U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Psychology
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-26-2013, 10:31 AM
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
2,378 posts, read 2,460,326 times
Reputation: 1477

Advertisements

What I find strange about our society is "being gay" almost never equates to being homosexual. What I've come to find that instead it can mean a few different things. It can mean you are socially retarded, a deep rooted coward, or internally a long ago socially left behind child. It seems to be a horrific tragedy that our society outcasts "gay" people who aren't homosexual at all, they just have a terrible social issue or misunderstanding they have yet to overcome. However because they are outcast there is virtually no chance they'll over come it possibly over their entire lifetime.

However I understand the problem is more complicated then just not outcasting them. I think what would help a lot is to come up with a different term for them so they don't get clumped up with homosexuals.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-26-2013, 10:43 AM
 
3,276 posts, read 4,896,995 times
Reputation: 5992
Where did you come up with this nonsense? I have NEVER heard of anything even close to what you describe.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2013, 10:58 AM
 
Location: Northeastern US
14,070 posts, read 8,445,292 times
Reputation: 6000
Well I have heard young people exclaim, "that is so gay" in contexts where in my salad days I might have said "this is so lame". If that's what you're talking about, it's probably an attempt to add insult to injury by equating a person's efforts to just get along in the world as ineffectual in a sort of stereotypical limp-wristed and therefore "gay" fashion. For men, particularly, it's a crude attack on one's manliness and potency.

I have never understood the eagerness to accuse people of being weak and ineffectual, as even in cases where it's really true and you really know that it's true, it's totally unhelpful. But then people don't spew verbal vomit in order to be helpful. It's to kick others when they're down. Sadly, like sharks, people smell blood in the water and show up to feed, to make their own fragile egos feel better.

The world is not a place that's meant for the kindly and gentle. Those people often are actually by far the strongest, but because they don't express that strength in obnoxious, violent or unkind ways, they have to be dismissed in some other fashion.

As for "coming up with another term" so they "don't get clumped up (lumped in?) with homosexuals", I think as I mentioned above we already have such a term: "lame" and some elements in society have deliberately decided to conflate that with homosexuality just to stir the pot. Things are the way they are because they got that way. The best thing anyone can probably do is to stay away from such people, to the extent possible. Don't feed the trolls -- online or in meatspace.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2013, 11:08 AM
 
4,762 posts, read 10,064,799 times
Reputation: 7776
Young people I know (20's) will say "That is gay". And they don't mean homosexual, but I think they are saying it is "not cool", bad, stupid, etc.

Then way back when, like early 1900's, gay did not mean homosexual at all. It meant happy. I frequently read in old texts that so and so was a "gay person" - meaning happy.

So this word has different meanings.

Also the young crowd has a new meaning for the word "sick". They will say "That is sick!" And by that they mean awesome!

I guess each new generation needs to have its own words for this and that...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2013, 12:07 PM
 
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
2,540 posts, read 3,015,221 times
Reputation: 6711
To the OP:

What you have described, to me would be called a "nerd, geek, wall flower " personality.

To me a gay person is one who has a sexual attraction to others of THEIR OWN gender.

My Gaydar rings sometimes, and I see men who are swishy, trendy, and love art, BUT who are actually married and have kids, with their female wife. On the other hand, some men who appear to be super masculine, and extroverted, are also in love with another man, and happy to be with him.

I live in the Canadian Province of Ontario, in the city of Toronto. Our recently elected Premier ( think State Governor ) is a lesbian, who was married for twenty years to a man, and had a child with him, and who then came out in 1990, and is now legally married to her long time female lover. She has been the Minister of Education and is now the leader of the Provincial Legislature. She comes across as professional and competent, but a bit on the butch side of the page.

My point ? Appearances are not all ways indicative of a person's actual sexual choices.

Jim B

Toronto.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2013, 10:40 AM
 
9,209 posts, read 17,868,058 times
Reputation: 21936
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeNigh View Post
What I find strange about our society is "being gay" almost never equates to being homosexual. What I've come to find that instead it can mean a few different things. It can mean you are socially retarded, a deep rooted coward, or internally a long ago socially left behind child. It seems to be a horrific tragedy that our society outcasts "gay" people who aren't homosexual at all, they just have a terrible social issue or misunderstanding they have yet to overcome. However because they are outcast there is virtually no chance they'll over come it possibly over their entire lifetime.

However I understand the problem is more complicated then just not outcasting them. I think what would help a lot is to come up with a different term for them so they don't get clumped up with homosexuals.
The bolded statement may be true in your circle of acquaintances (probably younger and immature), but in the real world with grown-ups, when we talk about someone being gay, we actually mean that they are homosexual. I haven't heard "gay" as a disparaging comment meaning "lame" since I was in junior high, and that was the early 80s.

I suppose "gay" being used that way must be making a comeback among the people you associate with. I was similarly shocked to recently hear people saying "you're so retarded" or describing a process/procedure at work as "retarded". They were using "retarded" in the same was you're using "gay"--a very adolescent way of saying something is stupid or "lame." They are not saying that this person or thing that's "retarded" actually has a developmental disability with an intellectual impairment. Just like your friends are not actually saying that the person or thing they are criticizing is homosexual. They are just expressing dislike for something in a very juvenile way.

I would suggest that these people learn some more negative adjectives rather than sounding like 12 year olds and resorting to "gay" and "retarded" to express distaste.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2013, 11:08 AM
 
11,540 posts, read 12,889,715 times
Reputation: 30479
The only kind of confusion I can think of that approximates that in the OP is the use of the word "qu eer." It came to mean homosexual, but also was used to cover a multitude of other persons and traits that were not homosexual.

As for "gay," it seems to have taken on the idea that one could be perhaps a little too gay (in the usual sense,") to be a regular guy, and that this over time became a slang term for homosexual, replacing "pansy" sometime in the Forties, I would guess. In the late 19th century gay women and gay houses were places for men to have illicit sex, and I wouldn't be surprised if that is when "gay" may have first slid over into being applied to transvestites perhaps.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2013, 12:06 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
2,378 posts, read 2,460,326 times
Reputation: 1477
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevxu View Post
The only kind of confusion I can think of that approximates that in the OP is the use of the word "qu eer." It came to mean homosexual, but also was used to cover a multitude of other persons and traits that were not homosexual.

As for "gay," it seems to have taken on the idea that one could be perhaps a little too gay (in the usual sense,") to be a regular guy, and that this over time became a slang term for homosexual, replacing "pansy" sometime in the Forties, I would guess. In the late 19th century gay women and gay houses were places for men to have illicit sex, and I wouldn't be surprised if that is when "gay" may have first slid over into being applied to transvestites perhaps.
I agree, que er's old meaning was probably the definition I'm thinking about before it added homosexual to it's meaning.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2013, 12:40 PM
 
12,399 posts, read 11,881,004 times
Reputation: 16934
Quote:
Originally Posted by TracySam View Post
I would suggest that these people learn some more negative adjectives rather than sounding like 12 year olds and resorting to "gay" and "retarded" to express distaste.
Why? Do the words not express distaste? Maybe it is the 12 year olds acting like an adult?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2013, 02:17 PM
 
1,024 posts, read 947,677 times
Reputation: 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxus View Post
Why? Do the words not express distaste? Maybe it is the 12 year olds acting like an adult?
Uh. What?

When I was in junior high & I confronted my friends about using "gay" as an insult, they almost always admitted they didn't REALLY mean gay. They meant "that sucks," or "that's lame." But used the term gay instead because that is how it was used at the time.

Because this was socially acceptable use of the term at the time, NOT because they hated people who were actually gay or thought homosexuality was distasteful. When I pointed out how stupid that was, they stopped using gay as a slur.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Psychology
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top