Draw A Line: When Is 'Fag' Appropriate?
I saw something on Kotaku today that really turned my stomach for a number of reasons, and after reading the comments there I'd like to see the reaction here at GayGamer.
Kotaku pointed to an interview with Gears of War designer CliffyB at CVG. The interview consisted mostly of questions about Gears of War 2 and the new Unreal Engine. There was, however, one bit at the end that was off-subject - and it was this vestigial bit of text that made Kotaku's headline:
If The Cliffster Had A Nickel Everytime He Was Called A "Fag"...
So there's that. The actual pull quote reads:
If I had a nickel for every time I was called a fag on the internet, I could retire. It's just the way the fans are sometimes; you do a good job and they'll hold you up in a chair and carry you through the streets. You screw up once and they'll be the first to tart and feather you, and that's the risk I take when I stick my neck out there.
Now I know the writer personally and can say without hesitation that he's as sweet and unbigoted a guy as you could ask for. But you shouldn't trust me - writers, being writers, speak for themselves. And sometimes, yes, we write things that come out the wrong way, or that appear to serve a different purpose than we'd intended. I've been on the receiving end of that mess myself.
However.
I also know that Kotaku, like many blogs (but not us), pays its writers according to pageviews - thus setting up an ideal situation for writers to artificially sensationalize their content. Such as selling an only moderately interesting interview by putting the most inflammatory - but least relevant - quote in the title. And in fact, when you look at the post on Kotaku, there's nothing else. No mention of the actual content of the interview, just two sentences wrapped around the pull quote punctuated by a link.
I thought the post was in poor taste, of course - if the interview had been about the misfortune of CliffyB instead of some details of his new game, it would have been a different story. Literally; it would have been a story about CliffyB being called "fag." Not so.
Read on for more...
Instead, I'm led to wonder how far we have to follow the dollar signs - generated by volatile and misleading headlines - before the journalistic integrity kicks in. Moreover, I'm extremely disturbed by the discussion that followed in the comments: there seemed to be far more readers justifying the use of words such as 'gay' and 'fag' because they are so widely used as synonyms for 'shitty' and 'lame' that they are no longer considered to be offensive.
That argument holds little to no weight in my opinion, but I can't help but feel that the cheap-shot title of Kotaku's post not only justifies such abuse of language but actually creates an environment where ensuing discussions help shore up the opinions of bigots who kid themselves by deciding that their hate speech is, in fact, simple linguistic drift.
Talk to me - I think it's bullshit, but what do I know? I don't find it to be absolutely horrible, but I do think it's distasteful enough to start our own discussion. This perennial topic may never go away, but if we don't talk about it openly and fairly, we can't expect anyone else to do so.
tiny dancer
Posted to Hot Stuff, Miscellany on 22 May 2008
· Comments (38)
Other stuff like this: cliffyb, fag, kotaku
I don't mean to offend...
but I think you're being a little over-sensitive.
We live in a country that allows for freedom of speech as protected under the first amendment. This allows anyone individual to say anything he or she pleases at any given time. Yes, even things you might not like.
The word "Fag" was used, so what? We should stop using this word because it offends some people? Those people who are so easily offended by spoken words, I invite you to move to a communist nation. There, rest assured, everyones language will be strictly monitored and those speaking anything your regime finds offensive will be punished accordingly.
However, so long as you live in a place that recoginizes an individuals right to self expression, i'd simply reccommend taking language with a grain of salt.
Having said this I do want point out that i'm not offended by your article. On the contrary, I fully support your basic human right to express yourself in any way you see fit. All I would ask is that you do the same for me and everyone else you come in contact with. :)
I tend to agree with Joe here. It doesn't really do any good, from a social point of view, to run in horror every time someone (friend, journalist, celebrity etc.) says something we don't like about ourselves or our relative communities. Rather, the best thing to do is to ridicule them for their own personal ignorance. Don't like the content matter of an article? Tell the writers how stupid it is. (BTW, I do feel that the pull quote is relatively innocuous, in my own personal opinion. Considering whom his target audience is, it would be more of a shock that he had never been called a "fag" or something similar.)
The freedom of speech argument is always interesting, especially when it's used by people to justify hate-speech.
It always smacks of a ridiculous double standard, like, oh you can't possibly impede on my freedom, my right, my poor little fragile right to run around and preach hatred and blatantly screw over everyone else.
Basically, protect my right to screw over other people's rights. does that really need protecting, is it really that vulnerable? Why is that placed on a hierarchy above the person who doesn't want to be subjected to your viewpoint?
@ Joe: Except for the fact that the Internet isn't the same thing as the United States of America or a country itself. The Constitution doesn't apply.
As far as the article itself goes.. I think it just shows that Journalistic Integrity and Blogs are vastly different concepts. It certainly makes you question some of the other articles they post... how accurate does Kotaku's info need to be so long as it's pulling in the $$?
I don't think Tiny was being sensitve. I think he was just reporting on an issue and starting a conversation.
Perhaps the article hit a little close to home for some of the early respondants?
I think it's a shame when hate words lead to income, but we live in a free enterprise society. That's life.
That's not really a valid argument. Dancer isn't saying "people shouldn't be allowed to say fag," he's saying "people shouldn't say fag." There's a semantic difference-- one is penalizing people for saying something, and the other is convincing people they shouldn't.
I completely agree with you about "gay" and "fag" not being offensive; in fact, the less "offensive" they're considered the worse it gets. Take the word bitch, for example; you could say that on dayitme TV, if you wanted, but it's a word that STILL means unlikeable woman-- and as it becomes more common, it will never shed its meaning. So if it's completely okay for anyone to call anyone else a gay fag, then you're just making it more allowable to belittle homosexuals.
Lucky for me, when I tried using those words as a kid (I plead ignorance, I was a child in a small town and didn't even know what a gay person was), my mom was awesome enough to make SURE I never said them again (even moreso than the swear words, discriminatory words were the most vile words in our house).
In short, Mr. Dancer, I agree with you fully... so I don't know how useful this comment is. :P
@Joe & Lance: just because you have the right to be an asshole doesn't mean you should be one.
What really got me upset (being a straight white male I have to be indignant on your behalf-- that's harder to sustain) was the fact that he got the idiom wrong. You "Tar and Feather" someone, not "Tart and Feather" them...
mmmmm Tarts...
So I was the one on kotaku who first called them on this in the comments (lionkitten). I sent a couple other e-mails around the interwebs too.
I knew it would stir sh-- up, but I felt like it had to be said, because it totally gives people license to use the word "fag" casually when to me and many others, it is an offensive word when used in this manner.
Kotaku would NEVER run a headline using some nasty gender- or race-related word, and as Tiny nicely pointed out, this isn't what the linked article is about, except for the last tacked on question. It's totally exploitative, in my opinion, and I thought it sucked.
hmmmmm.... so people who are black say n**ger to each other... and don't have a problem with it when said to each other... so its okay to just call every black person i see n**ger and then wonder why i got my ass kicked because i was using my freedom of speech?
faggot is used in such a bad way... but gay isn't bad... its like what black is to gay as n**ger is to faggot... imagine the article saying "If The Cliffster Had A Nickel Everytime He Was Called A 'Nigger'..." would it then be okay? should people be upset about it? would people are black who got upset be over reacting?
I just find it strange that out of the whole interview on Gears of War 2, that was the line quoted for the article on it... nothing about the new gameplay features discussed or presented in the interview, only about the fact that ppl on the internet call him a 'fag', I do think Ciff's word choice was poor, but the sensationalism spin put on it to get page view sucks even more
I'm divided on this. On the one hand, I agree that Kotaku's writer is being irresponsible with the title of the article. On the other hand though, when I read the article, I viewed it more as an indictment of the video game fan community. Cliff is just reporting how the fan community treats him.
why not just "if cliffy had a nickle for everytime he was put down by fanboys..."
thats a little more tastefull
@ jayoshi
But the big picture concept here is that being related in any way to being gay or a "fag" is the ultimate putdown. THAT'S the bigger problem here.
@Punning:
So you really think that the writer of the article (or Bleszinski, for that matter) were deliberately going out of their way to offend the (apparently oh-so-effete) gay gaming community? I guess it doesn't take much....
I really don't have a hard time believing that there are more than enough people on XBox Live, or in the gaming community, that would say things like that to game developers. (Let's face it, some of those guys aren't the brightest crayons in the bunch.) But when the knee-jerk reaction (at least on this webpage) seems to always be "Don't say that", instead of "You're a jackass for saying that, and here's why", I really don't see how that's any better and will convince people to follow suit.
Oh, and Jayoshi: "Faggot" is nowhere near as vile of an epithet as "Nigger". Seriously, just stop. I understand how you may want that to be the case, but really. Give it a rest, it's embarrassing.
I agree with the idea that speech should be free, the problem here is that by publishing that word it's encouraging the use of a word that is offensive. It's not about speech as much ethics. Is it ethically OK to encourage the use of language that people find offensive? No it isn't right. It's not the end of the world, but people should be expected to just "get over it" or "move to a communist country"
The media knows it shapes the way people behave, collectively, and as long as we continue to point out this fact and call them on their offensive or unethical BS we can slowly bring about change. It's what every progressive movement attempts to do: achieve the goal of equality, not being seen as an alternative for stupid but as human beings who are respected as equals.
Personally I just go with an eye for an eye. Sure it's not helping anyone, but in my guilds and online groups most people will insult each other and others by calling them things like "hetero" and "straight". Bear in mind these are mostly non-LGBT members using this language, because they find it fun enjoy insulting the bushwazi while also insulting each toher..
@Lance: My comments were directed at you only to the extent that you agree with Joe. I am really sick of hearing "but I have the right to be an ass" when someone says "you're being an ass, knock that off."
Everyone has the perfect natural right to express themselves as they wish (subject to time/place restrictions and likelihood of violence restrictions), and expect to be utterly free from the consequences of that expression. No one, however, should labor under the delusion that they are exempt from being called an asshole for their assholish behavior.
Turning gender, racial/ethnic, or sexual orientation into a slur is assholish behavior. Calling people out for it is the only way that it will cease happening.
Yes, the internet is not a country - but the country that the user lives in has the laws the usuer should abide by.
Yes, hate speech is bad. I'm not defending hate speech. I'm defending speech. If you don't like it - don't read it. If you didn't have a choice and were forced to hear something you didn't like - remember, if only for a moment, that the universe doesn't revolve around you or anyone else... not even me. ...as sad as that may be. :-P
If I want to say fag, bitch, whore, or any other offensive description - I'm going to. Know why? It's a god given right to speak ones mind. Like I said in my original post - if you have a serious problem with opinions that differ from yours there are plent of oppresive nations you could move to. Not only would you be surrounded by people who won't offend you but you'll also allow for the rest of us here in our free nation to be free without suffering the scorn of ignorance.
I certainly don't like hate speech - but if I read or hear something I don't like... i'm not going to be a douche bag about it. I'll just brush it off and get over it. Life is far too short to worry about some verbalized offense that has done no physical damage.
@lance
"Oh, and Jayoshi: "Faggot" is nowhere near as vile of an epithet as "Nigger". Seriously, just stop. I understand how you may want that to be the case, but really. Give it a rest, it's embarrassing."
actually it is... i believe people who HATE and want to kill gay people call them faggots... just like people who HATE and want to kill black people call them niggers... sorry to break it to you... but it is. didn't bible thumpers use to say "god hates niggers?" i tend to hear that a lot today... but instead the word faggot.
plus they both have two g's in them :P
"Life is far too short to worry about some verbalized offense that has done no physical damage."
Joe, you just don't get it. There have been countless instances of hate crimes where the aggressors DID use that word as they beat the crap out of someone they thought/knew to be gay. No, that's not what happened in this particular case, but when you know the damage that can be done by turning a word for someone's sexual orientation into an insult (as someone pointed out earlier), you might take it more seriously.
And again, you're not listening. No one is saying it should be illegal to use those words. They're suggesting that people just shouldn't use them based on respect and common sense. There's a big difference. You said you're not going to be a douchebag, but by refusing to see that difference, you kind of are.
Honestly, lately I've been thinking Kotaku is worth less than nothing. It's quickly becoming apparent that page views is all they are aiming for. Don't get me wrong, I know they're a business and need to pay the bills, but far too many of their "articles" are either complete ploys to get comment wars, or are designed to present whatever valid information or opinion they have so to achieve the same ends. It was no big deal when it was just console wars, but now they're posting blatantly sexist things, and deliberately causing homophobic discourse, and I find that absolutely deplorable.
It's a bit disappointing, because there are still good journalists at that site, who post interesting, well thought out, and inoffensive material. But they are falling to the wayside and I'm losing all respect for them by association.
@jayoshi:
Wow...Nevermind, dude. You live in your world, and I'll live in mine. O_o
I'm actually glad that there is less homophobia on the internet than I would have expected (at least in the places I usually spend time).
It will always offend be a little when people use "gay" or "fag" as an insult, but for the most part when people use fag on the internet, they dont mean "gay person who I hate." They just use it as an insult like stupid (like how gay has been used for years).
Basically what im saying is, most of the time when people use it, they arent even thinking of homosexuals, and that makes me happy.
I'm getting kind of disillusioned on the "discussion" about whether calling stuff gay and faggy is okay. The homophobes self-rationalize while the gay and/or sensible people attempt to be patient while desperately explaining why it's kind of not okay to do that thing that makes people feel like trash. Does it get anyone anywhere? I really don't know.
@Lance
If '"Faggot" is nowhere near as vile of an epithet as "Nigger"', then why do black people use it to describe each other whereas gay people feel uncomfortable at the very sound of the word? Think you're the one in your own world here.
The fact is this: They have the right to use it. We do have the right to be offended, but we don't really have any right to do anything about other than piss and moan.
Faggot is a terrible word. We know this. They know this. Everybody knows this. Does this mean we should bitch about people who still use words like fuck? or me, for having just used the word bitch?
I think we need to be more concerned about the misappropriation of political correctness in language problems, like in the Richard Gaywood instance, or TheGAYESTgamer. These are where we should be focusing our attention, not on people using dirty words. In those X-Box live instances, freedoms of expression are being taken away from people, not issues like this.
The majority of people are stupid, it's just that simple. I truly am sorry that you are upset, and I do sympathize with you entirely, but there's not really anything we can do sitting here preaching to ourselves. All we can do is just hope that education slowly takes a hold.
Side note: By constantly showing how hurt we are by people using the word faggot, we only empower them with it. Just a thought.
Counter side-note: You could also argue that by constantly showing how hurt we are by people using the word faggot, we remind them that their language has consequences - rather than let them carry on without any objection, which seems to equal tacit approval. That sounds more empowering to me.
Is it bad that I am rarely personally offended by the word fag? My definition of fag is a queenly little bitch, that flaunts being gay for attention. I know I'm not one (and I'm really uncomfortable when around these type of people), and about 90% of the gay community aren't, so why should we be offended? Taking offense only empowers the word, and allows for more hate and bigotry to be allowed.
I like to take context into consideration. The word fag was used in jest by clffyB and the article's title was arguably the most humorous part of the interview. I see no fault in using the most humorous quote as the title of the article.
If it makes people feel better, just look how stupid bigots look:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-q4MDQ0cDI
Kinda makes you worry less about words, right?
Obviously they know that they're hateful language has consequences, and those consequences are generally to hurt somebody... which is exactly what they want to do. Sure some people use it without thinking, and if they were decent enough people, they would already feel guilty for having used it. Nobody uses that word and doesn't know EXACTLY what they're saying unless they're incredibly incompetent.
@Zach
Why do you spend your time hating other people in your community? Yes, ALL gay, lesbian, and transgendered people are part of the gay community whether you're uncomfortable around them or not. I think you need to look up the definition of the word bigot, because you clearly are one...which is totally depressing...being bigoted against your own community. egh.
I have many times called people out for using the word fag or gay in this hateful negative light around me...even people i respect and am good friends with. Who gives a shit if they're not referring to homosexuals specifically (yes all homosexuals, not just the queens)...I don't want my sexual identity used synonymously with "shitty" or "lame". Those of you who think that's ok, i really don't fucking understand. Part of growing up is learning that words have consequences. Be accountable for what you say and its effect on those around you...these are basic social skills here.
How long has Kotaku been around?
I'm aware of Gawker, and Defamer and Jezebel, which tend to be written well, and the comments most of the time are by people with brains - but this gaming iteration of those sites is just... shit.
I wonder if they approve all commenters in the same way Jezebel does? Let's face it - most of the gaming community - especially those that rely on 3-letter words to make-fun of people (because they can't really come up with anything CLEVER to say) tend to be the dimmer lightbulbs in the 4pack on sale at Wal-Mart.
The use of gay/fag in the gaming community is part of the reason I have NO interest in voice-chat in online multiplayer and something I see as a benefit as a Wii owner. I still want an xbox360, but talking to people I don't know just so they can hurl random grade-school insults at me is something I'd rather stay away from.
@David
So you're saying that there's not two kinds of gay people, those who use it against people, and those who don't? I was referring to those that use being gay as a way to incite shock and get attention. Not just being a queen (god knows, I can be a queen myself). I don't think that your sexuality should be something that you can use to get attention for, or shock people. Just like you shouldn't be allowed to use race or religion in the same way.
I read my post now and see how it can be misinterpreted, but if you still don't agree, then I believe it is very sad that you still take up for people that are countering everything that we are working for. We want acceptance, they want to be different and stand out, and hurt and shock people along the way.
You say that I'm bigotted against people in my own community, but I'm gonna be honest, I don't want to be included in the same community with someone that's going to use their sexuality as a tool for attention. Just my personal preference.
Up until the early 1900s, faggot referred to an odd woman or a bundle of sticks, before that, a cigarette. What's my point? Words change in meaning. We don't want the word fag to be used to me lame... that's fine, just don't get pissed off when people call you a fag for the rest of your life, because you refuse to allow it's meaning to change. And yes, I actually do think that these words are becoming harmless and changing in meanings.
@Zach, you're missing the point. You are still using the word fag as an insult. You, yourself, in your own post.
In general, I'm with Tiny on this one. Standing up and making it known that we don't appreciate our sexuality being synonymous with "crappy" is the best way to empower ourselves and reduce the use of the word. If people are made aware that this slur (intentional or not) hurts us everytime it is used maybe it will drop out of the common consciousness.
Let them find another word. If things, or people, are "crappy" why can't people say so directly without having to substitute a hateful term?
A few thoughts:
1) I feel like it's almost notable in and of itself that a game designer regularly gets called that. To me, that's the news. It's not the most earth-shattering thing in the world, given the way gaming communities often think, but it's worth a post.
2) The headline, however, sucks. It totally does sensationalize the matter.
3) I think it's fair to blame the Kotaku pay system. Some of you may have heard other horror stories about the Gawker blog family and how they don't necessarily pay their writers in a way that ensures good content.
4) By linking to it, however, isn't GayGamer drawing more attention to it and getting the person who wrote it more money? I personally didn't click the link because I didn't want to put more cash in this person's pocket.
5) The inherent offensiveness of the word "fag" is totally objectionable, including where it sits on the Bigot-o-meter in relation to other slurs. That being said, it's the one I'd be the least surprised to hear, online or otherwise. And that sucks.
I suppose my point was that this word does not necessarily mean what we act like it does. At least to me it doesn't. You may disagree but that's your opinion and this is mine. Most of my friends don't agree with me either, so I guess I'm in a minority when it comes to what I think.
I do think this word is coming to mean something different, and I don't think that we should make such a big deal out of it, there's really no point. It only really makes other people have more fun using it, because they know it hurts you. They're not going to stop because they know it's hurtful, that'll just make them do it more.
That's how I feel, I personally do not use the word (yes, i know that I defined it for myself above, but I don't use it, just because I think it's a stupid word), so I don't see it's power. Everybody has different opinions, I'm sure most people on here would hate my opinions on this and other matters. I don't think that I'm bigotted, I just think that we, as a community have to work more towards, "hey we're not that different," rather than, "Look at me, I'm gay!!!"
Just my thoughts, I won't write anymore. I'm sorry if I offended anybody.
Thank you for your post, Tiny!!! I think it was an insightful critique of the "read this controversial post, pass it on!!" problem with some of the blog-for-profit sites. I'm a little disappointed that this issue, which was at the heart of your post, seems to have gotten mostly lost in the ensuing discussion. Regardless, thanks again for making the point.
I think "Tart and Feather" is my new favorite expression.