837:
Google NGram shows an uptick in its usage from 2014-ish onwards, but it was used in one context or another quite a bit before that. The word is, I think, a straigtforward abbreviation of cuckold, rather than an abbreviation of the portmanteau. Once a new article for 'cuck (insult)' has been written, it may then be desirable to merge the content of this article into that one, but that's not a page move. Happy to change my view if good evidence comes forward to demonstrate that my assumptions are wrong.
303:
402:
497:
476:
724:
507:
392:
371:
340:
203:
233:
836:
The trouble with this is that the sources in this article are talking about the word cuckservative. An article about the insult 'cuck' could potentially be written, but my impression is that cuck as an insult and/or sexual fetish was in use prior to the term 'cuckservative' being coined - certainly
627:
It should exist if it is noteworthy and correct, but it arguably is not. This term is also used by leftists as mockery based on studies which state that conservatives are more likely to fantasize about sharing their wives. Asserting that it is used only by conservatives is a distortion of facts.
918:
This article is not about "cuck" or "cuckold" as an insult. It is restricted to cuckservative. You should write an article on "cuck" and then merge "cuckservative" into it. "cuck" predates "cuckservative", and has a broader usage and meaning. Or just merge this article into
153:
881:? An article about that already exists (and refers to this article for further information about "cuckservative"). What would be the distinction between this article and that one? Should they be merged? —
800:
If the page is moved to just being about the insult "cuck" in general- with a section on the longer word "cuckservative" that was used from 2015 to 2016, then it could be broader, longer, and more in-depth.
785:– I'm pretty sure the term "cuckservative" has not been used by anyone since 2016. A cursory Google search shows that the last news articles to use the word "cuckservative" to be in 2015 and some in 2016.
273:
263:
253:
588:
903:- This single barely noteworthy pejorative does not need a dedicated article. It seems much more appropriate to incorporate it into a larger one discussing the far more widely used parent term.
760:
648:
There is a big red cite error listed at the bottom. @Captain Pingu, it appears your edit did so. I don't want to do a blanket revert, but could you correct said? Thanks.
194:
147:
592:
701:
960:
458:
448:
283:
789:
965:
955:
79:
975:
752:
563:
553:
424:
980:
970:
85:
44:
686:
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
616:
529:
924:
415:
376:
321:
99:
30:
520:
481:
104:
20:
168:
942:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
748:
135:
74:
790:
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2023/jul/11/zuck-is-a-cuck-why-is-elon-musk-borrowing-insults-from-white-supremacists
351:
190:
65:
819:
per nom, page should be rehashed into the "cuck" insult, with a small section for cuckservative (what a sentence).--
202:
185:
677:
309:
239:
213:
129:
904:
744:
339:
612:
109:
795:
928:
846:
125:
633:
886:
864:
687:
608:
357:
788:
Meanwhile, the insult "cuck" has been regularly used for years by now, such as these recent examples:
734:
604:
175:
629:
232:
792:
782:
407:
317:
161:
55:
690:
after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
528:
on
Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
423:
on
Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
824:
806:
218:
70:
838:
706:
601:
Again, i do not know if i should even write this here, but this should not exist on
Knowledge
51:
882:
860:
215:
141:
512:
738:
506:
496:
475:
949:
820:
802:
778:
768:
24:
730:
420:
723:
502:
397:
391:
370:
242:. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
525:
217:
796:
https://www.cosmopolitan.com/sex-love/a26426435/cuck-meaning-definition/
920:
878:
932:
909:
890:
868:
851:
828:
810:
713:
662:
652:
637:
620:
596:
793:
https://www.vice.com/en/article/5d93x5/cuck-obsession-jeff-bezos
767:
Comments from this user should be excluded from assessments of
718:
333:
297:
227:
219:
15:
859:: Not the only (or primary) use of "cuck" as an insult. —
756:
313:
308:
On 29 April 2024, it was proposed that this article be
160:
524:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
419:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
33:for general discussion of the article's subject.
174:
8:
337:
676:The following is a closed discussion of a
470:
365:
877:Isn't "cuck" simply a shortened form of
472:
367:
729:This discussion has been disrupted by
589:2601:19A:4400:218C:120B:A9FF:FE61:EFBC
7:
961:Low-importance Conservatism articles
695:The result of the move request was:
518:This article is within the scope of
413:This article is within the scope of
356:It is of interest to the following
23:for discussing improvements to the
433:Knowledge:WikiProject Conservatism
14:
966:WikiProject Conservatism articles
956:Start-Class Conservatism articles
436:Template:WikiProject Conservatism
976:Low-importance politics articles
938:The discussion above is closed.
722:
505:
495:
474:
400:
390:
369:
338:
301:
231:
201:
45:Click here to start a new topic.
558:This article has been rated as
453:This article has been rated as
238:This article was nominated for
538:Knowledge:WikiProject Politics
1:
981:WikiProject Politics articles
971:Start-Class politics articles
638:15:11, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
597:15:26, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
541:Template:WikiProject Politics
532:and see a list of open tasks.
427:and see a list of open tasks.
42:Put new text under old text.
669:Requested move 29 April 2024
50:New to Knowledge? Welcome!
997:
869:18:14, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
852:12:56, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
829:12:44, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
811:04:18, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
564:project's importance scale
459:project's importance scale
741:from the following user:
663:01:26, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
653:00:50, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
557:
490:
452:
385:
364:
80:Be welcoming to newcomers
940:Please do not modify it.
683:Please do not modify it.
621:00:57, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
416:WikiProject Conservatism
933:03:40, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
910:00:06, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
891:01:09, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
714:13:42, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
587:Is this here? PS: Kek
346:This article is rated
272:, 4 October 2015, see
75:avoid personal attacks
439:Conservatism articles
252:, 17 March 2017, see
195:Auto-archiving period
100:Neutral point of view
521:WikiProject Politics
282:, 29 July 2015, see
105:No original research
408:Conservatism portal
262:, 12 May 2016, see
352:content assessment
86:dispute resolution
47:
776:
775:
705:
702:non-admin closure
607:comment added by
578:
577:
574:
573:
570:
569:
544:politics articles
469:
468:
465:
464:
332:
331:
296:
295:
292:
291:
226:
225:
66:Assume good faith
43:
988:
906:Durchbruchmüller
844:
841:
745:Durchbruchmüller
726:
719:
711:
699:
685:
661:
651:
623:
546:
545:
542:
539:
536:
515:
510:
509:
499:
492:
491:
486:
478:
471:
441:
440:
437:
434:
431:
410:
405:
404:
403:
394:
387:
386:
381:
373:
366:
349:
343:
342:
334:
320:. The result of
305:
304:
298:
244:
243:
235:
228:
220:
206:
205:
196:
179:
178:
164:
95:Article policies
16:
996:
995:
991:
990:
989:
987:
986:
985:
946:
945:
944:
943:
849:
842:
839:
707:
681:
671:
659:
649:
646:
602:
585:
583:How the hell...
543:
540:
537:
534:
533:
513:Politics portal
511:
504:
484:
438:
435:
432:
429:
428:
406:
401:
399:
379:
350:on Knowledge's
347:
302:
222:
221:
216:
193:
121:
116:
115:
114:
91:
61:
12:
11:
5:
994:
992:
984:
983:
978:
973:
968:
963:
958:
948:
947:
937:
936:
935:
913:
896:
895:
894:
893:
872:
871:
854:
847:
831:
774:
773:
765:
764:
727:
717:
693:
692:
678:requested move
672:
670:
667:
666:
665:
645:
642:
641:
640:
609:79.191.16.109
584:
581:
576:
575:
572:
571:
568:
567:
560:Low-importance
556:
550:
549:
547:
530:the discussion
517:
516:
500:
488:
487:
485:Low‑importance
479:
467:
466:
463:
462:
455:Low-importance
451:
445:
444:
442:
425:the discussion
412:
411:
395:
383:
382:
380:Low‑importance
374:
362:
361:
355:
344:
330:
329:
322:the discussion
306:
294:
293:
290:
289:
288:
287:
277:
267:
257:
236:
224:
223:
214:
212:
211:
208:
207:
181:
180:
118:
117:
113:
112:
107:
102:
93:
92:
90:
89:
82:
77:
68:
62:
60:
59:
48:
39:
38:
35:
34:
28:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
993:
982:
979:
977:
974:
972:
969:
967:
964:
962:
959:
957:
954:
953:
951:
941:
934:
930:
926:
922:
917:
914:
912:
911:
908:
907:
902:
898:
897:
892:
888:
884:
880:
876:
875:
874:
873:
870:
866:
862:
858:
855:
853:
850:
845:
835:
832:
830:
826:
822:
818:
815:
814:
813:
812:
808:
804:
798:
797:
794:
791:
786:
784:
783:Cuck (insult)
780:
779:Cuckservative
772:
770:
762:
758:
754:
750:
746:
743:
742:
740:
736:
732:
731:block evasion
728:
725:
721:
720:
716:
715:
712:
710:
703:
698:
691:
689:
684:
679:
674:
673:
668:
664:
657:
656:
655:
654:
643:
639:
635:
631:
626:
625:
624:
622:
618:
614:
610:
606:
599:
598:
594:
590:
582:
580:
565:
561:
555:
552:
551:
548:
531:
527:
523:
522:
514:
508:
503:
501:
498:
494:
493:
489:
483:
480:
477:
473:
460:
456:
450:
447:
446:
443:
426:
422:
418:
417:
409:
398:
396:
393:
389:
388:
384:
378:
375:
372:
368:
363:
359:
353:
345:
341:
336:
335:
327:
323:
319:
318:Cuck (insult)
315:
314:Cuckservative
311:
307:
300:
299:
285:
281:
278:
275:
271:
268:
265:
261:
258:
255:
251:
248:
247:
246:
245:
241:
237:
234:
230:
229:
210:
209:
204:
200:
192:
189:
187:
183:
182:
177:
173:
170:
167:
163:
159:
155:
152:
149:
146:
143:
140:
137:
134:
131:
127:
124:
123:Find sources:
120:
119:
111:
110:Verifiability
108:
106:
103:
101:
98:
97:
96:
87:
83:
81:
78:
76:
72:
69:
67:
64:
63:
57:
53:
52:Learn to edit
49:
46:
41:
40:
37:
36:
32:
26:
25:Cuckservative
22:
18:
17:
939:
925:65.92.247.66
915:
905:
900:
899:
856:
833:
816:
799:
787:
777:
766:
739:sockpuppetry
708:
696:
694:
682:
675:
658:Nevermind.--
647:
603:— Preceding
600:
586:
579:
559:
519:
454:
430:Conservatism
421:conservatism
414:
377:Conservatism
358:WikiProjects
325:
279:
270:no consensus
269:
260:no consensus
259:
250:speedy close
249:
198:
184:
171:
165:
157:
150:
144:
138:
132:
122:
94:
19:This is the
883:BarrelProof
861:BarrelProof
735:ban evasion
688:move review
660:Surv1v4l1st
650:Surv1v4l1st
348:Start-class
148:free images
31:not a forum
950:Categories
805:(he/him •
644:Cite Error
284:discussion
280:Trainwreck
274:discussion
264:discussion
254:discussion
848:(blether)
769:consensus
757:block log
697:not moved
630:Drinkypoo
326:not moved
88:if needed
71:Be polite
21:talk page
821:Ortizesp
803:HadesTTW
753:contribs
709:Toadette
617:contribs
605:unsigned
535:Politics
526:politics
482:Politics
240:deletion
186:Archives
56:get help
29:This is
27:article.
921:cuckold
901:Support
879:cuckold
817:Support
562:on the
457:on the
199:90 days
154:WP refs
142:scholar
916:Oppose
857:Oppose
843:Summit
834:Oppose
354:scale.
126:Google
840:Girth
737:, or
312:from
310:moved
169:JSTOR
130:books
84:Seek
929:talk
887:talk
865:talk
825:talk
807:talk
749:talk
634:talk
613:talk
593:talk
324:was
162:FENS
136:news
73:and
923:--
761:spi
554:Low
449:Low
316:to
176:TWL
952::
931:)
889:)
867:)
827:)
809:)
781:→
759:·
755:·
751:·
733:,
680:.
636:)
619:)
615:•
595:)
197::
156:)
54:;
927:(
885:(
863:(
823:(
771:.
763:)
747:(
704:)
700:(
632:(
611:(
591:(
566:.
461:.
360::
328:.
286:.
276:.
266:.
256:.
191:1
188::
172:·
166:·
158:·
151:·
145:·
139:·
133:·
128:(
58:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
