Forum > General Discussion

teabagger

(1/4) > >>

mcdermott2:
Would TEABAGGER, as an informal name for a member of the Tea Party, be allowed by editors? I would like to use it in one of my puzzles, but am not sure if it's more vulgar meaning would rule it out.

Thanks!

Todd G:
1. Questions like these are usually asked in the CRUCIVERB-L mailing list instead of in the forum.

2. There's an interesting article on the development of the term teabagger at The Week

URL:  http://theweek.com/article/index/202620/the-evolution-of-the-word-tea-bagger

3. Personally, I'd be surprised if any of the mainstream editors would touch this with a ten foot pole.  Between the politics and vulgarity, I think they'd be afraid of starting a firestorm.

SJS:
I agree.  I had an editor ask me to change DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) which I thought was an interesting "in the news" entry but which the editor thought was a bit too hot button.  It was easy to change to DOME, but made the crosser very plain. 

You could try to clue it as "Machine at the Lipton factory" - but I'm pretty sure that would get rejected too (but after the editor had a good chuckle at the attempt).

magus:
I don't get the vulgarity of "teabagger," but I do its politics.  Why "politically hot button" items are a no go is quite beyond me.  I should think such current terms would add to the crossword lexicon.  Would "Occupy Wall St." be damned for the same reason?  How about "neocon" or "progressive"?  ???

Todd G:
Politics in itself isn't a problem.  Even less than flattering political terms (like NOBAMA) aren't really a problem.  The problem is when a political term is used in an offensive derogatory manner.

As noted in Wikipedia, the term teabagger "is routinely used as a derogatory term to refer to conservative protestors."  In this case, it's derogatory because of the sexual reference, but terms like "jack-booted thugs" or "grave robbers" would be needlessly offensive even without any sexual reference.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page