From: joelp@cs.man.ac.uk (Joel Parthemore || Pharos Project)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: New queer terminology (was Re: The media, again)
Date: 18 Aug 92 20:22:18 GMT


nelson@reed.edu (Nelson Minar) writes:

>In article <Bt3KHt.3sC@sti.com> coyote@sti.com (Ron Lussier) writes:

>>Speaking for myself, I find it really amusing how gay terminology has changed
>>over the few years that I have been a member of the community.

>>(Translation for QN:  Gay = Queer
>>		      Community = Tribe)

>Well I won't touch "Tribe" for "Community" - I think it's sort of
>silly myself.

>But "Queer" is most definitely *not* "Gay". It's not just a different
>word for the concept, it's a new consciousness.


I kind of get Nelson's point, but I still have trouble grokking it.

Back during the earlier discussion of ``masculine''/``feminine'', I wanted to
ask Arnold Zwicky to come in with a word or two on nominalism:  every time
people start acting as if words have some *inherent* meaning, someone should
remind the assembled that, in the end, words mean what we say they mean....


	``When *I* use a word,'' Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone,
	``it means just what I choose it to mean---neither more nor less.''

	``The question is,'' said Alice, ``whether you *can* make words mean so
	many different things.''

	``The question is,'' said Humpty Dumpty, ``which is to be master---that's
	all''
		-- Lewis Carroll, THROUGH THE LOOKING GLASS


>That's the extreme personal stereotypes. On to the real reasons why
>"queer" is different from "gay".

>gay is apolitical
>queer is radical

Aaarghhhhh, no.  Look, I understand that ``queer'' is coming into a new
meaning and power, and it has an anger in it that often isn't attached to
``gay''.  As I become more self-loving and consequently angry at people and
social groups who have pigeonholed me, I feel a calling to more active, more
outspoken involvement:  a sense of ``queerness''.  That's good.

But, please:  when I've needed a label for myself and my sexuality, I've
always used ``gay''.  Why?  Because I fit or unconsciously desire to fit into
any apolitical stereotype?  No, certainly not!  I've used it because it was
the word in usage that came seemed to come closest to saying what I meant;
``queer'' wasn't really available till recently, and most places I go it still
isn't used much.  Does that mean the people are apolitical or have worn
crotches in their jeans?

Words, words, words:  words are nothing in the end, words are empty symbols.
It's what we mean by them that's important.  That's what makes PC speech so
silly:  I can use ``cocksucker'' as a compliment and ``gay'' as a curse.  How
do you think ``queer'' and ``faggot'' got reclaimed by gayfolk? -- because
they have no inherent meaning, and while others infuse them with hatred we can
infuse them with love.


>gay is exclusive to homosexual men
>queer is inclusive of women and gender/sex minorities

No, argggh, again!  ``Gay'' can and has been used inclusively of women (I've
used it that way already), and ``queer'' can be exclusively male (I've
certainly never thought of it as being inclusive of women, or minorities for
that matter).  (Mind you, this doesn't mean being insensitive to people to
whom ``gay'' *is* exclusively male, and to whom ``lesbian'', ``queer'',
``bisexual'' and so on are important self-affirming labels.  But I wonder
sometimes whether the arguments over words don't end up being a waste of
words.)

>gay is from a different era, the time of civil rights, Vietnam, women's
>lib, gay lib.

I really don't think of myself being from another era yet.  Hey, I don't
remember Vietnam, let alone the '60s civil rights marches.

>gay is a lifestyle

Don't box me up!  I can get enough of that from my parents, my brothers and
sisters.

I'm gay and proud of it!  Sure, I'm ``queer'' too, and probably ``Otherfolk''
and maybe ``Elven''.  But in the end, all words break down, return to being
symbols:  in the end, I'm just *me*.

Joel,
	 wanting somehow to reach across the net in virtual form to give Nelson
	 a long hug, to get the point across as bluntly as possible, because
	 physical contact goes beyond words, and because he thinks Nelson has
	 really nice feet....


>nelson@reed.edu \/       This is the time, and this is the record of the time

hecateae@cs.man.ac.uk \/    I no longer like the way you hold your pens... and
						    pencils; I no longer like it