View: Of the four-lettered f word that is not 'four'

economictimes.indiatimes.com:

F word that is Not 'Four' (FFNF) in print. The standard practice has been to 'hide' FFNF by putting a pair of asterisks between its legs of the first and last letter of the word.

That's pretty much the same way no one calls that regional armour in cricket 'abdominal guard' since it protects anything but the abdomen of batters (yes, batswomen wear them too). Which is sad for 'fork', 'funk' and 'fink' (an unpleasant chap), for all FFNF variants are F words, but not all F words are FFNFs.

But really? Considering that when you see 'f**k', you read it as it would have stood without a stitch before its creator, what's the point in keeping up with this Queen Victoria's secret?

Elon Musk has, w***y-nilly (see what asterisks can also do when you use them for hijabi purposes?), brought back the subject of FFNF in formal and semi-formal public discourse.

Lashing out on Wednesday against advertisers who have boycotted X (by which I mean ex-Twitter, and not the 24th, and third least frequently used, letter in the Latin alphabet, to also signify anything X-rated), as well as at the naff New York Times twat interviewing him, Musk said 'Go f**k yourself!' a few times. Not 'Go f**k yourself!' or 'Go f**k yourself!' (see options above), but 'Go f**k yourself!' And suddenly the whole English-listening-reading world went, 'Aiyyo!'

FFNF has become more or less acceptable in informal circles.

Post-Nixon it even became presidential, underlining force, hegemonic irritation, while post-Tr**p, it's become downright everyday meh. I certainly value its rhetorical depth and heft.