"Gay" Used to Mean "Stupid" and the Offense Therein

Great Debates
81

Allow me to make my position more clear.

Common swear words are offensive generally. Given a certain group of people they aren’t.

“Faggot,” “Nigger,” and other words are generally considered offensive no matter what the context. They really don’t have accepted uses. I do not use such words except the current case where they are under discussion in the first place.

I also realize that my intent in using the word is largely irrelevant to the topic. As it stands already I reserve my usage of “gay” in the same manner I reserve my usage of “fuck,” and other common swear words.

Should I find that using “gay” in the manner described herein is, in fact, a no-no then I will stop using it regardless of the social context much like other slurs. There are a number of ways to convince me of this. I have offered two such ways.

Otto, you may find your response in the PIT at this thread. I have nothing more to say to you here until you gain some semblence of debate in your comments.

82

Frankly, lamia I could give a shit who uses the term. I am most interested in knowing how and who it offends and the general position of perception. If I am not offended by use of the word, oh, hippie it doesn’t really matter who uses it in what manner.

Ok. So you are suggesting to me that the ignorance of persons who are almost by definition ignorant is actually where the offense comes in. I have a hard time seeing that.

They also like peanut butter and jelly sandwiches more than adults. I don’t care. The source of the offense is always in the perceiver of the offense. this is who I m interested in understanding.

I have made no such claim. I did claim that there are persons who do use it without making or meaning that connection. Because of this, I offered a possbility of how it might be that way. I suppose it is really incidental to the case, however.

No. I also do not think they use the word “school” because they realize that it has roots in old Greek to mean “discussion” or “lecture.” Neither, I bet, do you. A possible source of the meaning of the word which doesn’t have its roots in homophobia is not the main thrust of my argument. Get over it, please.

I mentioned that it is possible to interpret the word in that manner without referencing homosexuality (I also asked if it were possible to source that meaning without referencing homosexuality). That is all I said. I supported that.

83

Otto:

[Moderator Hat ON]

Otto, do NOT call people names in this forum. You do remember the rules here, right?

[Moderator Hat OFF]

84

Fine. I’ll rephrase.

If one uses the word “gay” to mean “stupid” all the while knowing that there are people who find the usage offensive, then in my opinion one is an ill-mannered lout. If one seeks to justify this by demanding studies and surveys of the number of people so offended, in my opinion one is seeking permission to continue acting like an ill-mannered lout. And finally, if one wishes to act like a jackass, one needs no permission from me, with the understanding that if one continues to use offensive speech in full knowledge of its offensiveness, in my opinion one is a tremendous jackass.

No resemblance to any person, living or dead, is intended or to be inferred. Any resemblance is purely coincidental.

Funny how indirectly calling people “stupid” is all right but indirectly calling them “jackass” isn’t.

85

Well, that is certainly one manner of convincing me. There are others, and if you use your imagination I’m sure you’ll come up with some. I noticed, in fact, you did inside the pit thread.

Thank you. I didn’t think I was making an unreasonable demand at all to ask that you support your opinion on the topic without an appeal to emotion. You did that, albeit in the other forum. Good enough for me.

for those of you not interested in reading the pit thread, here is what otto posted.

Not rock solid, but of course I wasn’t asking for that. I was asking for something that would convince me, and layed out an idea or two on the matter.

I will also repost my other questions here, though now they are directed at anyone who would care to respond to them.

86

[Moderator Hat ON]

No.

You WILL NOT call anyone a “jackass” or even a “lout” in this forum, whether you preface it with “in my opinion” or no. You may insult erislover in the thread in the BBQ Pit, if you must.

If you are unclear on the rules of this forum, feel free to email me or start a pit thread. If you continue to attempt to find workaround ways to call your fellow posters names in this forum, you may face more aggressive forms of censure.

[Moderator Hat OFF]

87

You’ve been reading this thread and you still don’t understand who is offended by the use of “gay” as an insult or why it offends them? It offends many gay people, and many straight people who sympathize with gay people, because it takes a word that they feel should be a neutral term to indicate sexual orientation and makes it into something derogatory. Do you also need an explanation for why a girl might be offended by someone using “You throw like a girl” as an insult?

Your claim – which you have made repeatedly – rests on there being a connection between “marked by disregard for strict rules of correctness” and “lame”. There is no such link, so you have no support for your claim.

88

You’ve been reading my comments and you still say such a thing? You can, with the purest of hate, call me a hippie-pinko and if I’m not offended by it then it really doesn’t matter. In fact, if all the hippies who identify themselves as such aren’t offended by it then it doesn’t matter much.

Really, am I speaking fucking Russian here? Would it help if I did?

As far as the claim to lame goes, I’m am so not interested in debating that with you, but I suppose I can explain it again anyway.
Firstly, the word “gay” has as one of its meanings the word “licentious.” If we read the definition of this we find “marked by disregard for strict rules of correctness.”

Merriam-webster’s definition of lame leaves a little bit to be desired, but it still suits things well enough. “not being in the know; square.” Square, of course, as in not being hip. Or being uncool. Or not being characterized by following the rules.

But this still has little bearing on what is going on here. I merely used it to demonstrate that it is entirely possible to understand “gay” in that sense without referencing homosexual. It had no bearing whatsoever on whether or not the word was offensive to any particular person or persons.

In fact, humor me. Can you imagine using the word as such? Or is “gay” so completely locked up in homosexuality for you that it is a total stretch to see that I can’t think of it differently? That others can’t as well? Why have straight people not associated algebraic textbook material with heterosexuality, and why haven’t homosexuals linked “gay” with “happy” in the same sense, and why do I keep asking the same questions over and over with no response? I can ask others, too. How about, “That is so fucking cool” There, “fucking” is used as the adverb “very” without making reference to sex.

It is possible. For further clarification, I will say that I do not know if it is likely, probable, intentional, green, or any other adjective that doesn’t mean possible. OK?

89

So a square dude is one who doesn’t follow the rules. The kid who says “Teacher told you not to make spitballs!” is Mister Cool, while the rebellious James Dean type is “lame”. Are you from the Bizarro planet? The definition of “gay” that you’re using is about as close to an antonymn of the definition of “lame” that you’re using as you can get.

Is such a thing possible? Yes. Is it true? No. “Gay”, as an insult, derives from “gay” as a synonym for homosexual. This usage arose because many heterosexual people find it insulting to be compared to homosexuals. There is not any other reason. “Gay” as an insult is not unrelated to “gay” meaning “homosexual”, it is an insult BECAUSE “gay” means “homosexual”. I do not for one second believe that any modern, American, native speaker of English is genuinely unaware of this. Might someone use “gay” as an insult without thinking about the meaning? Sure. Someone might also say “He really jewed me on the price” or “You’re scared? What are you, a girl?” without thinking about real Jews or girls. But that does not make such usage of those words any less offensive to Jews or girls.

90

lamia, at the risk of pointing out the obvious, the “rules” depend on who is making the judgement.

Wherever a word comes from does not dictate exclusively where it ends up. Yes, I’m sure gay as an insult came from homophobia. That doesn’t mean it has to stay there.

I am done with this particular facet of the debate. It has clearly overshadowed the other questions I have, apart form being misunderstood in the first place.

91

Find A Replacement For “Gay” In The Pejorative Sense" Game

Take a break! Let’s not bicker and argue…

92

God, that’s so str8.

Marc

93

I can totally relate to this post. The full insult in my childhood neighbourhood was “gaylord”, which was usually shortened to “gay”. If someone wanted to be derogatory towards homosexuals they’d say the then-reviled “fag”. Not once did I ever say or mean to gay-bash. (Funny how both MGibson and I have stopped offending gays at the expense of the physically challenged!)

Fifteen years later, I still feel kinda weird saying “gay” as in “homosexual”; I weaned myself off the word by reminding myself that “gay”, “queer” and “fag” were terms offensive to gays. Now I have gay friends that use those terms all the time. Since I can’t keep things “str8” (heh) I communicate using a complex system of clicks and whirrs and hope for the best.

94

… so I’ll share my experience. When I started using the word “gay” as a playground insult, all I knew for sure was that it was an insult. (It was the same thing with “bastard” – it was years before I found out it was a derogatory term for one born out of wedlock. I thought it meant a jerk or someone who didn’t play fair.) If anyone had asked my 9-year-old self what “gay” meant, I would probably have said, “Uh, you know, ‘lame’. ‘Goofy’.” That what the word meant to me and my peers, even as we progressed to junior high and learned more about sexuality. Did we offend homosexuals with the term? No doubt. Did we mean to? No way. Does that make it okay? Of course not.

The important thing in my case was that when I realized my transgressions, I made a point of making sure my language reflected that fact.

95

Example:

There is a touring musical group called Up With People. They are exuberantly happy and positive, gay, if you will. One could use this type of “gay” ironically without any slight to homosexuals who use “gay” to describe themselves.

QED

96

erislover, some comments.

First, I will concede that theoretically it is possible to have a definition for gay that means homosexual, to have a different definition for gay that means lame or pathetic or worthless, and the two not be connected.

Second, I will agree it is possible that some immature children can use the word gay as a term for lame without knowing it as connected to the homosexual definition. This is, though, not due to there not being a connection, but because they are children and not fully informed.

I am reminded of certain things from my own childhood. I can remember back in first grade seeing “fuck” scribbled on the wall at my elementary school. At the time, I did not know what that word meant. I had been told various things by my parents about “where babies come from” and think I was at least vaguely familiar with the word sex (though not what it really entailed - that was a revelation), but didn’t connect “fuck” to “sex”. That hardly means there is no connection.

My father has a particular distaste for the use of the phrase “that sucks” or the word “sucks” to mean “is really a bad thing”, because it is an obvious reference to oral sex, and meant in a derogatory manner. Now I have seen that word used “that sucks rocks” or other euphamisms that imply the word sucks is not a reference to oral sex. Does that make “sucks” okay? Notice in this case that most people do accept sucks into everyday language, and aren’t particularly amazed or offended to hear children say it. This may be an example of the process you mean, the word taking on a new meaning and becoming acceptable.

I remember being in elementary and jr high, and the derogatory de jeur was “fag” and “faggot”. This usage is immortalized in the song “Money For Nothin’” by Dire Straights - That little faggot with the earings and the makeup… Boys that age (around 9 to 12) were quick to throw that label around, and yes, they really did mean to imply homosexuality. Fag jokes were popular, and certain teachers with a soft manner of speaking and a less than masculine way of walking were laughed about behind their backs. And more than one boy my age at the time was rumored about with that label. So to say children that age don’t think that way is extremely naive.

Cato, you mention the word “bastard” and how it used to mean born out of wedlock, but now means a jerk. That is true, there was a linguistic shift. But that is as much due to the loss of the relavance of “legitimacy”. Marital status at the time of conception and birth simply doesn’t have the same relevance. Oh, sure, we scold unwed mothers, and frown on men who don’t “fulfill their obligations”, but we no longer ascribe any pejorative upon the offspring. Similarly, “bitch” was applied to women who were promiscuous because of the semblance to “dogs in heat”. This was then extended to women who were “difficult”, which then by extention became applied to women whining and complaining, and thus “to bitch” is the act of complaining, and can be done by men, too. But in that manner, you again see a loss of relevance of the term to apply in the original manner. There are other words more applicable to the original meaning there - slut comes to mind, with hussy a good followup. This also coincides with women taking a more active role in seeking out sex, and promiscuity becoming more acceptable.

But the situation with “gay” is different. It is still a hot-button topic. The battle is still going on, so to speak, to break attitudes about homosexuality as being “deviant” or “unnatural” or “evil”. Gays are still fighting to achieve equal status - nothing less that the ability to be out and nobody care whether the two people kissing in the park are het or homo. And so it is still a sensitive topic to have any connection between a word being applied to a group of people and a word that means pathetic or stupid.

Bottom line, it is offensive, and even if no connection is meant by some of the users, the phrase itself originates from homophobia, and it is derogatory. So you can insist on your right to be “unintentionally offensive”, or you can be polite and avoid using the phrase.

Side note: back when Jester started this thread, I almost thought it was in reference to this thread.

Check out the start dates: 07-19-2001 08:37 PM vs. 07-18-2001 01:17 PM

I guess this is an example of synchronicity. :wink: Hey, at least one thread is actually debating the topic. Mine sure isn’t.

97

I realize that this certainly does not constitute proof of anything but I thought I would share it anyway. I used to work for an optical company and the (Asian) lab manager was attempting to repair a pair of glasses that someone had performed a previous (bungled) repair job on. His words were “whoever did this must be gay.” My response was “yea- they sure japped it.” Perhaps I was out of line myself, but he was not offended (nor was I actually offended by what he said.) He smiled and saw my point. (In case you haven’t guessed, I identify as gay.) I realize that people often say things that are offensive without meaning to be offensive - I am rarely truly offended by anything not deliberately intended as offensive- but I see the use of the term gay to mean stupid of uncool to be insensitive and potentially harmful.
Most of the gay (and straight for that matter) people that I know agree. (I have not conducted a scientific survey or anything but I have discussed the issue.) One could argue that the term “nigger” originally meant “black” and that the association between black and evil is much older than the use of the term to refer to someone of African descent. This would be true. However, if you then went on to try to justify continued usage of the term as a pejorative and claim that no offense was meant (possibly using dictionary definitions to back this argument) you would be denying the commonly held connotation of the term. When talking about what is offensive the connotations have to be considered as well as the denotations.
I do not automatically assume that anyone using gay as a pejorative is necessarily referring to homosexuality- the same as I know that when my father talks about “jewing someone down” he is not really even thinking about religion/ethnicity. But the subtext is still there, and I know I know that a certain amount of (possibly willful, as in the case of my father) ignorance exists- either that or deliberate callousness.

98

That’s not quite what I said or what I meant, but for the most part I believe we’re on the same page.

99

oops, sorry about the name misspell, Cajo.

100

Interesting story, Beltane. I remember one time I was in drama class, and this girl Ekta was posing some of us for a tableau. She got this one guy in this particular position and said, “Now I realize this probably feels kind of gay…” so I said, “Oh, maybe I should do it then.”

She immediately fell all over herself apologizing, which is sort of the effect I wanted. :slight_smile: