Alphagene Uh, no. I am not championing being Un-PC, afterall if you take it too far to the left you are back on the right, so to speak. What I don’t understand is how people are so empowered by words that, to use another analogy, they can’t see the forest for the trees.
Sticks and stones and all that stuff.
I don’t know about the Christianity thing, but it does bug me when people use the word “gay” to mean “stupid”. It also bugs me when they use the word “retarded” for that as well. No matter who says it, they instantly turn fourteen years old in my eyes.
A friend of mine who teaches math in a university had a student announce during a lecture on finity, “This is so retarded!”
I told him he should have responded with, “Are you sure it’s not just ‘gay’?”
I disagree with this statement. The saying “I jewed his price down” refers specifically to the idea that Jew’s are thrifty/stingy. The statement: “That is so gay (meaning lame)” does not neccasarily imply that homsexuals are lame. It could, depending on the context, but that is not the implication put forth when my friends and I use the word. The word ‘gay’ in this sense does not refer in anyway to anybody’s sexual preference, whereas the jew comment definately references an entire race, and intentionally at that.
There is nothing wrong with using the word “gay” to mean “lame” (meaning “goofy and cheesy”). However, I will probably not be using that phrase around here anymore just to save myself the keystrokes required to explain/defend my position. It’s not becuase I feel I am in the wrong, it just sucks to derail cool threads cause some people don’t understand the principles of context and intent. The usage is proper, commonly accepted (at least among my peers), and implys no malice towards gay people.
That said. Screw it. I’m pretty good at coming up with colorful insults so I’ll just reach deeper in the bag for my forays into the pit.
DaLovin’ Dj
I don’t think it’s that simple at all. One other question would be if you can, while complaining about “some gays”, refer to their being gay, thereby implying that that which you are complaining about has some connection to their being gay? Can you do this while complaining about “some Christians”?
DJ, you’re a complete fucking asshole, and an idiot to boot.
By that I mean you’re a really nice guy and a swell dj.
It’s all a matter of context.
:rolleyes:
Sure, but it depends on how you word your remarks. Say you see two guys kissing at the Metro station. You could respond this way:
“I was at the Metro and these two guys were blocking the turnstile while they kissed. I got no problwm with gay guys showing affection, but come on, there’s a time and a place for everything.” You would be commenting on behavior that directly has to do with their being gay, but does not reflect on all gays.
Or you could post like this:
“I was at the Metro and a couple of fags were swapping spit at the turnstile. It’s bad enough we let these fruitbars walk the streets, but they ought to keep their filthy, unclean acts out of the sight of decent people.”
See the difference?
Uh, pardon me for weighing in to state the obvious but . . .
You ask, in effect, “if being offensive to Christians is okay, why isn’t being offensive to gays?” But being offensive to gays is wrong all by itself, without regard to how Christians are or are not treated.
“Christian-bashing” and “gay-bashing,” perceived or real, are two different things. Even if people around here truly felt that the former was okay (which, you’re right, some do), that would not make the latter okay.
Other people’s unrelated bad behavior under no circumstances excuses our own.
andros, you are the master.
Y’know, I’ve been thinkin’ about this since reading the other pit thread where this was discussed, and I think I stand with gobear in this instance. Here’s my reasoning:
When I was in elementary school, we used the word “gay” to mean “contemptable,” also. However, we used the word “gay” to mean “contemptable like a homosexual.” There was no seperation of meanings here. (I’d like to point out that I’ve grown up in the interim.)
Granted, it appears that the word has undergone a slight change in meaning where “gay” can mean either “homosexual” or “contemptable” but not both. However, I find it hard to believe that the “contemptable” definition, although now divorced from the “homosexual” definition, did not come directly from the earlier usage I observed when I was in third grade.
My grandfather occasionally uses the word “jewed”, often in a context like, “He was asking $50, but I jewed him down to $35.” In this context, the word is hardly derogatory in meaning (why would my grandfather insult himself?), and, I think, has changed from the insulting “stingy” to the slightly different “good bargainer.”
Nevertheless, even in this context, I think using “jewed” is wrong, because its use alludes to the earlier (well, still current, really) use of “jewed” to mean “stingy, like Jews are.”
In the same way, I think using “gay” to mean “lame” is wrong, because its use alludes to the earlier (and probably still current) use of “gay” to mean “contemptable, like homosexuals are.”
As an aside when I read someone saying “that’s so gay!” I automatically interpret it as “that’s nasty, like fags are.” And I automatically assume that person is a bigot. Perhaps incorrectly, but that’s the way I’m hard-wired now. So now you know my knee-jerk reaction in addition to my reasoned one.
Gobear
I was thinking along the lines of a thread full of complaints about obnoxious gay guys, whose only shared characteristic was their being obnoxious and gay (as opposed to treating gay obnoxious people as obnoxious people who happen to be gay). Or throwing in a gratuitous reference to someone’s being gay when discussing some offensive act that they performed. (These as compared to the same with Christians).
Basically my point is that tolerance and offensiveness are not as clear-cut as you would suggest, and it is difficult if not impossible for anyone to definitively and objectively prove that the standards are or are not the same for the different groups. (Though as you may recall ( 
), freedom gave it a pretty good shot).
That is just so last April. The currently accepted term is “Stool-pushing humpfiends.”
zut, I believe your deconstruction of the word “Gay” in this context is excellent. It could not be better stated.
andros:
Well the context of this statement is a SDMB thread concerning use of the word gay. Now let’s talk about intent. You made a statement that by itself (or within the context of this thread) is rude and insulting. Then you clarified your intent, which was to use the words to mean something far from the common usage. Not only is the usage uncommon, it’s unheard of. I have never seen anyone use those words to mean those things. Perhaps you have an example, other than your own words, where those terms are used in that manner.
Now, I will go a step further and read into your true intent (which is different than the one you stated). You are being sarcastic in an attempt to derail my position on this issue. I presume you have a point, but since you chose sarcasm instead of straightforward speech, it is difficult to address. It would seem that your point is something like: “I can just use the word context to change the meaning of any word I want to fit my purposes is what you said DaLovin Dj. And see what happens when you do that?”
So, I’ve used context to determine your true intent. If I am wrong about your intent, feel free to correct me. I reccomend just saying it, instead of being sarcastic about it (like a punk).
To address your point: That is not what I said. The word gay has an accepted meaning that has nothing to do with homosexuals. For an example see “Jay and Bob Strike back” when one girl says it to another in the jewell heist scene. I am not just changing the meanings of words as I see fit. I am using it as is commonly used by a large portion of the people I commonly speak to. And I don’t hang around with biggots.
DaLovin’Dj
I’ve always felt that anyone has a right to be offended by phrases like “that’s so gay” or “indian giver” or “jew the price down”. Anyone also has a right to not give a crap if they’ve offended someone with a phrase like that.
I don’t think that anyone is automatically a homophobe for using the word “gay” in a Jay and Silent Bob sort of way. But I think using a phrase knowing that it offends people you are conversing with shows a lack of respect for that other person. And that lack of respect says more about someone than does the utterance of a word.
Getting back to the OP, if you see any group being unfairly blasted, then step in and defend them when you see it. It has a much more direct effect than starting a Pit thread vaguely indicting the SDMB as a whole.
Everything from the existence of God to the taboo bestiality has been questioned here. There are no universal sacred cows here that I am aware of.
And if a devout Shrisampradayan chooses to be offended by my last sentence, so be it.
gay* adj 1: bright and pleasant; promoting a feeling of cheer; “a cheery hello”; “a gay sunny room”; “a sunny smile” [syn: cheery, sunny] 2: full of or showing high-spirited merriment; “when hearts were young and gay”; “a poet could not but be gay, in such a jocund company”- etc…
Then somewhere along the line, tens if not hundreds of years later, the word was adopted by homosexuals to mean something else. If there is nothing wrong with that, why shouldn’t I be able to adopt the same word to do the same thing, and be held in contempt for doing so?
I am all for equal rights. Key word being equal. If the gay community can hijack a word to fit their needs, and the black community can hijack a word, why shouldn’t I?
They claim they do so to de-power the meaning of said word. Thats why so many of my friends call each other my nigga and that queer. The human condition known as speech is for everybody, not just the select few. Do I have to pay a licensing fee to use these special words? Do I have to be a part of the community to which the words belong?
If the answer is yes, then I am partially guilty. If the answer is no, then you are part of a mob mentality.
*[sub]Did you know that it is also a town in Georgia?
Gay, GA (town, FIPS 32384) Location: 33.09367 N, 84.57400 W Population (1990): 133 (64 housing units) Area: 2.0 sq km (land), 0.0 sq km (water) Gay, MI Zip code(s): 49945 Gay, WV Zip code(s): 25244[/sub]
I’ve heard people say “That is so New York!”
BuddhaDog, you’re being a thick-headed idiot.
We’ve already had this argument. Co-opted words and all that shit. Yes, if two gay people meet in the street and decided to call each other queer, that is fine and dandy. If I want to ride around in my car and yell, “Hey Queer!” out the window, that is not ok.
It is all about context.
And it has been explained to you that the context in which you are using a word is offensive to a great many here, and yet you want to stand behind your bullshit “I’m not PC” argument.
Here is a great example - it was pointed out to me just recently that the word “Batty” is a slang term for anus in Jamaica. And “Batty-Man” is a derogatory term for homosexual. Now that I am armed with that knowledge, I know a few terms to avoid using if I ever find myself in Jamaica.
You’ve been armed with the knowledge that saying, “that is so gay,” is going to offend people, but you still insist on shooting off your mouth. Fine. Be a dick. Just don’t be surprised when you’re called a dick as a result.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by zut *
**
bigot n : a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from his own
So, Zut since you ’ automatically interpret it as "that’s nasty, like fags are.’, it is you who is a bigot, as you are intollerable of other opinions.
Sorry Jack but context does not apply in the realm of the SDMB as we can see here and the subsequent pit thread here.
Sorry.
Hmm the MW online dictionary says:
Main Entry: big·ot
Pronunciation: 'bi-g&t
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle French, hypocrite, bigot
Date: 1661
: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices
while “prejudice” is defined as:
Main Entry: 1prej·u·dice
Pronunciation: 'pre-j&-d&s
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old French, from Latin praejudicium previous judgment, damage, from prae- + judicium judgment – more at JUDICIAL
Date: 13th century
1 : injury or damage resulting from some judgment or action of another in disregard of one’s rights; especially : detriment to one’s legal rights or claims
2 a (1) : preconceived judgment or opinion (2) : an adverse opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge b : an instance of such judgment or opinion c : an irrational attitude of hostility directed against an individual, a group, a race, or their supposed characteristics
So, it seems the definative issue is not that it’s one’s opinion, but that it’s a “preconceived one, specifically advers formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge”.
So, your attempt to paint some one else as being a bigot for not agreeing with your bigotry is, well as unfounded and uninformed as one would expect from a bigot.
And BuddhaDog wins the Green Grocer of the Year Award for the dumbest comparison of apples to oranges.
I’m talking about the context of how a word is used in conversation, you fucking ninny. Of course that matters. That’s pretty much the basis for communication. What the hell does a Russian dictator have to do with the fact that the expression “you’re so gay” is offensive to some?
I don’t care what “context” is being used to justify the Russian Revolution - it has nothing to do with the fact that you’re a doorknob.
This is just my two cents, but:
I’m not easily offended by phrases or words. You want to use the term “gay” to mean stupid around me? Fine. Knock yourself out. However, some people are offended if you use the word, and, if you know someone is going to be offended if you use a word, don’t use the word unless you want to offend that person! It’s not a hard concept, people. Don’t go telling me, “Well, I have the right to use the word” or “He doesn’t have the right to be offended.” or “But other people used the word and it was ok.” Fine, whatever, that’s not relevant. Just don’t use the word if you don’t want to offend whoever finds it offense.
Ok, lets say you make a mistake…you accidently use a word that somebody finds offensive when offending that person wasn’t your intention. You know what you do then? You say “I’m sorry I used word X. I won’t do it again.” This isn’t difficult.