dyer@vaxuum.DEC (This did not happen to/Pablo Picasso) (08/06/85)
Nomenclature - Gay/Homosexual/Lesbian___________________________________________ > By the way, don't call me "homosexual." I'm Gay. It's impolite to call a > Black person a "Negro," it's just as impolite to call us "homosexual." This gets really complicated. Just as some people object to using the word "man" to mean "person," there are those who object to using the word "gay" to mean "homosexual person." "Gay" is usually taken to mean "homosexual male" and "Lesbian," of course, means "homosexual female." Thus there are those who consider it sexist to use "Gay" to refer to both. On the other hand, "Gay" is much more ambiguous than "man," since it's not intrinsically male, but just used that way sometimes. There are some homo- sexual women who don't want to be called "Lesbian" because they feel it means being a subset of "Gay." To get into further shades of grey, there are those who differentiate between "Gay" and "Lesbian" as verbs, but use "Gay" as an adjective for both! And there are those who don't mind "homosexual" as an adjective, but despise it as a noun. Chaos. What will humankind do about it? <_Jym_> :::::::::::::::: Jym Dyer ::::' :: `:::: Dracut, Massachusetts ::' :: `:: :: :: :: DYER%VAXUUM.DEC@DECWRL.ARPA :: .::::. :: {allegra|decvax|ihnp4|ucbvax}!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-vaxuum!dyer ::..:' :: `:..:: ::::. :: .:::: Statements made in this article are my own; they might not :::::::::::::::: reflect the views of |d|i|g|i|t|a|l| Equipment Corporation.
sdyer@bbncc5.UUCP (Steve Dyer) (08/15/85)
> > Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the term, "Negro", is considered > to be insulting because its actual meaning is "slave". > > If that's the case, I see nothing wrong with "homosexual" as an adjective; > I don't mind being referred to as a heterosexual man, and if I were gay, > I don't think I'd mind being called a homosexual man. After all, > "homosexual" means, in my own terms, "sexually prefers persons of the > same gender," right? > Both are disliked by certain people, but not because of their dictionary meaning. "Negro", after all, is a simple cognate via Spanish of the Latin, "black", but its relative disuse these days comes from its association with its earlier use by non-blacks in an overwhelmingly racist society. In the same way, the word "homosexual", aside from its offensiveness to linguists, being an unwieldly juxtaposition of Greek and Latin stems, is a relic of late 19th century attitudes about human sexuality. It has a rather stodgy, dusty clinicalness about it which is inappropriate for everyday use. You might not mind being called "heterosexual" when the occasion calls for it (as in the rare case to identify someone as NOT-"homosexual"), but gay people end up living with the term all day long. There seems nothing wrong with calling people the way they wish being called. "Black" has replaced "negro" in most American English, and "gay" for "homosexual" is making inroads. -- /Steve Dyer {decvax,linus,ima,ihnp4}!bbncca!sdyer sdyer@bbnccv.ARPA
joe@emacs.uucp (Joe Chapman) (08/17/85)
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the term, "Negro", is considered > to be insulting because its actual meaning is "slave". From Latin nigrum, niger (black), through Spanish or Portuguese, according to the OED. > I see nothing wrong with "homosexual" as an adjective; > I don't mind being referred to as a heterosexual man, and if I were gay, ... There's some linguistic defense for the adjective when it's applied to sexual acts, in which case it means ``acts involving/between members of the same sex''. But what does it mean to refer to a same-sex person? Or a different-sex person? (Other than my mad friend Frank, of course, who tries to be of a different sex each day :-)). Of course there are worse ways to refer to gay people. My mother always tells me to watch out at the laundromat for those ``intellectual fags.'' I assure her that I do... -- -- Joseph Chapman decvax!cca!emacs!joe CCA Uniworks, Inc. emacs!joe@cca-unix.ARPA 20 William St. Wellesley, MA 02181 (617) 235-2600
dyer@vaxuum.DEC (This did not happen to/Pablo Picasso) (08/20/85)
Re: Nomenclature - Gay/Homosexual/Lesbian_______________________________________ > There seems nothing wrong with calling people the way they wish being called. > "Black" has replaced "negro" in most American English, and "gay" for "homosex- > ual" is making inroads. If only it were that simple. One main point of my original article was that there really is no consensus at this point, so it's very difficult to call people what they wish to be called. An older black woman once told me that it was an insult to be called "black" back in the fifties. "Negro" was the preferred term, since it was judg- ed to be better than "colored." "Colored" was, when it came into vogue, prefer- red to "nigger." (Back in Pittsburgh's North Side, working class white folk are still a bit behind, debating between "nigger" and "colored." But I digress.) I remember the first episode of _Room_222_, where the new white teacher asked the new black teacher if he preferred to be called "negro" or "black." He said, "just call me Mr. Whatsisname" (I forget his name). That's my approach. When I meet somebody, I just call them "a person" (or similar terms) until I find out what they like to be called. Then I call them that (unless they like to be called something like "Shah of Shahs, Ruler of the Heavens, Light of the Universe" (-:)). The other main point of my article was that whatever nomenclature we choose, it should be nonsexist. This point seems to have been lost in the shuffle, so I'm adding net.women to the discussion (Hi gang!). I strongly feel that the generic term should not be the same as the masculine term. For example, we have "man" for the males and "woman" for the females. Purportedly, "man" can be used as a generic, referring to either sex. I find this sexist and refuse to use it; I use "person" instead. The nomenclature is less clear for people attracted to motss, but it goes something like this: "Gay" means men and "lesbian" means women. Again, it is suggested by some that the masculine term be used as the generic; that is, the word "gay" is applied to both sexes. Alas, there appear to be as many arrangements as there are people. Some women prefer "gay" to "lesbian" because they see "gay" as a generic term, thus making the word "lesbian" seem demeaning. Others see "gay" as a mascu- line term, and decline to have it applied to them. I've met more of the latter group than the former - and I have encoun- tered more "Gay and Lesbian" groups than "Gay" groups, so I tend to use "gay" for men, "lesbian" for women, and "homosexual" for the generic term. That's my solution, at least for now. Perhaps somebody will come up with a different solution, and it will "make inroads." But if it turns out to be YASLC (Yet Another Sexist Language Construct), I will not use it. <_Jym_> P.S.: Some of you may have noticed that I listed "man" before "woman" and "gay" before "lesbian" in the above. I did not do this on basis of sex, I did this because I use alphabetical order. :::::::::::::::: Jym Dyer ::::' :: `:::: Dracut, Massachusetts ::' :: `:: :: :: :: DYER%VAXUUM.DEC@DECWRL.ARPA :: .::::. :: {allegra|decvax|ihnp4|ucbvax}!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-vaxuum!dyer ::..:' :: `:..:: ::::. :: .:::: Statements made in this article are my own; they might not :::::::::::::::: reflect the views of |d|i|g|i|t|a|l| Equipment Corporation.
dyer@vaxuum.DEC (This did not happen to/Pablo Picasso) (08/24/85)
Re: Nomenclature - Gay/Homosexual/Lesbian_______________________________________ > . . . the word ''homosexual'', which we quite correctly tag as the mark of the > oppressor, . . . Quite incorrectly. Again, the jury is still out on this. "Homophile" sounds like it has possibilities, though! <_Jym_> P.S.: Morrissey, the singer for The Smiths, refers to himself as a celibate homosexual. He's just this side of suicidal, and sings the most depressing music I know of. I have extreme difficulty calling him "gay." :::::::::::::::: Jym Dyer ::::' :: `:::: Dracut, Massachusetts ::' :: `:: :: :: :: DYER%VAXUUM.DEC@DECWRL.ARPA :: .::::. :: {allegra|decvax|ihnp4|ucbvax}!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-vaxuum!dyer ::..:' :: `:..:: ::::. :: .:::: Statements made in this article are my own; they might not :::::::::::::::: reflect the views of |d|i|g|i|t|a|l| Equipment Corporation.
flaps@utcs.UUCP (Alan J Rosenthal) (09/02/85)
How about Gay Men vs Lesbians? Doesn't this comply with all the restrictions expressed so far? The term "Gay Men" clearly does not include any women, the term "Lesbians" clearly does not include any men. I strongly dislike using "Gay" to refer only to men because it seems to me that the history of this is the belief that only male homosexuals exist. You know, like how men always ask gay women "Uhh... how do you do it??" Whereas Kurt Vonnegut (jr) describes graphically how men "do it"...