Neither. Gaydar implies that all gay people can be identified because there is something intrinsically about them that makes them identifiable.
That’s manifestly untrue.
I’m saying there’s a very short leap from all gays to identifiable as such to all gays are different from “us” to gays shouldn’t be granted the same rights.
Yes, gays are different in one aspect of their being. That should be a “so what.” Gaydar is a manifestation of making that one minor difference the defining characteristic. I say thinking that way is destructive, and for both sides.
this is the same goofy logic that makes people in health care change the term for retarded people every 3 weeks like clock work. its a word, a label used to define something, words are not offensive. the way you use words are offensive. (EDIT: note there are always going to be people who go out looking for ways to be offended, nothing you can do with them or for them)
if I come in here and say “yeah at the election night party all them fags were sure fucking with my gaydar, man I almost had to leave” I can see that being insulting.
if I say “yeah at the election party there was one guy who had my gaydar needle burried…of course the part where he actually nibbled on my neck and called me a giant Jesus he wanted to take home and impale me might have been a factor” I really dont see what or where you can find offense with. (true story, damn those random hugs DAMN THEM!!!)
I am both straight and male and I was a bit surprised but offended? nope.
No it doesn’t. The existence – or workability – of gaydar implies that, TO THE EXTENT THERE ARE SIGNALS* AVAILABLE TO BE READ AND SOMEONE READS THEM, there is a sense (or senseability or willingness) that can pick up on those signals. Not everybody (and that includes gays) gives off signals of any kind and not everybody (and that includes gays) picks up on them.
*These can include, but are not necessarily limited to, mannerisms, dress, eye contact (type and duration), ways of speaking about activities and personal life, and many other things. Some of these signals are chosen deliberately and are not manifestly, on their own, gay characteristics and tell-tales.
To be fair, there are behaviors that suggest that the person might be straight. Straightdar doesn’t have that same ring to it, though.
Never thought for a second that Wanda was gay… doesn’t she talk about men in her stand-up? Or didn’t she used to? Still a fan, but Jesus that lady has some big-assed feet!
Her work in CYA is to be adored. Freakin’ awesome.
Can you clarify something for me? If I’m at a party, and I get the impression that a guy there is interested in me, is the fact that I perceive him as gay what you object to? Or is it just that there’s a specific label I can apply to that perception?
I think she’s hella cute and I love her sense of humor. I suppose that makes me a lesbian? My gaydar was broken on that one! Oh wait - am I offended or not? :dubious:
There is. The fact that they are gay makes them identifiable.
Not for other gay people it shouldn’t. Hell, not for straight people, either. Determining the possibilty of reciprocation is a rather crucial part of beginning a relationship.
No kidding. It absolutely should be the defining characteristic when one is trying to determine if the person in question holds said characteristic.
Jesse Jackson ran as a black politican. Barack Obama ran as a politician who happened to be black. Would Jesse Jackson have won this year? No. Why? See above.
All I can say is that when you lose thirty straight elections, it’s time to change your strategy.
Obama got that. I guess it’s going to take thirty more losing elections before other groups do.
I’m a single gay man. I’d like to be a non-single gay man. To do this, I need to meet other gay men. More particularly, I need to be able to recognize which men I meet are gay, and which are straight. The ability to differentiate between the two is colloquially called “gaydar.” Now, can you please point out what part of this equation you feel is setting back gay rights? And please, for the love of Mike, be specific. Your tortured and ill-considered analogies to race are not helping.
Wanda Sykes is one of those comics whose humor isn’t captured by a script (at least one she didn’t write). She can make me double over when she’s doing stand-up or ad libbing on a talk show, but most of the movies and sitcoms I’ve seen her in were almost unwatchable. (Admittedly I haven’t seen her on The New…Christine.) The one exception was when she was a correspondent on The Chris Rock Show about a decade ago; her editorial on wanting to run for first lady was hysterical, something to the effect of=
And fwiw the term gaydar has never offended me at all regardless of its user or their opinions of gays.
See, Jesse Jackson could usually tell if someone was gay. That’s why he wasn’t elected president, despite running for the office thirty times in a row. Barrack Obama, on the other, just doesn’t have a clue. He’s all like, “Wanda Sykes is gay? OMG, I would never have guessed!” And the Electoral College is like, “DUH!” And that’s why Obama is going to be president.
