Max compounded terms

A compound term may combine two words and no more. This restraint is based on the rhythm of a cuss flow and the natural parsing made by the human ear when encountering such terms. “PunkHoBitch” will be heard as “Punk HoBitch” or “PunkHo Bitch.”

Fuck vs. Fucker

Among connoisseurs of profanity there is heated debate over the choice between "fuck" and "fucker." The problem arises in that “fuck” is commonly connoted as a verb infinitive. Good usage would then dictate the use of “fucker” to denote transformation to noun form, and the mere existence of “fucker” would suggest this to be proper usage. But the unmatched flexibility of the term “fuck” makes for a unique situation. “Fuck” can and should be used as the noun form whenever possible. The differentiation between a fuck as in sexual intercourse and a fuck as in a person can easily be gleaned from context.

The dogmatists would point to the example of “motherfucker” as evidence that the infinitive form is not so malleable. I favor the school of thought regarding “motherfuck” a suitable and even preferable substitute for “motherfucker” for reasons of flow. The universal acceptance in noun form of “dumbfuck” buttresses this somewhat avant garde position.

Definitions

Though at first counterintuitive, one must free himself from the shackles of literalism in order to proceed as a true craftsman of profanity. What an ass is, for instance, is far less important than how it relates to and combines with other terms. A “bitchass” connotes nothing beyond the pejorative whereas a “cuntfuck” connotes something quite specific (at least as a verb). Almost all nouns can be used to indicate either a person or the proper object and almost all verbs can be used in relation to those nouns.

To unlock the immense power of profanity, one must be willing to use terms as loosely as possible.

Exception: see integrating non-profanity.

Max syllable rule

Some potential compound terms may follow the max compounded terms rule and yet be unacceptable due to the max syllable rule. The difficulty arises from the archaic inclusion of “mother” and “asshole” as distinct terms. The cutting edge craftsman has long considered “ass” and “hole” separate terms, with the compound status of “asshole” obfuscated by its ubiquity.

The max syllable rule exists to enforce the underlying logic of beat, by limiting single compound terms to no more than two syllables. “Motherbitch” for instance does not work unless one aims to mimic a foreigner.

Exception: see integrating action

Syllable count rule

Good - 2:1, 2:2, 2:2:1, 2:3:1, 4:2

Bad - 1:2, 1:1, 1:1:2, 1:2:3, 1:4:2

It seems 1:1 should theoretically work under the descending syllable aspect of the rule, but 1:1 combinations are invariably presented as compound terms. Example, “fuck ass” is just “fuckass” to the ear. Unless of course “fuck ass” is meant as an imperative.

In general, syllable count should remain constant or descend, but not by more than a single syllable from one term to the next. Illustrating this point, “bitch cockwhore” doesn’t work but “cockwhore bitch” does. Also, “motherfucking cuntlicking dickfuck,” 4:3:2, works nicely.

Exceptions exist of course. Instances of proper 2:3:1 constructions are rare, but “bitchass cockfucking shit” is a good example of such an exception.

Judging the more complex constructions is problematic. Strings using beats such as 3:2:2:1 or 2:1:2:1:1:1 must be played by ear and appraised on a case by case basis.

Parsimony

Sometimes the simple unorthodox employment of single terms works to great effect.

“Morgan, this article is so ass.”

Thus illustrating the point that novel usage of a single term is often just as inspired as the creation of a long string. If the usage is unique enough a new term is essentially being created.

Describing people/objects vs. situations

The ire of men is generally directed at other men. But sometimes the situation itself warrants invective.

The process of tailoring a string of profanity appropriate to such a circumstance is terribly involved. When dealing with a person or a thing one must precede the string with a “you.” When dealing instead with a situation one eschews the “you” and just yells a little louder and in no particular direction.

Profane vs. non-profane

A key distinction must be made between the genuinely profane and the faux profane. Wad, jack, prick, hole and suck are examples of terms that seem profane but technically are not. The key point to remember about non-profanity is that it can work, but one must be mindful that less is more. The point after all is the use of profanity. Introducing too much non-profanity dilutes the intended effect, but is sometimes called for in the name of variety or maintaining a long cuss flow.

This should not dissuade readers from experimenting with non-profanity. “Jackhole” is a personal favorite of mine likely created in a stuporous attempt to string jackass and asshole.

Integrating non-profanity

In reality there are few genuine cusses. Non-profanity is therefore a necessary fact of life. This does not mean it cannot be effective, especially when a string adheres to the inherent logic of a single theme. “Jizzsucking spermwhore,” doesn’t contain a single true profanity, and yet it works.

But tread carefully. Non-profanity should constitute a small portion of one’s cuss flow despite representing the large majority of available terms.

Integrating size modifiers

In very particular situations size modifiers help add flesh to a compound term. "Hugeass" and "smallcock" are good examples of this. Users should labor to keep the size modifier limited to one syllable. “Gargantuan” is an obvious example of a word too unwieldy to use.

Integrating action

Upon reading the max syllable and syllable count rules astute observers likely noticed that quite a few terms exist which break the max syllable rule but can still be used in a typical string.

Important examples include “cockslurping” and “pussylicking.”

Compound terms ending in whoring, bitching, sucking and most notably, fucking, also apply. These can be referred to as “ing” terms. Action holds a special place in profanity creation because it necessarily breaks the max syllable rule, though it doesn’t obviate the need for said rule. Furthermore, the syllable count of an action term in audible execution is often closer to a half and not a full beat. This is because in the throes of a cuss flow the “ing” will usually be blurted out quickly or even incomplete.

Integrating “piece of”

“Piece of” must be considered carefully as its typical 1:1 beat limits application. It must usually be preceded by action, as in “cuntfucking piece of shit.” If however one starts the string with “piece of” the descending syllable rule can be ignored, thus producing such gems as “piece of cockloving, assfucking garbage.”

“Piece of,” also constitutes two consecutive non-profane terms and as such must be used warily.

What’s in the string and what isn’t

Profanities such as “suck my dick,” don’t seem to be addressed by any of these rules. That is not an oversight. In the given example profanity is not being created it is being used. Usage casts a long shadow and is too large to be discussed in this space.

If however the sentence read “suck my dick you punkbitch cockass fuck,” only “punkbitch cockass fuck” would be considered part of the string.

The Street Test

Ultimately the goal is to create compounds and strings that work. The final test for this cannot happen in the lab, so to speak, it must happen on the street. Some compound terms and strings can be made in adherence to every rule and yet not roll off the tongue properly or to great effect.

Profanity must anger, it must cut, it must shock, it must even amuse. It must not bore or engender puzzlement.

That is where practical application comes in. Take what has been learned here. Entertain friends. Endanger personal safety. Ignore social norms proscribing free expression.

Some people were meant to paint, others to do taxes.

You and I… we were meant to call people cockslurping fuckwads in public.