This is probably more amusing than it is worth critiquing, but I figure you WR-types are entitled to a laugh. My favourite quote:

"The promotion of [Harvey] Milk [to featured article] is SOAP as it represents a political advocacy for being a gay."

"[Arthur Rimbaud] was primarily a poet, not a gay."

"The gay advocacy should have its borders until it will be more popular than heterosexuality. I am not against gays as such, but against all those who somehow show that the gays are superior to straights."

Somehow, I suspect that no heterosexual could possibly create anything of this caliber:

I've only heard the expression "the gays" in British comedy. Is it considered offensive, or is it a mainstream expression for gays as a political/demographic entity?

It's certainly not mainstream in Canada. I don't know for sure that it's considered offensive, though to me it's always had a bit of a "Those People" ring to it.

He's clearly very, very concerned about the inherent morality of our GA and FA subjects.

FWIW, it is in the context. Gays will call themselves gay in the UK and we certainly talk of the gay community, so the gays does not seem to me to be offensive.

I lived closely around the gay community in The Midlands for a time, and I did find it quite wearing for it to be implied that you were some sort of failure as a human being if you were not gay by some members of the gay community.

Of course, any phrase can potentially be used offensively, and then Wikipedia does have a knack for redefining meanings of common words, so who knows?

In general, using a word like "gay" as a noun, instead of an adjective (e.g. "a gay person") smacks of archaicness or intolerance, at least to my ears - they're no longer a "person," but "a gay." Compare "the blacks," "the Jews," etc.

By the way, this userbox of Brandmeister's made me chuckle:

I've long suspected that the Kinsey scale wraps around mod 6 at the ends.

Are you heterophobic???

The gay thing is out of hand. Now, I don't care what people want to do in the dark of their house (Really) but I don't like it when GAYS shove it in my face, and yell and scream I'm evil, when I excise the my right to say it's wrong as gays excise their right to say its OK and acceptable?

PC (political correctness) is HYPOCRITICAL, and a form of thuggery.

I also hate it when people force me to watch them have sex. Or I would if that ever happened. It happens to you often, I gather?

(Taking the trollbait? You're goddamned right I'm taking the trollbait.)

I agree... in public, people should behave and have respect for others that share public space with diffing ages, belief, etc.. unless you like to watch and have a subscription to the sexboy channel.

Bollocks, let the public spaces be used and abused .

Newsflash - Gays are people, capable of the same human shortcomings as us "breeders".

Let me clarify, used the expression "The Gays" as opposed to simply "gays." Think of The Gambia.

"The gays" sounds very strange to me, and I can't tell whether it's a sincere non-bigot, non-parody expression, or just something Little Britain uses for comic effect. I guess Brandmeister's comment should tell me that it's at least a sincerely-used expression among some bigots?

That has happened to me before also. Once me and my wife were walking on Bourbon in New Orleans near the far end of the street where the gay clubs are, where some kind of festival was apparently taking place. As we walked by one group of men, I heard one of them say in a mocking tone, "Hey, check it out, two straights are here, and one of them is pregnant too, poor thing" (my wife was very pregnant at the time).

I immediately walked over and greeted them in a friendly way and introduced myself and my wife. We talked with them about the gay culture in Japan, which I knew something about because I used to hang around Shinjuku ni-chome, among other reasons. We proceeded on our way a little later on what appeared to be friendly terms.

So, I guess what I'm saying is that if you experience any condescending attitude from anyone in that, or any other social community, that it works to challenge it in a friendly way. Getting back to the subject of this thread, that editor at Village Pump should probably find something more serious in Wikipedia to complain about.

Trollbait perhaps, but not entirely incorrect. . .

This is clearly an inappropriate conversation for a noticeboard, regardless of the orientation of the doofuses involved. Why didn't anyone call them out?

There's a big difference between acceptance of gay people and acceptance of gay culture. I have gay friends and they tell me that they are completely turned off by what is called "gay culture" that has become mainstream.

If gay culture grew from what was a protest movement for civil rights, it has clearly lost its way when it goes from shocking to just deliberately offensive.

From my perspective gay culture appears to celebrate hedonism and nihilism, two bleak avenues that head only one way: downhill to oblivion. My gay friends chose not to go that way.

Recently I had a gay manager. We knew he was gay. He knew he was gay. Somehow my genuine respect for him had nothing to do with sexual orientation. It was simply that he was a decent human being. We had some great common interests, such as great food, which we enjoyed talking about. He was always available for a chat if I had a problem or issue.

Sometimes I wonder if "gay culture" is designed to provoke a backlash.

As you seem to be defining it, it's not "designed to provoke a backlash", it is a backlash. You try to deny people the right to be who they are for long enough, and they're going to start asserting themselves in some pretty aggressive ways. If we ever hit a point where we're truly egalitarian about this stuff, gay pride parades will persist solely as a tradition.

Sometimes I swear that you spend much of your time twisting what other people have said, just to fling it back in their face.

This whole thread is Teh Ghey!

I must say, this is probably the very first time (and, I assume, it will be the very last time) that I've ever seen The Gambia mentioned in the context of LGBT semantics.



Somebody did...and it was also somebody who carries a lot of weight:







Class act, Cla68. And my apologies about having your Bourbon Street stroll ruined by those trolls. Next time you're in the area, let me know and I'll take y'all on a Horsey ride around the Big Easy.

You're correct on that, of course, but I don't really see how I've done so here.

I'm not sure about this. Seems like if somebody wanted to really express intolerance, they'd make it clearer by using a different set of nouns altogether, no?

My impression is that the user in question holds strong prejudices but is also to some extent biting his tongue.

But generally speaking, English speakers use adjectives as nouns all the time (ESL speakers more so but I digress). In my ears at least, to speak of Gays or Lesbians or Straights or Bisexuals or Jews or Blacks or Whites or Hispanics or Asians or Canadians or Italians or whatever seems neutral enough at face value, these after all being the generally accepted words associated therewith.

An interesting discussion along these lines can be found on this CFD wherein the title "American Jews" was preferred over "Jewish Americans". Certainly many people (mostly Americans I think) do hesitate to use "Jew" as a noun—as if it were inherently some kind of slur—the decision to rename the category appears, to varying degrees, self-appellative.

Now obviously I'm not saying there should be a category called "American gays" (granted I'm not entirely sure we need categories intersecting nationality and sexual orientation to begin with) but if that's how people who are both American and gay ever wish to be collectively called I couldn't see arguing against it either, not based on semantic instinct anyway.

Further one may also note that several LGBT organizations (PFLAG, PLAGAL, GLIFAA, COLAGE, etc.) do use "gay(s)" as a noun. It would be laughable to suggest that they are wrong for naming themselves so (any more than the "United Negro College Fund" at least).

To be honest I think the use of a definite article is what's really throwing people off. If somebody says "the gays" a typical (though possibly naïve) response might be to ask "which gays?" rather than to just assume the speaker means "well all of them, of course".

Thank you.

What puzzles me is the use of the term on Little Britain. It seems like satire, but I can't figure out what they're satirizing. Is it really homophobes, or just small town bumpkins? I'd still like to know whether this usage is an actually backwater phenomena in Britain.

I come from a pretty homophobic place, and I've never heard reference to "the gays." Around my parts, they seem to prefer "homosexual," especially in phrases like "homosexual agenda." Even with this un-PC term, noun usage is less common than adjective, "the homosexuals" having a distinctly archaic ring to my ears. I would like to know whether this is different in other English-speaking nations.

I always thought it was funny that HBO kept the title of "Queer as Folk" when they created their own Americanized version of the British TV show -- even though the American version was shot in Toronto. To U.S. ears, "Queer as Folk" is a gibberish expression.

You have to understand that Matt Lucas is gay himself, and the character he is portraying is a completely over the top city gay lifestyle stereotype - living in the imagined confines of a rural community; the character is seeking attention and respect for the decision to abandon conformity by promoting his homosexuality... the humour is that nearly every other member of that community is also homosexual, but living in a tolerant, placid and non-invasive manner. The only person ignorant of the true nature of the community is the Lucas character. As the character is ever more outrageous and outraged by the perceived shortcomings of that provincial society, where in fact he is only kicking against the norm he represents, the funnier it is. The only I cannot explain why it is, but it is.

If there is a satirical point to Little Britain's "The Only Gay in the Village", its that gay people themselves can be as intolerant and condescending as any straight person. Certainly Matt Lucas is himself gay, but doesn't think that inhibits him from satirizing "gay culture".



What he said.

Actually, the reason he says The Gays in Little Britain is that he is affecting a Welsh dialect, and it is part of the way Welsh speak (in part related to the way Cymraeg works).

Brandmeister's user page says he comes from Guam, but his unusual English usage suggests to me that his native language is German. It is a typical mistake for a German speaker to use the English word "borders" in place of "limits," because the German Grenzen has both meanings.

Not from Guam, from GUAM. Which makes sense, as the Russian граница (granitsa) is cognate to the German grenzen and has the same issue.

Ach, so!