In a country where mistreatment and aggression against women is still the order of the day, it is sickening to see how much aggression has been caused by a girl’s manifesto song, which uses loose words. Vulgar, people say. Now it would be ridiculous to define vulgarity. I don’t even want to think about the class struggle that would arise on this topic. Beyond double standards. Vulgar language in the mouth of a man is perceived at most with a raised eyebrow, while in the mouth of a woman it unleashes jihad. But yes, great literature is full of loose language, obviously from the mouths of men.

Only last week we had an academic discussion about what vulgarity means in Aristophanes. I proceeded from the complexity of the translation, from the fact that it is easy to slip into one extreme or the other. And I was delighted with the way it was translated in the latest edition, with the way the translator managed to keep the salt and pepper without slipping into obscenity. I was told that the very purpose of vulgarity in Aristophanes is to cause laughter. And after thinking about it, I had to admit. Puns with overt sexual hints, even vulgar ones, generate comedy in this case. Of course, there’s a fine line between what’s entertaining and what might mean too much. But too much for whom? That it depends on social taste and how everyone perceives too much.

Leaving aside Aristophanes, who is in a comic register, we return to a very serious modernity, where there is no longer a trace of humor in the strong words used this time to emphasize the drama, not the comedy.

There are two novels recently read that come to mind. There is one Abraxas Bohdan Alexander Stanescu, whom I, for example, liked more than Kaspa Hauser’s childhood, despite much more violent language. It is a mixture of poetry and dirt, through which subtle ironic notes sneak through. I would recommend it to anyone who wants to read a well-written book, as long as they can control their lexical sensitivity.

There is another Saturday theater by Philip Roth, which unfortunately seems to me to be the weakest of the Roth books I have read so far. This is in a situation where I love Roth. But apart from the literary quality of both mentioned novels, both abound in parts of filth and profanity, next to which Erica Isaac with her song looks retired.

But aside from the vulgarity – more or less – that we may or may not tolerate, some of the reactions the song evokes are downright hallucinatory and fully bear this out. This girl felt the need to send a message. For better or worse, as she found out. I don’t think he laid claim to Aristophanes, BAS, or Roth. Moreover, the message is addressed to a certain social category. The ones where the worst abuses often happen. It’s hard for me to say how well this message will catch on. I wouldn’t be thrilled with the success of the message, but I also wouldn’t cringe at how it was delivered. That’s what she felt the need to do, that’s what she did. If he manages to move something, that will be good. On the other hand, I understand that there are people who reject any kind of vulgarity, but I don’t understand why they can’t sleep at night because there is a vulgar song (which, by the way, signals a real problem). I don’t think anyone is forced to listen on repeat Macarena Erica Isaac, if she doesn’t feel like it. On the other hand, I don’t think there is a woman who doesn’t have to endure vulgarity time and time again when she goes out. No matter how she is dressed. Because it is an undeniable truth that not all men are violent, but all women at one point or another become victims of violence (verbal, physical, etc.).

And in conclusion, I remembered a passage from the book of Simone de Beauvoir: The second gender. Where he speaks academically and elegantly, pretty much what the song that started the Facebook wars says. The book was written in 1948. It’s disarming to see how much has remained the same after nearly a hundred years. At least in Romania. And it hurts all the more when it happens in Romania, which cannot recover from an injury called Alexandra.

After he speaks of the double standard with which the man has set the boundaries of the feminine paradigm in a man’s world, where the wife is chaste, unlike the neighbor’s wife whom he “invites to commit adultery,” so that the woman realizes that Des Beauvoir is arguing her theory with the following story, extrapolating it to the field of prostitution: “Read the rest of the article at Contributors.ro,” “as far as she’s concerned, male morality is a colossal sham.”