WTF?

I always thought the Constitution was pretty clear when it comes to public speech: “Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech.” But of course with all things regarding the Constitution much involves interpretation, if not divination, a reading of the verbal tea leaves. What to make of a new law in Middleborough, Massachusetts, that imposes a $20 fine on anyone swearing in public? Despite there already being a law, going back to 1968, against public profanity in Middleborough, there have been no arrests because of the hassles and costs with court, so the citizens voted 183-50 to allow the police to just hand out $20 tickets for anyone cursing in public. Of course, the law isn’t aimed at the public in general but rather at a particular segment of the population, a segment often targeted by such laws – teens. Officials assure everyone that the purpose of the statute is only “to crack down on loud, profanity-laden language used by teens and other young people in the downtown area and public parks.” Apparently, teens and other young people don’t possess the same right to free speech as the rest of us. I can’t imagine the police doling out tickets to New England Patriots fans going blue in the local bar on a Sunday afternoon.

What I can’t find in any of the reporting on this law is what, exactly, constitutes “profanity.” I’m sure fuck and shit – the two biggies – would incur a $20 fine on the offender without question. As would variations such as fuck-face and shit-face and fuck-head and shit-head and fuck-ass and shit-ass, all appellations I’ve heard many times and occasionally used myself (often to effect).

But there’s a sliding scale on the barometer of profanity. Bodily expulsions are typically gross, shit being right up there in repulsion, if only because it’s the grossest (and the one we typically only do in private). The other excrement, piss, is a little less offensive, and even less so when it’s just pee. (You can say pee, and sometimes piss, on TV.) Snot and vomit are pretty tame bodily discharges, not profane, probably because they don’t involve reproductive organs. (And I don’t think there’s ever been a TV prohibition on either of them.)

Fuck is definitely a no-no. But not the more sanitized intercourse, coitus, copulation, sexual relations, make love, sleep with, get laid, copulate, pair, or couple. I’m not sure about the more slangy screw, hump, jazz, shag, shtup, or bang. Best if you’re in Middleborough to keep your intercourse middle-of-the-road.

But reproductive organs are themselves definitely problematic. Penis and vagina are OK; they’re technical, if not medical. But don’t go calling someone a dick or a cunt, at least in Middleborough, or you could be slapped with a $20 fine. At least maybe. I’m not sure about cock or wiener or pecker or boner. Or pussy or muff or clam or beaver. And I don’t even want to think about hooters, boobs, jugs, or tits.

And then there is butt and ass. I think butt is legal, as I hear it often on TV and radio. There was even a TV character named Butthead from 20 years ago who had a caffeinated persona, Bumholio.  I’m not sure though that butthead or butthole are acceptable (is bum more acceptable than butt because it’s British?). I think ass is OK. But I’m pretty sure asshole isn’t.

And finally there are the ethnic slurs, considered profane by many (in alphabetical order): boer, camel jockey, canuck, chink, coolie, coon, cracker, dago, frog, gook, greaseball, gringo, gypsy, heeb, honky, hymie, jap, kraut, limey, mick, nigger, nip, pollack, raghead, redneck, redskin, slant eyes, slope, spic, towelhead, wetback, wop. (And there are many more.)

I’m not sure how the Middleborough police are going to enforce this new statute against swearing in public. But I have a sneaking suspicion that it’s just going to be against “teens and other young people in the downtown area and public parks” who happen to utter within hearing distance something that a police officer deems profane. That can’t be unconstitutional. Can it?