Well said!

Thank you! Any writer worth anything wont curse simply for the sake of itself, the untalented may do it as some selling point (brand the book,poem whatever as "edgy") but truthfully i dont even think that works anymore. Sure when Catcher came out in '51 it was quite a big deal to have a character - and a teenager at that- swearing every other sentence. However, the point of it in that instance was to acurately portray a teenager (this is obviously a simple summation of the use of language in that book and there are certainly several other reasons for Holden's cursing (contrasting adult world/children etc) but this isnt about Catcher in the Rye so I shant go on about it any longer). The point is that language (no matter how vile it may seem) can no longer sell a book, so the only ways it might be used is to reinforce something within the narrative (be it emphassis, characterization or whatever else).  For whatever reason there is this pervasive notion amoungst some people that the use of certain words are a mark of intellectual paucity. As for the bussiness of making things "age aprpropriate" I tend to agree with you that both the language spoken by (most) people is often course and so the material that tries to depict them should at the very least be aware of this truth and aknowledge it with its own use of language. however, I would also add that despite this magazine being designed for a "younger" audience than say the New Yorker or Mcsweeny's that shouldnt take away from its whole "by teens for teens" mission. the truth of the matter is that when I was five I would go through book stores and browse for things about thomas the tank engine or clifford the big red dog, as I got older I read chapter books designed for kids of a certain age. I did not however accidentally stumble upon  Hunter thompson or Bukowski. "bad" language, mature themes etc can only really be injurious to those who are exposed to them by accident, and if a person A) decides to pick up one of my poems and B) decides to read it all the way to the end and has the capacity (unlike say a toddler) to acctually understand what im on about then it's pretty well impossible for them to be negatively effected by it. since this isnt a matter of something far more contentious like the use of racial slurs, violent sexual imagery etc there should be no debate as to the validity of someone using some word.  Sorry for the length of this repply I just felt the need to air my grievences about censorship in general. Obviously one magazines editorial choice has little to do with the world at large but it is worth discussing. Also my appologies for the butchering of one of your published works. thankfully I've yet to expeirence that.

Yes! It annoys me so much as well - you wouldn't include curses if they weren't there for a reason. I guess maybe they do it because it's aimed at young people but seriously... The books that we read and the speach that we hear is loaded with swearing so I don't see why our work has to be censored and altered to keep it curse free.  Another time, when I had one of my poems published they completely changed one of the lines and I read it in the magazine and was like; What??? I did not write this!

As far as why they rarely appear in print I imagine it has something to do with taste and my work not being apetizing (most of the time anyway) to whoever makes the magazine selections, but thats to be expected. The thing I fail to understand however is why they feel the need to edit or omit my use of specific words (even if they may be curses) its written the way it is for a reason. I feel as if the word goes from a nasty slap in the face to a wet noodle after censorship.

I genuinely don't understand why there isn't a little magazine logo next to every poem you've written...