Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by missygeorgia)
    You're not answering my question. Is the statement 'black people are sub-human and have less worth than white people' offensive, if the person saying it meant to cause no offense?
    Yes, but it is the 'sub-human' part rather than the 'black' part which makes it offensive.

    Likewise 'gay people are sub-human' is offensive but that does not make the term gay universally offensive. Saying 'oh no thats gay' is still not offensive, despite the fact gay can be used in an offensive way.

    It's not a hard concept.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Probably but people say it anyway.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aeonflux)
    Yes, but it is the 'sub-human' part rather than the 'black' part which makes it offensive.

    Likewise 'gay people are sub-human' is offensive but that does not make the term gay universally offensive. Saying 'oh no thats gay' is still not offensive, despite the fact gay can be used in an offensive way.

    It's not a hard concept.
    You're making it a pretty hard concept to understand. Is intention the primary thing making something offensive or not? Because you argued that it was, and now it seems you're saying otherwise. If so, 'black people are sub-human' is not necessarily offensive. If intention is not primary, then it is offensive.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    It depends on the intention. "That's so gay" is an annoying thing to hear and its kind of sad that it has come to be a synonym of "dumb" but i'm guilty of sayng it sometimes it too. Its better than "******" or "you're so gay"
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Anyone who says it is wrong is a namby pamby liberal who would let rapists live in women's changing rooms. Frankly, if anyone is offended by such a comment they need to develop a thicker skin. To be offended by something as pathetic is that is just pathetic bordering hilariously pathetic.

    I welcome any negative reputation I get for this comment. I know liberals like to give negative reputation to me, so knock yourself out...
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by missygeorgia)
    You're making it a pretty hard concept to understand. Is intention the primary thing making something offensive or not? Because you argued that it was, and now it seems you're saying otherwise. If so, 'black people are sub-human' is not necessarily offensive. If intention is not primary, then it is offensive.
    I'm saying intention and context are what makes it offensive or not, and have said that for at least the last 2 posts I've made. I'm not saying intention is primary, but neither am I saying context is primary, I'm simply saying those are the things that determine whether something is offensive or not. I won't repeat myself again, so if you're not going to add anything new don't expect another response from me.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Well...it just makes you sound ignorant and stupid. I don't think people realise how hard it is to hear if you're LGB if everyone uses it as a negative slang word. I mean we don't all go 'Omg guys that is soooooooooo black' do we?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    When i see something silly or stupid i usually say:

    "that's gay..."

    but i try and replace the word gay with something else because if a homosexual starts giving me jip for it then i'm gonna feel obliged to knock them out...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by missygeorgia)
    Who says it's become divorced from it's previous meaning? Because to the majority of people, it hasn't. I might as well go around calling everyone n****** or pakis or jews or blacks if they annoy me, and then say 'oh but it's not offensive because it's become divorced from it's previous meaning'. The fact that a hell of a lot of people find it offensive mean it hasn't become divorced from its previous meaning, that it is offensive and that people shouldn't use it. Just because you don't find it offensive that doesn't mean it's ok to use.

    I'm afraid you're wrong on this one. There is a fundamental difference between saying "that's gay" and saying "you're a ******* gay". The second is clearly a homophobic slur - and is comparable to "paki" or whatever.

    The first usage has nothing to do with homosexuality whatsoever. If I say "this music is well gay" I am not expressing a belief that the music is in any way related to homosexuality or homosexual culture.

    In 2010, it's now become purely coincidental that the word also has a different meaning that refers to homosexuality. Many, many words have several meanings, and normally people are smart enough to understand the context.

    If I say "this music is ********", would you conclude that I mean "this music is related to testicles", and therefore denounce me as a disgraceful testiclephobe? (maybe you would, I don't know). Because that's a fairer comparison. One word, two entirely separate meanings.

    95% people don't find the first usage offensive. If they do, its because they have a limited understanding of semiotics, but then again there are a few idiots who find pretty much anything offensive.

    It's far, far less offensive than the word "chav".
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teaddict)
    Anyone who says it is wrong is a namby pamby liberal who would let rapists live in women's changing rooms. Frankly, if anyone is offended by such a comment they need to develop a thicker skin. To be offended by something as pathetic is that is just pathetic bordering hilariously pathetic.
    LMFAO are you for real?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aeonflux)
    I'm saying intention and context are what makes it offensive or not, and have said that for at least the last 2 posts I've made. I'm not saying intention is primary, but neither am I saying context is primary, I'm simply saying those are the things that determine whether something is offensive or not. I won't repeat myself again, so if you're not going to add anything new don't expect another response from me.
    If that's what you've been trying to argue it's certainly passed me by. That's fine, but very subjective. Because as far as context goes, the reason I find the pejorative use of the word gay offensive is context. The fact that the use of the word directly stemmed from the attitude that homosexuality=bad is the most important context there is regarding the use of this word, but it seems that this is the context that everyone who uses 'gay' in this way wants to ignore. If homophobia wasn't rife, if gay didn't mean homosexual and if this use of the word gay hadn't stemmed from these things then no, it wouldn't be offensive. But that is the context, and that is why it is offensive.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cardine92)
    LMFAO are you for real?
    Actually half of it was sarcasm...
    The rapist in changing rooms was sarcasm to be fair, but the main point stands.

    1/ Who cares?
    2/ If anyone is offended by it, they are pathetic.

    It is like someone saying "Oh stop being so ginger" or "stop being so male"... its just pathetic. Oh no the offensive comments are burning my soul... blah blah blah...
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CherryCherryBoomBoom)
    I was just wondering this when I was browsing a few videos on youtube, and I wanted to see what TSR's opinions are. I admit I have said it a few times myself, just by picking it up from other people. I'm not too sure whether it's really offensive, since the word "gay" originally had a different meaning anyway (happy), but then going from describing homosexual people to saying something is lame or stupid, might be offensive. I really don't know. Do gay people (or even straight people) really find it offensive? Or is it just nothing? Discuss.

    Just a couple of people's opinions, though they have low ratings so I guess a lot of YouTube users disagree with them:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVicCD8FmMs
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tdgpg...eature=related
    when you say that's so gay...do u realize what you say? knock it off.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by missygeorgia)
    If that's what you've been trying to argue it's certainly passed me by. That's fine, but very subjective. Because as far as context goes, the reason I find the pejorative use of the word gay offensive is context. The fact that the use of the word directly stemmed from the attitude that homosexuality=bad is the most important context there is regarding the use of this word, but it seems that this is the context that everyone who uses 'gay' in this way wants to ignore. If homophobia wasn't rife, if gay didn't mean homosexual and if this use of the word gay hadn't stemmed from these things then no, it wouldn't be offensive. But that is the context, and that is why it is offensive.
    No. When I use the word gay in a sentence like 'my football team lost, thats gay' the only context I attach to it is the context of that sentence. The context I'm using it in gay simply means 'bad'. You could interpret it to mean 'homosexual' if you'd like, or 'happy' for that matter, but then you are taking the word out of the context it is used in (after all 'my football team lost, thats homosexual' doesn't make any sense). As far as I'm concerned all it means is 'bad'. If you want to interpret it in a homophobic way you're free to do so. However, thats your problem, not mine, and I'll continue to use the word in a non-homophobic way. The fact is you know full well that 'my football team lost, thats gay' has nothing to do with homosexuals, you are simply taking offense for the sake of it.

    To be honest I place the right to freedom of speech above the right to not be offended, and if people don't like that, I couldn't really care less.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by py0alb)
    I'm afraid you're wrong on this one. There is a fundamental difference between saying "that's gay" and saying "you're a ******* gay". The second is clearly a homophobic slur - and is comparable to "paki" or whatever.

    The first usage has nothing to do with homosexuality whatsoever. If I say "this music is well gay" I am not expressing a belief that the music is in any way related to homosexuality or homosexual culture.

    In 2010, it's now become purely coincidental that the word also has a different meaning that refers to homosexuality. Many, many words have several meanings, and normally people are smart enough to understand the context.

    If I say "this music is ********", would you conclude that I mean "this music is related to testicles", and therefore denounce me as a disgraceful testiclephobe? (maybe you would, I don't know). Because that's a fairer comparison. One word, two entirely separate meanings.

    95% people don't find the first usage offensive. If they do, its because they have a limited understanding of semiotics, but then again there are a few idiots who find pretty much anything offensive.

    It's far, far less offensive than the word "chav".

    It is not purely coincidental that the word gay is used both to describe homosexuals and bad things. Are you crazy? It directly stemmed from the homophobic view that homosexual=bad. People who use the word might not all be homophobic, they may just be ignorant of its blatant homophobic implications.

    The reason we say music might be ******** is because testicles are often found a bit repulsive. Which is fair enough, there isn't much hatred or prejudice going on there. The reason we say something might be crap is because we find crap/faeces horrible and repulsive. Again, fair enough. Same for the reasons we might say 'this tv show is rubbish', 'this tv show is arse'. And this is exactly how 'this tv show is gay' came about- because of the association of gay with something bad/wrong/disgusting. It is ok to associate faeces with something bad. It is not ok to associate gay people with something bad.

    95% people don't find the first usage offensive.
    That's such a wrong assumption. A huge amount of people find it offensive, I would say the majority of people. This thread alone shows that. I'm also guessing you're ignoring the attitudes of anyone over 25.
    Offline

    10
    (Original post by nolongerhearthemusic)
    You really don't think deliberately tormenting someone is wrong?
    It's not nice, nor is it right, but it's not wrong. It's legal and tolerable, even if annoying :unsure: Imo.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    About as wrong as saying 'straight on' :rolleyes:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teaddict)
    Actually half of it was sarcasm...
    The rapist in changing rooms was sarcasm to be fair, but the main point stands.

    1/ Who cares?
    2/ If anyone is offended by it, they are pathetic.

    It is like someone saying "Oh stop being so ginger" or "stop being so male"... its just pathetic. Oh no the offensive comments are burning my soul... blah blah blah...
    Most people can take a joke, fair enough but it's not pathetic to be made to feel like **** when the way you are is used as an insult. Would you like it if you heard someone say "urghhh the train is delayed, that's so ******* white".
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lefty Leo)
    It's not nice, nor is it right, but it's not wrong. It's legal and tolerable, even if annoying :unsure: Imo.

    Something can be legal and still wrong. I don't think anyone's arguing that the pejorative use of the word gay should me made illegal. That doesn't make it ok though, or not wrong.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I just think its word evolution, its meant so many things. Its also meant prostitute. I don't think its offensive and I know many gay people who say it and they're not offended when I say it.

    Its only offensive to call something/someone gay if its being used as a homophobic insult.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 20, 2010
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.