CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:7
Arguments:10
Total Votes:8
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Should the word "faggot" be reclaimed? (8)

Debate Creator

TheDevil(13) pic



Should the word "faggot" be reclaimed?

Hear me out before blowing up in the comments. 
It is possible that homophobia is not entirely based in religion. Think farther back. In times of tribalism, men were expected to hold a different role. We were hunters. We were defenders. Our status within our tribe depended on our display of dominance, because this was a display of willingness to get shit done when the safety or the tribe's next meal was on the line. Naturally, if we were perceived as weaker, or submissive, our standing withing that tribe would be damaged. It naturally follows that a gay man would be perceived as submissive, and not trusted in battlefield not to submit to his enemy- thereby seen as a liability to the group and shunned. However flawed such a perspective may be, how might the gay community have looked today if derogatory terms such as "faggot" had evolved instead to refer to men who we're too eagerly submissive to other men, and should the term be reclaimed for just that purpose? 
Love y'all dysfunctional (and sometimes batshit crazy) fuckers. Couldn't stay away forever.
Add New Argument
1 point

Yes. I think these horrible words should lose their power............................................................

0 points

But do you think it could be given another purpose? And might that purpose be a benefit or detriment to society?

1 point

I believe so. I happen to be bisexual, so that is why I am biased........................................

We should use the word FAG to refer to Federal Army Generals ;)

1 point

That's only a portion of history. Some of the most fearsome people, the Spartan's, engaged in same sex practices. The Greek and Roman military believed it boosted morale with some warriors believing that laying with a woman would soften them. Once Christianity came along the views and ideals started changing and those against the practice to begin with gained more ground.

In response to your question though. No. There is no reason to reclaim that word. It is used to demean and belittle people, not describe them.

Chinaman(1236) Clarified
1 point

That's only a portion of history. Some of the most fearsome people, the Spartan's, engaged in same sex practices. The Greek and Roman military believed it boosted morale with some warriors believing that laying with a woman would soften them. Once Christianity came along the views and ideals started changing and those against the practice to begin with gained more ground.

In response to your question though. No. There is no reason to reclaim that word. It is used to demean and belittle people, not describe them.

Democrat what kind of stupid rant did you type.

Mint_tea(4102) Clarified
1 point

It's adorable that you think that was a rant. Exactly what part of what I wrote was confusing to you? Just some of it? Or all of it?

I would agree with you that it's not only Christianity at odds with unnatural sex.

Most rational non Christians understand the Science of Biology.

Homosexuality goes against the natural normal design of our bodies. Nature and the non believer's theory of evolution shows the natural order to life.

There are no Gay animals despite the ludicrous claims of activist LGBT groups. Do you know of any Pets that are gay? How about livestock? Any gay animals? The Left will spew ludicrous rhetoric of male Geese who pair up with other male Geese when there is a shortage of female Geese.

There is no sex or mating going on between those two male Geese!

The only people who can deny such an obvious truth to our body's design, are those too insecure to admit the obvious.