I read the last two posts I wrote again, and it seems perfectly obvious to me that I meant using the word "a homosexual" has come to be seen as derogatory. I even quoted a block from your own post educating us all, in case we had forgotten that "No, the technical word for a same sex practitioner is 'homosexual." My only reason for even mentioning the use of "gay" to describe something laughable was because you continue using it to try to make some point that "gay" is a less precise (and I assume less preferable) term for gay people. I am beginning to believe that in your case this may be true, as somewhere in the middle you apparently lost track of which of these two words I take issue.

But to be honest, I think your failure to grasp what I actually meant is deliberate and a deliberate obfuscation. The alternative that you are truly that obtuse is not something I accept. I have gone back and forth in this very forum with a very anti-Muslim poster who was bigoted, mean-spirited and easily refuted, but at least he made it clear what he stood for. Most of time, it is not even clear what it is you are even arguing about. Do you stand for something? Or does the imprecise use of words like "gay" and "marriage" just stick in your craw for no other reason beyond the impreciseness of words? I find the British usage of "pavement" to mean "sidewalk" very imprecise as many things are paved, but are indeed not sidewalks. However, this impreciseness itself has yet to compel me to make countless posts about it. Do you have a stance on the preciseness of the use of the word pavement? I would guess that you don't as most people don't have an issue with "sidewalks" or "pavement" in and of themselves, but it is quite obvious that you have an issue with homosexuality in and of itself, so why don't you just come out and say it? I have friends from back home who still admit they are not sure if they can completely accept homosexuality, but at least they were up front about it, and we could debate whether or not "gay marriage" should be legalized w/o talking endlessly in circles about the actual technical definition of "marriage" and never getting beyond that to anything of substance.

It's usually hard to tell. You must remember he is a barrister so a straight committed answer is asking a lot. Bad for business if there is not an argument.

Of course what do I really mean by a "straight" answer?

A telling example is it not:

Homosexual = Gay
Keymaker = Frustration

KM is like a toddler who's just discovered his own poop. He doesn't care how bad it smells. He just knows how fun and squishy it is, and so he blithely smears it all over the place and giggles with glee, leaving the adults in the room to gag and walk away in disgust.

Yeah, a somewhat gross analogy. But pretty close, methinks. And surely less heavy-handed than simply calling him out on his bigoted, homophobic, egocentric imperialistic posture (oops, I guess I just did).

I wasn't responding to your last two posts but specifically to what was then your last post. That certainly gave the impression that you were talking about the word 'gay' not homosexual not least because you were answering a post of mine where that's what I had been talking about.

However, to answer your posts in general I would point out that the word 'homosexual can't be both a correct term and a derogatory term at the same time. If anyone's uncomfortable with the use of correct terms they need to get over themselves in my opinion.

km

LOLOL Roit!

"'homosexual can't be both a correct term and a derogatory term at the same time."

That is the straightest answer I ever remember getting out of you. Thank you for stating it so directly, so that our positions could finally be clear on this: 'homosexual' CAN be both a correct term and a derogatory term at the same time. It couldn't be put more succinctly.

There are certainly other words that share the same 'duality.' An example that immediately comes to mind is 'bastard', but I digress..

And, of course, you or anyone else is free to use the word 'homosexual' as much as you like, but many people will find it derogatory for the reason I just stated above (first paragraph just after the colon).

This does not at all detract from the astuteness of your last observation; one I most heartily agree with: Every single one of us needs to get over ourselves, yet inevitably it is an endeavo(u)r at which we all fail miserably.

Period/Full Stop. Almost midnight. Good night. Cue the sig.

To deal with your other points lest I be taken as having accepted them...


Quite a few things... exposing bullcrap is certainly included.


No I was just trying to suggest how apparently inconsistent poll results can come about.


By pavement we tend to mean not just sidewalks but a walkway paved with square or rectangular concrete slabs.


How often do pavements come up for discussion? With homosexuality some of you lot just can't seem to drop it - talk about obsessed. If you were constantly challenged for the most obvious truths about pavements along the lines that your preoccupation with them is not intellectual but sexual you might be inclined to put the record straight - unless of course their accusations happened to be true.


There you go again... I appreciate that activism involves attacking those who hold a different point of view but the truth is that its the zealots doing that who really have the issue not those whose thoughts they're trying to control with smears and innuendo.


Circles? I've made my position on homosexuality generally and on gay marriage in particular quite clear on many occasions and I refer to my previous posts in that respect.

km

Well, that's certainly hogwash, since wether or not its derogatory depends entirely on the context and to another extent upon the audience. Conservatives and Republicans for years used the therm "liberal" as a derogative word even as it was the correct term to use for their opponents (I still remember George Bush Sr. leaning heavily on the "L" as he sneered-out the word ;-). Calling someone a "Nazi" is often used as a pejorative even though that is the technically correct term to use to describe someone with certain socio-political beliefs.

In the context of this discussion, using the term "gay" in a phrase such as "don't be so gay" or "that's so gay" is clearly meant as a derogative word.

Basically, almost anything can be used as a derogative word if it represents something the speaker and/or their audience is opposed to.

Lawyers. Jeesh!

;-)

Roit indeed. LOLOL right back atcha.