"Gays" vs. "Homosexuals"

Anyone else notice that the religious rightwingers go out of their way never to use the word "gay."

They always use the more clinical "homosexual". I have my thoughts about why they do this, but I'd like to hear if anyone else had noticed this.

But seriously, I think they know they have to be extra PC on the issue, given their stances, so they're flat out scared to use anything else.

either way they use both terms the way they used to use the word "nigger".

I'm pretty sure it's because "homosexual" sounds both scarier and more pejorative. The slang "homo" being in there, all they have to do is linger over those first two syllables a bit. "Gay", used at its worst, sounds pretty harmless. If they could get away with "faggot", they would.

gay or homosexual?

I just like to be called a Bear, you know? ;)

but are WE gay or homosexual?

but I'm homosexual. I look at that as a neutral term that is perfectly descriptive of one aspect of my personality. "Gay" has never sat well with me as a personal descriptor.

And yet, I'm never going to refer to my self as a "homosexual", verbally, when talking to someone who doesn't already know. Like I said in my earlier post, it has baggage attached to it, unfortunately.

All of which makes me wish that the earlier movement to 'reclaim' certain words, such as "queer", had included "homosexual".

onto my sweatpants. you are funny

dont like to say the word, and i say it to condition, so we dont see it as a bad word. i purposely use homosexual over gay. i want homosexual to be as comfortable as heterosexual

that is why i say it. maybe i do it becasue the right uses it to offend. so i use it for the opposite, to nullify their use of it

i recognize this, because i am talking a lot about this issue. in terms of the bible. and yesterday typing out i purposely took homosexual over gay, and went thru the thought process why

in addition to gays.

I'm actually ok with RW people using the term. In terms of creating a dialogue, it helps to use words in common.







I also think the words "homosexual" and "heterosexual" in public discourse tends to put too much emphasis on sex.

If we're talking about pure sex, then sure, those words fit perfectly.

But when people start talking about love, committed couples, strong families, and the legal rights of spouses and partners, there's no need to fixate on sexual orientation.

The terms "heteroamorous" and "homoamorous" have been used in some conversations I've had. I think they fit the discussion better when social aspects beyond simple sex are involved.

I think religious rightwingers use "homosexual" because it is clinical and it can connote something "wrong" (one of their baseless claims is that "homosexuality" is somehow a "disorder".)

"Gay" on the other hand (while I'm not wild about it personally) is a non clinical term that gays themselves came up with. To call someone "gay" or "lesbian" is to give them respect, because it defers to THEIR terminology about themselves. It gives THEM the power to define themselves.

Religious rightwingers don't use "gay" because THEY want to define what it means, they don't want gay people defining what it means.

The religious rightwing version of political correctness is to only use the more clinical term "homosexual", which can be used with far more negative connotations.

from region to region, or even clique to clique.


When I was growing up, "gay" was being claimed by gay men as their word, and in the elementary schools the almost immediate response was to use it as a derogatory term for being as flamboyant as some higher-profile gay men.


In my years of tolerance work, I've generally been very dissatisfied with attempts to standardize what's considered respectful and what isn't.

While the motivations are indeed constructive in spirit, the dynamic and fluid nature of language makes it impractical in the long run. Nuances change too often, and outside of our control.




Hence, like I was saying in my previous post, I've been using the sexual language when the talk is about just sex. Homosexual and heterosexual and bisexual ought to be on equal footing.

If that sounds clinical, that's fine. Any serious study of sexology gets clinical pretty fast, once you get past all the porn.

I don't think it's necessarily dehumanizing to anyone... at least no more so than when a dermatologist calls out your skin tone rather than your race. In the context of dermatology, skin tone is more accurate and descriptive than race.

In the context of discussing sex, sure, use the sexual terms.






But like I said, we shouldn't be restricting the discussion to just sex when it comes to social issues important to the GBLT community.

My opinion is that the word "homosexual" (along with the other sexually focused words) is inappropriate when talking about relationships that go beyond sex.

For me, it's not about respect. Mere words do not enforce respect, and respect can certainly be withheld even with pleasing words.

For me, it's more about scope. Let's expand the scope of the discussion.

As long as the public keeps talking about who's boffing whom, the focus is on sex. This is the way it's been since at least the 1950's.

But if we effect a seachange shift and get the public talking about who's loving whom, who's caring for whom, who's committed to whom, who's parenting whom, then I think we can make some faster progress.

...than homosexual men. What gives?

I often get the impression that there are multiple approaches depending on the needs of the individual.




Sometimes it's just easier to say "gay" instead of "gay and lesbian", let alone add on "bi and transgendered".

Sometimes, "gay" has more clout than "lesbian". Gender inequality is still present, even when the context has shifted to sexual orientation.

Sometimes, a person just likes the word better.

while 'gay' is a self-claimed identity.

you said it much more succinctly than I :)

"Homosexual" is used because it contains the word "sexual." It inspires a more clinical use, thereby reducing the person to the sexual behavior. "Gay" represents a 'culture.' Using the word 'gay' would imply that there is more to the person than just sex. As a group that demonizes sex, it would not be good for the fundies to use a term than could indicate their target are "whole" creatures; instead, it is more important to paint us as "sexual" creatures. This also allows them to feed into the notions of deviant sex and illegal sexual activities.

Notice that many will say "homosexuals and lesbians." This is to further demonize gay men as the more aggressive, sexual predators. Also, 'gay' can still mean happy and they cannot have that meaning associated with us. Also, they do not use the term heterosexual, but "straight" or "normal." Again, they avoid the use of the word 'sexual' in this case because it would invoke sexual images and reduce their believers to one part of their identity.

I too, have noticed that they use 'homosexual' for gays & 'straight' for straights. They are masters of language manipulation, that's for sure. They aren't ethical about it, but they are good at it. And the dumb & dumber sheeple never question that they are being played.

They also never use the word "Democratic" as an adjective when describing the "Democratic Senator from Vermont", for example. They say the "Democrat Senator from Vermont".

Some pollster told them somewhere along the line that "Democratic" is too favorable a connotation, so use "Democrat" as both a noun and an adjective.

It confuses me when people differentiate lesbians like that, since my understanding has always been that "homosexual" or "gay" simply refers to any person male or female who is attracted to the same sex, not strictly a man who is attracted to other men. That is at least the meaning held by Merriam-Webster.

ho·mo·sex·u·al
Pronunciation: "hO-m&-'sek-sh(&-)w&l, -'sek-sh&l
Function: adjective
1 : of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex
2 : of, relating to, or involving sexual intercourse between persons of the same sex

gay
Pronunciation: 'gA
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French gai
1 a : happily excited : MERRY b : keenly alive and exuberant : having or inducing high spirits
2 a : BRIGHT, LIVELY <gay sunny meadows> b : brilliant in color
3 : given to social pleasures; also : LICENTIOUS
4 a : HOMOSEXUAL b : of, relating to, or used by homosexuals <the gay rights movement>

But "gay" was adopted at a time when women, in general, and lesbians in particular were invisible. Lesbians in the late 70's and early 80's struggled to be specifically included in the groups representing us. Rejecting gay as generic for homosexuals of both genders occurred in parallel with the general movement to reject the use of male nouns and pronouns to refer to both genders.

It took an organization in which I was involved several years to add lesbian to the name of the organization, which at the time included gay in its title. The women in the group were clear that the organization did not fully embrace us or address our needs. The name was merely a reflection of the failure to fully embrace us, and specifically being named was an important step in the process toward greater inclusively.

We have gone through a similar struggle recently to add bisexual and transgender to our title.

I don't know that it particularly matters now, but that is historically why there is a difference. I use either gay or lesbian to refer to myself. I generally don't use homosexual because my orientation is far more extensive than just the gender preference for my sexual partner.

I really like that analysis---makes a lot of sense and is very consistent with Conservative strategies. LLL

Mary Cheney is ALWAYS gay.

but point taken.

the reason is because that terminology sounds more like a clinical diagnosis than an individual characteristic, which is in line with their bigotry.

Should be "gay man" - not "gays"

Right? This has always bugged me.

according to dictionary.com.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=gay

...polysyllabic words they know how to pronounce. And spell.

And they are sooo fascinated by the subject. ;)

It's just a clinical term, but gay sounds better, I think, at this point, because the only people who say homosexual are usually right-wing bigots who drag out the syllables to emphasize the word.

an' Ah bet y'all kin skweel lack a pig, too!

because they know their knuckle-dragging, shiny-eyed, zealot followers are personally obsessed with the idea of gay sex. They want to make sure and keep the focus not on relationships, but on sex, preferably some stereotype of sex that involves activities sure to make the troglodytes shudder and secretly fantasize.

That one's for you, Senator "Santorum." (Speaking of keeping the focus on something that makes people shudder.)

I have always regretted that the word gay was adopted by the homosexual community.

I think that this is a wonderful word that has no other synonyms. What would you use: carefree?

Perhaps you have seen the moving Longtime Companion. Was a great movie that described the early '80s when a strange disease was killing homosexual men. This was before the terms HIV and AIDS would be used.

And I remember a scene in the beginning of the movie, when several young men were meeting at a beach location for a weekend and they looked so... yes, gay. So happy and carefree and that was when I really missed the original use of the word gay. Because, really, no one is using the word gay in its original meaning.

It now implies a "community based on sexual orientation" and not a "community based on sex." Personally, I do not like being called a homosexual, unless someone is referring directly to my sexuality.

As for synonyms, there are quite a few:

from Thesaurus entires for gay

Main Entry: gay
Part of Speech: adjective 1
Definition: happy

Synonyms: alert, animate, animated, blithe, blithesome, bouncy, brash, carefree, cheerful, cheery, chipper, chirpy, confident, convivial, devil-may-care, festive, forward, frivolous, frolicsome, fun-loving, gamesome, glad, gleeful, hilarious, insouciant, jocund, jolly, jovial, joyful, joyous, keen, light-hearted, lively, merry, mirthful, playful, pleasure-seeking, presuming, pushy, rollicking, self-assertive, sparkling, spirited, sportive, sprightly, sunny, vivacious, wild, zippy

Antonyms: sad, unhappy
Source: Roget's New Millennium™ Thesaurus, First Edition (v 1.1.1)Copyright © 2005 by Lexico Publishing Group, LLC. All rights reserved.

and yet, not exactly, or the words or longer..

Still, I will call you gay if this is what you like, as I do with other individuals and groups - and not necessarily on sexual context. I respect people's wishes on how they would like to be addressed and referred to.

there is nothing wrong with it and my homosexual friends don't think so either.

...and your friends don't mind, so be it. I find it offensive, unless one is speaking directly of my sexual orientation. To say, here is my friend, he is a homosexual; reduces me to a single-dimensional character based on sexual acts, real or imagined. When someone refers to me being gay, I see it as a reflection of my culture, including my struggles, sense of community, and my sexuality. But at least as a "gay," my sexual activities aren't the only aspect of me. Just my opinion.

as to your culture of gayness, i find such remarks nonsensical. you are not attacked, villified, and treated like a second-class citizen because of your "gay culture" but because of your sexual expression.

you are dismissing that the opponents of homosexual equality stand against your freedom of sexual expression, not your culture. homophobs do no go around beating up men who wear pink because they hate the color. they hate what you are and what you do.

maybe i just hang around with older homosexual men and women who are tired of being slammed for their sexual orientation and refuse to be maligned for their sexuality and call themselves homosexual because they are attacking head on the bigotry of their adversaries and consider using the term "gay" to define themselves a cop-out.

but if you differ, i will call you whatever you want.

I view my relationship as more than sex. I am in a relationship and sex is not the only component of it. I would like to hold his hand in public, but I don't. I don't think holding hands is sexual expression. I would like for his insurance to cover me so we don't have to pay for two insurance policies. I don't think insurance coverage is sexual expression. I would like that if I were to die, G-d forbid, that I don't have to have thousands of documents to establish his rights to my things. I don't think inheritance issues as sexual expression.

The matter of fact is that one can be homosexual and not have sex. Therefore, the concept of discrimination based on sexual expression is shot right out of the water. I love my partner and sex is only a SMALL part of our relationship. Therefore, those who discriminate against us are not just targeting our sexual lives, but the fact that we live our lives together.

And while I don't know your older friends, perhaps they use the term "homosexual" because they have bought into the religious right crap that they are only sexual beings and nothing more. But, maybe they are like me and are out in the community doing presentations informing people of our struggle and working for our civil rights.

Seems that their reason for using a somewhat clinical term is that they view homosexuality as a pathology.

And "gay" comes from old British prison slang, "gayboy", meaning a willing bottom...it was first used in the modern sense by protestors against the UK's sodomy laws in the 1930's. "Gay" is the language of self-empowerment, so of course the right aren't going to use it.

the clinical name ''homosexual'' because it was given to us by the straight world.

a ''clinical'' and in the not so distant bad old days a ''pathological'' description of us.

gay people took their own name -- in part because of the slang -- but also as a blatant rejectin of the idea that we were unhappy with our gayness.

that single lie caused more unhappines for gay men and women the world over -- than just about anything else.