Fuck and Fucked

[american_arcane]

Fuck
This Article is as simple and provocative as its title suggests: it explores the legal implications of the word fuck. The intersection of the word fuck and the law is examined in four major areas: First Amendment, broadcast regulation, sexual harassment, and education. The legal implications from the use of fuck vary greatly with the context

Comments

[glittergrrl69]

I absolutely loathe my old alma mater's fish wrap. But their most recent pile of dung had a related article about surveillance and how it's about to affect the college.

I may post about the article in my page. Here's a little sampling:

The Federal Communications Commission wants to expand its web of surveillance. If the government agency receives court approval to do so, it might forever change the way students communicate on campus.

Three weeks ago, a panel of three judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit began hearing oral arguments in the case of American Council on Education et al., v. Federal Communications Commission and the United States of America.

In essence, the lawsuit revolves around the question of whether broadband Internet and Internet telephone services should be perceived as "information services" or "telecommunications carrier." Depending on the definition, the FCC will be able to monitor online communications on campus.

Ugh, these are dark times my friend.

[american_arcane]

Yep. The argument over IP-based communication has been heating up a lot since VOIP became big news.

Of course, the most popular form of online communication--email--has never been considered private or secure. We just tend to forget that.

Mostly because it wasn't obvious before that there were actually people looking on a regular basis.

I still think the prospect of the government intelligence agencies monitoring all forms of communication all the time is more than just bad for our rights. It's bad for the bottom line, too. We can't even deploy aid successfully in the face of national disaster that gave us plenty of warning--what makes us think we can deal effectively with slogging through terabytes of data a day?

At the most it is a direct attack on our basic rights and the very freedom we claim to be bringing to the world. At the least, it's an improbably (if not impossible) task that just can't be done.

So, really, why do they bother?

[devil_panda]

I just read a commencement address for a Journalism school that I thought you'd like.

Just click it!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/23/AR2006052301304_pf.html

[american_arcane]

hehe... that's great. I love Wiengarten's stuff. He does a very good job of getting that same kind of over-the-top silly humor in there that actually makes good points.

Journalism is, indeed, changing at a rapid pace. But there are a number of people at the forefront, pushing for the shift in the industry and trying to reclaim some basic values of independence, honesty and investigation.

I know I've got my eyes on a bunch of them.

[nofcna]

re: FUCK: Such a cool idea for a thesis. I'd bet it'll be fun and interesting to do research for.

There are so many quotes from that abstract that I want to keep. He brought up some really interesting points about cultural taboo, words and actions.

For a such taboo word and so many attempts to extiguished it from the human language (as there is no clear etymology for it), it's interesting that fuck persists because it is a taboo. HA!

re: Tracking chips in Immigrants: What a dangerous idea. Besides the moral issues, they are so hackable!! http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.05/rfid.html

And with the advancement of technology by top hackers, their signal range isn't just a few feet anymore, but hundreds.

To quote that guy from the third article, these people who are suggesting this "need to educate themselves!"

re: Third article: Awesome!! Journalistic detective. What fun!

Thanks for today's intesting reads.

[nofcna]

oooh forgot to add this:

"The taboo persists because there is an emotional reaction, or “fearful
thrill,” that generates from speaking the forbidden word.92 If you use the word to insult someone or to feel the thrill of doing something that is forbidden, you are actually observing the taboo; this is often labeled as “inverted taboo.” Thus, both silence and use of the taboo word perpetuate it."

ok, done now :D