Have Your Say

New Christie Website

Welcome to the new Christie website!  We hope that you like the new site - please let us know your thoughts!

Dirty Words

squatty 04 Oct 08 at 5:21 p.m. GMT

Can someone clarify what constitutes a "dirty word"?

I just started a thread and was suprised to see the post rejected on account of a "dirty word" being used.

I kept reading the post back and couldnt for the life of me work out where I had erred.

After a few trials and errors, I was able to submit the post by changing the word for a female gay person beginning with L (it wont let me do it in this post either - comes up as "Profane words are not allowed") to gay

Can someone in admin confirm if this is correct?

Login or register to add posts and reply

50 replies

Reverse order

Moderator1 25 Nov 08 at 9:53 a.m. GMT

Can we all just calm down a bit. This was not meant to turn into a discussion that inflamed people.

Marc_Anton 25 Nov 08 at 9:46 a.m. GMT

I wish the contributors to these posts would invest as much time and energy in discussing the books and works of Agatha Christie as they do on this topic. There is a serious lack of interesting content lately in the other folders and elswhere on this Forum in general, it is all about Spoilers and Naughty Words.

Perhaps we should give this topic a rest and move on to what we are here for. The Moderator of the Forum and the editor of this website showed they do not want to interfere any longer with the language and choice of words in the postings and they leave it to the responsibility of the contributors themselves. That was a wise decision and I thank them for it.

So let’s grow up, act a bit more mature and for a change dedicate our efforts to the books we read and enjoy. It will be very refreshing!

AndThenThereWasTim 25 Nov 08 at 3:23 a.m. GMT

This is exactly what I am talking about. This has just become a debate over homosexuality. Weather you are refereing to a character or not there is always going to be a certain amout of debate over it and political undertone. It is also not a large enough issue in  Agatha's books to bring up.. How many Homosexual characters are there? Ones that are clearly homosexual and not by the opinion of a movie producer? Some people refuse to accept that this is a controvercial issue, but when you see riots and fights everyday on the news it is a controvercial issue. many people in other countries (such as Canada and Britain) where it is legal may not understand, but just because you dont want to see a flame of riots over the issue on a site you go on to get away from Politics does not mean you are a  "Homophob" and that your comments are "out of order", Just because someone does not share your views does not mean they are "just plain wrong" Certainly "Dirty Words" may not be the appropriate title if you are going to be "politicaly Correct" but "Controvercial Words" it is certainly. WHATEVER your views the moderators are only trying to keep the issue away from this forum..

chris_w 24 Nov 08 at 6:45 p.m. GMT

I have not visited this site for quite some time. In fact I hadn't even realised it had been updated... Now that I am revisiting I am somewhat horrified at how this particular thread has turned out. It seems that some posters live in worlds of their own making and expect this forum to conform with their own bigoted preferences. This is obvious in the suggestion that there is no room for the discussion of characters' sexuality here when it is clear that many people are of the opinion that some characters are homosexual. Are we to not discuss this merely to protect the feelings of homophobes? I should point out that I am not some sort of gay rights activist but I do think that some of the comments that have been made here are just plain wrong and out of order. Shame on these people. I thought I had found the forum for Homophobic Rights with contributions made by people who attend Prude marches. If some of the comments on here had been made in the workplace in more tolerant areas then the people making them could be liable to dismissal or worse. I see no reason why the perceptions of various characters' sexualities should not be discussed in an acedemic manner and in fact I would welcome it and I hope that someone may indeed set the ball rolling on this, but let's do it under a new header and not under the header of 'Dirty words' (even though some posters will clearly consider this to be the only suitable place on this forum for it, if it must be presented at all!) If nothing else, at least those of a homophobic opinion will only be offended by the sight of the thread title and not by the content of the postings on the subject which they can bypass.

squatty 22 Nov 08 at 8:45 p.m. GMT

Ok Lilifan - one more time. I started this thread to check out how the dirty word filter was operating as I couldnt believe that particular word could be censored. There then followed many posts from people giving their own experiences of the dirty word filter. You were the first person to deem the word "inappropriate" without really explaining why you felt it inappropriate. It was your post that triggered off the debate over whether an AC's character's sexuality should be mentioned on the site.

LiliFan 22 Nov 08 at 8:06 p.m. GMT

Ok, you all seem to use this 'gay' subject to attack me! Just because I said there's no need to mention that L-word here at all. (The problem is not with the filter, but with people mostly). I wrote 3 lines and you used this as a pretext to raise a whole debate on a topic which hardly relates to Agatha Christie, and which is now full of personal offences. That's what I call inappropriate.

You say you don't want political discussions here or something, but this is exactly what this thread has become. And a very popular one it is! Please, don't say I brought it up!

Katherine 22 Nov 08 at 10:48 a.m. GMT

I completely agree with you ATTWT, there are plenty of forums for people to discuss to their hearts content, the rights and wrongs of homosexuality. And this isn't the place for it.

However, an earlier poster was suggesting that the very mention of homosexuality was inappropriate for this site - presumably because they personally disapprove of it. And this is clearly ludicrous. "Hallowe'en Party" contains a debate over whether two of the characters are lesbians, so the notion that Agatha Christie herself would have been shocked to have the subject discussed is pretty ridiculous.

AndThenThereWasTim 22 Nov 08 at 2:09 a.m. GMT

All Im saying is that the moderators would prefer to keep the topic on Agatha Christie. discussing things like Homosexuality is not on topic.. dispite your beliefs about any political belief, Or Agatha's political beliefs, lets avoid any tension between Conservatives, Liberals, Republicans or Democrats, or any political beliefs. This site is an escape from the tensions of our modern society.. to discuss the works of a brilliant author not to start arguments about the things that bring us further apart.

Moderator1 21 Nov 08 at 3:42 p.m. GMT

Many thanks for your comments on this subject – we understand and appreciate it’s a sensitive subject.

This site is for all Christie fans and it is inclusive. However, it does not tolerate bad language – which we define as that which the majority find offensive. Christie wrote intelligent, articulate stories without bad language and as fans and managers of her estate we don’t see why any forum posts should either. But as there will always be people who will push limits imposed, we need to rely on you to alert any abuse where you see it. (Unfortunately, technically it is impossible for us to block use of swear words etc – without blocking words such as Babcock use of which, we agree, should be allowed. For that reason we have removed the language filter from the new site.)

As you are aware we are introducing a number of improvements to the site over the next couple of months – next month we hope to be introducing polls – and it looks like one of the first may be whether there should be an Agatha Christie pub!

S_Sigerson 21 Nov 08 at 3:30 p.m. GMT

Agatha Christie wasn't really Victorian. She was born in 1890 and was 11 years old when Queen Victoria died in 1901. After the Queen's death things started to loosen up. Agatha was a divorcee and could not present her daughter at court so she knew what it felt like to be an outcast. She worked in the theatre and knew all types of people and had all types of friends. She was C of E and not some religious franatic. I don't think she was one of these preachy, judgemental types and thought religion was a private matter. Bascially she was a kind lady with a good heart who was conservative on economic issues (taxes) and liberal on social issues. Of course this is supposition on my party. The only people who really knew Agatha Christie were her family and friends. She avoided the media and who could blame her for that given how the media over dramatizes everything. The problem is people project their own morality on other people. A lot of times you will hear people say "well that is something I wouldn't like or do". Well, guess what you are not that person and everyone is not the same. Or you hear someone say "oh if I can be successful, everyone can be successful". Well, guess what not everyone is given the same opportunities or the same the breaks as you. People need to understand everyone is different and deserves the right to be treated fairly and with respect. It really bothers me when I hear people talk about "family values" because it seems to me these people (usually religious) are trying to highjack values. I am sorry, but there is no such thing as "family values", just plain old values. You don't need to be religious to have ethics or values. Some of the best poeople with good hearts that I have met over the years have been atheists. It's a terrible shame people equate being religious with being ethical and having values because it really is just one big lie.

Marc_Anton 21 Nov 08 at 10:22 a.m. GMT

Yes, thanks heavens the filter has been switched off. I don't like to be invited to join a discussion and then being told what words I can and can not use: it really turns me off (oops, I almost used a naughty word there!) As for the words gay and lesbian being used on a Christie website: weather viewers like it or not, the recent TV-version of Poirot and Marple novels had gay characters, so in that context we should be allowed to discuss these matters.

As for Christie herself, though she had the reputation of a rather Victorian lady, in real life she was quite modern and more in touch with the times than most people realise. Though she did not write about 'The love that does not speak its name' very openly in her books, she did her best to move along with the changing social and political climate of several generations.

As a gay person myself, I never had any trouble with recognising the gay characters in Christie's books (or any other book), and I am sure other gay readers felt the same thing. Apart from the shear entertainment A.C.'s books offer the reader; they are most interesting because they give us an insight of English society during most part of the 20th century in terms of class, relationships between the sexes, minorities and politics.

McGinty 21 Nov 08 at 9:50 a.m. GMT

I don't know how this thread has turned from a request that the 'dirty words' filter be switched off ( and thankfully it seems it has now been turned off) to a discussion as to whether the words 'gay' and 'lesbian' are offensive. Being gay myself I have to say that I've never found either word offensive, certainly not political, and most definitely not 'dirty' ! And just for the record, I always assumed Hinchcliffe and Murgatroyd were what most people assume them to be - and that is not a couple of maiden aunts sharing a roof over their heads. (A view shared by the makers of both TV films). Agatha's description of Mr Pye in The Moving Finger is blatant in the extreme and should banish any readers belief that she never wrote about such things. I share Marc Anton's view that we should be able to discuss the work of Agatha Christie without being constantly ticked off for using alleged inappropriate language. The books were about murder when all said and done. How appropriate is that for the easily offended.

AndThenThereWasTim 21 Nov 08 at 12:43 a.m. GMT

And in Rebuttal to squatty.. When I said gay and lesbianism is touchy in California I didn't say it was offensive. This forum is suppose to be an escape from the constant news of Riots against and for Prop 8 and any other political arguments for that matter. Weather it has anything to do with AC or not please keep anything political or anything that could start a political debate to a bare minimum.

LiliFan 20 Nov 08 at 7:07 p.m. GMT

I'm sorry this grew into a big discussion. :) But... 1)I was referring to AndThenThereWasTim's post when I wrote about 'sending'; 2)I meant you as the one who brought this subject here, because it seemed to be a serious point of concern in your original post...

squatty 20 Nov 08 at 6:38 p.m. GMT

Lilifan - read back your post lol "I wasnt sending anyone to some other forums" "The one who brings the subject of gay here in the first place, should think of visiting political forums" Bit of a contradiction there

LiliFan 20 Nov 08 at 4:39 p.m. GMT

I just said there's no need to use words like 'lesbian' on this forum, I wasn't making a big issue of it. I wasn't attacking or sending anyone to some other forums. I think it's not so difficult to select words when you write comments here. If anything, the one who brings the subject of 'gay' here in the first place, should think of visiting "political forums".

squatty 19 Nov 08 at 7:01 a.m. GMT

This feels like a case of double standards going on in some of these posts. It's wrong of me to use the adjective "lesbian" to describe two characters but okay to use the phrase "old cronies" (I dont think Hinchcliffe and Murgatroyd were particularly old in the book). I'll just repeat that I was selecting them as two of my favourite characters in the whole of AC's works, so can hardly be accused of being inappropriate. It was a fan thread and not the material for a "political forum".

AndThenThereWasTim 19 Nov 08 at 4:53 a.m. GMT

Like I have said in a different post, remember some cultures, religions, and countries find certain words offensive.. now if it is blocked PLEASE dont use it or try to jump around it.. The word the first post used as far as a person in a relationship between two women is a touchy topic (especialy in here in California) and they want to avoid long arguments.. I agree with Jilly also winnebago.. you seem to attack APM all the time.. I also agree with Lili.. You have to try and avoid touchy topics.. Personally I do not agree with you with Murgtaroyd and Hinchliffe just because Hunchliffe is more manly then Murgtaroyd doen't mean she is like that.. but this isn't the place.. If you would like to talk about touchy topics please go to a political forum ect.

LiliFan 18 Nov 08 at 11:58 p.m. GMT

I don't know whether it was you, who 'diagnosed' poor Murgatroyd and Hinchcliff as being homosexual, squatty, or not, but I don't find it appropriate at all. Christie would have been terrified to hear that all those old cronies from her books will be considered gay some day, just 'cos they happen to live together. I'm sure there were similar remarks referring to Poirot and Hastings too, somewhere. Just like some nice people made Holmes and Watson more than just friends one day...

squatty 18 Nov 08 at 10:42 p.m. GMT

It was me actually Lilifan and it was definately not inappropriate. I was trying to use the word in a thread about our favourite AC characters and I was celebrating the fact that AC wrote the two characters in such a warm and non-judgemental way - which was pretty rare at the time the book was written (i.e. the 1950s).