What can I say?: A question for GLAAD

Dear GLAAD:

I noticed your press release taking Perez Hilton to task for calling someone a “fucking faggot” during a fight. Admittedly, I rolled my eyes at first, as I generally do when it comes to all things Hilton, but I quickly realized that some of my own language and actions may at times be construed as homophobic, so I figured I’d run a few of things by you to make sure I’m in the linguistic clear.

• When a man cuts me off in traffic, am I allowed to say, “You cocksucker”? Or, more specifically, “You motherfucking goddamn cocksucking son of a bitch”? If not, can you offer some replacement suggestions? “Cock-knocker” doesn’t have quite the same oomph to my ear.
• When I’m finely chopping garlic in my kitchen, am I “mincing,” or is that too stereotypical?
• As Florida’s Republican Gov. Charlie Crist runs for the U.S. Senate, am I allowed to refer to his marriage as a “fag the dog” strategy?
• Is the use of my last name to make puns on “bugger,” “buggering” and “buggery” an offensive use of anti-gay stereotypes or just a lame attempt at humor?

Thanks for your help!

Yours inoffensively,

Sean Bugg

Comments

[Miriel]

Unfortunate but true - semantics matter. However, by calling a word "The N-Word" or "The F-Word" (a euphemism that I will admit to not having encountered before), especially within the community to which that insult was applied from the outside, is to give the word (and the original negative connotations) all the more influence. By striking the term from common usage, it also eliminates the ability for the community to re-associate the word in a more positive manner.

Yes, the fact that Hilton called someone a faggot as an insult is not an association for the term that benefits the community, but it's also not as if the statement was made in a premeditated press release. People speak before thinking, and more importantly, they reflect the world around them. If GLAAD wants to pick a fight (and not sound ridiculous while doing it), they need to acknowledge the scope of the semantic issue - not just call out a convenient contemporary example.

[jason]

BS. Go ahead and say what you want to say. The pc crowd has grown tiresome. The word police want everybody to conform to their way of thinking... but how about something new:

Say what you want to say, but own it. If I wanna use the word fagot, I will. And do. Go ahead and be offended... I don't really care.

[tropos]

There are certain words, due to their historical use to convey extreme insults, have entered the realm of absolute no-no. Think the N-word. We get offended even when people from the Afro-Am community use it amongst themselves (as in Rap/Hip-hop music).
The F-word is similarly considered extremely offensive and hence not used. To have a prominent blogger use that word is certainly not helpful. The fact that the blogger happens to be gay is no excuse.

And neither is it an excuse for you to claim you do not know or that you do not agree. We all live within certain constraints society places upon us. Some of these make sense, like not using the F-word at all.
It is surprising/disappointing that you do not recognize this. Or are you just trying to get some attention (similar to the aforementioned blogger)?