Why is the word "gay" sacred?

[GSOgymrat]

Now I know when straight people say "that's so gay" it doesn't typically have anything to do with gay people, it just means lame.

[stromboli]

My gay friend occasionally describes himself as having a "gay moment" usually involved with the misalignment of furniture in his impeccably neat trailer, but I'm not one to try to be "gay friendly"by "talking gay," if there is such a thing. I grant people the right to be referred to as they choose. My name is Stephen but I used to be referred to as "Stevo" and "Stevie" and it irritates the shit out of me that people do that. I always make it a point to either know or ask people with nicknames if they are comfortable being called that. Quite often they aren't, but merely tolerate it.

I consider it an issue of personal respect to be observant of other people's boundaries and what they consider acceptable and not. And I wish that other people were mindful of that as well. A common sensitivity that would make the world run better.

[GSOgymrat]

I agree. Especially at work I ask people by what name they prefer to be called. I also ask people "how would you describe your sexual orientation" or "what should I put down on your medical record for race." I also give people the option to leave it blank. If there must be a label let the individual provide it.

[widdershins]

Now I know when straight people say "that's so gay" it doesn't typically have anything to do with gay people, it just means lame.

You know, thinking back, other people were saying that they saw this usage of the word referring to sexuality, but they did things like ignorantly claim there was no other definition.  Reading this simple response from you, assuming I understand correctly that you actually did not know that this usage of the word did not refer to sexuality in the least, I actually understand the other side of this argument now.

I had seen this as a group trying to hijack a word with multiple meanings and delete all the meanings but the one they wanted, which, frankly, annoyed the shit out of me.  Even those arguing here, at least the arguments I remember, all seemed to fall into one of two categories (on that side of the argument).  Either they said that you should not use it out of respect or they claimed that it was a direct insult to homosexuality, end of discussion.  There was a third argument, the "you're stupid" argument, but that childishness does not deserve analysis.  The first argument I understand, but it didn't help me see things from the other side.  The second argument was, frankly, pathetic and wrong, and only reinforced what I already thought about the situation because one arguer actually claimed that there was no other legitimate usage of the word.

With this simple response, I finally understand your position (I think).  After a lifetime of bigotry directed toward you, you simply saw this as no real change.  You have no desire to "hijack" a word, you just can't be sure exactly what it means when it's used in that way.  From my point of view, I have never said, "That is so gay" and in any way indicated homosexuality.  And now I understand and respect your point of view, I have my answer, it's not an attempted "hijack", it's just being jumpy from a lifetime of persecution.

Frankly, the Wanda Sykes argument actually made me MORE adamant about using it because her argument was deeply flawed.  The boy in the video did not mean offense to her, but she did mean offense to him with her comparison.  That wasn't a fair comparison and she came off as angry and combative rather than actually hurt, EXACTLY the imagery conservatives would have jump to our minds when talking about gays because it's easier to fight against a combatant than equality.

So, I have my answer (unless I in some way misunderstood you).  Having my answer I can dismiss the bad arguments against using the phrase as irrelevant.  This makes the simple argument you made with, I believe, your very first post in this thread, "I don't know how to take it when you say it", the only argument with substance, the only argument which matters and, as I now see, a rock-solid argument.  I understand why I should not use this phrase now, and I will not.  Thank you.

[stromboli]

I first heard the word gay in reference to homosexuality made by (I think) David Niven many years ago in an interview, where he, a Brit, Was in Hollywood to be in movies and mentioned it as local slang among Hollywood insiders. Cary Grant and Randolph Scott, both he man actors of the late 40s and 50s, lived together for some time, and rumors abounded about their relationship.



http://www.homohistory.com/2013/07/cary-grant-and-randolph-scott-hollywood.html

You decide.

[FaithIsFilth]

"Look at his outfit. That's so gay." "Soccer is so gay. Football is a real man's sport."

"This weather is f'n gay/ghey."

Huge difference between these two different uses. If someone is using it more like in the first couple sentences, I don't have a problem with them being called out for that. Homophobia is still very common, and there are plenty of people out there that will use gay as an insult, and mean effeminate when they say it.

[stromboli]

"Look at his outfit. That's so gay." "Soccer is so gay. Football is a real man's sport."

"This weather is f'n gay/ghey."

Huge difference between these two different uses. If someone is using it more like in the first couple sentences, I don't have a problem with them being called out for that. Homophobia is still very common, and there are plenty of people out there that will use gay as an insult, and mean effeminate when they say it.

Yes and the less than observant don't understand the difference. Granted we live in a world which more and more deals with hair splitting, this word is bad under certain conditions and not under others, if used by one group ok but not by others. And the internet is to blame as well, being a wide open turf where anybody can be as blatantly homophobic as they want and do it mostly anonymously. A brave new world.

[mauricio]

You know, thinking back, other people were saying that they saw this usage of the word referring to sexuality, but they did things like ignorantly claim there was no other definition.  Reading this simple response from you, assuming I understand correctly that you actually did not know that this usage of the word did not refer to sexuality in the least, I actually understand the other side of this argument now.

I had seen this as a group trying to hijack a word with multiple meanings and delete all the meanings but the one they wanted, which, frankly, annoyed the shit out of me.  Even those arguing here, at least the arguments I remember, all seemed to fall into one of two categories (on that side of the argument).  Either they said that you should not use it out of respect or they claimed that it was a direct insult to homosexuality, end of discussion.  There was a third argument, the "you're stupid" argument, but that childishness does not deserve analysis.  The first argument I understand, but it didn't help me see things from the other side.  The second argument was, frankly, pathetic and wrong, and only reinforced what I already thought about the situation because one arguer actually claimed that there was no other legitimate usage of the word.

With this simple response, I finally understand your position (I think).  After a lifetime of bigotry directed toward you, you simply saw this as no real change.  You have no desire to "hijack" a word, you just can't be sure exactly what it means when it's used in that way.  From my point of view, I have never said, "That is so gay" and in any way indicated homosexuality.  And now I understand and respect your point of view, I have my answer, it's not an attempted "hijack", it's just being jumpy from a lifetime of persecution.

Frankly, the Wanda Sykes argument actually made me MORE adamant about using it because her argument was deeply flawed.  The boy in the video did not mean offense to her, but she did mean offense to him with her comparison.  That wasn't a fair comparison and she came off as angry and combative rather than actually hurt, EXACTLY the imagery conservatives would have jump to our minds when talking about gays because it's easier to fight against a combatant than equality.

So, I have my answer (unless I in some way misunderstood you).  Having my answer I can dismiss the bad arguments against using the phrase as irrelevant.  This makes the simple argument you made with, I believe, your very first post in this thread, "I don't know how to take it when you say it", the only argument with substance, the only argument which matters and, as I now see, a rock-solid argument.  I understand why I should not use this phrase now, and I will not.  Thank you.

To clarify my point is not about using or not using the word or whether is it offensive or not. Those are things based on subjective perception and for each individual to decide. Im just trying to refute this attitude of throwing serious accusations like homophobia/racism/sexism to people just because they use impolite and crude expressions. To me those accusations are not about infering the worst possible interpretation of someone's word usage and then bringing them to the progressive pilory. Those accusations are reserved for people with unfounded dogmatic believes about other people based solely on their gender/race.There's no logical necessity for the user of a slur/insult to be racist/homophobe/sexist and the designination of this taboo words is morally selective.

The thing about the topic of slurs/insults, in the context of the internet, that bothers me are this:

People seem to separate words like faggot, nigger, cunt, tranny, etc. from other insults and refer to them as slurs with the implication that using those words is much worse than other insults because they are homophobic/racist/mysoginist/transphobic. They think that the person who uses those slurs holds or is spousing those attitudes by using them and therefore is deserving of serious moral condemnation because those attitudes are inmoral/wrong. I do not think that is necessarily the case, it can be but it does not neccesarily follow. I also think that in the context in which i have experienced the usage of this words as insults, internet chats and forums, most of the time it does not follow because there is a much more obvious explanation for people choosing this words to insult.

I think there is a disconnect there between the action the person is actually doing and the perception of that action by the people morally condeming them. This marks the difference between an asshole and a bigot. The asshole is making an strategic choice of words. He is personalizing the insult, tailoring it with whatever little information he has of the victim to prey on their self conciousness to inflict maximium distress possible with words. This is why if they know or think you are male they will call you a cuck or a virgin and doubly so if they know you are a nerd or introverted, they will also use sexual insults towards your mother, sister or girlfriend all of this preys on your self conciousness surrounding your male identity and your gender role. ( note also the selective morality of how this ways to insult males  are not part of the prohibit slur list for certain individuals) they will call a women a cunt and if she is a rabid feminist doubly so because they know how much they hate gendered insults. They will call muslims sand niggers, they will call black people niggers, etc. This strategic choice of words is in my opinion pretty standard insults 101 and is done automatically with all sorts of traits a person can have. The slur list is just a selection of some of this terms that with selective morality born out of hyperbolic progressive rhetoric become anathema. The way i see it, racism is not calling someone a nigger even if you are using it as an insult. To me racism is the irrationally dogmatic believe that a person MUST be a certain way based solely on their race. For example the racist is the one that strongly believes, without sufficient evidence, whites are inherently superior and other races are inherently inferior. This is the bigot. The guy who called you nigger/faggot/cunt/ (insert slur here) because you disagreed with him on the internet or beat him in a game is just being an asshole.

This also applies to threats of violence through the internet by random pseudonymous or anonymous people. The people who are not internet noobs should be familiar with the phenomena known as the internet though guy. This is why when someone threatens you on the internet you just laugh, because the lack of motive and material impediments and the fact that the person is most likely simply using words to try to cause you distress means you are basically completely safe and hes just a butthurt internet though guy.

With my experiences using the internet for more than a decade now engaging in many a shitfliging contests on the cesspools of the interwebs i cannot take seriously this pseudoslacktivists like anita shekelisian and her cohorts parading around "research" that are just basically people counting slurs and insults in videogame chatlogs as evidence of "widespread sexism and cyberviolence against women" on the internet and videogames community. This people are either purposfully disengenous or complete internet noobs oblivious to the art of trolling and shitposting.

[Draconic Aiur]

Why is there an argumenT?

[Sargon The Grape]

Why is there an argumenT?

Yes, why is there an argument on the Internet? It's unprecedented!


Fair and balanced (like Fox News).

[Dionysiou]

I say it occasionally when i consider something lame. Incidentally, being lame is also a medical condition, along with aspie, autist and retard. Essentially people insult other people with medical conditions. It works well enough.

[widdershins]

I say it occasionally when i consider something lame. Incidentally, being lame is also a medical condition, along with aspie, autist and retard. Essentially people insult other people with medical conditions. It works well enough.

Being a "retard" is not a medical condition.  Being "mentally retarded" is (or was.  This term is no longer used professionally, mostly).  Just like being a "negro" is a race, but not being a n***, making neither usage socially acceptable any more.