Comments about ‘BYU researcher taking look at profanity in books for youth’

"More than 80 percent of adolescents choose to read each day. Some studies say they spend as much time reading for pleasure as they spend playing video games."

Lois, Can you provide some supporting information for this? I cannot believe that the numbers are anywhere near that high.

How about trying to spread the word to everyone -- not just kids -- the truth of the old adage, "Foul language is the pitiful attempt of a feeble mind to express itself forcefully."

I think feeble minds can also utilize euphemisms to the same effect i.e. heck flip etc...
I've also observed that prevalent use of non-specific terms (such as stuff, thing like, and you know) also exhibit one's inability to express ones self.

When it comes to 'bad' words I like to consider intent. If you're screaming at me at the top of your lungs, does it really matter if your calling me caca head or something else?

My husband and I were both raised in homes with fathers who used foul language to intimidate. When we married 25 years ago, we made a promise that those words would never be used in our home, and they never have.

The result is we have raised children who also don't swear. Interestingly, we never sat down and had a "do not swear" family council, and yet they seemed to get the idea that there was certain language that we didn't use. I have never heard any of my children use foul language. (They are all grown now.)

I'm not saying I am the best parent; there are many areas in which I can improve. I just had no way of knowing 25 years ago, when my husband and I made that promise to each other what an impact it would have on our family and what peace it would bring into our home. This has taught me that children learn by example more than anything, and it makes me wish I had done better in other areas.

"None of the instances of profanity were humorous."

Humor is subjective...how can a researcher determine what is considered humorous?

The author of this article should consider profanity as a literary tool. The use of "mild" words here and there does not a dirty mouth make...again, I suppose this would be subjective, so the author appears to have the same issue as the research team, anointing themselves as supreme judges.

"Most characters that used profanity were from a high socioeconomic class...while those who did not use profanity were portrayed with average attractiveness."

The latter is probably average, because they are probably minor characters who aren't supplied with much dialogue. The more appropriate research technique would take the ratio of profanity use to overall dialogue, as 1 word out of 300 and 1 word out of 3000 is quite different.

Profanity does have use as a literary tool, Catcher in the Rye being case in point. Those who don't understand the use are offended, while those who do, not only learn something, but should they choose to not use profane language will do it for more educated reasons other than "because its naughty."

JoeBlow, I would believe the statistic. Just because the media has portrayed youth as fat slobs that veg in front of a TV all day does not mean it is the truth. It has been my experience that youth read more often that they are given credit for; the fact they do it in private so as to not be bothered by outside distractions speaks more to their desire for better reading comprehension than anything else.

I agree that the overuse of profanity is often associated with people who are unable to express themselves very well. The euphemisms that some use (heck, darn, freaking, and worst of all H-E-double hockey stick) also indicate an inability to express one's self, combined with a prissy, prudish attitude toward swearing. If you can't think of a more effective word than a swear word, why bother modifying it slightly to "heck", "darned", or "freaking"? Why not simply use the word that you are thinking of in the first place?

Profanity is definitely overused, but it can be very expressive, carrying a punch that less visceral words lack, especially when it is employed by someone who almost never uses it.

"Foul-mouthed characters were more likely to be "highly attractive and come from a higher socio-economic status, while characters who did not use profanity were more likely to be of average attractiveness."

I read a study recently suggesting that swearing in real life is the opposite, the more educated or wealthy a person is, the less they are likely to swear. Likewise swearing was perceived to decrease attractiveness, especially when used by females by both male and female viewers. I wonder why the books try and turn such ideas on their head?

First of all, this is hypocrisy at its utmost for someone to pore over profanity all day long and then tell me not to. Second, kids reading is so rare these days that I'm happy no matter WHAT they read! :)

I remember walking down the halls at my high school and hearing every word you could imagine, and that was an upper east side school. The books I read in AP English had some of those words in them, but nothing like real life.

I still use very few swear words today, and usually to draw a laugh!

George carlin had it right. What is or isn't profane is totally subjective. They're just letters, assembled into words. You own whether or not you need to be offended.

Afterglow Fanissimo, those are very odd comments. First of all, they "pored over" the information to gain insight to inform public dialog, and then they did absolutely nothing to tell you not to read it. Don't put words in their mouths.

Second, you seem to assume that kids read very little, but what do you base your opinion on? They didn't give a citation (as another commenter correctly noted), but I can give them the benefit of that doubt, with their scientific reputation on the line, that they have cause to say, "More than 80 percent of adolescents choose to read each day. Some studies say they spend as much time reading for pleasure as they spend playing video games." You not thinking so is not a persuasive argument. You are no expert, and you don't even comment with your real name. Besides, all my kids regularly choose to read about as much as they choose to play video games. But my experience is not evidence of societal trends, either. We all need to avoid make broad generalizations based on a couple of personal observations; this is why scientific investigation is needed to begin with.

Has this lady ever been to a JR High or High School. In the 5 minute class break you will hear more cursing than this lady read in her whole study.

I have always thought books need a rating system. If movies and tv do, why not books?

See my SafeLibraries blog for:

"Time for Book Ratings on YA Books, Says Dr. Sarah Coyne of Brigham Young University, While ALA Calls it Censorship"

I read a business article a few years ago that said, "People who swear make more money."
I tell that to people here in Utah and they don't believe me. Yet, let's look at most of the cities in our country: Chicago, Miami, Seattle, Houston, New York (and yes Salt Lake and Ogden)-----people who have no contol over their mouths, are the ones who know how to, under the law, bully, intimidate, throw tantrum, yell, rage, meet deadlines and make others fear them. James chapter 3 says if you control your tongue, you will become perfect one day.

If language is important (and I believe it is), and if words really mean something (and I believe they do), then it is worthwhile and appropriate to examine how and which words are being transmitted to the next generation. I'm glad someone is doing it.

It is interesting and appropriate as well to examine how the language is changing. What is profane or obscene in one generation, one country, or set of circumstances is not objectionable at all in another. But if a word is perceived to be "bad," and if "bad" words have an effect on human behavior, then by all means, let's examine their use.