<p>I too used gyp all the time, never realizing it had a connotation to gypsies. I have heard the term “jew down” or whatever, but never used it too much just because I never really grew up with it. In time these phrases get edited out of the language. No one ever says ■■■■■■■ rigged” anymore, it is now “jerry rigged.” I think the same thing might become of so gay, but maybe not because it’s use is very, very common. I have yet to see someone offended by that. Then again I know pretty much no gays at all.</p>
<p>Agreed. My point is that most kids using the term aren’t trying to be hateful when they use slang. When someone says something that is offensive to me, I usually try to understand their intent rather than the specific word choices. Sometimes people are a little too quick to be offended and sometimes you have to let things slide, especially when you know the character of the person involved as a whole.
It’s almost impossible not to offend somebody…
I do agree that I cringe when I hear “■■■■■■■■” thrown around so much today. I remember when I was a kid that was a standard schoolyard insult. Society was able to pretty much end that , however I have noticed a recent resurgence of usage. I have heard pop stars and talk show hosts alike use it freely and I’m sorry to say that many teens today have heard it so frequently that it does not seem strange to them. I have discussed this with my kids.</p>
<p>^Pamom–that’s exactly how I feel about “so gay.” It’s that cringe-worthy to me. I’d like to see more awareness of the roots, whatever the intent, so that, like “■■■■■■■■,” it eventually falls out of polite usage.</p>
<p>Okay garland - I understand your point. I guess we have heard it used so much by people who do not mean it that way that it does not seem insulting anymore. Like some poeple don’t think “■■■■■■■■” is insulting.</p>
<p>Joev - you are right about some of those terms. They have been phased out of usage by the majority (thank goodness) and perhaps “that’s gay” can be as well. I’m fine with that…when I was in college we used “weak” ( that was weak, weak effort, etc) Worked then…maybe I can start a new trend?</p>
<p>I can’t believe people make a fuss over something so silly. Freedom of speech must mean nothing to some of you.</p>
<p>As we’ve discussed on other threads, freedom of speech is a legal guarantee not an excuse for offensive behavior. In this case, I think most people agree that the girl probably shouldn’t have been disciplined, and certainly shouldn’t have recieved anything worse than a detention. However, trying to phase out use of a word that can be hurtful to others is just common decency. Sure, people have a right to say what they want. By the same token, other people have the right to respond with dissaproval.</p>
<p>Agreed. The consequences for word-usage are often too much for my taste and make me think of 1984.</p>
<p>My 80 y/o word-loving mother laments the fact that the word ‘gay’ has been hijacked to its current common usage versus what it meant in the 1800s-1950s (including the gay 90s - 1890s that is). She said back then it evoked a certain feeling of happiness and … gaiety. I agree with her that it’s too bad that this particular word’s usage has been usurped.</p>
<p>Maybe the student’s defense should be that she had just watched a slew of old movies and expressed her thoughts on how happy the mood of the school was in terms of the original meaning of the word. :)</p>
<p>
I agree. The school likely told the girl or the students at large that the language would not be tolerated in the same way that a lot of potentially offensive language isn’t tolerated at elementary, middle and high schools.</p>
<p>I agree that it’s inappropriate to use the word “gay” to mean lame or stupid. I also think that it’s appropriate for people who misuse the word to face some kind of mild sanction.</p>
<p>I feel the same way about how “■■■■■■■■” is inappropriately used by many people. And, of course, the word “■■■■■■” is even worse.</p>
<p>NSM, I agree with you.</p>
<p>And are lame people going to feel offended when something or somebody is called “lame?” Or has “lame” been replaced by “physically handicapped” the way garbagemen has been replaced by sanitation engineers or some such er… lame circumlocution?</p>
<p>They probably went too far or whatever. I mean it’s not really an illegal thing. Apparently one of the freshmen teachers at my schools has the student attend a GSA meeting with him if he catches them using it inappropriately three times. But there’s no other consequence. </p>
<p>The use of “gay” and “■■■■■■■■” to describe negative things disturbs me, I won’t lie. I have always felt this way. It was not the way I was raised. Unfortunately I have to hear it so much because of the age group I’m in. I usually do say something, offhand. Basically just “No, it’s really not ■■■■■■■■” or whatever. No one has ever reacted negatively. They just stop saying it around me, which is fine with me if they want to use it elsewhere. I’m just not going to have a conversation like that. Some people use it as a crutch word and that’s unfortunate. When everything is “gay” and “■■■■■■■■”, you really have to wonder.</p>
<p>People can spin it any way they want but ultimately this usage just equates things that shouldn’t, (IMHO) be negative, to things that are negative. The word “gay” hasn’t meant “happy” at any point in this generation’s lifetime, I mean let’s be real here. They know what they’re saying when you get down to it. It’s just become socially acceptable. When you say things like that, you don’t necessarily know who around you is affected by homosexuality or mental disability. And for people who are, it does hurt. How would you like to have a mentally disabled brother or sister, who your family adores because they are a PERSON just like any of us, and then go to school and hear every other child call everything “■■■■■■■■” in a negative sense? Yes it is hurtful. It is beyond me how people can have such little respect for the people around them. Maybe they don’t think about it. It is also beyond me how they could not even consider that it might be hurtful. You know I really don’t care that much if people want to hurt others and be disrespectful - that’s their choice. But I figure they might as well know that yes, some people don’t consider this cute or funny or cool or whatever it’s supposed to be.</p>
<p>^^^I think that’s a good, balanced commentary, Princedog.</p>
<p>I actually thought that “gay” meant “lame” nowadays, until I asked my 16 year old son.</p>
<p>He said he does not use the term, because he understands that there IS an underpinning of bigotry toward homosexual people inherent within it. But, as Princedog pointed out, not all kids are that aware; therefore the consequences should be minor, if any.</p>
<p>Agreed, Princedog. I’m just thinking that middle school is the age of the schoolyard bully and the mean girls. They will use words whose real meaning they don’t quite understand in order to hurt. They may not realize that whole groups of people are thereby also hurt.</p>
<p>It is interesting to connect this thread to the one about the Asian girl being insulted by a Hapa and the teacher not saying anything. Is calling someone “Fried Rice” any less hurtful than calling someone gay or ■■■■■■■■?</p>
<p>Okay, then what words do people use for slang/idoimatic usage? That won’t offend anybody?</p>
<p>If our most infamous four-letter-word is described in the dictionary as a “meaningless intensifier,” then if you substitute it with another word which sounds similar, then what? Does it not mean the same thing? Is it more acceptable since it itsn’t the word itself? Heh, we can actually get away with typing it on certain forums…:D…but does it mean the same thing? </p>
<p>So if I buy a “pre-owned” car as opposed to a “used” car, what am I getting? Maybe just a BMW that costs more since it is preowned and not used. Is being “disabled” better than being “handicapped” or “crippled” or “lame”? Or are we just forced to attaching nice-sounding names to something that isn’t so nice, in order to make it sound better?</p>
<p>Some of the people are here appalling. The fact that “gay” is synonymous to stupid is definitely offensive. How could some people miss that?</p>
<p>Sure it, offensive, as is calling someone ■■■■■■■■. But should that land individuals or schools in court? That’s the question. I’ve been offended many times. I’ve never contemplated taking anyone to court over it, though.</p>
<p>“mentally handicapped” - Don’t you mean mentally challenged or even more correctly differently enabled?</p>
<p>Political Correctness has gone wild in this country. I don’t particularly like the word ■■■■■■■■ but am not willing to make the jump all the way to differently enabled. That is so gay.</p>
<p>As for the “That is so gay” phrase I always felt it did refer to something a stereotypical Nancy Boy would say, do or approve of. Still unless it is directed at someone I wouldn’t think it should be a punishable offence. After all it is an expression of ones values. Do we really want the school board or the teacher or the state school board forcing their values on everyone else?</p>
<p>Silly question. Of course you do if you are a liberal. But what if the school board falls into the nefarious hands of the Christian right? Or worse yet Dick Chaney? Would you still want them forcing their values down your kids throat?</p>
<p>higherlead:</p>
<p>I was with you until you turned it into a anti-liberal screed.</p>