Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties

Listen to this article
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties
LC Class
KF9444 .F35 2009

Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties is a nonfiction book by law professor

Sphinx as a follow-up on the author's article "Fuck", published in 2007 in the Cardozo Law Review. It cites studies from academics in social science, psychoanalysis, and linguistics. Fairman establishes that most current usages of the word have connotations distinct from its meaning of sexual intercourse. The book discusses the efforts of conservatives in the United States to censor the word from common parlance. The author says that legal precedent regarding its use is unclear because of contradictory court decisions. Fairman argues that once citizens allow the government to restrict the use of specific words, this will infringe upon freedom of thought
.

The book received a mostly favorable reception from news sources and library trade publications.

Choice: Current Reviews for Academic Libraries called it stimulating, and the San Diego Law Review said it was thought-provoking. One reviewer said that the book, like the article, was a format for the author to repeatedly use "fuck" rather than analyze it from a rigorous perspective.[1] After the book's release, Fairman was consulted by media sources including CNN and The New York Times, as well as the American Civil Liberties Union, on issues surrounding word taboo
in society.

Background

Moritz College of Law in 2000.[2] He specialized in areas of freedom of speech and word taboo,[3] and earned a reputation as an expert on the subject of legal ethics.[4][5]

Fairman was motivated to conduct research on "fuck" after learning of a

tenure because he was concerned its publication would adversely affect his professional reputation. Nevertheless, his supervisors did not try to convince him to cease research into the topic. Government funding helped finance Fairman's scholarship.[7]

His original 2006 article "Fuck" is an analysis of forbidden speech from linguistic and legal perspectives.[7] It covers use of the word in case studies about sexual harassment and education.[8] The article is 74 pages long,[9] and the word fuck appears over 560 times.[1] According to author Jesse Sheidlower in his book The F-Word, Fairman's work is the first academic article with the title of simply "Fuck".[10]

Moritz College of Law at Ohio State University
(2008)

Fairman made his article available as a working paper on the

Kansas Law Review rejected his article 25 minutes after receipt.[7] It was published by the Cardozo Law Review in 2007.[12] The author wrote a follow-up piece in April 2007 titled "Fuck and Law Faculty Rankings".[13] Fairman died on July 22, 2015.[14] At the time of his death, Fairman's 2007 Cardozo Law Review article, "Fuck" was still classed with the 20 top downloaded works on the Social Science Research Network.[14]

Content summary

Fuck cites studies from academics in social science, psychoanalysis, and linguistics.[15][16] Of the sixteen chapters in the book, eight use the word "fuck" in their titles.[1] He discusses uses of the word from the 15th century onwards.[16] Fairman establishes that most current usages have connotations distinct from its denotation of sexual intercourse,[17] and asserts that rather than having sexual meaning, the word's use is most commonly associated with power.[1]

Fairman discusses the efforts of conservatives in the United States to censor the word from common parlance in the country and says these acts are opposed to the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.[18] Fairman warns against a tendency toward self-censorship. He explains that those who choose to silence themselves tacitly encourage a process by which speech is forbidden through the legal process. He argues that this passivity has an impact of increasing the taboo nature of the word.[6]

Fairman writes that legal precedent regarding using the word is unclear because of contradictory court decisions. He presents case studies of these conflicting applications of the law and uses them to analyze public perceptions surrounding freedom of speech.[15] He provides examples of exceptions to the First Amendment, such as speech intended to cause violent acts, and discusses how federal and state governments sanction these exceptions.[15][18] Fairman draws parallels between the protection of comedians' usage of taboo language and the ability of individuals in society to express ideas freely. He argues that once citizens allow the government to restrict specific words that can be used in speech, this will infringe upon freedom of thought.[6]

Reception

Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties was first published in 2009 in paperback by Sphinx Publishing,

Federal Communications Law Journal, W. Wat Hopkins was critical of Fairman's article and subsequent book, writing that both appeared to be formats for the author to repeatedly use the word "fuck", rather than analyze the subject from a rigorous perspective.[1]

A review of the book in

Choice: Current Reviews for Academic Libraries reviewed Fuck and called it a stimulating book. The review concluded, "[h]ighly recommended. All readership levels."[15]

Library Journal described the book as a sincere analysis of "fuck" and its history of censorship. The review characterized the book as of a higher quality than The Compleat Motherfucker: A History of the Mother of all Dirty Words (2009) by Jim Dawson.[22] Ian Crouch of The New Yorker praised the cover design for the book. Crouch observed that the word Fuck was shown partially obscured by correction fluid but was still clearly evident in full. He concluded this was an appropriate image for a book on free speech and word taboos.[23]

After the book's publication, Fairman was consulted by media sources, including CNN, on issues involving word taboo.[24][25][26] The American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio invited Fairman to host its forum "Word Taboos" in 2010; his presentation was titled "Putting the 'F' in Free Speech".[6] In a 2012 article on the word "fuck", The New York Times characterized Fairman as the foremost legal scholar in the United States on the word "fuck".[27]

See also

References

  1. ^ a b c d e Hopkins, W. Wat (December 2011). "When Does F*** Not Mean F***?: FCC v. Fox Television Stations and a Call for Protecting Emotive Speech". Federal Communications Law Journal. 64 (1). Archived from the original on March 18, 2014. Retrieved March 16, 2014.
  2. ^
    Moritz College of Law. 2014. Archived from the original
    on March 18, 2014. Retrieved January 30, 2014.
  3. ^ Fairman, Christopher M. (February 14, 2010). "Saying it is hurtful. Banning it is worse". The Washington Post. p. B01 – via LexisNexis.
  4. Cleveland, Ohio. p. A1 – via NewsBank
    .
  5. ^ Hansen, Ronald J. (November 15, 2005). "Cox hires justices' wives for staff". The Detroit News. p. 1B – via NewsBank.
  6. ^ a b c d McConnell, Kitty (July 15, 2010). "Professor takes on word taboo". The Other Paper. p. 46.
  7. ^
    Scripps Howard News Service – via NewsBank
    .
  8. ^ "Law Review Digest: Universities and Other Institutions of Higher Learning". Journal of Law & Education. 36 (4): 567. October 2007. Archived from the original on March 18, 2014. Retrieved March 16, 2014.
  9. ^ The Columbus Dispatch staff (September 24, 2006). "Curses: Treatise on taboo word a tough sell". The Columbus Dispatch – via NewsBank.
  10. ISBN 978-0-19-539311-8
    .
  11. SSRN 896790
    .
  12. OCLC 123736997. Archived from the original
    (PDF) on June 27, 2010. Retrieved April 2, 2013.
  13. SSRN 971103
    .
  14. ^ a b "College Mourns Loss of Professor, Associate Dean Fairman". Briefing Room. The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law. July 22, 2015. Archived from the original on July 23, 2015. Retrieved July 25, 2015.
  15. ^
    Choice: Current Reviews for Academic Libraries
    .
  16. ^
    ISSN 0018-5078
    .
  17. doi:10.1037/a0015646
    .
  18. ^ a b c Publishers Weekly staff (August 31, 2009). "Nonfiction Book Review: Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties". Publishers Weekly. Archived from the original on March 18, 2014. Retrieved March 22, 2013.
  19. OCLC 262433445
    .
  20. ISBN 978-1-57248-711-6
    .
  21. ^ Eaton, Nick (July 29, 2011). "The F-word: Why can't we just effing say it whenever we effing want?". Seattle Post-Intelligencer. Archived from the original on September 20, 2011. Retrieved April 2, 2013.
  22. OCLC 36096783
    .
  23. ^ Crouch, Ian (September 2, 2010). "How Should We Put This?". The New Yorker. Archived from the original on September 5, 2010. Retrieved April 12, 2013.
  24. ^ Park, Madison (September 27, 2010). "Congress eliminates the R- word". CNN Wire. p. Section: Med. Archived from the original on June 24, 2011. Retrieved June 11, 2013.
  25. ^ Grinberg, Emanuella (March 7, 2012). "Ending the R- word : Ban it or understand it?". CNN Wire. p. Section: Living. Archived from the original on March 10, 2012. Retrieved June 11, 2013.
  26. St. Petersburg Times. February 21, 2010. p. 6P – via NewsBank
    .
  27. ^ Liptak, Adam (May 1, 2012). "A Word Heard Often, Except at the Supreme Court". The New York Times. p. A16. Archived from the original on May 2, 2012. Retrieved November 8, 2013.

External links

Listen to this article (9 minutes)
Spoken Wikipedia icon
Audio help · More spoken articles
)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fuck:_Word_Taboo_and_Protecting_Our_First_Amendment_Liberties&oldid=1217655810"