1) Nigger. The word in itself is so politically incorrect, that it's inappropriate to use it even in conversations about the word itself! (E.g. to point out the "reverse"-racism, how blacks can use the word "nigger", but whites can't.)
2) Almost any topic that people have a very strong opinion about. E.g. feminism, chauvinism, and using rape threats against Adria Richards - for example, I could argue that people are wrong of accusing those who threatened her to be chauvinists, because if you want to threaten someone, it makes perfect sense to threaten them in the worst possible way - death, rape, hurting their children... so the problem aren't rape threats, but threats in general. But most people only hear the part of the argument "rape threats aren't the problem" and totally disregard the rest of the conversation or even the fact that I don't necessarily believe what I'm saying, I'm just presenting the rational argument!
In words of Aristotle:
> It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.
Many people don't get this. Attacking a good person because they swear is usually the symptom of this.
You're considering words entirely outside of their social, political, and historical context.
Context matters: if I point a gun at you, should you get upset? Why, I mean, I haven't actually _done_ anything to you, it's just a threat! Sure in an abstract sense a gun imposed no inherent harm. It's how you use it.
Also, this isn't very 'rational,' for example:
> so the problem aren't rape threats, but threats in general
If threats are a problem then rape threats are a problem.
Two examples:
1) Nigger. The word in itself is so politically incorrect, that it's inappropriate to use it even in conversations about the word itself! (E.g. to point out the "reverse"-racism, how blacks can use the word "nigger", but whites can't.)
2) Almost any topic that people have a very strong opinion about. E.g. feminism, chauvinism, and using rape threats against Adria Richards - for example, I could argue that people are wrong of accusing those who threatened her to be chauvinists, because if you want to threaten someone, it makes perfect sense to threaten them in the worst possible way - death, rape, hurting their children... so the problem aren't rape threats, but threats in general. But most people only hear the part of the argument "rape threats aren't the problem" and totally disregard the rest of the conversation or even the fact that I don't necessarily believe what I'm saying, I'm just presenting the rational argument!
In words of Aristotle:
> It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.
Many people don't get this. Attacking a good person because they swear is usually the symptom of this.