Prof. Mullen
ENG-101 230-320
08/27/2014
Cuss Time Summary
In Jill McCorkles’s article “Cuss Time” she explains, “By limiting or denying freedom of speech and expression, we take away a lot of potential.” With saying this McCorkle backs up her argument with many different personal stories and experiences. The title “Cuss Time” comes from an experience between McCorkle and her son. When McCorkle saw her son “. . . silently mouthing a lot of new vocabulary while riding in the car or drawing,” she decided to let him have “Cuss Time” McCorkle explains for 5 minutes a day he was allowed to say any word he wanted, but when Cuss Time ended he wasn’t allowed to cuss till the next twenty four hour period when Cuss Time started again. Part of McCorkles’s reasoning was without cussing (Or other words society has viewed as wrong or bad) it limits our potential in how we express ourselves. Her last point that she addressed was if these words are taken away then more will be taken until it’s a dead language. “Word by word, our history will be rewritten if we don’t guard and protect it. . .). In this quote she basically says our language will be changed if we don’t stand up and take action on our Freedom of Speech. Throughout her essay McCorkle gives a strong argument to support her thesis and get her opinion across.
You May Also Find These Documents Helpful
-
I comprehend Alan M Dershowitz’s speech of “A Real Test For Any Proposed Speech Code or Policy” as accurate because it can not be up to citizens to decide which words are offensive and which words are appropriate. More specifically, I believe that adding restrictions to Americans freedom of speech would be in total violation of the First Amendment and completely unrealistic to enforce. For example, Alan Dershowitz’s states "the proper response to offensive speech is to criticize and answer it, not censor it.” Although Harvard Law might counter this by saying that they didn’t want anyone at their school to view the offensive words of Tom Paulin. I maintain that freedom of speech is part of our foundation in America and we need to use it to benefit…
- 189 Words
- 1 Page
Satisfactory Essays -
The reason being that it comes with too big of a price and would be useless as a permanent solution. Bauer discusses the aftermath of Rahm Emanuel’s use of the R-word being that government fought to remove the term “mental retardation” from government agencies and state codes.They used this to contrast the origins of the word’s use, to convey dignity and respect. Their argument being that no matter how many times we purge words with negative connotations and replace them, taboos would just materialize once more, as can be seen in the replacement of the word idiot. Bauer also said that if a word is too stigmatized people develop what she calls a “word fetish”. This phenomena is backed by the writings of Harvard law professor Randall Kennedy, making it credible information. The example provided to back both claims was the case of David Howard nearly being fired for using the word “niggardly”. Overall Bauer’s evidence for this claim support her arguments well. She makes it clear that restrictions on speech create needless taboos and government restriction.…
- 725 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
the books are burned, the offender is arrested and taken to prison. Although book burning…
- 569 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
Throughout the world there are many different views on the use of swear words in everyday life. From evening family slot times to late night tv shows, cursing in society is slowly becoming part of our “normal” day to day language. Whether or not it is accepted is something different. Society has often labeled swearing one of two things: as an extreme type of language only used by the uneducated or the greatest use of power words that should be used by any and all people. Though swearing is offensive to many, it is proven to be a major extension of our vocabulary and should be tolerated and understood to a greater extent.…
- 1232 Words
- 5 Pages
Good Essays -
This language restricts government’s ability to constrain the speech of citizens, however, the prohibition on abridgment of the freedom of speech is not absolute. Notwithstanding the often broad freedom of expression guaranteed by the First Amendment, there are some historically rooted exceptions, as the Supreme Court has identified categories of speech that are not protected by the First Amendment and may be prohibited entirely. Among these categories are “fighting words” and words and actions that create an incitement of violence, both of which lay beyond the shield of First Amendment protection. I. Background In 1942, the United States Supreme Court established the “fighting words” doctrine by a 9-0 decision in Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, where the Court held that fighting words “by their very utterance inflict injury or tend…
- 1369 Words
- 6 Pages
Better Essays -
No right is truly unlimited journalist Roger Rosenblatt would argue. Author Rosenblatt narrates “everyone loves free expression as long as it isn’t exercised” (501) in “We Are Free to Be You, Me, Stupid and Dead” as part from his essay collection titled Where We Stand: Thirty Reasons for Loving Our Country published in 2002. Rosenblatt informs his audience about the very controversial and objectionable value of freedom of expression, and what negative costs can ultimately stem from censoring language. Rosenblatt uses his credibility where he appeals to the every man/women reader’s emotions and logic criticizing any censorship on free expression, emphasizes the defending right on freedom of speech given by the Constitution. However, Rosenblatt includes many examples of the limitations placed on our free expression. Rosenblatt successfully engages…
- 1153 Words
- 5 Pages
Good Essays -
When the general public is asked to refrain from the use of a few words that may be offensive to others, the right to freedom of speech is not infringed upon. In most cases a group of concerned citizens vocalize the need to discontinue the use of a particular word that evokes discomfort in other citizens. For example, there is a campaign against the use of the word “retarded,” and it is called “Spread the Word to End the Word (Downes).” It is not required by law for every citizen of the United States to abstain from using the word “retarded,” so the right to freedom of speech has not been…
- 656 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
In response to the doctor he says, “My head’s always been wrong”. (Alexie 65) He uses his sense of humor as a way to withhold his fear; in fear that he would have a brain tumor, he was scared, not only for himself but for his wife and children that represent the essence of his life. From this, it is conspicuous that the Alexie has his ways of using both unintentional dark humor and profane use of language to expose how we tend to pay attention to the negative aspects in our lives and what we have in our families, ignoring the smallest things that turn out to have the biggest…
- 1395 Words
- 6 Pages
Good Essays -
As Roger Rosenblatt endured in countries of constrained inhabitants, “the secret publication of books, the pirated music, the tricky subversive lines of poetry read at vast gatherings of tens of thousands. And the below the surface comedy” (503) will continuously arise no matter the discouragement present. In a country founded on its freedoms, the retraction of any of those privileges will be met with extreme adversity. Moreover, “since free is the way people's minds were made to be” (Rosenblatt 502) the restriction of verbal expression will only cause riots and outrage. Currently, various universities and colleges have faced the backlash of unjust speech limitations on their campuses. One student attending a college in Arizona prepares to sue the school for, “her school’s so-called “speech zone,” arguing the policy “severely limited” her right to free speech and due process” (Harkness). Reactions to a decrease in the liberty to speak freely induces immediate retaliation and hardship, in addition, to being entirely unnecessary. To keep the peace and stability, the United States must keep the freedom of speech as it was intended to be used, freely.…
- 1325 Words
- 6 Pages
Better Essays -
Should cussing be socially acceptable or should it remain offensive among present day society? In the article “Cuss Time” by author Jill McCorkle she proposes that cussing should be acceptable in moderation. The article speaks of how it restricts freedom of expression and takes away from thoughts. But that simply cannot be the case though as cuss words really don’t have a place in society now and have never had one before. Society should refrain from repulsive language as it is not acceptable in most environments, it hinders your linguistic ability, although some people argue that it has certain benefits.…
- 1165 Words
- 5 Pages
Good Essays -
2. The First Amendment grants each citizen the right to freely express him or herself as he or she chooses. This is not without restraint. Network television and radio have the right to censor offensive content. NBC will never show full-frontal nudity. WWNO will never broadcast “bad” words. There are also restrictions for the sake of public safety. One can be arrested for yelling “fire” in a crowded theater because the panicked reaction might cause injury or death. This kind of rule has also caused great debate on whether the instructions to…
- 665 Words
- 3 Pages
Satisfactory Essays -
In the wake of school shootings, cracking down on potential threats has become priority. Not only are there threats of mass violence, but racist speech and sexist speech, that some would define as fighting words. A question to ask is when does speech become a fighting word. Having to decide what speech is protected by the first amendment, worthwhile, and what speech has no social value and is not protected, worthless, is controversial. Speech that is defined as worthless include: lewd, obscene, profane, libelous, and fighting words. Focusing on fighting words and the ever developing world of technology, we will examine a present-day situation of words that wound and compare them to past cases.…
- 1146 Words
- 5 Pages
Better Essays -
Allowing people to speak freely is easy when what they say is not offensive. Being free to say things that offend or insult other groups of people may be necessary to challenge those in power or to identify problems within society. I am sure some would argue that hate speech serves no purpose but to offend and divide. To that argument, I would quickly point out that we should not be afraid of what people say, write, or think. You don't fight ideas by attempting to silence them. You fight them with better ideas. Also, who decides what is offensive? For example, if someone said, “I'm sick of Black people killing each other in Chicago”, some would find that offensive, but is that hate speech? We can easily say no, but it would not be our decision. Once a law is in place, those in charge decide how it is implemented. This is the other problem with limiting free speech, those in power would set and interpret the law. History is littered with examples of people gaining power then using that power to silence their…
- 493 Words
- 2 Pages
Good Essays -
Jon Katz, an American journalist and author, also argued: “Institutions that are supposed to be breeding grounds for original and innovative thought have embraced the forced re-ordering of moral conscience” (Katz). However, speech codes do not stifle freedom of speech. It merely adds to the exclusions of the first amendment in order to create a safe learning environment and equal opportunities for all. Speech codes, in no way, limit learning, in fact, they enhance learning…
- 1668 Words
- 7 Pages
Good Essays -
“Crippling the delivery of unpopular views is a terrible lesson to send to impressionable minds and future leaders” (Rampell 1). This quote taken from Catherine Rampell in her article “Free speech is flunking out on college campuses” explains that strict censorship rules hurt students whose minds are still developing. Rules on censorship in a college setting are supposed to protect the rights of students. Censorship is supposed to protect them from extremely hate filled speeches, newspaper articles, and other documents. For example, defamation, lies, and uses of extremely hateful name calling such as the word “nigger,” are all applicable to fair censorship rules. Today, the power of censorship has grown strong. In a scramble to not offend anyone,…
- 1126 Words
- 5 Pages
Good Essays