[WillowTheWhisp]

Originally Posted by baby boo

if a woman or young girl was to be called a silly moo these days she would take it offensively as obviously it relates to being called a cow. i would rather be sworn at than called a cow.
same with the word bitch, who likes being called a dog? but yet its classed as a swear word so when a young child is learnig the word bitch people will automatically think first? is my child swearing?? or would they then realise that they were learning a new meaning for a lady dog??
or ba****d this word is in alot of films that is only realting to a child without a father??

Tw**t- a female fish??
where do we draw the line at what is swearing and what is not??

The original word when "Till Death Us Do Part" was written was meant to be "cow" but it was deemed to be too offensive to use on television so was changed to "moo".

Now you're talking about words and the context in which they are used. If we are talking about animals then a female dog is a bitch and there's no problem with that any more than there is a problem with the animal we get milk from being called a cow. The problem arises when people are insulted by being called such names. Other animal names have also been used to insult people, "pig" for example, or even "toad". It's the fact that the words are chosen and intentionally meant as insults which makes them offensive to the recipient.

The word used to describe an illegitimate child (the child does have a father, he's just not married to the mother) still sounds harsh when used in the correct context. This is probably because when someone has been referred to as the "b******d son of so and so" rather than the "illegitimate son of so and so" it has often been said that way in order to sound harsh and critical.

There is a sea bird which is called a shag. I believe it is rather like a cormorant. I vaguely remember the fish from a quiz I did a few years ago. I thought it was a young fish but can't remember the species.

You could also argue the point about words such as "bloody" which when referring to something covered in blood are nothing more than descriptive adjectives. An example being the "bloody baron" ghost in Harry Potter.

That reminds me of something my youngest daughter once said to me. She'd been quite horrified at something a friend of hers had said and I asked her what it was. She didn't want to repeat the words even though they were nowhere near as bad as the words her sister is now expected to speak in class at school but she also wanted me to understand what it was so she got round it by saying. "You know what the baron is in Harry Potter? Well it was that and the place you end up if you don't go to Heaven." She was about 7 at the time I think.

You may find it quite normal if you are angry with someone to tell them to "f" off but my kids would say "get lost!" with just as much emphasis. I've never used the word in my life and believe me there have been times when I've been angry/frustrated/upset/annoyed/exasperated. Maybe I'm in a minority but if so then I find that rather sad. MY father once told someone to "p" off when he was very angry and my mother was mortified. He'd never sworn before and even used to criticise her for say "blast". I think that illustrates A-b's point. If he'd been used to swearing like a trooper thsoe two words wouldn't have had half the impact they did.