Talk:Faggot

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1 Old, unsectioned comments
2 Etymology
3 Another two pence
4 anti-gay slang etymology and witch burnings

[edit] Old, unsectioned comments

This page was getting awkward with so many definitions. I've split them up so they can be referenced directly, included in the category hierarchy, etc. A lot of it seemed to have been nicked from elsewhere anyway.

I found some stuff which seemed extraneous; if someone wants to add it somewhere appropriate, feel free.

I couldn't work out what the following had to with "faggot", so I haven't saved it yeah:

Strength through union

On the obverse of the pre-"Roosevelt" U.S. "Mercury" silver dime is a battle axe sheathed with sticks. This symbol is also seen in the U.S. House of Representatives. An ancient Roman symbol of the authority of the magistrate it is also representative of the strength of union - where an individual stick may be easily broken a bound bundle cannot. This is similar to the use of a bundle of sticks as a fascist symbol - also implying a strength through union.

Simple. One of the older definitions of "faggot" is "a bundle of sticks." The fasces found on the reverse of the so-called "Mercury" dime could be loosely defined as a faggot wrapped around a battle-axe. I'm not quite sure why it's pertinent to the "faggot" page itself, but whatever... -- Chris Lawson 08:16, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

This seems to me to be simply a dicdef, so I haven't included it:

Form of Collection

In American and British terminology, to Faggot is a "noun" and "verb" variant of action or adjective.

V. "faggoted", "faggoting"

To make a faggot of, v. verb

To bind together, v. verb

Collected promiscuously, loose, "v. adjective, verb"

1 Geneva Preene requested her son not make a faggot of wood for the fire; assuredly he would lose much despite her warn.

2 It was evident to the teacher that little Johnny would faggot his information and return the following day no smarter than he had left.

3 Reginald thought it intolerable that his employees had faggot ideals when their paychecks were more than acceptable.

John Dryden, The Hind and the Panther, (1687)

[edit] Etymology

An anon editor insists on adding this to the etymology of the word:

Faggot is a pejorative slang term used to refer to a gay man. In this context, it has been suggested that the origin of the word dates back to the Spanish Inquisition. Apparently when those charged with witchcraft were burned at the stake, accused homosexuals were thown upon the flames at the feet of the witch, likening them to firewood/fuel. Given that faggot referred to bundles of sticks used as firewood, homosexuals came to be known as "faggots". Reputable sources, however, have been found to debate over the validity of this particular explanation.

This is not true. The first use of the word in English to refer to a male homosexual dates from 1910-1915, according to my Random House Unabridged, and there are several online sources that corroborate this (for example, [1], which debunks the Inquisition bit, and [2] or [3]). Antandrus (talk) 15:29, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

All of which is useful, but beside the point. Faggot (slang) is where this sort of information should go, even if it were true, and we've covered the topic there already. This is simply redundant here, and this anon has tried to inject this into Fag, Faggot and Faggot (slang). -Harmil 06:16, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

To Rhobite in response to the following message: Please stop removing information from faggot and faggot (slang). Multiple users have reverted your edits - the burning at the stake etymology is probably false. In addition, please read Wikipedia:Three revert rule - you seem to have violated the rule. Rhobite 18:03, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

I will comply with your request. I would like to remind you, however of Wikipedia's recommendation for resolution of disputes:

Use of edit summaries in disputes If a content dispute develops, proper use of edit summaries is critical. Edit summaries should accurately summarize the nature of the edit, especially if it may be controversial; if the edit involves reverting previous changes, it should be marked as a revert in the edit summary. However, edit summaries are not the place to carry on debates or negotiation over the content. Doing this will actually exacerbate the situation, because it naturally encourages the other party to respond in the same manner - in other words, by making an edit and using the edit summary - and what might have been productive dialogue instead becomes an edit war. The proper place to discuss changes to article content is on the talk page.

You and I have both fallen into the "edit war" scenario as referenced above. Although, as you state it, "the burning at the stake etymology is probably false" this does not mean it is absolutely false. As there are many people who subscribe to the burning at the stake scenario as a possible explanation, including it as a possible origin of the word "faggot" should be included for the sake of being thorough. My edit did state that "IT HAS BEEN SUGGESTED" the burning at the stake theory. This is a true statement. I also included that "REPUTABLE SOURCES DEBATE" as to whether or not the explanation was valid. This is also a true statement. There is therefore no valid reason I can see to remove my edit. I made no claim that the theory has been proven true. My only intention was to share information. Perhaps you should have reworded my edit if it seemed misleading. I don't feel, however, it merited deletion.

It seems that there are those among you who have contributed a great deal to Wikipedia, and for this you should be thanked and your efforts greatly appreciated. I would suggest, however, that adopting an "alpha male" stance in controlling the edits of others is contrary to the spirit of Wikipedia. Wikipedia suggests, rather than deleting the edits of another, improve upon them. It is my understanding that the purpose of this wonderful thing known as Wikipedia is to share knowledge, not censorship.

As I have no desire to engage in further conflict over something so trivial, you will be pleased to know that I will not attempt to edit the page again.

Best wishes to you.

Censorship? You're the one who is removing valid information from this disambig page. I asked you to stop removing the line "Faggot is a pejorative slang term used to refer to a gay man." I'm glad to hear that you're complying with this request, but please don't accuse others of censorship when you're the one who is removing statements from this page. In the future, it would be helpful if you could supply a reference for your claim that homosexuals were burned at the feet of witches. Rhobite 21:03, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Another two pence

These arguments appear to be grasping at straws (pardon the ironic metaphor). I have a book called "Slang and Its Analogues", a 1970 reprint from a book originally published ca. 1900. It says that centuries ago a woman who had been judged a heretic and/or of being promiscuous, and had recanted (thus escaping the proverbial stake), was required to carry around the bundle of sticks called a "faggot", as a reminder that her previous words (and her own self) were worthy only of being burned. Meanwhile, there is the term "fag", applied to a schoolboy who does menial work for an upperclassman. It should be fairly clear from both words how the two converged and came to be applied (presumably by "masculine", straight men) to any "effeminate" or "weak" male, whether he was literally homosexual or merely "unmanly". The book does not pull any punches, yet it says nothing about homosexuals being burned at the stake. Wahkeenah 13:05, 23 February 2006 (UTC)