In my experience, it's mainly employed by my middle class lady friends referring to scarves, purses, and other things I shan't mention I can't correct them - they genuinely do find unfashionable items of apparel 'extremely unpleasant', 'wicked', 'nasty' and 'foul'.


Don't forget 'cognitive dissonance'

No, you didnt mention that you were a pedant Did I mention that I don't know what one of those is?

[quote=rancidbeings;68465030]



Murderer? Rapist? Child abuser? We have finite terms that define such people - and a vast array of adjectives that can be utilised both in relation to such atrocious actions, as well as 'extremely unpleasant' things in the more day to day sense. Context is everything, and we have the appropriate language to employ to make the intended meaning clear. Vile is officially not reserved for perpetrators of horrific crimes. Using it in relation to HMs is not hyperbole if one can back up why they feel that word is appropriate in relation to the official definition.



You are of course quite right RB in pointing out that context is everything and I couldn't agree more. I think my issue with the word vile and some others is that it gets thrown about so much on DS that it rapidly becomes a cliche and loses its oomph

I also feel that often it is used to substitute for giving a matter any real thought. It is so easy to peddle out a one liner 'XXX is a vile, evil, witch or whatever' Which tells you only that the poster violently dislikes someone but adds little more to the discussion. We might as well use like and dislike icons.

My third problem which is less an association with a particular word is the tendency to observe two or three bits of behaviour and then declare the person as opposed to the behaviour to be vile. Most HM's like the rest of us are like the Curates egg. The adjective chosen is not so much of an issue here except there is a tendency to go for very visceral descriptors. On this point I have less of a problem with a post that say's XXX's behaviour was vile than I do with XXX is vile.The first seems to me to be fair comment, the second over the top.

Anyway fancy some cheese?

I think, sadly, the key word there is 'genuinely' and is probably another example of our language evolving, (and not in a good way if you're as old as me). I suspect a large proportion of the people using words like 'vile' don't think they're grossly over-exaggerating, because the word means something different to them than it means to me. Personally I think it's a shame, because the English language is gradually being reduced and eroded, so that nowadays, kids seem only to have this one word to describe anything from brussels sprouts to murdering paedophiles.



If it's not in my Vocab Book from 1970, it doesn't exist.

Now there's a silly question Today so far has included emmental and stilton, and tonight is a beautiful burrata. I love cheese more than my arteries

To be fair I think I may have been guilty of this (the BIB) myself, despite it being my personal rule. Not in terms of the word 'vile', but other strong terms such as 'morally reprehensible' etc where I've intended to condemn the behaviour as opposed to the person in their entirety but in the rush to put thought to screen get the wording less than ideal.

I think the kind of threads like 'X is vile/witch/evil' with no further detail offered, are certainly an issue but not so in terms of vocabulary choice, but rather the distinct lack of conveying anything meaningful for debate.

There will always be buzz words and phrases that become clichéd, and many of them like 'passive-aggressive', as someone else mentioned, are often incorrectly applied. But I'm afraid I don't think the same can be said of 'vile'. I'd agree it's annoying to see any word so liberally used to the point of being hackneyed, but to my mind it certainly is more often than not being used in an appropriate and reasonable context - even if I disagree with the opinion being conveyed or have a personal preference for its use that isn't in line with the official definitions.

Most people rarely think change away from the ways they are accustomed to are good plain human nature and I feel your pain in my own ways

But of course we don't speak like our medieval ancestors, and evolution of language will happen, for better or worse.

I'm sure you're heard about the 'literally' furore but here it is for anyone who is interested http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23729570


Ha ha! Don't look at this then http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-23861702

Ok, to expand on my previous post, I think Charlotte is vile because she talks about shitting and pissing and farting and shagging in a rather disturbingly frequent and incongruously casual manner, which leads me to conclude that she has no moral standards, a lack of hygiene and little respect for her body, sexuality and other people. Vile isn't perhaps the best adjective to describe this conduct, but it is sufficient to communicate the magnitude of my disgust and accurate enough according to the following definition: "morally low; base; despicable".

Fair points all. Tonight I have some Machego which I plan to have with some fresh figs and a glass of.. hmm not decided but Rioja probably. Jealous?

Sadly, "evil" was used frequently to describe Hazel and, to a lesser extent, Gina. With regards "murderer" and "rapist", they describe an abhorrent act performed by the person, not his/her personality.

When it is used correctly it's a fine word as someone else said earlier. When used to describe actions it's fine when it's used to describe a contestant on a game show it's wrong.

Hi Sugar Ape!
I hope you don't mind if i use your posts as an example to express what i mean it's just you have given a brilliant example of how the typical "xxx is vile" post comes across. When it is merely:


it is easy to disregard your opinion because it appears to readers who don't know you (me for example) that it is "just another one of those posts" and skip on by.
Whereas this post:


adds to the debate and readers who don't know you can see you are watching and thinking about what you are seeing. When it is the former it looks, to me anyway, like someone is disregarding anyone else's opinion and just saying "xxx is vile" there is no argument. I would probably disagree with the first post, yet i totally agree with the your second post!!!


Totally agree with this jaded.

I forgot to multiquote the other poster but i think it was Annsyre who said about it being possibly one of the U words (as Non-U and the Mitford Girls) i always think of Vile Bodies which is appropriate as Rancid is on this thread!!!!

Nah - cos I got figs too! (OK, maybe a big smidge - I have no vino - Rioja or otherwise )


That's what I'm talking about. A perfectly supported explanation of how and why 'vile' is a an appropriate adjective in the context.


Indeed, 'evil' has been used to describe many a HM. That's certainly one I've never used, and can't see any where I would see it as at all fitting as I have my own slant on that one like many do on 'vile'. But again, by definition, in can be appropriate - if someone could back it up. Though I'd probably enjoy debating whether someone felt 'evil' was more appropriate than an alternative! I think 'vile' works better with actions, behaviours, etc whilst not condemning the person altogether than 'evil' does.... hmm... interesting.

And to not quite quote Noam Chomsky

Murdering paedophiles can be contentious.

It's mainly used on the forum by children. They think it's a grown up version of naughty.

BIB is exactly it! Perfectly put. I feel just the same.

And the non BIB too 'Vile' until I ventured on to this forum was almost exclusively used in my experience by people of a certain demographic and invariably about material things as opposed to people and their behaviour (though that too, only not in a way I even want to mention on here think Daily Mail!).

I'd agree. "Evil" does seem to condemn the person wholly, whereas "vile" could well be used to describe simply an action. Personally, I would consider "evil" far too strong a word to use on silly HMs, but I guess, if pushed, I could use "vile" to describe an action of theirs..anything to do with toilets/bodily functions would do it for me...

as in: the colour of emma's dress last night was vile ?

A little vile as in violet?

Gaaaaahhhhh! Now I'm depressed. I'm off to start a petition to have the Offended thread re-opened and then start a Dinosaurs United one.

There was an argument on here last year with two people who must have had a thesaurus each, they went on for pages trying to outdo each other with words, it was hilarious to read.

Sometimes it's nice just to let a thread go and just sit with some cheese and a beer and watch.
(Grandma Singleton's Strong Lancashire and Peakland Blue, since you asked)

To remain on-topic: Norwegian Brunost caramel cheese is about the only thing in the world I would use the description 'Vile' for. It qualifies as it is quite repugnant, and to say 'unpleasant' would be doing it and readers a dis-service.

There are times certain words should be used, but only to emphasise the point, and sparingly.

someone brought me some weird kind of bendy cheese *shudders* from germany once it honestly tasted as if it had been matured in charlotte's wet bed.....

Calling a housemate evil is just silly, and is indeed an entirely justified example of hyperbole.

You could argue that when someone has committed numerous acts of rape or murder, it overshadows all other aspects of their personality, and they do, to a large extent, become that thing rather than it just being an aspect of their behaviour or simply an act they have performed. E.g. they are a murderer, not just a person who has murdered; they are a tyrant and not merely a person who has acted tyrannically.


No problem.

Succinct, straight to the point and entirely accurate. Love it.

i have a bit of a crush on mickmercer