Moderating the Discourse Ep 1

Episode 1: The F-Word Phenomenon

Dr. Margaret Grace Thornfield as portrayed by AI

Dr. Margaret Grace Thornfield never intended to moderate an online forum about profanity.

A respected linguist with two PhDs, three published books, and a reputation for academic rigor that made graduate students weep at the mere thought of an out-of-place em dash, she reluctantly used email for work and everyone knew even in that medium, if they expected a response, it better be a well-drafted email.

When Professor Davidson—her colleague of years and one of the few academics she even bothered reading emails from—abruptly resigned to pursue his lifelong dream of becoming a battle rapper (his words: “These students inspired me to stir shit up with some lit bars”), someone had to step up.

That someone, unfortunately, was Margaret.

The forum—Fucking Language: Advanced Profanity Linguistics & Discourse Analysis—was Professor Davidson’s idea of cleverness. Margaret had argued for the more dignified “Profane Language Studies Forum,” but Davidson insisted the current title was “on brand” and “would drive engagement.”

She hated that he was right about the engagement part.

The forum was supposed to be a space for serious academic discussion about the evolution, etymology, and sociological impact of curse words. A place where scholars could discuss taboo language without taboo.

It was Week 1. Margaret poured her third coffee of the morning and opened the forum dashboard.

---

[NEW POSTS - RECENT ACTIVITY]

Posted by: Creative_Writer_Lin
Thread: “Profanity in Narrative Climax: Intensity Gradation”

I’m currently developing a dramatic scene for my thesis on profanity deployment in contemporary fiction. The scene occurs near the narrative climax, and the protagonist—who has maintained formal speech patterns throughout—faces a moment of extreme emotional rupture.

I believe a single deployment of “fuck” would be appropriate here, given the character’s established linguistic restraint. However, I’m concerned that after 200 pages of careful language control, a simple “fuck” may not adequately convey the insurmountable intensity of this moment.

My question: From a linguistic perspective, would the addition of a secondary profane element—such as “fucking hell”—create a more effective escalation? Or does the compound structure dilute the impact that a singular, unprecedented “fuck” would achieve?

I’m interested in scholarly perspectives on profanity intensity gradation in dramatic contexts.

---

Margaret smiled.

This. This was why she’d agreed to moderate the forum.

Professor Davidson had spent years trying to convince her to participate. “Margaret, I’m telling you, there’s genuine scholarship happening here,” he’d insisted over faculty lunches she’d rather have skipped. “Yes, it’s about profanity, but the linguistic analysis is solid. You’d appreciate it if you gave it a chance.”

She’d always declined. Too busy. Too many other commitments. Too dignified to spend her time moderating discussions about curse words.

But here was Creative_Writer_Lin proving Davidson right: a genuine question about linguistic intensity, asked with academic rigor, using profanity purely as the subject of analysis rather than emotional expression. The kind of thoughtful inquiry that justified the forum’s existence.

She typed her response:

---

[MODERATOR COMMENT - Dr. Margaret Thornfield]

Creative_Writer_Lin,

This is an excellent question and precisely the kind of scholarly discourse this forum was designed to facilitate.

From a linguistic perspective, your instinct about the “singular unprecedented deployment” is sound. The scarcity principle suggests that a character’s first use of profanity carries significantly more weight than subsequent uses. Adding “fucking hell” might actually decrease impact through redundancy—you’re essentially deploying two profane elements where one carefully positioned word could achieve greater effect.

Consider also the phonetic impact: “fuck” as a standalone utterance has a percussive quality (the hard consonants, the short vowel) that creates auditory sharpness, “fucking hell” would soften this through elongation.

But beyond the technical considerations, there’s something profound about a single “fuck” from a character who has maintained linguistic restraint for 200 pages. It’s not merely profanity—it’s the collapse of their carefully maintained control. Consider the cultural impact of “Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn” in Gone with the Wind—a single utterance of “damn” at the narrative climax became one of cinema’s most memorable moments precisely because of its rarity and placement. Your character’s singular “fuck” could achieve similar impact: not just emphasis, but a revelation of emotional honesty, perhaps the most honest word they’ve spoken in the entire narrative.

I’d recommend the single “fuck” for maximum impact, though I encourage other forum members to weigh in with alternative perspectives.

This is exemplary use of the forum. Thank you for your thoughtful question.

—Dr. Thornfield

---

Margaret refreshed her coffee and felt briefly optimistic about humanity’s capacity for intellectual discourse.

Then she opened her moderation queue.

That optimism lasted approximately four seconds.

---

[MODERATION QUEUE - FLAGGED POST #1]

Posted by: Dr_Etymology_McPedant
Thread: “The Versatility of the F-Word: A Morphological Analysis”

Listen, it’s fucking ridiculous that “fucking” as an adjective has strayed so goddamn far from “fuck” as a verb. The semantic drift is fucking insane when you think about it.

When I say “that’s fucking brilliant,” I’m not suggesting banging brilliance’s brains out (tho the logistics of said fucking are hilarious, but I digress). When I say “this fucking traffic,” I’m not anthropomorphizing vehicular congestion as a kink (not kink-shaming any traffic… fuckers?). The word has evolved into an intensifier completely divorced from its original meaning, and that’s fucking fascinating from a linguistic standpoint.

But here’s where it gets really fucked up: “fuck” as a verb maintains its sexual connotation (mostly), while “fucking” as an adjective has become this catch-all emotional intensifier. It’s like the word underwent mitosis and the two resulting words want nothing to do with each other.

Fucking bananas!

And don’t even get me started on “fuck” as a noun. “I don’t give a fuck”—what the fuck IS a fuck in that context? Is it quantifiable? Can you measure fucks? The semantic ambiguity is fucking endless!

This creates so much fucking confusion in cross-linguistic analysis because most languages don’t have this level of morphological flexibility in their profanity (that I’m aware of… I’m sure some of you fuckers will see this as a competition but I don’t give a fuck!). It’s a fucking nightmare to translate, and honestly, it’s fucking beautiful in its complexity.

---

Margaret stared at the post for a full minute. Then another minute.

She could feel the optimism from thirty seconds ago evaporating like her will to live. Seventeen violations. She counted them twice to be sure. Seventeen separate instances of Dr_Etymology_McPedant using profanity emotively while discussing... the emotive use of profanity.

The irony would have been funny if it weren’t so exhausting.

She refreshed her coffee—her fourth of the morning—and wondered, not for the first time, if Professor Davidson had known exactly what he was doing when he convinced her to take this position. Probably. The man was now freestyling somewhere, armed with the verbal dexterity of Shakespeare crossed with Lil Wayne; he’d clearly mastered the art of escaping consequences.

With a deep breath that felt less like preparation and more like surrender, Margaret began typing.

---

[MODERATOR RESPONSE - Dr. Margaret Thornfield]

Dr_Etymology_McPedant,

I want to begin by acknowledging that your analysis of the morphological evolution of the word “fuck” and its adjectival derivative “fucking” raises several valid points regarding semantic drift and the challenges this presents for cross-linguistic translation. Your observation about the disconnect between the verb form and the intensifier form is, indeed, a legitimate area of scholarly inquiry.

Your mitosis metaphor is particularly apt.

However.

While I recognize your enthusiasm for the subject matter—and I do appreciate enthusiasm in academic discourse—I must draw your attention to Forum Rule 3.2: Distinction Between Analytical and Emotive Deployment of Profanity, as well as Rule 4.1: Respectful Engagement with Fellow Forum Members.

Let me be absolutely clear: You are permitted—indeed, encouraged—to use the word “fuck” when referencing the lexical item itself as the object of study. What you may not do is employ “fucking” as an emotional intensifier to express your personal frustration, excitement, or amazement about the topic at hand.

Additionally, you may not address other forum members as “fuckers,” regardless of how affectionately you intended it.

Let me enumerate your violations:

Acceptable uses (7):

• “fuck” as a verb (analysis of original meaning)

• “fucking” as an adjective (when discussing its grammatical function)

• “fuck” as a noun (when questioning its quantifiability)

• Direct quotations (”I don’t give a fuck”)

• References to the word’s morphological forms

• Scholarly examination of semantic evolution

• The mitosis metaphor (genuinely clever, actually)

Unacceptable uses (17):

• “it’s fucking ridiculous” - emotive deployment

• “so goddamn far” - secondary profanity violation

• “fucking insane” - emotive deployment

• “banging brilliance’s brains out” - creative, I’ll grant you, but still emotive

• “the logistics of said fucking are hilarious” - meta-commentary ≠ analysis

• “any traffic... fuckers?” - this barely makes grammatical sense

• “fucking fascinating” - emotive deployment (even when describing linguistics)

• “really fucked up” - emotive deployment

• “Fucking bananas!” - standalone exclamatory violation (new category!)

• “what the fuck IS” - emotive emphasis

• “fucking endless” - emotive deployment

• “so much fucking confusion” - emotive deployment

• “some of you fuckers” - addressing fellow members as “fuckers” violates Rule 4.1

• “I don’t give a fuck!” - emotive deployment (different from the quoted example)

• “fucking nightmare” - emotive deployment

• “fucking beautiful” - emotive deployment (I understand the irony, I truly do)

I count seventeen distinct violations, which I believe may be a new forum record.

You may discuss “fuck.” You may not use “fuck” to express how you feel about “fuck.” You may certainly not call other forum members “fuckers,” even in what I assume was meant as collegial jest.

Please edit your post to maintain analytical language throughout. For example:

• “it’s fucking ridiculous” → “the degree of semantic drift presents a remarkable linguistic paradox”

• “Fucking bananas!” → “This phenomenon is quite extraordinary”

• “some of you fuckers” → “some forum members” or simply “others”

Regarding your digression about the “logistics” of copulating with abstract concepts: while I appreciate the absurdist humor, this forum is for academic analysis, not comedic commentary. I recommend keeping tangential observations to yourself, however hilarious you may find them.

I trust you understand the distinction. This is your first warning.

Sincerely,
Dr. Margaret Grace Thornfield
Forum Moderator
Fucking Language: Advanced Profanity Linguistics & Discourse Analysis

P.S. - Your question about the quantifiability of “fucks” in the phrase “I don’t give a fuck” would make an excellent standalone thread, provided you discuss it analytically rather than emotively. I genuinely look forward to reading it—just perhaps with 17 fewer violations next time.

[Thread Status: LOCKED PENDING EDIT]

---

Margaret closed the thread and allowed herself a moment of satisfaction. One down, four to go.

She glanced at the next flagged post in her queue:

Thread: “Hamlet’s Insufficient Profanity: A Modern Adaptation”
Posted by: Shakespeare_Nah_Fuckspeare

“So I’m adapting fucking Hamlet for TikTok and the original only has like 3 curse words?? they all lame too! WTF!?! Unacceptable! My take currently has 417 instances of fuck bombs and more delicious profucknities (close to my goal of 420 bitches!) and I think it really captures what Shakespeare WOULD have written if he had written with balls!”

Margaret’s eye twitched.

She poured her fifth coffee.

It was only 9:47 AM.

End Episode 1

I haven’t posted something purely comedic in a while.

I had this idea about the ridiculous contrast of serious discussion of profanity and this is what came out. If you like it, maybe I can turn this into a series.

I’d love to hear what you think.

If you want to read the previous comedic post I made back in July, here it is:

The Birthday Song Incident

Thank you for reading, for your time, and for being you. 😊

---

☕ Support My Work

Thank you for reading. If you enjoyed this short story and want to continue supporting my work, why not buy me a coffee?

If coffee is not for you (I get it) then liking, commenting or restacking will also be greatly appreciated.

😊