Hate the word "homosexual"

I don't, I think It's just a clinical/technical term for describing a gay person. However, considering the context, I can understand your feelings.

 

I like the word gay better , but I like to use lesbian for me .

 

All I want to say right now is that the subtext of how they say it is identical to other terms of intolerance. When it is discussed in terms the OP put.

 

Well, it's sort of more 'formal'. Sort of like 'selflessness' and 'altruism'.

Yes, it has a bad history, like the word transsexual, so I avoid using it and I usually sort of get my hair raised when I hear it, like some sort of reflex - but if they aren't using it offensively then I don't really mind.

I think the reason why it sounds so negative is because of how it has been used. But it's not negative at all.

 

I don't actually have a problem with it, I mostly just think it seems pretty clinical and formal so I just say gay. It does get used a lot by homophobes though but I try not to let that change the word

 

Ok...I've not used a Mac in over 20 years, so be patient with me. In what way does your Apple have definitions for words? Does the OS contain a dictionary with that definition? Or are you talking about something else?

If this is somewhere in their basic product, that to me is grounds for a product boycott.

It is also grounds for starting to use the word "apple" or "mac" to mean "foolish" or "stupid".

"Sorry dude, I can't go out tonight, I have too much homework."
"Oh man, that's mac."

I like it!

 

Wait, what do you mean by the definitions? I reread the OP and all I caught was... Italian?

EDIT: Assuming it's autocorrected from 'gay', I don't really think it's Apple's fault. The dictionary is... well, the dictionary, and a person who doesn't know English well will start to think about people are calling inanimate objects homosexual, which, in sad reality, they aren't. They're calling it stupid. Which makes me want to slap them in the face, but it doesn't change the fact that's where society's heading, anyway.

 

I chose "yes," but my real answer is that it has it's place in certain clinical or scientific contexts. For talking about non-human animals, for example, I think it's more appropriate to use "homosexual" than to talk about gay and lesbian rats, penguins, fruit flies or whatever.

For humans, in most contexts, I consider it too clinical and reductive.

I was thinking about this the other day. So many people have a negative reaction to "queer" because they've had it used against them as a slur, but in my time I've heard "gay" used as a term of derision more often than I ever heard "queer" used as an insult. Unless and until same-sex love loses all social stigma, I think any term associated with us can potentially aquire a negative connotation.

 

i don't really mind it. i admit that it does get annoying after a while, even i don't like to use it as much. i rather have that term used then the "f' word or any other derogatory terms you can think of.

i think language and definition of any kind of term changes as the year or decade or century progresses.

 

Hrm... As someone who went through a state of bi-genderism I actually didn't feel comfortable with any of the common terms for sexuality. I still wouldn't call myself a homosexual because it makes me uncomfortable since it binds gender and sexuality together... I mean I'm comfortable with saying I'm a lesbian because for me its empowering! But I'd still rather classify myself as a gynophile, so that I don't have to be weighed down by binary gender standers to describe my sexuality.

 

Whoa, ok...just looked it up.

Apple MacBook dictionary defines gay as 'foolish, stupid' as informal definition | WJLA.com

Man...that's totally mac!

 

I hate the word a lot. I find it just as offensive as faggot. It's clinical and dehumanizing.

 

At least it's marked as informal (and offensive), which it is.

If someone who was not familiar with the informalities of English, and they witnessed someone calling, I don't know, their homework gay... they will search it up and see what? "Homosexual" and "happy", both which do not make sense.

Google includes this definition as well.

Obviously it shouldn't be used that way. But people do anyway. It's not the company's fault. It's society's fault. They are just doing their job by defining the words to help others understand what they are used for.

EDIT: Well, you can also search it up on other sites. I read the article and it does make sense about "normalizing the usage", which is IMO is pretty bad. But doesn't it do that with every word? A bitch is a female dog, but it's also used as an insult for (usually) women. Yet I don't see anyone trying to get that definition off. Is it different?

 

It would depend on how it's used, I suppose, although the way most people throw it outside of academia and research tends to be derogatory... akin to using a word like negroid. I find "homo" to be even worse, when used by homophobes.

And one member brought up a very good point: how it binds sex and gender together. Another reason I never understood the whole -sexuality behind trans and homo.

 

I love it and I have no idea why...

Me and my best friend Tyler (who is gay) are the "Bhffs" or "Best Homo Friends Forever" and ever sinse we became bhffs I've loved the word XD

 

Really? Wow. I feel the opposite has been abused. I never use the word homosexual regardless. " gay agenda" is pathetic. Probably used by people who never met anyone other than a straight religious male

 

As the word "gay" has begun to be used more to describe men than women, and "lesbian" to describe women, homosexual is a single word that describes both same-sex oriented men and women. OK, maybe it is more clinical sounding than casual, but I would rather see it used than "queer", "faggot", "lesbo", or "homo", all of which have historically been used as slurs more so than the more clinical/technical word "homosexual".

The real problem is, of course, the implied negativity of being homosexual; get rid of that prejudiced mindset and the word is no more negative than heterosexual.

And for the poster above who describes themselves as a "gynophile", there is nothing wrong with that either, except that not one person in 10,000 is going to know what you are saying about yourself unless you tell them using other more familiar words. I don't mean to sound rude, but it is true.

 

Well, I mean, if someone knows some root words, they can probably place "gynophile" as "a lover of women".

 

Oh I know, but I don't mind that ^^ I like it its a definition that suits me better and that's all that matters to me. I don't even mind explaining it xP(*hug*)