Change my name?

[jgarvas]

Personally, I'd pick a better moniker to be known by than scruit. The first time you meet people in public who use the forums you'll have to say "Hi, I'm scruit" and hopefully nobody will have their kids there

I'm equally unimpressed with people would judge over a choice of mantle. That said, I do recognize the fact that the human psyche is label-oriented.

"Whats he want to screw dad?"

He didn't say screw anything. It's not spelled that way and it's not even two words. He could've been wrapping up an unfortunate round of Scrabble and just capitalized it to remain inline with traditional English syntax. Anybody that sees Scruit and thinks screw something already understood the concept ahead of time

Which is why I was refering to him introducing himself in a public setting and saying it outloud, as most of us would pronounce it.

Scruit, if he means 'screw it i'm not getting a license, shows giving up and is a defeatist attitude. That is why I said a better moniker could be chosen. He asked for comments and opinions, he's getting them

-Jeff

[ArcherAce]

Reminds me of when I was a little boy and called my cousin a "punk" in front of my Grandfather. Luckily, my father was there to explain it to him before he took a belt to me.

Was many years later before I understood why he was so mad about it.

If that's the nick you want to go by, so be it.

[TunnelRat]

We have language to convey our thoughts. Anybody that would try to control that would also be willing to control your thoughts if it suited their needs.

No one here is trying to control your thoughts or speech. Rather it is our hope that you would control your own. There is such a thing as "polite company".

I was an infantry officer. I am quite familiar with profanity and obsenity and crudity. It's not that I "judge" anyone; I just don't care to associate with those who use such language. If that is my loss, it is a loss I am willing to take.

There are no bad words. Period.

You are quite mistaken, sir. There are words that will get you arrested, words that will get you fired, words that may get you beaten up, and words that can get you banned from many places. There are words that can lose your case, words that can lose your wife, and words that can lose an election.

You are absolutely right when you say:"We have language to convey our thoughts." All we know about each other is based upon the words we choose to speak. This is especially true on an internet website. You know nothing about me and I know nothing about you other than the words we post here. It is by our words alone that we express ourselves here. A man's word is his bond. What sort of word do you want to represent you?

[GWC]

I don't think the person that said he was offended was all that serious. I took it to be a way to make a point about (perceived) censorship of his own posts.

Since you are new here you may have missed the context of his comment.

[SMMAssociates]

Tom:

Putting on my Philosopher's hat....

The words themselves are quite neutral. In other languages they may mean nothing at all, high obscenity, or great praise.

It's their use (or misuse) and the way in which they are offered, that can be an issue....

I am, for example, attempting to start a crusade where the use of the "underscore" in a name is deemed offensive. Largely because when my most-used e-mail address included one, and "normal people" began using e-mail, I always had trouble explaining it to them. Not to mention pronouncing it....

(You thought that Petrof was a handful? I got a degree in this stuff. Which says a great deal about YSU. Most of it bad....)

Personally, I'm going to spend the weekend trying to decide if my avatar should be changed - I don't carry that one much anymore . Being under-employed and over-educated has it's advantages. If I think of any, I'll call....

Regards,

[dan_sayers]

No one here is trying to control your thoughts or speech. Rather it is our hope that you would control your own. There is such a thing as "polite company".

I agree and that is why you'll often find me observing said concept. However, with all the real challenges we face collectively, putting each other down over something so trivial strikes me as embarrassingly counterproductive.

It's not that I "judge" anyone

I consider such usage indicative of a lack of vocabulary, a lack of imagination, and a lack of good manners.

It would seem that you do.

I just don't care to associate with those who use such language.

That's a shame. I don't know anybody who has so many real friends that they can afford to pass up the opportunity to gain another. Especially just for choice of words. Some people honestly don't know any better. For others, it's merely habit. Neither would discount them from the potential of being truly stellar individuals. The good guys have enough time foraging this jungle we call life; we don't need to add to that by outcasting that by way alone. A man should be judged on his actions.

You are quite mistaken, sir. There are words that will get you arrested, words that will get you fired, words that may get you beaten up, and words that can get you banned from many places. There are words that can lose your case, words that can lose your wife, and words that can lose an election.

In every one of the above examples, the sentiment behind the words is the guilty party. Not the words themselves. If I say "I hate stupid people" or "I {deleted - JK} hate {deleted - JK} stupid people," the fact remains that I hate stupid people. Those sentences are no different. Some people use profanity as an expression of extremity and it accentuates an idea well to this end.

What sort of word do you want to represent you?

Oh believe me, I do not concern myself with how others view me. I spent 3 decades living that way and was glad I finally woke up and realized I had been living my life for others. It's demoralizing to an extent I hope you never have to consider. I oftentimes WILL say things just to get a rise out of people. To me, it separates those down for who somebody really is and those sheepish to the point of allowing what they perceive to be one surface flaw be enough to cause them to flee. I often tell taboo jokes for that same reason. I like people to enjoy themselves, stand together, and think for themselves. Judging a person on particular words chosen accomplishes none of these, so I gladly speak the counterpoints in order to coax others to free themselves from that shackle. Because I'm all too familiar with way it can sap one's individuality and THAT my friend IS a crime.

[ArmorMax]

@Scruit Your name doesn't offend me. If it it did, Scruit.

I will concede that I sometimes knee jerk with certain words. I personally never liked calling a firearm a gun, but that is just me and I let it slide when someone calls it a gun. I have had people make your ma jokes to me and so what, life goes on. Remids me of another thread with an argument, ahem disargreeance, ahem conflict, ahem ?get what I mean? between the words "weapon" and "firearm".

Religion, age, demographics, enviroment all shaped us for language. I think it just comes down to where no one will ever agree what is right and we will all need to argee to disargree. Overall, just argee to say [EXPLICIT DELETED] it all.

[robbeaudin]

I've seen worse on a TV commercial, and heard far worse on the radio. IMO is rather clever; sorta like mine. Somepeople don't know what it means until you say it slow!

Mighty bare what?

[Wayne]

I think it in bad form as a screen name and I do not approve of what they say on TV. and radio either. This is indicative of the larger moral decay of our socitey. Just because something is accepted by the populace by and large does not make it right. That being said people have the right to say these things in certain venues,do to the first amendment, and I do support the constitution. Just remember that although a person may have the right to free speech that does not give that person the right to be heard.

[SMMAssociates]

I've seen worse on a TV commercial, and heard far worse on the radio. IMO is rather clever; sorta like mine. Somepeople don't know what it means until you say it slow!

Mighty bare what?

I think he's going for "empty brass", but I like yours too.

Sometimes keeping one's mind in the gutter can be a lot of fun!

(My daughter just called a little bit ago. My sister's boyfriend apparently helped her get her car unstuck and trashed the power steering. I needed a laugh....)

Regards,

[charles1198]

Main Entry: screw
Function: verb
1 a (1) : to attach, fasten, or close by means of a screw (2) : to unite or separate by means of a screw or a twisting motion <screw the two pieces together> (3) : to press tightly in a device (as a vise) operated by a screw (4) : to operate, tighten, or adjust by means of a screw (5) : to torture by means of a thumbscrew b : to cause to rotate spirally about an axis
2 a (1) : to twist into strained configurations : CONTORT <screwed up his face> (2) : SQUINT (3) : CRUMPLE b : to furnish with a spiral groove or ridge : THREAD
3 : to increase the intensity, quantity, or capability of <trying to screw up courage to confess -- Will Scott>
4 a (1) : to mistreat or exploit through extortion, trickery, or unfair actions; especially : to deprive of or cheat out of something due or expected <screwed out of a job> (2) : to treat so as to bring about injury or loss (as to a person's reputation) <use the available Federal machinery to screw our political enemies -- J. W. Dean III> -- often used as a generalized curse <screw you!> b : to extract by pressure or threat
5 usually vulgar : to copulate with
intransitive senses
1 : to rotate like or as a screw
2 : to turn or move with a twisting or writhing motion
3 usually vulgar : COPULATE
(From Mirriam-Webster OnLine)

I think when you use a phrase like that, you are using definition #4, which is "a generalized curse" and is certainly NOT the same as definition #5! It probably came from the phrase "put the (thumb)screws to" someone, meaning torture.

[Scruit]

This is indicative of the larger moral decay of our socitey. Just because something is accepted by the populace by and large does not make it right.

The evolution of society is a universal constant. If you pick any point in history you will find that people will consider the 'good old days' with fondness and decry the loose morals of the younger generation.

Remember rock and roll in the late 60's? In his 1967 book "ROCK AND ROLL: THE DEVIL'S DIVERSION" Bob Larson said "Rock and roll is a part of this plan (Satan's) to achieve a world-wide moral decay."

I listen to rock and roll. I listen to everything from classical to new age to rap. I would just as quickly reach for my Linkin Park CD as I would Vivaldi's 4 seasons (I'm actually kinda partial to Nigel Kennedy, but I have a cheap CD from the Soloists of Zagreb which is surprisingly good - I always go right for Allegro Non Molto). Does that make me a bad person? Am I a slave to my choice of music? If I listen to 'Break Stuff' then am I likely to "Break your (expletive) face tonight" as commanded in the lyrics?

I am not completely disagreeing with you. I am saying that people tend set their own level of comfort with how society existed when they were in their formative years. I mean, that's how you were raised to understand it should be, so why should you question what you were raised to understand? When people step outside of that comfort zone they will generally see things as being wrong. There's stuff that you do that people 50 years ago would have considered to be evidence of social decay (even things as accepted as going to church dressed in 'Business Casual' or walking around your house in your boxers) Does that mean you are wrong, or should be judge harshly for that? Or does it mean that's just how things were when you were raised and that's what you accept as normal?

The question is, is you wanted to correct the 'social decay' and reset back to the way things 'should be', then where to we reset to? Who should set the standards? Me? You? Your great grandfather? etc.

[dan_sayers]

This is indicative of the larger moral decay of our socitey. Just because something is accepted by the populace by and large does not make it right.

I think this is a matter of perspective. To be told you should talk a certain way because certain words are bad or could hurt people is a misrepresentation of priorities. That is to say that there are more important things to focus on. People will often attempt to spread their own views to increase their own level of conviction as they watch others agree with them. This is a dangerous thing when you consider the following...

I mean, that's how you were raised to understand it should be, so why should you question what you were raised to understand?

Or does it mean that's just how things were when you were raised and that's what you accept as normal?

Exactly. Some people are raised to believe some pretty inaccurate ideas. Growing up, my mother warped me something fierce with her prude, painfully over-conservative beliefs. I was born highly intelligent, yet she would choose restriction over education every single time and to ridiculous lengths. Teachers were no better because they were just in it for the paycheck. Government was no better because they too were just in it for my cash. It took a VERY long time to realize how enslaved I was. Fortunately, the day came where I was finally able to "think outside the box" (god, I hate that phrase). And now that I can, I realize I was lied to about so many things, including the idea that we should be particular with our words. I speak eloquently when I do because I choose to; not because I feel I have to. And I use words like screw and suck and I use profanity. That doesn't make me a bad person nor does it mark me as a socially decayed miscreant. I'm a fine human being who doesn't bother with spreading the misconception that words have any weight beyond getting a concept from one person's understanding into another's. We should focus on the idea/person behind it. The irony of course is that I originally proposed that the phrase "screw it" suggest to me exasperation and now that Sir Scruit has revealed exactly how he chose it, it was for that reason alone. So anybody who sees a sexual reference in it is the morally decayed one That's IF you feel that comfort on the subject of sexuality marks a person as lesser. I myself do not. I don't believe that anything that comes naturally and does not hurt anybody can be faulted.

[Wayne]

This is indicative of the larger moral decay of our socitey. Just because something is accepted by the populace by and large does not make it right.

I think this is a matter of perspective. To be told you should talk a certain way because certain words are bad or could hurt people is a misrepresentation of priorities. That is to say that there are more important things to focus on. People will often attempt to spread their own views to increase their own level of conviction as they watch others agree with them. This is a dangerous thing when you consider the following...

I mean, that's how you were raised to understand it should be, so why should you question what you were raised to understand?

Or does it mean that's just how things were when you were raised and that's what you accept as normal?

Exactly. Some people are raised to believe some pretty inaccurate ideas. Growing up, my mother warped me something fierce with her prude, painfully over-conservative beliefs. I was born highly intelligent, yet she would choose restriction over education every single time and to ridiculous lengths. Teachers were no better because they were just in it for the paycheck. Government was no better because they too were just in it for my cash. It took a VERY long time to realize how enslaved I was. Fortunately, the day came where I was finally able to "think outside the box" (god, I hate that phrase). And now that I can, I realize I was lied to about so many things, including the idea that we should be particular with our words. I speak eloquently when I do because I choose to; not because I feel I have to. And I use words like screw and suck and I use profanity. That doesn't make me a bad person nor does it mark me as a socially decayed miscreant. I'm a fine human being who doesn't bother with spreading the misconception that words have any weight beyond getting a concept from one person's understanding into another's. We should focus on the idea/person behind it. The irony of course is that I originally proposed that the phrase "screw it" suggest to me exasperation and now that Sir Scruit has revealed exactly how he chose it, it was for that reason alone. So anybody who sees a sexual reference in it is the morally decayed one That's IF you feel that comfort on the subject of sexuality marks a person as lesser. I myself do not. I don't believe that anything that comes naturally and does not hurt anybody can be faulted.

• No I think you are wrong sir .There are absolutes in this life and I take great offense at the suggestion that I am the one who is morally decayed just because I think there is a better way to present ones self in speech and thought and ones way of life.

[dan_sayers]

No I think you are wrong sir .There are absolutes in this life and I take great offense at the suggestion that I am the one who is morally decayed just because I think there is a better way to present ones self in speech and thought and ones way of life.

I don't think anybody is anything based on their beliefs alone. Nor did I claim. I DO think poorly of those who would try and FORCE their beliefs onto others. Control does not impress me and I think that people who would allow certain words to mark how they would judge somebody are victims of an upbrining that conditioned them to have that desire to control others. A child knows no difference between these words. When they discover them, they're only inclined to use them because of the way adults react when they do. Either by surprise or by scorn, it is clear that their words made an impact. The words themselves had no varying weight; WE gave them their weight. Imagine a world with no divide by way of articulation alone. We make so many efforts to bridge the gaps we face, yet we continue to uphold these basic vehicles of our own division. So yes, I admire those that can evolve beyond what they were taught to realize that no harm is done so long as no harm was intended. At the same time, make no mistake that an identical harm could be constructed by words that separately you would approve of.

Intent my friend; It's more important than the vessel that carries it.