From UMassWiki

Write here :)

Note: These critical cultural analyses were assigned as homework to students in a Communication course on Group Dynamics. Steph^(talk) 20:49, 23 March 2008 (EDT)

Contents 1 Michael 2 Jackie 3 Marissa 4 Bart 5 Anna 6 Katie 7 == 8 Amanda 9 Sahar 10 Baldi 11 Rachael 12 Alison 13 Jia 14 Matt 15 Corey 16 Scott

Michael

Religion figures prominently in the lives of countless people around the world. The theological traditions which we, as a public, have inherited have informed much of our ethical and political discourse. As will be shown later, an etymological analysis of the word ‘religion’ helps elucidate some of the particulars of this supremely human institution.

Etymology: According to the“Online Etymology Dictionary,” the English word religion is in use since the 13th century, derived from the Anglo-French religiun (11th century), ultimately from the Latin religio, “reverence for God or the gods, careful pondering of divine things, piety, the res divinae.” The ultimate origins of the Latin religionem is obscure and in some dispute. Even the ancients were not able to agree. Cicero though it derived from relegere, meaning ‘read again,’ in the sense of ‘choose’, ‘go over again’, or ‘consider carefully’ (‘re’ is again plus legere, which means ‘to read’) Servius and Augustine derived the Latin religionem from religare, meaning to ‘bind fast,’ in the sense of place an obligation on. The first spelling of the word was recorded in the 14th century. If we are to take Cicero’s line of reasoning, than religion deriving from relegere, meaning to reread, is an interesting etymology. It suggests that the written word is to play a fundamental role in the promulgation of a particular religion. However, the lack of agreement among the ancients suggests to me that the mysteriousness of the origins of the word ‘religion’ is merely a reflection of its origins, which we have ceased to able to recall, but which, still exert an influence on us. In using the etymology popularized by St. Augustine, religion is seen as deriving from religare, ‘to bind fast’, via the notion of ‘place an obligation on,’

Definition: Defining the word ‘religion; is fraught with challenges. Attempts have been made, but they have all been found lacking the necessary components to make the definitions stand up to empirical and genealogical analysis. The most successful of the attempts have focused on only a few key aspects of religion, thereby excluding those faiths that do not conform.

All the definitions that I have encountered contain a number of deficiencies:

Some exclude beliefs and practices that many people passionately defend as religious. For example, their definition might include belief in a God or Goddess or combination of Gods and Goddesses who are responsible for the creation of the universe and for its continuing operation. This excludes such non-theistic religions as Buddhism and many forms of religious Satanism which have no such belief.

Some definitions equate "religion" with "Christianity," and thus define two out of every three humans in the world as non-religious.

Some definitions are so broadly written that they include beliefs and areas of study that most people do not regard as religious. Some define "religion" in terms of "the sacred" and/or "the spiritual," and thus require the creation of two more definitions.

Sometimes, definitions of "religion" contain more than one deficiency.

Dictionaries have made many attempts to define the word religion:

Barns & Noble (Cambridge) Encyclopedia (1990):

1. "...no single definition will suffice to encompass the varied sets of traditions, practices, and ideas which constitute different religions."

The Concise Oxford Dictionary (1990):

2. "Human recognition of superhuman controlling power and especially of a personal God entitled to obedience"

This definition would not consider some Buddhist sects as religions. Many Unitarian Universalists are excluded by this description. Strictly interpreted, it would also reject polytheistic religions, since it refers to "a" personal God."

Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary:

3. "a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith."

This is a curious definition because it does not require elements often associated with religion, such as deity, morality, worldview, etc. Also it requires that a person pursue their religion with enthusiasm. Many people identify themselves with a specific religion, but are not intensely engaged with their faith.

Webster's New World Dictionary (Third College Edition):

4. "any specific system of belief and worship, often involving a code of ethics and a philosophy." This definition would exclude religions that do not engage in worship. It implies that there are two important components to religion: a) one's belief and worship in a deity or deities b) one's ethical behavior towards other persons

This dual nature of religion is expressed clearly in the Christian Scriptures (New Testament) in Matthew 22:36-39: "Teacher, what is the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.

In all these examples, it seems that belief is not mitigated by action. All that is called for when one professes a particular faith is a declaration of allegiance via emotion. A person's behavior, in no way, bears upon the person’s faith. It is the reason why seemingly gross violations of fundamental beliefs (such as Christian love during the Inquisition or extremist Islam's disregard for Human life) do not dissuade adherents that perhaps their religion does not reflect accurately in their behavior. Nevertheless, religion's finality reinforces its importance. It encompasses all other aspects of being-in-the-world and cannot be divorced from it. Thus, religion has the potential to inform all aspects of human action and striving. This is not necessarily problematic, but it can be when definitions of religion are either to specific as to exclude some forms of religious practice or so general that they become universals. In such a situation, religious freedoms can be threatened if the definitions of religion are tailored so as to exclude these practices. When we examine some other words that bear on this discussion, such as sacriligeous, a number of observations can be made. According to the Online Etymology Dictionary, sacrilegious is described as: c.1303, "crime of stealing what is consecrated to God," from O.Fr. sacrilege (12c.), from L. sacrilegium "temple robbery," from sacrilegus "stealer of sacred things," from phrase sacrum legere "to steal sacred things," from sacrum "sacred object (from neuter sing. of sacer "sacred") + legere "take, pick up”. Second element is related to lecture, but is not from religion. Transf. sense of "profanation of anything held sacred" is attested from 1390. Sacrilegious is from 1582.

Temple robbery is particularly interesting as it suggests that religious purity is reflected and upheld in external institutions (in this case the institution of religion). Thus, religion is externalized and abstracted from the particular individual until it forms a specter overlooking a particular group of people. This is extended as far as possible via institutions that serve to reinforce and promulgate certain views. Thus, it is being ‘away from God’ when one vandalizes or sacks a temple, no matter his moral virtuousness. But, what is sacred? It could be sacred for one person but not another. The universalism of the definition would seem to argue for a level of religious freedom because of its unequivocal tone. Any religious institution (no matter the specific beliefs or geographical location) is to be protected from any from of profanation.

Jackie

As the assignment is to pick a word that “encapsulates” something that is “very representative” of my culture, I selected the term “bitch.” Living in the U.S., on a college campus, and constantly among girls and women, it would not be a stretch to say that I hear this word every day, and speak it quite frequently, too. A critical analysis of the term is revealing of American cultural gender roles and expectations.

According to the “Online Etymology Dictionary,” the word bitch comes from the Old English word bicce, which comes from the Old Norwegian word bikkjuna, meaning “female of the dog.” Bitch has been used as “a term of contempt applied to women” for centuries now and was at one time considered “the most offensive appellation that can be given to an English woman, even more provoking than that of whore.” The word can also be used as a verb whose meaning is “to complain,” and in the form “bitched,” coming from Middle English’s bicched, it means cursed or bad. Modern definitions, in addition to “a female dog,” also include “a malicious, unpleasant, selfish person, especially a woman,” “a lewd woman,” “a complaint,” “a woman considered to be spiteful or overbearing,” “a man considered to be weak or contemptible,” and “anything difficult or unpleasant.”

Because the original meaning of the word had a direct female connotation, I understand how bitch came to be the common slang word for anything female-related. I suppose, even, that I should not be surprised that it evolved with a negative connotation, because in our language and our culture we have plenty of derogatory words for categories of people. Simply put, bitch is the one to be used when insulting females.

The progression of the use of the word could be considered logical, but I still cannot help but feel offended when I really examine the significance of its meaning today (in terms of the definitions provided above but also in a social context). I have discussed this word in classes before, and we always talk about how a woman is a bitch if she is competitive in the workplace or aggressive in getting what she wants. We rarely criticize men who act the same way. “Malicious,” “lewd,” “unpleasant,” “selfish,” “spiteful,” “overbearing,” “difficult,” “contemptible.” These labels describe a bitch. A bitch is not at all the same as a lady. “Lady” is another word to describe a female, but ladies are pleasant, proper, and refined. With this contrast we see that a bitch is a woman in bad form. This meaning holds the cultural assumption that there are certain behaviors and qualities that a true woman should and should not have.

When a person complains about something, he or she is known to be “bitching.” This verb form of the word is accusatory in itself, creating a direct relationship between females and the act of complaining.

The phrase “son of a bitch” is quite interesting, too. This insult transfers the blame from its recipient on to his mother, so as to say that, because his mother is a bitch, he could not be held responsible for the negative qualities he possesses or bad behavior he produced. Bitch is also used in the context of men when labeling a man “weak or contemptible” as defined above. Thus, not only can women be insulted with this term, but it might serve as an even bigger insult in an attempt to emasculate a man.

The label bitch is responsible for the creation of a “new social world” because it implicitly determines how women should behave and how they will be thought of if they violate these expectations.

Marissa

Recently while people-watching at the bus stop, I noticed a male student wearing a t-shirt that said, in giant letters, "I HATE PEYTON MANNING." I did a double-take in complete shock- people can just say they hate someone now? No beating around the bush with phrases like "Yankees Suck," oh no, now we can just say outright that we hate people! I was thinking about the word "hate" that whole bus ride; does that kid really hate Peyton Manning, or is he just buying into the socio-cultural baggage that comes along with being a sports fan? That mentality where supporting your team equals "hating" another, or its rival. Has Peyton Manning done something so atrocious to this person that he must proclaim to the world by means of his t-shirt that he "HATES" him? I was always taught that hate is a "strong word" as a little girl, and not to say it, yet it seems to have become a simple word that gets jumbled into everyday jargon. Listen closely to young people talk and "hate" is used frequently. "I hate onions." "I hate this class." "I hate that guy," etc. What are people really saying when they use hate in this context?

The [Online Etymology Dictionary] says that "hate" comes from the Avestan sadra, "grief, sorrow or calamity" and the Greek kedos "care, trouble, sorrow." The old English meaning is "hatred, spite," along with the Welsh for "pain and anger." "Hatred" is also related to the verb rædan "to advise, discuss, rule, read, guess." In other words, we are making the decision that something causes pain, anger, spite, aversion, or extreme hostility. Maybe using "hate" to describe what is really just not pleasing to you is an exaggeration, if we examine the actual meaning of the word.

To continue with devalued verbs, [love is interesting as well. People use love in as informal conversation as hate is used. "I love Winona Ryder!" "I love trees!" Do you really have a profoundly passionate affection that could make way to sexual intercourse with avocadoes, or are they simply "pleasing" to you? This really sparked my attention in Italy, because in the Italian language hate and love are very rarely used. There are even two ways to express "I love you:" one is reserved only for saying it to your family, friends, or girl/boyfriend, and the other is only said to your very serious boy/girlfriend. In this way, the fact that you would reserve the special "love" for someone you actually feel [that way] for makes it more meaningful. And by "meaningful" I mean that it pertains to its original meaning, and not our new socially constructed view of it.

Bart

“Queer”

queer: 1. Deviating from the expected or normal; strange: a queer situation. 2. Odd or unconventional, as in behavior; eccentric. See Synonyms at strange. 3. Of a questionable nature or character; suspicious. 4. Slang Fake; counterfeit. 5. Feeling slightly ill; queasy. 6. Offensive Slang Homosexual. 7. Usage Problem Of or relating to lesbians, gay men, bisexuals, or transgendered people.

The word “queer” has been an interesting word in my life and I believe that its use is a very good example of Boston area culture. When I was young, the word queer was often used when something or somebody was stupid or annoying. Pronounced “queah” by the real Haverhillites, I never thought too much about the word. Then one day, probably when I was 9 or 10, my mother and I were driving somewhere and when she asked me if I wanted to do something that I thought was just for girls. I said, “ what mom, you think I’m queer or something?” She said, of course not. She said that just because it was mostly girls who did the activity that she asked me to do didn’t mean that I would be homosexual for doing it. I was then taken a back because I had no idea that queer meant gay (at this point, I also had a very limited understanding of the term gay also). I told her that I didn’t imply that by my use of the word, but then I thought about it and realized that the term, in my own colloquial sense, meant a guy acting like a girl. My buddies usually prefaced the word with “fahckin” or “wicked fahckin”, but I knew that that would be inappropriate in front of my mother. A few years later, I kid in one of my classes used the word queer in place of gay or homosexual. The teacher immediately chastised him and said that he shouldn’t use that word in school. I was confused, because I didn’t know when it was ok to use the word. Would it be ok to use it if the person were talking about something being stupid, because it certainly wasn’t ok to use it in the sense that my mother told me it meant? These days, I only use that word when I’m pretty pissed off and have lost my political correctness. I think that my experience reflects the strange relationship that the United States has with political correctness in general. Nobody is ever really sure if using a word is appropriate and in what situation it is appropriate. With a word like “queer”, some people might get offended and some might not, so who knows when it is appropriate. In the United States right now, this concept of political correctness is constantly changing, and I’m having trouble keeping up.

Anna

'Wicked'

Upon moving to the Boston area five years ago, I was most struck by language differences between my hometown in Texas and my new home in Massachusetts. I anticipated an accent change, however the vocabulary was a challenge. I was asked, “Are you all set?” and told where I could find the “bubblah” at school, both of which were extremely foreign to the point of confusion. Most apparent was the use of the word wicked.

In regular American usage, wicked withholds its ancient meaning:

1. morally very bad: evil
2. a: fierce, vicious b: disposed to or marked by mischief: roguish
3. a: disgustingly unpleasant: vile b: causing or likely to cause harm, distress, or trouble
4. going beyond reasonable or predictable limits: of exceptional quality or degree Mirriam-Webster Online Dictionary.

Its etymology, as noted in the Online Etymology Dictionary is derived from the Old English word wicca meaning wizard; the female equivalent being wicce or witch. It is interesting that the use of a wicked wizard is much rarely used when compared to the phrase wicked witch, and brings the question of slander toward women who are in many cultures seen as more evil, or more capable of evil, than men. The adjective describes mostly animate objects or human beings. When I consider who is wicked, I often think of people who commit bad deeds. The word would be used against those who are almost inhuman, in that they are willing to act despite harm caused toward other living beings. Even the bible in Isaiah sends a message to the wicked: 57:20 But the wicked are like the troubled sea, when it cannot rest, whose waters cast up mire and dirt. _57:21 There is no peace, saith my God, to the wicked. (Source King James Bible)

The meaning of words change with societal evolutions, and this is definitely the case for wicked. Initially wicked was used as an adjective (a wicked person) or a noun (the wicked). In the Online Etymology Dictionary, wicked became slang by way of F. Scott Fitzgerald in the 1920s as an adjective meaning wonderful, and is still used with this sense today. In a recent Harry Potter movie Harry’s friend Ron responding to a charm by saying, “that’s wicked!” In the Boston area, wicked is used as an adverb: that’s wicked cool, or to use an example from Bart’s response: “wicked fahckin”. In this usage, the sense of the word according to the Mirriam-Webster Online Dictionary is very or extremely, and dates back to the 1980s.

As with words such as sick and ill, wicked has entered slang language with a meaning quite opposite its original usage. What has changed about these words or in society that allows for such a change in usage? One answer could be an interest in being bad or dangerous, or simply not having a word extreme enough to describe a feeling. Using wicked outside of its original meaning is provocative and initially elicits a response of surprise. After the word “catches on” and becomes common, the surprise factor disappears except to those foreign to the culture or society.

Katie

I have chosen to unpack the word “green.” When I offered it, as a joking example, to explain the assignment I was about to do to a friend whose last name is Green, we were actually astounded by the complexity and many meanings of this word.

When one thinks of the word “green,” most people first think of simply the color green, and may even dismiss it as an elementary word. However, when one continues, the meaning of “green” as environmentally friendly comes to mind: green movement, Green Party, “go green,” “green energy,” etc. Green can also mean new or young. And what about the expression “green with envy?”

According to the Merriam Webster online dictionary, the word “green” has several meanings. To shorten the list, I’ll categorize and group a few together:

1. “of the color green” (Ed: duh. So much for that rule about not using the word in the definition.) -it can also mean ‘covered in green growth or foliage,’ i.e. a green field, or ‘consisting of green plants and usually edible herbage,’ i.e. a green salad.

2. several meanings related to being young, new, or not ready: -“youthful, vigorous” -“not ripened or matured” (green apples or tomatoes, etc.) -“fresh, new” -“not fully processed or treated” (i.e. green liquor), or “unseasoned” -“deficient in training, knowledge or experience” (“green recruits”) or deficient in sophistication (naïve)

3. “marked by a pale, sickly or nauseated appearance” -related: envious (“green with envy”)

4. related to or being an environmentalist political movement, concerned with supporting environmentalism, or tending to preserve environmental quality (i.e. recyclable, biodegrading or nonpolluting)

Etymology-wise, according to the Online Etymology Dictionary, the word “green” came from Old English “grene” or earlier “groeni,” which was related to Old English “growan,” to grow.

The word “green” is rich in commonly used expressions that are rarely questioned; knowing its multiple meanings is such an entrenched part of being an English speaker and an American that we don’t even realize the word’s versatility. Remember being told to “eat your greens” when you were younger? You don’t actually eat the color “green,” nor can you eat “youthfulness and vigorousness.” Instead, “greens” is here synonymous with vegetables, and represents nutrients and things that are good for you. As a kid, green has a positive connotation as being healthy for you but a negative connotation as being something you don’t want to eat.

This two-sidedness is evident in green’s meaning of “sickness.” According to wikipedia’s “green entry” [1]: “In Western culture the color green is often used as a symbol of sickness and/or nausea. However in many Latin cultures green portrays health and growth and illness is associated more with red.”

The color or signal of green is also commonly understood to mean “go,” in the case of stoplights, green arrows, etc., and is often posed in opposition to red meaning “stop”—think of the expression “to give someone a green light.” And is a “green room” in the context of theater always actually green? The walls of the one in my high school were covered with paint of every color, done by students. Think about an area being “green” in context to being dry and arid—Massachusetts, for example, is “green” in comparison to New Mexico or Texas or Oklahoma.

In Dante’s “Divine Comedy,” green symbolizes hope (Wikipedia). It’s one of the Christmas colors, and many people may associate it as a color of patriotism (i.e. it is on their flag) or as a school color (i.e. Michigan State University, where my sister goes—to wear green is to show pride for one’s school and being a Spartan… and what are the broader cultural implications of those kinds of loyalties?).

The multiple meanings of green also have larger political implications and connections. The idea of green as meaning “new” or “not ready” can have negative implications—someone who is “green” may be inexperienced, lack knowledge, be unconfident, etc. At the same time, to be “green” can be to have a clean slate. In a new job, someone who is “green” may be malleable to the employer’s interests and agenda.

Green as an environmental movement, a political party and something that is good for the environment is also a really interesting idea. The Green Party of the U.S. (which ran Ralph Nader as a candidate in 1996 and 2000) “presents an eco-social analysis and vision for our country,” according to its platform established at the national nominating convention in 2004 [2]. It emphasizes grassroots process and participation, democratic process, and aims to “end exploitation, unsustainable consumption and destructive competition.”

By politicizing the word “green,” the Green Party and the environmental movement have created, in some cases, a polarization: some people passionately work for a “greener” world, while people who disagree with or feel threatened by the environmentalism movement try to discredit “green” rhetoric (e.g. global warming…).

I personally try to live my life as “green” as I can by doing small things: using Tupperware, unplugging my computer when I’m not using it, eating at Earthfoods, composting at my house, riding my bike most places I go, etc. Yet to some people trying to live “green” is just sort of “hippie idealism.” So in this sense “green” can be a political ideology, a lifestyle choice, a description of a product…

And what does any of that really have to do with the original word “green”?

Still, this meaning of green seems to be the most prominent. When I type the word “green” into google.com, the first entry is “green” in Wikipedia, which addresses green as a color in relation to spectrum and wavelength. The next several entries are related to environmentalism: “Welcome to Earth Force – GREEN,” “Green Party of the United States: Official Homepage,” “TreeHugger: How to go Green,” and “The Green Guide – green living tips, product reviews…”

Right now the Collegian is working on a series, “How green is UMass?” to be published sometime in the near future. I hadn’t even stopped to think about the multiple meanings of green when planning the story…

==

In response to Marissa, I would argue that although love has become devalued and meaningless in many contexts, it does not always have to be that kind of passionate love one would feel for a significant other, “romantic love.” Can I say “I love dance?” Is that legitimate? Can I say I love working at the paper? Is this devaluing its legitimacy as that strong, passionate feeling for which the word was originally intended, or changing the meaning…?

What do you guys think?

Amanda

The word I want to pick apart is "opinion." I decided on this when a professor in one of my classes contrasted a "mere opinion" with something more based in fact, and I realized that there has been quite a lot packed into this word.

The word originates from Latin, opinio, which means "to think." The word used to be a verb, but has been changed to a noun... used to mean "to think," and now its meaning has been changed to the object of the thinking, "the thought." This follows with the vague idea of what we think an opinion is, but its meaning has changed a bit over time. In today's definitions, I found:

1. a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.

2. a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.

3. the formal expression of a professional judgment: to ask for a second medical opinion.

4. Law. the formal statement by a judge or court of the reasoning and the principles of law used in reaching a decision of a case.

5. a judgment or estimate of a person or thing with respect to character, merit, etc.: to forfeit someone's good opinion.

6. a favorable estimate; esteem: I haven't much of an opinion of him.

The first two definitions would follow with what my professor was getting at, which is that an opinion lacks a certain quality that makes it completely certain or worthwhile as a piece of information. The phrase on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty explains exactly this. An opinion is, after all, only what a person is thinking or believing, it has no real value in a discourse where hard facts are involved. This method of thinking about an opinion can also be applied to the way that people use "opinion" almost as a defense or an excuse for their behaviour/words. "Well, in my opinion," or "in my humble opinion," or "it's only what I think, but..." This implies that the speaker is saying one of two things. 1) "I know this is not necessarily valid, but here's my take on the situation." 2) "I have no power over my own thoughts, but I feel the need to share them with you anyway." It is rather astonishing to think about this word this way... after all, isn't the ability to think critically and make judgements one of the characteristics of the human species that separates it from other animal species? (By the way, if you haven't read "Ishmael" by David Quinn, I highly recommend it! At one point, it discusses why and how humans think themselves so separate from other animals, and some basic assumptions underlying that conclusion).

However, if the thought is that of an authoritative figure, such as a doctor or a judge in court, the story changes. Then an "opinion" is something to be valued and followed as the professement of knowledge-- not as a mere thought or idea that one of these figures had, but instead as a showing of that person's extensive research and/or experience with the given situation. So who gets the right to have their "opinion" be one of value? Most likely, you would have to have a whole lot of schooling, degrees, experience, and credentials behind you in order for this to happen. If people go into a doctor's office and there are 15 plaques on the wall saying where he graduated from, what he'd done with his life and studies, etc., that doctor's medical opinion will be much more valued as "truth" than somebody fresh out of medical school who is just learning the business. I'm not passing judgement on this, it is just so. You want someone who knows a lot about a situation to be the one to advise you on it, not someone whose "opinion" is more like a "guess."

Lastly, we use "opinion" to help us in our value judgement of things or other people. In the last definition above, it says that "opinion" can be used to indicate the level of esteem that one holds for another. Ah, so in this case, is an "opinion" valuable, or not as much? This might be somewhere in the middle, between the two definitions I have already described. When we are talking about facts - a historical scenario, a political debate - we don't count on our opinions for much information, because in these cases they are "mere opinions," simple thoughts from simple beings who do not base their beliefs on necessary information. When we are talking about other people, however, we are allowed to follow our "gut reactions," or beliefs, and an opinion expressed is more valued in this scenario. This is probably due to the fact that unless we are using our opinions about people, we can't explain why we are attracted/opposed to certain individuals, so we count on our opinions to create an image, a judgement, on individuals who enter into our consciousness.

Sahar

When I read this assignment, I took note that Raz said to pick a word that is "representative of the 'culture' in which you have lived for a while." I took this to mean our study abroad cultures, not America, because he said "for a while" not "all your life" or "the culture with which you identify." Plus, I just thought it would be more interesting to do a word that related strongly to one of my host cultures. It took me a while to think of something, but I like what I came up with: "Arab." I can take a look at this word from a global perspective, a Moroccan one, an American one, and an Iranian one.

For what the word technically means, I turned to wikipedia for a quick and dirty definition. "Arab" is really a very fluid concept, and it doesn't have to stick to its original definition, but it's helpful to take a look at it to begin with. First, the word doesn't technically have any religious connection. Arab doesn't necessarily mean Muslim and Muslim doesn't necessarily mean Arab. The only reason I bring this up is because in much of the western world, these two words are often used interchangeably or at least assumed that the two groups overlap completely. But a person can be Arab without being Muslim and a person can be Muslim without being Arab. To explain that, let's look at what an "Arab" is (since a "Muslim" is easy to define as anyone who follows the teachings of Islam, Allah, and the Quran).

There are three ways to break this word down. The first is geographical/genealogical. Wikipedia says "Arabs" are those who trace their ancestry to the "tribes of Arabia- the original inhabitants of the Arabian Peninsula- and the Syrian Desert." That's a pretty fixed definition in the geographical/geneological sense. It gets complicated because of all those wars and conquering of other peoples. But this is a main reason Iranians always say we're not Arab, though the western world tends to like to assume we are. Iranians are descendants of a branch of Indo-Europeans. Not the same ancestry. OK? Thanks, please stop calling us Arab now.

The other reason Iranians don't like to be called "Arab" is because we don't speak Arabic, which is one of the other categorizations of "Arab" on wikipedia- based on linguistics. The site says an Arab is someone "whose first language...is Arabic, including any of its varieties." That last part is thrown in there because barely anyone speaks pure classical Arabic (the language of the Quran) on the street, there are many dialects which different regions speak. This is a pretty straight-forward classification, though, and I'll talk about how it relates to Morocco in a bit. The last wikipedia classification is political. An "Arab" country may be part of the Arab League, or their national or official language may be Arabic. The combination of these three criteria make a person or nation "Arabic."

So, first, how does this relate to Morocco? Well, actually, there are several distinctions made in Morocco. Before the "tribes of Arabia" invaded, the native people were Berber. And they are still around today, some tribes still being nomadic. So in Morocco, there is a social distinction made for Berbers, as it is for French, the assumption being that everyone else is Arab. But if you ask a Moroccan if the country is Arab, they would prefer to say it is north African. Or, they tell you it is "Maghrebi" which literally means "west" but is meant to mean "the west of the Arabic world." They don't identify as "African" because that tends to mean sub-saharan. To westerners they say they are north African, which if you press they say means they are the Arab part of Africa and they identify more (politically, socially, culturally, linguistically) with other Arab nations. This is where "Al-Maghreb" comes in: [3] the western spread of the Arabic world, which is how Moroccan tend to identify. Morocco is also part of the Arab League. Moroccan also speak Arabic. So, by all three classifications, they are "Arab." But that's an oversimplification. At least for recent history. Throughout the past century, Morocco has been very heavily influenced by France, a kind way of saying they were under French colonial rule. So many originally French people live in Morocco, and they don't necessarily identify as "Arab." And many people, most of the middle and upper classes, speak French, not only in business situations but in everyday communication. Whether Moroccans identify as "Arab" or not can be a pretty touchy subject, but for political and cultural reasons, in a broad- sense, Moroccans do tend to say they are "Arab." At least as opposed to "African" or "European." So I guess the word has most meaning when it is compared to others in the same category. If someone asked an American if he were "western" I think he'd prefer to say "well, I'm American, but I guess I'm western too." Arab is a very broad term, which can make people uncomfortable with identifying with it, because it puts them in such a large group of people whose actions and beliefs they may not want to take responsibility for or associate with.

Baldi

Hippie

Hippie is a term that is used both in the States and in Spain (spelled the same in Spanish). I choose it because I was not considered to be a hippie in Spain, but my friends here often categorize me as one. Barcelona and Granada both have a huge hippie culture, and Sevilla has a pretty large representative group. They are generally recognized as the young people who wear piratas (capris-length pants for both men and women; these pants are made of loose cotton and will generally have vertical stripes of different colors), and shirts striped with thin horizontal black and white or red and white, and they often have several piercings and dreadlocks.

The word has English roots. According to the Oxford English Dictionary (OED), the word “hippie” is from the root word “hip.” “Hip” is a term that stems from “hep” (as in hep-cat). By OED definition, “hep” means “well-informed, knowledgeable, ‘wise to’, up-to-date; smart, stylish.” Interestingly enough, one of the earliest recorded uses of the word appears in the book Criminal Slang in 1914. The term was probably brought into the popular consciousness by Cab Calloway in the ‘30’s with his song Hi De Ho. “Hep” is also largely associated with alternative musical movements like swing, jazz and, later, be-bop. Notably, under the listing for “hip” the OED lists quotes from Jack Kerouac as well as publications by/for black populations. Already, the term was associated with an Other, the criminal, the wild musician, the bohemian, the minority.

The word then shifted to “hippie”, a noun that means “hipster; a person, usually exotically dressed, who is, or is taken to be, given to the use of hallucinogenic drugs; a beatnik” (OED). This term first appeared in 1953, but probably came into popular use in the ‘60’s with the rising alternative culture spurred by the Vietnam War and political consciousness movements. Quickly glancing over the original uses that OED lists for “hippie,” there are mentions of “insurrectionists,” “long hair”, “European,” “dropped from ‘straight’ society,” “unkempt,” and, of course, drugs. Again, the tradition of anything “hip” being connoted as an alternative and wild subculture of society is preserved within the term “hippy/hippie”, but now there is a more subversive element as drugs and an messy appearance are factored in.

The official definition shows a marked switch between simply being socially shrewd and being eclectically different. The first connotes inclusion in an elite society while the second definition connotes an exclusion from the society at large. In today’s college environment, the term hippie is generally used to describe a group of people who wear tie-dyed shirts, have dreadlocks, and who use drugs - especially marijuana - recreationally. However, the term is also used to describe people who are not only “earthy-crunchy” but who stand for a social cause. So, the OED definition of “hippie” seems to encapsulate the unkempt, tie-dyed, Birkenstock-ed college kid, but leaves out the socio-political connotation. Katie then uses the term in her entry: ‘To some people trying to live “green” is just sort of “hippie idealism.”’ Here, the connotation is socio-political and addresses environmental justice.

Consistent through all of these definitions and definitions is the idea that being a “hippie” is bad because it represents a subversive element of society; it threatens the common person, the majority. In this respect, it can be used as a derogatory label. Looking at Katie’s quote, we can see that the political sphere is threatened in a sense by the green party because of its “hippie idealism.” Here, hippies are discredited, and considered to lack real-world sensibility; they are detached and flighty.

As I wrote this, my friend asked me if I chose the word “hippie” so that I can better understand myself, and my roommates regularly refer to me as such. I take this as an insult. I do not consider myself a hippie because I do not use drugs and I am mindful of my personal appearance/hygiene, but people will label me because I am also mindful of the natural world, I enjoy being outdoors and I represent social causes. Also, I try to be more grounded and in touch with real-world logical issues, though through a lens of hope. Perhaps it is this hope that can be misconstrued as Katie’s “idealism” and that’s why people place me into this category.

What is interesting is that the OED associates the word “hippie” with “hipster”, but in our college culture, the two are completely disparate groups of people. Hippies are, again, a group of “earthy-crunchy” individuals while hipsters are considered “people in their teens to 20’s who generally listen to indie rock, hang out in coffee shops, shop at the thrift store and talk about things like books, music, films and art” (Urbandictionary.com. These groups do not typically socialize. Hipsters are typically urbanites while hippies are often associated with the granola (meaning, the great outdoors—though Greenwich Village of NYC and the Bay Area might prove the exceptions).

Also interesting is that the term “hippie” comes from “hep” which was used by the Other group to describe themselves. Over the course of its use, the word “hippie” has been adopted by the majority group to describe the Other. Again, in Katie’s example of “hippie idealism”, the majority group is putting down the Other group as being out-of-touch with reality by using this term. Thus, there are power-dynamics inherent in this term. Also, at UMass you will often hear the term “f*ing hippies” or “dirty hippies” used by the majority population to describe the group of people that gather outside the Student Union at midday. This is derogatory, because it is used in conjunction with a very harsh expletive/judgment, and it is packed with power because the majority use it to label and defame a group of people.

In Spain, the hippies are generally regarded the same as here, as the Other, as dirty. However, I think it’s interesting to look at why I am considered part of this category here but not in Spain. I think the difference is that the Spanish hippie category is more easily defined by its style whereas the hippies of the States are defined by their ideologies. I think this might be because on the Iberian peninsula, as in Europe at large, people live with a greater awareness of environmental issues every day while in the States, we are very wasteful on a daily basis. This means that those who incorporate this environmental ideology into their daily routines are labeled as Other - hippie, while the Other in Spain is identified by outward manifestation and style.

Rachael

I chose the word “busy” to describe my culture. I pick this word in particular because after studying abroad I feel as though we are a very busy culture and becoming even more so, trying to fit too many things into a day. In contrast Australia was not as busy and much more laid back and I would argue in a better position to enjoy life. So here is my analysis of the word “busy”.

Etymology of “busy”: Online Etymology Dictionary interestingly states in the 17th century "busy" was a euphemism for being sexually active, once the telephone was invented it was used to describe a unavailable telephone but was first used as we still know it today as being occupied and anxious. It is still used today in each context of the word just described.

“Busy” as a Metaphor: As described in the etymology of the word it is used as a sexual innuendo.

The Formal Definition of “busy”: As stated on dictionary.com “busy” is both an adjective and a verb. More commonly used as an adjective its meanings are: 1. actively and attentively engaged in work or a pastime. 2. not at leisure; otherwise engaged. 3. full of or characterized by activity. 4. (of a telephone line) in use by a party or parties and not immediately accessible. 5. officious; meddlesome; prying. 6. ornate, disparate, or clashing in design or colors; cluttered with small, unharmonious details; fussy.

You can see that the origins of the word are still in the current dictionary definition of “busy”. As a verb its defition is: 7. to keep occupied; make or keep busy.

Assumptions: I think there are two very contrasting assumptions of the word “busy” the first being a negative assumption and the second being a positive assumption. The negative assumption is that there is a problem with being too busy. Then there’s the positive assumption that being busy is a good thing. I think that the positive connotation of the word is the most cultural aspect of the word as it applies to Americans. The definition of the word states that being busy is not leisurely, and I think this is reflected in the culture through our “busybody” life styles. There are not too many times in the day where I have time for leisure, but I enjoy being busy. I think the word “busy” at least in my culture has evolved to include leisurely activities, even though that is not explicit in the definition.

Actors and Usage of “busy”: Everyone I know uses the word busy, often very loosely. If one has any type of plans, they are busy. It is most often used in very casual invitations and planning. An example would be one asking someone if they would like to go mini-golfing and that person responding by saying “I’m busy.” It acts as an obligation or something to do without getting detailed. That is another part of the culture that is expressed through the use of this word. If you say I’m busy it probably means you don’t want to go into any further explanation of your plans. It exemplifies the value of personal privacy that the culture has. It can also be a vague way of telling one that you don’t want to accept their invitation, even if you have no actual plans.

Conclusion: The word “busy” has many more meanings than the general usage of the word by our culture. The American culture has evolved its everyday meaning to being occupied with any type of plans, not just work-related, which is a reflection on the fast-paced life that Americans lead and the amount of time Americans do spend working or thinking about work that a word related work would enter the vocabulary of an everyday American.

Alison

I chose to examine the word love. Love is a word to describe feeling that I have heard throughout my life. I never realized that there were different definitions of love, or different connotations for love until I went abroad and realized what the word love means in America (generally speaking of course). I have learned that Americans come off as very open, friendly, and caring. I have realized that in American culture many salespeople greet you when you enter a store, and other people often hold doors open, or say thank you, or say hello to strangers. This all shows the warm openness expressed whether it is actually genuine or not is an entirely different story.

Love is a word I always thought was used to express a deep, profound feeling of affection for another person or thing. Last Friday I realized I never heard so many people say “I love you” to me in my life. I checked a facebook message from an American girl I studied with in Spain who was asking for my phone number and ended the message with a big “I LOVE YOU!!!” I listened to my voicemail from a fellow UMass student and best friend (also American) who ended her message with “Love you mwa.” Lastly, my Danish boyfriend ended our conversation with an “I love you” before I ran off to class. Believe it or not there is a big difference between the first I love you, and the last. Love is a word that is often tossed around and may not necessarily mean sexual passion, desire, or warm personal attachment. The world love is very representative of American culture because we see it everywhere. Even in the popular I ‘heart’ NY t-shirts…that heart stands for love. Love can be expressed between friends, family members, lovers, and even strangers in the phrase “love at first sight.” In a recent fight I had with my Danish boyfriend we talked about how in Denmark “Jeg elsker dig” or “I love you” is very rarely said among couples, and even those who are married. This does not mean they do not love eachother, this word is just very special and when used rarely it has more meaning and significance. Danes, then, may assume we lie, or our version of the word is not as powerful because we use it so much, or that we are obsessive, or even too expressive. I say I love you to my friends and family on a daily basis. I rarely hang up the phone with my parents without saying I love you to end the conversation. The word love for me and the word love for him mean two totally separate things, and it is a word he would never (or very very rarely) say to his friends or family.

Love is a very powerful word that could be confusing to anyone who is not used to or aware of the perhaps lighter connotation of the word love in the US. Love can also be a nickname, represent a feeling for another person, place or thing. You can make love, be in love, do something for love etc. On dictionary.com “love up” means to cuddle. Just because I may say I love my best friend Stacy, that does not mean I am a lesbian…it does not mean we related through blood…it does not mean we are inseparable, but it also does not mean I do not understand what the word love means. I have my own definition which differs from others. From the outside (and I as a new outsider coming back from being abroad) may think that Americans use the word too casually. In some cases I think this is true, but I also think this frequent usage of the word love ties into American culture as being open, friendly, and expressive.

When you say the word love in terms of “I love you” you could be saying I care about you so much…you could be saying I admire you…you could be saying I want to be like you…you could be saying many different things that do not necessarily mean a deep affection for someone. Americans say it to their friends, their families, their girlfriends, their boyfriends. The word appears in songs, on cards, on clothing, and in television. Love is everywhere. I guarantee that my facebook message from Danielle was not the dictionary definition of love; after all we only knew each other for a couple months. This is not to put a timeframe on love, it is just to point out the many meanings of love, the variety of contexts the word is used in different cultures, some more than others, and the various assumptions that may be tied along with the use or absence of the word.

Jia

“Shame” According to Dictionary.com, shame can be defined as: 1. a painful feeling due to some dishonorable or improper events 2. susceptibility to this feeling 3. a fact or circumstance bring disgrace or regret If “shame” is used as verb, it also means: 1. to cause to feel shame 2. to drive, force through shame 3. to cover with ignominy or reproach

In many of Asian cultures, “shame” dictates their decisions and behaviors, actions towards self and others. I grew up with the notion of “shame.” One of my best example to illustrate this point is when I was in grade school, my teacher published everyone’s midterm grades and rank them on a poster. Immediately on the same week, she held a parent conference and discussed with them how to improve your child’s academic performance. Of course, my mother saw my grade which did not rank the top ten of the class. She also saw the grades of my friends who did much better than me. She was dissatisfied and criticized me. I feel ashamed, and vowed to do better next time.

It is difficult and often challenging to explain the concept of “shame” to a non-Asian person. They associate shame as “being too negative, too self-critical, lack of confidence.” Shame does cause a person to feel embarrassed or humiliated. I was shamed of myself because I did not meet my mother’s high standard of expectation. However, I did not have this feeling until I experienced several events: 1) the ranking of everyone’s grade; 2) my mother’s meet with the teacher; 3) her criticism of me. Therefore, “Shame” is not just an innate feeling but also culturally constructed and reinforced.

Shame can also have positive effects on a person. “Shame” motivates an individual to do better. One can argue that a person does or shows their best in order to avoid shame. To use my example—after the parent conference, I was much more motivated in my studies. My mother was also concerned of my studies and often provided extra help when I needed. As a result, my grades improved significantly in the final exams and when my teacher ranked the class grades again, this time I made it even to top 5. Through avoiding “shame,” I was able to work much more diligently, thereby achieving a much better outcome.

Shame is closely connected with the notion “lose one’s face.” Again, since there is no equivalent expression in English, it is very difficult to explain this concept. It does not mean “losing one’s face” in a literal sense. Take the following phrase, for example, “I will lose my face if I don’t succeed the family business.” Clearly, the person is speaking about his obligation in fulfilling an expectation. The expectation is not clearly spelled out in the phrase; however, the person knows such expectation is important to himself and his family. Any deviant behavior or action will cause a failure to address this expectation, a disappointment to his family, and perhaps a feeling of “shame” to himself.

Since I’m culturally sensitive to “shame,” I am very confused when I hear “shame” used colloquially as a slang by the South Africans. This example may have come up in some of my earlier responses. A South African uses “shame” almost as often as an America uses “cool.” At first I was very offended, thinking that the South Africans were very judgmental. After all, the feeling of “shame” is generated when others perceive you “not good enough” or “fail to complete an expectation.” However, as I began to familiarize myself with the South African culture, I realized that their usage of “shame” was just a way to express their own sympathy towards your mishaps, almost like “Yeah, I feel you, buddy.”

Matt

I have unpacked a word that fully encapsulates the predominant culture in which I live at UMass. By dictionary definition “liberal” is defined as:

(Adjective)

1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.

2. (often initial capital letter) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.

3. of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism.

4. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.

5. favoring or permitting freedom of action, esp. with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.

6. of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.

7. free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant: a liberal attitude toward foreigners.

8. open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.

9. characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts: a liberal donor.

10. given freely or abundantly; generous: a liberal donation.

11. not strict or rigorous; free; not literal: a liberal interpretation of a rule.

12. of, pertaining to, or based on the liberal arts.

13. of, pertaining to, or befitting a freeman.

This is one word that really packs a punch as far as diversity of definition and history. Certainly, one would expect controversy to arise in the discussion of any politically designated term, but, rather than identifying the morals and values of “What makes a liberal person?” I want to look at why this term might have come into use.

UMass is a “liberal campus”. This is an assumption that I feel is a valid starting point. In the broadest sense, this likely stems from the fact that the student body votes (of those who vote) mostly democrat. This is further rooted in the state mandate for in-state enrollment. 75% of UMass students are residents of Massachusetts. Massachusetts is a blue state. Blue = Democrat. Democrat = (for the most part) liberal. All this mathematical proof helps validate the second definition, which is “pertaining to a political party.”

But, what lies beyond this red-blue, (R)-(D), right-left, elephant-donkey affiliation nonsense? George W. Bush is fond of saying that the whole world is jealous of our wonderfully defended freedom. However, liberals are those “favoring or permitting freedom of action,” (5) yet Bush is very much not a liberal.

Perhaps, a clearer understanding can be found by analyzing one of the highly polarized liberal-conservative debates. Abortion has been, for the entirety of my life, the great polarizer in political arenas. What does the “liberal” faction have to say about abortion? Liberals are known to be pro-choice, in that the woman has a right to determine whether or not abortion is right for her particular situation. Here, again I can invoke the fifth definition’s clause about “freedom of action”. Taking this even further, the fourth definition discusses a liberal person as one “in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible.”

In the debate on stem cell research liberals believe in continuing investigation to find cures using these living embryonic cells. Arguing against this usage is arguing against “maximum individual freedom” and could, therefore, not be construed as liberal thinking.

The liberal stance on government intervention is favorable with regard to the creation of governmental institutions to support poor or disaffected groups. Non-liberals prefer a “hands-off” Social Darwinist approach to government involvement (to grossly oversimplify the prevailing opinion). Interestingly, this falls under an entirely different definition (the tenth), which refers to liberal as “given freely or abundantly; generous”. Liberals have oft been cited for wanting to give handouts.

These two differing meaning of the same word (“maximum freedom” and “generous”) are both appropriate with reference to the general attitudes of liberals in my UMass society. Even a third differing definition (the seventh and eighth) relating to a lack of prejudice and “open-mindedness” is evidenced by attitudes toward Gay marriage.

Compare all this with the words earliest appearance in English, as seen in the term “liberal arts” in 1387: “the seven attainments directed to intellectual enlargement, not immediate practical purpose, and thus deemed worthy of a free man.” [etymonline.com] Here, there is an entirely new angle of viewing UMass as liberal. This large educational institute is one that instructs students in varying academic fields, not immediately practical and directed toward intellectual enlargement. So, just as a multiply-focused school UMass is, by historical definition, “liberal”.

The use of liberal as meaning “free from prejudice” or “tolerant” arose during the Enlightenment. The term seems to have overwhelmingly positive connotations. Its use refers to one who is gaining a diversified education, one who is tolerant or generous and one who advocates maximum individual freedom. However, when used by opponents, the word can certainly take on derogatory meaning. In a demeaning sense, liberal can mean overly idealistic, or not based on realistic principles. This could be a perversion of the “liberal arts” definition, which is not immediately practical.

One of the largest assumptions, one that I have been propagating throughout this analysis is that all liberals adhere to these same values. In fact, I think many liberals do not hold to every platform principle of the democrat party (nor does every democratic candidate run with the same issues).

I hope that my liberal [loose] interpretation and generalization of the liberal [politically democratic] UMass populace is excusable, and all would find in their liberal [generous] hearts the liberality [open-mindedness] to allow me this liberal [maximally free] speech.

Corey

Though it may seem sophomoric, I’ve chosen to write about the word “fuck”. Don’t ask me why but it’s the first word that popped into my head. When I started thinking about it more, it’s by far one of the most commonly used words of people my age and has had a direct impact on American culture far greater than most arrangements of letters. It’s also extremely versatile. At parties I’ve definitely heard people use some form of the word at least twenty times in one sentence. It can offend old people, is forbidden from formal situations, and yet anyone who’s dropped something heavy on their foot has probably said it before. I’ve always wondered about the origins, history, and incorporation of this word into the English language and this paper provided a great opportunity to learn more.

According to Wikipedia, the etymology of fuck is ambiguous, but seems to have originated within Anglo-Saxon culture. Some of the earliest evidence of its use is a line from a coded poem from the 1400s that seems to translate to “they are not in heaven because they fuck wives of Ely,” records of a man named “John le Fucker,” and an Anglo-Saxon charter that mentions a place called Fuccerham, which would be the home of the fucker, who must have been smooth with the ladies. The word fuck cognates in many Germanic languages, such as the German focken (to copulate), and may be connected to the Latin root pug- which ended up in words like pugnacious (combative). It is not, as some believe, an acronym for Fornication Under Cardinal Knowledge. I find it funny that there’s clear origin of the word, as it seems it was spoken as slang before it was written. Apparently it just popped out of someone’s mouth one day and stuck.

In terms of usage, it seems it was a vulgar word that was looked down upon from the start (it did not appear in the Oxford Dictionary until 1965, along with the word cunt). Not surprisingly, some of its earliest public usage came in the form of music via Louis Armstrong. Many artists, such as James Joyce, had their works pulled from the shelves due to their liberal use of the word. Slowly it appeared in more movies, books, and television, with the “fuckers” if you will usually getting fined or fired. John Kerry commented about Bush “fucking up” the War in Iraq and Dick Cheney told Patrick Leahy to go fuck himself. Despite it’s potential consequences, use of the word is protected in public under the First Amendment.

The main, literal definition of the verb fuck is “to have sexual intercourse with.” Even within this definition fuck can take on a slightly different meaning. While it can mean the general act of having sex (‘I can’t believe you fucked the mango,’), it can also delineate a distinction between slow, tender, soft sexual experience versus a harder, more vigorous, intense one (I’m sure most guys and girls would agree that there is a difference between making love and fucking, fucking being the latter.) Things get even more complicated when one looks at the slang definitions, not to mention its compound words. Here’s a list:

1. v. To treat unfairly or harshly. I told you a long time ago, don’t ever fuck me

2. v. To meddle with. Don’t fuck with that button, you’ll kill us all

3. interj. Expressing negative emotion. Fuck!

4. n. An act of sexual intercourse. THAT was a good fuck!

5. n. A partner in sexual intercourse. SHE was a good fuck!

6. n. A person who is annoying or contemptible. You are one stupid fuck

While this is Oxford’s take on the word, I thought of many other common uses in contemporary society:

1. Dismay: If I don’t get this paper done, I’m fucked

2. Question: What the fuck are you talking about?

3. Filler adjective used similarly to “like” or for emphasis: I had the best fucking fuck last night, fuckin’, we fucked for like five fucking hours, it was fucking awesome.

4. Added within a normal word with hyphens: Abso-fucking-loutely. I would get into compound words like fuck tard, fuck face, cluster fuck, son of a fuck, etc. but I’d be well on my way to writing a book at that point.

It’s hard to say which definition is most frequent form of usage of the word since it’s used in so many ways. I suppose it depends on the context. If you’re fooling around with a partner, the fucks that are uttered will likely be of the sexual and/or interjection variety. If you’re having a few beers with a friend, unless you’re telling tales of sexual encounters, you will likely hear the word fucking as a filler adjective or some other form of slang. All definitions are usually equally applicable. For example:

John: Fuck!

Barry: What the fuck’s the matter?

John: I’m fucked, my fucking computer’s frozen.

Barry: Just fuckin’ hit ctrl+alt+delete

John: Really? Are you fucking with me?

Barry: I’d never fuck you over like that you stupid fuck.

John: Got it. Fan-fucking-tastic.

So as you can see the slang use is extremely versatile and depending on the context of the conversation one use may or may not predominate. Overall, however, the slang use tends to be used more than the literal definition. In general, society’s reception of the word is a negative one. Unless it’s used as an adjective or inserted within a word, when it’s used it almost always has a negative or neutral connotation (except, ironically, as an interjection in the bedroom.) This is reflected in the fact that it is probably the most widely-censored word, banned from cable, newspapers, radio, and advertising. If you were to walk up to someone and say “Fuck you,” they would likely start a fight with you. My poor grandmother would have a heart attack if someone told her to go fuck herself. But where did this come from? How did a four-letter word gain such power? I honestly have no idea, but I’ll try to draw a few hypotheses based on American culture.

One important factor is the American perception of courtesy and politeness. Certain words were designated at some point as “rude” and therefore using them in conversation became taboo. The reason that fuck was added to this list is most likely because of the predominantly Christian tradition of avoiding talking openly about sex. I’m sure in the 1600s even saying the word sex would at least raise an eyebrow, so a slang word like fuck, which sounds like a dirty onomatopoeia to start with, would be inexcusable. This is likely why the word is censored from media and discouraged as a word for children

But that leads to another interesting aspect in that the word fuck can in itself be an indicator of maturity. It makes sense that children not be directly exposed to the word because kids say whatever is on their mind, and if they’re running around everywhere telling people to fuck off, people would inevitably get offended. It is interesting culturally that as a child matures it is gradually more socially acceptable to use words like fuck in terms of the people and contexts within which they can say it. In a sense, the day you can say fuck in front of your parents and not get reprimanded is the day you become an adult. This of course varies between families, but overall I believe that it’s the case. And once you’ve “earned” the right to use it through maturity, it can actually be a very therapeutic word.

As mentioned earlier, anyone who’s dropped a bowling ball on their foot, slammed their finger in a car door, or broken a bone has probably said fuck. Didn’t it feel a little better each time you said it? It seems to get something off your chest. It’s power also transcends into the art that we enjoy. Would Richard Pryor have been so influential if he was unable to add dramatic and hilarious emphasis to his words by saying fuck all the time? I doubt it. It’s interesting that it seems to come out of people’s mouths when they’re not thinking, during orgasm or after hitting their head on the cabinet for the fiftieth time. For a lot of people, it’s just what comes out when you can’t say anything else. We’ve all heard the “fuck” uttered by the outright flabbergasted individual.

But using it can hurt you too. Fuck is about as strong as slang can get, and using it repeatedly in say an essay about the Theory of Relativity would reflect negatively on the writer. American academic culture considers the word sophomoric and uncivilized it seems. This reflects the placement of power in terms of fuck’s usage. It is the older people, teachers, judges, chairmen of the FCC, etc. that are in charge, and they would’ve gotten a smack across the mouth if they ever used it in front of their parents. And so still today it remains a word that lingers largely outside the mainstream of our linguistic culture, yet is extremely prevalent in the underground. So essentially, strict socio-cultural norms regulate it’s use in the presence of authoritative figures, yet in casual conversation it’s used similarly to any other word.

In that sense it can be both a tool and a weapon. Its power can make people laugh or it can offend. It can provide vivid imagery or just be a convenient word to pause upon. Of all the words in the English language, the “new social world” of fuck is probably one of the most interesting. The possibility of someone who’s been socially programmed to react to a mere sound by taking offense keeps it submerged just below the surface of mainstream exposure. There are people, such as the Vice President, who should probably not use it in public due to social backlash. There are contexts in which it’s inappropriate such as during a speech to a senior citizen’s coalition. Yet outside of these specific social roles and contexts, fuck is merely a versatile, potent, and interesting word.

The fact that it’s been adopted as either a direct translation or has analogous words in most major languages is testament to this. In Ecuador and the Galapagos, although jotar is a loose translation of “to fuck,” I didn’t hear it very often, and if I did it was in a sexual context. Shit, bitch, pussy, and faggot were extremely popular, yet little to no fuck. It would be interesting to explore why that is. One possibility is the overwhelming presence of Catholicism in the country, and the resulting taboo of talking openly about anything sexual. This was something I noticed, as girls were often too embarrassed to get condoms from the hospital because of the gossip that would result (guys apparently just didn’t go get them.) But that’s a topic for a different essay. Well, that’s my fucking paper, sorry if I got carried away.

Scott

So, I’m going to take a look at the word, “western” here. First, let’s take a look at the definitions given by dictionary.com:

1. lying toward or situated in the west: our company's western office. 2. directed or proceeding toward the west: a western migration. 3. coming or originating from the west, as a wind. 4. (often initial capital letter) of, pertaining to, living in, or characteristic of the West, esp. the western U.S.: a Western ranch. 5. (usually initial capital letter) Occidental: to adopt Western dress. 6. (usually initial capital letter) of or pertaining to the non-Communist countries of Europe and the Americas: Western trade agreements. 7. (initial capital letter) of or pertaining to the Western Church. –noun 8. (often initial capital letter) a story, movie, or radio or television play about the U.S. West of the 19th century. 9. western sandwich. 10. a person or thing from a western region or country.

The first few seem to be strictly relevant in a geographic sense. Then, the definitions seem to ease away from being strictly geographic and adopt both political and religious (#7) significance. I’m not really sure what to make of #9 but #10 then enters a certain realm of ambiguity. Is a “person or thing from a western region or country,” referring to someone from a western region in a strictly geographic sense or is this instead the version of western that seems to refer to the region’s political and economic tendencies? Such ambiguity seems to be commonplace in the use of the word.

The reason I chose this specific word is because it was often how I was identified while in both Egypt and Yemen. In fact, I had never heard the term used with such frequency until my arrival in Egypt. It was used to describe me as well as several other foreign students from European countries and Australia as well. Perhaps the high frequency in which it was used caused me to think a bit more about what exactly it implied.

The first irony, I found, was that I was now being lumped in a similar group with citizens of a country in which I had been a foreigner just months ago. When I studied in Italy, I was American and I was a cultural outsider. The culture was obviously far different from that which I had experienced in the US for most of my life. Nonetheless, when I arrived in Egypt and also while I was in Yemen, I was suddenly placed in the same category of “western” along with the Italians in both places. Though I was still American, and they were still Italian, we were both Western in the eyes of many native Egyptians and Yemenis. This would hardly be significant if it was meant in a strictly geographical sense. This was not the case, however. Though the geographic distinction might be accurate for those actually coming from the western hemisphere, the term was not used in such a limited manner. Moroccans, Tunisians, Algerian, and Libyans were not considered Westerners, yet most Europeans were considered as such. Most of Europe is no further west than the former mentioned countries and Australia certainly is not west, however.

So, then, if the distinction is not strictly geographical then what exactly should it be taken to mean? It seems as though we are using a modified mixed version of the definitions offered in #s 5, 6, and 10 above. The definition seems to have strayed from its original political and economic intent and come to also have a role in defining culture. Often did the phrase, “Western culture” find its way into classroom discussions in Egypt though never in such a limited sense. Western culture was used in defining both American culture and Italian culture, though I refuse to be convinced that the two cultures are the same and should be defined in such a sense. I realize by taking up this word I have opened a discussion that could last the length of a book. For the scope of this assignment, however, it must obviously be limited quite a bit. One point of discussion regarding this particular word which cannot be ignored, however, should be how the term originally strayed from its strictly geographic meanings. How did such a direct term come to take on a world of ambiguity? If a group of countries is to be defined as “Western” there certainly must have been an original motivation to use a geographically significant term. Essentially, such countries must have been West of something. And, if there is a west there must also be an east and a middle, right? Looking at a map, the definition under #6 seems to make sense. It is a Cold War term and most of the non-Communist countries of Europe and the Americas are actually West of the former Soviet Union. This begs the question, however, as to why the map was created in such a manner in the first place. Asia could just as easily be placed on the western portion of the map if the perspective were to be shifted a bit. I guess this line of questioning could really go on forever, but I think the point is clear. The idea that Europe is in the middle, the Americas are to the west, and Asia is to the East seems to be an integral part of our world perspective when, in reality, such terms are hardly so definite. If anything, this suggests more about the historic and social realities of our world than it does about its physical positioning.