Bigotry is common. When people use these words it may just be a matter of them telling you who they are. In some ways it's good that they've let you know.
When aimed at someone as purposeful insult and contempt it is another issue in my opinion. I never forgave my uncle for the incident I mentioned. In that case it was not so much what he…
Bigotry is common. When people use these words it may just be a matter of them telling you who they are. In some ways it's good that they've let you know.
When aimed at someone as purposeful insult and contempt it is another issue in my opinion. I never forgave my uncle for the incident I mentioned. In that case it was not so much what he said, but how he said it.
The magic of magic words is not just the word, but how it is used.
You mention the Q word. As a child I learned the word as meaning, out of the ordinary, peculiar or strange. I don't know when its dominant use became a slur aimed at homosexuals. Something new during my lifetime or something I was just unaware of in a time of innocence. One of a number of words ruined by how it became used.
"Was the N word (origin) ever benign like that?" Yes, the borrowed word 'niger' has ancient origins meaning 'dark' or 'night' and continues to have benign or official use today. It is a major river and even a country in Africa. It is recognized internationally as a color, even appearing on children's crayons. This legitimate word appears with a single g (not gg). My apologies if you are asking only about the etymology of the far more recent "gg" variety.
In my recollection the Q as noun has always been a slur; in Commonwealth English it was often no more than (as an adjective) meaning something like "odd." Growing up, "queer" was easily one of the two or three most vile slurs there was.
Then at some point it became a badge of identification, about the time when being gay ceased to be remarkable or noteworthy, and those radical gays who saw their specialness slipping away were obviously seeking a way to go back to being offensive.
There has always been a strong imperative to tell heterosexuals how much we hated them (except I didn't) and to offend them as much as possible, which is what pride parades were always about.
Some people tell me that for not accepting "queer" I am demonstrating "internalized homophobia," but then that's the same thing they told me for not accepting pantomimed sex on pride parade floats.
I was thinking in terms of the use of the word in "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland" where it had, to the best of my understanding, no sexual connotations, or even in the song "Send in the Clowns".
I had not considered generalized hate, but I guess that would explain the parades essentially giving heterosexuals the finger which is clearly not about seeking acceptance.
What is the ratio of politicized (in a caustic way) vs. non-political homosexuals (just living your life as you see fit)?
Perhaps it is too difficult for it to not be an identity in the face of open hostility. Now making me wonder if it applies to all of the identities in today's politicize everything world where demonization and insult are so common.
I pretty much exited the gay community in 1996 and ceased any activism at the same time. I had my post-breakup fling with gay bars in 1994-5 and after I abruptly got tired of that and left for the last time I eventually stopped caring. For gay activists there was no uglier word than assimilation and the cause that mattered most to me, same-sex marriage, was openly scorned as a "str8" institution while promiscuity was our birthright.
It ain't me, babe.
I have no idea what it's like now. I have the impression that the specialness has gone out of the enclave culture. But the "trans" BS has taken over; gay magazines and sites are now all about "trans." I have the impression that gay culture is a lot more mainstreamed now but I have been away from it for a long time and now geographically remote from it.
Personally, I don't "identify" with being gay, while a lot of activist gays identify with nothing else. If you read their profiles on, say, Medium they are just recitations of their "queer" credentials, with no mention of hobbies or interests. I can't imagine anyone other than Trump supporters I want less to do with.
That's one of the problems with identity politics. Instead of being in a subset of the whole bringing peace and harmony to all, it results in hate, discontent and turmoil. Another is that they are essentially NPCs marching in lockstep with tribal dictates.
Bigotry is common. When people use these words it may just be a matter of them telling you who they are. In some ways it's good that they've let you know.
When aimed at someone as purposeful insult and contempt it is another issue in my opinion. I never forgave my uncle for the incident I mentioned. In that case it was not so much what he said, but how he said it.
The magic of magic words is not just the word, but how it is used.
You mention the Q word. As a child I learned the word as meaning, out of the ordinary, peculiar or strange. I don't know when its dominant use became a slur aimed at homosexuals. Something new during my lifetime or something I was just unaware of in a time of innocence. One of a number of words ruined by how it became used.
Was the N word (origin) ever benign like that?
"Was the N word (origin) ever benign like that?" Yes, the borrowed word 'niger' has ancient origins meaning 'dark' or 'night' and continues to have benign or official use today. It is a major river and even a country in Africa. It is recognized internationally as a color, even appearing on children's crayons. This legitimate word appears with a single g (not gg). My apologies if you are asking only about the etymology of the far more recent "gg" variety.
In my recollection the Q as noun has always been a slur; in Commonwealth English it was often no more than (as an adjective) meaning something like "odd." Growing up, "queer" was easily one of the two or three most vile slurs there was.
Then at some point it became a badge of identification, about the time when being gay ceased to be remarkable or noteworthy, and those radical gays who saw their specialness slipping away were obviously seeking a way to go back to being offensive.
There has always been a strong imperative to tell heterosexuals how much we hated them (except I didn't) and to offend them as much as possible, which is what pride parades were always about.
Some people tell me that for not accepting "queer" I am demonstrating "internalized homophobia," but then that's the same thing they told me for not accepting pantomimed sex on pride parade floats.
I was thinking in terms of the use of the word in "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland" where it had, to the best of my understanding, no sexual connotations, or even in the song "Send in the Clowns".
I had not considered generalized hate, but I guess that would explain the parades essentially giving heterosexuals the finger which is clearly not about seeking acceptance.
What is the ratio of politicized (in a caustic way) vs. non-political homosexuals (just living your life as you see fit)?
Perhaps it is too difficult for it to not be an identity in the face of open hostility. Now making me wonder if it applies to all of the identities in today's politicize everything world where demonization and insult are so common.
I pretty much exited the gay community in 1996 and ceased any activism at the same time. I had my post-breakup fling with gay bars in 1994-5 and after I abruptly got tired of that and left for the last time I eventually stopped caring. For gay activists there was no uglier word than assimilation and the cause that mattered most to me, same-sex marriage, was openly scorned as a "str8" institution while promiscuity was our birthright.
It ain't me, babe.
I have no idea what it's like now. I have the impression that the specialness has gone out of the enclave culture. But the "trans" BS has taken over; gay magazines and sites are now all about "trans." I have the impression that gay culture is a lot more mainstreamed now but I have been away from it for a long time and now geographically remote from it.
Personally, I don't "identify" with being gay, while a lot of activist gays identify with nothing else. If you read their profiles on, say, Medium they are just recitations of their "queer" credentials, with no mention of hobbies or interests. I can't imagine anyone other than Trump supporters I want less to do with.
That's one of the problems with identity politics. Instead of being in a subset of the whole bringing peace and harmony to all, it results in hate, discontent and turmoil. Another is that they are essentially NPCs marching in lockstep with tribal dictates.