bidden subjects and the forbidden vocabulary associated with them. Hardly anyone can escape from at least hearing some of these expressions. The sexual patterns of the use of forbidden vocabulary have also been in flux. The free and constant use of “foul lan- guage” on the part of men in groups, such as in the military or in all-male work places, has long been regarded as typical. The use of such language in the presence of women (and children) was, and still is for a broad segment of the population, a strong social taboo. The historical pattern of the male use of. forbidden expressions, and the female opposition to the use of forbidden expressions, has come under strong challenge in the last three decades. Most strikingly, the proponents of the “women’s liberation” movements of the 1960s and *70s and, later, the feminists have adopted and adapted the typical male patterns of forbidden language use for their own purposes. It is still too early to predict how these conflicting sexual pat- terns of forbidden language use will be resolved, if, indeed, they ever will. Young people also remain the creators and prime users of for- bidden vocabulary. As many teachers, parents, and grandpar- ents have learned, the use of forbidden vocabulary among the young is amazingly widespread. The notes and comments in #hi¥ iictionary attempt to show what the ‘ypical use patterns are-for each entry. The state- ments abcut typical users really describe the kinds of people for whom the vocabulary items seem most appropriate—given the point of view of this dictionary. There is no notion that the phrase typical of male-to-male talk means that only males use the expression in question; it simply means that the expression is perceived as more typical of male-to-male use than any other use. The comments about typicality refer to perceived typical patterns; they are not limitations. One would expect that many of the expressions marked as typical of male-to- ‘male talk are already in frequent use by females,