"egregious" isn't a pleasant kind of word…

I would use "egregious" as a derogatory description of someone's conduct, even a falsifying of what is not true that is an "egregious" offense.

The subjective use of "egregious" lends itself to an expose about what may even be a criminal act, the breaking a trust that is implicit, perhaps in a government agency where breaches of the law took place. 

This descriptive word, "egregious," can related to a bias, perhaps in politics, or in writing about an event that is subjectively cited as an example of malfeasance, though in this 21^st century of media prominence "egregious," is that which exposes what is also a subjective view of something that has taken place or will take place that is not going to bring a good result.  The use of "egregious" can lend itself to scandals and actions that are damaging to a person's reputation—in politics, something of a common occurrence in our permissive cultural scheme of interpreting what is right and what may no longer be wrong, that is if measured by substance of some sort.  

I believe this way of interpreting good and bad is an "egregious" perversion of a moral stance that is no longer immoral in the opinion of those who set the standards for what is good and bad.

Is it any wonder that growing up in this 21^st century is more of a confusion—there are no rules to point toward a standard of behavior that may be considered as not "egregious."

*to find out more about my writing and works please visit my other blogs:

http://www.nomorenotcomfortablehotels.blogspot.comand my Authors Guild maintained websites:
http://www.cynthialynn.org