Dude You Re A Fag Essay

Pascoe, in which they both explore sociological topics such as sexuality and gender in relation to American high school students. Though there are some differences, for example in terms of approach. In her book, Pascoe looks at the student body in general, while Woolley focuses on LGBTQ students. Specifically, Woolley’s research expands upon Pascoe’s chapter of LGBTQ violence by using more participants, and includes a much more detailed analysis compared to Pascoe’s. In this context, the two pieces of literature complement each other in a way that one can fill in any gaps that the other piece might have, and vice versa. Because of this, Woolley’s article is useful when analyzing the sociological concepts examined in Pascoe’s

C.J. Pascoe’s book, Dude You’re A Fag: Masculinity and Sexuality in High School, examines masculinity and its connection with sexuality through an eighteen-month study at River High School. The goal of Pascoe’s study is to explain how teenagers, teachers, and schooling construct adolescent masculinity through idioms of sexuality. In addition, the book investigates the relationships between gender and sexuality as it relates to a major social institution. Throughout the book she asks how heteronormitive and homophobic discourses, practices, and interactions produce masculine identities through focusing on gender and sexual practices of the students, teachers, and administrators.

The old idiom, “sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me,” has been used for decades, and although a good sentiment, can be disproven by any person with an basic understanding of their feelings. The power of the words one hears can greatly affect their self esteem and confidence. The fact that words hurt is an issue everyone faces, but some words hold too much power, power that can be used in not so ideal ways. Slurs, or words that are used to oppress minority groups, are used too casually in the modern world, with grave consequences on the minorities they are used against. The word faggot, a term used to describe gay men, has become popular in modern America between school boys as a way to either mock their peers or intentionally hurt an actual queer person. This word in particular moves farther away from offensive and can be categorized as oppressive due to its both psychological and social ramifications. The use of the word faggot is an act of oppression when one looks at both the social and psychological effects the word has on both the user and the recipient of the slur.

In the article “Dude you’re a fag; Adolescent masculinity and the fag discourse” C.J Pascoe addresses American adolescent boys learning to become masculine through the rejection of the fag identity. Masculinity and sexuality are embedded with the word faggot. This article focuses on the challenges of the relationships between homophobia and masculinity. This article points out three arguments that focus on homophobia demonstrating that the fag is not only an identity linked to homosexual boys, but an identify that can temporarily adhere to heterosexual boys as well and highlighting the radicalized nature of the fag as a disciplinary mechanism. Homophobia is usually used to describe ways that boys aggressively tease each other, girls do not harass each other this way and they often aren’t embarrassed in the same manner. Pascoe provides examples of how the fag discourse is radicalized and that failing at the masculine tasks of competence reveals weakness and femininity with sexual identity.

Pascoe discusses how masculinity can function as a regulatory mechanism of gender in American adolescent boys. It has been found that the word ‘fag’ is not necessarily directed at a homosexual boy, but has taken on a new meaning in school age boys. It is being used as a disciplinary mechanism to police certain behaviors “out of fear of having the fag identity permanently” (Pascoe p.330). This kind of teasing and harassment can temporarily be place on any boy who shows signs of weakness or femininity. The high schoolers in the study told Pascoe that calling someone a fag was like telling them they were nothing or stupid (Pascoe p. 335). Boys could be called a fag for anything that he did that was opposite of masculine, even when it had nothing to do with his sexual preference. The fag discourse seemed to be just another way for the contest of masculinity to take

Educators must understand and respect the legal rights of students and their parents, which are protected by the U.S. Constitution/Fourteenth Amendment. The Individuals with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 protect students who have been identified with disabilities. According to both IDEA and Section 504, all special education students must be educated in the least restrictive environment. The two provisions also mandate that that all children with disabilities receive a free and appropriate public education, which is referred to as FAPE. This essay will answer the question, "what is FAPE and why is it so important in the education of all children, especially students with disabilities?"

It was only in late Stage 3 that the topic of sexuality was approached – through intensive

So if one guy called another guy a “fag” it is not necessarily to say that he is literally gay; it’s a charge that he is not being “a real man”. In essence the word “fag” is not only a homophobic slur, it is a homophobic slur that also attacks behavior as not being masculine. This is why Pascoe used the phrase gendered homophobia throughout the book to describe the masculinity the male students showed on a daily basis.

A 2014 study showed that most (95%) Ontario parents supported some form of sexual education, and approximately 82% of the same group of parents were supportive of a sexual education curriculum starting in elementary school. While this seems like a large percent of the population, the study did state that their research group were mostly well-educated middle to upper-middle class mothers. This positivity was echoed in a Globe and Mail article, which stated a senior student, Joel Louzado, “was moved that different sexual and gender identities would be introduced to students as early as grade 3, when they are taught that some kids have gay parents.” The article continued, stating that sexuality and same-sex relationships were not previously taught in school, and that most students learned about these topics through friends or online. A 2013 article reiterated these opinions; a two-spirited social studies teacher stated that “no mention of sexuality was ever made explicitly in any social studies unit.” These articles show that there are many different types of people who agree and promote the new sexual education curriculum in Ontario, and that the progressive teachings may, in fact, teach these young children to be accepting of other’s differences. Those who support the curriculum tend to see it as a way to help children deal with modern issues in a world where men and women are sexualized at younger ages than

For many members of the LGBT community, especially homosexuals, they usually discover their sexuality at a very young age, just like one of the characters in “Survivors”. While many of them chose to hide it from family members and friends for various reasons, others unknowingly display stereotypical characteristics of a gay person. These characteristics could be anything from a young boy

The intent of this film I think is unmistakable: to instruct educators in how to introduce gay issues in their classrooms in a way that promotes acceptance of homosexuality as a lifestyle choice. As one teacher in the film stated, schools must provide education in gay issues in order to create good citizens, increase student's confidence, and provide them with supportive individuals. Particularly interesting is the beginning of the film, in which juxtaposition is shown between Senator Robert Smith talking about gays and gay awareness in schools as filth and trash, and a group of younger students discussing homosexuality with a seemingly inherent sense of fairness and democracy that is quite mature for their age. One child in fact mentions that those who oppose homosexuals would not want to be discriminated against if they were in the same situation. I thought it was also a strength of the film to focus on how most children are affected by homophobic prejudice in some way, be it through the media, their home, or their friends. Some of the children, I'm guessing third

In Pascoe’s analysis of the word fag she interviews many boys at River High and most of them had the same response, that a boy could be called fag for exhibiting any sort of behavior defined as unmasculine such as being stupid or incompetent, to caring too much about something, or being too emotional(57). With this I analyzed the situation I always got stuck in and constantly was under fire for the word fag. At River High having a girlfriend “both protected boys from the specter of the fag and bolstered their masculinity” in certain cases (90). At El Capitan I was the guy who always had a girlfriend but I never dated girls from the same school. Even though I was adored by other girls at the school for expressing my love interest to this other girl. The guys constantly threw the word fag at me for being emotionally attached to a girl. So I was intrigued and happy to hear that in Pascoe’s one on one interviews the guys who would be calling me a fag were actually in the same situation as me but just too scared to admit their feelings publicly. All because of the social organization as Weeks explains that the peer influences within the high school put out a

Growing up gay during adolescence, a time when a sense of self is being developed, realization of who you truly are, is often not possible for young gay men. Being different, not seeing yourself in characters on television or in books, or knowing a gay couple living in a long-term relationship deepens your doubts of being accepted by your family or friends for who you are on the inside. Hiding feelings of attraction toward other males while trying to cope with male hormones is a challenge. Frequently the choice made is trying to fit in, run with the other boys, pretend you are interested in the opposite sex, and measure up to society’s hyper-masculine ideal. Feeling awkward in a life that feels foreign to

I think it is safe to say that no two words elicit more feelings of concern, anxiety, and anger in parents, and stirs up more controversy and debate than the words “sexual education”. This especially true with the implementation of the new, revised sexual education curriculum in Ontario schools. Consequently, this controversy has strongly divided individuals, families, and organizations between those who approved of and those who opposed and protested against school-based programs that providee sexual health education to children. But why so much opposition? This is due to the significant changes made to the sexual education curriculum and the sensitive nature of the topics being taught to children regarding sexuality as a whole, changes which are seen as both radical and “even more explicit and more age-inappropriate than before…” (“Ontario’s Radical,” n.d.).

Rather than implementing these standard curriculum checkpoints as a reflection of social and scientific research just like any fundamental education program should be, these eight-points are founded upon a “values” agenda invoked by radically conservative members of Congress with the specific intent of applying these ideals using hetero-normative, homophobic, and appallingly misogynistic teaching methods. A 2004 investigation by the staff of the House Government Reform Committee revealed that many abstinence-based lessons contain “false, misleading, or distorted information”, with instructors teaching things like “pregnancy can result from touching another person's genitals”, “women who have an abortion are 'more prone to suicide'”, and “half of gay males in in the US have tested positive for HIV” (Henry A. Waxman). In addition to these falsifications, the curriculum goals are worded in a way that would explicitly disallow any information of alternative contraception methods—except for the sole purpose of emphasizing their rates of failure—while at the same time labeling sexually active teens as