Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties

Last updated

Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties
Fuck by Christopher Fairman.jpg
Cover of 2009 edition
Author Christopher M. Fairman
Cover artistCyanotype Book Architects
CountryUnited States
LanguageEnglish
Subject Freedom of speech
Publisher Sphinx Publishing
Publication date
2009
Pages250
ISBN 978-1-57248-711-6
OCLC 262433445
342.7308/53
LC Class KF9444 .F35 2009

Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties is a nonfiction book by law professor Christopher M. Fairman about freedom of speech, the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, censorship, and use of the word fuck in society. The book was first published in 2009 by 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.

Contents

The book received a mostly favorable reception from news sources and library trade publications. Library Journal described the book as a sincere analysis of the word and its history of censorship, 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

Christopher M. Fairman graduated from the University of Texas at Austin. He taught high-school-level history for nine years before returning to his alma mater, where he ultimately received his Juris Doctor degree. He worked as a clerk on the Texas Court of Appeals for the Third District for Justice J. Woodfin Jones. Subsequently, he was a clerk on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit for Judge Fortunato Benavides, and worked for the law firm Weil Gotshal in their office in Dallas. [2] Fairman became a professor at Ohio State University's 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 Columbus, Ohio, man who was arrested for using the word in an email to a judge in 2004. [6] Fairman delayed writing the article until he received 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]

Professor Christopher M. Fairman of the Moritz College of Law at Ohio State University (2008) Christopher Fairman.jpg
Professor Christopher M. Fairman of the Moritz College of Law at Ohio State University (2008)

Fairman made his article available as a working paper on the Social Science Research Network website on April 17, 2006. [11] Initially the author unsuccessfully tried to have the article published by providing copies to multiple U.S. law reviews. 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, [19] and in an electronic format for the Amazon Kindle the same year. [20] The Seattle Post-Intelligencer called Fairman's paper compelling and amusing. [21] The Horn Book Magazine described the paper as a contemplative scholarly work which was simultaneously an engaging read. [16] In a 2011 article for the 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 Publishers Weekly called it a vibrant extension of his article. It described it as educational and assertive in promoting freedom of speech, particularly in the face of the controversial language discussed. [18] 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

Related Research Articles

Fighting words are spoken words directed to the person of the hearer which would have a tendency to cause acts of violence by the person to whom, individually, the remark is addressed. The term fighting words describes words that when uttered inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Seven dirty words</span> Words disallowed in U.S. radio and TV

The seven dirty words are seven English-language curse words that American comedian George Carlin first listed in his 1972 "Seven Words You Can Never Say on Television" monologue. The words, in the order Carlin listed them, are: "shit", "piss", "fuck", "cunt", "cocksucker", "motherfucker", and "tits".

Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court holding that the First Amendment prevented the conviction of Paul Robert Cohen for the crime of disturbing the peace by wearing a jacket displaying "Fuck the Draft" in the public corridors of a California courthouse.

Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969), was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court that defined First Amendment rights of students in U.S. public schools. The Tinker test, also known as the "substantial disruption" test, is still used by courts today to determine whether a school's interest to prevent disruption infringes upon students' First Amendment rights.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Freedom of speech in the United States</span> Overview of the human rights history in the North American country

In the United States, freedom of speech and expression is strongly protected from government restrictions by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, many state constitutions, and state and federal laws. Freedom of speech, also called free speech, means the free and public expression of opinions without censorship, interference and restraint by the government. The term "freedom of speech" embedded in the First Amendment encompasses the decision what to say as well as what not to say. The Supreme Court of the United States has recognized several categories of speech that are given lesser or no protection by the First Amendment and has recognized that governments may enact reasonable time, place, or manner restrictions on speech. The First Amendment's constitutional right of free speech, which is applicable to state and local governments under the incorporation doctrine, prevents only government restrictions on speech, not restrictions imposed by private individuals or businesses unless they are acting on behalf of the government. However, It can be restricted by time, place and manner in limited circumstances. Some laws may restrict the ability of private businesses and individuals from restricting the speech of others, such as employment laws that restrict employers' ability to prevent employees from disclosing their salary to coworkers or attempting to organize a labor union.

Prior restraint is censorship imposed, usually by a government or institution, on expression, that prohibits particular instances of expression. It is in contrast to censorship that establishes general subject matter restrictions and reviews a particular instance of expression only after the expression has taken place.

Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568 (1942), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court in which the Court articulated the fighting words doctrine, a limitation of the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of speech.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jack Balkin</span> American legal scholar

Jack M. Balkin is an American legal scholar. He is the Knight Professor of Constitutional Law and the First Amendment at Yale Law School. Balkin is the founder and director of the Yale Information Society Project (ISP), a research center whose mission is "to study the implications of the Internet, telecommunications, and the new information technologies for law and society." He also directs the Knight Law and Media Program and the Abrams Institute for Free Expression at Yale Law School.

<i>Fuck</i> (film) 2005 American documentary film directed by Steve Anderson

Fuck is a 2005 American documentary film by director Steve Anderson about the word "fuck". The film argues that the word is an integral part of societal discussions about freedom of speech and censorship. It examines the term from perspectives which include art, linguistics, society and comedy, and begins with a segment from the 1965 propaganda film Perversion for Profit. Scholars and celebrities analyze perceptions of the word from differing perspectives. Journalist Sam Donaldson talks about the versatility of the word, and comedian Billy Connolly states it can be understood despite one's language or location. Musician Alanis Morissette comments that the word contains power because of its taboo nature. The film features the last recorded interview of author Hunter S. Thompson before his suicide. Scholars, including linguist Reinhold Aman, journalism analyst David Shaw and Oxford English Dictionary editor Jesse Sheidlower, explain the history and evolution of the word. Language professor Geoffrey Nunberg observes that the word's treatment by society reflects changes in our culture during the 20th century.

In law, commercial speech is speech or writing on behalf of a business with the intent of earning revenue or a profit. It is economic in nature and usually attempts to persuade consumers to purchase the business's product or service. The Supreme Court of the United States defines commercial speech as speech that "proposes a commercial transaction".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Christopher M. Fairman</span>

Christopher M. Fairman was a professor of law at Ohio State University Moritz College of Law and Associate Dean for Faculty. He was also the C. William O'Neill Professor in Law and Judicial Administration.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Marjorie Heins</span> American lawyer

Marjorie Heins (b.1946) is a First Amendment lawyer, writer and founder of the Free Expression Policy Project.

In the United States, censorship involves the suppression of speech or public communication and raises issues of freedom of speech, which is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Interpretation of this fundamental freedom has varied since its enshrinement. Traditionally, the First Amendment was regarded as applying only to the Federal government, leaving the states and local communities free to censor or not. As the applicability of states rights in lawmaking vis-a-vis citizens' national rights began to wane in the wake of the Civil War, censorship by any level of government eventually came under scrutiny, but not without resistance. For example, in recent decades, censorial restraints increased during the 1950s period of widespread anti-communist sentiment, as exemplified by the hearings of the House Committee on Un-American Activities. In Miller v. California (1973), the U.S. Supreme Court found that the First Amendment's freedom of speech does not apply to obscenity, which can, therefore, be censored. While certain forms of hate speech are legal so long as they do not turn to action or incite others to commit illegal acts, more severe forms have led to people or groups being denied marching permits or the Westboro Baptist Church being sued, although the initial adverse ruling against the latter was later overturned on appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court case Snyder v. Phelps.

Sexual slang is a set of linguistic terms and phrases used to refer to sexual organs, processes, and activities; they are generally considered colloquial rather than formal or medical, and some may be seen as impolite or improper.

Fuck is an English term for the act of sexual intercourse, also used as an intensifier or interjection, and generally considered vulgar.

The F-Word is a book by lexicographer and linguist Jesse Sheidlower surveying the history and usage of the English word fuck and a wide variety of euphemisms that replace it. Sheidlower examines 16th and 17th century poetry, 20th century literature, and 21st century media uses of the word.

Intellectual freedom encompasses the freedom to hold, receive and disseminate ideas without restriction. Viewed as an integral component of a democratic society, intellectual freedom protects an individual's right to access, explore, consider, and express ideas and information as the basis for a self-governing, well-informed citizenry. Intellectual freedom comprises the bedrock for freedoms of expression, speech, and the press and relates to freedoms of information and the right to privacy.

<i>Not in Front of the Children</i> Book by Marjorie Heins

Not in Front of the Children: "Indecency," Censorship, and the Innocence of Youth is a non-fiction book by attorney and civil libertarian, Marjorie Heins about freedom of speech and the relationship between censorship and the "think of the children" argument. The book presents a chronological history of censorship from Ancient Greece, Ancient Rome and the Middle Ages to the present. It discusses notable censored works, including Ulysses by James Joyce, Lady Chatterley's Lover by D. H. Lawrence and the seven dirty words monologue by comedian George Carlin. Heins discusses censorship aimed at youth in the United States through legislation including the Children's Internet Protection Act and the Communications Decency Act.

<i>Sex, Sin, and Blasphemy</i> Book by Marjorie Heins

Sex, Sin, and Blasphemy: A Guide to America's Censorship Wars is a non-fiction book by lawyer and civil libertarian Marjorie Heins that is about freedom of speech and the censorship of works of art in the early 1990s by the U.S. government. The book was published in 1993 by The New Press. Heins provides an overview of the history of censorship, including the 1873 Comstock laws, and then moves on to more topical case studies of attempts at suppression of free expression.

Hazelwood School District et al. v. Kuhlmeier et al., 484 U.S. 260 (1988), was a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that held that public school curricular student newspapers that have not been established as forums for student expression are subject to a lower level of First Amendment protection than independent student expression or newspapers established as forums for student expression.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 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. 1 2 "Christopher M. Fairman". Professors. Ohio State University, 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. ↑ McCarty, James F. (March 26, 2010). "Comments linked to judge's email discussed cases Saffold says she didn't post thoughts about attorneys and trials on website". The Plain Dealer . 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. 1 2 3 4 McConnell, Kitty (July 15, 2010). "Professor takes on word taboo". The Other Paper . p. 46.
  7. 1 2 3 Harden, Mike (September 27, 2006). "In scholarly pursuit of the 'Queen Mother of dirty words'". Washington, D.C. 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. ↑ Sheidlower, Jesse (2009). The F-Word. Oxford University Press, USA. p. xxviii. ISBN   978-0-19-539311-8.
  11. ↑ Fairman, Christopher M. (March 2006). "Fuck". Ohio State Public Law Working Paper No. 59; Center for Interdisciplinary Law and Policy Studies Working Paper Series No. 39. doi:10.2139/ssrn.896790. S2CID   233747571. SSRN   896790.
  12. ↑ Fairman, Christopher M. (2007). "Fuck" (PDF). Cardozo Law Review . 28 (4): 1711–1772. OCLC   123736997. Archived from the original (PDF) on June 27, 2010. Retrieved April 2, 2013.
  13. ↑ Fairman, Christopher M. (April 2007). "Fuck and Law Faculty Rankings". Ohio State Public Law Working Paper No. 91. doi:10.2139/ssrn.971103. SSRN   971103.
  14. 1 2 "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. 1 2 3 4 American Library Association (March 2010). "Book Review – Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties, by Christopher M. Fairman". Choice: Current Reviews for Academic Libraries .
  16. 1 2 3 Campbell, Patty (May 1, 2007). "The Sand in the Oyster: The Pottymouth Paradox". The Horn Book Magazine . Boston, Massachusetts. pp. 311–315. ISSN   0018-5078.
  17. ↑ Jay, Timothy (2009). "Do offensive words harm people?". Psychology, Public Policy, and Law. 15 (2): 91–93. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.523.938 . doi:10.1037/a0015646.
  18. 1 2 3 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. ↑ Fairman, Christopher M. (2009). Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties. Sphinx Publishing. ISBN   978-1-57248-711-6. LCCN   2009016762. OCLC   262433445.
  20. ↑ Fairman, Christopher M. (2009). Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties. Sphinx Publishing. 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. ↑ Orme, Marianne (August 21, 2009). "Xpress Reviews: First Look at New Books". Library Journal . ISSN   0363-0277. 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. ↑ "Rich or poor, women juggle family balance". 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.
Listen to this article (9 minutes)
Sound-icon.svg
This audio file was created from a revision of this article dated 28 November 2014 (2014-11-28), and does not reflect subsequent edits.
(Audio help  · More spoken articles)
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.