I would genuinely appreciate an answer to an important question concerning the use of 'c*nt' [not by me], & how it differs from my previous use of the same word in undisguised form, which I posted this morning at 08-05 a.m. It is a question asked in true search of academic enlightenment as to the distinction.

I name names here — KatLaughing & Ebbie, you both denounced me in exceedingly immoderate terms, casting doubt on my parentage, honesty and bona-fides, notwithstanding the fact that you were intervening in a dispute I was in the throes of at the time with one other particular individual in which you were in now way concerned. How can you justify not having reacted similarly in this present instance when the only differences are that the use of the epithet was this time entirely gratuitous & in no way provoked as in my case [by the use of 'turd' towards me by the other party, just to remind you]; and that it was most inadequately disguised by an asterisk replacing the central vowel?

I am not asking for any sort of justification of your previous addresses to me, which are all in the past. But I do hope for enlightenment in the form of some academic explanation as to the
differences between the two instances. My interest, I repeat, is purely academic. What difference, please, does the asterisk make? Is it not at least arguable that its use exacerbates, rather than moderates, the offensiveness of the word by drawing attention to its potential offensiveness?

Like the man in Dickens: "I want to know, you know". Answers, please. This thread,, if anywhere, is the place for such.

Michael