This thread is so gay

[Kilgore Trout]

Just because you don't intend it to be insulting to gay people does not mean that it isn't. It also doesn't mean that the usage of the word gay in a derogatory sense doesn't subconcsiouly cause you, or your listeners, to link the concept of gay with being uncool, wrong, etc.

It's like in Talledega Nights: Just because you say "With all due respect" before you say something, doesn't mean that you get to say anything you want. You can say that you don't mean to be offensive, but the fact is, you are being offensive.

If I intend no offense, and there's no one there to be offended, than "being offensive" becomes rather meaningless.

 

[Magic Man]

Just because you don't intend it to be insulting to gay people does not mean that it isn't. It also doesn't mean that the usage of the word gay in a derogatory sense doesn't subconcsiouly cause you, or your listeners, to link the concept of gay with being uncool, wrong, etc.

First, if someone hears me say it and knows that I support the LGBT community, they should realize that I'm not using it to be insulting to gay people.

Second, the use of the word in a derogatory sense doesn't subconsciously cause me or my listeners to link the concept of gay with being uncool or bad. I thought I made that clear when I said I use it around people who are either gay or "gay-friendly", if you will.

You can say that you don't mean to be offensive, but the fact is, you are being offensive.

Only to some people. Other people don't find it offensive at all, which, again, is why I and others are careful not to use it in certain situations.

 

[Falvlun]

Right, and at some point in time I'm guessing the b word was used both to mean a boy born out of wedlock and as an insult.

I think the difference is that ******* was almost always considered an insult. I mean, it wasn't ever a good thing to be considered a *******.

We are trying to get people to think that being gay is, if not a good thing, at least, not a bad thing.

EDIT:
In other words, being gay is not a bad thing. Being a child born out of wedlock was considered to be a bad thing, so it easily lent itself to becoming an insult.

 

[Falvlun]

If I intend no offense, and there's no one there to be offended, than "being offensive" becomes rather meaningless.

Unless you are the only person in the room, you can't really know whether there's no one around to be offended.

Regardless, it's still harmful, even if it's just among you and your unoffendable cronies. Why? Because familiarity breeds contempt. The more you use it; the more it will become an integral part of your speech pattern, and the more likely it will slip out in mixed company.

Furthermore, you are simply strengthening the connection in your brain, and that of your listeners, that gay is undesirable. It's a subconcious linkage.

Lastly, when there are so many other words to choose from, why use the one that is directly derived to denigrate a group of people? Why even go there?

 

[Magic Man]

I think the difference is that ******* was almost always considered an insult. I mean, it wasn't ever a good thing to be considered a *******.

We are trying to get people to think that being gay is, if not a good thing, at least, not a bad thing.

EDIT:
In other words, being gay is not a bad thing. Being a child born out of wedlock was considered to be a bad thing, so it easily lent itself to becoming an insult.

But being gay is considered a bad thing by people, hence why people would get offended by this use of it. Just like being gay is not bad, but is seen that way by some, being born out of wedlock was not actually a bad thing, but was seen that way by some. I don't think your difference is legitimate.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Unless you are the only person in the room, you can't really know whether there's no one around to be offended.

Unless, of course, I'm around people I know wouldn't be offended.

Regardless, it's still harmful, even if it's just among you and your unoffendable cronies. Why? Because familiarity breeds contempt.

I think you're misusing this phrase.

The more you use it; the more it will become an integral part of your speech pattern, and the more likely it will slip out in mixed company.

I don't know about you, but I have no problem keeping track of what language I use contextually depending on where I'm at, and who I'm around. If I had so little control over my behavior, I doubt I'd leave the house.

Furthermore, you are simply strengthening the connection in your brain, and that of your listeners, that gay is undesirable. It's a subconcious linkage.

Only if the link between gay and bad already exists. You might have missed the whole thing about words having different contextual usages.

Lastly, when there are so many other words to choose from, why use the one that is directly derived to denigrate a group of people? Why even go there?

Sometimes it's the most effective word for communicating what you mean. That's just how I roll.

 

[Falvlun]

First, if someone hears me say it and knows that I support the LGBT community, they should realize that I'm not using it to be insulting to gay people.

Some things are insulting regardless of intention.

If I did not know you, or did not know you well, and I heard you say this, I would assume you were not sympathetic to the LGBT cause. The LGBT community needs solidarity; they need numbers. So why do something that makes it look like they have less numbers than they actually have?

Second, the use of the word in a derogatory sense doesn't subconsciously cause me or my listeners to link the concept of gay with being uncool or bad. I thought I made that clear when I said I use it around people who are either gay or "gay-friendly", if you will.

I disagree. I feel that it chips away at the concept that being gay can be a good thing.

Have you ever described something good as gay? Why not? The way you are using the word gay was specifically generated because being homosexual was (and is) considered to be a bad, uncool thing. I don't know why you would want to perpetuate this stereotype, simply because you can't be bothered to use a different word.

Only to some people. Other people don't find it offensive at all, which, again, is why I and others are careful not to use it in certain situations.

Seems like a lot of trouble. Why bother to use it at all? Do you derive such pleasure from saying "That's so gay" that you must engineer moments when you can utter that delicious phrase?

 

[Magic Man]

Unless you are the only person in the room, you can't really know whether there's no one around to be offended.

Regardless, it's still harmful, even if it's just among you and your unoffendable cronies. Why? Because familiarity breeds contempt. The more you use it; the more it will become an integral part of your speech pattern, and the more likely it will slip out in mixed company.

No. As I said before, I tell offensive jokes, but only to certain people. You could say the same thing you do here about that, that I shouldn't tell those jokes because I run the risk of having something slip out. But that's not how it works. I know how to control myself.

Furthermore, you are simply strengthening the connection in your brain, and that of your listeners, that gay is undesirable. It's a subconcious linkage.

Again, no. That's just incorrect. My friends don't think being gay is undesirable and neither do I. Our using the word "gay" in this sense will not make us think differently. Over the last couple decades the acceptance of the LGBT community has grown by leaps and bounds, during the same time when the use of "that's gay" or "that's so gay" became popular. It seems society at large can come to accept homosexuality as a normal part of life while using the term this way.

Lastly, when there are so many other words to choose from, why use the one that is directly derived to denigrate a group of people? Why even go there?

Because it has a special connotation. I like what Nick Swardson said in one of his stand-ups: What else am I supposed to call a fanny pack?

 

[Magic Man]

Some things are insulting regardless of intention.

To certain people, which is why you should be careful not to use those things around them.

If I did not know you, or did not know you well, and I heard you say this, I would assume you were not sympathetic to the LGBT cause. The LGBT community needs solidarity; they need numbers. So why do something that makes it look like they have less numbers than they actually have?

If you didn't know me well enough to know that I support the LGBT community and causes, then you probably wouldn't hear me say it.

I disagree. I feel that it chips away at the concept that being gay can be a good thing.

I'm not sure how you can disagree with this. My friends and I aren't going to start thinking there's something wrong with being gay. It's not going to happen, period.

Seems like a lot of trouble. Why bother to use it at all?

How is it a lot of trouble to not say something around people you don't know very well? Maybe that's hard for you, but not for me.

Do you derive such pleasure from saying "That's so gay" that you must engineer moments when you can utter that delicious phrase?

Wow...you should probably not degrade yourself with ridiculous questions like this.

 

[Falvlun]

But being gay is considered a bad thing by people, hence why people would get offended by this use of it. Just like being gay is not bad, but is seen that way by some, being born out of wedlock was not actually a bad thing, but was seen that way by some. I don't think your difference is legitimate.

Sorry, didn't make it clear.

The difference is that the people using the b-word as an insult were the same people who considered being born out of wedlock to be a bad thing.

The difference here is that we have people using the word gay as an insult even though they don't think being gay is a bad thing.

It makes sense to use a bad thing as an insult; it doesn't make sense to use a good thing as an insult.

 

[Falvlun]

The fact of the matter is that you could use a different word. You just don't want to. You prefer to possibly offend someone, to possibly make someone feel less safe, to make someone unsure of your alliance, to perpetuate a negative stereotype about gay people, to imprint a negative connotation about gay people on impressionable minds, than to simply give up the questionable usage of a word that denotes a group of persecuted people. That's pretty selfish, mates.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

The fact of the matter is that you could use a different word. You just don't want to. You prefer to possibly offend someone, to possibly make someone feel less safe, to make someone unsure of your alliance, to perpetuate a negative stereotype about gay people, to imprint a negative connotation about gay people on impressionable minds, than to simply give up the questionable usage of a word that denotes a group of persecuted people. That's pretty selfish, mates.

Your rhetoric and lies offend me.

 

[Panda]

The fact of the matter is that you could use a different word. You just don't want to. You prefer to possibly offend someone, to possibly make someone feel less safe, to make someone unsure of your alliance, to perpetuate a negative stereotype about gay people, to imprint a negative connotation about gay people on impressionable minds, than to simply give up the questionable usage of a word that denotes a group of persecuted people. That's pretty selfish, mates.

How can you presume to know what another person thinks? Especially someone you don't know?

 

[Magic Man]

Sorry, didn't make it clear.

The difference is that the people using the b-word as an insult were the same people who considered being born out of wedlock to be a bad thing.

How do you know? That was my point. I'm sure at a certain point it was being used as just an insult even by people who didn't associate it with the "born out of wedlock" meaning.

The difference here is that we have people using the word gay as an insult even though they don't think being gay is a bad thing.

It makes sense to use a bad thing as an insult; it doesn't make sense to use a good thing as an insult.

The two situations actually work against you. They are practically identical. Being gay is not bad. Being a bas**** is not bad. Some view each as bad. Each term has come to be used as an insult dissociated from its other meaning. I don't consider being born out of wedlock to be a bad thing, just like I don't consider being gay to be bad, but I use both of those terms as insults.

 

[Falvlun]

How can you presume to know what another person thinks? Especially someone you don't know?

What part do you object to?

Do you deny that it is possible for a person to choose a different word it they wanted to? That is the only thing I presumed. They told me how they thought about the rest.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

What part do you object to?

Do you deny that it is possible for a person to choose a different word it they wanted to? That is the only thing I presumed. They told me how they thought about the rest.

You're being so gay.

 

[Magic Man]

The fact of the matter is that you could use a different word. You just don't want to. You prefer to possibly offend someone, to possibly make someone feel less safe, to make someone unsure of your alliance, to perpetuate a negative stereotype about gay people, to imprint a negative connotation about gay people on impressionable minds, than to simply give up the questionable usage of a word that denotes a group of persecuted people. That's pretty selfish, mates.

In other words, you like to be offended and don't like to actually listen when people talk to you. Got it. That's pretty selfish, though isn't it?

 

[Falvlun]

You're being so gay.

Why thank you. :blushes:

 

[Magic Man]

You're being so gay.

Why are you so black?

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Why are you so black?

I just love absorbing all the light that hits me.