I was going to discuss something else, but today I ran smack into the word game some people love to play, the ones who think they are being funny when in fact they are merely fostering homophobia and racism. To me, homophobia is racism, though the politically correct would disagree.

In an adult webmaster forum, where you would think people would know better, a post was made in an innocuous thread, that I questioned. The post

half these answers are gay.

seemed out of place. I questioned it and so far the original poster has yet to return to reply, however others have waded in. It is those who have attempted to make it seem right that I have a problem with. See, to begin with they have no idea really what the poster might have meant or not. Though frankly I don’t see any other way than to assume it isn’t complimentary.

If you look at the definition of what ‘gay’ means, in any dictionary, you are not going to find that it means ‘lame’ ’soft’ ’squishy ideas’ or ‘pitiful’.

American Heritage Dictionary

1. Of, relating to, or having a sexual orientation to persons of the same sex.
2. Showing or characterized by cheerfulness and lighthearted excitement; merry.
3. Bright or lively, especially in color: a gay, sunny room.
4. Given to social pleasures.
5. Dissolute; licentious.

(source)

Assume for one minute that this isn’t about making a rude comment about gays, but the post is using the word as it is defined otherwise. So if it isn’t about homosexuals, about a preconception of what homosexuals are about, how then does it fit the context of the posting? It doesn’t.

I think what has me pissed, is the way that the others have come sailing in to try and justify what the poster meant. Not like he has told them, but it is revealing to see how they make excuses for what is basically a slam against Gays. Not overt, but it is there unless the poster can actually come up with something else to explain it.

It also raises the simple question, if the word had no offensive meaning to it, why are these people rushing in to defend it before the original poster has explained it? Only reason really is because they KNOW it is offensive, can only be offensive.

One busybody stuck their nose in with this:

I’m the last guy to defend [name edited], but in this context “gay” just means lame or pitiful. Popular US slang these days. My son uses it all the tgime, usually in reference to a band or type of music (like emo) he doesn’t like.

And that is perhaps what has set me off. Kids learn from their peers and their parents. To associate ‘lame’ or ‘pitiful’ with ‘gay’, fosters a subconscious thought process. Not a good one either. So when a kid hears people talking about gays, he is also thinking of pitiful and lame. He/She will associate those meanings with homosexuals and thus the youth are given Lesson 101 in racism.

Gay is about being happy, by any definition and long before it was included to refer to Homosexuals. There is no record of ‘gay’ being used to refer to something being pitiful or lame until after the definition was altered to include reference to homosexuals. So it is slang for something distasteful, and that is okay, because well gee, the kids all use it, as this poster pointed out. And that makes it okay?

Not to me it doesn’t.

It is this careless attitude that encourages people like the Pope. It is this ‘knowing slur’ and ‘acceptance of it’ that allows people to get away with constant attacks on Gays and Lesbians. It is why people like Bush are able to get elected or people like Stephen Harper. They use the fear, the unsavory aspect of homosexuality that is fostered daily by misuse of the word ‘gay’. It is an old tactic, one well used in the early 1930’s by Adolph Hitler and his gang of thugs.

Now it is once more being well used by the newest Nazi’s on the block.