Gamer Imagery Used in Campaign to Discourage “Gay” as an Insult

The sorry history of homophobia in gaming is pretty well documented, so it’s probably not a coincidence that a campaign to discourage anti-gay remarks includes a gaming piece among its poster ads.

ThinkB4YouSPeak, which hopes to raise awareness about anti-gay bias in America’s schools by reducing the use of homophobic language, explains its mission at its website:

Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) teens experience homophobic remarks and harassment throughout the school day, creating an atmosphere where they feel disrespected, unwanted and unsafe. Homophobic remarks such as “that’s so gay” are the most commonly heard; these slurs are often unintentional and a common part of teens’ vernacular. Most do not recognize the consequences, but the casual use of this language often carries over into more overt harassment.

The poster at left substitutes the commonly heard "That’s so gay" with "That’s so gamer guy who has more video games than friends." Stereotypical? Of course. But that would seem to be the point. Other posters include jock and cheerleader themes.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone


  1. questionmark1987 says:

    I do find the whole thing a bit… I don’t know toothless. But sometimes it’s nice to see someone trying to make this kind of a change without reverting to really nasty or insulting retorts (something I can’t always even do myself.) I think it’s something they wanted to do to make a point without actually insulting anyone so they made the insults a bit outlandish. Out of all the stuff on their website I think the most effective would be the 3rd commercial with the two cashiers, and even that is being polite. Though it’s much more personal then the multi-word insults used for the other stuff so that is what I find to be slightly more effective.

  2. Untouchable says:

    I refuse to stop using the following words on the list.






    -Beard (Seriously… why?)


    I left off cougar because it’s a stupid word anyways and I don’t use it. But still, what do I call my beard? It’s not enough for a tuft but it’s too much for a goatee and Facial hear doesn’t flow well in a proper conversation.

  3. Baruch_S says:

    Yes a private group can spew whatever crap they want. Of course, based on the reaction the campaign has garnered here, they’re just making themselves look like a bunch of thin-skinned, reactionaries who have nothing better to do than protest a perceived slight. They’re welcome to it, and props to them if they can get people to stop laughing at and/or ignoring their ridiculous posters.

  4. Baruch_S says:

    Would you please quit throwing red herrings into this? Next you’re going to be finding a way to bring the Holocaust and puppy-kicking into this discussion… If you can’t actually make a point, don’t throw the most shocking thing you can think of in and expect us to all fall for it; you’re making your own points look weaker by creating shoddy connections to shocking material.

    Rape is in no way remotely equivalent to offending someone by exercising your right to free speech. Last time I checked, rape was illegal because it violates more than a few of the victim’s rights while using a possibly offensive word is protected by freedom of speech.  Rape has no place in this discussion, and pretending it does just makes your point look silly.

    I’m not the one determining what people have to deal with, the US Constitution is. It gives people freedom of speech regardless of what they say or how they say it (libel and slander excepted, obviously). So suck it up and be happy that you have the ability to ignore them and the right to say whatever you want right back. People don’t have a right to shut up anyone who offends them, and people have the right to say what they like.

  5. questionmark1987 says:

    First amendment only protects you from the GOVERNMENT preventing you from saying something. A non profit, a group, a club or an individual can decry you saying anything they want. Once again they aren’t pushing some bill through congress, it’s a friggin ad campaign designed to make you use your head before you open your mouth and spew a bunch of worthless crap that makes you look like an incompatent, intolerant, bigotted ass.

  6. questionmark1987 says:

    With that attitude nothing should be offensive to anyone. Someone raped your girlfriend? Get over it, get some thicker skin. Who are you to determine what people should and shouldn’t have to suffer through to be able to live happily?

  7. Father Time says:

    The only reason people have nothing against gays still use "that’s so gay" is because it’s a common expression. If one day the majority of people decide to stop using it for the sake of being PC then a lot more people who don’t care about being PC (like me) will stop using it for the simple reason that nobody says it anymore.

    Pick any word that used to be considered profane but nobody uses anymore, not even profane people. Same concept really.

    Also the common decency argument is laughable. There are many people who have no problem with "that’s so gay" in fact they probably are the majority so to say you should stop using it because everyone hates it is just inaccurate at best.


    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  8. Baruch_S says:

    That’s because it isn’t validly offensive unless you’re thin-skinned. "Stupid" is a legitimate definition of "gay." You could just as well be saying that people shouldn’t use "gay" to mean "happy" because it might offend some homosexuals who are depressed.

  9. Baruch_S says:

    Not if we can get over all this PC bull and actually start promoting the First Ammendment again. Of course, then someone’s feelings might get hurt when someone has an opinion, so we obviously can’t let that happen…

  10. questionmark1987 says:

    I’m praising people having respect and compassion for people who aren’t like them. REgardless of if you agree with someone or not, people who use comments like "that’s gay" aren’t respectful or compassionate towards gay people because they don’t think it’s offensive. People who defend saying it are even less so because they refuse to consider that it is validly offensive.

  11. Baruch_S says:

    Are you suggesting that becoming a brainwashed PC sheep is actually a good thing? I’d prefer if everyone thought for himself and got offended every so often, but to each his own, I suppose.

    You should really do some research on political correctness and the ways in which it stifles people’s thoughts and opinions before you go around praising it. Leaf van Boven published an interesting study about political correctness and a phenomenon know as pluralistic ignorance; it’s in the June 2000 issue of Political Psychology if you happen to have access to a college library or a journal database like JSTOR

  12. questionmark1987 says:

    I don’t see them trying to pass a law. They’re running an ad campaign, I object in the mildest manner to the use of the word "force" when speaking of an ad campaign.

  13. questionmark1987 says:

    Unfortunatly it does, I can point you to countless articles about gay and non-gay teenagers committing suicide because of being teased at school for being seen as gay. Now honestly tell me, regardless of their mental stability would it have hurt the other children more if they had been put in detention and reprimanded for calling the kids who killed themselves gay?

  14. questionmark1987 says:

    She couldn’t have possibly meant it’s mean to imply someone is unitelligent and it’s better not to say anything if that’s your opinion.

  15. questionmark1987 says:

    No we aren’t, I didn’t say the stereotypes are correct. Not all gay men are flamboyant and dress in drag. A stereotype is a stereotype because it’s a percieved aspect of a larger group that doesn’t truly show the reality of every individual in that group. ANY stereotype is wrong about someone in the group.

    Take gamers for example: We all love violence, we all have no social life, we all live with our parents, we all are overweight, we all are geeks, we all are either extrememly intelligent or very unintelligent. None of these are correct about all gamers, but it’s the perception of the majority that makes them stereotypes, not if they are correct or not.

  16. questionmark1987 says:

    Frankly this whole arguement/debate is pointless anyway. Those of us who find the phrase "that’s gay" offensive will just avoid associating with people who use it. In a way it’s judgemental but frankly I would rather judge someone for their behavior then for an aspect of their being (race, gender, etc.).

    Those of you who choose to use it can, but you alienate yourself from a growing part of the population as more and more people are becomign more PC, there are plenty that never will, but if you look at things like the evolution of acceptance of blacks and other racial minorities in society, especially american society, in 50 years or so they people walking around saying "that’s gay" won’t be regarded with much more respect then someone who uses the term N**er to identify a black person now. It’s not about correct, incorrect, definition or anything in that. It’s about common decency and civility.

  17. Father Time says:

    I’ve been here since the livejournal days when there was no forum you dolt.

    Sorry if I find the discussion here a bit more lively.


    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  18. Father Time says:

    Yes they still do you can still find ‘mental retardation’ listed as an effect of certain diseases.


    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  19. chadachada321 says:

    No one uses "retarded" to reference mentally-challenged people anymore…

    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  20. chadachada321 says:

    …huh. learn something new everyday.

    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  21. Father Time says:

    it’s a euphemism for a man’s dick.

    Although I’ve never heard beard be used for anything other than facial hair.


    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  22. Father Time says:

    I never thought you wanted censorship, the impression I got was that everyone who uses gay as an insult should feel ashamed and change their vocabulary (not by force). I think trying to convince everyone to change their language in such a way is PCism to some degree.


    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  23. Baruch_S says:

    Says who? I have some college professors who would take umbridge with the numerous and ridiculous statements you’ve just made about a fluid, evolving language. If you don’t like it, learn to speak a "purist" language that doesn’t like to let in new words or change the meanings of old ones.

  24. chadachada321 says:

    What does "prick" mean though, other than "asshole"?

    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  25. Anomalous says:


    Also, I like saying balls. Say it with me, kids! "I’ve got balls of steel!"

  26. Pinworm says:

     Yes, it fucking does hurt.

    Unless you think no one got hurt by books being burned in Germany pre-WW2.

    Yes, yes I did just godwin, but my fucking point is valid.

  27. Majutsukai says:

    Where did I say that people should be forced not to use the word? I don’t recall having said that.

    I said this in my last post, but you seem to have ignored it, so let me say it more plainly:

    If you don’t care about offending people with your words, then none of this applies to you.

    I don’t condone censorship, and by extension, I don’t like "PC" either. The politically correct mindset likes very much to act as though "offensive" words shouldn’t be allowed period, but that’s not even close to my attitude. If you want to say it, then say it. I don’t care.

    That’s what I meant. The ads were made to raise awareness, not to petition for the outlawing of the offending word. They’re aimed at people who do care that what they say might have offended someone. The reaction it’s meant to provoke is "Oh, I never thought of it like that. Guess I’ll think twice next time," not "Oh dear, I have spoken a forbidden word! For shame! I shall cease its use forthwith."

    Can we put away the straw men now?

  28. Father Time says:

    It doesn’t hurt but I fail to see any point so why make the effort?

    Are you really going to tell me that people using gay as an insult alone drives people to suicide? If it truly is the case then I betcha those kids were mentally unstable anyway (like the hypothetical kids inspired by GTA to kill people).


    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  29. Father Time says:

    Uh except they don’t. Gamers are not all social rejects, jocks and cheerleaders are not all idiots so it really is pointless.


    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  30. Meohfumado says:

    I was joking…sheesh.

    My point is once people think they have a right to not be offended, language and free discourse itself is sacrificed.

    The left will say, "Don’t use the term libs, its derogatory towards liberals."

    The right will say, "Don’t use the term NeoCon, its derogatory towards conservatives."

    And on and on and on…

    Normally I never use a Slippery Slope argument such as this, but this is one of the few valid applications.  Once one group receives preferential treatment and earns the right to never have to be offended by terms they find offensive, every other group who can convince somebody they are in the minority is going to do the same.


    "You know what I wish? I wish all the scum of the Earth had one throat and I had my hands about it."

  31. Meohfumado says:

    If somebody committed murder/suicide because of what ANYONE said to them or called them…that person has/had problems and was probably not the most stable of people to begin with.

    You can’t force society to abide by conventions just to protect the lowest common denomenator. 

    Else nobody could play video games at all (just because a few whackos decided to kill people after playing GTA).


    "You know what I wish? I wish all the scum of the Earth had one throat and I had my hands about it."

  32. questionmark1987 says:

    Someone committed murder/suicide because of something someone else called them. Yeah that’s about the time that whole little childhood chant lost it’s value.

  33. questionmark1987 says:

    An inferiority complex is by definition a problem in that person that makes them worse off then they could be. I don’t think anyone would care about this issue if people were saying that’s so gay to call something happy. Inferior has never meant anything good or positive about anyone.

  34. questionmark1987 says:

    Does it really hurt you to not use a word? Do you walk around calling people Ni**ers, Ch*nks, etc.? It’s just a word right?

    Some kid killed himself today (yes every single day in america alone) because of BS like this and you’re trying to convince us YOU are more put out by being asked not to use the word. Amazing. People’s complete lack of perspective simply amazes me.

  35. questionmark1987 says:

    I think the whole point is to show that everyone, especially the groups using the term "that’s gay" fits into a stereotype.

  36. Meohfumado says:

    Well if that isn’t a terrible example.  The word "Jew" wasn’t a word that described something else before it was used as a pejorative.

    Nice try though….

    "You know what I wish? I wish all the scum of the Earth had one throat and I had my hands about it."

  37. wfernjohn says:

    What does competition have to do with insulting an entire group of people? If, to criticize something, I said "That’s so Jew," would it be okay?

  38. Meohfumado says:

    Whatever happened to "sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me"?!?!?

    I swear we are raising a generation of thin-skinned idiots who can’t deal with competition in the real world (the "everybody wins" and "Let’s not keep score" mentality).

    "You know what I wish? I wish all the scum of the Earth had one throat and I had my hands about it."

  39. Father Time says:

    Ok I don’t understand tranny, usually when I hear it it’s just a shorter version of transvestite with no inherent negative connotations. I mean you can easily put a negative spin on it with context like you could with any other term but still.

    Also I have to laugh at nuts, balls, cherry, prick and especially dick and ass.

    Dick is a euphemism said when you want to talk about a certain body part but don’t want to sound crude.

    Ass is the same thing only it’s used when you do want to sound crude.

    And to be against both seems stupid as if they don’t care about other people’s feelings but really just want us to only use vocabulary that they feel comfortable with.

    The rest of them are just euphenisms for body parts and if they really think they have negative connotations or need to be purged for the sake of ending predjudice they’re hopelessly lost.


    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  40. babbleon says:

    I will agree that some people are highly offended by the word "gay." However, that is not a good justification to say that we need to keep people from using certain words. I applaud the campaign’s attempt to get spread the word that use of the word gay maybe derogatory, but it’s not effective for the all the reasons that were posted earlier.

    Personally, I find that anyone highly offended by just the use of the word, "gay" has a problem. Think of it this way, there are gay men out there who can laugh and even say, "that’s so gay" in the same way a straight guy would say it. There are a few that get very offended. I have much more respect for the gay man who can laugh and even use the word "gay" in the way we do. He seems like the type of person who is easy to get along with and has a lot of self respect. The person who get’s offended does not.

    I’d rather hang out with a person who knows what he or she is about and proud of it.

    Instead of discouraging the use of one word, why not try and encourage those people who get offended to not care, or be proud.

    Kids tease each other in the playground all the time. From my experience, if a kid gets all emotional and angry over being teased, the other kids usually do it more, just because it get’s a reaction. It stops being fun when you can’t get any kind of reaction.

  41. State says:

    Isn’t it pretty obvious that the whole point the term "that’s gay" exists as an insult and used to say that something is bad comes from the fact that whoever originally used it didn’t like gay people and to say that something was gay was probably to him the most insulting thing to say?

  42. finaleve says:

    The term "gay" as part of the "gamer" slang has been around for so long now.  I remember using the term many, many moons ago, possibly when I was a kid.  At the time, we used it as a joke because…well we didn’t know any better.  We would also say that "Gay means happy" in some countries or something (I forget where).
    When I started playing games online, people would say the some variation of situations followed with "gay" (That sniper is gay, the guy carrying the bomb is gay, etc) and well…it became part of anyone’s terminology.

    I found out some time later that one of our clan mates is in fact gay.  I remember a lot of people would use "gay" around him but he never seemed bothered.  Maybe not everyone finds the term offensive.  I can’t vouche for my friend actually saying it, but I can say I still talk to the guy and am pretty good friends.  Hell, I gave him some advice awhile back when he was going through a tough time in a relationship.

    Time will probably erase the term itself.  Someday, we’ll move on to something else that people are uncomfortable with.  I remember there was an issue with a game for having the word, "spaz" and they made such a big deal out of it.  It could be worse, we could be going back to the whole racism cards again (though I’m sure there are those words still being spouted across every match of every game possible).

  43. State says:

    I highly doubt homosexuals stole the word "queer" and was probably used in its orginal form when talking about gay people because their behaviour was seen as odd and not normal as in: "That man (who is attracted to other men) is a bit queer (odd)". "Odd" or "strange" probably could have taken on the same meaning as "queer" has to directly mean homosexual.

  44. deuxhero says:

    I don’t use "gay" as an insult anyways. 1.It’s overused to the point it has lost any meaning 2. Yuri is hot, what is so insulting? I prefer insults like "vegan spine", because they will still offend people.

  45. Meohfumado says:

    Your use of the word "inferior" insults people with inferiority complexes.  That is a very serious psycholigical ailment, and it is very rude for you to use the term thusly.

    Please cease using that word in that context, else you are merely propagating hate against those with self-esteem issues.


    "You know what I wish? I wish all the scum of the Earth had one throat and I had my hands about it."

  46. Austin_Lewis says:

    I just went to the website, and am now dead against the whole thing.  
    Here are some other words they suggest we stop using:

    Cougar (as in a MILF who likes to pick up on younger men or women)















    So, I suggest we continue to openly mock the faggots, trannys, and dykes who must surely be pushing this organization.

    Oh wait.  There are none.  Just a bunch of asshats.  Well, fuck them.


    Add the word ‘Beard’ to the list.

  47. Austin_Lewis says:

    I just went to the website, and am now dead against the whole thing.  
    Here are some other words they suggest we stop using:

    Cougar (as in a MILF who likes to pick up on younger men or women)
















    So, I suggest we continue to openly mock the faggots, trannys, and dykes who must surely be pushing this organization.

    Oh wait.  There are none.  Just a bunch of asshats.  Well, fuck them.

  48. Father Time says:

    If you know what we mean, as in you know that you could just replace gay with some synonym for bad or stupid then why does it matter? Why do we need to change our exact wording and vocabulary? If someone doesn’t like homosexuals then they will associate them with bad things, period. Doesn’t matter what language they use and the only way to really change that is to change attitudes.


    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  49. ZippyDSMlee says:

    Don’t you know its far easier to tell others what to do then comprehend the world dose not revolve around you and yours and maybe perhaps the world dose not have the time or means to protect you from every slight possible….

    Until lobbying is a hanging offense I choose anarchy! Stop supporting big media and furthering the criminalization of consumers!!

  50. Father Time says:

    I’d like to know what sites for gay gamers think of these ads. I could take a guess but it’d just be a guess and I don’t want to insult them by saying ‘I know what you should think of this’.


    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  51. questionmark1987 says:

    Good lord, our english language has no word to describe something we find:

    Bad: 1: Not good in any manner or degree. 2:Inadequate or below standard. 3: Of inferior quality.

    Inferior: Of comparativly low grade.

    And the list goes on and on.

    Yes you simply could not describe something as being bad, inferior, low quality, not fun, without using the word gay. That’s totally IMPOSSIBLE. O.o


  52. ZippyDSMlee says:

    More like a black guy was hung because he was a criminal and deserved capital punishment but all people can comprehend is "black" and "hanging" and openly refuse to think beyond that.

    Until lobbying is a hanging offense I choose anarchy! Stop supporting big media and furthering the criminalization of consumers!!

  53. Father Time says:

    "And to top if off, my niece (who is 5 by the way) told me I shouldn’t use the word "stupid" at all because it is mean."

    Tell her that whatever you use to substitute stupid will become as equally mean as stupid is now so there’s no point.


    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  54. Father Time says:

    Well put.


    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  55. questionmark1987 says:

    Deleted content because I posted in the wrong spot, I hate that when I click "login" on someone’s post it still points me to the bottom automatically. ><

  56. Wormdundee says:

    I get where you’re coming from, but your ‘dumb’ example isn’t really a good one. The issue people have with calling something gay if its undesirable, or stupid, or bad, or whatever, is that the majority usage of the word is used to refer to homosexual people.

    In your example, hardly anyone still uses the word ‘dumb’ for its archaic meaning (mute) except when referring to animals. I don’t think this campaign will have any effect, but we’ll see.

    I personally think anyone who uses gay in its pejorative context is childish and immature, and I instantly lose some respect for them and I wish that usage would go away, but I’m not going to get all worked up about it.

  57. Meohfumado says:

    "That’s so gay," is not an insult if it is not directed at a person or group.  There’s this little thing called context.

    Gay is a frakin homonym!!!  Uh-oh…that word has "homo" in it.  Better outlaw the use of that word as well.

    So what word can we use for "uncool" or "stupid?"

    Can’t say gay….offends homosexuals.  Can’t say lame…offends the physically disabled.  Can’t say retarded…offends the mentally challenged. 

    And to top if off, my niece (who is 5 by the way) told me I shouldn’t use the word "stupid" at all because it is mean.


    I’m just going to start sayin, "That’s so beep."   You can fill in your own word of disgust at that point.  Too tired to deal with all these thought police morons….uh oh, is moron insulting?  Well I meant it as an insult so it should be!!!



    "You know what I wish? I wish all the scum of the Earth had one throat and I had my hands about it."

  58. Roh02 says:

    I got this from the website *sarcasm* I had to correct some mistakes they made though


    gay (ga)1. there once was a time when all "gay" meant was "happy" then it meant "homosexual" now, people are saying "thats so gay" to mean dumb and stupid. and whats pretty insulting to intelligent people (and we dont mean "") is that rather than accept it were going have a tempertantrum over it. 2. so knock it off "".

  59. Father Time says:

    Oh and one other thing that struck me as odd was apparently they’re trying to get people to stop using nuts as a synonym for testicles.

    I refuse though on the grounds that keeping it that way can lead to some hillarious innuendo and the fact that NO ONE cares.


    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  60. Father Time says:

    Never thought of it that way but yeah if you try to seperate gays out from jocks or cheerleaders or whatever you isolate them further and do even more damage to the gays that fit in with those groups.

    I must say this campaign seems very counter-productive especially as it gives fuel to the stupid belief that people can and should be pigeonholed into groups with no overlap.


    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  61. Father Time says:

    Oh goody let me get out my PC BS check list

    "Context doesn’t matter" check

    "It’s not about PCism it’s about common decency (defined by our terms of course)" check

    "Some people (a small amount) find it offensive so we should cater to them" check

    that’s all I got going so far but feel free to give me more.

    Here’s a simple thought, if it wasn’t meant as an insult to gay people than they shouldn’t take it as one. I know this may seem like strange and foreign thoughts but you can try it.

    You know what you call someone who takes things personally all the time despite the intent of the speaker? Thin Skinned. If people misinterpret simple phrases is it really more practical to get everyone to say things that can’t be misinterpted or to teach the minority how to interpret multiple meanings and context?


    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  62. Father Time says:

    ""That’s so gamer guy who has more video games than friends.""

    Well gee I’ve been gaming since I was a small child so i’d have to surrender my gamer card if I didn’t.

    If I had as many friends as I had games I wouldn’t be able to keep track of them all. My brother and I have 82 PS2 games (83 if you let me count a jampack and yes I counted them just so I could make this point), so our gaming collection probably hits the triple digits. Even if it didn’t I could grab a hundred bucks or so and go nuts at the local gamespot bargain bin.

    Oh and I’m sick of these PC groups that refuse to acknowledge the fact that words can have two unrelated meanings. Gay used to mean happy and when we hear "we’ll have a gay old time" in the Flintstones theme song we know that’s what they’re referring to.

    Also take dumb which can mean mute or stupid, how do you know which one they’re referring to? Well you listen for the all important context and if you have intelligence you’ll be able to figure it out.


    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  63. linkreincarnate says:

     What does this campaign do for gay gamers though? Doesn’t this poster just add insult to injury? Not only do they have to deal with the whole discrimination from straight people but also from nongaming gays. Must be rough…

    For that matter the same applies to gay chearleaders and gay jocks…

    It’s impossible to use a steriotype to fight a steriotype. Inevitiably you end up with unintended victims sometimes even vicimizing people from your own group.

  64. Majutsukai says:


    This campaign, while done with good intentions, is destined to fail.

    My objections have nothing to do with whether or not its use is insulting. It is. Just because x, y, and z are not offended by it doesn’t mean nobody is, and that’s a common pattern I notice with people who defend its use– it’s always defended by people who are not themselves offended by the word on the grounds that it’s not offensive. It comes as no surprise, then, that they’re so mystified as to why people are making a big deal about it. (and yes, that includes gay people that use it– there are lots of people who happen not to be offended by it, and by the law of averages, at least some of them ought to be gay. Big whoop, proves nothing.)

    What I object to is, as some of the comments here prove, campaigning against the word will not change the underlying attitudes that validate it. So long as people continue to think that the word is harmless just because it means nothing to them, campaigns like this will be met with nothing but resistance. In fact, suddenly, people are cool and edgy for using it because someone asked them nicely to cut it out.

    (And no, no matter what you say, the use of the word as a generic insult has not overtaken its other meaning. Not even close.)

    To the people making snide comments about how the campaign is implying that "gay" is an insult: are you really that thick? People use it as an insult. That is the whole ISSUE here.

    Oh, and this has nothing to do with the whole "PC" bullshit. It’s about common decency. If you genuinely don’t care that someone might be offended by something you say? Hey, great, more power to you. You’re not a part of this campaign’s target demographic.

    "But we don’t mean it as an insult to gay people!" — Yeah, that’s nice. They already specifically addressed that. "these slurs are often unintentional and a common part of teens’ vernacular."– just because you don’t mean it as an insult doesn’t mean it makes people feel all warm and fuzzy. (And if you don’t care about how your word choice makes people feel, see the above paragraph.)

  65. ZippyDSMlee says:

    Boil it down and look to the least offensive most widely used context to the words further defined by the sentence and situation its used used in.

    Thats so queer(as in strange/odd)

    Thats so gay( as in stupid)

    Thats so gay (as in queer as in strange/odd)

    Your so gay(as in queer as in strange/odd)

    Whats up my nger!(Whats up my friend/homie/bud)

    Hey nger!(hey friend/homie/bud)


    These comments,sayings are not contexaully evil,vile or wrong. Poorly constructed or grammatically errorous perhaps.

    If you look at stuff and see things as being primarily negative or offensive you are not only going to be offended but wind up being a closet sexist or racist.

    Until lobbying is a hanging offense I choose anarchy! Stop supporting big media and furthering the criminalization of consumers!!

  66. Dragoon1376 says:

    Gay still means homosexual, not stupid, the youth culture doesn’t define words. Mainly because they are youth, idiots, have no actual value and I’m one of them.

    Ummm, youth culture has a lot to do with the current pejorative meaning of words that frequent their own vocabulary.  Every generation goes through a creation of new slang or the repurposing of old words to mean something new.  Think of the word "punk."  While its archaic meaning is prostitute, its current meaning is more associated with the punk music movement.

    While some influential people in a generation can coin several new words, those individuals are few and far between.  Most of these meanings have their origins in a more humble beginning in the youth of a generation.

    Lament about the devolution of language all you want but language has to change in order accomodate changes in technology and culture.  There’s a reason why Samuel Johnson’s attempts at preserving the English language fell short.

    First secure an independent income, then practice virtue. -Greek Proverb

  67. Lcpuche says:

    HAH, that’s not gonna work, and is going to backfire horribly! Nobody listens to what schools say and it just serves as an incentive to do it more. That expression i used in almost every language by the way, like "marica, cacorro, pirobo," in spanish are used as insults that mean gay. so they can try all they want but it’s not going to work. Most are just going to point and laugh at the whole program (like me)

    funny how they throw the word homophobia in the article when it really makes no sence either.

    to me stupid campaign is stupid, there are better things to spend money on besides making a bunch of overly sensitive people happy. Like the economy or poor people for a change.

  68. Overcast says:

    A ‘homosexual’ guy I used to work with was fond of saying, "That’s so gay, that even I think it’s gay". He just did it for kicks to get a reaction out of people, because he was quite feminine in his manner of speaking and overall mannerisms.

    He was a lot of fun though and not all bent out of shape on words, like too many people seem to be.

    I’m never really offeneded when someone comments that something is ‘nerdy’ or ‘geeky’, lol

    I mean it’s one thing to say something is "gay" in just the course of talking, but it’s quite another if you are attempting to use the term or phrase to use it as insult intentionally.

    We could joke around with John (guy I worked with) all day about stuff like that and he wouldn’t care at all. He’d start it half the time. It was a restaurant in a fairly bad area of town and more than once I had heard people use those same terms towards him, with the intent of it being an insult and he didn’t care for it at all – that’s where it crossed the line and hurt his feelings.

    Context matters a lot.

    Even if I were to joke like that – doesn’t mean for a second I’m ‘homophobic’. Of course, like it was said above – true, it’s stereotyping on both ends.


  69. ZippyDSMlee says:

    Well US english came from queens english came from, meh its more living than you think. And yes gay is defined more as gay people/odd,strange or stupid these days and IMO they share those deffnistions eqaully.

    Until lobbying is a hanging offense I choose anarchy! Stop supporting big media and furthering the criminalization of consumers!!

  70. ZippyDSMlee says:

    These days PCisim places mixed meanings upon words and certain negative meanings of certain words are so "evil" the words in question can not be said or thought about.

    Until lobbying is a hanging offense I choose anarchy! Stop supporting big media and furthering the criminalization of consumers!!

  71. Snipzor says:

     It doesn’t work when the word "gay" still means homosexual and is in common usage, in fact, it doesn’t work that way at all. Meanings change only when the word is obscure and they try to rebranded, but when the word is still in common usage, and its common usage is the second popular meaning… you should know where I am getting at. Gay still means homosexual, not stupid, the youth culture doesn’t define words. Mainly because they are youth, idiots, have no actual value and I’m one of them.

    Progression of language is a joke, more like devolution of language.

  72. Talouin says:

     It’s simply natural language progression.

    Queer used to be odd or unusual and now it is a slur for a homosexual individual

    Gay used to mean happiness (as in let’s have a gay time).  

    Then gay refered to a homosexual individual.

    Now gay is a synonym for stupid.

    If a group of individuals ‘claims’ a word as their own and then rebrands it until it gains public acceptance they must be ready to accept it when another group of individuals claims the word does the same thing.

  73. Roh02 says:

    accoridng to wikipedia queer used to mean "odd or unusual" grr they cant just go around stealing words for their own use like that.

    serves them right it was given a negative meaning.

    by the way I have nothing against homosexuals other than the ones raising up a fuss over the same bull theyve been pulling.

  74. Ganjookie says:

    Since some "gamer guy with more games then friends-o" got his feelings hurt thinking everybody was about him and then protested it and had a hissy-fit.  Also known as the first emo in modern history.



    Trevor Gray

  75. ZippyDSMlee says:

    Same for queer really when a demogrphic of the public took the word and used it for thier demogrphic and part of the greater demographic used it as a diss on them.

    Until lobbying is a hanging offense I choose anarchy! Stop supporting big media and furthering the criminalization of consumers!!

  76. Roh02 says:

    where were these people when the word gay got stolen by homosexuals and repurposed from its REAL ORIGINAL meaning of happy or carefree.

    homosexuals can go screw themselves (heh heh I made a funny ahem) people are just doing what they did before with the word gay and now their getting all huffy about it they have no right to.

  77. King of Fiji says:

    Well looks like I’ll just have to start using homosexual as an insult.

    "Thats so homosexual."

    Dosen’t have the same roll off the tip of your mouth-e-ness as gay but it will suffice.  πŸ™‚

  78. MaskedPixelante says:

    This campaign is the single "gamer guy who has more video games than friends"-est thing I’ve ever heard.

    —You are likely to be eaten by a Grue.

  79. ZippyDSMlee says:

    Gay is like fck its a verb and a noune its multifuctional!!!


    What happened to looking to the context of a sentence and not single words or what can be gleamed from reading in between the lines?
    Example Gay=lame is not a insult but "gays are lame" is an insult.

    Until lobbying is a hanging offense I choose anarchy! Stop supporting big media and furthering the criminalization of consumers!!

  80. MechaTama31 says:

    You haven’t done anything wrong.  I may not agree with you, but we’re all entitled to our opinions.  I for one really enjoy hearing ones that oppose my own.  I think it’s interesting to see what other people think of an issue, and sometimes I even end up changing my mind.  Nobody is born knowing everything, myself included.  πŸ˜‰  It’s just so rare to have a serious conversation about something, especially something this inflammatory, and not have it devolve into mindless insults.  This discussion has remained very civil, especially by internet standards, and I really have enjoyed it.  Of course, I am only considering the posts that actually took part in the debate for real, not the immature one-off "this is gay" posts, which I’m sure their posters found to be terribly clever.  >.>

  81. questionmark1987 says:

    I appreciate the comment. I get pretty riled up about these issues (gay or not anytime someone is, in my opinion, being mistreated or insulted unnecessarily) and I tend to want to just stick my foot in my mouth.

  82. Baruch_S says:

    Don’t worry about it, it’s understandable. You’re still a lot more civil than some people around here can be, and discussing an issue with you is a very enjoyable experience because of that.

  83. questionmark1987 says:

    Penny Arcade posted an interesting take on the matter. I think they sum it up pretty well actually. I would link but since it’s the current one it’s just on . I’ll update this to have the archive link when they archive it.

  84. questionmark1987 says:

    Yes, I apoligize if I got a little worked up. I hope you all can accept my apology and give me a bit of a pass for being so worked up, I just get so intense about this kind of thing because it really does effect me in a very real and visceral way everyday.

  85. questionmark1987 says:

    And continuing to use words that identify me to insult and belittle things and people only furthers to isolate me. As I said in another post above about cliques, everyone avoids feeling uncomfortable in whatever way they can. People using the term gay this way makes us feel more isolated because it makes us feel like we’re worthy of being defamed and belittled.

    I don’t want a law or a rule or anything of that kind saying "you can’t say gay". I want people to have enough respect for me and people like me to not use it out of consideration for us. Apparently that small amount of consideration is asking too much of some people.

    Note I don’t mean to direct this at anyone directly. Most the people on here are just arguing points of view. I know I post with terms like "you" a lot but I do it not to really target a poster but more the viewpoint. I probably need to work on that.

    I agree with you that the real problem is real rights not being given to gay people, but I would at least settle for a semblance of respect while we worked on the more pointed issues.

  86. questionmark1987 says:

    Chose my ass. I’m sorry but if you think anyone would CHOOSE to be openly hated by a large majority of the population you’re not just ignorant you’re completely out of your mind. I’m not even going to bother addressing your other points because you’re obviously too out of touch with reality to even waste my time.

  87. questionmark1987 says:

    Ah but you expect everyone who hears it to make an informed judgement based on a supposed understanding of the meaning. You can’t expect EVERYONE to know it as a pejorative. I heard this all the time growing up, I knew everytime it meant homosexual, and all the people using it knew because the context they used it in was intended to insult other male peers by calling their sexual orientation into question. That was within the last four years, cultural understanding of language does NOT shift that quickly.

  88. questionmark1987 says:

    So if a small group of people began using Negro as a general prejorative for "bad" and it suddenly became all the rage in american language, and none of those people using it were thinking about black people when they said it your judgement says that’s just fine.

    I’m sorry, I understand your reasoning, I don’t agree. The fact that over time it lost the connection doesn’t change the fact that the entire reason the term "gay" has ever meant stupid or campy is because of it’s initial (in terms of the "common" usage you’re defending) connection to the homosexual meaning. Every use of the word in it’s new pejorative stems from that connection. So no, it’s not ok.

  89. questionmark1987 says:

    Thank you for the acknowledgement, I would replace "happened" with "happening" in most of my examples (we’re still second class citizens, there are still a lot of physically violent and deadly attacks here).

    And I will definitley agree with you on the "special rights" comment. I don’t agree with giving someone a leg up because some time ago someone else was mean to them. In regards to race I can see the logic, in regards to sexual orientation no. It’s not like there is such a thing as a gay bloodline. My parents are both completely straight as is my sibling and as far as I am aware I am the first openly gay person in my family.

  90. MechaTama31 says:

    Everybody seems to have moved on now, but I just wanted to thank you all for an interesting and lively discussion, with very little of the usual internet argument antics like ad hominem, ad hitlerum, etc.  If only all debates could be this civil.  πŸ™‚

  91. MechaTama31 says:

    Most of your post is kind of beside the point here.  We’re not talking about actual threats or harassment, which are truly wrong.  We’re talking about people using a word that you feel ownership of, in a way that you don’t like.

    Your last paragraph is an interesting point, but the problem is not that other people have a right to use a word in a widely accepted manner, the problem is that your right to express yourself is being trampled.  The way to make things fair is not to trample other people’s rights of expression too, it’s to get you the rights you ought to have.  I wish there were a quick, simple way to do that, I really do.  Unfortunately, I think it’s a generational thing we are going to have to wait out.  In the meantime, deliberately misinterpreting people’s use of the word "gay" can only serve to make you feel more isolated.

  92. MechaTama31 says:

    You don’t have to be a mindreader to know that "gay" can be used in a sense that has nothing to do with homosexuality.  It’s a very widespread and commonly understood way to use the word.  We’re not talking about something someone just made up and expects everybody else to magically know.

    Nobody has ever heard me say "that’s gay", because I don’t say it.  πŸ˜›

    Nigger never came into use as a general pejorative, it has always been used to target a specific group of people.  There is no comparison to make here.  And a word doesn’t have to lose all its old meanings to pick up new ones.  Look at how many meanings set has.  How do we ever keep them all straight?  Why, it’s our good friend Mr. Context!  "Gay" has had many meanings over the years.  This is just one more.

  93. Baruch_S says:

    I’m sorry that you feel that way, but you chose the lifestyle knowing that it would likely be unpopular. If you’re going to hold unpopular views or live an unpopular lifestyle, you’re going to have to be ready to get crap. You shouldn’t have to worry about your physical safety or being fired for your orientation, but you’re probably always going to have to deal with people judging you for your orientation because you’re never going to make everyone like or accept it and, in fact, cannot stop people from holding negative opinions of it. If you want to put yourself out there, you’re going to have to be ready to deal with people not accepting you. There’s no right to feel comfortable.

    Again, I’m sorry that you feel this way, and I hope that you can find a way to either gain acceptance or become comfortable despite not being completely accepted.

  94. Baruch_S says:

    Yes that sort of injustice happened, but I think we’re getting over that now. Homosexuals are even beginning to get the fun rights like the right to marry, and I’ll be rather surprised if we don’t start seeing people push for special homosexual rights in the name of equality (yeah, special rights for equality doesn’t make sense, but it seems to be how we do things).

  95. questionmark1987 says:

    The wording was incorrect. I meant what about someone’s right to feel safe, to feel as if they can be safe in public being who they really are. A large majority of gay people don’t have that right now, and that saddens me.

    It offends me that to feel like I will have an equal shot at keeping my job I have to hide my sexuality from my coworkers. It sucks that to progress in my career I have to judge whether it’s safe to reveal a very integral part of myself to people I interact with everyday. I’m not talking about having a conversation about that guy I banged last weekend, I’m talking about having my partner with me to a company family event. Being able to say "My boyfriend and I went to…"

    I don’t think anyone can understand the complete disconnectedness that many if not most gay people feel because they have to do this everyday in order to have a fair shot in the real world, and if you think even for a second our country ISN’T like that you’re looking through rose colored glasses.

    Yes, that is offensive to me, someone having more of a right to use a label that defines me and many of my best friends and loved ones as an insult, then I have to simply openly discuss my weekend without fearing for my safety, my job, and my general well being is extremely offensive.

  96. questionmark1987 says:

    They can’t read your mind, their assumed meaning to your words IS the meaning of your words because you never take the time to correct them. SO congrats, a lot of people who have heard you say "that’s gay" think you hate gay people. Welcome to the world.


    Try to use that same logic to defend the meaning of N***er. You can’t because no matter how far we get from it that will always be associated with what happened to them. Guess what, no one has stopped using the word gay to mean homosexuals. No one. You might use it for someone else, but you’re still more likely to say "gay" when asked how to define a man who has sex with other men. You can’t even claim that it’s not the understood definition like some people try to claim that N***er has changed since it’s use for slaves. Gay is still used, to this day and into the foreseeable future, to label homosexual people, most often homosexual men. It never lost that meaning, so yes, it is always associated and always understood.

  97. questionmark1987 says:

    a victim of prejudice similar to that suffered by blacks; a person who is economically, politically, or socially disenfranchised.

    Seperate but equal – Check

    Second Class Citizen – Check

    Murdered without investigation or care by authorities – Check

    Activly harrassed beaten and killed by authorities – Check

    We were never slaves but that’s because we were too wrong to be allowed to live in that time frame.

  98. clownluv247 says:

    someone above me said something along the lines of “what about my right to not be offended?” Brother, you dont have that doesnt exist.

  99. chadachada321 says:


    God you are retarded.

    I really think that you might be mentally handicapped, because you either have little grasp of the english language or you’re incredibly intolerant of others.


    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  100. chadachada321 says:

    lol homos r niggers

    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  101. GavinBrindstaar says:

    The weird thing here is that all of your points make sense, but I still feel that I shouldn’t use gay as an insult. It seems to me that there’s a difference between what we can say, and what we should say. For instance, you can swear wherever you want, but you wouldn’t do it it polite society. It’s sort of like witholding your opinions when it could be harmful. Because what it all comes down to is, you’re using a term that refers to a, I’d venture, disenfranchised segment of the population, and giving it a negative connotation, and using it as an insult. I feel that you can use the word as an insult, but it wouldn’t be polite.

  102. Baruch_S says:

    Why isn’t it okay? Because some people don’t like it? If you’re using a decent dictionary, a number of the definitions had negative connotations. The definition of "happy" was often used with a sense of depreciation. The definition "wanton, lewd, or lascivious" is obviously negative and often referred to hedonistic, promiscuous people. It can also mean "reckless" in the old phrase "to get gay." People need to suck it up and realize they chose a word with multiple–often negative–meanings. If they don’t like some of the meanings, maybe they should change their word instead of expecting everyone else to drop legitimate definitions to avoid offending a small number of people. Why should everyone else change just to make them feel better?

  103. Baruch_S says:

    Yep, because their ancestors were kidnapped from their ancestral homeland, shoved on boats, and sold as property before being segregated for a hundred years… Oh wait…

  104. Icehawk says:

    I am still lost.  By what right do Homo/Bi Sexuals have the right to dictate slang?  

    Question I am sorry to hear that you have not had much luck in finding people to game with but I submit;  Might it not the game and the crowd that follows it?  Maybe something more mature is in order?  I mean before trying to tell the majority what words to use might I suggest you pay more attention to what games you buy/play or what chat rooms you visit. 

    Also if you are going for the shock value should the word Gay be replaced with say Queer?  Used to mean odd, now of course is linked to male homosexuals.  As is faggot (bundle of sticks or twigs) or tulip (flowers are insulting?)  Tell you what.  Stop the twisting of perfectly good other meaning names to fit homosexuals and I will consider not using words that might hurt your feeling.  Both have about the same odds of happening. 

  105. MechaTama31 says:

    "What people don’t get is that it doesn’t matter what you mean to say, it matters how people interpret what you’re saying."

    Bullshit.  It absolutely does matter what I mean.  If someone wants to misinterpret my words, that is their problem, not mine.  You can’t just go around ignoring an extremely common usage of a word, always interpreting it instead as another usage which you find offensive, and then try to blame the people using the word.  You are the one running counter to the flow of language.

  106. MechaTama31 says:

    Yes, that’s exactly what it means.  Enough people use and understand "gay" as a general pejorative term, without necessarily referring to homosexuals, to make that an acceptable use of the word.  It’s exceedingly widespread, as this campaign and everybody in this discussion admits (and some lament ;).  Negro, on the other hand, does not have a general use (Spanish excepted, of course) and has only been used as a slur aimed at black people.  So when somebody says "gay", they may or may not mean anything about homosexuals.  You have to judge from context.  When someone says "negro", it is definitely targeted at black people.  This is why one can be ok and one is never ok.  This must be the fourth or fifth time I’ve tried to explain this concept to you.  Do you really still not get it?

  107. questionmark1987 says:

    Interestingly enough when using which is a lot closer to common usage and accepted meaning then webster’s, here’s the definition for N***er:


    1. Slang: Extremely Disparaging and Offensive.
    a. a black person.
    b. a member of any dark-skinned people.
    2. Slang: Extremely Disparaging and Offensive. a person of any race or origin regarded as contemptible, inferior, ignorant, etc.
    3. a victim of prejudice similar to that suffered by blacks; a person who is economically, politically, or socially disenfranchised.

     I guess by #3 homosexuals are as well.

  108. questionmark1987 says:

    So let me see, out of ALL those definitions, did any of them hold a negative context besides homosexual to anyone?

    I suppose "bright and showy" or "brightly colored" might to someone like me who hates extremely bright colors.

    Or maybe depressed people find "happiness or merriment" to be offensive, so that’s their meaning.

    Or someone could be using the older version of gay which refers to prostitues, womanizers, and brothels. Though I find it hard to believe they wouldn’t just use the terms "slut" or "whore" for those, especially in todays vernacular.

    Out of all the definitions I found for gay ALL DAY, the only one that to any group I know of has a negative connotation meaning bad, stupid, or wrong, is homosexual. So explain again where this becomes ok?

    Also Negro and N***er are not the same term.

  109. questionmark1987 says:

    Reposting this from Kotaku because it’s very well done.


    I do not like this ad. Picking on another stereotype is a poor and immature way of addressing the issue. However, I do appreciate the sentiment, and the idea of "think before you speak" is a good one.

    This is a general response to many of the comments:

    What people don’t get is that it doesn’t matter what you mean to say, it matters how people interpret what you’re saying. Saying "that’s so gay" might not be a slander to homosexual people to you, but when people hear you say it, many of them will take it to mean that you are homophobic. Many gay people will take it to mean that they are not welcome. Some people, like me, will hear something like that and take it to mean that you are either homophobic, or an immature jerk. Either way I lose respect for you. How could I take it any other way when someone chooses to say it despite the fact that they know it’s highly offensive to many, many people? You are basically making the statement that you refuse to respect those people, so you lose respect. You might not care about my opinion, but I guarantee that I’m not the only one.

    It hurts people. I’m sorry but it does. I’ve spoken to many people who are deeply bothered that they hear it everywhere. Some of these people have been beat up or kicked out of their homes for being gay. It’s not just an innocent phrase. It’s but a piece of a bigger pattern and every time they hear it, it feels like more affirmation that people hate them. It might not hurt your particular friend who happens to be gay, but if you say it enough you will hurt plenty of people. Do you really need more justification to cut one phrase out of your vocabulary? Do you really need to sit there and find reasons to say why you should be able to say whatever you want without guilt? Yes, we have free speech. But with freedom comes responsibility, you can say whatever you want, but you are also accountable for what you say. You can call things gay or say fag all you want, but also know that you are judged by your own words.

    When I was younger, I said retarded a lot. I was informed by someone that many people found it highly offensive, so I stopped saying it. It wasn’t a big deal. My life was not changed dramatically. It wasn’t a big enough deal to wrack my brain on all the reasons I should be able to say it. I care about people and I care about respect. Anyone who does not isn’t deserving of consideration or respect.

  110. Baruch_S says:

    No, the multiple, acceptable definitions of gay make it okay to use in some other context than "homosexual." "Negro" has only ever really had one definition that is viewed as offensive by most of the black community. In fact, I’m looking at the Oxford English Dictionary right now, and every definition of "negro" relates in some way to black people whereas only one of the fifteen definitions of "gay" relates to homosexuality. Trying to connect the two words is silly, and I hope that most people here recognize a red herring when they see one.

  111. questionmark1987 says:

    And this somehow means it’s ok to say gay as an insult but not negro. Just because a lot of people are doing something doesn’t make it ok. If it did we would all most likely still own/be slaves.

  112. MechaTama31 says:

    But "negro" never caught on as a general pejorative term, while "gay" has.  If you go around spouting the word "negro", there is only one meaning that will come to mind.  If you continue to willfully ignore this distinction, then you have only yourself to blame when you feel offended.

  113. GoodRobotUs says:

    Political correctness is things like banning ‘Baa baa Black Sheep’ for having the word black in, if someone said something like ‘That’s so Negro’, instead of ‘That’s so gay’ then it would still be hurtful, not down to ‘political correctness’, but because it’s associating the word ‘Negro’ with the implication of stupidity, failure and pointlessness is just as much labelling as using the word ‘gay’.


    After all, like ‘Gay’, ‘Negro’ is just a word too…

  114. MechaTama31 says:

    I applaud your thick skin.  It seems you are equipped to deal with the sometimes harsh reality of a world where people may speak freely.  If only more were like you, we wouldn’t have to waste our time with PC tripe like this.

  115. GoodRobotUs says:

    Well, there’s always the concept of appealing to people’s humanity and better nature, they weren’t demanding laws or anything, just asking that people stop and think for 2 seconds about other people.

    Having read a lot of the posts in here, that is quite obviously too much effort for a lot of people to go to πŸ™

  116. Phlopsy says:

    People will always be hypersensitive about words used perjoratively that they believe could or do apply to them. Me, I hate when people say psycho, because it’s insensitive to people who suffer from psychosis or other mental illnesses.  

    Ever since it became no longer okay to make fun of retarded people, the mentally ill are the last bastion of "okay to make jokes about."  Once you pay attention to it, you’ll start to notice how hilarious prime time TV writers apparently think mental instability or antidepressant medication is. 

    But I’m not going to make any damn posters, because I accept that the world is full of people who don’t think about words or use language the same way I do, and that flaming jerkoffs make up a huge fraction of earth’s population.  That’s the world we live in folks, so when somebody makes fun of a homeless person suffering from schizophrenia, I get on with my life.  Just like these gaywads should get on with theirs. 

  117. Werrick says:

    My reaction to this poster;

    "Yah… so?"

    The difference being… I’m a grown-up. Getting all worked up about this kind of shit, whether it’s going in either direction or both, is stupid.

    On a personal note, I’m getting really fucking tired of being told what I am and am not allowed to say based solely on the colour of my skin, my gender and my sexual orientation, none of which are anything over which I have any control. If I say something offensive and someone’s offended then that’s my problem and theirs. The consequences being that I now have to deal with the offended party. If I choose to monitor my language (and I do, not because I recognize any ideal that "disallows" me from saying certain things, but simply because I don’t like being hurtful) then fine, but if I choose not to then the consequences are that I deal with the individual(s) who were offended.

    I am in no way beholden to anyone, simply because they’re different from me. Sorry. Neither I nor the world owes you anything just because you don’t fit some self-defined role in society. And I sure as hell resent organized groups representing the interests of a sub-set of society trying to censor my speech. Shit like this ad actually makes me WANT to say those things, simply out of some sense of rebellion.

    Last I checked people didn’t have the right to not be offended. Next time someone says something that’s offensive, just do what us straight, white guys have been doing for years… Recognize that some people are assholes, ignore them and anything they have to say and move on.

  118. Bennett Beeny says:

    "That’s so gay" is not (as I understand it) anti-gay.  Words are often used for different things and in different contexts.  ‘Geek’, for example, doesn’t always refer to a sideshow performer, and when people use it in its more common meaning they are not discriminating against the sideshow performers.

    Last time I checked, ‘gay’ still meant ‘happy’ and ‘homosexual’ as well as ‘lame’.  That doesn’t mean that the person using the word in any context thinks gays are necessarily happy or lame.

  119. State says:

    So does "that’s so gay" mean:

    – That’s so happy?

    – That’s so camp?

    – That’s bad?

    But then does "bad" mean "good" or "bad"?

    Personally if I was to something was gay, then I would mean that I would find that thing to be stereotypical of homosexuality.

  120. questionmark1987 says:

    The problem with those comparisons is that the words were used as negative adjectives when describing those groups. Gay was only negative when people who felt homosexuality was wrong thought of it. Gay people have used gay to describe themselves without any negative connotation, I doubt stupid, dumb, or retarded have ever been considered positive adjectives about a person, whether they were technically true or not. Lame I don’t know, but I doubt that one could be used as a passive adjective without any negative context either as someone who is literally lame is worse off then someone who isn’t.

  121. Baruch_S says:

    I can’t. But I also can’t come up with a plausible reason for any of the other definitions, either. Words get their definitions in weird ways, and I wouldn’t assume anything about them because you can draw a connection that appears plausible.

  122. MechaTama31 says:

    If you can come up with another plausible explanation of how it came to be used as an insult, I’d love to hear it.

  123. Baruch_S says:

    It also used to be obvious that heavier objects fell faster than light ones and the the sun revolved around the earth. Things are seldom "obvious," and the English language is extremely weird at that. The origins of words and their meanings are very complex, so I’m not going to believe that origin unless someone can provide a solid etemology of the word that proves otherwise. Right now, it’s purely speculative.

  124. MechaTama31 says:

    I’m arguing in favor of the general pejorative use here, but come on.  It’s obvious why "gay" became an insult in the first place.  Trying to ignore that doesn’t bring anything to the discussion.

  125. MechaTama31 says:

    No, it would not have become a pejorative if not for the association with homosexuals.  That is correct, but still irrelevant, no matter how many times you say it.  If you insist on applying the original meaning to any word that has since become pejorative, then you’d better not say dumb, stupid, lame, retarded, or any of a host of other pejorative terms that used to be targeted at specific groups of people.  No matter how common the plain pejorative usage might be, you have to act as if only the original meaning matters, if you want to be consistent with your position on "gay".  However, if you acknowledge that it is possible for someone to say dumb without referring to someone who can’t speak, or lame without referring to someone who is crippled, then you have to accept that the same can be true for gay.  Otherwise, you are being a hypocrite.

  126. Baruch_S says:

    Why, do you have any real evidence? If not, we call that faith, and it’s generally not a legitimate point in most debates.

  127. Baruch_S says:

    Where did you get information suggesting that the pejorative meaning came about as a result of the homosexual meaning?  I can’t find anything to link the two meanings, and I’d like to know if there actually is some sort of definite link or if it is–as I assume it to be–baseless conjecture by people who think the perjorative use is offensive.

  128. questionmark1987 says:

    I refuse to believe that the pejorative meaning can exist without the reason for it’s creation or evolution if you will yes.

  129. MechaTama31 says:

    I didn’t say "no one thinks of gay people when they say this", I said that it is very common, and more common all the time, for people to say it without thinking of actual homosexuality.  I have never ever ever in this whole argument tried to say that nobody uses gay in the homosexual sense anymore.  I have always been arguing of the existence of the general pejorative usage, NOT the nonexistence of the homosexual usage.  Multiple usages exist, and you have to figure out which is which from context.  That’s what I have been saying the whole time.

    And gay does mean "stupid or bad or anything negative" all by itself.  Sometimes.  It became a pejorative term because of the homosexual meaning, yes.  That is the origin of the word, but that doesn’t mean it has to still carry that meaning now.  Now, it is often used as a pejorative with no thought whatsoever to the homosexual aspect.  It’s funny how you acknowledge some shift in language, because you do accept that gay acquired a pejorative meaning some time ago.  But you refuse to accept that the usage can drift away from the homosexual meaning and towards the plain pejorative.  Do you only believe in the shifts in language that can offend you?

  130. MechaTama31 says:

    I have to assume you are referring to my argument when you say "crying out that it’s the accepted and popular definition that most defines the word", but that’s not what I’ve been saying at all.  It’s not THE popular definition that defines a word, as if a word can only have one meaning.  I’ve been saying that the general pejorative sense is one of several meanings "gay" can have, and it is foolish to pretend that usage doesn’t exist and see every usage as a homophobic one.  I have never said that the general pejorative sense is the ONLY usage of the word, and I’d appreciate it if you didn’t strawman my arguments.

  131. questionmark1987 says:

    I never said only one definition was correct. But because so many people are defending it saying "no one thinks of gay people when they say this" I wanted to point out that in order for it to make sense, you have to, because gay never has and never will just mean stupid or bad or anything negative all by itself, it takes the association and the feeling towards that association to create the logic the gay = bad.

  132. Baruch_S says:

    Sorry, I put more trust in the Oxford English Dictionary than random people off the street. My two definitions (along with 13 others) are all valid defiinitions for the word "gay." Not only are both definitions valid, you have no evidence that the definition "stupid" is directly related to the definition "homosexual," so your original implication that the definition "stupid" came about as a way to demean homosexuals has absolutely no support.

    On top of that, picking one definition that is most defines the word is silly. Redundant phrasing aside, the word has multiple definitions. You can’t just pick one and say "this is the right definition, and you’re wrong if you use it in any other context." It has multiple, unrelated definitions. You’re going to have to accept that it’s just the English language and not some elaborate anti-homosexual conspiracy.

  133. questionmark1987 says:

    If you asked any person on the street their first definition of gay would be homosexual. Since the people defending the term are crying out that it’s the accepted and popular definition that most defines the word, I think YOUR definition is the one that falls through.

  134. Baruch_S says:

    And that means what, exactly? Words in English gain, lose, and change meanings all the time. Notice how you never hear anyone use "gay" to mean "happy" anymore. That’s because the definition has become obsolete. Instead, the word has picked up a couple new definitions, namely "homosexual" and "stupid." In fact, if you actually took the time to look "gay" up in a good dictionary, you’d get a few dozen meanings, very few of which relate in any way to homosexuals. I think your connection fell through, friend.

  135. questionmark1987 says:

    This is exactly what I mean. Everyone avoids certain situations because they feel uncomfortable. It just so happens that online gaming with people using the term "that’s gay, you’re gay, this is gay" is uncomfortable for a lot of gay people, so they tend to avoid it.

  136. MechaTama31 says:

    …says the person trying to push their narrow interpretation of the word "gay" on others…  πŸ˜‰

    But I kid.  Like I said, the general online population is full of offensive little shits, so if you found somewhere more pleasant to game, I truly am glad for you.  Personally, I just quit playing online, except with a couple of real-life friends.

  137. MechaTama31 says:

    Nah, I was responding to questionmark.  The hardcore partisans on both sides definitely qualify for "tolerate" rather than "respect"…  πŸ˜‰

  138. questionmark1987 says:

    Are different and behave different are very different things (god I hope that sentance stands the internet translations). I have friends who are gay/straight, male/female, old/young, black/white/hispanic/middle eastern/asian/etc. I have friends from all different backgrounds, social classes and religious beliefs.

    The one thing all my friends have in common is that they would never use words like racial slurs or insults like "that’s gay". I don’t tolerate the behavior, I have no problem with the group. It DOES affect where I LOOK for my friends, I don’t tend to hang out in places people my age usually do and I don’t tend to attend religious events etc. I do end up avoiding people I would have no problem with, but it’s just my attempt to avoid concentrations of the kinds of behavior I prefer not to deal with.

  139. questionmark1987 says:

    Excuse my wording. I didn’t mean to imply gays or straights are inherently more or less respectful. I simply meant to point out that we break into our own "cliques" as someone put it to avoid people we find offensive who ruin our experiences. I have plenty of gay people in my life I avoid for the same reason, though usually they are being offensive in their behavior towards my passtime and career (gaming) and not the fact that I’m gay. Self hating gays make me scratch my head, it’s like women who think women should not work and stay at home with the kids only. I understand wanting to do that for yourself but how does it make sense to push it on others?

  140. chadachada321 says:

    Well I was thinking "tolerant" as in "tolerant of stupid people or people with different political/social beliefs." I’m tolerant of the hard-core lefties and hard-core righties on this site, even if I completely disagree with them.

    If my comment came off the wrong way, I’ll reword it. 80-90% of the people on this website are perfectly fine with gay people. 9-19% think that the lifestyle is "wrong," but tolerate it anyways, and 1% is intolerant and belligerent about it.

    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  141. MechaTama31 says:

    For what it’s worth, the little monsters will call you "gay" and other names whether you are gay or not.  They are doing it because they are immature, not because of who you are.  They likely don’t know anything about you.  I agree that it sours the experience, though.  I dropped my XBL account years ago because of that crap, and I am not gay, black, or any of the other groups they flung slurs around for.  You don’t have to be a member of a minority to be offended by hateful speech, and these people make it quite clear that they mean these words in a hateful, offensive way.  I do not condone this use of the word "gay" at all.

    Of course, you also don’t have to be a member of a minority to be respectful of it.  You seem to be operating under some stereotypes yourself, namely that gay people are inherently more respectful/mature than straight people.  A stereotype is a stereotype.  The problem with the loudmouths on XBL and other places isn’t that they’re straight, it’s that they are immature, crude, obnoxious, and end up drawing a lot of attention to themselves and away from the normal, respectful users who just want to play their games.  If you have found a group of people to game with where you don’t have to put up with that crap, wonderful.  But I’d wager that the behavior is better because all of the people in the group were looking to escape the obnoxious behavior, not because all of the people in the group are gay.

  142. MechaTama31 says:

    Tolerance is hate with nice makeup.  You don’t tolerate things you like or respect.  You tolerate things you dislike or disapprove of, but have to cope with them anyway.  I think it is a terrible choice of words to use.  It gives the sense that there is something wrong with whatever you are tolerating, but you, big man that you are, put up with it anyway.  There are much better words, like respect and acceptance.  I don’t "tolerate" homosexuals, because there’s nothing wrong with them that I need to put up with.  As far as I’m concerned, they’re just another person.  And whether someone is homo, hetero, both or neither, what they like to get up to in the bedroom is none of my business.

    And yes, I do see the irony in the fact that I am arguing against a common usage of the word "tolerate".  But since I’m not running around calling people bigots and hatemongers for using it that way, the comparison is not really complete.  πŸ˜‰

  143. Flamespeak says:

    If you don’t feel comfortable around people who are different, then why get upset if they don’t feel comfortable around you when you are different than them? 

    Also, being an asshat isn’t exclusive to straight people.

    Do whatever you feel like. Sprouting out stereotypes for teenagers on your end is no different than others doing the same to gay people though. 

  144. questionmark1987 says:

    We break off into groups in order to FEEL comfortable and at ease and to actually enjoy our hobbies. I don’t want to sit there and be insulted because of who I am while I’m playing a game with someone. It’s distracting and ruins the experience. The fact that I surround myself with other gay gamers is because I don’t have to deal with the teenage "my dick is bigger then your dick but I didn’t actually look at your dick because that’s gay" BS.

  145. questionmark1987 says:

    If this is tolerance I’ll take outright hate anyday, at least it’s easier to avoid and much more obvious for others to recognize. This is hate with nice make-up.

  146. Flamespeak says:

    I just call the groups that break off and form their own little cliques for others with their certain minority profile matching what it truly is: Self-imposed Segregation.

    I still find it funny that civil rights movements and court battles were fought for people of all creeds, colors, and sexual orientations to have the same footing, rights, and treatments, however, given the oppurtunity people still break off into groups that match their mindset or race the bulk of the time. 

  147. Puck says:

    Yes. Here you go.

    I don’t care that it wasn’t you who said it – it proves that people everywhere are willing to shout down as ‘special interest’ a group of people who just want to play with other people who understand where they’re coming from.

    Trust me – gay gamers don’t use the website of the same name to find people to fuck.  They use it to find people with whom to play games who won’t use homophobic loudmouthing and ‘gay’ as a derogative slur.  Telling them to get the fuck over it is not a method of smoothing it all over and making everything okay between straight and gay-friendly gamers – it’s a method of making yourself look like a fool.

  148. chadachada321 says:

    My thoughts exactly. We seem to be a pretty tolerant website. Far more than 99% of the rest of the interweb.

    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  149. Father Time says:

    I don’t remember anyone on GP saying anything like that, you got any proof it was said?


    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  150. Puck says:


    Any other day on GamePolitics, it’s overprivileged straight white kids bleating, "Why on earth do gay gamers need their own website?!  Why do they want to associate with each other by showing pride in their sexuality in their profiles? Why can’t they get along with the rest of us?!"

    You’re why.


  151. Father Time says:

    No privilidged is just a generic label to throw at people when you want to try to discredit their arguments. As in "of course you see it that way you’re priviledged".

    In other words it’s subtle ad hominem at worst and pointless namecalling at best.


    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  152. MechaTama31 says:

    Perhaps, but we’re not talking about the quality of peoples’ vocabulary here.  And yes, the context really, truly, absolutey, completely and utterly does matter.  "Dumb" came into the pejorative context because of a negative association with people who couldn’t speak.  It was probably offensive for a while (or would have been, had PC existed back then).  But now the word has left its original meaning behind almost entirely.  When you call something dumb, you are not thinking about the original meaning of the word, nor does the original meaning (or how it came to become pejorative) matter.  What matters is the way you are using it now.  And now it is a generic pejorative that almost never refers to the group it originally did.  "Gay" is not to that point yet, but is in a transition period.  The "original" (considering homosexual as the original meaning here instead of happy, since homosexual is the meaning the new pejorative context is derived from) meaning is still used frequently, but so is the new, generic pejorative meaning.  The new meaning is already very prevalent, and is still increasing.  You don’t like the fact that it became pejorative because of the association with homosexuality, and I can understand that.  But you can’t just ignore a widespread and commonly accepted use of the word, simply because you don’t like how it picked up that meaning.  Like it or not, it is used as a general pejorative quite frequently, and lumping those uses in with the use of gay as a slur directed at homosexuals is intellectually dishonest, and it makes you feel persecution where none exists.

  153. questionmark1987 says:

    All the context in the world won’t make up for the reasons it can fit into that context in the first place. It also shows a lack of intelligence in my opinion that the only thing the person can come up with is "that’s gay".

  154. chadachada321 says:

    I disagree with your opinion and believe that saying "that’s gay" doesn’t imply homosexual intolerance. But to word it differently:

    lol thats ghey.

    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  155. MechaTama31 says:

    I see what you did there.  I’ve hashed this out for you probably a half dozen times by now, so I’ll be brief.  Yes, it arose as a pejorative term because of its use to describe homosexuals.  That doesn’t mean that it is locked into meaning homosexual for all eternity.  It is now commonly used just as a general pejorative, with no thought or connection to homosexuality.  Context is how you tell which way a person is using the word, since it does have multiple uses.

  156. questionmark1987 says:

    Believe it or not I actually used to share your opinion, I used to welcome a larger circle of friends and simply dealt with it. Wanna know what I figured out? My friends who used slurs like this made my life worse. They made me feel uncomfortable when I was supposed to be enjoying myself, and it was easy to find better more supportive friends that didn’t make me feel like crap.

    But to say that it isn’t offensive when used this way is pretty asinine and immature, in my opinion. Context far outweighs the word itself and the context this is used in requires the homosexual connection in order to make sense, especially with a word that is so widely used in referance to homosexuality these days. To say that the word doesn’t mean "homosexual" is a pretty ignorant and blind thing to do, especially when the original meaning, "happy", has fallen out of popular use and the newer adopted meaning "stupid" is based in it’s association by homophobic people with homosexuals.

  157. chadachada321 says:

    Well…seeing as "gay" has become a synonym for "homosexual," and then has recently (within the past 20 years about) become a synonym for "stupid," I can see why your social circle may not use gay very often to imply stupidity or dislike. But to say that it is offensive is pretty asinine and immature, in my opinion. Context far outweighs the word itself, especially with a word that is so widely used in a non-homosexual way these days. To say that a word can ONLY mean "homosexual" is a pretty horrible and blind thing to do, especially when the original meaning, "happy" and the newer adopted meaning "stupid" are still and becoming just as much of a definition.

    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  158. thefremen says:

    Sounds about right, I’m 28 and my peers never feel the need to use "gay" as a derogatory expression, usually stick to insults which are actually insulting rather than silly words. 

  159. questionmark1987 says:

    More to do with my generation. I don’t associate with anyone under 25 because this is so entrenched in my generation (I’m 22) the average age of my social friends is 35-45.

    It’s not a who, it’s a what, and it’s called the current and next generations. This is an AGE based phenomenon.

  160. MechaTama31 says:

    Well, your opinion is completely and utterly incorrect.  Supporting free speech and being reasonable about shifts in language hardly equates to having disrespect for homosexuals.  If you’d actually read what I’ve been saying, really read it with an open mind and without instantly disregarding what I say because I am defending that usage of "gay", you would never be able to come to the conclusion that I don’t respect homosexuals.  I believe everybody has the right to love who they want, I believe homosexual partners should have the same rights heterosexual ones do, I have several gay friends, and I don’t use the word "gay" as a slur or as a general insult.  But I have to come down on the side of free expression on this one, both because that is one of my core principles, and because I respect homosexuals enough to assume that they are reasonable and intelligent enough to know whether someone is really attacking homosexuality when they say "that’s so gay", or if they are just using it in a general way.  To me, your position is more disrespectful of homosexuals, because it assumes they are incapable of understanding the English language as fully as the rest of us.  That kind of condescension is a more insidious kind of discrimination and disrespect, because it masquerades as a kindness.

    If you really feel the need to cut off contact with anybody who uses that word, even in a general sense, that’s your call.  But it’s a pretty poor criterion, if you ask me.  You will be cutting off contact with a lot of people who are more respectful of homosexuality than your irrational interpretation of that word leads you to believe.  You’ll also increase your own sense of being persecuted, by unfairly putting anybody who uses that word into the homophobe column.  This will also self-reinforce your mistaken notion that people always mean that word as a dig at homosexuality, because with so many of your phantom "homophobes" out there, how could they not mean it that way?  You start with a preconcieved notion that you are being targeted, and then every perceived slight simply reinforces that notion, since you no longer accept the possibility that it might not be targeted at you.

  161. questionmark1987 says:

    I’ll say it again, to me even defending saying something like that IS OFFENSIVE. It’s disrespectful and it’s disrespectful to defend it. I don’t believe you can be respectful of a group and simultaneously defend someoen for insulting and belittling them, whether that is why the person is saying it or not it is intrensicly connected. You can’t seperate it just to make yourself feel better about saying it.

    If you don’t realize that it’s disrespectful and offensive to do this you and I don’t share the same idea of respect, and in my eyes, in my opinion no one that has defended the use of the phrase "that’s gay" in this discussion has ANY respect for homosexuals as a group or as individuals, and you all lose my respect and many other people’s respect because of it. I don’t intend to take steps to stop anyone from using the phrase, as I’ve said in another post on here, I simply choose not to associate with those people. That is the only "punishment" or "force" I can use on someone in this country and the only I would choose to use. You lose my respect and my company, that’s all I can do, if that doesn’t bother you nothing I have to say will change your mind.

  162. chadachada321 says:

    It seems to me as if you didn’t even read my comment. I’ll repeat it for the record.

    No. One. Here. Is. Hating. Gays. Do you see any comments that are offensive? That are trying to hurt a gay person’s feelings? Nope.

    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  163. MechaTama31 says:

    Flamespeak already said it pretty well.  The right to say what you want is absolutely more important than the nonexistent "right" to not hear what you don’t want to.  Being offended sometimes is the natural consequence of free speech.  It’s a price worth paying.

    It’s epithet, and once again you are ignoring the fact that "gay" has a widely used and commonly accepted use that does not relate to homosexuals.  Find me a racial epithet like that, and then maybe you will start to have a point.

  164. Flamespeak says:

    You don’t have a right to ‘not feel hated by a large majority of society’.

    Get some tougher skin. You are gonna need it. There is a large percentage of people that have an outright hatred of homosexuals and you aren’t going to change their minds on the subject. Just like they don’t have any right to step in and dictate the way you live your life, you don’t have any right to step in and change theirs. You have the freedom to believe whatever you want to, even if that belief is that some people’s lifestyle is totally wrong. What you don’t have, however, is any kind of right to step in and change that lifestyle simply because you don’t agree with it.

    I don’t understand why some people hate homosexuals myself. I could give a flying f— less if someone is attracted to the same sex. I don’t care if they raise kids, get married, anything else. What defines a person has nothing to do with their sexual orientation. A straight drug-dealing, murder is still a drug-dealing, murder. A gay teacher who raises a successful family, is still a teacher raising a successful family.  But, for f—‘s sake, people say insulting stuff all the time and you literally need to let that shit roll off you back. Tolerance starts with you.

  165. questionmark1987 says:

    As a gay man it’s extrememly offensive to me that gamers (I’m choosing that label because come on, look at the website we’re on) not only understand the connection but REFUSE to recognize why this kind of thing is hurtful. It’s offensive to me that someone’s "right" to use a word for a slang meaning somehow outweighs someone else’s right to not feel hated by a large majority of society. THAT’S offensive to me.

    I wonder if all the people on here defending the use of the phrase "that’s gay" walk around using racial epitaphs as well. After all it’s JUST a word right?

  166. chadachada321 says:

    …Uhh…no one is hating gays here. Looks like YOU spoke too soon…

    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  167. thefremen says:

    Looks like you spoke too soon, my friend. Welcome to the new GP, where minorities are about as welcome as they are in /b/. 

  168. MechaTama31 says:

    Which is why I’ve been saying all along that since there are now a couple of widely used uses of the word, you have to look at the context and judge which is which.  "Gay" is still used quite often as a slur against homosexuals, and I am not defending that usage.  I’m just saying that it’s not reasonable anymore to lump all instances of "gay" into that usage when you know (or ought to) that many people are not using it that way.

    And I don’t use "gay" as an insult either, but it offends me a hell of a lot less than this thought police rubbish. πŸ˜‰

  169. MechaTama31 says:

    No, that is actually irrelevant.  Unless you are somehow suggesting that it is ok to single out a certain group for derision, as long as the criteria by which you single them out is completely negative instead of only perceived as negative by some.  But even then, it’s not really pertinent to this discussion.  How the words became pejorative, or whether they "should have" become pejorative, is not the point here.  The point is that, however they might have become pejorative words, through widespread use they have become disconnected from their original meanings and are now just generic pejorative terms, with only the rare thought given to what they originally meant.  "Gay" is not quite there yet, but it’s moving that way, and the parallels with the other words that have gone down that road are quite obvious to anybody who is not deliberately ignoring inconvenient facts in an attempt to keep justifying their self-righteous tirades.

  170. Geryon says:

    I wouldn’t say needless offense, frankly if you want to get down to the bones of it all offense is needless.  That aside, I love your argument of lame et al being precursers to this exact issue.  To be honest, I don’t like when gay is used as an insult, I don’t use it as an insult, but I recognize that is is often used as a general pejoritive term now with no real connection, aside form history, to homosexuality.  The issue is that even if gay does become a regular pejoritive term with the homosexual definition becoming antiquated it is currently in a state of transition hence the caused offence, including mine, albiet mild.

    So I guess the short of it is that I agree with your points see the logic but arrive at a slightly different conclusion because everyone’s feelings and experience always contribute to conclusions.  So anyway, ramble, ramble, ramble, uh… good arguments and *winky face*. ;p

  171. MechaTama31 says:

    Seems like a silly reason to cut off contact with people, but who you associate with is of course your business and nobody else’s.

    I’m not sure where your second paragraph came from.  I am not arguing to try to convince anybody to start using "gay" as a pejorative.  All I’m saying is that when someone does, there is a good, and ever increasing, chance that they say it with no malice, or even thought, towards homosexuals.  You don’t have to use "gay" that way if you don’t want to.  Personally, I don’t use it that way either.  But you can’t just ignore that usage and react as if every use of the word "gay" is intended as an attack on homosexuals.

    Losing end?  I’m not arguing about the longevity of "gay".  Neither of us can possibly know whether this word and its pejorative sense will stand the test of time, so your last paragraph is just silly.  Words like "lame" and "dumb" have been very long-lived indeed, while "square" and other words had their brief time and died out.  You can’t predict which kind of word this will be.  Even if you could, that doesn’t really affect my point.  Let’s assume that this word definitely will die out as a general pejorative term.  So what?  At this moment, right now, that is still a very common usage of it, so at this moment, right now, it is still silly to ignore that usage and take needless offense.

  172. questionmark1987 says:

    I don’t have to worry about it really. As I said in other posts I don’t associate with people who use that comment because of their ignorance or hate. Whatever their reasoning. I also don’t associate with people who insult gamers. There are plenty of other people to be around.

    Additionally, it’s highly unlikely that anyone will be prompted to start using the term "that’s gay" because of any arguement anyone poses, because anyone who doesn’t use it is most likely not looking for the next insult to hurl. However a few minds will be changed by campaigns like this, and over time that becomes a trend, and eventually a flood.

    Someday this won’t be part of general vernacular, I just have to be patient. You’re on the losing end of the arguement, regardless of how much support it has now.

  173. MechaTama31 says:

    No kidding.  And if "lame" had not been a term for crippled people, it would never have become an insult either.  But it did.  And its insulting use has become so widespread and ubiquitous, the original use is all but forgotten.  When somebody calls something lame, do you get all offended on behalf of the poor crippled kids whose self esteem might suffer because a word that was used to describe them is now just a word for pathetic/uncool?  Of course not.  And nothing you have said has shown any kind of fundamental difference between "gay" and any other pejorative word that originally was directed at a specific group of people.  "Gay" is simply not completely through the process yet.

    You’ve made it quite clear that you don’t care what the common usage of "gay" is, but unfortunately for you, whether you care or not does not change the fact that the common usage is becoming more and more simply a generic pejorative, and not directed at homosexuals.  That’s just the way it is.  Pretending otherwise serves only to give you fuel for your self-righteous fire.

  174. questionmark1987 says:

    "it’s not usually the people actually using the word who cause the problem."

    By saying this I’m pointing out that just saying it in and of itself USUALLY isn’t going to cause anyone to be terribly upset, an exception would be the example I used of a kid hearing this over and over and getting the impression he will never be accepted.

    I don’t care how common the usage is, the only reason "that’s gay" at all implies stupid, uncool, whatever is BECAUSE of it’s connection in a negative fashion to homosexuality. If the word gay never meant homosexual it would never have devolved into an insult.

  175. MechaTama31 says:

    I may not like what you have to say, but I will defend to the…  umm…  internet…?  >.>  your right to say it! πŸ˜‰

  176. MechaTama31 says:

    That’s how it originated as a pejorative term, yes.  But as it gets used more and more, the original meaning falls to the wayside and only the general pejorative sense remains.  I have explained this as thoroughly as I’m going to.  Try reading my other posts a bit more carefully.

  177. MechaTama31 says:

    You said, and I quote, "it’s not usually the people actually using the word who cause the problem."  So the problem arises, at least in your version of how the world works, when the actual homophobes are emboldened by hearing someone else say it.  But the actual saying of it is usually not a problem, you said so yourself.

    And no, the word doesn’t lose its connection to homosexuality because of anything I alone do or think when I say it.  It loses that connection because common usage is shifting more and more to a a meaning that has nothing to do with homosexuality.  It’s not like I’m saying "Applesauce now means a pile of books used to prop up a speaker, because I said so".  I didn’t pull this out of thin air.  The usage of gay as a generic pejorative, with nothing to do with homosexuality, is very, very common.  It is widely known and understood to be used like that.  I can reasonably expect someone to realize that when I say "That’s so gay," I mean that is it stupid/uncool/whatever, not that it is homosexual.  This change in the meaning and usage of the word is real, it’s growing, and at this point the new usage is probably even more common than the old one.  It is absurd to refuse to acknowledge the new usage, for no purpose other than to have yet another thing to get needlessly offended about.

  178. Baruch_S says:

    So basically, you’re saying the same thing but replacing "afraid" with a euphimism that hopefully will not provoke the same reaction…

    Many people who disagree with homosexuality don’t go out of their way to actively attack it. Most people aren’t the Westboro Baptist Cult. Most Christians and/or conservatives don’t spend their time running around with "God hates fags" signs. They’re not afraid, threatened, or whatever other euphimism or synonym you want to insert; they’re just people with an opinion or belief. The idea that people are only against homosexuality because they’re afraid or threatened is a bunch of politically correct bull.

  179. Ratros says:

    Intelligent, well thought out argument, and you defend something that you find tasteless?  I second the love!

    I once had a dream about God. In it, he was looking down upon the planet and the havoc we recked and he said unto us, "Damn Kids get off my lawn!"

  180. questionmark1987 says:

    And no that’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying the term gay should not be used as an insult period. Just as the terms black, white, mexican, muslim, and jew should not be used as insults. Descriptions yes. A man who has sex with men is gay (or in some cases bi). Calling something gay that has nothign to do with it being happy or homosexual but instead intending to demonstrate that it is bad is by connection calling homosexuality bad.

    The word doesn’t lose it’s connection to homosexuality just because you aren’t thinking about gay people when you say it. Just like the term N***er doesn’t lose it’s connection to slavery just because you’re not thinking about slavery if/when you use it (I DEFINITLEY DO NOT CONDONE THE USE OF THAT WORD).

  181. questionmark1987 says:

    Ok perhaps afraid was in incorrect term. Threatened. People who ar ehomophobic are threatened by homosexuals. Replace afraid with threatened though and the rest of it still reads the same, now we’re really just playing with symantics.

    The point being if someone simply disagrees with something they don’t go out of their way to attack it, they might avoid it but they won’t expend energy attacking and harrassing it. If they feel threatened by it (it changes my life somehow, affects me, scares me) then that’s when people begin to take action.

    All the people making the arguement that it has nothing to do with homosexuals are off base.

    As for the lame, retarded, stupid, etc. comparisons, those are words that define a specific problem in a person. No one considers any definitions of those words to be positive. People who are born mentally retarded think differently, not necissarily worse, but that difference makes life for them more difficult then for someone who isn’t. People who are gay only suffer because of other people being intolerant, not because being gay is in and of itself more problematic then being straight. That is what makes the difference in using the terms.

  182. Father Time says:

    Yeah really, I hate the WBC for picketing funerals and graduations, however I don’t see them as any sort of threat just a loud obnoxious noise, like a car alarm. So you can’t say I have some sort of phobia against them.


    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  183. GoodRobotUs says:

    It’s not drifting at all, that’s the whole point, it wouldn’t even be used if it didn’t mean what it did.

  184. MechaTama31 says:

    Yes, that is where the word came from.  I’m not denying that.  But the word is drifting away from that meaning and towards being just a generic negative term with the original meaning rarely thought of.  Just like stupid, the word you so readily substituted in your previous post.  When you said stupid, did it even occur to you that it was a medical term used to describe people with a certain level of low intelligence?  Its pejorative sense obviously derived from this medical sense.  To put it your way, the entire word is used because it represents less intelligent people, if it didn’t, it wouldn’t be used, it’s as simple as that.  So just as with gay, stupid originated as a word used as a negative description of a certain subset of people.  But stupid has been used as a generic pejorative so much, it has become divorced from its original meaning.  Few people even remember it, fewer still intend that meaning when they say it.  Gay is headed the same way.  That’s what I’m saying.  Now, obviously some people still use gay in a way that is actually against homosexuals.  That’s why I keep saying the context matters.  But the generic usage is overtaking the homosexual-specific usage, and people who insist on ignoring the distinction between the two are just looking for reasons to upset themselves, imho.

    P.S. Just a tangent here, but I never said "reading comprehension".  Putting it in quotes as if I did say it doesn’t reflect too well on yours.  πŸ˜‰

  185. GoodRobotUs says:

    So associating the word ‘Gay’ with the word ‘Stupid’ is ok in your books? Because the association wouldn’t exist if the word gay did not represent homosexuals, there’s no escaping that fact. The stereotype of homosexuals was where this phrase came from. If the word for ‘gay’ changed to ‘orange’ tomorrow, in 6 months time, everyone would be calling each other ‘orange’ on the Internet.

    I don’t buy this idea of ‘it’s a different kind of ‘gay’ in the slightest, it’s just making exuses.

  186. GoodRobotUs says:

    Oh please, don’t talk rubbish. The entire word is used because it represents homosexuals, if it didn’t, it wouldn’t be used, it’s as simple as that, trying to justify it with your own excuse of ‘Oh, I said gay, but I didn’t mean gay’ really doesn’t hold water.

    So it’s not a question of ‘reading comprehension’ as you put it, but burying your head in the ground and shouting ‘It’s not homophobic, because I don’t want it to be!’.

  187. MechaTama31 says:

    So…  You’re saying that it is ok to use "gay" as a generic insult, except that it would trick real homophobes into thinking I am one of them and they would be emboldened.  Oh, and then it apprently is not ok to use it anyway because it makes kids kill themselves?  Jesus, and here I thought it was just a word.

    Look, actual homophobia and harassment are genuinely bad.  But saying "that’s so gay" about some random stupid thing hardly qualifies.  Yes, that usage arose out of homophobia, but now it has been used so much, it is losing that connection.  Some people use gay in a way that is hateful of homosexuality.  Some use it in a way that is not.  The former usage is shrinking, while the latter is growing.  The context usually makes it pretty clear which is which.  If someone wants to ignore the context so that they  can get upset and offended at every use of the word, no matter how innocent, then I really don’t care what they think about it anyway.  I have no time for their histrionics.  And no, I do not buy into the "real power" of these words.  Words have only the power that you give them.  Freedom of speech must include the freedom to be offensive.  There is no such thing as a right to never be insulted.  You just have to learn to cope with it.  That’s life.  And before someone brings it up, I know this isn’t an issue of government censorship, but this kind of sleazy thought police campaign is almost as bad.  Government is not the only threat to free expression.

    By the way, has anybody else noticed that almost every word offered as a substitute in this conversation has been "discriminatory"?  Lame (crippled), dumb (unable to speak), retarded and stupid (various degrees of lower intelligence), all of these were originally terms for people with certain mental or physical conditions.  As with gay, it was the perceived negativeness of these conditions that led to them becoming insult words.  And now, here we are, we use these words as insults without the slightest thought to their original meaning, and with no malice to the people the term originally described.  This is exactly what is happening with gay.  So everybody calm down, take a deep breath, relax

  188. MechaTama31 says:

    "the context is there within the phrase"

    No, it really isn’t.  Not very often, anyway.  The history of the word is of course pretty ugly, and it has in the past been used to venomous effect against homosexuals.  But now, in the kind of usages this campaign is talking about (saying "that’s so gay" about just any old thing), it is simply not targeted at homosexuals.  It’s used as a generic insult, with likely no thought given to homosexuality.  If you really can’t tell from the context whether someone means it in an anti-homosexual way or not, well, tough cookies.  We shouldn’t have to hobble our speech to accomodate people with poor comprehension skills.

  189. MechaTama31 says:

    1: I think you completely missed the point of what I was comparing, even though I spelled it out as clearly as possible.  Read it again, try to find a part where I compare retardation to homosexuality.  Protip: there is no such part.  I was comparing how the usage of the words "gay" and "retarded" have changed over the years.  Everything I said was from the linguistic perspective, not comparing the actual conditions of being homosexual or being retarded.

    2: No, the point of the campaign is to get people to stop saying "gay", regardless of context.  The fact that they replace the word "gay" with various stereotypes of other groups just compounds the absurdity.  When people say "that’s so gay" about something, it’s not necessarily because they think it is something stereotypically homosexual.  They could just think it’s stupid.  And the campaign even specifically mentions this kind of usage as what they are trying to stop.  So, we have "gay" being used as a general insult, not in a homosexual-specific or stereotyped manner, and their idea of how to combat it is with a bunch of stereotypes of other groups, when stereotypes are completely beside their point?  Sensible and classy.  How do they do it?  At any rate, I didn’t "miss" that point, because it exists only in your mind.  It’s clearly not the actual thrust of the campaign.

  190. Baruch_S says:

    Well I’m glad that SOMEONE is psychic and can figure out people’s motivations. I had no idea that people who disagreed with homosexuals for their own reasons were actually AFRAID of them. I guess, by that logic, everyone is scared of everyone else they disagree with. I’ll remember that next time I enter a political debate. *eyeroll*

    Seriously, do you think you’re actually right? If so, I think you should actually take some time to talk to people who disagree with the homosexual lifestyle instead of stereotyping all of them. You might learn something.

  191. MrKlorox says:

    Depends on if the homosexuality stems from gender dysphoria. Then it indeed would be part of a disorder. Some would argue mental, others would argue genetic.

  192. wfernjohn says:

    1. Mental retardation is a recognized mental disorder, hence its use (kind or not) as an insult. Homosexuality is not a recognized disorder and your attempt to compare the two is disgusting.

    2. The entire point of the campaign was to show that, yes, stereotypes are ignorant, baseless, and reflect poorly on the speaker. You seem to have missed this point as well.

  193. GoodRobotUs says:

    But the problem is, the context is there within the phrase, otherwise it wouldn’t be used. There may not be any direct intent to insult homosexuals, but that just makes it more casual, not less intended to mean a reference to homosexuals in general.

    People say ‘Well, it only means stupid’, but it only meant stupid after and because it was related to homosexuality, we’re talking causal here, not correlation, if ‘gay’ didn’t mean homosexual then it would never have been adopted as a term for ‘stupid’, and it was adopted as the word for ‘stupid’ because it meant homosexual, there’s no two ways about it.

    So in that case, yes, the advertisment is doing exactly what it intended, you may consider it too silly to be insulting, but then, if you think the stigma attached to being a Video gamer is bad? Just look at the stigma attached to being gay…


    This isn’t like ‘Baa baa Black Sheep’ and all that other politically correct rubbish where a part of the word or phrase just happens to interpretable as a skin colour, this is a word deliberately chosen for what it meant in the homosexual context and used as an insult. People can argue language drift, and yes, I’ll concede that the widespread use of the word could encourage some degree of that, but I greatly doubt the majority of people who use the word ‘gay’ don’t think ‘homosexual’ the moment they hear that word.

  194. Father Time says:

    I don’t hate gays I hate the abuse of the English language, probably because I’m a huge Carlin fan.

    Anyway phobia has always meant fear of, it’s a psychology term and those have to be precise you can’t just simply put every form of bias against them into that one term and call it a day. It’s dishonest and just factually incorrect like calling people from Mexico Spanish just because they speak the language (Spanish in that context can only refer to people who are from Spain).

    Gay on the other hand used to be happy and isn’t a technical term so yeah I can say gay can mean more than one thing.

    As Carlin put it (paraphrasing) "please try to use the language we’ve all agreed to"

    or to put it even simpler to everyone who uses homophobia to mean bias.

    The English Language, You’re Doing It Wrong. (sorry but I can’t think of a way to put it simpler than that).


    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  195. State says:

    You moan about the usage of the word "gay" and that it doesn’t always mean homosexuality is bad as an insult, just bad, but then moan at the usage of the word "homophobia" and how that always means a fear of homosexuals. Homophobia means either fear of or hatred towards homosexuals.

    It seems a lot of people don’t want to be called homophobic eg "I’m not afraid of gays, I just hate them, so don’t call me homophobic". Seems a bit pathetic really.

  196. Father Time says:

    Not all hate stems from fear though so to call every gay hater homophobic is dishonest.


    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  197. questionmark1987 says:

    I’m quite aware of what homophobic really means. If you don’t understand why the word homophobic is used for people who behave agressivly towards homosexuals I will explain. THEY ARE AFRAID of gay people because it weirds them out, much like someone with Arachnophobia is afraid of spiders. THEY ATTACK homosexuals due to their fear. These attacks can come in the form of verbal abuse, physical violence or other avenues such as politics and laws.

    Racism and sexism stem from fear of being outdone or ousted from a position of comfort and power by someone of another race or gender. Fear is the motivation, hate and violence are the results.

    Meant to post this up here.

    Additionally no I don’t expect homophobes to be afraid because other people don’t use the word "gay" in a negative context, but they will lose thier imagined support from the group, which anyone who has studied psychology will tell you makes them much less likely to commit real violence against the people they are afraid of/don’t like.

  198. Father Time says:

    People who hate homosexuals are not going to be intimidated if they think they are the minority, it doesn’t work that way. And are you really suggesting that we should stop using it because stupid individuals who don’t know the context might misinterpret it as meaning something else? Lots of things we say can be misinterpreted, why should we dance around our language to accomadte predjudiced shmucks who all ready had an axe to grind against gays to begin with? It seems so stupid.

    While we’re on the subject of language, stop using homophobia to mean gay hating or people who are predjudiced against gays. Phobia means fear, so a person who is homophobic would mean someone who is afraid of homosexuals not someone who simply sees them as lesser beings.

    Here’s an example do you think spiders should be considered less important than human beings, if yes (and I hope it’s yes) than you have arachnophobia according to these new stupid language rules. However there are people with irrational fear of spiders, but oh wait now everyone’s an arachnophobic and we shouldn’t treat those who fear spiders because they’re completely normal now.


    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  199. questionmark1987 says:

    Thank you for not using it, but you’re still wrong. Unfortunatly it’s not usually the people actually using the word who cause the problem.

    Think of it this way. You say "That’s so gay" about X event or thing to say it’s not cool, bad, whatever. The guy in the room who actually is homophobic hears you. The word itself carries the connotation of homosexuality regardless of the context you’re using it in, because in the english language in america "gay" is most often used to refer to homosexuals. So now this random homophobic individual has heard you use a word he automatically associates with homosexuals, and to top it off you’ve used it to call something bad, not good, etc. Guess what he thinks your opinion of gay people is?

    THIS is why casual utterances like this are so dangerous. Very few out and proud homosexuals are going to be hurt by you saying it, but plenty of dangerous, more homophobic people will take it as a sign that the people using it feel the same way they do, and will therefore feel more comfortable expressing stronger hate, both verbally and physically. It creates a mob mentality in single individuals who believe the mob is on their side.

    Additionally, to homosexuals who are not out or a person who is unsure, especially teenagers and children, hearing things like this can cause them to feel very insecure and self hateful. No one wants to be unaccepted by their peers, and when it’s something you don’t feel you can control about yourself that everyone is expressing hate towards, it’s a pretty bad feeling. There are kids taking their own lives everyday becasue of harrassment about sexuality, and some of those kids aren’t even gay, they are just percieved that way.

    Bottom line, if you can’t recognize the real power of these kinds of words you’re being willfully ignorant of other people’s feelings and psyches. Have some common human dignity and just say bad or stupid instead of gay.

  200. chadachada321 says:

    I love you.

    And like I said in one of my comments further down, saying "stupid" is itself like saying gay or retarded, because it is saying that something is "unintelligent" (god forbid it offends people that get bad grades) when you really mean that you "don’t like it."

    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  201. chadachada321 says:

    I do respect gay people. I don’t really understand what you’re trying to say…

    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  202. questionmark1987 says:

    I want to state I don’t think anyone here has said anything about gay people NOT being able to have social liberties. THis is more about showing respect and compassion than actual rights, civil or otherwise.

    I don’t call people out for belonging to any group, even when I REALLY hate the majority of what that group stands for. It would be nice if others did the same. That’s why this is an issue. ALong with the other reasons I’ve mentioned (the parts that actually lead to someone really getting hurt).

  203. chadachada321 says:

    No no no, you’re missing the point. A stupid person may be offended by the use of the word "stupid" to mean "disliked," because when you call something (let’s say a rule in a game) stupid, you don’t actually think that it’s "unintelligent," you simply dislike it. You’re therefore associating "stupid" with "disliked."

    Of course no one actually is offended by the use of the word stupid, because we’ve gotten far enough as a society to think of the context of the sentence. Stupid means more than just unintelligent, it is interchangeable with disliked. The word gay is becoming like that too, because saying "gay" doesn’t always have to have anything to do with "homosexual," in fact it originally meant "happy." Now, gay has 3 fairly-accepted definitions: Happy, homosexual, and stupid/disliked.

    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  204. Flamespeak says:

    Stupidity is a gift. Those with simple minds are amused by all the small wonders of the world.

    The intellgent can’t see past the steaming pile of suck that is the big picture of life as Tommy the retard happily chases a butterfly.

  205. Flamespeak says:

    You are free to have your opinion.

    Just like I am free to think its stupid. As someone with multiple gay friends and family members, I can assure you that people are indeed born that way. Talk to me after you see someone try to kill themselves because they were brought up being taught that being gay was ‘wrong, immoral, and evil’ and they felt that suicide was better than admitting that they are homosexual to people they grew up with out of fear of being rejected and hated by them forever. 

  206. cpu64 says:

    all there needs to be done is to eliminate this gay "fad" and problem solved.

    Please, spare the "born that way" excuse, you’re only kidding yourself.

  207. Flamespeak says:

    I don’t really think it is all that clever of a campaign, personally.

    It seems to me that it is little more than name calling. Instead of rising above the campaign is just painting negative stereotypes of people in an attempt to tick others off. Basically they are calling people who have used the term ‘stupid jocks’, ‘airhead cheerleaders’, and ‘videogaming losers’.

    Yeah, that is going to work wonderfully. Next thing you know, they might even start with ‘yo’ mama’ insults.

  208. Inimical says:

    Very clever campaign. Let’s hope it not only impacts anti-gay language but the slew of racial slurs that come out of a lot of the same gamers, too.

  209. questionmark1987 says:

    In this hypothetical though it’s not about the word, changing the insult to match the "new" gay word would just show that it’s being used specifically because of it’s association with homosexuality and not because of the word having an assumed or evolved meaning. That’s hate.

  210. treydawg says:

    yah the gamer sterotype is really not all that offending. its about as crappy of a insult as a homosexual calling a straight person a "breeder" which is gotta be the most non-offensive word to be used as a insult to date.

  211. State says:

    Apparently it seems to be based off of the belief that people only own a couple games. When talking about real friends and not the friend count on Facebook this "gamer guy" stereotype doesn’t work. Imagine "music guy with more CDs than friends", "film guy with more DVDs than friends" and most people would see that this assumption was poorly made.

  212. Baruch_S says:

    You’re not the only one, believe me. I really don’t care that our president is black or our new Supreme Court justice is Hispanic. What I can about is if they’re qualified and have solid policies and ideas. I also don’t look at race when I call someone a lazy, irresponsible Wellfare leech. But for some reason, having different skin pigmentation somehow makes you incredibly different and lets you do all sorts of things. I really don’t get it, but I guess that’s how it works.

  213. chadachada321 says:

    I know that I don’t judge people based on their race, and if others want to say otherwise, then fuck ’em. I’m sick of people calling racism when there isn’t any, and more sick of people forcing diversity everywhere (see: Sotomayor’s court decisions). The only time that people don’t call racism is when there is actual racism going on. I sometimes feel as if I’m the only colorblind person on this planet, because I don’t vote based on skin color or party, but rather on the person’s character, dignity, and their stance on MY rights and liberties.

    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  214. Baruch_S says:

    Wow, I didn’t think anyone had the guts to actually say something like that. That’s the sort of statement that gets people screaming "racist" even if parts of it are incredibly true. Good job.

  215. chadachada321 says:

    I consider a nigger to be someone that dresses like an idiot with pants that hang almost to their knees who listen to demeaning, racist and sexist music, and not only listen to it but believe in it, who leach off of welfare while robbing, raping, or killing the rich and/or other "gangstas" and still complaining about their situation when they’re too fucking stupid to move away from the cities and into good neighborhoods, but instead stay where they are and continue to recieve government checks and inbred with their immature culture and incomprehensible English.

    It has nothing to even do with being black, actually. White people can be niggers, too. And like the "Yankees" of old who took up the term as a term of endearment, so too have certain members of the black community taken "nigger" as a term of endearment, as has the gay community taken "gay" as a positive term or something to be proud of.

    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  216. Puck says:

    Dooder thats cool.  I have a black friend who jokingly calls himself a nigger; I guess I can call as many people and things niggers as I want, cuz he does it and I feel entitled!

    Ahaha! Awesomenigger!

  217. chadachada321 says:

    MY gay friend uses it jokingly in reference to himself sometimes, that kid’s so funny

    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  218. chadachada321 says:

    Most of us (Libertarian here btw) here greatly care about social liberties. We also aren’t saying that this group can’t exist. We’re simply saying how this group has the wrong mentality and grasp of language. You can call me an ass or anything all you want for me saying "that’s gay," and like the other user said, I really wouldn’t care, because I know that I didn’t mean to offend you.

    I’m only replying because I am fairly offended by someone saying that I don’t care about social liberties.

    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  219. Meohfumado says:

    Not being able to get married….that infringes upon your social liberties.  Being discriminated in the workplace…that infringes upon your social liberties.  Being attacked by mouthbreathing homophobes damn well infringes upon your social liberties.

    All of the above are horrible injustices that no person under the law should be subject to.  I wish you nothing but success in getting these wrongs righted.


    However….common words (except as written in law, or slander/libel) have never, ever affected anybody’s social liberties.  Particularly words that aren’t even being used in an offending context.  Trying to keeping people from using mere words does not protect your social liberties, only your delicate feelings.

    I live in the US…a place that guarantees my freedom of speech.  Even if I’m saying the most heinous hateful things in the world…I can say them, because of the 1st Ammendment (of course I can’t say Fire in a movie theatre but this is a different argument).

    The reason I object to this type of stuff is it is thought-police PC bullshit.  This is a small step towards laws like those in Europe against hate speech.  As much as I hate Nazis, the KKK and the Westboro Baptist Church…in America they can say what they want.   And I can call them all fuktards in return.  You don’t like it when somebody says, "That’s so gay…"  Fine.  Call them an asshole and be done with it.  There’s no reason to try to legislate vocabulary to the greater population.


    "You know what I wish? I wish all the scum of the Earth had one throat and I had my hands about it."

  220. Puck says:

    Wow.  I could spend another day and a half posting retorts to the countless threads here, but it would be like throwing pearls to swine.  (Ooh ooh, is someone going to post and call me a hypocrite for quoting the Bible even though I’m queer?! Please do; it would be par for the course.)

    I have better things to do.  I’m pretty disappointed how many people post here and still use playground logic.  Really, guys, this isn’t GameFAQs.  Maybe just try to think outside your boxes here for a sec.  Young minds are extremely susceptible to marketing like this.  If you think otherwise, you’re either still a child (and too rebellious to believe in marketing), or you’re a jaded adult (and still, likely, has not worked with marketin).

    And besides, what the fuck is the campaign going to hurt?  Everyone has the right not to be insulted by language – period.

    And don’t ever, ever pretend to speak for queer people or what’s good for them if you’re not one.  The reason we feel entitled to affect changes in language is a little something about being in a minority which has been murdered and beaten and legislated against for pretty much always in the Western world.  Language shifts and grassroots movements are the only weapons a minority has.

    Not that I expect to change anyone’s mind, but I do feel a bit betrayed knowing there are so many normally liberal folks posting here who, when it comes down to it, don’t give a rat’s ass about social liberties except when it directly benefits them as gamers.

    Good luck gaining acceptance by the mainstream when you’re busy working to divide your own community.

  221. Baruch_S says:

    I think quiet a few people have said the stereotype is silly and very non-offensive. Many gamers build game collections, and these collections can easily have hundreds of games. Of course these people are going to have more games than friends; how many people actually have 100+ people they would consider very close friends? On top of that, some people prefer to keep a small circle of close friends and don’t have any problem with that.

    The entire ad is based on the stereotype of all gamers being anti-social nerds who spend all their time hunched over keyboards in dark basements. Very few gamers actually fit that stereotype, so the ad kind of falls flat on making any impact on the gamer demographic.

  222. Artifex says:

    While everyone is busy debating if "gay" is really a hateful term directed toward homosexuals or not, rather than where this topic intersects with gaming culture, has anyone considered the other angle on this specific Ad?

    Is anyone going to point out the part where this Ad campaign is replacing an implied negative sexual term with an implied negative stereotype about gamers? ("Gamers don’t have friends")


  223. Baruch_S says:

    Wow. Personally, I’m not insulted if someone says I have more games than friends. My collection is big enough that I wouldn’t want that many friends because A) I wouldn’t be able to keep their names straight and B) I’d always feel bad because I wouldn’t be able to spend time with even half of them each weekend. Someone obviously didn’t know anything about gamers when they wrote this.

    On another note, gay people are welcome to say stuff like "that’s so straight" or "that’s so Christian/conservative/insertgroupthatislikelyagainsthomosexuality." Personally, I wouldn’t be offended if they used any of the groups or whatever that I belong to. In fact, I’d probably fall over laughing if I heard someone say "that’s so straight," and I wouldn’t take it as an insult to myself or my sexual preferences. Of course, I’m a straight white male, so I guess I don’t matter anyone. You’re free to insult me or say whatever you like, I’m not defended by any sort of politically correct standards.

  224. Aliasalpha says:

    Whilst I absolutely support the rights of the LGBT community (one gay mate, one mate about to have a sex change and 2 of the best friends I’ve ever had are bi), there’s got to be a point where people toughen the fuck up, get a thicker skin, call the people who insult them idiots and then get on with their lives.


    I’ve been discriminated against for various reasons through my life and the one thing I’ve learned is that if you don’t respond in just that way, you give far too much value to the opinions of idiots and you can forget just how great you are. In effect you HELP the idiots win. Does anyone want idiots in charge? Can you imagine a country ruled by an idiot?


    Oh wait…

  225. clownluv247 says:

    wow,for having taken a word that meant happy to represent themselves , these ppl seem to whine a lot

  226. Meohfumado says:

    A rose by any other name….

    It’ll just be a euphamism merry-go-round.  What word can we use this week?  Damn…they took offense…ok, can’t use Orange anymore.  Let’s use Flipper…damn…now they taking offense at that.  Ok…next word…


    "You know what I wish? I wish all the scum of the Earth had one throat and I had my hands about it."

  227. GoodRobotUs says:

    Thing is, there’s an interesting little thought-experiment you can do here:

    Imagine that tomorrow, the homosexual community completely abandoned the phrase ‘Gay’ for representing themselves, that word is never used by Homosexuals from that point onwards. Instead, for the sake of argument, the word ‘Orange’ is used, so ‘orange’ now means to homosexuals and the rest of the world exactly what ‘gay’ did beforehand, people still remember the phrase ‘gay’, it hasn’t been erased from history, just not used any more.

    Personally, I suspect the answer to whether the comment is homophobic, intentionally or not, would depend on whether the phrase ‘that’s so gay’ became ‘that’s so orange’ and the length of time it would take to do so if it did.

  228. Meohfumado says:

    You are right…this is an ad campaign and nothing more.

    It just seems to me that we are becoming a bit too obsessed with the European ideal that no person should ever be offended, and that you can outlaw words and language.  I want to resist that here no matter what.

    Point taken.


    "You know what I wish? I wish all the scum of the Earth had one throat and I had my hands about it."

  229. Puck says:

    My partner and I appreciate the well-wishes for our civil rights.

    I agree with you that people have a right to say what they want, and those with different ideas can dissent how they want as long as it’s not infringing.  Which is why it baffles me to have to say this:

    Who said anything about trying to legislate vocabulary?  This is an influence campaign to try and get people (gamers) to see things in a light they’ve never had to (having their identity attacked so they experience being on the defensive for something they shouldn’t have to defend).  No one is proposing legislation, only the changing of minds via discourse.

  230. sirdarkat says:

     Yes yes we are as a side note on that debate my friends started calling themselves My Devil and yelled at their black college friends that they weren’t allowed to use that term when they tried; ah the god old days when we thought that was witty.

  231. ChrowX says:

    Calling something gay often has nothing to do with homophobia, though. It’s not something that people say because they are intentionally trying to bash homosexuals. They’re reading too deep into Xbox live talk, really.

    Additionally, since when is ‘gay’ a slur? Are we really moving towards a, "Only we can say that! That is our word!!" debate?

  232. Erik says:

    What about when someone uses the term gay as an insult someone and they are insinuating that that person has relations with a person of their own gender even in truth they do not.  So the comparison is rather moot when many people who do use gay as a derogatory actually do dislike gay people.

    Though now I have a bit running through my head:

    Person 1: "That movie was so gay!"
    Person 2: "Hey, that is derogatory, don’t be like that."

    Person 1: "You are right.  I’m sorry.  What I meant to say is that movie was two men or two women having sex with one another."

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  233. Meohfumado says:

    You can only be offended if you want to be.  Let me say that again, "You can only be offended if you want to be."

    You can say the most horrible things to me, and you know what?  I’m not going to care.  Because I don’t care enough about your opinion for it to matter.

    If my father calls me the same names, I might get upset.  But just because some complete stranger says a bad word….why on earth would I get upset?

    If I got upset and cried at every stupid thing anybody has ever said in my presence, or in the media, I’d have run out of tears years ago.



    "You know what I wish? I wish all the scum of the Earth had one throat and I had my hands about it."

  234. wfernjohn says:

    For the record, what is the age range in this discussion? Does anyone over the age of 13 seriously use "gay" as an insult? Is anyone over that age sincerely confused as to why it irritates people?

  235. wfernjohn says:

    What? Stupidity is universally accepted as a negative trait. It means a lack of intelligence. How does that compare to sexual orientation?

  236. sirdarkat says:

     As a fun note on this a gay friend of my girl uses the phrase that is so gay to refer to stupid all the time … I wonder if he thinks everytime he uses it hes insulting himself?

  237. chadachada321 says:

    What’s funny is that one of the commercials for the "knock it off" campaign with Wanda Sykes in it did a very hypocritical thing. She said that using "gay" to say that something was "stupid" was wrong, but to me, using "stupid" to say that they dislike something is just as offensive to people with low IQs. Sure, people don’t get offended by things being called stupid (as opposed to disliked) anymore, because people realize that context is more important. Yet some of the same people will have a hissy-fit about the word "gay" even if it has abso-fucking-lutely NOTHING to do with homosexuals at all.

    Yes, it’s a small stretch to call hypocrisy, but using "gay" does not mean that the user dislikes gays or has any negative feelings towards homosexuality. I also wouldn’t mind if people said "that’s so straight" to imply that they disliked something, because I’m smart enough to know that it’s the context and the feelings behind it that matter, not the words themselves.

    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  238. Father Time says:

    Oh yes because us over-priviledged white male straight guys (I don’t see how being white or male is  relevant to this but whatever) all act the same way and our actions can be predicted so easily.

    Fuck off you narrow-minded, delusional, predudiced, idiot.


    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  239. chadachada321 says:

    Eh, no one cares about the commercial, the comments will probably more-so be a debate about how/if saying "that’s gay" is a true insult or not, even if used in a non-offensive way.

    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  240. thefremen says:

    In before shitstorm of over-privileged white heterosexual guys moaning about how horrible gays are for insulting them.   

  241. Austin_Lewis says:

    Because she’s a talentless hack like her father, her friends, and the Jonas Brothers, owned by the same label. 

    Having her say that there’s something wrong with the word gay carries as much weight as wanda sykes saying it.  Sure, it’s cool when she used to say it, acts like a racist, etc, but when someone calls something gay, its the worst thing they could do.

    By the way, I never read people magazine OR us magazine. They’re both pretty mediocre magazines.  I just hate Miley Cyrus and what people like that are doing to music.

  242. MechaTama31 says:

    And what point would that be?  The gamer version is silly to the point where it’s not even insulting.  If anything, it would make the person who said it seem pretty dumb.  And if you think about it, having more games than friends isn’t even that weird.  I have hundreds of games.  Games are easy to find and acquire.  But friends?  I have plenty of acquaintaces, but I’d say probably only about a dozen good, close friends.

    But aside from all that nitpicking, I disagree with the very core of this campaign.  Calling something gay to mean that it is stupid/uncool/etc is not homophobia, not in and of itself.  Gay can be used in a homophobic way, but the context is everything.  It’s very similar to the word retarded.  When you call something retarded because it is stupid or whatever, you are not using it to discriminate against the mentally challenged.  That meaning of the word probably doesn’t even enter your mind as you use it.  It’s the exact same thing with gay.  It’s also interesting that both words originated as harmless ones, gay meaning happy and retarded meaning slowed; later ended up associated with groups of people, gay for homosexuals, retarded for the mentally challenged; and now both have also become empty words for stupid/uncool/whatever.  But the point is, just because the words can be used in an insulting manner, doesn’t mean that every use of the word carries that same venom.  I can understand that people who are the target of such insults can be overly sensitive about the word, but I don’t believe that gives them the right to ignore the context the word is used in and demand that everybody eradicate the word from their vocabulary.  Just be patient, soon enough slang will move on and "gay" will go the way of "square" (gasp!  quadrilaterophobic hate speech!) and other antiquated insults.

    And personally, I don’t use the words gay or retarded.  I think they are tasteless.  But that’s my decision, as it should be.  I can choose what I do and don’t want to say.  I truly despise thought police and all the bullshit they come up with, like this campaign.  Really, all this does is isolate homosexuals even further, trying to drive home that they are separate from the rest of "us" and need to be treated differently.

  243. GoodRobotUs says:

    That’s pretty clever in it’s own right.

    I wish I could be optimistic about its success, because it does prove a valid point.

  244. Rodrigo YbÑñez García says:

    I want to know: what insults use gay people against other gays?

    I think this is gonna be a waste of time because insults are sometimes common gaming online. I´m more concerned that XboxLive is banning accounts just because they accept to be gay (or even because they truly have the word "gay" on their names).

    The cynical side of videogames (spanish only): My DeviantArt Page (aka DeviantCensorship):

  245. sirdarkat says:

    That’s so gay.

    I had a long post but frankly its summed up in three words "Grow Some Skin" as oppose to the three above words.

  246. MrKlorox says:

    Words like "gay" and "retarded" to replace "lame" aren’t going anywhere for a while. Hate to break it to you.

    Nothing against either peoples; it’s just the way folks talk in real life.

    edit: I hope I didn’t offend any handicapped by using "lame" in reference to a negative meaning. /s

Comments are closed.