Survey says that left-leaning bloggers use more naughty words than those on the right. But does that mean that they are less civil or serious?

http://www.thepoorman.net/2007/03/02/a-style-guide-to-civility-and-seriousness/

I've heard this before and actually given it some thought. As someone whose political sympathies usually fall on the left side of the spectrum, I surmise it's probably true that my side uses the seven dirty words more often. The taboo against such words is largely (though not entirely) based in conservative religious values, so it's perhaps not surprising that those with a more secular worldview would be less inhibited in that regard. I almost never use such words myself because (a) they further coarsen an already far too debased civic culture, and (b) constant repetition causes them to lose their power, which lessens their usefulness in the very rare instances in which they are appropriate.

That said, however, it's also been my observation that those on the political right are much, much more likely to use the language of violence, advocate violence (such as torture and war) and take delight in explicitly describing violence. There is NO left-wing equivalent of Ann ("kill all their leaders") Coulter or Michael ("get AIDS and die") Savage. The vicious, hate-filled language heard regularly on conservative talk radio and seen on sites such as Free Republic simply does not exist anywhere on the left outside of a few crazed (and anonymous) blog and chat-room comments. You certainly don't hear it on Air America.

So sure, those on the left probably do drop a few more f-bombs than their right-wing counterparts. But the right is guilty of far worse rhetorical sins.

Nailed it!

Agreed completely.

The difference between the left and the right is that the left "says" the country is being f---ed by the right and the right doesn't say it but does it.

Actions DO speak louder than words.

In regards to Nitefly's comments above, I, too have a hard time picturing profanity being used to try to persuade people to follow a morally upstanding or spiritual path. My observation has been that religious viewpoints often have their own supernatural jargon, so they don't have a need for the emotionally intensifying function often associated with expletives.

> I almost never use such words myself because (a)
> they further coarsen an already far too debased
> civic culture, and (b) constant repetition causes
> them to lose their power, which lessens their
> usefulness in the very rare instances in which
> they are appropriate.

I'd like to say mega-dittoes on point "a" as far as the use of cuss words in forums and materials intended for public consumption by strangers is concerned. I think that our society has created a civic culture that is too harsh for its own good. In the polarized environment that we have today, starting an intellectual conversation for the purpose of trying to learn about an issue or position seems a difficult task. Instead, a lot of people seem to treat the discussion of sociopolitical matters as a combative exercise wherein one is focused on rounding up allies and demeaning anyone who is not an ally.

I would like to add that I am not a big fan of the edgy, sarcastic writing style that seems to show up on a lot of online columns and blogs. I can understand that these writers are trying to appeal to an audience that is somewhat jaded, but I think that in the long-run, these writers hurt their own arguments and images.

There is one place that I think it is OK to use profanity to your heart's content. That place is in the company of friends, over drinks, assuming, of course, that they don't mind profanity and that they like to drink.