I don't have a good sample size for this, so I will be speaking from personal experience only: As a heterosexual person, the term heterosexual makes me feel uncomfortable, I am not offended by it, but it is of putting to me.
sorry, I have not heard the word heterosexual used often, especially not used to describe a particular person (I am speaking from personal experienced)
I am not quite sure why I feel uncomfortable, but I think that it feels unnatural and weird to me. It goes back to the idea of it feeling clinical.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"If you knew anything about the lore you'd see that they were clearly hinting that the madness on Innistrad was caused by Uncle Istvan wearing Urza's Power Armor ... tainted with Phrexyian Oil"
Graham from Loading Ready Run
sorry, I have not heard the word heterosexual used often, especially not used to describe a particular person (I am speaking from personal experienced)
You've not heard someone referred to as being heterosexual?
I am not quite sure why I feel uncomfortable, but I think that it feels unnatural and weird to me.
There are few things less unnatural and weird than heterosexuality.
It goes back to the idea of it feeling clinical.
Except you said that you feel uncomfortable with the word "straight" also, which is neither clinical nor uncommon.
I pretty much never hear the words heterosexual or homosexual used in conversation. I mean, just in terms of practicality, why would you use a 5-6 syllable word when a one syllable word would suffice? It makes about as much sense as referring to your dog as a "canis lupus familiaris" in polite conversation.
If the issue is that using "homosexual" feels uncomfortable because it's a medical-sounding term, is "heterosexual" equally offensive?
...kind of. This is a bit of a false equivalence. It's hard to alienate straights from mainstream society considering y'all are the majority. But yeah, I can see some far-left feminist using the term to try and attack straights.
sorry, I have not heard the word heterosexual used often, especially not used to describe a particular person (I am speaking from personal experienced)
You've not heard someone referred to as being heterosexual?
I am not quite sure why I feel uncomfortable, but I think that it feels unnatural and weird to me.
There are few things less unnatural and weird than heterosexuality.
It goes back to the idea of it feeling clinical.
Except you said that you feel uncomfortable with the word "straight" also, which is neither clinical nor uncommon.
Highroller you are not arguing in good faith. Xecel wasn't talking about heterosexuality itself being unnatural but rather the connotation that it gives the word. But you know that - you just don't want to admit that clinical terms are uncomfortable, especially when it's something so touchy as sexuality.
I pretty much never hear the words heterosexual or homosexual used in conversation. I mean, just in terms of practicality, why would you use a 5-6 syllable word when a one syllable word would suffice? It makes about as much sense as referring to your dog as a "canis lupus familiaris" in polite conversation.
Highroller you are not arguing in good faith. Xecel wasn't talking about heterosexuality itself being unnatural but rather the connotation that it gives the word. But you know that - you just don't want to admit that clinical terms are uncomfortable,
I wouldn't lecture someone on "good faith" without first reading the post in question. Xecel also expressed discomfort at the word "straight," which is neither clinical, nor unusual in its usage (not that heterosexual is unusual in its usage, seriously guys, we're past fourth grade), nor is it polysyllabic. So it has nothing to do with how "clinical" it might sound, because he's expressed discomfort towards a word that is decidedly un-clinical.
And you're right, I don't think it's justified to express discomfort at either the word "heterosexual" or the word "homosexual." I think they're perfectly acceptable words to use, and are used in common conversation.
especially when it's something so touchy as sexuality.
Heterosexuality is a touchy topic? This is news to me. Maybe the fact that people are treating it as such might be the problem. See also "hypersensitive."
...kind of. This is a bit of a false equivalence. It's hard to alienate straights from mainstream society considering y'all are the majority.
It's a false equivalence, but not for the reason you say it is. Consider that many clinical words are fine in informal conversation - nobody is going to bite your head off if you refer to someone as "asthmatic" or "autistic" or "hemophiliac". And consider that both "white man" and "black man" are accepted terms, but "yellow man" and "red man" are racial slurs. You simply can't make generalizations like "All clinical words are offensive" or "All color words are offensive". You just have to look at the usage of the particular words; every word has its own history. Maybe the offensiveness has something to do with majority or minority status, but maybe - as in "asthmatic" and "black man" - it doesn't.
Let's be cautious about attributing intent. Especially among the older generation, I get the sense that it comes more from a misguided idea that the word "gay" has been appropriated away from its "correct" meaning of "happy". I notice they also tend to avoid "straight" - surely they're not trying to alienate themselves. They just don't hear these words as the regular and accepted terms for the concepts; they hear them as slang, like "weed" for marijuana. Whatever your opinion on drug laws, it would probably look weird to you to see a newspaper article refer to "weed legalization". That's sort of what "gay marriage" sounds like to them. This doesn't indicate that they're hostile; it just indicates that they're out of touch with the march of language. (Although of course it doesn't indicate that they're not hostile, either.)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
Let's be cautious about attributing intent. Especially among the older generation, I get the sense that it comes more from a misguided idea that the word "gay" has been appropriated away from its "correct" meaning of "happy". I notice they also tend to avoid "straight" - surely they're not trying to alienate themselves. They just don't hear these words as the regular and accepted terms for the concepts; they hear them as slang, like "weed" for marijuana. Whatever your opinion on drug laws, it would probably look weird to you to see a newspaper article refer to "weed legalization". That's sort of what "gay marriage" sounds like to them. This doesn't indicate that they're hostile; it just indicates that they're out of touch with the march of language. (Although of course it doesn't indicate that they're not hostile, either.)
This is how I feel about it. "straight/gay" sounds like slang to me, and I'm only in my mid-20s.
Same with marijuana. I find it difficult to take anyone who says "weed" instead of marijuana seriously when they talk about it.
So far it looks like nobody has really even attempted to try to make an argument why the word homosexual is offensive. Perhaps the strongest support in favor of showing that it is in fact a neutral term is how feeble the arguments are that try to prove otherwise.
I prefer being called straight to heterosexual, and I think the word heterosexual sounds rather clinical. In other words, there is nothing offensive at all about calling me heterosexual. The same can be said for homosexual. 'It sounds clinical' is not a weak argument, it is no argument at all.
I asked a gay friend of mine if he thinks homosexual is offensive and he told me that it depends how you say it. If you call a gay guy homosexual in an offensive way, it is offensive. If you call a gay guy handsome in an offensive way, it is offensive. If you call anyone anything in an offensive way, it is offensive. And if you call him homosexual in a non-offensive way, it is not offensive. Thus, the word homosexual is neutral, according to him. And I agree wholeheartedly.
Fun fact, I've been raised in a Jewish family and everyone I know uses the term "Jews" and "Jew" all the time. I only just found out two months ago that apparently we consider the term "Jew" to be derogatory when other people use it.
There should be pamphlets for these things.
It's often better to treat these things on a person by person basis, apologize if you accidentally offend someone and then use their preferred term with them from then on.
This is the best post I've read in ages. Not only is it funny as hell, it drives the point home so eloquently.
I recall somewhere on this thread someone made a comparison to the N-word. Now that word is offensive. As a white guy, if I walked in the Bronx calling African americans the N-word and I did so in a pleasant manner with no ill-intentions, I would probably get the crap beat out of me. It doesn't matter how I use that word, because that word is offensive. Homosexual on the other hand, is neutral.
In an attempt to see why some people think this word is offensive, all I see is that certain elements in the media are trying to convince others to try to be offended when it is used. As though that's a justification. If I was called upon to make an argument why the N-word or even the word 'gay' is offensive, it would be pitifully easy because both those words are used as slurs. Homosexual is not.
Thus, I feel that the answer is yes, those who find the term homosexual offensive are hypersensitive. For those who disagree - please make a valid argument to support your case.
Thus, I feel that the answer is yes, those who find the term homosexual offensive are hypersensitive. For those who disagree - please make a valid argument to support your case.
I'm not going to repeat myself because you can't be bothered to pay attention. If you dispute or do not understand parts of my or anyone else's argument, you can highlight those parts specifically and we will do our best to explain in further detail. But what you're doing right now? It's just fingers-in-the-ears-nyah-nyah-nyah denial. The full extent of your counterargument is to assert, and I quote, "Homosexual on the other hand, is neutral", and "Homosexual is not [used as a slur]." End of paragraph, end of discussion. But of course what's freely asserted may be freely rejected. So if you want a "valid argument", start by making your own.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
I don't think I'm being hypersensetive when I say the word is often used as a slur. You can say plenty of things to be offensive, yes. But I find that homosexual is more often used with a dehumanizing intention than as a neutral word. It's used to make gay people seem further from natural and healthy.
It's a word that the general public doesn't think is offensive, so often times people use it to appear "politically correct" while meaning hurtful things when they say it. So when people say it not trying to be mean or offensive, it can come off that way.
...And all this is without even getting into the fact that, even if homosexuality were a mental disorder or health risk, we're still supposed to treat people suffering from mental disorders and health risks with sympathy and dignity. If medical science were to discover tomorrow that gay people had an intrinsically higher cancer rate or whatever, it'd be absurd to say, "Oh, yeah, never mind on the whole gay rights thing, that justifies all the crap they get." So the fact that clinicizing the trait works to stigmatize the person says some of us have still got some improving to do on our attitudes towards illness, as well as on our attitudes towards gays.
Actually, pretend for a moment you're bipolar, or have some other condition that is and really, truly ought to be in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. You hear gay rights activists repeatedly stressing that homosexuality was removed from the DSM, so gays should not be treated like they're mentally ill. What subtext do you, as a bipolar person, hear in that? Is it comfortable for you?
Food for thought.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Why?
I am not quite sure why I feel uncomfortable, but I think that it feels unnatural and weird to me. It goes back to the idea of it feeling clinical.
Graham from Loading Ready Run
There are few things less unnatural and weird than heterosexuality.
Except you said that you feel uncomfortable with the word "straight" also, which is neither clinical nor uncommon.
...kind of. This is a bit of a false equivalence. It's hard to alienate straights from mainstream society considering y'all are the majority. But yeah, I can see some far-left feminist using the term to try and attack straights.
Highroller you are not arguing in good faith. Xecel wasn't talking about heterosexuality itself being unnatural but rather the connotation that it gives the word. But you know that - you just don't want to admit that clinical terms are uncomfortable, especially when it's something so touchy as sexuality.
Why? To alienate minorities, of course.
Jarad Graveyard Combo[Primer]!
Sidisi ANT!
Playing Commander to Win - A guide on Competitive, 4-player EDH
LandDestruction.com - An EDH blog
And you're right, I don't think it's justified to express discomfort at either the word "heterosexual" or the word "homosexual." I think they're perfectly acceptable words to use, and are used in common conversation.
Heterosexuality is a touchy topic? This is news to me. Maybe the fact that people are treating it as such might be the problem. See also "hypersensitive."
Heterosexual people are not minorities.
Let's be cautious about attributing intent. Especially among the older generation, I get the sense that it comes more from a misguided idea that the word "gay" has been appropriated away from its "correct" meaning of "happy". I notice they also tend to avoid "straight" - surely they're not trying to alienate themselves. They just don't hear these words as the regular and accepted terms for the concepts; they hear them as slang, like "weed" for marijuana. Whatever your opinion on drug laws, it would probably look weird to you to see a newspaper article refer to "weed legalization". That's sort of what "gay marriage" sounds like to them. This doesn't indicate that they're hostile; it just indicates that they're out of touch with the march of language. (Although of course it doesn't indicate that they're not hostile, either.)
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
This is how I feel about it. "straight/gay" sounds like slang to me, and I'm only in my mid-20s.
Same with marijuana. I find it difficult to take anyone who says "weed" instead of marijuana seriously when they talk about it.
I prefer being called straight to heterosexual, and I think the word heterosexual sounds rather clinical. In other words, there is nothing offensive at all about calling me heterosexual. The same can be said for homosexual. 'It sounds clinical' is not a weak argument, it is no argument at all.
I asked a gay friend of mine if he thinks homosexual is offensive and he told me that it depends how you say it. If you call a gay guy homosexual in an offensive way, it is offensive. If you call a gay guy handsome in an offensive way, it is offensive. If you call anyone anything in an offensive way, it is offensive. And if you call him homosexual in a non-offensive way, it is not offensive. Thus, the word homosexual is neutral, according to him. And I agree wholeheartedly.
This is the best post I've read in ages. Not only is it funny as hell, it drives the point home so eloquently.
I recall somewhere on this thread someone made a comparison to the N-word. Now that word is offensive. As a white guy, if I walked in the Bronx calling African americans the N-word and I did so in a pleasant manner with no ill-intentions, I would probably get the crap beat out of me. It doesn't matter how I use that word, because that word is offensive. Homosexual on the other hand, is neutral.
In an attempt to see why some people think this word is offensive, all I see is that certain elements in the media are trying to convince others to try to be offended when it is used. As though that's a justification. If I was called upon to make an argument why the N-word or even the word 'gay' is offensive, it would be pitifully easy because both those words are used as slurs. Homosexual is not.
Thus, I feel that the answer is yes, those who find the term homosexual offensive are hypersensitive. For those who disagree - please make a valid argument to support your case.
My G Yisan, the Bard of Death G deck.
My BUGWR Hermit druid BUGWR deck.
I'm not going to repeat myself because you can't be bothered to pay attention. If you dispute or do not understand parts of my or anyone else's argument, you can highlight those parts specifically and we will do our best to explain in further detail. But what you're doing right now? It's just fingers-in-the-ears-nyah-nyah-nyah denial. The full extent of your counterargument is to assert, and I quote, "Homosexual on the other hand, is neutral", and "Homosexual is not [used as a slur]." End of paragraph, end of discussion. But of course what's freely asserted may be freely rejected. So if you want a "valid argument", start by making your own.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
I'm not just imagining this.
It's a word that the general public doesn't think is offensive, so often times people use it to appear "politically correct" while meaning hurtful things when they say it. So when people say it not trying to be mean or offensive, it can come off that way.
Modern - GB Elves, UW Ojutai Control
Legacy - BWG Junk Stoneblade
Gay and Proud
#MakeAmericaGreatAgain
Actually, pretend for a moment you're bipolar, or have some other condition that is and really, truly ought to be in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. You hear gay rights activists repeatedly stressing that homosexuality was removed from the DSM, so gays should not be treated like they're mentally ill. What subtext do you, as a bipolar person, hear in that? Is it comfortable for you?
Food for thought.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.