The term "homosexual"

[Haven]

During the past week, I have observed a number of people here using the word "homosexual" in reference to gay and lesbian people. Although some might not realize it, the term is considered offensive and demeaning to gay people. With the site's rule against cursing and offensive language, I find it surprising that such a term is allowed here. Would it be possible to put out a mod announcement clarifying that the term "homosexual(s)" in reference to a person / group of people isn't allowed? Thanks.

[bluethread]

So, why is the term homophobic so commonly used by the "gender" crowd. Is this like to N word, it is offensive when used by one group of people and not when used by another?

The term homophobic is used because it's decades old, and "homosexual" was the accepted term back then (just like "colored" for black at one point; that doesn't mean it's not offensive today). It can also refer to homosexuality, which is still an acceptable term.

Why do some want to call people "homosexuals" so badly? Why not just drop the term? It's the kind thing to do and it's not that hard.

Just a note, colored did not mean black. It meant mixed heritage.

[Danmark]

Here's another article explaining why "homosexual" is a pejorative and uncivil term:

http://www.advocate.com/politics/media/ ... gbt-issues

As Equality Matters reported this week, use of the term "homosexual" to refer to gay and lesbian people long ago fell out of favor with most mainstream news outlets, as "homosexual" is commonly used by opponents of LGBT equality — and rarely by advocates.

I confess I too had no idea the word was considered offensive by anyone. And I didn't find an explanation at the quoted site as to why it is offensive. I'd like to know why.

I'm guessing that McCulloch hit the nail squarely on the head with his reference to the euphemism treadmill.

In any event, my rule is that members of a group are fairly united that the term is offensive to them, I try to oblige their sensitivity unless of course I want to offend.

My father was a wise man. I was just a kid when he explained the principle of the euphemism treadmill. In an unrelated conversation he expressed irritation that a perfectly good word, 'gay' had been kidnapped and held hostage by . . . how do I say it? 'Them?'

I came in late to this party, but what is an acceptable an neutral term for 'homosexual?' As much as I claim I want to be sensitive to the concerns of groups that have historically been subjected to discrimination, I'm not so sure I should be forced to use a positive label when I want to signal neutrality.

As McCulloch points out, this may be a fool's errand due to the nature of language with the fluid nature of connotations and even denotations.

My #1 peeve in this area is the word 'unique.' A truly useful word with a very specific meaning ['one of a kind'] has been virtually destroyed by misuse until its connotation, 'rare' has actually changed its denotation as well.

[Danmark]

During the past week, I have observed a number of people here using the word "homosexual" in reference to gay and lesbian people. Although some might not realize it, the term is considered offensive and demeaning to gay people. With the site's rule against cursing and offensive language, I find it surprising that such a term is allowed here. Would it be possible to put out a mod announcement clarifying that the term "homosexual(s)" in reference to a person / group of people isn't allowed? Thanks.

When I read this topic I found it quite absurd and disregarded it as just another crusade by the politically correct zealots. However, after thinking about it I do sympathize with the LGBT community. People should have the right to call themselves whatever they want. If a college wants to change its mascot to a different animal it should have every right to, if a person wants to change their name they should have every right to and if the LGBT community wants people to stop calling them homosexual and use a different word instead, we should respect that. People have the right to identify themselves with whatever word they want, and as a society we should have the decency to respect their desires.

Good for you WP. And by way of apology to you, let me say I am surprised and delighted you've taken that approach. This [my surprise] is another example of how we can unfairly attribute characteristics or attitudes to others. Thanks for teaching me a good lesson.

BTW, this discussion reminds me once again about the difficulty we can have with language. A very confusing, and related issue is the use of words like 'Mexican' or 'Latino' or 'Hispanic,' at least in the United States. Depending on which 'Latino or Latina' you are talking to, any or all of these terms can be offensive or inaccurate.

I give up. My beautiful wife is 14 years my junior and her skin is whiter than my Norwegian/English, Irish, Welsh, German outer covering; despite her Mexican/Jewish/and whatever heritage. Yet today she asked rhetorically, 'Why are most of my friends 'white?' 'White,' now there's a term I don't care for, if it's applied to me. And I'm not even sure why.

All I know is that during a conversation once with a beautiful dark skinned Latina lawyer [I'll go with alliteration ] she said a reference to 'whites' or 'you whites.' And I was actually shocked. I did not think of her as 'other' and did not realize she saw me as 'other.' And yet I am well aware that members of any 'majority' class tend to be more oblivious to such considerations.

Still, it surprised me to hear I had been assigned to some category other than 'human' or 'friend' or 'colleague.' I'm making no argument here, just trying to accurately report my experiences.

[Haven]

I came in late to this party, but what is an acceptable an neutral term for 'homosexual?' As much as I claim I want to be sensitive to the concerns of groups that have historically been subjected to discrimination, I'm not so sure I should be forced to use a positive label when I want to signal neutrality.

Lesbian (for women) or gay (for men). These are the neutral terms accepted by the LGBT community, academia, and national news media organizations. "Homosexual" has negative connotations (today, it's mostly used by anti-LGBT activists) and, in my opinion, it's only one small step above that bigoted term starting with "F."

[Danmark]

I came in late to this party, but what is an acceptable an neutral term for 'homosexual?' As much as I claim I want to be sensitive to the concerns of groups that have historically been subjected to discrimination, I'm not so sure I should be forced to use a positive label when I want to signal neutrality.

Lesbian (for women) or gay (for men). These are the neutral terms accepted by the LGBT community, academia, and national news media organizations. "Homosexual" has negative connotations (today, it's mostly used by anti-LGBT activists) and, in my opinion, it's only one small step above that bigoted term starting with "F."

I miss 'queer.' I understand it is making a comeback. I guess it's happening under the same theory that African Americans have responded to the 'N' word, a word I can't even bring my self to spell. As I understand it, the effort to use the word as in "my nigga" or "niggah" is a way to rob the word of its power and turn it into a term of endearment.

Language and its nuances present a never ending fascination.

BTW, being both black and gay AND living in a small town in South Dakota has got to be a daunting proposition.

I lived in Japan for two years, in a fairly large city, but one that was not accustomed to seeing foreigners. I got just a small hint of what it is like to be 'other.' Even when there was no particular negative prejudice against me due to my race, it was interesting to watch my own reaction to constantly being an object of interest. Walking down a sidewalk and having virtually every single person in a group of 50 waiting for a bus, stare at me takes a certain toll after a while.

For my wife [then], a tall blonde, it was even worse. I got so I didn't want to go anywhere with her in public. Things may have changed [this was in the 70's], but sometimes it was ridiculous. Once she was positively mobbed by a group of teen agers who somehow got it into their heads she was a movie star. They wanted her autograph. When she signed her name in katakana (the Japanese character system for spelling foreign words phonetically) she was quite a hit.

My point is that for some of us, it is a burden to be a point of attention because we are different, even when the attention is positive and friendly.

[Haven]

I miss 'queer.' I understand it is making a comeback. I guess it's happening under the same theory that African Americans have responded to the 'N' word, a word I can't even bring my self to spell. As I understand it, the effort to use the word as in "my nigga" or "niggah" is a way to rob the word of its power and turn it into a term of endearment.

"Queer" (and that f-word that I won't repeat here) is used exactly the same way in the LGBT community as "nigga" is in the black community. "Queer" has been sufficiently reclaimed to be used by anyone (including non-LGBT people) as a neutral or positive term, but that other word is still offensive when used by anyone outside of the LGBT community.

BTW, being both black and gay AND living in a small town in South Dakota has got to be a daunting proposition.

Oh yes. Sometimes, I feel like a fish in the middle of the Sahara around here. Fortunately, I haven't faced much overt hate (a few epithets shouted from pickup trucks, but no violence), but I have experienced social exclusion and isolation here (there is no black or queer community), and I realize I have no chance of having any sort of dating life. It could be worse, though . . . I could be in Uganda or Russia. I'm still fortunate .

[Haven]

Yet another example of how "homosexual" is used offensively by anti-gay activists:

Homophobic Benham Brothers: "We Love 'Homosexuals'"

[Danmark]

Yet another example of how "homosexual" is used offensively by anti-gay activists:

Homophobic Benham Brothers: "We Love 'Homosexuals'"

To me what is worse is their obvious dishonesty. The may be deceiving themselves as well, as seems apparent by their reaction to the recording of one of their own statements. Besides, don't you think the one on the right . . . well . . . I'll send my thoughts in a pm.

[99percentatheism]

The "APA" validated the appropriateness of same gender sex acts for those that follow its precepts. They/it refer to the behavior and the people that engage in the behavior as homosexuality and homosexuals.

Until the DSM VI comes out with another neologism for the behavior and propensity, the taking offense at using the word "homosexual" seems to be based on gay pride activism and little else. The use of the word and/or term "homosexual" is simply accuracy.

Should we go back to "inversion"? Wasn't that the word for the behavior before "homosexual" was coined by a psychologist in the 1800's?

Or would that be offensive to Teeter Hang Up company? https://www.teetertv.com/

In all reality. "homophobe" is an utterly offensive and propagandist word. What is irrational about not wanting to be the participant in a homosexual interaction?

All of anatomy, biology and physiology declares the intense or passive aversion to homosexuality is perfectly natural and perfectly appropriate physically as well as mentally.

[McCulloch]

In all reality. "homophobe" is an utterly offensive and propagandist word. What is irrational about not wanting to be the participant in a homosexual interaction?

It certainly would be an offensive word if that was what it meant.
Homophobia encompasses a range of negative attitudes and feelings toward homosexuality or people who are identified or perceived as being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT). It can be expressed as antipathy, contempt, prejudice, aversion, or hatred, may be based on irrational fear, and is sometimes related to religious beliefs.
Homophobia has nothing whatsoever to do with not wanting to participate in gay sex. I, for example, have no antipathy, contempt, prejudice, aversion or hatred towards anyone who is LGBT and yet my own sexual activities are consistently heterosexual. We can be accepting of LGBT people without wanting to be LGBT.

All of anatomy, biology and physiology declares the intense or passive aversion to homosexuality is perfectly natural and perfectly appropriate physically as well as mentally.

This statement is what is utterly offensive propaganda.