It seems I offended a particular political tribe on a social media platform the other day. Their response reminded me of a piece I wrote quite a while ago. Welcome to the strange death of the asterisk...
It used to be that the asterisk served as a modest shield, a polite veil over language deemed too offensive for polite company. In print and even online, we saw fck, sht, and b******s - an implicit agreement that certain words, while understood, shouldn’t be fully spelled out. But in today’s media landscape, particularly online, the asterisk is disappearing. And what replaces it? Full-throated expletives, loud and unfiltered.
Elon Musk, for example, seems to have taken a wrecking ball to the idea of moderation, both linguistic and moral. On December 28th 2025, he posted on X (formerly Twitter), in response to a tweet about immigration policy:
"Take a big step back and FUCK YOURSELF in the face. I will go to war on this issue the likes of which you cannot possibly comprehend."
The very next day, with no apparent irony, he called for more “positive, beautiful, or informative content” on the platform.
This isn’t just Musk being his usual obnoxious self. It’s typical of a wider trend in online culture, where leaders, influencers, and even traditional media no longer shy away from vulgarity. What does it mean when the people shaping our national discourse abandon even a thin pretense of civility?
The death of the asterisk might seem like a small thing: a punctuation mark sacrificed on the altar of “authenticity” or shock value. It’s not: it marks a deeper shift, a normalization of crude, abusive language and a diminishing of the boundaries that once helped define public decency. Could there be something rather more at stake here than just the risk of offending some snowflake's pretentious morality? Studies have linked increased exposure to profanity to increased aggressive behaviour in young adults. Perhaps even more worryingly, some have extrapolated a relationship between profanity and political polarisation. As much as I feel almost morally obliged to tell fascists to f*ck off, could all those "Fuck Trump" shirts and hats and bumper stickers actually have backfired?
It’s an uncomfortable thought, but one worth exploring. Political discourse has become a battlefield, not just in the metaphorical sense, but in the way people engage with each other - hostile, unyielding, and often abusive. The line between righteous anger and performative outrage has blurred, and nowhere is that clearer than in how we use language. If the theory holds that profanity normalizes aggression, it’s not a stretch to consider that its widespread use in political messaging might be intensifying divisions rather than breaking them down.
Once upon a time, calling a politician an idiot, a liar, or a crook might have been enough. Now, it’s often an expletive-laden tirade, shouted online, plastered across social media, flyers, and even clothing. And when both sides are engaged in this arms race of verbal escalation, does it do anything other than entrench opposition? The moment one side yells "Fuck Trump," the other side doubles down with "Fuck Biden," and any hope of debate disappears beneath the noise.
But this isn't just about slogans; it's about how we perceive and react to them, and to the people behind them. Profanity isn’t just a means of expression; it’s a provocation, a line in the sand. It signals not just opposition, but often contempt. And when people feel attacked, they don’t usually reflect or reconsider - they defend. So, rather than shaking someone out of their ideological slumber, a well-placed "fuck" might just push them further into their trench, convinced that the other side isn’t just wrong but hateful and unhinged.
Of course, this isn’t an argument for sanitizing language altogether. There are moments where strong words are necessary, where outrage is justified, and where a point deserves to be made with appropriate emphasis. As Billy Connolly noted, "you never hear 'fuck off', he hinted." Some things need to be said plainly. But when every day feels like a shouting match, we have to ask - who’s really listening anymore?
If profanity is becoming the default language of political engagement, is it also part of why debate has become futile? Is the raw, unfiltered nature of modern discourse, especially on (anti)social media, contributing to an atmosphere where every discussion feels like a fight, every disagreement a war? And if that language is simply intensifying polarisation, how can either side 'win' such a war?
Acknowledgement: The title owes a debt to George Dangerfield's The Strange Death of Liberal England. Any resemblance between a disappearing punctuation mark and the collapse of Edwardian politics is entirely intentional.
Enjoyed this article?
If you found it interesting, useful, infuriating, thought-provoking, or simply worth the time it took to read, you can help keep the kettle boiling by buying me a coffee (£3).
Or, if you think it more appropriate, perhaps a pint! (£5) .
Still got the kettle on?
Browse everything I've published so far.