Talk:Cunt

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Cunt article.
Article policies
Archive
Archives


Contents

[edit] More uses

In Life of Brian, Reg of the PFJ upbraids Brian "You CUNT! etc" - see Monty Python’s Life of Brian Bob Hawke famously described Bill Hayden as "a lying cunt with a limited future" - see Bob Hawke Ian Healy to Arjuna Ranatunga when the latter called for a runner during a one day cricket match: "You don't get a runner for being an overweight, unfit, fat cunt" - [1] 2001 - Zimbabwean cricketer Grant Flower played a shot against Australia which just evaded the fielders and scored some runs. Australian bowler Shane Warne's reaction, which was made almost directly into the stump microphones and heard on national television: "You fuckin' arsey cunt!" - [2] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tooclever4Uhaterz (talk • contribs) 13:37, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

There is a real danger that this article is eventually going to be overloaded with references and uses, and I'd suggest some restraint is necessary to avoid the proposal that there should be a List of Uses of the Word "Cunt". I think the encyclopedia could live without such a list. --Rodhullandemu (talk - contribs) 18:54, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Well, yes, trivia really. But which uses should be in the encyclopedia and which shouldn't? James Joyce's use is notable and less trivial, but don't we go a bit into POV each time? Monty Python is a celebrated comedy troupe and James Joyce is a celebrated writer.--Keerllston 13:03, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't get what you mean, all the uses you listed are exactly the same. Funny examples none the less, but nothing that wasn't covered in the article.

I remembered a fairly popular Aussie use of the word aswell; funny-cunt (as in, "What a funny cunt!")

[edit] Proposed Formatting Changes

Reverted good faith edits by Dwarf Kirlston; Revert pending consensus discussion.

I was bold, but given that this is a controversial page, my edits were held back until consensus could be reached.

Currently Usage has topics 4.1 In modern literature
4.2 Referring to women
4.3 Referring to men
4.4 Usage in Great Britain
4.5 Usage in Ireland & Scotland
4.6 Usage in Australia
4.7 Usage in the United States
4.8 Referring to inanimate objects
4.9 Other uses
I propose that "In Modern Literature" be moved to "in popular culture" - literature is ,perhaps not "popular" literature but, definitely not popular usage
I propose that Usage by country be preceded by the different types of usage.
I note that "Usage:pre-20th Century" relates to etymology as origins to current usage - I propose that "Vulgarity and offensiveness should not split them apart.--Keerllston 13:03, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Note: I also did something less likely to reach easy consensus, more debatable, than the above, I altered headings. I changed "Usage in Country Name" to "Country Name" - both are perhaps a tad unpalatable, and very debatable. This wold have deserved some talk page discussion even in an uncontroversial page.--Keerllston 13:28, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed Lead

Proposed by User:Rodhullandemu

  • basic definition - genital area, etc
  • etymology
  • offensive connotations
  • familiar usage

I agree, but I wanted to say that Etymology should not simply be moved up but rather summarized, made concise -goes for all the other parts as well. Also it seems that the "Vulgarity and offensiveness" is badly formatted because it was part of a previous lead.--Keerllston 13:22, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Link needs update

http://www.matthewhunt.com/website/cunt/index.html instead of http://www.matthewhunt.com/cunt/ at the end of the article —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.18.136.67 (talk) 23:56, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, you can do that. --Rodhullandemu (please reply here - contribs) 22:29, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Actually, you can't since the page is semi-protected. I'll do it. --Rodhullandemu (please reply here - contribs) 22:31, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bull by the Horns

I've taken out a lot of stuff which by any standard is moot- look at the diffs to see what- or unsourced, or irrelevant. That which remains (from what I've looked at) but seems to be worthy of inclusion, I've tagged as needing citation. This is of necessity my own perspective and I don't mind being shot down for it; however, as I pointed out above, apart from the vandals, people have been sticking folkloric uses in without proper sources. Rather than just tear them out, I've left them for now, but it is a lot of work to try and find sources for recent popular culture. One example- in the "Rhyming Slang" section, there was a reference to an Essex butcher, Robert Munt. Leaving WP:BLP considerations aside, I could not find an independent source for this, so it went. A little restraint, discipline & encyclopediarity would not go amiss here. When time permits, I'll continue. --Rodhullandemu (please reply here - contribs) 02:25, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Support Might I say that Spoonerisms and so on are included in usage? perhaps a rename into "Usage:Spoonerisms..." in is order.--Keerllston 03:12, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Archive and Progress

Now that the article itself is semi-protected for a month, some housekeeping and organisation might be useful (& thanks already to User:Dwarf Kirlston here). I've taken the liberty of archiving a load of stuff which has either been incorporated, or rejected for inclusion as either irrelevant or unconstructive. In particular, it would seem prudent henceforth to be aggressive towards unsourced additions in "popular culture"-type sections, particularly music, film and television. The reasoning behind this is simple: notability; there was a time when use of "cunt" was a shocker, but those times are now behind us, unless you're aged about eleven. I'd argue that for an addition to be truly encyclopedic, it now has to be somehow outside or beyond the current usage which we document here. Having said that, please feel free to present counter-arguments and discussion; after all, nobody owns any Wikipedia article; it may not be a free-for-all, but it should at least be constructive. Happy New Year! --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 03:27, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Film: The word appears in The Sound Of Music in a scene where a nun asks in a cut-glass accent "What is it you can't face?" so that it comes out as "What is it, you cuntface?". 86.142.207.163 (talk) 10:34, 29 January 2008 (UTC) George Icbar 29 january 2008

[edit] Links

Did you see what does the last link point to? "Vaginafest.us", a page full of vaginas photos... Is that proper for an encyclopedia? --82.56.84.94 (talk) 00:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Yup. Wikipedia is not censored. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 00:06, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
The link is borderline relevant, in that it discusses "YONI YAGNA, CELEBRATION OF CUNT", and in that discussion makes a distinction between cunt & vagina. It is not a very authoritative looking website, but equally its content is distinct and fulsome. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:12, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Berk (dead link)

A citation URL for the origin of "berk" (45) appears to be dead. I can't edit in a replacement directly. However, both The New Oxford Dictionary of English (and, I'm assuming, any other print dictionary of a decent size) and Merriam-Webster Online give similar origins of the word (1930s, as rhyming slang etc), if anyone wants to do so. --English as tuppence 17:52, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Fixed. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 17:57, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Civilian Under Naval Training

I heard this used by Naval Reservists (myself among them) to describe themselves when I was attending schools at Naval Air Technical Training Center Memphis aboard Naval Air Station Memphis, Tennessee in 1970-1971.LorenzoB (talk) 03:30, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Is there a reference for this, as it needs to be verifiable? --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 03:34, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Military Uses

for whoever edits this page, 'cunt caps' are also worn by some Australian air force personal.

There would need to be a reliable source for this. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 03:36, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


i must point out then that under us military usage there is no citation. no meaning to be rude in doing so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.9.184.45 (talk) 03:44, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "C-Word"

When someone says the bad "C-Word," is the person saying the word "Cunt?" If so, should that be added to the article? 67.160.140.132 Gibsonj338 (talk) 23:09, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Usually, but I think (without looking at the article) there are one or two references in there already, e.g. to "seaward" being misunderstood. Not sure how you'd source it anyway. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 23:10, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I just foud in the article where it talks about the "C-Word." Sorry about that. Gibsonj338 (talk) 08:54, 28 January 2008 (UTC) In the U.S. Navy a cunt cap is also known as a Piss Cutter. This term is undoubtable derived from cunts use as a team for the female genitalia.

This would need a source. If I can find one, it might be important. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 21:41, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Disambiguation

The article Cunt (novel) needs to be linked to. 60.234.249.161 (talk) 08:04, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Stupid text

>>In certain circles the word is considered merely a common profanity with an often humorous connotation. For example, in Australia, Ireland and among some Europeans who speak English as a second language, the word may be used as a colloquial term of endearment (e.g., in such phrases as "You're a funny cunt!" or "Daft cunt!").<<

I object to the claim that Europeans who speak English as a second language, even use the word "cunt". This is a ridiculous claim, it is unsubstantiated, and I challenge it. Gregpalmerx (talk) 23:25, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

It is unsourced, so it goes. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 23:48, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Popular Music

Australian band TISM has also released an album titled Australia the Lucky Cunt, a play on words derived from Australia being known as the lucky country. The album was later re-released with the title Censored Due To Legal Advice. Ralphy512 (talk) 07:34, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Jane Fonda Incident

Is it appropriate to include the February 14, 2008, incident when Jane Fonda said "cunt" on the Today Show? I'll leave this addition to the more astute Wiki-editors.

As time goes by, public use of the word becomes more common and arguably less offensive. The article is already overloaded with examples of its use, and a cull based on notability might be a worthy exercise. If Fonda's use generated comment or criticism which is reliably sourced, then it should go in, after all, it's not considered a word in normal use by 70-year old women. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 13:54, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Images

I think this article needs a picture of a 'cunt' to demonstrate what it is. Not a diagram but an actual image. It will help explain what the word is determined from 81.86.220.130 (talk) 12:58, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Does the lead section of the article not explain adequately what the word means? The article is also about the word and its use, not the thing, so a distinction can be drawn between it and, say breast.--Rodhullandemu (Talk) 14:09, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
I have to agree with Rodhulandemu. After all, under the article for fuck, there is no picture of a couple having sex. Sure, it would be illustrative of what the word means in everyday language, but unnecessary. 15 Februaru 2008

Yes there is a description, but a picture paints a thousand words. And yes it is about the saying, but the saying relates to an actual thing. Given Wikipedia's policies of adding pictures to illustrate an article, and its no censorship policy, it is appropriate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.86.220.130 (talk) 14:12, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

This article is about the word and the meanings of the word. The lede mentions what it most commonly refers to, and those articles do have images. Dreaded Walrus t c 14:59, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Indeed. If there were a high-quality picture of the word cunt, that would be suitable for this article.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 01:36, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Or, since he's mentioned in the text, a picture of Piers Morgan Almost-instinct 23:16, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Libel laws being what they are in the UK, I think it might be cheaper if I took a day-trip to Lincolnshire and and photographed a road sign for Scunthorpe. --Rodhullandemu 23:32, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Too many lists

The sheer number of lists and endless, marginally notable examples of the use of the word grossly detract from the quality of the article. I have eliminated[3] the worst of these lists, but my edits were quickly reverted[4] without a specific reason. I do not feel the removal of these lists was unwarranted, or even particularly bold. While the amount of text I deleted was enormous, the encyclopedic value contained therein was negligible. If someone wants to reintroduce one or more of the sections I deleted as polished, compelling prose, I'm all for it, but these lists are simply out of hand.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 01:09, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree that this article is a magnet for any old rubbish that is unsourced "common knowledge", and I have long believed that unsourced local usage should be excised, with extreme prejudice, and I have done so on more occasions than I care to enumerate. However, it is my opinion (and no more than that), that notability policy applies here as elsewhere. Usage in popular culture is particularly contentious, because as new generations arise, they seem to think that their favourite tv program/group's use of the word is somehow novel. It isn't, and the article should reflect that. Ideally, there would be a project, or task force, to propel this article towards GA, if not FA status, and defend it against some of the more optimistic additions. Certainly, in popular culture (film, television, pop music, etc.) there have been notable milestones. With regard to the major removals of content, personally I would have preferred a proposal, followed by consensus; however, I do understand TFMWNCB's position. Meanwhile, leaving this here, I revert this article and open the debate, notifying those who have made major contributions in the last few months, and if necessary, will refer this to a request for comment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rodhullandemu (talk • contribs) 01:32, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
I tried to look for policy that would indicate what to do: Wikipedia:Trivia sections tell you that it "does not suggest removing", but rather to look at Wikipedia:List_of_policies#Content_and_style, which leads you to WP:OR, WP:V, and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not - and then to section: Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information that does not speak to this subject at all...--Kiyarrllston 15:09, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
It seems there has been a very intense debate in wikipedia on this very subject. see: Wikipedia:"In popular culture" articles. I appreciated very much The Fat Man Who Never Came Back's input... I do not like the inclusion of so much unencyclopedic information (or barely encyclopedic as it may be)... I think WP:PSTS (part of WP:OR) which says "Primary sources that have been published by a reliable source may be used in Wikipedia, but only with care" and "Wikipedia articles should rely on reliable, published secondary sources."--Kiyarrllston 15:52, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Trimming

Again, this topic raises its head. OK, "in popular culture" is an unhelpful and deprecated subtitle, and as pointed out above, a magnet for any old unsourced rubbish. However, the word has a history and we should not edit out certain items on the basis that they are no longer controversial; the test should be that they were controversial, or otherwise notable, at the time. Given that some pruning has been on the agenda for some months now, this should not be taken as a licence for butchery, although surgery is appreciated. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 15:07, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Atonement

I'm not familiar with the proper way of editing wikipedia articles, but I just wanted to point out that "cunt" played a major role in the movie Atonement, yet it has not been added as a pop culture reference under "film" at the bottom of this article. It would be nice to update this article by adding a blurb about "cunt"'s role in the movie.

It is mentioned, briefly, now. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 18:53, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Tone

I have removed the inappropriate tone tag. In the past couple weeks this article has had a significant facelift. I have half a mind now to nominate it for a "good article," except that it still needs more sources. If anybody disagrees, by all means say so and even put that tag back up. But I feel that this article's tone is now totally appropriate and in keeping with Wikipedia standards, an impressive feat for such a controversial and vulgar subject. Rudy Breteler (talk) 01:08, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm working on it when I have spare time. If you can tell the vandals to go away and play for a while, I might have more time. I intend to tackle the Film section next, but GA would be a big step forwards. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 01:11, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Usage in Urban Scots

It's locally known that in certain dialects of Urban Scots (notably the Glasgow Patter), "cunt" can be used to indiscriminately refer to a person; usually in the third person or in certain phrases ("Any cunt kens that"). While the word can be and is frequently used in the usual offensive manner within these dialects, in this context it is purely non-offensive. This is from personal knowledge, though I'm sure a citation could be found if anyone's willing to edit. 91.125.37.91 (talk) 03:29, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Regional variations would be welcome but are notoriously difficult to source reliably in my experience. That's why I've had to take so much out. However, input would be welcome. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 04:26, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
This is a well know usage, and has certainly been on this article in the past. It's n6 over on Wictionary: [5] which also has a citation to literary usage (which wouldn't be hard): Trainspotting (novel): "The only problem [with heroine], at least the only principal problem is that you have to put up with all manner of cunts telling you...", "No way would I put that stuff in my veins."". Thanks/wangi (talk) 22:04, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Trainspotting is already cited in the "Referring to men" subsection, although not specifically for Scottish use, and more particularly with respect to the drug subculture so it may not be much use outside that. Problem with looking at Wiktionary is that I don't see any sources there, which means we can't source it here. If anyone can cite a dictionary of urban Scots language, that would help. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 22:17, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
The problem of course is a reliable source, which most "online dictionaries" are not. The use in Trainspotting is in no way related to drug subculture, it's just a reflection of the larger culture. Thanks/wangi (talk) 22:20, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Film: The Exorcist inaccuracy and 2 omissions

There is a mistake in the reference made to the use of the word "cunt" in the 1973 film The Exorcist. There are also 2 omissions regarding the use of the word in the film.

1. Chris MacNeil (Ellen Burstyn) takes her daughter Regan (Linda Blair) to hospital for medical testing, after which the doctor notifies her of Regan's swearing while he was examining her. He then tells her "Well, specifically, Mrs. MacNeil, she advised me to keep my fingers away from her goddam cunt."

2. Burke Dennings (Jack MacGowran) does NOT address the demon at any time during the film. Rather, he addresses the butler, Karl (played by Rudolf Schündler) whilst drunk at a party, and says to him: "Cunting Hun! Bloody damn butchering Nazi pig!"

3. Later in the film, the demon-possessed Regan (Linda Blair), whilst sitting on her bed, twists her head 180 degrees so that it is facing backwards and tells her mother : "You know what she did, your cunting daughter?" Tend60 (talk) 02:52, 21 April 2008 (UTC)Tend60

Thanks for that; that's what you get when you rely on IMDb! It's only there to show use in its time so we actually only need one reference. I'll look into a reliable source for the quotes. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 02:55, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Fixed --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 22:15, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The ultimate taboo???

The article states:

"The word "cunt" is generally regarded in English-speaking countries as unusable in normal public discourse as it is perceived as an ultimate taboo."

In my experience, the word is treated quite a bit more casually in England than in the United States. In England the phrase "You silly c---!" is -- to the best of my knowledge -- not particularly taboo. Comments in sections above tend to corroborate that this is also true in Australia and some other countries.

I suggest that people avoid making vast generalizations without solid evidence. Daqu (talk) 01:58, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

You should have seen this article before I started working on it! However, feel free to contribute positively. I would regard that proposition as being supported by the BBC's list of taboo words, even after the watershed. But you and I know that common/street usage is difficult to source reliably; let it be said that if this article is ever to reach Good Article status, which it had no chance of doing before I took it on, the rubbish needs to go (and, er, it has) and it needs reliable sourcing. It's unhelpful to pick on ONE statement without seeing the vast amount of work that has gone into this article in the last six months in order to make it a defensible and worthy article. Nevertheless, the problem lies in the word "generally", which is difficult to justify, even though we both know it's true. Enough blood from me. You write it. --Rodhullandemu 02:08, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't know how to 'wiki', but in my lifetime of living in 5 English-speaking countries and being a native speaker myself, I have found that the idea that CUNT is an 'ultimate taboo' to be ludicrous, especially in the US. People don't say 'cunt' for the same reason they don't offer you a cup of tea- it isn't popular and would be regarded as weird before inappropriate! Fuck or shit would still be more taboo!

This has now been sourced. See ref to Rawson. --Rodhullandemu 15:36, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
No, it has often been stated by language experts that it is the most taboo word in U.S. English. (It was certainly the last taboo word to make its appearance in a mainstream U.S. movie, by a long shot.) But I strongly doubt that the sources will confirm this to be the case for England and certain other English-speaking countries.Daqu (talk) 05:59, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
I feel that you won't have trouble finding a source that saying that cunt is still the most taboo word in the UK Almost-instinct 14:43, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Shameless and Skins

The dramedy shows: Shameless and Skins in Channel 4 in Britain, are the only 2 shows that I know that uses the word "cunt" uncensored, which the writers wrote for the script, and they say it at least 3 times in an episode, should this be mentioned in the article?-SCB '92 (talk) 15:28, 8 May 2008 (UTC)