"That's so gay" - enough to get twelve-year-olds suspended

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

I'm not calling anyone names in specific, but if people continue to put forth incredibly stupid arguments I think it's safe to call them morons.

I don't see why mine and Agathon's arguments are "stupid". We're saying that one of the commonly accepted meanings of "gay" is as a synonym of "lame" and has no relations to the sexual meaning of "gay". No one has disproved this. Where's the stupidity?

Well it has an historical relation to it, but I can't see why they can't get it either.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Agathon


The last sentence is part of my claim. You want my support for it?

Can't you see that wishy-washy effeminate behaviour is silly (even in women)? You have noted that the stereotype of the fairy is known to be false of gay people - I know that. But the name for that stereotype is still "gay" - there is a fork in the meaning of the term here occasioned by the recognition that the stereotype is not true of homosexuals. I'd argue that the mild nature of the teen insult means that the teens are picking up on "gay" from the second fork - silly effeminate, etc. If they were trying to use it along the lines of "***" it would be a much deadlier insult, but it isn't. Case closed.

Again, this doesn't hold water in the face of the actual way in which homosexuals were regarded when the phrase originated--people were mocking gays for what they did just as much as for stereotypes as to how they acted. That's why derogatory phrases for what were seen as gay acts "********er," "butt buddy," etc. were also being used rampantly. To try to assert the use of "gay" in this context was somehow different from those and was aimed at mocking the stereotype is ludicrous in the face of the SLEW of other insults that were running concurrently. Your reasoning defies logic.

So can I, but I've noticed that things have changed. No teen-ager who wanted to insult a homosexual would use "gay", they wouldn't even use "queer" or "fairy" because these are a bit old and quaint. "***" is still verboten though.

Once again, it's not about an explicit intent in modern usage to deride gays--it's about the use of a group label to denote something bad or silly, which reinforces cultural notions, however subtley, that being a part of that group is a bad thing. It is really much more simple than the convulusions you're going through.

[Drake Tungsten]

mindseye, we brought up that point with the "Jew" phrase, but they repeatedly ignored it, because it doesn't compute to their illogic.

My friends (including our Jewish friend) use the term "jewish" to describe the cheating that sports videogames often use to give a good player competition. Do you think we're insulting our friend and his religion? Is he a self-hating Jew? Or are we just using a familiar word in a new way?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
I don't see why mine and Agathon's arguments are "stupid". We're saying that one of the commonly accepted meanings of "gay" is as a synonym of "lame" and has no relations to the sexual meaning of "gay". No one has disproved this. Where's the stupidity?

Because it's not something you can prove/disprove, and it DOES NOT MATTER.

People ARE offended by it, people WILL CONTINUE to be offended by it, REGARDLESS if some people on online forums "prove" (they can't) it has nothing to do with the sexuality.

The very word is identical to the sexual orientation. Kids don't know the difference, hell no one can know the difference and origin. To kids, it's just calling stupid things gay.

Hey, I wonder why gay people have such a hard time in high school???

That's why it's stupid.

(BTW, "lame" simply means weak/ineffective -- the fact that it can also refer to physically disabled people is completely different than "gay")

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Agathon
So it's similar in some respects, different in others. Big deal.

Originally posted by Agathon Well you are obviously too dopey to see that two words might have different histories and thus your case is a false analogy.

If you can't keep consistent arguments in the span of two posts, then this really is pointless.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Asher

I'm not calling anyone names in specific, but if people continue to put forth incredibly stupid arguments I think it's safe to call them morons.

From the chief dolt on Apolyton himself that is high praise indeed.

Such as telling millions of people that we can continue using a word and that they shouldn't be offended by it. The person with such an argument clearly doesn't understand that people WILL continue to be offended by it, regardless, and it also isn't clear from the context.

It is clear in the speech community (i.e. teens) in which it is used. It is their coinage, you have no right to tell them what their words mean.

Gay is used both as a catch-all insult and as a description of sexual orientation these days.

Yes, it is. Two different meanings.

Idiots can argue that they are completely separate, but they're obviously not -- it's the same stupid word.

Idiots like Asher who has just demonstrated that he is well aware of the distinction. I'll say it again in plain English: they used to be synonyms, now they are effectively homonyms.

And since we don't know exactly where it came from, and nobody will ever know, gay people will continue to assume it's because of the sexuality (which logically makes the most sense).

I know where it came from. I speak English.

[Drake Tungsten]

The very word is identical to the sexual orientation. Kids don't know the difference, hell no one can know the difference and origin. To kids, it's just calling stupid things gay.

Don't assume that kids can't recognize basic differences in context just because you can't...

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

mindseye, we brought up that point with the "Jew" phrase, but they repeatedly ignored it, because it doesn't compute to their illogic.

My friends (including our Jewish friend) use the term "jewish" to describe the cheating that sports videogames often use to give a good player competition. Do you think we're insulting our friend and his religion? Is he a self-hating Jew? Or are we just using a familiar word in a new way?

If a kid was in highschool gym class, and shouted a phrase, "don't be such a Jew with that ball," do you think that would be appropriate? If a kid in class said to his teacher, "don't be such a Jew with grades," would that be appropriate?

Your above story isn't a suitable comparison. If you have worked out an arragement with your friend that slurs are fine so long as everyone realizes they are in good fun, that's your business. But to expect people not in on the arrangement to not be offended when they hear you say it...please.

And would you possibly assert that the origin of the use of that phrase is in no way related to the hurtful stereotypes against Jews? Of course you wouldn't.

[mindseye]

So it's similar in some respects, different in others. Big deal.

It's not just different, it's the opposite!

Well you are obviously too dopey to see that two words might have different histories

Except in this case they don't.

Besides, even were that ridiculous notion true, it's still a moot point as long as a pre-existing group already is identified by the same word. In other words, if you invented a new meaning for "Latino" that meant "worthless", Latinos would be be justified in being offended, even if the "new" meaning for "Latino" had some other origin.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Agathon
From the chief dolt on Apolyton himself that is high praise indeed.

Does it embarass you that the chief dolt on Apolyton puts you to absolute shame?

It is clear in the speech community (i.e. teens) in which it is used. It is their coinage, you have no right to tell them what their words mean.

Nonsense, as a member of the "speech community" (i.e. teens) in which it is used, I can tell you that the vast majority of people assume "gay" to refer to "gay people", and not any of the high-strung examples you've pathetically tried to assemble here.

Yes, it is. Two different meanings.

Wow! What a coincidence. They're not two different meanings, it's the same meaning with two different interpretations.

Morons and bigots interpret the sexuality as stupid and bad, and use it as an insult. Next thing you know, everyone uses the word as an insult casually and it's suddenly a completely separate word! Give me a break.

Idiots like Asher who has just demonstrated that he is well aware of the distinction. I'll say it again in plain English: they used to be synonyms, now they are effectively homonyms.

Read again. There is no distiction, it just depends how you interpret it.

I know where it came from. I speak English.

It's about the only thing you can do.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov

Again, this doesn't hold water in the face of the actual way in which homosexuals were regarded when the phrase originated--people were mocking gays for what they did just as much as for stereotypes as to how they acted. That's why derogatory phrases for what were seen as gay acts "********er," "butt buddy," etc. were also being used rampantly. To try to assert the use of "gay" in this context was somehow different from those and was aimed at mocking the stereotype is ludicrous in the face of the SLEW of other insults that were running concurrently. Your reasoning defies logic.

My logic is "that was then, this is now". The use of the word gay as a term of mild insult is very recent. We are old men, Boris. Teens have new slang.

Once again, it's not about an explicit intent in modern usage to deride gays--it's about the use of a group label to denote something bad or silly, which reinforces cultural notions, however subtley, that being a part of that group is a bad thing. It is really much more simple than the convulusions you're going through.

Sure it's simpler, but it doesn't really provide an explanation. You seem now to be saying that teens magically decided to use the term "gay". Perhaps they did, but that flies in the face of the fact that most changes in linguistic usage are evolutionary rather than instantaneous.

And it isn't reinforcing cultural notions amongst teens, who know very well what they mean.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

I'm not calling anyone names in specific, but if people continue to put forth incredibly stupid arguments I think it's safe to call them morons.

I don't see why mine and Agathon's arguments are "stupid". We're saying that one of the commonly accepted meanings of "gay" is as a synonym of "lame" and has no relations to the sexual meaning of "gay". No one has disproved this. Where's the stupidity?

No one has disproved it?

Huh. You must have very selective reading. Did you not see all those posts explaining to you that IT'S A MATTER OF INTERPRETATION?

Or do you live in an alternate reality where words are some sort of magical entities that have absolute power and control over people's minds?


Maybe you are not intpreting intreptation the same way I am. ( then would that sentence make sense?) Here is the idea behind it:

1 : to explain or tell the meaning of : present in understandable terms
2 : to conceive in the light of individual belief, judgment, or circumstance

Really, help me out here, why can you not understand this? Why can you not even acknowledge these arguments?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Don't assume that kids can't recognize basic differences in context just because you can't...

Argh!

Seriously, I'm out of here.

I'm dealing with ****ing morons who want to justify their casual use of "gay" as an insult because they don't know any better.

Gay people are here telling them we're offended by it, but they continue to insist it's alright.

You are all seriously disgusting individuals. Scum.

[Drake Tungsten]

Your above story isn't a suitable comparison. If you have worked out an arragement with your friend that slurs are fine so long as everyone realizes they are in good fun, that's your business. But to expect people not in on the arrangement to not be offended when they hear you say it...please.

The point you are missing is that society as a whole has settled on a new meaning for "gay". Just as my group of friends has decided that "jewish" or "white" can have meanings different from their ethnic ones, society (primarily the society of the youth) have decided that "gay" can be used as a synonym for "lame", in addition to meaning "homosexual" and "happy". Contemporary society has agree on a new usage of the word "gay" and it's futile for you and Asher to try and stop it. The word "gay" has developed yet another meaning. You may not like it, but you'll have to get used to it.

We certainly shouldn't be punishing kids for using the slang of their peer group...

And would you possibly assert that the origin of the use of that phrase is in no way related to the hurtful stereotypes against Jews?

When did Jews become associated with videogame defensive backs making absurd interceptions?

[Agathon]

Originally posted by mindseye

So it's similar in some respects, different in others. Big deal.

It's not just different, it's the opposite!

Well you are obviously too dopey to see that two words might have different histories

Except in this case they don't.

Duh. The N-word went from being an insult to being a term of comradeship among black youth. The term gay went from being an insult to being a PC term and an insult. The meanings forked. In both cases we have a word that came to have a changed meaning based on the use of a speech community. The N-word is somewhat more analogous to fork one and not 2.

Besides, even were that ridiculous notion true, it's still a moot point as long as a pre-existing group already is identified by the same word. In other words, if you invented a new meaning for "Latino" that meant "worthless", Latinos would be be justified in being offended, even if the "new" meaning for "Latino" had some other origin.

That's not my claim. You need to read properly.