"Fag"

[PolySciGuy]

haha, I always feel so lost when joining these supermassive threads, but to address the origional question of "fag". I am still pretty young, so I was around when the word was becomming popularized, I would say it, and not know what it meant. Same with "gay". My friends and I would always say gay. and not know what it meant. Now that I am in high school, of course I know what it means, (i don't remember exactly when I found out) and as far as I know there are two main reasons for the continued use of these derogatory comments.

1) Old habits die hard

2) My friends and I are honestly scared of gay men! We have some gay friends, but there is always an aura of uncomfortability and here's why: We know how we look at girls, and we assume that gay guys look at us the same way.... that frightens me to death

as a side note, we would NEVER call someone who was actually a homosexual a Fag, nor refer to them as Gay unless, we were refering to their sexual orientation, so in that light I think it's acceptable.

as a side side note Gay men call each other "Fag" and other derogatory names much in the same way that Black people call each other "N-word" sort of an ok-if-you-are-one social standard.

 

[jallman]

I'm so twisted. My first instinct is to match his violent mannerisms to dare him to mean it. And then if he does, I see it as a way to test myself. ......It's the Jarhead in me.

I don't doubt that and I actually can be the same way...as long as I think I can take him. If he looks like he might be able to mar my face in any way, it ain't happening. I like the way I look. It must be the homo in me. :mrgreen:

 

[DeeJayH]

haha, I always feel so lost when joining these supermassive threads, but to address the origional question of "fag". I am still pretty young, so I was around when the word was becomming popularized, I would say it, and not know what it meant. Same with "gay". My friends and I would always say gay. and not know what it meant. Now that I am in high school, of course I know what it means, (i don't remember exactly when I found out) and as far as I know there are two main reasons for the continued use of these derogatory comments.

1) Old habits die hard

2) My friends and I are honestly scared of gay men! We have some gay friends, but there is always an aura of uncomfortability and here's why: We know how we look at girls, and we assume that gay guys look at us the same way.... that frightens me to death

as a side note, we would NEVER call someone who was actually a homosexual a Fag, nor refer to them as Gay unless, we were refering to their sexual orientation, so in that light I think it's acceptable.

as a side side note Gay men call each other "Fag" and other derogatory names much in the same way that Black people call each other "N-word" sort of an ok-if-you-are-one social standard.

dude
fag goes back to I believe the 1920s where it meant a cigarette
it still means that in parts of Europe, in particular England
I chafe my manly friends asses by saying I need to step outside to blow a fag (smoke a cigarette)
not sure when it became a term for gays but the word has been around alot longer than I, and most definitely alot longer than you

as far as calling each other fags or Nigg@rs
I think that is a way for the people under assault by the term to desensitize themselves to the term
i have made friends with alot of gay and minorities over the years
but I only had one black friend i was comfortable enough around to call a nigg@r w/o any repercutions. And that was usually only using it in "whats up my niggar" or 'thats my niggar'
the way it is used is just as important as the word itself
Never been familiar enough with a gay person though to call them a fag
but i do use the term to bust the chops of straight guys

 

[PolySciGuy]

by becoming popular i was refering to the transference of meaning, i am not an imbicile

 

[DeeJayH]

by becoming popular i was refering to the transference of meaning, i am not an imbicile

wasnt implying that or anything else from your statement
but fag has meant gays long before you were born if you are less than 20 years old

one of the problems when one is young is jumping to conclusions
you will debate more effectively here, and learn alot more, about yourself, your views, and the oppposition, if you do not jump to conclusions

myself, i was too busy getting drunk and scoring at your age to be involved in politics, much less msg boards
so, for your age, you are far beyond what i was at that time.. Kudos for that
I say that so you will take this as nothing more than some friendly advice, rather than a smackdown
carry on

 

[Gardener]

by becoming popular i was refering to the transference of meaning, i am not an imbicile

You are not an imbecile, but the word fag as it refers to homosexual men has been around longer than you have.

Heck,the term fag hag predates you,too.

 

[PolySciGuy]

I'll take your word on it. I couldn't find the history of the term when I origionaly posted (still can't) so I just assumed, but you know what they say, when you assume you make an @$$ out of u and me

 

[DeeJayH]

I'll take your word on it. I couldn't find the history of the term when I origionaly posted (still can't) so I just assumed, but you know what they say, when you assume you make an @$$ out of u and me

dont worry about it
carry on

 

[1069]

Heck,the term fag hag predates you,too.

Yep; that's been part of the popular vernacular since at least the mid-80s.

 

[Gardener]

Yep; that's been part of the popular vernacular since at least the mid-80s.

First time I heard it was around 1975, myself. Of course,that didn't make it a part of the popular vernacular, necessarily, as I always was a bit ahead of the curve.

 

[BodiSatva]

I didn't hear the term "Fag" until the mid-80's, when I was about 14 or so, and Freddy Mecury was the person associated with it. I thought, "Damn! Queen Rocks! What else matters?" And the other guy laughed and started ripping on gays and I thought it was such stupid reasoning (or lack of) that I decided not to worry about anybody and their sexual preference.

That was my first Impression and that one stuck. I have not heard any person be able to make a logical argument against Homosexuals since either. Lots of hate, but no rationale.

 

[PolySciGuy]

I didn't hear the term "Fag" until the mid-80's, when I was about 14 or so, and Freddy Mecury was the person associated with it. I thought, "Damn! Queen Rocks! What else matters?" And the other guy laughed and started ripping on gays and I thought it was such stupid reasoning (or lack of) that I decided not to worry about anybody and their sexual preference.

That was my first Impression and that one stuck. I have not heard any person be able to make a logical argument against Homosexuals since either. Lots of hate, but no rationale.

Define argument against, because I don't have a problem with homosexuals at all, but there are certain things they physically cannot do

 

[Gardener]

Define argument against, because I don't have a problem with homosexuals at all, but there are certain things they physically cannot do

Yeah, but I've found that leaping a tall building in a single stride to be a bit difficult, too.

 

[BodiSatva]

PolySciGuy
Define argument against,

Excuse me...but what? Do you mean that you have never heard people argue against homosexuality? Like it is a sin...like marraige is not a "Right"...like Homosexuals are innately perverted...and/or any of the other arguments against homosexuality? I am not sure what you could possibly even mean...

because I don't have a problem with homosexuals at all,

I am glad that you are open...

but there are certain things they physically cannot do

I was unaware that there were, would you describe some please...

 

[PolySciGuy]

Excuse me...but what? Do you mean that you have never heard people argue against homosexuality? Like it is a sin...like marraige is not a "Right"...like Homosexuals are innately perverted...and/or any of the other arguments against homosexuality? I am not sure what you could possibly even mean...



I am glad that you are open...



I was unaware that there were, would you describe some please...

I think you get me wrong here, I was responding to the fact that you said you could not agree with any arguments against homosexuals, and I was wondering what you meant by against, because homosexuals cannot reproduce with each other, and I wasn't sure if that was "against" homosexuals

 

[BodiSatva]

PolySciGuy
I think you get me wrong here, I was responding to the fact that you said you could not agree with any arguments against homosexuals, and I was wondering what you meant by against, because homosexuals cannot reproduce with each other, and I wasn't sure if that was "against" homosexuals

I did get you wrong. Sorry.

I said that I could not agree with any arguments against homosexuals...but let me clarify arguments against homosexuals legally. There can be arguments against them that are morally based, but I still think that those are weak.

They may not be able to reproduce with each other...but I give that a big old, "so what?"

Single people can't reproduce either.

If a single person "Had" to reproduce...well, so could a homosexual...just suck it up and get busy with the opposite sex. :2razz:

This has to do with "Choice"
This has NOTHING to do with "Ability".

Can you dig that action?

 

[PolySciGuy]

I did get you wrong. Sorry.

I said that I could not agree with any arguments against homosexuals...but let me clarify arguments against homosexuals legally. There can be arguments against them that are morally based, but I still think that those are weak.

They may not be able to reproduce with each other...but I give that a big old, "so what?"

Single people can't reproduce either.

If a single person "Had" to reproduce...well, so could a homosexual...just suck it up and get busy with the opposite sex. :2razz:

This has to do with "Choice"
This has NOTHING to do with "Ability".

Can you dig that action?

Personally, I think it is a major flaw considering the fact that the biological and evolutionary incentive for a sexual relationship is procreation. If you say that there is another reason why people form sexual relationships (other than fun) then you get into emotions not directly connected to evolution, which lends itself to the idea of a higher power, which is what my whole argument is based on.

 

[BodiSatva]

PolySciGuy

It seems as if you are critisizing my statement and I have no idea what your ideas are about this issue.

Are you anti-gay? Just say it if you are....Flat out.

I am not anti-gay.
If you are challenging me, then this would seem as if you are anti-gay...for I would know no other rason for your seemingly benign, yet subtly hostile/subversive attitude.

I think it is a major flaw considering the fact that the biological and evolutionary incentive for a sexual relationship is procreation

I think that this is a "Limited" way of looking at the issue...

If you say that there is another reason why people form sexual relationships (other than fun) then you get into emotions not directly connected to evolution

Yeah...so? What does "Choice" matter to you?

which lends itself to the idea of a higher power

Please do not place limitations on this discussion...
higher power with regards to sexual preference? :roll:

which is what my whole argument is based on

Why don't you just "spill the beans" rather than speak with vieled innuendos?

 

[PolySciGuy]

PolySciGuy

It seems as if you are critisizing my statement and I have no idea what your ideas are about this issue.

Are you anti-gay? Just say it if you are....Flat out.

I am not anti-gay.
If you are challenging me, then this would seem as if you are anti-gay...for I would know no other rason for your seemingly benign, yet subtly hostile/subversive attitude.



I think that this is a "Limited" way of looking at the issue...



Yeah...so? What does "Choice" matter to you?



Please do not place limitations on this discussion...
higher power with regards to sexual preference? :roll:



Why don't you just "spill the beans" rather than speak with vieled innuendos?

haha ok... fine.

I am not sure if I am challenging you because I dunno what views you have, I just feel homosexual couples should not get "married" because of the semantics of the word. I think that there should should be a separation between the religious connotations and the political connotation of marriage. So I am not anti-gay, I honestly don't know what to call myself

 

[Stace]

Personally, I think it is a major flaw considering the fact that the biological and evolutionary incentive for a sexual relationship is procreation. If you say that there is another reason why people form sexual relationships (other than fun) then you get into emotions not directly connected to evolution, which lends itself to the idea of a higher power, which is what my whole argument is based on.

So what about straight folks that can't reproduce? Or those that choose not to?

 

[BodiSatva]

PolySciGuy
haha ok... fine.

I am not sure if I am challenging you because I dunno what views you have, I just feel homosexual couples should not get "married" because of the semantics of the word. I think that there should should be a separation between the religious connotations and the political connotation of marriage. So I am not anti-gay, I honestly don't know what to call myself

Sounds good to me. I hear your thoughts and see nothing wrong with them, I just feel that the term "marraige" could be applied and it would cause no harm to anybody.

I was not sure if you were "Throwing Down" or something. It is all good though... :2razz:

 

[DeeJayH]

So what about straight folks that can't reproduce? Or those that choose not to?

unless you can show they are a large group of the population
wouldnt this be a red herring?

 

[Stace]

unless you can show they are a large group of the population
wouldnt this be a red herring?

Infertility affects about 10%, or if you look at actual couples, 15%, of our population of a reproductive age. I believe that's about equal to our homosexual population. There's no way to really document an accurate percentage of folks that just don't WANT kids, though.

So, nope, not a red herring. Besides, the question at hand is dealing with folks using reproduction as an argument against gays being allowed to marry....if reproduction is the main purpose of marriage, then where do infertile people fit into that? Or people that just don't want kids? If they can't reproduce, should they not also be denied marital bliss?

 

[DeeJayH]

Infertility affects about 10%, or if you look at actual couples, 15%, of our population of a reproductive age. I believe that's about equal to our homosexual population. There's no way to really document an accurate percentage of folks that just don't WANT kids, though.

So, nope, not a red herring. Besides, the question at hand is dealing with folks using reproduction as an argument against gays being allowed to marry....if reproduction is the main purpose of marriage, then where do infertile people fit into that? Or people that just don't want kids? If they can't reproduce, should they not also be denied marital bliss?

assuming the alleged facts in question are reliable :shock: Yikes
10% shooting blanks
that is more than i was expecting
and I see what you are saying
but the main reason for a relationship, in nature, is in fact reproduction, for the perpetuation of the species
why are humans any different than every thing else on the planet

 

[Stace]

assuming the alleged facts in question are reliable :shock: Yikes
10% shooting blanks
that is more than i was expecting
and I see what you are saying
but the main reason for a relationship, in nature, is in fact reproduction, for the perpetuation of the species
why are humans any different than every thing else on the planet

Maybe because we have more intelligence, a greater capacity to DO things, and therefore, not all of us really need to reproduce anyway? :lol:

Besides, it's not that gay people can't reproduce....they just can't reproduce with their chosen partner.