It’s not that uncommon a restriction to use similar words as adjectives, not nouns. You don’t say “gays” or “blacks” or “autistics”. And many say you shouldn’t say “Jews” or should only use it in certain contexts.
If I don’t know, I default to sticking with the adjective form.
Is the usage you’ve encountered symmetrical, i.e. there’s no sensitivity about a non-queer person using it? It seems like it’s fundamentally better to have an actual word encompassing not-straight-binary. LGBT[QIA+…] has the obvious intrinsic problem that you have to figure out how many letters to write out be inclusive; and it’s convoluted to pronounce.
Aside from any historical aspect, this is also grammatically consistent with queer being used as a synonym for LGBT, which cannot be a noun, only an adjective.
It’s like the opposite of “Jew”.
Are we really not allowed to use our words within a rational discussion of language use?
Are there those who would seriously take offense, even in this context?
Exactly what I was going to say. There are contexts where it would be fine to call me a female Jew, but I can’t imagine anyone calling me a Jew lady without meaning it as an insult.
I didn’t put the words this way to avoid offending someone on the board. Are we “allowed” to use demeaning terms within the context of a rational discussion? That didn’t cross my mind. Writing these terms in this way was an attempt to highlight the subject of the thread, namely, that some words that describe some groups are hot-buttons.
If anything I feel squeamish about writing out some of the terms-- like the way I order the “w-word” salad at the Italian restaurant by pointing to the menu, because I cannot bring myself to say that word out loud.
To quote Strother Martin, “What we’ve got here is a failure to communicate.”
I didn’t mean to call you out, Thelma. Nothing personal.
But when someone writes “the Q word”, every one of us thinks, “he means ‘queer’”. So, by writing “the Q word”, you are forcing me to say “queer” in my mind, thus giving yourself an out. You are giving me that burden to carry.
Anyway, this is starting to feel like a hijack on my part, so I’ll stop.
Happy holidays!
mmm
In general, there are lots of words that can be used in a OK way and also in a way that shows disdain. It all depends on the baggage behind it. Even though “queer” has become mostly normalized, hearing a skinhead use it as a pejorative would still be unacceptable. The word “Jew” is still used both ways. I can well imagine negative usage of Black in some contexts.
Kind of how George Carlin put it. “Bad words? No bad words. Bad thoughts.”
I remember when Howard Cosell, sports commentator, was calling a boxing match back in the 60s or 70s. One of the boxers was from Poland. He continually referred to him as “the Polak”. At one point, he said, “And I do not mean that in the derogatory sense.” I think he really thought Polak was the correct thing to call a person from Poland. It still was sort of sensational because the only way that word was ever used was negatively, particularly in a whole genre of jokes. He got a lot of criticism for that.
Speaking as someone who identifies as queer, I absolutely use it as a synonym for LGBT. What meaning do you assign it that’s more specific than that? When I say I’m queer, what do you think I’m saying about myself?
I’d take it to mean you identify with a certain subculture, rather than strictly an indication of who you might be dating.
Huh, i have a lot of queer friends, by which i mean friends who self-identify as queer. And other than all being under 60, and all being members of some sexual minority, they don’t have much in common.
I’ve always assumed that’s because there is an actual adjective that should be used instead: “Jewish.” Since “Jew” has a history of being used as a snarl word, using it instead of the correct word has negative connotations.
And that is the same reason why using “queer” as a noun sounds bad. That word has a history of use as a snarl word, so using it where one should say “queer folk” or similar carries the old negative connotations.
Heck, it explains why “Democrat party” irritates so many people. And why I and many people I know have a bad reaction to “woman doctor,” even though some insist this is correct.
That you are someone who has reclaimed the word and are okay with it being used about you.
LGBT I will use for anyone who identifies as lesbian, gay, bi, trans, and possibly even a few other labels like ace, nonbinary, and so on. Y’all created the word, so I assume you are okay with it. But, since “queer” was originally an insult, I will only ever use it for those who self-identify as queer.
“Woman doctor”, or more commonly, “lady doctor” is okay if you are talking about a gynecologist (of any gender) but is not okay if you are talking about a woman who happens to be a physician. She’s a female doctor, or just a doctor, unless for some reason it’s important to know she’s female. (I wanted a female obstetrician, because I wanted my doctor to think of me as her patient, and not just the baby. And I thought a woman who had had kids would more naturally identify with her pregnant patients than a man would. )
I’m not what would be described as “queer” in any sense, but my understanding is that it’s a catch-all term for all minority forms of sexuality. Some of the more common (or less uncommon) minority forms of sexuality include homosexuality, bisexuality, and transgenderism, and so those get their own letters in the acronym, but there’s no way to include enough letters to include everybody, so you add Q for “queer” as a sort of catch-all. It’s sort of like how, when Catholics recite the Litany of the Saints, in addition to “Virgin Mary, Pray For Us” and “Francis of Assisi, Pray For Us”, and so on, we add at the end “All You Holy Saints of God, Pray For Us”: Mary and Francis are, of course, included in that last category, but we know we missed some names, and so all those folks we would have missed are also in the last category.
Note, incidentally, that in addition to “queer”, there’s also another separate term that’s more specific, “genderqueer”. This still encompasses a lot of possibilities, but it’s narrower than “queer”, because it refers to someone that’s specifically queer in some way regarding their gender. But one can be queer without being specifically genderqueer.
Love this analogy!
[aside] I have a recording of monks chanting the old-timey Litany of the Saints (in Latin, of course-- used to sing it on Good Friday), and I put it on repeat and play on my Echo when I wake up in the night and can’t go back to sleep. Hypnotic.[/aside]
What would be an example of this?
My youngest (21, non-binary, ACE, ARO, Junior at a SPLAC) uses it to describe themselves and their friends - who are various forms of GLBT+ - and uses it synonymously with GLBT+ - and yes, uses it to describe her friends who are CIS lesbians. (i.e. not genderqueer).
(But I would avoid using it around someone who is older than I am who has more experience with it as a slur - and of course, would never use it as a slur).
Um… could you spell those out, please?
ACE - Asexual - not interested in sex
ARO - Aromantic - also not interested in a romantic relationship (with or without sex)
SPLAC - Small Private Liberal Arts College - i.e. the type of place where Queer Theory is taught as a class in the Gender Studies department.
and for good measure
Non-Binary - does not feel that binary gender roles and descriptions fit. Does not see themselves as either a man or a woman (born female, presents female/androgynous). “Gender is a social construct that I reject.”
They are in a long term committed relationship with two people who are sexual and romantic partners - they just aren’t interested in the sex or the romance.
A cis homosexual is not genderqueer. And I think “genderqueer” has not caught on as a catch all category for anyone who is not cis. I think it has a more specific meaning. I have a lot of friends who consider themselves queer due to their gender, but only one has ever describes herself as genderqueer to me.