The following essay will be carefully censored, in the sense that if I don't censor it myself, our built-in online filther will helpfully do it for me. Let's see if I can manage to discuss this language issue intelligibly in spite of this handicap – which, let's face it, is merely a tangible reminder of the centuries of discomfort we humans have in discussing certain subjects we find a bit too close to home.

The Question of Our Intimate Anatomies

1973 – The Streaking Epidemic:

When it was announced that a student planned to 'streak' around the Cathedral of Learning at high noon, efforts were made on the part of certain students to prevent our venerable professor of Old English from getting near the windows. The savvy lady demanded an explanation, which was given – reluctantly, and with no Anglo-Saxon involved.

She laughed¹. 'Can't they at least wear funny hats?'

According to online sources, the first incident of streaking in modern times occurred on 5 July 1799 in London. (Why are we not surprised?) A bet of 10 guineas was involved. (Why are we not surprised?) Five years later, the first university student streaked in the United States. Streaking became a tradition at Washington College in the Early Republic. That first collegiate streaker later became a congressman. (Why are we not surprised?)

In the 1960s, alarmed citizens who didn't know their history blamed the streaking fad on 'sex, drugs, and rock'n'roll'. It must have been a powerful combination of love, reefers, and the Rolling Stones that sent Minnesota students running across the snow in their birthday suits. The temperature was -18°. Celsius.

1973 Streaking Epidemic: Overheard on Campus:

He, whining: Why are all the streakers male?

She, grinning: Because only men look funny when they run naked.

The foregoing is offered as a brief virtual-visual demonstration of the topic at hand, which is tabooed words and insults.

Our Bodies, Our Language: Male Division

Putz, Schwanz, Schmuck

The only three words for 'penis' that will (probably) get through the filther. They are in Yiddish. We are grateful to the inventors of that language.

In spite of the prejudice of the BBC's censors (who gifted us with that filther), words for 'penis' are not really as controversial as other 'cuss words'. However, they are all either pejorative or demeaning. That is their intent, and that intent is a part of the reason they are tabooed. Reducing another person to their sexual organs is a primitive form of insult, but an enduring one. It is part of bad human behaviour. People shouldn't do it, but sometimes, they do.

Penis insults seem to come in two forms, at least in English:

• As indicators of unworthy behaviour, such as 'He's such a Richard,' or 'He's such a Richard-head.' Obviously, a Richard-head hasn't got much ratiocination going on in his noodle. That's why he acts like a putz.
• As indicators of general uselessness. I'll let you supply the epithets.

Conclusion: When it comes to swearing, the penis is not treated as a sacred object. No phallic monuments are being built to it: in fact, it is an object of scorn. No wonder the millennials prefer the word 'junk' – and frequently protest that they do not wish to see same in an Instagram. We applaud their good taste.

Our Bodies, Our Language: Female Division

Things Kids Say:

Vicky, unrepentant hippie, shared this:
My dad was a gynecologist. In first grade, the teacher asked all the kids what their dads did for a living.

'And what does your daddy do, Vicky?'

'He looks at ladies' hoo-has.'

A very polite child. 'Ladies' hoo-has', indeed.

Ladies' hoo-has are never funny. Unlike the lingam, they are never objects of ridicule. They do not symbolise uselessness. At this point, we would like to invite a leading psychiatrist and world-renowned evolutionary biologist to discuss this topic with a feminist scholar, but we don't know any, so we'll leave you with a link to some really weird stuff by Slavoj Zizek, all about God, Lilith, and the divine Shekhina. We would also point you in the direction of the majority decision of the Second Circuit in the case of Ulysses. We're not sure it's relevant, but we'll throw it in, anyway, for a giggle.

There is one word in use as an English-language insult, which invokes the female anatomy. It's considered beyond rude. Using it is more than taboo. Englishmen use it, but mainly against other men. In the US, even hard-swearing people do not use it. I believe that is because ladies' hoo-has are not a frivolous matter. Just as men running about in the nude are risible, but women aren't.

Our Bodies, Our Language: Privacy, Please

Joke Told by Linguists, a Filthy-Minded Lot:

Jack, a sailor, went on shore leave. His buddy Mack, who was in the brig for an infraction, didn't get to go, and demanded all the juicy details of his comrade's 24-hour debauchery. Mack listened attentively to Jack's tale.

Jack: I runs down the bleepin' gangway, see? And I grabs a bleepin' taxi, and asks the bleepin' cabbie to take me to the hottest bleepin' spot in town, which he does, and I has a few bleepin' beers, lookin' around, you see, and I spots this bleepin' girl at the end of the bar, she was a bleepin' looker, you see, so I says to her, says I, hey girlie, you wanna have a bleepin' good time? And she says, bleep yeah, that's why I'm bleepin' here…so we goes upstairs, and…

Mack: Yeah? And then?

Jack: I, er, had intercourse with her.

There are reasons why we are shy about our anatomies. Some things are personal. Maybe the raucous swear words are more of a smokescreen than anything else – intended to keep other monkeys…er, humans…away from what, after all, is a very private part of our lives. And that's probably a good thing.

In spite of alarmist proclamations and scandals intended to garner mouseclicks and/or sell newspapers, we're probably still pretty private, most of us. And we probably have more respect for each other, male and female, than we sometimes let on. It might be a good idea to stop and think about that, and to give ourselves a pat on the back (and our neighbours a break).

Dmitri Gheorgheni

09.04.18 Front Page

Back Issue Page