LGBT Politically Correct Police

i don't see how i need practical experience to understand that taking offense to a word that wasn't meant by the speaker to be offensive is beyond ridiculous

i wasn't talking about ru paul so much as in general, though i don't see why it's impossible to see his use of it as an attempt to 'take the word back' instead of an attempt to offend people

Because he can't take the word back, it's not his. He's a cisgender man, and the word is primarily directed at trans women.

It's like a white guy trying to reclaim racial slurs. He can try it, but he's going to look like a clueless jerk, and there is going to be massive backlash.

he sees himself as a prominent member of the LGBT movement, and while some people may not see it as appropriate for him to speak for them I'm sure there are others who support his doing so

Isn't this simply a twisted version of ad-hom?

Simply because he's part of the majority doesn't mean he can't have an opinion on this topic (educated or otherwise). It may be ill formed, but to judge it on anything other than its merits is pretty feeble.


I never thought I'd see the day that I'd be defending ComeAtMeBro.....

I've said this numerous times, but it still bears repeating.

Gays aren't entitled to use anti-lesbian, biphobic, or transphobic slurs without consequence.
Lesbians aren't entitled to use anti-gay, biphobic, or transphobic slurs without consequence.
Bisexuals aren't entitled to use anti-gay, anti-lesbian, or transphobic slurs without consequence.
Trans people aren't entitled to use homophobic, or biphobic slurs without consequence.

RuPaul is a cisgender gay man. He is not entitled to use anti-lesbian, biphobic, or transphobic slurs without consequence.

It may be one acronym, but it doesn't mean everyone gets along, or doesn't step on each other's toes from time to time.

nobody is entitled to use any words without consequence, what's your point exactly

Because you seem to be implying RuPaul is entitled to use transphobic slurs on the basis he is gay.

i'm saying that attempting to reclaim a 'transphobic' word on the basis of a community he takes part in is not the most unreasonable thing in the world and the fact that those with high-end victim complexes are demanding he stop doesn't necessarily mean what he's doing is wrong

Except he's not a part of that community/minority, and his attitude toward that minority taking offense is not helping his stance. He's not reclaiming anything, he's not furthering our rights, just his career.

I'd agree, hence why I said that context matters. I'm sorry, I don't recognize the concept of a "bad word" or that something is a slur all the time, regardless of context. I don't roll that way, and never will.

There is no "taking it back" as there was nothing taken in the first place, just a bunch of people who place more importance on words than context.

I don't care, and neither should anyone else on how a word is popularly used, the hate will never go away until people can move past the stigma associated with things.


On another note:

I find this highly inaccurate. The main reason you don't hear people say the word N word to black people or around them, when they aren't in that racial group, is because of the hate behind it. The same thing can be applied to the F word, it is there to have a negative connotation. Why should people just let it continue if its full of hate? It should be treated just like the N word, it is something spewed out on a constant basis by a lot of people and they normally don't like gay people to begin with.

When you are on the receiving side of that word it can be very degrading because of the weight it carries. You can tell pplz to get thick skin but that doesn't change how that word is so oppressive.

The word isn't oppressive, people and the context are. Words have no weight, they are meaningless without context and being applied to communicate.

dood you make no sense XD. The word is now oppressive BECAUSE of people and the history behind it. It don't matter if you say it jokingly, it is still meant in a derogatory fashion. You statement just doesn't make sense.

People are aware of those words carrying negative connotation. It's probably a good idea to frown upon media sources using them, but if someone's calling me a f*g, it's either my close friends poking fun, or someone who legitimately has a problem with homosexuality. If I take the word away from them I don't take away whatever problem they have, and if I get angry and try to fight them on it, well that's probably what they wanted. Neither the whole LGBT nor me as an individual have the power to take away the deep seeded hate some people have, and I think that's the point trying to be made with "having thick skin".

It isn't, and the fact that you cannot see past it doesn't surprise me that it doesn't make sense to you.

Words alone aren't oppressive, by their very nature, they cannot be.

'Context' keeps being thrown around like it's a separate entity but the language is part of the context.

Little advances can go a long way, just look at the N word and how that is now something very bad to say. Media has a big part in it but that doesn't mean the word wont hurt pplz. You can't just tell someone to get "thick skin" when they hear it, it just dont work. I'm sure the people who use the N word back then still have some feelings like that, but over time it change and it was made NOT acceptable to say that.

Going to have to disagree Pleebs, but it's getting late for me anymore, and I'm going to "bed" later.

ok and whats ur point? Its like ur trying to convince me its ok for people to say F*g because its just a word? Obviously we all know in here that is is used primarily as a derogatory term... So this means when its said in most situations it is meant as such, a negative word.

As a matter of practicality, you're right.

As a matter of philosophical waffling, no. The definition of a word isn't concrete, and language in general is a dynamic entity.

One day, the word Morgaglflops could be the the worst derogatory word in the history of mankind, right now that dubious honor belongs to "Creationist".

I don't understand the context of your language....or is it the language of the context? This whole thread has me confused. Not about myself, mind you, but about...context.

If words were meaningless and had no power behind them, people sure do a good job of getting bent out of shape and trying to make the value of their words weigh in more than others. I love forums.

As for the LGBT community feeding on themselves and lashing out at themselves and everyone to make themselves feel better, entitled, *insert whatever you'd like here*, I guess they can pat themselves on the back for trying to be so different yet just the same as the rest of humanity. Hell when I was younger, I was subjected to lose-lose situations. Black, so I had all those wonderful perks going for/against me in one corner by other uhh ethnic groups, but then also had other blacks against me for being too "white" for whatever imagined reasons in their head.

Of course just by saying that there is someone out there waving a giant entitlement I am unique flag going "IT'S NOT THE SAME OUR SITUATION IS DIFFERENT DERP DERP YOU CANT IDENTIFY"

at least it makes for something to pass the time until I go to sleep.

Do you really wanna play the "scar" game darling? HIV positive latino gay man here. Do you see me demanding special treatment and bitching about my hurt feelings- no you don't.

So the minority of a minority dictate the majority for a minority. That is some excellent logic right there.

That's what younger LGBT don't realize. They think by playing the victim card, policing speech and opinion, demanding special nomenclature they are going to achieve social equality. News flash!

It is a separate entity. Don't get your panties in a twist over the words/opinions from people who support you.

I can see where y'all are coming from with the whole "words are words" thing, but it really is a bit more complicated than that.

Language is an absolutely formative part of human cognitive development; it literally shapes the way that we perceive, interact with, and (yes) feel about the world around us. Think about it: how do you understand something? How do you think? Words define all of these experiences--from the day you start making sense of this "da da" character until the day you sit upon your deathbed struggling to comprehend the end of your mortal existence.

Nuances in language and connotation (as can be seen between different cultures, for example) can cause different people to interpret the same basic idea in completely different ways. Learn a foreign language or two (and I mean really learn them, not just the definitions of a few common nouns and verbs) and then go interact with a native speaker--I guarantee you'll be able to see the effect that their language has had on their thoughts and attitudes. If you're lucky, maybe you'll even see how your own language has influenced you!

At any rate, all of this is just to illustrate that words are in our heads and under our skin more than some of us will ever realize. It's not an issue of being thick-skinned or too sensitive; our language is what binds us--willingly or not--to the greater consciousness of our society. Example: when the word "gay" is used as replacement for "shitty" or "*** up" (even if the speaker in question does not personally view gay people as shitty or *** up), it begins to take on these new meanings and connotations. When this usage becomes so commonplace as to be "just something that people say," these meanings begin to pollute the greater consciousness of society. Try to imagine how it might be difficult to grow up in an environment where the words "I am gay" sound like self-debasement. It can be pretty rough, and all because of well-meaning dudebros who can't be assed to say what they mean (protip: we already have pleeeenty of words that mean shitty^^) instead of heavyhandedly appropriating an otherwise neutral word while they grasp around for a fresh expletive. I don't view them as malicious or ill-intentioned; I view them as lazy. But that doesn't mean they aren't still feeding into something harmful.

I am not trans (or black, HELP I AM TRAPPED IN 2006 PLEASE SEND A TIME MACHINE, female, religious, whatever), but this is how I try to relate to someone when they tell me that I'm using/twisting their descriptor to mean something negative. It really isn't that hard. I definitely agree that "political correctness" is something of a distraction, but only because lately it has become the battle cry of boring people who prop themselves up by trying to make others look ignorant. It shouldn't be about that.

The idea behind "political correctness" exists for a reason though: we're all people and we're all flawed in that we aren't automatically privy to our neighbors' perspectives, which makes it really hard to imagine the impact that our language will have on them. Ideally we want to build a mutually positive relationship with those around us, so there are reasons for paying attention to our words. "Political correctness" is kind of like a cheat sheet that lets us skip over these reasons (which we we can't always see from our distant perspective) and proceed straight to the end result of not being a *** to our neighbors. Using a cheat sheet is obviously not so ideal (turns out people really do need to know why a certain way of speaking is harmful) and has led to the bloated monstrosity that is the modern PC movement, but this doesn't invalidate the reason behind its existence in the first place.

Regardless, when it comes to issues like language usage, we should all understand that not everything occurs to everyone right off the bat. It should always be about sharing perspectives and helping people to understand our pain, never about shaming them for not automatically understanding something outside their experience--especially because a majority of people really do mean well. Perspectives are a form of privilege; not everyone shares as many of them as you do.

tl;dr: We build language. Language controls our minds. Words matter. Don't be a ***.

Yes it is. People are looking at us as a bunch of whiny bitchy queens who have nothing better to do than police people's opinions and words.

It's *** absurd.

People will react to you based on the way that you approach them about something. If you run at them flailing your arms and vomiting accusations, then of course they aren't going to take you seriously.

This isn't the only way.

They also aren't going to take you seriously via excessive political correct policing.

Everytime the LGBT has been in the news as of late it involves policing the thoughts and opinions of Americans. Do you realize what type of image that creates for the LGBT community?

That's because those that came before us did the heavy lifting for our "special treatment" ability to be treated like everyone else. Ugh, don't make me use the p-word.

That's the only response I seem to see from communities when it's concerned with language though. That may be media's fault, but outside of those commercials where comedians or some other odd celebrity ends with the punchline of "don't say gay when you mean stupid", you very rarely see the topic brought up civilly.

It's about picking your battles, as a group that is making decent strides in marriage equality, and has other important issues to tackle, I don't think expending large amounts of energy on accidental name calling should be a top priority.

Did I experience the violence on the level of Stonewall, White Riots or Blackcat? No I did not. However, I have experienced my fair share of discrimination and done my own heavy lifting. Regardless I do not play the victim card. I live and let live, I've learned via my experiences to pick your battles, there are bigger fish to fry than language and differing opinions.

I'm sorry but being "treated like everyone else" doesn't include policing the thoughts and speech of Americans, particularly supporters.

"Hey, ***/***/(insert Anye's list)"
"Don't call me that"
"Ok"

SO HARD