[PDF Download] Interrogating the use of lgbtq slurs 1st edition meredith g f worthen full chapter pd
Interrogating the Use of LGBTQ Slurs
1st Edition Meredith G F Worthen
Visit to download the full and correct content document: https://textbookfull.com/product/interrogating-the-use-of-lgbtq-slurs-1st-edition-meredi th-g-f-worthen/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant download maybe you interests ...
“Worthen provides the first comprehensive review of sexual slurs, the context in which they are used, and the harm that they can cause. By carefully documenting how sexual slurs provide both bonding opportunities for groups in power and work to further stigmatize already stigmatized groups, Worthen charts a new path for queer criminology: one that focuses on the relationships between power, sexuality, and stigma. This analysis is a call to action for policymakers and all who care about creating an equitable world.”
C.J. Pascoe, Associate Professor, Department of Sociology, University of Oregon
“In a historical moment where LGBTQ people across the country face renewed attacks on their lives and their rights in the political and social spheres, Meredith Worthen takes us deep into the ways in which homophobic and transphobic slurs continue to normalize and justify gender and sexual stigma and exclusion. Drawing on survey data, Worthen troubles the popular belief that younger generations will usher in a great age of LGBTQ acceptance, a belief that locates homophobia in “the bad old days” of 1940s Lavender Scare or the anti-gay backlash in the 1980s AIDs crisis. Interrogating the Use of LGBTQ Slurs examines and unpacks the continued deep-seated resistance to LGBTQ lives and identities that many people–including many young people –feel in the U.S. today, and shows the impact of slurs on the safety and mental health of minoritarian subjects.”
Kristen Schilt, Director for the Center for the Study of Gender and Sexuality, Associate Professor, Department of Sociology, University of Chicago
“Interrogating the Use of LGBTQ Slurs is a necessary and important intervention in contemporary debates about sexuality and gender inequality. Worthen shows that anti-LGBTQ slurs remain a ubiquitous feature of U.S. society. Turning her analytical gaze on these slurs, Worthen helps us to understand their harmful effects and, ultimately, to dismantle their use. This book is a must-read for scholars and advocates alike who hope to one day live in a society free of anti-LGBTQ slurs.”
Doug Meyer, Assistant Professor, Department of Women, Gender & Sexuality, University of Virginia
“Interrogating the Use of LGBTQ Slurs: Still Smearing the Queer? provides a powerful example of how queer criminology can help us understand and combat stigma through a critical interrogation of the impact of LGBTQ slurs and their role in perpetuating discrimination and violence. Building on a diverse set of theoretical frameworks drawn from sociology, queer criminology,
and legal scholarship, Worthen demonstrates how queer criminological frameworks can successfully challenge hetero-cis-normative systems that allow slurs to flourish. This nuanced and contextual analysis illuminates the complexities of LGBTQ slurs and offers a variety of recommendations aimed at cultivating a more supportive environment for LGBTQ populations. This book is a must-read for anyone interested in understanding the vital role of queer criminology in combatting LGBTQ stigma.”
Aimee Wodda, Assistant Professor, Department of Sociology, Anthropology and Criminal Justice, Law and Society, Pacific University
“This book is one of the most important works of queer scholarship that is out there. In Interrogating the Use of LGBTQ Slurs: Still Smearing the Queer?, Worthen provides a much-needed look at LGBTQ slurs and their harms. Groundbreaking in the field of Queer Victimology, Worthen offers the Theoretical Model of LGBTQ Slur Use which she uses to explain how LGBTQ slurs and derogatory language are part of a wider set of processes and systems that allow for certain groups to maintain power over others and secure the ‘gatekeeping’ of gender and sexuality norms. Through its contribution to theoretical criminology, this book demonstrates the significance queer criminological scholarship within the wider fields of victimology and criminology.”
Shelly Clevenger, Chair, Department of Victim Studies, Sam Houston State University
INTERROGATING THE USE OF LGBTQ SLURS
Interrogating the Use of LGBTQ Slurs: Still Smearing the Queer? provides a critical exploration of LGBTQ slurs through its innovative focus on heterocis-normativity and Norm-Centered Stigma Theory (NCST), the first-ever testable theory about stigma. Based on research with more than 3,000 respondents, the ways gender/sexuality norm-violators are stigmatized and disciplined as “others” through asserting and affirming one’s own social power are highlighted alongside other unique elements of slur use (joking and bonding).
Through its fresh and in-depth approach, this book is the ideal resource for those who want to learn about LGBTQ slurs more generally and for those who seek a nuanced, theory-driven, and intersectional examination of how these LGBTQ prejudices function. In doing so, it is the most comprehensive scholarly resource to date that critically examines the use of LGBTQ slurs and thus, has the potential to have broad impacts on society at large by helping to improve the LGBTQ cultural climate.
Interrogating the use of LGBTQ Slurs: Still Smearing the Queer? is important reading for scholars and students in the fields of LGBTQ studies, Gender Studies, Criminology, and Sociology.
Meredith G. F. Worthen, Ph.D. (the University of Texas at Austin, 2009), is a Professor of Sociology, elected faculty member of the Department of Women’s and Gender Studies, and faculty affiliate of the Center for Social Justice at the University of Oklahoma. Her main interests are in the sociological constructions of deviance and stigma, gender, sexuality, and LGBTQ identities, as well as feminist and queer criminology. She is the author of Queers, Bis, and Straight Lies: An Intersectional Investigation of LGBTQ Stigma (Routledge, 2020) and more than fifty academic pieces.
Queering Criminology and Criminal Justice
Edited by Matthew Ball, Queensland University of Technology
Angela Dwyer, University of Tasmania
Vanessa Panfil, Old Dominion University
Research into the criminal justice experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) people has grown significantly in recent years, particularly under the label of ‘Queer Criminology’. Criminologists and criminal justice scholars are increasingly responding to the historical exclusion of LGBTQ+ people and their lack of representation in criminal justice studies and policies.
This series explores LGBTQ+ issues in relation to crime, criminology, and criminal justice, including: LGBTQ+ victimisation and offending; theoretical and conceptual developments required to ensure criminology better represents LGBTQ+ people; and studies into the experiences of LGBTQ+ people in relation to criminal justice agents, institutions, and practices.
Queering Criminology and Criminal Justice serves as a focal point around which the field of queer criminology can develop and allows a diverse array of researchers globally (including those from the global South) to discuss a variety of criminological topics. It also aims to reinforce the importance of queer and intersectional critiques to criminology more broadly and act as a point of reference for criminologists outside of queer criminology, as well as criminal justice agents/LGBTQ+ service providers seeking to develop more inclusive, representative, and diverse understandings and practices.
Queer Histories and the Politics of Policing
Emma K. Russell
Interrogating the Use of LGBTQ Slurs: Still Smearing the Queer?
Meredith G. F. Worthen
For more information about this series, please visit: https://www.routledge.com/ Queering-Criminology-and-Criminal-Justice/book-series/QCCJ
The right of Meredith G. F. Worthen to be identified as author of this work has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Worthen, Meredith Gwynne Fair, author.
Title: Interrogating the use of LGBTQ slurs : still smearing the queer? / Meredith G.F. Worthen.
Description: Abingdon, Oxon ; New York, NY : Routledge, [2024] | Series: Queering criminology and criminal justice | Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2023028540 (print) | LCCN 2023028541 (ebook) | ISBN 9781032269160 (hardback) | ISBN 9781032269245 (paperback) | ISBN 9781003290506 (ebook)
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2023028540
LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2023028541
ISBN: 978-1-032-26916-0 (hbk)
ISBN: 978-1-032-26924-5 (pbk)
ISBN: 978-1-003-29050-6 (ebk)
DOI: 10.4324/9781003290506
Typeset in Sabon by KnowledgeWorks Global Ltd.
To all the slur survivors. Words hurt us but they will not break us.
FIGURES
2.1 LGBTQ slurs as foils to dominant gender/sexuality norms with the queer adjustment 19
2.2 Theoretical model of LGBTQ slur use 20
2.3 Percentage of LGBTQ slur users by age cohort (N = 3,104), representing the age-slur curve 22
3.1 Spectrum of stigma 30
3.2 Theoretical model of Norm-Centered Stigma Theory 33
3.3 Spectrum of stigma with examples of gender and sexual identities 35
3.4 Theoretical model of NCST, hetero-cis-normativity, and LGBTQ slur usage 36
4.1 Photo of the fagbug, a Volkswagen Beetle with rainbow stripes donning a rainbow flag at the 24th annual North Carolina LGBT Pride Parade and Festival at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina, September 27, 2008
4.2 Theoretical model of NCST, hetero-cis-normativity, and the use of “fag/faggot” as an insult from the stigmatizer lens
39
47
5.1 Dykes on Bikes® riding motorcycles hoisting rainbow flags leading the Stockholm Pride Parade on July 31, 2010 72
5.2 Theoretical model of NCST, hetero-cis-normativity, and the use of “dyke” as an insult from the stigmatizer lens 80
6.1 Kate Bornstein at Babeland, an erotic toy store in Seattle, Washington (USA) on December 6, 2010
6.2 Theoretical model of NCST, hetero-cis-normativity, and the use of “tranny” as an insult from the stigmatizer lens
104
112
7.1 Image of a sheet of stickers for Queer Nation-Houston from a Queer Helper packet put together by Queer NationSan Francisco. The packet name, “Dykes, Faggots, and Bisexuals in a Zesty Sauce,” was a riff on Hamburger Helper (Mullan n.d.) 138
7.2 Theoretical model of NCST, hetero-cis-normativity, and the use of “queer” as an insult from the stigmatizer lens 144
8.1 Black and white artist rendering of Lil Nas X wearing a studded cowboy hat and suit with double belt, fishnet top, wrist scarves, and matching multi-strap body harness as seen in his 2020 Grammy award show appearance 168
8.2 Theoretical model of NCST, hetero-cis-normativity, and the use of “no homo” from the stigmatizer lens 184
9.1 Cover art for the album That’s So Gay (2009) by Pansy Division 207
9.2 Theoretical model of NCST, hetero-cis-normativity, and the use of “that’s so gay!” from the stigmatizer lens 216
10.1 LGBTQ slurs as foils to dominant gender/sexuality norms with The Queer Adjustment as an outcome of the Theoretical Model of LGBTQ Slur Use 238
10.2 Percentage of the sometimes/frequent use of six LGBTQ slurs among the total sample (N = 3,104) 239
TABLES
4.1 Percentages of Using the “Fag/Faggot” Slur by Axes of Social Power for the Total Sample (N = 3,104)
48
4.2 Percentages of “Fag/Faggot” Slur Users and Non-Users by Axes of Social Power for the Total Sample by Age Cohort (N = 3,104) 50
4.3 Mean Values (and Standard Deviations) of the HCN Scale with t-Tests Comparing “Fag/Faggot” Slur Users and NonUsers by Axes of Social Power for the Total Sample by Age Cohort (N = 3,104)
4.4 Logistic Regression Results (Odds Ratios) Estimating NCST and “Fag/Faggot” Slur Usage, Hetero-Cis-Normativity, and Axes of Social Power by Age Cohort (N = 3,104)
5.1 Percentages of Using “Dyke” as an Insult by Axes of Social Power for the Total Sample (N = 3,104)
5.2 Percentages of “Dyke” Insult Users and Non-Users by Axes of Social Power for the Total Sample by Age Cohort (N = 3,104)
52
54
81
83
5.3 Mean Values (and Standard Deviations) of the HCN Scale with t-Tests Comparing “Dyke” Insult Users and Non-Users by Axes of Social Power for the Total Sample by Age Cohort (N = 3,104) 85
5.4 Logistic Regression Results (Odds Ratios) Estimating NCST and “Dyke” Insult Usage, Hetero-Cis-Normativity, and Axes of Social Power by Age Cohort (N = 3,104)
6.1 Percentages of Using the “Tranny” Slur by Axes of Social Power for the Total Sample (N = 3,104)
87
113
6.2 Percentages of “Tranny” Slur Users and Non-Users by Axes of Social Power for the Total Sample by Age Cohort (N = 3,104) 115
6.3 Mean Values (and Standard Deviations) of the HCN Scale with t-Tests Comparing “Tranny” Slur Users and Non-Users by Axes of Social Power for the Total Sample by Age Cohort (N = 3,104)
6.4 Logistic Regression Results (Odds Ratios) Estimating NCST and “Tranny” Slur Usage, Hetero-Cis-Normativity, and Axes of Social Power by Age Cohort (N = 3,104)
7.1 Percentages of Using “Queer” as an Insult by Axes of Social Power for the Total Sample (N = 3,104)
7.2 Percentages of “Queer” Insult Users and Non-Users by Axes of Social Power for the Total Sample by Age Cohort (N = 3,104)
7.3 Mean Values (and Standard Deviations) of the HCN Scale with t-Tests Comparing “Queer” Insult Users and Non-Users by Axes of Social Power for the Total Sample by Age Cohort (N = 3,104)
7.4 Logistic Regression Results (Odds Ratios) Estimating NCST and “Queer” Insult Usage, Hetero-Cis-Normativity, and Axes of Social Power by Age Cohort (N = 3,104)
8.1 Percentages of Using the “No Homo” Slur by Axes of Social Power for the Total Sample (N = 3,104)
8.2 Percentages of “No Homo” Slur Users and Non-Users by Axes of Social Power for the Total Sample by Age Cohort (N = 3,104)
8.3 Mean Values (and Standard Deviations) of the HCN Scale with t-Tests Comparing “No Homo” Slur Users and NonUsers by Axes of Social Power for the Total Sample by Age Cohort (N = 3,104)
8.4 Logistic Regression Results (Odds Ratios) Estimating NCST and “No Homo” Slur Usage, Hetero-Cis-Normativity, and Axes of Social Power by Age Cohort (N = 3,104)
9.1 Percentages of Using the “That’s So Gay!” Slur by Axes of Social Power for the Total Sample (N = 3,104)
9.2 Percentages of “That’s So Gay!” Slur Users and Non-Users by Axes of Social Power for the Total Sample by Age Cohort (N = 3,104)
9.3 Mean Values (and Standard Deviations) of the HCN Scale with t-Tests Comparing “That’s So Gay!” Slur Users and Non-Users by Axes of Social Power for the Total Sample by Age Cohort (N = 3,104)
9.4 Logistic Regression Results (Odds Ratios) Estimating NCST and “That’s So Gay!” Slur Usage, Hetero-Cis-Normativity, and Axes of Social Power by Age Cohort (N = 3,104)
117
119
146
147
149
152
186
187
189
192
218
219
221
224
PREFACE
“Smear the Queer!”
—a phrase that could be heard across American playgrounds, especially during the 1950s–1970s, yelled out when boys physically piled on top of each other after one boy was singled out as the loser of the game— essentially tackling the “queer” by keeping him on the bottom of the pile (Brontsema 2004; Loutzenheiser 1996; Reed and Brown 2000).
Ouch. This game and its accompanying catchphrase are historical artifacts that linger in our memories. They are a reminder that LGBTQ people are perceived as others and that our otherness has been chastised for decades via insults and slurs. Today, LGBTQ slurs look different and they have taken on new forms, but they still have tremendous power—the power to continue to shape LGBTQ people as others, the power to unite bigots together, and the power to dehumanize LGBTQ people. It is precisely because of their power that I believe that researching LGBTQ slurs is vital.
About the Book
This is a book about exposing and dismantling slurs and slur users. But I never set out to write a book about LGBTQ slurs. Because they are so troubling to hear, researching them for more than a year was not in my original plan. But when I was poking through my own dataset (the same data used for this book) and I found that young men held stronger anti-LGBTQ attitudes, that they were more likely to adhere to patriarchal norms and to feel uncomfortable by other men “hitting” on them, and that young men were more likely to use LGBTQ slurs than older age cohorts (Worthen 2021), I was
shocked. I had always heard/thought that young people were the “woke” ones: the ones who grew up in the wake of open conversations about LGBTQ rights; the ones who defy the 1980s stereotypes that I grew up with; the ones who support LGBTQ people, right? I checked and rechecked my data and after confirming its accuracy, I began to formulate an understanding of these patterns that at first blush, seemed to defy logic.
In my initial search, I found that I am by no means the first person to denote these patterns. For example, the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation’s (GLAAD’s) newly released Accelerating Acceptance report showed that those aged 18–34 years have been increasingly less supportive of LGBTQ people in recent years (GLAAD 2019). In fact, the biggest drop in LGBTQ support was found among Millennial men whose acceptance levels were nearly cut in half from 2016 to 2018. In particular, only 35% were “very” or “somewhat” comfortable interacting with LGBTQ people in 2018 as compared to nearly twice that (62%) in 2016 (GLAAD 2019). Other research bolsters these patterns and shows that Millennial men are less supportive of LGBTQ issues as compared to their female counterparts (Hensley, Diddi and Hyllegard 2019; Milkman 2017).
Interestingly, previous studies (Becker 2012; Cox, Navarro-Rivera and Jones 2014; Flores 2014; Norton and Herek 2013) using data collected prior to 2014 either indicate increasing LGBTQ support among young people or no major age or generational differences in LGBTQ attitudes. Thus, it seemed to me that it was something that occurred after 2014 that was driving these patterns of unsupportive LGBTQ perspectives among Millennials.
In 2015, Donald Trump began his campaign for US Presidency and eventually served as the 45th President from 2017 to 2021. As I have argued elsewhere (Worthen 2021), many Millennial men were coming of age during this time. In particular, some young men began developing their understandings of masculinity in a culture that was led by a president who made numerous toxic comments about women, including his belief that you can just “Grab ‘em by the pussy” (Victor 2017). While Trump and his party were in power, a particular type of young men, which I call “dude bros,” were emboldened and empowered. “Dude bros” are typically young (Millennial), straight, White cisgender males of privilege who express masculinity in entitled, obnoxious, and toxic ways which can be inclusive of overt anti-LGBTQ commentary and behaviors (e.g., a “dude, you’re a fag” discourse, Pascoe 2007) as well as misogynistic rants about their sexual “conquests” over women (Baxter-Webb 2016; Jourian 2017). Most specifically, dude bros’ unifying characteristics are their shared negative and disparaging perspectives about women and LGBTQ people that work to secure their own places of privilege as cisgender men (see Worthen 2021: 291). Not surprisingly, I found that those exhibiting dude bro characteristics were significantly more likely to stigmatize LGBTQ people than non-dude bros (Worthen 2021; see also Pascoe 2007).
But this book and its journey to provide a narrative about LGBTQ slur use are about more than just dude bros. In fact, as we will learn together, blaming a single group for toxic language is not only an inaccurate description of actual cultural patterns, it is also highly counterproductive. In the next couple hundred pages, dude bros will be well-represented, but other types of slur users are also exposed—some of them highly unexpected. By dismantling the sociological patterns of LGBTQ slur use, I highlight the complexities of this mode of toxicity in efforts to build a deeper understanding of how to disrupt systemic anti-LGBTQ cultural dynamics and work toward increased efforts to support LGBTQ people.
Trigger Warning and Self-Care
This book was hard to write and I am sure it will be hard to read. Seeing these LGBTQ slurs in black and white over and over again will likely be triggering to many. They can conjure up vivid memories and they have the power to produce and reproduce harm. Slurs can be weapons and they can feel like daggers. Opting into reading hundreds of pages about them can be a daunting task. I do not believe this subject is easily palatable to all. Some findings might be upsetting and difficult to learn about. That is why I recommend practicing self-care as you read through this text.
Self-care can mean many things to many people. Here are some strategies that might help:
• Take breaks.
Building in time to stop and take a break while reading can help with the strains and stressors related to the toxic language you will read in this book. Reading this book in a single sitting may not be ideal.
• Reflect/journal/write as you read.
Taking the time to work through this material as you read it and/or during breaks from reading may also be helpful. Reflecting about the upsetting language in this text can involve journaling about your own experiences/ responses to this material and/or about your own research ideas that could expand upon what is done here.
• Have something fun and/or relaxing planned for after you finish reading. When you are done reading for the day, plan an activity that will bring you joy, help you relax, or both!
• Decompress.
Whatever the self-care practices that work best for you are, it is important to remember to decompress from this material by recognizing that damaging language is only one part of human interaction. Although it is upsetting, many people do not contribute to this type of harm. In fact, most do not.
Thank You
In closing, I want to thank you for reading this text. It takes guts to take on a subject like this and I am honored to be a part of your journey through this experience. I hope this book will inspire you in your work.
References
Baxter-Webb, Joe. 2016. “The ‘Bro Gamer’: An (Imaginary?) Intruder in Videogame Culture.” pp. 51–64 in Mapping the Digital: Cultures and Territories of Play Leiden, Netherlands: Brill.
Becker, A. B. 2012. “Determinants of Public Support for Same-Sex Marriage: Generational Cohorts, Social Contact, and Shifting Attitudes.” International Journal of Public Opinion Research 24(4):524–33. doi: 10.1093/ijpor/eds002.
Brontsema, Robin. 2004. “A Queer Revolution: Reconceptualizing the Debate Over Linguistic Reclamation.” Colorado Research in Linguistics 17(1):1–17. doi: 10.25810/dky3-zq57
Cox, Daniel, Juhem Navarro-Rivera, and Robert Jones. 2014. A Shifting Landscape: A Decade of Change in American Attitudes about Same-Sex Marriage and LGBT Issues. Washington, D.C: Public Religion Research Institute.
Flores, Andrew R. 2014. “National Trends in Public Opinion on LGBT Rights in the United States.” The Williams Institute 1–47.
Hensley, Cammie, Sonali Diddi, and Karen Hyllegard. 2019. “Millennial Consumers’ Responses to Cause-Related Marketing in Support of LGBTQ Homeless Youth.” Social Sciences 8(8):240. doi: 10.3390/socsci8080240.
Jourian, T. J. 2017. “‘Fun and Carefree Like My Polka Dot Bowtie’: Disidentifications of Trans*masculine Students of Color.” pp. 123–43 in Queer People of Color in Higher Education. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing. Loutzenheiser, Lisa W. 1996. “How Schools Play ‘Smear the Queer.” Feminist Teacher 10(2):59–64.
Milkman, Ruth. 2017. “A New Political Generation: Millennials and the Post2008 Wave of Protest.” American Sociological Review 82(1):1–31. doi: 10.1177/ 0003122416681031
Norton, Aaron T., and Gregory M. Herek. 2013. “Heterosexuals’ Attitudes Toward Transgender People: Findings from a National Probability Sample of U.S. Adults.” Sex Roles 68(11–12):738–53. doi: 10.1007/s11199-011-0110-6.
Pascoe, C. J. 2007. Dude, You’re a Fag: Masculinity and Sexuality in High School. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Reed, Tom, and Mac Brown. 2000. “The Expression of Care in the Rough and Tumble Play of Boys.” Journal of Research in Childhood Education 15(1):104–16. doi: 10.1080/02568540009594779.
Victor, Daniel. 2017. “‘Access Hollywood’ Reminds Trump: ‘The Tape Is Very Real.’” New York Times, November 28.
Worthen, Meredith G. F. 2021. “The Young and the Prejudiced? Millennial Men, ‘Dude Bro’ Disposition, and LGBTQ Negativity in a US National Sample.” Sexuality Research & Social Policy 18(2):290–308.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Many have helped make this book a reality. I would like to acknowledge the Department of Sociology at the University of Oklahoma for supporting my research journey for the past 14 years. I would also like to thank the University of Oklahoma Office Vice President for Research Norman Campus Research Council Faculty Investment Program grant that allowed me to obtain a nationally stratified dataset for this project and others. I would like to continue to thank Melissa Jones who was there for me every step of the way during the construction of my first book, Queers, Bis, and Straight Lies (2020), which serves as the foundation for this book. I owe Mark Stafford a great deal of gratitude for his support and mentorship for more than two decades and his help with developing Norm-Centered Stigma Theory. I am also thankful to Amy Goodin, Trina Hope, Tonya Maynard, and Marc Musick for their assistance with the survey instrument that was used to collect data for this project. I would also like to acknowledge the 3,104 survey respondents who took time to share their experiences. I would be remiss not to thank the anonymous manuscript reviewers whose critical insights have helped me to cultivate a deeper understanding of LGBTQ stigma over the past several years. To the editors of this Queering Criminology and Criminal Justice series by Routledge, Matthew Ball, Angela Dwyer, and Vanessa Panfil, thank you for your mentorship and friendship, it is because of you that queer criminology is growing and thriving. And finally, I would like to acknowledge my family: my parents’ lifelong presence in my journey for social justice made me who I am today; my husband, Brian, who I am forever indebted to for his support throughout my academic journey; and my daughter, Gwyneth, who shows me that leading a life of kindness and respect can be done with ease and grace. With the support of those mentioned explicitly and those not mentioned, I have the strength to tackle the difficult subjects discussed in this book and I am deeply appreciative of you.
1 INTRODUCTION
Fag! Dyke! Tranny! Queer! No homo. That’s so gay!
These are slurs; these are insults; and they are a damaging part of many people’s daily existence. Though the actual terms used may change over time, slurs and insults remain a powerful fixture in everyday vernacular. Slurs associated with lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) people run a wide gamut. Indeed, one specialty dictionary of gender and sexual identity biases lists more than 1,000 words used to disparage those who do not adhere to norms about gender and/or sexuality (Herbst 2001). Yet there are important differences across slurs and slur usage that are essential to examine. For example, one could easily make an argument with a great deal of face validity that using the term “fag” as an insult differs notably from using the term “dyke.” Not only does the target of prejudice likely differ in their outward appearance and demeanor, but also, the person using the insult and their patterns of usage of these two terms also likely differ. For example, teenage boys’ use of a “fag” discourse to both assert their masculinity and berate what they perceive to be non-masculine, specifically gay men, and also anything perceived as feminine, was highlighted by sociologist C.J. Pascoe in her book Dude, You’re a Fag (Pascoe 2007). In this ethnographic study of a California public high school, Pascoe carefully and critically elucidates
the significance of this LGBTQ slur and in doing so, provides a great deal of information about the sociological patterns of “fag” usage (Pascoe 2007). However, other LGBTQ slurs have received significantly less attention. It is especially important to examine different types of LGBTQ slurs as separate but related phenomena. In my past work, I have argued that we must build distinct but interconnected discussions about the experiences of lesbian women, gay men, bisexual men, bisexual women, trans men, trans women, non-binary/genderqueer individuals, queer women, and queer men to best understand LGBTQ stigma and negativity (e.g., Worthen 2013, 2020). The overarching goal of this book continues in the same vein and uses a queer criminological lens to encourage future researchers to investigate specific prejudices toward LGBTQ individuals as both unique and overlapping.
Examining LGBTQ Slurs through Queer Criminology
Queer criminology responds to the needs of LGBTQ people by providing a space for their experiences in the field of criminology (Buist and Lenning 2015; Dwyer, Ball and Crofts 2016). Queer criminologists have demonstrated such efforts in their investigations of intimate partner violence among samegender and transgender couples (Ball 2013; Guadalupe-Diaz and Jasinski 2017), gay gang members’ experiences (Panfil 2017, 2020), LGBTQ interactions with police (Dwyer 2014, 2020; Dwyer et al. 2020; Meyer 2020), and the targeting of trans women (Buist and Stone 2014; Lenning, Brightman and Buist 2021; Wodda and Panfil 2014), among many other explorations. Recent calls for trans-inclusivity in criminology exhibit the critical need for the engagement of LGBTQ issues in criminology and queer criminology heeds this call (Valcore et al. 2021). Together, such projects expose the significance of bringing in fresh perspectives about LGBTQ experiences within criminological frameworks in efforts to create informed solutions that work to alleviate the difficulties that LGBTQ people endure (Dwyer, Ball and Crofts 2016).
Specifically, this text follows Queer Criminology scholar Vanessa Panfil’s acknowledgment of its “unbounded potential” (Panfil 2018: 2). By focusing on LGBTQ slurs specifically, this book demonstrates how queer criminology offers an important space to engage with both queer theory and LGBTQ slurs in ways that disrupt the hetero-cis-normative systems that allow such language to flourish (Ball 2016; Buist and Lenning 2015; Dwyer et al. 2016). In particular, this text engages with a queer criminology lens in an effort to demonstrate how LGBTQ slurs can be understood as weapons mobilized against those perceived as LGBTQ. In doing so, the experiences of LGBTQ people are centered and their negative treatment is problematized. Beyond this, I also use a queer theoretical lens to highlight the ways LGBTQ slurs can serve as a mechanism to stigmatize/discipline gender/sexuality “others” as well as a mechanism that allows for bonding and humor. Through using a queer
criminological lens to expose LGBTQ slurs and their complexities—as both volatile weapons and as intricate tools of social bonding—this research is well-positioned to provide ways to work toward creating a more supportive environment for LGBTQ people.
Goals of the Text
In line with my previous work (see especially Worthen 2013, 2021b), the goals of this text are three-fold: (1) to expose and dismantle slurs and slur users in an effort to build a deeper understanding of how to disrupt systemic antiLGBTQ cultural dynamics and work toward increased efforts to support LGBTQ people, (2) to provide a theoretically-informed and empirical analysis of the sociological patterns of LGBTQ slur usage by testing Norm-Centered Stigma Theory (NCST) by highlighting the significance of hetero-cis-normativity and intersectionality in understanding LGBTQ stigmatization, and (3) to continue to stress the importance of separate but interconnected discussions about prejudices directed toward LGBTQ people so that ultimately, such negativities can be dismantled and ameliorated.
The Slurs
One way to work to achieve these goals is to examine the sociological patterns of specific LGBTQ slurs. For example, some LGBTQ slurs are gendered, such as in the case of “fag” which is typically an insult used by heterosexual men to degrade other men (Burn 2000; Pascoe 2007). The phrase “no homo” is also commonly used between men but in contrast to a direct insult, “no homo” is used to thwart the suspicion that its (heterosexual) user might be gay after he has complimented another man (e.g., “Hey man, I like your shirt…no homo!”) (Brown 2011; Pascoe and Diefendorf 2019). Another saying, “that’s so gay!,” is not quite as specifically entwined with gay men, but rather is used to disparage something or someone and in doing so, makes “gay” and “stupid” into synonyms (Chonody, Rutledge and Smith 2012; Holland, Matthews and Schott 2013; Nicolas and Skinner 2012; Woodford et al. 2012). While all three LGBTQ slurs reflect some level of negativity toward gay men, there are clear differences between them. Other LGBTQ slurs are more commonly associated with women, such as “dyke.” Some, especially heterosexual people, use “dyke” as an insult directed toward women who perform gender and/or sexuality in non-heterocis-normative ways; however, “dyke” has been reclaimed by some in the lesbian community (Califia and Sweeney 2000; Eliason 2010; Ettorre 2010). In particular, the group Dykes on Bikes® proudly displays their reclamation of this term in pride parades and beyond (Kates and Belk 2001). Even so, “dyke” as an insult remains a complicated reminder of cultural negativity
directed toward LGBTQ women that deserves to be unpacked to help us continue to work toward ameliorating LGBTQ stigma.
Another cluster of LGBTQ slurs is directed toward transgender people. The insult “tranny” is one such slur that is commonly associated with trans women. As scholar Julia Serano describes in her book Whipping Girl, trans women endure multifaceted prejudices associated with trans-misogyny (Serano 2007). In addition, the sexualization of trans women, especially in the realm of sex work, is embedded in the negativities that trans women can experience (Tibbals 2015). However, despite the recognition of the problems associated with this slur (Heklina 2015), the patterns of its usage are surprisingly underresearched. This is particularly problematic because trans people, and especially trans women of color, experience tensions within the LGBTQ community and endure extreme economic and social hardships (Browne 2011; Currans 2020; James et al. 2016; Schilt and Westbrook 2009; Worthen 2016, 2020). Thus, it is essential to critically examine the sociological patterns of this slur and its usage.
In contrast to the more specific slurs referred to above, “queer” has historically been used as a generalized insult for those who are perceived as “odd” or “weird” but was later more specifically used to refer to effeminate men, especially in the schoolyard game of “smear the queer” wherein boys physically piled on top of each other after one boy was singled out as the loser of the game—essentially tackling (i.e., “smearing”) the “queer” by keeping him on the bottom of the pile (Brontsema 2004; Loutzenheiser 1996; Reed and Brown 2000). Because “queer” has been reclaimed by some in the LGBT community but certainly not all, “queer” occupies a contentious position both in and out of the LGBTQ community. Furthermore, though “queer” as an identity has received scholarly attention (Goldberg et al. 2020; Khayatt 2002; Worthen 2021a), its usage as a slur has not been examined extensively, especially in the climate of the evolution of queer theory (Brontsema 2004; Gamson 1995; Halperin 2003). To contribute to this gap, this book offers one of the first theoretically-informed intersectional analyses of the use of “queer” as an insult.
Analytical Tools (Chapter 2)
To help explain LGBTQ slur use, I offer a handful of analytical tools in this text. Specifically, I provide definitions of slurs in the context of their power to shape LGBTQ people as others, to unite bigots together, and to dehumanize LGBTQ people. I also discuss how LGBTQ slurs function as real-life literary foils to dominant norms about masculinity, femininity, and hetero-cisnormativity. To further elucidate these patterns, I adapt Goffman’s (1963) concept of The Good Adjustment, by offering The Queer Adjustment to explain how this foil arrangement that allows the stigmatizer to assert and
affirm their social power over gender/sexuality “others” (e.g., through the use of LGBTQ slurs) ultimately maintains the status quo and secures the “other”-ness of LGBTQ people.
Bringing these ideas together, the Theoretical Model of LGBTQ Slur Use is then offered. This four-tiered model conceptualizes the broad significance of asserting and affirming one’s social power over gender/sexuality others which can include the processes of stigmatizing gender/sexuality others via holding bigoted perspectives and beliefs, actively disciplining gender/sexuality others through discrimination, or most specifically, using LGBTQ slurs. I also describe how LGBTQ slurs can take the shape of jokes/humor, bonding through mutual dislike, and bonding through homosocial feelings (emotions shared between same-gender persons).
Further contextualizing LGBTQ slur use, I apply concepts from Sampson and Laub’s Age-Graded Theory of Social Control (1993) by arguing that the use of LGBTQ insults is age-graded in that younger age cohorts are most likely to participate in such behaviors as a result of enhanced (1) awareness of their bodies, sexualities, and gender identities, (2) importance of peers, and (3) normalization of name-calling behavior. These patterns generate what I call an age-slur curve wherein LGBTQ slur use peaks in late adolescence/ early adulthood and drops throughout the life course.
Further described in Chapter 2, these analytical tools are utilized throughout this text to describe the sociological patterns of LGBTQ slur use. Beyond these tools, however, a theoretical framework is necessary to unite these ideas together.
Theoretical Framework (Chapter 3)
LGBTQ slurs exist within a nexus of complexities associated with not only sexual and gender identities, but also race/ethnicity, class, and other axes of social power. Thus, an approach that considers the interlocking intricacies involved in the oppression of LGBTQ people is necessary when exploring the sociological patterns of LGBTQ slur usage. Specifically, I use an intersectional lens that considers how multiple identities of privilege and oppression interact to examine the ways axes of social power relate to the use of LGBTQ prejudicial terms (Collins 2002; Crenshaw 1991; Davis 2008). This intersectional perspective acknowledges the importance of gender- and sexuality-based oppression in line with queer theorists’ interrogations of cisnormativity and heteronormativity (Butler 1990, 1993; Sedgwick 1990) and the importance of investigating the simultaneous and interacting effects of other identities (e.g., race, ethnicity, class) on prejudicial perspectives. In addition, this approach centers on “issues of difference and diversity” (Davis 2008: 71) as they relate to LGBTQ prejudices and investigates how social identities converge and differentially contribute to LGBTQ slur usage patterns. Furthermore, I also
utilize a queer criminological lens that seeks to draw attention to “the stigmatization, the criminalization, and in many ways the rejection of the Queer community … by academe and the criminal legal system” (Buist and Lenning 2015: 1). Overall, the framework of this book provides an approach that is especially cognizant of how axes of social power associated with sexuality, gender, race, ethnicity, and class interact and contribute to the oppression of LGBTQ people.
Norm-Centered Stigma Theory
In this book, I test my newly developed theory, NCST, as seen in some of my most recent work (e.g., Worthen 2020, 2021c; Worthen and Laljer 2021). NCST is built from established scholarly research about stigma that acknowledges the significance of norms and social power in conceptualizing stigma (e.g., Goffman 1963; Link and Phelan 2001; Stafford and Scott 1986) and other works that recognize how diverse, interacting axes of social power shape varying life circumstances (e.g., Butler 1993; Collins 1999; Crenshaw 1991; Davis 2008). Using NCST, hetero-cis-normativity (and violations of hetero-cis-normativity) (Worthen 2016, 2020) are utilized as the centralized overarching concepts that help us to understand LGBTQ stigma and the cultural devaluation of LGBTQ people. Specifically, the relationships between hetero-cis-normativity, intersecting axes of social power, and the use of LGBTQ slurs are highlighted throughout this text. Chapter 3 further specifies this theoretical framework. Specifically, the relationships between norms, intersecting experiences with social power, and stigma are emphasized in the three tenets of NCST identified in this chapter. The theoretical model for NCST and accompanying hypotheses that guide the body of this text are also provided.
Outline of the Body of the Text (Chapters 4–9)
The body of the text identifies the sociological patterns of LGBTQ slur usage by discussing the empirical results of quantitative analyses of survey data collected from adults ages 18 to 64 that was stratified by U.S. census categories of age, gender, race/ethnicity, and census region (N = 3,104; n = 1500 cisgender men and women; n = 1,604 LGBTQ people). Each chapter is dedicated to a specific LGBTQ slur and follows a similar format wherein a description of the slur and its history are provided first, then, current research about the use of the slur is discussed, and after that, descriptive statistics that highlight intersectionality and logistic regression results testing NCST are provided. To conclude, each chapter provides a summary of key findings that integrates the previous literature while also underscoring the unique contributions of the text.
Chapters 4–7 focus on direct projectile slurs. I define a direct projectile slur as an insult that is cast upon another person in a purposeful and straightforward manner in efforts to diminish the slur target. Chapter 4 focuses on “fag” and “faggot” as insults used against those who are perceived as effeminate and/or gay men who do not meet the standards of hetero-masculinity (Herbst 2001; Spears 1985; Stanley 1970). Most specifically, the “faggot = loser” projectile is examined as it relates to a set of processes that allow its users to affirm/defend hetero-cis-normativity by disparaging non-normative expressions of gender (Corbett 2001; Pascoe 2005, 2011; Pascoe and Bridges 2015). Chapter 5 explores “dyke” as an insult used against people who are perceived as masculine and/or lesbian women (Herbst 2001; Spears 1985; Stanley 1970) and integrates a discussion of this slur’s reclamation and contentious position both in and out of the LGBTQ community (Brontsema 2004; Eliason 2010; Ettorre 2010). Chapter 6 investigates sociological patterns in the use of “tranny” as it is used to ridicule others who are perceived as transgender, but more specifically, people who are perceived as trans women. Trans studies scholar Julia Serano’s (2007) concept of trans-misogyny is highlighted to further develop critical discussions about the difficulties that trans people experience, including multiple overlapping and troubling scripts that denigrate both trans and feminine identities, as also demonstrated in previous work (Heklina 2015; James et al. 2016; Schilt and Westbrook 2009; Serano 2007; Tibbals 2015; Wodda and Panfil 2014; Worthen 2016). Chapter 7 provides an historical and contemporary discussion of “queer” as related to its use as slur and as a reclaimed identity (Anderson-Nathe, DeFilippis and Mehrotra 2018; Blasius 2001; Brontsema 2004; Butler 1993; Gamson 1995; Worthen 2021a, 2023). Age cohort is highlighted due to the fact that younger people—especially those who are college educated, liberal, and social justice-motivated— are more likely to embrace queer as an identity compared to older people who more commonly perceive the term “queer” to be offensive (Brontsema 2004; Friedman and Leaper 2010; Goldberg et al. 2020; Gray and Desmarais 2014; Mereish, Katz-Wise and Woulfe 2017; Morandini, Blaszczynski and Dar-Nimrod 2017; Russell, Clarke and Clary 2009; Worthen 2021a).
The next two chapters focus on two phrases: “no homo” (Chapter 8) and “that’s so gay!” (Chapter 9). This is a noticeable departure from the discussions of direct projectile slurs offered in the previous four chapters. While both phrases in these two chapters can be read as anti-LGBTQ, they operate somewhat differently than overt insults. Perhaps precisely because “no homo” and “that’s so gay!” are not direct projectiles, scholars have provided more in-depth discussions of these phrases that consider their diverse uses, meanings, and functions. In particular, their more frequent humorous/joking qualities coupled with their more common use between friends, especially through social bonding, largely differentiate “no homo” and “that’s so gay!” from “fag,” “dyke,” “tranny,” and “queer.” In doing so, both “no homo”
and “that’s so gay!” more closely adhere to the full Theoretical Model of LGBTQ Slur Use. Together, these two chapters bring together an integrated discussion of LGBTQ slurs that considers both differences and overlaps between direct projectile slurs and the defensive/joking/bonding qualities of “no homo” and “that’s so gay!” In all, the dynamic and evolving meanings of LGBTQ slurs are highlighted alongside a discussion of their utilitarian qualities.
The final chapter (Chapter 10) reviews key concepts, theoretical contributions, and eight key findings from this text. In addition, recommendations in schools and communities are discussed and expansions for future research are provided.
References
Anderson-Nathe, Ben, Joseph Nicholas DeFilippis, and Gita R. Mehrotra. 2018. “Deconstructing and Reconstructing Identity: How Queer Liberation Organizations Deploy Collective Identities.” Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare 45:85.
Ball, Matthew. 2013. “Heteronormativity, Homonormativity and Violence.” Crime, Justice and Social Democracy: International Perspectives 186–99.
Ball, Matthew. 2016. Criminology and Queer Theory: Dangerous Bedfellows? New York, NY: Springer.
Blasius, Mark, ed. 2001. Sexual Identities, Queer Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Brontsema, Robin. 2004. “A Queer Revolution: Reconceptualizing the Debate over Linguistic Reclamation.” Colorado Research in Linguistics 17(1):1–17. doi: 10. 25810/dky3-zq57
Brown, Joshua R. 2011. “No Homo.” Journal of Homosexuality 58(3):299–314. doi: 10.1080/00918369.2011.546721
Browne, Kath. 2011. “Lesbian Separatist Feminism at Michigan Womyn’s Music Festival.” Feminism & Psychology 21(2):248–56. doi: 10.1177/0959353510370185
Buist, Carrie, and Emily Lenning. 2015. Queer Criminology. New York, NY: Routledge.
Buist, Carrie L., and Codie Stone. 2014. “Transgender Victims and Offenders: Failures of the United States Criminal Justice System and the Necessity of Queer Criminology.” Critical Criminology 22(1):35–47. doi: 10.1007/s10612-013-9224-1
Burn, Shawn Meghan. 2000. “Heterosexuals’ Use of ‘Fag’ and ‘Queer’ to Deride One Another: A Contributor to Heterosexism and Stigma.” Journal of Homosexuality 40(2):1–11.
Butler, Judith. 1990. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. London, UK: Routledge.
Butler, Judith. 1993. “Critically Queer.” GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 1(1):17–32.
Califia, Pat, and Robin Sweeney, eds. 2000. The Second Coming: A Leatherdyke Reader. Los Angeles, CA: Alyson Books.
Chonody, Jill, Scott Rutledge, and Scott Smith. 2012. “‘That’s so Gay’: Language Use and Antigay Bias among Heterosexual College Students.” Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services 24(3):241–59.
Collins, Patricia Hill. 2002. Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment. Routledge.
Collins, Patricia Hill. 2002. Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment. New York, NY: Routledge.
Corbett, Ken. 2001. “Faggot = Loser.” Studies in Gender and Sexuality 2(1):3–28. doi: 10.1080/15240650209349168
Crenshaw, Kimberlé. 1991. “Mapping the Margins: Identity Politics, Intersectionality, and Violence against Women.” Stanford Law Review 43(6):1241–99.
Currans, Elizabeth. 2020. “Transgender Women Belong Here: Contested Feminist Visions at the Michigan Womyn’s Music Festival.” Feminist Studies 46(2):459–88. doi: 10.15767/feministstudies.46.2.0459
Davis, Kathy. 2008. “Intersectionality as Buzzword: A Sociology of Science Perspective on What Makes a Feminist Theory Successful.” Feminist Theory 9(1):67–85.
Dwyer, Angela. 2014. “‘We’re Not Like These Weird Feather Boa-Covered AIDSSpreading Monsters’: How LGBT Young People and Service Providers Think Riskiness Informs LGBT Youth–Police Interactions.” Critical Criminology 22(1):65–79. doi: 10.1007/s10612-013-9226-z
Dwyer, Angela. 2020. “Queering Police Administration: How Policing Administration Complicates LGBTIQ–Police Relations.” Administrative Theory & Praxis 42(2):172–90. doi: 10.1080/10841806.2019.1659047
Dwyer, Angela, Matthew Ball, and Thomas Crofts, eds. 2016. Queering Criminology. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
Dwyer, Angela, Matthew Ball, Murray Lee, Thomas Crofts, and Christine Bond. 2020. “Barriers Stopping LGBTI People from Accessing LGBTI Police Liaison Officers: Analysing Interviews with Community and Police.” Criminal Justice Studies 33(3):256–75.
Eliason, Michele J. 2010. “A New Classification System for Lesbians: The Dyke Diagnostic Manual.” Journal of Lesbian Studies 14(4):401–14. doi: 10.1080/10894161003677133
Ettorre, Elizabeth. 2010. “Nuns, Dykes, Drugs and Gendered Bodies: An Autoethnography of a Lesbian Feminist’s Journey through ‘Good Time’ Sociology.” Sexualities 13(3):295–315. doi: 10.1177/1363460709363137
Friedman, Carly, and Campbell Leaper. 2010. “Sexual-Minority College Women’s Experiences With Discrimination: Relations With Identity and Collective Action.” Psychology of Women Quarterly 34(2):152–64. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402. 2010.01558.x
Gamson, Joshua. 1995. “Must Identity Movements Self-Destruct? A Queer Dilemma.” Social Problems 42(3):390–407. doi: 10.2307/3096854
Goffman, Erving. 1963. Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Goldberg, Shoshana K., Esther D. Rothblum, Stephen T. Russell, and Ilan H. Meyer. 2020. “Exploring the Q in LGBTQ: Demographic Characteristic and Sexuality of Queer People in a U.S. Representative Sample of Sexual Minorities.” Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity 7(1):101–12. doi: 10.1037/sgd0000359
Gray, Amy, and Serge Desmarais. 2014. “Not All One and the Same: Sexual Identity, Activism, and Collective Self-Esteem.” Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality 23(2):116. doi: 10.3138/cjhs.2400
Guadalupe-Diaz, Xavier L., and Jana Jasinski. 2017. “‘I Wasn’t a Priority, I Wasn’t a Victim’: Challenges in Help Seeking for Transgender Survivors of
Intimate Partner Violence.” Violence against Women 23(6):772–92. doi: 10.1177/ 1077801216650288
Halperin, David M. 2003. “The Normalization of Queer Theory.” Journal of Homosexuality 45(2–4):339–43. doi: 10.1300/J082v45n02_17
Heklina. 2015. “The Trouble with Tranny.” Studies in Gender and Sexuality 16(2):142–43. doi: 10.1080/15240657.2015.1038201
Herbst, Philip H. 2001. Wimmin, Wimps & Wallflowers: An Encyclopaedic Dictionary of Gender and Sexual Orientation Bias in the United States. Yarmouth, ME: UNKNO.
Holland, Laurel, Todd Matthews, and Melinda Schott. 2013. “‘That’s So Gay!’ Exploring College Students’ Attitudes toward the LGBT Population.” Journal of Homosexuality 60(4):575–95.
James, Sandy, Jody L. Herman, Sue Rankin, Mara Keisling, Lisa Mottet, and Anafi Ma’ayan. 2016. The Report of the 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey. Washington, DC: National Center for Transgender Equality.
Kates, Steven, and Russell Belk. 2001. “The Meanings of Lesbian and Gay Pride Day: Resistance through Consumption and Resistance to Consumption.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 30(4):392–429. doi: 10.1177/089124101030004003
Lenning, Emily, Sara Brightman, and Carrie L. Buist. 2021. “The Trifecta of Violence: A Socio-Historical Comparison of Lynching and Violence against Transgender Women.” Critical Criminology 29(1):151–72. doi: 10.1007/s10612-020-09539-9
Link, Bruce G., and Jo C. Phelan. 2001. “Conceptualizing Stigma.” Annual Review of Sociology 27(1):363–85. doi: 10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.363
Loutzenheiser, Lisa W. 1996. “How Schools Play ‘Smear the Queer’.” Feminist Teacher 10(2):59–64.
Mereish, Ethan H., Sabra L. Katz-Wise, and Julie Woulfe. 2017. “We’re Here and We’re Queer: Sexual Orientation and Sexual Fluidity Differences between Bisexual and Queer Women.” Journal of Bisexuality 17(1):125–39. doi: 10.1080/ 15299716.2016.1217448
Meyer, Doug. 2020. “‘So Much for Protect and Serve’: Queer Male Survivors’ Perceptions of Negative Police Experiences.” Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice 36(2):228–50. doi: 10.1177/1043986219894430
Morandini, James S., Alexander Blaszczynski, and Ilan Dar-Nimrod. 2017. “Who Adopts Queer and Pansexual Sexual Identities?” The Journal of Sex Research 54(7):911–22. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2016.1249332
Nicolas, Gandalf, and Allison Louise Skinner. 2012. “‘That’s So Gay!’ Priming the General Negative Usage of the Word ‘Gay’ Increases Implicit Anti-Gay Bias.” The Journal of Social Psychology 152(5):654–58. doi: 10.1080/00224545. 2012.661803
Panfil, Vanessa R. 2017. The Gang’s All Queer: The Lives of Gay Gang Members. New York, NY: NYU Press.
Panfil, Vanessa R. 2018. “Young and Unafraid: Queer Criminology’s Unbounded Potential.” Palgrave Communications 4(1):1–5. doi: 10.1057/s41599-018-0165-x.
Panfil, Vanessa R. 2020. “‘I Was a Homo Thug, Now I’m Just Homo’: Gay Gang Members’ Desistance and Persistence.” Criminology 58(2):255–79. doi: 10.1111/ 1745-9125.12240
Another random document with no related content on Scribd:
government as the prize to be fought for It can always be found by wireless.
(11) We submit that there shall be no discussion of the terms of settlement until the central government is set up and a proper tribunal is constituted to deal with all claims. The first step in the interest of parties is disarmament, and upon that we insist.
(Signed) I S . U S .
XVII: PEACE
T manifesto was transmitted by wireless to all parts of the world. It was published in the newspapers of America, and therefore could not be suppressed by the various National Committees for Keeping the Public in the Dark. Ultimus received invitations to all the capitals of the belligerent nations. He said that if they had anything to say they could say it by wireless. Meanwhile if nothing was said the Fatter fleet would be destroyed within a week: the Fattish fleet immediately after it: and the various ports and capitals would one by one meet the fate of Bondon.
A great deal was said. Almost every day mean little men, who looked as though they had been fat only a short time before and then scorched, arrived to offer Ultimus his own price for his new explosive. They all said the same thing: the enemy alone was responsible for the war and it would never end until the enemy was destroyed. Therefore, in the interests of civilisation and universal peace, Mr. Samways ought to sell, nay, give to humanity the secret of his invention.
“I am using it in the interests of civilisation,” said he, “and, as you see, I am resisting all temptation to make money out of it. The proper use of an explosive is that for which I made mine, namely, to destroy every ugly and useless thing I had made.”
And the mean little men went away Two of them committed suicide on their way back to shore, so troubled were they at being deprived of the monopoly which had enabled them to drive millions of men to the slaughter that the rest might be miserable slaves in their hands.
As a matter of fact, these two had been ruined by the destruction of Bondon, upon which they had been dependent for the world-wide circulation of their credit.
Day after day brought the news of the suicide of one great financier after another, and the army contractors, realising that they might not be paid for their efforts, abandoned them. No food or supplies reached the armies, which came home in search of food. The Emperors of Fatterland and Grossia fled to their country estates. The Emperor of Waltzia had been dead for ten years, though his death had been concealed.
Before long a number of intelligent men from every country had met in Scandinavia and a central government was proclaimed. The Fattish, Fatter, Grossian, Waltzian, and Coqdorian fleets were collected in the North Sea, and Ultimus had the great satisfaction of driving the island through them.
XVIII: THE RETURN OF THE ISLAND
A now Ultimus could breathe again. Came the news every day of tremendous rejoicings in all the countries, and in all the name of Ultimus Samways was blessed. He was asked by every one of them to anchor his island off their shores, but he replied:
“Not until the lunatic that is in every European is dead, can I dwell among you. It is easy for you, whose lives are shallow to forget. But I have seen and suffered and I cannot forget. When you have discovered the depths in your own lives and each man recognises the profound wonder of every other, then will the thought of the philosopher Siebenhaar be as fertile seed among you and you will reap the harvest of brotherhood.”
When he had sent this message to the United States of Europe he sought out the little chambermaid and said to her:
“I beg your forgiveness. I have let the horror of war break in upon my devotion to you. We are making for the Southern Seas. If you prefer it you can retire to Bondon, though I must warn you that your luxurious hotel is now a hospital for the cure of astute business men.”
The little chambermaid replied:
“I did want to go to see the fun when peace was declared, having seen the fun in the streets when they declared war. But it’s come over me now that I love you and only you, and I want to be by your side to give you all the happiness you have brought into my heart.”
And Siebenhaar said:
“This is a mystery past the understanding of men, but the understanding is its servant.”
Gynecologia
I: HISTORY
I, C P. L , of Crown Imperial, Pa., U.S.A., do hereby declare that the following narrative of my adventures is a plain truthful tale with nothing added or taken away. At the end of a long life I am able to remember unmoved things that for many years I could not call to mind without horror and disgust. Even now I cannot see the charming person of my daughter without some faint discomfort, to be rid of which (for I would die in peace) I have determined to write my story.
The whole civilised world will remember how, during the years when Europe was sunk under the vileness of a scientific barbarism, there was suddenly an end of news from Fatland. Our ships that sailed for her ports did not return. Her flag had disappeared from the high seas. Her trade had entirely ceased. She exported neither coal nor those manufactured goods which had carried her language, customs, and religion to the ends of the earth. Her colonies (we learned) had received only a message to say that they must in future look after themselves, as, indeed, they were as capable of doing as any other collection of people. In one night Fatland ceased to be.
It was at first assumed that her enemies the Fatters had invaded and captured her, but, clearly, they would not destroy her commerce. Moreover, the Fatters were at that time and for many years afterwards living in a state of siege, keeping nine hostile nations at bay upon their frontiers. This was the last of the great wars, leading, as we now know, to the abolition of the idea of nationality, which endowed a nation with the attributes of a vain and insolent human being, so that its actions were childish and could only be made effective by force. When that idea died in the apathy and suffering
and bitterness of the years following the great wars then the glorious civilisation which we now enjoy became possible.
The disappearance of Fatland took place shortly after the outbreak of hostilities, which, from the practice which the Europeans had in those days, was always accomplished with great expedition. Every four years or so, when the exhausted nations once more had enough young men over eighteen, there would be some little quarrel, or an arranged assassination, or an ambassador would be indiscreet. One war, I remember, broke out over a scuffle between two bakers in the streets of Bondon: they were a Fattishman and a Fatter, and they had been arguing over the merits of the Fattish loaf and the continental bâton. The Press of both countries took it up: their governments had a good class of troops that year and they did not hesitate to use them. We, in the Western world, were accustomed to it by then and knew how to keep our trade alive through neutral countries. Also, I regret to say, we had engaged upon the dreadful traffic in war material. In those days we were still bounded by the primitive civilisation of Europe. We had not been wakened to manhood and the way of life and eternity, we had not been taught to be elemental in our own elemental continent by the sublime masterpiece of Junius F. Hohlenheim.
When it became clear that Fatland could not be in the hands of the Fatters: when, moreover, we were told that she was taking no part in the last and bloodiest of the wars, and when, after many months, there came no news of any kind, then our merchant-monarchs (now happily extinct) fitted out an expedition, with credentials to the Fattish Government, if any. Wild rumors had spread that the Gulf Stream was diverted, making the Skitish islands uninhabitable, but I had just then returned from a voyage to Norroway and knew that it was not so. I had gazed at the coasts of the mysterious islands with pity, with curiosity, with sad and, I must own it, sentimental longing. Were they not our home? We were still colonists in those days, always looking to other lands than that in which we lived. “O Fatland,” I cried. “O mother inviolate!” But we had the captain’s wife on board and she laughed and said that was not the adjective to apply to a mother.
II: CASTAWAY
O my return I married and put my savings into my father-in-law’s brush-making business, which was almost at once ruined, and I had to go to sea again. Government money had been got for the expedition I told you of, and I knew that pay would be higher on that account. I sent in an application, and, having an uncle well placed, was taken on as third officer. A dirty little gunboat had been put in commission, and directly I set eyes on her I knew the voyage would be unlucky. We were but three days out when we had trouble with the propeller shaft and were carried far north among the ugliest ice I ever saw, and narrowly escaped being caught in a floe. Fortunately we ran into a southward current in the nick of time and, with a fresh wind springing up, were quickly out of danger. However, the years of war had added another peril to those of nature. We fouled a mine among the islands of Smugland and were blown to bits. At the time I was standing near a number of petrol cans, and when I came to the surface of the water I found some of them floating near me. I tied six of them together and they made a tidy little raft, though it was very uncomfortable. On them I drifted for four days until hunger and thirst were too much for me and I swooned away I was then past agony and my swoon was more like passing into an enchantment than a physical surrender.
I was not at all astonished, therefore, when I came to my senses to find myself in a bed with a man sitting by my bedside. Very glad was I to see him, and I cried out in a big voice:
“Kerbosh! If I ain’t got into heaven by mistake.”
The man shook his head sadly and said:
“Heaven? No.”
But I could not shake off the feeling that I was in Heaven. The man had long hair and a beard, and I could be pardoned for taking him for Peter. He wore a rough shift, a long kilt below his knees, and thick stockings, and by his elbow on a little table, was another stocking which he had been knitting. He gave me food and drink, and I at
once felt stronger, but somewhat squeamish, so that the sense of hallucination clung about me. When I asked where I was, the man tiptoed to the door, opened it and listened, then returned to my bedside and said in a whisper:
“It is as much as my place is worth, but I would warn you as man to man to make good your escape while you may. As man to man, I say it, man to man.”
He was so terribly excited as he said this that I decided in my own mind that he was a harmless lunatic, one of the many whom the great wars had rendered idiotic. To humour him I repeated:
“As man to man.”
And I put out my hand. He seized it and said in a desperate voice:
“I am old enough to be your fa——”
Footsteps sounded on the stairs and in absolute terror he stopped, took up his knitting and plied the needles frantically.
III: MY CAPTOR
T footsteps came up to the door of the room in which I lay. The door opened to reveal a truly remarkable figure; plump, short, with a tousled mop of reddish-grey hair and a wide, pleasant, weatherbeaten face. This figure was clad in a loose blue coat and Bulgarian trousers, very baggy about the hips and tight about the calves; not at all an unbecoming costume, though it both puzzled and pained me. So much so that I pretended to be asleep, for I was averse to being made to speak to this strange object. A woman’s voice addressed the man with the knitting and asked him how I was. He replied that I had come to my senses and gone to sleep again. As luck would have it, the food I had eaten so hastily began just then to cause me acute discomfort, and my body, escaping my control, relieved itself after its fashion. Thereupon the woman, perceiving that I was malingering, fell upon me and shook me until my teeth rattled and delivered herself of an oration upon the deceitfulness of man. I was still suffering acutely and could offer no resistance, though I cried out
that I was an American citizen and neutral and should have the matter brought to the ears of my Government.
“In this country,” said my assailant, “men are men and are treated as such, and we do not recognize the existence of any other country in the world. You will get up now and place your superior strength at the service of those who feed you and as far as possible justify your existence.”
The man with the knitting had crept from the room. He returned with a shift, a kilt and stockings like his own. I was made to put these on, the woman, in defiance of all decency, watching me and talking shrilly all the time. Then she drove the man and myself out of doors and set us to work at hoeing in a field of turnips, while she whistled to a dog that came bounding over a hedge, and trudged off in the direction of a wood.
“Who is she?” said I. “Is she your wife?”
“Wife?” answered he. “Wife! There is neither marriage nor giving in marriage. She is a farmer, and I, who was once a Professor of Economics, am her labourer. Intellectually I am in despair, but physically I am in such rude health that I cannot entertain the thought of self-destruction long enough to commit the act. She is my niece, and when the change came she undertook, as all women did, to provide work for her male relatives above a certain age.”
“Change?” I whispered. “What change?”
“Have you not heard?” he said. “Is the country severed from the civilised world?”
I informed him of the expedition which I had joined. He gave a long hopeless sigh and fell into a great silence which moved me far more than his words had done. We plied our hoes in the immense field which was situated in a desolate region of slight undulations the outlines of which were blurred with rank growth.
Presently I broke in upon his silence to ask his name.
“I was,” he murmured, “I was Professor Ian Baffin.”
“Can it be possible?” I cried, for the fame of that great man was world-wide, and during the notorious Anti-Trust elections in my country his works had been in every cultured home. I told him this, but it brought him no comfort.
“At the time of the change,” he said, “I and fifty other Professors and Fellows of Colleges published a manifesto in which we pointed out the disasters that must ensue, and we even went so far as to promise them degrees at the major universities, but the change came and the universities were destroyed.”
“What change?” I asked again. He leaned on his hoe and gazed toward the setting sun.
IV: THE CHANGE
“A the tenth year of the second of the great wars,” he said, “there was a convulsion in the country. A young idealist appeared who with fiery and vulgar eloquence proclaimed that war was the triumph of the old over the young, to whom since the world began justice had never been done. The old, he said, were in the position of trustees who had betrayed their trust and instead of working for the benefit of the endless army of the young who came after them, devoted all their energies to robbing them of their birthright. To extricate themselves from the punishment which must otherwise have fallen on them they exploited the courage and love of adventure of the young and set them to destroy each other. So successful had they been in this device that they could count on using it at least once in every generation, and politicians knew that when they were at the end of their tether they could always procure a continuance of their offices and emoluments by declaring war. This had been the condition of civilised existence for so many thousands of years that it was generally accepted and the truth was never suspected until our young idealist arrived with honey on his lips for the young and gall and bitter invective for the old. He rushed up and down the country persuading young men on no condition to take up arms. ‘Government?’ he said. ‘What government do you need except
such as will provide you with roads, railways, lighting, bread for the incapacitated, and drainage for all?’ I signed a manifesto against him too. His ignorance of economics was pitiful. In the end martial law was proclaimed and he was shot. The young men did not listen to him, but the young women did. Shooting him was a mistake. It gave his name the magic of martyrdom. By the thousand, women, old, young, and middle-aged, cherished his portrait in their bosoms, prayed to him in secret, vowed themselves to his cause, and remained chaste. Nunneries were founded in his name, but so potent was the spell of his martyrdom, so overwrought were the women of this country by the many crises through which we have passed, that amid all the temptations of life they were dedicated to his memory and preserved their virginity. They said if the country can find no better use for our sons than to send them to the slaughter and disablement, we will breed no sons. The Government was warned, but like all governments they could not see beyond the system by which they governed, and when at last they were convinced that something serious was happening, they could think of no other remedy than that of giving votes, i.e. a share in the system by which they enjoyed their positions. At first, to show their contempt for the Government, the women did not use their votes until the country was shown by an energetic and public-spirited woman that another war was in the making. An election was forced and the Government was defeated. At the conclusion of the second great war you may remember that Bondon was destroyed, and with it the Houses of Parliament and the Royal Palace. A new capital was chosen, but as Fatland was no longer the center of the world’s credit system, finance had lost its old power. A new type of politician had arisen, who, in order to win favour with the women, set himself to do all in his power to make government impossible. The enormous numerical superiority of the women made their leaders paramount in the land, though there was still officially a Cabinet and a House of Swells. On the third and last outbreak of hostilities the officials made their final despairing effort and declared war on Fatterland, but they had no army. They had been unable to rebuild their fleet as all the other countries had done. They were helpless. The Cabinet and the House of Swells, to set an example to the country, armed
themselves and went to the front, taking with them the last ten thousand young men in the country. They never returned and the country was left populated solely by old men, cripples, and women, of whom a few thousand were pregnant. These were interned. A committee of influential women was formed and issued a decree that Fatland would henceforth have no share in male civilisation. Men had, to cut a long story short, made a mess of things, and women would now see what they could do. They began by abolishing property in land. The first, the only important thing was to feed the population. The State guaranteed to everybody food, housing, and clothes. Able-bodied women were to take charge of their male relatives and make them useful. Decent women, that is to say virgins, were to work on the land. All women guilty of childbirth were to be sent to work in the factories. I cannot remember all the laws made, for my memory has been impaired by my sufferings, but they were all dictated by an unreasoning and venomous hatred of men. We are little better than slaves. They laugh at us affectionately, but they despise and ignore our thoughts. They have defied every economic law, but astonishingly they continue to live.”
“Indeed,” said I, “the world goes on. The sun sets and will rise as it has done these millions of years, with change upon change, folly upon folly beneath it. We turn up the earth for the food we eat and so we live. Truly I think there is some wisdom in these women.”
The sun went down, a bell rang in the farmhouse, we shouldered our hoes and returned thither, each busy with his own thoughts.
V: THE HOMESTEAD
T my annoyance I found that the bell was not a summons to a meal, but to a meeting of the family of five women for a kind of a service. This consisted in reading aloud from the speeches of William Christmas, the idealist who had provoked this monstrous state of affairs. His portrait hung on the wall opposite the door, and I must confess that his face was singularly beautiful. The woman who had roused me from my bed read a passage beginning: “The tyranny of the old is due to their stupidity, which neither young men nor
women have yet had the patience to break through.” And as she closed the book she said, “Thus spake William Christmas.” Whereupon the other women muttered, “of blessed memory, which endureth for ever and ever. Amen.” These women were plain and forbidding. Their eyes were fixed on the portrait with a dog-like subjection which I found most repulsive. They stood transfixed while the woman-farmer declaimed: “For guidance, William Christmas, spirit of woman incarnate, we look to thee in the morning and in the evening, in our goings out and our comings in, and woe to her who stumbles on the way of all flesh into the snares of men.” On that the five of them turned and glared sorrowfully at my old friend and me until I was hard put to it not to laugh. The meeting then came to an end, and we were told to prepare supper. We withdrew to the kitchen, and there Professor Baffin began to snigger, and when I asked him what amused him he said:
“The joke of it is that this Christmas, like all idealists, was as great a lecher as Julius Cæsar. It was his lechery made his position in the old order of society impossible.”
I laughed too, for I had begun dimly to understand the passion which moved these virgins in their chastity, and I was filled with a fierce hatred of the lot of them, and resolved as soon as possible to escape.
We cooked a meal of fish and eggs, and having laid the table we had to wait on the family. I was struck by the triviality of their discourse and the absence from it of any general argument. The five women twittered like sparrows in mid-winter and not once did they laugh. They talked of the condition of their beasts and their crops, and so earnest, so careful were they that I understood that it must be barren soil indeed that would resist their efforts. They were discussing what goods they would requisition from the district store in return for their contribution to the State granaries. I wondered if they had succeeded in abolishing money, and upon enquiry I found that they had. The Professor told me that they had abolished everything which before the change had made them dependent upon men and their pleasure.
“But why do you men stand it?” I cried.
“We would starve else. We have no credit. Contributions to the State granaries are not accepted from men, nor are men allowed to trade direct with the stores.”
“But cannot they revolt and use their strength?”
“The strange thing is,” said the Professor, “that men cannot now endure the sight of each other. They are as jealous of each other as women were in the old days. Besides, writing is forbidden, and no book is allowed save the posthumous works of the lecherous William. The libraries were destroyed on the same day as the arsenals. Intelligence is gagged. Thrift and a terrible restless activity are now our only virtues.”
“And art?”
“Art? How should there be art? It was never more than the amusement of women in their idleness. They are no longer idle and I must admit that they are admirably methodical in their work, energetic and straightforward as men never were. But it is ill living in a woman-made world and I shall not be sorry when death comes.”
VI: OBSEQUIES
D came to the old man that night, and so surprised him that he was unable to feel anything. I had been put to sleep in the same room with him and was awakened by his talking. He was delivering himself of what sounded like a lecture, but he broke off in the middle to say:
“This is very astonishing. I am going to die.”
I struck a light, and there he was lying with a smile of incredulity upon his face, and I thought that, if we were sentient beings when we were born, so and not otherwise we would accept the gift of life. So and not otherwise do we greet all manifestations of life which have not become familiar through habit.
I was grateful to the old man for giving me the key to my own frame of mind. I spoke to him, but he was dead.
His loud discourse had roused the mistress of the house who came knocking at the door, saying:
“Baffin, if you don’t behave yourself I shall come and tickle you.”
So astounded and outraged was I at this address that I leapt out of my bed, donned my kilt, and said:
“Come in, woman, and see what you have done. This learned old man, whose mind was one of the glories of the world, has been driven to his death, starved, deprived of the intellectual habits through which a long life had been——”
I got no further, for the woman flung herself upon me and tickled my sides and armpits until I shrieked. Two other women came rushing up and held me on the floor, and then with a feather they tickled my feet until I was nearly mad. I wept and cried for mercy, and at last they desisted and withdrew, leaving me with the corpse, to which they paid not the slightest attention.
The next morning I was told to dig a grave and to prepare the body for burial. There was no more ceremony than in a civilised country is given to the interment of a dog, and in the house I only heard the old man referred to twice. The youngest of the women said, “He was a dear old idiot,” but the mistress of the house shut her mouth like a trap on the words: “One the less.”
But a day or two later I found upon the grave a pretty wreath of wild flowers, and that evening under a hedge I came on a little girl, who was crying softly to herself. I had not seen her before and was puzzled to know where she came from. She said her name was Audrey and she lived at the next farm, where they were very unkind to her, and she used to meet the old man in the fields and he was very nice to her, and when she heard he was dead she wanted to die too. The men on the farm were rough and dirty, and the women were all spiteful and suspicious.
When I asked her if she had put the wreath on my old friend’s grave, she was frightened and made me promise not to tell anyone. Of course I promised, and I took her home. As we parted we engaged to meet again in the wood half-way between our two houses.
VII: SLAVERY
I my own country I have often remarked the cruel lack of consideration with which women treat their servants, but here I was appalled by the bland inhumanity of the conduct of these women toward myself. I was given no wages and no liberty. (I could not keep my engagement with Audrey.) I was a hind, and lived in horror of the degradation into which I saw that I must sink. Day after day of the cruel work of the fields brought me to a torpid condition in which I could but blindly obey the orders given me when I returned home. Especially I dreaded the evenings on those days when the mistress of the house went to the district stores, for she always returned out of temper and found fault with everything I did. Also, when she was out of temper, her readings from the Book of Christmas were twice as long as usual.
I was some weeks in this melancholy condition, not knowing how I could make my escape and indeed despairing of it, when I was sent on a message to the next farm. On the way back I met Audrey, at the sight of whose young beauty I forgot the despair which latterly had seized me. I rushed to her and caught her up in my arms and kissed her. Thereupon she said she would never go back, but would stay with me forever. I could not deny her, for I had found in her the incentive which I had lost in my growing indifference to my fate. She was but a child, and the only gracious being I had met in this ill-fated country. Hand in hand we wandered until dusk, when I hid her in the hay-loft and returned to my duties.
I was severely chidden for my long absence and ordered during the next week to wear the Skirt of Punishment, a garment of the shape fashionable among women at the time of the great change. Poor Audrey could not help laughing when she saw me in it, but having no other clothes I had to put off all thought of escape until I was released from punishment. Never before had I realised how cramped the mind could become from the confinement of the legs. My week in a skirt came very near to breaking my spirit. Another four days of it and I believe I should have grovelled in submissive adoration before
my tyrant. Only my nightly visits to Audrey kept me in courage and resolution.
VIII: A STRANGE WOOING
T youngest of the women in the homestead was the last to speak to me. She was dark and not uncomely, and I had often noticed her at the readings smile rather fearfully at her own thoughts. Once my eyes had met hers and I was shocked by the direct challenge of her gaze. At the time I was disturbed and uneasy, but soon forgot and took no notice of the woman except that I felt vaguely that she was unhappy. But soon I was always meeting her. I would find her lurking in the rooms as I came to scrub and clean them. Or she would appear in the lane as I came home from the fields, or I would meet her in the doorway, so that I could not help brushing against her. A little later I missed one of my stockings as I got up in the morning and had to go barefoot until I had knitted another pair.
One night as I was creeping off to my poor Audrey, now deadly weary of her close quarters in the hay, to my horror I met this woman clad in her night attire. She vanished and I went my way thoroughly frightened. I told Audrey to be ready to come with me next day, for we were spied upon and could not now wait, as we had planned, until my little thefts from the larder had given us a sufficient store of food.
Nothing happened the next day and I gave up my determination to ransack the larder. That night as I opened the door I found the woman pressed against it, so that she fell almost into my arms. She clung to me wildly, assured me that I was the most beautiful man she had ever seen, and tried to press me back into my room, her tone, her whole bearing conveying an invitation about which it was impossible to be mistaken. It chilled me to the heart, coming as it did so suddenly out of the coldness engendered by the rigid separation of the sexes and the deliberate humiliation of men in that womanridden region. As gently as I could I put her from me, though it was not so easy, and I rushed out into the night. I could not tell Audrey what had happened, but as soon as I saw her I felt that the moment
for our escape had come. If we did not seize it I should be denounced and tickled, if not worse. We crept away and made straight across the fields and at dawn hid in a wood.
IX: THE RUINED CITY
I relieved to hear from Audrey that there were no newspapers. She told me that a man from her farm had run away but was never found. There were always new men coming, because it was impossible for them to obtain food except what they could kill. In the summer there were always men wandering about the country, but they came back in the winter and were glad to work for their board and lodging. I soon understood this, for when we had exhausted our store we were often a whole day without a morsel passing our lips, and I began to see the foolhardiness of my attempt at liberty. Again and again I besought Audrey to leave me, but she would not. She could always have obtained a meal for herself had she gone alone to a house, but wherever I went I was asked for my registered number, and at first had not the readiness to invent one. At last I told one woman I was 8150. She asked me what district and I did not know. On that she bundled me out and I was lucky to escape detention. When I asked Audrey about the registration she said all men were registered with a number and a letter. The men on her farm had been L.D. Next time I said I was L.D. 8150, and when asked my business I said I was taking my young miss to the nunnery at O. Either my answer was satisfactory or Audrey’s beauty was the passport it would be in any normal country, for we were handsomely treated and given a present of three cheeses to take to the nuns.
We ate the cheeses and were kept alive until, after a fortnight’s journey, we came on a dismal mass of blackened buildings. We entered the city, once world-famous for its textiles, and never have I been so near the hopelessness of the damned. The remains of a dead civilisation; decomposing and festering; grass grew in between the cobbles of the streets; weeds were rank; creepers covered the walls of the houses and their filthy windows. Huge factories were crumbling away, and here and there we came on immense piles of
bricks where the chimneys had tumbled down. For miles we walked through the streets and never saw a soul until as we turned a corner into a square we came on a sight that made me think we had reached the lowest Hell.
X: THE OUTLAWS
T was a great fire in the middle of the square, and round this was a tatterdemalion crew of men and women. They were roasting an ox, and, as they waited for it, they sang and danced. When we approached near enough to hear what they were singing I blushed and felt aggrieved for Audrey. Many of the men and women were perfectly shameless in their gestures, and I wished to go back the way we had come. However, we had been seen, and were drawn into the light of the fire and asked to give an account of ourselves. I told them I was an American citizen only too anxious to return to my own country now I had seen the pass to which theirs had been brought. Audrey clung to me, and I said she was my little cousin whom I had come to deliver, and that, having wandered hungry for so many days, we had taken refuge in the town in the hope of faring better. We were given stools to sit on, and slices of the best cut of the ox were put before us. The rest drank spirits and wine from some cellar in the town and were soon more crazy than ever, and more obscene, but with my belly full of good meat I was not offended and preferred their debauchery to the icy virtue which had so horribly oppressed me at the homestead. Audrey was excited by it all, but I knew that her innocence could take no harm.
Presently there was only one man sober besides myself. He came towards me and invited me to stay the night in his house where he lived alone with his son. I liked the looks of the man. He was poorly clad, but in the old fashion of coat and trousers, whereas the costumes of the men in the square were strange and bizarre.
As we walked through the dark streets our new friend told me that all the great cities of Fatland were in this condition, abandoned to the dregs of the population, degraded men and women, idle and lawless, with the leaven of the few proud spirits who would not accept the
new regime and found a world governed by women as repulsive as a world governed by men. I was astonished at this, for I could not then see, as later I saw, the abomination of civilised life as I had known it at home. Perhaps a sailor, for whom life ashore means pleasure and relief from responsibilities, cannot feel injustice and inequality. On the sea he has his own way of dealing with those poisons.
The house we came to was small but comfortable. My new friend explained that he was able to keep alive by dealing with the outlaws, who kept money current among themselves, and, indeed, had come to regard him as their counsellor and peacemaker, and never returned from their raids without bringing him some tribute. Seeing me dubious of the morality of this, he explained that under the old order he had been a shareholder in joint-stock companies and accepted his share of the profits without scruple as to how they had been obtained. He told me further that he was quite alone in the city, and that no one else maintained the old life. He had registered himself in compliance with the law, but could not leave the mathematical work to which his life had been devoted, for he believed that he would achieve results which would survive all the vicissitudes of Fattish civilisation even as the work of Pythagoras had survived ancient Greece. The number of outlaws, he said, was growing, and there would eventually be a revolution, to lead which he was preparing and educating his son, Edmund. His own sympathies, he declared, had at first been with the women, who had been driven to extricate the country from the vicious circle of war into which it had been drawn by the egregious folly of men. But when, having achieved this, they abused their power and, in the intoxication of their success, defied nature herself, then he had abandoned all hope and had taken the only means of dissociating himself from the life of his country, namely, by staying where he was. To be sure the women had established agriculture on a sound basis, but it was vain for them to breed cattle if they would not breed themselves.
I asked him if he was a widower. He said No.
XI: EDMUND
T man’s son was the most charming boy I ever set eyes on. He was eighteen, but had the carriage and assurance of a young man in his prime, most resolute and happy. He liked talking to me and was more communicative than his father. For a fortnight he would work steadily at his books, imbibing the principles of government in the philosophers from Plato down. He thought they were all wrong, said so, and but for his simplicity I should have put him down as conceited. It was very slowly as I talked to him that I came to realise the revolution in thought produced by the great European wars and the terrible consequences, how fatal they had been to the old easy idealism. The new spirit in its generous acceptance of the gross stuff of human nature and its indomitable search for beauty in it has been expressed for all time by our poet, Hohlenheim, and I only need state here that I encountered it for the first time in that ruined city. Not, however, till Hohlenheim expressed it did I recognise it.
But for Hohlenheim I could believe in a Providence when I think of Edmund and Audrey. They were as bee and flower. The honey of her beauty drew him and he was hers, she his, from the first moment. I had regarded her as a child and was amazed to see how she rejoiced in him. I had expected more modesty until I reflected how in such darkness as that which enveloped Fatland love must blaze. It flared up between them and burned them into one spirit. So moved was I that all other marriage, even my own, has always seemed a mockery to me.
How gracious Audrey was to me! She promised me that Edmund would hurry up his revolution so that I could return to my own country, but I was given to understand that the position was very difficult, because his own mother was Vice-Chairwoman of the Governing Committee. For a week at a time Edmund would be away rounding up outlaws, and, at great risk, preaching to the kilted and registered men in the fields. Had he been caught he would have been tickled to death.
After a time I went with him on his expeditions. It was amazing how his eloquence and his personality produced their effect even on the dullest minds. The stream of men proceeding to the ruined city increased every day, and we began to have enough good people to
