[mholt]

Using profanity indicates a weak vocabulary. A lack of discipline. A degree of unrefinement unbecoming of astronauts representing the "best" of humanity and their country.

Depending on the type of profanity it can divide societies by reinforcing social schisms/prejudices. Such words typically cluster around areas of cultural discomfort such as religion, sex, and hygiene, causing polarizing emotional reactions. It's biological as well as cultural.

Seems like the "best and bravest humanity has to offer" can probably represent a little better than that for one of the most significant feats of history.

[carefree-bob]

If you think astronauts are supposed to be "the best of humanity" then you are going to be dissapointed. Astronauts are chosen because they can withstand high G forces and keep cool under pressure. It is very similar to how race car drivers are chosen. No one believes formula 1 drivers are "the best of humanity". And I wouldn't care if astronaut cursed anymore than if a formula 1 driver did.

[ASalazarMX]

I'd argue they're precisely the best humannity has to offer for that use case. And even car racers avoid swearing in public.

[elijaht]

> And even car racers avoid swearing in public.

That’s absolutely not true. Watch any F1 race and within the first few minutes you will hear a censored drivers radio. IIRC F1 tried to penalize drivers who swore too much on the radio and faced massive backlash from the drivers

[carefree-bob]

I think we should cut the astronauts a break. If I can swear while driving to a coffee shop, they should be able to swear when orbiting the moon.

[frrlpp]

That's a moral frame were you belong. In mine, swearing does not preclude someone to be the best human because her swearing.

[RealityVoid]

> Using profanity indicates a weak vocabulary. A lack of discipline. A degree of unrefinement unbecoming

Says you. I think not swearing obviously indicates a weaker vocabulary since there's a lot of things you can't or won't say.

Of course, swear words can be offensive if you're their target, and I don't really enjoy that side. But they are _very_ effective in communicating frustration, anger, surprise. I think using them brings a bit of spice to life and a well placed "Fuck!" can feel extremely cathartic and... dare I say... pleasant.

[dspillett]

> Using profanity indicates a weak vocabulary. A lack of discipline.

Lack of discipline, maybe. Though that is subjective.

Weak vocabulary, no, that is objectively not true unless someone is repeatedly using a small number of profanities (i.e. someone who uses the F/C bombs and the N & R words, for instance). Studies of online communications have shown the people who use a range of profanity also have a wider vocabulary more generally, wider on average even than those who were not seen to use profanities at all.

Of course this still has some subjective judgement involved: the studies had to define what was considered profane, and may have missed many words only considered bad in a minority of places. I'm not sure what the studies did, if anything, to account for people speaking the target language as a second that they are not fluent in. These could be important factors in correctly defining the “doesn't use them” set.

> It's biological as well as cultural.

Only because there is a biological component to the reaction to the words, which is trained by culture. This could be a programmed disgust reaction, an amused one (a small rush of relevant endorphins), or a fear reaction (where the word is a slur that is often followed by further problems like the threat of physical violence). The closest we come to a truly biological reaction might be words associated with excreta and so forth, the things they can describe carrying a biological risk, but even that is culturally informed (you aren't born knowing that shit means a form of feculence, or that feculence is considered a more polite way to describe something dirty to the point of being unsafe).

[loloquwowndueo]

Sorry, using Sacré Quebecois or Mexican albures is a total art form which requires extensive knowledge and creativity. Nothing further from “a weak vocabulary”.

[john_strinlai]

>Using profanity indicates a weak vocabulary. A lack of discipline.

this is just made up, though. not a lick of scientific backing to it.

[philipallstar]

Where's your scientific backing that it's not made up?

[john_strinlai]

the keywords you want to put into google are "burden of proof".

[mathisfun123]

> Using profanity indicates a weak vocabulary

i'll bet you $1000 my vocab is wider, deeper, and more sophisticated than yours despite my profuse use of profanity. interested? happily able to provide various standardized tests (SAT/GRE/LSAT/etc.) and/or your preferred method (wordle/crossword/etc.).

[estimator7292]

That's just regurgitating the same Puritannical bullshit that's been infecting American society for the past hundred years or so.

Humans curse sometimes. That's what happens to real people in the real world. Astronauts are not some kind of pure, unspoiled demigods. They're regular-ass humans who say things like shit and fuck. Just like approximately everyone else does.

I'd rather the best and brightest among us admit that they're real people just like everyone else than put on a show to protect the delicate sensibilities of a very small number of people who clutch pearls and scream when someone nearby says a "bad word".

Astronauts are people. They have genitals, they walk around nude sometimes. They shit, piss, and fuck just like you and me. You want to deify and make them into false idols for some reason. That is a fundamentally bad and wrong thing to do, and you can directly quote many/most religions on that one.

[foresto]

> Using profanity indicates a weak vocabulary.

What a bizarre leap of logic.

I wonder what disparaging others for using profanity indicates.