Is John Edwards Really a Faggot?
While reading the news I stumbled upon an article that brings up some interesting looks at homophobia in American culture. Here, we have Anne Coulter (ultra-conservative columnist) calling John Edwards (Democratic presedential candidate) a faggot (reminds me of my playground days). I find turmoil here. Ms. Coulter seems to think that her proclamation of what she believes Mr. Edwards' sexual preference to be is a high quality insult. Makes about as much logical sense as him insulting her preference of black or green tea. Why is this an insult is the question I would like to ponder.
The problem with being a faggot is the equivalent problem with being a girl. Not so much that girls and faggots are bad people, as that they are exactly what men must fight not to be. To be one of those is to fail to abide to societies' masculine ideal. Namely, that a man should be stoic, strong, heterosexual, etc. Throughout elementary school, high school or until you grow out of it (unlike Ms. Coulter) accusing a man of failing to be a man is the best insult you can come up with. If a man does anything resembling feminity, such as wear pink, say "cute," sing soprano, or cheer for the Packers they are bound to get called a homo, fag, or sissy by their more homophobic friends. This is the angle that American society has played on faggotedness and why Anne Coulter thinks that she is actually insulting him. She is likely trying to communicate that she thinks he is a wuss or chicken in some sense but I don't really know.
Comments
I was intrigued by your post and checked out more details about the comment. It brings up many questions about the media's response to un-politically correct rhetoric.
Coulter's comment "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,'" was in reference to the recent media coverage of Grey's Anatomy star Isaiah Washington seeking rehabilitation for public comments about fellow star T.R. Knight. Coulter claims it was just a jab made in good humor. So far no one public apology has been issued from Coulter, or is anyone questioning her job as a syndicated newspaper columnist. Should she expect the same coverage/slashing from the media as Washington? How are these situations different and in what ways should they be reconciled?
I agree with you Jon in that it is a sad day in American politics when a high-powered political figure such as Coulter can no longer criticize a colleague on his platform, but instead uses cheap and offensive rhetoric to generate media coverage ($$$).
Kudos to Edwards for generating some campaign funds, calling for supporters to donate "Coulter Cash".
Posted by: Amy D. | March 5, 2007 4:54 PM