logo
EXCLUSIVE Trump's F-bomb broke another presidential taboo - but here's why Americans don't give a you-know-what

EXCLUSIVE Trump's F-bomb broke another presidential taboo - but here's why Americans don't give a you-know-what

Daily Mail​3 days ago

Ever had one of those days when you're just, like, 'F%#K!!!'?
The word that has become part of most Americans' vocabulary is popping up in contexts where swearing used to be verboten.
That includes the White House lawn on Tuesday where Donald Trump dropped an F-bomb that echoed around the world.
'We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don't know what the f**k they're doing, the president said about Iran and Israel, venting his frustration with both countries for bombing each other in the hours after he prematurely announced a ceasefire in their 12-day war.
Although Trump is the first U.S. president to say 'f**k' to reporters on live TV, he has plenty of company among public figures – including comedians, rappers, and social media influencers – who have normalized the word.
Joy Reid and Charles Barkley recently made headlines for saying the word on live news and sports broadcasts.
Even Paris Hilton's two-year-old son, Phoenix went viral for repeating it several times in a home video.
In a nation bitterly divided by politics, rattled by Trump's much-debated decision to bomb Iranian nuclear sites last weekend, and sweating through this week's heatwave, one linguistic expert says it's time to stop clutching our pearls over language that has become common parlance.
Why, he asks, should we feign surprise over politicians and other public figures uttering a word that, for more than 20 years now, polls have found most Americans use in conversation?
'"F**k" is here to stay,' Professor Timothy Jay, who has researched the science of swearing for more than 40 years, tells DailyMail.com.
'To pretend otherwise seems out of touch with reality.'
WHERE THE F%#K DID IT COME FROM?
Etymologists are quick to debunk a popular myth that the f-word derives from a British royal law under which commoners needed to post a 'F.*.*.K.' sign – an acronym for 'Fornication Under Consent of the King' – on their doors in order to have sex.
Although there is some disagreement in academic circles, most scholars believe the word instead has roots in Germanic languages.
The German 'ficken' and the Dutch 'fokken' mean to copulate and to breed, respectively.
The word is believed to have first appeared in English between the 14th and 15th centuries to mean sexual intercourse, and to have morphed into a derogatory synonym for, say, 'screw' as both a noun and a verb in the 16th century.
It took on taboo status in the late 1800s when it came to connote casual sex frowned upon in the buttoned-up, morally strict Victorian Era. And it gained linguistic legitimacy in 1966 when Penguin became the first publisher to include it in an English dictionary.
Literally and figuratively a four-letter-word, f**k can be described both as a curse, meaning an expression wishing violence or harm on someone, and as a swear word, one considered profane or offensive to some people.
Meanwhile, it has over the decades made its way into all kinds of acronyms.
Military terms such as SNAFU (Situation Normal: All F**ked Up) and FUBAR (F**ked Up Beyond All Recognition), for example, were coined among soldiers in World War II.
And the letter 'f' has become a common component in internet shorthand such as the faux directive 'STFU' for 'shut the f**k up,' the exclamation 'OMFG' for 'oh my f**king god,' and perhaps the two most existential questions put forth by English-language texters – 'WTF?' meaning 'what the f**k?' and 'WTAF?' meaning 'what the actual f***?' for emphasis.
Although moralists have come up with alternatives – effing, farking, flipping, fracking, freaking, frigging, fricking and fudge – f-word purists say those words don't scratch the same itch as the original.
A century ago, the word f**k, words for female body parts, along with anti-religious words like damn, hell, god, and Jesus, were considered the most indecent words of all.
Today, studies show that, at least in the U.S., the f-word ranks behind slurs for racial, ethnic, religious, and sexual identity groups in terms of offensiveness.
'Swear words change over time,' says Jay, 75, a professor emeritus of psychology at the Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts.
'When I was in high school, we had dress codes and acceptable ways of eating and acting in public that most people now don't worry about anymore.'
Grammarians note that the f-word has taken on an especially flexible role in the English language, functioning not only as a transitive and intransitive verb, but also as a noun, adjective, adverb, and interjection.
A celebrated testament of its many uses and meanings – and also of its expressiveness and, some might say, poetry – came in the fourth episode of the first season of HBO's The Wire, considered one of the greatest scenes in television history.
PRESIDENTIAL PROFANITY
Colorful language is nothing new in politics, including among presidents.
Andrew Jackson had a parrot who reportedly repeated his swear words during his 1845 funeral service. Harry Truman once referred to General Douglas MacArthur as 'a dumb son of a b***h.'
Lyndon Johnson – remembered as by far the country's most vulgar commander-in-chief – once referred to his wife, Lady Bird, as 'the best piece of a** I ever had.'
Johnson's successor, Richard Nixon was a regular user of racist, homophobic and anti-Semitic slurs.
Tricky Dick became notorious for recording nearly every conversation he had in office.
Once those recordings were made public and transcribed, they were filled with expletive-deleted redactions.
In a precursor to Trump's comments on Tuesday, Jimmy Carter was reported to have said, 'F**k the Shah' in response to pressure to allow the deposed Iranian leader into the U.S.
His successor, Ronald Reagan, famously pounded his fist in anger at Canada's prime minister, saying, 'God damn it, Pierre.'
This century, George W. Bush described New York Times reporter Adam Clymer as 'a major a**h**e.'
His vice president, Dick Cheney, told Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy to 'Go f**k yourself' on the same day in 2004 that the Senate passed the Defense of Decency Act.
Barack Obama described Kanye West as a 'jackass' and Joe Biden was caught on a hot mic calling Fox News reporter Peter Doocy 'a stupid son of a b***h.'
Trump became the first president to use the f-word on television in 2020 when preparing to speak to the nation from the Oval Office about the country's response to the coronavirus pandemic.
'Oh f**k,' he said in a hot mic when realizing he had a pen mark on his shirt.
C-SPAN inadvertently included the comment in its livestream, but edited it out after.
Vulgarity has always been a signature part of Trump's schtick.
He infamously referred to Haiti and African nations as 'sh**hole countries.'
He simulated performing oral sex on a malfunctioning microphone at a pre-election rally in November 2024.
And his first election in 2016 was nearly tanked by a leaked recording of his conversation with Access Hollywood host Billy Bush about pushing himself on beautiful women.
'I just start kissing them. It's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait. And when you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab 'em by the p***y.'
POWER, PAIN, AND PROFANITY
Coarse language can serve several different purposes, says Jay, the swearing expert.
One is harassment, discrimination and abuse, as he categorizes Trump's 'p***y' comment.
He describes the president as a 'pejorative swearer' and 'master at name-calling and insulting.'
'He didn't pioneer bullying. But he has certainly furthered the use of purposely offensive language in our country. That's the political moment we're in, and it's too damn bad,' he says.
Similarly, he adds, swearing can be a mark of power – 'a luxury among people unafraid of being fired for doing it.'
He notes that Americans at the top of professional and cultural hierarchies can say what they want with impunity, while people at the bottom don't enjoy the same latitude.
'Loose speech can be a sign of wielding power,' he says.
Although swearing can be a mark of fluency with language and a tool to emphasize a point, it also, conversely, can be indicative of what he calls impoverished or lazy language.
'People with poor vocabularies tend to swear a lot,' he says.
Some scientists say swearing may actually be good for you.
Jay, for his part, lauds it as a form of self defense that's far safer than shooting guns or throwing punches.
'In my research, some people said that expressing anger and frustration at people abusing them makes them feel better,' he says.
Other experts see swearing as a form of catharsis, a harmless emotional response that lets off steam and lowers cortisol levels.
British psychologist Richard Stevens argues that swearing increases one's tolerance for pain.
And in his book, 'The F-Word,' writer and slang expert Jesse Sheidlower asserts: 'F**k, is one of the few words in the English language with true medicinal qualities.'
Jay's read on Trump is that he swears partly as a political strategy – a way to connect with average Americans and convince them of his authenticity.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt espouses that theory when asked about his profanity.
'One of the things the American people love the most about this president is he often says what they were thinking but lack the courage to say themselves,' she has said.
Jay also sees Trump's language as the mark of an emotional and at times impetuous leader who at times lacks a reliable edit button and sense of self-control.
He describes the president's F-bomb on Tuesday as an unconscious response to the chaos of the Middle East conflict.
As he sees it, Trump broke from presidential norms on Tuesday less through his word choice than through his obvious stress over a high-stakes foreign-policy situation.
Psychologically, he adds, it's no coincidence that the president dropped the F-bomb in the hours after he prematurely announced a ceasefire between Iran and Israel and asserted, along with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, that the three nuclear sites he unilaterally decided to bomb in Iran 'obliterated' that country's nuclear facilities.
Officials familiar with a classified intelligence report said Tuesday that the bunker-buster bombs that Trump ordered in the attacks sealed entrances to two of the three targets but did not collapse their underground structures.
The report also showed that much of Iran's stockpile of enriched uranium was moved before the strikes, indicating that Iran's nuclear program has been set back only by a few months, not indefinitely as Trump and his circle claimed.
By saying those countries 'don't know what the f**k they're doing,' Jays says Trump's subliminal message is really that he doesn't know what the f**k they're doing.
If the president knew, he adds, he would say so.
'What became clear is that he doesn't know, and the people around him don't understand the complexities.
'It's a sign that he has as little clue about what's going on as the rest of us, even though he has more information than we do,' says Jay.
As he tells it: 'You could see the confusion in his face and hear it in his words.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Iran's nuclear enrichment ‘will never stop', nation's UN ambassador says
Iran's nuclear enrichment ‘will never stop', nation's UN ambassador says

The Guardian

time8 minutes ago

  • The Guardian

Iran's nuclear enrichment ‘will never stop', nation's UN ambassador says

Amir-Saeid Iravani, Iran's ambassador to the United Nations, said on Sunday that the Islamic republic's nuclear enrichment 'will never stop' because it is permitted for 'peaceful energy' purposes under the treaty on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. 'The enrichment is our right, an inalienable right, and we want to implement this right,' Iravani told CBS News, adding that Iran was ready for negotiations but 'unconditional surrender is not negotiation. It is dictating the policy toward us.' But Iravani said Tehran is 'ready for the negotiation, but after this aggression, it is not proper condition for a new round of the negotiation, and there is no request for negotiation and meeting with the president'. The Iranian UN envoy also denied that there are any threats from his government to the safety of Raphael Grossi, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, or against the agency's inspectors, who are accused by some Iranian officials of helping Israel justify its attacks. IAEA inspectors are currently in Iran but do not have access to Iran's nuclear facilities. Pressed by the CBS News anchor Margaret Brennan on whether he would condemn calls for the arrest and execution of the IAEA head, which Marco Rubio, the US secretary of state said a newspaper close to Iran's leader had made, Iravani said that he would. 'There is no any threat,' Irvani said, but acknowledged that Iran's parliament had suspended cooperation with IAEA. The inspectors, he said, 'are in Iran, they are in safe conditions, but the activity has been suspended. They cannot have access to our site … our assessment is that they have not done their jobs.' Iravani also responded to questions on why Tehran has not accepted proposals for a diplomatic solution. Referring to Trump's 'unconditional surrender' demand, Irvani said that the US 'is dictating the policy towards us. If they are ready for negotiation, they will find us ready for that. But if they want to dictate us, it is impossible for any negotiation with them.' Iravani said on Saturday that Iran could transfer its stocks of enriched uranium to another country in the event of an agreement with the United States on Tehran's nuclear program, according to news site Al-Monitor. The transfer of 20% and 60% enriched uranium would not be a red line for Tehran, Iravani said, adding that the material could alternatively remain in Iran under IAEA supervision. But as he said again on Sunday, Iravani stressed that Iran would not renounce its right to domestic uranium production, a condition the US rejects. Irvani's comments comes as western nations, including the US, are pushing for Iran to resume negotiations over its nuclear program a week after the US launched strikes on three facilities, setting off days of heated dispute over whether the facilities has been 'totally obliterated', as Donald Trump initially claimed, or if they had delayed but not destroyed the program. Grossi told CBS that there is 'agreement in describing this as a very serious level of damage' but went on to say that Iran will likely will be able to begin to produce enriched uranium within months. 'The capacities they have are there,' he said. 'They can have, you know, in a matter of months, I would say, a few cascades of centrifuges spinning and producing enriched uranium, or less than that. But as I said, frankly speaking, one cannot claim that everything has disappeared and there is nothing there.' On Sunday, President Trump again dismissed reports that Iran had moved 400kg (880lb) on 60% enriched uranium ahead of the strikes on Fordow, regarded as the center of Iran's enrichment program. 'It's very hard to do, dangerous to do, it's very heavy, plus we didn't give them much notice because they didn't know they we were coming,' Trump told the Fox News host Maria Bartiromo. Trump speculated that vehicles seen near the entrances to Fordow before the strikes were likely masons brought in to seal up the facility. 'There are thousands of tons of rock in that room right now,' Trump said. 'They whole place was just destroyed.' However, the Washington Post reported on Sunday that the US obtained intercepted Iranian communications in which senior Iran officials remarked that damage from the attack was not as destructive and extensive as they anticipated. The White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, scoffed at the Iranian claims in a comment to the Post in which she did not dispute that such communications had been intercepted. 'The notion that unnamed Iranian officials know what happened under hundreds of feet of rubble is nonsense,' Leavitt said. Separately on Sunday, Abdolrahim Mousavi, Iran's armed forces chief of staff, reportedly told the Saudi defense minister during a call that Tehran is not convinced Israel will honour the ceasefire that ended their 12-day war announced by Trump. 'Since we are completely doubtful about the enemy honoring its commitments, including the ceasefire, we are prepared to give it a tough response in case of recurrence of an act of aggression', Mousavi said, according to Turkey's state-run news agency Anadolu. Israel and the US, 'have shown that they do not adhere to any international rules and norms' the Iranian general added. 'We did not initiate war, but we responded with all our power to the aggressor.'

Trump sent ‘explicit' threat to cut funds from University of Virginia, senator says
Trump sent ‘explicit' threat to cut funds from University of Virginia, senator says

The Guardian

time9 minutes ago

  • The Guardian

Trump sent ‘explicit' threat to cut funds from University of Virginia, senator says

The University of Virginia (UVA) received 'explicit' notification from the Trump administration that the school would endure cuts to university jobs, research funding and student aid as well as visas if the institution's president, Jim Ryan, did not resign, according to a US senator. During an interview Sunday on CBS's Face the Nation, Mark Warner, a Democratic senator for Virginia, defended Ryan – who had championed diversity policies that the president opposes – and predicted that Donald Trump will similarly target other universities. Warner said he understood that the former UVA president was told that if he 'tried to fight back, hundreds of employees would lose jobs, researchers would lose funding, and hundreds of students could lose financial aid or have their visas withheld'. 'There was indication that they received the letter that if he didn't resign on a day last week, by 5 o'clock, all these cuts would take place,' Warner added. He also said he believes this to be the 'most outrageous action' that the Trump administration has taken on education since it retook office in January. Ryan resigned from his position as UVA president on Friday. He was facing political pressure from Washington to step aside in order to resolve a justice department investigation into UVA's diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies, the New York Times reported on the same day. 'I cannot make a unilateral decision to fight the federal government in order to save my own job,' Ryan said in his resignation message to the university community. He expressed an unwillingness to risk the employment of other staff, as well as cuts to funding and financial aid for students. Ryan had a reputation for trying to make the UVA campus more diverse and encouraging students to perform community service. He had served as the university's president since 2018. Warner criticized the administration for what he said was its overreach in education. He said federal education and justice department officials 'should get their nose out of [the] University of Virginia'. 'They are doing damage to our flagship university,' he remarked. 'And if they can do it here, they'll do it elsewhere.' He referred to Trump's ongoing battles with Harvard, the US's oldest university, including the president's signing a proclamation to restrict foreign student visas and continued threats to cut funding over its DEI policies. 'They all want to make them like Harvard,' Warner said. 'End of the day, this is going to hurt our universities, chase away that world-class talent. 'And, frankly, if we don't have some level of academic freedom, then what kind of country are we?'

'Very wealthy group of people' poised to buy TikTok, Trump says
'Very wealthy group of people' poised to buy TikTok, Trump says

ITV News

time15 minutes ago

  • ITV News

'Very wealthy group of people' poised to buy TikTok, Trump says

US President Donald Trump has said a "very wealthy group of people" have agreed to buy social media app TikTok from its Chinese owners. Hinting at a deal which could safeguard the future of the app, Trump said specific details on the buyer will be revealed in two weeks and offered little further detail. He said: 'We have a buyer for TikTok, by the way. I think I'll need, probably, China approval, and I think President Xi will probably do it.' Earlier in June, Trump signed an executive order to keep TikTok running in the US for a further 90 days, while his administration worked to make a deal to bring the app under American ownership. It marked the third deadline extension, and came after the Supreme Court upheld a law banning TikTok in January - causing the platform to breifly go dark. TikTok is owned by Bytedance, and boasts around 170 million users in the US. The Supreme Court said the ban was necessary to deal with the "well-supported national security concerns regarding TikTok's data collection practices and relationship with a foreign adversary'. The US is concerned vast swathes of user data, including sensitive information on viewing habits could be obtained by the Chinese government. Officials have also warned the algorithm that fuels what users see on the app is vulnerable to manipulation by Chinese authorities, who can use it to shape content on the platform in a way that's difficult to detect. TikTok, which sued the government last year over the law, has long denied it could be used as a tool of Beijing.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store