Read time: 4 minutes

Is The New York Times Advising Blogs On Use Of 'The F Word'?

Reeeaally? The New York Times wants to talk about civility? Again?
Is The New York Times Advising Blogs On Use Of 'The F Word'?

Editor's Note: Crooks and Liars has a 'no F-word' policy. Web search results are compromised when posts contain profanities, as search engines devalue titles and content containing the word. (Posts containing the word are banned from safe search and deranked for everything else.) If you wish to read this post with all it's F-word glory, the original is here. Driftglass is one of the founding "vituperative foul-mouthed bloggers of the Left" (David Broder, 2006) and we're grateful he allows us to cross-post his writing, edited for f-words, here.

Context:

-- eds

The tone police
They live on cable teevee
The tone police
They're paid to shush and decree
The tone police
They're coming to denounce me
Oh no...

As a card-carrying vituperative, foul-mouthed blogger of the Left, I spend most of my evenings pretty much like every other vituperative, foul-mouthed blogger of the Left in America:  leading my local chapter of the notorious Libtard "lang-gang", MLA-13, on a city-wide reign of linguistic terror. 

Our signature move?  Spray painting churches with improperly positioned Oxford commas.  Ha!  Take that, Corrupt Duopoly! 

Yes, for years I put the "punk" in "improper punctuation" but it turns out that, as good as it felt to stick it to The Man, I was wrong to do so.  So very wrong! 

What turned me right around was the very wise column by my betters at the New York Times yesterday.  Mr. Peter Baker and Ms. Katie Roger note very wisely that, when fighting a Russia-backed white-supremacist/theocratic minority who have taken over your country, are aggressively destroying every democratic institution right before our eyes, deliberately trashing our key alliances, and ripping babies from their mothers and putting them in cages, nothing is more important than good manners.  


↓ Story continues below ↓

In Trump’s America, the Conversation Turns Ugly and Angry, Starting at the Top

...

Mr. Trump’s coarse discourse increasingly seems to inspire opponents to respond with vituperative words of their own. Whether it be Robert De Niro’s four-letter condemnation at the Tony Awards or a congressional intern who shouted the same word at Mr. Trump when he visited the Capitol this week, the president has generated so much anger among his foes that some are crossing boundaries that he himself shattered long ago.

The politics of rage that animated Mr. Trump’s political rise now dominate the national conversation, as demonstrated repeatedly during the debate over his “zero tolerance” immigration policy that separated children from parents apprehended at the border.


“Unfortunately, we’ve seen a decline in civility and an uptick in incivility,” said Christine Porath, a Georgetown University professor and author of “Mastering Civility,” a book on behavior in the workplace. “It seems like people are not only reciprocating, but we tend to stoop lower rather than higher. It’s really putting us in an unfortunate place.”


...

Yes, by the simple act of pretending that the entire Bush Administration never happened, the entire Obama Administration never happened --




 -- and, indeed, the entire history of the modern Republican party never happened --



-- Mr. Baker and Ms. Katie Rogers are able to dial in on the real problem facing our democracy.

Bad manners!  On Both Sides!

So take heed, Libtards:  in the fight against the Republican forces of darkness and barbarism that are squeezing the life out of our country, how can you expect to be taken seriously if you use language that  would offend the extremely delicate sensibility of Peter Baker and Katie Rogers?  I mean, can one even imagine what an irreparable blow to the cause of emancipation it would have been to if, for example, at the height of the Civil War, instead of dainty, polite locutions, Abolitionists had used harsh language to denounce the pro-slavery goons across the aisle?


And so, in aid of this vital directive from our betters at The New York Times here is a short but helpful guide to the proper use of the word "f*ck" in a formal dining situation:

Dinner f*ck: The largest of the f*cks, also called the place f*ck, is placed on the left of the largest Republican atrocities. Other smaller f*cks for other crimes against democracy are arranged to the left or right of the dinner f*ck, according to when they will be used.

Fish f*ck: If there is a fish course, this small f*ck is placed to the left of the dinner f*ck because it is the first f*ck used

Salad f*ck: If the salad is served after the entrée, the small salad f*ck is placed to the right of the dinner f*ck, next to the the largest Republican atrocities. If the salad is to be served first, and fish second, then the f*cks would be arranged (left to right): salad f*ck, fish f*ck, dinner f*ck.

Important additional etiquette tip!  No more than three of any f*cks should are ever be used during a formal occasion, except when a "Fuck you, you baby stealing motherf*ckers!!!" is used in addition to three other f*cks.

Yours in Christ,

driftglass.

Comments

We welcome relevant, respectful comments. Any comments that are sexist or in any other way deemed hateful by our staff will be deleted and constitute grounds for a ban from posting on the site. Please refer to our Terms of Service (revised 3/17/2016) for information on our posting policy.