Since when was the term "homosexual" offensive?

[elliebean]

I don't know anyone who is gay, including myself, that uses "homosexual" in everyday talk about ourselves...am I the only one that's never heard it?

In common dialogue, face to face, I can see using homosexual as too "proper" or even improper, however my amazement is in its written form, in speaking of the gay, gay is preferred.  We learn something new daily.

Homosexual Community < Gay Community
Homosexual Man/Woman < Gay Man/Woman
Homosexual sex < Gay sex

Got it.  From hence forth...  

[AnimatedDirt]

I mean, you wouldn't say "gay acts", that would just sound like... some kind of "effeminate male" stereotyped behaviour. And that would be offensive.

[GAYtheist]

I don't know anyone who is gay, including myself, that uses "homosexual" in everyday talk about ourselves...am I the only one that's never heard it?

In common dialogue, face to face, I can see using homosexual as too "proper" or even improper, however my amazement is in its written form, in speaking of the gay, gay is preferred.  We learn something new daily.

Homosexual Community < Gay Community
Homosexual Man/Woman < Gay Man/Woman
Homosexual sex < Gay sex

Got it.  From hence forth...  

However, in describing from a biblical perspective in debate/discussing whether "God hates gays" vs "God loves gays", I think "homosexual acts" is the best form to use as the difference in interpretation.

Ok, Sadly, school, by and large has kept me busy and off the site, but I have to comment on this again. What you just said more or less proves my point. Many Christians, not all, but I see alot in my day to day wandering, see gay people as...lesser people. The word "homosexual" as you put it, is offensive for the exact reason that you just used it in. The term "Homo" is widely used in a mean spirited way, case in point being Fred Phelps, religious fuckwad extraordinare. The term "homosexual act"...OK, just say gay people fucking or something, because, frankly, I find it less annoying. I stated before that many religious people use the term homosexual to dehumanize us, and I mean it as exactly that. By calling me a homosexual, yes, you may be calling the kettle black, but you aren't seeing the intricate designs on the kettle that make it unique. You are in essence saying that all black kettle are just black kettles. By saying that someone is gay you are saying that one aspect of that persons like is that they love/fuck/make love to someone of the same gender. To me there is a rather large difference. One is clinical, the other is not.

[elliebean]

On the other hand, in more formal laguage, like in a biology textbook or in a research paper or something, where a "clinical" term is called for, homosexual would probably be most appropriate (which is, I think the problem Byron is having), as long as it's used as an adjective, not a noun.

Ok in certain contexts:
a homosexual male
a homosexual female
has homosexual fantasies
has homosexual sex

Not as ok:
a homosexual
the homosexuals
deviants
perverts

 

[Asmodean]

Ok in certain contexts:
a homosexual male
a homosexual female
has homosexual fantasies
has homosexual sex

Not as ok:
a homosexual
the homosexuals
deviants
perverts

Still, if someone supports a "red" political party, you can call that person "a red". Not politically correct textbook language, but that's not the language we use to speak anyways, now is it..?

I, for one, wouldn't mind in the slightest being refered to as "a bi" or any other adjective that applies. I can imagine the last part quite efficiently myself. For instance, "a bi" in my case would mean "a bi(sexual male)"

[elliebean]

Still, if someone supports a "red" political party, you can call that person "a red". Not politically correct textbook language, but that's not the language we use to speak anyways, now is it..?

Political identity is not the same as sexual or gender identity, though, is it? The problem is having your personhood  reduced to a mere descriptor of only one aspect of yourself, and especially, in many cases, an apsect that is being maligned (along with the individual) in the contexts in which the words are most often used.

For instance, "a bi" in my case would mean "a bi(sexual male human being)"

Fixed that for you.  

[AnimatedDirt]

Ok, Sadly, school, by and large has kept me busy and off the site, but I have to comment on this again. What you just said more or less proves my point. Many Christians, not all, but I see alot in my day to day wandering, see gay people as...lesser people. The word "homosexual" as you put it, is offensive for the exact reason that you just used it in. The term "Homo" is widely used in a mean spirited way, case in point being Fred Phelps, religious fuckwad extraordinare. The term "homosexual act"...OK, just say gay people fucking or something, because, frankly, I find it less annoying. I stated before that many religious people use the term homosexual to dehumanize us, and I mean it as exactly that. By calling me a homosexual, yes, you may be calling the kettle black, but you aren't seeing the intricate designs on the kettle that make it unique. You are in essence saying that all black kettle are just black kettles. By saying that someone is gay you are saying that one aspect of that persons like is that they love/fuck/make love to someone of the same gender. To me there is a rather large difference. One is clinical, the other is not.

So basically what you are telling me is that if anyone uses the word homosexual, it is in the mean-spirited sense everytime and thus the gay community wants that word stricken from the English language unless it is written in a text book?  What if a term was started that was, Same-sex Fucker?  Are you telling me you prefer anything BUT homosexual?  Btw, more people use the term "gay" as a dehumanizing term than they do "homosexual".  Have you spent any time with high school kids?  And not only them.

Now when I say I reserve the right to use it in biblical context, it is because Christian fanatics like the WBC, take God's hate of something to the extreme.  That "God hates fags".  Not at all correct.  What God hates are the homosexual acts...exactly like He "hates sinners"...not at all, He loves sinners, what He hates is the sin acts we do, which include homosexual acts but that those specific acts are normally committed by homosexuals.  God doesn't hate gays.  He hates gay acts as he does sinful acts.  Not the ones that commit them.

Btw, is the term "fag" more acceptable than homosexual?  Just wondering.

[Asmodean]

Political identity is not the same as sexual or gender identity, though, is it? The problem is having your personhood  reduced to a mere descriptor of only one aspect of yourself, and especially, in many cases, an apsect that is being maligned (along with the individual) in the contexts in which the words are most often used.

Yes, there is a point there. However, it may be just me, but I don't see the "reduction" of one's personhood to just a descriptor. I see a descriptor for one particular trait of one particular being or object or groups thereof. It may be, in context, that that particular trait is most relevant in an ongoing discussion or just the most interesting trait at the time.

For instance, "a bi" in my case would mean "a bi(sexual male human being)"

Fixed that for you.   Whoareyoucallin'... ... ...

 Oh wait... I am.  

[elliebean]

Btw, is the term "fag" more acceptable than homosexual?  Just wondering.

You can't be serious.  

[GAYtheist]

So basically what you are telling me is that if anyone uses the word homosexual, it is in the mean-spirited sense everytime and thus the gay community wants that word stricken from the English language unless it is written in a text book?  What if a term was started that was, Same-sex Fucker?  Are you telling me you prefer anything BUT homosexual?  Btw, more people use the term "gay" as a dehumanizing term than they do "homosexual".  Have you spent any time with high school kids?  And not only them.

Now when I say I reserve the right to use it in biblical context, it is because Christian fanatics like the WBC, take God's hate of something to the extreme.  That "God hates fags".  Not at all correct.  What God hates are the homosexual acts...exactly like He "hates sinners"...not at all, He loves sinners, what He hates is the sin acts we do, which include homosexual acts but that those specific acts are normally committed by homosexuals.  God doesn't hate gays.  He hates gay acts as he does sinful acts.  Not the ones that commit them.

Btw, is the term "fag" more acceptable than homosexual?  Just wondering.

Can you understand the words that are coming out of m mouth? Ok, one. I have stated a few times that it is usually the religious that use it to define us as a lesser being. Not all, but more than a few. Two, I agree with what you said of Fred. Three...I have had to fight so many times, physically and otherwise, because of peoples ignorance, in high school and out. Do not speak of what you do not know.

Four...

Btw, is the term "fag" more acceptable than homosexual?  Just wondering.

Won't even touch it.

[Asmodean]

Btw, is the term "fag" more acceptable than homosexual?  Just wondering.

You can't be serious.  :raised:

[AnimatedDirt]

Btw, is the term "fag" more acceptable than homosexual?  Just wondering.

You can't be serious.  

Quite.  I've heard it kicked around by my gay friends a few times.

Either way, I understand why homosexual is offensive and will curtail my use of the term, but I disagree with making it an unacceptable term just because, "I don't like the way they said that...".  I don't like the way many people say many things.  It doesn't make the WORDS offensive, but rather their self-righteous use and context.  The word simply means same-sex.

[The Magic Pudding]

[Either way, I understand why homosexual is offensive and will curtail my use of the term, but I disagree with making it an unacceptable term just because, "I don't like the way they said that...".  I don't like the way many people say many things.  It doesn't make the WORDS offensive, but rather their self-righteous use and context.  The word simply means same-sex.

It's hard to make gay sound bad, being short helps, but I think there's an onomatopoeic thing going on.

There must some people with a same sex orientation who associate gayness with a frivolous lifestyle.  I don't expect if would be a significant number, I can't recall hearing the feeling expressed.  I think to some degree the gay term was adopted as a rejection of the dark and dirty image straights cast on them.  Does a very serious person just accept the gay term for themselves and reject the old bright and sunny connotations?

[GAYtheist]

Btw, is the term "fag" more acceptable than homosexual?  Just wondering.

You can't be serious.  

Quite.  I've heard it kicked around by my gay friends a few times.

Either way, I understand why homosexual is offensive and will curtail my use of the term, but I disagree with making it an unacceptable term just because, "I don't like the way they said that...".  I don't like the way many people say many things.  It doesn't make the WORDS offensive, but rather their self-righteous use and context.  The word simply means same-sex.

Do you know the history of the word "fag" as it is used today? More than likely, the reason you hear gay people throw it around is the same reason you hear black people throw around the N-word. Doesn't make it good, or bad, but we understand it. And again, you are completely missing the point about the word "homosexual". Yes, it simply means "same-sex", we know that. Mind you there is a huge "but" at the end of that sentence. Most of the people I have ever heard using it, use it to clinicalize gay people. I.E. "The homosexual-agenda" "Homosexuals" or what have you. It's very clinical, and hurtful.

For the record, the word fag has a very dark history for gay people.

During my studies, and sadly I cannot find my sources for this anymore, so you can choose whether or not to believe this, when the religious fuck-wads of the day wanted to bun a "witch" they would also find as many gay people as hey could find, or accuse, tie them around the stake that the witch was to be burned on, douse them with flammable liquid, and put the torch to them. Make the "faggots". Kindling. People may say that fag is a ciggarette, but think about it. A ciggarette is still a stick that people but a flame to isn't it?

I am, clinically, a homosexual male. Yes, that it true. I love my boyfriend, and hope to call him husband one day, but we do not ever call our relationship homosexual, we do not call ourselves homosexual, we are GAY. Deal with it.

[AnimatedDirt]

...we are GAY. Deal with it.

Whoa!  I'm simply trying to figure it out.  I hold on offense to your lifestyle...