Whoa, whoa, whoa! Stop the presses! Donald Trump said vulgar things about women!
How shocking is that?!
Oh. Okay, well, then, how about that Donald Trump used the "P" word?
That he used the "F" word?
How about that The New York Times used the "F" word?
That's right. Right there in this morning's edition:
How shocking is that?!
Oh. Okay, well, then, how about that Donald Trump used the "P" word?
That he used the "F" word?
How about that The New York Times used the "F" word?
That's right. Right there in this morning's edition:
| The redacting is mine. The Times printed the actual word. I also blacked out Mr. Trump's reference to the woman's pectorals. |  |
Now, granted, the newspaper was only accurately quoting Donald Trump,s words; still the question is there for the begging: did The Times actually mean to print those words? Or in their excitement over the material did they accidentally neglect to substitute a couple of asterisks for letters?
Not, I guess, that it should really make all that much difference, right? I mean, we are well into the 21st Century and off-color language is fairly ubiquitous, especially the "F" word. The word is part of standard dialogue in books, movies, cable TV, pop music, and, for some folks, normal conversation. In truth I might have even uttered it a time or two myself.
In fact, since coming into its own in the lexicon, the "F" word has become quite a versatile term with a variety of meanings that can be used in variety of circumstances, if most of them not particularly auspicious.
And yet here's the thing about that word: Common as it is, versatile as it is, still it has its place. For example, while most of us may find a few "F"'s tossed about in an action flick on a movie screen to be acceptable, hearing the word being used aloud in a public place would register as offensive to most of us.
The same can be said of hearing a candidate for President of The United States using it to describe the sexual relations he planned on having - but was denied - with a married woman.
But back to the question of reading that word in The New York Times. I mean, I guess don't exactly feel offended by reading it in the most reputable, most respected, most highly regarded newspaper in the United States...just kind of, well, surprised, I guess. Like, you just don't expect to read the "F" word in the New York Times, even for the sake of accuracy. I don't know.
But then maybe the off-color writing is on the wall. Today's Columbus Dispatch also carried the story of Trump's gross remarks and behavior towards women, and while the Dispatch article worked around the "F" word, it did include the "B" word - which I guess being published in The Columbus Dispatch is the equivalent of the "F" word being published in The New York Times -
Not, I guess, that it should really make all that much difference, right? I mean, we are well into the 21st Century and off-color language is fairly ubiquitous, especially the "F" word. The word is part of standard dialogue in books, movies, cable TV, pop music, and, for some folks, normal conversation. In truth I might have even uttered it a time or two myself.
In fact, since coming into its own in the lexicon, the "F" word has become quite a versatile term with a variety of meanings that can be used in variety of circumstances, if most of them not particularly auspicious.
And yet here's the thing about that word: Common as it is, versatile as it is, still it has its place. For example, while most of us may find a few "F"'s tossed about in an action flick on a movie screen to be acceptable, hearing the word being used aloud in a public place would register as offensive to most of us.
The same can be said of hearing a candidate for President of The United States using it to describe the sexual relations he planned on having - but was denied - with a married woman.
But back to the question of reading that word in The New York Times. I mean, I guess don't exactly feel offended by reading it in the most reputable, most respected, most highly regarded newspaper in the United States...just kind of, well, surprised, I guess. Like, you just don't expect to read the "F" word in the New York Times, even for the sake of accuracy. I don't know.
But then maybe the off-color writing is on the wall. Today's Columbus Dispatch also carried the story of Trump's gross remarks and behavior towards women, and while the Dispatch article worked around the "F" word, it did include the "B" word - which I guess being published in The Columbus Dispatch is the equivalent of the "F" word being published in The New York Times -
| ...also here redacted by me. |  |
The New York Times and The Columbus Dispatch may be ready for those words but Ailantha is not.
RSS Feed