Prompted by some comments by Hostile Dialect in this thread regarding the use of the word “gay” as being inappropriate in phrases such as gay marriage (same sex marriage is preferred) and gay rights (LBGT rights is preferred).
I apparently used same sex marriage correctly in one of my comments, but I got the buzzer rung on me for my use of gay rights.
As a gay/lesbian/queer woman, I intimately and deeply appreciate the desire for people not to generalize when deeper understanding is needed.
But “gay” jumped the shark as referring only to 100% homosexual men long ago.
It is a general usage term now. Obama was not consciously excluding lesbians, bisexuals, and transgendered people in his speech last night. The countless news articles around the country are not excluding any of us either, when they refer to Prop 8 as a ban on gay marriage.
I’m not trying to pit Hostile Dialect here or anything. I think there remains a debate here and would like to discuss it.
I’m a bisexual, which I consider to be a subset of “gay.” I tend to refer to myself as gay because I don’t really like the word “bisexual” for purely aesthetic reasons. While I’m certainly sensitive to Hostile Dialect’s experiences of oppression from straight society and simultaneous rejection from gay society, I don’t think his objections to the term “gay marriage” or “gay rights” as an expression of that oppression/rejection holds water.
I like the term “queer” the most as a general descriptor including all BTLGetc. It seemed like it was the most used term when I was in college.
And as for “gay marriage” vs. “same-sex marriage.” I like same-sex marriage because it is just more accurate. (I won’t go as far as “marriage for same-sex couples” which is what I had to say when I was phonebanking.) If “gay” means just men, then “gay marriage” is underinclusive. If “gay” means LBGTetc., then “gay marriage” is way overinclusive. “Same-sex marriage” is exactly what it says.
My gay friends have bigger issues to worry about than whether the term covers enough people. I think for a gay person to pick on minor issues like this is hurting his/her cause. Especially when the people using the term are on the same side. When discussing the election I told people I could never vote for someone who doesn’t support gay rights, is anyone really suggesting that is an inappropriate thing to say?
Personally, I’ve never liked the term. It’s always seemed like the term the homophobes too polite to say “fag” say, and it always takes me aback when I hear gay people use it.
“Gay” has long been an “umbrella” term, meaning homosexual men and women . . . and usually including bisexuals; and to a lesser extent, transgendered people. There was a time when a significant number of lesbians rejected the label, but that number seems to have decreased.
I have no trouble with the term “gay marriage,” though of course it’s not as accurate as “same-sex marriage” . . . which in turn is not as accurate as “marriage between same-gendered individuals.”
Yeah, we’ve got more important things to worry about.
Can I just say, as a staight, white, male, with full use of all my limbs and faculties that I’ll be happy to refer to all the people of color, size, alternative sexuality, different ableness, women, minority religious and political affiliations, and that work in the carnival*, by whatever name you’d like so long as you can come up with a concensus and stick with it. I refuse to feel bad it changes every 6 months to a year, or depending on which bar I’m in. Thankyou, carry on.
While I agree that too much bickering probably isn’t productive, I’m a bit tired of people deciding what is and isn’t worth fighting over (this gets trotted out a lot when feminists dare to complain about negative portrayals in the media or the politics of fashion rather than violent rape or female genital mutilation). There’ll always be something more and less important than the topic being discussed, and someone who’s better and worse off. Language shapes our world– certainly it deserves to be examined.
That being said, I find it odd when entire discussions are had about ‘gay people’ and homosexuality that obviously exclude lesbians. I read an entire editorial a while back about the dangers that come with the ‘gay lifestyle,’ especially anal sex. Not once, not even in an aside, did the author point out that lesbians are probably enjoying a safer lifestyle than sexually active heterosexuals.
Yes, language is important, and “common usage” is a very subjective thing. Even specific usage within specific populations is debatable.
It is ironic, I think, that I’m posting in one thread about desiring a more expansive legal/social/moral interpretation of the word “marriage”, sharing the views of ragerdude above, and a few minutes later defending my use of a generalized word from a fellow LGBT as not being discriminatory in how I use it. And earlier today, I was discussing my frustrations at the resistance from other minorities to extend the perception of the phrase ‘civil rights issue’ to the SSM movement. No, it is not an apples to apples comparison, but it isn’t an apples to oranges comparison either. It is a Macintosh to Granny Smith comparison, perhaps.
All swirling around language and what the popular/common interpretations are, and the understanding that comes from their effective and accurate use in communication.
…And earlier today, I was discussing my frustrations at the resistance from other minorities to extend the perception of the phrase ‘civil rights issue’ to the SSM movement. No, it [the comparison of what has historically been referred to as the Civil Rights Movement and the SSM/LGBT Rights Movement] is not an apples to apples comparison, but it isn’t an apples to oranges comparison either. It is a Macintosh to Granny Smith comparison, perhaps.
I’m always amazed at the lengths that “the community” will go to make sure they include EVERYONE… and boy do I mean EVERYONE… Toronto organizations talk about providing services to the “LGBTT2IQQ Community”*…
I think it’s very nice that they’re making sure no-one gets forgotten, but there comes a point where an umbrella term fits nicely…
And I have to agree that I have a marriage - not a Same Sex Marriage… not a Gay Marriage… just a plain old marriage - that’s been maybe canceled by a bunch of bigots in California, but still… just a plain old marriage…
*Gay, Bisexual, Transgendered, Transexual, Two-Spirited, Intersexed, Queer and Questioning Community…
Just out of curiosity, can you explain how queer differs from gay, and what 2 spirited means?
and Cookies, to me, as a straight guy, it IS an apples to apples civil rights issue. Ok, I have friends in the community, and I’m convinced it’s not a lifestyle choice, but that’s hardly the point. A more just social order is better for everyone, it’s better for me. If a church from out of state can come in and campaign to take away civil rights that the California supreme court has granted than my civil liberties are threatened. I mean what’s next? where will they stop? It doesn’t have to affect me directly to affect me.
Bisexual reporting; I actually am somewhat displeased at bisexual being a subset of gay. I’m as much one as I am the other.
OTOH, i’ve no problem with “gay marriage”. It pretty much does just cover the same ground that “same-sex marriage” does. But then i’ve never really heard any passionate claims to the otherwise.
Some who are not willing to consider this a civil rights issue point out the differences in the manifestations of the discrimination that have experienced and set the movement(s) in motion. There are indeed differences, but that doesn’t change the fact that this is a civil rights issue.
I guess since the arguments against SSM seem as invalid to me as the arguments against interacial marriage, and seeing as I’ve dated interacially in the past, I just see it all as the same issue.
My understanding of the evolution of the term is that it was simply a euphemism for homosexual, no gender implied. In the sixties and seventies, when women were struggling with their own civil rights issues, gay women felt a need to claim a name foe themselves. Thus was born gay as opposed to lesbian. This was unnecessary, IMO, and I strive to use the general term, gay, unless I’m referring to a specific individual or self-identified organization.