Originally Posted by Dhsu (Post 592781)

It's their fault for hijacking a word that originally meant "happy" in the first place.

Originally Posted by eriol33 (Post 592876)

I kinda shocked when I hear a christmas song used the word "gay day", that's when I realize my english vocabulary is far from good.

Originally Posted by Fresh Frank (Post 592903)

I hope that this sentence is meant to be funny, because if not... :gonk:

Originally Posted by eriol33 (Post 593032)

@Fresh Frank+Gechmir
um yeah, I meant it to be funny, partially. I didn't realize the original meaning of 'gay' means 'happy', so that phrase means "happy day" isn't it? :O

Originally Posted by Mo0 (Post 593043)

I don't think you could've sounded any more ignorant and childish in that post if you tried.

Originally Posted by sprouticus (Post 592750)

I dunno, maybe I secretly hate gays like this girl seems to think, but I feel like in 2008, if someone says something is gay when they are CLEARLY not talking about homosexuals in a derogatory way, it shouldn't be an issue.

Originally Posted by Superhero Chuck (Post 595301)

Of course it shouldn't be an issue. All you're doing is playing off of the deep-seated cultural prejudice that homosexuality is inherently wrong and backward by associating something displeasing to you with homosexuality. No grounds for offense there.

Yes, I realize that you're not intentionally speaking of homosexuals in a derogatory way. I would wager that a lot of people who use the word "gay" in that sense aren't. But does that make it better? Nope. It means that we've reached the point where we don't think about it. Homosexuality is bad, therefore "gay" equals "stupid" or "crappy." It's the same kind of thing you see in music theory, where, once upon a time, a melody that ended on a strong beat was said to have a "masculine" ending, and a melody that ended on a weak beat was said to have a "feminine" ending. Even after women's lib, some people still use these terms. Do they all necessarily believe, as the people who coined the terms did, that women are inherently weaker than men? No. But whether they intend to or not, they're perpetuating a symbol of an old prejudice, merely out of force of habit. I can't really think of a solid justification for doing that.

It's the same with using "gay" as a derogatory term. Whether you actually hate gays or not, you're bearing the standard of those who do. It'd be like decorating your walls with Nazi flags because you think they're pretty. I mean, you don't believe in what the symbol stands for, so what's the harm, right? Try telling that to your Jewish friends. It doesn't affect you because you haven't been exposed to the hate it represents. But to those who have, it is a powerful reminder of the their constant, painful war with a society that will not accept them for who they are. You are, in effect, doing the same thing as a guy I knew who, while playing Super Mario Brothers, called the Goombas "stupid niggers" every time he died.

Frankly, I find most people's insensitivity on this issue puzzling. It's like the people in the South who just can't understand why the blacks don't want them flying the Confederate flag. It's just good ol' stars 'n' bars, right? Ugh, I could go on.

Suffice it to say, yes, it is very crass of you to use the word in that manner, especially since you seem to know better. You should stop.

Originally Posted by Some brilliant Anthropologist

The usage of “cunt” –––
There are few words that garner the sort of ire that cunt does. As an insult, it is second to none. It has come to signify the basest of insults that can be hurled around a room, and is absolutely venomous when snarled properly. It is, however, just a word. And like all words, it has undergone radical changes since its initial foray into the lexicon, and will continue to shift in future. I’m not about to go into the etymology of the word, as it is both highly contested and incredibly broad. (There is, however, a wonderful history available at www.matthewhunt.com that manages to encompass the main theories while offering a historical context.)

The word was not always as profane as it is now; long before it was a taboo, it was used in medical journals and existed in the common vocabulary of English speakers. So, when did this liberal use of cunt become so maligned? Around the same time we began saying “white meat” instead of “breast meat.” This switch from the sacred to the profane came with the rise of Puritanism and has stayed strong ever since. Although words like fuck and prick have become much less grotesque over the years, cunt has managed to hold its sway over us.

It is this enduring ability to be offensive that makes the c-bomb so intriguing. With the re-appropriation of words like wog and queer we have seen how hateful words can be taken from the domain of the abusers and become empowering for the abused, and cunt is not far behind. As comedian Lenny Bruce said, “the word’s suppression gives it the power, the violence, the viciousness.” There is also a large movement that agrees with him. Within the domain of the so-called “cunt-power” movement, there have emerged many strong voices decrying the defamation of the word, such as “Cuntfest” at Penn. State and the “Cunt Club” at Wesleyan University.

Many people credit the modern student movement of Megan Goudy and Ashley Newton for the modern swing of taking cunt from the profane to the sacred, as their paper released in 2004, spoke of how the history of the word had become largely forgotten and that “by recognizing and reclaiming the etymological connotation of the word ‘cunt,’ women can take back part of the language that keeps them in their socially determined subordinate position.” Though this position is nothing new, it does bring one point to light that should definitely be stressed. Cunt is a word. It is not but letters arranged in a left-to-right fashion and nothing more. The meaning is entirely what you make of it, and by hiding it in a corner and shuddering whenever it is pulled to light you empower it.

Language is an ever-changing thing, and we all have the ability to prescribe our own meanings to it. I am not saying that you should not be offended if someone calls you a “raving cunt,” but be offended by the hate behind it, not the word itself. The word is nothing. At least Shakespeare got that right.

Originally Posted by Superhero Chuck (Post 595301)

Of course it shouldn't be an issue. All you're doing is playing off of the deep-seated cultural prejudice that homosexuality is inherently wrong and backward by associating something displeasing to you with homosexuality. No grounds for offense there.

Yes, I realize that you're not intentionally speaking of homosexuals in a derogatory way. I would wager that a lot of people who use the word "gay" in that sense aren't. But does that make it better? Nope. It means that we've reached the point where we don't think about it. Homosexuality is bad, therefore "gay" equals "stupid" or "crappy." It's the same kind of thing you see in music theory, where, once upon a time, a melody that ended on a strong beat was said to have a "masculine" ending, and a melody that ended on a weak beat was said to have a "feminine" ending. Even after women's lib, some people still use these terms. Do they all necessarily believe, as the people who coined the terms did, that women are inherently weaker than men? No. But whether they intend to or not, they're perpetuating a symbol of an old prejudice, merely out of force of habit. I can't really think of a solid justification for doing that.

It's the same with using "gay" as a derogatory term. Whether you actually hate gays or not, you're bearing the standard of those who do. It'd be like decorating your walls with Nazi flags because you think they're pretty. I mean, you don't believe in what the symbol stands for, so what's the harm, right? Try telling that to your Jewish friends. It doesn't affect you because you haven't been exposed to the hate it represents. But to those who have, it is a powerful reminder of the their constant, painful war with a society that will not accept them for who they are. You are, in effect, doing the same thing as a guy I knew who, while playing Super Mario Brothers, called the Goombas "stupid niggers" every time he died.

Frankly, I find most people's insensitivity on this issue puzzling. It's like the people in the South who just can't understand why the blacks don't want them flying the Confederate flag. It's just good ol' stars 'n' bars, right? Ugh, I could go on.

Suffice it to say, yes, it is very crass of you to use the word in that manner, especially since you seem to know better. You should stop.

Originally Posted by sprouticus (Post 595312)

The swastika, as far as I know, was always the symbol of Nazism

Originally Posted by sprouticus (Post 595320)

Touché good sir! I was unaware of its humble origins.

Though my argument still stands on the Confederate flag and the word 'nigger'

Originally Posted by Josiah (Post 595948)

Someone has a serious problem if they're homosexual by choice and take offense at 'gay' being used in a manner not pointed at them. After all, they're the one who signed onto that lifestyle, they should get used to hearing 'gay' used like that. They're just going to look like an ass if they get all pissy about it at some random person who pops it unaware of their sexual orientation.

Originally Posted by Josiah (Post 595948)

Someone has a serious problem if they're homosexual by choice and take offense at 'gay' being used in a manner not pointed at them. After all, they're the one who signed onto that lifestyle, they should get used to hearing 'gay' used like that. They're just going to look like an ass if they get all pissy about it at some random person who pops it unaware of their sexual orientation.

Originally Posted by sprouticus (Post 595312)

Faggot I can understand, but not gay.

Originally Posted by Helloween (Post 595952)

I wish Deni had given you a harder thrashing for this.

Originally Posted by sprouticus (Post 595312)

Faggot I can understand, but not gay.

Originally Posted by nanaman (Post 593050)

Why don't we just bury it like we did with the N-word?

Originally Posted by Denicalis (Post 595309)

Getting that worked up about words, and not intent, is so ass backwards it's pathetic. Intent and meanings are insulting, not language. If someone says something is gay, and they obviously mean nothing by it, and you turn it into an issue, you know who the asshole is? You. If someone who is against black people voting calls a black man a 'nigger' it's not insulting because he said nigger. It's insulting because he meant nigger as a black person of lesser standing. That's the issue. Intent and meaning.

Originally Posted by sprouticus (Post 592750)

Do you think that saying something is "gay" is grounds for scrutiny and harassment? I recently said that something was gay within earshot of this uptight lesbian, and she got all pissed at me saying "nice Dave, real nice."

Originally Posted by Helloween (Post 595952)

I wish Deni had given you a harder thrashing for this. By your logic, if i were to come up and piss all over your shoes for having pirates in your signature you should be ok with that, because you signed on to that lifestyle and with it comes certain consequences. That's a fucking prejudice to believe that man. It's no different than believing the Jews deserved what they got during the Holocaust.

Originally Posted by Josiah (Post 596193)

Now wait a minute, I'm talking about people using the word that way when they don't know that someone who is homosexual is within earshot, or perhaps someone friends with or related to another who is homosexual. It's a completely different matter if they did know; yes, I think that's disrespectful if they did know and say it anyway. But if no such people who might take offense are around, nobody there is going to think that if you say "That's gay" in the manner we've been talking about that that suddenly means you hate or are disrespecting homosexual people, but that you're basically saying "That's dumb" and nothing more.

I don't even say it that often myself, I say "That's messed up", "That's ridiculous", etc. just as easily. And if I knew that someone homosexual was nearby, I wouldn't say it.

What I was trying to say is that people who choose to be homosexual are bound to hear the phrase sooner or later because it is common to some degree, and that you'd be sending the wrong message if you tried to make it less common by blowing up on the first person you hear say it like that. If I were that "first person" I would probably say "Whoa, okay, I didn't know you were homosexual, I'm sorry", but if they reacted that way in the first place, I don't know if they'd accept the apology. The "serious problem" I was speaking of is hearing the phrase and reacting that negatively to it.

Originally Posted by KrelEN (Post 596322)

Anyone who takes offense to 'misuse' of the word is being pedantic.

"What do you mean, 'it's lame'?! I happen to be paraplegic! You're very rude :mad:"

Originally Posted by Josiah (Post 596193)

<manic backpedaling> Blah blah blah people who CHOOSE to be homosexual blah blah but I don't really hate queers. </manic backpedaling>

Originally Posted by Josiah (Post 595948)

Someone has a serious problem if they're homosexual by choice and take offense at 'gay' being used in a manner not pointed at them. After all, they're the one who signed onto that lifestyle, they should get used to hearing 'gay' used like that. They're just going to look like an ass if they get all pissy about it at some random person who pops it unaware of their sexual orientation.

Originally Posted by Jochie (Post 596639)

A better example would be:

"What do you mean, 'it's paraplegic'?! I happen to be paraplegic. You're very rude :mad:"

See how that's actually rude? Because paraplegics don't call themselves "lame"? And because gay people do call themselves "gay"?

Originally Posted by guyinrubbersuit (Post 592797)

I don't use gay unless it's really to denote that it's homosexual in someway, not in a derogatory fashion.

Originally Posted by KrelEN (Post 596973)

"That's gay" = offensive to homosexuals
A sensible homosexual witnesses somebody using "gay" in a derogatory context, and is secure in the knowledge that the user isn't slagging off actual homosexuals.
y.