One right-wing news aggregate site had a pretty hilarious blunder with their find-and-replace policy, turning sprinter Tyson Gay into Tyson Homosexual.
In other words, “unnecessary”?
It can certainly sound offensive coming from the mouth of someone like the late, not-at-all-missed Jesse Helms, who could snarl humma-SECK-shule and make it sound like the foulest, most obscene slur ever uttered. But it’s not an inherent property of the word, it’s just shit frosting being smeared on by a malicious chef.
Recently Hemant Mehta commentedon on the Illinois Family Institute’s awkward reluctance to use the word “gay,” rather than “homosexual.”
It seems to me like using the term “homosexual” isn’t necessarily bigoted, but bigots are known for their total avoidance of any other (more positive) term, so it may be picking up the connotation.
+1. Most people - or so I thought - used the term “gay” because it’s one syllable.
Any bigots use the same word(s) it’s just how they say them.
ETA:
This annoys me because it then these groups are shunted into categories as “different” and “needy” when what truly separates America is class and income, not race.
I wonder how long this is going to last. Using male second-person pronouns as umbrella terms for both genders has been quite out of fashion for decades now, going by what I see.
Hah. do you know what I take offense to? The idea that because someone is gay they need to support transgendered (one hot mess of a tranny!) or that because someone is Latino they should be understanding of blacks and such compartmentalization.
“Homosexual” is perfectly appropriate in a medical or academic context, and I don’t think many people would consider it truly derogatory even in a casual context. However, it can seem awkward and in some situations may indicate that the speaker has problems with homosexuality.
To grab an example from Google Scholar, there’s nothing weird about a scholarly article saying “A total of 375 homosexual males were studied to assess the dental findings, life-style, and risk factors during a 4-year period.” In this context it’s a correct, neutral technical term. But in a conversational remark like “My next-door neighbor is [a] homosexual” the term doesn’t seem so neutral. Again, I wouldn’t say it’s derogatory, but it seems to suggest at least slight discomfort with the neighbor’s sexual orientation.
“Lez” is most definitely not preferred. It can in some cases be used humorously without causing offense, but it’s generally regarded as both juvenile and insulting.
What about the term sodomy/sodomite?
Wow, I would have never guessed that homosexual could be derogatory. Didn’t even realize it was becoming so.
I have difficulty believing that even someone of your age can be so naive, Qin. The terms you mention stem from a story of mass murder by God, a story used as a justification for homophobia. Sodomite is only more elegant a term than faggot; it is no less hateful.
“Sodomite” has the advantage of sounding so archaic it usually inspires laughter.
Sodomite implies that being gay, or at least engaging in homosexual relations, should be a crime and is as perverted as having sex with an animal. Doesn’t seem very risible to me, but perhaps I left my sense of humor in the lair.
Great if you’re going to a Bible Reading party with Carrie White’s ma.
It sounds Aussie to me.
“We’re happy little sodomites, as bright as bright can be…”
I was being quasi-sarcastic.
I remember back when “gay” started to become more widespread, the 70’s I think it was, and there were radical queers who said that the word “homosexual” was at best incomplete, in that it defined a whole group of people strictly by a sex act, and that gay/queer people were so much more than that (or something like that, I’m sure I don’t have that quite right. Any radical queers on the board, please step in and correct me.)
The other piece for me is that it implies (in my opinion, that is the forum we’re in, right?) a strict division between homo- and heterosexual. “Gay”, being a kind of umbrella term even if its coverage isn’t always welcomed by lesbians, tends to be broader than just “homosexual”. At least it seems to include a somewhat larger range on the scale towards bisexuality.
Finally, I have to agree with those who say that, now, if someone uses the word “homosexual” in a non-clinical context, they are probably uncomfortable with the concept and also uncomfortable with using words like “gay”. After all, when I was growing up, only the word “homosexual” was used, and it was always used pejoratively (see the movie “The Detective” as a late example).
Personally, I’m not offended, just cautious.
Roddy
That’s kind of how I feel about gay versus homosexual. I identify as gay, because I’m sexually attracted to other men. I don’t identify as homosexual, because I’m also sexually attracted to women.
Not as much laughter as “Gomorrahite.”
I’m not at all attracted to women, but I still consider “homosexual” to be an adjective, describing the fact that I’m attracted to other men. But “gay” (noun or adjective) describes broader aspects of my sexuality . . . political, cultural, etc.
How old is he?
Qin, how old are you?