DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
I suspect you're being facetious. You must be.
But if you are serious, there is a special degree irony to witness a non-queer declaring what they think the term ought to mean and when it should be used.
Queer?
- Thread starter mathman
- Start date
But if you are serious, there is a special degree irony to witness a non-queer declaring what they think the term ought to mean and when it should be used.
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
You are assuming the Write4U is a non-queer. That may not be the case.I suspect you're being facetious. You must be.
But if you are serious, there is a special degree irony to witness a non-queer declaring what they think the term ought to mean and when it should be used.
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
I know a bit about him. We've both been around a while.
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
Ah, so while he is a non-queer you'd agree that he is odd?
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Does my sexual orientation matter?
If I were homosexual, I'd be highly offended by the term "queer", which carries only negative connotations, but not by the term "gay" which carries a positive connotation.
The term "queer" is an invention by "heterosexual" people and is a term of derision and suggests a "threatening" aspect to human social interaction.
The term "gay" is an invention by "homosexual" people, and suggests a "positive" and "disarming" aspect of human social interaction.
Note that there are two separate definitions of "queer". The Oxford dictionary definition (see above) and the Wikipedia definition (see below).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queer
Last edited:
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Or threatening? (look at the Oxford dictionary definitions!)
p.s. you can call me "gay" anytime you want to.
Those were the people I hung out with many times, to my great delight and comfort.
I like "gay" people....
......... I am afraid of "queer" people.....
Last edited:
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
If this were a discussion about the appropriateness of the term "Negro", and you were offering you opinion about whether Negros should or should not be using it to describe themselves, it would certainly be significant if you were white.
So yes, it matters what your orientation is.
There are uncountable people who identify with the term queer, despite your personal opinion of it.
Again this is a zany form of irony. In this day and age, having someone decide for others how they should or can label themselves. This is a textbook example of Privilege.
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
That makes you a homophobe.I am afraid of "queer" people.....
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Noooo! Where ever did you get that notion? Homophobes are queer people. I am afraid of homophobes, not of homosexuals. Homosexuals are just people with a gender preference.
Homophobes are dangerous people.
The origin (etymology) of the term "queer" has nothing to do with gender at all.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/queer#Etymology
These are some of the original definitions. "deviant, aberrant, freak, freakish, suspicious, dubious, questionable, eerie, unnatural, unco, fishy, creepy, spooky, freaky, rum, off the wall, bizarro, suspect, doubtful, murky, dark, criminal, dishonest, corrupt, nefarious, crafty, deceitful, shifty, underhand, dishonorable, unscrupulous, unprincipled, fraudulent, illegal, unlawful, shady, bent".
Where do the above have anything to do with gender? And no, I did not invent those interpretations.
Reference to homosexuals came later and is really a bastardization of the English language by heterosexuals who viewed homosexuality as a sin.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queer
No one can convince me that the LGBT community is proud of that identifier, unless it is an expression of self deprecation.
If anybody had called my sister "queer", I'd have punched them in the face. She was a wonderful person in a loving relationship with another wonderful person that lasted 40 years.
I don't care how anybody else applies it, I refuse to use the term queer as a label (identifier) of a LGBT person. I believe it is pejorative, regardless of any tortured justification.
Last edited:
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
I suspect you are having a kneejerk misunderstanding of my perspective. You may want to reread the original statement. "I think the term robs the person from all positive character traits. The term should only be used for deserving individuals.", i.e. bad people who deserve to be called by that pejorative label.
Do you believe a gay person deserves the label of "queer"? I don't. So who is the homophobe?
Kinda doesn't matter what you think they deserve. Most gay people I know call themselves queer. They get to choose.
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Indeed, but heterosexuals don't get to make that choice. When they do it's derogatory.
Heterosexuals may want to take note of this courtesy.
Again, I'll post some of the original heterosexual definitions of the word "queer";
"deviant, aberrant, freak, freakish, suspicious, dubious, questionable, eerie, unnatural, unco, fishy, creepy, spooky, freaky, rum, off the wall, bizarro, suspect, doubtful, murky, dark, criminal, dishonest, corrupt, nefarious, crafty, deceitful, shifty, underhand, dishonorable, unscrupulous, unprincipled, fraudulent, illegal, unlawful, shady, bent".
I did not invent those definitions!
As heterosexual, I would not presume to have the right to use that word to identify a homosexual person.
White people don't get to use the term"nigger" either. Black people can choose to use it and do use it as a term of endearment.
Last edited:
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Understood, no offense intended. Just objective analysis.
Why not just call people what they want to be called? Is that so hard?
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Last edited:
I guess it is hard for you. You're a sad person.
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
I am just trying to heed Bells request. Your irrational persistence makes you a presumptuous ass.
Notes on Thoughts, &c.
• Queer is not nigger; it is not bitch. Still, it was used as an accusing and alienating word. The LGBT community consciously chose to celebrate queerness, in large part because everyone needs their flaming queers, so there is precisely no reason to make them some sort of negative prejudice.
• In its current form, queer includes gender fluidity, pansexuality, and any number of questions I wouldn't know to ask, according to its broad range.
• Questions of categorization do sometimes have applicable merits. There is a gay-rape fantasy that sometimes comes up in masculine homophobia. To the other, I remember when Joanie Caucus confessed her love to Andy Lippincott, and it was devastating: "Joanie," he said, "I'm gay." She started babbling, "Well, so what, lots of people are happy …―" Calmly, he simply spoke her name, "Joanie." She broke: "Oh, God." These years later, that should be just a bit from once upon a time, but I have no idea how a present-day Andy would address his own deadname, while there are apparently a bunch of cishet dudes who would think Andy an idiot for giving up her female privilege. More realistically, less than a month shy of TDoR, sister still dies because some dude gets pissed off that she isn't woman enough. I do agree, though, there are times when categorizations are just asking for problems; there are, after all, reasons why the boys aren't demanding to see one another's junk in the restroom to prove manhood sufficient for the right to piss while standing.
• Accusations about enforcers of political correctness reflect priorities and definitions of the accuser.
• Of course there is something queer about QAnon; grown-ass, ostensibly competent adults are reorienting their entire worldview in order to spend that much time thinking about celebrities getting on kids.
• Function is important, such as we might identify in basic comparisons.
• The point of accusations reflecting accusers cannot be reiterated enough.
• It is never quite clear what accusers against political correctness mean by their notions of special treatment; we might here reiterate something about the importance of fuction in comparisons.
• The point of equality and privilege ought to be self-evident, and note considerations of function, such as the question of victim and criminal, or them and us (or self).
• The string of letters only gets so long. That's why the Q for queer, and the plus sign to acknowledge the ranges we haven't figured out: LGBTQ+
• Trump is certainly queer, but there comes a point at which the applicable range of a term renders its context meaningless.
• Queer is not nigger; it is not bitch. Still, it was used as an accusing and alienating word. The LGBT community consciously chose to celebrate queerness, in large part because everyone needs their flaming queers, so there is precisely no reason to make them some sort of negative prejudice.
• In its current form, queer includes gender fluidity, pansexuality, and any number of questions I wouldn't know to ask, according to its broad range.
• Questions of categorization do sometimes have applicable merits. There is a gay-rape fantasy that sometimes comes up in masculine homophobia. To the other, I remember when Joanie Caucus confessed her love to Andy Lippincott, and it was devastating: "Joanie," he said, "I'm gay." She started babbling, "Well, so what, lots of people are happy …―" Calmly, he simply spoke her name, "Joanie." She broke: "Oh, God." These years later, that should be just a bit from once upon a time, but I have no idea how a present-day Andy would address his own deadname, while there are apparently a bunch of cishet dudes who would think Andy an idiot for giving up her female privilege. More realistically, less than a month shy of TDoR, sister still dies because some dude gets pissed off that she isn't woman enough. I do agree, though, there are times when categorizations are just asking for problems; there are, after all, reasons why the boys aren't demanding to see one another's junk in the restroom to prove manhood sufficient for the right to piss while standing.
• Accusations about enforcers of political correctness reflect priorities and definitions of the accuser.
• Of course there is something queer about QAnon; grown-ass, ostensibly competent adults are reorienting their entire worldview in order to spend that much time thinking about celebrities getting on kids.
• Function is important, such as we might identify in basic comparisons.
• The point of accusations reflecting accusers cannot be reiterated enough.
• It is never quite clear what accusers against political correctness mean by their notions of special treatment; we might here reiterate something about the importance of fuction in comparisons.
• The point of equality and privilege ought to be self-evident, and note considerations of function, such as the question of victim and criminal, or them and us (or self).
• The string of letters only gets so long. That's why the Q for queer, and the plus sign to acknowledge the ranges we haven't figured out: LGBTQ+
• Trump is certainly queer, but there comes a point at which the applicable range of a term renders its context meaningless.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queer
Wiki article gives a more comprehensive picture of usage. OED definition seems too narrow.
Wiki article gives a more comprehensive picture of usage. OED definition seems too narrow.