Tanenbaum and Pascoe (Monday 10/11/2010)

Summary

The Pascoe (2005) reading concerns the use of the word fag among youth and its often ambiguous definition between sexual orientation/”un-masculine” behavior. The Tanenbaum (1999) piece discusses the similar role of the word “slut” and its variations, in the lives of women.

Discussion Questions

1) Why do you think words like “slut” and “fag” are so powerful in influencing people’s behavior? Why is it that sexuality tends to be the primary attribute people attack?

2) Why do you think people find certain visual/behavioral cues evident or supportive of these sexual stereotypes? (i.e. early puberty in females, short skirts, “effeminate “ and/or passive behavior in males)

3) Do you think it would be simple to imitate this behavior, (“faggy”, “whorey”) as well as their antithetical and socially acceptable variations (“straight”, “manly”, “non-whorelike”), whether for a joke or for gaining social acceptance? Can you think of any repercussions for the joker or for the façade?

Discussion Video

Discussion Content

It is clear that the words “slut” and “fag” are very powerful in influencing people’s behavior.  It is very common for people to attack others’ sexualities because we are ultimately defined by our sexuality.  We are constantly being judged by our looks/clothing and behavior, and these certain visual cues support different sexual stereotypes.  In general, the word “fag” has negative implications that are almost always associated with actual homosexuals.  When these words are used, the person they are directed at is placed outside box considered “normal/acceptable,” and the person using the words is in a sense reinforcing their position inside the box.