Gendered Uses and Meanings of Taboo Language: A Systematic Review of Sociolinguistic, Digital, Cultural, and Cognitive Research

Taboo language is a complex form of communication that extends beyond simple expressions of offence or aggression, as its use and meaning may vary according to gender, social context, culture, identity, power, digital environments, and cognitive processes. However, existing research on gendered taboo and offensive language remains dispersed across sociolinguistic, digital, cultural, and cognitive perspectives, making it difficult to obtain an integrated understanding of how gender shapes its forms, functions, and meanings. This systematic literature review (SLR) aims to synthesise existing research on the gendered uses and meanings of taboo language and identify major patterns across different research contexts. The review employed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) protocol and systematically searched two major databases, Web of Science and Scopus, using the keywords “taboo language,” “offensive language,” “gender,” and “swearing.” The initial search and screening process identified 84 relevant studies, of which 43 proceeded to the eligibility stage, and 41 studies were retained for the final thematic analysis. The findings revealed seven major themes: sociolinguistic patterns and gendered variation in swearing and taboo language (9 studies; 21.95%), taboo and offensive language as identity, power, resistance, and gender performance (8; 19.51%), online hate speech and gendered digital communication (4; 9.76%), censorship, euphemism, avoidance, translation, and gender-fair language reform (8; 19.51%), cognitive and emotional processing of taboo language (7; 17.07%), gendered discourse and representation beyond swearing (3; 7.32%), and contextual and peripheral uses of offensive or forbidden terminology (2; 4.88%). Overall, the review demonstrates that gendered taboo language is multidimensional and context-dependent, functioning not only as offensive speech but also as a resource for identity construction, solidarity, resistance, humour, power negotiation, and social representation. The findings highlight the need for future research to examine gendered taboo language through more integrated sociolinguistic, digital, cultural, and cognitive perspectives.

Taboo language, gender and swearing, offensive language, sociolinguistics, cognitive processing

1. Alzubaidi, M., & Hatoss, A. (2025). What can taboo words tell us about language choices? Saudi females’ attitudes towards taboo words in English and Arabic. International Journal of Arabic-English Studies, 25(2), 401–420. https://doi.org/10.33806/ijaes.v25i2.870 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Balikienė, M., Dečiunienė, J., & Navickas, V. (2022). Managing the menstrual communication taboo in Lithuania: Past and present. Yearbook of Balkan and Baltic Studies, 5(1), 136–159. https://doi.org/10.7592/YBBS5.06 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Chiaro, D. (2007). Not in front of the children? An analysis of sex on screen in Italy. Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series – Themes in Translation Studies, 6, 255–276. https://doi.org/10.52034/LANSTTS.V6I.191 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Defina., Rizkilah, R., & Hastuti, D. (2024). Cirebon coastal adolescents' use of taboo language and its relation to parental education [Penggunaan bahasa tabu remaja pesisir Cirebon dan hubungannya dengan pendidikan orang tua]. Jurnal Gramatika, 10(1), 70–86. https://doi.org/10.22202/jg.2024.v10i1.7751 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. de Klerk, V. (1992). How taboo are taboo words for girls? Language in Society, 21(2), 277–289. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500015293 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Dorfman, D. D., Grossberg, J. M., & Kroeker, L. (1965). Recognition of taboo stimuli as a function of exposure time. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2(4), 552–562. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0022493 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Eid, O. A. A.-H. (2021). A socio-pragmatic analysis of taboo language using animal names in Facebook Messenger in the Jordanian setting: A gender-based study. Jordan Journal of Modern Languages and Literatures, 13(3), 411–430. https://doi.org/10.47012/jjmll.13.3.3 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Furman, M. (2018). Of mat and men: Taboo words and the language of Russian female punks. Laboratorium: Russian Review of Social Research, 10(1), 5–28. https://doi.org/10.25285/2078-1938-2018-10-1-5-28 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Gottesfeld, D. (2014). “Forbidden words”: Palestinian women's literature in Israel—Between conservatism and subversion. Hawwa, 11, 212–234. https://doi.org/10.1163/15692086-12341243 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Khaghaninejad, M. S., Ahmadi, A., & Shegeft, T. (2020). An investigation into the effect of foreign language learning on the use of taboo words in the learners' first language discourse. Teaching English Language, 14(1), 91– 117. https://doi.org/10.22132/tel.2020.102839 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Maazallahi, E., & Hajibagheri, Z. (2022). The effect of translator gender on the censorship of taboos in Iranian context. Ezikov Svyat, 20(3), 386–395. https://doi.org/10.37708/ezs.swu.bg.v20i3.9 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Mitchell, A. (2015). Words that smell like father-in-law: A linguistic description of the Datooga avoidance register. Anthropological Linguistics, 57(2), 195–217. https://doi.org/10.1353/anl.2016.0004 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Palacios Martínez, I. M. (2021). Taboo vocatives in the language of London teenagers. Pragmatics, 31(2), 250–277. https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.19028.pal [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Pekbay, B., Lagarde, S. M., Keyzer-Dekker, C. M., de Vries, F. C., de Jonge, J., & Hendriks, J. M. (2025). Serve coffee, hold clamps, do not complain: Student perceptions and experiences regarding surgery. Journal of Surgical Education, 82(2), Article 103394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2024.103394 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Shafiba, N., & Stapleton, K. (2024). Persian immigrants’ language choice for swearing: The effects of socio- biographical variables and personality traits. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 45(7), 2734–2751. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2022.2068559 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Shafto, M. A., Abrams, L., James, L. E., Hu, P., & Gray, G. (2024). Relating tabooness to humor and arousal ratings in American English: What the f*** is so funny? Language and Speech, 67(4), 1121–1134. https://doi.org/10.1177/00238309241228863 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Stephens, R., & Zile, A. (2017). Does emotional arousal influence swearing fluency? Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 46(4), 983–995. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-016-9473-8 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Sutarsih, Subyantoro, Mardikantoro, H. B., & Yuniawan, T. (2024). Cases of women's hate speech due to the use of taboo language on social media. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 14(9), 2814–2822. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1409.17 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Tian, X., & Deng, Y. (2017). Organizational hierarchy, deprived masculinity, and confrontational practices: Men doing women's jobs in a global factory. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 46(4), 464–489. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241615617810 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Eftimova, A. (2020). The tension between masculine and feminine nouns in the language of political correctness. Bulgarski Ezik i Literatura (Bulgarian Language and Literature), 62(1), 19–36. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Engoren, M., Brown, R. R., & Dubovoy, A. (2017). A retrospective analysis of the effect of blood transfusion on cerebral oximetry entropy and acute kidney injury. Perfusion, 32(1), 35–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267659116661050 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Guzzetti, M. (2023). Forbidden words and female anatomy: Gender and language taboos in the Oxford English Dictionary. LEA, 12, 137–156. https://doi.org/10.36253/LEA-1824-484X-14254 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Kapoor, H. (2016). Swears in context: The difference between casual and abusive swearing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 45(2), 259–274. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-014-9345-z [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Kapoor, S. (2022). “Don't act like a Sati Savitri!”: Impoliteness in Indian YouTube comments. Journal of Pragmatics, 189, 4–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2021.12.009 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Kunene, D. P. (1958). Notes on Hlonepha among the Southern Sotho. African Studies, 17(3), 159–182. https://doi.org/10.1080/00020185808707057 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Kwarteng, J., Perfumi, S. C., Farrell, T., Third, A., & Fernandez, M. (2022). Misogynoir: Challenges in detecting intersectional hate. Social Network Analysis and Mining, 12(1), Article 166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13278- 022-00993-7 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Lomotey, B. A. (2018). Making Spanish gender fair: A review of anti-sexist language reform attempts from a language planning perspective. Current Issues in Language Planning, 19(4), 383–400. https://doi.org/10.1080/14664208.2017.1403217 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Love, R. (2021). Swearing in informal spoken English: 1990s–2010s. Text & Talk, 41, 739–762. https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2020-0051 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Manning, S. K., & Goldstein, F. D. (1976). Recall of emotional and neutral words as a function of rate and organization of list presentation. Journal of General Psychology, 95(2), 241–249. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.1976.9711347 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. McGarry, T., & Kiser, K. (2017). Adverbial clauses and speaker and interlocutor gender in Shakespeare's plays. Palgrave Communications, 3. https://doi.org/10.1057/palcomms.2017.53 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Muharremi, I., & Krasniqi, A. (2026). The vulgar use of language in graffiti on the walls of Pristina. Ezikov Svyat, 24(1), 92–106. https://doi.org/10.37708/ezs.swu.bg.v24i1.6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Mujević, D. (2025). Negative stereotypes about women in gender-marked phrases of Rožaje's speech. Croatica et Slavica Iadertina, 21(2). https://doi.org/10.15291/csi.4906 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Qassim, N. A., & Abbas, N. F. (2025). A socio-pragmatic study of profanity and derogatory words in Doja Cat’s songs: A corpus-based study. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 15(10), 3355–3365. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1510.22 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Rahmat, W., Putra, L. D., & Fitriyah, R. (2025). How do the ethnic Minangkabau males express their masculinity in language? An identity point of view. Culture & Psychology, 31(1), 166–180.https://doi.org/10.1177/1354067X231201389 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Reilly, J., Zuckerman, B., Kelly, A., Flurie, M., & Rao, S. (2020). Neuromodulation of cursing in American English: A combined tDCS and pupillometry study. Brain and Language, 206, Article 104791. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2020.104791 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Szczyglowska, T. (2024). Using corpus linguistics to uncover repeated patterns of language use in important 20th century speeches by American women. Świat i Słowo, 43(2), 79–100. https://doi.org/10.53052/17313317.2024.28 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Van Hedger, S. C., Heald, S. L. M., & Nusbaum, H. C. (2016). What the [bleep]? Enhanced absolute pitch memory for a 1000 Hz sine tone. Cognition, 154, 139–150.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2016.06.001 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Walsh, T. (2017). Public nuisance, race and gender. Griffith Law Review, 26(3), 334–354. https://doi.org/10.1080/10383441.2018.1449055 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. White, K. K., Abrams, L., LaBat, L. R., & Rhynes, A. M. (2016). Competing influences of emotion and phonology during picture-word interference. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31(2), 265–283. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2015.1101144 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Windsor, L., Mitchell, S. M., Osborn, T., Dietrich, B., & Hampton, A. J. (2022). Gender, language, and representation in the United States Senate. Journal of Language and Politics, 21(6), Article 80.https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.21053.win [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Yousefinaghani, S., Dara, R., MacKay, M., Papadopoulos, A., & Sharif, S. (2022). Trust and engagement on Twitter during the management of the COVID-19 pandemic: The effect of gender and position. Frontiers in Sociology, 7, Article 811589. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2022.811589 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study