I’m not one to use the word “queer”, or “faggot”. (Though I believe I have read the word “faggot” in old British novels, it’s a slang for cigarettes?) And obviously “queer” has many meanings. As far as what this old guy had in mind when he said it, who knows? I think the object of his comments (Richard) would be the best person to judge, right?
What I’d like to know is, is there some universal bulletin board where the latest “correct” terms can be posted, so we can all keep up with them? Can we get daily updates of the latest “correct” terms? Maybe we should all take seminars, to make sure we are all up to speed with what has been most recently decided is the best term for this or that.
And what if different people from a particular group want to be called different things? For instance, an wheelchair-bound aquaintence of my mom’s insists on being called “Physically Challenged”, yet my sister (with her legal blindness and one leg) wants to be called “Disabled”. So which term is it? If I call the wheelchair-bound aquaintence “Disabled” instead of “Physically Challenged”, am I a bigot? It’s not what she wants to be called.
Sucks to be you. Figure it out as you go along, like everyone else.
Make mistakes, adjust, whatever. Forgive and be forgiven. But life’s lack of clear road signs is not a new thing, and a willingness to treat people–even individuals, struggle as you may to find a generalization that makes your life :rolleyes: easier–a willingness to treat people the way they would like to be treated goes a long way.
There is a difference. This is not Pokemon where I gotta catch em all and I better fall behind. I don’t accept the thought police or their belief that their new provenance is now vocabulary.
Do you hear how ridiculous that sounds. As an Armadillo-trousered skirt-chaser, am I now supposed to sign over the deed to the word “queer” to you as the designated representative of the homosexual community.
No.
You don’t own the word. What if I don’t have the time to subscribe to the PC periodicals and learn the special weekly code phrases? Don’t you see that this kind of bullshit semantics actually detracts from equality? That it gives a false feeling of righteousness. I can stop you and your gay friend from renting an apartment from me because I don’t like your kind, but as long as I don’t call you queer I can console myself with my lack of prejudice.
Bullshit! Bullshit! Bullshit!
Take the case of Rudy. A legitimate war hero. Honest. “An admired friend,” of the Gay Richard. His loyal ally. For chrissake, he even rubbed suntan lotion in the guy’s back!
Because he didn’t keep up with the current PC vocabularly being spouted by people who thinks it means something, he used the word “queer,” which in his context was perfectly correct and polite. Now he’s labelled as a bigot. Is this correct?
In the 50’s there was no such thing as “Gay.” You were queer.
If you don’t like the word that’s your problem, not Rudy’s. He’s proven himself. Likewise I’ve never done anything bad to ANY gay person. I’ll use any damn word I feel like.
Tell me which is the prejudiced phrase:
“Damn, these queerboys sure know how to dress sharp!”
Okay, fine. I’m all in favor. If the word is “gay”, i’ll use it, if the word is “queer”, I’ll use it. If either or both of these are a slur, I’ll use neither. But I don’t see why you can say “My queer friends and I think you are a bigot,” but I can’t say, “But I like you and your queer friends.”
I’ll bring this argument back to the word “nigger”. I know black people have refered to other black people as “niggers”, and they have reserved the right to do so. Personally, I don’t see why they would want to. It seems to be validating the bigots who invented the word in the first place.
I’d also like to say that, Lissener, you seem to be a little quick to label others as bigots. There may be some disagreements, and possibly some misunderstandings in this thread, but from what I’ve read, no one who has responded in this thread is a bigot. Good intentions have to count for something.
What I’m trying to say is that if you expect me to study a rulebook before talking to you so I don’t step on your toes because I’m not gay, then you are proably not worth talking to. You’re the one being prejudiced.
Absolutely, that’s a major point I’m trying to make. If Rudy made the remark out of ignorance, I’m 100% forgiving. If he learns that the people referred that way don’t like to be referred to that way and still insists on using it, I’m not.
As to Scylla’s point, let me make it a little clearer: Any such generalizing labels should be dropped. A word invented to marginalize a group–queer, nigger, whatever–should not be used by someone who’s not trying to marginalize them. That said, I feel it’s a right of the labeled group to reclaim the word from the ashes to use if they want, how they want. But I don’t feel that this confers the same right to those outside the group.
Understand: I’m not in any way suggesting that any of this be legislated or even codified; only that this is how I find myself determining if a person is willing to honor the wishes of the labeled group or not honor them. If not, I don’t have much use for them.
Sam Stone and yosemitebabe raise good points about the word du jour. I remember when it was okay to be “black”. I knew a guy from Colorado that used the word “colored” :eek: (just 5-6 years ago) in reference to black people. I wasn’t offended, because I knew he didn’t mean anything by it. He was a heckuva nice guy, and didn’t strike me as bigoted, but his sheltered upbringing left him ignorant as to what was “acceptable”. “Colored” would elicit gasps now, but “people of color” is alright? Give me a break. The point is, Rudy is 72. “Queer” may not have been derogatory in his mind.
Because of my ignorance of what’s currently PC, I feel pretty safe using the term “gay”. The others have a negative connotation to me, and I would never be presumptuous enough to use them.
After 39 days on an island together, I think Rudy and Richard know each other better than we do.
::I’m almost rid of my surplus of quotation marks.::
You entirely misunderstand me. As I said in my above post, I’m 100% forgiving of an honest mistake. I don’t expect anyone to study a rule book. But if you’re given an indication of a faux pas or something, I’ll personally read a refusal to honor that as an indication that you don’t really care about dealing with people the way they wish to be dealt with.
I’m not saying you can’t, I’m just saying if, for example you worked with me and referred to me as queer, and I indicated that I didn’t appreciate that, for you to insist on using it anyway would probably make me put a little checkmark next to your name on the list I keep for when the revolution comes.
Another example: Anyone else here a Real World junkie? The Mormon girl, I forget her name, used the words “colored” and “queer” about other members of the house, but no one took offense because she was so obviously sheltered and ignorant of the “word du jour.” But as soon as she learned that those words had come to seem offensive, she altered her vocabulary. I loved her for that. If she’d said, “Look that’s how I was raised. I refuse to read a rule book,” don’t you think you’d deal with her differently? Which reaction shows a greater sympathy for others’ feelings? That’s all I’m asking for.
Point taken, but to my knowledge Richard never expressed any problem with the word “queer” when Rudy used it. In spite of being a loyal friend, he’s being crucified in the article cited in the OP on that basis alone.
If I call you a queer with no derogatory intent, it’s not a faux pas. It’s you that has the problem. Just like it wasn’t the Mormon girl’s problem with the word, it was everybody else’s. She changed as a courtesy. She didn’t have to.
I agree that it is polite to do so, and would do the same thing in similar circumstances.
If everybody else still used the word, but I wasn’t allowed to, than I might become pissed and wonder who was being prejudiced.
If you don’t like the word, and don’t want me to use it fine. I’ll think you are silly but will probably go along, just to be nice. I’ll expect you to do the same and not fly a double-standard. Anything less is prejudicial.
I am bothered that speaking the word “queer,” is used as proof of bigotry, when in fact it’s no such thing, i.e. Rudy’s crucifixion in the article.
Two asides:
Sue Did kinda have her hand on Kelly’s thigh in a pretty suggestive manner. Speculations about lesbianism by Rudy may not have been out of line. If you remember after the show, there were hints that Greg and Colleen’s tryst was covering up the REAL romance on the island. Take it a step forward and imagine that Sue and Kelly Were lovers and Sue was jilted and betrayed at the end. That puts Sue’s venomous speech in a different light, doesn’t it?
While Greg was technically correct with Rich in the one episode they had dealings together, he tried to manipulate Rich through his gayness. His actions showed prejudice. Rudy used the wrong words, but his actions showed respect.
Whichever way you put it, if neither Rudy nor I can use the word “queer,” but you can, than I find that demand unreasonable, elitist, and discriminatory, as well as plain pissy.
I for one am uncormfortable with “nigger.” I didn’t like it when my granfather used it. I felt uncormfortable with it in Huck Finn, and I was embarassed when my friend used it (though he was black,) when we played golf.
When we were playing golf, I didn’t think of him as a black guy that I had to be careful not to offend because of 200 years of racial history. He was just my friend.
When he missed the putt and used the word it made me uncormfortable, and when I thought about using it again in jest when he shanked one, but decided I better not, all of a sudden he was this black guy, and I had better be careful of what I say. That was his fault.
I’ve been told that I’m pretty good at basketball for a white guy, and felt similarly. I can’t state the corollary, because that would be a racial slur, and the fact that I can’t,brings up all that history between the races, spoiling the game. It’s also bad taste, and shows a lack of consideration.
You simply cannot advocate a double-standard without being guilty of the kind of prejudicial meanness you’re seeking to dispel.
Bigoted is bigoted. It doesn’t matter if the group is refered to may be offended or not. If an old man refers to black people as negroes, becuase he thinks it is the proper term, then it is not bigotry. It may still be very offensive, but not bigotry. I have met many black people who want to be called African-American, or whatever. But I don’t care what you want to be called, I refuse to use the term African-American(or hyphen American) because I find them very bigoted, and innacurate(Just to clear up any confusion I should point out that I am white). Race is just a matter of genetics it has nothing to do with political standing. The hyphen construction is often used in our language to denote a qualified position, meaning not quite the true thing. African American seems to me to be saying oh “Their not normal Americans, the’re African Americans” Plus the fact I am usually talking about people with dark skin in general, which is where the innacuracy comes in. Saying something like “Cabbies in New York are less likely to stop for an African-American” But they will stop for an African-Brit or a Nigerian on vacation I guess?? The whole point of the statement is that the color of the skin is a factor in the decision of cabbies to stop, and the term black references that most effectively.
Sorry got off on a bit of a rant their that wasn’t my point. My point is that I will continue to use the word black rather than African-American no matter what a majority says because A-A just seems very Racist. This doesn’t make me a bigot, just someone with a different view on the most egalitarian words.
Some people are still missing the point. Queer can be offensive. Faggot can be offensive. Nigger can be offensive. Jew can be offensive.
A local paper had an issue “City of Queers”. They would never have one called “City of Niggers” or “City of Faggots”. The simpsons had an episode where they chanted “We’re here. We’re queer. We don’t want any more bears.” They would never have an episode with either of the other two terms. Queer, while it can still be used in a hatefull manner, is NOT a hateful term.
The fact that it was used in a paper and on a national televsion show is proof of that.
Many people use it to refer to the LGBT community, as it is a lot easier to pronounce. Plus it’s a good descriptive term when you don’t fit easily into a LGBT catagory.
Please comment on anything you disagree with in this post.
I don’t care what you call yourself. But if you don’t want me to use the word, than you shouldn’t either.
Being gay doesn’t confer on you any special rights or privileges not enjoyed by others.
If “queer” is your own word for solidarity against the bigot, and I as a non-gay can’t use the word, that implies I’m the bigot simply because I’m not gay.
That’s prejudice.
Your position is indefensible. Roll your eyes all you want and call me intolerant. It doesn’t change that fact.
good point, well articulated and darn convincing. .
And those outside the group can think that teh members silly and belligerent. Personally, I don’t think that being easily offended is a trait to nurture.
Often a group without power will try to gain some back through intolerance to what it is called. Comments or tags that they know are not malicious can be used to brow beat others. People will always use what they can to balance things out.
Personally, I will call people what they want, when it is within reason and when there is a consensus within their group. But there rarely is. Chicano, hispanic, spanish american, latino, mestizo…I give up.
I seem to recall a group called the Queer Nation. Are they still around?
I would like to be referred to as “Master of the Universe,” as a symbol of my solidarity against bigots who get to use the word “queer,” but won’t let me because I’m not gay.
They should me refer to me in that fashion. Everybody else can just call me Scylla.
In all seriousness, if I knew you personally and you seriously asked me to address you as Master of the Universe, I would do so.
If you’re not serious, and you’re drawing a parallel between your arbitrary and flippant example and desire of a politically oppressed group to name itself, then of course I’m glad I don’t know you personally.
The more it sits with me, the more horrified and insulted I am that you would compare my desire as a member of a widely hated and name-called group to insist not to be called names, and your childish example.
If you really see a parallel between the two, then of course you’re blind to the whole substance of this discussion.
