Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting our First Amendment Liberties

by Christopher M. Fairman

@$#*%! Our most taboo word and how the law keeps it forbidden. This entertaining read is about the word "fuck", the law, and the taboo. Whether you shout it out in the street or whisper it in the bedroom, deliberately plan a protest, or spontaneously blurt it out, if you say "fuck," someone wants to silence you, either with a dirty look across the room or by making a rule that you cannot say the word. When it's the government trying to cleanse your language, though, you should worry. Words are ideas. If the government controls the words we use, it can control what we think. To protect this liberty, we must first understand why the law's treatment of "fuck" puts that freedom at risk. This book examines the law surrounding the word and reveals both inconsistencies in its treatment and tension with other identifiable legal rights that the law simply doesn't answer. The power of taboo provides the framework to understand these uncertainties. It also explains why attempts to curtail the use of "fuck" through law are doomed to fail. Fundamentally, it persists because it is taboo; not in spite of it.

Genres: Nonfiction, Law, History, Politics

272 pages, Paperback

First published April 1, 2009

Reviews

[Alison Smith · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fuck illuminates a paradox of modern American culture: the fact that our strong protections for freedom of expression are coupled with remarkably puritanical attitudes. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held “fuck” as (in most cases) protected speech, and yet, as Fairman puts it, “Whether you shout it in the street or whisper it in the bedroom, say it deliberately as a political protest or accidentally let it slip out, make a single fleeting reference or sing an expletive-laden rant, intend it to be funny or downright foul, if you say “fuck,” someone wants to silence you.”

Fuck covers a lot of ground, from psycholinguistics (who even knew that was a thing?) to the FCC’s baseless and contradictory rulings (fuck the FCC, by the way). It digs into legal distinctions between obscenity, indecency, and vulgarity, and outlines the case law that determines teachers’ freedom to say “fuck” in the classroom. (Fun fact: “fuck” is not legally obscene.)

I was particularly fascinated by Fuck's section about the nearly-defunct “fighting words” doctrine, and especially by how wide a latitude the Supreme Court has given us in interacting with police officers. The Court has established Black Panthers’ right to call cops “motherfucking fascist pigs” (Brown v. Oklahoma) and even reversed the conviction of a man who threatened a police officer (Gooding v. Wilson). To quote Justice Lewis Powell in Wilson, “a properly trained officer may reasonably be expected to ‘exercise a higher degree of restraint’ than the average citizen and thus be less likely to respond belligerently to ‘fighting words.’”

And yet, lower courts frequently uphold convictions of “disorderly conduct” or related charges for people swearing at police officers. The book describes a case where a woman was arrested for cursing at an overflowing toilet within her own home. Her neighbor, a police officer, overheard and charged her with “disorderly conduct.”

It seems that the right to tell a police officer to fuck off is one that is constitutionally recognized but not consistently upheld.

While I recommend Fuck to anyone who’s not offended by the title, it probably most needs to be read by people who are.

Now go listen to his absolute masterpiece:
“Platypus (I Hate You)” by Green Day

[Matt · Rating 5 out of 5]

Christopher M. Fairman approaches his book with the greatest of ease, and so he should. Dealing with the word fuck and all its legal impediments over the years, Fairman seeks to better understand how the word has garnered such a taboo and how it is being mislabelled and unjustly adjudicated in US Courts. Touching repeatedly on the First Amendment and the free speech that flows from it, Fairman tries his best to educate the reader on the law, as well as produce some persuasive arguments surrounding the history of 'fuck', its etymological basis, and the two-pronged means by which it can be used (and is largely misinterpreted). Fairman argues effectively that all laws and regulations in the US cite profanity and obscenity laws based on the use of sexual or excretory words as being those worth censoring, leaving fuck as a word free from issue in most cases. However, as Fairman exemplifies, while the law forbids fuck in its prurient sense, common use of the word falls outside of this purview. Clogging the courts with many First Amendment cases and having them reach the Supreme Court of the United States only goes to show how taboo-filled the word tends to be (the reader may enjoy how former Chief Justice Burger was so influenced by the taboo of fuck that he cringed when it was used in oral arguments over these types of cases, even when he ruled against the censorship found within state laws). Through over a dozen chapters, Fairman demystifies much of the taboos of fuck and tries to argue that there is a strong contradictory nature even among those who regulate speech, depending on the medium used and type of program on which the word is found. Fairman's highly entertaining and academic work is a must-read for those who do not cower in fear from words and who seek to have a better (worse?) understanding of the laws of censorship and linguistic regulation in the United States.

I applaud Fairman for this book and the concept behind it. He seeks to challenge much of the taboo nature of fuck and bring it into the mainstream. While not outwardly promoting its use, Fairman attempts to show that fuck should be be shied away from and placed 'out of the English lexicon' simply because of the vile nature it has received over the years. Fairman's extensive legal research and ability to present fuck in a number of everyday situations (use in the workplace, in public schools [by students and teachers, separately], in post-secondary institutions, on television, and over the radio, to name but a few) goes to exemplify how far reaching the legal application of the word can go and how much time and ink the courts have spent on explaining and discussion the First Amendment rights of Americans when it comes to speech, and specifically the word fuck. It is truly boggling to see just how many legal precedents and First Amendment tests there are to weigh in on this matter, all of which were unknown to me, a mere curious reader and not a legal expert.

Kudos and a great big fuckin' eh to you, Mr. Fairman. You opened my eyes and piqued my curiosity with this wonderful book, full of academic arguments, but mainstream to the end.

[Richard · Rating 4 out of 5]

A wonderfully unabashed book that makes all the pseudonyms and avoidances like 'the f-word' and 'f-bomb' feel embarrassingly silly. The strongest points and argument of this book involve the self-replicating taboo nature around the word fuck and the continued strength of that taboo through both the word's continued usage as well as efforts to stymie its use. Some great work is done on defining some basis for the taboo and its background. The second part of the full title, though a noble and essentially unarguable concern, the quashing of freedom of expression, is what is probably the weaker argument here. The court cases are often argued as using inconsistent standards, which is true, but perhaps with too much suggestion that all courts at all times should act with complete consistency. This method does well to set up the author's outrage, but feels a little flat as argument. The wild range of inconsistency due to judges (and FCC commissioners) trying to pretend that personal taste is not their standard when the self-negating logic of their decisions reflect the opposite might have made the stronger case overall. But this book will certainly give you a new appreciation--and renewed reason--to use it with little regret.

[John · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a thoughtful and well-researched book. On balance, it was a focused and insightful foray into the absurdities of modern societal “norms.” I only hope that as our ever-more liberal society one day takes control over our political process, these mindless and puritanical philosophies will change.

Professor Fairman does not consider the longer-term consequences of normalizing all speech under the umbrella of the First Amendment. He is certainly on point about many legal issues and often contradictory court rulings on appropriate language. However, he neglects to point out profanity’s use as a powerful speaking tool. Because the intent of language is to communicate across a broad spectrum of both factual and emotional messages, bringing any word with a social taboo into widespread acceptance negates its ability to convey strong emotions.

If social taboos are gone from our language, how can a speaker possibly shock his audience?

[Sarah]

What a great book! I really enjoyed this interesting look at the history, legality, and cultural power of the word fuck. There were some truely hilarious stories in this book -- the guy who was arrested for saying "oh fuck!" as his canoe tipped over, the guy who was arrested for wearing a "Fuck the Draft" patch on his jacket, the bizarre inconsistencies in the FCC rulings over the word fuck.



The author writes about law and history in a breezy way that makes the book a fun read. Parts of the book will outrage you, others will make you think. I particularly enjoyed the parts about language, how we use the word fuck, what it means or doesn't mean, and how it clearly makes people feel. Very thought-provoking things.



And reading a book titled "Fuck" in public (or in my case in the work break room) is an invitation to many interesting conversations with your friends and co-workers.

[Brandy]

This is a much needed book about the many legal cases establishing the legal boundaries of using the word FUCK in diverse contexts. The quick summary: the conclusions of the legal cases are contradictory and inconsistently applied; this has the effect of chilling our "freedom of speech" (if you can't rely upon a consistent ruling then you self-censor in order to avoid possible punishments) and allowing taboo to reign. This book is a legal reference book which is awesome but as a lay person I would have appreciated a glossary of the cases he's referring to for easy-reference as he builds upon his arguments.

[Alexa S. · Rating 2 out of 5]

I wanted so hard to love this book, because censorship and the first amendment has always been a subject that really interested me. The problem is that Fairman is coming from such a biased perspective that it's hard to take him seriously 100% of the time. He largely seems to be confused about the legal distinction between rules and laws and the right of private institutions to enforce rules (just not through the legal justice system). However, his points on the inconsistency of the legal system's response to profanity-related cases are well-made and worthy of note.

[Kerry Gibbons · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fascinating book. The author does the very lawyer-like thing of repeating the same idea from twenty angles and the very academic-type thing of mentioning examples he hasn't laid out yet. But overall, I learned a lot and definitely view FUCK and self-censorship in a slightly different light.

I do highly disagree with his categorizations of why people say/use fuck and also with his conclusion, towards the end of the book, that cunt and nigger are not as bad as fuck. They are definitely worse in my mind. Hell, many would argue that "moist" is worse than fuck.

[Paul · Rating 5 out of 5]

A thoughtful look a language, taboo, censorship, and the general disposition of American dialogue. Fairman's work served as an inspiration and the basis for my most in important undergraduate work and has continually made me question my own take on language.

[Love · Rating 3 out of 5]

Pretty interesting argument. Could have been developed further.

[Daniel Namie · Rating 4 out of 5]

I do believe the censorship of the word Fuck is a violation of my freedom of speech.

[Erikaorgan · Rating 3 out of 5]

interesting