# Why was this useage of "queer" offensive? **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [April 5, 2022, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-useage-of-queer-offensive/962320 "2022-04-05T15:04:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![puzzlegal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puzzlegal/32/3827_2.png) [@puzzlegal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puzzlegal)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2022, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-useage-of-queer-offensive/962320/81 "2022-04-05T21:04:17Z")
> [@What\_Exit](#): > > It is tricky as usual. > > - “I’m queer” _is no problem._ > - “I am a queer” _is weirdly worded but not actionable._ > - “queers and mixed race couples” _probably shouldn’t be used as many posters are going to find it offensive._ > - In a serious rant “queers are assholes” _is pretty much hate speech._ The mods have been discussing this, and I have some minor clarifications to add: - Using “queer” as an adjective is usually okay. For instance, I was once told I wasn’t queer enough to go to a queer dinner church with a queer friend. - Using “queer” to self-identify is also generally okay. That includes both “I am queer” and “I am a queer”. It also includes most of the uses like LGBTQ group names. - Using “queer” as a noun to “other” people, and set them apart from “ordinary” people is generally not okay. That was the problem with the post that was moderated. If was pretty much “there are too many queers in advertisements today” - Using “queer” in a rant about those bad people (“queers are assholes!”) is almost certainly not okay. As WE? said, that’s pretty much hate speech. Definitely a case where context matters. (Oh, and “Queer” has definitely been reclaimed, at least among younger Americans. My example of the queer dinner church is real, and I was sad not to be welcome at it. I know tons of people who identify as queer, and use that word to describe themselves. But I also know some older people who still cringe at the word, as they were attacked by people wielding it in their youth.) ---
**Author:** ![puzzlegal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puzzlegal/32/3827_2.png) [@puzzlegal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puzzlegal)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2022, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-useage-of-queer-offensive/962320/83 "2022-04-05T23:54:13Z")
Speaking as a Jew, i think that when people use “Jew” as an adjective, it is usually offensive. The part of speech isn’t definitive in either case, but i think it’s highly suggestive. ---
**Author:** ![GreysonCarlisle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a87d85/32.png) [@GreysonCarlisle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreysonCarlisle)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2022, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-useage-of-queer-offensive/962320/85 "2022-04-06T00:13:35Z")
> [@Snooppuppy](#): > > You used Jew as both a noun and an adjective. Off the top of my head, I can’t think of many ways to use Jew as an adjective that aren’t offensive. You have a Jew \_\_\_\_\_\_. That looks like a Jew \_\_\_\_\_\_\_. I still wonder (and am willing to take advice) on whether me calling my sidelocks Jew curls is antisemitic. ---
**Author:** ![Q.Q.Switcheroo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/q.q.switcheroo/32/5713_2.png) [@Q.Q.Switcheroo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.Q.Switcheroo)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2022, 12:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-useage-of-queer-offensive/962320/87 "2022-04-06T00:19:09Z")
> [@Snooppuppy](#): > > Jew as a noun is ok? But Jew as adjjective is wrong. Seems to be the opposite of Q word as an adjective is ok, but Q word is horrible as a noun. _See also_ “Democrat” (as in “Democrat Party”): > **[Democrat Party (epithet)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrat_Party_(epithet))** > > Democrat Party is an epithet and pejorative for the Democratic Party of the United States, often used in a disparaging fashion by the party's opponents. While use of the term started out as non-hostile, it has grown in its negative use since the 1940s, in particular by members of the Republican Party—in party platforms, partisan speeches, and press releases—as well as by conservative commentators and third party politicians. > United Press International reported in August 1984 that the term Demo... ---
**Author:** ![Briny\_Deep](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/briny_deep/32/17188_2.png) [@Briny\_Deep](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Briny_Deep)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2022, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-useage-of-queer-offensive/962320/90 "2022-04-06T00:55:40Z")
> [@GreysonCarlisle](#): > > I still wonder (and am willing to take advice) on whether me calling my sidelocks Jew curls is antisemitic. I’m not a Jew, but if you’re being serious, this sounds wildly problematic outside of your in-group, but presumably OK within it, depending on your audience. It’s a little funny that the subject word “queer” tends to be OK as an adjective but not a noun (as applied to people from outside the in-group, anyway), but with “Jew” the offensive/nonoffensive grammar seems to be the opposite. ---
**Author:** ![puzzlegal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puzzlegal/32/3827_2.png) [@puzzlegal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puzzlegal)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2022, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-useage-of-queer-offensive/962320/91 "2022-04-06T00:57:01Z")
They are both used as both. But the noun version of “queer” and the adjectival form of “Jew” are usually used in derogatory ways, whereas the adjectival form of “queer” and the noun version of “Jew” are routinely used in neutral and positive ways by people who identify as described by those words. And even so, context matters. Language isn’t strictly logical. It’s messy, and the history of how people have chosen to use words affect their connotations. As someone pointed out, “colored person” is offensive and “person of color” is polite, at this moment in history, in the US. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2022, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-useage-of-queer-offensive/962320/92 "2022-04-06T00:58:29Z")
> [@GreysonCarlisle](#): > > I still wonder (and am willing to take advice) on whether me calling my sidelocks Jew curls is antisemitic. I think it sounds a lot like an antisemitic slur, so I’d recommend avoiding it in general conversation. > [@Snooppuppy](#): > > Jew as a noun is ok? But Jew as adjjective is wrong. Seems to be the opposite of Q word as an adjective is ok, but Q word is horrible as a noun. I know linguistic evolution can be confusing and tricky, especially when it involves terms that are or have recently been widely considered derogatory. Here’s a handy guide for the current cultural moment, to the best of my ability: “Jew” as a noun, as in “the Jews”, “a Jew”, “that Jew”, etc., used to be (like, mid-20th century) widely considered a bit antisemitic-sounding, mostly because so many antisemites couldn’t stop talking about why they didn’t like “the Jews”. Jewish people could still acceptably use the term for themselves, though. And as more Jewish people began discussing Judaism and Jewishness and world Jewry in public discourse, use of the word “Jew” as a noun became more acceptable even for non-Jewish speakers. It’s still more reliably inoffensive for a non-Jewish speaker to say “a Jewish person” rather than “a Jew”, though. And it definitely sounds offensively antisemitic for anybody to use “Jew” as an adjective. A Jewish person doing so, as in GreysonCarlisle’s example of calling his payot or sidelocks “Jew curls”, is on a par with Black people using the N-word for themselves. In-group users can get away with it but will still sound a little shocking to out-groupers, while out-groupers should avoid such usage like the plague. Similarly, “queer” used to be considered invariably offensive as both adjective and noun, but is being reclaimed via its usage by in-group speakers, as puzzlegal explained. But the reclamation trajectory is a little different in this case: “queer” as an adjective has moved farther along the path to general acceptability than “queer” as a noun. > [@Snooppuppy](#): > > i do have a problem with people just deciding that using an adjective as a noun is inherently wrong. Eh, you’re kind of missing the point. The issue is not “people deciding” that there’s something wrong with turning adjectives into nouns in general. The issue is the existence of a real and significant linguistic history in which the use of certain words, sometimes only in certain contexts, has been genuinely interpreted by most language users as insulting. You can’t nitpick language use in an artificial vacuum where you just ignore actual linguistic history to suit your rhetorical purposes. Sure, it doesn’t seem to make theoretical sense that it’s offensive to use “Jew” as an adjective but not as a noun while it’s offensive to use “queer” as a noun but not as an adjective. It doesn’t seem to make theoretical sense that we [drive on the parkway and park in the driveway](https://www.straightdope.com/21341571/why-do-we-drive-on-the-parkway-and-park-on-the-driveway), either. Sensible people understand that meaningful analysis of language use is not just about what seems to make theoretical sense when considered in an artificial vacuum ignoring actual linguistic history. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2022, 1:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-useage-of-queer-offensive/962320/94 "2022-04-06T01:15:25Z")
> [@Snooppuppy](#): > > That argument has been made in this very thread. It seems odd, then, that you have not quoted someone making that argument. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2022, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-useage-of-queer-offensive/962320/96 "2022-04-06T01:19:47Z")
No, it’s not. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2022, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-useage-of-queer-offensive/962320/98 "2022-04-06T01:21:04Z")
> [@Snooppuppy](#): > > > [@Kimstu](#): > > > > The issue is not “people deciding” that there’s something wrong with turning adjectives into nouns in general. > > That argument has been made in this very thread. No, it hasn’t. Johnny\_Bravo opined in post #18 that > [@Johnny\_Bravo](#): > > Somehow, in our language, transitioning a potentially offensive word from adjective to noun gives it power. But that is not the same thing as claiming that “there’s something wrong with turning adjectives into nouns in general”, just an attempted analysis of how [nominalization](https://www.thefreedictionary.com/Nominalization-Creating-Nouns.htm) seems to affect the “offensiveness potential” of words. I happen to disagree with his take on this aspect of linguistic evolution, but whether I agree with it or not, he’s still not making quite the same argument that you claim has been made in this thread. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2022, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-useage-of-queer-offensive/962320/100 "2022-04-06T01:21:43Z")
That is not _prescribing_ usage, it is _describing_ usage. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2022, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-useage-of-queer-offensive/962320/101 "2022-04-06T01:22:57Z")
Three quotes, at this point. Snooppuppy, you are currently 0 for 3 (and maybe 0 for 4, if you were initially trying to reference Johnny\_Bravo’s post #18) in attempting to provide actual instances of the argument that you claim “has been made in this very thread”. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2022, 1:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-useage-of-queer-offensive/962320/103 "2022-04-06T01:24:12Z")
Again, that is _describing_ usage. ---
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2022, 1:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-useage-of-queer-offensive/962320/111 "2022-04-06T01:39:48Z")
Opened on April 6, 2022, 1:39am UTC ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2022, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-useage-of-queer-offensive/962320/113 "2022-04-06T01:45:54Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > Intrinsic anything in language, if you think about it, is straight up nonsensical. I have no idea what you are talking about when you say “intrinsic” meaning. The meaning of words is established by spontaneous consensus-forming in communities of speakers. But do not make the common mistaken inference that descriptive linguistics implies that words do not have _objective_ meaning. You do not just get to pick your own idiosyncratic meanings for words. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2022, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-useage-of-queer-offensive/962320/114 "2022-04-06T01:51:47Z")
I’m not entirely sure that the assertion that words have objective meaning is actually true. If they did, surely referencing a dictionary or other source would be sufficient to ascertain meaning and remove any ambiguity in language. ---
**Author:** ![GreysonCarlisle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a87d85/32.png) [@GreysonCarlisle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreysonCarlisle)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2022, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-useage-of-queer-offensive/962320/115 "2022-04-06T01:52:58Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > I’m not entirely sure that the assertion that words have objective meaning is actually true. Many words have some sort of objective baggage, and that baggage should be examined before use. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2022, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-useage-of-queer-offensive/962320/116 "2022-04-06T01:53:13Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > I’m not entirely sure that the assertion that words have objective meaning is actually true. How would we communicate if they did not? I’m not quite sure what you mean by your “dictionary” comment. “Objective” does not mean static through time. It does not mean identical in all communities of speakers. It does not mean that a word means exactly the same thing in all contexts. No real world dictionary perfectly captures all these subtleties, although in principle it could. If you like - what we’re discussing in this thread is what the perfect dictionary entry for “queer” _should_ say, based on the way the word is actually used, including all the complex semantic baggage. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2022, 2:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-useage-of-queer-offensive/962320/117 "2022-04-06T02:14:26Z")
Hearing them from elder people set in their ways is one thing, but you say you would have no problem with using them in conversation? ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2022, 2:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-useage-of-queer-offensive/962320/118 "2022-04-06T02:21:44Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > I’m not entirely sure that the assertion that words have objective meaning is actually true. If they did, surely referencing a dictionary or other source would be sufficient to ascertain meaning and remove any ambiguity in language. Nitpick: I think that would be the case if words had only objective meaning. But they have all sorts of derived secondary meanings as well. For example, the notorious N-word epithet arguably still has the objective meaning “black”, from cognates of Latin niger. But that doesn’t mean that the N-word doesn’t also have other meanings that are very different in implication and offensiveness from the objective original sense “black”. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-useage-of-queer-offensive/962320.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-useage-of-queer-offensive/962320.md?page=6)