Talk:Gay/Archive 2

message: One theory is that the term is short for "gay deceiver."  "Gay deceiver" was once  a familiar phrase, though it began as a Victorian term for a love 'em and leave 'em  ladies' man (the second verse of "Dixie," for example, begins:  "Ol mistis married Will the Weaver, Will he was a gay deceiver, Look away...").  In the years when gay men stayed "in the closet," deceiving the world as to their real interests, a coded inquiry from one to another was "Are you a gay deceiver?"  
:The article is out of date (June 2006). It is now common amongst youth in US, UK and Australia to use the term 'gay as a general pejorative term. "That music band is gay (or so gay)..." does not indicate homophobia. Please research this fact and alter. Please consult the new version of the Oxford English Dictionary for confirmation. I think this warrants valid inclusion as may people are unnecessarily offended due to their own ignorance of youth culture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.184.30.16 (talk • contribs) 
::Really? Read it properly. Try going all the way to the end. Or does it display "ignorance of youth culture" to expect you to do that? Paul B 11:19, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Regarding rather more long-term etymology: I just removed the claim that 'gay' came from Latin gaius - it's not even mentioned in the referenced source (etymonline)!!.  Gaius was a personal name in Latin, but I'm not aware of it as an adjective or even common noun, and it's not listed as such in any Latin dictionaries I've looked at.  I suppose French gai could have been related to Latin gaudere ('rejoice'), but the fact that more serious etymologists than I don't seem to think so puts me off that idea. garik 11:58, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology 

message: It seems that not a day goes by without some bright little 12-year-old getting the ingenious idea of editing this article to say "Gay is a term for [insert name of boy in editor's class whom he doesn't like]". The only really effective way to stop this is to protect the page. Do other Wikipedians think this is necessary? — JIP | Talk 14:35, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The vandalism is minimally harmful. It takes about three seconds for a sysop to revert this and about fifteen for anyone else. If this page starts getting hit ten times per hour like some slashdotted articles have been, I would recommend protection. Guanaco 22:11, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protected? 

message: It seems a little inappropriate here that in the see also section "Dyke" and "Fag" appear.  I mean, if you go to African-American, in the see also section, you're not going to see the n-word.  Gilliamjf 03:40, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is in fact an article on Nigger. Dyke and Fag are not - these days - merely insults, as I'm sure you know. Anyway, "Gay" originated as essentially a slang word, so it is reasonably comparable to the other two. "African-American" is not slang, and is only applicable to the U.S. Paul B 13:14, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a little besides the point, but African-American translates into German as Afro-Amerikaner.  I am fairly certain that this term is not unique to American English.  Gilliamjf 06:36, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't follow. The fact that the phrase translates into German, or any other language, does not alter the fact that it only applies to the USA. In German it still refers only to black people who are Americans, not to black people who are Germans. "American" here refers to the USA, not to other countries in the Americas. Paul B 16:04, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  See also section 

message: Someone has added the following sentence just after the Bringing Up Baby section - "Gay is slang used among government officials for high ranking CIA field operatives." Is it? Can anyone clarify? Even if true, this is misplaced, since its presumably a recent usage, and should not be placed on a para about the 30s-40s. I have deleted it, provisionally. Paul B 17:22, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It would definitely need a citation, and clarification if it were to be reincluded.  -Seth Mahoney 16:47, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gay CIA 

message: "Gay used as an adjective, describes traits associated with gays and lesbians, their culture, or perceived lifestyle." This usage would seem to be less common, since "gay" is usually associated with homosexual men, rather than with lesbians. Isn't this the reason for the increasing usage of "LGBT"? SouthernComfort 16:05, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think differences in usage are regional (I can check to see if there are any studies to confirm that - it would make an interesting sociolinguistic addition).  It wouldn't be unusual here on the northwest coast of the US to hear someone use the phrase "gay woman" to refer to a lesbian, or to hear a lesbian describe herself as gay.  Gay as a plural noun is also often used to refer to gay men and lesbians (to me, it would be weird to hear someone say "gays" - a word I'm bothered by anyway - and not mean to include lesbians).  However, that brings up another difference - gay used as an adjective is also commonly used to describe people in a way that doesn't specifically reference gay culture, gay traits, or any so-called gay lifestyle.  A nearly unreadable lipstick lesbian shopping for new shoes could just as well be called gay as an uberbutch dyke repairing her pickup truck.  LGBT, in my understanding, is used not so much to specifically include lesbians (who have been for a long time included under, say, gay rights movements) but to specifically include bisexual people and trans people, and in exceptionally liberal circles has been expanded to LGBTQQI+some other letters I don't remember.  LGB was used for a while to specifically include bisexual people, but I don't recall ever seeing LG.  -Seth Mahoney 16:46, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright, considering regional differences and so forth (it's been a long while since I've heard the term "gay woman" as a common phrase), how about this version: "Gay, used as an adjective, sometimes describes traits associated with both gay men and lesbians, their culture, or perceived lifestyle"? SouthernComfort 17:16, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That works.  It sounds a liitle like 'gay' as an adjective only sometimes describes all the things that follow, rather than describing traits of gay men and sometimes women, but I can't think of a way to further clarify.  -Seth Mahoney 17:41, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't think of a better phrasing either. SouthernComfort 18:10, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accuracy of intro statement 

message: Glad to see this page is finally (semi)protected.  It must have been getting vandalised 5 times a day for the last few weeks.  Exploding Boy 06:51, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Five times an hour, more like. Sceptre (Talk) 15:18, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protection 

message: Disambiguation IS neccesary. The original meaning of the word is joyous and happy, it remains present in many literary texts, it can be found in text and explanation sought that is not given here. In addittion, my elderly relatives often use the term in this sense. By what right can the word be wholly appropriate - it is unacceptable. Further, the word 'gay' is not just used as an insult to homosexuals, it is also a word meaning 'sad' or 'pathetic' or 'uncool' or 'failure' amongst the youth of Britain without a thought to sexual orientation. This is the most common usage of the word by far. If this term should be classified by most common usage, it should be explained as such.
Shouting at the wind does not change the fact that 'gay' is not a technical term, or that the rainbow flag was appropriated from the hippy movement and the flag of the Cuzco area of Peru and is being reappropriated for that reason. Things change - for or against you, it is fact that should be represented 194.112.58.29 03:25, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, disambiguation is not necessary, as it's not an insult anymore but a cultural and sexual description. "The most common usage of the word by far" is to describe homosexual men. FCYTravis 04:08, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Disambiguation is provided.  See gay (disambiguation), which links to other interwiki disambiguation pages.  GilliamJF 12:16, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguation neccesary 

message: Could somebody who is allowed to amend please correct the spelling of 'connetations' to 'connotations'? MichaelMaggs 10:04, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for pointing that out. Done. Paul B 10:10, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spelling error in Pejorative usage section 

message: If we're going to put links to "scientific" articles (which I believe are closer to pseuo-science) which purport to identify markers of homosexuality, we should also include scientific research on markers of heterosexuality. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by WikipediaExpert (talk • contribs) .
:That would belong in our Biology and sexual orientation article, not the Gay article. FCYTravis 18:50, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scientific markers 

message: I think the development of this word's usage to mean "homosexual" has little to do with it's connection to "carefree" and "happy."
After WWI, social clubs for men pooped up all over metropolitan America, and Greenwich Village was booming. Lawyers, bankers, actors, writers, academics all formed private clubs in New York City. In the Village, there were alot of homosexuals, and they wanted a social club as well. They bought a building on Gay St. and called their club The Gay St. Social Club (because they obviously couldn't call it the homosexual's social club). 
In order to avoid discrimination, the members began to refer to themselves as the "gays."
:Interesting claim. Do you have any references for it? --FOo 05:35, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I can find no references to a "gay st social club". The notion that the sexual meaning was influenced by Gay St because of its association with bohemian culture is already mentioned in the article. In fact, it was a largely black community, the home of a number of black musicians. I suspect it's just that Gay St is in the West Village, and so people have assumed that there must have been a "gay" hang out there at some point, so assert that there actually was, and so the modern meaning emerged. Anyway, I haven't yet seen good evidence for this theory. See Gay Street (Manhattan) Paul B 11:35, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure you've put this comment in the right place, but I like it.  It's a very unprovable thing, but the words have certainly acquired such baggage each that your distinction is a pleasing one:) garik 03:43, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why homosexuals are "GAY" 

message: I find this category to be disruptive trolling.  Indeed, the so-called pejorative use of the word gay is documented, but for gay to be considered a pejorative name for someone as a category is POV.  I want to remove this category, which is being misused.  GilliamJF 20:48, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it should be removed. As a label for people it is not pejorative. As a prejorative term, it is not a label for people. Paul B 00:24, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly.  Labelling gay as such in a general sense is inappropriate and misleading.   GilliamJF 03:16, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok... sounds reasonable if we are trying to remove the category. - Stephanie Daugherty (Triona) - Talk - Comment - 04:50, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have reservations about removing the category from the article, as it is certainly used as a general pejorative term in everyday parlance.  However, I believe these concerns are assuaged by the fairly well-developed "Pejorative non-sexualized usage" section. This said, I disagree wholeheartedly with Gilliam's claim that this is disruptive trolling.  I think a legtimate argument can be made for gay to be in the category of pejorative terms for someone--it is used that way, after all. Zenosparadox 05:12, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Nonsense, you are confusing a pejorative term with a stereotype. The pejorative usage oroginates with the connotations of "camp" and "kitsch" but is not used as a pejorative label for a category of people. Paul B 08:21, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Your reply indicates that you miss the point entirely. If your friends don't like the French, then they might see someone French and say "he's French" in a "pejorative tone". That does not make "French" a pejorative label for French people. Likwise "Jew" is not a pejorative label for Jews, just because it is used pejoratively by people who don't like Jews. If an anti-semite called a non-Jew "Jewish" then he would be using the term as a pejorative label, but that precisely because it is used for connotation, not denotation. Paul B 08:10, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category:Pejorative names for people 

message: What's the difference between gay and queer? --Yancyfry jr 01:28, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Gay" applies specifically to homosexual men, while "queer" applies to gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people (it's an attempt to reclaim the word).--Archangel127 02:55, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Gay can apply to bi men too actually.~ZytheTalk to me! 17:51, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say that queer implyes everything that is not a hetero-normative, so even str8 persons who don't accept patriarchy, standard values....--Marko Jurcic 11:06, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think gay has multiple meanings - just like 'man;' (i.e. man & mankind) gay means both non-heterosexual and a homosexual man.  For me, the specific meaning is deduced from context.  I do think that the meaning of 'gay' is narrowing as the different identities within the 'gay' movement are becoming understood and visible.  In fact, Queer feels to me like it is taking on a  broader meaning for non-heterosexual.  However, gay still has that same connotation. Jcf608 19:55, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you look at the Queer article, it also points out that Queer has more of a radical, activist tone, which some who identify themselves as gay don't agree with or endorse. Jeffpw 14:21, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gay and Queer 

message: This page is looking great, good work people JayKeaton 10:13, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page is looking good (21 Oct 06) 

message: The term lesbian, on the other hand, is used exclusively in a gender-specific way to describe women who prefer sexual relations with other women.
This statement will lead some to assume that all lesbians have a choice in their sexuality. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.241.90.124 (talk • contribs) 
::I prefer apples to pears, but I don't have a choice about it. My preference is what my experience tells me. It's not a choice that I freely make. I don't decide to dislike pears, I just experience the fact that I do. I would much rather like them, but I just don't. Choice follows on from experiential preference. Stating that lesbians "prefer sexual relations with other women" is stating a fact about desire, not about choice. Paul B 10:38, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Try stewing the pears in water with sugar until they start to go a little brown. Drain the water, sprinkle some cinnamon on top and serve right away with a scoop of good quality vanilla ice cream JayKeaton 01:11, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That sounds even more revolting. Paul B 08:21, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Preference 

message: I have removed the following sentence:
"Grant's Hollywood background should leave little doubt as to what he meant--he knew the connotation of the term, even if the audience did not."
The sentence was about actor Cary Grant's ad-lib that he just "went gay" in the film Bringing Up Baby. Whoever added this can not presume to know what Cary Grant knew or did not know or make assertions that his "Hollywood background" would have somehow entitled him to know more than the average citizen.  We can assume lots of things, but that doesn't make them worthy of encyclopedia entries. ExRat 18:46, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed sentence. 

message: I have found that there has been repeated vandalism by new users and unregistered users.  Please semi-protect this page to help reduce the constant vandalism.
:It's nothing overwhelming. -- Steel 21:49, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's actually been semi-protected since November, and this still has not solved the problem entirely. -- Beland 22:33, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm of the opinion the sprotect is working splendidly. It cut out the vast majority of morons, idiots, and POV-pushers. The small residue left is easily fixed.  E. Sn0 =31337= Talk 22:35, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ... or "the Santorum is wiped away."  Joie de Vivre 23:53, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for semi-protection 

message: Gay refers to men, lesbian refers to women, homosexual could be both. Women are not "gay", they are either lesbian or homosexual. Can someone registered change that on the page?
:I see no problem with the current terminology.  E. Sn0 =31337= Talk 03:37, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I know plenty of lesbians who call themselves gay from time to time (or at least happy for others to do so). garik 13:03, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

text: type "gay woman" into google and see how many hits you get. A great many. Paul B 13:07, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There are regional variations as well.  'Gay' is rarely used to refer to women in the UK, but is more common in the US. However, I don't think the term 'Gay Women', would ever be seen as an inappropriate way to refer to Lesbians, even in English speaking countries where that usage is unusual.  Indisciplined 19:12, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gay only refers to men 

message: I understand the history of both the terms, but don't they mean the same thing at this point?  Do they each need their own article?  (Asking at Homosexual as well.) Joie de Vivre 23:04, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Response here.  As you've posted this question twice, I think it's probably best to keep all responses in Talk:Homosexuality to avoid two discussions of the same issue. garik 23:56, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, that does make sense.  Sorry.  Joie de Vivre 01:23, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why are "[[homosexual]]" and "[[gay]]" two separate articles? 

message: Sky TV's May 2004 show 'How Gay are You?', channel4.com's 'Gay-O-Meter' and similar put forward the idea that certain (heavily stereotyped) traits are 'gay' or 'straight' and therefore lead on the idea of being 'too gay' or 'too straight'.  Is this usage pejorative? At least it may be an interesting subject for discussion and possible inclusion in the article?
In fact 'How Gay are You?' drew a few complaints about whether it's use of the phrase 'too gay' was pejorative or not - this was ruled 'not in breach' of standards by OFCOM later that year in its September Program Complaints Bulletin.
Pault69 00:25, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: While it's an interesting question, I'm not sure if it can really be incorporated in this article. Of course, some of the other contributors may have some better ideas. :) Justin Eiler 00:32, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is it pejorative to call someone 'too gay' or 'too straight'? 

message: The word "respectable" occurs in two places, in both cases the context could be construed that gay people aren't "respectable". The first, under the sub-header of "Development of modern usage" states "...implying a willingness to disregard conventional or respectable sexual mores." The second is in the same section a few paragraphs down that begins with this (partial) sentence, "By the mid-century 'gay' was well-established as an antonym for 'straight' (respectable sexual behaviour)..."
If the use of "respectable" in these two cases merely cites what was respectable during the evolution of the word "gay" from its origins to present day usage I'd be fine with that: but the context isn't at all clear, in my opinion and could be seen as POV. Thank you. Rob Pommer 04:11, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see what you mean.  It obviously isn't POV and isn't intended to imply that a gay lifestyle isn't respectable, merely that it wasn't perceived as such.  But I suppose it could have been worded better, so I've changed it so that "respectable" appears only in past-tense sentences. garik 12:00, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV Query