Another thing I observed in real life that I observed in Ken Corbett's essay is that the bigger person gets to call someone faggot and get away with it, and the smaller person is always the one called faggot. It is as if you can only call someone a faggot if you are masculine enough. If the smaller person calls the bigger person a faggot, they are laughed at and ridiculed because others see the smaller person as having no basis and "no right" to call someone else a faggot. If the smaller, weaker, and more feminine guy calls someone else a faggot, then in return, the bigger guy might defend himself with, "Who are you to call me a faggot when you're the biggest of them all?" or "Look who's talking", and in response, the smaller guy would have to come up with something greater to defend himself. As it was shown in Corbett's essay, Josh, tried to "steal" the use of the word, faggot, from his older brother because he was called it many times by his brother. It is as if Josh felt that by using the word faggot, it would make him bigger and more masculine like his brother. However, if Josh used the word, faggot, to his older brother, it would have been a different story than him calling Corbett a faggot. In the end, faggot is a word used by bigger, more masculine guys to make them seem more masculine and superior than the victim of the word, and the victim of the word is usually the smaller, more feminine guy.
My observation of the word faggot is that it is a word used to build the name caller's masculinity and to make them feel more superior and bigger than the person who was called faggot. But to call someone a faggot, there are social "standards", unsaid rules to using the word. Not everyone can call anyone a faggot, you need to be bigger, better, stronger, and more masculine than the other. The person calling another a faggot is the winner, and the person being called a faggot is the loser.
No comments:
Post a Comment