News:

Happy New Year! Yes, the current one, not a previous one; this is a new post, we swear!

Main Menu

Question: Indians or Native Americans

Started by CrAz3D, May 05, 2011, 04:28:07 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

iago

Quote from: CrAz3D on May 07, 2011, 04:12:35 PM
I use the term homosexual or gay (but gay "offends" me because ... something about calling someone "happy").

That said, yeah, I do lol when people get offended when a 3rd person says "that's gay" in a negative tone.
I find it confusing when somebody uses "gay" negativelyh


I use whichever word fits the situation best, though, which occasionally is "fag". But I always mean it in the nicest (and usually most ironic) way possible. :)

Joe

I don't think "gay" is offensive. I use it in a derogatory meaning (which I'm trying not to), but when you use it to describe a dude who likes dudes, I don't think it's offensive.

For example, my girlfriend and I have a mutual friend Jim. I saw a guy writing on his Facebook wall and calling him "babe", and I said to her "I think Jim is gay."

I think the difference between "gay" and "homosexual" is like the difference between "shit" and "feces". One is totally proper and has only one meaning, and the other one has multiple meanings but is pretty understood and more commonly used.
</thesis-paper>
Quote from: Camel on June 09, 2009, 04:12:23 PMI'd personally do as Joe suggests

Quote from: AntiVirus on October 19, 2010, 02:36:52 PM
You might be right about that, Joe.


Hitmen

Quote from: iago on May 07, 2011, 06:59:39 PM
I use whichever word fits the situation best, though, which occasionally is "fag". But I always mean it in the nicest (and usually most ironic) way possible. :)
I think louis ck has the best answer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IFloXOuLgA
Quote
(22:15:39) Newby: it hurts to swallow

CrAz3D

Joe, it's gay used in negative context that offends. Like..."that is unfortunate/that is gay" kinda thing.

Blaze

In my head, there's two categories of derogatory words: ones that you can say in public conversation that almost everybody won't care about, and ones that people are more likely to care about.  Ones that you can include things like 'stupid', 'lame' or 'gyp', while others are things like 'nigger' or 'jew'.

I'm unsure where I'd place 'gay' or 'faggot' in here, but I'm leaning towards gay being a less hostile word than faggot, but still possibly offensive (depending on usage) to go into second category.  With that said, I use it all the time, and very rarely am I meaning it in a derogatory fashion.

Both of these are offensive to some people, but the former have been dissociated with their offensive meanings and are used more generally to represent negative things in general.  When you say something is lame, you're obviously not actively attacking the crippled, but the opposite is considered for the other category.

I think what it comes down to is people are stupid and only dislike negativity if it's trendy to do so, or if it affects them.

Bonus points if you got the joke in the last sentence.
And like a fool I believed myself, and thought I was somebody else...

while1

Quote from: CrAz3D on May 07, 2011, 04:12:35 PM
That said, yeah, I do lol when people get offended when a 3rd person says "that's gay" in a negative tone.

lol, yeah, I find it amusing when Ender gets uptight over me using it to describe something negatively.
I tend to edit my topics and replies frequently.

http://www.operationsmile.org

Joe

#21
Quote from: Blaze on May 08, 2011, 09:57:54 AM
I'm unsure where I'd place 'gay' or 'faggot' in here, but I'm leaning towards gay being a less hostile word than faggot,

Yeah, that struck me as kind of odd. iago, why would you prefer to be called a fag over being called gay? It seems like the more offensive word to me. In my experience it has always been a derogatory term for a homosexual, or a bundle of sticks (usually intending to make a pun off gay people). *shrug*

EDIT -
Oh, I read it wrong. I thought he meant he preferred it, not that it's sometimes most appropriate.
Quote from: Camel on June 09, 2009, 04:12:23 PMI'd personally do as Joe suggests

Quote from: AntiVirus on October 19, 2010, 02:36:52 PM
You might be right about that, Joe.


iago

Quote from: Joe on May 08, 2011, 04:51:37 PM
Quote from: Blaze on May 08, 2011, 09:57:54 AM
I'm unsure where I'd place 'gay' or 'faggot' in here, but I'm leaning towards gay being a less hostile word than faggot,

Yeah, that struck me as kind of odd. iago, why would you prefer to be called a fag over being called gay? It seems like the more offensive word to me. In my experience it has always been a derogatory term for a homosexual, or a bundle of sticks (usually intending to make a pun off gay people). *shrug*

EDIT -
Oh, I read it wrong. I thought he meant he preferred it, not that it's sometimes most appropriate.
Yeah, it's sometimes funnier is all. :)

CrAz3D

What about queer? I've notice that when straight people say it, it's offensive, but when homosexual people say it, it's fine. Sorta like nigga/nigger and white people v. black people. Wut up wit dat?

iago

Quote from: CrAz3D on May 09, 2011, 11:39:33 AM
What about queer? I've notice that when straight people say it, it's offensive, but when homosexual people say it, it's fine. Sorta like nigga/nigger and white people v. black people. Wut up wit dat?
It all depends on context. "Fucking queer!" vs "I'm a queer" - same goes for most terms for most homosexual (and other commonly taboo words)

In reality, though, the problem with the word 'queer' is that it's broad. It refers to any person who's gay/lesbian/bisexual/pansexual/transgender/assexual/heteroflexible/bi-curious/adventurous/kinky/etc.etc.etc. It doesn't even necessarily apply to homosexual preferences - if you're a heterosexual whose leather play bothers the kids upstairs, 'queer' could be used to describe you.

Anybody who doesn't fit into the strict 'straight' and 'vanilla' categories could be considered 'queer'. It's kind of a catch all.

CrAz3D

I've always taken queer to mean "not the norm," which would include any of the above examples.

What about "That person is (a?) queer." or "That person seems queer." <- how legit does that sound? It seems it'd be more "technically" correct because one would be expressing the observation of non-normalcy in a general enough way that it could be, as you said, a "catch all" phrase. hmm. Sort of like the indian situation, where you dont know what tribe, but need to make a more specific observation than "person."

People are interesting.

iago

Quote from: CrAz3D on May 09, 2011, 12:35:05 PM
I've always taken queer to mean "not the norm," which would include any of the above examples.

What about "That person is (a?) queer." or "That person seems queer." <- how legit does that sound? It seems it'd be more "technically" correct because one would be expressing the observation of non-normalcy in a general enough way that it could be, as you said, a "catch all" phrase. hmm. Sort of like the indian situation, where you dont know what tribe, but need to make a more specific observation than "person."

People are interesting.
I'd stick with 'weirdo'. Nobody gets offended by that.

(that's an inside joke that nobody here would 'get' - my friend got into a lot of trouble for using the word 'weirdo' in a talk :) )

CrAz3D


iago

Yeah, a presentation.

"got in trouble" = somebody in the audience was offended and interrupted the talk for 5 minutes to argue about it.

Blaze

If someone got upset for the use of 'weirdo', they're just being stupidly oversensitive.  I would go out of my way to inject it into more sentences, if anything.
And like a fool I believed myself, and thought I was somebody else...