HOMOPHOBIC? REALLY?
Lots of chat yesterday on the sport talk channels about Ozzie Guillen's "homophobic" epithet directed at a sportswriter he doesn't like. I haven't heard anyone contest that the remark was made, or that the target is indeed gay, so apparently the fact pattern is clear.
What I don't get is why the comment is necessarily "homophobic"? Derogatory, yes. In poor judgment, sure. In poor taste, okay. But why has every commentator made the leap from derogatory to homophobic? Are we really to believe that Ozzie is *afraid* of the fellow's sexual orientation? I rather doubt it. It's PC gone mad when jocks can't rip homos-- I mean, those who are born that way and did not choose alternate lifestyles, not that there's anything wrong with that-- in the locker room without taking an all-day beating in the press. Not that he should have, only that it's not that big a deal.
1 comment:
First off, I agree with E that the concept of homophobia is overplayed. It would be nice if we could call each other out as fags without fear of reprisal from the public at large. We are allowed to each other assholes, after all. If I beat up a fella while callling him a cocksucker, I'm probably looking at assault, but if I call him a faggot, I'm going down for hate crime.
I haven't read whether the reporter is or isn't gay. Guillen explains that in his language fag means cowardly, so he was in no way alluding to the man's sexual preference.
I think Guillen can expect a suspension. You just can't really talk that way as a public person in this age. It's like calling Dusty Baker a nigger, then explaining that you just mean that he's kind of stingy.
Post a Comment