Classical Values :: Buttf-cking gun rights with "batfags"?

Buttf-cking gun rights with "batfags"?

Attention gay readers, and gun nuts!

I just heard about a new term -- "batfags" (already at 651 Google hits) -- which is being used as a slur against the notorious BATFE (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms Enforcement) agency.

Here's a libertarian blogger using the term in its typical manner.

I wonder what my blogfather (and the blogosphere's leading gay gun nut, Jeff Soyer) thinks about the term . . .

Actually, I'm of two minds about this. On the one hand, I don't mind insulting the BATF, and if referring to them as "fags" insults them, well fine. And I also hate the politically correct crowd which would tell people what language to use, and what to call people. However, what is pejorative language, and where is the line drawn between this and politically correct thought police, language enforcement?

I'm wondering whether this is just an attempt at humor, or whether there might be an intention to create -- or further -- a division between homosexuals and Second Amendment supporters. (Not that there is one in terms of logic, but people have a wont to think in emotional and stereotypical terms.)

So, much as I support the right to deprecate the BATFE with the "batfag" expression, I have a question for the people doing it: would tacking pejorative words like "niggers" or "kikes" onto another unpopular federal law enforcement agency be seen as equally acceptable?

If not, why not?

I realize this sounds sarcastic, but I'm honestly trying to be logical. (If only the two didn't so often seem synonymous.)

Obviously, this is all just an exercise in name calling.

But who is being called names?

And why?

Comments

Ok, I'm neither but I'll comment anyway:

I assume they added "fag" part as an extention of the F at the end of BATFag, right? It strikes me as a lame schoolyard insult. I can think of another pejorative word that starts with F that they might use.

I don't oppose the use based on PC reasoning, I oppose it b/c it's not clever, funny, or biting.

Duffy · April 13, 2006 01:52 PM

It's a throwaway insult, and hardly new... I'm sure I encountered the term on a dial-up BBS sometime in the early 90s. It think it was "officially" a contraction of "BATF agent", with any other interpretation surely being a figment of the reader's imagination.
It may be new-again, though; I don't recall having encountered it since the dial-up BBS era, but then maybe I haven't been reading the right (or wrong) fora.
Um... and I would guess that it seems appropriately insulting because it's directed at a group perceived as having a stereotypically macho culture.

Eric Wilner · April 13, 2006 05:05 PM

I'm against namecalling about 95% of the time, and this one just seems pointless. I know of one guy whose standard term is JBGT (Jack Booted Govt Thugs), but he's two rounds shy of a conspiracy theorist on his best day.

As a hobby rocketeer, we've put up with a lot of crap from these guys over the last several years (preceeding 9/11 even). There are good agents in the BATFE and there are real jerks, just like any agency. Probably even moreso than other agencies, the agents are slaves to policy from higher ups, and seem to stick to whatever party line has been most recently handed down. Not much room for personal interpretation, even in the gray areas (and there are plenty of those). At least, no personal interpretation "on the record".

Ted · April 16, 2006 10:02 AM

I would agree that this is out of line. I myself don't have any problem calling a fag a fag, but I certainly wouldn't intentionally compare a fag to an ATF agent. That's unconscionable.

Phelps · April 17, 2006 03:33 PM

At some point I hope people come to sanity and stop comparing sexual desires to racial identity. Let me assure you, minorities are less than amused by this.

Anonymous · April 18, 2006 11:34 AM

Sun

Mon

Tue

Wed

Thu

Fri

Sat