That's so gay!

Recent article from The Guardian:
Using the word 'gay' to mean 'crap' is a form of bullying of gay people

Over the years, I've tried (unsuccessfully) to articulate this in a way that makes sense to others. I feel like Will Young does a good job of getting to the core of the issue and conveying why the use of this particular word in certain contexts affects some of us the way it does.

I disagree. Gay used to mean festive then it meant happy then it was hijacked by homosexuals to mean homosexual now it means uncool. Atheist tried to do this with the word bright ,but it never caught on.

The meaning of words change all the time that is no reason to get upset. I'd hate to live in a word were I have to constantly watch what I say for fear that I'm going to constantly offend someone.

On the flip side you could say you're bullying people's right to express themselves how they want.

South Park did a whole episode on this.

The word fag used to mean cigarette, and some people still use it in that sense....as vesha pointed out many words have an original meaning before being hijacked for a new meaning...dope= drugs, dope= fool, dope= cool...ill= sick, ill= awesome, ill= awful...

Language constantly evolves remember the movie idiocracy and the "fuddruckers" sign :laugh:

Well, as a LBGT rights supporter (and practitioner) I think that this has gone on long enough. I live in Texas, where some of the old ways are still seen quite clearly through the looking glass. "That's gay" is a favorite catchphrase of some people locally, and once I question why people use said word, I am usually met with such resistance as, "Why does it matter? It's just a word. Are YOU gay?" My reply to these people is simple;

"It matters because no matter how many times you may strike my body, words strike my soul.
It's not just some word. You don't hear me going around saying I'm going to murder someone. Because if I say that, someone can take it seriously. What happens if the police come to me, is it still just a word?
And no, I'm not gay, I am in fact a bisexual man and proud to be as such."

This is exactly my opinion, nothing more. I won't go over "language changes" bull crap. I live in the here and now, and if I am discontent with the present, then I will do what I can to change it.

I understand that language constantly evolves. That doesn't negate the fact that the usage of the word 'gay' in this sense has a negative psychological effect on me and many others.

Sadly, I don't think most people understand this if it doesn't affect them personally. I respect your views on this issue, but disagree with the general perspective.

I've always viewed words as just words,....they only have power over the listener if the listener chooses to give it power over them...I've been called all sorts of offensive things and simply laughed it off...I choose to not let a word, any word have power over me...I am the master of my mind,body, and spirit...as such I do not allow anyone or anything (words included) to have power over me....

If someone becomes offended it's because they chose to give something power over themselves and submitted to that power

This is a typically "ryujin" (thick skulled, barbaric and/or neanderthal-ic mentallity or thinking) attitude about this topic....

Things do change, and when not for the "arcade" (meaning better, excellent, good; a positive [thing]), and, when this is the case, we need to not "jestor" (meaning joking/silliness, or dimwitted) about it and take it serious....

No one likes it when they are used to be a negative description, insult or vesha (meaning an uncaring, or unthought out statement or comment; see [munson], or [mudd])....

Not only, does those "gay" members need to be less sensitive, but those who are not need to be more sensitive...

I hope my message is clear...

(All names used as example, and to illustrate a point.... None of the negative meanings I attached to names are seriously meant by me.... Of course, Arcade is fabulous, and I can be a bit foolish......)

EDIT: Not tjatvit matters, but imam a straight guy withva child who used to say "that's gay"... Until I pointed this out to him very similarly... I do however, have a few gay friends...

I think it's other people perception that needs altering. Many words of duel good and bad meaning like Redneck or Yankee. The best way to deal with this to own it.

Jestor wrote:
No one likes it when they are used to be a negative description, insult or vesha (meaning an uncaring, or unthought out statement or comment; see [munson], or [mudd])....
[/i]

My statement was a total Vesha. Tuff love guys tuff love.

Arcade wrote: the usage of the word 'gay' in this sense has a negative psychological effect on me and many others.

Maybe you should download this app 'Cade...

https://www.settingcaptivesfree.com/setting-captives-free-mobile-app/

Then you'll be "normal" and it won't hurt so much :lol:

:silly: :silly:

Nah seriously though, there's a Scottish (Fife) saying "That's Black as F*ck"... and I see it in the same context... people will say it when somethings really gross... "ewwwwww that's (etc)" I think it HIGHLY offensive and racist.

So I totally feel where you are coming from (no homo) :whistle:

*sorry couldn't resist*



I'd just come out with a sarky comment when people say it and make them feel as awkward as you do to get the point across... like "ohh thats so gay" .... just be "like me then yeah?", it'll put them on the back foot.

*it may not be the jedi way, but if through awkwardness they learn the lesson then surely it counts as "good in the long run"

Jestor wrote: Arcade is FABULOUS

You just had to get one in there Jestor right :whistle:

(lol sorry 'Cade, I couldn't resist buddy but I think you know me enough that you'll take it as humor)

Jestor wrote:

Not only, does those "gay" members need to be less sensitive, but those who are not need to be more sensitive...

I hope my message is clear...

Perfectly ...

... now we'll see who comes around to resist the clarity.

Tao Te Ching 32 :

The Tao can't be perceived.
Smaller than an electron,
it contains uncountable galaxies. If powerful men and women
could remain centred in the Tao,
all things would be in harmony.
The world would become a paradise.
All people would be at peace,
and the law would be written in their hearts. When you have names and forms,
know that they are provisional.
When you have institutions,
know where their functions should end.
Knowing when to stop,
you can avoid any danger. All things end in the Tao
as rivers flow into the sea.

I've said (complained really) recently that even for a crappy as others have treated homosexual in our culture, I feel that the group who have been the nastiest to homosexuals are the homosexuals themselves. And why is that ? Principally, because to make a stand for "gay rights" it had to become a subculture, it had to become a movement, a milieu ... and as such inevitably form in-groups and out-groups. And gays have become, whether by reaction or affirmation, one of the most largely intolerant groups in the whole "sub-culture" universe. Even pointing this out, I've been accused of "latent homophobia", described as that I cannot accept my own homosexuality.

So -- in a way, all of this cataloguing is pretty damned gay !!

I can sort of validate the term ... though it is not that I want to. If, for example, people were using "gay" to mean reactionary, discriminatory, superficial or ostentatious intellectualism, then I might not object to the term.

It is generally wise to not put too much importance on a quality of oneself. For some it is race, for others it is a fashionable disorder, for homosexuals it is sexuality -- and in all these cases, so much of one's self-identity focuses on that one quality to the exclusion of others. And it is only the name of the quality that carries the concept - and hence the sympathy or revolt we feel about it.

I am a man, first and foremost, with all of the strengths and weaknesses of character and body that that condition implies. Then I am a Jedi Knight, an instrument of peace - cultivating mindful attention and compassionate kindness as I may, moment by moment. Then I am a citizen and functionary of the République Française with the obligations, duties and rights which that carries. I happen to be gay as well, but it isn't my species, my religion or my political affiliation. It is happen-stance of my being ... nothing more. I don't feel that it is 'abject', but I don't feel any more inclined to 'pride' about it than I would about being left-handed ...

Likewise, I don't feel any particular offence when one employs this term in a derogatory manner, I don't wish to defend it either. Language is changing very quickly now - a result of the state of the art of communications technology and globalisation - and it follows that values change as quickly with it. If this is really so intolerable, just wait a year or two when some other derogatory remark will replace it.

how about:

Using the word gay to refer to homosexuals is oppressive of heterosexuals because it makes them feel as though they cannot have happy relationships.

ren wrote: how about:

Using the word gay to refer to homosexuals is oppressive of heterosexuals because it makes them feel as though they cannot have happy relationships.

Can anyone have happy relationships ? :huh:

Alexandre Orion wrote:

ren wrote: how about:

Using the word gay to refer to homosexuals is oppressive of heterosexuals because it makes them feel as though they cannot have happy relationships.

Can anyone have happy relationships ? :huh:

That's the point of LBGT rights; so that we can be miserable as the rest of you people

Would most people say 'That's retarded!' in front of a disabled person? Even if they laugh about it, those words are going to penetrate that person's psyche in some way.

It's the same for gay people when someone uses the word 'gay' in a similar manner. No matter how much armor we wear or how capable we are of controlling our feelings and perceptions, a part of us will still wonder if we're broken, defective, or not good enough.

I didn't post the article on behalf of the gay community or because I felt compelled to perpetuate political correctness. I simply felt the article was well written and accessible and expressed reasonable thoughts on something that's been bothering me for many years.

Innocent people have died because idiots have believed gay = bad. That's reason enough to drop that connotation from everyday language.

It's "just a word" only so far as people are enlightened enough to understand that. The people likely to hurt others for their sexual predisposition don't generally operate from an especially advanced level of etymological understanding...

In my previous post, I said that some need to be less sensitive, and others, more sensitive....

Words don't hurt me either....

But, this only shelters me from the, uh, "ignorance"? of others...

Being empathetic toward others, makes me aware that they may be offended from words that I speak, so I do need to be cautious.... (I understand, not anyone (or at least most) here, but, the entire world are not Jedi either... ...)...

So, if I wish to not offend, I need to be aware that regardless if people shouldn't be offended, some still are....

And, as a guardian of peace, acting like I don't have my hand in how others feel, wouldn't be very observant of me, would it?

I really hate when some says I'm not caring, lol... But, the simple fact is sometimes, I am simply ignorant ofvothers discomfort, and when I find out, unless I find pleasure in it, I should endeavor to stop...

@Ren, I don't really understand your comment because "gay" means nothing about having a happy relationship....

If anyone has gay friends, they will know there are many unhappy gay relationships because the person is as screwed up as any straight person... Nothing to do with being gay, lol...

I only became aware of the homosexual meaning of "gay" when I was a teenager. Before that, to me it only meant "happy".

Name anything you do not like. Say, "black hats". Anyone who wears a black hat has, in your opinion, no sense of hat taste. And by extension, language evolution and all that, "black hatted" means someone who has no taste in hats.

Point is, people who don't like black hats and people who like black hats will always disagree on the matter. Doesnt matter what you call it. It doesnt even need to have a name.

Oppression is to force people to like black hats. Or to dislike black hats. Or to like black hatters or to dislike black hatters.

If you're going to say conscience, belief, speech are human rights, they have to be human rights for everyone. Not just when it's convenient. As such it must always go both ways.

Anyway.gays will always see homosexuality as a good thing. and gay haters will always see homosexuality as a bad thing. Want to ban usage of that word to protect sensitivities? All it's going to do is piss people off, and those people who once thought that "this is so gay" are going to start beating people up for being homos.