Usage of the word "gay"

Gackt said:
Pathetic argument, really. Not only that, but using logic as an excuse is flawed. Logic can be used to justify any opinion.

For one, sexuality isn't wholly related to the act of procreation. Furthermore, sexuality is linked to genes.
Click to expand...

The whole point of sex is reproduction, that's what it's for.

If sexuality is linked to genes, there would be no gays, because those genes would never be passed on.
 
PMKeates said:
Do you exclusively have sex for reproduction? If not, then we can conclude that the purpose of sex today is not solely reproduction.
Click to expand...
I have a feeling that 'I don't want kids yet' is his excuse for having not yet had it...
 
PMKeates said:
Do you exclusively have sex for reproduction? If not, then we can conclude that the purpose of sex today is not solely reproduction.
Click to expand...

You don't necessarily choose to have sex because you want to reproduce, but your instinct makes you want to have sex - that's built into all creatures, to make them reproduce regardless of whether they want to.
 
billysielu said:
You don't necessarily choose to have sex because you want to reproduce, but your instinct makes you want to have sex - that's built into all creatures, to make them reproduce regardless of whether they want to.
Click to expand...
So what is wrong about that? I have a desire to have sex, with men, and that may be a function of our "natural" desire to reproduce by having sex with women, but it doesn't make it wrong. We as a species today are not the same as we once were. We don't swing from trees, or have tails, or live in the ocean. We now have sex for fun, and some people do that with men.
 
If all that's true - you have a 'natural' desire to have sex with men. Clearly that's going to mean you never reproduce. Are you okay with that? Do you think you're attracted to men because it's nature's way of preventing you from reproducing?

------
everyone else:
no i'm not catholic, I've had plenty of sex, I'm straight, and if you hadn't guessed already: I think being gay is categorically wrong.

op:
you question why people use the word gay in that context. it's because the majority of human beings are homophobic, so i doubt you'll see the usage of the word change. if you were gay in certain countries you wouldn't make it through the day. especially where people are strongly religious, but i don't like religion either - so lets leave religion for another day!
 
Last edited:
The term "GD is a gay sub-forum" doesn't offend me...

My 85 year old granddad things the word Gay means happy.

I know gay means happy, homosexual and "this is rubbish".

What's the problem here?
 
billysielu said:
If all that's true - you have a 'natural' desire to have sex with men. Clearly that's going to mean you never reproduce. Are you okay with that?
Click to expand...
I don't know. I'm 24 - I'm not sure at this age if I want to have children. If I want to, I can, without having sex with a woman to do it.
 
Todge said:
I just wondered at what point will society get out of the habit of saying "gay" when they mean simply "I don't like this".
[...]
It doesn't bother me, and it probably doesn't bother most gay people, but is it not a little bit wrong?

NB. I fully expect at least one smartass "this is gay" reply so thanks for reading.
Click to expand...


erm - this is gay!

Do you get offended on behalf of disabled people when someone describes something as 'lame'. Perhpas you don't use the terms 'master' and 'slave' in reference to hard drives in case you offend a 'person of colour'....


Where is the issue? - homosexual people don't have a monopoly over vocabulary. The word 'Gay' doesn't exclusively mean 'homosexual' - can also mean carefree, happy etc...

Also it is used quite regularly in a negative sense these days - languages do change/evolve and this use of the word 'gay' is not necessarily homophobic:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay#Generalized_pejorative_use

"The word ‘gay’, in addition to being used to mean ‘homosexual’ or ‘carefree’, was often now used to mean ‘lame’ or ‘rubbish’. This is a widespread current usage of the word amongst young people... The word 'gay' ... need not be offensive... or homophobic ... The governors said, however, that Moyles was simply keeping up with developments in English usage. ... The committee... was "familiar with hearing this word in this context." The governors believed that in describing a ring tone as 'gay', the DJ was conveying that he thought it was 'rubbish', rather than 'homosexual'. ... The panel acknowledged however that this use... in a derogatory sense... could cause offence in some listeners, and counselled caution on its use. ”

—BBC Board of Governors,
Click to expand...
 
This thread is hilarious.

Half the people whining in this thread about men putting their willies up another man's bum would be only too eager to stick it up their wives/girlfriends' bums if they'd be allowed to. Potting the brown is the ultimate aim of any man isn't it?

Besides, gay mates I know are always on about how they pick up "straight" men with wives and kids, who like nothing more than man sex on websites. Guess their missus must have headaches that night, eh? :D
 
I think it's just a word. It works well, I don't care why it's used and for what reason it's used. However, it fits well within our language now. People take offence far too easily these days.
 
billysielu said:
The whole point of sex is reproduction, that's what it's for.

If sexuality is linked to genes, there would be no gays, because those genes would never be passed on.
Click to expand...

Incorrect, as the gay genes may confer a sexual advantage when not expressed in the configuration of alleles that produce the gay phenotype [/biology pwn].

Furthermore, the majority of the genes that have this cumulative effect are assumed to be Y chromosome, which helps to explain why there are more gay men than women.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom