Skip to main content

meaning - Is calling a homosexual person “gay” offensive?


My native language is German but I’ve been watching a lot of TV in English. During a conversation about the English language, a question about the term gay came up. Is calling a homosexual person gay offensive?


Meaning, using "gay" - not in a general contents (as asked in other questions) but to describe the sexual orientation when using it in a sentence like:




  1. Talking about someone: He/she is "gay" [...]




  2. Talking to someone: I didn't know that you're "gay" [...]





Answer



The adjective gay is the most common term, at least in the U.S., and is not offensive on its own. (It can be used offensively, of course, by using it as an insult, or even as a generic pejorative — "my English class is so gay!" — but then the offensiveness is in the implication that gayness is an insult, rather than in the choice of gay as the word for gayness. It can also be used offensively in more subtle ways, such as consistently describing someone as "my gay friend", but again, that's not tied to the specific word gay at all.)


The noun "gay", however, is generally used only in the plural (e.g., "allowing gays to serve in the military"); use in the singular is very rare, and it's hard to guess whether someone would take ?"he's a gay" to be offensive. (The same is true of many other adjectives, such as "white" and "black"; "American blacks" is fine, ?"she's a black" is not.)


Incidentally, although homosexual is a more formal term, it may actually be more likely to be offensive; for example, if you compare the Google-search results for "gay rights groups" to those for "homosexual rights groups", you'll see that the latter has a much higher proportion of disparaging uses from the right wing (though this is far from categorical). I think this may have something to do with the history of homosexual as a clinical term for a putative mental illness.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.