Lifecrafting) for your support.
I was puzzled by the action taken then, let's leave it with that.
The mere fact I was allowed to even mention it now, in this context, has convinced me such silliness will not happen here.
So, thanks to the mods as well. 
What has happened in Vegas, can stay in Vegas. Over and done with. 

And I'm sorry to hear, mourningdove, that you've had a similar experience. It's so hard.