Can we please get past this "-gate" convention every time some scandal occurs?

Case in point: Nipplegate- what is the fallout 2 years later ?

Plamegate, Nipplegate, Whitewatergate, Lewinskygate, Whatevergate… it’s just stupid. It’s so prevalent that I half expect the historians to start referring to older scandals in this fashion. How about Teapotdomegate? Or maybe foreign scandals, like Profumogate? UN scandals? How about Oilforfoodgate? Maybe Kofiannangate? No.

How about we congratulate ourselves for our years of cleverness in referring to everything through the historical lens of Watergate and then just stop doing it? It’s trite, tired, and just plain nonsensical.

Yeah, but it’s fun.

A solid pitting. This drives me up the wall too, and it’s so trivial that it just makes it worse, because I feel silly getting all bent out of shape over it. 8 out of 10; well formed but could be longer.

Sorry guys, it’s part of the language now. You might as well pit the tides for all the good it’ll do.

Ahhhh! It’s Gate-gate! Doors has doomed us all! :smiley:

Incidentally, the person who popularized this was William Safire. His reputation had been damaged by his work for the Nixon Administration. Many of his critics said that he did this to minimize the seriousness of Watergate.

Hear, hear! Harrrumph! Amen!

I’d just like to point out these sequential thread titles:

I am not a crook!
Can we please get past this “-gate” convention every time some scandal occurs?

Well, you make a good point- the “gate” thing has gott hwaaaay over used and is now trite. However, IMHO it can still be used for Washinton political scandals.

I can see anti-gategate is getting pretty heated…

I’m past Watergate.

No, really…we passed it on the way to the Kennedy Center last weekend…

(That is one BIG hotel!)

Oh fine, you try coming up with a better scandal name than “Nipplegate.”

How about “Operation Mammary Freedom?”

“Shock and Areola?”

–and I believe it was actually “Monicagate.” “Lewinskygate” just sounds goofy.

How about we call it what it was: The Super Bowl Halftime scandal.

No, you don’t understand. ANYTHING-gate sounds stupid.

I heard “Fornigate” early on, but it wasn’t picked up by the prudish electronic media and vanished.

I remember hearing it used by the Japanese press very early on.

I have no problem with this suffix at all. It’s useful, it’s concise, and it’s filled a gap in the language.

This one will be around for a long, long time.

Well, but that could refer to any * scandal involving the Halftime show, such as the Rolling Stones’ performance during the last Super Bowl. Your version totally ignores the most significant and defining element of the scandal: the nipple*. On the other hand, allude to a nipple-related scandal of recent memory, and chances are that people will know exactly which scandal you are talking about.

As far as the “-gate” suffix goes, well… I wouldn’t be totally surprised if there were ancient Greeks who found the neologism “scandal” to be out-of-place and stupid-sounding. "Can we please stop using the word for a hunter’s snare to describe a public revelation resulting in shame and disgrace? Yes, we get it; they’re snared by their own actions, therefore it is a “scandal.” It was witty the first hundred times, but can we please go back to (whatever the word was that they used before “scandal”)?

I wasn’t arguing the point there, just noting that the Monica Lewinsky scandal was better known by another “-gate” name. How can you properly berate “–gate” if you can’t keep your “-gates” straight?

Argh! It’s Pit-gate.

It’s even big over here. A guy got shot in a terror raid in Forest Gate, London, and the press were calling it Forest Gate-gate. Dudes, you already got one gate - don’t be greedy!

Would you believe that Canadian journalists often use the -gate suffix? Boggles the mind.

Thank you Doors, I’ve come close to making this rant myself several times. Damnit, Watergate was not a scandal involving water. And although ‘gate’ has entered the language as a valid suffix, I do wish it’d go and die.