Fuckity fuck, fucking fuck (make love), shag!

So I wrote in my last post about curse words, inspired by this piece by Ursula K. Le Guin (found via The F-Word Blog). I promised I would write about the word "fuck", inspired by that post.

Ms Le Guin writes:

Of our two swearwords, one has to do with elimination, the other (apparently) with sex. Both are sanctioned domains, areas like religion where there are rigid limits and things may be absolutely off-limits except at certain specific times or places.

...

But fuck and fucking? I don’t know. Oh, they sound good as curses, too. It’s really hard to make the word fuck sound pleasant or kindly. But what is it saying?

I don’t think there are meaningless swearwords; they wouldn’t work if they were meaningless. Does fuck have to do with sex primarily? Or sex as male aggression? Or just aggression?

Until maybe 25 or 30 years ago, as far as I know, fucking only meant one kind of sex: what the man does to the woman, with or without consent. Now, both men and women use it to mean coitus, and it’s become (as it were) ungendered, so that a woman can talk about fucking her boyfriend. So the strong connotations of penetration and of rape should have fallen away from it. But they haven’t. Not to my ear, anyhow. Fuck is an aggressive word, a domineering word. When the guy in the Porsche shouts Fuck you, asshole! he isn’t inviting you to an evening at his flat. When people say Oh shit, we’re fucked! they don’t mean they’re having a consensual good time. The word has huge overtones of dominance, of abuse, of contempt, of hatred.

I think there is a lot of underlying truth in this statement. But I also wondered about other words for fucking that we have in the English language. I had a quick brainstorm to come up with as many terms or colloquialisms that I could that are familiar to me (I may have missed some), that mean some version of "fuck":

• Have sex (with)
• Have sexual intercourse (with)
• Make love (to or with)
• Screw
• Fuck
• Copulate (with)
• Bonk
• Hump
• "Do ('it' (with))"
• "Take"
• Ravish
• Boff
• Rut
• Get laid
• Bed
• Shag
• (Interface)

There was another category, which is typified by such terms as "bone" and "knob" used as verbs for fucking, which are unequivocally "man does to woman" terms. A man has a boner, which he uses to bone a woman. A man has a knob, which he uses to knob a woman. And so on. It is hard to describe someone describing a woman as "knobbing" or "boning" a man (or another woman for that matter - although a strap-on might allow "knobbing" or "boning", the fact that you need a plastic phallus to make the term appropriate shows that it is at least phallocentric, if not androcentric (is that a word? It is now, assuming you got the intended meaning!) I am not looking at those unequivocally male-subject/woman-object terms now, although I am curious as to what the equivalent inversions might look like though - I recall suggesting @ Figleaf's Real Adult Sex, "cunt-wrap" as a verb for what a woman does to a man. But maybe the equivalent of "to know someone" would be "to cunt someone", although the way "cunt" is used as a term of violence in current culture, it might be understood as "to punch someone". To "pussy" someone unfortunately might be taken as "to sissify" (render a sissy) which difficulty shows up the misogyny in society on so many levels! The equivalent of getting a boner I suppose is to "become wet" or "get juicy", I can't think off the top of my head of any colloquial terms for other physiological events associated with female arousal. But "she wet him" doesn't seem to work, and "she juiced him" has a number of problematic elements (it might be taken as "she made him ejaculate" or it might be taken as describing the penis as resembling a lemon juicer going inside her vagina as the fruit). Any suggestions?

Anyway, I said that wasn't what I wanted to write about here! (Focus, Snowdrop, focus! **slaps self around the face**) I want to talk about the first list, the words that mean some variant of "fuck" in a sexual sense.

I didn't put them in any particular order, the list is just in the order in which they came to mind as I typed them.

I agree with UKLG that "fuck" has violent connotations. As it happens, that's the way I like my sex to be, and why I tend to associate "fuck" with good things generally. But "I'm fucked" or "fuck you" use it to mean utter defeat or ruin. It implies something being taken away by force, or it implies the loss of something valuable (e.g. dignity or virginity) - the idea of the "ruined woman". "Screw" has similar associations, and is used in a similar way, "screw you", "I'm screwed" etc. But while "fuck" still implies at the very least energetic and vigorous sex (from the violent overtones), "screw" seems to imply contempt rather than violence. Particularly, it seems to imply a contempt for the act as well as for the person one does it with. I do not like the word "screw".

"Hump" is another word that I dislike. Humping is universally the term used when describing what a horny dog does to a person's leg, and the connotation seems to be about as salubrious as that when it's used to describe two humans getting it on together as well. Like "rut" (another word I dislike), it seems to be basically tied to mindlessness and unemotional "animal" sex. The most positive reference I've seen is in Chixdiggit!'s song "I Wanna Hump You" (aggravation warning for the sexist "learn to play... adverts at the bottom of the page - really, if you're going to use women to sell guitar lessons, try selling them to women?), but even there it comes across as a horny teenager wanting to work off some of that teeny hormonal horniness (although I hear the line as "more than just a lay" rather than "more than just a maid/made" as appears in the transcript linked).

Then there's the "possessive words" category. "Have (sex/sexual intercourse (with))", and "take". I think it may have been Figleaf (again!) who asked why it's "have" sex instead of "do" sex (it was a while back, and I can't find the post where he may have said it). It always feels a little bit odd to put "sex" as an object in the verb - especially when that verb is "have". It is as though "sex" becomes a third entity in the relationship - me, you and the sex. On the other hand, it is better than "I've had him/her". I don't think I've ever heard "I'm going to have you", "I've had you", "I've been had" or "you've been had" being used to refer to sex. (The first one means "I'm going to beat you (at sports or as in physical violence; the last two are about being robbed or conned; the second one I don't think I've heard ever.) "Have" is all about sexual conquest and proclaiming it to someone else. It is the ultimate in objectifying language (since it automatically makes the partner into an object either before or after the fact). The only exception I can think of for this is The Beautiful South's "Don't Marry Her", which says "Don't marry her, have me" (in the radio-friendly version - the original album version has "fuck" instead of "have"). "Take" is almost the opposite of "have" in this sense: it seems to be almost always used by one partner to signify their own passive role, as an invitation: "take me!" It has particular usage in (romance) literature with the form "he took her" (or, less frequently, but just as valid, "she took him"). The one who says "take me!" (or is taken) plays a passive role, the one who does the taking is the active role (given romance novels' tendency to have the dashing hero sweep a woman off her feet, this active/passive dynamic is particularly common and therefore the definition of the roles that "take" provides seems especially appropriate for that genre). Again, an example of this is The Beautiful South's "Perfect 10", with the last line, "Promise me this: take me tonight". It seems to be very rare to hear someone say "I'm going to take you" or even, "I took him/her last night" - it is either third person narrative style, or else it's given in the imperative. That alone makes it awkward for discussing sex!

Of a kind with "have" is "do". On its own, when someone talks about sex using "do", they are talking to someone else other than their (intended or putative) partner - "I'd do her, wouldn't you?", "I've done her!" etc. If "have sex (with)" is disappointing because it makes sex a possession or an external party to the act, then "do" is disappointing because it seems to equate the partner (intended, putative or past) with an item on a checklist - a "to do list", in fact. "Done that, done that, done her, done him, done that..." "I'm going to do you" is another term for violence rather than sex. Another term that always feels to me like its common usage seems to be of the "checklist" variety is "bed". Maybe this is just my perspective, but I cannot feel that "I want to bed you" sounds like an attractive proposition - it conjures in my mind images of "another notch on the bedpost". "Do 'it'" and "do 'it' with" are terms used to avoid talking about sex, and again, the image in my mind is the uncertain fumbling of teenage sexuality, nervously asking "do you want to do... 'it' with me?" "It" could be anything, it relies on a shared interpretation, and is the antithesis of good communication.

If "take", "have" and "do" are bad, then what about "get laid"? Another term that can't easily be used to talk about sex with a partner, but only to one's mates before or afterwards. (I can imagine a scene where X says to Y, "You're so going to get laid tonight!" meaning, "I want sex with you tonight", but unless X and Y know each other well, that could come across as threatening rather than an invitation.) "I'm going to get laid" (or "I got laid last night") seems to make both participants into objects (or even, it makes the other person invisible or irrelevant). To use "lay" as a verb appears curiously archaic and still carries an element of conquest, like "bed" above (is it a coincidence that a bed is also something you lay?). But in modern terminology, "lay" is a noun, meaning "the person with whom one got laid" (see above, my interpretation of the Chixdiggit! lyric; interestingly, if the line is, "A girl like you is more than just a lay", then it suggests that to the song's narrator-character, "hump" is a more personalised action than "get laid" and has more value).

Then there are the "comic" terms, "boff" and "bonk". Again, it is hard to imagine two people agreeing to "bonk" or "boff" one another. These are terms usually used to describe other people doing sex together, or if it's used about oneself, then only in the most abstract terms. It's a media favourite, and used to construct such terms as "bonkbuster" (to refer to the more explicit types of romance novels or movies).

"Ravish", like "take" above, is a staple of romance novels. It is another word that carries clear connotations of a "powerful" partner and a "weak" or "passive" partner. It is also a violent term, and in my dictionary, the definitions list "seize or carry away by force" and "rape" before we get to "enrapture". Although we have common terms such as "ravishingly beautiful" so that "enrapture" might be seen as the common association, it is still a term of "taking by force" to enrapture (which is how it seems to appear in romance novels, for example). In this it shares a lot in common with "fuck", and might even be seen as the "posh" or "polite" way of saying fuck. When someone says "ravish me!" they are inviting not merely "enrapture me" but often specifically, "enrapture me with a (vigorous) fucking!" Needless to say, with my sexuality, I like this word. But it's not great for all situations! (I'm entertained now by the notion of someone cursing in the street, "Ravish you, arsehole!"...)

I don't think much of "make love to/with", either. First, "to" implies the active/passive dichotomy and makes sex a one-way street. But my main issue is that it equates sex with love, which is a huge problem (especially as there's a gendered assumption that women can't have sex without it somehow signifying emotional attachment). It's a problem because although sex can accompany love and vice versa, there's no need for them to do so. Using language that insists that love and sex are synonymous leads to some serious issues around consent and boundaries. On the plus side, "make X with" is a good formulation if we were trying to invent a new term (I'm not, in this post). It implies a shared activity, and while I might not choose the verb "make" in there, it is at least carrying implications of defining the activity and relationship (we make sex what it is through interacting with one another).

Diametrically opposite to that is "copulate", which is the cold, scientific-sounding term for the activity. It's the term used in science fiction to make a "robotic" character seem emotionless (e.g. ISTR that when Seven of Nine was introduced in Star Trek:Voyager, she analysed a male crew member's physiological symptoms as he started trying to chat her up and reported, "You wish to copulate with me?").

Which leaves me with "shag". Although this has similarities of usage with "hump" and "screw", it carries less of the venom or unpleasant associations either of those words and is considered far more acceptable these days. It doesn't get used as an expletive, for example. It is contrasted with "love" (compare James Bond: The Spy Who Loved Me vs spoof Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me) and tends to signify a lack of emotional involvement, it doesn't preclude romantic usage either (in modern usage). Depending on class and social factors, it can be perfectly okay to say to a romantic interest "I'd really like to shag you" instead of (say) "make love to you". The derivation is unclear, but the suggestion at that link is that it comes from an Old or Middle English term meaning "to shake about", referring to the physical action involved in penetrative (or engulfing) sex. It certainly has none of the violence of some of the other terms, and my only real complaint is that it is considered low and vulgar. But then, that's a classist issue. I do actually feel comfortable with "shag" as a word. To me, it is hot, soft and slightly damp in tone - being a homophone with "shag-pile" carpet or rug, and similar-sounding to "shaggy" like a shaggy dog. There's also shag tobacco, and while tobacco itself irritates me a lot, the idea of smoky, smouldering or burning desire is also a nice addition to the word-image composition that "shag" can provide.

I did add one more term to that list - "interface", which I put in brackets because it doesn't quite belong with the others. It is from the lexicon of Transformers fanfiction (I read a lot of what Trinity @ Fierce Awakenings writes in that vein), where slash fiction writers had to devise language and concepts for how giant sapient robots with emotions would fuck each other. I assume it was derived from the concept of sticking one's jack into a port, which would lead one to the computing term "interface". I'm not sure the word could ever be constructively taken to facilitate sexual communication between humans, but it was a word that I know that can mean "sex", so I added it to the list anyway.