Is it ever Ok to refer to things as gay (aside from known homosexuals)?
0 voters
This shirt for instance. If irishstu came to work in a shirt like this, would it be wrong for me to say, “how gay”?
Seriously. Would that always be a politically incorrect, anti-homosexual slur, or might it be a perfectly appropriate comment and people shouldn’t be offended by it?
Irishstu doesn’t want to be the first pirate.
I think it is funny, but it’s not really acceptable. I use the word ghey.
That’s 'cause you’re a homo.
How can describing a man’s clothing as ‘gay’ be an insult? Straight boys, even the most fashion dubious gay man I know is a million floors above you, in the tower of pants.
‘Ghey’, is a different word, in British. Best only used in writing, for obvious reasons. Women can be ‘ghey’, but not ‘gay’.
It’s fine for boys and girls between the ages of 10 and 14 but by the time you reach senior high, you should be seriously considering going to university/college so you should be able to master a few more adjectives.
Rush Limbaugh is gay and so is Sean Hannity.
Ever? I could think of a few positive exceptions.
But using “That’s so gay,” and “Carry on, ladies,” as pejoratives probably ranks on par with referring to you with “Whiteboy” or “Cracker”, no?
I don’t know. Once gay meant happy and cheerful. Now it still means that, but people rarely use it for that meaning because it has an additional meaning of homosexual. Is it possible it might also have another meaning of goofy and girly (if one can say goofy and girly – can one?)?
In the above shirt situation, the word is used solely to describe the shirt, and not the sexuality of the wearer. Isn’t it possible such a use could be legit and inoffensive to anyone other than the wearer of the shirt?
pc is so gay
The new PC is hateful boorishness. Anti-PC is the new PC. Fweeeeedom!
[quote=“Mother Theresa”]
In the above shirt situation, the word is used solely to describe the shirt, and not the sexuality of the wearer. Isn’t it possible such a use could be legit and inoffensive to anyone other than the wearer of the shirt?[/quote]
But are you saying the shirt is happy and cheerful or are you saying it is homosexual? If ‘gay’ is being used in a pejorative manner then surely the sentence is an insult to homosexuals, and not aimed at the shirt itself.
You need to start using the word more. Matt Groening gave us back the word bender. Yet Randal failed with porch monkey. You have to persist MT.
My lesbian sister uses the word ‘cock’/‘dick’ as both a noun and and adjective. ‘Butters, you’re such a dick’, ‘Goat’s cheese and bacon ciabatta is middle class cock.’ etc.
It’s OK to call certain things “gay”, like a Hello Kitty man-purse. But using “gay” to mean “lame” is insulting.
Hmm… I’ve heard my gay friends use the term “straight” dismissively. “OMG! This is soooooo straight!” (I.e. this is so representative of the bad taste of straight people, etc, etc.)
Is the intention of the speaker important, or the response of the listener? Ooooh! Debate!
Really? I honestly have no problem with homosexuality whatsoever and don’t wish to cause offense, but I have trouble finding a better way of describing that puffy shirt than, “how gay.”
Seriously. I challenge anyone to come up with a better description – something that captures the essence of that shirt so accurately and so succinctly.
Silly? Ridiculous? Absurd? No, they don’t describe in what way it’s silly.
Foppish? Flamboyant? No, those words are too serious and the former too outdated.
Swishy? I suspect that’s equally off limits. Besides, it’s not nearly so good.
“How gay.” A mere two syllables. The briefest little utterance that very clearly captures the essence of the shirt.
Can you come up with a better description?
If not, is it right that the clearest, most succinct, best description should be off limits because some might be offended by use of those words in that context? Would it be reasonable to be offended by that use of those words in that context?
frankly, i’m too distracted by your avatar to seriously consider your dilemma.
[quote=“Mother Theresa”]Foppish? Flamboyant? No, those words are too serious and the former too outdated.
[/quote]
Too serious?!? Afraid of being labeled a nerd or something?
I would agree if you suggested replacing “shit!” by “excrement!” but I really don’t see a problem with “flamboyant.”
Really? I honestly have no problem with homosexuality whatsoever and don’t wish to cause offense, but I have trouble finding a better way of describing that puffy shirt than, “how gay.”
Seriously. I challenge anyone to come up with a better description – something that captures the essence of that shirt so accurately and so succinctly.
Silly? Ridiculous? Absurd? No, they don’t describe in what way it’s silly.
Foppish? Flamboyant? No, those words are too serious and the former too outdated.
Swishy? I suspect that’s equally off limits. Besides, it’s not nearly so good.
“How gay.” A mere two syllables. The briefest little utterance that very clearly captures the essence of the shirt.
Can you come up with a better description?
If not, is it right that the clearest, most succinct, best description should be off limits because some might be offended by use of those words in that context? Would it be reasonable to be offended by that use of those words in that context?[/quote]
Define: gay
I’ve never heard the phrase being used by a person who liked the shirt. Usually ‘it’s so gay’ means that they don’t like it. This is how I see it.
I think it’s a rather foppish and flamboyant shirt, yes.