I’ll bet there were elders that were unhappy when the word came in general use to mean “homosexual” too. I wonder if any of them sat their kids down and gave that lecture.
What it seems is that the word is still evolving. In the past it had a double meaning: happy, and licentious. Now it has a single meaning: homosexual (if you use it to mean “happy” you sound absurdly archaic). In the future it may have a double meaning again: homosexual, and “lame”.
The offensiveness of course comes from the association of the two meanings - that “homosexual = lame”. But that does not necessarily follow. Lots of words have a double meaning which is not associated, or at least not directly. For example, think of the former meaning of “gay”: most people using it when it had two meanings were not attempting to convey the notion that being homosexual made you happy, right?
The proof will be in the usage. Oddly, “gay = lame” is catching on with kids for whom, in some cases, anti-gay feelings are far more alien than they were to my generation. When I was growing up, the cops in our city beat up gays and many thought that was a good idea. Now, cops in our city march in the annual Gay parade.
Thing is, would you make the same defence if the phrase were ‘that’s so Irish’ or ‘that’s so African’ or even ‘that’s so Malthus’ to mean pathetically bad?
When words have more than one meaning, and one is a commonly-used pejorative, the non-pejorative meaning tends to fall out of use. Cf. sinister, bastard, bitch (people these days often say female dog instead), queer, faggot, awful.
All of those words started life as names, not euphemisms. That’s a difference.
Certainly I can well understand why people would be unhappy to see the word gay used to mean lame. I’m saying it may end up a generational thing, with the kids not considering or caring that homophobia is the source.
Certainly. What may be happening here is that “gay”, in a world where anti-homosexual prejudice was simply assumed as the norm, used to be a perjorative. While that may still be true in some places, quite obviously (and thankfully) the trend is the other way - to viewing homosexuality as perfectly normal and acceptable. To many kids I know, it simply never crosses their minds that gay is somehow wrong, because that isn’t the world they grew up in.
So the meaning of "gay’ as “lame” may well crowd out the meaning of “gay” as “homosexual”, simply because the latter has lost any perjorative meaning.
What I’m saying is that protesting a change in the meaning of a word can be like Canute attempting to hold back the waves; doubly so it the targets of the lectures know they do not mean by it what you fear. We grew up in a world where it took a concious effort not to spout homophobic prejudice. Our kids, hopefully, will not require that.
I’ll go for the presumably unpopular 3rd option. Don’t teach Christmas (religious) music in schools. Besides, sitting through those concerts really sucks ass.
Yup, exactly - gay (the sexuality) used to be used as a pejorative, which is why gay meaning bright and cheerful died out.
Using gay to mean lame is not only caused by homophobia, it causes homophobia. If you ear every day that a sexuality is lame, it can’t help but affect your perception of that sexuality. It would be completely impossible.
African (etc) being proper nouns doesn’t make any difference to the way being African were perceived if that word were frequently used to mean lame. If people used the word Malthus to mean lame then people who don’t know you would have to assume you’re lame, even though you’re not.
The targets of my lectures probably don’t actually know all this. Though they’re not lectures - just saying that I don’t want to hear the word used in front of me that way again and explaining why if asked.
Of course, except when I’m teaching and probably at work, people are free to continue using the word that way if they want to - and I’m free to think they’re a homophobic arsehole and avoid all contact with them.
Slang words do go in and out of popularity - there is absolutely nothing inevitable about the word gay inevitably meaning lame in the future.
“Deck the Halls” doesn’t mention Christmas though, it’s really a Yule song. The only one I can think of as a matter of fact. It’s about as Christmas-y as “Jingle Bells” or “Winter Wonderland.”
I’m not so certain the latter is true. People are capable of using words to mean two different things, and not of necessity bleeding them together.
An example: allegedly, some people have taken up the habit of calling Black people “Canadians” as a racist euphemism:
It does not necessarily follow, if this usage became general, that those people will start to actually dislike Canadians from Canada. When they call Black people “Canadians” it is presumably to disguise the fact (thinly) that they are hating on Black people - they know damn well they are not actually hating on people who are Canadian citizens.
Also - if the theory that a perjorative meaning drives out a non-perjorative meaning is true, as I think it is in part - at some point in the future, assuming the “gay = lame” usage catches on, people will simply stop referring to homosexuals as “gay”. Already, the term “queer” seems to be losing is perjorative taint and comming into more general use - as in “the queer culture festival”. Thirty years ago, you’d never have seen something like that. What you may get is “queer” meaning (neutral, non-perjorative) “homosexual” and “gay” meaning “lame”.
Certainly. But what if you find that the younger generation starts to use the term in this manner as a group, and in fact are not homophobes? It will label you as somewhat curmudgeonly. Not that there is anything wrong with that.
Not inevitable, but I think damn hard to deliberately prevent if it is happening. When has earnest moral lecturing by elders ever actually prevented the adoption of slang terminology by kids? Usually has somewhat the opposite effect.
I suspect that people who are as racist as that are probably xenophobes too.
If you really didn’t think the meanings bleed into each other, then you would be quite happy for everyone to use your name to mean lame.
Yes… The meaning as homosexual might get driven out, absolutely. I don’t see this as a good thing.
Nah. If I explain my reasoning and say it in a polite and friendly way, it doesn’t come across as curmudegonly at all. I’m not accusing them of being homophobes - no need to argue that point with me; I never made it.
It’s not earnest lecturing. And, also, it’s not just kids. I’ve heard it used more by adults than by kids (and I’m an occasional secondary school teacher with a teenage daughter). However, I’ve heard it far less in the last couple of years - I think it actually is dropping out of popularity. And active attempts to discourage people from using a word do sometimes work - look how popular the word ‘nigger’ used to be.
What difference does it make if one word drops out of use and another is adopted?
My mistake. I must have misunderstood this:
[Emphasis added]
I’ve never heard anyone of my generation using the term. It may very well be dropping out of popularity - if it does, I would not mourn; just as if it gained, I would not be fussed.
The term “nigger” is unpopular because the express racism it represents is unpopular. It is unpopular for the exact opposite reason: it has become more charged with racial animosity (unless used by people of Black ethnicity themselves).
“In the future…”, “catching on” may not be the right words. Back when I was in high school in the early 90’s in southern California we used gay to mean lame. Maybe we were ahead of our time or from the future but the usage of gay to mean lame has been around a while.
Yule or Yuletide (“Yule-time”) is a winter festival that was initially celebrated by the historical Germanic people as a pagan religious festival, though it was later absorbed into, and equated with, the Christian festival of Christmas. (SOURCE)
OR:
Definition of YULE
: the feast of the nativity of Jesus Christ : christmas (SOURCE)
And:
During the Victorian re-invention of Christmas it was turned into a traditional English Christmas song. The first English language version appeared in The Franklin Square Song Collection, edited by J.P.McCaskey in 1881 and published by Harper & Brothers in New York City. (SOURCE)
The difference is between a use that exists, but is confined to a particular group and is otherwise disputed, and one that is generally and universally accepted (like it or not).
"Gay’ itself is an example of this. In the 50s, some people used “gay” to mean “homosexual”, but the majority knew it as meaning “happy” - hence its use in ads and the like. By the 70s and 80s, nobody would say with a straight face in an ad for a product “getting this product makes me feel really gay!”. It would be laughable, because, like it or lump it, by the 70s and 80s “gay” meant “homosexual” and not “happy”.
The meaning of “gay” as “lame” simply has not reached this level (and may never). Though it may in the future.
This is an old issue here in KY, where the original lyrics to our official state song go “The sun shines bright on my old Kentucky home/'tis summer, the darkies are gay”. People were substituting in “children” or “old folks” for “darkies” until the legislature finally changed the official version to “the people are gay” in 1986. My chorus director changed it to “the children will play” when we did it in middle and high school. We, in turn, preferred “'tis summer, the African-Americans have a happy disposition”.
