Talk:Faggot/Archive 1

message: For clarity: The Bible and Catholicism do not state that homosexual people are going to hell, but that the act of homosexual intercourse is a mortal sin, falling into the category of lust called "the unnatural vice". Saying that all homosexuals are going to hell would be cruel, since people who are born with the inclination would be condemned from birth, no matter what they did.
EDIT: and this isn't a diatribe on religion, it is an explanation as to why I changed the paragraph under "Biblical Allusion".Don't give an Ameriflag 21:08, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religious references 

message: *Support.  Exploding Boy 21:16, August 2, 2005 (UTC)
*Also Support. --Bcshell 05:09, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Followup: When they are merged, the target should either be Faggot (slang) or Fag (slang), but not Fag (pejorative), since the word is not always used in a pejorative sense. -Harmil 23:26, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion on merge with [[Fag (pejorative)]] 

message: Slang is a very biased term that implies judgments about the value of a word based on who uses it and in what context. It carries with it a negative connotation about both the word and its users. I think this page should be moved to Faggot (epithet). Any comments?  Dave 05:05, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd like to point out that while the new page name doesn't bother me all that much, the above makes no sense at all. Slang is simply common usage, and I have no idea what the "value of a word" is. Value in what units or relative to what? "Yo mamma" is slang. That doesn't make it particularly good or bad, but it probably indicates that your expected not to use it when writing in a formal or educational context. "Fag" is also a slang term and the same applies. -Harmil 02:04, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slang 

message: An epithet is something like a nickname or a title added to a person's name, such as Alexander the Great. "Faggot" would only be an epithet if it was used in a similar way, such as Alexander the Faggot. TharkunColl 23:58, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Epithet 

message: Sorry if this has already been covered here, but it seems to me like the "British meanings" section needs to be removed from the article.
It has nothing to do with americanizing wikipedia, or anything like that. It's just that this is specifically an article about using 'faggot' as an insult. And while although 'fag' is an entirely valid word for a cigarette, I can't imagine how it could be used as both a cigarette and an insult in the same sentence.
I hope I'm making myself clear here; I might be rambling. The disambiguation page for 'fag' (rightly) includes the link to cigarettes. But the article specifically for the insult really shouldn't. (or, at the very least, shouldn't have an entire section on meat and cigarettes) Bladestorm 18:44, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: 1) No, the etymology section is relevant for the origins of the epithet. 2) Cigarette is not a meaning of specifically the insult. See the difference? Cigarette is a meaning of 'fag'. Cigarette is not a way of interpreting 'faggot' if you first specifically clarify that you intend it as an insult. Bladestorm 04:53, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  British Meaning? 

message: homosexuals were supposedly burnt at the stake in medieval England. More accurately, they were doused in fuel and used in place of sticks for the burning of supposed witches. Surely that can't be right??? They might indeed have been burnt at the stake as heretics, but used as mere kindling to burn witches?--Ramdrake 15:18, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I find this very odd as well.  Now most sources I've read certainly indicate that burning has never been the normal punishment for homosexuals in Britain.  And burning homosexuals as heretics is not the same as burning them for homosexuality — particularly as that was made a crime in itself.  Has anyone read this Homophobia book?  How well-researched does this item appear?  Either way, the burning-at-the-stake story is highly unlikely to have much to do with the modern offensive use of the word. garik 15:53, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Homosexuals doused in fuel and burned? 

message: Although this is "original research", after learning the original meaning of faggot, the first connection I made was that gay men are people who put their "sticks" together. also Is there any chance that this is a source for the word? 68.166.67.241 01:40, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No. garik 23:01, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Faggot to fag 

message: On October 3, a vandal blanked several sections. Later,  restored much of the vandalized content, but seems to have missed some of it. If you look at the diff from before to after, a section was dropped in Balilas's edit. It's not clear if this was intentional, since no edit summary was left. As this was a helpful, and contextually useful section, I'm going to restore it. If anyone has problems with that, please discuss. Note: this is not new content, it's actually quite old. -Harmil 15:33, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Written uses 

message: Hey fellas, I'm not sure if anybody is actively editing this article, but I'm going to contend the statement that "The term is often used by young people as a synonym for words such as jerk (i.e. "What a jerk!" becomes "What a faggot!")". Do be honest, I have never heard anybody use this term as lightly as "jerk". In fact, in Oregon, it's quite possibly the most vulgar word period. It's an unspeakable, like Nigger. In fact, I've heard it less often than that. If this is not the case in other places, then the statement needs a qualifier on it, such as "many young people in Australia...", however if it is the case, then the statement needs to be removed. I'll wait around for a day or two, and if nobody responds, or if responses are in consensus, I'll remove the passage. Xeinart 21:00, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uses in popular culture dispute 

message: Lately the younger generation seems to use fag/faggot as a general purpose insult with no set meaning and no care towards sexual orientation at all. How much of such a trend has to go on before it warrants a mention here? Howdoesthiswo 15:15, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: With all due respect, I couldn't disagree more. While straight people who use that word may feel like it is not offending anybody or targeting anybody in particular, that word plays a vital role in the enforcement of heteronormative gender roles in American public schools. In my opinion, while it is easy for straight people to believe that they are not hurting anybody in uttering things like "fag", it is the people to whom this word applies that offense in that word is obvious. Fokion 04:21, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Whether it hurts or not isn't the point. The point is that it is used that way, undeniably. A huge number of people, especially younger people, use "faggot" in the same way they use "loser." Many people who use that word, especially people without much experience with gay culture, think nothing of gays when they use it. While it shouldn't be a huge factor in the article, it should most definitely be discussed.--Josh 06:58, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Simply stating such would be original research, however, if you can find an authoritative source that confirms your understanding, you should cite it in the article. -Harmil 02:13, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's just tangential though, because there are so many things throughout wikipedia and even in this article that do not have citations. Take the sentence "'Fag' and 'Faggot' have historically been two of the most offensive terms that could be addressed to an American man or adolescent boy.", for instance.  It seems as though this statement is "pending citation", but has been allowed in without it because no one has come forward who disagrees with it and challenges it.  It is quite false to say that one must cite sources on wikipedia.  If this were true, the encyclopedia would be much smaller from all the deletions.  It is good that we do not delete material without citations that seems credible or widely held to be true, because if no one challenges it, it is like a work in progress, pending citation.  And as this usage of fag is very widespread, I think all contributors will fall into two categories: those who are familiar with this usage and will allow a discussion of it pending citation, and those who are unfamiliar with it but do not necessarily believe it not to exist.  Thus no one will come forward to challenge its accuracy until someone finds appropriate examples in mainstream communication, which, in any event, should not be hard to find.  Of course, you may just reiterate the "policy", but it still seems that wikipedia's articles widely lack appropriately extensive support while nonetheless being pretty accurate, because people will cut out false stuff they "know" to be false and leave in stuff they have no first-hand knowledge of or know to be true.  In fact, Wikipedia IS original research, or, rather, we cite our intellects when editing articles.  Only obscure or controversial topics have a more urgent need for citation, because in the first case, few people will know anything about the topic, and in the second, different people will have different viewpoints.  This usage of faggot is neither obscure nor controversial, and precedent suggests it be allowed in, unless someone believes it to be false152.163.100.8 00:35, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Broadening of Meaning 

message: Please add the following:
Daily Kos.  "Democrats and the faggot problem.",  "Who invited the little faggot?", and "When is a faggot just a bundle of sticks?"  []
[]--—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.232.222.5 (talk • contribs) .
:Why don't you add it? garik 17:58, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uses in Popular Culture 

message: I have also heard "fag" use as a transitive verb in England. It means to wear out or tire. I think this is why public school boys were said to "fag" for the older boys when they ran errands. They would often serve them sexually. It was also used as a noun for such boys.
I think it is commonly thought that a cigarette is a fag because it makes you short of breath to smoke them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.147.55.201 (talk • contribs) 10:02 22 July 2006 (UTC)
Yes but its likely the uses of 'faggot' and 'fag' are connected (it also makes sense that cigarettes are called fags on that ground) Like the article points out the words have a number of uses and have a number of ways they are also used to be derogatory. But something I think people might be missing is its likely that there is no completely direct connection to homosexuality; that it was sort of used at different times as more general term and form of derision, and only became narrowed down to homosexuality later when the more general language went out of fashion. Or in a alternatively but in a similar sense there were just a collection of uses that owed to many different derivations into derogatory uses because of the similarity. (words like 'dog' are used in different types of ways for derision)—Preceding unsigned comment added by Brianshapiro (talk • contribs) 
Brian - no; OED sees no connection between faggot (from French) & fag (origin unclear, perhaps from flag in the sense of getting tired, around which most of its many meanings cluster. The cigarette meaning comes from fag-end (see below), coming to mean the whole cigarette. first citation 1888, when they were still supposed to improve breathing etc. 
Johnbod 02:04, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fagging 

message: I have deleted the following:
*It is also possible that the meaning derives from the use of the word as a derogatory term for street prostitutes, female and male, because of their association with the gutter, where "faggot-ends" (or fag-ends) of meat were thrown by butchers.[3]
(and the ref, which I'll add below)
- because it is not supported by the OED reference given, and the OED has no mention of "faggot-end" at all; it is "fag-end", still in common use in the UK,OED 2: "the last part or portion of anything", deriving from OED 1:"the last part of a piece of cloth".  Nor is "faggot-girl", supposed C19 British, in the OED. Reference? Where the butchers throwing meat into the street come from who knows. The mutton quote comes from 1613; the prostitutes supposedly from the late C19 (see below). This non-association seems to have survived any number of edits on this article, but its time has come.     
This is a fairly ancient version of the section (lost date,sorry): 
" Prostitution  + "Faggot"  
- It is more likely this use of faggot was originally a derogatory term for street prostitutes, female and male, because they were associated with "the gutter", where "faggot-ends" of meat were thrown by butchers. The term "faggot girls" for prostitutes is attested from the late 19th century. Often perceived still as gender traitors, homosexual men are still often spoken of as "girls," and there were probably a number of male prostitutes at the same time referred to as "faggot boys". In either case, it would be a short leap from "faggot girl" meaning "prostitute" to "faggot" meaning "homosexual male"—probably starting with male prostitutes who tend to serve primarily or exclusively male customers." 
Johnbod 01:53, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  fag-end, faggot-end, faggot-girl, & mutton 

message: Be sure to update the information as it relates to Isaiah Washington's Larry King interview were he stated that his reference to T.R. Knight is incorrect, according to Washington his use of the word was directed at another co-star during a verbal argument where he used the word in sexually neutral manner...furthermore he denied that he had directed any slur's at co-stars nor was his behavior unprofessional prior to that. Also make sure to note for contexts sake that Washington was gaged by Disney not to talk publicly about any of the rumors. Also note that Knight's outing himself has nothing to do with Washington, considering his interview with Larry King.  Thank you --216.76.232.52 03:48, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Be Sure to Update! 

message: It should also be noted that in the Mel Brooks film "Blazing Saddles" one of the characters uses the term "Kansas City Faggots"  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aramaki (talk • contribs) 21:23, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  another use in pop culture 

message: The etymology of the English word "faggot" is possibly similar to the etymology of the Italian word "finocchio" which literally translates to "fennel." The word "fnocchio" is common in Italian profanity(slang) and can be used as a blatant slur equivalent to the word "faggot"; that is, if not in jocular context and depending on its tone and sentiment, in which case it is like using the words "gay' or "queer." Italians use other words for similar use and meaning, but it is popularly assumed that "finocchio" finds its etymology in the age of the "Holy Inquisition." In that era, finocchio, or fennel, was apparently thrown on persons burned at the stake. During "Inquisition" individuals were executed for homosexual acts, as well as other "heresy." Fennel was used in order to mitigate the stench of burned flesh, especially since it is a common herb seen throughout Italy. In fact, in English language, "finocchio," the herb, is often referred to as "Florence fennel." The etymology and history of fennel in English, Italian and other languages seems to support this arguement.
:The above was just added and although I imagine someone will pick it apart or remove it altogether it seems an interesting angle I'd never heard before. It may be worthy of further consideration. Benjiboi 10:40, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I made the addition to the etymology section because I think it has just as strong of a possibility as other theories and even like etymology of the word "fennel" itself.  Please see those wiki topics, as well as the "Inquisition" and "heresy."   Of course, it would also help to understand the influence of Italian history, the Papal States and the Roman Empire on the rest of Europe, including England.  The English language, unlike others, does in fact incorporate the etymology of other languages and cultures, thus making it unique in many ways.   
Furthermore, I invite you to look up the topic and etymology of "bugger" in the English language, as it has similar development that is linked to "heresy" under the reign of King Henry VII, who notably created the devide between the Roman Catholic world and the protestant Church of England.  Years removed from this era, it is not surprising how the history and meaning can be lost.
To understand the history of English, I do think it is important to consider these facts. DjZ (talk) 11:00, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't delete the material simply noted here that i found it compelling. Do you have some reliable sources that others can access that show the parallels? Benjiboi 12:08, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: First, I think you can see it in the most obvious topics at Wikipedia itself.  See the topics for Buggery and then the Buggery Act of 1533.  If those topics need to be clarified or questioned in of themselves, or even for the interest of the etymology of the word "faggot" as a slur word; then, too, notwitstanding the general history of homosexuality, heresy and "deviancy," then let's start that discussion.  Myself, I am somewhat familiar with Henry VII role in the Renaissance age.  The King was certainly a controversial figure, well beyond his country of England. 69.109.208.103 (talk) 21:14, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The word "Bugger" has its etymology from the word for the ancient Bogomil gnostic sect, which spread into the Byzantine Empire, Serbia, Bosnia, Italy and France.  To see the evolution of the name "Bogomil," go to the wiki topic and section at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bogomil#Name.  Here is an example of how things can be hidden from history and yet how they have evolved through time.  The word takes on variant meaning as it travels.   As you will see, the word connotes "heretic, traitor" to "peasant, blockhead;" then, as the writer points out, it "entered old Italian as 'buggero' and Spanish as 'bujarrón,' both in the meaning of "sodomite", since it was supposed that heretics would approach sex (just like everything else) in an "inverse" way. 69.109.208.103 (talk) 22:15, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[finocchio]] and [[fennel]] 

message: I've reorganised this section, and removed an unsourced claim that had been there too long. If anyone has a reliable source stating that homosexuals were regularly burnt at the stake in some English-speaking country, then please let us know. The finocchio stuff is interesting, but also needs to be sourced. It's also not terribly good evidence for the origins of English "faggot". Overall, however, the bundle-of-sticks explanation just seems rather unlikely; the old-woman etymology seems much more plausible. And that's not just me saying so: two reasonably reliable sources are of the same opinion. garik (talk) 13:58, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The "homosexuals burnt at the stake" theory seems to be a widespread belief. On that basis, its inclusion (with references to sources--which I suspect will date mainly to 1960s and '70s liberation theorists) might be merited, along with the discussion of why the theory might be less plausible than others. Rangergordon (talk) 04:19, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you can find such sources, please update that section. It's crying out for good citations! garik (talk) 17:27, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology section 

message: In the UK "FAG" is used as an acronym for "fuck-and-go" sexual behaviour stereotypical of gay/bi men, i.e. men in the LGBT community who typically have "no strings" one-night stands purely for sexual gratification, involving very little or no emotional intimacy. Such interactions rarely involve the sexual partners sharing a bed for the night, for example, as typically one of the partners will leave shortly after orgasm.
The slang term originated in the late 1980s as a sideways reference to the marketing by Proctor & Gamble of its shampoo & conditioner all-in-one product Wash & Go. The original TV adertising of the product extolled the virtues of saving time, energy & trouble by having to use only one product instead of two.
:Interesting but we, of course, need a reliable source to use this content.  -- Banjeboi 00:55, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Fuck-and-Go" 

message: Lines suggested for removal.
Original:
Someone with a harley.
Suggested read:
On July 27, 2006 American author and pundit Ann Coulter said that the former Vice President of the United States (Al Gore) was a "total fag" while being interviewed by MSNBC's Chris Matthews[17].
The referece to her comments about Clinton are not germain. Why not reference the rest of the interview? Only the total fag comment is appropriate. This is a list of usage in pop culture for the entry and not what ever she had to say about political figures in that interview.
The suggestionon that the comments caused a controversy in the LGBT community maybe true but is not sourced and in the event that it could be is not needed in the article. It also could be considered POV. Each item in the list of usages could have comments about the effect that they produced but would make the article unwidely. Keep it to just the referece used and document it. Anything else is editorializing. If she is a pundit she is also an author. Either add author and link it to american authors or just author or delete pundit.
Original:
On March 1, 2007, Coulter again created a controversy when she made an off-color joke: "I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, but it turns out you have to go into rehab if you use the word "faggot," so I'm kind of at an impasse, can't really talk about Edwards ..."[20][21] Her comments using the "f-word" triggered a campaign by a gay rights group and media watchdog to persuade mainstream media outlets to ban her shows and appearances.
Suggested read:
On March 1, 2007, Ann Coulter said "I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, but it turns out you have to go into rehab if you use the word "faggot," so I'm kind of at an impasse, can't really talk about Edwards ..."[20][21]
The phrases "created controversy" and "off-color joke" could be considered POV. At any rate there is no source that this was created or was off-color even though it may be. It is more in line to just have "Coulter said" just like the previouse mention of her comments two paragraphas above. Why use "f-word" when there is no source that is being quoted. Or is it necessary to use the ephamisim f-word in an article discussing the word faggot? Either way the fact that it triggered a campaign is not sourced. What campaign? What watchdog group? And even if it could be sourced as I'm sure it could, why include it? It's editorializing. Just list its' appearance in popular usage and document it. Just like the other references in this list.
If what I consider to be editorializing is being used to support why the reference is significant to be included in the list, why not do that for each entry? Let's just keep to a list of references or usage in popculture. Uniformity should win out over extraneous comments. These comments would be better suited for an article about homosexual references that led to public outcry or something like that.
Heavywikiduty (talk) 17:09, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editorializing and comments not directly related to the entry 

message: I read somewhere that fag/faggot is used a lot to mean 'poor substitute for', by analogy to the bundles-of-sticks used as a poor substitute for firewood (serving boy for servant, ciggarette for cigar, stand-in for soldure, lump-of-offal for meat, etc) and hence faggot comes from 'a guy is a poor substitute for a woman'.
anyone got any citations/mind if i plonk it in the article? --Dak (talk) 19:24, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Find a reliable source first then it could be written NPOV and added.  -- Banjeboi 09:01, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  poor substitute for 

message: The line "Nevertheless, there is no tradition of burning at the stake being used as a punishment for homosexuality in Britain[4]" is NOT what the cited footnote indicates.
It reads: "The oft-heard statement that male homosexuals were called faggots in reference to their being burned at the stake is an etymological urban legend." This means burning at the stake is not the way homosexuals acquired the term fag/faggot. 
Continuing: "Burning was sometimes a punishment meted out to homosexuals in Christian Europe (on the suggestion of the Biblical fate of Sodom and Gomorah [sic]), but in England, where parliament had made homosexuality a capital offense in 1533, hanging was the method prescribed." According to the source, burning at the stake was used to execute criminal homosexuals from time to time, just not as often as hanging.
The sentence as it stands implies no homosexuals were burned at the stake, & I think the wording needs to change, because it isn't true. Anyone have any ideas how to do this succinctly? wbm (talk) 04:43, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Not quite. What the source says is that burning sometimes occurred in parts of Europe, but not in England. It does say that "burning at the stake was used to execute criminal homosexuals from time to time", but it does not say that this ever occurred in England (the same can probably be assumed for Wales, which adopted English law at a reasonably early date; I have no idea about Scotland), and it implies that it did not. garik (talk) 14:10, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  concerning burning at the stake