Swearing and its Consequences

This week, I read several articles relating to the firing of teacher Reed Walters for using foul language in an argument with a student in the classroom. Though many of the local Mississippi newspaper articles are very vague about the specific language he used, court papers show that Mr. Walters said "hell" and "ass" in a heated conversation with a student. This encounter caused the teacher of 11 years to be fired immediately, and his case is currently being heard at the Superintendent level.

I found this incident to be very interesting as it highlights how swearing and foul language is a touchy subject in American society- to the point where it can be the reason for someone losing their job. Why exactly are certain words deemed inappropriate and foul? It seems to me very intriguing that certain words, which have gained status as "swear words" through social construction (I wonder if there are actual roots of offensiveness to words such as "F*** or S***) hold so much weight in our social interactions that it caused the dismissal of a teacher. For me, this connects to how language is fundamentally human: humans create, appropriate, adjust, and fully immerse themselves in this complex system called language. We take meaningless phonemes and morphemes and combine them to create endless words, phrases, and sentences with very powerful meanings.

Additionally, the specific role that the teacher was in was indeed very key to the decision to fire him. Because he is a role model, an academic, and an occupant of a position of power (over the female student he was talking to), his language held more weight and potential negative consequences than if he were holding a different occupation, such as gas station attendee or vehicle technician. This highlights how language and its significance varies greatly depending on the speaker, the listener, and the overall context. Relating to the importance of "context," article also mentioned Mr. Walter's defense that if he is to be fired, then all sports coaches must be fired as well, as they are frequent users of swear words and other foul language. These coaches, however, have not been subjected to the same punishments (firing) as Mr. Walters. In fact, there has been no administrative response at all. This issue brings to light how certain language (such as swear words) is much more socially acceptable in some settings versus in other settings. After speculating as to why this is the case, I came to the conclusion that the fundamental culture difference between a classroom and a sports team cannot be overlooked.

This issue also brought up the topic of censorship and the media. I find it very peculiar that media outlets, such as television and the radio, are so adamant about censoring words from their broadcasts. While there is a "beep" noise, it is very

What is the purpose of canceling the sound of swear words, even when the vast majority of people still understand what the word is, and whose minds often fill in the blank anyway? My hypothesis would be that media outlets (and the pressures that make them keep their censorship regulations) view having no swear words as having "class." It has simply become socially understood that public and significant media outlets and figures should not engage in inappropriate language in order to uphold their image. Thus, by making a token effort to "erase" this language, these groups are seen as maintaining a wholesome, socially acceptable image. By doing so, they avoid possible prosecution, like that which the teacher received (though this is different as the teacher incident was one on one personal interaction). Nevertheless, it still seems silly to me that these regulations on media exist, as attempting to censor is futile as most viewers know the words anyway.

Question I have moving forward that I was not able to answer through online research: Is there a basis for the harm caused by swearing? Or, in other words, do swear words inherently cause harm? Is there a correlation between amount of "foul" language a person hears and his/her actions? Or is it simply that foul language, combined with a negative context or specifically threatening environment or relationship between the parties involved, has the potential to be extremely damaging and dangerous.

Links:

News Articles:

http://leadercall.com/opinion/x563624635/More-to-teacher-firing-than-foul-language

http://leadercall.com/local/x1687706738/Fired-WJ-teacher-likely-to-hear-fate-Monday

http://leadercall.com/local/x993497207/Meeting-gets-heated

http://leadercall.com/local/x58341799/Fired-teacher-gets-hearing

Psych/Science Research Articles:

http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=2&hid=15&sid=d27f5211-64ae-4027-a01f-4548980055c4%40sessionmgr10

http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=1337539271&Fmt=3&clientId=12498&RQT=309&VName=PQD