thats sooo gay MERGED

[prism]

Does it irritate you when some ppl. use the term 'gay' as an insult? For example, "like, oh my god, that is soooo gay." PPl. who say those things really piss me off like there's no tomorrow. Yet, a lot of ppl. say it often & they don't even know (& probably don't even care) that a gay or lesbian person could be right near them. How do you ppl. feel about this? Would you be insulted? Should you (or did you) say something to someone who used 'gay' as an insult?

[Sunburst]

Doesn't that piss you the hell off?!? I hear that ALLL DAY at school! Sometimes I get this really serious mean look on my face (I'm usually really smiley and friendly and sweet), and say really sternly "DON'T use the word 'gay' to describe something you DON'T like." Usually it shuts them up, at least for a little one ;)

[PhotoGra1]

This pisses me off to no end. See posts 17 thru 19 HERE! (http://hipforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=314920&postcount=20)

[PhotoGra1]

Let me try that again. See post 17 thru 20 on THIS THREAD. (http://hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10698)

[prism]

Yeah, ppl. use the word gay to describe all sorts of things (like medicine?!) which makes no sense at all. And another thing: using the word 'retarded.' That would offend me b/c my uncle had a severe learning disabilty. And ppl. spurt these words out all the time without any consideration, especially young ppl. b/c some of them just don't know that they could be insulting someone else. btw, I'm not trying to bash on young ppl. here; but a lot of homophobic jerks at my former high school said these types of things all the time.

[PhotoGra1]

Exactly, imagine if I were to say "That cereal is nigger." I would NEVER, NEVER say anything like that, but it is the exact same thing.

[when 2 roads meet]

I gotta say you're right there. But a lot of people who say that something is "gay" are not in any respect referring to actual gay people or trying in any way to insult them. And it really does suck that phrases like "that's retarded" or "that's so gay" are so coomon place now. But just try to remeber that most people (sorry that is a generalization, I mean most people I know, or am friends with, but anyway alot of people) don't mean to be so rude they've just never been confronted about how the slang they use can actually hurt people.

[In The Moment]

I have people that do that around me (out of habit, unfortunately) and I'll look right into their eyes....and say...it certainly is quite STRAIGHT..emphasizing that word...


That usually embarasses them to at least look at their language.

[SelfControl]

Apparenty it's being added to the OED with that meaning. Weird, no?

[The World of Dan]

Does it irritate you when some ppl. use the term 'gay' as an insult?Hell yeah, I hate it, I get all worked up over it (and this was before I even knew I was bisexual).

I had a HUGE rant about it in my blog a couple of months ago, if you're interested, it has all my thoughts on the subject:

http://theworldofdan.co.uk/blogger/2004/04/correct-usage-for-word-gay.html

[The World of Dan]

Apparenty it's being added to the OED with that meaning. Weird, no?That's a real shame, but I can understand why. I hope it's listed as a slang term, and not one that's 'acceptable'...

[LogsOnSticks]

TO be honest, I really don't find it offensive...I find it quite rude and negligent, but I have a theory with situations like these- Usually you won't truly respect it unless you've experienced it.
If you've got a deaf relative, chances are that you probably won't use the term in any sarcastic form, such as, "Are you DEAF???"
Here's a little story-
My brother, his friend, and myself were having a conversation on many different topics, and at one point, my brother made a sarcastic remark about seizures....You know, something like, "Yeah, like you're on the floor having many seizures..." When he said that comment, his friend immediately replied saying, "That's not funny, because ever since my grandma had her tumor, she's been getting seizures...." Now, his reaction to the comment is very understanding, but knowing that he's not innocent himself in other areas, I replied saying, "Well, would you have said that before your grandmother was sick?" He didn't respond, and kinda shook it off.

The same thing goes when people use the term "gay" or "faggot" or any other lifestyle remarks that are used in its inappropriate terms, whether its directed as an offensive comment or to describe something...But I'm sure they'll change their tune as well if they've come to experience the gay lifestyle, gradually learning to respect it in its appropriate term.

But here's a question I've got-
How do you feel when gay people use the term faggot or gay themselves to imply something? Surely, I've witnessed this...Even I have used the terms inappropriately like once in a blue moon...

[The World of Dan]

LogsOnSticks, I understand what you mean, and where you're coming from, and fully agree with you, but I believe that the word in case (gay) is a bit diffrent to the examples you have used.

By talking about something being like having a seizure, it's using it as a discriptive word. In the same way as you might describe a colour as being 'as red as the sun at sunset', or something like that. Sure, it's disrespectful to people who suffer from seizures, and I'm not saying that it's right.. but at least it's more accurate that people who use the word gay as an insult.

"Oh that movie was gay" - oh right, so the movie started fucking some guy up the ass did it?

It's not even in the same general area, it's a totally unfounded, assoctation, and (as has been suggested before), it doing nothing but fueling, even if the person who used the word didn't mean to.

I used to go around using the word 'retarded' a lot, I don't anymore, for the same reason.

[prism]

Actually, that did happen once... my friend who is gay said 'that is so gay.' And he knows I'm bi (or as I call it "half lesbian") so I was offended when he said that. So I asked him why he said that (being that he's gay). Apparently, it doesn't bother him. And then I kinda had a quizzicle expression for the rest of the evening... meh..

[LogsOnSticks]

lol I know, the seizure situation isn't the best example, but it still proves what I believe.
Sometimes people won't understand how we feel unless we express ourselves. I'm not saying that a therapy session should occur, but if people are willing to listen to our feelings, they'll embrace it. The same goes for the inappropriate use of the "gay" term...
Life is a matter of learning from eachother...We're all ignorant in many different ways...I'm sure that everyone here, including myself, could react to a situation or a term more respectfully...In this case, its anger over people using "gay" innapropriately...Thats why its our job to teach those people to respect it in its appropriate form...Humans aren't always independent, we need to be dependent upon eachother sometimes, and you need to realize that.
Again, usually its a matter of experience before we respect it...And through that, its takes learning and understanding...

[SelfControl]

Reclamation, innit? I say it all the time, just because I find it funny. I prefer faggy to gay though. The fact is, most people who say it aren't actually homophobic, it's just that they're used to it. Homophobia isn't the same as not wanting to be gay - who does, really? - but I find most people are fairly tolerant, but still use the word in that context because they're used to it. Most of them apologise to me if they do, I just tell them that I don't mind and they're generally OK. You can't demand that people change, but you can at least appreciate it when they try, even if they get it wrong.

[The World of Dan]

One of my best mates is asian. His family is from india (Sikh). He and I slag each other off all the time (as all good friends do ;)), and within this context, there is almost no limit to what we can say and slag off, and that includes things like each others culture and religion, eating habbits, whatever... but that's only because we're good mates, and know what the boundries are. That does not mean I'm going to goto other Sikhs and say the same things.. that would be disrespectful.

It's the same with the gay issue, if my friend wanted to take the piss out of me because of my bisexuality, thats fine, because I know he's joking, and he's my mate. But it's a totally diffrent story when someone you don't know does it (and even then out of context). It's disrespectful.

It's like the N word, if black people want to use it (to reclaim it, to take its power away), then that's great, it's up to them, but it does not give anyone else the right to use it, because of what the word means, and what it symbolises.

[FreakyJoeMan]

White folks can't use "nigger" an straight folks can't use "gay". An, anyways, language is a constantly changing thing. 'Faggot' used to mean a bundle of kindling, and now it's a derogatory term fer gay people. I've only used the word 'fag' twice, an both times it's been to describe this one person who I absolutely loath. No other word I know can connotate this persons absolute disgustingness of character. He's cruel, he hits on all the chicas, and he thinks he's the coolest while doin all this shit. I don't think of gay folks as 'fags' or anything. It's evolved from sticks to homosexual to someone morally-bankrupt. Same as 'gay', it's evolved from happy to homo to stupid. An, really, 's jus a fucking word, anyway.

So, in conclusion, evil, nasty people are fags, gay people are gay, but not gay-stupid, and monkeys will sooner or later fly out of my butt.

[Patch]

faggot...was actually a bundle of kindling placed under a stake with a person tied to it and set a blaze as a form punishment in the middle ages...guess who those people were...gays, witches, anyone who was viewed as socially flawed in the eyes of the church...joan of arc was burned at the stake...the term just kind of transferred itself to the dude(tte) kabobed to the stake.

as for this whole "Gay" as a negative term...i personally hate it when it is used in a way that is meant to be hurtful..whether concious or unconcious, people who say this usually have a problem with homosexuality...on the otherhand...said in jest it doesn't bother me...i mean...i completely support freedom of speech but there is a responsibility with that right...when people disregard thier responibility to treat people fairly...that's when i get hurt/upset.

[FreakyJoeMan]

Hey, didja know that flippin someone the bird came about when during one of the English-French wars, when English archers were captured, their middle fingers were amputated so that they couldn't shoot anymore, so when French soldiers passed them in their cells, they held up their middle fingers to taunt them. God, I have a wealth of useless information.

[The World of Dan]

Hey, didja know that flippin someone the bird came about when during one of the English-French wars, when English archers were captured, their middle fingers were amputated so that they couldn't shoot anymore, so when French soldiers passed them in their cells, they held up their middle fingers to taunt them. God, I have a wealth of useless information.Actully... it was the british that used the sign, not the french. The 2 filger sulute (sp). We would do it from a distance to show them we still had our fingers, and so were will able to use our bows... It's because our bowmen were so highly trained, that just seeing a bowman with his fingers was enough to scare anyone in the french army. I don't know where you got your verson of the story from, but I can assure that it's wrong. (the british use the sign all the time, the french don't).

[FreakyJoeMan]

Hey, then I'm a repository fer useless an wrong information!

[The World of Dan]

Hey, then I'm a repository fer useless an wrong information!Well, the basis for the gester was there (the lack of middle fingers), just the wrong way around is all.... although that does not excuse the fact that it was truly useless information LOL - but it's cool, I like useless info :D

[hailtothekingbaby]

To go back on topic, I know it's discriminating, and I myself never use the word ( I'm not straight either so it would be really stupid of me if I did ), but I'm not so easily upset by it. I guess I've gotten used to it because especially in the metal scene it's very common to use the word gay in a negative / mocking meaning. It doesn't disturb me and I do not correct people. Maybe I should, though.

I'll see.

[SelfControl]

faggot...was actually a bundle of kindling placed under a stake with a person tied to it and set a blaze as a form punishment in the middle ages...guess who those people were...gays, witches, anyone who was viewed as socially flawed in the eyes of the church...joan of arc was burned at the stake...the term just kind of transferred itself to the dude(tte) kabobed to the stake.

This is exactly why I like the word. It's got a bit of history to it. I mean, what the fuck does gay mean?

[The World of Dan]

what the fuck does gay mean?Happy

[SelfControl]

No shit sherlock. I meant why is it applied to homosexuals? I mean, firewood, that makes perfect sense, but why happy? Most homos I've met are pretty miserable on the inside.

[PhotoGra1]

I have to admit, too, that I use the words queer and faggy at times. It is different from straight people, or people who aren't your mates. For example, my mother was addicted to drugs, hardcore, for several years. I didn't have a problem talking about it, and didn't care if my friends made fun of me for it. When someone who barely knows me says anything about it, though, it is an entirely different story...

Besides, sometimes I just like to be as offensive as possible. The following statement, that I saw on a friends bumper sticker, is a great example. It offends EVERYONE:

"Eat a Queer Fetus For Jesus."

I thought that was great. People would start yelling at her at stoplights, and throw eggs at her car. What a RIOT!

[PhotoGra1]

Most homos I've met are pretty miserable on the inside.
Most people I have met are pretty miserable on the inside...

[Midget]

Yeah, it's stupid when people use the term gay to describe something they don't like. I used to do it, but then I realized how stupid it was...after having a big class discussion about it. The other day some kid said soemthing was gay and I ripped into him. :P Then he was like "Oh, sorry...I mean stupid." :P

[The World of Dan]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/4219409.stm
The word "gay" is commonly used as an insult in British playgrounds. With homophobia on the increase in schools, should teachers be doing more to stop such name-calling?YES.. this was a common insult for me when I was a child, I wasn't even gay...

[crystalstarr]

:) your back!

remember me? maybe sorta?

anyways, i hear the word gay thrown around all the time by kids and teens.

[The World of Dan]

anyways, i hear the word gay thrown around all the time by kids and teens.Just because it happens, doesn't make it right... It left me with some real problems up until about a year ago, when I was able to work it out in my head (kinda).... but even now, when I hear someone using gay as an insult (you know, in that really dumb way, like described in the article "your shoes are gay") it really winds me up...

(and who could forget you :p)

[Fooja]

Yeah it pisses me off as well. I live with it all day all the time.

Usually I just respond "Its not THAT awesome." Just to smite them.

[crystalstarr]

yeah the comment i always heard at my last job (with teens)was "thats so gay" whenever they didnt like something... my response always was "why is it homosexual" hahaha that would embaress them, and then they would TRY to make a effort not to use that word.

[The World of Dan]

"why is it homosexual"That never works for me... if I try and say something like that, they'll come back withh "duh, that's not what I mean, it's not homosexual, its GAY!!" which just pisses me off even more...

[SelfControl]

The language has evolved. It won't devolve back so I just put up with it.

[LOSTBOY7]

It's not just the word gay that kids & teens use to upset others wot
about the words mong spaz fatty

[Taylor]

I always argue with people when they use it. It annoys the shit out of me and I'm glad its finally getting some media attention.

[Disarm]

I call things gay.. I don't mean it offensively but yeah. My sister tried to kill me when I said it in front of her, but people have so much slang that offends me that I can never change. Caring sucks. I'm slowly running out of derogatory words to say :(

[W4W]

I always argue with people when they use it. It annoys the shit out of me and I'm glad its finally getting some media attention.
Petty shit like this deserves NO media attention. There are bigger problems at hand.

[SelfControl]

The media has a lot of space to cover stuff like this without detracting from their coverage of more important news. I wouldn't say it deserves no attention, I say just blame the Daily Mail et al for giving disproportionate amounts of coverage to stuff like this.

But yeah, there's no shortage of space in the media, so I don't see why "bigger problems" should push any issue out of the media altogether.

I don't have a problem with the word in itself, in the right context. But I can understand why institutions have a problem with it, because they get sick of being sued here and there because their employees either have no sense of humour or no sense of appropriacy.

[PhotoGra1]

I can't believe how prevelant it is!!!

How can people think it is okay to call something gay as a derogatory term, publicly?

Would it be accepted if someone said "thats just like a wet-back" or "just like a woman" or "those shoes are so niggerfied"?

NO!

This behavior SHOULD ABSOLUTELY be DISCOURAGED!

It is not acceptable!

There are TONS of non-offensive negative terms, ie sucks, shitty, bad, lousy, worthless, etc, etc, etc. There is no good reason to use speech that can potentially alienate an entire group of people. Why would someone want to do that???

[The World of Dan]

I fully agree with you PhotoGra1, tho I don't get the wet-back reference? (maybe i'm just dense??) :p

[PhotoGra1]

its a racial slur...for Mexicans...one I would NEVER use!!!

[Becknudefck]

some people say gay a lot and dont mean it as an insult to homosexuals...sometimes its just a word for something really stupid that they dont like.

[The World of Dan]

its a racial slur...for Mexicans...one I would NEVER use!!!Must be an american thing... being in the UK it's obvious why I've never heard of it
some people say gay a lot and dont mean it as an insult to homosexuals...sometimes its just a word for something really stupid that they dont like.But that's just what I don't understand... WHY? It's such a pathetic insult that means NOTHING!!!

First gay means happy, then it means homosexual - now it's an insult? it makes no sense to me...

[Becknudefck]

Must be an american thing... being in the UK it's obvious why I've never heard of it
But that's just what I don't understand... WHY? It's such a pathetic insult that means NOTHING!!!

First gay means happy, then it means homosexual - now it's an insult? it makes no sense to me...
but its not even an insult.. people can just be like " oh man thats pretty gay" its just station something is stupid and they dont agree with it...

[The World of Dan]

again, i know that already... but it still does not answer my question.... why? I'm not asking why people use it... i already know that - people are idiots, and are not intellegent enough to think up a worthy insult (yes, it's still an insult, regardless of how someone tries to justify it), so they throw out a generic "gay"...

What I want to know is how 'gay' has ended up in that position, rather than some other word? why gay and not "dog" or "sausage"...

regardless, it's pathetic, and i believe that people who are offended by it (myself included) need to try and turn a blind eye - but at the same time, we need to move to stop it from being used - once it was nigger... now it's gay - nigger was not acceptable, so gay should not be either...

[PhotoGra1]

some people say gay a lot and dont mean it as an insult to homosexuals...sometimes its just a word for something really stupid that they dont like.

Correct, but that does not make it okay...

A schizophrenic a few years ago was killing people and drinking their blood, to replace the blood that the UFO's were sucking out of him. This was not a hate crime, and not a crime of passion, but to that individual, it was survival. If he didn't consume blood, his veins would dry up and he would die. Its still not acceptable behaviour!

It is disrespectful to call something gay as a derrogatory term. If someone chooses to be needlessly and recklessly disrespectful, they have every right to do so, but it is not a defendable action.

How could someone defend it?

I could call you a bitch and not mean it as an insult, but I suspect my intent would be of little interest to you and to others that heard me...

You see what I mean?

It breeds hate! NO EXCUSE!

[PhotoGra1]

I should add, for clarity, that I am NOT calling you a bitch, that was just added for effect...

[GanjaPrince]

I have noticed as many of you have probably, that a common word in my generation to note something boring or stupid or whatever... is to call it "gay"

I hear it in college... this class is gay, this exam is gay, that movie was gay, and so on.

Hear is my theory about this.

Gay was originally a word that had positive things about it... it mean lightness, happiness and so on... as it started being used to describe homosexuality, suddenly the original use of the word was tainted in the uptight minds of those that did not get sexuality, that's its just a big joke...

Thus gay was used by some people to describe the things mentioned above and it caught on quick... why?

Because it helps seperate uptight people from gayness, and it puts gayness in a negative spot in thier mind... thus helping suppress and repress desires that most likely exist in thier mind, as most people have tendencies toward both sexes even though they most likely prefer one over an other. (Note:Not that people can't get beyond desire... there are BEINGS that have gotten beyond all desire... I am talkin about people still caught.)


The use of the word "gay" in this way, becomes like a mantra for a person telling people thier stance on homosexuality as well... like they say, this movie was gay.. what they are really saying is, gay people are stupid and I don't like them... Thus distancing themselves from gayness.. because I don't like gay people it is obvious I am not gay. Such silliness

[Uriah Heep]

Let them over use the gay word . in time no one well even pay attention .

[GanjaPrince]

Let them over use the gay word . in time no one well even pay attention .
There is no "them" there is only US. It's all US, it is all ONE CONSCIOUSNESS.

[Uriah Heep]

There is no "them" there is only US. It's all US, it is all ONE CONSCIOUSNESS. i hear the dam word in every pc games and this idiots are all over the world so get off the U.S BULLSHIT.

[SelfControl]

There is no "them" there is only US. It's all US, it is all ONE CONSCIOUSNESS.
In that case, maybe some reclamation is called for. Seems to have worked for the N-word.

[Uriah Heep]

In that case, maybe some reclamation is called for. Seems to have worked for the N-word.When we come to Columbus himself, the accuracy of whose accounts has so recently been questioned, we find a Negro, Pedro Alonso Niño, as the pilot of one of the famous three vessels. In 1496 Niño sailed to Santo Domingo and he was also with Columbus on his third voyage. With two men, Cristóbal de la Guerra, who served as pilot, and Luís de la Guerra, a Spanish merchant, in 1499 he planned what proved to be the first successful commercial voyage to the New World.



The revival of slavery at the close of the Middle Ages and the beginning of the system of Negro slavery were due to the commercial expansion of Portugal in the fifteenth century. The very word Negro is the modern Spanish and Portuguese form of the Latin niger. In 1441 Prince Henry sent out one Gonzales, who captured three Moors on the African coast. These men offered as ransom ten Negroes whom they had taken. The Negroes were taken to Lisbon in 1442, and in 1444 Prince Henry regularly began the European trade from the Guinea Coast. For fifty years his country enjoyed a monopoly of the traffic. By 1474 Negroes were numerous in Spain, and special interest attaches to Juan de Valladolid, probably the first of many Negroes who in time came to have influence and power over their people under the authority of a greater state. He was addressed as "judge of all the Negroes and mulattoes, free or slaves, which are in the very loyal and noble city of Seville, and throughout the whole archbishopric thereof." After 1500 there are frequent references to Negroes, especially in the Spanish West Indies. Instructions to Ovando, governor of Hispaniola, in 1501, prohibited the passage to the Indies of Jews, Moors, or recent converts, but authorized him to take over Negro slaves who had been born in the power of Christians. These orders were actually put in force the next year.

[SelfControl]

Yeah, but on the upside, without slavery we wouldn't have rock music. So it ain't all bad.

I personally use "gay" in a derogatory way all the time, occasionally I feel a bit stupid about it but that's all.

[Uriah Heep]

Yeah, but on the upside, without slavery we wouldn't have rock music. So it ain't all bad.

. with out the homo greek spartans a lot of things like the roman empire might have not happen since it was all base on the greeks.

[white ginger]

Yeah, but on the upside, without slavery we wouldn't have rock music. So it ain't all bad.

I personally use "gay" in a derogatory way all the time, occasionally I feel a bit stupid about it but that's all.
SC I am really enjoying your posts.

Ganja~I think you've figured it out for the most part.

[treyola]

I don't think I've ever referred to something as "gay".I just don't use the word that way,and I can't help thinking how immature it sounds to use it like that.

[SelfControl]

I don't think I've ever referred to something as "gay".I just don't use the word that way,and I can't help thinking how immature it sounds to use it like that.
I only really do it because it sounds that immature.

[white ginger]

In grade 7 or something my friends and I used to say things were gay (in a derrogatory way) a lot. I'm sure I pulled off the full, ignorant and bitchy-person effect :&
One time this guy said to me coldly, "Gay is not an adjective." I don't think I stopped using it at that point, but I did a little while later.
I think part of why I did use it was to separate myself from gay people, but that fact that it was a 'trend' also encouraged me to use it.

[SelfControl]

...Gay is an adjective though.

[amp7325]

...Gay is an adjective though.
Hahahaha I was about to say that.


Sometimes it's good to hear people say the word like that, only because it tells me who I don't want to be friends with.

[white ginger]

That's not the point!!!

[Erasmus70]

My understanding, intention and reception of the word gay in the context being used is that its describing something or some concept that is needlessly superfluous, overly silly or uncalled for frivolity in place of effectiveness and purpose.

Has nothing whatsoever to do with the word 'gay' in the homosexual sense of the word other than there may be times when they share in it:
Example: Richard Simmons is gay (homo) and he sells 'Deal a Meal' cards which are so gay (silly gimmicks compensating for real value)

But no, its not a thing where people are trying to demean homosexuals or make any sort of comparison.

[GanjaPrince]

But no, its not a thing where people are trying to demean homosexuals or make any sort of comparison.

Not overtly, but use the word in this way... such as "this tv show is so gay" meaning boring and stupid.... gained popularity for these reasons

A) it allows us to distance ourselves from gay but constantly refering to stupid negative things as gay like a mantra... thus further proving to us that we are not gay because look we use gay in a negative way... see that means I don't want to do that stuff. This exists because of homoerotic unconscious and/or sometime conscious desires we have that make us very uncomfortable and cause anxiety... Thus a good way to deal with it is the gay mantra. Being Gay is a negative thing thus how could I evern indulge in such thought patterns the mind so trains itself. Oh this post is soooo gay! I am no fruedian, his theory is sooo gay, I think he was way off on a lot of things. Yet he was right about certain levels (patterns in elements on the mud from which the lotus of higher consciousness grows from). Thus I will use on of Frued's words forgive me Buddha nad Jesus... This use of the word gay could be in some cases a reaction formation... Thus saying gay in a negative way, but what the person really wants to do is say, gimmie the hot beef injection or suck my cock dude... But instead of saying, I want my male teacher to suck my cock. The guy would say, this class is gay. The teacher is so gay... a person from another country not knowing the slang could ask, "you mean homosexual?" To which the guy would respond, "No, gay is a word to mean something boring or stupid... in the context I use it... It is a popular slang in my generation, all my male friends say it repetidly" then he thinks, "because it helps us from getting huge boners about each other as we sit close while watching football, where guys get all rough and play with each other. Thus preventing us from having massive gay orgies, which is what I want, please Jesus gimmie some fuckign cock right now" He shivers at the thought, feel anxiety and denies he even had the thought.

B) it tells those around and ourselves where we stand on the issue of homosexuality. We are basically saying when we call something gay, "I am one of the nazis that is against the gay lifestyle and think it is a negative thing. If I had the chance I would shove em into the over like hitler wanted to do with the jews as well as the gays." Thus it is like saluting hitler over and over again... thus funneling hatred and helping keep one seperate from gayness and on the side of straightness. It is a mantra for homophobia.


What I am saying is that it is NO conspiracy... It is a simple step by step process that created this popularity

1) gay = happiness
2) gay is taken up to describe the homosexual community.
3) gay becomes slang for a negative thing or stupid or boring thing. Because it become associated with the homosexual community. Thue use of the word gay to describ a positive thing like lightness or happiness because a thing of the past... when the flistones say have a gay old time, some giggle at the use of the word picturing homosexual acts. Then they tell themselves how they are not gay, they are straight and how gay people are stupid and whatever negative thing you want to put on these people.


Why? because people are UPTIGHT NAZIS that are afraid of OURSELF!
http://poshmodern.com/gay/hitty.gif

Now does that mean all people that use the word gay like I mean are like this...


No, there are some poor souls that just use it because it is popular and catchy... thus it catches on.

But most people, use it for the reasons I mentioned above.

[SageDreamer]

GanjaPrince, I agree with what you're saying here. I don't find too many people my age using "gay" this way...and I'm happy about that.

I don't know if there's much chance of reclaiming the word. The use of the "n" word was mentioned, and I haven't seen much progress on that front. I'm white, and I don't use that word simply because there's too much chance of misunderstanding and inadvertently hurting or offending someone or giving someone the wrong idea about myself.

I've always preferred the word "gay" to the alternatives. I've found some more-political-than-thou types using "queer" as an in-your-face gesture. It strikes me as particularly obnoxious. In my town, you find a number of gay people using "queer" as a blanket term not just for gay men and lesbians and bisexuals and intersex people and questioning people, but to refer to "sexual minorities," folks into bondage and other alternatives. Somewhere along the line, the word loses its meaning if you use it to refer to so many different kinds of people.

As a gay man, I feel like "we" had the word "gay" before the straight kids did it. It's our word. They are bright and creative to get a new word of their own.

[kjhippielove88]

it seems everyone my age uses the word gay to mean stupid. i never use it because its highly offensive. gay does not equal stupid!

[hipunk]

My understanding, intention and reception of the word gay in the context being used is that its describing something or some concept that is needlessly superfluous, overly silly or uncalled for frivolity in place of effectiveness and purpose.

Has nothing whatsoever to do with the word 'gay' in the homosexual sense of the word other than there may be times when they share in it:
Example: Richard Simmons is gay (homo) and he sells 'Deal a Meal' cards which are so gay (silly gimmicks compensating for real value)

But no, its not a thing where people are trying to demean homosexuals or make any sort of comparison.


Yet another example of trolling. Why won't somebody report this and why won't they do something about it? Because there is no mod in this forum?


Trolling: Any individual who chronically trolls, who regularly posts arguments, flames or personal attacks for no other purpose than to annoy someone or disrupt a discussion will be banned. Trolls are recognizable by the fact that they have no real interest in learning about the topic at hand - they simply want to utter flame bait.


Everyone has to sign the above agreement in order to join Hip Forums. Obviously, eraz has made this post, and many others on the Gay forum, for the only purpose of enticing flaming (flame baiting).

He has a right to an opinion. But he doesn't have a right to shame, harass, propagandize, and demonize LGBT people anywhere he wants. It's especially rude that he does it at a "Gay" forum, (rainbow power! where?), and tragic that Hip Forums allows it to go on and on.

[SelfControl]

But he doesn't have a right to shame, harass, propagandize, and demonize LGBT people anywhere he wants.

He's not really doing that in the post you quoted though, is he. You're just being over-sensitive.

[GanjaPrince]

yeah let him stay. I love him and his comments... he is very funny, not a troll!

[SelfControl]

yeah let him stay. I love him and his comments... he is very funny, not a troll!
Well I wouldn't go that far. But this place would be pretty boring without him, because we'd mostly all agree the whole time, and I'd have to become even more objectionable and fascistic in order to fill his shoes.

[GanjaPrince]

Well I wouldn't go that far. But this place would be pretty boring without him, because we'd mostly all agree the whole time, and I'd have to become even more objectionable and fascistic in order to fill his shoes.I would...

Let me confess... although I play the game of holding opinions and so on... I am really PRO-EVERYTHING! It is all one consciousness, it does all, it is all... That includes all the "evil" things in this world like say homophobia and fundementalist christianity, and all the "good" things like tolerance and understanding towards homosexuality and mystical teachings of unity... Yet that is all part of the one consciousness... thus I am for it... horray for what is! Let peace and love come to all through realization, that we have done it to ourself all along.

All is love and Love is all.

[lietchi]

Hm, well, some etymological research might be in order... I've never used gay to mean anything other than homosexual and happy/cheerful, so I don't really know why some people use it for a third meaning, but is it so sure that it is meant as derogatory to homosexuality? It might just seem that way maybe?
I studied linguistics, and semantics can be a complicated field, the creation of new meanings for existing words is not always as it seems...

[hipunk]

.


He's not really doing that in the post you quoted though, is he. You're just being over-sensitive.


You seem to be suggesting that he has done it in other posts. And that you have noticed that. And you chose to remain mute.





this place would be pretty boring without him, because we'd mostly all agree the whole time, and I'd have to become even more objectionable and fascistic in order to fill his shoes.



Not funny. Like I've said before, it's hard to shake internalized homophobia since you never see it in yourself. Some of the most homophobic people I've met were gay. So, you are only as fascistic as you are, dear SelfControl, if anything eraz makes you look more so. I have wondered at times if the two of you are in cahoots.

Erasmus70: "There may be times when they (gay and needlessly superfluous) Share it (the same meaning)"

He is intimating that gay and superfluous are one in the same.

Erasmus70: "he sells 'Deal a Meal' cards which are so gay (silly gimmicks compensating for real value)"

He uses gay in the juvenile way. That is meant to inflame and demean. He has done it again and again on this board. Nobody seems to mind. But I do, and as of now, when I see his trolling and flame bating I am going to make a note of it weather the incident is small or gross.

You may wish to overlook it. You may feel the same as he does about GLBT. That still doesn't make his flame baiting right.


The reason and use of the term "gay" as juvenile put-down is the same as for "cock sucker": it's a derogatory term derived from homosexuals. It's use reinforces the prejudice against GLBT. And since no school can ban the use of the word "gay", like they can with "cock sucker", it is has all the more effect.




... I am really PRO-EVERYTHING! It is all one consciousness, it does all, it is all...
... thus I am for it...


I am sorry that I can't enjoy that stance. There are many criminal and evil things that human beings do, which I can't abide by. As far as this forum goes, there are rules we all agreed to against trolling and flame baiting.

.

[henry101]

This thead is gay :D

[wawa2]

.

As far as this forum goes, there are rules we all agreed to against trolling and flame baiting.

.
That pretty much sums it up...

[SelfControl]

.

You seem to be suggesting that he has done it in other posts. And that you have noticed that. And you chose to remain mute.In a way. I just don't think anything would be served by denying him a voice. It's not like anyone takes him seriously anyway, but if we stop him from saying this stuff it makes it seem that we do take him seriously. I'm sure he'd also feel quite justified in taking the matter to every other forum in here.

Not funny. Like I've said before, it's hard to shake internalized homophobia since you never see it in yourself. Some of the most homophobic people I've met were gay. So, you are only as fascistic as you are, dear SelfControl, if anything eraz makes you look more so. I have wondered at times if the two of you are in cahoots.Why so? Because I'm willing to enter into a dialogue with him rather than call him a Nazi all the time. You can't change anyone's mind with petty insults, you just reinforce their belief that anyone who disagrees with them is stupid and/or over-emotional. I'm not saying I can change him, but I feel it's important to try. If you actually want to accuse me of being in cahoots, please, present evidence. I'd like to see it.

As for myself, a lot of people have said I'm fascistic, I don't know if I agree, and I don't personally see what's fundamentally wrong with it, especially since I have no actual power with which to exert any fascist ideology beyond just saying stuff on a forum that no-one even knows about.

Erasmus70: "There may be times when they (gay and needlessly superfluous) Share it (the same meaning)"

He is intimating that gay and superfluous are one in the same.

Erasmus70: "he sells 'Deal a Meal' cards which are so gay (silly gimmicks compensating for real value)"

He uses gay in the juvenile way. That is meant to inflame and demean. He has done it again and again on this board. Nobody seems to mind. But I do, and as of now, when I see his trolling and flame bating I am going to make a note of it weather the incident is small or gross.
Well, that is your view and your opinion. Personally I think it would be a mistake. The word's meaning has changed over time (more about this below), and I honestly don't think it has that much to do with homosexuality anymore. Seems on a par with saying anyone who listens to Wagner is inherently anti-Semitic.

The problem with antagonism is that you have to choice to ignore it or respond to it. The urge to respond is great, but that's because comments like that are designed to get a response. It's pretty much all they're for. What he wants is to upset people, trick them into saying or doing something stupid which he can then use against them. It is my view that what he would like, more than anything, is for us to deny him the right to speak, because it would confirm his belief that he has aired on here many times that the reason we don't agree with him is because we are ignorant. I'm sure he'd be crowing about it elsewhere on the forum the whole time, and I'm sure he won't be without approbators.

The guy is a nuisance, I won't deny that, but I think he would become more than that if we treated his attention-seeking ramblings with anything more than the contempt they deserve.

The reason and use of the term "gay" as juvenile put-down is the same as for "cock sucker": it's a derogatory term derived from homosexuals. It's use reinforces the prejudice against GLBT. And since no school can ban the use of the word "gay", like they can with "cock sucker", it is has all the more effect.See, I'm not arguing that it derives from homophobia. But I don't believe that everyone who uses it is homophobic. Bringing up "internalised" homophobia muddies the issue, because you're implying someone could hate something and have no knowledge of it. There are people who harbour that kind of hatred, but they tend to be the ones who will protest against people using hateful words, that their hate will be far more manifest in their actions than in their overt persona. They wear a facade of tolerance by using the right language and such, because it makes them seem more acceptable.

I don't think anyone could level that accusation at Erasmus. I'm not saying he's perfect, but it's dangerous to level unsubstantiated accusations at people like him, because it gives them the satisfaction of a kind of martyrdom.


You may wish to overlook it. You may feel the same as he does about GLBT. That still doesn't make his flame baiting right.Interesting. You haven't accused me of flame-baiting directly, but you do it by association. Care to elaborate?

[Ballad f Dwight Fry]

This thead is gay :D..

[SelfControl]

This thead is gay :D
Seconded. People who want justify verbal homophobia often insist that gay people just have no sense of humour. I'm not saying that making these kinds of jokes would take the fun out of it for them. But given how much pleasure it seems to bring to a nation of assholes, it's gotta be worth a shot.

[Ballad f Dwight Fry]

Seconded. People who want justify verbal homophobia often insist that gay people just have no sense of humour.
QUOTE] actually most gay have the best humor and the uptight macho guys are right down boring as hell.

[SelfControl]

Seconded. People who want justify verbal homophobia often insist that gay people just have no sense of humour.actually most gay have the best humor and the uptight macho guys are right down boring as hell.
My main experience of the gay sense of humour has been noticing that objects look a bit like cocks, and getting four hoursworth of material out of them. Whereas with straight guys they'll get done with it after two hours and fill up the remainder with dead baby jokes. So whichever you prefer.

(I'm beginning to wonder if I should just put a disclaimer after everything I say, I'm sure someone's going to find that offensive).

[SelfControl]

It's worth noting that the Oxford English Dictionary has idea what the origins of the word "gay" actually is. Which is why I prefer to use "fag", because at least then I know where I stand.

But yeah, what insanejester describes is semiotics, and it runs contrary to the idea that a word is inherent with its meaning(s) like some Adamite language. To quote Humpty Dumpty: "Words means what I say they mean".

[Ballad f Dwight Fry]

My main experience of the gay sense of humour has been noticing that objects look a bit like cocks, and getting four hoursworth of material out of them. Whereas with straight guys they'll get done with it after two hours and fill up the remainder with dead baby jokes. So whichever you prefer.

(I'm beginning to wonder if I should just put a disclaimer after everything I say, I'm sure someone's going to find that offensive). and by the way even the british have lost lots of the well known british humor they once were well known for.

[SelfControl]

and by the way even the british have lost lots of the well known british humor they once were well known for.
To be honest, I have no idea where the idea of the "great British sense of humour" even came from.

[Ballad f Dwight Fry]

To be honest, I have no idea where the idea of the "great British sense of humour" even came from. Monty Python , Benny Hill . Are you being served, quite a few more. Red Dwarf .

[Ballad f Dwight Fry]

of course not much difrent in the USA since all the great comidians are either dead or too old to think of anything decent.

[Ballad f Dwight Fry]

It's worth noting that the Oxford English Dictionary has idea what the origins of the word "gay" actually is. Which is why I prefer to use "fag", because at least then I know where I stand.

But yeah, what insanejester describes is semiotics, and it runs contrary to the idea that a word is inherent with its meaning(s) like some Adamite language. To quote Humpty Dumpty: "Words means what I say they mean". I though Fag were cigarrets in your side of the pond.

[hipunk]

I just don't think anything would be served by denying him a voice. It's not like anyone takes him seriously anyway, but if we stop him from saying this stuff it makes it seem that we do take him seriously. I'm sure he'd also feel quite justified in taking the matter to every other forum in here.


The rules of the Forum state "No Trolling", "No Flame Baiting." You'd like to give eraz a free ticket because, why? Or are you saying you don't agree to the rules you signed on to?

You seem to be taking him seriously, because you're consistantly engaging in his squirrel debates. He may take "it" to every other forum if he's banned from the Gay Forum. That's up to Hip Forums to decide. Myself, I've had enough of the shaming and baiting. This is suppose to be a safe place for LGBT folks. All the forums are suppose to be free from flame baiting and trolling, not just the straight ones.





You can't change anyone's mind with petty insults. . . but I feel it's important to try.

. . . a lot of people have said I'm fascistic, I don't know if I agree, and I don't personally see what's fundamentally wrong with it. . .


You will never change Eraz's mind. He comes here to disrup not discourse. He comes to disseminate bigotry. You suggest that comparing him to a Nazi won't help. This is always the way with the right-wing. They act like Nazi's and then cry when we call them on it. They're cry babies.

Now, you're suggesting I knock it off. However, when Eraz spews his bigotry with flame baiting, well -that's free speech! You believe he should be allowed to do that. How is it free speech only works for bigots?

That's one way you seem to be in cahoots. Another is that you are consistently engaging in a weak debate with him after others have let an issue drop, like a straight man who sets up the joke for his partner. Sorry, I haven't been keeping notes. And I am not going to go back and review your dialogue. What I stated was, "I have wondered at times," Wonder, that's something that happens when you have a free mind. I hope you approve of wonder?





... The problem with antagonism is that you have to choice to ignore it or respond to it. The urge to respond is great, ...


I would like to refer you again to the rules of this forum. You are not allowed to post flame bait nor trolling. You seem to disagree with the rules, or don't seem to understand them. If so, you should take some time to review the rules you agreed to.

Flame baiting can be small and constant, like chinese water torture. I said I am going to point out each time he flames, whether small or gross.





See, I'm not arguing that it derives from homophobia. But I don't believe that everyone who uses it is homophobic.


We're talking about institutionalized homophobia. In the 1950's in the south many people did not believe they were racists because blacks had their own schools and bathrooms. They also didn't see anything wrong with the 'N' word. Using the word gay pejoratively is like teaching your child a nursery rhyme that insults the king. 1) The child doesn't know what he's saying, so the king can't hang him for treason. 2) The child eventually grows up learning to hate the King, he transposes the lesson he learned at a very young age along with his peers.

insanejester, words in and of themselves are benign, that's what the quote from Romeo and Juliet means. The intention used with certain words, when they're meant to demean and debase, as you demonstrated, is what makes them offensive. It's an institutional device that keeps an element of society, like LGBT, suppressed. If you're willing to use these words in a derogatory manner, that's your right, but be man enough to admit you're abetting that oppression.

Now, why do we have 3 straight guys and one closet case asserting their right to use the word "gay", or any other word, in any derogatory way they wish?

.

[SageDreamer]

Words don't mean what you say they mean any more than what your hearer thinks that they mean.

If there's a chance that you'll be misunderstood or not causing offense, you're best off not using the word. If you're the sort of person who does it just to offend someone, you don't deserve to be my friend.

[henry101]

Add Father Ted, Spaced, Black Books, and a bunch of others to that list.

Ballad, what is up with those pictures you keep posting?

[okay]

I generally find it offensive but a good straight friend of mine described something as being gay once and quickly apoligized. I said "no problem, I say it too". So a few days later I did use it like that. And as I'm writing this, I realize that that was pretty lame but he's a good friend and I didn't want him to know that it bothered me.

Anyway, it's not just the use of the word gay that I find offensive. Everywhere I turn there are gay jokes that offend the hell out of me. I used to watch adult swim on cartoon network but it seemed like everytime i turned it on there was another offensive gay joke. I listen to laughbreak and rawdog (comedy channels) on Sirius. A lot of the comedians make offensive gay jokes.

There was a time when the jokes didn't bother me but they do now. Because even though the jokes can be funny, they reinforce the ignorant heterosexual mindset that there is something wrong with being gay.

[hipunk]

.
Okay, I do understand where you're coming from; I've been there. I have to say that I am glad to hear you are concerned with this issue. But to be honest, he doesn't sound like too good a friend. If we can't tell our friends how we feel about a slur that affects us, who can we discuss it with? When you can't say, "no it's not okay, but I forgive you for saying it." then you're telling your friends, as a gay person, that it's okay to use those derogatory terms against you.

I know that there are some people who look both ways to see if I'm around before they dispense their homo-jokes, but those folks aren't my friends. The joke telling has gone too far, I agree. Most of the time it's not even that funny. The so called comics are trying too hard, like saying fuck every other word. I only wish people would wise up before gay jokes just get to be another boring cliche like Leno and his Clinton and Monica thing.

I don't watch shows that do stereotyping gay jokes. Sending an email doesn't do any good. I just carry out my own boycott, no one has to tell me to. But I will let my friends know why I don't watch those shows, if they're like, "did you see...", I'm like, "I don't watch that anymore because of ..." It's more effective than sending an email.

.

[Ballad f Dwight Fry]

Add Father Ted, Spaced, Black Books, and a bunch of others to that list.

Ballad, what is up with those pictures you keep posting? You like the Pictures?

[SageDreamer]

If I want chair to mean table and table to mean chair... then goddamnit I'll sit in a table and eat on my chair!...
Be my guest! However, don't be surprised to experience some confusion or frustration in a furniture store.

[henry101]

You like the Pictures?I was just wondering why you were posting them, seemed kinda random

[Ballad f Dwight Fry]

life is random

[SelfControl]

Words don't mean what you say they mean any more than what your hearer thinks that they mean.

If there's a chance that you'll be misunderstood or not causing offense, you're best off not using the word.

This goes against every single one of my principles.

[lietchi]

If there's a chance that you'll be misunderstood or not causing offense, you're best off not using the word.
You might as well stop using words right now then... :p

[SelfControl]

The rules of the Forum state "No Trolling", "No Flame Baiting." You'd like to give eraz a free ticket because, why? Or are you saying you don't agree to the rules you signed on to?I think the definition of Forum Trolling and Flame Baiting is vague at best, and very much open to interpretation. Forgive me if this offends you, but I think the only real reason you object to Eraz's criticisms to the extent that you do is because they are criticisms of something you believe strongly in. If someone was using the same kind of tactics and style to rally against something you were against, I doubt very strongly you'd be calling for them to be banned.

You seem to be taking him seriously, because you're consistantly engaging in his squirrel debates. He may take "it" to every other forum if he's banned from the Gay Forum. That's up to Hip Forums to decide. Myself, I've had enough of the shaming and baiting. This is suppose to be a safe place for LGBT folks. All the forums are suppose to be free from flame baiting and trolling, not just the straight ones.I don't think I engage in his "squirrel" debates any more or less than those who keep on calling him a Nazi and such.

And you're entirely safe. Sticks and stones and all.


You will never change Eraz's mind. He comes here to disrup not discourse. He comes to disseminate bigotry. You suggest that comparing him to a Nazi won't help. This is always the way with the right-wing. They act like Nazi's and then cry when we call them on it. They're cry babies.He's not really acted like a Nazi though, has he? He's not even a sexual deviant anymore. If you want to call someone for distorting the truth, deceit, propaganda, whatever, I'd say there's far less inflammatory and less misleading ways to do it that comparing him to the Nazis. Lots of people have engage in deception and bigotry who have never engaged in religious genocide. I'm pretty sure Eraz is one of those people.

Now, you're suggesting I knock it off. However, when Eraz spews his bigotry with flame baiting, well -that's free speech! You believe he should be allowed to do that. I don't get your argument. Are you saying I'm denying you the right to free speech by criticising what you say? If so, stop, because that's just really really stupid. In calling for someone of an opposing view to be banned from the forum, you're the only one calling for a denial of freedom here. You're just as free to voice your opinion as I am to call it stupid.

How is it free speech only works for bigots?Wha?

That's one way you seem to be in cahoots. Another is that you are consistently engaging in a weak debate with him after others have let an issue drop, like a straight man who sets up the joke for his partner. Sorry, I haven't been keeping notes. And I am not going to go back and review your dialogue. What I stated was, "I have wondered at times," Wonder, that's something that happens when you have a free mind. I hope you approve of wonder?Why do you care whether I approve or not?

Others haven't let the issue drop, they just became bored with/unable to continue with it. If I have better debating skills or a longer attention span than the rest of the forum, I apologise profusely.

I would like to refer you again to the rules of this forum. You are not allowed to post flame bait nor trolling. You seem to disagree with the rules, or don't seem to understand them. If so, you should take some time to review the rules you agreed to.

Flame baiting can be small and constant, like chinese water torture. I said I am going to point out each time he flames, whether small or gross.
Again, it depends heavily on where you draw the line between flame baiting and making an unpopular argument inspite of others' criticisms.


We're talking about institutionalized homophobia. In the 1950's in the south many people did not believe they were racists because blacks had their own schools and bathrooms. They also didn't see anything wrong with the 'N' word. Using the word gay pejoratively is like teaching your child a nursery rhyme that insults the king. 1) The child doesn't know what he's saying, so the king can't hang him for treason. 2) The child eventually grows up learning to hate the King, he transposes the lesson he learned at a very young age along with his peers.I disagree, for the reasons I previously gave you. Plenty of kids sing "Ring-a-Roses" at school without learning (subconsciously or otherwise) anything at all about plague.

insanejester, words in and of themselves are benign, that's what the quote from Romeo and Juliet means. The intention used with certain words, when they're meant to demean and debase, as you demonstrated, is what makes them offensive. It's an institutional device that keeps an element of society, like LGBT, suppressed. If you're willing to use these words in a derogatory manner, that's your right, but be man enough to admit you're abetting that oppression.Maybe he doesn't agree with you. To be honest, as usage of the word increases, it becomes more and more divorced from any kind of homosexual connection, favourable or otherwise. People who aren't in any way homophobic use it. You may, if you wish, insist that they are institutionally homophobic. But in my view, you're wrong. I think taking these words back is part of the solution, not part of the problem. Again, it worked for the N-word.

Now, why do we have 3 straight guys and one closet case asserting their right to use the word "gay", or any other word, in any derogatory way they wish? I've been out of the closet for 7 years. I also find it quite amusing that you're accusing anyone who uses the word "gay" negatively in any context of being subconsciously homophobic, yet you're happy to imbrue "closet case" with a negative subtext.

Not sure why it's gone all italicky like that.

[SelfControl]

You might as well stop using words right now then... :p
Indeed. Herbert Henck wrote something about it in response to John Cage's 4'33". It basically said that silence is a purer form than language, because as soon as you start using words you are forcing upon the listener/reader a set of pre-defined rules of discourse of which he or she may or may not be fully aware. It creates a prison of misunderstanding from which there is potentially no escape.

So I vote we all sit silent and motionless in front of our computer screens and advance the discussion through personal reflecting for as long as it takes for it to seem really stupid to self-censor for the benefit of those who might just possibly misunderstand, disagree, or move their lips when they read.

[Ballad f Dwight Fry]

....

[hipunk]

.
SelfControl,

My point is that Erasmus70 is flame baiting and trolling. You disagree. Fine.

From past posts you have made on the subject of coming out, I gathered that you were fairly closeted. Please excuse me if I insulted you.

You don't believe that institutionalized homophobia exists, fine. We are raised in a deeply homophobic society. It's getting better, but most folks of our generation were raised with the institution of Gay bigotry we call homophobia. It takes time to erase all of the marks that leaves on us as gay people. I am trying to learn to show more of my compassion for folks who are still struggling with those issues.

However, there is no call for Erasmus70's trolling.


.

[SelfControl]

.
You don't believe that institutionalized homophobia exists, fine. We are raised in a deeply homophobic society. It's getting better, but most folks of our generation were raised with the institution of Gay bigotry we call homophobia. It takes time to erase all of the marks that leaves on us as gay people. I am trying to learn to show more of my compassion for folks who are still struggling with those issues.
To clarify, I didn't say that instutionalised homophobia doesn't exist. I just feel you are seeing it in places where it is not, maybe looking too hard for it. I certainly don't think that people - straight or otherwise - who use the word "gay" in its more recent meaning are showing marks of a homophobic culture. I mean, I use it, and I've generally not experienced a great deal of homophobia in my life, even when I was "out" in high school. It's something people tease each other about; when they use it, they're not firing off accusations of homosexuality, they're just running with the pack. You can really blame people for that, because it's just human nature. But I do personally feel that, the more people across the sexual spectrum use the word, the less impact it will actually have.

And yeah, I do kinda object to being called a closet case. I just have no idea where you got that impression.

However, there is no call for Erasmus70's trolling.

I'm not arguing that he isn't a douche. I just think he's potentially more dangerous if he thinks he's some kind of martyr.

[Ballad f Dwight Fry]

Many of the Metal Music and Rap " crowds" do have a Homophobia Agenda But Most realise sooner or later most of the great bands of late 60s 70s 80s and even 90s had lots of gay members in the band "Including the Lead Singer!.

[SageDreamer]

You might as well stop using words right now then... :p
Perhaps I'd be best off modifying my earlier post and saying that if there's a strong chance that your words will be misunderstood, you might want to consider saying something differently.

As I see it, the purpose of words is to communicate. If a speaker uses a word to mean one thing and the listener takes it another way, communication breaks down.

That's the problem I see with the word "gay." For years, it meant something like happy and carefree. We would hear Christmas carols about gay apparel, and decorators would refer to gay colors. When "gay" started to mean "homosexual," the old meanings of "gay" faded away pretty quickly. Language changes when a large number of people make the change, not any one person or two people.

Now we've got a growing number of people using "gay" to mean weak or lame. What is someone who is attracted to his own sex supposed to do? If I tell someone I'm gay, I would hope that common sense would tell them that I mean that I like other guys. Frankly, I hope that the sense of "gay" as weak or lame doesn't catch on and dies out like lots of other slang and fads.

When two people talk, someone can always ask, "When you use this word, do you mean it this way or that way?" Somehow that doesn't work quite as well with written communication. When I post something on a bulletin board that people are reading all around the world, I make an extra effort to write in a way that people will understand something the way I mean it.

[SelfControl]

Many of the Metal Music and Rap " crowds" do have a Homophobia Agenda But Most realise sooner or later most of the great bands of late 60s 70s 80s and even 90s had lots of gay members in the band "Including the Lead Singer!.What, this man, gay?! I won't hear such nonsense!

http://fumettidicarta.interfree.it/MusicalBox/ANGELOFRETRIBUTION/Halford.jpg

[SelfControl]

That's the problem I see with the word "gay." For years, it meant something like happy and carefree. We would hear Christmas carols about gay apparel, and decorators would refer to gay colors. When "gay" started to mean "homosexual," the old meanings of "gay" faded away pretty quickly. Language changes when a large number of people make the change, not any one person or two people.

Now we've got a growing number of people using "gay" to mean weak or lame. What is someone who is attracted to his own sex supposed to do? If I tell someone I'm gay, I would hope that common sense would tell them that I mean that I like other guys. Frankly, I hope that the sense of "gay" as weak or lame doesn't catch on and dies out like lots of other slang and fads.Well, I doubt you'd ever have that problem. It's generally as obvious in context which one you mean as the difference between "bat" the animal and "bat" the cricket playing appliance.

I'm not arguing that this development is necessarily the greatest linguistic development since Shakespeare. But I certainly don't see it as anything to worry about; it's only ever going to be recognised as a colloquialism, and certainly won't take over the original meaning in the same way that "gay" meaning homosexual took over "gay" meaning happy.

This does all remind me of that Simpsons episode where Homer objects to a gay guy using the word "queer", saying "That's our word for making fun of you."

[Ballad f Dwight Fry]

Now we've got a growing number of people using "gay" to mean weak or lame. What is someone who is attracted to his own sex supposed to do? If I tell someone I'm gay, I would hope that common sense would tell them that I mean that I like other guys. Frankly, I hope that the sense of "gay" as weak or lame doesn't catch on and dies out like lots of other slang and fads.

.they loved to use the word in multiplayer games how ever i have way to shut them up, the fact that Spartans and some of Hitler right hand mans were homosexual along with many other military giants the sense of gay man being weak goes right out the window " they shut up very fast" .

[Sealed With A Kiss]

like i said before

[Closet Kid]

I don't really care I'm not offended when my friends or parents say it. I just find it stupid and Immature.:eek:

[lietchi]

I don't think it's a sign of institutionalisd homophobia either... I can't say I'd use that word gay in that meaning myself, but I don't people use it to be negative about homosexuality.

Let me give a parallel example... In my language, in colloquial use, people use the word blonde to signify stupid or dumb. For example "Oh my God, how could she not notice that he was cheating on her, she's so blonde!" Is this a sign of institutionalised blonde-phobia? I'm blonde myself, should I be protesting to everyone who uses the word blonde with this meaning, telling them that they are insulting me? I am not offended, and in this example, the link between the two meanings of the word is clearer than with the word gay (dumb blonde jokes...).

It might be immature etc. but I don't think we should be reading this deep into it... Semantics...

[GanjaPrince]

He was making a valid point, by using it...

[Closet Kid]

Yeah antigay is a total retard

[GanjaPrince]

hellopeople said, "although most people dont actually mean homosexual when they use the word gay towards an inanimate object, it still puts a HUGE negative connotation on homosexuality..."


YES, this is so obvious, how can people deny it?

[hipunk]

.
Lietchi, you compare the jocular use use of Gay as not being institutionalized homophobia because people tell blond jokes and use blond in a similar. I might tend to agree if blonds were being tied up to fence posts and and left for dead because they were blond. As it is, blond are considered more sexually appealing, and as such are granted better benefits in society. The use of blond as a jocular rebuff could be akin to dispersing up not down, in the same way you might make fun of a Suit. However when you make fun of an oppressed class it is different.

The same could be said for the N word at one time. The people using the word may not have thought about African Americans at all while they were using it. My brother used to say, "I'm not your nigger" in the same way that people today say, "that's so gay." That's what I mean by institutionalized homophobia. The people using the term may not be aware of any homophobia and may believe themselves to be non-homophobes. Whether or not they believe themselves to be bigots, or whether or not they believe they are actively referencing Gays when they use the term is immaterial.

1) the word is used pejoratively, you don't see people pointing out a particularly brilliant bridge design and saying "that's gay."

2) the word is referencing an oppressed minority.

Certain jokes, and catch words reinforce negative attitudes and biases against a minority. That's what I mean by institutionalized homophobia. The people who use these words may not understand they negative impact or even realize it, but they do it to go along with the pack. We are not born with hate. Bigotry and homophobia are learned by people who just want to run with the pack. You would never ever see them saying "how white," in the same way. The semantics of the word, as it is used, is tied to gay oppression. To deny that sounds like your just running with the pack.

.

[hipunk]

Says the 13 year old...


Said the child to the wise one.

Even though you may feel enlightened, my friend, you have much to learn.
Picking on children would be childish, if you weren't a child yourself.

.

[GanjaPrince]

hipunk said, "My brother used to say, "I'm not your nigger" in the same way that people today say, "that's so gay.""

Yes, a very valid example...

[Closet Kid]

that is pretty funny, a fag calling a straight man gay! GAY! See how it is people even the gays calll others gay Insane jester isn't gay I check his profile it said hetero get your facts right.

[SelfControl]

they loved to use the word in multiplayer games how ever i have way to shut them up, the fact that Spartans and some of Hitler right hand mans were homosexual along with many other military giants the sense of gay man being weak goes right out the window " they shut up very fast" .
Are you suggesting that World War 2 was just a big bitchfight?

[lietchi]

.
As it is, blond are considered more sexually appealing, and as such are granted better benefits in society. Sure, well, I can't tell you how many people have treated me as dumb and didn't listen to what I had to say, simply because I am blonde. I don't think that will be in my favor when I go look for a job...
Of course, not nearly as bad as discrimination towards gays.

I still think that some are making too much of a deal of this... Words can have several meanings, without one meaning influencing the other. One option is that in the future gay will disappear as meaning homosexual. Or the negative meaning will disappear.
I still haven't seen any proof that gay in its negative meaning is being used on a large scale to oppress gays, except that some of you feel like that it the case, because you feel that the negative meaning reflects on the homosexual meaning. But I feel there is a difference between how people using the word see the meaning, and how people hearing the words see the meaning.

I can't help but look at this with my linguistic background, semantics is a tricky business, complex, and mostly uncontrollable.

[SelfControl]

The origin is obviously derogatory. But it comes down to whether you see it as an attack on homosexuality to use the word even when it has ceased to have any direct relationship with homosexuality at all.

Personally, I think those who want to campaign against homosexuality have much bigger fish to fry, and should be going after those with a homophobic attitude, rather than just trying to censor people's vocabulary.

[Baja 1000]

Are you suggesting that World War 2 was just a big bitchfight?
As Adolf Hitler began his ascent to power in the early 1930s, he at first endorsed a laissez-faire attitude toward homosexuality, especially among his close associates - thus helping to fuel rumors that he himself was gay (http://www.q.co.za/2001/2001/10/20-hitlergay.html). Sly insinuations about Hitler's sexuality came from his enemies in Germany and from members of the foreign press. American journalist Dorothy Thompson, for example, after interviewing Hitler in 1931, wrote about his "soft, almost feminine charm. I bet he crooks his little finger when he drinks a cup of tea."

Recently, German historian Lothar Machtan posited the theory that the fuhrer was indeed, in his early years, actively homosexual. Among Machtan's "evidence" were Hitler's many close, intimate-seeming associations with men who preferred male companionship.

One of Hitler's most loyal deputies, for example, was Rudolf Hess, who had been imprisoned with Hitler in 1923, following the Nazis' unsuccessful attempt to overthrow the government - the famous Beer Hall Putsch. After their release from prison in 1924, the two enjoyed a close personal relationship that Hess called a "most beautiful human experience," lasting until Hitler's suicide in 1945.

Hess' contemporaries had revealing nicknames for the sensitive, effeminate man, like "Fraulein Hess," "Fraulein Paula," and "Black Emma." Although Hess eventually married - at Hitler's suggestion - his wife later complained that her life with him was much like that of a "convent schoolgirl."

Also prominent among Hitler's intimates was Ernst Rohm, commander of the S.A. - the Nazi storm troopers. Rohm, a tough, brawny man who had been an army officer during World War I, became part of Hitler's inner circle in 1919, when the future fuhrer began venturing into politics. Although Rohm left the S.A. for a few years over differences with Hitler - Rohm wanted the storm troopers to be independent of the party - in 1931 he was invited back by Hitler and once again firmly entrenched in power.

Unlike others in the Nazi Party, Rohm was openly homosexual, admitting to associates that he was "far from unhappy" about his sexual orientation. He frequented gay bars, belonged to a homosexual organization called the League for Human Rights, and publicly advocated the repeal of Paragraph 175. An anonymous 1932 article called "National Socialism and Inversion" has been credited to Rohm's influence (or even authorship); the article stated that if Nazi Party members performed their official duties well, they were entitled to private lives of "creative eroticism" and "loving homosexual relationship[s]."

Rohm established a kind of gay network within the S.A., assigning prominent posts to gay friends and lovers. Among Rohm's "sweethearts" was Edmund Heines, whom Rohm appointed first as his deputy and later as leader of the Munich branch of the S.A. Another of Rohm's favorites was Karl Ernst, who was nicknamed "Frau Rohrbein" for his intimate friendship with Paul Rohrbein, Berlin's S.A. commander. After meeting Rohm, Ernst had a meteoric rise from a leadership position in the S.A. to a seat in the Reichstag, Germany's legislative body.

Rohm and his close-knit circle - dubbed in a Munich paper the "Brotherhood of Poofs" - had powerful, homophobic enemies who convinced Hitler that Rohm was a threat. These included Joseph Goebbels, head of Nazi propaganda, and Paul Schultz, captain of the Berlin S.A., who warned Hitler of the danger in "the employment of morally objectionable persons in positions of authority." Although Hitler's decision to destroy Rohm and his network was framed as a safeguard against a possible S.A. putsch, it may have also been designed to put to rest the rumors about Hitler's sexuality.

On June 30, 1934 - called the Night of Long Knives - Hitler, Goebbels, and a small group of Gestapo traveled in the middle of the night to a resort where Rohm and his lieutenants were enjoying a furlough, sleeping peacefully in a hotel, some with their male companions at their side. Edmund Heines was dragged from his bed and shot. In recognition of his long friendship with Hitler, the half-dressed Rohm was given a pistol and ordered to kill himself, but he refused and was executed. Over the next four days, about 150 S.A. leaders were rounded up and shot by firing squads. In a radio speech, Goebbels announced that "a clean sweep is being made ... symptoms of moral degeneration that manifest themselves in public life are being cauterized." The following year, Nazi policy took a sharp turn toward a harsher interpretation of Paragraph 175, sending thousands of gay men to concentration camps.

[Baja 1000]

Unlike others in the Nazi Party, Rohm was openly homosexual, admitting to associates that he was "far from unhappy" about his sexual orientation. He frequented gay bars, belonged to a homosexual organization called the League for Human Rights, and publicly advocated the repeal of Paragraph 175. An anonymous 1932 article called "National Socialism and Inversion" has been credited to Rohm's influence (or even authorship); the article stated that if Nazi Party members performed their official duties well, they were entitled to private lives of "creative eroticism" and "loving homosexual relationship[s]."

Rohm established a kind of gay network within the S.A., assigning prominent posts to gay friends and lovers. Among Rohm's "sweethearts" was Edmund Heines, whom Rohm appointed first as his deputy and later as leader of the Munich branch of the S.A. Another of Rohm's favorites was Karl Ernst, who was nicknamed "Frau Rohrbein" for his intimate friendship with Paul Rohrbein, Berlin's S.A. commander. After meeting Rohm, Ernst had a meteoric rise from a leadership position in the S.A. to a seat in the Reichstag, Germany's legislative body.

[SelfControl]

Funnily enough, last time I went clubbing on got hit on by a guy who looked a lot like Winston Churchill.

[Baja 1000]

IM NOT trying to portrait all gays as Nazi just the fact that lots of people think all homosexual man fall into the catagory of limp wrist femine type guys . well they are in for a big suprise. by the way the highest medal given to a soldier and medic during the Gulf war was given to a homosexual soldier who was step all over once he openly admited he was gay.

[Baja 1000]

The beginning of the Nazi terror against homosexuals was marked by the murder of Ernst Rohm on June 30, 1934: "the Night of the Long Knives. "Rohm was the man who, in 1919, first made Hitler aware of his own political potential, and the two were close friends for fifteen years. During that time, Rohm rose to SA Chief of Staff, transforming the Brownshirt militia from a handful of hardened goons and embittered ex-soldiers into an effective fighting force five hundred thousand strong ** the instrument of Nazi terror. Hitler needed Rohm's military skill and could rely on his personal loyalty, but he was ultimately a pragmatist. As part of a compromise with the Reichwehr (regular army) leadership, whose support he needed to become Fuhrer, Hitler allowed Goering and Himmler to murder Rohm along with dozens of Rohm's loyal officers.

For public relations purposes, and especially to quell the outrage felt throughout the ranks of the SA, Hitler justified his blatant power play by pointing to Rohm's homosexuality. Hitler, of course, had known of Rohm's homosexuality since 1919, and it became public knowledge in 1925, when Rohm appeared in court to charge a hustler with theft. All this while the Nazi Party had a virulently anti*gay policy, and many Nazis protested that Rohm was discrediting the entire Party and should be purged. Hitler, however, was quite willing to cover up for him for years ** until he stood in the way of larger plans.

* * *

The Nazi Party came to power in 1933, and a year later Rohm was dead. While Rohm and his men were being rounded up for the massacre (offered a gun and the opportunity to shoot himself, Rohm retorted angrily: “Let Hitler do his own dirty work”), the new Chief of Staff received his first order from the Fuhrer: “I expect all SA leaders to help preserve and strengthen the SA in its capacity as a pure and cleanly institution. In particular, I should like every mother to be able to allow her son to join the SA, Party, and Hitler Youth without fear that he may become morally corrupted in their ranks. I therefore request all SA commanders to take the utmost pains to ensure that offences under Paragraph 175 are met by immediate expulsion of the culprit from the SA and the Party.”

Hitler had good reason to be concerned about the reputation of Nazi organizations, most of which were based on strict segregation of the sexes. Hitler Youth, for example, was disparagingly referred to as Homo Youth throughout the Third Reich, a characterization which the Nazi leadership vainly struggled to eliminate. Indeed, most of the handful of publications on homosexuality which appeared during the Fascist regime were devoted to new and rather bizarre methods of “detection” and “prevention.”

Rudolf Diels, the founder of the Gestapo, recorded some of Hitler’s personal thoughts on the subject: “He lectured me on the role of homosexuality in history and politics. It had destroyed ancient Greece, he said. Once rife, it extended its contagious effects like an ineluctable law of nature to the best and most manly of characters, eliminating from the reproductive process precisely those men on whose offspring a nation depended. The immediate result of the vice was, however, that unnatural passion swiftly became dominant in public affairs if it were allowed to spread unchecked.”

* * *

The tone had been set by the Rohm putsch, and on its first anniversary-June 28, 1935, the campaign against homosexuality was escalated by the introduction of the “Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honour.” Until 1935, the only punishable offence had been anal intercourse; under the new Paragraph 175a, ten possible “acts” were punishable, including a kiss, an embrace, even homosexual fantasies! One man, for instance, was successfully prosecuted on the grounds that he had observed a couple making love in a park and watched only the man.

Under the Nazi system, criminal acts were less important in determining guilt than criminal intent. The “phenomenological” theory of justice claimed to evaluate a person's character rather than his deeds. The “healthy sensibility of the people” (gesundes Volksempfinden) was elevated to the highest normative legal concept, and the Nazis were in a position to prosecute an individual solely on the grounds of his sexual orientation. (After World War II, incidentally, this law was immediately struck from the books in East Germany as a product of Fascist thinking, while it remained on the books in West Germany.)

Once Paragraph 175a was in effect, the annual number of convictions on charges of homosexuality leaped to about ten times the number in the pre-Nazi period. The law was so loosely formulated that it could be ** and was ** applied against heterosexuals whom the Nazis wanted to eliminate. The most notorious example of an individual convicted on trumped-up charges was General Werner von Fritsch, Army Chief of Staff; and the law was also used repeatedly against members of the Catholic clergy. But the law was undoubtedly used primarily against gay people, and the court system was aided in the witch-hunt by the entire German populace, which was encouraged to scrutinize the behaviour of neighbours and to denounce suspects to the Gestapo. The number of men convicted of homosexuality during the Nazi period totaled around fifty thousand:

[Baja 1000]

Rohm rose to SA Chief of Staff, transforming the Brownshirt militia from a handful of hardened goons and embittered ex-soldiers into an effective fighting force five hundred thousand strong ** the instrument of Nazi terror. Hitler needed Rohm's military skill and could rely on his personal loyalty, but he was ultimately a pragmatist. As part of a compromise with the Reichwehr (regular army) leadership, whose support he needed to become Fuhrer, Hitler allowed Goering and Himmler to murder Rohm along with dozens of Rohm's loyal officers.

[Baja 1000]

Röhm served as a career officer with the Bavarian Army during World War I. He held the rank of Oberleutnant with the Bavarian 10th Infantry Regiment and was severely wounded in the face in September of 1914 in Lorraine, France. He later was promoted to Hauptmann.


Early leaders of the Nazi Party: Ernst Röhm (photo right) standing next to Adolf HitlerFollowing the end of the war in 1918, he joined the Franz Xaver Ritter von Epp's Freikorps, one of the many private militias that had formed in Munich as a reaction against the Weimar Republic. In 1920, he became a Nazi-party member and helped organize the Sturmabteilung (SA). In 1923, after the failed Beer Hall Putsch in Munich, Röhm spent 15 months in prison, during which time he became a close, personal friend of Adolf Hitler.

In 1924, after Röhm was released from prison, he worked with Hitler to rebuild the Nazi Party, but several intense differences developed between the two. Röhm resigned from the Nazi Party in 1925 and went to Bolivia to serve as a military advisor.

[edit]
Röhm's homosexuality
In the 1960 chronicle The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, author William L. Shirer says that many of the early Nazis were homosexual including Ernst Röhm. Shirer further stated that Lieutenant Edmund Heines, whom Ernst Röhm had appointed first as his deputy and then later as leader of the Munich branch of the S.A., was not only a homosexual but a convicted murderer. Historian and University of Bremen professor Lothar Machtan says in his book The Hidden Hitler that after the failed 1923 Beer Hall Putsch in Munich, Ernst Röhm spent 15 months in prison, during which time he became a close, personal friend of Adolf Hitler. Machtans book states that former Freikorps men knew "a lot about Adolf Hitler's homosexuality from back in Munich," for instance, his liaison with young Edmund Heines whom he says was also one of Ernst Röhm's lovers whose response to Hitler's criticism of his lifestyle was as follows: "Adolf hasn't the slightest reason to open his trap so wide - one word from me, and he'll shut up for good!" (p.212)

Professor Machtan writes that the young painter Martin Schdtzl accompanied Ernst Röhm to Bolivia and in February of 1934 when Röhm assumed command of the SA, Schdtzl was appointed to his staff. Röhm established a sort of gay network within the S.A., assigning prominent posts to gay friends and lovers. William L. As well, Machtan wrote that another of Röhm's favorites was Karl Ernst, whom William L. Shirer described as a former ex-bouncer in a homosexual café, who was given the nickname "Frau Rohrbein" because of his relationship with Paul Rohrbein, the S.A. commander in Berlin. After meeting Ernst Röhm, Karl Ernst had a meteoric rise from a leadership position in the S.A. to a seat in the Reichstag.

In his book, Professor Machtan also wrote that Hitler initially protected Ernst Röhm and others but eventually ordered the deaths of several high-ranking Nazis to prevent the secret of his homosexuality from surfacing after reports of their homosexuality began to surface in the media in response to the Nazi party hardliners asserting Paragraph 175.




[edit]
Röhm's return to Germany
In 1930, Hitler personally assumed command of the SA (storm troopers) as the new Oberster SA-Führer. Hitler sent a personal request to Röhm to return to Germany, offering him the position of Stabschef (Chief of Staff) of the entire Sturmabteilung. Röhm accepted the offer in 1931, introducing radical new ideas into the SA and staffing the senior SA leadership with his close friends and personal associates. Rumors also abounded that the SA leadership participated in homosexual activities, and Röhm's conduct as the SA Stabschef was soon under heavy criticism, particularly by the conservative German military hierarchy. Eventually, the closeted Röhm was outed by the leftist press.

The main function of the SA during the formative years of the Nazi Party had been that of a political army — namely, to supply the force to protect the party leadership and to attack and terrorize political opponents such as the Communist Red Front. Through violence and intimidation, the SA helped the Nazis become more powerful than the other political parties first in Munich and later throughout Germany.

[edit]
Downfall
Following the Nazis' ascent to power in 1933, the left wing of the Nazi Party — led by Röhm — continued to believe in the socialism inherent in the party's name. This radical faction of the party insisted on nationalization of large firms, profit sharing for employees, and cuts in the interest rates — all measures that were anathema to the business community that had supported Hitler's rise to power in 1933. Röhm himself spoke of "the second revolution" and vowed to act against what he termed reactionaries, much as the Nazis had acted against the Communists during their consolidation of power earlier that year.

Hitler moved swiftly to reassure the German business community. In so doing, a breach was opened between Hitler and the SA. The storm troopers, whose ranks were largely composed of dispossessed members of the working class, were anticapitalist in tendency and hoped to gain from the "revolution" they had helped win by their fighting in the streets. Hitler was of the opinion that the storm troopers were a political force who, once the Nazi Party had gained power, were no longer needed. Röhm, on the other hand, believed the SA was destined to be the germ of a "revolutionary" army for Hitler. While Röhm showed contempt for the Prussian military leadership, Hitler was well aware that he could not have come to power without the support of the Army, nor could he remain in leadership were the Army to withdraw its backing. Furthermore, Hitler realized he needed the Army's support to succeed the 86-year-old Paul von Hindenburg as President and Commander in Chief when von Hindenburg died.

In 1934, as it became clear that the president was weakening and approaching death, many factions in Germany devised schemes to position their own favorite candidates as von Hindenburg's successor. According to William Shirer's The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, a group of conservatives — including many within the armed forces — sought the return of Crown Prince Wilhelm, the son of Kaiser Wilhelm II, to Germany either as President or as head of a re-established German monarchy.

Germany's military leadership was incensed by Röhm's proposal in February 1934 that Germany's armed forces (the Reichswehr) be absorbed into a single organization wherein the SA would have a clear numerical superiority and thereby become dominant. The Army viewed the SA as a brawling mob of undisciplined street fighters, and the tales of homosexuality and "corrupt morals" were well known by the Army; the officer corps unanimously rejected Röhm's proposal, citing the destruction of German military honor and discipline, were Röhm's brawling storm troopers to gain control of the armed forces.

Hitler was presented with the opportunity to meet with the leaders of Germany's armed services on April 11 on board the pocket battleship Deutschland while reviewing the military's spring maneuvers in East Prussia. In the company of Defense Minister von Blomberg, Hitler met with army commander in chief General von Fritsch and naval chief Admiral Raeder. Hitler advised the commanders of the deterioration of Hindenburg's health and proposed that the Reichswehr support Hitler's succession to the presidency. In exchange, Hitler offered to reduce the size of the SA, suppress Röhm's ambitions, and guaranteed the Reichswehr as Germany's sole bearer of arms. Shirer's account states that it was likely that Hitler also seduced the military leaders with a promise to expand both Army and Navy in exchange for their support.

The tension within the Nazi Party worsened after further calls from Röhm for the "second revolution" (this time against the conservative power structure) and after a showdown between Röhm and Hitler in early June.

Similarly, the conservative industrialists that had supported Hitler's rise to the chancellorship in 1933 continued to voice unease over the socialist leanings Röhm shared with the Strasser brothers, in particular their calls for the second revolution. Through their close relationship with President von Hindenburg, both conservative groups — the officer corps and the industrialists — made their displeasure known to the president.

In early June 1934, President von Hindenburg, though ailing, conveyed an ultimatum to Hitler that, unless the tension in Germany was put to an end, von Hindenburg was considering a declaration of martial law. Knowing that such a step would cause power to slip out of his hands — possibly forever — Hitler decided he could no longer forestall honoring his pact with the Reichswehr to suppress the SA and end its plans for the second revolution.

[edit]
Death
In spite of the pressure applied on him, Hitler postponed his decision to do away with his long-time right-hand man to the very end. He appealed to Röhm not to press for the second revolution. Only when the differences appeared irreconcilable did Hitler finally make up his mind that Röhm had to go. Hesitating to the last, but spurred on by Göring and Himmler with what were likely highly colored accounts of "treason" by Röhm and the SA, Hitler was finally convinced to order Göring and Himmler to put down the "plot" by Röhm. Both Göring and Himmler had their own scores to settle and consolidated their own power by putting down the SA and its leader.

This led to Röhm being shot to death without trial during the purge of the SA — the so-called Night of the Long Knives. Following his arrest by Hitler himself at the resort of Bad Weissee on 30 June, Röhm was held at Stadelheim Prison in Munich. There, on 2 July, he was visited by SS-Brigadeführer Theodor Eicke (then Kommandant of Dachau) and SS-Sturmbannführer Michael Lippert, who shot Röhm at point-blank range after he had refused to commit suicide with a pistol given to him. Röhm may not have realized whom had ordered his execution as his last words were reported as "Mein Führer, mein Führer". The measures taken by Hitler's followers during that weekend were made legal after the fact by a decree in the Law Regarding Measures of State Self-Defense on 3 July. Ernst Röhm was buried in Westfriedhof (West Cemetery) in Munich

[Baja 1000]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/8/8f/Ah_angeklagte.jpg/400px-Ah_angeklagte.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ah_angeklagte.jpg)
Early leaders of the Nazi Party: Ernst Röhm (photo right) standing next to Adolf Hitlerhttp://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/3e/Ernst_R%C3%B6hm.jpg

[Baja 1000]

The tension within the Nazi Party worsened after further calls from Röhm for the "second revolution" (this time against the conservative power structure) and after a showdown between Röhm and Hitler in early June.

[Baja 1000]

If Röhm had a idea Hitler was going to kill him he prob would had done Hitler in first. with a good chance WW II would had not started. on the CON side Röhm prob would had jointed the soviets " real bad news for England and the U.S. SO thank Hitler in many ways.

[hipunk]

.
We seem to have a disagreement here. I can't help but look at this with my language background and my studies on oppression and propaganda. Bigotry and hatred are allowed in a society and spread through many channels. I feel that the jocular use of the word gay is similar to the use of the N word in such phrases as "I'm not your nigger;" while not reprehensible in this particular use, time has taught us to disapprove of the negative reference to an oppressed sector of our society. The same could be said of the phrase, "jew you out of."

I agree that the language is not the first item on the list of how to end homophobia. First we got to get them to stop killing us. These types of phrases play differently in the mind of the person who murders gays, especially when Gay, Lesbian, and Bi people think their use is okay. The two problems are intertwined. I would say it isn't the first item of business, however it may be the easiest to tackle. The 19 year old boy with a baseball bat who lives down the corner, I may never be able to reach him. But I might be able to affect his little brother.

Self Control, liechti, you both seem to disagree with me. That's fine. But liechi, in your country of Belgium, do they use the term Gay, in the same derogatory meaning that we do in America? If so, it's use is much more wide spread than I realized, which makes me even more confirmed of it's potential to condem homosexuality. And while I enjoy your opinion on many subjects, I doubt very much that you have experience with the phrase, "I'm not your nigger," or "Jew me out of..." And sorry, I'm not going to search for the clinical study on the use of the word and it's implication to oppression, though there probably is such a study, or several studies in the field that support my contention. So, until you run across them in your study of linguistics, you will probably feel the same way. That's fine.

We seem to disagree, that's fine.

Baja_1000, while I appreciate the history lesson, I haven't learned anything new. I wonder if a link to the source material would have served your purpose. I guess, I don't really understand the point you're trying to make.


.

[Baja 1000]

.

Baja_1000, while I appreciate the history lesson, I haven't learned anything new. I wonder if a link to the source material would have served your purpose. I guess, I don't really understand the point you're trying to make.


.Baja 1000 (http://www.hipforums.com/forums/member.php?u=36545) vbmenu_register("postmenu_2210421", true);
Guest

Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 38


http://www.hipforums.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif
IM NOT trying to portrait all gays as Nazi just the fact that lots of people think all homosexual man fall into the catagory of limp wrist femine type guys . well they are in for a big suprise. by the way the highest medal given to a soldier and medic during the Gulf war was given to a homosexual soldier who was step all over once he openly admited he was gay.

[GanjaPrince]

somebody said, "they loved to use the word in multiplayer games how ever i have way to shut them up, the fact that Spartans and some of Hitler right hand mans were homosexual along with many other military giants the sense of gay man being weak goes right out the window " they shut up very fast""


No offense dude, by going around killing people and being military like IS WITHOUT A DOUBT, ABSURD AND WEAK. It is no courageous... violense and military action is BASED IN FEAR OF DEATH.

The strong man resist violence without fear through LOVE AND NONVIOLENCE, like Gandhi, Jesus, Martin Luther King and so on. Reguardless of the issue of homosexuality, since you brought it up, almost in a way to rub it in... This attitude that Hitler and the Spartans are somehow not weak is a problem. Like they are "tough guys" BULLSHIT.... Gandhi is tough, Hitler is a wimp.
http://www.flatrock.org.nz/topics/odds_and_oddities/assets/brains_courage_gandhi.jpg

Instead you should say there is no link between homosexuality and being a nice kind person... plenty of homosexaul are evil violent fear filled assholes, just as plenty of hetrosexuals are.

[Baja 1000]

No offense dude, by going around killing people and being military like IS WITHOUT A DOUBT, ABSURD AND WEAK. It is no courageous... violense and military action is BASED IN FEAR OF DEATH.

. in that case we would be still be the niggers or slave of the british empire . im not usiing the N word as a racist coment but as a slave example.

[Baja 1000]

Arguably no civilization, except for the Ancient Greek, were more gay than the Japanese.
None.
Just because they are a distant second, don’t hold it against them. Anyone would come a distant second being compared to the Greeks.
The Greeks were so gay that they literally saw no purpose for women.
The Japanese were so gay that their was more social status