The Evolution of Swear Words: How Gen Z Views Profanity in Modern Society

In today’s rapidly changing social landscape, the concept of what constitutes offensive language has undergone a remarkable transformation. Once upon a time, certain four-letter words would have earned children a stern lecture and possibly a bar of soap in the mouth from disapproving parents. However, according to recent research from Macquarie University, these traditionally taboo expressions no longer carry the same weight they once did, particularly among members of Generation Z. The study, led by Dr. Joshua Wedlock, asked 60 Australian-born Gen Z students to evaluate 55 different words on their offensive nature. What emerged was a fascinating shift in linguistic values: anatomical curse words that older generations considered shocking are now viewed as relatively mild by young adults born between 1997 and 2012. Instead, this generation reserves their strongest disapproval for language that degrades people based on their identity characteristics—specifically words that are racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, or ableist. This fundamental reorientation of linguistic taboos reflects broader societal changes, highlighting how young people have developed a value system that prioritizes human dignity over traditional notions of propriety.

The research revealed interesting gender differences in how offensive language is perceived. Women in the study found gendered terms of abuse significantly more insulting than their male counterparts did—an understandable reaction given the historical use of such terms to specifically degrade and control women. This gendered perspective on language demonstrates how our personal experiences and social positions influence our reactions to words. Dr. Wedlock emphasized that language, especially what’s considered taboo, is fundamentally shaped by culture and societal shifts. This explains why certain curse words that once shocked previous generations have become almost commonplace in casual conversation today. Particularly noteworthy is his observation that many traditionally taboo terms have fallen so far out of use that young people don’t even recognize them anymore, representing a genuine generational language gap that goes beyond mere differences in attitude.

In contemporary American culture, particularly in urban centers like New York City, words that would have been bleeped on television just a decade ago now function almost as casual adjectives or emphatic particles in everyday speech. The normalization of these expressions can be heard in traffic jams, coffee shops, and workplaces across the country. Despite New York’s reputation for colorful language, a study by WordTips surprisingly ranked it as only the 17th most foul-mouthed state in America—a placement that many New Yorkers might dispute as absurdly low. Even more surprising were the states that outranked New York in profanity usage: Alaska, Florida, Texas, California, Illinois, Michigan, Nevada, Mississippi, and neighboring New Jersey all apparently curse more frequently, with Maryland claiming the dubious honor of being America’s most vulgar state. This geographical distribution of swearing habits challenges stereotypes about where one might expect to hear the most colorful language.

The ubiquity of profanity in modern American life can be attributed largely to the rise of social media and digital communication. Benjamin Bergen, author of “What the F: What Swearing Reveals About Our Language, Our Brains, and Ourselves,” explains that social platforms have given us unprecedented access to people’s informal communication patterns. Before the digital age, most published or broadcast content was filtered through professional standards that removed profanity. Now, with direct access to unfiltered thoughts and expressions online, we’re exposed to far more casual language—including swear words—than previous generations ever were in public discourse. This constant exposure has normalized profanity to a degree that would have been unimaginable in previous eras. The result is a kind of linguistic desensitization, where words that once carried strong taboo associations now barely register as noteworthy in many contexts.

The changing status of swear words reflects broader shifts in what society considers truly offensive or harmful. While traditional curse words have lost much of their shock value, language that attacks people based on their identity characteristics has become increasingly taboo. This represents an evolution in social values—moving away from concerns about propriety, religious blasphemy, or sexual references, and toward greater concern about words that cause genuine harm to marginalized groups. Today’s young adults appear to make distinctions between harmless profanity that might express frustration or emphasis, versus genuinely harmful language that degrades others. This shift suggests a more nuanced approach to linguistic taboos, one that considers the actual impact of words rather than simply adhering to traditional categories of “bad” language established by previous generations.

The transformation of swear words from shocking taboos to everyday expressions highlights the fundamentally dynamic nature of language. No word is inherently offensive—meaning and impact are always culturally constructed and subject to change over time. What was scandalous to one generation becomes unremarkable to the next, while new taboos emerge that reflect contemporary social concerns and values. Generation Z’s relative comfort with traditional profanity alongside their strong rejection of identity-based slurs suggests a generation that has developed its own linguistic moral code, one that prioritizes compassion and respect for human diversity above adherence to traditional notions of proper speech. As society continues to evolve, so too will our understanding of what words are truly harmful versus merely colorful expressions of human emotion. The shifting landscape of swear words ultimately tells us less about the words themselves than about the changing values and priorities of the society that uses them.