Is "bros before hos" offensive?
 

I'm posting this thread seperately rather than hijacking the ongoing thread by a similar name: http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?t=90503 because my SO and I had a discussion about whether or not this phrase was offensive. I believe we both had valid positions, and I do not want to discredit either but I was curious what the "majority" thought.

Is it offensive? To me no. To someone else, obviously. Of course I'm a guy..so I may not know what it's like to be called a bitch or ho in every other song :rolleyes:

My first thought when I read the original thread title was "if you refer to women as "hos", you'll be hanging with your bros, 'cause you won't get any women". I considered mentioning this, but decided to simply skip the rest of the thread.

This phrase is offensive to me, and I know a few other women who posted on the other thread felt it was as well. This is because I believe the phrase is gender biased, and the word "ho" is a gendered insult. This is the common phrase used, but "bros" doesn't really refer to a woman's friends (I don't call my friends bros), and we can't exactly call our SO's "hos." We (women) could come back with saying something like, "chicks before dicks." But "chicks" in turn, will still offend some women. So what do we do? Drop the phrase all together or find a new one? Or just tell the women to shut the hell up and let the phrase be the way it is? I'm not exactly sure what to do. I came up with a phrase that is essentially a little less biased-- "bros before SO's." However, such a phrase is hard to change without people beginning to use it.

I would never try to change the world with my feminism and "stop using gendered insults toward me and my people" (hehe). I would just wish for people to take a look at what they do and what they say... perhaps to be more conscientious about what is offensive to a large group of people. That's all. Perhaps it's asking too much. Who knows.

I give up for the day.

Voted "No. It's just a rhyme for ease-of-memory and is not meant to insult.".

Female.

No problem with it whatsoever.

(unless it was! meant as an insult).

hell, i call people 'ho' sometimes.

/me looks @ guccilvr :p

I didn't take offense because i saw no offense meant. I wouldn't use the term in coversation, but i know exactly what it means, and that there is no offense meant in the context it was used, rather merely something people will instantly recognise.

I voted No. Some people need thicker skin.
it's not offensive in the least, and anyone who thinks otherwise is heavily sensitive.

Maybe I should of re-worded to giggalos before hos or hos before giggalos.. :lol:

People with gigantic chips on their shoulders need to get over themselves. The phrase stems from a distinct, oftentimes common, occurance of the man putting his woman before his friends.

Perhaps it is meant to offend. Those that are easily offended by comman phrases are generally the type of women to pull said guy away from his male friends. Just perhaps.

I did not reply in that thread because I was offended. Like Redlemon says, if you use that phrase, you're most like going to be sticking with your "bros."

and there are probably even more women that put their 'man' ahead of their women friends...

I know how the phrase was meant... and it doesn't make it right to refer to women as ho's... It's wrong and it's demeaning...

/me adjusts chip on shoulder and wanders off to the next thread...

Just because it rhymes (sort of) doesn't make it right.

Even the "friends before lovers" phrase for women is offensive.

"Chicks before dicks"

It's the type of thing you raise an eyebrow at, shake your head and move on.

I don't appreciate the assumption that women who are offended by being called something that demeans them are the "type" of women who pull a man away from his friends. I don't believe that "stealing" a man away from his friends is a gender issue, it's a maturity and insecurity issue... on both sides of the relationship. I do not want/have never wanted/will ever want to take my SO away from his friends. And I am still offended by these so-called "common phrases." I'm wondering how using a certain phrase just because it is common and is the norm makes it so right? So the appropriateness of something is justified because the majority does/says it?

*chip on shoulder gets bigger*

If someone is offended, it's offensive. Simple as that.

Am I offended? No, but I might think twice before posting under a topic with such a title. I wouldn't want anyone to think (even mistakenly) that I thought of women as whores, or that I belonged to the kind of culture that treated women that way.

A rhyme for ease of memory? What is so difficult to remember about the topic that you need to use a mnemonic?

Normally, I wouldn't say anything, because I think everyone is free to post how and what they like. I'm only giving you my opinion, because you asked for it.

I can't say that I'm offended, but it's not a term I'd use without intending insult. (Like the stupid 'Ho that almost hit me on my motorcycle)

So i'm relatively certain from your post that if i called your mother a whore-ass cunt to her face and she got offended, it would be due to her thin skin? I'm not actually doing so, i'm just wondering where you draw the line.

Sorry but you're taking it out of context. Would you be offended if I referred to your mom as a MILF? Would you be offended or take it as a compliment?

That's not exactly a flattering thing to say to someone... It's not a compliment... How about - your mom is a very attractive woman.. Saying you'd like to fuck her - is about as bad as calling her a ho...

Offensive? No, not really.
Juvenile? Yes most defiantly.

I wouldn't be offended, but just there you would've solidified your position in my mind as a douchebag. I don't care much for the attitude that somehow it is acceptable to distill people down to sex objects, that somehow people should be flattered that some complete stranger would fuck them.

I'm not taking it out of context, i'm just pointing out that is silly to think that people who get offended by certain words have a chip on their shoulder or just need thicker skin. If you disagree, well, then, your mother just finished lapping up my hot steaming jism after sucking me off with a picture of you taped to my stomach. :p

the usage of the term "hos" and the reasoning behind it is specific.

"bros before hos" is generally used in a negative manner anyway (got my heartbroke, friend ditched us for girlfriend etc etc)

so, it's not "friends are put before good, logical girls"

but rather "friends are put before hurtful, lying, etc etc etc"

I initially thought that this was a thread about the band 'bros', then i thought that maybe the word broshos was in some way an insult from another language - then I realized it meant brothers before whores in the ghetto sense and thought, 'what a stupid thread' I wouldn't find this insulting - but thats because It's not a style of language I would ever use and I doubt the original poster uses it as part of his daily vocabulary when interacting with women. Unless of course he's a G

Well according to the polls the "majority" doesn't find the slang term hos offensive. Something must be wrong with society.. Those chips must be getting really heavy just about now.. :lol: :icare:

http://img178.exs.cx/img178/671/weee8kz.jpg
Watch out for the prudes! :lol:

No. They're just words.

The next time someone gets on me about using the word nigger i'll have to write them off as having a chip on their shoulder. I'll be all like, "Poor Old Nigger Thinks It's A Cadillac, is just for ease of memory." Yeah, that's it.:rolleyes:

An interesting distinction, although I think that there is overlap between the concepts. It is juvenile to find humor in simple offensiveness, and takes as much mental effort as a fart joke.
I don't think anyone would consider the TFP to be a representative slice of any population! And, that is also the reason why I didn't post in the original thread; I already knew that this is how the poll would turn out. I'm in the TFP minority on this subject, and I didn't feel like raising a stink.

I didn't say anything in the original thread because it was obviously intended in a lighthearted way, but yes, I find it offensive. I am by no means the kind of woman who gets between a guy and his friends, either. Being offended at being called a whore doesn't make a person oppressive and juvenile.

I don't have any "bros" and I don't know any "hos," to take it literally. I understand that "ho" has become a common way to refer to women in general and I can't think of a more disrespectful way to label them, unless someone comes up with a catchy, rhyming way to say someone eats turds and maggoty dead dogs with their breakfast cereal. It's not that I don't have a sense of humor (I do) but this is along the same lines as blanket racial insults. Then again maybe I'm just old-fashioned because I've noticed that sometime in the last few years the word "pimp" became cool. That's another word I wouldn't use, unless I was referring to the scum of the earth. Pimps as role models makes me roll my eyes in disgust. I have to wonder if people have ever met a real pimp? Ever turned a trick? Murderers and drug dealers are cool too I guess. I've known a few of these people and I wouldn't want to be lumped in the same category as them, either. In fact I probably wouldn't even want to be in the same room.

I know all this stuff comes from rap music and the thing people have to remember is, not everyone is immersed in that world the way they are. These are not common phrases in the big picture. It's scary when folks have lost their perspective to the point that they think that's a normal way to talk about other people.

I have a problem with words being used so inaccurately and then if enough people hear it enough times, they start to just accept it because some guy on the radio just said it 50 times. I think words are powerful things because they carry meaning and we should use them carefully.

considering it was coined by males, i would have to agree with you. Although its just a phrase teenaged-college guys use when guys instead of hanging out with them, go and only hang out with their girlfriends for sex. Now, you can say you dont keep your guy away from his friends, but its the guys choice to go after what he wants from the female than with the boys. This is whats assumed and i use that word on purpose. Just lighten up people, it relates entirely to the phrase "pussy whipped" and if your offended by that phrase as well.. well then im sorry.
You do? i hate to say it but you sound like the people who blame video games and tv for violence.

btw i voted the last option

No need to start getting personal here. You don't know me. And no, I'm not one of "those people."

There was a comedian that I recall something to the effect of....

"I find it interesting that women will be very upset if you called them ho's but put them on the dance floor and when the DJ calls out for the Bitches and Ho's you see them get all excited waving their hands and dancing even more vigorously."

I think that given the right context, things are fine.

IMO People have just removed all senses of context for everything that they find offensive. The nature of the item is offensive, but put into conext it works.

I also am finding that as I get older, I don't care so much for offensive (to me) materials and I go out of my way to make sure that I avoid them. In a way then it becomes a circle of non exposure and less tolerance towards that offensiveness, so I'm learning to tackle them head on but on my own terms and timeframe.

I was watching a show in Trio "Sick Humor" (totally becoming a favorite channel of mine) that discusses exactly this form of "sick humor".

If anyone is interested in seeing the 1/2 hour show PM me.

/slight thread hijack here**

Cyn the reason the girls get excited by us DJ's is because they know we have the magic fingers ;)

hehe

I think it's also a matter of where/how you grew up. I grew up in a super religious home and so I was always rebelling and doing what I wanted. I hung out with a pretty rough crowd. Talk like this was the norm. **However** I don't really use those words on a daily basis in my descripter of girls. I usually call them chicks :)

I suppose I don't find it offensive because it is juvenile and I expect kids say stupid things. You are not offended by a toddler who soils their pants, and likewise I am not offended by a immature adult who soils himself verbally. It takes a level of respect before one could really be offended by something, and I assume they are still learning how to interact at an adult level. Most people go through this kind of stage and it would be hypocritical to be offended when I myself had a period where I said stupid and offensive things in that transition from child to adult.

Another good point, Ustwo. I revise my first statement to say I consider the use of the phrase in question "stupid and immature", not "offensive".

I think one important thing to acknowledge is that no one person is the sole arbiter of what is or isn't offensive. It seems arrogant to me to pretend that anyone who doesn't share your arbitrary taste for ribald or sexist language is somehow oversensitive.

i was not trying to say you were one of those people. only that a generalized statement that says "its raps fault people are saying that" is on the lines with such things as that.

and off topic and in the sense of humor to lighten the thread up a tad. Whenever i hear anyone say "You dont know me" i just have crazy flashbacks to maury episodes with the outrages 12 year olds.

I understand what you mean, and agree with it to a degree, but... Just as I do not define what is offensive to you, you don't define what is oversensitive to me.

Being offended by the OP's quote is, by my ribald standards, oversensitive. And that, along with my right to that opinion, is equally deserving of acknowledgement.

Not that you were addressing me, but... the Kleenex are already on the table, there's no stopping this train now.

Some people find this offensive, others find that offensive. It's not only pretty natural to be offended by something, nowadays it's practically a cultural thing. You have to be upset and offended over something. Otherwise, what's the point of existing?

I get called "bro" by some random males all the time, but somehow, no matter how much it pisses me off, I've managed to keep my knuckles in my pockets. After all, I'd hate to be oversensitive about it.

I must have misinterpreted your tone because I thought it sounded sarcastic and condescending. Sorry if I did.

I think what I was trying to say was more along the lines of "people who are immersed in a particular subculture should keep in mind that not everyone sees things from their perspective." Something you're used to hearing every day might take someone else by surprise or offend them, and their point of view is no less valid. Just like I might not be shocked at hearing profanities or seeing someone doing drugs or walking down the street naked, but I wouldn't expect everyone to take it in stride the way I would. Sorry I don't know what you're taking about with the Maury episodes though.

Some people take language a lot more seriously than others - I'm one who takes it seriously, and you aren't, so we just disagree on that point.

If it is some sort of slang you can without a doubt know that someone will get their panties in a bunch over it.

My mother would probably shoot back at you with something far wittier.

I believe that labels, regardless of what they are, are pointless and a person has no need to get upset by them. There is nothing that you could call me (in the lingustic sense of the word) that would upset me. The intent that you have behind it, though, is different.

For example, in college if my buddy wanted to spend the night with some woman in our room, and I needed to wake up early the next day, a comment of "bros before hos, dude" would make him think twice and change his actions in order to support his friend (who has known him, and been there for him, far longer than this random chick that he picked up). However, used in the context of, oh I don't know, maybe referring to his wife , then it would be different and possibly offensive.

Regardless, words are not offensive. They are l-e-t-t-e-r-s that are placed together to represent a physical thing or idea. Anyone who is offended by any word, on the basis of what the letters spell alone, needs thicker skin.

That's exactly how everyone I know uses it.

Amen, brother.

If somebody started a conversation with me using that word, I can most definately say that I would disregard anything that came after it just as unmeaningful

Not if my cock was in her mouth. Words are words, right? Just let me know when you get offended, i'll apologize.

Just because you believe that someone need not be upset by your actions (words are actions too), doesn't mean they don't have the right to be justifiably offended by your words. You don't get to choose how people interpret what you say. It doesn't make any sense for you to say insensitive shit, and then blame someone else for your inability to communicate effectively.

I understand the context. What is unclear to me is how you find it justifiable to call some girl you probably know very little about a ho. If i were your "bro" in that situation, i'd probably tell you to fuck off if you came at me like that. Whatever happened to "bros getting laid before bros needing to get up early"? Perhaps things would be simpler if you were to say, explain your position and why it would be favorable to you if you didn't have to hear your bro have sex until the wee hours of the morning.

I generally tend to agree that the world could use thicker skin. Seeing you claim that words are just words proves to me that you've never taken a psychology class where trauma was covered. Words shape the way we look and think about the world. Read 1984 for an interesting perspective on the power of language and vocabulary.

The words you choose to use say a great deal about you. I hear someone use the word ho, and i tend to think that that person feels insecure when confronted by women who are comfortable with their sexuality. It's almost as if they don't know their place around women who aren't bamboozled in to complying with the norms of american gender politics. I'm not offended, just getting a clearer picture of who that person is. I would imagine that a person who uses the word ho seriously also likes to use the word dyke for lesbians he doesn't find attractive.

I would argue the word ho is nearly always offensive, because it is nearly always used by emotionally stunted people as a means to make themselves feel better by comparing themselves to a sexually promiscuous woman. Ho is a loaded word. It is a vague word, it lacks complexity. It is used as an insult by intellectually lazy people. There is no use of the word ho, except perhaps in an ironic way, that doesn't seek to belittle a woman based on her sexual behavior, behavior which just happens to be encouraged in men such as yourself. Ask yourself: Why do i feel like i need to make myself feel superior to a sexually promiscuous woman? Why do i feel the need to denigrate certain women because of alleged sexual promiscuity? Why do i feel the need to pay attention and make judgements on people based on their sexual behavior, even when said behavior has nothing to do with me whatsoever? Why is it okay for me to act like a ho, but not okay for a woman i don't care about to act like a ho?

Wow this thread needs more cowbell!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...f/Cowbell2.gif

Personally, I would not use the word "Ho" in a sentence. I'm not offended by it per se, but just don't see this kind of language as a step forward.

Also, I seem to recall in my younger years cheering if one of my mates looked like getting laid - more power to him - who am I to stand in his way?

While the concept of B's before H's should mean "loyalty to friends" which in itself worthy, I don't respect somebody who refers to people differently in front of them vs. behind them.

If you refer to women as "ho's", I would question your need to belittle others, and your lack of intelligence in resorting to low common denominator language. Stupid isn't fun for anybody.

Sorry but women who prevent their boyfriends/husbands from having any social life outside their relationship don't deserve any respect in my book. That was the intent of my other thread but some of you so called intellectual prudes have nothing better to do than bitch about a non-pc word rather than discuss the issues of closed relationships and the need for social interaction :lol:

And these boyfriends/husbands don't have enough of a backbone to actually stand up to these women? They don't deserve respect... They aren't worthy of friendship... It goes both ways... People can only do to you what you allow them to do -- if the guy puts up with it -- it's not the woman's fault -- it's his.

What if they're blackmailed and have no other choice? Is it still the guy's fault? Let's say if the guy steps one step out the door to hang out with his buddies, his wife threatens to leave and take all his money and their kids? If you bail out on your friend because of that you don't have much backbone yourself.

Yes, it is still his fault for letting it get to that point.. Did he not realize what this woman was like before the first child? Did she justs turn into a harpie overnight? No< I think not... He shares the blame.

Some guys don't realize it until it's too late (Pussy has a way of hindering judgement.) and yes some women can turn into harpies over night.

Bros to the end. :lol:

... and why would you want to be friends with a guy who's so stupid to have his head turned so easily by a female?

and to refer to a woman as 'pussy' is equally as demeaning...

The opposite sex are called WOMEN... they are people - living breathing thinking people... they are not just sex organs there for the pleasure of men...

:crazy:

The feeling I get is that Jesus Pimp really needs some pussy, badly.

;)

I was referring to the vagina not the person. Sheesh.. :hmm:

I'm not that weak sorry.. :lol:

Take a look at the context it was in. It was not meant to offend, it was meant to provided humour to a certain topic. When I chose 'ho' over 'bro,' I didn't mean that my girlfriend was not a hoe, I meant that I would choose her.

If you wanted to discuss the issues in any kind of intelligent way then you could start by using intelligent language. Calling someone a whore is an insult, so why be surprised when they are insulted? It looked like "ho" was a generic term referring to women in general, not specifically, "dominating women who are threatening and conniving and blackmail men into losing their friends." Otherwise how are people going to know what you're even talking about?

Why would a woman be insulted by the word ho if she previously wasn't a ho in the first place? Obviously you're not intelligent enough to understand the context of the previous thread.

I was trying to take a constructive approach and you resorted to calling me stupid. That really helps clear things up.

Because you just don't get it. :lol:

So far the poll is saying that this is the most popluar answer:

I am so gratified that I can use offensive language so long as I use it in a rhyme. Next time I am in a meeting with one of my black co-workers I'll be sure to ask her:

"What do you figure, nigger?"

Since it rhymes she will certainly see how clever I am being and not be offended and we'll all have a good laugh over it.

Somewhere out there, a pot and kettle are having a conversation.

Amen, brotha, Amen...

Their names are Ustwo and Maleficent. They ponder the drudgery of their lives.

I really dont think that was called for :o

HEY! I HATE WHEN PEOPLE ON THIS BOARD INSULT OTHER PEOPLE! JESUS CHRIST, PEOPLE HAVE OPINIONS, OKAY?! THAT DOESNT MEAN THEY'RE "NOT INTELLIGENT ENOUGH"...

If you started a thread with questionable rhymes/topics/etc, expect some criticism. Both sides, however, should learn how to keep their insults to themselves.

/rant

Laugh, if you could only be so lucky to be me :thumbsup:

My thread.. its crummmmblliinggggg... my precssiioussss.... :) Stop bickering! :crazy:

That aside, my SO and I have come to agreement that "Bros before SOs" is perfectly acceptable for me to say, because its just as much a catch phrase without being offensive.

As far the "it's a rhyme for the ease-of-use" option I provided, the position behind that stems from this "youth culture" that many of you are seperated from -- which is not necessarily a bad thing.

"Bros before hos", whether locally or nationally, is used by teens alike, and I've even heard it perpetuated by quality media like MTV. It would be nearly impossible for me to say "Man.. bros before hos" to a male compatriot in my age demographic and have it misunderstood. So the argument was seemingly that it only gained popularity and thus maintained meaning because it is a popular "catchy" phrase. Removing the rhyming scheme and saying a more PC phrase, like "Longterm friends before the sexually-permiscuous girl that you are with" would be both inconvenient and unncessary. It might even be misunderstood. The advantage of adoption into trendy-slang increases your likelihood of being understood by your peers, but also misunderstood by other groups of people. "What do you figger, nigger" obviously doesn't have this large exposure, and would be considered by the whole to be offensive. I personally voted for that option, because I beleive "ho" was used just becuase it rhymed and was easier to remember than "Bros before girls" or something of a simliar nature.

"Bros before SO's" is close enough to the rhyming scheme to not be misunderstood by my undereducated demographic, without objectifying or labeling women, so I've chose it as a nice middle ground. :) thx emotional20. :icare:

I voted yes. I found the phrase offensive, though I was not upset and I did reply in the thread.

I see several problems with the phrase in general.

First, it seems to imply that if a man chooses to spend time with a woman rather than his existing male friends, it must be because she is sexually promiscuous and they are having sex. It seems to dismiss the possibility that a man might want to spend time with a woman because he enjoys her company, or for any reason other than sex. It seems to me to reduce women to less than human status.

The two terms are not equal. Brother is a general positive way to refer to a man, and implies equality; whore is a generally negative way to refer to a woman and implies inferiority.

Context makes all the difference in the world. The phrase wasn't used in the context of a boy talking casually to his peers, it was used in the context of a thread title on a general discussion message board frequented by both more mature men and a large number of women. In that context, it was offensive. Using the bolded form, or some other less offensive description, in this context, would have worked equally well.

A problem occurs when people take the slang of their subculture and use it outside the context of that subculture. Part of the problem is that the word may have a completely different meaning or connotation outside that subculture that is more offensive. For example, I have to stamp out the casual use of "gay" and "retarded" in my classes at the beginning of each year. How they talk with each other when they are in casual conversation doesn't concern me. How they use language in my classroom and in my presense does, particularly since many of them seem to genuinely not know that "retarded" does not actually mean "a person or thing of which I disapprove" ourside of their subculture. Indeed, many seem not to understand that language has different meaning depending upon context, and that one needs to adjust one's diction as appropriate for a given context. In other words, the way to talk to your friends, especially if your language uses a lot of group specific slang, is often inappropriate when talking to others outside your social group.

Using a more polite phrasing could easily have communicated the same message without the offense.

Perhaps his friends are completely fucking worthless individuals who will only bring him down, i.e. he is in recovery and they're your average insecure alcoholics. Perhaps he really doesn't care that much for you, and is pawning off his unreceptiveness on his wife. Perhaps you just cling to this junior high notion of "brodom" which hinders your ability to see the world that exists beyond the oversimplified "friends vs girlfriends" paradigm.

Well I never really heard that one before. I thought you were referring to "Bros" that great pop group from the late 80's early 90's :crazy:

OMG!!! I can't believe that someone else knows that band...

When Will I Be Famous, Cat Among the Pigeons

and who can forget... I Owe You Nothing.

Gilda, I agree completely. That's what I was trying to say in my post. :) How though, would you suggest people determine if the other person belongs to their "subculture" -- there's all sorts of lingo that are specific to these subcultures that are NOT offensive, and they are a perfect example. In fact, I have many as a Computer Geek, often very unfamiliar to those out of my "zone." If I dont use these words, someone might get offended that I was treating them like an idiot. Or this not an apt metaphor?

You're welcome. :icare: Thank you for taking my views into consideration. Sorry if being appreciative came a little late. ;)

No, that's a good example. I have friends who are computer geeks, too, and I'm a comics nerd myself.

Usually it's pretty obvious whether a person is part of your in group. If in doubt, it's probably best to assume not until you know otherwise, and use a moderate level of diction, using standard American English (in the US) and adjusting on the fly as needed. If I'm with my comics group, I'll use shorthand like, for instance, the term retcon without thinking about it and without explanation. If I were talking to someone who isn't a comics nerd--and we're pretty easy to spot--I'd be more likely to use an explanation (retcon--retroactive continuity, or changing past events to fit the present).

In the case of the thread title in question, the thread was on a public message board frequented by a large number of people of various ages, ethnic backgrounds, political viewpoints, etc. Using colloquial slang that included a word usually intended to be demeaning to women was taking a risk of misunderstanding and/or offense.

My students quickly get a lesson in proper diction in my classes at the beginning of the year. Saying something is "gay" or "retarded" with your friends as a form of insult is fine with me. Doing it in my classroom or when speaking to me is not. Learning to adjust your level of discourse to match the situation as appropriate is a big part of maturing.

Thicker skin people, thicker skin.....

If having thin skin means I dont speak on a juvenile level....I'll stay thin skinned if its all the same

You miss the point. You can't communicate effectively if you offend the people to whom you are speaking. It is also difficult to communicate effectively with people when you blame them for being offended at your poor choice of words.

thick-skinned (thksknd)
adj.

1. Having a thick skin or rind.
2. Not easily offended.
3. Largely unaffected by the needs and feelings of other people; insensitive.


No thanks. I'd rather be thin-skinned and care about how I'm affecting other people.

So, if I'm thought of as "easily offended" then so be it.

just chiming in when i probabyl should be keeping my trap shut, but i think hardknock was referring to number 2 of the definitions, not number 3.

In general, in my everyday dealings wiht people, i'm pretty careful about how i affect others. I am generally the most concerned person around and i generally care about how others feel bc i have often been mistreated, but i'm also pretty thick skinned as well. It takes quite a bit to really offend me. Calling my mother a Ho probably isn't gonna do it in general. Calling me whatever probably isn't either, but I wouldn't be the one going around sayign these things to others

so am i thick or thin skinned?

With total disregard to the argument that has ensued from this thread, here's my take on the OP's question:

In a certain circle of friends that I've had for quite sometime, the phrase is somewhat common. It's not meant in a demeaning way. The translated meaning (from "playa" into regular mature English) is this: "Don't let a purely sexual encounter that means nothing more than a mindless fuck harm or otherwise damage the friendship of the current company, whom you know will be by your side through thick and thin and ultimately when the random person that you picked up tonight has fucked you over or you're no longer interested in her." That's it. It isn't meant as an insult. Just a reminder that although the current fling will most likely fade, the friends will be there. It's a way of saying not to blow off your true friends for something fleeting.

Do I agree with calling women ho's in a derogatory blanket manner? Hell no.

And that's why I never found this all that offensive. My friends (male AND FEMALE) all knew that this was in no way a comment on women as a whole. It was just a reminder that friends are forever.

This isn't meant to be used towards a woman, but towards a situation. It's a way of trying to remind a friend to respect the friendship that he has cultivated over time and not let it slip away for sheer sensual pleasure. It's not meant to degrade women or to even discourage anyone from entering a relationship or spending time with their significant other.

Could it have been better worded? Sure thing. But the thing is, I doubt anyone on this forum is responsible for the spread of this phrase in pop-culture.

And truth be told, above the explanations and pop-culture acceptance, the reason it doesn't bother me is that I've gotten to a point where I'm just not that easily offended by words.

Want to call me a greasy Italian piece-of-shit? Go for it. I'm proud of my last name and background.

Wanna call me a cracker or a honky or a W.A.S.P? Have at 'er.

Think my long hair and beard makes me a dirty hippie? You'd be wrong, but you're more than welcome to voice it.

I can see where some people (especially anyone that has a different understanding of the phrase than the usage I'm accustomed to) would be offended. But overall, I don't think it was ever meant to be hurtful or in any way demeaning.

Bro before ho.

Well this really means "friends before sex"
But that isn't as catchy.

The point here is "ho (hoe?)" bothers some people.

Frankly, this is a phrase that should only be used by guys anyway.
So a girl shouldn't hear it, to be offended.

I hate being called a 'bro' and that isn't quite the same as "ho".

But I have used "bros before hos" I have some friends who fall off the face of the earth when they get a girl friend.. then come back when they break up.

Why is it so hard to hang out with more then one person? Co-dependent people.
I dunno, but I and my best friends are able to have a girl-friend and friends at the same time.

I think "pussy-whiped" and "bros before hos" are good, however badly worded, phrases on dating/friend relationships.

No one cares about 'hen-picked' even though it means the same as pussy-whiped.

It is all about the words, and people who are looking to get angry at something.

i think that every needs to remember that any type of quote can be offensive to another person. take something seemingly innocent like religion and someone somewhere is going to be offended.

there are many, many phrases that when you hear them for the 1st time, you are offended. even if you know that it isnt the best or most PC phrase to use, hearing XYZ phrase 50 times a week, you can, as much as you hate it, become immune to it. does it mean that you are a crude person? no.

down here there are many terms and phrases that are used, by everyone, that you just get used to it. doesnt mean that you go around referring to myself as a gringo or a guero, but i dont get offended as much anymore.

is it offensive, yes, but not to everyone. different people have different standards and levels of respect, as anyone could tell by reading some of the previous posts (ie JesusPimp)

those are my 2 cents and feel free to slap me in the face, tell me how wrong i am, whatever.

just because opinions are free doesnt mean you have to take them. mine or anyones.

Aghhhhh So it's OK to talk about a person, especially in a demeaning way, behind their back?

:crazy:

Everybody quiet down... she's in here now. We don't want her to hear what we've been saying....

Ho... :lol:

*Phant forgets that he ever knew Tex and slowly backs away*

Somebody is getting ready to die.......................................

And that would be Ms Ho to you.

After reading my previous post, I did want to jump in and apologize if Jesus Pimp, or anyone else somehow took what I said as directed their way. It wasn't.

But the argument that "ho" is now a part of society's vocabulary so it shouldn't be considered offensive doesn't make sense to me. The word did and still does mean "whore", and if a friend of mine ever called a girl I was dating, friends with, or just hanging out with for the night a whore he would end the night minus a friend and probably some teeth. Disrespecting anyone one I am with, friend or acquaintance, is disrespecting me.

You can say I am thin skinned or emotional if you would like, but to tell you the truth I was much weaker when I used to let stuff like that slide. For me, respect is at the core of my friendships and I can't think of anything more worthy of drawing a line and standing firm.

Oh, sorry again Pimp.

Maybe some of this disagreement has to do with how men and women generally interact.

It is not at all uncommon for good male friends to regularly "insult" each other, and generally say things that are as outrageous as possible. None of it means anything. It's just an (admittedly immature) way of passing time/having fun. All men know, however, that you can't talk to women like that.

From what I gather, female friends never use insulting language to each other unless they really mean to offend. They in fact seem to go out of their way to make sure nothing they say can possibly be intepreted as even slightly offensive.

Men much more often take the point of view that words can only be offensive if they're meant to be. With that in mind, "bro's before ho's" is not meant to imply that the woman is a whore. The word "ho" is used just because it rhymes, and the expression is well-known (I don't know its origins). It's actually more often meant as an insult to the man. Some possible translations might be "grow a spine" or "stop thinking with your dick".

Stingc, I think that's a very astute observation. Now that I think about it, I really think that's true. I don't think me or any of my friends would dream of jokingly calling each other a "bitch" or "whore" unless we were prepared for some very serious repercussions, including the possible loss of that friendship. I haven't ever heard guys using that phrase but what you're saying makes a lot of sense.

That it rhymes doesn't really alter that it's a contraction of "whore". Many others in this thread have said that the phrase refers to abandoning friends in favor of sex with a woman, which would seem to indicate that "ho" is being used to denigrate the woman involved.

In any case, even if we accept that it's a phrase that's acceptable among male friends, that's not how it was used here. It was used here in public among a large group of women. Even if we accept everything you say, it was still rude to use it in this context.

I knew a bunch of women in college that were like that... they constantly called each other things like slut, bitch, cunt, ho bag, tampon, and many other things, all in the name of ribbing each other.

Yes, it often refers to abandoning friends over a woman. I don't see your implication at all, though. The man is being told to give his friends (bros) some respect. That doesn't (necessarily) have anything to do with the woman involved. For example, it's often used to tell a man to stop flirting with a woman that one of his friends has been interested in.

Fair enough, but I think the poster was just trying to be witty (certainly not a first on this board). That usually involves saying something a little off-color, and there's often a fine line between amusing people and offending them. He probably also didn't realize that the expression wasn't known to everyone.

Since we're now on the topic of how to act around the opposite sex, I think it is important to point out that men usually don't intend (or even think of) every possible implication in their choice of language before speaking. Similarly, there are often things women say that men will never pick up. I think we'd all be better off if we tried to recognize these things more often rather than just assuming a man was rude or a woman was overemotional.

I don't know where these women have been hiding all my life. On the other hand, I also haven't known men who said these things either, so who knows what the answer is there. I'm starting to get this creepy feeling like I've been living under a bucket all my life but, you know, that's really not true. I've known a lot of people and plenty of young men too, and I certainly haven't restricted my exposure to the upper crust, not by a long shot! :p One thought occurs to me - could this possibly be an east coast/west coast thing?

I didn't get the impression that stingc was trying to justify insulting language, just that he was offering some analysis, btw.

And in the process, calling the woman a whore.

Earlier in the thread:

And so forth. Pretty much everyone else who is defining the phrase says or implies that it is meant to insult the woman involved, that the guy is choosing sex over friendship. It implies that the only reason a man would choose to spend time with a girl rather than his friends is for sex.

Agreed. But I don't think it takes much analysis to understand that calling women other than prostitutes whores is likely to be perceived as insulting.

Again, you're reading far too much into it. None of those quotes except for JinnKai's says anything about the woman involved. Unless you want to claim that any woman that sleeps with a man without being in comitted relationship is a "ho," your argument makes no sense.

If a man is choosing sex over friendship, then he's the one making that decision. The girl usually has no obligations to the man's friends. The phrase is directed solely at him.

There is also no implication that women are only good for sex. Of course some men do treat some relationships that way (as do some women), and his friends would certainly know when he's doing that. The previous posters were saying that this phrase could be used in those particular cases. It can also apply to more serious relationships in certain ways, but I don't see the point in going into every possible usage.

To be honest, I don't even know if I've really answered your complaints. I don't understand how you've reached any of your conclusions. Maybe the fact that you don't have relationships with men is clouding your judgement...

Yes, it was probably clear enough in this context. But all of the complaining should have died off after it was explained that nothing negative was implied.

As a related issue, a lot of slang terms have meanings that are different from their component words. For example, I've heard girls say things like "it took a lot of balls for me to do that." I think the meaning of that is so well-known that nobody would interpret her as saying that she was trying to be a man, was a transsexual, carried around a bunch of marbles, etc. Yet each of those interpretations might be possible for someone who was just learning english, and didn't know about slang yet. That's the kind of overanalysis you're applying in this thread.

Read the quotes again. Of the five, only one doesn't specifically refer to the woman.

Regardless of who the phrase is addressed to, it refers to the woman involved as a whore. Unless the woman involved is a prostitute, it's use must be for purpose of denigrating her. That the man using this phrase is talking about women in an insulting manner rather than to women does not change this.

We must not be reading the same explanations. I see that clearly implied in many of the interpretations:

"The phrase stems from a distinct, oftentimes common, occurance of the man putting his woman before his friends. "

"friend ditched us for girlfriend "

"go and only hang out with their girlfriends for sex."

"women who prevent their boyfriends/husbands from having any social life outside their relationship don't deserve any respect in my book"

These phrases are being used as explanations for the phrase "bro's before ho's" Simple substitution shows us that in this context, friend = bro (brother) and girlfriend/woman = ho (whore). A whore is a woman who has sex for money. Other explanations are more explicit, referring to women whose boyfriends choose them over their friends as "sexually promiscuous" or "pussy".

First, there's no need to make this personal. My sexual orientation has nothing to do with the discussion.

Second, all of my casual friends are male--remember the comic group I referred to earlier? All guys. They're late teens/early 20's. I have no idea how they talk with each othe when I'm not around, and frankly I don't care. They don't, however, refer to women as whores, or use demeaning language to describe women when they're around me because that would be rude.

Jesus Pimp's subesequent posts in this thread made it pretty clear to me that something negative was implied.

"it took a lot of balls to do that" is a compliment. Calling a woman a whore is an insult. That's the kind of analysis I'm applying in this thread.

The girl is in the quotes, but she's completely incidental. Even when she isn't there, it's obvious that the guy isn't going to go have sex with his hand. It seems obvious to me that the man is object of almost all of those quotes.

There are instances where it can be used to complain about the woman, but it is not at all automatic. It depends on the context. Lots of language can be insulting, but usually isn't. It depends on context. It was obvious to me (and other's who knew what it meant) that there was no insult implied here. Jesus Pimp clearly got fed up eventually, and stopped replying maturely. I almost feel like doing that too. Stop going out of your way to find problems with things.

Only the last of these says anything negative about the woman. That is a valid use of the phrase, but as I said above, it is one of many. It is not necessarily insulting to those who understand its meaning. Look, I know what the phrase means, and you admittedly don't. Just trust me.

You missed my point. It was that the meaning of the overall phrase was completely different than the meanings of the individual words. This isn't exactly the only place that this happens in the english language.

Hmmm...I'm finding some of this a little interesting. I don't really see any way around the fact that many women are going to find the term "ho" insulting, so I'm staying away from that aspect. However, I've never known that phrase to be synonomous with "pussy-whipped." I've always heard it used as a invocation of the natural law of friendship involving non-competitiion over a particular girl. As in "regardless of what happens with girl x, we will still be friends."

Frankly, I think the comment is supposed to be a little insulting towards the woman, when used by men. In this sense, it removes the focus of the comment away from the woman, and towards the male relationship. It trivializes the woman, intentionally, in order to stress the importance of the male friendship. I'm not saying it's the greatest phrase ever invented, nor do I normally run around calling ladies "hos." I just think that's where it normally comes from. Something along the lines of "friends before females" is close, but not exactly it...and "brothers before intellectually stimulating, phyisically arousing, emotionally mature members of the opposite sex" just doesn't cut it.

I was replying to this statement of yours: "None of those quotes except for JinnKai's says anything about the woman involved." I'm glad to see that you now concede that they do say something about the woman.

I don't believe I've ever said this was a complaint about the woman. My point is that phrasing the complaint in this manner is insulting to the woman involved.

Exactly, it depends upon the context. The context here was that it was used on a public message board frequented by a large number of women, many of whom have reported that they found that particular usage offensive, and by men who were not part of the OP's social group. In that context, I find it insulting.

I'm not going out of my way. It's right there at the top of the thread: Ho's. As in whores. Further explanations have done nothing to change my perception that calling women whores is insulting.

That I disagree with you does not mean I don't understand. Where exactly have I "admitted" to not understanding?

I understand the meaning quite well, as it has been explained many times in this thread. It means, roughly "You should should not allow a relationship with a woman interfere with your relationship with your friends." Phrased this, way I find no problem with it. When you substitute whore for woman, as in the phrase Bros before hos, it becomes insulting. It isn't the situation being described that is offensive, it is the wording used to describe it.

I understand quite well how idiom works. This particular phrase was used not in a private discussion among a group of friends, but in a public fourm. Many of the women have posted, saying that they found the phrasing insulting. Thus, regardless of the intent, and I'm not entirely convinced that the OP's intent was entirely devoid of disrespect for the woman involved, as is evidenced by his subsequent posts, in the context of a public discussion, calling women whores is insulting.

What use is it being offended by people who could care less who you are, what you're about, or how it makes you feel. Why do you even get offended by their passing garbage, and give them power over you?

People will say what they want to say, if they don't interfere with you and your routine, let them do whatever the hell they want, it's of no consequence to you.

What guy doesn't dislike those ho's who go out with a guy, create a bubble with him where they spend all their time together, don't allow them to socialize on their own, and generally 'censors' your ex-bro from all outside influence.

It's a common trend, and to that, us men say, bro's before ho's. It rhymes. It's cutting to the women who it really applies to and we don't like, and we like that. Maybe we'd stop saying it if it didn't bother them, or carry as much understanding as it does with any guy who hears it spoken.

I'm male, and yeah it's offensive and is usually used by those with less intelligence as apparently they can't remember things that don't ryhme.