Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The use of the word "gay"
- Thread starter vmardian
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
MacNut said:
No need to worry, nothing wrong with not knowing. Homosexual means you like others of the same sex, it refers to either males or females liking others of the same sex. Gay and lesbian are just a little more specific, gay is a male homosexual, lesbian is a female homosexual.
I don't know when "gay" became offensive. Gay use to mean "happy" among other things. Then it referred to homosexuals. People started using it to insult other people who didn't want to be considered homosexuals, and then it became a word to insult anything (ie, "that book is gay").
I don't know how "straight" became "heterosexual". If you find out please post, I never thought about that before and its interesting.
MacNut said:
Ooh ooh, queer politics!
Gay became a term that was used to describe...well...gay men. Women didn't like the idea that the culture was using the word gay as to describe almost soley gay men so they came up with the term lesbian as the word they would use to describe themselves. That's why cities often have Dyke Marches along with regular Pride celebrations if they do such a thing. Male dominance remains present even in this sub-community of people so women decided they needed to seperate themselves and become more visible.
Homosexual on the other hand is larkely unused by the general GLBT population. The cultural connotations of the word itself being the ,ain reason. Homosexual has been widely used in the medical community in the past, mostly by the psychiatric part. Some people don't know this but homosexuality was on the mental illness list until around the 50s I think in the US. That term was used by the medical community to marginalise non-heterosexual people and throughout the years past the removal from the list of mental illnesses, by conservative religious groups mostly to do the same. Therefore the term homosexual is rarely used by the people who actually are to describe themselves.
MacNut said:
Because technically, gay is a synonym for homosexual. Culturally however, its not.
Ok not to get into meanings of words but has the trend of the offensiveness of the word "gay" been around since it evolved to mean something different. Can we assume that the word changed when back in the late 50's some drunk white guy saw a flamboyant colorful man and said wow your gay, meaning it as offensive but the word stuck and became accepted in the culture? Or am I over analyzing and way off base.vniow said:Ooh ooh, queer politics!
Gay became a term that was used to describe...well...gay men. Women didn't like the idea that the culture was using the word gay as to describe almost soley gay men so they came up with the term lesbian as the word they would use to describe themselves. That's why cities often have Dyke Marches along with regular Pride celebrations if they do such a thing. Male dominance remains present even in this sub-community of people so women decided they needed to separate themselves and become more visible.
Because technically, gay is a synonym for homosexual. Culturally however, its not.
Abstract said:
the poster I was responding didn't specify the 'negative' use of the word black to be "race related" - and neither did I as it happens. (edit: actually I see that I did infer this with my following statements - I apologise)
The fact that you were able to glean this (non)racial inference from the simple use of the word might perhaps contradict your point - or at least reinforce the points that many others have made here - that the words are loaded with cultural / social connotations - and contribute to marginalisation and oppression. (edit: see edit above and another apology)
I don't know how you know that 'black heart' has no racial implication and
It may be a 'british thing' ... try starting with Shakespeare and every other major piece of literature up to say 1980 (and quite a bit after that). You know, the kind of stuff they teach to kids - that forms character and 'world views'. The reason the epiphets have fallen out of usage a bit is because we've got some others --- but they're still there
In the English language and idiom the word black has overwhelmingly negative connotations... and this, in fact, is all "race related". Whether before or after the fact, these negative connotations have (often) been inferred onto Black people.
It might be that 'the english' didn't / don't like black or dark things so they 'naturally' transfer those feelings onto Black people. It might be that they didn't/don't like Black people so they named their fears after them. Whatever, the results are the same
Totally agree
scem0 said:
Many levels - vertical and horizontal - like the social turnip who thinks he can get away with offending 'inferior' people
It's not really that smart though; If someone tried that **** with me, they'd better hope I have enough intelligence not to smash them in the face with the 1st thing that came to hand
... maybe even enjoy it as well
Given the due consideration that you've given to my points (and the fact that I may be in a more mellow mood) I will apologise if this has turned into a personal contretemps. And - other than the fact that we are actually talking about language - I hope this can be seen as healthy & robust debate
This may be a crass example - but I'm sure you know that in Japan, for example, the have a canned soda called "Sweat" - and there's hundreds of examples various other amusingly inappropriate 'translations' or whatever.
Anyways, cultural 'norms' mean we are very unlikely to see any little packs of sweeties (as in confectionary) marketed as "Fairy Turds" are we? We know that the word turd is not inherently offensive - there a couple of completely wholesome definitions (and everybody loves fairies don't they?)
But it wouldn't be considered appropriate ... and to proceed with this use of the word would be offensive. And all the more so if the offensive language relates to people as opposed to things and all the more again if tgese people are oppressed
hmmm ... Notwithstanding your direct knowledge of the subject, isn't it possible that you are making some pretty broad assumptions about this guy yourself. I mean, you haven't mentioned as a friend or associate but some guy selling rum.
Granted, his own sobriety might be self-evident but I would say it's pretty bold to assume that he would be as comfortable with the word if he held a different vocation in life. Also I didn't make assumptions about the guy getting high - I posited the question.
mpw said:
This may be a crass example - but I'm sure you know that in Japan, for example, the have a canned soda called "Sweat" - and there's hundreds of examples various other amusingly inappropriate 'translations' or whatever.
Anyways, cultural 'norms' mean we are very unlikely to see any little packs of sweeties (as in confectionary) marketed as "Fairy Turds" are we? We know that the word turd is not inherently offensive - there a couple of completely wholesome definitions (and everybody loves fairies don't they?)
But it wouldn't be considered appropriate ... and to proceed with this use of the word would be offensive. And all the more so if the offensive language relates to people as opposed to things and all the more again if tgese people are oppressed
hmmm ... Notwithstanding your direct knowledge of the subject, isn't it possible that you are making some pretty broad assumptions about this guy yourself. I mean, you haven't mentioned as a friend or associate but some guy selling rum.
Granted, his own sobriety might be self-evident but I would say it's pretty bold to assume that he would be as comfortable with the word if he held a different vocation in life. Also I didn't make assumptions about the guy getting high - I posited the question.
True but I don't like to assume what I don't have evidence of. (EDIT - see above - keith) The fact that the term was/is used was raised in conversation, often by people new to the island, and when its explained that nobody took issue to it and the context was considered most people didn't have a problem with it.I live in an (ex) sea port - Tiger Bay, Cardiff. Growing up in this area, we interact with each robustly and the language is often a bit 'coarse' ... visitors often remark on the apparent 'hostility' between friends and neighbours and we explain and they think it's cool --- or so they say - it's hard to tell because most of them seem to know better than to argue with us ...
But anyway, things have moved on and while I am known to still use the odd expletive in casual conversation a bit too often, I no longer call my friends c*nt as a matter of course. ...
Your first post pointed to a change of attitudes towards the 'n' word in recent years - do you see a possible connection?
Possibly. That they've taken so long (compared to the rest of the UK) might say something else
[
As I say I'm from Tiger Bay - a name which has been synonymous with diversity (and other things) for more than 100 years- aside from any crude 'colour' integration this includes people from all areas of of Europe - we know a thing or two about getting along . As it happens, if there is any target of racial / national hostility it is usually the English! Generally aimed towards institutions rather than individuals, it's considered fair game to slag you lot off. But again, I had some of my excesses challenged and I no longer do it - actually by an african woman and an indian woman who both had english partners and were offended by my constant jibes.
I believe he would mean it without offence as he's a really 'nice' genuine guy. Again your assumption is wrong he's no saint just a 'normal'(for here) guy who isn't a racist or bigoted in any way. It's maybe telling that you seem to constantly assume that people will be bigoted in some way.
Another interesting use of words / semantics arises here:
You "believe" - I "assume" ... I was once told that "to assume is to make an 'ass' of 'u' and 'me' - but the woman who said it was so rude about it I think my assumptions about her were correct anyway.
Yes, I do assume that people will be predisposed to some kind of prejudice / bigotry. I encounter it every day and in every strata of life - in fact many of the pillars of society are founded on bigotry - at the same time, much of the social progress has been delivered by people who challenged and railed against 'the offence' - as opposed to those who just see no offence until it ***** in their mouth!
But I also believe it's possible to be a really nice genuine guy and have some screwed up notions about things - people who know me would probably use the same phrase. But what does that mean to you, if I'm going to call you a prat like that? We all have to review our attitudes and adapt our behaviour (including thoughts) if we insist on using language, expressions, irrespective of the meaning to others we can't challenge when others do the same.
Which is largely my point also, but where I chose to give an example of a word used in a non offensive context that elsewhere could be deemed offensive you chose to do this by attempting an insult.?
Because you were trying to prove it wasn't offensive by virtue of intention and I was trying to prove it was - as a matter of fact I was offended
Sure, like all words and I'm willing bet there's a few that you don't use / like - or at least have the decency not to use
I think so, I'm TT and know nothing of these things really... I had to look it up after I'd called you it ...
I would say that listening / comprehension skills are far more important than eloquence. But for the most part the onus of communication isn't on the audience - it's on the speaker ...
A silly little analogy with 'road safety': Yes, pedestrians and other road users need to be aware and have a certain amount of judgement of their own but things still work better when drivers stick to the rules - and quite dangerous when they don't. As we've moved on - more roads more traffic, different kinds of traffic, more powerful cars, etc, - so the rules have changed / grown. My old man didn't even have to sit a driving test - now you have to have a permit to park outside your own house (if you can). There's no point some old fart talking about how it was somehow 'better' when he was the only lunatic on the road.
If people are going to get engaged in public debate like this without considering the audience in it's entirety they must be prepared for the response from others - who may also be inclined to call a spade a shovel ...
All this just illustrates why we should not get all bitter and twisted over mere words; as someone said earlier, words can start wars.
Perhaps it comes down to lack of smarts or education; ignorance on all sides.
Wasn't there a case in the US a couple of years ago over the use of the word "niggardly?" It means in an ungenerous, mean or bad-tempered manner, originally a Scandinavian word. The press and attention-seekers on both sides of the argument went nuts for weeks. I still don't know if they all wised up in the end.
Perhaps it comes down to lack of smarts or education; ignorance on all sides.
Wasn't there a case in the US a couple of years ago over the use of the word "niggardly?" It means in an ungenerous, mean or bad-tempered manner, originally a Scandinavian word. The press and attention-seekers on both sides of the argument went nuts for weeks. I still don't know if they all wised up in the end.
gwuMACaddict said:why does everything around here always come down to gay this or gay that these days...?
I was juat about to post something along those lines
There's surely more to talk about than one's sexuality and by which name it should be called.
scem0 said:
what about them? i find it humorous that now (at least) 3 people have reacted to my posts when i have never once said that it's OK for someone to use the term "gay" in a derogatory way.
the only thing i said that was contrary to lee was that he shouldn't assume he knows what all gay people feel in a certain situation, just because he feels that way.
feel free to continue to jump on my one little point, incorrectly, i might add, when there are now probably 10+ people here have clearly showed signs of ignorance and intolerance.
gwuMACaddict said:why does everything around here always come down to gay this or gay that these days...?
oh yeah, "everything" "ALWAYS" comes down to gay this or gay that. maybe my head was in the sand when barry bonds's steroid use came down to him being a closeted homosexual. or when the new "meroms" were actually some fictional product of the gay community. or when the "socketed" intels were actually a reference to gayness. or when the woman who died after riding the disney ride turned out to be gay. or when millar876's brilliant wife brilliantly told him she was actually gay. or when the greatest made lightsaber fight ever was a not so subtle reference to gayness. and damn if the nhl playoffs aren't just talk about a bunch of gay canadian and russian men throwing their bodies and sticks around. and clearly the best chocolate ever can only be discussed by gays. the gay cop shot himself in the foot. figures. easter bunny? gay. drinking nectar? gay. giving notice of resignation? gay. american idol. oh whoops.
damn, i missed ALL THAT!?!?!?!?
aquajet said:And on that note, I prefer to call myself queer. I don't know why, maybe because the word just sounds cool to my ear. Gay sounds, well, kind of gay.
I tend to prefer it too, mostly because its like an all-encompassing word somewhat and no other label seems to accurately describe that aspect of me.
I've never warmed up to the term queer. It is too political for me. Plus it brings back memories of grade school when us kids used to play "sneer the queer". Shudders.
Ditto, preferably with a captial "Q."aquajet said:And on that note, I prefer to call myself queer. I don't know why, maybe because the word just sounds cool to my ear. Gay sounds, well, kind of gay.
Using "gay" is so contextual - and the dictionary gives it a bunch of meanings as well. I tend to break it down as to whether or not the use has pejorative intent just to simplify matters for myself - which means that there's a whole gray area of times when it's used as an adjective when referencing Queer culture that are neither describing someone's sexuality nor pejorative. Sometimes it's really obvious: using "gay" as a substitute for "stupid," "abnormal," or other negative terms. And using "gay" in the old-fashioned sense, "we'll have a gay old time at the party" or in the newer meaning, "John is gay" also seem pretty obvious.
Where it gets blurry is when you're looking at something like a store display, and someone comments, "that display is so gay." Living in the Bay Area, this could simply be as stated, since there are a lot of store displays that are, well, very gay. Maybe someone saying this in Wichita or Fargo might mean it in a more pejorative sense, I dunno.
BTW, someone above asked why women will also call themselves "gay." While not entirely the explaination, this is sometimes a generational thing in the Queer women's community. Gay women often are the gals who were around during the Daughters of Bilitis time, and call themselves gay because there was no huge movement to differentiate the various flavors of Queer that exist today. Everyone was either gay or they weren't. Lesbian, as a popular term and identity didn't emerge until later and was partly used to start differentiating women's needs from men's in the movement for civil rights and recognition - and also to counter sexism both in society and in the movement.
I suppose if I were born a few years earlier, I'd refer to myself as "lesbian" - but, I prefer Queer because I became involved in the movement when it was really blowing up in the late 1980s and early 1990s and I tend to identify with radical Queer politics, which includes ACT-UP, Queer Nation, and the Dyke March.
[Edit]: I also like Queer because I'm not locked in to any one kind of social pattern that is related to my identity. I could date women, men, trannies, whomever I please and not be seen as purely "lesbian" or "bisexual" and going through a phase. But that's a whole 'nother discussion.
Of course, "queer," "dyke" and related terms were also completely pejorative up until pretty recently, and also now face the same debate over their uses. For example, CS Lewis often uses the word "queer" in the Chronicles of Narnia books: "Lucy gave Edmund a queer look and began to light the lantern" or "There was some queer writing on the cave wall." I don't think Lewis was using queer as a pejorative reference to the Queer community, but rather using the word in its historical sense as "odd." However, queer historically meaning "odd" was rapidly used to describe gays and lesbians as well, and in a pejorative manner. So again, it's completely contextual, since I know a lot of straight folks (but again, maybe this is a Bay Area thing), who say things like, "oh yeah, my sister's queer" and don't mean it in a negative way.
[Edit]: Authors who use the word "queer" as an adjective nowadays, though, fall under greater suspicion with me. Are they really using it in its historical definition of odd and unusual, or trying to pull off some sort of double-entendre that imparts a distinctly pejoritive and stereotypically gay flavor to whatever "queer" is describing?
I suppose there's nothing wrong with using hetero- and homosexual, though homosexual is increasingly taking on a pejorative slant in popular culture because it sounds clinical and is an easy way for the Right to quickly describe people it wants to demonize who are all kinds of sexual minorities or gender deviant. I wouldn't use it in everyday conversation, myself.
I personally don't equate using words such as gay, queer, dyke and so forth, even when used pejoratively, with the N-word. Mainly because the N-word has a much deeper and historical context that deals explicitly with race - and while Queers definitely don't enjoy full civil rights and equality in America, they were not subjected to horrors such as the slave trade. Personally, the only word that even comes close to the N-word when referring to lesbians and gays is "f*ggot" - though again, these words both have entirely different historical contexts and the connections (or no) between them need to be drawn carefully.
Yep, it's Friday.
Sorry for showing my ignorance again but what are preferred words, I always assumed that the Q word was one of the worst ones but the F word was the ultimate insult. Is "Dyke" accepted because I always that that to be a racist thing too? I am hearing it thrown around.
Well, I'll take a stab at answering...MacNut said:
In short, using words like Queer, Dyke and f*ggot depend entirely on how and with whom you're using them. You're absolutely right that all three used to be extremely pejorative, and an absolute insult to whomever they were used against. However, just like using the N-word, that some of Black America has reclaimed as a self-referential term that isn't negative in all contexts, the same holds true for "queer, "dyke" and to a much lesser extent, "f*ggot."
I wish there were a clearer answer than looking at someone's intent when using these words, which may or may not be evident when they're using them.
I'd say if you're looking for a generic polite term to refer to folks, it's really hard to go wrong with simply "gay," "lesbian," "bisexual" or "transgender" - if you're sincere in using them as a means of developing greater personal understanding of these communities and not as an insult, it has been my experience that even if used in the wrong context, folks aren't going to be insulted.
It does get more tricky when using terms that are in the process of, or partially reclaimed. Not all women who date women want to be called "dykes" or "queer", however, some women use these terms both as identity markers and in referece to themselves. So, asking someone "are you a dyke?" could be interpreted as hostile if you're not part of that particular community, however, if you asked the same person, "are you a lesbian?" is using a more common denominator term and is therefore less risque and subjective. Although folks in the Queer community (as I call it and myself) or the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) community will always disagree amongst ourselves about how we use and identify with reclaimed terms such as dyke, queer and f*ggot - if you're coming from outside these communities (e.g. you're straight or not gender variant), it's harder to properly contextualize the use of reclaimed terminology and thusly the potential for insult can increase.
I'm not aware of any racial interpretation of "dyke", although there can be in certain localities in the U.S. a slight class meaning imparted with the term, where "dyke" is more associated with blue-collar women and "lesbian" with white-collar or upper class women, but this is very regional.
I hope at least some of this helps...
[Edit]:
Good linky aquajet - Ahh Wikipedia, the Internet's repository for all things pop-culture and scientific... I keep forgetting to use it as a starting point for various topics.aquajet said:
vniow said:
Homosexuality wasn't removed from DSM II (the bible of mental illness) until 1973.It's interesting that a group of shrinks could decide something long held as a mental illness could suddenly not be one,how many other mental illness's have they got wrong?
Incidently it wasn't delisted in China until 2001.
Peterkro said:
It seems like every once in a while there will be a publication that discusses something previously held to be a mental disorder and has since been reclassified in the DSM IV as another illness entirely, a symptom of something entirely different, or not an "illness" at all. Science hasn't been a complete waste of time, thankfully. Heck, it wasn't too long ago that doctors used vibrators on women to induce paroxism to relieve female hysteria. Like all things, whoever holds the power holds the keys to defining what's what. There's a certain amount of politics in the medical community, too.
Although we've apparently done a complete 180 on leeches and maggots - they're now being used again in modern medicine to treat certain kinds of infections and burns. But of course, these leeches and maggots are a lot cleaner than the ones we used to use
