I don't care if you don't mean it when you say, somewhere in your brain the connection between 'gay' and 'stupid' exists, or you wouldn't say it.
Or they've just developed a habit from hearing other people do it.
And that habit, in turn, inscribes anti-homosexual sentiment in society.
Citation needed?
If somebody on Xbox Live says "Man, camping the warthog is so gay," and he's not thinking about homosexuality, and his teammates aren't thinking about homosexuality, how is an anti-homosexual sentiment being inscribed?
Do you believe that the human mind conflates all definitions of a word or all words that sound alike?
Well, I dunno. Kids will be kids, and I don't think you're going to stop derogatory terms in middle school anytime soon (particularly with the lax disciplinary measures we see today, but that's a whole other can of worms).
That said, I do use the term gay to describe to things quite often and now that it's been brought to my attention I can realize how juvenile and (particularly) inaccurate it really is. The goal then, might to be bring this error to society's attention and those who are not complete assholes will shy away from using the term in lieu of not wanting to offend homosexuals. This will, of course, result in homophobes and assholes using the word more as if to accentuate their point. Thus, without getting into deeply involved conversations with said assholes, it becomes easier to identify the type of people you'd prefer not to associate with.
If somebody on Xbox Live says "Man, camping the warthog is so gay," and he's not thinking about homosexuality, and his teammates aren't thinking about homosexuality, how is an anti-homosexual sentiment being inscribed?
Do you believe that the human mind conflates all definitions of a word or all words that sound alike?
Like I said, it's more a philosophical point than a practical point, which relates to words and cognition. (In the article linked in the OP, they cite the extent to which homosexual teens are harrassed or attacked in school, which even I agree is a tenuous link, but worthy of note).
You concede a link exists between words and cognition in the next part of your post, so I won't really bother arguing it, you just disagree with the extent to which it has a tangible effect on social attitudes.
I personally think language is pretty central to how we understand the world around us. But like I said, more philosophical than practical, my faith in that.
Just totally rambling now -- I was thinking about how the verb "sucks" is actually a shortening from "sucks dick," because sucking dick was seen as a demeaning thing, and as such it was loosely, lazily applied, all part of the attitude against non-traditional sexuality like women who would want to perform oral sex. I don't think that attitude is quite as prevalent as before, despite the concomitant rise in the slang formation "that sucks," but then again I think the fact that you can delete the "dick" from the phrase to make it work also helps in that. If people replaced all instances of "it sucks [dick]" with "it sucks dick," I think you'd see people's reaction to that statement change rather rapidly, because, really, what's so bad about sucking dick?
People would approach someone completely differently if they were like, "Point blank -- The Dark Knight sucked dick. The story sucked dick, all the characters sucked dick, maybe Heath Ledger didn't suck dick quite as much as everyone else in the movie, but overall it was definitely one giant pile of dick sucking, and I would only recommend people who like dick sucking things go to see it. Personally, I prefer my entertainment not to suck dick, but I guess I'm just different that way." etc.
If somebody on Xbox Live says "Man, camping the warthog is so gay," and he's not thinking about homosexuality, and his teammates aren't thinking about homosexuality, how is an anti-homosexual sentiment being inscribed?
Do you believe that the human mind conflates all definitions of a word or all words that sound alike?
Like I said, it's more a philosophical point than a practical point, which relates to words and cognition.
Yeah, and I don't think we're going to resolve it in this thread.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
Then I beat myself up and take my own lunch money, just to save time.
I try hard not to use "gay", given that I've got gay friends and don't want to be a dick. I sometimes fail, but am working on it. I'm more likely to use "fabulous", but I use it more specifically to mean "swishy and effeminate", which I often mean in a derogatory way (when a video-game character is supposed to look badass, but instead looks swishy and effeminate, for example). It's still tied up in teh ghey, since the swishy effeminate == gay thing is there, but until calling someone "a dandy" comes back, I don't know what else to use beyond "metrosexual", which, as above, I'd likely beat myself up and take my own lunch money after using.
I'm bad about "lame". I use it. I know some people are offended by it. I'm working on it, but not to the degree that I'm working on "gay", probably because I don't have disabled friends who, even if they don't say anything, remind me just by being there that I'm kind of a dick every time I let the word slip out.
Yeah, and I don't think we're going to resolve it in this thread.
So relating strictly to the OP, and not to the larger philosophical point, you think the ads are a waste of time and money?
Honestly, I'm sort of indifferent, because I don't know if advertising can really change attitudes just like that, but then again I'm not mad they exist or anything. I support the message, even if I personally wouldn't put my own time or money into spreading it in a national ad campaign.
The Green Eyed Monster on
0
Options
KageraImitating the worst people. Since 2004Registered Userregular
edited October 2008
I've decided I'll be using "That's so Raven" instead of 'that's so gay' from now on.
Unfortunately I never actually use gay in spoken word, only the internet. And I can't remember the last time I used that in the offending connotation.
A friend of mine from high school got me to stop saying it freshman year, and I'm really glad that she did, because I knew that it wasn't that great to say.
I think I got in the habit from playing Counterstrike a lot.
they're more going along the lines of 'you might not want to say this word because well some people are gay and that's not very nice to them.'
Just look at the posts in this thread - there are plenty of people that don't seem to understand that.
The one with Hillary Duff, in particular, works pretty well IMO. It's gentle, low-outrage, and witty; it points out the subtext obliquely and comes off as good advice from someone you want to emulate.
Yeah, and I don't think we're going to resolve it in this thread.
So relating strictly to the OP, and not to the larger philosophical point, you think the ads are a waste of time and money?
No, because there's a strong subtext of: "Think about how gay people feel." That message, I think, will extend past the simple issue of using 'gay' as a pejorative and improve attitudes about homosexuality in general.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
Yeah, and I don't think we're going to resolve it in this thread.
So relating strictly to the OP, and not to the larger philosophical point, you think the ads are a waste of time and money?
No, because there's a strong subtext of: "Think about how gay people feel." That message, I think, will extend past the simple issue of using 'gay' as a pejorative and improve attitudes about homosexuality in general.
Not to people who don't care.
I don't think the pie chart of people who use 'gay' as a derogatory term is split 50/50 between actual bigots and people who have this as a bad habit. I think the bigot chunk of the pie is significantly larger. You hop onto XBox 360 for more than 20 mins, in a game like CoD4 or Halo, and you hear the people who are saying "The rocket launcher is so gay!" are the exact same people who then follow up with; "Haha, you missed, FAG..."
This is a much larger problem than people just being insensitive or ignorant of what they're saying. This is a deep running bigotry towards gay people in America.
Headspace Cools on
0
Options
Zilla36021st Century. |She/Her|Trans* Woman In Aviators Firing A Bazooka. ⚛️Registered Userregular
edited October 2008
I've always liked the word 'Tripudiate'. :P
[fr. L. tripudiare, to dance] (rare)
1) to dance, skip, or leap for joy; to exult 2) to trample, stamp, or jump upon in contempt or triumph
I don't really have anything else to add in this thread, other than that I agree with everything Pony has said.
Yeah, and I don't think we're going to resolve it in this thread.
So relating strictly to the OP, and not to the larger philosophical point, you think the ads are a waste of time and money?
No, because there's a strong subtext of: "Think about how gay people feel." That message, I think, will extend past the simple issue of using 'gay' as a pejorative and improve attitudes about homosexuality in general.
Not to people who don't care.
Victimization requires dehumanization; humanizing the victim counteracts that. It won't change the attitudes of all the bigots in the country overnight, but I do think it will help.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
Yeah, and I don't think we're going to resolve it in this thread.
So relating strictly to the OP, and not to the larger philosophical point, you think the ads are a waste of time and money?
No, because there's a strong subtext of: "Think about how gay people feel." That message, I think, will extend past the simple issue of using 'gay' as a pejorative and improve attitudes about homosexuality in general.
Not to people who don't care.
I don't think the pie chart of people who use 'gay' as a derogatory term is split 50/50 between actual bigots and people who have this as a bad habit. I think the bigot chunk of the pie is significantly larger. You hop onto XBox 360 for more than 20 mins, in a game like CoD4 or Halo, and you hear the people who are saying "The rocket launcher is so gay!" are the exact same people who then follow up with; "Haha, you missed, FAG..."
This is a much larger problem than people just being insensitive or ignorant of what they're saying. This is a deep running bigotry towards gay people in America.
I think the know-nothing defense, though, is that those people are deeply enlightened individuals who totally aren't think of gay people at all when they say FAG. They just mean, oh, a totally non-specific unlikeable person.
Or maybe a bundle of wood for burning.
edit: I mean -- like I said before, it's not about whether people who through these pejoratives around are, on some level, at least slightly uncomfortable with homosexuality... but if it were about that? I'm skeptical.
Yeah, and I don't think we're going to resolve it in this thread.
So relating strictly to the OP, and not to the larger philosophical point, you think the ads are a waste of time and money?
No, because there's a strong subtext of: "Think about how gay people feel." That message, I think, will extend past the simple issue of using 'gay' as a pejorative and improve attitudes about homosexuality in general.
Not to people who don't care.
Victimization requires dehumanization; humanizing the victim counteracts that. It won't change the attitudes of all the bigots in the country overnight, but I do think it will help.
Yeah, I really don't think all that many people are true unrepentant assholes. A lot just don't encounter any gay people in their lives, and have had them presented as examples of unenviable, emasculated, effeminate men. Showing them that gay people are in fact other people is a way of cooling off that sort of ire.
A lot just don't encounter any gay people in their lives, and have had them presented as examples of unenviable, emasculated, effeminate men.
Oddly enough, the most unenviable, emasculated, and effeminate men I know are married. The first two especially.
On topic, I can see Feral's point about counteracting dehumanization, but on the other hand I can see these ads just encouraging the 12 year old bastards who are most likely to use the term anyway.
I think that the internet has been for years on the path to creating what is essentially an electronic Necronomicon: A collection of blasphemous unrealities so perverse that to even glimpse at its contents, if but for a moment, is to irrevocably forfeit a portion of your sanity.
Xbox - PearlBlueS0ul, Steam
If you ever need to talk to someone, feel free to message me. Yes, that includes you.
Yeah, and I don't think we're going to resolve it in this thread.
So relating strictly to the OP, and not to the larger philosophical point, you think the ads are a waste of time and money?
No, because there's a strong subtext of: "Think about how gay people feel." That message, I think, will extend past the simple issue of using 'gay' as a pejorative and improve attitudes about homosexuality in general.
Not to people who don't care.
I don't think the pie chart of people who use 'gay' as a derogatory term is split 50/50 between actual bigots and people who have this as a bad habit. I think the bigot chunk of the pie is significantly larger. You hop onto XBox 360 for more than 20 mins, in a game like CoD4 or Halo, and you hear the people who are saying "The rocket launcher is so gay!" are the exact same people who then follow up with; "Haha, you missed, FAG..."
This is a much larger problem than people just being insensitive or ignorant of what they're saying. This is a deep running bigotry towards gay people in America.
I think the know-nothing defense, though, is that those people are deeply enlightened individuals who totally aren't think of gay people at all when they say FAG. They just mean, oh, a totally non-specific unlikeable person.
Or maybe a bundle of wood for burning.
edit: I mean -- like I said before, it's not about whether people who through these pejoratives around are, on some level, at least slightly uncomfortable with homosexuality... but if it were about that? I'm skeptical.
I think it'd be a beautiful world if this were true, but I also honestly believe that the vast majority of people who use 'gay' and 'fag' as derogative declarations are - in fact - well aware of their bigotry and maybe even proud of it.
A lot just don't encounter any gay people in their lives, and have had them presented as examples of unenviable, emasculated, effeminate men.
Oddly enough, the most unenviable, emasculated, and effeminate men I know are married. The first two especially.
On topic, I can see Feral's point about counteracting dehumanization, but on the other hand I can see these ads just encouraging the 12 year old bastards who are most likely to use the term anyway.
I see what they're getting at, but is this really that big of an issue? It seems like another case of political correctness run amok.
Should I be offended the next time someone says they're going to Irish up their coffee?
I haven't seen a lot of guys chained to pickups and dragged until their limbs came off because they were Irish lately. Pretty much the worst thing we (Irish Americans) have to worry about are the Lucky Charms mascot and the fact that Notre Dame hasn't been a good football team since they started cracking down on under-the-table payments to athletes.
I see what they're getting at, but is this really that big of an issue? It seems like another case of political correctness run amok.
Should I be offended the next time someone says they're going to Irish up their coffee?
It's a pretty big deal, especially for the target of the ads: kids.
I haven't seen a lot of guys chained to pickups and dragged until their limbs came off because they were Irish lately. Pretty much the worst thing we (Irish Americans) have to worry about are the Lucky Charms mascot and the fact that Notre Dame hasn't been a good football team since they started cracking down on under-the-table payments to athletes.
To be fair, there was a time in history when the Irish were quite mistreated.
It stopped because of major social change, not because people stopped using a less than PC phrase they meant no harm by.
I haven't seen a lot of guys chained to pickups and dragged until their limbs came off because they were Irish lately. Pretty much the worst thing we (Irish Americans) have to worry about are the Lucky Charms mascot and the fact that Notre Dame hasn't been a good football team since they started cracking down on under-the-table payments to athletes.
Racism is by no means dead, but it's come a long way towards a more progressive and tolerant (though I hate what that word implies) place in American society. Homosexuality has not progressed as far.
Sure you've got Ellen on TV and other shows/movies where gay characters are prominent, and that is quite a change from 40 years ago, yet you still have people debating whether gay couples deserve certain rights that other people take for granted.
So I think it's more of an appearance of progression, and a genuine effort - by a very vocal minority - to push towards true equality... but the bias, hatred and flat-out fear is still there and will be there for a long time to come.
Technically, the ungendered pronouns in the English language are identical to the masculine pronouns. Appropriation of singular plurals ("they") and other methods are all part of the [understandable] backlash. :P
EDIT: I'm not going to deny that this helps reinforce a patriarchal society, of course, in its ... own small way.
You know, I only learned 6 months ago that using "they/their" as a substitute for "he/his" was completely wrong? I used to do it all of the time.
I like that most of my professors mix it up really well when lecturing, usually using more "she"s then "he"s.
WRONG
Okay, so I'm a writing tutor, and this is coming straight from the professor in charge of the tutoring center.
If you want to learn actual English, the worst person to ask is an English teacher. Here's what you say to anyone who tries to tell you that using "they" as a singular is somehow "wrong":
Sally left the room, didn't she?
Jack left the room, didn't he?
Someone left the room, didn't ___?
If you can find anyone who will use anything but "they" in that blank in actual speech, I will give you a shiny nickel.
"They" is the singular. That's how it's used. That's all there is to it. There's no such thing as "official" English— that's crap. Grammarians are dumb.
Note that this factual advice does not constitute a guarantee against points taken off by a misguided prescriptivist :P
I would use they in that sentence knowing it is wrong exactly the way I would use they incorrectly anywhere else. If I was writing and trying to use good grammar, I would immediately recognize, "someone left the room, didn't they?" as incorrect.
I haven't seen a lot of guys chained to pickups and dragged until their limbs came off because they were Irish lately. Pretty much the worst thing we (Irish Americans) have to worry about are the Lucky Charms mascot and the fact that Notre Dame hasn't been a good football team since they started cracking down on under-the-table payments to athletes.
To be fair, there was a time in history when the Irish were quite mistreated.
Indeed.
It stopped because of major social change, not because people stopped using a less than PC phrase they meant no harm by.
Of which the general public's growing intolerance for "dirty mick" or "he's got a head like a n----" as general phrases was likely a part.
I haven't seen a lot of guys chained to pickups and dragged until their limbs came off because they were Irish lately. Pretty much the worst thing we (Irish Americans) have to worry about are the Lucky Charms mascot and the fact that Notre Dame hasn't been a good football team since they started cracking down on under-the-table payments to athletes.
To be fair, there was a time in history when the Irish were quite mistreated.
Indeed.
It stopped because of major social change, not because people stopped using a less than PC phrase they meant no harm by.
Of which the general public's growing intolerance for "dirty mick" or "he's got a head like a n----" as general phrases was likely a part.
Seriously, it's not either/or. Not allowing your particular group to be ridiculed constantly is a big step towards some respect in the public eye.
I would use they in that sentence knowing it is wrong exactly the way I would use they incorrectly anywhere else. If I was writing and trying to use good grammar, I would immediately recognize, "someone left the room, didn't they?" as incorrect.
Says who? Because the English-speaking population of the world tends to disagree.
Again, mind, if a grammarian happens to be grading your paper you might just as soon pick your battles.
Adrien on
0
Options
WulfDisciple of TzeentchThe Void... (New Jersey)Registered Userregular
edited October 2008
Can we just.. I dunno, let all the people who hate using Non-PC terms form their own country or something. You know, where they can just watch kittens playing in fields on all their TV channels and play hopscotch in the parking lots.
Can we just.. I dunno, let all the people who hate using Non-PC terms form their own country or something. You know, where they can just watch kittens playing in fields on all their TV channels and play hopscotch in the parking lots.
Our own country where we don't have to deal with bigots who hide behind the "OMG, U R BEEING 2 PC ABOUT EVERTING!" excuse?
That sounds like paradise!
Headspace Cools on
0
Options
ShadowfireVermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered Userregular
Yeah, and I don't think we're going to resolve it in this thread.
So relating strictly to the OP, and not to the larger philosophical point, you think the ads are a waste of time and money?
No, because there's a strong subtext of: "Think about how gay people feel." That message, I think, will extend past the simple issue of using 'gay' as a pejorative and improve attitudes about homosexuality in general.
Not to people who don't care.
I don't think the pie chart of people who use 'gay' as a derogatory term is split 50/50 between actual bigots and people who have this as a bad habit. I think the bigot chunk of the pie is significantly larger. You hop onto XBox 360 for more than 20 mins, in a game like CoD4 or Halo, and you hear the people who are saying "The rocket launcher is so gay!" are the exact same people who then follow up with; "Haha, you missed, FAG..."
This is a much larger problem than people just being insensitive or ignorant of what they're saying. This is a deep running bigotry towards gay people in America.
So when my mother-in-law says "that's gay," she's showing a bigotry toward homosexuals?
Is it the same when she calls Christopher Lowell a "flaming faggot?"
Yeah, and I don't think we're going to resolve it in this thread.
So relating strictly to the OP, and not to the larger philosophical point, you think the ads are a waste of time and money?
No, because there's a strong subtext of: "Think about how gay people feel." That message, I think, will extend past the simple issue of using 'gay' as a pejorative and improve attitudes about homosexuality in general.
Not to people who don't care.
I don't think the pie chart of people who use 'gay' as a derogatory term is split 50/50 between actual bigots and people who have this as a bad habit. I think the bigot chunk of the pie is significantly larger. You hop onto XBox 360 for more than 20 mins, in a game like CoD4 or Halo, and you hear the people who are saying "The rocket launcher is so gay!" are the exact same people who then follow up with; "Haha, you missed, FAG..."
This is a much larger problem than people just being insensitive or ignorant of what they're saying. This is a deep running bigotry towards gay people in America.
So when my mother-in-law says "that's gay," she's showing a bigotry toward homosexuals?
Is it the same when she calls Christopher Lowell a "flaming faggot?"
She is a lesbian
No, the carpet-munching is what makes her gay.
:P
Sorry, couldn't resist. No disrespect.
*EDIT: I just realized what I said here makes NO sense whatsoever. In my desperation to make a joke I totally mangled things. YAY FOR ME!
Yeah, and I don't think we're going to resolve it in this thread.
So relating strictly to the OP, and not to the larger philosophical point, you think the ads are a waste of time and money?
No, because there's a strong subtext of: "Think about how gay people feel." That message, I think, will extend past the simple issue of using 'gay' as a pejorative and improve attitudes about homosexuality in general.
Not to people who don't care.
I don't think the pie chart of people who use 'gay' as a derogatory term is split 50/50 between actual bigots and people who have this as a bad habit. I think the bigot chunk of the pie is significantly larger. You hop onto XBox 360 for more than 20 mins, in a game like CoD4 or Halo, and you hear the people who are saying "The rocket launcher is so gay!" are the exact same people who then follow up with; "Haha, you missed, FAG..."
This is a much larger problem than people just being insensitive or ignorant of what they're saying. This is a deep running bigotry towards gay people in America.
So when my mother-in-law says "that's gay," she's showing a bigotry toward homosexuals?
Is it the same when she calls Christopher Lowell a "flaming faggot?"
She is a lesbian
No. Because that is reclaiming the word (like when black people use the n-word, you see).
When a straight person uses those words in that manner, no matter their feelings toward homosexuals, they are not reclaiming the word. They are normalizing it.
Yeah, and I don't think we're going to resolve it in this thread.
So relating strictly to the OP, and not to the larger philosophical point, you think the ads are a waste of time and money?
No, because there's a strong subtext of: "Think about how gay people feel." That message, I think, will extend past the simple issue of using 'gay' as a pejorative and improve attitudes about homosexuality in general.
Not to people who don't care.
I don't think the pie chart of people who use 'gay' as a derogatory term is split 50/50 between actual bigots and people who have this as a bad habit. I think the bigot chunk of the pie is significantly larger. You hop onto XBox 360 for more than 20 mins, in a game like CoD4 or Halo, and you hear the people who are saying "The rocket launcher is so gay!" are the exact same people who then follow up with; "Haha, you missed, FAG..."
This is a much larger problem than people just being insensitive or ignorant of what they're saying. This is a deep running bigotry towards gay people in America.
So when my mother-in-law says "that's gay," she's showing a bigotry toward homosexuals?
Is it the same when she calls Christopher Lowell a "flaming faggot?"
She is a lesbian
No. Because that is reclaiming the word (like when black people use the n-word, you see).
When a straight person uses those words in that manner, no matter their feelings toward homosexuals, they are not reclaiming the word. They are normalizing it.
I think the whole 'reclaiming the word' thing is baloney. It's doing a disservice to your own 'people'.
My opinion, of course, and I don't impose it on others.
While I understand what they're trying to accomplish by doing it, I think the massive amount of time that the word has had such incredible negativity associated with it really does eliminate the chance of turning the word around. It's best to just not use it, or - in the case of 'that's so gay' - to not use it in a negative/dorogative sense.
Headspace Cools on
0
Options
ShadowfireVermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered Userregular
Yeah, and I don't think we're going to resolve it in this thread.
So relating strictly to the OP, and not to the larger philosophical point, you think the ads are a waste of time and money?
No, because there's a strong subtext of: "Think about how gay people feel." That message, I think, will extend past the simple issue of using 'gay' as a pejorative and improve attitudes about homosexuality in general.
Not to people who don't care.
I don't think the pie chart of people who use 'gay' as a derogatory term is split 50/50 between actual bigots and people who have this as a bad habit. I think the bigot chunk of the pie is significantly larger. You hop onto XBox 360 for more than 20 mins, in a game like CoD4 or Halo, and you hear the people who are saying "The rocket launcher is so gay!" are the exact same people who then follow up with; "Haha, you missed, FAG..."
This is a much larger problem than people just being insensitive or ignorant of what they're saying. This is a deep running bigotry towards gay people in America.
So when my mother-in-law says "that's gay," she's showing a bigotry toward homosexuals?
Is it the same when she calls Christopher Lowell a "flaming faggot?"
She is a lesbian
No. Because that is reclaiming the word (like when black people use the n-word, you see).
When a straight person uses those words in that manner, no matter their feelings toward homosexuals, they are not reclaiming the word. They are normalizing it.
I think the whole 'reclaiming the word' thing is baloney. It's doing a disservice to your own 'people'.
My opinion, of course, and I don't impose it on others.
While I understand what they're trying to accomplish by doing it, I think the massive amount of time that the word has had such incredible negativity associated with it really does eliminate the chance of turning the word around. It's best to just not use it, or - in the case of 'that's so gay' - to not use it in a negative/dorogative sense.
There's also the original intent of both "gay" and "fag," being that neither had much to do with homosexuality.
And for the record, I was trying to point out that a blanket statement like "people who say 'that's gay' are bigots" is stupid.
Posts
Citation needed?
If somebody on Xbox Live says "Man, camping the warthog is so gay," and he's not thinking about homosexuality, and his teammates aren't thinking about homosexuality, how is an anti-homosexual sentiment being inscribed?
Do you believe that the human mind conflates all definitions of a word or all words that sound alike?
Do I deny that such a link exists? No. I will concede that such a link exists.
Is that link as important as you're making it sound? I really doubt it.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
That said, I do use the term gay to describe to things quite often and now that it's been brought to my attention I can realize how juvenile and (particularly) inaccurate it really is. The goal then, might to be bring this error to society's attention and those who are not complete assholes will shy away from using the term in lieu of not wanting to offend homosexuals. This will, of course, result in homophobes and assholes using the word more as if to accentuate their point. Thus, without getting into deeply involved conversations with said assholes, it becomes easier to identify the type of people you'd prefer not to associate with.
You concede a link exists between words and cognition in the next part of your post, so I won't really bother arguing it, you just disagree with the extent to which it has a tangible effect on social attitudes.
I personally think language is pretty central to how we understand the world around us. But like I said, more philosophical than practical, my faith in that.
Just totally rambling now -- I was thinking about how the verb "sucks" is actually a shortening from "sucks dick," because sucking dick was seen as a demeaning thing, and as such it was loosely, lazily applied, all part of the attitude against non-traditional sexuality like women who would want to perform oral sex. I don't think that attitude is quite as prevalent as before, despite the concomitant rise in the slang formation "that sucks," but then again I think the fact that you can delete the "dick" from the phrase to make it work also helps in that. If people replaced all instances of "it sucks [dick]" with "it sucks dick," I think you'd see people's reaction to that statement change rather rapidly, because, really, what's so bad about sucking dick?
People would approach someone completely differently if they were like, "Point blank -- The Dark Knight sucked dick. The story sucked dick, all the characters sucked dick, maybe Heath Ledger didn't suck dick quite as much as everyone else in the movie, but overall it was definitely one giant pile of dick sucking, and I would only recommend people who like dick sucking things go to see it. Personally, I prefer my entertainment not to suck dick, but I guess I'm just different that way." etc.
Anyway -- just rambling and pretty tangential.
Yeah, and I don't think we're going to resolve it in this thread.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Then I beat myself up and take my own lunch money, just to save time.
I try hard not to use "gay", given that I've got gay friends and don't want to be a dick. I sometimes fail, but am working on it. I'm more likely to use "fabulous", but I use it more specifically to mean "swishy and effeminate", which I often mean in a derogatory way (when a video-game character is supposed to look badass, but instead looks swishy and effeminate, for example). It's still tied up in teh ghey, since the swishy effeminate == gay thing is there, but until calling someone "a dandy" comes back, I don't know what else to use beyond "metrosexual", which, as above, I'd likely beat myself up and take my own lunch money after using.
I'm bad about "lame". I use it. I know some people are offended by it. I'm working on it, but not to the degree that I'm working on "gay", probably because I don't have disabled friends who, even if they don't say anything, remind me just by being there that I'm kind of a dick every time I let the word slip out.
Honestly, I'm sort of indifferent, because I don't know if advertising can really change attitudes just like that, but then again I'm not mad they exist or anything. I support the message, even if I personally wouldn't put my own time or money into spreading it in a national ad campaign.
Unfortunately I never actually use gay in spoken word, only the internet. And I can't remember the last time I used that in the offending connotation.
I think I got in the habit from playing Counterstrike a lot.
The one with Hillary Duff, in particular, works pretty well IMO. It's gentle, low-outrage, and witty; it points out the subtext obliquely and comes off as good advice from someone you want to emulate.
No, because there's a strong subtext of: "Think about how gay people feel." That message, I think, will extend past the simple issue of using 'gay' as a pejorative and improve attitudes about homosexuality in general.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Not to people who don't care.
I don't think the pie chart of people who use 'gay' as a derogatory term is split 50/50 between actual bigots and people who have this as a bad habit. I think the bigot chunk of the pie is significantly larger. You hop onto XBox 360 for more than 20 mins, in a game like CoD4 or Halo, and you hear the people who are saying "The rocket launcher is so gay!" are the exact same people who then follow up with; "Haha, you missed, FAG..."
This is a much larger problem than people just being insensitive or ignorant of what they're saying. This is a deep running bigotry towards gay people in America.
Victimization requires dehumanization; humanizing the victim counteracts that. It won't change the attitudes of all the bigots in the country overnight, but I do think it will help.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
I think the know-nothing defense, though, is that those people are deeply enlightened individuals who totally aren't think of gay people at all when they say FAG. They just mean, oh, a totally non-specific unlikeable person.
Or maybe a bundle of wood for burning.
edit: I mean -- like I said before, it's not about whether people who through these pejoratives around are, on some level, at least slightly uncomfortable with homosexuality... but if it were about that? I'm skeptical.
Yeah, I really don't think all that many people are true unrepentant assholes. A lot just don't encounter any gay people in their lives, and have had them presented as examples of unenviable, emasculated, effeminate men. Showing them that gay people are in fact other people is a way of cooling off that sort of ire.
Oddly enough, the most unenviable, emasculated, and effeminate men I know are married. The first two especially.
On topic, I can see Feral's point about counteracting dehumanization, but on the other hand I can see these ads just encouraging the 12 year old bastards who are most likely to use the term anyway.
If you ever need to talk to someone, feel free to message me. Yes, that includes you.
I think it'd be a beautiful world if this were true, but I also honestly believe that the vast majority of people who use 'gay' and 'fag' as derogative declarations are - in fact - well aware of their bigotry and maybe even proud of it.
Lizzy MacGuire has serious 12-year-old cred. 8-)
Should I be offended the next time someone says they're going to Irish up their coffee?
It's a pretty big deal, especially for the target of the ads: kids.
To be fair, there was a time in history when the Irish were quite mistreated.
It stopped because of major social change, not because people stopped using a less than PC phrase they meant no harm by.
Racism is by no means dead, but it's come a long way towards a more progressive and tolerant (though I hate what that word implies) place in American society. Homosexuality has not progressed as far.
Sure you've got Ellen on TV and other shows/movies where gay characters are prominent, and that is quite a change from 40 years ago, yet you still have people debating whether gay couples deserve certain rights that other people take for granted.
So I think it's more of an appearance of progression, and a genuine effort - by a very vocal minority - to push towards true equality... but the bias, hatred and flat-out fear is still there and will be there for a long time to come.
WRONG
Okay, so I'm a writing tutor, and this is coming straight from the professor in charge of the tutoring center.
If you want to learn actual English, the worst person to ask is an English teacher. Here's what you say to anyone who tries to tell you that using "they" as a singular is somehow "wrong":
Sally left the room, didn't she?
Jack left the room, didn't he?
Someone left the room, didn't ___?
If you can find anyone who will use anything but "they" in that blank in actual speech, I will give you a shiny nickel.
"They" is the singular. That's how it's used. That's all there is to it. There's no such thing as "official" English— that's crap. Grammarians are dumb.
Note that this factual advice does not constitute a guarantee against points taken off by a misguided prescriptivist :P
I would use they in that sentence knowing it is wrong exactly the way I would use they incorrectly anywhere else. If I was writing and trying to use good grammar, I would immediately recognize, "someone left the room, didn't they?" as incorrect.
Indeed.
Of which the general public's growing intolerance for "dirty mick" or "he's got a head like a n----" as general phrases was likely a part.
Seriously, it's not either/or. Not allowing your particular group to be ridiculed constantly is a big step towards some respect in the public eye.
The harder the rain, honey, the sweeter the sun.
Says who? Because the English-speaking population of the world tends to disagree.
I'll grant that this amounts to an argument between grammarians and linguists, but the point is that the linguists are right, because there is no académie anglaise; there's just how people talk.
Again, mind, if a grammarian happens to be grading your paper you might just as soon pick your battles.
Our own country where we don't have to deal with bigots who hide behind the "OMG, U R BEEING 2 PC ABOUT EVERTING!" excuse?
That sounds like paradise!
So when my mother-in-law says "that's gay," she's showing a bigotry toward homosexuals?
Is it the same when she calls Christopher Lowell a "flaming faggot?"
Or there is a person named Gay.
No, the carpet-munching is what makes her gay.
:P
Sorry, couldn't resist. No disrespect.
*EDIT: I just realized what I said here makes NO sense whatsoever. In my desperation to make a joke I totally mangled things. YAY FOR ME!
No. Because that is reclaiming the word (like when black people use the n-word, you see).
When a straight person uses those words in that manner, no matter their feelings toward homosexuals, they are not reclaiming the word. They are normalizing it.
3DS: 1607-3034-6970
I think the whole 'reclaiming the word' thing is baloney. It's doing a disservice to your own 'people'.
My opinion, of course, and I don't impose it on others.
While I understand what they're trying to accomplish by doing it, I think the massive amount of time that the word has had such incredible negativity associated with it really does eliminate the chance of turning the word around. It's best to just not use it, or - in the case of 'that's so gay' - to not use it in a negative/dorogative sense.
There's also the original intent of both "gay" and "fag," being that neither had much to do with homosexuality.
And for the record, I was trying to point out that a blanket statement like "people who say 'that's gay' are bigots" is stupid.