#175942 - 04/17/08 08:06 AM
Homophobic; miscoined form combining.
|
Stevo
stranger
Registered: 11/03/05
Posts: 5
|
Anyone who knows the language should refuse to use the word. In my dictionary, there is a full page of homo-words, all having a conotation of "same". If someone learned English without knowing slang, they would interpret homophobic as meaning "fear of your own kind". Someone who didn't know the language properly, took the slang term "homo" and created this word.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#175988 - 04/17/08 08:52 PM
Re: Homophobic; miscoined form combining.
[Re: The Pook]
|
Faldage
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 12/01/00
Posts: 11613
|
I object not only to the absurd etymological construction of the word, but also to the way it is popularly used. I know I'm touching on politics here, but it is also a case of word abuse.
Allowing for a moment its valid use to mean fear of homosexuals, and by extension hatred also (since hatred often comes from fear), there is a kind of person that is truly homophobic because they are suppressing their own homosexual tendencies (like the next door neighbour in the film American Beauty). However, it is now used as a pejorative term to describe anyone who opposes the homosexual lobby in any way. Even if someone is not afraid or, or does not hate homosexuals, if they say anything against homosexual practices or lifestyles, they earn this label. If you do not agree with the beliefs of homosexual lobbyists you are automatically considered "homophobic." That is a great language coup by the homosexual lobbyists that is rarely commented on because to do so is to become homophobic. It's a bit like speaking against a conspiracy theory - in the mind of those who hold it you become part of it.
Language is not static in its forms or meanings or usage. Either in time or in place (dialects). It is a fluid, living, ever changing creature. It creeps, downwards, upwards, and sideways.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#175994 - 04/17/08 11:55 PM
Re: Homophobic; miscoined form combining.
[Re: Faldage]
|
The Pook
old hand
Registered: 02/20/08
Posts: 730
Loc: Tasmania
|
I object not only to the absurd etymological construction of the word, but also to the way it is popularly used. I know I'm touching on politics here, but it is also a case of word abuse.
Allowing for a moment its valid use to mean fear of homosexuals, and by extension hatred also (since hatred often comes from fear), there is a kind of person that is truly homophobic because they are suppressing their own homosexual tendencies (like the next door neighbour in the film American Beauty). However, it is now used as a pejorative term to describe anyone who opposes the homosexual lobby in any way. Even if someone is not afraid or, or does not hate homosexuals, if they say anything against homosexual practices or lifestyles, they earn this label. If you do not agree with the beliefs of homosexual lobbyists you are automatically considered "homophobic." That is a great language coup by the homosexual lobbyists that is rarely commented on because to do so is to become homophobic. It's a bit like speaking against a conspiracy theory - in the mind of those who hold it you become part of it. Language is not static in its forms or meanings or usage. Either in time or in place (dialects). It is a fluid, living, ever changing creature. It creeps, downwards, upwards, and sideways.
There's no inconsistency there. I'm only objecting to the disingenuous use of the word. It is not generally accepted as meaning simply opposed to homosexuality or homosexual practices. Its generally accepted meaning is a pejorative one. This is someone with something wrong with them, someone who is suffering some kind of mental problem or paranoia. That's fine if that's what it has come to mean. But applying the word 'homophobic' with all those negative connotations to someone who simply opposes or criticises something to do with homosexuality or particular homosexuals the clear implication is that any criticism of things Gay must be inherently psychologically unhinged. It thus stymies objective debate about Gay issues and is simply namecalling as a substitute for rational counterargument.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#176006 - 04/18/08 08:58 AM
Re: Homophobic; miscoined form combining.
[Re: Faldage]
|
The Pook
old hand
Registered: 02/20/08
Posts: 730
Loc: Tasmania
|
Any word can be misused. The word liberal has taken on a pejorative sense, for bleep sake.
'Bleep' - now there's a word with an interesting etymology I bet.
Liberal - depends on the context. It used to mean simply generous in temperament and behaviour. It can also mean people of certain political leanings, certain schools of theology, or someone loose and lavish with their possessions. In Australia, with a capital 'L' it is a political party, which, confusingly is not politically 'liberal' in the sense that Americans use the word, viz to describe the social liberalism of the Democrats, but is the Australian equivalent of the Republican party (well the nearest we've got to it). Of course if you are of the opposite political or theological persuasion in any of those contexts then, yes, it becomes a pejorative term in certain circles. But it doesn't have an inherently negative etymology like 'homophobic' does.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#176012 - 04/18/08 09:57 AM
Re: Homophobic; miscoined form combining.
[Re: BranShea]
|
zmjezhd
Pooh-Bah
Registered: 08/13/05
Posts: 1680
Loc: R'lyeh
|
'Gay' for homosexual took away the innocence of the original meaning of the word gay.
From Partridge (1961) A Dictionary of Slang and Unconventional English (in two volumes): "Gay. (Of women) leading an immoral, or a harlot's, life: 1825, Westmacott (OED), In C. 20, coll., on verge of SE.--2. Slightly intoxicated; ob. C.19-20; Perhaps orig. a euphemism.--3. Impudent, impertinent, presumptuous: US (--1899), anglicized in 1915 by PG Wodehouse, OED (Sup.)." Also, gay house == brothel; gay in the arse == (Of women) loose; to lead a gay life == to live immorally; the gay instrument == the male member; gaying it == sexual intercourse.
The word gay, like many a word in many a language, has many a meaning, yet nobody rails against the multiple meanings of set. Long ago, I came to the conclusion that it's not the word or its meanings that folks are uncomfortable with but the referent.
homosexual
The word was coined inthe mid-19th century. Many have railed against the word, which like telescope, is a mix of Greek (homos) and Latin sexualis. Somehow they think that one oughtn't to mix roots from the Classical languages. Some think the homo is the Latin for 'man, mankind', but that word would yield hominiphobia I suppose which still others might mistake for a 'fear of grits'.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
6640 Members
16 Forums
12180 Topics
178833 Posts
Max Online: 853 @ 10/23/07 11:39 AM
|
|
0 registered
and 25 anonymous users online.
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Search FAQ
