Respect

   When people want to diss someone, they resort to name-calling. It's very likely common in every society and at every level.
   It serves several purposes. To begin with, the use of titles shows respect and acknowledges a hierarchy -- if status is important. So to use a derogatory title is a way of reinforcing that hierarchy.
   In some societies, even high officials are addressed  by their first names. In others, by titles. And in these groups, the higher the officials, the more likely the disparity between respect and domination.
   For example, in America it's customary to address an occupant of the Oval Office -- present or former -- as Mister President, while the president can refer to those he deems underlings by their first names, or by some other appellation of his choosing.
   All this despite the principle expressed in 1776 that all are created equal, perhaps in protest of an attitude that a monarch is more equal than others.
   (I know, there's no law that says only men can be president. So far, all U.S. presidents have been men. But the day is coming when a woman will preside at the Oval Office desk.)
   So it is that the current occupant of the Oval Office publicly refers to the leaders of Congress, the co-equal branch of government, as Chuck and Nancy, while he expects to be addressed as Mr. President.
   But despite continually acting like one, he is not a monarch. That differential was eliminated in the 18th Century, as America became an independent nation.
   Even so, the custom of showing respect for the individual holding the highest elected office in American government carries forward the use of the term "Mr. President."
   Whether that person deserves such respect is decided by individual citizens.
   Meanwhile, it behooves that person to show as much respect for others as he demands from them. And name-calling is not the way to do it.