A History of Cursing: From Sacred Oaths to Social Media Storms
I. Introduction: Defining the Indefinable – The Nature of Cursing and Profanity
The study of cursing delves into a fundamental, albeit often contentious, aspect of human language. It explores words and expressions that societies have, at various times and for diverse reasons, deemed offensive, taboo, or powerful. Understanding the history of such language requires a careful delineation of key terms, an appreciation for its universal yet culturally specific nature, and a clear scope for investigation.
A. Defining Key Terminology
The lexicon of offensive language is rich and varied, with terms often used interchangeably despite nuanced distinctions. Profanity itself originates from the classical Latin profanus, meaning literally 'before (outside) the temple' (pro meaning 'outside' and fanum meaning 'temple, sanctuary').1 This etymology underscores an intrinsic historical connection between the concept of profanity and religious sanctity. Initially denoting that which was unhallowed or secular, "profane" evolved in Middle English to mean the desecration of a temple, and later, to encompass irreverent language, particularly concerning God or holy things.1 Its extended sense of "foul language" is linked to the Old Testament injunction against "profaning" the name of the Lord; notably, "profanity" as a term was relatively rare before the 19th century.2 This origin suggests that the earliest conceptions of what we now term profanity were likely tied to violations of religious codes rather than general vulgarity.
Swearing, in contemporary English, serves as a broad, catch-all term for the use of profanities, even when no formal oath is being taken.1 Uniquely, English, along with French (jurer), Canadian French (sacrer), and Swedish (svära), employs the same term for both profane utterances and the solemn act of oath-taking.1 The word's etymological journey begins with the Old English swerian ("to take an oath"), which itself derives from the Proto-Germanic swarjaną ("to speak, swear").4 This dual meaning—a solemn declaration versus a profane exclamation—points to a fundamental societal ambivalence towards the power of words connected to the sacred or forbidden.6 One usage invokes power respectfully, often in legal or religious contexts to affirm truth, while the other employs similar linguistic structures, such as invoking sacred names, in a transgressive or trivial manner. This suggests that the shocking power of profane swearing might historically have derived some of its force from its parody or perversion of the sacred act of oath-taking.
Cursing originally carried the specific meaning of invoking harm or evil upon someone—a literal malediction.1 In American English, while it retains this association with wishing harm, it is also used synonymously with swearing.1 The Old English root cursian meant "to wish evil to; to excommunicate".7 This distinction between the deliberate invocation of supernatural harm and a general profane outburst is significant for historical analysis.
Blasphemy refers specifically to impious or profane speech directed at God or sacred things, maintaining a stronger and more direct religious connotation than the broader term "profanity".1 It is often characterized by its intentional and defiant impiety.2
Obscenity typically pertains to language that is offensive due to its connection with sexual or scatological subjects.1 While related to profanity, not all obscenity is profane, and vice versa. The power of obscene words often resides in their taboo nature rather than their literal denotation, causing offense even when used metaphorically.1
Finally, an expletive is a word or phrase, frequently profane, used to fill out a sentence, express strong emotion, or serve as an interjection.1 Its original meaning was simply the addition of words without altering the sentence's core meaning.
Understanding these definitions, their etymological roots, and their overlaps is essential for navigating the complex and evolving history of offensive language. The following table provides a consolidated reference:
Table 1: Etymology and Core Definitions of Profane Language
B. The Universal Yet Culturally Specific Nature of Taboo Language
The use of taboo language appears to be a near-universal human behavior, employed across cultures to express strong emotions, demonstrate disrespect, add emphasis, or achieve various other communicative goals.1 However, the specific words, phrases, and concepts that are considered "profane" are profoundly shaped by cultural, social, and historical contexts.11 The primary subjects from which profanities are drawn—such as religion, sex, and bodily functions—receive different levels of emphasis and carry varying degrees of offensive weight depending on the language and culture in question.1 For instance, religious profanity, so central to the history of swearing in many Western societies, is largely absent in languages like Japanese and most Polynesian languages.1 This duality—a common human tendency towards using potent, restricted language, juxtaposed with highly localized and specific manifestations of that tendency—forms a central theme in the historical study of cursing.
C. Overview of the Report's Scope
This report will endeavor to trace the historical trajectory of cursing and profane language from ancient civilizations through to the complexities of the digital age. It will examine the etymological origins of key terms, explore the socio-cultural functions that swearing has served, and analyze the profound influence of religion and evolving moral frameworks on what is deemed offensive. Furthermore, it will document societal attempts to regulate and censor such language, and briefly touch upon the psychological and neurological factors that contribute to its power and persistence. While the available source material necessitates a primary focus on Western, particularly English-speaking, contexts, comparative elements from other cultures will be incorporated to provide a broader perspective on this multifaceted linguistic phenomenon.
II. Ancient Echoes: The Origins of Offensive Language
The practice of using offensive or supernaturally charged language is not a modern invention but has deep roots in antiquity. Archaeological and textual evidence from ancient civilizations reveals that cursing, in various forms, served purposes ranging from state-sanctioned magical rites to personal invective and public commentary.
A. Cursing in Ancient Egypt
Among the earliest documented forms of cursing are the Egyptian Execration Texts, dating as far back as the 20th to 18th centuries BCE.15 These texts, typically inscribed on pottery bowls or figurines representing enemies of the pharaoh or the state, were ritually smashed and buried.15 This act was a form of sympathetic magic, intended to harm or neutralize the power of those named.17 The rituals could be elaborate, involving binding the object, followed by actions such as smashing, stabbing, burning, and even urinating upon it before burial.17 Such practices demonstrate a profound belief in the performative power of inscribed curses to manifest tangible, destructive effects, particularly when linked to ritual action.
Beyond these formal, state-sanctioned practices, linguistic evidence points to the use of personal, vulgar invective. The term transliterated as "nk," likely pronounced "neck," is considered an ancient Egyptian equivalent of the "f-bomb," a vulgar term for sexual intercourse.18 Its appearance in a tomb curse—"May a donkey fuck you!"—highlights the early use of sexual vulgarity for malediction, combining offense with a wish for harm.18 Another potent insult, "kAt-tAHt" (kat-takhat), literally translating to "vagina-prostitute" and rendered as "filthy whore," appears in the ancient narrative, the Tale of Two Brothers.18 Furthermore, a stela from the era of Ramses III (c. 1198–1166 BC) is cited as containing one of the earliest recorded instances of what might be considered swearing.19 These examples from ancient Egypt illustrate that offensive language encompassed both ritualized, magically potent curses and personal insults often drawing on sexual or demeaning themes, a pattern that resonates with later historical periods.
B. Oaths and Imprecations in Ancient Greece
Ancient Greece also provides ample evidence of sophisticated cursing practices. Curse tablets, known as katadesmoi (κατάδεσμοι), were widely documented from the 5th century BCE onwards.16 These were typically small lead tablets inscribed with curses, imploring gods (often chthonic deities like Hecate or Persephone), spirits, or the deceased to inflict harm upon an adversary or rival.16 To enhance their perceived efficacy, these tablets were often pierced with nails—symbolically binding the victim—and then deposited in locations believed to facilitate contact with the underworld, such as graves, wells, or sanctuaries.16 This practice was not confined to a specific social class but was prevalent across various strata of Greek society.16 The targets of such curses were diverse, including litigants in court cases (wishing them to forget their words or become dizzy), thieves, competitors in business or sports, and even the objects of romantic or erotic interest.16 Erotic binding spells, such as diakopai (separation spells) and agogai (spells to bind a target to the user), became particularly popular during the Hellenistic period.16 The existence of professional magicians who crafted curse objects, such as kolossoi (akin to voodoo dolls), is evidenced from around 400 BCE.20
Beyond formal curses, ancient Greek literature, particularly the comedies of Aristophanes, reveals a robust vocabulary of personal insults, often of a fecal or sexual nature.19 Terms such as koprophagos (κοπροφάγος, "shit-eater"), metrokoites (μητροκοίτης, "mother-fucker"), and kunops (κυνώψ, "bitch-face") demonstrate that taboos surrounding the body and its functions were already potent sources for offensive language.19 The Greek term aischrologia was used to describe such shameful or offensive language.19 Oaths invoking deities, such as "ma Dia" ("by Zeus"), were also common and could be adapted to other gods.19 Some historians have compared the use of curse tablets to modern swearing, suggesting that similar psychological motivations, such as anger or envy, might underlie both.16 The Greek practices, therefore, showcase a dynamic interplay between belief in supernatural intervention through meticulously crafted curses and a vivid, often vulgar, lexicon of personal invective.
C. Verba Prava in Ancient Rome
Ancient Rome, too, possessed a rich and often explicit tradition of offensive language, or verba prava (bad words). Literary sources, such as the poetry of Catullus and Martial, provide direct evidence of common and "dirty" swear words, a subject extensively explored by J. N. Adams in The Latin Sexual Vocabulary.21 Catullus's Poem 16 is infamous for its opening lines: "Pedicabo ego vos et irrumabo, / Aureli pathice et cinaede Furi" ("I will fuck you in the ass and in the mouth, / Cocksucking Aurelius and Butt-boy Furius").21 This demonstrates a direct, aggressive, and highly sexualized form of invective. Even the statesman Cicero discussed Roman sensibilities towards obscenities, noting that words like cunnus (cunt) and mentula (penis) were generally avoided in polite discourse, to the extent that Romans hesitated to form a diminutive of menta (mint) due to its phonetic similarity to mentula.21
A more informal, yet equally revealing, source of Roman profanity is the graffiti preserved on the walls of Pompeii.22 These inscriptions offer a glimpse into everyday language, often sexual or scatological in nature. Examples abound: "Hic ego puellas multas futui" ("Here I fucked many girls") was found scrawled outside a brothel.22 Insults frequently referenced sexual acts, such as "Amplicatus, I know that Icarus is buggering you" 23, or "Myrtis bene felas" ("Myrtis, you suck dick well").22 Scatological warnings and declarations were also common, for instance, "Stranger, my bones beg you not to pee at my tomb... go away, shitter!" 23, and the simple statement, "Secundus took a shit here".23 The Roman lexicon of offensive terms included cinaedus (a pejorative for a passive male sexual partner), culus (arsehole), landica (clitoris), and verbs such as futuere (to fuck), pedicare (to butt-fuck), fellare (to suck dick), and irrumare (to force oral sex, or "face-fuck").21
While these words were clearly in use, Roman writers like Martial and Cicero acknowledged their obscene status.21 The fact that Latin translations have often been "bowdlerized" (expurgated) in later eras indicates a persistent discomfort with this explicit language.21 The Roman evidence, particularly from Pompeii, shows that profanity was robust, direct, and often publicly displayed. It drew heavily on sexual and bodily themes, indicating these domains as powerful sources of taboo and invective, much like in subsequent historical periods. The survival of some Latin swear words into modern Romance languages, such as cunnus evolving into the Spanish coño, attests to the linguistic endurance of these ancient terms.21
The practice of inscribing curses and insults in ancient times—whether on Egyptian execration shards, Greek lead tablets, or Roman public walls—served not only as a purported mechanism for the curse's efficacy or as an emotional outburst but also as a lasting declaration. These written forms, whether intended for supernatural mediation or public shaming, parallel modern forms of aggressive online communication, though ancient practices were often imbued with a belief in supernatural enforcement that is largely absent in secular modern equivalents. This highlights a historical shift in the perceived locus of power behind such potent utterances, from supernatural agents to social or personal impact. The prevalence of sexual and scatological themes in Greek and Roman informal profanity further suggests that taboos surrounding the body and its functions were ancient and potent sources for offensive language, existing alongside or independently of purely religious imprecations.
III. The Sacred and the Profane: Religious Influence on Cursing
Religion has historically exerted a profound influence on the nature, perception, and regulation of cursing, particularly in Western societies. The very concept of "profanity" is rooted in the distinction between the sacred and the secular, and for centuries, the most potent forms of offensive language were those that transgressed religious boundaries.
A. The Old Testament and Early Christianity: The Primacy of God's Name
The development of swearing in modern European languages is inextricably linked to early Christianity and its Judaic roots, specifically the Old Testament's prohibitions against misusing the divine name.1 The Decalogue's commandment, "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain" (Exodus 20:7), became a cornerstone for defining religious profanity.26 In this worldview, divine names and concepts were not mere labels but were believed to possess inherent power. Invocations of God were seen as attempts to tap into this power, whether to solemnly affirm the truth in an oath or to direct divine force towards someone in a curse.1 Consequently, the unauthorized, trivial, or disrespectful use of God's name was considered a grave transgression, an act of hubris implying an attempt to control or diminish divine authority, or even to place oneself above God.1 This was not merely about politeness; it was about a perceived ontological status of divine names and power.
This theological understanding had severe implications. The Book of Leviticus, for example, prescribed the death penalty for blasphemous language.1 In the New Testament, the Gospel of Matthew was interpreted by some groups, such as the Quakers, as a condemnation of all forms of swearing, not just profane ones.1 Early Christian writers and Church Fathers, including John Chrysostom, consistently condemned foul language as sinful.1 Apostolic writings, such as Ephesians 4:29 and 5:4, explicitly warn against "unwholesome talk," "obscenity," and "coarse joking," advocating instead for speech that edifies and expresses gratitude.1 This robust theological framework established religious profanity, particularly blasphemy, as the most potent and condemned form of offensive language in Christian-influenced societies for many centuries. The extraordinary historical focus on punishing blasphemy is understandable only if such speech was perceived as a genuine threat to the cosmic or social order, not merely an offense to human sensibilities.
B. Blasphemy vs. Profanity
A distinction is often drawn between blasphemy and more general religious profanity. Blasphemy is typically understood as an intentional and direct verbal assault against a religious concept, deity, or sacred tenet, characterized by its defiance and impiety.1 Religious profanity, on the other hand, can be more casual, such as exclamations like "God!" or "Jesus Christ!" used in moments of surprise or frustration, where the intent may not be to directly denigrate the divine.1 Historically, however, religious swears in general were considered more severe offenses than those related to sexual or anatomical matters in many Western cultures.1 This distinction between blasphemy and profanity allowed for graded societal and legal responses to offensive religious language. The severe penalties associated with blasphemy likely acted as a linguistic pressure, contributing to the development of "minced oaths"—euphemistic alterations of religious swears—as a means to express strong emotion while attempting to mitigate the risk of uttering a more gravely offensive, blasphemous phrase.
C. Pagan Beliefs and the Christian Co-opting of Curses
The interaction between Christianity and pre-existing pagan beliefs also shaped the landscape of profanity. Many ancient cultures held strong taboos against speaking the names of their deities or of malevolent spirits, fearing that such utterances could invoke their presence or power.1 As Christianity spread, it often absorbed or reframed elements of these prior belief systems. A notable linguistic consequence was the transformation of some pagan deity names or spiritual terms into profanities within a Christian context.1 A frequently cited example is the Finnish word perkele. Believed to be an original name for Ukko, the chief thunder god of the Finnish pagan pantheon, perkele later became a common swear word, often associated with the devil.1 This phenomenon is a linguistic footprint of religious power struggles and cultural assimilation, demonstrating how the sacred symbols of a supplanted religion can be demonized or trivialized into the profanities of a new dominant faith. It underscores how profanity can become a repository for historical power dynamics, even if contemporary users are unaware of these origins.
D. Perspectives in Judaism and Islam
The concern over profane language, especially that which touches upon the divine, is not unique to Christianity. Judaism strictly forbids profanity, viewing it as a contradiction to the Torah's command to "Be holy" (Leviticus 19:2). The Talmud teaches that speech has a profound impact on the soul, and the use of vulgar language can lead to spiritual regression.1 Consequently, shemirat halashon (guarding one's tongue) is considered a fundamental practice for spiritual development.1 Along with Islam and Brahmanism, Judaism traditionally forbids the casual or disrespectful mention of God's name.1
In Islam, the use of "bad words," impertinence, and slander is considered haram (forbidden).1 Islamic profanity typically centers on divine concepts, the Prophet Muhammad, or holy places, and generally lacks the diabolic element (invoking Satan or demons) found in some Christian swearing traditions.1 These perspectives from other Abrahamic faiths demonstrate a shared deep-rooted concern for the sanctity of divine representation in language, each with its own specific theological underpinnings and cultural expressions.
E. Crucifixion and Diabolic Swearing in European Languages
Within European Christian traditions, the narrative of the crucifixion of Jesus became a significant source for profane interjections.1 Oaths and exclamations referencing Christ's suffering—such as "'Sdeath" (a contraction of "God's death"), "God's wounds" (which evolved into the minced oath "zounds"), "God's blood," or "God's bones"—were common and considered highly profane for centuries.1 This highlights how specific, emotionally charged theological narratives can be transformed into powerful linguistic expressions of shock, anger, or emphasis.
Christian profanity also encompassed appeals to the diabolic, invoking the Devil or hell.1 While the perceived impact of swearing by divine names has diminished in many Western societies with increasing secularization, diabolic swearing—cursing someone to hell or invoking the devil—has retained a notable profane force in some regions, such as Germany and the Nordic countries.1 This suggests that concepts of ultimate evil and damnation can maintain their linguistic potency even as overt religious observance declines.
IV. The Evolution of Swearing in the Western World: From God's Wounds to Four-Letter Words
The history of swearing in the Western world is a dynamic narrative, reflecting shifts in religious belief, social structures, moral sensibilities, and the very understanding of what constitutes "offensive." From an era dominated by the sanctity of religious oaths, the focus of taboo language gradually transitioned towards concerns about the body, sexuality, and eventually, social identity.
A. The Middle Ages (c. 5th-15th Centuries): The Dominance of Religious Oaths
During the Middle Ages, the Christian Church's influence permeated all aspects of life, including language. Consequently, the most egregious forms of swearing were those that touched upon the holy.31 Oaths that invoked God, parts of God's body (e.g., "By God's bones!", "God's wounds," "God's blood"), or other sacred figures were commonplace yet considered profoundly potent and, if misused, deeply offensive.3 The belief was that such oaths, when uttered profanely, could cause actual harm to God or trivialize sacred mysteries.33 The Church actively policed language, and blasphemy or profane use of sacred names could lead to social ostracization or formal punishment.36 By the 15th century, for instance, any reference to Christ as a suffering entity became particularly taboo, as it touched upon the sacredness of his passion and death.36
A distinction was recognized between "sincere swearing"—the taking of solemn oaths essential for social order and legal proceedings, with God as the ultimate guarantor—and "vain swearing," which involved the trivial or disrespectful use of God's name, often as an intensifier or insult.36 The latter was considered shocking and offensive.36
In contrast, words relating to scatological or sexual matters, while present, carried less of the severe taboo they would later acquire. Defecation was a more public act, and societal concerns about bodily privacy were different from later periods.31 Authors like Geoffrey Chaucer, in works such as The Canterbury Tales, used words like "shit," "piss," and "queynte" (cunt).34 While Chaucer himself was more circumspect with overtly blasphemous language, condemning it in his texts, the precise offensive weight of these bodily terms in everyday medieval speech is still debated by scholars.34 Medieval insults also included terms reflecting social hierarchy, personal character, and gender norms, such as "churl" (a low-class person), "knave" (a dishonest boy or man, originally just "boy"), "turd," "hag" (an old or ugly woman), "cur" (a cowardly or vicious dog), "dastard" (a coward), and "cuckold" (a man whose wife is unfaithful).39 This period firmly established the linkage between profanity and religious transgression as the paramount concern in the West.
B. The Renaissance and Early Modern Period (c. 14th-17th Centuries): The Shift Towards Scatological and Sexual Terms
The Renaissance and Early Modern period witnessed a gradual but significant transition in the landscape of taboo language. While religious oaths remained powerful and widely used, terms related to scatology and sexuality began to acquire greater obscene power.1 This shift coincided with evolving notions of privacy, particularly concerning bodily functions.32
Religious swearing was still very much alive. Oaths such as "God's blood," "God's wounds," "God's bones," "damn me," and "By Our Lady" were employed, sometimes by figures like the libertines of the Restoration court, specifically to shock the pious.31 A statute in 1606 even forbade the profane use of God's name in theatrical plays.31 "Damn" and "hell" were considered blasphemous variations of such oaths.31 To navigate these strong prohibitions, euphemistic "minced oaths" began to emerge, such as "gadzooks" (for "God's hooks") and "zounds" (for "God's wounds").30 These represent a linguistic adaptation, allowing emotional expression while attempting to lessen the perceived religious offense.
Simultaneously, words related to the body and its functions, which had been relatively common descriptive terms in the Middle Ages (e.g., "arse," "shit," "fart," "bollocks," "prick," "piss," "turd"), started their journey towards becoming obscene.31 For example, to say "I'm going to piss" was considered more polite than the newer, more vulgar 16th-century expression, "I'm going to take a leak".31 The word "shit," used by Chaucer simply as a noun, was employed in a vulgar, offensive sense by the 18th century, as seen in the writings of Jonathan Swift.38
The history of the F-word is complex and its precise origin disputed, with candidates including the Old German ficken ("to strike" or "penetrate") and the Latin futuere ("to copulate").30 A record from 1278 mentions a man named "John LeFucker," though the interpretation of this surname is debated.38 An early written instance appears in 1528, when an anonymous monk scrawled "O d fuckin Abbot" in the margins of a manuscript, the "d" likely standing for "damned," indicating that the religious component was still the primary element of offense.31 The F-word was in common parlance by the 16th century but, according to some scholars, did not acquire its full vulgar impact until the 18th century.38 An earlier term with a similar meaning, "sard," had largely fallen out of use.30
The C-word, with roots in Old Norse, High German, and Latin, entered the English language around the 13th century. The existence of street names like "Gropecunte Lane" in medieval Oxford and London, associated with prostitution, indicates its earlier, more direct anatomical usage before it became one of the most taboo words in English.38 During the Renaissance, it began its shift towards profound obscenity.31
Literary figures like William Shakespeare often crafted their own elaborate and imaginative insults rather than relying solely on common religious profanities, for example, "Thou beslubbering, swag-bellied maggot pie".38 This era, therefore, marks a crucial pivot. As societal norms regarding privacy and the human body evolved, the nature of offensive language also transformed, setting the stage for modern profanity, which is more heavily weighted towards sexual and scatological references.
C. The Victorian Era (c. 1837-1901): Prudery, Minced Oaths, and Regulation
The Victorian era is famously characterized by a heightened sense of public morality and prudery, which significantly impacted the use and perception of swear words. During this period, cursing, while still prevalent, grew in its perceived power to offend, leading to its suppression in polite society and a proliferation of euphemisms.32 It was an age where even the word "trousers" could be considered taboo in mixed company for fear of suggesting the body beneath.32
Minced oaths became particularly common as a way to express strong emotion without uttering direct blasphemies or overtly offensive terms. Phrases like "Jiminy Cricket!" (for Jesus Christ), "Gee Whiskers!", "Crikey!", "Gosh!" (for God), "bejabbers" (for by Jesus), "dadgummit" (for God damn it), and "H-E-double-hockey-sticks" (for Hell) allowed speakers to vent frustration while adhering to stricter social codes.30 Even these softened expressions, however, could be deemed too vulgar for a true gentleman in certain contexts.42
Social class and gender played crucial roles in dictating linguistic propriety. Upper and middle-class gentlemen typically confined their swearing to private, male-only gatherings, such as the smoking room.45 Women of the same social standing were expected to refrain from swearing publicly, though some might do so in private.45 In contrast, the lower classes and individuals in professions like the military often continued to use stronger and more direct profanity, frequently of a religious nature, a continuation of earlier traditions.38 An interesting shift was noted around 1880, when observers reported that even "better class" criminals had begun to casually use terms like "shit," "crap," and "fuck," indicating a gradual infiltration of these terms into wider usage.42
Despite the rise of bodily terms, religious profanity remained a significant component of swearing. Words like "hell," "Jesus," and "damnation" were considered potent.43 Terms such as "damn," "bleedin'," "bugger," and especially "bloody" (a contraction of "By Our Lady" or "God's blood") were common and considered very rude.38
The Victorian era also saw the strengthening of formal regulation of offensive language. In England, earlier laws like the Profane Oaths Act 1745 (which had repealed and expanded upon the Profane Swearing Act 1694) remained relevant, imposing fines or time in the stocks for "prophane Cursing and Swearing," with penalties differentiated by social class—higher fines for gentlemen.48 A significant piece of legislation was the Obscene Publications Act 1857 (also known as Lord Campbell's Act), which made the sale of obscene material a statutory offense and granted courts the power to seize and destroy such material.49 While initially aimed at pornography, the Act's interpretation, particularly through the "Hicklin test" (defining obscenity as anything with a tendency "to deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences"), allowed for broad application to any material deemed offensive, including literature containing strong language.49
The Victorian period thus exemplifies a complex interplay between public morality, social stratification, and linguistic behavior. While overt profanity was heavily suppressed in polite, middle and upper-class society, it continued to thrive in other circles, and the very act of suppression likely amplified the transgressive power of certain words. This era also solidified formal legal mechanisms for controlling language deemed "obscene" or "profane."
D. The 20th Century: Modern Swear Words, Warfare, and Hate Speech
The 20th century marked a dramatic transformation in the landscape of swearing, characterized by a shift in the hierarchy of offensive terms, the mainstreaming of words previously confined to private or subcultural use, and a growing societal awareness of the harm caused by discriminatory language.
A key development was the ascendancy of sexual and anatomical swears as the most vulgar forms of profanity in many Western societies, overtaking the historical dominance of religious blasphemies.1 Sexual swearing, in particular, gained popularity after 1900.50 The euphemism "four-letter word" itself emerged in the 1920s to refer to these increasingly potent terms.30 The F-word, for example, gained wider currency throughout the century. Its use as an intensifier became more common 31, and its inclusion in The Penguin Dictionary in 1965 signaled its official entry into the English lexicon.30 The word became notably more prevalent in public discourse during events like the Vietnam War protests.51 The S-word (shit), which evolved from the Old English "scite" (meaning an obnoxious person), had come to mean "stuff" or refer to excrement by 1934, as seen in Henry Miller's Tropic of Cancer, and its use as a general expletive grew.30
Warfare played a role in this linguistic shift. Soldiers returning from the World Wars and subsequent conflicts are often credited with helping to normalize the use of strong curse words outside the immediate context of the battlefield.32 The intense, shared experiences of combat likely fostered a linguistic environment where powerful expletives became common currency for expressing extreme emotion and forging camaraderie.
A crucial development in the latter half of the 20th century was the growing recognition of hate speech as a particularly harmful form of profanity.1 Specific types of discriminatory language, such as ethnophaulisms (ethnic and racial slurs) and homophobic terms, came under intense scrutiny. Words like "Polack," once more common, became highly taboo.52 The terminology used to refer to people of African descent underwent significant evolution, with terms like "Negro" and "Colored," which had been standard or even considered respectful in earlier parts of the century, being replaced by "Black" and later "African American" as consciousness about the power and implications of racial labeling grew.37 Similarly, ableist terms (e.g., "insane," "crazy," "crippled," the R-slur) began to be recognized as offensive and harmful.53
Censorship and media continued to be significant arenas for battles over profane language. Landmark literary obscenity trials involving works like James Joyce's Ulysses, D.H. Lawrence's Lady Chatterley's Lover, and Henry Miller's Tropic of Cancer (detailed further in Section VII) challenged existing laws and gradually expanded the boundaries of acceptable expression in print.30 In film, the Hays Code (1930-1968) strictly limited the use of profanity in Hollywood productions for decades.63 Broadcast radio and television were subject to FCC regulations concerning indecency, famously contested by comedians like Lenny Bruce in the 1960s and George Carlin with his "Seven Dirty Words" routine in the 1970s.63 Music, particularly genres like rock and roll and later hip-hop, also became a focal point for controversies over explicit lyrics, leading to the development of the Parental Advisory labeling system.75
The 20th century, therefore, was a period of profound linguistic change regarding profanity. It saw a reordering of the hierarchy of swear words, the gradual mainstreaming of many terms once considered unprintable, and a heightened ethical awareness concerning the impact of discriminatory language. This evolution was driven by a confluence of factors including major global conflicts, counter-cultural movements, legal challenges, and the expanding influence of mass media.
The evolution of dominant swearing themes in the West—from a primary focus on religious transgression in the Middle Ages, to an increasing preoccupation with scatological and sexual terms during the Renaissance and Early Modern period, and finally to a modern era where sexual terms remain highly vulgar but slurs targeting social groups have gained extreme offensive power—is not a random linguistic drift. Instead, it mirrors fundamental shifts in societal power structures, collective anxieties, and the very definition of what is held sacred or inviolable. In medieval times, with religion as the central organizing principle, blasphemy was the ultimate linguistic offense. The Renaissance and Early Modern period, with growing individualism and changing notions of privacy, saw the body and its functions become more prominent sources of taboo. In the contemporary era, characterized by further secularization and a heightened awareness of social justice, language that demeans or marginalizes individuals based on group identity has risen to the forefront of what is considered most profane. This trajectory suggests that the nature of a society's strongest swear words offers a revealing insight into its deepest values and fears.
Furthermore, the cyclical nature of the offensiveness of certain swear words—for instance, "bloody" transitioning from a potent oath to a milder expletive in British English 38, or the S-word evolving from a purely descriptive term to a highly profane one and then, in some contexts, to a common intensifier 30—demonstrates that the power of any given swear word is not immutable. This power is constantly renegotiated through usage, social change, and the emergence of new taboos. Overuse can diminish a word's shock value 79, and as societal anxieties shift, the original source of a word's taboo status (e.g., a religious reference) may lose its cultural resonance. This dynamic underscores that the "profanity lexicon" is in perpetual flux, reflecting the evolving moral and social landscape of its speakers.
The following table offers a comparative overview of these shifts:
Table 2: Comparative Timeline of Dominant Swearing Themes and Regulatory Milestones in the Western World
V. The Multifaceted Functions of Cursing: Why We Swear
Swearing, far from being a monolithic act of vulgarity, serves a remarkably diverse array of socio-cultural and psychological functions. These functions, which have manifested in various forms throughout history, range from intense emotional expression and pain management to the reinforcement of social bonds and the assertion of aggression. The meaning and impact of any given swear word are profoundly context-dependent, negotiated by speakers and listeners within specific social and cultural frameworks.
A. Emotional Expression and Catharsis
One of the most fundamental and widely recognized functions of swearing is the expression of emotion, particularly intense feelings such as anger and frustration.1 Swear words, with their strong connotative meanings rather than purely literal ones, are exceptionally well-suited for this purpose.1 The act of swearing can provide catharsis, a release of pent-up emotional energy, thereby helping individuals to manage stress and cope with negative feelings.10 It is often described as a way to "vent" or "blow off steam".86
Intriguingly, research has demonstrated a hypoalgesic effect of swearing, meaning it can increase an individual's tolerance to pain.10 Studies, notably those conducted by Richard Stephens and colleagues, have shown that participants could endure pain (such as immersing a hand in ice water) for significantly longer periods when repeating a swear word compared to a neutral word.79 This effect appears to be more pronounced in individuals who do not swear frequently in their daily lives, suggesting that the potency of the words may be linked to their taboo status and the emotional arousal they provoke.79 The underlying mechanism is thought to involve a form of stress-induced analgesia, possibly triggering the fight-or-flight response via the amygdala and leading to a surge in adrenaline, a natural pain reliever.98 Some evidence also suggests that swearing can alleviate psychological or social pain, such as feelings of exclusion or distress.95 Beyond pain relief, swearing has also been linked to temporary increases in physical strength and performance during short, intense tasks.86 These psycho-physiological effects suggest an adaptive utility for certain types of swearing, potentially rooted in primal arousal systems that predate complex language.
B. Emphasis, Intensification, and Attention-Grabbing
Swear words are frequently employed as grammatical intensifiers or for emphasis, serving to highlight the importance or emotional weight of an utterance.1 They can make a statement more memorable or lend it greater force.1 The inherent transgressive and potent nature of taboo words also means they can be highly effective in grabbing attention or causing shock.1 This linguistic function leverages the shock value of violating social norms to ensure a message is heard and registered.
C. Social Bonding, In-Group Identity, and Camaraderie
Paradoxically, language that is considered offensive in mainstream society can serve to build social bonds and reinforce in-group identity within specific social circles.1 Casual swearing among peers can signal an informal environment, intimacy, and trust, functioning as a "verbal handshake" that affirms shared values and experiences.1 The sharing of taboo jokes or scurrilous connotations can foster a sense of camaraderie.10
Historically, this bonding function has been observed in various groups, particularly those that are marginalized or operate under high-stress conditions. For example, swearing was common among sailors, soldiers, and in frontier communities.32 On the American frontier, there are accounts of male immigrants and Native Americans learning and using swear words of the dominant white male culture as a means of communication and to bridge cultural divides within these often rough environments.107 This suggests that shared transgression through language can be a powerful tool for creating solidarity and defining an in-group, often in contrast to or defiance of mainstream societal norms. This function may partly explain the resilience of swearing despite persistent attempts at its suppression.
D. Aggression, Insult, and the Assertion of Power
Perhaps the most widely recognized function of cursing is its use in aggression, insult, and the assertion of power.1 Swear words are frequently deployed to demonstrate disrespect, convey negativity, or directly offend an individual or group.1 Abusive profanity involves the deliberate selection of words intended to cause harm or insult.1 In this capacity, swearing can act as a form of verbal aggression, sometimes serving as a substitute for physical violence.11 Historical examples, such as accounts of cursing contests among cowboys on the American frontier or insults exchanged between warring parties (e.g., during the Nez Perce War), vividly illustrate this aggressive function.107 Furthermore, swearing can be used to assert dominance, establish power dynamics, or intimidate others.12
E. Humor, Playfulness, and Transgression
Offensive language is also a staple of humor and playfulness.10 The violation of taboos, when performed in the right context (such as in comedy or among close acquaintances), can elicit laughter and amusement.10 The act of transgression itself can be a source of enjoyment or satisfaction for both speaker and audience.10 Stylistic swearing, where profane words are used creatively or unexpectedly, often serves a comedic purpose.1 This function highlights the complex human relationship with social boundaries, where deliberately crossing them through language can be a source of entertainment and shared experience.
The diverse, and often contradictory, array of functions that swearing fulfills underscores its nature as a highly adaptable and context-dependent linguistic tool, rather than an inherently negative or simplistic form of speech. Its meaning and impact are continuously negotiated, reflecting the intricate social and psychological needs of its users.
VI. The Mind Behind the Mouth: Psychological and Neurological Underpinnings of Swearing
The enduring presence and potent effects of swearing across cultures and history are not merely matters of social convention; they are also deeply rooted in human psychology and neurology. Research in these fields has begun to unveil the complex brain mechanisms involved in processing and producing swear words, as well as the varied psychological impacts of their use.
A. Brain Regions and Processing of Swear Words
Neuroscientific investigations suggest that swearing is not processed in the brain in the same way as neutral language. Instead, it appears to involve a dual system:
Cortical Systems (primarily Left Hemisphere): These areas are typically associated with deliberate speech comprehension and production, including the formulation of novel sentences and grammatical structures.85 Propositional swearing, such as crafting a witty insult or using a swear word for calculated emphasis, relies on these regions.108
Subcortical Systems and Right Hemisphere: These include structures like the limbic system (especially the amygdala) and the basal ganglia, which are crucial for emotion regulation, motivation, and more automatic responses.10 Automatic or reflexive swearing—the kind that erupts in moments of sudden pain, shock, or intense emotion—is often processed in the right hemisphere and is closely linked to these emotional centers.10 This is supported by observations of patients with aphasia due to left-hemisphere damage who may lose much of their capacity for propositional speech but retain the ability to utter swear words, particularly under emotional duress.10
The amygdala, a key component of the limbic system, is activated during swearing, especially in response to pain or strong emotion. This activation can trigger a fight-or-flight response, leading to the release of adrenaline and other physiological changes.10 The basal ganglia, involved in motor control and the inhibition of unwanted actions, are also implicated. Damage to these structures can affect spontaneous swearing, and they are thought to play a role in conditions like Tourette Syndrome, where involuntary vocalizations, including swearing (coprolalia), can occur.10
This distinct neurological processing for different types of swearing helps to explain its dual nature as both an uncontrollable emotional outburst and a carefully chosen communicative strategy. This complexity suggests that while the specific content of swear words (i.e., which words are considered taboo) is culturally learned, the capacity for certain kinds of profane outbursts may be rooted in more fundamental brain structures, lending swearing a persistent and powerful quality.
B. The Hypoalgesic Effect of Swearing (Pain Tolerance)
One of the most striking psychological findings related to swearing is its hypoalgesic effect—its ability to increase pain tolerance. Seminal research, particularly by Richard Stephens and his colleagues, has demonstrated that individuals can often endure pain (e.g., keeping a hand submerged in ice-cold water) for longer periods and report feeling less pain when they are allowed to swear compared to when they utter neutral words.10
The likely mechanism behind this effect is a form of stress-induced analgesia. The act of swearing, particularly in response to a painful stimulus, is an emotional response that appears to activate the fight-or-flight system, leading to an adrenaline surge and a natural blunting of pain perception.79 Interestingly, this pain-reducing effect seems to be more pronounced for individuals who swear less frequently in their daily lives.79 This "habituation effect" suggests that the psychological power of swear words is, in part, derived from their perceived transgressiveness or taboo status. When this taboo is weakened by frequent, casual use, the emotional arousal and consequent physiological effects (like adrenaline release) associated with uttering them are likely diminished. Consequently, as societal tolerance for certain swear words increases and they become more commonplace, their inherent psychological potency for functions like pain relief might paradoxically decrease for the average individual. Some research also indicates that swearing can alleviate psychological or social pain, such as the distress caused by social exclusion.95
C. Emotional Catharsis and Regulation
A primary psychological function of swearing is emotional catharsis and regulation. Timothy Jay, a prominent researcher in this field, emphasizes that a core purpose of swearing is the expression of emotions, particularly anger and frustration.85 Swear words, with their strong connotative (emotional) rather than denotative (literal) primary meanings, are particularly effective for this.88
Swearing can serve as a venting mechanism, allowing individuals to release pent-up emotional tension and cope with stress.10 By externalizing intense feelings, profanity can help in emotional regulation.95 Some theories even propose that profanity can act as a self-defense mechanism against the adverse effects of daily stressors, anxiety, and depression, by providing an immediate outlet for negative emotional energy.90
D. Social Perception: Honesty, Intelligence, and Trustworthiness
The social perception of individuals who swear is complex and often contradictory. While a common stereotype associates swearing with crudeness, low morality, or even a limited vocabulary, research presents a more nuanced picture.
Counter-intuitively, some studies have found a positive correlation between profanity use and perceived honesty. Individuals who swear may be perceived as more genuine or authentic because they are seen as expressing their feelings and thoughts in an unfiltered manner.10 In certain contexts, such as legal testimony, the inclusion of swear words has been found to make the testimony seem more credible to listeners.95 This suggests that, at times, violating linguistic politeness norms can be interpreted as a signal of raw, unvarnished truth, overriding negative stereotypes.
The notion that people swear due to a "poverty of vocabulary" is largely a myth. Research has indicated a positive correlation between an individual's overall vocabulary size and their fluency in generating swear words.80 This suggests that a richer lexicon may simply provide more options for expressive language, including profane terms.
However, the context of swearing is crucial in shaping perceptions of intelligence and trustworthiness. Swearing in inappropriate settings, such as formal or professional environments, is generally perceived negatively and can lead to judgments of lower intelligence or untrustworthiness.9 Conversely, profanity used appropriately within certain social contexts might even enhance a person's social standing or perceived charisma.9 Benjamin K. Bergen's work explores the cognitive lifecycle of swear words, including how slurs (a potent form of profanity) can influence the treatment of others, while also noting that profanity can communicate a range of positive emotions like excitement or love.94 These findings challenge simplistic views, indicating that the social judgment of swearing is a complex calculation involving the words themselves, the speaker, the listener, and the situation.
E. Tourette Syndrome and Coprolalia
Coprolalia, the involuntary outburst of obscene words or socially inappropriate and derogatory remarks, is a symptom experienced by a minority of individuals with Tourette Syndrome (TS).110 A related symptom, copropraxia, involves making obscene gestures involuntarily.110
The neurological basis of coprolalia is believed to involve a dysfunction in the brain's inhibitory mechanisms, particularly implicating the basal ganglia—the same structures involved in other motor and vocal tics characteristic of TS.10 Individuals with coprolalia often experience an irresistible urge to utter these words or sounds, which builds until it is expressed, providing temporary relief.110 These utterances are often not contextually appropriate or emotionally driven in the typical sense; they can be louder or different in cadence from normal speech and can be highly distressing to the individual experiencing them.110
Coprolalia offers a unique insight into the neurological underpinnings of swearing. It demonstrates that the production of taboo words can be disconnected from intentional, semantic language use and can be driven by deeper brain mechanisms related to impulse control and neurological "misfirings." This highlights that not all instances of swearing are volitional or communicative in the conventional sense.
VII. "Thou Shalt Not": Censorship, Control, and Controversies
Throughout history, the perceived power of cursing—to offend, to disrupt, to challenge authority—has led to persistent efforts to censor and control its use. These efforts have taken various forms, from religious proscriptions and blasphemy laws to obscenity statutes and media regulations, each reflecting the dominant moral, religious, and social anxieties of its era. Landmark controversies and legal battles have often been pivotal in shaping the boundaries of free expression and public decency.
A. Historical Blasphemy Laws and Their Societal Impact
Historically, blasphemy laws constituted one of the most severe forms of regulating offensive language, particularly in societies where religion played a central role in governance and social identity.114 These laws were typically designed to protect the dominant religious beliefs and institutions, as well as to maintain a social order often believed to be divinely ordained. Insulting God, sacred figures, or core religious tenets was not merely an offense to sensibility but was often viewed as a direct threat to the stability and moral fabric of the community.
The enforcement of blasphemy laws varied across cultures and time periods but could be exceptionally harsh. In England, for example, the Blasphemy Act 1697 codified earlier prohibitions, and such laws were often defended on the grounds that an attack on Christianity was an attack on the foundation of English law itself.114 Notable cases include the execution of Thomas Aikenhead in Scotland in 1696 for denying the Trinity and other Christian doctrines, and the imprisonment of John William Gott in Britain in 1921 for publishing pamphlets considered blasphemous.114 While these laws have been abolished in England and Wales (2008), Scotland (2021), and Ireland (2020) 114, their historical existence underscores the gravity with which religious profanity was once viewed. Many other European countries, including Austria, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, Italy, Poland, and Russia, have had, or continue to have, laws against blasphemy or religious insult, leading to various prosecutions and societal debates.114
In many Muslim-majority countries, blasphemy laws are often derived from interpretations of Sharia and can carry severe penalties, including imprisonment, corporal punishment, or even death (e.g., in Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia).114 These laws are frequently criticized internationally for their application against religious minorities, political dissenters, and reformers. In India, while traditional Hindu and Buddhist philosophies may not have a direct concept of blasphemy akin to Abrahamic religions, Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code is often used as a de facto blasphemy law to prevent "hate speech that insults or attempts to insult the religion or the religious beliefs" of any class of citizens, primarily with the stated aim of maintaining public order.114
The history of blasphemy laws provides a stark illustration of the perceived power of religious cursing and the extent to which societies have sought to control language deemed threatening to sacred or foundational beliefs. The gradual repeal or non-enforcement of such laws in many Western nations reflects processes of secularization, evolving understandings of human rights, and a greater emphasis on freedom of expression.
B. The Comstock Act (1873) and Its Legacy in the US
In the United States, the Comstock Act of 1873 represents a significant period of moralistic censorship that had a profound impact on what could be written, published, and disseminated, including language deemed profane or sexually explicit. Championed by the anti-vice crusader Anthony Comstock, the Act broadly criminalized the mailing of "every obscene, lewd, lascivious, indecent, filthy or vile article, matter, thing, device, or substance," as well as any "article or thing designed or intended for the prevention of conception or procuring an abortion".81 The Act's vague definition of "obscene" and "indecent" allowed for wide interpretation and zealous enforcement.
Anthony Comstock, in his role as a U.S. Postal Inspector, boasted of destroying over 160 tons of material deemed obscene and of driving fifteen "smut-peddlers" to suicide.63 His targets were not limited to pornography but extended to works of art, medical textbooks, information about contraception and abortion, and even personal letters containing "any sexual content or information".81 While the primary focus was often on sexual content and contraception, the Act's broad language inherently covered offensive or profane language within those materials.
Over time, the reach of the Comstock Act was curtailed by court rulings. In the 1930s, federal appeals courts began to narrow its application, for example, by ruling that it did not apply to contraceptive materials if their intended use was not illegal, or that sex education materials did not inherently violate the Act.81 Landmark Supreme Court decisions in the mid-20th century, such as Roth v. United States (1957) and Cohen v. California (1971), further refined the legal definition of obscenity, moving towards standards that considered the work as a whole, its appeal to prurient interest, and its potential redeeming social value.63 Congress officially removed references to contraception from the Comstock laws in 1971, following the Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) Supreme Court ruling that established a right to privacy in marital contraception.81 While the Comstock Act technically remains on the books, its modern enforcement has largely focused on child pornography.118 Nevertheless, its historical legacy is one of extensive censorship that significantly shaped American discourse on morality, sexuality, and language for decades.
C. Landmark Literary Obscenity Trials
The 20th century saw several high-profile literary obscenity trials that became crucial battlegrounds for freedom of expression, challenging prevailing definitions of obscenity and the state's power to censor. These cases often revolved around works containing explicit sexual content and profane language.
James Joyce's Ulysses (serialized 1918-1920, published as a book in Paris 1922) faced immediate censorship. In the U.S., its serialization in The Little Review led to an obscenity prosecution in 1921 due to the "Nausicaa" episode, which contained a masturbation scene.57 The magazine was declared obscene, effectively banning Ulysses in the U.S., and copies were burned by the Post Office.57 The novel was also banned in the United Kingdom until 1936.57 A pivotal moment came with the 1933 U.S. District Court case, United States v. One Book Called "Ulysses". Judge John M. Woolsey famously ruled that the book was not pornographic and therefore not obscene, considering its effect on "a person with average sex instincts" and acknowledging its literary merit, even if difficult to read.57 This decision, affirmed on appeal in 1934, was a landmark in U.S. obscenity law, shifting the focus towards the work as a whole and its artistic intent, rather than isolated passages.58
D.H. Lawrence's Lady Chatterley's Lover (privately published 1928, unexpurgated UK publication 1960) was highly controversial for its explicit descriptions of sexual acts, its use of then-unprintable "four-letter words" like "fuck" and "cunt," and its narrative of an adulterous affair between an upper-class woman and a working-class gamekeeper.41 The 1960 British trial of Penguin Books, R v Penguin Books Ltd, under the newly enacted Obscene Publications Act 1959, became a watershed moment. This Act allowed for a defense based on "literary merit".41 The prosecution's infamous question to the jury—"Is it a book you would even wish your wife or your servants to read?"—highlighted the establishment's disconnect with changing social norms.59 Penguin was found "not guilty," a verdict that dramatically liberalized publishing standards in the UK and had international repercussions.59 The book also faced bans and legal challenges in the U.S. (where its ban was overturned in 1959, establishing a "redeeming social or literary value" standard), Canada, Australia, India, and Japan.120
Henry Miller's Tropic of Cancer (published Paris 1934, U.S. 1961) was renowned for its "candid sexuality" and explicit language.30 Upon its U.S. publication by Grove Press in 1961, it triggered over 60 obscenity lawsuits in more than 21 states.62 The book had been banned from import into the U.S. since its French publication.62 Ultimately, in 1964, the U.S. Supreme Court declared Tropic of Cancer non-obscene in Grove Press, Inc. v. Gerstein, citing its earlier ruling in Jacobellis v. Ohio.61 The novel was also banned or faced censorship in Canada, the UK, Australia, and Finland.62
These literary trials were instrumental in evolving legal definitions of obscenity, championing the importance of literary merit, "redeeming social value," and the "average person" standard over the earlier, stricter Hicklin test (which judged material based on its tendency to corrupt the most susceptible minds). They not only expanded the boundaries of free expression for authors and publishers but also reflected and propelled significant shifts in societal attitudes towards sex, language, and art. The arguments made in these cases, and their outcomes, demonstrate a gradual movement away from outright suppression towards a more nuanced understanding of artistic freedom and the role of controversial literature in public discourse.
D. Regulation in Mass Media: Film, Radio, and Television
The 20th century saw the rise of mass media, which quickly became new arenas for debates over profanity and its control.
Film and the Hays Code: The Motion Picture Production Code, commonly known as the Hays Code, was a set of industry self-censorship guidelines adopted by Hollywood studios from 1930 and rigorously enforced from 1934 until its gradual decline and replacement in 1968.63 The Code explicitly forbade the use of profanity, including words like "God," "Lord," "Jesus," "Christ" (unless used reverently), "Hell," "S.O.B.," "damn," and "Gawd," alongside prohibitions on obscenity, racial slurs, graphic violence, and depictions of promiscuity or "deviant" sexuality.64 Under the strict administration of Joseph Breen (1934-1954), Hollywood films were heavily sanitized.66 Famous challenges, like keeping "damn" in Gone With The Wind (1939), were exceptions that highlighted the Code's power.45 The Code's authority weakened in the late 1950s and 1960s, with films like Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? (1966) being granted approval despite containing previously forbidden language (e.g., "hump the hostess," though "screw" was removed).65 The Code was eventually replaced by the MPAA film rating system in 1968, which allowed for more explicit content, including language, but categorized films for audience appropriateness.65
Radio, Television, and the FCC: Broadcast media, due to its perceived pervasiveness and accessibility to children, faced different regulatory standards. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in the U.S. was granted authority to regulate "indecent" material. This was famously tested in the Lenny Bruce obscenity trials of the 1960s. Bruce, a stand-up comedian, was arrested multiple times for the allegedly obscene content of his routines, which often included profane language and social satire.67 Although he was convicted in New York (a conviction later overturned posthumously), his legal battles were pivotal in expanding First Amendment protections for comedic expression and challenging prevailing social mores regarding language.69 In People v. Bruce (1964), the Illinois Supreme Court notably ruled that his routine constituted social commentary rather than obscenity.69
A subsequent landmark case was FCC v. Pacifica Foundation (1978), concerning George Carlin's "Seven Dirty Words" monologue broadcast on radio.63 The Supreme Court upheld the FCC's power to regulate "indecent" (though not necessarily obscene) speech on broadcast airwaves, particularly during daytime hours when children were likely to be listening. This ruling affirmed the FCC's ability to sanction broadcasters for airing such content and led to the establishment of the "safe harbor" rule, restricting indecent broadcasts to late-night hours.71 These cases underscored the ongoing tension between protecting free speech and safeguarding public morality and minors from potentially harmful content in easily accessible media.
Musicians and Profanity Controversies: Music also became a significant battleground. In the 1980s, concerns from groups like the Parents' Music Resource Center (PMRC), co-founded by Tipper Gore, led to widespread debate over explicit lyrics in popular music, particularly in rock and emerging hip-hop genres.77 This movement resulted in the adoption of the Parental Advisory: Explicit Lyrics label. The rap group 2 Live Crew faced legal challenges for their sexually explicit 1989 album As Nasty As They Wanna Be, which was declared obscene by a U.S. federal judge in Florida—the first sound recording to receive such a ruling.76 This decision was later overturned on appeal, which found artistic value in the music, citing its roots in African-American cultural traditions like "call and response" and "boasting".76 Their subsequent album, Banned in the U.S.A. (1990), was the first to carry the standardized "black and white" Parental Advisory label.78 These controversies highlighted the cultural clashes over language, race, and artistic expression in music.
The history of censorship and control over cursing is fundamentally a history of societal anxieties about morality, social order, and the perceived inherent power of language. The legal frameworks established—from ancient blasphemy laws to modern broadcast regulations—consistently mirror the dominant moral or religious concerns of their respective eras. Their evolution, marked by landmark trials and public controversies, reflects broader social and cultural shifts, including processes of secularization, changing attitudes towards sexuality, and the ascendance of free speech ideals. Each major legal challenge or new regulatory measure has not only reflected contemporary norms but has also actively shaped the boundaries for future expression.
VIII. A World of Words: Cross-Cultural Dimensions of Cursing
While the act of swearing or using offensive language appears in many, if not most, human cultures, its specific manifestations, the words deemed taboo, and the social functions it serves vary dramatically across linguistic and cultural landscapes. Examining these differences and commonalities reveals much about shared human preoccupations and unique cultural values.
A. Common Themes in Global Profanity: Body, Sex, and Religion
Despite vast cultural differences, certain themes consistently emerge as sources for swear words globally. These often relate to areas of life that are surrounded by strong social, moral, or religious rules and taboos:
Religion and the Sacred/Supernatural: As extensively discussed, references to deities, religious figures, sacred objects, rituals, and concepts of heaven, hell, or damnation form a major category of profanity, particularly in cultures with strong Abrahamic traditions (Christianity, Judaism, Islam).1 This can include blasphemy, taking sacred names in vain, or invoking diabolical forces. Even in cultures with different religious frameworks, appeals to or denigrations of spiritual entities or forces can be a source of potent language. Some cultures also incorporate words with pagan roots that were later demonized or trivialized by dominant religions, turning former deities into swear words (e.g., Finnish perkele).1
Sexual Acts and Anatomy: Words referring to sexual organs (e.g., penis, vulva), sexual acts (e.g., copulation, oral sex, anal sex, masturbation), and sexual promiscuity are nearly universal sources of profanity.1 Terms for sexually promiscuous women (e.g., "slut," "whore") or insults related to prostitution are widespread.1 The specific acts or body parts emphasized can vary, reflecting cultural sensitivities around topics like incest, adultery, or particular sexual practices.1
Bodily Functions and Excrement: References to scatological processes (defecation, urination) and their products (feces, urine), as well as other "unclean" bodily effluvia, are common in swear lexicons across many languages.1 Words like "shit" (English), "merde" (French), "Scheiße" (German), and kuso (Japanese) exemplify this category.1
Animals: Animal epithets are frequently used as terms of abuse, often referencing perceived negative attributes of the animal or associating the target with something considered base or unclean.1 Dogs, pigs, donkeys, and cows are common sources for such insults globally.1 Monkey-related swears are noted in Arabic and East Asian cultures.1
Family and Ancestry: Particularly in some cultures, insults targeting a person's mother, other female relatives, or ancestors can be among the most severe forms of profanity.1 Russian profanity, for instance, heavily emphasizes the sexual conduct of the listener's female relatives 1, and in Mandarin Chinese, insults can focus intensely on family and ancestry.96 Aboriginal Australian languages sometimes invoke deceased ancestors in profanity.1
Death: Death itself can be a theme in profanity, especially in some Asian languages like Cantonese.1
Mental Competency and Social Deviance: Terms relating to mental illness or lack of intelligence (e.g., "idiot," "retard") have become more prominent as profanity in some Western contexts, attacking an individual's competency.1 Slurs targeting specific demographic groups based on race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, or other characteristics also form a potent category of offensive language, designed to dehumanize and project prejudice.1
The recurrence of these themes across disparate cultures suggests that they touch upon fundamental human anxieties, social boundaries, and areas of life that are heavily regulated by societal norms. Violating these linguistic taboos can thus generate a powerful emotional or social impact. However, while these themes are common, the specific words, their precise connotations, and their perceived severity are deeply embedded in and shaped by the unique historical, social, and moral frameworks of each culture.11
B. Unique Cultural Expressions of Cursing
Beyond these common thematic categories, many languages and cultures exhibit unique and highly specific forms of profanity that reflect their particular histories and social structures.
Quebec French Sacres: A distinctive feature of Quebec French (and Acadian French) is the use of sacres—words and expressions directly derived from Roman Catholic liturgy and sacred objects—as its most potent swear words.1 Terms such as tabarnak (tabernacle), hostie or esti (host), câlice (chalice), sacrament (sacrament), and baptême (baptism) are used as strong expletives, often strung together in creative and lengthy combinations (e.g., "Mon ostie de saint-sacrament de câlice de crisse").125 These are generally considered stronger than the sexual or scatological profanities common in European French.125 The origin of sacres dates to the early 19th century, a period when the pervasive social control exerted by the Catholic clergy in Quebec became a source of increasing frustration for the populace.125 The expression "Ne dites pas ça, c'est sacré" ("Don't say that, it is sacred/holy") is believed to have evolved into sacrer referring to the forbidden words themselves, likely linked to the commandment against taking God's name in vain.26 The decline in the Church's influence since the Quiet Revolution of the 1960s has not diminished the use or potency of sacres, which remain a deeply ingrained and culturally specific feature of Quebec French.26 This phenomenon powerfully illustrates how specific socio-historical tensions with a dominant institution can generate a unique and enduring profane lexicon.
Japanese "Bad Words" (Warui Kotoba): Japanese is often described as a language lacking swear words in the direct, taboo-violating sense common in many Western languages.1 While it does not have a strong tradition of religious or overtly sexual profanity, it possesses a category of warui kotoba ("bad words") or impolite expressions that fulfill similar functions of expressing anger, frustration, or insult.1 These often involve direct commands (e.g., shine 死ね - "Die!" 127; damare 黙れ - "Shut up!" 127), terms denoting foolishness or stupidity (e.g., baka 馬鹿 - "idiot/fool"; aho アホ - "idiot/fool," more common in Kansai region 127), or terms expressing disgust or contempt (e.g., kuso クソ - "shit/damn" 127; kuzu クズ - "trash/scum" 127). The severity can depend heavily on context, tone, and regional usage (e.g., baka vs. aho).127 Expressions like kuso kurae (クソ食らえ - "eat shit") 128 or kono yarou (この野郎 - "you bastard") 127 are considered quite harsh. The Japanese example demonstrates that even in the absence of a strong taboo-based swear lexicon like that of English, languages develop mechanisms to convey strong negative emotion and insult effectively, often relying on directness, commands, or terms of disparagement rather than invoking sacred or sexual taboos.
Arabic Insults and Curses: Arabic profanity often involves insults to honor, particularly through female relatives, which are considered extremely offensive due to cultural emphasis on family honor and female chastity.122 Phrases like kus ummak (كس امك - "your mother's cunt") are among the gravest insults.122 Curses invoking God's damnation upon a person or their family members (e.g., Allah yel'anak الله يلعنك - "May God curse you"; yel'an abouk يلعن أبوك - "Curse your father") are also common and potent.122 Animal epithets like kalb (كلب - dog, implying disloyalty or baseness) and himar (حمار - donkey, implying stupidity) are frequently used.122 The term ayreh feek (عيرة فيك) is a strong equivalent to the English F-word.129 The structure of insults often uses a vocative particle ya (يا) followed by the insult (e.g., ya kalb - "you dog").122 Adding ibn al- (ابن ال - "son of the") before an insult, like ibn al-kalb (ابن الكلب - "son of a dog"), intensifies its offensiveness.122
Chinese Swearing: Mandarin Chinese features a range of swear words, with some of the most severe involving insults to one's mother or ancestors, reflecting the cultural importance of filial piety and family lineage.96 Cào nǐ mā (操你妈 - "fuck your mother") is an extremely offensive phrase.123 "Egg-based" insults are also a notable category, often implying illegitimacy or foolishness, such as bèndàn (笨蛋 - "stupid egg," i.e., idiot) 123, huàidàn (坏蛋 - "bad egg," i.e., wicked person) 123, wángbādàn (王八蛋 - "turtle egg," often meaning bastard or son of a bitch, implying a cuckolded father or promiscuous mother) 123, and húndàn (混蛋 - "mixed egg," implying impure bloodline or bastard).123 The term sānbā (三八) is a highly offensive insult directed at women, akin to calling them a bitch or slut.123 Tā mā de (他妈的 - "his mother's," often used like "damn it" or "fuck") is a common expletive.123 Chinese languages and some Southeast Asian languages also utilize puns and sound-alikes to create alternative or veiled swear words.1
Dutch Disease-Based Swearing: Uniquely, the Dutch language incorporates names of diseases into its swearing lexicon.13 For example, one might curse someone with kanker (cancer) or other illnesses. This reflects a cultural peculiarity where diseases, rather than solely religious or sexual terms, can form a potent category of imprecation.
These examples underscore that while certain thematic domains (religion, sex, body) are common fodder for profanity globally, the specific linguistic forms, their cultural resonance, and their perceived severity are products of unique historical, social, and linguistic trajectories. The study of cross-cultural cursing thus offers a rich lens through which to understand diverse worldviews and value systems.
IX. Swearing in the Digital Age and Beyond: Modern Trends and Future Outlook
The 21st century, characterized by the ubiquity of the internet and social media, has introduced new dimensions to the use and perception of profanity. These technological and social shifts are reshaping linguistic norms, particularly among younger generations, and fueling ongoing debates about free speech, censorship, and the nature of offensive language.
A. The Impact of the Internet and Social Media
The internet, and particularly social media platforms, has profoundly influenced how profanity is used and encountered. Several key trends are observable:
Increased Exposure and Normalization: Social media has created vast public forums where informal language, including swear words, is prevalent.83 This increased exposure, especially for younger users, can contribute to a desensitization and normalization of profanity.54 What might have been shocking in earlier media is now often commonplace in online interactions.130 Studies show that curse words appear frequently on platforms like Twitter, with a significant percentage of tweets containing such language.83
Youth Culture and Generational Differences: Younger generations (e.g., Generation Z) tend to use swear words more frequently and with a more positive or casual attitude compared to older generations (e.g., Generation X).54 For many young people, profanity is integrated into everyday conversation, both online and offline, often to intensify feelings, express camaraderie, or for humor, rather than solely for aggression.54 This can lead to a generational language gap, where words perceived as highly offensive by older individuals are used casually by younger ones.54
Online Disinhibition and Aggression: The anonymity or perceived distance afforded by online communication can sometimes lead to the "online disinhibition effect," where individuals feel bolder in using aggressive or offensive language they might avoid in face-to-face interactions.83 This contributes to phenomena like cyberbullying and online "flaming."
Impact on Impression Formation and Professionalism: Despite increased normalization in some contexts, the use of profanity on social media can still have negative consequences, particularly concerning professional image and employability.83 Employers increasingly scrutinize candidates' online presence, and aggressive or offensive language is a major deterrent.134 Studies on Facebook timelines show that swearing generally results in poorer impressions regarding professionalism and credibility, although effects on perceived attractiveness can be complex and gender-dependent.133
New Forms of Expression: Digital communication has also given rise to new ways of expressing or mitigating profanity, such as the use of emojis to convey strong emotion, or the use of abbreviations, symbols (e.g., grawlixes like @#$%), or deliberate misspellings to allude to swear words without typing them explicitly.
The internet and social media have thus acted as both an accelerator for the mainstreaming of many traditional swear words, particularly among youth, and a new battleground for defining what constitutes acceptable public discourse. This has created a complex linguistic environment where norms are rapidly evolving and often contested.
B. Evolving Social Norms and the Hierarchy of Offense
Societal attitudes towards what constitutes "offensive" language are in constant flux. Historically, as discussed, religious blasphemy was often considered the most severe form of profanity in many Western cultures.1 Over time, particularly in the 20th century, sexual and anatomical terms rose in their perceived vulgarity.1
In the late 20th and early 21st centuries, a significant shift has been the increasing societal condemnation of slurs and hate speech—language that demeans or attacks individuals based on their race, ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual orientation, disability, or other group affiliations.1 While words like "fuck" or "shit" have become more desensitized for many, especially younger generations 54, slurs are often viewed as carrying a more profound and harmful social impact. This reflects evolving societal values that place greater emphasis on inclusivity, respect for diversity, and the prevention of harm to marginalized groups, compared to earlier concerns primarily focused on offense to religious sensibilities or general moral propriety. For example, the R-slur, which originated as a medical term, became a common profane insult and is now widely recognized as a deeply offensive slur due to its demeaning impact on people with intellectual disabilities.54 This evolution in the hierarchy of offense suggests that modern societies are increasingly judging the severity of language based on its potential to inflict social and psychological harm, rather than solely on its transgression of traditional taboos.
C. Secularization and Attitudes Towards Religious Profanity
The process of secularization in many Western countries has had a notable impact on attitudes towards religious profanity. As the direct influence of religious institutions on public life has waned, words and phrases that once derived their profane power from their connection to sacred concepts have lost some of
their shock value for a significant portion of the population.1 Exclamations like "God!" or "Jesus Christ!" are often used casually as interjections with little to no conscious religious irreverence intended by many speakers.1
However, this desensitization is not uniform. For devout individuals, such language can still be deeply offensive. Moreover, campaigns like the Anti-Profanity League in the early 20th century in America framed profanity not merely as a religious failure but as a threat to social cohesion, character, and national values, linking clean language to public virtue.135 These movements underscore that even as overt religious authority declines, concerns about the moral and social implications of language persist, sometimes taking on more secular justifications.
D. Free Speech Debates and the Future of Cursing
The use of profanity, particularly in public and in media, remains a subject of ongoing free speech debates. In the United States, the First Amendment protects freedom of speech, but this protection is not absolute. Courts have ruled that profanity cannot be categorically banned but can be regulated under certain circumstances.68 For instance, profane rants that constitute "fighting words" (direct personal insults likely to provoke violence) or "true threats" are not protected.68 Public schools can punish students for profane speech (Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser, 1986) 68, and the FCC can regulate indecent speech in broadcast media (FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, 1978).63
The legal landscape continues to evolve, with challenges to state laws criminalizing profanity and debates over the extent to which online speech can or should be regulated.68 The tension lies in balancing individual expressive rights with concerns about public order, the protection of minors, and the prevention of harassment and hate speech. The internet, with its global reach and diverse user base, presents particularly complex challenges for navigating these issues.
Looking ahead, the history of cursing suggests that it will remain a dynamic and contested aspect of human language. As societal values continue to evolve, so too will the lexicon of what is considered offensive, the ways in which such language is used, and the attempts to control it. The increasing interconnectedness of global cultures through digital media may lead to further cross-pollination of swearing practices, as well as heightened awareness of the impact of words across different social groups. The fundamental human needs to express strong emotion, bond with others, challenge norms, and assert identity through language will likely ensure that cursing, in some form, endures.
X. Conclusion: The Enduring Power and Shifting Sands of Swearing
The history of cursing is a rich tapestry woven from the threads of human emotion, social dynamics, religious belief, moral codes, and linguistic creativity. From the ritualized imprecations of ancient Egypt and Greece, designed to invoke supernatural harm 15, to the casual expletives punctuating 21st-century digital conversations 83, offensive language has served as a persistent, if often controversial, feature of human communication.
This exploration reveals that the definition and perception of "cursing" and "profanity" are not static but are profoundly shaped by their historical and cultural contexts. The etymological roots of "profanity" in the sacred—that which is "outside the temple" 1—underscore its foundational link to religious sensibilities. For much of Western history, the most potent swear words were those that transgressed divine sanctity, such as blasphemous oaths invoking God's name or body parts.1 The severity with which such utterances were treated, often codified in strict blasphemy laws 114, reflects a worldview where words were believed to hold inherent power, capable of affecting the sacred order.
However, the history of cursing is also one of constant evolution. The Renaissance saw a gradual shift, with terms related to sexuality and scatology gaining increasing obscene force as notions of privacy and bodily propriety changed.31 The Victorian era, with its emphasis on public decorum, drove much swearing underground or into the realm of minced oaths, yet simultaneously solidified legal mechanisms for controlling "obscene" content.42 The 20th century witnessed a further transformation, with sexual and anatomical terms becoming paramount in perceived vulgarity in many Western societies, while a new awareness emerged regarding the profound harm caused by slurs and hate speech directed at marginalized groups.1 This ongoing shift in the "hierarchy of offense" indicates that what a society deems most profane is a powerful reflection of its core values, anxieties, and power dynamics.
The functions of swearing are as diverse as its forms. Beyond simple aggression or insult, cursing serves crucial roles in emotional expression and catharsis, offering relief from pain and stress.86 It can be a tool for emphasis, humor, and, paradoxically, social bonding, creating camaraderie and in-group identity through shared transgression.10 These multifaceted functions, rooted in complex psychological and neurological processes 10, explain the tenacity of swearing despite centuries of condemnation and attempts at suppression.
Censorship efforts, from ancient religious proscriptions to modern media regulations and landmark literary obscenity trials 57, highlight a persistent societal tension between freedom of expression and the desire to protect moral, religious, or social order. These battles have continuously reshaped the boundaries of acceptable language.
Cross-culturally, while common themes like religion, sex, and bodily functions provide universal fodder for profanity 1, unique cultural expressions such as Quebec sacres 125 or the distinct nature of Japanese "bad words" 127 underscore the deep entanglement of language with specific historical and social milieus.
In the contemporary digital age, the internet and social media have accelerated the evolution of swearing, leading to increased exposure and normalization for some terms, particularly among younger generations, while simultaneously creating new platforms for offense and public shaming.54 The focus of societal concern continues to shift, with hate speech and discriminatory language now occupying a prominent position in discussions of linguistic harm.
Ultimately, the history of cursing demonstrates that such language is far more than a collection of "bad words." It is a vital, albeit often unsettling, component of the human linguistic repertoire, reflecting our deepest emotions, our social structures, our moral frameworks, and our ever-changing relationship with the power of words. As long as humans experience intense emotions, navigate complex social relationships, and grapple with the boundaries of the sacred and the taboo, cursing, in its myriad forms, is likely to endure as a potent and revealing aspect of our shared linguistic heritage.
Works cited
Profanity - Wikipedia, accessed May 21, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Profanity
Profanity - Etymology, Origin & Meaning - Online Etymology Dictionary, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.etymonline.com/word/profanity
How the Word Profanity Began Outside the Temple - Wordfoolery - WordPress.com, accessed May 21, 2025, https://wordfoolery.wordpress.com/2021/04/05/how-the-word-profanity-began-outside-the-temple/
en.wiktionary.org, accessed May 21, 2025, https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/swear#:~:text=%2D%C9%9B%C9%99(%C9%B9)-,Etymology%201,(%E2%80%9Cto%20swear%E2%80%9D).
Swear - Etymology, Origin & Meaning - Online Etymology Dictionary, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.etymonline.com/word/swear
Swear - Definition, Meaning & Synonyms - Vocabulary.com, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/swear
www.etymonline.com, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.etymonline.com/word/curse#:~:text=Middle%20English%20cursen%2C%20from%20Old,malignant%20evils%22%20is%20from%201590s.
Curse - Etymology, Origin & Meaning - Online Etymology Dictionary, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.etymonline.com/word/curse
Profanity | Definition, Examples, Words, & Facts - Britannica, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/topic/profanity
Profanity and Emotion are Inextricably Entwined – Let Me Show You ..., accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.mindbrained.org/2024/05/profanity-and-emotion-are-inextricably-entwined-let-me-show-you-how/
The Linguistics and Cultural Dynamics of Swearing: Between Language and Magic, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.byarcadia.org/post/between-magic-and-language-the-power-of-swearing
Fok: A Comparative Study of Profanity Across Different Languages - FasterCapital, accessed May 21, 2025, https://fastercapital.com/content/Fok--A-Comparative-Study-of-Profanity-Across-Different-Languages.html
Swearing - Radboud Educational Repository, accessed May 21, 2025, https://theses.ubn.ru.nl/bitstreams/f5a241d3-9167-4355-adb5-a07dc1b17c6f/download
(PDF) Cursing, Taboo, and Euphemism - ResearchGate, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318042045_Cursing_Taboo_and_Euphemism
Egyptian Curses - Timeline, accessed May 21, 2025, https://timeline.cityofdavid.org.il/event/egyptian-curses/
Curse tablet - Wikipedia, accessed May 21, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_tablet
Execration texts - Wikipedia, accessed May 21, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Execration_texts
Wondering what sort of swear words were used in Ancient Egypt ..., accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6dqdlv/wondering_what_sort_of_swear_words_were_used_in/
language - How would a 16-year-old girl from Cleopatra's era curse ..., accessed May 21, 2025, https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/48565/how-would-a-16-year-old-girl-from-cleopatras-era-curse
The Allure of Curses and Magic in Ancient Greece - Hellenic Museum, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.hellenic.org.au/post/the-allure-of-curses-and-magic-in-ancient-greece
classical latin - Did the Romans use any swear words? - Latin ..., accessed May 21, 2025, https://latin.stackexchange.com/questions/2183/did-the-romans-use-any-swear-words
What swear words were used by the ancient Romans? - Quora, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.quora.com/What-swear-words-were-used-by-the-ancient-Romans
Graffiti of Pompeii | Tales From A Tour Guide, accessed May 21, 2025, https://tourguidegirl.wordpress.com/2017/05/26/graffiti-of-pompeii/
Obscene graffiti of ancient Romans - imperium romanum, accessed May 21, 2025, https://imperiumromanum.pl/en/curiosities/obscene-graffiti-of-ancient-romans/
Has swearing as it's known today been present throughout history or is it a modern concept?, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistory/comments/cyop02/has_swearing_as_its_known_today_been_present/
Why so many curses have religious references? - English Stack Exchange, accessed May 21, 2025, https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/289026/why-so-many-curses-have-religious-references
Vulgarity in Literature: Profanity, Scatology, and Sexual Content | Dr. Philip Irving Mitchell, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.dbu.edu/mitchell/worldview-literature/vulgurit.html
Slavic Folklore and Pagan Practices - Curse Studies, accessed May 21, 2025, https://cursestudies.com/slavic-folklore-and-pagan-practices/
A Journey into Witchcraft Beliefs | English Heritage, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/learn/histories/journey-into-witchcraft-beliefs/
A Very Brief History Of Curse Words | The Ashland Chronicle-Oregon, accessed May 21, 2025, https://theashlandchronicle.com/a-very-brief-history-of-curse-words/
The 1600s Were a Watershed for Swear Words | History Today, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.historytoday.com/archive/explicit-content
A Brief History of Swearing | WUWM 89.7 FM - Milwaukee's NPR, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.wuwm.com/podcast/lake-effect-segments/2013-07-16/a-brief-history-of-swearing
A brief history of swearing - The Talon, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.gradedtalon.com/2625/features/a-brief-history-of-swearing/
Did the English people back in the 1400s have swear words that they used in speech? - Reddit, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1cckar/did_the_english_people_back_in_the_1400s_have/
Old English Profanity - Polysyllabic, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.polysyllabic.com/?q=node/36
Cursing in Medieval England: 'By God's Bones' and ... - PDXScholar, accessed May 21, 2025, https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1047&context=pat_pnw
African American Poetry: A Note on Historical Language: 'Negro ..., accessed May 21, 2025, https://scalar.lehigh.edu/african-american-poetry-a-digital-anthology/a-note-on-historical-language-is-negro-a-racial-slur
Mind your language - A (very) short history of swearing! - Word Wenches, accessed May 21, 2025, https://wordwenches.typepad.com/word_wenches/2011/03/mind-your-language-a-very-short-history-of-swearing.html
10 Medieval Insults - Medievalists.net, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.medievalists.net/2024/12/10-medieval-insults/
10 Old-Fashioned Swears to Spice up Your Cussin' - Mental Floss, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/49652/10-old-fashioned-swears-spice-your-cussin
A very short history of the F-word - Big Think, accessed May 21, 2025, https://bigthink.com/the-past/history-of-the-f-word/
Did people swear in the victorian era, if so, what sort of swearwords were common? - Reddit, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3c39tr/did_people_swear_in_the_victorian_era_if_so_what/
Did people say 'I don't give a shit' in Victorian times? How were ..., accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.quora.com/Did-people-say-I-dont-give-a-shit-in-Victorian-times-How-were-swearwords-used-in-the-19th-century
Victorian Curse Words : r/VictorianEra - Reddit, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/VictorianEra/comments/1irlbec/victorian_curse_words/
Did people swear in the Victorian era? If so, what sort of swearwords were common? Did it differ with class/occupation? - Quora, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.quora.com/Did-people-swear-in-the-Victorian-era-If-so-what-sort-of-swearwords-were-common-Did-it-differ-with-class-occupation
The Salty History of Swearing Like a Sailor - People | HowStuffWorks, accessed May 21, 2025, https://people.howstuffworks.com/swearing-like-sailor.htm
Why do Brits and Americans swear so differently? - BBC, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20151109-english-speakers-or-not-brits-and-americans-swear-in-different-languages
Profane Swearing Act 1694 - Wikipedia, accessed May 21, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Profane_Swearing_Act_1694
Obscene Publications Act 1857 - Wikipedia, accessed May 21, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obscene_Publications_Act_1857
Swearing Through the Centuries | WVU Magazine Past Editions ..., accessed May 21, 2025, https://magazine-archive.wvu.edu/stories/2016/04/13/swearing-through-the-centuries
Did people swear as much in the past (i.e. 40s, 50s, 60s) as they do nowadays? - Quora, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.quora.com/Did-people-swear-as-much-in-the-past-i-e-40s-50s-60s-as-they-do-nowadays
How has the frequency of swearing in everyday English changed over the past century?, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/asklinguistics/comments/m2n90l/how_has_the_frequency_of_swearing_in_everyday/
No Can Do, Gung Ho, Cakewalk: Racist Language in Common Use, accessed May 21, 2025, https://nbcuacademy.com/harmful-ableist-racist-language/
The evolution of profanity | The Tower, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.towerphs.com/articles/2025/3/opinions/The-evolution-of-profanity-715
To Inflame the Censors, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.detroitlawyer.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/DetroitBar-Hemingway.pdf
Banned Books: 10 Literary Classics That Faced Censorship - History.com, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.history.com/articles/10-literary-classics-that-have-been-banned
Obscenity Case Files: United States v. One Book Called “Ulysses”, accessed May 21, 2025, https://cbldf.org/about-us/case-files/obscenity-case-files/obscenity-case-files-united-states-v-one-book-called-ulysses/
Ulysses | The First Amendment Encyclopedia - Free Speech Center, accessed May 21, 2025, https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/ulysses/
The book that changed Britain: why the Lady Chatterley's Lover trial still matters 60 years later, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.penguin.co.uk/discover/articles/d-h-lawrence-lady-chatterleys-lover-trial
'It's rather different from selling an ordinary book': How Lady Chatterley's Lover was banned – and became a bestseller - BBC, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20241031-how-lady-chatterleys-lover-was-banned-and-became-a-bestseller
Attorney General v. Book Named "Tropic of Cancer." - Descrybe.ai, accessed May 21, 2025, https://descrybe.ai/case-details/c2113275
Tropic of Cancer (novel) - Wikipedia, accessed May 21, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropic_of_Cancer_(novel)
The History of Censorship in the United States - ThoughtCo, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.thoughtco.com/censorship-in-the-united-states-721221
Hays Code | Hollywood History, Films, Years, Rules, Era, & Definition | Britannica, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/art/Hays-Code
The Hays Code was the precursor to today's film ratings system - Sent-trib, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.sent-trib.com/2023/11/12/the-hays-code-was-the-precursor-to-todays-film-ratings-system/
Hays Code - Wikipedia, accessed May 21, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_Picture_Production_Code
When did swearing become common in America? : r/AskAnAmerican - Reddit, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/AskAnAmerican/comments/17p0zxf/when_did_swearing_become_common_in_america/
Profanity | The First Amendment Encyclopedia - Free Speech Center, accessed May 21, 2025, https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/profanity/
Lenny Bruce | The First Amendment Encyclopedia - Free Speech Center, accessed May 21, 2025, https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/lenny-bruce/
The Trials of Lenny Bruce | The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression - FIRE, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.thefire.org/research-learn/trials-lenny-bruce
FCC v. PACIFICA FOUNDATION, 438 U.S. 726 (1978) - FindLaw Caselaw, accessed May 21, 2025, https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-supreme-court/438/726.html
FCC v. Pacifica Foundation | 438 U.S. 726 (1978) - Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center, accessed May 21, 2025, https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/438/726/
Lenny Bruce - Wikipedia, accessed May 21, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenny_Bruce#Obscenity_trials
FCC v. Pacifica Foundation - Wikipedia, accessed May 21, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCC_v._Pacifica_Foundation
The Rebellion Power of the F-word in Modern Songs - DiVA portal, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1815029/FULLTEXT01.pdf
2 Live Crew | The First Amendment Encyclopedia - Free Speech Center, accessed May 21, 2025, https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/2-live-crew/
2 Live Crew and the Miller Obscenity Test;Note, accessed May 21, 2025, https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1274&context=jleg
Parental Advisory - Wikipedia, accessed May 21, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parental_Advisory#History_and_controversies
In Pain? Swear Your Way Out, New Study Advises - Force Science, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.forcescience.com/2009/07/in-pain-swear-your-way-out-new-study-advises/
Rise of profanity in movies, television - San Marcos Record, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.sanmarcosrecord.com/article/25068,rise-of-profanity-in-movies-television
The Comstock Act: Implications for Abortion Care Nationwide - KFF, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.kff.org/womens-health-policy/issue-brief/the-comstock-act-implications-for-abortion-care-nationwide/
This paper examined the use of swear words among individuals from three generations in Rivers State University. It spe - African - British Journals, accessed May 21, 2025, https://abjournals.org/ijlll/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/journal/published_paper/volume-8/issue-1/IJLLL_7YPDRYKS.pdf
English Profanity On Social Media: Linguistic Preferences And Reasons For Use, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.europeanproceedings.com/article/10.15405/epsbs.2021.06.02.50
Issues Related to Speech, Press, Assembly, or Petition, accessed May 21, 2025, https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/encyclopedia/topic/issues/issues-related-to-speech-press-assembly-or-petition/
The pragmatics of swearing, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.mcla.edu/Assets/MCLA-Files/Academics/Undergraduate/Psychology/Pragmaticsofswearing.pdf
Profanity Can Be Therapeutic AF | Psychology Today, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/some-assembly-required/201801/profanity-can-be-therapeutic-af
The Relationship between Profanity and Intelligence - CDN, accessed May 21, 2025, https://bpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/campuspress.yale.edu/dist/a/1215/files/2016/05/Giordano-rg5y5r.pdf
www.researchgate.net, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/scientific-contributions/Timothy-Jay-2022516755#:~:text=The%20main%20purpose%20of%20swearing,culture%20and%20its%20language%20conventions.
Dr. Timothy Jay - Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.mcla.edu/about-mcla/faculty/timothy-jay.php
Profanity as a Self-Defense Mechanism and an Outlet for Emotional ..., accessed May 21, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10171984/
Profanity - Wikipedia, accessed May 21, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swearing#Psychological_and_social_functions
The Anatomy of Swearing: Montagu, Ashley: 9780812217643 ..., accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.amazon.com/Anatomy-Swearing-Ashley-Montagu/dp/0812217640
Frankly, We Do Give a Damn: The Relationship Between Profanity and Honesty - PMC, accessed May 21, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5686790/
What the F: What Swearing Reveals about Our Language, Our Brains, and Ourselves, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.rizzolibookstore.com/product/what-f-what-swearing-reveals-about-our-language-our-brains-and-ourselves
The Surprising Health Benefits of Swearing | TIME, accessed May 21, 2025, https://time.com/7272667/swearing-curse-words-health-benefits/
(PDF) The Linguistics of Swearing: Why We Curse and How It ..., accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/388614585_The_Linguistics_of_Swearing_Why_We_Curse_and_How_It_Translates_Across_Cultures
The psychology of swearing - American Psychological Association, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.apa.org/news/podcasts/speaking-of-psychology/swearing
Hypoalgesic effect of swearing - Wikipedia, accessed May 21, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypoalgesic_effect_of_swearing
Profanity Can Sometimes Be the Best Medicine, Increasing Pain Tolerance by ~33%, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.psychiatrist.com/news/profanity-can-sometimes-be-the-best-medicine-increasing-pain-tolerance-33-percent/
New York Post Cites LIU Brooklyn Study That Finds Cursing Helps Workouts, accessed May 21, 2025, https://headlines.liu.edu/?p=1153
Richard Stephens - Keele University, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.keele.ac.uk/psychology/people/richardstephens/
Effect of swearing on physical performance: a mini-review - PMC, accessed May 21, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11586181/
Why Swear Words Are So Damn Interesting: An Exploration of ..., accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.schooltube.com/why-swear-words-are-so-damn-interesting-an-exploration-of-etymology-and-impact/
What is the oldest known swear word, and what did it mean? - Quora, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-oldest-known-swear-word-and-what-did-it-mean
Benjamin Bergen - Science Behind Profanity | Nelda Live, accessed May 21, 2025, https://neldastudios.com/benjamin-bergen/
Philosophy and Profanity., accessed May 21, 2025, https://againstprofphil.org/2019/01/30/philosophy-and-profanity/
Frontier Cussing - Notes From the Frontier, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.notesfromthefrontier.com/post/frontier-cussing
web.stanford.edu, accessed May 21, 2025, https://web.stanford.edu/class/linguist1/Rdgs/jay00.pdf
Benjamin K. Bergen, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.cogsci.ucsd.edu/~bkbergen/
What is Coprolalia, cursing and inappropriate language gestures - Tourette Association, accessed May 21, 2025, https://tourette.org/resource/understanding-coprolalia/
accessed December 31, 1969, https://www.mcla.edu/academics/academic-resources/faculty-profiles/timothy-jay.php
Frankly, do we give a damn…? Study finds links between swearing ..., accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/frankly-do-we-give-a-damn-study-finds-links-between-swearing-and-honesty
About Tourette Syndrome - CDC, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.cdc.gov/tourette-syndrome/about/index.html
Blasphemy law - Wikipedia, accessed May 21, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law
en.wikipedia.org, accessed May 21, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy#:~:text=By%20the%2017th%20century%2C%20several,its%20blasphemy%20laws%20in%202021.
Blasphemy in Pakistan - Wikipedia, accessed May 21, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_in_Pakistan
Comstockery: How Government Censorship Gave Birth to the Law of Sexual and Reproductive Freedom, and May Again Threaten It, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.yalelawjournal.org/article/comstockery
Comstock Act of 1873 - Wikipedia, accessed May 21, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comstock_Act
Ulysses (novel) - Wikipedia, accessed May 21, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulysses_(novel)#Censorship
Lady Chatterley's Lover - Wikipedia, accessed May 21, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Chatterley%27s_Lover#Obscenity_trials
Tropic of Cancer (novel) - Wikipedia, accessed May 21, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropic_of_Cancer_(novel)#Censorship_and_obscenity_trials
Arabic Insults & Meanings (dialects with audio!) - Playaling, accessed May 21, 2025, https://playaling.com/insults-in-arabic/
30 Chinese Cuss Words To Learn | Mandarin Blueprint, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.mandarinblueprint.com/blog/chinese-cuss-words/
8+ Chinese Curse Words And Meanings Explained [2025] - Lingopie, accessed May 21, 2025, https://lingopie.com/blog/chinese-curse-words-guide/
Quebec French profanity - Wikipedia, accessed May 21, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_French_profanity
TIL: French Canadian swears are mostly insults about the Catholic Church. Known as sacres they originated in the early 19th century when the social control exerted by the Catholic clergy was increasingly a source of frustration to them. : r/todayilearned - Reddit, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/cb0z66/til_french_canadian_swears_are_mostly_insults/
Understanding bad words in Japan: Why you not to use them - MochiMochi, accessed May 21, 2025, https://mochidemy.com/support/japanese-bad-words-should-not-use/
16+ Crazy Japanese Curse Words And Expressions (With Context) - Lingopie, accessed May 21, 2025, https://lingopie.com/blog/learn-japanese-curse-words-and-expressions-with-context/
16 Curse Words in Arabic and How to use Them - Lovlan blog, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.lovlan.com/blog/16-curse-words-in-arabic/
To Curse or Not To Curse: Is Digital Media Shifting When and Where We Swear? - MediaShift, accessed May 21, 2025, http://mediashift.org/2016/10/curse-not-curse-digital-media-shifting-swear/
Profanity in Digital Media - Institute for Internet and the Just Society, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.internetjustsociety.org/profanity-in-digital-media
Beyond Profanity: Reversing The Rise Of Bad Language Among Kashmiri Youth, accessed May 21, 2025, https://kashmirreader.com/2025/02/27/beyond-profanity-reversing-the-rise-of-bad-language-among-kashmiri-youth/
F*c*book: Swearing impacts impression formation on social media - OSF, accessed May 21, 2025, https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/wvcsa/download
Swearing on social media really could cost you your job | World Economic Forum, accessed May 21, 2025, https://www.weforum.org/stories/2017/04/swearing-social-media-jobs-employers/
The Semantics of Sin: Profanity, Reform, and Cultural Authority in Progressive America - UNH Scholars Repository, accessed May 21, 2025, https://scholars.unh.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1001&context=sawyer_scholarship
"The Semantics of Sin: Profanity, Reform, and Cultural Authority in ..., accessed May 21, 2025, https://scholars.unh.edu/sawyer_scholarship/2/
No comments:
Post a Comment