I posted no. Now don't everyone gang up on me... but I see it as a pop culture word. For instance, when someone says "OH MY GOD" and they use God's name in vain. Most people look past that - it's an expression.

Gay didn't always mean homosexual until quite recently in the world. That's another example of pop culture. The times are changing, and so are the words.

Fag used to be a cigarette or a cigar. Now it is a derogatory term for a homosexual male. But in other countries, the word fag is still popularly used as a term for cigarettes. The Polish side of my family has always referred to cigarettes as fags, and still do to this day.

Then you have the "You're so retarded". The "What's up my nigguh?" and so on... They are just words. If they aren't said in order to put down a gay person, then it doesn't really apply to them.

This doesn't mean someone isn't free to take offense to it. Everyone feels differently. I just think people need to learn to somewhat understand that words are just words, and look past it. I have said this term every now and then when something really crazy happens. Even most of my homosexual friends say this. I try not to say it just because I'm watching the way I speak, but I don't think it's a huge deal. less

I totally agree that people are too sensitive, like they can't find anything better to do with their lives than be offended by people. It's pretty dumb (geez I hope that doesn't offend mute people) and moronic (I hope that doesn't offend anyone with an IQ between 51 and 70). less

What the....? I'm not saying the people who are offended are dumb. I'm saying BEING offended by something so innocuous is dumb. And I was just using 'dumb' and 'moronic' as more examples of words that people COULD take offensively but don't.

Also, I don't use the phrase around people that I know aren't okay with it, and if I know they think being gay is unnatural or godless or whatever, I make sure to add a, "And not in the hot, Anderson Cooper kind of way," to make them feel uncomfortable.

Edit: Actually, I stopped saying, "That's so gay," at all. I now say, "That's SOOO Takeiiiiiiii." less

Okay, but do you see that calling someone "dumb" and saying that something they feel is "dumb" are pretty damn close to the same thing? Many people don't think that using a word that has come to mean homosexual as an insult is innocuous. Actually, I'd say it's insidious, because so many people don't seem to think about why it would be offensive.

In fact, the question of whether or not it's offensive to say "that's so gay" is a somewhat subjective one. It would be more objective to say that using a phrase that turns someone's sexual identity into an insult is prepetuating stereotypes and discrimination.

Also, virtual high five for "That's so Takei." I heart Takei. less

"Okay, but do you see that calling someone "dumb" and saying that something they feel is "dumb" are pretty damn close to the same thing?"

False. I'm not dumb but I have dumb feelings and say dumb things quite frequently.

And I call it innocuous simply because most people say it without thinking about what they're saying, and mean nothing by it, which could be said of many things that people say and believe.

Yes, there are people who say it insidiously, but I am not one of these people, and I don't associate with people who would use it insidiously.

SO, if someone were to be offended by someone who said something innocuously (as previously described), they would be better off spending their time in more worthwhile endeavors. And if someone were to be offended by someone who said something insidiously, they could simply stop associating with that person and invest in more worthwhile endeavors, as well. less

First, people may say "dumb" things, such as "that's so gay," but neither you nor anyone else has "dumb" feelings. Emotions are chemical responses in your brain, over which you have little to no control. You may be able to control how you act when you feel an emotion, but it is never "dumb" to feel what you feel. Also, your feelings are a part of who you are, your personality, so to insult someone's feelings is to insult that person.

Second, whether a cultural phenomenon--such as a popular slang phrase--is innocuous or insidious is not dependent on who says it or how it's said. "Innocuous" means harmless, while "insidious" means harmful in a subtle way. Things you say can be harmful to others whether you intend them to be or not. When the things you say perpetuate harmful stereotypes, but not in a way that's immediately obvious to everyone, then they are indeed insidious.

As others have pointed out, saying "that's so gay" is analogous to using the phrase "that's so black" to mean that something is annoying, disappointing, or otherwise undesirable. Would you find that to be offensive and racist, or would you think that as long as the person didn't intend to insult African-American people, then there's nothing wrong with it? less

My explaining how thoughts can be "dumb" would go WAY off topic, so I shan't even go there.

And I hold to saying that it IS innocuous in a certain context (amongst my pro-equality friends who use it without thinking because it is a popular slang phrase), and I don't flat out tell them they shouldn't say it because it would make things weird and them less receptive. Instead, I'll use the phrase in light of some positive circumstance to bring attention to what is actually being said (Hey! I found out that two of my cousins are atheists! That's SOOOO Takeiiiii). In this manner, I've caused other people to start using it positively without calling them out on it.

As for people who use it AND MEAN IT negatively (like my little cousin's idiot boyfriend)....trying to reason with them only causes them to be more adamant about being assholes, so there's really not much hope. Reason really doesn't work against bigotry, because there's no reasonable foundation for it.

I just got unfriended on FB by the pastor who baptized me at eleven days, confirmed me at twelve years, and officiated my wedding at twenty-one, not because I'm now an atheist, but because I support equality. Maybe "that's so gay" (or "that's so black")is not polite to say and should be corrected in all cases, but I can attest that the people using phrases like "that's so gay" without thinking about it are not a real problem.

Those who think poorly of gay people aren't going to have their minds changed because a colloquialism stopped being uttered. If they are swayed at all, it will be due to meeting actual gay people and realizing there's nothing wrong with them, or perhaps via scientific reasoning to prove that homosexuality IS completely natural (I tried this with the previously-mentioned pastor --- it failed T^T). less

I'll just stick with the essentials here: whether or not it's helpful to criticize or "call out" someone who uses this phrase is not the question here. Whether anyone's mind will be changed in favor of gay equality if this phrase goes out of popular usage is not the question, either. Nor is whether your "pro-equality&quo t; friends are justified in thoughtlessly using it amongst themselves (although I have to wonder how pro-equality they truly are, if your discussing the negative implications of the phrase, and how it can be harmful, would make them "less receptive").

The question is simply whether or not it is an offensive phrase, in general. Whether it causes any social harm to a group of people who are regularly and systematically discriminated against. If everyone suddenly stopped saying "that's so gay" tomorrow, would that discrimination instantly disappear? Of course not. But each individual who sees the harmfulness/ignorance of using the phrase, and stops using it, takes a step toward perpetuating acceptance and equality, instead of perpetuating harmful stereotypes that encourage unequal treatment.

Ps. Thank you for engaging in a reasoned discussion on this! I'm enjoying the intellectual challenge. less

My explaining how thoughts can be "dumb" would go WAY off topic, so I shan't even go there.

And I hold to saying that it IS innocuous in a certain context (amongst my pro-equality friends who use it without thinking because it is a popular slang phrase), and I don't flat out tell them they shouldn't say it because it would make things weird and them less receptive. Instead, I'll use the phrase in light of some positive circumstance to bring attention to what is actually being said (Hey! I found out that two of my cousins are atheists! That's SOOOO Takeiiiii). In this manner, I've caused other people to start using it positively without calling them out on it.

As for people who use it AND MEAN IT negatively (like my little cousin's idiot boyfriend)....trying to reason with them only causes them to be more adamant about being assholes, so there's really not much hope. Reason really doesn't work against bigotry, because there's no reasonable foundation for it.

I just got unfriended on FB by the pastor who baptized me at eleven days, confirmed me at twelve years, and officiated my wedding at twenty-one, not because I'm now an atheist, but because I support equality. Maybe "that's so gay" (or "that's so black")is not polite to say and should be corrected in all cases, but I can attest that the people using phrases like "that's so gay" without thinking about it are not a real problem.

Those who think poorly of gay people aren't going to have their minds changed because a colloquialism stopped being uttered. If they are swayed at all, it will be due to meeting actual gay people and realizing there's nothing wrong with them, or perhaps via scientific reasoning to prove that homosexuality IS completely natural (I tried this with the previously-mentioned pastor --- it failed T^T). less

"If they are swayed at all, it will be due to meeting actual gay people and realizing there's nothing wrong with them, or perhaps via scientific reasoning to prove that homosexuality IS completely natural (I tried this with the previously-mentioned pastor --- it failed T^T)."

Sorry, I should have included the following in my previous response: This is an excellent point. Those who already have a bias against gay equality DO sometimes change their minds as a result of meeting and getting to know gay people on an individual basis. My mom is a good example, actually. The first time she met a girlfriend of mine was several years ago, when my then-girlfriend, her mother, her three daughters, and I drove down to visit my family. Then-girlfriend's mother shared with me, when we were alone for a few minutes, that MY mom had told HER that she hadn't really wanted to meet my girlfriend, and had been determined not to like her, but that once Mom met her she just couldn't help but like her. I'm not with that woman anymore, but my (Mormon) mom is much more accepting of me and my current partner because of that experience.

As far as scientific reasoning goes, I don't know that it'll work for anyone who bases their discrimination on religious reasoning. less

"My mom is a good example...."

That's a lovely story, something I wish I could witness much more often (or at all).

That scientific reasoning could change the minds of those around me is probably a naive hope....my most recent attempt did reveal to me that my pastor was hiding his prejudice behind "nature and natural reason" (I refuted his claims quite effectively)' when his prejudice actually resides solely in his religion (which shouldn't have an impact on laws).

Theoretically, I SHOULD be able to change minds with science. Science is what brought me to reason, and it probably would've happened earlier if ANYONE had, say, informed me of the beauty of evolutionary theory, instead of shielding me from it and shoving creationism into my brain. In any case, no harm in TRYING to educate people, I suppose. less

Absolutely, no harm at all! Especially if you can manage to do it without mocking their belief system--that'll usually shut them down right away. If nothing else, you might help people like your pastor to see the real reasons behind their beliefs. I'm guessing you explained to him that there has been homosexual behavior documented in many, many animal species, and that the bonobo apes are known for it? less

Actually, I tried to give a different explanation (one that I thought he might actually think about - I was wrong).

He said that homosexuality opposed "nature and natural reason," and he's a creationist (and hence separates humans from other animals with a thick black line). I figured pointing out that from an evolutionary point homosexuality CLEARLY doesn't represent a problem to our species or thousands of others where reproduction and survival is concerned would be lost on him. Actually, I can just copy and paste part of our discussion:

----------

Him:.....As to homosexuality ... one need not be religious at all to oppose it. Nature and natural reason itself speaks against it, but that is another discussion....

Me:Along the "nature and natural reason" vein, natural reason "speaks against" other human conditions such as sickle cell disease (the gene of which nature has favored in people of African heritage for reasons related to malarial infection), but who's protesting the idea of a heterosexual marriage between people with these conditions? My point is, sickle cell disease is "bad," from a human perspective, but being a carrier of this gene also serves a positive natural purpose that is not obvious enough to be detected without the benefit of science.

....And so, data strongly suggests that homosexuality (in males, at least) coincides with a sort of "super femininity" in female siblings that renders them more likely to bear children.

--------------------

He stopped replying to me after that. less