It’s 2018, ironic use of the F-word (no, the other one), isn’t okay.

 

I have never been a fan of the word “queer.” Wasn’t a fan of it when I was in junior high and called one. Wasn’t a fan of it when it became popular term for LGBT people to use to describe themselves. Wasn’t a fan of it when I started college and heard it in academic circles. I forever associate that word with bullies making fun of me for my perceived…queerness.

But whatever. That word has transcended its original meaning and is now used in a positive manner for those who identify as it. It’s not a word you’ll hear me say often, but the masses have spoken. Queer is an okay word to say (in context). I’m not going to argue that one.

But I won’t give “faggot” the same courtesy.

A writer whose name is not worth typing recently puked forth this nonthinkpiece about Adam Rippon and his, and, to quote from that disgusting headline, “faggy magic.” The writer says that they never felt anything special about other openly gay athletes, but feels differently about Rippon because of he is flamboyant in a way that other openly gay athletes are not, saying “Adam Rippon is not only gay, but our first nationally recognized and respected faggot.”

The article makes a lot of points about assimilation and LGBT representation in the media. It suggests that, with acceptance of LGBT people, a sort of blandification of the “gay lifestyle” has taken over. LGBT people, especially gay men, are shown to be “normal” (in monogamous relationships, not flamboyantly gay) more than they used to be. Their personas as polyamorous queens is being taken away from them. This makes the writer mad. They don’t identify with “normal” culture. They like their gays the same way Homer Simpson does, because that’s how they view themselves.

I would counter that by saying that the “flamboyant slut queen” had been the entirety of gay male representation for the better part of the 20th century, and that this progression into more diverse representations of the gay experience is more than welcome. Furthermore, I would add that the writer’s assertion that non-flamboyant gay men are somehow less gay is, at best idiotic, and at worst a bizarre form of self-hating homophobia.

From the piece:

Rippon is not Michael Sam, kissing his long-term boyfriend chastely on TV during the NFL draft, or Gus Kenworthy with his square and stubbled jaw. His gayness is not an afterthought, but a central piece of his personality.

I’m not Michael Sam, I don’t know much about Michael Sam, but I would highly doubt that he would consider his gayness an afterthought. What the hell does that even mean? I would guess that Michael Sam, or any other the other more “masculine” gay men out there consider themselves just as gay as the next self-identified flaming queen. 

I understand the author’s desire for more diverse representation. They lament the lack of mainstream gay films about single gay men who sleep around without reservation. I agree. Let’s get more of that. I also agree with the writer that too many “gay” films end in tragedy, however, the writer mentions Carol. Now, (spoiler for a three year old film based on a novel from 1952) that movie ends with a happy ending! The book from which Carol is based is actually incredibly famous and well-known within LGBT communities for being one of the first gay-themed novels to have a happy ending! As an example of “sad gay stories” the writer of this article name-dropped a book that was written explicitly to counter that trope. Damn. If I was the writer of this article, I’d be embarrassed.

But whatever, I’m not writing this to address the writer’s embarrassing lack of knowledge regarding LBGT representation in the media.  And I’m not even writing this to counter the writer’s terrible ideas regarding what makes someone more or less gay than someone else. I’m writing this mostly to discuss the writer’s use of the word “faggot.” Because fuck that.

Faggot is a word of hate. A word of violence. A word of death. Faggot is a word most gay men have had hurled at them at one point in their lives, and usually accompanied by a threat of bodily harm and/or death. Faggot is a word that used to be so commonplace and normalized, that you would hear it in kids movies as a general insult like “numbnuts” and “butthead.” It was a punchline. A punchline in family comedies.

 

But we fought back, we let the world know that “faggot” wasn’t an okay word to use anymore. And now it isn’t. Remember when Eminem used to drop “faggot” in his songs like they were commas? He doesn’t anymore. We won that battle. Faggot has become a word so taboo and offensive that it’s often referred to as “the other f-word.” We’ve stripped it out of the vocabulary of acceptable words. Let’s keep it that way.

It’s not even like the writer of this article had a reason to use “faggot.” He could’ve used “queen,” “femme,” “dandy” or any of the other words that we’ve all decided are more acceptable terms for flamboyantly gay men. They would’ve gotten their point across just fine.

Of course that wouldn’t have made their point, that flamboyant gay men are somehow more “gay than those who aren’t, any less stupid. And that’s probably why the writer of this shitstain of an article chose to use the word “faggot” in the first place. They had a weak thesis, a rambling narrative, and no real point to make. That doesn’t bring in the hits or get the attention. So out went “flamboyant” and in went “faggot.” 

And congrats to the writer. It worked. People are talking about their piece, and the writer is getting all the attention they want. Good for them. All they had to do was take a word many associate with kicks to the head and sell out large swathes of the LGBT community. I’d like to know if they think it was worth it, but after asking them on Twitter about their use of “faggot,” the writer blocked me on Twitter. This writer is a coward. When straight people called them out for using the word, he fell back on “you’re straight I don’t need to listen to you.” When gay men (like me) called him out on it, he said that we were wasting our time telling fellow gay men how to act. Because this writer doesn’t understand how criticism works.

I’m not naming this writer because their name isn’t worth mentioning. By writing about their pathetic article (and linking to it), I’m already giving them more attention than I wish was necessary. The person behind this piece is an attention whore, so I won’t give them satisfaction of calling them by their name.

But I also won’t call them a faggot, no matter how much I hate them. Because fuck that word and fuck anyone who uses it.

 

Update: Immediately after tweeting out this article and including the word “fag” in my tweet, my Twitter account was soft-banned for 12 hours (only followers can see my tweets). Meanwhile, Splinter continues to tweet out the article, headline and all, and face no repercussions. So if you wanted another reason to hate them and their bullshit, there you go.