you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]MezozoicGayoldschool gay 16 insightful - 12 fun16 insightful - 11 fun17 insightful - 12 fun -  (13 children)

Homosexuality is regressive word, we need to change it for homogenderuality. So even if you both non-binary, but of same non-binary gender and love each other, then you are homogenderual people!

[–]fuck_reddit 11 insightful - 4 fun11 insightful - 3 fun12 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

I just love (/s) how the logical conclusion re: non-binary people is that only a small subset of the total population would be attracted to them (under their own gender theories), but instead, they've created new rules so that everyone is supposed to be attracted to non-binary people. Joy

[–][deleted] 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

'Gay The adjective used to describe people whose enduring physical, romantic, and/ or emotional attractions are to people of the same sex (e.g., gay man, gay people). Sometimes lesbian (n. or adj.) is the preferred term for women. Avoid identifying gay people as "homosexuals" an outdated term considered derogatory and offensive to many lesbian and gay people'

https://www.glaad.org/reference/lgbtq

If only you were joking.....

[–]indeepshadowsBi woman 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Tbh I'm shocked they still call it same-sex attraction, not same-gender one.

[–]oofreesouloo⚡super lesbian⚡ 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Jeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeez

[–]RedditHatesLesbiansHomosexual Not Queer 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Ehh. If someone referred to me as "the homosexual" it would be pretty weird. Or if someone referred to a group of gay men as "a bunch of homosexuals" I can see how that would have negative connotations. It's just weird for day to day social function. Kind of like "yeah, that's a female." It's a bit clinical which could show detachment and be a bit dehumanising. But that's just my take.

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

'It's a bit clinical which could show detachment and be a bit dehumanising'

Or it's just an adjective used to describe a person or group of persons.

There is no requirement with language to add unnecessary emotional baggage to words. Yet people are doing it more and more. It is nothing but bunkum. Absolute horseshit. Utterly pointless, without merit or value or reason. But that's just my take.

'Or if someone referred to a group of gay men as "a bunch of homosexuals"

What's the difference (rhetorical btw there is none) between 'a bunch of gay men' or 'a group of homosexual men'.

Answer absolutely none what so ever. Except the completely arbitrary decision YOU MADE to make one 'ok' and the other 'problematic'. The words gay man and homosexual man are descriptors for the EXACT SAME THING. You chose to make one different to the other.

Stop policing language. Stop policing OTHER PEOPLES language. And stop telling others what words are 'ok' to use to describe themselves.

You do not get to do that. Ever. I define me, however I please, using whatever words and language I please to use.

Offence is taken NOT given. If you CHOOSE to find the word homosexual offensive that's on you.

[–]RedditHatesLesbiansHomosexual Not Queer 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Relax. I don't care what people say, I'm just providing the justification. I'm not the type to get enraged by words. It's just words. But there's always subtext and connotations behind every word. There's a lot of nuance in the English language. Ever been to a English literature class and had your English teacher pick apart a sentence like "the curtains were blue" and derive undertones of sadness and how the curtain represents the veil between life and death or some BS? Same thing. People can easily see what they want to see in words. I've been called, mockingly, "Leeeesbian" by my peers and it was definitely used negatively then, doesn't mean lesbian is a negative word or that it's offensive in any way, but intent mattered in that context. If anything this dictionary definition shows the innate homophobia in our society that means people derive the subtext of offensive from the word homosexual. It's not me you have your qualms with.

I'm browsing a GC subreddit. I'm not telling you to stop saying anything, I'm just playing devil's advocate. I'd really appreciate it if you'd stop soap boxing and putting words in my mouth. You're getting outraged over nothing, kind of like the people who find homosexual offensive.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

Perfectly relaxed, but thanks for the passive aggressive balderdash.

As to the rest.

yawn

[–]ThiccDropkickGay 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

You were the one throwing around accusations with nothing behind them

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

yawn You are boring mate, go take your faux concern and shove it where the sun don't shine.

[–]ThiccDropkickGay 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

With an attention span like that I can see how you struggle to understand interaction. Have a nice day

[–]MezozoicGayoldschool gay 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If someone referred to a group of gay men as "a bunch of gays" it would have negative connotations as well. Phrasing matters.

[–]MezozoicGayoldschool gay 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

sometimes lesbian

Even here they somehow put lesbians in a worse position.