Bitch, Bitch, Bitch

Big Dick, sure; Bitch, no way. A capricious corporate-name policy in California lets pornographers slide while giving a feminist magazine the boot.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


It may not sound like it, but being a corporation documents examiner for the California secretary of state’s office can be fun. As a CDE, you’re on the front lines of the state’s war on corporate bad taste, with de facto authority to reject any corporation name you deem offensive or inappropriate.

Lawyers for San Francisco-based Bitch magazine, an up-and-coming feminist publication (to which this reporter has contributed) learned this the hard way after its application to incorporate under the name Bitch Publications was rejected recently.

Editor and publisher Lisa Miya-Jervis says, “When women are called bitches in the insulting sense, it’s generally because they are outspoken and don’t take any shit. If speaking my mind makes me a bitch, I’m proud of that. Plus, from a purely mercenary marketing perspective, people are more likely to pick up the magazine if it’s called Bitch than if it was called Women’s Media Critic.”

Attorneys for Bitch have applied for a trademark for the magazine’s name, since federal law allows such words on the grounds that, though perhaps offensive, they are not obscene.

But corporate-name watchdogs are stricter than either the trademark folks or the registrars on the information super-smutway, where since 1996 the only obscenities not allowed in domain names are comedian George Carlin‘s notorious Seven Dirty Words.

According to Connie Christensen, one of 14 CDEs employed by the state’s corporations division, examiners follow no written policy regarding sketchy names. “It’s just kind of everybody’s opinion, just what somebody would consider offensive,” she says. “It’s partly for the people who work here; it’s not pleasant to have to deal with these [distasteful] requests.”

Asked for examples, Christensen politely spells out the offending words. “We had a request for b-i-t-c-h one time, first word ‘ice,'” she says. “That wasn’t acceptable.”

And others?

“There was the opposite of b-i-t-c-h for a guy.”

And how might one spell that?

“B-a-s-t-a-r-d,” replies the examiner. “See? This isn’t pleasant for me.”

The lack of a clear policy raises questions of when, and by whom, such a line should be drawn. That a state would allow some such names and not others raises questions of fairness and free speech says Miya-Jervis, who plans to fight the ban on Bitch.

Consider some examples: Florida gave the go-ahead to Pussy Pillows Inc., which probably makes cat cushions; that state is also home to Bitchy Kitty Software, Arse Corp., and Balls of Steel Inc. (a bearing manufacturer, perhaps?). Chances are that Big Dick Oil and Gas Company of Kansas was founded by a fellow named Richard; Arkansas boasts the Australasian Order of Old Bastards Inc.

“Maybe knowing what they were doing with [such names] would clarify matters,” says Debra O’Banion, commercial division manager for the Louisiana secretary of state, “But we wouldn’t know, and wouldn’t legally have the right to ask what a corporation is doing.”

The absurdity of leaving such decisions to individual bureaucratic staffers is demonstrated by names already on the books in California. In addition to Ice Bitch — initially rejected, then accepted on appeal — there’s Big Balls Productions Inc., Furry Balls Inc., Lil’ Naked Butt Factory, Poo Poo Butt Inc., Snatch Inc. (a porn operation), Ass Enterprises Inc., Bass or Ass Bass Fishing Club, and Dick Corporation, to name just a few.

Louisiana, which in 1992 OK’d Bitches Inc. (now defunct, unlike Nevada’s Bitch Enterprises) also handles names case-by-case, but seems to have a firmer grasp on reality.

According to O’Banion, something as clearly profane as the F-word would probably be passed along to staff attorneys. “We’ve got coon-ass this and coon-ass that,” she says, adding that “coon-ass” is a regional reference to people of French descent. “Bitches Inc. I probably wouldn’t worry about; I wouldn’t consider that offensive. Bitch can be a female dog, too.”

Los Angeles actress Lisa Janney Nordskog named her clothing business after her old nickname, Ice Bitch. “I call it ‘attitude apparel,'” says the thespian. “I don’t find anything offensive about Ice Bitch; both words are in the dictionary, and there was no offense intended.”

Cathy Mitchell, business programs chief for the California secretary of state, defends the state’s position, adding that most of the CDEs are veteran employees, and for all practical purposes are following the advice of staff attorneys. In this case, Mitchell agrees that the word is offensive. “If it’s a dog breeders outfit, maybe,” she says. “The [California department of motor vehicles] wouldn’t allow ‘BITCH’ either” on personalized license plates.

Indeed. But a search of California DMV records did reveal the following plates: BBBITCH, NBITCH, BEATCH, BBITCHN, BITCHEN, BITCHIN, BITCHNB, BITCHNG, BITCHNT, BITCHN9, BITCHYN, and BOBITCH — but, thankfully, nothing so offensive as BITCH.

WE'LL BE BLUNT.

We have a considerable $390,000 gap in our online fundraising budget that we have to close by June 30. There is no wiggle room, we've already cut everything we can, and we urgently need more readers to pitch in—especially from this specific blurb you're reading right now.

We'll also be quite transparent and level-headed with you about this.

In "News Never Pays," our fearless CEO, Monika Bauerlein, connects the dots on several concerning media trends that, taken together, expose the fallacy behind the tragic state of journalism right now: That the marketplace will take care of providing the free and independent press citizens in a democracy need, and the Next New Thing to invest millions in will fix the problem. Bottom line: Journalism that serves the people needs the support of the people. That's the Next New Thing.

And it's what MoJo and our community of readers have been doing for 47 years now.

But staying afloat is harder than ever.

In "This Is Not a Crisis. It's The New Normal," we explain, as matter-of-factly as we can, what exactly our finances look like, why this moment is particularly urgent, and how we can best communicate that without screaming OMG PLEASE HELP over and over. We also touch on our history and how our nonprofit model makes Mother Jones different than most of the news out there: Letting us go deep, focus on underreported beats, and bring unique perspectives to the day's news.

You're here for reporting like that, not fundraising, but one cannot exist without the other, and it's vitally important that we hit our intimidating $390,000 number in online donations by June 30.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. It's going to be a nail-biter, and we really need to see donations from this specific ask coming in strong if we're going to get there.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT.

We have a considerable $390,000 gap in our online fundraising budget that we have to close by June 30. There is no wiggle room, we've already cut everything we can, and we urgently need more readers to pitch in—especially from this specific blurb you're reading right now.

We'll also be quite transparent and level-headed with you about this.

In "News Never Pays," our fearless CEO, Monika Bauerlein, connects the dots on several concerning media trends that, taken together, expose the fallacy behind the tragic state of journalism right now: That the marketplace will take care of providing the free and independent press citizens in a democracy need, and the Next New Thing to invest millions in will fix the problem. Bottom line: Journalism that serves the people needs the support of the people. That's the Next New Thing.

And it's what MoJo and our community of readers have been doing for 47 years now.

But staying afloat is harder than ever.

In "This Is Not a Crisis. It's The New Normal," we explain, as matter-of-factly as we can, what exactly our finances look like, why this moment is particularly urgent, and how we can best communicate that without screaming OMG PLEASE HELP over and over. We also touch on our history and how our nonprofit model makes Mother Jones different than most of the news out there: Letting us go deep, focus on underreported beats, and bring unique perspectives to the day's news.

You're here for reporting like that, not fundraising, but one cannot exist without the other, and it's vitally important that we hit our intimidating $390,000 number in online donations by June 30.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. It's going to be a nail-biter, and we really need to see donations from this specific ask coming in strong if we're going to get there.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate