Adequacy front page
Stories Diaries Polls Users
Google

Web Adequacy.org
Home About Topics Rejects Abortions
This is an unofficial archive site only. It is no longer maintained. You can not post comments. You can not make an account. Your email will not be read. Please read this page or the footnote if you have questions.
Poll
You are a:
Dumb Cunt 15%
Flaming Cock 7%
Stupid Twat 16%
Complete Prick 12%
Total Dick 7%
Warty, Unlubricated Fist 40%

Votes: 79

 The Genital Offensive

 Author:  Topic:  Posted:
Feb 07, 2002
 Comments:
A recent diary entry touched on an issue that I have been arguing about in bars lately. The subject in question is the use of terms for genitalia as insults. There are so many such insults that we might as well create a new grammatical term to describe them: The genital offensive.
feminism

More stories about Feminism
Misogyny: Why hurt when you can hate?
Women's Magazines - reversing the accomplishments of feminism?
Is it time women covered up at work ?
Sexism. Nature ? or Nurture ?
Women responsible for society's ills
Koleen Brooks Has Got The Right Stuff
A New Kind of Feminist Science
The Tyranny of Makeup

More stories by
RobotSlave

How to Smash Global Industrial Capitalism Without Leaving Your Bar-Stool
Reexamining the Recording Industry
The Incontrovertible Existence of God
Happy Tango-no-Sekku!
Amateur Golf and the Computer Criminal
A Brief Explanation of the Adequacy Comment Ratings System
Linux Zealot Takes a Bath
In America, the term for the vagina that is most commonly used as an insult is the word pussy. It is almost always applied to men, and it implies weakness or cowardice. The feminists have gone completely apeshit over this, resulting in an Orwellian obliteration of the formerly mild term in certain circles.

There are many terms for the penis deployed as insults, and they are remarkably consistent in meaning. The word schmuck is relatively benign, probably because many people are entirely oblivious to Yiddish. As we move on to stronger but still mild words such as pecker and dick and then to harsher terms like prick and cock, the meaning is preserved; the words describe someone who is overbearing, inconsiderate, short-tempered, and possibly violent, and the insult is invariably applied to men. The feminists have nothing to say about this.

In fact, the feminists have unwittingly taken the central tenet of the most common case of the penile genital offensive, and raised it the level of gospel truth: to wit, the equation of the penis with violence. This association is absurd on its face, and yet it persists. The truth of the matter, as almost everyone knows, is that the penis is essentially useless as a weapon.

The soft skin of the penis is quite prone to abrasion, especially when erect. When flaccid, the penis is useless for delivering blows of any consequence to one's enemies. When erect, the application of very little force can cause tremendous pain to the penis, and greater force can cause irreparable damage. And yet, thanks in part to the feminists, we continue to see widespread use of the penile genital offensive to indicate aggression in men.

Perhaps some day an overly earnest do-gooder will begin collecting "penis monologues" and staging them for audiences of undergraduates, and the gentle, loving penis will finally emerge from the fog of shame surrounding it, and leave its legacy of hurtful misunderstanding behind. Stranger things have happened.

There are a couple of other vaginal genital offensives worthy of note. The most interesting, of course, is the word cunt. In the US, this word is applied exclusively to women, and it indicates stubbornness, foul temper, and petty viciousness. It is commonly used by both men and women, unlike its cousin twat, which is used almost exclusively by men, perhaps because it is understood to carry an additional connotation of worthlessness. In the UK, the word cunt is used somewhat differently. It is commonly used by men to describe other men, and its meaning is very close to that of pussy as described above, perhaps with an added implication that the man being insulted is deceptive.

The only other penile genital offensives of note are mild terms meaning "idiot" or "obsessive," such as boner or the Yiddish putz. These insults are so mild that they are never meant to be truly insulting, conveying as they do more levity than antipathy.

For those who choose to regard the genital offensive as problematic when used to imply aggression or stubbornness, I believe there is a workable alternative: fist. The implication of violence is clear, and the advanced sexual practice known as fisting should lend sufficient vulgarity to the term. It can be used as a noun, standing in directly for the penile genital offensive, e.g., "I hear what you're trying to say, but you don't have to be such a fist about it," or "did you hear what he said to her? What a fucking fist." More creative usage is possible, of course: "would you kindly pull your fist out of my ass and listen for a minute?" "Before you put that fist back in, do you mind if I introduce you to my favorite lubricant, semiotics?" (or whatever topic might be appropriate). A bit of creativity is required to replace the vaginal genital offensive, but it can be done: to imply weakness, one might say "what's he waiting for? The other fist?"

Some might correctly complain that a well-lubricated fist is often a gentle and tender means of expressing love, but so long as fists are used more frequently in fights than in fucking, the suggested use of the word fist will at least reflect reality, unlike the current usage of the genital offensive. After all, genitalia are used to express love far more often than anything else, and are in fact relatively useless for anything other than pleasure and procreation.

Vulgarity has changed before, and it can change again. I would submit for your examination a relatively recent innovation: it was pointed out, some few decades ago, that suck, sucks, and sucker have their origins in an act that is, in fact, quite pleasant, and that the familiar slang was perhaps a bit incongruous. Though the old words have hardly fallen out of use, the incongruity did result in new synonyms: today we have the widely used bite, bites, and, of course, biter.


A note on the hyperlinks (none / 0) (#4)
by RobotSlave on Thu Feb 7th, 2002 at 06:30:28 PM PST
I must admit to a bit of carelessness here.

When I submitted this story, I did not take the time to fill it with informative, supporting hyperlinks. Fortunately, the advanced, closely-guarded soft-wares that enable the adequacy detected the problem immediately, and presumably used an advanced AI routine to embed appropriate hyperlinks automatically.

While it seems to have done an excellent job, for which I am grateful, the AI, for some reason, seems to have linked to an inordinate number of geek-interest sites, whereas the article was intended for a general audience.

I will assume that the AI has a better basis for predicting the actual (rather than intended) audience than I do, and has supplied its links accordingly. Kudos.

With apologies,
--RobotSlave


© 2002, RobotSlave. You may not reproduce this material, in whole or in part, without written permission of the owner.

I warned you... (none / 0) (#12)
by jvance on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 12:05:10 AM PST
but you wouldn't listen. You stole your AI from Forum 2000 and now you're reaping the whirlwind. Return Bitter Crack Baby © now, before you regret it.

John Vance
--
Adequacy has turned into a cesspool consisting of ... blubbering, superstitious fools arguing with smug, pseudointellectual assholes. -AR

 
I find this totally offensive. (none / 0) (#5)
by John Wainright on Thu Feb 7th, 2002 at 07:48:48 PM PST
Next thing you know there will be links to pages with a person stretching his anus extremely wide, or something equally repugnant.


Is there anyway to issue a formal protest to the editors of this site. The language used herein is entirely inappropriate for polite company.


If you don't like it, FUCK OFF (none / 0) (#6)
by dmg on Thu Feb 7th, 2002 at 08:50:01 PM PST
The editors keep a close eye on this site. Which is why there are no trolls to be found. If you find the material controversial that is hardly surprising. adequacy.org is the Internet's most controversial site after all!

So with all due respect, if you don't like the content please don't read it. Adequacy is all about controversy. If you cannot stand the controversial heat, get the fuck out of the controversial kitchen.

If it helps, I can have your account deleted.

time to give a Newtonian demonstration - of a bullet, its mass and its acceleration.
-- MC Hawking

 
Pussy! (n/t) (none / 0) (#9)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Feb 7th, 2002 at 10:04:48 PM PST



 
And I admire that! (none / 0) (#7)
by Orinoco on Thu Feb 7th, 2002 at 09:00:19 PM PST
It takes balls to write about this topic.


absolutely (none / 0) (#8)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Feb 7th, 2002 at 09:39:13 PM PST
It's great that adequacy.org provides such a wonderful forum to discuss things like this in adult manner.

Language and how it affects society has always fascinated me.

Take the word "gay." Liberals fought a tremendous PR battle to make people use the word "gay" instead of "fag." But they didn't seem to notice that "gay" is an adjective instead of a noun like "fag". As a result "gay" is used to describe everything from shoe laces to goat cheese.

It would have been much smarter to use the word "fruit" instead of "fag." This has the added advantage that everyone likes fruit.

Of course gays were never known for being bright. (Hint: gays are known for being gay) and it's too late for them to do anything about it now.


you should have just posted the link (none / 0) (#17)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 07:31:29 AM PST
and not posted the rest of the comment.

It might have been mildly controversial if it hadn't been so boring. But "might" is not the same as "is", monkeys might fly out of my arse for example...


 
weapon... (5.00 / 1) (#10)
by poltroon on Thu Feb 7th, 2002 at 10:57:10 PM PST
In fact, the feminists have unwittingly taken the central tenet of the most common case of the penile genital offensive, and raised it the level of gospel truth: to wit, the equation of the penis with violence. This association is absurd on its face, and yet it persists. The truth of the matter, as almost everyone knows, is that the penis is essentially useless as a weapon.
You know, instead of thinking of your penis as a padded bat-like weapon, consider something more spear-like, something you'd thrust rather than swing, or shoot, how about a gun? Well, ok, yeah, it'd be a squirt gun. I see your point.


Useless as a spear (none / 0) (#11)
by RobotSlave on Thu Feb 7th, 2002 at 11:25:35 PM PST
I noted that a slight bit of force will cause pain to the penis, and greater force can cause permanent damage. This is, if anything, more true when the penis is employed in a "stabbing" manner than in a "batting" manner.

Note, further, that I did not specify any particular martial technique when describing the shortcomings of the penis as weapon. You sort of read that in yourself, I think.

But you got my point. The living penis is completely useless as a weapon. Now if you were to, say, detach a penis and freeze it and then hurl it at your enemies with great force, you might be able to maim or even kill, but that sort of thing just doesn't add much to the discussion, does it?


© 2002, RobotSlave. You may not reproduce this material, in whole or in part, without written permission of the owner.

A versatile tool (none / 0) (#15)
by Orinoco on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 04:27:51 AM PST
As a weapon it is not effective. It wouldn't frighten a midget. Not a really healthy midget, anyway. I have used this handy instrument as a gag, however, with only the slightest modification.


 
re (none / 0) (#18)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 07:43:23 AM PST
Anybody seen scary movie?


No. (none / 0) (#19)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 07:59:30 AM PST
Proletarians are not welcome on adequacy.org. Only the bourgeois and the illuminati need apply.


 
Don't forget "fanny" (5.00 / 1) (#13)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 01:04:26 AM PST
Among Scottish people, the word "fanny" is a synonym for "poontang", whereas in the rest of the world, it means "buttocks". This can lead to many amusing misunderstandings, like in the movie "Billy Elliot", where the girl who likes Billy says: "I can show you me fanny if ye like" and Billy, probably thinking: "ah, just 'er butt", gallantly declines the offer. But I knew what was up. I stood up in the back row and yelled: "Dude, make your move! She's coming on to you!" But then I realized it was just a movie and he couldn't hear me, so I sat back down.


hey min (none / 0) (#14)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 02:26:22 AM PST
seeus a skwatch o yer fanny!


 
Thoughts (none / 0) (#16)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 06:53:11 AM PST
This article is interesting. I have to say, sitting here at a computer in the morning, I would have never thought to see an article like this. I do have some comments though. Thinking about ones genital area and the different names for it is probably a touchy subject for people. Everyone knows that words hold the key to life. The usage of words such as prick, dick, pusssy, cunt,etc have a more driving emotion behind them. The fist idea is a little unusual, but I can only see it working in some cases. Otherwise you might end up getting decked.
A subject I am kind of curious on is feminism. I have never met a women that was a feminist so I am kind of curious to where it originated and if they even like men. I honestly think that there wouldn't be any feminist if women were not looked down upon instead of equals.
Looking at these reasons, as well as the battering, the raping, the display, and the manipulation, one can only see why feminist react the way they do.


Feminists: because we can't all be men (none / 0) (#20)
by marko on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 08:55:22 AM PST


You're one of a kind, but you're not alone.

 
If you think woman are equal to men (none / 0) (#21)
by Adam Rightmann on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 08:58:09 AM PST
Let's see two men have a baby.

Woman are of equal worth to men in the eyes of the Lord, but they are different.


A. Rightmann

ah, a missed point (none / 0) (#22)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 09:25:58 AM PST
Well I have to agree, two men can not have a baby this is true. That is unless a man is scientifically modified, which in the eyes of God would be completely wrong. The point that is missed is that people look more at the physical aspect of men and women and not who they really are. If you look at it, women are just as important as men. The only difference is women are more exploited then men. This is what draws the defines the difference. Females are more or less considered to be items and things instead of a person. Think about it, who is best used to sell a product, a female (whom on would say is blessed in a skimpy outfit) or a well know male. Looking at this, one can see my point.


 
I'll do you one better! (5.00 / 1) (#24)
by jvance on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 12:22:13 PM PST
How about three men and a baby?

jvance
--
Adequacy has turned into a cesspool consisting of ... blubbering, superstitious fools arguing with smug, pseudointellectual assholes. -AR

 
In the eyes of the Lord (none / 0) (#25)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 12:51:27 PM PST
No doubt. But in the eyes of Man ? There lies the problem.


 
in the eyes of the Lord (none / 0) (#26)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 01:08:37 PM PST
the problem lies in the eyes of Man.


 
yes, but... (none / 0) (#40)
by treefrog on Sat Feb 9th, 2002 at 03:06:01 PM PST
Soon we will have single machines which can make a baby by themselves, and therefore will be twice as good as either man or woman in the eyes of the LORD. Hallelujah!


 
We're all inferior (none / 0) (#45)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Feb 10th, 2002 at 04:06:29 PM PST
So... by your logic, a single bacteria is superior to both man and woman? After all, that thing can reproduce all by itself...
Really though, there is a clear division of roles between males and females in modern society, but is it really a disadvantage to females? That example someone posted about how women are better in advertising - is that a bad thing for females? I mean surely, if half the population regards you as more desirable as an advertiser, isn't that a good thing? Sure, some will aspire to reach roles that society generally doesn't accept for ones of that sex, but that applies to both men and women.


 
bad analogy (none / 0) (#52)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Feb 11th, 2002 at 06:13:41 PM PST
Let's see two women have a baby.


 
Feminism. (none / 0) (#23)
by tkatchev on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 10:29:12 AM PST
I am an avid feminist. I believe it is time that women take equal responsibility for their own lives.

The abuse of males in your societies has caused women to take on a parasitic role -- which is hurting women themselves more than anyone else.

Women should throw off their shackles and become once again normal human beings. This means, first and foremost, realizing that any action you take might have potentially horrible, life-threatening implications. (Something that males are instinctivelly taught from their earliest childhood.)


--
Peace and much love...




Question (none / 0) (#27)
by hauntedattics on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 02:28:47 PM PST
When you say 'parasitic role', do you mean that in an emotional, mental, physical or economic sense?



Re: (none / 0) (#31)
by tkatchev on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 10:26:11 PM PST
Mostly in an economic and mental sense. Though for some it is also an emotional thing.


--
Peace and much love...




I wish (none / 0) (#41)
by hauntedattics on Sat Feb 9th, 2002 at 03:26:13 PM PST
I could say that you were wrong, but unfortunately, you are quite right. The mental parasitism (?) is the biggest problem, I think.



 
Answer (none / 0) (#42)
by pyramid termite on Sat Feb 9th, 2002 at 04:55:09 PM PST
By parasitic role, he means they attach themselves and suck.
He who hides his madman, dies voiceless - Henri Michaux

 
Another question (5.00 / 1) (#28)
by jvance on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 03:02:33 PM PST
When you say "are instinctively taught" do you have any particular meaning in mind?

jvance
--
Adequacy has turned into a cesspool consisting of ... blubbering, superstitious fools arguing with smug, pseudointellectual assholes. -AR

Yes. (none / 0) (#32)
by tkatchev on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 10:27:09 PM PST
It means that parents do it to their boys without even realizing what they are doing. (i.e. it's not a conscious decision.)


--
Peace and much love...




Okay (none / 0) (#39)
by jvance on Sat Feb 9th, 2002 at 02:51:48 PM PST
Fair enough. You actually meant "subconsciously taught." It's not as much of a quibble as you'd think.

jvance
--
Adequacy has turned into a cesspool consisting of ... blubbering, superstitious fools arguing with smug, pseudointellectual assholes. -AR

 
I couldn't agree more. (5.00 / 1) (#50)
by derek3000 on Mon Feb 11th, 2002 at 08:41:03 AM PST
There are so many examples of women being hypocritical about this. They want to be treated equally, but won't take the responsibility necessary.

If my girlfriend were to ever slap me (she wouldn't--we have a pretty calm relationship), I would slap her back just as hard. It's only fair.




----------------
"Feel me when I bring it!" --Gay Jamie

 
fem nazi (none / 0) (#53)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Jun 24th, 2002 at 12:21:27 AM PST
we are all here to reproduce.... Deal with it

xskippyx
xcompletelyagnosticx


We are? (none / 0) (#54)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Jun 25th, 2002 at 03:31:16 AM PST
Waht about the untold millions of infants and children who have died and continue to die before they reach sexual maturity? What were they here for?

How about the thousands who currently roam the earth, having sworn off sex for life? What are they here for?

What of the amoeba? What is it here for?

Please, put down the hippie music, and join the real world.


 
another point I might add (none / 0) (#29)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 04:12:47 PM PST
Now looking at this from another point, I think that there is a little more to this also. One said that there is a problem with the eyes of man. Equally though, there are also women out there who are just as bad as men. So the problem I believes lies in the hands of both sexes. Looking at this, men aren't completely to blame. I agree that we are to blame for alot, but women are equally to blame for their fair share as well.
I do believe as I stated before though, women are seen as lower than men because they are treated more like items instead of people. I feel that once this barrier has been crossed, there will be no need for feminist. My only concern, is that the barrier will never be crossed. I fear that society will regress even more to where women are overly exploited.


 
question (none / 0) (#34)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Feb 9th, 2002 at 05:40:02 AM PST
Are you refering to some men, or men in general?


some men (none / 0) (#43)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Feb 9th, 2002 at 08:32:09 PM PST
There are a lot of us out there that take the wrap for things that we haven't done let alone would ever think about doing.


 
I think it was pretty clear from context. (none / 0) (#44)
by RobotSlave on Sat Feb 9th, 2002 at 08:51:32 PM PST
If you had a particular instance of the word "men" in mind, please specify.


© 2002, RobotSlave. You may not reproduce this material, in whole or in part, without written permission of the owner.

 
best links ever (none / 0) (#35)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Feb 9th, 2002 at 06:19:55 AM PST
Whoever wrote http://www.twoshortplanks.com/simon/cunt is thoroughly adequate.


It is rather good, isn't it. (none / 0) (#36)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Feb 9th, 2002 at 09:02:22 AM PST
Its from a UK TV parody site called tvgohome.

I live in London, and I have to say the bars are simply choc-full to the brim with cunts like Nathan Barley. Especially in 'edgy' trendy districts like Hoxton and Shoreditch.


OOoops (none / 0) (#37)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Feb 9th, 2002 at 09:43:11 AM PST
The correct link is www.tvgohome.com. how silly of me.

You can download Nathan Barley wallpaper for your PC from this site.


And a tv show (none / 0) (#38)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Feb 9th, 2002 at 09:51:08 AM PST
They are going to turn it into a tv show. That should be worth watching.


 
Feminism (none / 0) (#46)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Feb 10th, 2002 at 07:26:31 PM PST
Author, to whom are you referring when you say The Feminists? You should realize that there are different waves, movements and beliefs within the world of feminist thought. Referring to feminists as a whole, as a "they", and presuming to know how "they" feel about something seems a little incredible - and you refer to no specific sources in your article. Who, specifically, is going completely apeshit? I'm a feminist. I don't feel that way. Please don't put words in my mouth.


If you insist. (none / 0) (#47)
by RobotSlave on Sun Feb 10th, 2002 at 08:59:12 PM PST
I was thinking of the "second wave" and "third wave" feminists, and in particular of the American feminist rhetoric of the early nineties that focused on date rape and sexual harassment, which in turn evolved from the language of "phallocentrism" commmon in "second wave" feminism (which was referred to as "women's lib" before the present retreat started calling itself a "third wave").

Are you happier now?

I actually know quite a bit about feminism, but I thank you for assuming otherwise. It shows how quick a feminist can be to jump to the concusion that anyone criticising feminism must be ignorant.

You're not a geek as well, by any chance, are you?


© 2002, RobotSlave. You may not reproduce this material, in whole or in part, without written permission of the owner.

Call for you on the White Courtesy Telephone (none / 0) (#48)
by Orinoco on Sun Feb 10th, 2002 at 10:41:04 PM PST
Robotslave: I require you to write more diaries. My immediate requirements are for diaries on the following topics:

  • Spanking: A Business Case
  • The Bartenders Best Friend
  • When Feminists Stray


This is a matter of some urgency.


Oh yeah. (none / 0) (#51)
by hauntedattics on Mon Feb 11th, 2002 at 02:37:17 PM PST
I second the spanking and bartender entries. I'm hesitant to support the third, as I'm not getting enough sleep these days anyway, and it might just get me snoring at my desk.



 

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest ® 2001, 2002, 2003 Adequacy.org. The Adequacy.org name, logo, symbol, and taglines "News for Grown-Ups", "Most Controversial Site on the Internet", "Linux Zealot", and "He just loves Open Source Software", and the RGB color value: D7D7D7 are trademarks of Adequacy.org. No part of this site may be republished or reproduced in whatever form without prior written permission by Adequacy.org and, if and when applicable, prior written permission by the contributing author(s), artist(s), or user(s). Any inquiries are directed to legal@adequacy.org.