Gabriel Rodriguez

Don’t F with me at Christmas

It can be hard to make people understand – empathy is trickier to elicit than you might think. Especially when it comes to things that seem so simple, from both sides, and even more so when it’s something that people love so much.

As it has every year for around the last decade, a small, insistent row has erupted over a particular lyric in a very popular Christmas song that’s not only a huge selling record but also gets heavy rotation on radio stations and music channels. Celebrating its 30th anniversary in 2017, the song is much loved by those who “don’t really like Christmas songs” and still, after all this time, offers a refreshing alternative to the regular brand of festive tune – either lovelorn wistfulness, schmaltzy cheer or infantilised celebration. The song is visceral, heartrending, a veritable opera of hopes dashed and dreams crushed, yet with cold, quiet optimism running through it like the finest thread of gold floating on top of a sewer. Over its four and a half minutes, all human life is there. It’s both immediately relatable and reassuringly distant, the tale of two down and outs – possibly Irish immigrants or at least an early ensuing generation – their lives poisoned by doors closed in their faces, alcoholism, drugs, illness and the unbreakable bond between them that will likely kill them both.

The song is the Pogues’ Fairytale of New York. Of course it is. But there’s a problem – actually, there are several but, in typical style, only one’s causing an issue at the moment. It’s a word. An F-word. No, not that one. You know the one. It comes at 2 minutes and 22 seconds into the song and is sung, with gusto, by the much-missed Kirsty MacColl. The word is “faggot”.

We know what faggot means, what it’s meant for decades. In fact, as clever people who always end up getting all their Trivial Pursuit “cheeses” before you land even your first will tell you, it has quite a few meanings. A faggot can be a bundle of sticks used for kindling, or a rather unpleasant spiced meatball, or it can mean a homosexual man – most dictionaries in the UK do their best to distance themselves from this unpleasant definition by insisting it’s “chiefly US, informal”, but it has been spat in school corridors up and down the country for at least 30 years, funnily enough, thanks to its use in American movies. There is, apparently, another meaning for the word in Ireland and some parts of Liverpool where it means a lazy person, but beyond the archaic attribution “an unpleasant or contemptible woman”, there isn’t much out there to support this claim.

Around ten years ago, when the song regained popularity thanks to legal downloads in the mid Noughties – although it had returned to the chart a couple of times before that – radio stations took the decision to miss the word out. Whatever had been allowed back in 1987 was deemed perhaps to be best left there, and it was no doubt thought better that all generations could enjoy it at any time of day on the radio rather than suppress the entire song altogether. Somewhat strangely, there was an outcry – from gay and straight people alike – and, after a few weeks, the original version was reinstated and the word has been booming from speakers all over the country ever since. In your supermarket, as you pirouette on your ice rink, as you listen to the radio on a Sunday afternoon. The issue here is it’s all about context, apparently. There are several defences, each one as paper-thin and patronising as the last.

1. They are characters in the song. Kirsty is not calling Pogues’ frontman Shane MacGowan a faggot in “real life”.
2. They are in fact referring to the old definition of “faggot”, meaning someone lazy or good for nothing. As Wikipedia would say: CITATION NEEDED.
3. The Pogues had a gay guitarist so it is unthinkable there would be a homophobic lyric in the song.
4. The use of “faggot” here predates its usage as an homophobic insult.
5. We shouldn’t censor art.

There is an extra problem with the song in that it’s acquired an almost mythical, untouchable quality, forever canonised because it features the talents of Kirsty MacColl, who died tragically in 2000 – around Christmastime, in an act of heartbreaking coincidence – and that as Kirsty was such a generally wonderful and well-loved singer, the song should not be touched. There is the story that Kirsty’s mum loves to hear it on the radio so she can hear her daughter’s voice again. But nobody is suggesting the song be erased from history; there would be no hysterical violent purge and the handing over of all physical copies, or wiping of it from your iPods and phones, a Fahrenheit 451 of all whimsical ditties with problematic lyrics. Of course not. But the word “faggot” shouldn’t be on the radio at any time of day, least of all at 2pm when I am wrapping my Christmas presents.

Call me pompous, call me pious, call me wrong – but only two of those will ever be true when it comes to this word.

I’ve had a hard time making people get it. It’s been out there for so long, what does it matter? All sense of the original meaning has been lost. It’s only a song. But this isn’t really about the song itself, or its motivations – although I would argue the writers knew exactly what they were doing and even if the intent was this Irish definition of faggot that’s hard to trace, I’d hazard a guess that it was a play on the fact it had another meaning in the US, where the song takes place, featuring these characters, who are hurling insults at each other. They are not speaking words of love: you scumbag, you maggot, you cheap lousy faggot. She is replying to his equally gross assertion that she is a “slut” – also merrily left to play out on the song when it should be bleeped – not mildly chiding him for not putting the bins out. But that’s all irrelevant; it’s too late to worry about that. Like I say, it’s not about the song; it’s the word. When someone sings this song, be they a school bully or that annoying guy from Accounts doing karaoke, they’re not mindful or respectful of the context, the finer details of the song and its true meaning, whatever that might be. All they’re hearing is the word faggot and applying it to the definition familiar to them. Maybe, like, 1 in 100 thinks she’s calling him a meatball and 1 in 1,000 reckon she’s using the Irish definition but most in the UK, where the song is a huge hit, will take it to mean she’s calling him a poof – now there’s a word that would get bleeped.

The pain words cause is usually invisible to those unaffected by them. The discomfort, or the scars, are usually borne in silence because to speak up about them makes you a complainer, or uppity, or rocking the boat; it exposes you to derision, dismissal, distress, so you carry on taking it all in, a sponge involuntarily soaking up the acid that will eventually destroy it. Perhaps if we all screamed out in pain every time it was heard on the radio, every time it was chanted triumphantly in a pub full of people delighted of the special dispensation to finally shout it out, every time someone came to us with an excuse of “but context”, maybe then they’d get it. It would become an irritation, a problem they’d have to fix, like a car alarm farther down the street that won’t shut up, or an infestation in the cellar. To make people understand and realise the harm, you have to make them deal with it directly.

If it still isn’t going in, if you think the song has no bearing on the homophobic use of that word and is merely a piece of art existing in isolation from all other areas of society, if empathy and imagination have yet to kick in, allow me to tell my story. There are thousands of others like it, I promise you.

I remember the song coming out in 1987 and being circled by a group of boys in the playground – I was coming up for 12 years old – cheering ones from the song and pointing at me on the word “faggot”. A daily occurrence. I remember Christmas 1989, one of my very favourite school bullies striding down the aisle of the school bus shouting out that line, and timing the “faggot” with a slap to the side of my head that made it bounce off the window. I remember the awkward looks from colleagues singing it at karaoke at a work Christmas party as they approached the line, willing me to give them permission, which I gave, against my will, by grinning and opening my mouth and miming along – even that word. No sound came out.

I remember having to sit quiet and obedient in a straight man’s world for almost all my life, unable to say or do anything without being under suffocating scrutiny. Playing nice, not complaining, wondering how far to push it, then immediately withdrawing. The bullies’ hands stopped choking my throat a long, long time ago, but sometimes it feels like they’re still there. I won’t allow bizarre, misplaced affection for a SONG restrict my breathing or keep me quiet any longer. It doesn’t offend me, or make me angry, or sad; I just feel tired. Tired of trying to explain my existence.

If the word “bastard” had been used, the word would’ve been bleeped out on release and the song would very likely have never been heard in its original form on the radio or TV. In later performances, the band and Kirsty themselves switched it out for “haggard”, perhaps acknowledging the word’s unsuitability. If they can bleep out bitch, slut (when they do), drug or sex references, lyrics about guns and crime, then it should be no trouble to dispatch faggot into the ether where it belongs. Allowing it on the radio legitimises it, offers it the thin veneer of respectability and acceptability – it burdens the LGBT+ community with making it a problem. The word still has power, sharp cruel fangs, and is still used to demean and destroy lives of young people up and down the UK.

You owe it to them and, frankly, you owe it to me. The fairy-tale ending we all deserve is for hearing that awful word to be an option, not an obligation. As Kirsty also sang, so beautifully: Happy Christmas your arse.


EDIT: It is also worth noting, for anyone doubting that Shane MacGowan knew the offensive meaning of the word, when the song was beaten to no.1 by Pet Shops Boys, he called them “two queens with a drum machine” and has also referred to them as “faggots with synths”. When the song returned to the radio in the mid-noughties and the words slut and faggot were bleeped out, to much outcry, the Pogues said they thought this was “amusing”. When the controversy reared its head yet again in 2018, MacGowan appeared to acknowledge the word was included in the song to be as offensive as possible, thus suggesting he knew it was homophobic. “Sometimes characters in songs and stories have to be evil or nasty in order to tell the story effectively,” he said, and he’s not wrong. He also said he had no problem with the word being bleeped out on the radio, “if people don’t understand that I was trying to accurately portray the character as authentically as possible”. So there we have it.

FURTHER EDIT FOR 2020: The BBC has announced that Radio 1 will no longer play the song in its original version. Instead, Kirsty MacColl will be heard to sing “You’re cheap and you’re haggard”. The piece also says that one of Shane MacGown’s lines will be edited to remove a word entirely – I’m assuming it’s the word “slut”. It’s notable that the BBC piece announcing the change chose not to mention either word – not even starred out – which suggests they’re aware neither are socially acceptable words. It is also worth noting that the newly appointed Head of Station at Radio 1 is Aled Haydn Jones, a gay man. Radio 2, however, has opted to continue playing the original – its Head of Station, appointed in May, is Helen Thomas; her sexuality has not been disclosed.


Support my work:  Whether you agree or not, if you liked this or it made you think, please consider , where anyone who feels like it can bung me a couple of quid with no obligation or subscription.

Or buy one of my novels, The Last Romeo and The Magnificent Sons – the song even gets a mention in one of them.

Buy The Magnificent Sons Buy The Last Romeo

Image: Gabriel Rodriguez



  1. This times a million – it makes my skin crawl every time I hear it. (same with Money For Nothing – not marked as explicit in Spotify despite the line “that little faggot with the earring and the makeup” and a few more to boot).

    My story – I am straight but was “outed” as gay at my school during my final years there. People moved away from me in classes and refused to sit near me, I walked corridors with my head down to taunts of “queer” and “fag”. It was relentless for over a year. The bullying had an impact on every aspect of my life, my confidence in all male groups is still shot and I’m 42. (I’m even crying as I write this…)

    Remove the word – its fucking offensive and is not art – there is no excuse.

    Right – I’m going to try and go back to work now and pretend there’s something in my eye and make small talk about weekend plans.

    PS I was bullied for a year and it was bad. I can only imagine what its like for a lifetime so sending hugs to all who need them…

  2. Interesting that you should mention the word “slut” here as I had pretty much this exact same discussion about that word recently. Somebody was defending its use by a “comedy sexist” who was “clearly playing a character”. When I said I had just heard that word used in hatred and anger too many times to find it funny, I was told “Perhaps you should put your lived experience aside and just consider the word in the context of the joke”. Naturally this was a man whose “lived experience” differs vastly from mine- a man who doesn’t have the same associations with fear and violence that I do. Put it this way- I have been called a “slut” more times than I want to remember, and the intent was never to make me laugh…

    When I hear the word “slut” I just hear the translation “Hello, I think women are a bit disgusting and I hate them”. “faggot” also seems to be dripping in anger and hatred, with nothing more complicated to it. People who feel entitled to a more charitable interpretation of these words, especially from the very people they were designed to wound, should F off.

  3. I’m Irish, gay and member of the Irish 1980s diaspora – and proud of all three.

    Growing up I heard used the term ‘lazy faggot’ used – it may was directed to towards people considered ‘bone idle’. I don’t particularly like the ‘f-word’ but it is as much with the mixed up with laziness connection as the homophobic slur (which I become more aware of as I came out).

    Language is a powerful and wonderful thing. We Irish has we successfully been able to capture the English language and done amazing things with it through word, speech and as with this case song.

    ‘Fairytale in New York’ is as much (more) a song about the Irish Diaspora of the 1980s. Lovers who no doubt set out to New York to pursue their hopes and dreams and escape the economic hopelessness that thousand of Irish found themselves in the 1980s (and many generations before them). In my case my partners brought me to Australia in 1987, shaping my identity forever. Unfortunately for these characters the ‘American Dream’ is far from a ‘Fairytale’ – with drugs and alcohol claiming them and throwing less than favourable insult at one another in their despair. Is this nice? No. But the story of migration is often not. And it is certainly not a ‘joke’.

    And the reaction to the language also reflects the culture clash and misunderstanding that often follows from migration. Even though we all speak English having lived in Australia, the UK and consumed my far share of American cultural content – we don’t always speak the same language.

    I respect the use of the ‘f-word’ causes pain, like I said I’m not found of the word. Nor should the word ‘slut’ be bandied about lightly. But in the case of this song it is the use of these ‘nasty’ words that illustrates that life was for many Irish in the 1980s was far from a ‘Fairytale’ in New York.

    The Irish gay publication GCN also covered this subject in 2013:

    1. Regardless. The two words should be bleeped out on the radio in 2018. They would be in any other song. Any.

      1. I understand in different cultures this F word may mean something different but here it is a derogatory word for gay men. In context and in an adult programme I accept this word can be used to convey meaning but not at all times of day?

  4. I’m so glad I’ve finally found someone with the same opinion as me about the lyrics in this song. Most years I complain to the radio stations when I hear it played, particular when it’s played during the breakfast programme and children may be listening. I point out that I can’t think of any other circumstance when that F word would be broadcast to such an audience. I get fobbed off of course but I will carry on. I know I’m not wrong.

  5. You know what makes homophobia? Whining art-revisionists who project their own discomfort at some incident three decades ago onto other people.

    1. No it doesn’t. Homophobes make and perpetuate homophobia. There is no revisionism going on – if anything the insistence by the song’s increasingly abusive fans are the ones guilty of revisionism. The writer of the song has been very clear about wanting the characters saying the lines to be as offensive as possible. Maybe have a think about why people are so desperate to justify this word being played on the radio; what’s in it for you?

  6. Thank you for writing this Justin, I feel exactly the same – and I get very tired of arguments from people like John above, that gays should learn to laugh at themselves and stop moaning. The fact is, the lyric is offensive; if the song contained a racial slur that would never in a million years still be getting broadcast on national radio – so why should we have to put up with gay slurs? Apparently sticking up for yourself and calling homophobes out on their support of offensive language makes me a whining art-revisionist. So be it; rather that than an arsehole who is happy for any marginalised group to to referenced in a song only as an insult. Snowflake and proud!! Appropriately enough, it being Christmas and all… 🙂

  7. I’m a bit late to the party here, only just discovered this blog. Reading the timescale of events here it would seem you went through school about 10 years after me, I was 14 in 1979 and 22 when FTONY hit the charts. I had a seemingly identical school experience to you with the physical violence and name calling but the word spat at me when I was being humiliated wasn’t faggot it was queer. The same generation who can’t listen to the original version of this classic tune because it offends them would now describe me as ‘queer’ because I am a gay man. So are only words that offend people under 40 a problem?

    1. Hi Nick. I was called a queer at school too, among many other things.
      The word ‘queer’ has gone through many incarnations over the years. It has been used in academia, for example, when talking about ‘queer theory’ since at least the 1970s. The modern, more mainstream interpretation of queer among LGBTQ people has certainly soared in popularity over the years, largely because the existing labels have felt either too restrictive or not descriptive enough. When I first noticed queer being used more, I was suspicious and hesitant in the beginning – it seemed odd to me that a slur could empower anybody. But then I looked at it another way: if using this word can make someone feel more included, liberated, or able to express their sexuality or gender, then I wouldn’t dream of denying them that power. Ninety-nine per cent of the time, queerness is self-determined. The generation you talk about would not call you queer as an individual, they would call you a gay man, as that is how you identify and live your life.
      This is a completely different situation, anyway, as the word has been reclaimed by LGBTQ+ people to promote inclusivity and freedom, which certainly cannot be said for the F-slur.
      There is nothing empowering about straight people shouting out faggot, or queer for that matter, at anyone – but I think you know that already.

  8. Hi
    I think this is a generational thing and we’ll have to agree to disagree. I worked with young people y whole life and have been involved in groups to help LGBT youth since the 1990’s, mostly on a voluntary basis in addition to my main job. This proliferation of new ways to identify among the young has happened before and will do again but now social media is involved the differences that occur between all generations are being played out in public and attracting unwanted attention from extremists on both sides who would have had to be content with firing off crap letters to the newspapers years ago. I have no issue with people wanting to change the lyrics of this song, they don’t bother me within the context of the song, but that doesn’t mean I think they shouldn’t bother others. I also have no issue with playing a re-recorded version on the radio with said words removed, but I get the impression, that because they bother you , you feel I should be offended by them too and that if I’m not I am as bigoted as those who would scream that word at people in the street. Herein lies the problem with modern ‘cancel “ culture, there is no middle ground, everyone is either in group A or group B, and the other group are heretical. I also don’t ‘identify’ as a gay man, any more than I identify as white , having brown eyes, or having a disability, it’s not a costume I wear , I am a gay man. What does the word identify in this context even mean? Good blog though!

Leave a Response