Can any conclusion be drawn as to how our culture has changed in this regard since the 1950/1960s? On the one hand, today we find language and expression that once would have been considered taboo on TV, radio, bumper stickers, and out in public. On the other hand, when I read Stoner's comment on the radio side that Don Burden told his DJs, "I give you the God-damned Queen Mary, and you treat it like the Titanic!" I was struck that in general, I do not hear this kind of language and demeanor in my work, especially when a manager is addressing his subordinates. Some accounts that I have heard and read of the offices of 40-50 years ago suggest that they were boys' clubs where gruff demeanors on-the-job were common.

In the political arena, there is no question that decorum has changed. It’s obvious that politicians of old from opposite parties were much more likely to work and socialize together than today. Today, polarization seems to better define the relationships of politicians of opposite parties. That’s why there is so much distrust between the two parties. And it’s the fault of both parties. Rather than trying to find common ground, the engage in seek and destroy missions. Just look at state of modern politics since 1980. It’s become much more personal and the attacks are never ending.

"how our culture has changed in this regard since the 1950/1960s"

Simply put, we've advanced as a species. Evolution right under your nose.

So, you (Vitalogy) are saying that decorum today is better than it was in the 1950s and 1960s?

I guess I should clarify my question a little bit in regards to the workplace issue: Part of my question is whether my observations might be skewed because most of my employment has been around engineering types.

If you mean that people today are less apt to tell off color jokes or chase a little tail, I think things have improved immeasurably. There is no place for that kind of ballyhoo in the workplace.

Alfredo,
I think I understand what you are asking. I wasn't around 50 years ago, but I'm going to take a crack at it anyway. I've considered the same thing you have. The conclusion I've reached is that the politically correct forces that control HR policy in the workplace, and the degradation of old standards of personal conduct are actually products of the same phenomenon. I think that the social revolution this country went through 40 or so years ago created a culture where we now believe our rights are "freedoms from", instead of "freedoms of". For example, the prevailing wisdom is that we have the right to not witness certain conduct in the workplace BECAUSE our diversities can mean that I subscribe to a belief that would cause me to take offense to your conduct. Yet your conduct, outside of work, is itself often respected as your choice. In such an environment, there is no shame and sometimes it's "anything goes", which is why we're more numb as a society to seeing old social taboos portrayed as okay in our entertainment. So I think both phenomenons you brought up are products of the same changes in society.

Thanks. The paradox that both "politically correct" HR policies and almost "anything goes" entertainment and public conduct are actually parts of the same phenomenon is what I have a hard time getting my arms around. I think that your analysis is correct, though.

actually there was more formality, the Boss was always Mr. So and So, to the people in the office. Maybe more politness and definitely more Polish jokes. Of course it depended on the workplace. Car Dealers and factories were more crude, Yet my Father NEVER used the F word, his best friend, it showed up in just about every sentence. The N word appeared frequently as well,
yet not in mixed company.

...."politically correct" HR policies and almost "anything goes" entertainment and public conduct"

truly sends a mixed message.....

I think that the best explanation that I have seen for the changes in entertainment has to do with changes in audience research methods and the resulting assumptions that programmers made about the audience. This came out of one of the television history websites, although I can't remember the exact URL. Of course in later years, increased choices and audience fragmentation played a significant role, as well.

According to the article I read, in the 1950s, television was new, and not a lot of research existed about the viewing audience. The networks and advertisers thus made the assumption that most of the viewers were white, middle class families, and that children would likely be part of the audience. As a result, coarse language and controversial or "adult" subjects were not put on the air. The characters were designed in the idealized image of the supposed viewers (i.e. Leave It To Beaver).

The same article went on to say that in the late 1960s and early 1970s, audience research started showing that there were viewers who wanted programs designed for adults--that is ones that were more frank about social issues or about adult relationships. The research also showed that the number of people wanting to see shows about or for minorities was large enough to be considered important by advertisers. As a result, shows like All In the Family, M*A*S*H*, Good Times, The Jeffersons, etc. were created.

... then there was a research blackout and "When Things Were Rotten" was created

:-D

I once read a book that said the f-word although being very old in origin, was not commonly used until World War II. If you hear a blooper tape from before that time, all you hear is a series of "hell"s and "damn"s. If you look at it this way, you can see why Clark Gable's use of the word, "damn" in "Gone with the Wind", was so controversial: It was virtually the equivalent of using the f-word! Incidentally, when I was a kid, "hell" and "damn" were still not completely acceptable. I remember being quite surprised by the Spanky & Our Gang song, "Give a Damn".

Spot on Semoochie...it's shocking where we have gone with our slang/profanities in the media/movies and even in the private world. I hang with at risk kids occasionally and the f-word is a preverb,adverb,noun,...used in every sentence. Obviously the people who speak this way need to learn more creative ways of communicating. My question is where will this all go in 20 years in society...any new taboo words out their being supressed that will come out!?

McCain uses the C word when talking about his wife......

Agreed.

If we look back, profanity has always been a mild escalation of words. Here's something to think about.

The ideas, acts and things in this world, that profanity refers to, are constant. Like ages are constant. At any one time, there are always kids, adults, old people. In like kind, there are vile acts, ideas and things.

Those words we use to describe these ugly things are considered ugly, but that tends to wear over time. As this happens, and language continues to evolve, new words replace the old and profanity moves and shifts in lock step with our language trends over time.

This too is a constant. If it were not, we would still be speaking the kings English, on this side of the pond and all that bloody vile rot.

Because of these things, we always have profanity. There will quite simply always be ugly things in the world, ugly emotions and such, that will always need expression.

Gay used to reflect a state of happiness. Remember that? Now it's something quite different.

This happens to language over time.

I'm all for there being a time and a place for profanity, but I absolutely do not believe it's unacceptable just for it being profane.

If we do not have these words to express ugly emotions and ideas, things and acts, we then simply cannot express our thoughts about the world in a real fashion.

Real conversations are the only ones that actually matter. This is why we have our free speech doctrine! If we cannot speak as we feel we must, we then cannot improve ourselves and we lose that which makes our society vibrant and a growing, living thing.

Profanity can be broken down into two coarse catagories of expression:

There is lazy speech, where profanity is used for it's shock value alone. This does not contribute substantially to the conversation, and should be discouraged as it's just bad form.

The rest of it does add value in that the ugly thing being expressed does add value to the conversation, as in it would not be a complete, real conversation without that ugly thing being an element of it.

Sorry, but there are times when that simply must be the case. Anyone who does not grok this, really isn't capable of real conversation.

The shock value changes over time, and this drives the excalation of profanity. Damn, used to be profane. It used to have considerable shock value. As it gets used, this fades and something new takes it's place.

This will happen to our current profane words as well, and life continues on.

To deny this is to deny our own cultural evolution over time and is simply futile.

"Simply put, we've advanced as a species. Evolution right under your nose."

I would say that evolution has somehow reversed itself.

Yep.

From each of our unique perspectives, we've regressed in some ways. I think that's actually valid too. The society as a whole, does improve.

And I think the older we get, the more this perception becomes.

My particular manifestation of this happens to be this spend your way out of trouble culture seen in many younger people. I don't get it. I think it's a problem.

A conversation like ours has occurred over time, repeatedly. Always will.

"I would say that evolution has somehow reversed itself."

Not one of the dumbest, but pretty close to one of the dumbest quotes of all time.

I suspect, Vitalogy, that you're sensitive to the fact the statement might be applicable to you. You're certainly in the best position to know.

If you think we haven't advanced in any way in the last 40-50 years, you're an idiot.

You don't easily catch on to things, do you Vitalogy?

Speaking of today's decorum, or lack thereof, here's a reminder from our administrator:

Rules and "Netiquette"

When writing your messages, please use the same courtesy that you would show when speaking face-to-face with someone. Flames, insults, and personal attacks will not be tolerated. It's fine to disagree strongly with opinions, ideas, and facts, but always with respect for the other person. Great minds do not always think alike, and that's where the fun is!

"Please use the same courtesy that you would show when speaking face-to-face with someone."

You mean sort of like Dick Cheney uttering F-bombs in the Senate and blasting attorneys with weapon?

Yeah, that's the ticket.

> If you think we haven't advanced in any way in the last 40-50 years, you're an idiot.

I think that some important societal and cultural issues and problems have been solved. However, in that time, new issues and problems, not necessarily related to the old ones, have been created that need to be resolved. Example: the blatant workplace sexism that was considered OK in the 1950s and '60s is now taboo. Calling female co-workers "broads" is not OK today. This is a significant improvement. However, today language not appropriate for children to see occasionally gets displayed on bumperstickers and T-shirts. Music with lyrics containing this kind of language is sometimes heard blaring from car stereos. As I understand it, in the 1950s and the early part of the 1960s, this kind of language was kept in private settings, where children wouldn't hear it. There were records with indecent language (such as "The Farting Contest"), but these were hard to find, and played only in adult settings. Even in the late 1960s, record company management were somewhat squeamish about making records with indecent language.

On a broader scale, not necessarily related to decorum, there are a lot more opportunities for racial and ethnic minorities today than there were 40-50 years ago. On the other hand, since then, the new problem of children and teens being sexually solicited on the Internet has been created.

In short, I don't think that anything like a perfect society or "utopia" is possible because new problems are continually created.

"Calling female co-workers "broads" is not OK today. This is a significant improvement."

We haven't cured Cancer, Parkinson's, and a host of other diseases, foul language is everywhere and sex on demand is the whim of the day, but we sure got that drag on civilization fixed.

But we have nailed a ton of diseases, so that's a serious gain.

Foul language is more prominent now than before. That's a wash in that we have far fewer taboos, and that's a gain, but we've a lot more lazy speech, so that's a loss.

The lack of taboos have brought racial and cultural issues into the discussion at a higher level, that's good too. Being able to have more real conversations, with fewer inhibitions is valuable as well.

Sex on demand is very hard to see as a bad thing. Sorry, but our physiology permits this. If we were not meant to enjoy that act and each other, we would not have pleasure linked to it. Trying to deny this is to deny our humanity. Futile, IMHO. Either we face who we are, accept that, then work to become better, or we live our lives in fear and or loathing over who we are.

I lean liberal socially because I see no rational reason to entertain the latter, particularly when we have conversation available to us that's real enough to deal with this, and improve on it.

Our level of technical understanding continues to grow, as does our ability to communicate. These are seriously good things too.

Alfredo, yep! It seems each answer does bring new questions, doesn't it? I can only offer this:

Utopia is an ideal we seek, but cannot really achieve. You are as happy as you think you are and that's a function of the expectations you buy into, or allow to be set.

Resetting these is something I highly recommend, if you are not there. I'm going through that right now, and it's work, but it's paying off too.

We have a Black man running for President --leader of the free world. This is huge! The world is watching to see if Americans can once again do what they do best.

Yes we can.

Hope, inspiration, empowerment and tolerance are powerful things. They speak to those things about us, as a race, that are great. IMHO, they are necessary if we are to get along as a people and improve our lot each day.

Having those be a part of the political conversation gets me up each morning, thinking that maybe all the crap I've taken, and that others I know have taken, will pass. With that passing will be a good time where we can enjoy just being here with one another.

Yeah, I know simple stuff, but important stuff.

Again, as we age, I think we lose some of our ability to bend and twist to adapt and grow. This changes our outlook on things and all of that is a use it or lose it affair.

Works a lot like gymnastics. As kids, we can pretty much do all the movements we are supposed to. If we continue to do them, from time to time, remembering the core of who we are and how we are supposed to be --what we can be, then we simply are just that.

If we do not, then we change and grow stiff, something less than we were.

That's up to each of us, more than it is any element of our society and our leadership.

This Republican administration put a lot of pressure on people to embrace the stiffness, the need to be led, fear, inhibition, you name it. All of those things that make us less, not more.

Thankfully, most of us will have endured that, ready to let it pass.

One loss is that we are working more than we should be right now. That's an artificial burden, imposed on those that would cripple us and exploit us. That can and should change.

Working hard, for clear gains, and on the right things is good and healthy. Nobody would argue that. Working hard because it's expected for some self-serving reasons or domination isn't healthy and just being able to have that conversation speaks to our ability to improve and grow, despite our flaws.

Our state today is what each of us thinks it is. Focus on the negatives and it's a loss. Focus on the positives and it's a gain.

You don't easily catch on to things, do you Vitalogy?

Coming from an ignoramus like yourself that's not saying much.

Oh darn, schools out.

I think grade schoolers could ad more intellectual input than some posters here...

HONEY WHERE'S THE KIDS?

I think grade schoolers could write the above two sentences correctly.

(Heck, even Elian Gonzalez could probably still do it.)

Sometimes the irony is just too much!

"Sometimes when we touch..."

Modern Decorum?

That fraternity story (above) is hilarious! I bet those guys were reluctant to call the police. The chivalrous thing to do here would have been to offer assistance to the young lady.

Maybe it was Dean Wormer's wife?

Or his daughter, sans shopping cart?

Deane sez: "Oh darn, schools out."

Yup, this means kids filling in for employees going on vacation at his nursing home.

"Mr Johnson, give me $10 or you're getting an enema."

...Best laugh all day! Thanks!