Comments on: Do fuckfriends offend you?

By: Mike Berthold

Mike Berthold — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 14:19:04 +0000

My point exactly.

By: jean.naimard

jean.naimard — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 19:01:07 +0000

As a minority in a largely french society, you better learn fast how the majority of people see you.

By: Mike Berthold

Mike Berthold — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 17:19:30 +0000

I hate people that paint other groups of people with a single brush. They're usually intolerant assholes. *Usually*.

By: jean.naimard

jean.naimard — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 14:48:53 +0000

Gee!!! People seem to think I am attacking them all the time! :) :) :) :) :) :) Why would that be???? :) :) :) :) :) :) I am just buttressing your argument… :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)

By: jean.naimard

jean.naimard — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 01:40:18 +0000

The sad thing is that I actually agree with many of the comments you make -particularly about "green" related issues such as cycling.

Flattery will get you nowhere.

By: Marc

Marc — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 01:38:44 +0000

Where did I say that? There is no such thing as the "right to not be offended."

By: wkh

wkh — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 00:54:31 +0000

No, I just have a neeeed for order. Like I'm not eating fish at Magnan.

By: wkh

wkh — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 00:53:26 +0000

I agree with all that just fine but... I want my Gazette to be nice whitewashed Canwestianism. I don't expect to think when I read the Gazette, and I like it like that.

By: Paul

Paul — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 22:09:26 +0000

I'm a snob because I read the best english-language newspaper on the web? One that has all of its content available without charge? Or I'm a snob because I live in Westmount and say "fuck"? You know nothing of my political opinions at all yet you make a sweeping value judgment. You may think I'm a snob, but you have demonstrated that you are a cretin. The sad thing is that I actually agree with many of the comments you make -particularly about "green" related issues such as cycling. Yet you have decided to close you mind without bothering to find out more. Very sad, Jean, very sad.

By: jean.naimard

jean.naimard — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 21:37:59 +0000

Where is it written in the holy saint Charter of Rights that you have the right not to be offended???

By: Marc

Marc — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 21:18:19 +0000

So you see stuff in the newspaper that you don't like...what to do? Call the Human Right Commission? Bzzzzzt - wrong!

TURN THE PAGE!

It's as simple as that. Same goes for TV and radio - change the station.

By: jean.naimard

jean.naimard — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 20:59:27 +0000

Snob.

By: Michael J.

Michael J. — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 20:52:58 +0000

It's also interesting that they censored the offending words in the letters (which I believe they do in the rest of the paper too) but it seems there's no issue if it's used in ads. Unless of course it was a discrepancy or oversight on their part.

By: Michael J.

Michael J. — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 20:47:54 +0000

I'm more surprised that it's a government ad of all things.

By: Paul

Paul — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 20:34:21 +0000

I live in Westmont and people here use the word "fuck" quite often. Personally, I like newspapers that use The Guardian's style guide: http://www.guardian.co.uk/styleguide/f - for fuck, it says: "do not describe this as "a good, honest old-fashioned Anglo-Saxon word" because, first, there is no such thing as an Anglo-Saxon word (they spoke Old English) and, more important, its first recorded use dates from 1278
see swearwords"

And the swearwords entry has:
"swearwords
We are more liberal than any other newspapers, using language that our competitors would not. But even some readers who agree with Lenny Bruce that "take away the right to say fuck and you take away the right to say fuck the government" might feel that we sometimes use such words unnecessarily.

The editor's guidelines are as follows:

First, remember the reader, and respect demands that we should not casually use words that are likely to offend.

Second, use such words only when absolutely necessary to the facts of a piece, or to portray a character in an article; there is almost never a case in which we need to use a swearword outside direct quotes.

Third, the stronger the swearword, the harder we ought to think about using it.

Finally, never use asterisks, which are just a cop-out"

Hard to argue with that.

By: Gary

Gary — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 20:22:46 +0000

OMG. Fuck in a newspaper. Call the police.
To tell you the truth, that Ad catched my attention, if it said "AIDS BEAWARE/WEAR CONDOMS" in bolded letters, I'd skip to the next page pretty quickly.

By: wkh

wkh — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 19:55:35 +0000

I use worse language around my personal tweenagers, so it's not THINK OF THE CHILLUNS' I'm on about at all. But... I don't want to see that in the Gazette. It's the fucking Gazette. It's not Mirror or Hour. It's the Gazette. It's Westmount English, not Point St. Charles English. I don't know anyone who looks for anon random sex who does not actually use condoms regularly. The people they need to worry about are the serial monogamist in two month "relationships" who never use condoms because yk, they're in "relationships."

By: Fassero

Fassero — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 16:53:24 +0000

If an "underage" kid actually sat down and read the whole darn thing, I'd be impressed. I'd like to think most people, if they read it at all, just skipped to the headline at the bottom.

By: TUx

TUx — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 16:48:39 +0000

So people have no problem with articles about ecological disasters, horrific violence, child abuse etc etc sitting on the coffee table for their children to peruse, but mention sex or use the word "fuck" with a sexual connotation and suddenly it's MORAL PANIC!!

I think people who have a problem with sex need to get themselves a fuck-friend :)

By: mare

mare — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 13:31:17 +0000

Who said they were fake? They could have harvested them (and slightly changed) anywhere. The ads in the m4m sections of craigslist for instance: http://sfbay.craigslist.org/m4m/

I don't think anybody would complain if they were "cited".