Freedom of Speech
I have a couple of things to say on the subject of freedom of speech, and the first is that all my favourite feminist bloggers have effectively robbed me of it! Every time I think of something angry (often), witty (rarely) or mixed-up (see remainder of post) to say about feminist issues, I find that one or more of them have said it first – and a hell of a lot better than I ever would! So damn your eyes, all of you (but keep blogging, please)!The main point of today’s ramble is how much freedom of speech we should really have. My reaction would normally have been a resounding: ‘Total, of course!’ but a recent online debate really made me think. Someone had researched the etymology of the word ‘gay’ and soon there were hordes of people weighing in with battle-axes and wet fish* primed for action.
As someone who has, like many of my contemporaries, used the word ‘gay’ as an adjective meaning ‘rubbish’, but without intending it to be in any way anti-homosexual, I was disconcerted by the idea that I might, as the eminent linguist David Crystal argues, be using the word as a weapon - or that its widespread usage showed a subconscious absorption of homophobic attitudes. It’s easy to dismiss this as political correctness and, like anyone else, I can cite gay friends who don’t object to the usage of ‘gay’ in this way and who may indeed use it themselves. The use of the word ‘gay’ to mean ‘homosexual’ is itself the result of etymological evolution, one might argue, and it has been adopted with pride. Who are we to censor another ‘new’ word? The meanings are quite distinct. Yet, the more I think about it, the more I am convinced that for every person using the ‘gay’ in an entirely unbiased way, there are five who are as prejudiced as hell – and twenty more who might come to associate ‘homosexual’ with ‘rubbish’ without even meaning to through neuro-linguistic programming.
Equally, while many homosexual people wouldn’t be remotely offended if you remarked that English weather was ‘gay’ while you both strolled along in icy drizzle, some people would be. In the same way, while some women relish a flirty ‘darling’ tacked on to every utterance directed at them by their local barman, I don’t. In fact I hate it. It makes me uncomfortable and angry: I feel that the word is used, intentionally or not, in a diminishing way against me and, more irritatingly, that I can’t easily protest without being branded humourless and/or getting overcharged for my gin.
I’ve debated turning around and adding an insultingly belittling ‘endearment’ to the barman/waiter/whatever in return, but this too has its pitfalls. Unfortunately, if I call someone ‘darling’ or ‘cutie’ I run the risk of him thinking I mean it (I can’t pull off a ‘Cheers, duckie’ or ‘Ta, love’ as though it comes naturally, and anyway I don’t want it to be taken that way – I want it to grate). I am racking my brains for a suitable term to call men who insist on these charming little tags for women they don’t even know. ‘Boy’, perhaps? Suggestions welcome …
Language, as we all know, has incredible power. We’re still fighting the stereotypes that have been superglued to ‘feminist’. Scope had to change the Spastic Society’s name after a medical term became a tool for bullies. So, although I don’t advocate censorship, and I relish the creativity of the English language, I think that from a personal point of view I will try to stop using ‘gay’ to mean ‘rubbish’, because I don’t want to unintentionally perpetuate bigoted attitudes. Or maybe I’m just a big girl’s blouse? I suppose I should take it like a man.
*Would anyone care to volunteer to be hit with a wet fish? I've always wanted to do it … please?
posted by Growlergirl @ 4:49 pm
2 Comments:
I totally, totally hate the usage of "gay" to mean "lame". I remember back in the dark ages of the 80s, when I was a tiny nerdling, when that vernacular use of gay was common. My mom gave me a good scolding. Other people's mom's must have, too, because gay=lame went out of fashion while I was in high school (92-96). I heard it reappear in the vernacular after I finished university (2000). An ex of mine - a super liberal non-heteronormative ex - said it in 2002 and I read him the riot act. and it made me cringe. Very uncool.
I'm sure it's entirely a coincidence that the eclipse of gay as slang for lame roughly equals the Clinton years ... Right. Completely coincidental.
With reagards to an appropriately patronising endearment for men, I think 'my lad' works quite nicely. Particularly if you have a Yorkshire accent.
Post a Comment
<< Home