CreateDebate


Debate Info

81
109
yes, its not hurting any body. no, its disrespectful an drude
Debate Score:190
Arguments:74
Total Votes:231
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 yes, its not hurting any body. (42)
 
 no, its disrespectful an drude (52)

Debate Creator

jermannesimm(6) pic



Should people use the word "Gay" as a derogatory adjective?

should people at Lakeridge High School be aloud to use the word "Gay" as derogatory adjective?

 

yes, its not hurting any body.

Side Score: 81
VS.

no, its disrespectful an drude

Side Score: 109
2 points

There's a difference between "should" and "allowed".

Should they? Free country, their choice.

Be allowed to? Of course, as I said, free country.

I use gay to describe things that are lame, usually. No one says lame, though, so gay is just a better word. Considering that it has about 3 other definitions, adding lame really isn't that big a deal to me. I mean, gay means happy, colorful and homosexual. And with modern youth, it can also mean lame/stupid.

Side: yes, its not hurting any body.
Swryght(161) Disputed
4 points

Your argument is invalid:

"I use gay to describe things that are lame, usually. No one says lame, though, so gay is just a better word. Considering that it has about 3 other definitions, adding lame really isn't that big a deal to me. I mean, gay means happy, colorful and homosexual. And with modern youth, it can also mean lame/stupid."

Your argument in logical form:

1. We need a commonly-word to describe "lame" things. (Premise)

2. The word "lame" is rarely used (Premise)

3. Therefore, we need a new, more commonly-used word to describe "lame" things (from 1,2)

4. The word "gay" is commonly-used (Premise)

5. Therefore, we should use the word "gay" to describe things previously described as "lame" (from 3,4)

My counterexample illustrates that your argument is built on invalid reasoning:

1. We need a commonly used word to describe "mortifying" things (Premise)

2. The word "mortifying" is rarely used (Premise)

3. Therefore, we need a new, more commonly-used word to describe "mortifying" things (from 1,2)

4. The word "straight" is commonly-used (Premise)

5. Therefore, we should use the word "straight" to describe things previously described as "mortifying" (from 3,4)

This counterexample follows identical logical form to your argument, but as you can see, the conclusion does not follow logically from the premises, regardless of their truth value. Thus the argument is invalid. There are several reasons why the conclusion does not follow logically:

A. Why should we choose the word "straight" to describe things that used to be called by the rarely used word "mortifying"? Any number of other words would work. The choice seems arbitrary.

B. the word "straight" already has several meanings (e.g., referring to an angle of zero degrees, or a heterosexual person), but it is not the only word with several meanings already, so why not choose another?

C. Because the word "straight" has one connotation that defines a group of people based on sexual orientation, it might be offensive or hurtful to heterosexuals if we used the word "straight" to mean "mortifying", which means "causing extreme shame or embarrassment".

Incidentally, "mortification" is what people who willfully use the word "gay" in a derogatory sense should probably feel. Check out my argument on the "no" side of this debate for an explanation of how using the word "gay" in a derogatory sense hurts people.

Side: no, its disrespectful an drude
ThePyg(6737) Disputed
3 points

I'm not saying we HAVE to do anything. My logic is built on the fact that it's OKAY that this is what it has become. The youth (which I guess I'm still part of) use this expression commonly to describe lame or stupid things, and that's okay for w/e reasoning. Words are words and we decide what their impact may be.

Side: yes, its not hurting any body.
Pineapple(1448) Disputed
2 points

Happy=Lame? No.

Colorful=Lame? No.

People using the word "Gay" as a derogatory adjective is, whether the person saying it is educated enough to know it or not, a dis to gay people.

You have the freedom to say whatever the fuck you want. Congratulations. But you better know what your saying, and mean it.

Side: no, its disrespectful an drude
ThePyg(6737) Disputed
3 points

Happy=Lame? No.

Colorful=Lame? No.

Ya see, you should have stopped it there, because that supports my point completely. None of the definitions of gay = lame, because it is a new definition that the next generation has come up with.

The very fact that ALL YOUNG PEOPLE use the term to refer to something they find lame shows you how homosexuals no longer have a monopoly on the word. Or at least, shouldn't be allowed to. Stop holding so tightly unto the word, because frankly, young people don't give a shit about your feelings.

Side: yes, its not hurting any body.
2 points

Exactly. I'm glad someone else finally decided to chime in. We have the freedom to be hateful and hurtful if we want to, but why would we freely choose to hurt people when it would be just as easy to use a different word and avoid causing harm? That's just malicious and nasty.

Side: no, its disrespectful an drude
2 points

The whole point of insulting somebody is to use insulting language.

Its up to the individual to be insulted by being called 'gay'. Nearly all men take it as an insult. (homosexuals and their supporters aren't men).

It has several meanings aswell as plain old gay. It can mean lame, stupid, ugly, silly and in its own right has become a word similar to those.

If you want to insult somebody using derogatory language, you use words that are perceived as derogatory. It's wrong to be gay and so its wrong to be called gay and so calling somebody gay to offend them is a good way of going about it.

Simple logic.

Side: yes, its not hurting any body.
jessald(1915) Disputed
1 point

One problem with your argument: there's nothing wrong with being gay.

A gay person isn't a bad person, they are just different.

Side: no, its disrespectful an drude
burnleycoll(6) Disputed
1 point

I agree that there is nothing wrong with being gay but I don't believe gay people are different. In your logic then, women are different too because they're not men. Muslims are different because they're not Christian...

Side: no, its disrespectful an drude
2 points

Honestly, I think that people need to stop being so sensitive. Sure, it can be offensive, but these days, calling something "Gay" doesn't mean you're calling it homosexual, it just means that you're calling it stupid/lame. It's like how Bass has two meanings. "Gay" has become a homograph in the english language (at least... as far as pop culture slang says so).

Side: yes, its not hurting any body.
WARCOW(5) Disputed
1 point

This kind of reasoning is dismissive of the harm it causes to a minority group that we share the world with. There is a gross disconnect on the part of anyone who uses the word to mean anything other than to describe being happy or to describe being homosexual. Even the long standing use of what should mean happy to identify a homosexual person is derogatory, yet it is firmly established and at least there is no inherent insult (yet, it deeply implies "different from what is normal"). If you hold firm to the type of thinking that the color blue is for boys and that pink is for girls and use "gay" to mean "lame" in your everyday speech, I urge you to consider that the world and the use of "gay" in this context is far more complex than the consideration you are giving it. What might be an acceptable use for you personally is actually hurting others. While we live is a world where a teenager is killing himself for being homosexual an average of once a week and a man is murdered for being homosexual an average of once a month (both rates are probably higher as this is only what gets reported), measurable harm is being done. To fail to recognize this and use the word to mean lame is to condone these deaths and murders.

Side: no, its disrespectful an drude
1 point

Ok,most people will say that word gay can cause pain, bad affects on people's lifes, or even bad future affects on people's lifes. I can currently 15, a sophmore in high school. I am infact, a homosexual. I'll make a list of everything I see as see a reason. 1. Gay has been over used. By that I mean, people don't really call other's gay as much as you think anymore. Now they prefer more insulting things. Gay has been so used so many times, it's not as popular as a word to say now-a-days. 2. Not very insulting. By this you can take different points of veiws of this, examples: Calling a gay person a gay isn't very isulting at all, People can take it has it meaning happy, People don't see much as a insult thus going back to it being over used. 3. If you take away the word gay then accual gay people can't use the word as well. I have a rainbow armband that says gay on it. It's not offending anyone, infact it helps get me dates, and others just see me as a homosexual. 4. It makes things a little bit more diffcult. I mean as in, if that should be ok, or not ok, or is it even right? I have a shirt that says, gaymer. Most of you will find something wrong with that, http://gaymer.org/

gaymer.org is a gay video gamer support group. If you take gay as being a "bad" word. I will not be able to wear this shirt. Plus if I do, people will take into question ifthat shirt is "ok" or is it to "out there"

With all that into consideration, I guess it's up to you to decide if you want the word "gay" to be ok or not. Please try to see the point from both veiws before deciding what you think is right or not-right.

Thanks, sorry if there is any mis-spelled words, I'm using my bad labtop and the keys can get jammed a lot and it also won't let me use the spell check, so thank you for reading

Side: yes, its not hurting any body.
Swryght(161) Disputed
1 point

Thanks for your viewpoint. I don't think anyone here is objecting to the use of the word "gay," but only to using it to mean "stupid" or "lame".

Side: no, its disrespectful an drude
1 point

The way this term is perceived has changed massively amongst the youth and adult culture.

Its more often than not a painless term, and carry's no offense, and is a more descriptive means of describing something as 'tacky' or a bit 'crappy'.

I would suggest it no longer imply's any harm or offense to anyone of a homosexual nature. When used as a form of slang :)

Unless maybe ure a bit ''oldy worldy'' the sorta chump who takes offense when someone farts in your general direction!!

Side: yes, its not hurting any body.
WARCOW(5) Disputed
1 point

The harm lies in the very nature of this line of thinking. Gays are discriminated against, tortured and murdered just for being gay world wide. To think that there is no offense is to not be thinking.

Side: no, its disrespectful an drude
0 points

I like to cut to the chase and say: "That's homosexual". Because in my opinion homosexuality = lame.

[Just my opinion don't slaughter me.]

But would I say it around somebody that was gay? No. That would be mean. I'm not heartless.

Side: yes, its not hurting any body.
ZaneCoster(2) Disputed
1 point

Honestly, what you just said is mean and heartless. It is the exact thing that people in my shoes are fighting against. You are the kind of people who "passively" discriminate. You wont do it to the victims face because that would make you look bad and tarnish your reputation of being a non hateful person. in reality, you are. Sorry to burst your bubble, but thinking, acting, and saying things like that only makes the argument stronger. You are directly supporting hate and making people who are gay feel like they can't be who they are without having to be hated on and treated like dirt.

thank you for your heart warming support for hate.

Side: no, its disrespectful an drude
WARCOW(5) Disputed
1 point

So this begs the question... Is it lame that one person could love a person of the same gender or lame that parts of society have an issue with it?

This post was actually kind of funny, but also somewhat at core of what is wrong with the lack of thought and consideration that that should go into issues that deplu affect gay people.

Side: no, its disrespectful an drude
0 points

Yes. First of all, I don't care how derogatory the term is (i.e. D-go, n-gg-er, etc [hyphens added to avoid controversy, though I, personally, am not against it]); what does it matter: it's a word. Whether you say 'gay', 'homosexual', 'sexually different', 'pervert', or any other stupid politically correct (or incorrect) term, you are still getting the same meaning across. It's a controversial subject, if you choose it, be prepared for hatred.

P.S. Google 'Rev. Fred Phelps', the most extreme people on here aren't as bad as him.

Side: yes, its not hurting any body.
1 point

I agree with terminator. I'm gay, and the fact that people use the word 'gay' in a derogatory sense doesn't bother me in the SLIGHTEST. Nor should it bother anybody else, because they should just accept that the english language is a very complex field, and the meaning of words are constantly changing and developing new connotations. I agree that this new use of the term 'gay' isn't helping to normalise homosexuality, nor is it showing it through rose tinted spectacles, but the point is, it's not something that MAJORLY affects gay people, to the extent where it makes them commit suicide. People being singled out and bullied at school because they are gay causes people to kill themselves, yes, but using the word gay as a casual and meaningless insult does NOT. Otherwise we'd have already heard about it by now. Try to change my mind ? You'll have to try very hard.

Side: yes, its not hurting any body.
ZaneCoster(2) Disputed
1 point

You may feel like it doesn't matter, but in reality there are many gay or bisexual individuals who won't come out because people still support such jargon. No, there are many gay people out there who are not flamboyant and feminine. And these gays are those who do not want to deal with the stigma str8 people force onto such a life style. Those who say that it is life and deal with it need to try thinking the way of "what gives the person the right to treat someone that way".

On the stand that the English language evolves constantly, it does because people are lazy and do not want to actually learn nor apply a vocabulary let alone gather the actual respect for an individual to think that they are really doing something that brings even more negative connotations to a lifestyle that is hard to begin with.

Side: no, its disrespectful an drude
WARCOW(5) Disputed
1 point

To use the word casually is to condone the suicides and murder of gays world wide.

Side: no, its disrespectful an drude
6 points

Those like ThePyg who use the word "gay" to mean "lame" are either willfully or inadvertently hurting other people in a way that is difficult to understand except as an expression of ignorance, homophobia, or a considerable emotional/social immaturity. I suppose the question of whether a person "should" use the word this way is pointless. As ThePyg aptly points out, free speech is important. People are free to hurt each other with their words if they wish to. However, I'm guessing that if they knew how hurtful this small act is, they would stop perpetrating it.

What we should ask instead is how we can help these insensitive and socially immature individuals develop their empathy and understanding of how their subtly hurtful words and actions, called "micro-aggressions" in the psychological literature, are harming homosexuals and other people in measurable, significant ways. The use of the word "Gay" in a derogatory sense qualifies as a micro-insult. To those who commit this offense, it might not seem like a big deal, but I want to stress that the damage done by this sort of act is well-documented and empirically verified. Here is an introductory link to information on micro-aggression:

Side: no, its disrespectful an drude
lawnman(1106) Disputed
4 points

Would you explain to me, and all other participants of this debate, why homosexuals are adversely affected by terms that denote their sexual preference, yet heterosexuals do not exhibit the same adverse reactions by terms that denote their sexual preference? Furthermore, would you also explain why heterosexuals must modify their mannerisms to be more acceptable of gays, yet homosexuals do not modify their mannerisms to be more acceptable of heterosexuals?

If homosexuality is both natural and genetic, then the gays have just as much right to be insulted by the term ‘gay’ as do blondes by the term ‘blond’. But, I suspect there is no empirically documented evidence that supports why blonds should not suffer the insult of being called blond. If blonds can learn to accept the use of “Blond” as a derogatory term, then why are homosexuals incapable of accepting ‘gay’ as a derogatory term; and as a consequence of such, the heterosexual is asked to refrain from using the term ‘gay’ as a derogatory term?

Seriously, if Blondes can learn to live with the derogatory usage of the term ‘blond’, then homosexuals can too learn to live with the derogatory usage of the term ‘gay’. And when the day arrives when gays can learn to cope with living in their genetically natural bodies (supposed), so too will be the day when homosexuals are not offended by the derogatory usage of the term ‘gay’.

Side: yes, its not hurting any body.
Swryght(161) Disputed
3 points

Sure, I'll try answering as well as I can.

"Would you explain to me, and all other participants of this debate, why homosexuals are adversely affected by terms that denote their sexual preference, yet heterosexuals do not exhibit the same adverse reactions by terms that denote their sexual preference?"

When does anyone use a word denoting heterosexuality to mean something negative? I guess I just don't understand this one. Maybe if you fill me in I can give a better answer.

"Furthermore, would you also explain why heterosexuals must modify their mannerisms to be more acceptable of gays, yet homosexuals do not modify their mannerisms to be more acceptable of heterosexuals?"

I didn't realize that there was an issue with homosexuals being unaccepting of heterosexuals. If there is such a problem, then homosexuals should definitely be courteous and accepting towards heterosexuals as well. If I said anything to suggest otherwise, then I was mistaken. Did I say anything like that?

"If blonds can learn to accept the use of “Blond” as a derogatory term, then why are homosexuals incapable of accepting ‘gay’ as a derogatory term; and as a consequence of such, the heterosexual is asked to refrain from using the term ‘gay’ as a derogatory term?"

I think you have a very strong point here. Assuming Homosexuality is as genetic as Blondness, why should gays have more trouble having their name associated with stupidity than blonds? I think the answer might be that gays have been systematically oppressed throughout much of history (many gays targeted in the holocaust, killed as sinners by religious fundamentalists, etc.), while blonds have not been discriminated against as a group to such an extent.

Sure, Blonds have been the butt of jokes for a while, but they're also typically White, and therefore members of a group that has historically been pretty dominant. I guess it seems to me that being joked about doesn't quite compare to being persecuted by Nazis and the like. Maybe that's why it's easier for them to accept it than it is for gays?

Side: no, its disrespectful an drude
burnleycoll(6) Disputed
2 points

The difference, Lawnman, is that homosexuals suffer from hate-crimes on a daily basis. Whether you believe homosexuality to be nature or nuture, the thing is that throughout history homosexuals have been totally ignored, labelled insane or ill and although times have changed, gay men and women are often threatened with physical or verbal violence because of their sexuality! So it's completely different to being blonde. Are blondes attacked because of the colour of their hair? Nope, it's probably down to their sexuality, race or gender. My gay friend and his boyfriend received physical threats of violence almost every day because of the small town mentality of the people in their town.

Side: no, its disrespectful an drude
1 point

Clear use of logic, coupled with an empathic heart... please stay! :o)

Side: no, its disrespectful an drude

Using the word "gay" as a derogatory adjective is just plain gay! ;)

Side: no, its disrespectful an drude
3 points

Uh yeahh, NO!

I go against this.

Okay how is it not hurting anybody.

It can hurt the gays.

Like seriously?

You're going off and be like "Dude, that's gay."

...???

There are so many other words you could use?

Side: no, its disrespectful an drude
1 point

I have just read through and upvoted on both sides...............lol at it all.....i am hapilly gay and far from lame!..btw..im a bi-sexual woman who is non-active in my bi-sexuality...work that one out...lol. IT COMES DOWN TO EACH INDIVIDUAL SITUATION..........HOW IT IS APPLIED,AND HOW IT IS INTENDED!...I also understand what pyg was tring to say and he really wasnt trying to be derogatory towards gay people at all,only that everyone beat up on him, as tho he was, his attempt to explain, was trodden down to that view.,And so in his defense....As a few of my gay friends(not all of them but a few) also use the word "gay" to describe certain things as "lame".So as i said, it depends on the individual situation,how it is applied and how it is intended!Now will people just leave the word "gay" alone.....lol... As long as you dont apply it to hurt the feelings of a gay person or to belittle the existance of gay people then who cares,......you can use it til your hearts content.....Furthermore i just went into my laundry, kicked my lame washing machine and called it gay,....it didnt get upset....but i would not kick a gay person for being gay,...but i may however,... kick them for being lame....As for all this splitting of hairs, ive decided to take them all ,knit a wig,style it to my fashion,and where it with pride.

Side: HAPPILLYGAYNOTLAME
1 point

Did you know that Gay and Lesbian youth represent 30% of all completed suicide, meaning a successful suicide attempt by a gay teen every 5hrs and 48mins.

Now think about that every time you use the word "Gay" in a derogatory way.

Side: no, its disrespectful an drude
1 point

Being apart of the so called "gay" community, I have been subjected to many cruel things that "str8" people do. I have had beer cans and bottles thrown at me, beat, harassed, and called numerous derogatory names. "Gay" people have been forced by str8 people to identify with these terms in a positive way to deal with the scrutiny and indignities we have went through. Do I personally identify as gay? NO. But str8 people do.

Being hatted against for nothing, being forced to view myself as a heinous thing, to be forced into a hell like no other, only to have people take another negative to me and those who are forced to identify with this word is beyond disrespectful.

The high school children who comment on this saying it is ok to do so are just that: Children. Many have no clue about what gays truly have to go through. The str8 children make this ok because they refuse to make the paradigm shift that shows how mean these actions are. Why? Because they would have to accept that they are wrong and that they are creating more hate.

Honestly, its pathetic. The swastika was a Hindu symbol of the sun and now has an irreversible association with the Nazis. The pink inverted triangle has been adopted as a positive image of "gay" pride. Now "gays" have to make "queer" and "fag" as a positive thing because str8 people will not change how they treat others, evidently because its to hard to treat another person with any measure of dignity, respect, or maturity.

Side: no, its disrespectful an drude
1 point

I personally, absolutely hate when people use the word gay in that way, especially when they think its ok to do that. Some facts about this that there are plenty of kids that use gay as a derogatory term and other words that they commonly use to taunt and denigrate their peers - words that play on disability or racial differences. It’s said when you use gay as a derogatory term means that you are homophobic. “Gay” is a shortened or another term to describe someone’s sexuality (ex. Homosexual). Using the word gay to describe men who are not afraid to express their feelings or be romantic is a very narrow-minded. If a man doesn't have the typical macho man attitude and doesn't mind showing emotion, don't automatically assume that the person is gay.

Side: no, its disrespectful an drude

No one should use offensive terms toward anyone. Derogatory remarks are mean.

Side: no, its disrespectful an drude
1 point

I agree, gays' are mostly used by people when they insult homosexual.

Side: no, its disrespectful an drude