I was just interviewed for a podcast by HBR's Sarah Green about my post on the Strategic Use of Swearing, which was inspired by HBR editor Dan McGinn's great post on Should Leaders Ever Swear? To prepare for this little interview, I read an article by Timothy Jay published in 2009 (volume 4, number 2, p. 153-161)) in Perspectives on Psychological Science that is called "The Utility and Ubiquity of Taboo Words." This article reviews all sorts of research and theory on "swear words" (which is uses interchangeably with "taboo words), but there were a few sentences that I found especially striking for understanding the functions of swear words:
From an evolutionary standpoint, swearing is a unique human behavior that was developed for a purpose. Taboo words persist because they can intensify emotional communication to a degree that nontaboo words cannot (Jay & Janschewitz, 2007; Potts, 2007). Fuck you! immediately conveys a level of contempt unparalleled by nontaboo words; there is no way to convey Fuck You! with polite speech. p. 155.
Do you love this as much as I do? Or does something bug you about this? I found it most compelling. But it still may not find enough justification for leaders to swear.
Two other gems from this article:
1. I was also interested, but not shocked, to discover that, in the U.S., one-third to one half of all swear words are either "fuck" or "shit."
2. Can you explain why American people with Tourette's syndrome often shout 'fuck" and ""motherfucker" but not "poop?"
P.S. I meant to do a serious post on competition and cheating, but I got distracted. You will see it later in the week.
You shouldn't swear is a logical truth. "Not being supposed to say it" is what "swearing" is. Leaders shouldn't do it. That's why it's so fucking effective when they do.
Posted by: chinese tea supplier | July 28, 2010 at 06:36 PM
I bet Jawaharlal Nehru & Indira Gandhi swore and Mahatma Gandhi did not swear. Funny thing is in India some bosses would swear in English but would not swear in their own mother tongue. In English swearing seems okay, but sounds really crude done in our own mother tongue. Probably a colonial hangup.
Posted by: Daniel Christadoss | June 25, 2010 at 08:27 PM
The 'f' word is unrivaled in power in the English language. It's got aggression built in and demands to be heard. Choosing to avoid the use of powerful words like this is like choosing to use a screwdriver to drive a screw, when you've got a 24v drill driver in the back of the van. Distinguished craftsmen would advocate the eloquence of using your hands to create beautiful works of art in the same way a writer would only use 'acceptable' language to colourfully express the full spectrum of emotions.
I've got no problem if you want to be old school and proud of the craftsmanship of your handy work, but you're out of your fucking mind if you don't use the best tool for the job!
Posted by: Liam-og Griffin | June 24, 2010 at 06:54 AM
"I long ago quit praying and took to swearing. If I pray, I will have to wait until I am dead to get anything; but when I swear, I get things HERE."
Mary Harris "Mother" Jones
Posted by: Susan Singer | June 23, 2010 at 01:01 PM
Swearing is bad for the children too.
Posted by: online backup | June 23, 2010 at 10:23 AM
This sort of bugs me, Bob, now that you ask. Let me preface this comment by saying that I advise the non-native English speakers I work with to cut down on their swearing in English. They just don't make it sing. (Swearing in Danish is a completely different game ... long story.)
But your post reminds me of the bowdlerization of your title that you sometimes "complain" (not sure that's the right word) about. The No Jerk Rule just doesn't quite capture the spirit of your project, perhaps. But suppose someone suggested a still more "accurate" title: The No Cunt Rule. (To my horror, my browser's spellchecker has actually underlined the offending word!) In many places/cultures these three options denote roughly the same thing, but one is not a swear word, one is a mild swear word, and one is what we might properly call "taboo".
Perhaps I should dare you even to publish this comment? (Go ahead an correct it to C*** if you must.) Those who would argue that this comment is a stunt, of course need to ask whether the same isn't true of The No Asshole Rule.
Anyway, the problem ... what bugs me about the question of whether leaders "should swear" ... is that it's always going to end with a "well, yes, when it's appropriate" (Diane on Cheers famously declared she could be spontaenous when, erh, she thought it was appropriate).
Should leaders (or scholars for that matter) ever say something truly offensive? No, of course, not. Unless, unless, unless ... that's the effect that is needed. I can't see this issue leading anywhere but to a policy of moderation "with exceptions". "Strategic" use of swearing is unlikely to really be swearing at all.
You shouldn't swear is a logical truth. "Not being supposed to say it" is what "swearing" is. Leaders shouldn't do it. That's why it's so fucking effective when they do.
Posted by: Thomas | June 22, 2010 at 02:37 PM