Stories

The cursing generation

Mark Milke
April 18, 2012
Several millennia ago, Aristotle asserted that man was different from the animals because only he had the gift of (thoughtful) speech. The cursing generation seems intent on erasing that distinction as Mark Milke explains…
Stories

The cursing generation

Mark Milke
April 18, 2012
Several millennia ago, Aristotle asserted that man was different from the animals because only he had the gift of (thoughtful) speech. The cursing generation seems intent on erasing that distinction as Mark Milke explains…
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter

Several millennia ago, Aristotle asserted that man was different from the animals because only he had the gift of (thoughtful) speech. The cursing generation seems intent on erasing that distinction. The blanketing of everyday conversation with curse words and crudities is so common that few people stop to question it, or tell people to zip it.

The relentless torrent of swear words, used as if they were punctuation marks in a sentence, was again made real to me recently courtesy of two unrelated episodes.

Episode one brought three youngish women along my path while I was nearing the University of Calgary’s library. “This bi**h needs to eat” exclaimed one gal—about herself—loudly. 

The second reminder took place as I was stuck on a chairlift at Lake Louise ski resort. Some young man behind me cursed three times in five minutes. He repeatedly urged the motionless mechanical object to “‘effing’ move!” It eventually did, perhaps reinforcing a correlation-causation error in his mind: “I curse, the object moves; therefore my cursing was cause to the effect.”

A few years back, a political operative who shall remain nameless but was known for his drinking and colourful language was a fellow patron at a small Italian restaurant, converted from a house to its current use. So the four of us were at a table in a small room; a family with young kids and a couple lingering over a romantic dinner sat at two other tables.

The more my fellow dinner companion drank, the bluer his language became; he was oblivious to the frequent dark stares from the family and irritated glances from the couple.

Finally—being embarrassed for us but especially sorry for the other patrons with children, I blurted out with some frustration, “Would you please shut up already?! There are other people here and with kids.” He looked around with the then-dawning wakefulness that perhaps the wine had masked his own self-awareness. He mumbled his regrets.  

The swearing virus is not limited to undergraduates, frustrated skiers and politicos. Historian Niall Ferguson prints the F-word (as an action) in his recent book, Civilization. While he is quoting someone else, past historians would have put part of that word in asterisks.

I won’t claim I never swear. I do try and limit it to private, consenting episodes between me and my slow computer (and I realize it won’t help but everyone needs to be occasionally irrational).

Still, to curse is to admit that one has become lazy; that the effort to find the right words and to engage in the act of reason has been abandoned.

Maybe that’s why swearing most often takes place when people are frustrated or angry. Insofar as the curses are directed at others, it’s an attempt to skip past reason and enter the realm of intimidation, just with harsh words instead of fists. 

But that’s not much different from the animal world. As Aristotle also pointed out, once you abandon the act of speech with logic and thought behind it, all you’re left with is mere voice and its primal grunts.

Mark Milke is the editorial board chair of C2C Journal.

Love C2C Journal? Here's how you can help us grow.

More for you

Ottawa is Playing a Game of Charter Chicken with the Provinces

The federal government has long objected to provinces using the Charter of Rights and Freedoms’ “notwithstanding” clause, arguing it lets them trample over the rights of Canadians. But that view, flawed as it is, is nothing compared to Ottawa’s latest gambit on this issue, writes Andrew Roman. Liberal Justice Minister Sean Fraser’s recent intervention in the case of Quebec’s Bill 21 asks the Supreme Court of Canada to declare limits on the use of the notwithstanding clause. This would amount to a backdoor amendment of the Constitution by the court, one that would give judges even more power and leave elected representatives even less scope to avoid or undo their harmful decisions. More than just an attack on provincial autonomy, writes Roman, it threatens to upset the balance at the heart of Canada’s federal democracy.

What if October 7 Had Happened Not in Israel but in Canada?

It is probably beyond the imagination of most Canadians that they would ever face the kind of evil atrocity Israelis suffered on October 7, 2023. Or that we would find ourselves living next door to savage terrorists bent on our annihilation. But as Gwyn Morgan points out, it is critical to understand that reality as Israel’s struggle for existence carries on. The history of Israel is nothing short of miraculous. As Morgan personally observed on a tour of the world’s only Jewish state, Israelis have with determination and heart built a free, tolerant, prosperous and technologically-advanced democracy while surrounded by enemies. In the face of ruthless attacks by Hamas and the craven behaviour of supposed friends and allies who now lean in favour of the terrorists, Israel has reminded the rest of the world what real courage is.

One Country, Two Markets: The Shaky Promise and Unfair Burden of “Decarbonized” Oil

“Decarbonized” oil is being touted as a way to bridge the policy chasm separating energy-rich Alberta and the climate-change-obsessed Mark Carney government. Take the carbon dioxide normally emitted during the production and processing of crude oil and store it underground, the thinking goes, and Canada can have it all: plentiful jobs, a thriving industry, burgeoning exports and falling greenhouse gas emissions. But is “decarbonized” oil really a potential panacea – or an oxymoron that makes no more sense than “dehydrated” water? In this original analysis, former National Energy Board member Ron Wallace evaluates whether a massive push for carbon capture and storage can transform Alberta into a “clean energy superpower” – or will merely saddle its industry and government with a technical boondoggle and unbearable costs while Eastern Canada’s refiners remain free to import dirty oil from abroad.

More from this author

Not So Beautiful Minds: Conspiracy Theories from JFK to Oliver Stone and Donald Trump

Shocking events that plunge a country into chaos or destroy a beloved leader are hard for anyone to process. The evil done is so towering it bends the human psyche to accept that the evildoer is utterly banal, a loner walking in ordinary shoes. The cause simply must befit the outcome; thus can a conspiracy theory be hatched. At other times, the cold hope of political or financial gain or simple mischief might be the source. There certainly is no shortage of conspiracy theories. Mark Milke revisits one of history’s most famous political assassinations and the conspiracy theories it spawned to illuminate the ongoing danger this toxic tendency poses to us all.

Picture of Thomas Hobbes frontispiece of Leviathan. A renowned pieceof political work on liberty

Future of Conservatism Series, Part VII: Memo to Politicians: We’re Not Your Pet Projects

Canadian conservatives have most of the summer to ruminate on what they want their federal party to become – as embodied by their soon-to-be elected leader, anyway. Acceptability, likability and winnability will be key criteria. Above all, however, should be crafting and advancing a compelling policy alternative to today’s managerial liberalism, which has been inflated by the pandemic almost beyond recognition. Mark Milke offers a forceful rebuttal against the Conservative “alternative” comprising little more than a massaged form of top-down management.

Leaders_debate_2019_canada_diversity_bias_free_speech_liberal_conservative

So Much for Diversity: The Monochromatic Moderators of Monday’s Debate

Canada is a big, diverse country by virtually any measure, from our no-longer-so-sparse population to our epic geography to the ethnic makeup of our people. Diverse in every way, it seems, except in our elites’ aggressively progressive official-think. Consistent with this is the otherwise bizarre decision to have Monday’s federal leaders’ debate hosted by five decidedly similar female journalists. Mark Milke briefly profiles the five and, more important, advances a positive alternative: five distinguished women diverse in background, hometown and, above all, thought.