|
08 Jun 10 - 09:08 AM (#2923027) Subject: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: John MacKenzie As this word has now become irrevocably altered in meaning from it's original definition. Would capitalising it, or putting in quotation marks, enable millions under 20 years of age, to realise there is more than one meaning of the word? |
|
08 Jun 10 - 09:18 AM (#2923035) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: Greg F. No. |
|
08 Jun 10 - 09:52 AM (#2923063) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: Bonzo3legs So we have 2 meanings - 1) happy and jolly and 2) doesn't know what his backside is for. |
|
08 Jun 10 - 10:06 AM (#2923071) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: IanC The problem is that in English, capitalisation is used for proper nouns, and "gay" as a noun is not [proper. ;-) |
|
08 Jun 10 - 10:26 AM (#2923083) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: frogprince I suspect you would just replace possible minor confusion with major confusion. Which usage would we capitalise or place in quotations, and how much chance would there be that everyone would catch on and keep the practice consistent. |
|
08 Jun 10 - 11:12 AM (#2923110) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: PHJim While it does bother me when words change their meaning, (It makes books, articles, movies, songs of yesteryear difficult to read, watch, perform) the word "gay" doesn't bother me as much as "reality" or "virtual". Reality now seems to mean to put a group of people in an artificial situation and manipulate their actions. Virtual used to mean real. Now it means almost real or very lifelike. |
|
08 Jun 10 - 11:18 AM (#2923112) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: frogprince I know what you mean, PHJim; things like that literally drive me up a tree. : ) |
|
08 Jun 10 - 11:30 AM (#2923121) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: Ebbie Now that, Dean, is frustration. An emotion like that could decimate an entire village. :) |
|
08 Jun 10 - 11:51 AM (#2923131) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: mauvepink "So we have 2 meanings - 1) happy and jolly and 2) doesn't know what his backside is for. " What is this obsession with the word gay and 'backsides'? Why is the assumption that gay means only affecting men? Females are and can be gay too. Not all gay men engage in anal sex either. Why does that fact never seem to be aired so much? Why are so many purportedly straight people obessesd with what gay men may or may not do with their bottoms? There are many words used in the English language that have come to stand for the actual thing they represent but they do not get capitalised either. No biggie really, I suppose, as long as those using the word really understand what it means in it's use. Hetrosexuality is not capitalised. Nor is bisexuality or lesbianism, unless they start a sentence or as titles, so gay/homosexuality needs no special treatment either..... except understanding and acceptance. One can even accept it without the need to understand it. Using any excuse to attempt a 'gay bashing' seems inexcusable. IMHO! mp |
|
08 Jun 10 - 12:28 PM (#2923153) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: Emma B Words change - no big deal! "Silly is first recorded in Old English, in the form sælig, with the senses 'fortuitous, happy or prosperous'. The sense 'spiritually blessed' is also attested early, as is the sense 'pious, holy, and good'. In the early thirteenth century there are textual references to 'holy martyrdom' as seli martyrdom and a female saint is referred to as a seli meiden or 'blessed maiden'" During the Middle English period, and especially from the late thirteenth century onwards, the meanings of the word silly become more diverse. At this time, the sense 'blessed or holy' develops into a new sense, 'innocent'," I have sung a carol celebrating 'yon tender silly babe' "Further developments take place in early modern English. In the sixteenth century, the senses 'deserving of pity' and 'helpless' give rise to new interpretations of silly as 'unlearned, unsophisticated, simple, rustic and ignorant', which leads to the use of the word to denote someone who is 'humble in rank' or 'lowly' The modern sense 'lacking in judgement or common sense, foolish' also appears for the first time in the sixteenth century, and eventually becomes the dominant usage" -(quotations from the fascinating AskOxford.com) The term gay was originally used to refer to feelings of being "carefree", "happy", or "bright and showy"; but had also come to acquire some connotations of "immorality" as early as 1637 according to the Online Etymology Dictionary". In the 20th C, Gay became the preferred term to describe people attracted to members of the same sexsince other terms, such as "queer", were inevitably derogatory and "Homosexual" was perceived as excessively clinical, as the sexual orientation now commonly referred to as "homosexuality" was,, at that time a mental illness diagnosis in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Interestingly, according to Wiki "Bringing Up Baby (1938) was the first film to use the word gay in apparent reference to homosexuality. In a scene where Cary Grant's clothes have been sent to the cleaners, he must wear a lady's feathery robe. When another character inquires about his clothes, he responds "Because I just went gay...all of a sudden!" However, since this was a mainstream film at a time when the use of the word to refer to homosexuality would still be unfamiliar to most film-goers, the line can also be interpreted to mean "I just decided to do something frivolous." There is much debate about what Grant meant with the ad-lib (the line was not in the script). So is a thread about the use of the word gay 'silly' or as mauvepink fears, yet another excuse for gay bashing and/or a puerile indulgence in other people's sexual acts? |
|
08 Jun 10 - 12:35 PM (#2923160) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: Dave MacKenzie I'd say this thread is gay queer. (Scots gay/gey = very) |
|
08 Jun 10 - 12:53 PM (#2923176) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: Rog Peek It irritates me that the word gay got highjacked. Almost seems to suggest that heterosexuals are miserable. When Johnny comes marching home again, Hurrah, hurrah We'll give him a hearty welcome then Hurrah, hurrah The men will cheer, the boys will shout The ladies they will all turn out And we'll all feel homosexual when Johnny comes marching home. Just doesn't sound right somehow. Rog |
|
08 Jun 10 - 01:08 PM (#2923186) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: mousethief "Gay" is morphing again -- among certain young persons, it means "stupid" or "bad". For instance one might say the high school football game has been cancelled, and the other might say, "That's gay." They're not talking about sexuality at all, just using the word as a synonym for "bad". How I hate it when words change meanings. I even misuse perfectly good words like "hijack" to describe how I feel about it. |
|
08 Jun 10 - 01:24 PM (#2923197) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: Stower Mmmm, I think capitals belong where they belong, in the correct grammatical place. Otherwise we're into the whole issue of Not Only putting capitals Where They Don't Belong, but just using apostrophe's indiscriminately just because there is an s on the end's of word's, or, what may be even worse, and It Just Looks Wrong, missing out full stop's on abbreviation's altogether, such as D.I.Y. as DIY, or putting them all in except the last, such as D.I.Y - oh! That just look's Irritating!!!!!!!! Oh, yes, and people who don't know when to stop using exclamation mark's!!!!!! Lol!!!!!! And, don't get me started on lol, lol!!!!!!! |
|
08 Jun 10 - 01:39 PM (#2923209) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: Paul Burke "Gay" has a long history of sexual connotation anyway, a "gay laidee" was a bit edgy even before London Bridge got reconstructed. As for capitalising it, you try making them. |
|
08 Jun 10 - 01:56 PM (#2923234) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: John MacKenzie Not getting at anybody here, the thread was prompted by the thread Isn't it time for a gay president. Does it mean Obama is sad? {maybe he should be) It's just that especially in the interrogative, the word gay is more ambivalent, I think. The words quoted by Mauvepink as not being capitalised, are not capable of the same misinterpretation, as they only have one meaning. |
|
08 Jun 10 - 02:05 PM (#2923246) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: mauvepink John, I should say my comments were not aimed at your honest question in the OP. The question itself is/was legitimate. Sadly the subject word often gets abused and used for abuse. I am aware that was not your intent :-) mp |
|
08 Jun 10 - 02:20 PM (#2923259) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: McGrath of Harlow How do you pronounce a capital letter? |
|
08 Jun 10 - 02:39 PM (#2923279) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: Little Hawk One thing I've noticed is this little 4-step scenario, which unfolds repeatedly through history as the decades and centuries roll by... STEP 1: An embattled minority who feel that they are in a vulnerable positionn vis a vis the majority (which has generally been the case with homosexuals).....that minority is usually troubled by various derogatory words they have been labelled with by the majority. Hence they search for an acceptable word of their own to label themselves with, one which does not offend. Hence....... "gay" STEP 2: The new acceptable word is marketed vigorously to the majority so that the more kindly inclined people among the majority will know exactly what to call the minority in order to show sympathy, solidarity, and not offend the minority. And the minority go about proudly and happily calling themselves by the new acceptable label. Big celebration! Hence........ "Gay Pride" STEP 3: Children, youths, and insensitive or immature people of all kinds among the majority, people whose natural inclination is to fear or despise anyone who is "different" from themselves start using the new acceptable label as a term of abuse! "Oh, that is so gay, man!" (meaning it's bad, creepy, and stupid) STEP 4: The formerly acceptable label has begun to become an embarrassment, because so many people are now using it as a term of abuse. Gradually it falls out of favour with the minority which once embraced it and with those majority members who befriended the minority. It becomes a label not of respect, but of disrespect. It gradually falls out of usage, except among those who like to use it as a term of abuse. The search then begins for a NEW acceptable label of respect for the embattled minority.....and that takes us straight back to..... STEP 1! (see above, and repeat the 4 STEPS as frequently as necessary...) ;-D ****** I guarantee that the word "gay" will fall out of favour and be replaced by some other fashionable word soon enough, just as the words "Black", "Negro", "N*gger", "AfroAmerican", and "Colored", for instance, have all been favoured for a period of time, then replaced by the next one, and so on. At present we've come full circle on that one. Blacks are AGAIN being called Blacks....long after that word had been discarded as offensive and replaced by some other word. This is the dance people do as the edge around issues that make them nervous. They play games with words. The words keep changing, but the games just go on and on. |
|
08 Jun 10 - 03:09 PM (#2923306) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: Bainbo No need to differentiate. We've got plenty of words which sound the same but mean different things. The context will pretty much always make it clear. There's absolutely no danger of confusing a gay bar with the Flintstones having a gay old time. Unless you do it deliberately, for comic effect, say, or so you can manufacture outrage about language changing - which, as Emma B points out, it always has done. |
|
08 Jun 10 - 04:32 PM (#2923352) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: Little Hawk I'm going to float a prediction. It will almost certainly be wrong as to the specific word, but what the hey, what have I got to lose? ;-D I predict that the next fashionable and popular word that will be adopted by the homosexual community when "gay" goes totally out of style...which it will...will be... "swish" We'll have articles about the swish lifestyle, and movies about swish romance. We'll have swish pride parades and we'll fight for swish marriage rights. Vicious rednecks from the Deep South will send anonymous emails to people vilifying swish people, and fundamentalist preachers will rant about the evils of swish sexual practices. Swish couples will adopt children. The Swiss (in Switzerland) will object that the word "swish" can be confused with the word "Swiss", but no one else will pay any attention to their complaints. Some turkey will start a thread on Mudcat that asks the question: "Has the time come yet for a swish president?" |
|
08 Jun 10 - 04:49 PM (#2923358) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: McGrath of Harlow "Queer" has come back in favour, I understand. |
|
08 Jun 10 - 04:52 PM (#2923361) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: Bonzo3legs It never went away. |
|
08 Jun 10 - 04:54 PM (#2923363) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: McGrath of Harlow As an insult, perhaps, but that's different. |
|
08 Jun 10 - 04:57 PM (#2923367) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: Amos In a similar vein, I predict the normal usage of the expression "to fuck up", and the adjectives "fucked up", "totally screwed up" and "FUBAR" will gradually replaced with the verb "to chongo" and the adjective "totally chongo'd" and "chongo'd beyond recognition". My reasons for making this prediction are not suitable fare for a civilized forum, however... A |
|
08 Jun 10 - 05:00 PM (#2923371) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: Little Hawk "Queer" was the standard insult term when I was growing up, McGrath. It would be quite ironic (but typical) if it got rehabilitated from its former low status and became legitimized as an accepted term among the community it refers to. That's exactly what has happened with the word "Black", while "Negro" has gone right out of fashion. |
|
08 Jun 10 - 05:03 PM (#2923375) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: McGrath of Harlow Enter "Queer pride" in Google. |
|
08 Jun 10 - 05:22 PM (#2923382) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: Don Firth Good analysis of the process, Little Hawk! But--"swish" was in use back when I was in high school (shortly after the Big Bang), only slightly politer than "queer," so I tend to think that might not be a viable candidate. But we'll see what shakes out. Don Firth P. S. Maybe there will come a time when people just won't care what other people get up to. Nah. Never happpen. . . . |
|
08 Jun 10 - 06:04 PM (#2923402) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: Mrrzy I don't let my kids use gay to mean lame, not as in halt but as in uncool, that is. |
|
08 Jun 10 - 06:09 PM (#2923406) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: mauvepink I thought ghay had come into being to seperate it from gay as in the homosexual sense? ghay = adj.) a non-homosexual reference used to describe something that is lame, boring or just plane stupid; can also be referred to as "GHay with an H" Personally I'm not bothered who is what is which is who as long as they are nice and pleasant people. What they do in their own private life has nothing to do with me. I'm too busy getting on with my own life... and reading up on Mudcat ;-) mp |
|
08 Jun 10 - 06:22 PM (#2923419) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: Little Hawk The proper phrase is "Chongo'd beyond ALL recognition", Amos. ;-) **** I can just picture it. A few years from now Chongo is sitting at his desk and going through some files from a case he's working on, when an angry-sounding yell of "CHONGO!" echoes from outside somewhere and interrupts his train of thought. "What the hell....?" He gets up and goes to the window. Looks out. No one to be seen. He goes back to the desk, starts to sit down... "CHONGO!!!" Again the angry yell from outside, louder than before, followed by hammering sounds. "Fer Chrissake..." He gets up and goes to the window again, sticks his head out, and yells, "Who the hell is that, where are you, and whaddya want?" No answer. Just the sound of metal hammering on metal. Following the sound, Chongo eventually spots a pair of work boots sticking out from under a jacked-up car. "That must be the guy," he mutters. "I'm gonna go see what this bozo wants." A quick scamper down 3 flights of stairs and Chongo is in the back alleyway. Yup, the guy is still there under the car, still hammering furiously. "CHONGO!!!!!!!!!" he yells for the third time. This guy sounds mighty ticked off. Chongo walks over to the car. "Okay, I'm here, loud boy. Whaddya want from me?" The hammering stops. "What?" comes an irritated voice. "Who the hell is that?" "Shouldn't I be askin' you that question?" replies Chongo. "You been callin' for me, and I'm here, so either get to the point quick or get lost. Either shit or get off the can. Capiche?" "For Chongo's sake..." growls the guy under the car. He crawls out, stands up, and glares at Chongo. He's covered in oilstains and holding a large crescent wrench in one hand and a hammer in the other. "Who the Chongo are you?" "Exactly!" says Chongo, glaring back. "You got the name right. Now tell me watcha want and stop wastin' my time." "You're the one who's wasting my time, you Chongoing, Chongofaced monkey! I'm the one who's busy! Why don't you get the Chongo out of here before I rearrange your Chongoing face?" "Why don't YOU stop talkin' about ME in the third person?" says Chongo, narrowing his brows. "I ain't no monkey. I am an ape. Got that? A-P-E...ape. Apes ain't monkeys!" "Ape. Monkey. What's the Chongoing difference?" spits the guy, "You're all just a buncha Chongoing dirty animals who don't have any Chongoing place in a decent society! Who don't you just Chongo off back to Africa? Chongo YOU!!!" He brandishes the hammer in Chongo's face. And that is when Chongo coldcocks the guy with a vicious right cross to the jaw which lays him out flat as a flounder. He carries the fallen man over to a nearby dumpster, throws him in, dusts off his hands, and walks away. "This city is goin' to the dogs," he mutters. "There ain't nobody here with no manners at all anymore." **** Yup, there's gonna be hell to pay, Amos. No doubt about that. |
|
08 Jun 10 - 07:01 PM (#2923448) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: gnu I really don't understand why homos wanna be "gay". Why can't they be homos? What's wrong with that? Here, we have a Gay and Lesbian Society. The lesbians aren't gay. Are females just more intelligent than males?... hetero or homo? |
|
08 Jun 10 - 07:13 PM (#2923462) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: frogprince Lesbians are obviously smarter than "straight" women, 'cause lesbians know what's good! |
|
08 Jun 10 - 08:47 PM (#2923541) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: mousethief "Queer" was the standard insult term when I was growing up, McGrath. In my high school it was "queer bait" (what you called somebody you didn't like, or who was effeminate (if male)). |
|
09 Jun 10 - 09:59 AM (#2923884) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: mauvepink Lesbians have suffered their fair share of abusive terms... friccatrices and tribades for instance. Dyke has been taken back by some. Some lesbians still use gay just the same way as men do. Homss I only know as an abusive term and it is used pejoratively. Why use the terms at all, except in strictest need? We don't go around calling straight people 'hets' all the time. There is far more to most people than their sexuality. Why should it matter unless you have an interest in that person? mp |
|
09 Jun 10 - 04:59 PM (#2924156) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: Don Firth The late Quentin Crisp, bon vivante and epicure of style, who said of himself once, "I am one of the stately homos of England!" was interviewed on an American television show some time back. He looked a bit androgynous. His longish hair was blue and he wore slacks and an informal jacket, with shirt and ascot. His mode of dress could have been either male or female. The interviewer commented on his appearance and said, "Do you ever get asked if you are a man or a woman?" "Oh, yes," he answered. "It happens quite often. My usual response is, 'Does it matter? What do you have in mind?'" Good answer, I'd say. Don Firth |
|
09 Jun 10 - 05:21 PM (#2924167) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: gnu mauve... you find "homo" abusive? It's a word and it's short for homosexual, just like gay has been given a new and false meaning. It's a word. Lighten up. |
|
09 Jun 10 - 06:35 PM (#2924228) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: Paul Burke It's not "mauvepink" or "me" that finds it offensive- it's gays. It's a bit up to them what thewy are called. They seem to like gay just now. |
|
09 Jun 10 - 06:49 PM (#2924237) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: Smedley I've called myself a homo quite a few times here but I still wouldn't like it if it were insultingly shouted at me by strangers. Gay is OK, but a bit 'nice'. Queer is useful sometimes and has a political dimension in that it can be used to encompass gay men, lesbians, trans people, bisexuals, anyone outside of the norm. |
|
09 Jun 10 - 07:01 PM (#2924249) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: mousethief friccatrices and tribades Wow, I have never heard either of those words. Then again I've never had call to insult Lesbians. All the Lesbians I've ever run into were pretty nice people -- even one I met after being told (by reliable people) she hated all men. We hit it off because we found a common interest. Peoples is peoples. The word I've heard used most as a pejorative for heterosexuals is "breeders." I've also heard it used as a term of endearment, and tongue-in-cheekily by breeders themselves. |
|
09 Jun 10 - 07:11 PM (#2924255) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: Lox John. I think it seems like a reasonable suggestion and that it is obvious how it would work. |
|
09 Jun 10 - 07:40 PM (#2924283) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: mauvepink "mauve... you find "homo" abusive? It's a word and it's short for homosexual, just like gay has been given a new and false meaning. It's a word. Lighten up." Nothing to lighten up about. I detest the word homo being used perjoratively and as an insult/attack. The word to me is like the word Paki... short for Pakistani. It is offensive when used nastily and there is no excuse in using it to define a fellow human being in that way. I have never seen it used in a nice way by a non gay person. It tends to be hurled about and used almost aggresively. THAT is what offends me, sorry. If gay people like to call themselves homos then that is their perogative I think. The default setting when chatting about humans is straight and I see no reason why that should always be assumed. If I found gay people using a similar word to insult straight people I would also find that offensive. I have to disagree that it's not "just a word" when it has the connotaions that have been given it in the past. But that is just my opinion I guess and you are certainly entitled to yours. I have no need to lighten up. My comments were not meant to be inflamatory or 'heavy' ;-) mp |
|
09 Jun 10 - 07:50 PM (#2924289) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: Don Firth Might I make another Swiftian "Modest Proposal" here?" My policy toward nicknames, euphemisms, and pejoratives is summed up thusly: I knew a young woman named "Kristine" who preferred to be addressed as "Kristine," not as "Kris." James lives across the hall from us, and he would rather not be called "Jim," but "James." Singer Will Pint (of Pint and Dale) prefers "Will," not "Bill." You get the picture. I refer to them as what they prefer to be called. Most homosexual men with whom I am acquainted tend to refer to themselves as "gay." I have never heard a term from ladies of Lesbian orientation save for "Dykes on Bikes" in the Gay Pride Parades, but I suspect that might simply be tossing an "in your face" term right back at homophobes. "Quaint?" Interesting character in E. F. Benson's series of "Map and Lucia" novels—and later television miniseries starring Geraldine McEwen and Prunella Scales: Quaint Irene Coles (Miss) ~ Resident of Taormina in West Street in Tilling. Free-spirited, free-speaking post-impressionist artist in the modern manner, Germanophil and socialist. Loathed by Miss Mapp who tried in vain to poison minds against her as a "disgrace to Tilling and her sex." In contrast Irene was merely amused by Miss Mapp and mockingly dismissive of her. To the irritation of Miss Mapp, male Tillingites such as Captain Puffin and Major Flint liked Irene and found her "fetching" and "killing." Produced daring life studies of Tilling fishmonger, Mr Hopkins au naturel and stinging caricatures, notably of Elizabeth Mapp. Lived in a very queer way [sic] with one gigantic maid called Lucy, who, but for her sex might have been in the Guards. Sometimes Irene sported an old wide-awake hat, tall collar and stock, large loose coat, knickerbockers and grey stockings. With a handsome boyish face, she often dressed boyishly with Eton crop, fisherman's jersey and breeches. Somewhat eccentric as reflected in her work and mad-cap antics, such as experimenting with living the day backwards, which was very advanced for Tilling. Drove a motorcycle with great elan. As I recall, there was no mention in the series of Quaint Irene's sexual preferences (or anyone's, for that matter), but there was a scene where Quaint Irene threatened to kiss Georgie (played with great panache by Nigel Hawthorne). She reassured him with the illuminating words: "Don't be alarmed, dear lamb. Your sex protects you from any forwardness on my part." But this was not all that revealing, really. Because no one could really be quite sure about Georgie. Don Firth |
|
09 Jun 10 - 07:58 PM (#2924293) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: mauvepink In a truly equal society no-one would feel the need to be proud of WHAT they are. They could be proud of WHO they are. For me it really is the person who matters because the person is a whole being. When we start seeing people as only a small part of what they are, then we not only limit ourselves to see the real person, we perhaps limit the chance of that person to achieve who they can be. Some people have found it neceassry to particulary show just one aspect of WHAT they are in order to be accepted as a whole person within their group or community. Some people think it is legitimate to limit a person's potential on just one aspect of who he/she is. In a truly equal society none of these names or labels would matter at all, capitalised or lower cased, as only the person would truly matter. The only time a given aspect of a person should be looked at is when there is a chance to affect you directly in some harmful way. If it has nothing to do with your relationship with this person then why waste time even thinking about it? If I am not looking to sleep with a person then why the heck should it matter what their sexuality is? Or is that too simple a model? ;-) mp |
|
09 Jun 10 - 08:06 PM (#2924297) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: mauvepink Don :-) I know several lesbians who prefer to call themselves 'gay' rather than lesbian. Some feminist lesbians will not be called gay because it tends toward being a 'male term'. I think you hit the nail firmly on the head. Let the person decide what they like to be called if their sexuality has to be mentioned. Afford thye person the choice. I am sure they appreciate the thought... Just like we all like being referred to by the name we like. Great point Don! mp |
|
09 Jun 10 - 08:16 PM (#2924300) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: gnu mauve... sorry for my ignorance... I did not mean offense and certainly did not mean to say it "nastily" ... I will try to refrain. I grew up when bi/homosexuality was not "okay". "Homo" was not even a term used. Queer, cocksucker, cocksmoker, fag, others were used and violence was always a threat for anyone "fay" in any way, sadly. Matter of fact, I grew up when there were no lesbians... seriously... never even heard of that until I was a teenager. In any case, I apologize for my callousness. I am still hopeful that I will grow up one day. |
|
10 Jun 10 - 04:35 AM (#2924427) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: mauvepink gnu.... I never took you as being callous or ignorant! I was just pointing out why I myself had a problem with the use of the word homo. I made no point towards you other than to explain why I find it offensive. I remember, a long time agao, I was using a word I had no idea was offensive to so many. I cannot even remember it now, it is so long ago, and all I could do was stop using it when I found out it had bad connotations. This happens and I am not perfect in any way. Thanks for being so magnaminous but, truly, there is no need. Let them who is without sin... etc.. :-) Best wishes mp |
|
10 Jun 10 - 01:06 PM (#2924708) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: frogprince Example of this; please forgive the drift factor. For as long as I can remember, I have heard married American Indian women referred to as "squaws"; I thought squaw was simply the word for wife in at least some Indian tongues. A couple of years back I heard a local man, an Indian who does cultural presentations, say that "squaw" is derogatory, more or less equivalent to "Ho". |
|
10 Jun 10 - 08:24 PM (#2925105) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: akenaton A simple case of re-branding. Commercial companies do it all the time, usually to cover some flaws in the product, or negative public perception of same. |
|
10 Jun 10 - 08:39 PM (#2925110) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: Ed T I know a man that has a first name Gay, and a woman who has a last neme GaY. Then there is the product Ben Gay. |
|
11 Jun 10 - 02:15 PM (#2925581) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: PHJim Emma said: Interestingly, according to Wiki "Bringing Up Baby (1938) was the first film to use the word gay in apparent reference to homosexuality. In a scene where Cary Grant's clothes have been sent to the cleaners, he must wear a lady's feathery robe. When another character inquires about his clothes, he responds "Because I just went gay...all of a sudden!" However, since this was a mainstream film at a time when the use of the word to refer to homosexuality would still be unfamiliar to most film-goers, the line can also be interpreted to mean "I just decided to do something frivolous." There is much debate about what Grant meant with the ad-lib (the line was not in the script). Cary Grant did not use the word gay to mean that he was suddenly attracted to men. Cross dressing is not a fetish that is confined to gay men. As many, if not more, straight men enjoy cross dressing as gay men. Bringing up baby used the word gay, but not to refer to homosexuality. |
|
11 Jun 10 - 02:54 PM (#2925623) Subject: RE: BS: Why gay, and not Gay ? From: meself Re: "squaw". It is derived a word that simply means "woman" in one if not several Aboriginal languages. What the speaker was no doubt referring to was the fact that over the centuries it has taken on negative connotations, to the point that today it is considered offensive. Now back to our regular program. |