4
   

Is the word "homosexual" extremely offensive?

 
 
layman
 
Reply Sat 14 Feb, 2015 11:33 pm
Who knew?

Quote:
Identifying a same-sex couple as "a homosexual couple," characterizing their relationship as "a homosexual relationship," or identifying their intimacy as "homosexual sex" is extremely offensive...


http://www.glaad.org/reference/offensive
 
ehBeth
 
  0  
Reply Sat 14 Feb, 2015 11:35 pm
@layman,
I didn't know that.

After reading the commentary at the link I can understand it and will keep it in mind.

Thanks for bringing that to my attention.
layman
 
  3  
Reply Sat 14 Feb, 2015 11:58 pm
@ehBeth,
If what I always took to be a neutral, descriptive term is "extremely offensive" to gays, I wonder how they would characterize the terms that are applied to them with the intent to mock or ridicule?

Extremely extremely offensive, maybe?
0 Replies
 
FBM
 
  3  
Reply Sun 15 Feb, 2015 01:18 am
Why would 'homosexual' be offensive to gays/lesbians if 'heterosexual' isn't to straights? Are bisexuals offended by that term? Asexuals? Pansexuals? I sometimes wonder if people haven't become addicted to self-righteous indignation. Not just gays, mind you. People in general.
roger
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Feb, 2015 01:42 am
@FBM,
Of course.
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Feb, 2015 01:44 am
@roger,
roger wrote:

Of course.


How dare you say such a thing? http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb192/DinahFyre/dramaqueen.gif
roger
 
  0  
Reply Sun 15 Feb, 2015 01:59 am
@FBM,
Comes with seniority, and you're hurtin'.

Not to be offensive, you understand.
Setanta
 
  5  
Reply Sun 15 Feb, 2015 02:00 am
This is political rectitude carried to a ridiculous extreme. The term homosexual is simply descriptive and does not inherently constitute a value judgment. I see no reason to knuckle under to the dictates of a self-appointed special interest press agency.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Feb, 2015 02:08 am
A good deal of reality is offensive, but we still need words for it. So, there are going to be lots of offensive words if we are to communicate reality. Therefore the argument " such and such word is offensive" tends to get a "ho-hum" from me.
0 Replies
 
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Feb, 2015 02:16 am
@roger,
roger wrote:

Comes with seniority, and you're hurtin'.

Not to be offensive, you understand.


I need to get me a little señorita, then.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Feb, 2015 03:05 am
@FBM,
FBM wrote:
I need to get me a little señorita, then.




(I'm sure that video is full of offensive stereotypes.)
0 Replies
 
contrex
 
  3  
Reply Sun 15 Feb, 2015 03:56 am
if I said that my boss was "homosexual" (which he is) I am sure that he would regard that as an unfriendly thing to say. Sometimes the neutral term can be seen as distancing.
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  2  
Reply Sun 15 Feb, 2015 11:55 am
@Setanta,
Quote:
This is political rectitude carried to a ridiculous extreme. The term homosexual is simply descriptive and does not inherently constitute a value judgment. I see no reason to knuckle under to the dictates of a self-appointed special interest press agency.


Hear, hear.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  0  
Reply Sun 15 Feb, 2015 02:50 pm
@FBM,
Have you read the info at the link?

I think it makes sense after reading that page.

Again, very pleased that this was brought to my attention.

I'm sure the OP had another intent now that I've read more of its posts.
ehBeth
 
  0  
Reply Sun 15 Feb, 2015 02:51 pm
@Setanta,
Did you read the material at the link?

0 Replies
 
FBM
 
  2  
Reply Sun 15 Feb, 2015 03:14 pm
@ehBeth,
Yes, I did, and I was convinced until I started thinking about the terms 'heterosexual,' 'bisexual,' etc. There's nothing inherently derogatory about any of those terms, and I don't know of anyone who intends to insult a gay or lesbian person with that term. It now looks to me as a case of PC hyper-sensitivity. That's not to say that I'm unsympathetic to their plight. I know that they are discriminated against. But I just don't think that word is an example of it.

That said, I'll go back and re-read the page.

Edit:

OK, I re-read it and am still not convinced.
layman
 
  2  
Reply Sun 15 Feb, 2015 04:36 pm
@FBM,
Quote:
OK, I re-read it and am still not convinced.


Me neither, FBM. The basic rationale seems to be summed up this way:

Quote:
"homosexual" is aggressively used by anti-gay extremists to suggest that gay people are somehow diseased or psychologically/emotionally disordered


But why focus upon what a particulary group ("anti-gay extremists") might "suggest?"

The "reasoning" seems to be along these lines:

For Hitler, the term "jew" implied an inferior person. I don't like Hitler. Therefore the term "jew" should be expurgated from the language, and it's usage forbidden.

Hitler was indeed "extremely offensive." But that doesn't make "jews "offensive, does it?
contrex
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Feb, 2015 04:45 pm
@layman,
layman wrote:
Hitler was indeed "extremely offensive." But that doesn't make "jews "offensive, does it?

You are either autistic or a troll.
layman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Feb, 2015 05:17 pm
@contrex,
Quote:
You are either autistic or a troll.


I haven't said what I think y0u are, contrex, and I'll try not to. I try to be polite.
0 Replies
 
Lustig Andrei
 
  4  
Reply Mon 16 Feb, 2015 10:09 pm
@ehBeth,
I've read the entire page linked to. I'm afraid I have to agree with Set and others here that this is political correctness run amok. These people also object to such expressions as 'gay lifestyle,' as opposed to 'gay life.' If that makes semantic sense to you, we are speaking two different languages.

I can't find anything at all offensive -- let alone 'extremely' -- in a connotation-neutral descriptive word e.g. 'homosexual.'
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Is the word "homosexual" extremely offensive?
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/19/2019 at 02:18:25