@Trai_Dep: BTW, I get what you mean. I was being a little tongue-in-cheek and looking back it probably didn't come across properly. itiswhatitis seems to be advocating 2 contradictory & extreme positions. I probably should have put a /sarcasm in.

And it's totally "gay" to throw a hissy-fit and cry like a little girl (if you're not little or a girl) if someone is "mean" to you because your mommy told you that you are a special little snowflake.

I spun around to see what dumbass would use such an offensive word in public. It was a black man talking to someone on his cell phone.

However, I may have mis-heard. He may have said "Hey nigga" which is completely acceptable.

So, can anyone get this certification at their local community college? Is it a 2-year or a 4-year program? I'm guessing one has to register as a homosexual as a prerequisite for certification? Does one show their certification documentation to the media when speaking officially for all homosexuals everywhere?

Or is like joining a union or like a MLM? To be a homosexual you have to be approved by a certified homosexual who will then be authorized to speak and vote on your behalf?

I don't use the term, but word policing irritates me to no end.

The word "queer" originally meant something different or strange. I dislike referring to homosexuals as queer because we really are not all that different from everyone else. And I have encountered a lot of strange people from any sexual orientation.

A lot of people (although definitely not everyone) have gotten past putting down black people, Jewish people, or others based on their race or genetic heritage.

Yet "gay" is one of the groups where it is still OK to call us lame, to deny us our rights, to harass us, and in some cases to cause physical violence against us. If you don't believe me, then look at the court cases where gay bashers either get very light sentences or are found not guilty because they claim that the gay guy they beat up or killed had come on to them.

And how about all the gay teenagers who get so many messages that they are lame that they feel suicide is the best or only option for them? I speak from my own experience of having suicidal plans most of the time when I was a teen.

So "That's so gay" is NOT OK.

@timsgm1418: If they're "just words", does that mean you think the secret service was overstepping their boundaries for arresting a man carrying a "death to Obama" sign?

Words are used to create a culture of intolerance and hate. White-against-black racism didn't exist prior to the beginnings of slavery, and Nazi Germany's acts against jews wouldn't have been possible without Martin Luther and 500 years of christianity.

"We [christians] are at fault in not slaying them [the jews]."

-Martin Luther "On the Jews and their lies", 1543

[www.awitness.org]

Violence doesn't come out of nowhere. People have to be guided and goaded into a willingness to perpetrate it.

@ShortBus:
My grandfather grew up in a world where young boys routinely called each other "nigger"

And then only if you are gay can you call some one gay without offending another person. They will go around saying "Whats Up My Gay!"

Personally I'd say "Thats so queer!" but then the gays and lesbians tried to hijack that word from me too.

so I guess we don't teach "sticks and stones" anymore? they're just words people

Consumerist editors: You're spreading misinformation in this article:

"...genetic attributes such as ethnicity, hair color or heterosexuality..."

Ethnicity is not genetic! Ethnicity is "Identity with or membership in a particular racial, national, or cultural group and observance of that group's customs, beliefs, and language."

If want to get really technical, race also is not genetic. What you mean is phenotype or "The observable traits or characteristics of an organism, for example hair color, weight, or the presence or absence of a disease. Phenotypic traits are not necessarily genetic." See [www.genome.gov] for more info.

@TomCoughlin: Obviously history isn't your forté. There's recent history (e.g. christian terrorists like James Kopp, Eric Rudolph and Scott Roeder, or Korean christian violence against buddhists) and older history (e.g the crusades, anti-jewish pogroms, witch trials, etc.) that refutes your claim. And that's without any mention of the KKK or Nazi Germany.

Do try to keep up with current events, at least, if not all history.

@woogychuck:

"In fact, when I finish this fried twinkie, I'm making an ad."

I am in awe of your funniness.

Somehow you made it worth slogging through hundreds of comments from people who have no intention of being open-minded. Thank you.

Actually, that's the right mind-set. But gay is better than other words; can't we all just get along and use "douchie" to describe things that suck or will massengill get all t.s.s. about it?

Hate is in attitude and intent. It's not in what words you choose to use, it's the emotion behind them.

I will, for example, continue to tell my female friends that an exceptionally fabulous outfit they just bought is "so gay". I know what I mean by that, they know what I mean by that, and so do you. No hate there whatsoever. Why manufacture problems where none exist.

I hope the whole think backfires and makes them look stupid for linking the new terminology of gay with homosexuals. Sounds like it has backfired with the consumerist.com crowd.

You know what? I want the word hot to mean temperature not that somebody is attractive or a situation is awesome!

If you put a gun up to my head and pull the trigger and it jams, then you've done nothing wrong, correct?

Sorry, but that's so gay. Or, if you prefer, ghey.

It's nearly as ironic as those wacky Mormons spending so much time and money "defending" "traditional marriage." Someone forgot a history lesson there, too...

Other parts of speech sound bad, such as using the word "niggardly" because of the negative connotations relating to it's parent word ... but the word "gay" in and of itself is not offensive.

I'd rather the "thinkb4uspeak" people go after bad grammar and speech than a relatively benign substitute for "lame." Get everyone speaking properly before we worry about context and connotation.

[www.urbandictionary.com]

Most of the comments here are cruel immature and insensitive. -And I will bet most commentators were picked on in High School and know what the teasing feels like. They just can't imagine the hatred.

kids, growing up, have to sit there and take it when folks use the word gay to describe being crap, or lame or stupid. the gay kids don't protest because it could be outing themselves, and the straight kids don't want to say something because it could taint their magical hetero-ness.

/self-righteous rant

I'm somehow having trouble believing that. Perhaps consulting the dictionary for the word "inflamatory" is in order for you.

But then again, you don't give a "fuck" what we believe, right?" ;)

I think the word "gay" and the concept of people who are gay are two different things in people's minds. Still, I get the feeling the expression originated in a derisive way, and I don't really believe people can "take back" an offensive word so that it's no longer offensive. Still, slang changes relatively quickly, and it sounds really dumb in adult society, so this will probably work itself out so long as it's a practice frowned upon in the workplace and other adult places.

You guys need to get your trolldar fixed. Also, this site needs a gay smiley like on Something Awful.

I have a feeling that's pretty jock of me.

Ohhhhh.... that thing that's a theory that science has yet to prove. that thing.

THAT'S SOOOO GAY

It's not edgy. In fact, it's very immature, a very elementary school-style insult.

@floraposte: That's interesting. Makes more sense than mine.

@Trai_Dep: I always thought that the pejorative use of 'blows' and 'sucks' had to do with the perceived degradation of the person performing oral sex. Not that I think performing oral sex is degrading! But I think there is a lot of societal disdain for the person doing the sucking or the blowing; not (hopefully) between intimate partners, but more of a widespread social perception on who and what kind of person would do that sort of thing.

I have a vague recollection of feminist theory on this sort of thing, but it is definitely not a topic I want to look up while at work. The gist of it is that you're servicing someone else sexually and therefore trashy, low class, etc. It's a quick hop from looking down on the person who sucks or blows to equating those terms with things that are unpleasant and annoying.

All I know is ADHD is another ploy to sell medication by the big pharmaceutical companies. And unfortunately most Americans are gullible enough to buy into it so they don't have to take responsibility for disciplining their children since they don't want to spank their child and be "the bad guy".

@squinko: Yes. It also started out as the word 'fagot'; the extra 'g' version comes from a British variant of the word.

If they are going to make it an issue, at least produce something that makes sense. And using yellow font is gay.

The English language is full of words that have developed alternate meanings over the years. It's also full of pejorative words that have become non-pejorative over the years (a process known as amelioration). Some examples include Protestant, Christian, Geek, and even Liberal! The first two go back a long time, but isn't there a company called Geek Squad? And, aren't there actual political parties with the name Liberal (or in the US, is it not ok to be known as a liberal?)

@calquist: Or make your point with more accurate words. I always think that someone using those phrases just has a lazy vocabulary or completely unimaginative/unoriginal thoughts. It's a childish way to refer to things, and I'd rather people were more direct and descriptive about what they think.

* Yup, really, totally homosexual lubricant. Flag-waving, glowstick-waving, thumpata-thumpata-thumpata lube. In a bottle. A gay bottle.

@Trai_Dep: I think it's pretty clear. Everyone should say whatever they feel like saying (people with hurt feelings should just get over it - it's not like putting a gun to their head or anything) unless they feel like saying certain words that no one should say under any circumstances.

Certain words are racist, and should never be used. If you get upset over any other words, you're just oversensitive. Capisce?

I wish people who are not licensed clinicians or have no relevant experience with ADD/ADHD would stop pretending like they have something to say about it.

Use your critical thinking skills, read a few medical journals and stop putting your ridiculous unfounded rhetoric all over the internet.

Use your critical thinking skills, read a few medical journals and stop putting your ridiculous unfounded rhetoric all over the internet.

If me saying "that is so gay" offends you, sorry but that is your issue to deal with, not mine.

As a black person... No one has the right to use Nigga/Nigger or however you want to spell it [in] any form of the word.

Well put as well, CaptainSemantics.

"No, it may also be because your gay friends are so concerned with being accepted that they pretend to be just as cool using the hip lingo that their friends do no matter the etymology."

+100

Oh, and "Your faux lisping belies a conflicted pansy mind" also wins for me.

Don't use the word "gay" as a pejorative- it's not cool.

What's next are black people going to start calling themselves Mulinyans but Italians can't?

As far as tits or chick, whatever. Those are adjectives used to describe something. I really don't care if you call my boobs mommy pillows, milk jugs, titties or call me a chick, broad or gal. It doesn't change how I feel about myself and I appreciate your choice of words to describe me. If you call me a cunt then we have a problem but otherwise they are just words, who cares? There should not be seperatism, everyone should be allowed to say what they want to say, no one race, sexual preference or gender should have power over words.

@Trai_Dep: "you stick 'em, I lick 'em"

Asshole.

@corbyz: Your PSA is pretty much something I overheard in college, right before a large lecture class started. 2 or so freshmen were snickering over something in the school paper and one said to the other, "That's so gay". An upperclass girl turned around, gave them a death glare, and said, "Dudes, you are not in high school any more. Saying things like that is not cool and makes you look stupid. Stop it." I wanted to cheer. A high five would have been in order.

I think if more people pointed out when someone was being inadvertantly (or not) offensive, we'd have more interesting discussions. It has nothing to do with being PC - I just wish people actually said what they mean and were more deliberate with their language.

@diasdiem: no, they just aren't drunk chicks trying to get attention from drunk guys.

@itiswhatitis: "Pissy, over-sensitive, and whiny gay people, are the reason this will keep on going. "

That sentence there seems a bit off to me. That would be my reasoning there.

Let's us it for the N word:

Pissy, over-sensitive, and whiny black people, are the reason this will keep on going.

It still doesn't look right to me, not if it was written by someone who had black friends like the rest of the comment was pointing towards his gay friends.

@EvilTaxi: Thanks for posting those - I think that's a much better attempt. The graphics are striking, as well.

You can choose whether or not to have relations.

You cannot choose with whom you desire to have said relations.

In your case, it doesn't matter, since.. well.. so_gracefully is pretty spot-on.

No, we're bringing "sexy" back.

ha ha

I love the word "whack" and use it a lot.

My teenagers die a little each time.

Gay was being used back when I was in school (class of 81) and the kids of today are still using it. That's not a fad, it's even past trend.

Gay activists are generally the most bigoted and vitriol people I have ever met .. would be better to run an ad campaign about getting rid of them then trying to get rid of the word "gay".

In theory, it's the intent that matters. However, it's also the privilege to use it. That's why the people who are the butt of the term get free pass to use it and take away it's power NOT YOU. A woman can call her breasts "tits" or call herself a "chick" but you had better not unless you have earned that right with that person. Same with "nigga" or "queer" or any other word that you have no right to use, unless you want to get ripped a new one.

Armchair psychoanalyzing = FAIL

OMG, I love your entire comment! "Lance Bass's ears perked up" -- LOL

That's a terrible ad -- almost impossible to parse and decipher at a glance. And ads have to "get you" at a glance.

Suck is the opposite of blow, get it? ;-)

I say this all the time and I am gay. Not just gay...SUPER gay.

@EinhornIsAMan!: No, it doesn't.

It's funny too, because I abhor the use of the word Jew in a nasty sense. Not because I'm Jewish, but because every time someone near me says something ridiculous like, "I got Jewed" they always follow it up by asking me if I'm Jewish when they see the irritated look on my face. I always say no, but that I think they're stupid for saying it anyhow. I've been thinking about just not answering the question at all. Let 'em wonder. Also, why do they think I'm Jewish just because I've got a large nose and curly hair. Same reason they think I'm gay because I don't have a girlfriend and wear flashier clothes I suppose.

It is not ok.

Although, really, in this context, it makes more sense to refer to a bad or otherwise poorly thought out idea or set of actions as "lame" rather than "gay" because lame does imply a certain defect in the process.

BTW
Asexual:
1. Having no evident sex or sex organs; sexless.
2. Relating to, produced by, or involving reproduction that occurs without the union of male and female gametes, as in binary fission or budding.
3. Lacking interest in or desire for sex.

Use a dictionary please.

It's really, really annoying.

But like Peta's efforts (I've been a vegetarian since 1996), I think this campaign is going to be seen as too lame to have any effect, even if it is something I support. They need a better way to get the message across.

Hell, maybe I could just do a PSA and say "Hey, that really pisses me off when you say 'gay' like that, so stop being a dick and don't say it, alright? It also makes you sound stupid."

Phil and Phil's sister, I don't care what you say - it's definitely not ok. And I don't care if they ARE in high school - they won't be for long and really ought to learn to think for themselves about how things like that make other people feel. "They're just kids." Eff that noise. I was taught that "That's gay", "That's retarded", and other things like that was NOT ok to say. Unfortunately, not everybody had the awesome parents I had.

@pecan 3.14159265: Yes because Will & Grace speak for ALL of us. Some GLBT people hate mainstream portrations because of that idea.

But also, possibly being that are not gay, the fact is in that line it is interpreted as being to 'flamboyant' or 'out' about who you are. Will wanted to lay low and not advertise who he was. Jack wanted everyone to know who he was and everything about him.

I see that the only problem in this whole situation is you have a misplaced victim complex. And you may or may not be a jerk, but I am tending towards "may be".

Early christians were tossed to the lions and tortured in many different ways. They truely were honest in their beliefs and were tolerant too. The absolute worst you have to face these days is a troll on an internet forum who bad mouths your beliefs. You complain a bit too much for that.

The word gay also has other meanings...

@MostlyHarmless: No, I'm saying that your "calling out" had nothing to do with any respect or tolerance for Christianity. For you to try to pretend otherwise and use it as a defense is ridiculous and juvenile.

Words are words and it is what you make of it. If me saying "that is so gay" offends you, sorry but that is your issue to deal with, not mine. If you can step back and realize the context of what I am saying you will see that I am not being racist or a bigot.

You have a problem with him being a dick, and you have a problem with me asking him not to be one.

You certainly are confused. And the born again types are definitely not the "turn the other cheek" kind of people. It is not my problem that you think that my statement extended to all the Christians. Your rants are still misplaced. Your victim complex is funny to watch though.

I choose to be straight when i porked a girl instead of a guy, lol. I could have just as easily chose to be asexual and not been with either a guy or a girl.

@squinko: I agree 100% squinko. Come on radi0logy, you (have seemed) to be better than that.

/eyeroll

In the real world, people do in fact stop using words that are offensive, and are amazingly able to do so while simultaneously focusing on stopping other forms of hateful behavior. Wowzers!

@EinhornIsAMan!: It's the context, that blondes are dumb. It's easy to say, "that's such a blonde thing to do" and convey that blondes are stereotypically dumb.

@MostlyHarmless: Nowhere did I say that Christianity is perfectly tolerant. But I'm tired of enduring the hypocrisy from people asking for endless "tolerance" out of one side of their mouth while insulting and denigrating Christianity out of the other.

And as for your "calling out" of Radiology - it consisted of you telling him that he should be better than to stoop to the level of those bigoted hateful Christians. Thanks so much for that.

(Thought I agree about the commenters.)

I'm pretty sure lesbian is a slang word, too, but I prefer that than to humor someone and actually take it serious and say "person with an alternative lifestyle". By that generic phrasing, I think even necrophiliacs could apply. Eww.

It's not about "eliminating" words. When vile words are treated as ordinary and OK, then the sentiment behind those words is also treated as OK.

Or did you not notice that it's no longer considered socially correct to call someone a "Jap" or a "sheeny"?

@pecan 3.14159265: Dyslexic. Dyslexic!

@subtlefrog: I don't know if I could work for an organization that uses numbers instead of letters in its name. Think of the dylexic people!

@EinhornIsAMan!: It's important to differentiate between "understand" as in understand the concept of the ad and "understand" as in knowing what it's saying and not grasping why people are offended about "that's so gay" - because certainly I think a great deal of people would pass this on the street and have no clue what to make of it simply because it's poorly worded. It's not as if these people are stupid or homophobic or actually use "that's so gay" in their language, but it's just that the message of the ad isn't clear. Now if they did get the message, but didn't grasp why it was needed, that's when you get ignorance.

....weren't we taught from a young age that words cannot hurt us? Evidently these people missed that very important lesson.

@RecordStoreToughGuy: It's meant to be contrary, like "sick" or "ill" mean good or "mad" means an increase of, not angry. I mean, I guess you could make "lame" offensive by saying "gimpy" but that's one, a hilarious word, and two, should not infer you are insulting people in wheelchairs.

And way to stereotype others while accusing them of stereotyping. Sure, radiology was being an ass (and i suppose you chose to ignore the fact that I called him out on it), but your rants are really quite hollow.

@RecordStoreToughGuy: It reminds me of the dad in '10 Things I Hate About You' (the movie, not the show) trying to identify with his kids by saying "jiggy" and "I'm down with it."

@bball123h: No, then it would be much easier to understand and would say:

LULZ, jok is so 'can throw ballz but cant sez sentence.'

/rant

People in this country are too fucking sensitive about everything. They need to learn about context instead of trying to stifle people's freedom of expression. When someone is really using hate speech you will know it. Everyone really needs to chill the fuck out and stop giving words more power than they need.

@MostlyHarmless: Nope! Neither am I, for that matter. But ohhh boy, was there some muttering when the family photos got sent to the relatives. Not so much with the younger generation, but the old fogeys.

@squinko: I think that's the point fuzzmanmatt was making, that if you're not Mexican, you'd be offended if everyone assumed you were, with the belying context being "all hispanic/latino people look alike."

@katstermonster: It definitely refers to the kid, though at first glance one might think the kid belonged to Charlie Sheen's "masculine" character, when it actually belongs to Jon Cryer's "effiminate" character.

At any rate, I got over it.

I don't know about you, but that's not someone I'd want mad at me.

@FTWGeek:

Way to be passive agressive there champ...

@SkokieGuy:

I agree, censorship and denial are the only thing this ad promotes. The 1st ammendment, for all the good or bad language that swirls around it, is a big part of what separates us from devolving into a state like Nazi Germany.

@P_Smith: It's not the blasphemy I object to. He's perfectly within his rights to blaspheme. Christians don't go chopping off heads or stoning people for expressing their freedom of speech. You must have us confused with another religion. It's the complete and utter lack of tolerance and common decency that I object to.

@diasdiem: Maybe not so much now but that wasn't always the case.

It's a negative phrase, and the heterosexual act is generally considered (at least on the receiving end) as a good thing.

The bold part is why something sucking is a bad thing. It's not tied to the homosexual act, it's about being on the giving end being a bad thing.

Also, it's not just high school students, I hear this word used as an insult pretty regularly among adults as well.

@MostlyHarmless: The guy chose to denigrate the beliefs of billions of people from behind a pseudonym on the internet - a religion that prides itself on "turning the other cheek." In my book, that's cowardice and bigotry.

But he's no worse than you or any of the other folks out there who get off on mocking people for their beliefs, the very beliefs that encourage them to do nothing except forgive you for your rudeness. You stereotype with reckless abandon while castigating those you pigeonhole for being less than perfectly tolerant of your every whim. Your snark is truly courageous.

I think the latest scientific theories on the causes of homosexuality are pointing towards hormone levels during pre-natal development. Either way, it's clearly more complex than simply saying, "it's genetic."

When my two stepsons moved in with us from another state, they were in the habit of using that term, along with a few others that were very hurtful. Shame we can't have a campaign using my method to break the habit. Every time they said something was gay, or used the "n" word, i made them clean the catbox. Use crappy language, get a crappy job. Only took about a month, (shows how stubborn they were, i had 5 cats at the time) but it worked

...teens experience [insensitive] remarks and harassment throughout the school day, creating an atmosphere where they feel disrespected, unwanted and unsafe.

All of the responses to this comment are an obvious indicator of something you all can't seem to get through your heads:

All gay people act differently. (gasp)

Why is it that a majority of people seem to think that all gay people think the same thoughts or are offended by the same thing(s)? Well, here's a big surprise for you: we're human, and just like humans, vary a great deal. So just because your "gay friend" says it's okay doesn't mean that it is. You may not have thought about this, but your "gay friend" doesn't represent every gay person out there. We don't have secret meetings to discuss these things and decide what we all think at once. So while your Linda/Mark/Rick/Steve may say that it's okay to call something "gay" because it's lame, that doesn't mean I think it's okay.

Ask your friend if they've ever been physically harmed and/or threatened because they're gay, then get back to the rest of us.

Kinda like when Mr Garrison could say the three letter f-word referring to gay people and not be censored but anyone straight who said it got beeped.

Oh, and calling someone a jerk is probably offensive to salted meat, you lame-o. ;)

Also, to the guy who started this nonsense, why do you choose to be such a jackass? Is it because jackasses are so problem-free that they can point out every flaw of every other person out there?

But I don't think most people think of that when they say it, it's just an expression for "that's bad." I think it's the same with "gay." People don't connect it with homosexuality when they use it to describe something stupid or lame. Granted, I'm sure it was originally used that way, deriving from the stereotypical homophobic macho man's idea of homosexuals as the stereotypical flamboyantly homosexual lisping, mincing hair dressers. The meaning of the word is changing, or at least branching into a new, additional meaning. This happens to words often over time. "Awful" once meant "full of awe" or "awe-inspiring," and "terrible" was a synonym for "terrific."

Also, "gay" isn't really very good as a pejorative for homosexuality, considering the plethora of other, more offensive phrases available.

Kidding aside, how on earth are you not banned yet?

No, I just hope you share that same attitude of tolerance toward homosexuality

At first glance it seems to be a PSA for literacy. The cliche of an athlete not passing muster academically. ETC.

Gay is happy. Fag is a cigarette, and queer is just odd.

Oh yeah, and this is the most "homo-sexual" advert I've ever seen.

Man, my friends laughed me out of the restaurant that day

@DollaValueLIFO: really? you sure about that? you're not transposing(sp) words there are you?

He caught on fairly quickly

@SciotoSurfer:

As a dedicated fatty, I'm offended by the term phat. In fact, when I finish this fried twinkie, I'm making an ad.

I prefer the politically correct term. I am voluptiously muscular.

@TalKeaton: I was mostly talking about here, the US/canada, when referring to choosing to be discrimnated against. Also i didn't see that there was a response to your question.

i also agree that there is no room for hatred, at least for groups of people. I can't keep myself from hating a couple of individuals in my life, but I can avoid them.

@aguacarbonica: I understand that, I was just letting him know why religion may have been brought up. also it is one of the largest group of people that choose to do something that they would have at one time been possibly killed for.

It sounds like you and Perez Hilton would get along swimmingly.

"stupid", "dumb" etc. are offensive to mentally challenged people.

I IMd my sister, Linda, a certified lesbian who is self-proclaimed spokesperson for all gay people.

@uberbitter: The problem here is that the people who use the term have a tendency to militantly avoid thinking about the language they use. Most people I've seen using that term have a vocabulary of about ten words, at least four of which can't be used in polite company.

I'm not sure where I'm going here, though, as I am someone who abuses the phrase "that's so gay" and I feel like telling me to stop because it's offensive towards homosexuals is time and effort that could be spent on other more important endeavors. But I also understand where the argument is coming from, whether I wholeheartedly agree with it or not.

It's crazy, the religious nuts hate homosexuals, then members of their same congregations take offense at somebody using terms like "fag", "queer", "mexican", when the people who are affected by these terms mostly seem to let them roll off their backs. Except for that one time at the gay bar, when my friend, a gay mexican, was insulted by a white jock calling him a fag, and brought half the bar out to watch this Archie look-alike get his cracker-ass beat down by a bunch of queers.

And I sort of agree with the person with CP you refer to; however, I don't necessarily think it's an indicator of one's ignorance to use coarse terms, but it is an indicator of one's sensitivity and respect generally.

This may go over some heads, but a comment I reserve for people like this is along the lines of, "You have coped well with so many (physical, mental) challenges, yet it appears the best you've got is sanctimony." At heart, these attitudes are nothing more than secular Pharisaism.

@Matt: I usually respond with "how is that two men having sex?" While slightly exaggerated, it pretty much shuts people up.

@DollaValueLIFO: No to the first question (both of which are still choices people are free to make or not make, mind you), yes to the second.

@The Porkchop Express: I know the conflict, it just wasn't present in this thread before. And he summed up his point eloquently, so it makes much more sense to me now.

As to your latter paragraph, people do choose paths that leads to being hated/discriminated against all the time; in kind of a funny parallel, Christians in many other countries receive just as much (sometimes more) discrimination and hatred for choosing to be Christian as the homosexual community does in the United States. Of course, most American Christians don't recognize that. Regardless of viewpoints, there's no room for hatred on anyone's part.

What about when the word 'gay' was taken away from meaning 'happy'? Why no ad campaign then?

sigh

@cambiata: You haven't seen my moon missle have you? once that puppy's gone it'll be low tide all the time. yahooo for clam diggin.

Another thought about this campaign. I'm noticing that several commenters are equating this problem of the use of "gay" to lack of intellect. This takes us to another cultural place, which is that place where we disdain smarts and thoughtfulness. These things are considered "gay"--just think of the movie Idiocracy, where this message is reinforced frequently. The subtext of this perjorative "gay" is that certain qualities of mind and interaction, including analysis, expressiveness, intelligence, empathy, are socially unacceptable and subject to censure. The reasons why we've come to this point I will leave to other armchair sociologists and mass psychologists.

@The Porkchop Express:

Not picking on you, but I think this is a great opportunity to express my belief.

And that is that our society has made it so that a large proportion of Americans, religious or otherwise, believe homosexuality is "wrong." The religious folks are the only ones who have a morality platform to combat it with. The other jackasses only have "Ew."

I think that we are going to be backwards as a country as long as we see the problem as a purely religious one. Everyone would be totally shocked if religion disappeared and underneath that homophobia was still lurking, but that's exactly what would happen if we continued our current trajectory.

@CaptZ: like how you now use the word now more now?

I doubt you have many gay friends given your opening sentence there.

Using lame as a negative adjective is offensive to crippled people, you jerk.

@bogartbrown:

That's an interesting idea. Maybe we should take the word back. We can go around calling really amazing things "gay" until we completely reverse the meaning of the word. Free XBOX 360? That's so gay!

I think the brits are the only ones who are that preoccupied with the shortcomings of redheads. I think they're hot!

Instead of stupid ad campaigns about not offending yet another stupid group of people, start using the word "gay" in the original sense!

@pecan 3.14159265:

I agree it is not clear at all. I had to read the article to get it, and I consider myself to be pretty bright. Also, I really, really want some pecan pie right now. Go figure.

She would get so irate when either of us would use the word "retarded" in any sort of description. It didn't bother him having been called many things throughout school, and she had no physical or mental (retardation anyway) to speak of. They didn't last of course, but it makes me think that it's a little ass backwards for those who are not "gay" to be more offended than those who are.

His logic was that since the word meant nothing offensive to him anymore it became a clear indicator of the ignorance of the person using the term, if they were in fact using it to intentionally insult anyone at all.

@Radi0logy: really dude, I don't believe that stuff either but....damn.

Our language is always changing. I find it mildly offensive that homosexuals used the word "gay" in the first place. For example, one of my favorite musicals "State Fair" (c. 1950's) has a line in it, 'I feel so gay in a melancholy way...' It used to mean happy, merry or lively. There used to be people in my parents' generation named Gaye or Gaylord. Think about how those poor people felt when their names evolved.
I am being somewhat sarcastic here, but there is a grain of truth in it.

"Gay" should not be used for lame or anything else. However, the ad makes no sense. I have yet to find someone who understands it.

SO, another advertising agency full of suits has put together an add they think will be embraced by teenagers and instead will be laughed at and/or ignored.

GOOD WORK!

@RecordStoreToughGuy: Funny you bring that phrase up, they should use thinkb4youspeak to stop that too probably.

It's the commenters who don't get it.

None of the examples I used above would be tolerated as an overall synonym with anything and everything useless, dumb or annoying.

I'm gay and I'm sick of it. Being a gay kid isn't the easiest thing in the world as it is. Why all the support for a pejorative that just serves to reinforce how undesirable and useless the mainstream finds you?

Just because Linda, or any other gay person, doesn't feel offended, it doesn't mean that the entire gay community doesn't feel offended. Gay people don't organize meetings and pass resolutions as to what's offensive and what isn't. Some gay people do find this offensive. Just because Phil's sister doesn't, or your gay friend from work doesn't find it offensive, doesn't mean that someone else doesn't.

@mythago: Did you READ my (badly typed) comments? I'm not suggesting we all become mimes to end homophobia, I'm suggest that banning potentially offensive words and deferring to politicaly correct "nice" words is pointless.

Does eliminating the "N" word eliminate racism? Of course not, it merely makes it harder to detect.

If someone has a hateful attitude, using a benign word doesn't eliminate the attitude, it masks it.

Language that accurately represents the feelings of the speaker is a good thing. Language that hides and glosses over the actual feelings, not so much.

However, I do feel that the first course of action in treating ADHD should be attempts at behavior modification, not pills. I did not seek help with my attention problems until I was 23; perhaps if I had been taught better ways to keep my mind focused when I was young, I wouldn't have to use an entire pad of post-it notes, cell phone alarms, and weird whiteboard+string flowcharts to keep myself focused at work now.

@TalKeaton: Probably because a large portion of people who think being gay is a choice tend to be religious folks who also think being gay is wrong. Please note my use of "a large portion" and know that I don't think all christians (among others) think that being gay is a choice and that it is wrong.

I find it hard to believe that so many people who, other than being gay, make the same choices as everyone else would choose to be something that is discriminated against/hated/etc.

@LoveyH: I think you're right, except that the N-work is more analogous to the word "faggot." That word is so wildly offensive in its origin and meaning, I wish it were gone from EVERYONE'S vocabulary. I roll my eyes at people saying stuff is "gay," but I have no patience at all for the word "faggot."

so at what point did you "choose" to be straight?

sexuality isn't a choice. case closed. thanks for playing though.

AINDERBY QUERNHOW (n.) One who continually bemoans the 'loss' of the word 'gay' to the English language, even though they had never used the word in any context at all until they started complaining that they couldn't use it any more.

@TCama:

So you've created a third category in the Nature v Nurture argument? Credentials please?

Also, the ad isn't meant to offend anyone. It's intended to take stereotypes about other groups and insert them into conversation in the same way gay is inserted in to "casual" conversation.

@JulesWinnfield:

It's cool as long as you spell it "ghey". The ad fails.

What is a "certified lesbian"?

Do they have to pass a test or something?

This is a language fad. It will go away on it's own once the old people start using it.

The analogy is wrong, as Phil stated. Gay is genetic. Dumb jock, while it can be considered largely inherited, is environmental.

At least they've left us art nerds out of the fray!

@mythago: These days, raid bosses drop nothing but epic loot. It's so straight.

@JohnDeere: Same here. At first I used to apologize to my gay friends for saying it also but none of them care.

@TalKeaton:

He brings religion up because the primary battle over the normalcy of homosexuality is with the religious community that believes it is a biblical sin.

Religious people are equal, in this country. Actually, looking at Prop 8, I'd say religious folks are a little too powerful.

@SciotoSurfer: Speaking of "happy"...

If anyone wants to counter gay-hating, start calling bigots gay when they're happy.

Here's how gay people use "that's so gay": to refer to things that are stereotypically gay. (A Christmas tree covered in tasteful lavender ornaments and signed by a noted fashion designer: so gay.)

Here's how straight people use "that's so gay": in the same way they would mean "that's so retarded". (The new raid boss drops epic loot only 1% of the time: so gay.)

If you can't see the difference it's because, in between all your "satirical" posturing, you'd rather not.

@TalKeaton:

So you can screw who you want to, because you just so happen to be straight, but Jonny Queer has to pine for men while in a sham marriage to Jane?

Did you choose your orientation?

@TomCoughlin: Blasphemy is a victimless crime.

@Bhockzer:

So what if it shows up on an eeg? Mattel is marketing a game ythat is predicated on the fact that many parameters of eeg output are, indeed voluntary.
[www.usatoday.com]

The g-word is quickly becoming the new n-word in terms of "we can say it but you can't"

@Eryk:

Describe the "other side".

You can say alot without offending large groups of people that are unrelated to the topic. Like "hey, Eryk is an idiot, he's so stupid". You don't need to bring sexual orientation into it. Or race, or religion.

@SkokieGuy: ...those who tease and bully gay youth often have homosexual tendencies that they CAN NOT acknowledge.....

For the love of an edit button - sorry all!

"Jock who can complete a pass but not a sentence." Think that's mean?

No. Actually, I think that's funny.

The other problem with this (other than being a jock being a choice) is that it isn't even an insult about jocks in general. Instead of implying that all jocks are dumb the insult is about jocks who are also dumb. It's not really hurtful when you sidestep the stereotype like that.

Using JC as a curse doesn't denigrate those who believe in Christianity - or at the very least is not predicated on that belief. Using "gay" as a pejorative is intended that way - a judgment on the person. If, on the other hand, someone said "That's so Judeo-Christian," you would have a point.

Otherwise, you're just talking about (what you believe to be) foul language.

@TomCoughlin:

Cowardice and bigotry? Please tell me that was directed at tz and not at Radi0logy.

@TalKeaton: To illustrate why choice vs. genetics is irrelevant.

The homosexuality is a choice argument is constantly used by religious groups that try to make the case that a because (they feel) homosexuality is a choice is therefore not deserving of equal protection.

I am making the case that other activities that are choices are not merely granted equal rights and protection, but special rights and protection.

No, I do not believe in religion, but I respect other's rights to practice it. IMHO faith belongs in the home, not in school or government. However I resent the use of my tax dollars to support a class of people that largely actively works to prevent my equal rights.

If you're not busy being offended by it, it's actually kind of a funny situation when you see her cover her mouth and try to stop herself when it pops out.

@FuzzysFriedChicken: That's because they must be "jock"

@Shawn4168: If it's not just the injection of personal opinion that's getting up your ass, then what specifically is your problem?

FYI, this is a blog. Sure it's a consumer blog, but a blog just the same. They're free to editorialize if they want to, and do quite frequently. As for this particular article, it's about an ad. That seems to me to fall within the umbrella of what this site would be inclined to cover.

I don't get where your indignation is coming from, but to each their own. I hope you find what you're looking for out there.

@Shawn4168: Shawn, I actually AGREE with you that this post has nothing to do with consumerism. [FYI: Consumerist has a comment code that requests that comments about editorial choices be sent to consumerist, not posted in comments.]

I must ask, when you saw the headline: "Ad Campaign Out To Stop People From Using 'Gay' As Pejorative", why did you click on it to read the article? What was your expectation?

@Groovymarlin: my gay and lesbian friends are the biggest users of the term "gay".

its probably a regional thing. or maybe it just makes them feel better about themselves, making light of contraversy. either way this article is "gay".

p.s. advertising has what I believe expert weights-and-measures-ologists call "a metric ass-ton" to do with consumerism.

@fordpickup: Anyone remember the Will & Grace controversy in which Will was embarassed to be around Jack because Jack was just "too gay"?

@TomCoughlin: I just left it at "Wow". If he's not trolling, then he's an ass. Either way he doesn't really deserve any attention for it.

No, no it doesn't on either account. People will naturally pursue what they believe to be true, which is an entirely valid pursuit. Whether or not what they believe is true is true is another issue entirely.

That's the second Consumerist article this week where an editor just couldn't resist injecting their own personal beliefs as fact, into an article that has absolutely NOTHING to do with consumerism. You guys aren't going to get very far if you insist on alienating half of your audience on a regular basis.

This place is a joke now. I'm off to find some better blog to read.

Also, the ads don't really seem to work.

@ShortBus: Interracial marriage is, unfortunately, still a matter of contention among many people, and (in my experience) particularly of contention among ethnic groups. It isn't "white people shouldn't be with other races" so much as it's "Koreans need to marry Koreans," and there seems to be disappointment when these "rules" aren't followed. It's sad, but it's not about hatred or inferiority as much as sometimes it's about the difference in how different cultures are perceived.

Otherwise, keep trying.

@pecan 3.14159265: I knew that there was a reason I clicked that little heart beneath your name once. Well said, and I agree wholeheartedly.

J/K

We are taking back the hatefulness of the word gay. It's not your word anymore so don't worry about it. Pick a better fight.

BTW we are coming for the rainbow next.

@Cyberxion101: I think a better campaign would be to depict a jock with the idea that despite what one sees, it clearly is not what one IS. Jocks are not dim, despite their stereotype, and gay people are not lame, despite the use of the word "gay" to mean so (even though it usually is not directed at a gay person).

The idea should be that "words hurt because they try to make us into what we are not" and that as jocks should not be represented as stupid just because they're good at sports, gay people should not be associated with the word "gay" to mean lame, because that's just simply not true.

And if you even place two people in the ad, it shows a level of understanding and comraderie, a feeling that "we may be different in the eyes of other people, but we're in this together because we're both being misrepresented."

Wow, I sound like an ad campaign.

@tz: +1

Unfortunately, being tolerant of the "other side" is not something that people care a rat's ass about. Why? Cause people only care about themselves and their causes - all other causes and cares are irrelevant.

We can go allllllllll day with this one folks - to the point that we can't say nearly anything without offending someone.

How about instead, we all put our big boy hat on, realize the world isn't exactly the kindest place in the world, grow some thicker skin, and deal with the occasional insult directed towards us? For fuck's sake - kids handle it better than us.

"Sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me."

@Radi0logy: Wow.

@tz: I think we could definitely stand to be more polite and tolerant for sure.

whats hurtful to you isnt hurtful to everyone my ni---. i mean my homie. my gay friends are who use the term the most. if its fine with them then its fine with me.

@Eryk: Hmm...this shouldn't have been posted here...meant for another reply.

*No, I actually have it, I wasn't trying to be cute/offensive by using it as an insult. :P

I'm of mixed opinion about retarded, actually. At it's most basic meaning, it means to slow down or impede. Usually when I use it I'm referring to someone whose way of thinking seems to be significantly impeded, but not through physical defect, just their own ignorance or prejudice. I honestly don't know if that makes it any better, but I do enjoy using the word "retardulous" to refer to something mind-bogglingly stupid.

~I

@Radi0logy: Wow - your cowardice and bigotry is amazing. I fully expect a storm of condemnation from all those championing tolerance on this board...

@SciotoSurfer: @tz: +1

Unfortunately, being tolerant of the "other side" is not something that people care a rat's ass about. Why? Cause people only care about themselves and their causes - all other causes and cares are irrelevant.

We can go allllllllll day with this one folks - to the point that we can't say nearly anything without offending someone.

How about instead, we all put our big boy hat on, realize the world isn't exactly the kindest place in the world, grow some thicker skin, and deal with the occasional insult directed towards us? For fuck's sake - kids handle it better than us.

"Sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me."

Frankly I believe that PC and word police are a laughable exercise. What matters is not what language people use, but their intent and true feelings. Frankly "it's so gay" is mostly an expression of youth and the majority of young people find sexual orientation irrelevant and don't harbor true deep-seated hatred or fear of homosexuality.

Invariably, those who tease and bully gay youth often have homosexual tendencies that they can acknowleldge BECAUSE they internalize messages that homosexuality is bad. Just as no one is born a racist (it is learned from messages from their parents, family, community, etc.), so to is fear of homosexuality. It is a learned behavour.

Attempting to censor language from the general population doesn't eliminate the underlying prejudice. Does banning the "N" word eliminate racism? Of course not. It simply forces racists to use code words and gives the veneer of a more tolerant society, without any real underlying change of attitudes.

I'd rather have someone call me a faggot to my face and recognize that he has the courage to not hide his true colors.

Rights for women, people of color, the disabled and other groups weren't created by censoring word choice, they were created by government enacting laws - not based on popularity, but based on morality and ethics.

IMHO every yelling of faggot and homo and every tragic violent event helps underscore why it is essential we are given equal (not special) rights. Let's NOT subdue offensive language and give the false impression the problems aren't there.

That's so "Daintily worded that it loses any effect before you even finish the sentence." If you really want to hit them where it hurts, it has to be something more directly negative, like:

That's so "Jock who is useless outside of throwing a ball".

Yeah, that'll do.

@JediJohn82: Choice or genetic is SO irrelevant, gosh I wish that "issue" would go away.

If being gay is 100% choice, does that make it any less valid and people who make the choice any less equal?

Homosexuality has existed in all cultures, as long as recorded history and most likely longer. It is observed in virtually all mammal behavour in the wild.

Religion on the other hand is clearly and 100% a choice. Furthermore, rather than an activity between two consenting adults, children, too young to grant consent are indoctrinated into the beliefs of their parents. Yet, this 100% FORCED choice is not only legally protected, is is granted SPECIAL (not equal) rights, (tax exempt, paid national holidays, etc.)

Personally, I'm not a proponent of gay marriage, but I don't use the term "gay" in the negative context out of respect for those who are offended by it. Whether or not you agree with others is no reason to be disrespectful, but some people just don't have any respect for anyone, period. And there always will be people like that, unfortunately.

@Cyberxion101: Yeah, no need to go all avant garde about it. Just say it.

@rdclark: @SciotoSurfer: This campaign is simply stupid. No offense to those who have IQ's under 85.

It just doesn't make any sense - almost to the point that its insane. No offense to anyone inside an insane asylum.

I agree , gay ad.@TeeDub:

@Toffeecake: When I was growing up, 50% of my vocabulary was, gay, retarded and dude (even for women).

I've since grown out of it, but I still think that a carefully used, "that's so gay" is still appropriate (and funny).

There's always a choice, most people just pretend there isn't because they don't like any of the other choices (like in your ADHD example, admitting that it might be a parenting issue).

@pecan 3.14159265: I agree. It's so unclear and open for interpretation that the message is almost lost for it.

I just tend to think that when you've got something important to say, it's probably best not to engage in obfuscation. Make it as clear and straight-forward as possible.

For one thing, I've never met a jock who couldn't complete a sentence (except for that one mute guy, but he was cool so it doesn't count). Now a paragraph, that's a whole nother story altogether. :)

@korybing: Some people don't like being called "cracker" though.

@uberbitter: I agree, and as a teacher, I don't permit it in my classroom.

@LoveyH: My gay friends are the same way, but they're a bit more careful. It's only when people are really gay (as in lame), that they use gay.

I have yet to meet someone who says "that's gay" in a way that implies that they are actually referring to homosexuals (same with "retarded" and the mentally impared). The way the language is evolving, it will either fall out of favor in a few years or become completely detached from it's original meaning, like a person saying "that guy gypped me" with no knowledge that "gyp" is a pejorative against gypsies.

@jhuang: What about "That's so Raven!"? Will that do the trick?

@me and the sysop: your friend is the voice of the gay community? well as long as a gay says using "gay" is ok, then it's ok... black people use "the n word" all the time, I guess that means it's ok for all of us to use too, right?

I think it's really cool how they substituted the letter "B" and the number "4" for the word "before." It really lends an edgy vibe to their whole campaign, and makes me take their message that much more seriously. If there's one thing bigots hate, it's spelling. I also enjoy Mountain Dew and have thirteen different posters of Tony Hawk in my bedroom.

Should we be more polite? Tolerant? Both?

I would say both.

@TCama: I don't doubt that you're right. They're clearly trying to illustrate just how ridiculous the term is, but it appears that they're twisting the "That's so gay" phrase in a manner that will be more likely to hit home with folks in order to achieve that end.

That's just the way I read it, I could be wrong. Regardless, I still think the campaign is ill thought out. I think these folks would be better served by educating folks as to why they feel the term is offensive in a far more direct manner. As my earlier post illustrated, there's the chance it'll be misinterpreted, and it'd be a shame if their message ended up being buried under the misconception that they're being sort of childish about it.

@TCama: I think it could actually have been more effective if it did something like "that's so black" or "that's so blonde" precisely because it incites the kind of offense that people should feel when they describe something as "that's so gay" - the message in the ads the way they are, I think, is lost precisely because it doesn't incite the kind of emotional response needed for someone to step back and say, "well, I should rethink how I say things because other people may be as upset as I am about seeing this."

@Floobtronics: yes, while you're being outraged about us stealing the word gay, you might as well get mad at us for stealing the rainbow from Judy Garland, hell, you should get mad at us for stealing Judy, too!

I believe this happens to everyone in high school. It's part of learning to deal with assholes in the real world. While not gay myself, neither was I particularly athletic, and (gasp!) quite active in the theater department (which did afford me a sort of weird popularity once people started recognizing me from plays I was in), so I was part of a group that would occasionally come under fire. I took refuge in snark, and dished out as good or better than I received. There were some pretty cruel back and forths, but I got over them pretty quickly, mostly because, well, they were just words after all. I wouldn't be half the person I am today if I hadn't learned to think on my feet that quickly, or learned to slough off insults.

Of course, engaging in a verbal battle with someone with a background in comic improv and a love for satire is probably not a good idea to begin with...

Gays have made fairly significant strides towards cultural acceptance but still have a long way to go. Once society grows to accept varying sexual identities, the prerogative use of "gay" will naturally fall to the wayside.

My grandfather grew up in a world where young boys routinely called each other "nigger" in the same nonchalant manner my grade schoolmates used "fag." Once gay marriage becomes as much of an non-issue as interracial marriage, our language will naturally evolve again.

@Groovymarlin: My sister, also a certified lesbain, also uses "gay" as a perjorative. I think its a personal thing, kind of like Black people using the "N" word, except gay people *usually* don't mind when other people use it.

The ad campaign itself is also pretty gay.

Secondly, I also disagree that the campaign would be more effective if it used attributes that aren't choices. In that case, it wouldn't be effective, it would likely just be offensive. "That's so black." Uh, no. "That's so blonde." Nope.

Instead, the campaign uses phrases and words that are quite obviously ridiculous as adjectives and synonyms for "lame." In this way, it points out how ridiculous it is to use an personally identifying characteristic to describe something like a situation.

But it is a choice. The genetically inclined argument is similar to parents claiming that their kids have ADHD as a way to explain their kids acting up because it couldn't possibly be because of a lack of discipline.

When god closes a pejorative door, he opens a window.

So you asked ONE person if they were offended by this use of the word, and THAT was your research for this post?

I agree that the campaign is not as effective as they hope for, as the purpose is unclear. But your analysis of this issue so completely misses the point, I'm shocked that your editor even allowed it to be posted.

Let's do a simple exercise to help you understand the problem. Instead of the word "gay" in your text, I'm going to replace it with Black:

People use the word "black" in offhand ways not to disparage people, but as a slightly edgy synonym for "lame." The derisive "black" has nothing to do with skin color.

So, do you think if you and your sister were "certified black people," would you be as happy about someone using the word in this way?

Just because YOU don't find the use of the word offensive, doesn't mean it isn't.

Where's the outrage over the homosexual community snatching up a word that means "happy"?

Oh yeah, they did it because some considered "homosexual" or "homo" to be pejorative too. Is it really shocking to see the successor viewed in the same light?

Now, if the campaign instead used phrases such as "That's so black," it might be different.

What a queer thing to say!

I'm so retarded.

@kylere: I'm pretty sure the ad is hard to understand whether you use "gay" to mean "lame" or not. It's not the clearest of ad campaigns.

This campaign will come and go and no one will blink.

The poster would be more effective, if like Phil said, it substituted for something that is not a choice.

Though I still think censorship and the banning of words is more awful than the use of the words itself. There's a whole theory behind using taboo words more frequently is more effective than telling people not to say them.

While is seems innocuous to most teenagers, it still links things that are "lame" or "bad" with being gay. There is nothing good that can possibly come out of that for the gay community, and certainly doesn't promote safety for gay teens.

Someone had to say it.

@FuzzysFriedChicken: Well, the meaning (at least IMO) isn't exactly apparent when you read it together (without seeing the words at the bottom) and it's not grammatically correct, at least the way I read it. I read it as, "jock, who can complete a pass but not a sentence," but without the comma behind "jock" it seems to lose emphasis. Is this something anyone else sees or am I just looney and need more coffee?

That campaign is so ill thought-out. I don't quite think that "Jock who can complete a pass but not a sentence" is going to offend anyone. It's just not the same as using "gay" as a pejorative.

Besides, there's the whole thing where two wrongs don't make a right. Instead of stooping to this level, maybe it'd be a better idea for these folks to try to educate people as to why they feel the term shouldn't be used in such a manner. All they're doing by going this route is inviting folks to retaliate in kind. You don't get folks to stop doing something by provoking them.

ThinkB4YouSpeak indeed...