flamingjimmy Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 There are two valid but opposing arguments here: 1.The problem with banning words because you do not like the meaning(s) they have acquired is that logically you would then have to control or ban the use of half the words in the English language. You can stamp on language as much as you want but new words will surface and someone will take offence to them. It is better to let them run their course and not risk becoming a '1984' like state which controls what people can and cannot say, and by extension, think. No-one is advocating banning any words though. ---------- Post added 02-06-2014 at 18:55 ---------- But they wouldn't be using the word in an offensive way in that context. It seems you're unwilling to accept it now has another meaning, which is why i asked if people thought it should have some form of protected status, or at least the meaning. You could argue it still has it's original meaning of jolliness, therefore cannot be offensive in such a way. I know that sounds quite argumentative, but i genuinely don't mean it that way. Let's say you overheard someone call a mate who wouldn't lend him 20p a Jew, would you be offended by it's use in that context ? Given they wouldn't be belittling Judaism in any way. They wouldn't be using the word in an offensive way in that context. It seems you're unwilling to accept it now has another meaning. That argument is clearly worthless when applied to the term 'Jew'. What's so different? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
04jessops Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 This is pretty much it. People getting offended on behalf of people who aren't offended. Yes but clearly some people do get offended by it. So it's up to individuals to challenge something if they find it offensive, and up to people to be careful when using words they know may cause offence. ---------- Post added 02-06-2014 at 19:57 ---------- 1.The problem with banning words because you do not like the meaning(s) they have acquired is that logically you would then have to control or ban the use of half the words in the English language. You can stamp on language as much as you want but new words will surface and someone will take offence to them. It is better to let them run their course and not risk becoming a '1984' like state which controls what people can and cannot say, and by extension, think. Bit of a slippery slope there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 But they wouldn't be using the word in an offensive way in that context. It seems you're unwilling to accept it now has another meaning, which is why i asked if people thought it should have some form of protected status, or at least the meaning. You could argue it still has it's original meaning of jolliness, therefore cannot be offensive in such a way. I know that sounds quite argumentative, but i genuinely don't mean it that way. It is interesting some gay people use the term queer and fags amongst themselves without malice...but then the way some gay people treat each other on the gay scene is appalling. I personally don't refer to other gay people in those pejorative terms - some people call it reclaiming words, I just think it's disrespectful I guess it's to do with intent and motivation. On a wider point it's also about who has the power to define what is naff can be called gay. ---------- Post added 02-06-2014 at 19:07 ---------- Should happy straight people be offended that people use the word gay to mean homosexual? Many were and are furious. I've heard older people on phone ins complain that such a lovely word as 'gay' meaning carefree and without abandon should has ended up meaning two men having sex (never complain about two women having sex). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happ Hazzard Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 Words change their meaning and it can be confusing for some people. If I was to describe a small reddish brown dog as being "foxy" some people could take it to mean I was a beastialist! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 Words change their meaning and it can be confusing for some people. If I was to describe a small reddish brown dog as being "foxy" some people could take it to mean I was a beastialist! Only because they know you too well HH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyranna Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 I broadly agree with the above post. For much of the 90s it was widely used by schoolchildren and young adults as a casual, throwaway pejorative for almost any item/action they didn't like, as in 'Oh that's so gay'. They would insist if challenged (as we had to) that it meant nothing homophobic and to them, I do not think it did. I have a book published in the 1950s about how to be a good wife and mother and it dedicates a whole chapter to creating your own gay furnishings. Gay rugs, gay lampshades, gay pelmets - the possibilities are endless. Not yet heard it in connection with dress sense, though. This is absolutely true; as recently as the 1960's and even early 70's the word 'gay' is used quite innocently in childrens books and adult literature such as novels meaning 'colourful' or 'jolly'. I have a Playhour annual (For kids from 3 to 10 years old) from the 1960's which mentions about things in 'gay colours'. I would be firmly of the opinion that nowadays 'gay' should be acceptable as meaning Homosexual and also general 'LGBT', but it is also acceptable that it CAN still be used in its earlier meaning of 'cheerful, colourful, jolly, etc'. For example the adverb 'Gaily' is still used in this manner, e.g. 'a gaily painted house' without it seeming odd. It's a bit like for example the word 'French' which still means anything from France, but it can also be used for describing things such as 'French Windows' 'French Loaf', etc. What I think is a great shame is that the word 'gay' has been used in a vulgar or childish way to describe something that is shoddy or no good -e.g. 'that car is so gay, it never starts on the first attempt'. Let's keep the word 'Gay' in its truer meanings, meaning happy, colourful, flamboyant, and yes, openly homosexual or LGBT-friendly. BTW, it is believed that the use of the word 'Gay' for homosexual originated in America in the 1960's as abbreviation for 'Good As You', stressing that LGBT people are equally good citizens with equal rights as everyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 This is absolutely true; as recently as the 1960's and even early 70's the word 'gay' is used quite innocently in childrens books and adult literature such as novels meaning 'colourful' or 'jolly'. I have a Playhour annual (For kids from 3 to 10 years old) from the 1960's which mentions about things in 'gay colours'. I would be firmly of the opinion that nowadays 'gay' should be acceptable as meaning Homosexual and also general 'LGBT', but it is also acceptable that it CAN still be used in its earlier meaning of 'cheerful, colourful, jolly, etc'. For example the adverb 'Gaily' is still used in this manner, e.g. 'a gaily painted house' without it seeming odd. It's a bit like for example the word 'French' which still means anything from France, but it can also be used for describing things such as 'French Windows' 'French Loaf', etc. What I think is a great shame is that the word 'gay' has been used in a vulgar or childish way to describe something that is shoddy or no good -e.g. 'that car is so gay, it never starts on the first attempt'. Let's keep the word 'Gay' in its truer meanings, meaning happy, colourful, flamboyant, and yes, openly homosexual or LGBT-friendly. BTW, it is believed that the use of the word 'Gay' for homosexual originated in America in the 1960's as abbreviation for 'Good As You', stressing that LGBT people are equally good citizens with equal rights as everyone else. Thank you for a reasoned and well argued point Tyranna Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aliceBB Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 Let's keep the word 'Gay' in its truer meanings, meaning happy, colourful, flamboyant, and yes, openly homosexual or LGBT-friendly. But who decides which (if any) is/are the 'truer' meanings of words and enforces the use of those 'truer' meanings? The Language Police? Language is as language does. It means what the community of users decides it means. If enough people ascribe a meaning to it in context, then that is what it means, whether you like it or not. And you try telling people they are not to give it any other meaning. You can express a wish to keep what you see as the 'true' meaning of a term, but if lots of people are already using it to mean something quite different, what do your propose to do about it?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 Do you have a gay car ? This did make me laugh though. A good question though! You might be driving a Porsche! No-one is advocating banning any words though. ---------- Post added 02-06-2014 at 18:55 ---------- Let's say you overheard someone call a mate who wouldn't lend him 20p a Jew, would you be offended by it's use in that context ? Given they wouldn't be belittling Judaism in any way. They wouldn't be using the word in an offensive way in that context. It seems you're unwilling to accept it now has another meaning. That argument is clearly worthless when applied to the term 'Jew'. What's so different? That's a straw man surely. The word Jew has and always been used to describe a Jewish person. Calling someone a Jew in derogatory sense (implying tightness with money) is playing on stereotypes and is wrong. Calling something gay (like the gay car earlier) isn't the same thing at all. It's harking back to schoolyard idiocy is all. Is it offensive? Depends on the context. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amberleaf808 Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 What is a bottler? In Scotland to lose your bottle or to bottle it, He is a bottler! means to lose your nerve. No idea what the OP means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.