:::::Right I agree, so I don't understand why we need to be using descriptive things, like "vulgar" or "homophobic."  Why go on with this attempt to source and use language like that when there doesn't seem to be much need for them at all?  It's not that I mind being reverted, I just don't understand why . Do we really need to say it's vulgar when we give the definition?  Maybe we can pretty well source "homophobic" to CNN ("play on deep-seated fears"), but that reaction is the most we need.  "Vulgar" etc. isn't necessary when the definition allows the reader to judge.  The current lead is weaseled in order to accommodate judgments. (I won't be able to edit for a day or so, BTW.) BE——Critical__