That's Gay
April 16, 2007 2:22 PM Subscribe
Help me gauge current social take on the phrase "that's so gay", and possibly decide on some rules about it's use in my new closed virtual community.
I need decide whether it's necessary to have a formal rule banning the use of the specific phrase, "that's gay". I'm wondering what people's feelings are about this phrase.
So I'm starting a guild in World Of Warcraft. I need to write up a charter for the guild and formalize some rules and guidelines. One of the things I encounter with some frequency in both text and voice conversations is the phrase, "that's gay". Which everyone seems to take to mean, "that's lame". Personally I'd rather have general guidelines than lists of specific banned words. We already have a guideline that says, "Passive or overt bigotry won't be tolerated." This perhaps covers "that's gay", but I really doubt the people prone to use that phrase would see it that way.
This isn't a phrase I use as I consider it juvenile and perhaps inconsiderate. But in the larger community of online gamers the phrase is pretty common and more or less accepted. I really get the impression that most gamers feel the phrase just means something is lame and no derogatory connotation is intended or should be implied. I'm not trying to defend anything here. Just laying out some context.
My preferred solution would be to stay with the "no bigotry" rule and only scold people who say things that are obviously derogatory. I'm just not sure where to draw the line, or if I'm just wrong about this phrase.
What I want to know is -
1) Just how offensive is this phrase?
2) Is it worth stopping the game every time the phrase is used to lecture someone and threaten to kick them from the guild?
I know this seems like I'm asking for permission to be lazy on passive bigotry. But the whole point of the guild is playing an online game. Too many hard rules about what you can say just get stupid pretty quickly. I'd like some feedback on this phrase before I write a hard rule prohibiting it.
I need decide whether it's necessary to have a formal rule banning the use of the specific phrase, "that's gay". I'm wondering what people's feelings are about this phrase.
So I'm starting a guild in World Of Warcraft. I need to write up a charter for the guild and formalize some rules and guidelines. One of the things I encounter with some frequency in both text and voice conversations is the phrase, "that's gay". Which everyone seems to take to mean, "that's lame". Personally I'd rather have general guidelines than lists of specific banned words. We already have a guideline that says, "Passive or overt bigotry won't be tolerated." This perhaps covers "that's gay", but I really doubt the people prone to use that phrase would see it that way.
This isn't a phrase I use as I consider it juvenile and perhaps inconsiderate. But in the larger community of online gamers the phrase is pretty common and more or less accepted. I really get the impression that most gamers feel the phrase just means something is lame and no derogatory connotation is intended or should be implied. I'm not trying to defend anything here. Just laying out some context.
My preferred solution would be to stay with the "no bigotry" rule and only scold people who say things that are obviously derogatory. I'm just not sure where to draw the line, or if I'm just wrong about this phrase.
What I want to know is -
1) Just how offensive is this phrase?
2) Is it worth stopping the game every time the phrase is used to lecture someone and threaten to kick them from the guild?
I know this seems like I'm asking for permission to be lazy on passive bigotry. But the whole point of the guild is playing an online game. Too many hard rules about what you can say just get stupid pretty quickly. I'd like some feedback on this phrase before I write a hard rule prohibiting it.
Best answer: Why not have it as an example of passive or overt bigotry in the rules.
posted by djgh at 2:27 PM on April 16, 2007 [1 favorite]
My sister uses this phrase and it drives me nuts. I don't think the people using it are aware that its offensive, much like the "that's retarded" fad. I hate it, but I don't think that stopping the game every time its used is going to be effective. Maybe a simple "Passive or overt bigotry won't be tolerated, ex: thats so gay."
posted by thebrokenmuse at 2:30 PM on April 16, 2007
posted by thebrokenmuse at 2:30 PM on April 16, 2007
The implied accusation -- that a user of "that's gay" who means "that's lame" is necessarily a bigot -- is kind of harsh. Especially if you're a gaming site and not an advocacy site who needs to knock people around with your political correctness.
What about "Overt, passive or inadvertent bigotry will not be tolerated, e.g. 'That's gay,' 'that's retarded,' or 'white trash'."
posted by pineapple at 2:32 PM on April 16, 2007
What about "Overt, passive or inadvertent bigotry will not be tolerated, e.g. 'That's gay,' 'that's retarded,' or 'white trash'."
posted by pineapple at 2:32 PM on April 16, 2007
I would discourage it. And just so you know, some people are offended by the use of the word "lame" to mean, well, stupid. It's apparently offensive to disabled people? I wish I was kidding.
posted by bonheur at 2:32 PM on April 16, 2007
posted by bonheur at 2:32 PM on April 16, 2007
Well, my experience is that it depends on who's saying it and what it's being said about. For example, if I'm talking with friends of mine... or even let's just say my friend Mark, who is gay... Mark OR I could say "That is SO gay" about something and no offense will be taken by anyone around us because we're probably noticing that something is actually, in truth, really really gay. And that's not insulting, it's just an observation. Soooo it will just be a part of totally acceptable conversation.
In contrast, if my suspiciously overly-homophobic, stuck-in-the-1950s father looks at something & says "That's SO gay."? There's a good bet that he's being an ignorant, prejudiced asshole or trying to get a reaction out of me. And that's not as acceptable.
posted by miss lynnster at 2:35 PM on April 16, 2007
In contrast, if my suspiciously overly-homophobic, stuck-in-the-1950s father looks at something & says "That's SO gay."? There's a good bet that he's being an ignorant, prejudiced asshole or trying to get a reaction out of me. And that's not as acceptable.
posted by miss lynnster at 2:35 PM on April 16, 2007
I think the point I'm making is that if the person saying "It's so gay" is someone who has a problem with gay, hasn't had much contact with gay people, or finds gay "wrong," then they are no doubt saying it in an offensive context. To other people it can just be used as a descriptive adjective.
posted by miss lynnster at 2:39 PM on April 16, 2007
posted by miss lynnster at 2:39 PM on April 16, 2007
There was a similar askme about this a few weeks ago.
posted by hydrophonic at 2:43 PM on April 16, 2007
posted by hydrophonic at 2:43 PM on April 16, 2007
I'm sorry, but it's homophobic. Would you accept "That's so Asian" if someone was referring to something stupid?
posted by beaucoupkevin at 2:51 PM on April 16, 2007
posted by beaucoupkevin at 2:51 PM on April 16, 2007
Response by poster: A little more background -
I work as a middle manager in a big corporation. I need to deal with HR issues and take regular classes on proper office behavior and how to manage people who use any phrase that might make anyone uncomfortable. I cringe when I think about needing to get anywhere near that with a gaming guild. And frankly when I go home I'd really prefer to not even care.
There really isn't much expectation in a WoW guild that you won't be offended. Probably the reverse is true.
I just don't know how upsetting this phrase is to people. Seriously. Call me naive if you want. I do know it's "wrong" and I wouldn't use it. But that doesn't mean I know how others really feel.
posted by Skyriss at 2:53 PM on April 16, 2007
I work as a middle manager in a big corporation. I need to deal with HR issues and take regular classes on proper office behavior and how to manage people who use any phrase that might make anyone uncomfortable. I cringe when I think about needing to get anywhere near that with a gaming guild. And frankly when I go home I'd really prefer to not even care.
There really isn't much expectation in a WoW guild that you won't be offended. Probably the reverse is true.
I just don't know how upsetting this phrase is to people. Seriously. Call me naive if you want. I do know it's "wrong" and I wouldn't use it. But that doesn't mean I know how others really feel.
posted by Skyriss at 2:53 PM on April 16, 2007
Banning speech is a bad idea. How do you tell who the assholes are if you don't let them out themselves? When they do out themselves, either by using particular trigger phrases or by being jerks in other ways, consider kicking them out.
But yeah, it falls pretty clearly under the "passive bigotry" clause.
posted by contraption at 2:57 PM on April 16, 2007
But yeah, it falls pretty clearly under the "passive bigotry" clause.
posted by contraption at 2:57 PM on April 16, 2007
In the WoW guild I have been in for the last couple years, just about every time it has been said it has upset someone.
Personally I don't think there is ever an excuse to use prejudiced comments that are absolutely offensive. If someone started using your name to mean 'stupid', but it became socially accepted as having a new meaning, how would you truly feel about it? Letting it slide in a community that you are in a position to oversee is saying that it is OK to hurt people as long as they are ignorant/naive to what they are saying.
posted by trishthedish at 2:58 PM on April 16, 2007
Personally I don't think there is ever an excuse to use prejudiced comments that are absolutely offensive. If someone started using your name to mean 'stupid', but it became socially accepted as having a new meaning, how would you truly feel about it? Letting it slide in a community that you are in a position to oversee is saying that it is OK to hurt people as long as they are ignorant/naive to what they are saying.
posted by trishthedish at 2:58 PM on April 16, 2007
Not really an answer to your question, but if Michael Scott says it (or close), probably not a good idea:
Michael Scott: I call everybody faggy. Why would anyone find that offensive?
Toby: I think Oscar would like it if you just used "lame" or something.
Michael Scott: But that's what faggy means!
posted by RandlePatrickMcMurphy at 2:59 PM on April 16, 2007
Michael Scott: I call everybody faggy. Why would anyone find that offensive?
Toby: I think Oscar would like it if you just used "lame" or something.
Michael Scott: But that's what faggy means!
posted by RandlePatrickMcMurphy at 2:59 PM on April 16, 2007
I hear this phrase all the time and absolutely hate it.
posted by Camel of Space at 2:59 PM on April 16, 2007
posted by Camel of Space at 2:59 PM on April 16, 2007
Oh and also, my guild has about 100 members, the general rule is to not say things that would offend other members of the guild as a standard of respect. Overall it has worked beautifully, the people that could not respect the other people in the guild were not welcome and were kicked out.
posted by trishthedish at 3:01 PM on April 16, 2007
posted by trishthedish at 3:01 PM on April 16, 2007
I'm offended by the phrase but I console myself with two facts: The users tend to be very young and possibly insecure in their own sexuality; and it's easy to crush them with a comeback.
tweener123: That <noun>'s so gay!
me: I don't see it having sex with any other <nouns>. Maybe you are mistaken?
me: Did you find it in a pride parade?
me: Does it come with condoms and lube? Sweet!
me: Yep, and so am I. Hand it over.
I admit these aren't great but you'll get more mileage out of some discussion (even this light) than you would out of banning. Besides, banning words is sooo straight.
posted by chairface at 3:06 PM on April 16, 2007 [1 favorite]
tweener123: That <noun>'s so gay!
me: I don't see it having sex with any other <nouns>. Maybe you are mistaken?
me: Did you find it in a pride parade?
me: Does it come with condoms and lube? Sweet!
me: Yep, and so am I. Hand it over.
I admit these aren't great but you'll get more mileage out of some discussion (even this light) than you would out of banning. Besides, banning words is sooo straight.
posted by chairface at 3:06 PM on April 16, 2007 [1 favorite]
I don't play WoW myself but if you did decide to enforce it, would there be any way to autofilter the word 'gay' and change it to something silly like 'bananas' or 'arousing'?
I've played other games and chatted in IRC channels where they did things like this and it very quickly dissuaded people from using words that could be interpreted as offensive. Fear of humiliation is a strong tool (one channel changed swear words to "pink handbags").
Naturally it would interfere with the ligit use of the word gay but it would easier than enforcing it manually..
posted by TheAspiringCatapult at 3:13 PM on April 16, 2007
I've played other games and chatted in IRC channels where they did things like this and it very quickly dissuaded people from using words that could be interpreted as offensive. Fear of humiliation is a strong tool (one channel changed swear words to "pink handbags").
Naturally it would interfere with the ligit use of the word gay but it would easier than enforcing it manually..
posted by TheAspiringCatapult at 3:13 PM on April 16, 2007
When I played CS, the server I frequented had the "cuss up a storm if you wish, but no bigotry" rule. This is actually a good tradeoff, as you're bound to come into situations where you'd wish to use the most versatile word in the english vocabulary, and it'd be tragic indeed to not be able to use it.
Chairface's idea will probably work better with a smaller group; you'll need the rule in place, and use common reasoning / comebacks like the ones he suggested against the kids that voice vehement opposition to the rule.
posted by Muu at 3:18 PM on April 16, 2007
Chairface's idea will probably work better with a smaller group; you'll need the rule in place, and use common reasoning / comebacks like the ones he suggested against the kids that voice vehement opposition to the rule.
posted by Muu at 3:18 PM on April 16, 2007
I'm a great believer in "It's not what you say, it's how people take it that matters".
Some people find the word offensive. Some people use it to be offensive. Which kind of people do you want in your group? People who deliberately try to upset folk (if they're old enough to know it's offensive*, then they're old enough to know it's unacceptable to behave in certain ways in certain circumstances), or people who don't?
They must know it's offensive to use it to insult something. It's not like they're saying "that's so nice", is it?
posted by Solomon at 3:19 PM on April 16, 2007
Some people find the word offensive. Some people use it to be offensive. Which kind of people do you want in your group? People who deliberately try to upset folk (if they're old enough to know it's offensive*, then they're old enough to know it's unacceptable to behave in certain ways in certain circumstances), or people who don't?
They must know it's offensive to use it to insult something. It's not like they're saying "that's so nice", is it?
posted by Solomon at 3:19 PM on April 16, 2007
I'm sorry, but it's homophobic. Would you accept "That's so Asian" if someone was referring to something stupid?
Oddly enough, Chinese Fire Drill.
While I definitely understand the way offense can be taken, I think you very much need to hear what pineapple said. There's no way everyone who says this phrase is thinking aboutgayhomosexual people. Just make it clear that, as some people may be offended, it would make things better all around if the phrase wasn't used.
posted by niles at 3:19 PM on April 16, 2007
Oddly enough, Chinese Fire Drill.
While I definitely understand the way offense can be taken, I think you very much need to hear what pineapple said. There's no way everyone who says this phrase is thinking about
posted by niles at 3:19 PM on April 16, 2007
In reading other posts... yeah so here's the thing: if you're saying "gay" in a non-negative way, simply to describe something that appears somewhat less than heterosexual? Like for example, this? Or say, this? That's a reasonable descriptive adjective based in simple truth & not a prejudiced judgment of any kind. However, if the word "gay" is being used to describe something bad or in place of the word "stupid" or some such thing? If it's being spoken as though someone is a 13 year-old boy with limited social skills? That is then officially not cool.
posted by miss lynnster at 3:20 PM on April 16, 2007
posted by miss lynnster at 3:20 PM on April 16, 2007
Excerpt from the Sarah Silverman Program:
Laura: I only have three dollars.
Sarah: Aw, fag! < em>to gay friends> .. I'm sorry you guys! I didn't mean fag as in 'homosexual', I meant fag as in 'retarded'.
Brian: It's cool.
Sarah: Yeah, it is cool.
djgh had it right I think; mention it in your guidelines and remind people who abuse the policy. If they insist on using it anyway, give 'em the boot (Who needs another ret pally anyway?)
Don't worry about whether or not people in general find the phrase acceptable. It's your guild, the rules of conduct are down to you and your officers. Just make sure people are aware of what those rules are, and be reasonable about it.
posted by wolfsleepy at 3:21 PM on April 16, 2007
Laura: I only have three dollars.
Sarah: Aw, fag! < em>to gay friends> .. I'm sorry you guys! I didn't mean fag as in 'homosexual', I meant fag as in 'retarded'.
Brian: It's cool.
Sarah: Yeah, it is cool.
djgh had it right I think; mention it in your guidelines and remind people who abuse the policy. If they insist on using it anyway, give 'em the boot (Who needs another ret pally anyway?)
Don't worry about whether or not people in general find the phrase acceptable. It's your guild, the rules of conduct are down to you and your officers. Just make sure people are aware of what those rules are, and be reasonable about it.
posted by wolfsleepy at 3:21 PM on April 16, 2007
I do want to echo miss lynnster's point that it is possible to say that something is gay without meaning it as an insult. But when it's derogatory, the phrase is offensive enough to me that my sisters get a little lecture about it every time they use it in my presence, which is often.
I'm not the MMORPG type but a guild that did not tolerate this sort of thing would definitely win big points in my book.
posted by brett at 3:25 PM on April 16, 2007
I'm not the MMORPG type but a guild that did not tolerate this sort of thing would definitely win big points in my book.
posted by brett at 3:25 PM on April 16, 2007
I find the best way for such minor behavior modification is by not using it yourself, encouraging your closer friends online and the leaders not to use it. Subtle social cues are totally gone online, there's no way for someone to give the "Did he just say that?" look or posture themselves in condescension to those remarks. There's no real way you can counter this in a fool proof manner. Difficult members will exist who exhibit anti-social behavior for attention or just the rebelliousness factor. Lead by example and do not feed them, do not advance them, do not let them think they have any power. Most users will recognize this and see the behavior as counter-productive in group dynamics. Sure it makes the user stick out in a quick knee-jerk way, but if this is not productive for self-advancement or inclusion in the group -- such behavior will not be imitated. If you accept that it is impossible to universally solve completely with in a very heterogeneous group you will come along way. Otherwise you end up with arcane bureaucratic rules which tend to isolate otherwise rational people for the benefit of the few. It is much more beneficial to be passive-aggressive or slightly mock their immaturity than say "USER50101 BANNED FROM GROUP", as that comes across as very authoritarian and you risk alienating people like me, who do not want to spend their leisure time dealing with power-hungry assholes, such behavior is usually indicative of such things.
Age limits are great, as are $5 fees. Most are one and the same.
posted by geoff. at 3:26 PM on April 16, 2007
Age limits are great, as are $5 fees. Most are one and the same.
posted by geoff. at 3:26 PM on April 16, 2007
"Lame" as a synonym for "disabled" is no longer in common use, and a lot of people consider it offensive when used that way. Some hypersensitive people may be bothered by it's use as a general pejorative, but I don't think it's the norm. Compare these two sentences:
"That guy's lame."
"That guy's gay."
Does the second seem more ambiguous? That's because "gay" is still in common use with the meaning "homosexual," and is why appropriating that word as a pejorative bothers many people (most notably gay people, but lots of others as well.)
posted by contraption at 3:26 PM on April 16, 2007
"That guy's lame."
"That guy's gay."
Does the second seem more ambiguous? That's because "gay" is still in common use with the meaning "homosexual," and is why appropriating that word as a pejorative bothers many people (most notably gay people, but lots of others as well.)
posted by contraption at 3:26 PM on April 16, 2007
I consider it a rude phrase, and encourage people not to say it when I think I can do it privately and appropriately, that is, without embarrassing someone who is usually using the phrase unthinkingly. The reaction is almost always surprise, then grudging agreement.
Of course some people do get annoyed, because any criticism is hard to take, even if it's just "hey, do you really mean that or do you just use that word just because other people do?" And of course there's the whole holier-than-thou problem.
But I've never understood the people who seriously disagree about the whole issue - sort of a "how dare you be offended by that?" attitude - if someone is offended, they're offended. After that if you persist you're offending them on purpose, and what is the point of that?
As for what you should do about it, I like pineapple's suggestion for how you should phrase the rule.
posted by lockedroomguy at 3:31 PM on April 16, 2007
Of course some people do get annoyed, because any criticism is hard to take, even if it's just "hey, do you really mean that or do you just use that word just because other people do?" And of course there's the whole holier-than-thou problem.
But I've never understood the people who seriously disagree about the whole issue - sort of a "how dare you be offended by that?" attitude - if someone is offended, they're offended. After that if you persist you're offending them on purpose, and what is the point of that?
As for what you should do about it, I like pineapple's suggestion for how you should phrase the rule.
posted by lockedroomguy at 3:31 PM on April 16, 2007
I find it offensive in WoW. I /report the n00bs who use it in general, and it's banned in my guild, along with other racist and sexist language. Most people don't think about what it means; many times, our prohibition is the first time they have to think about it. So far, nobody's quit the guild because they have to call things dumb or thrashed or pwned instead.
posted by headspace at 3:32 PM on April 16, 2007
posted by headspace at 3:32 PM on April 16, 2007
I'd argue that their intentions don't entirely matter.
Some really old people still use "the N-word," and yet mean no real malice by it. "You know, the new neighbor across the street is a n-----," even if your grandmother doesn't mean anything demeaning by it, is still horribly offensive.
FWIW, I'm gay, and am not so much offended by the phrase as I am frustrated that people don't realize that it's demeaning. And yet, from time to time, I say it myself without realizing it, because so many people say it that I sometimes forget its meaning. Which is exactly why it's so bad to let the word go unchecked!
I applaud your efforts. What I'd do, though, is work on educating people more: don't immediately start kicking people over it, but just message them that it's offensive and shouldn't be used. Because most people probably just don't realize that it's offensive.
posted by fogster at 3:35 PM on April 16, 2007
Some really old people still use "the N-word," and yet mean no real malice by it. "You know, the new neighbor across the street is a n-----," even if your grandmother doesn't mean anything demeaning by it, is still horribly offensive.
FWIW, I'm gay, and am not so much offended by the phrase as I am frustrated that people don't realize that it's demeaning. And yet, from time to time, I say it myself without realizing it, because so many people say it that I sometimes forget its meaning. Which is exactly why it's so bad to let the word go unchecked!
I applaud your efforts. What I'd do, though, is work on educating people more: don't immediately start kicking people over it, but just message them that it's offensive and shouldn't be used. Because most people probably just don't realize that it's offensive.
posted by fogster at 3:35 PM on April 16, 2007
I think a majority of gamers who are of a certain level of maturity find the phrase offensive, myself included. I chose my guild based largely on their established policies against offensive, discriminating language, and I think you will find that it is a consideration many people take into account when joining a (raiding especially) community.
As far as policing, it is hard to give a disapproving glance at your fellow players, but it's easy for an officer/raid leader to step in and say "language warning" if someone crosses the line. It usually gets the point across.
And yes, in the larger community, the phrase is fairly common and is generally accepted and encouraged. So is calling people 'pussies', talking about 'raping' each other in PvP, to name a few examples. (I once personally destroyed a world dragon raid, because as the only warlock, I got informed my raid was going to 'rape my face'. Oooo boy.)
The problem with general chat in a MMORG is that the population is too busy with questing to police each other, and instead of "learning moments" you get a "slippery slope" which is unpleasant for a large part of the population. I would think long and hard about the type of community you want to create, and good luck.
posted by lastyearsfad at 3:56 PM on April 16, 2007
As far as policing, it is hard to give a disapproving glance at your fellow players, but it's easy for an officer/raid leader to step in and say "language warning" if someone crosses the line. It usually gets the point across.
And yes, in the larger community, the phrase is fairly common and is generally accepted and encouraged. So is calling people 'pussies', talking about 'raping' each other in PvP, to name a few examples. (I once personally destroyed a world dragon raid, because as the only warlock, I got informed my raid was going to 'rape my face'. Oooo boy.)
The problem with general chat in a MMORG is that the population is too busy with questing to police each other, and instead of "learning moments" you get a "slippery slope" which is unpleasant for a large part of the population. I would think long and hard about the type of community you want to create, and good luck.
posted by lastyearsfad at 3:56 PM on April 16, 2007
my guild does not tolerate it - but that doesn't mean it's banned. There are several people who raise a stink whenever someone 'new' says it - and it normally doesn't happen again. People can justify it any way they want - but it's offensive.
That being said - as a gay man I still believe that words are just words, it's their context and how they're used that make them offensive or not. Sometimes saying 'that's so gay' can actually be funny - but usually only in a self-depracating way. Unfortunately, this particular phrase is RARELY used in a way that is anything other than demeaning and derrogatory.
I wouldn't ban it - but I'd call somebody on it every time it happens. The people in your guild will catch on soon enough.
posted by matty at 3:58 PM on April 16, 2007
That being said - as a gay man I still believe that words are just words, it's their context and how they're used that make them offensive or not. Sometimes saying 'that's so gay' can actually be funny - but usually only in a self-depracating way. Unfortunately, this particular phrase is RARELY used in a way that is anything other than demeaning and derrogatory.
I wouldn't ban it - but I'd call somebody on it every time it happens. The people in your guild will catch on soon enough.
posted by matty at 3:58 PM on April 16, 2007
As to "How offensive," see this previous thread. Could be illustrative.
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 4:04 PM on April 16, 2007
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 4:04 PM on April 16, 2007
It's not necessarily bigotry, but it's potentially offensive and therefore inappropriate in mixed company. I don't think it needs a special rule, but I think you should ask people who say it to stop and kick repeat offenders.
miss lynster: if you're saying "gay" in a non-negative way, simply to describe something that appears somewhat less than heterosexual?
The poster clearly specified the way in which the phrase is being used, so your counterexample is irrelevant. Also, you could probably come up with a better wording than "less than heterosexual."
posted by ludwig_van at 4:07 PM on April 16, 2007
miss lynster: if you're saying "gay" in a non-negative way, simply to describe something that appears somewhat less than heterosexual?
The poster clearly specified the way in which the phrase is being used, so your counterexample is irrelevant. Also, you could probably come up with a better wording than "less than heterosexual."
posted by ludwig_van at 4:07 PM on April 16, 2007
'Nother queer gamer chiming in: I don't use it, and my internet-friends don't use it at least when I'm on.
If you're not down with calling people "niggers" -- a word which, after all, is in wide use by black folks -- then how are you down with calling people fags? Yes, this applies to "gay" too. Not that I make a deal of this when I'm playing a game, what's the point? But if you're running a guild, well, make that step. Believe me, any actual fags you run into will appreciate it.
posted by kavasa at 4:11 PM on April 16, 2007
If you're not down with calling people "niggers" -- a word which, after all, is in wide use by black folks -- then how are you down with calling people fags? Yes, this applies to "gay" too. Not that I make a deal of this when I'm playing a game, what's the point? But if you're running a guild, well, make that step. Believe me, any actual fags you run into will appreciate it.
posted by kavasa at 4:11 PM on April 16, 2007
Personally, I wouldn't actively start censoring it, but if someone says it in chat, respond with something like "Hey, please watch your language in the guild chat."
You should be able to set a tone of civility, and if people value the kinship of the group, they'll try to fit in. If people don't want to abide by that, kick them out.
posted by lubujackson at 4:18 PM on April 16, 2007
You should be able to set a tone of civility, and if people value the kinship of the group, they'll try to fit in. If people don't want to abide by that, kick them out.
posted by lubujackson at 4:18 PM on April 16, 2007
Doesn't sound like a fun guild if you have to have a Minister of Hurt Feelings policing all guild chat. Perhaps you can could use an addon to filter the offensive text, just ignore it, or immediately kick the person out of the guild.
Remember, controlling speech is gay.
posted by voxpop at 4:19 PM on April 16, 2007
Remember, controlling speech is gay.
posted by voxpop at 4:19 PM on April 16, 2007
Said with all the smugness of someone who's never had his life threatened for holding hands, voxpop. That and then some.
Jesus.
posted by kavasa at 4:27 PM on April 16, 2007 [1 favorite]
Jesus.
posted by kavasa at 4:27 PM on April 16, 2007 [1 favorite]
I don't really find it offensive, but I do assume that anyone saying it either is a 13 year old American boy, or has the maturity level/intelligence of one.
posted by EndsOfInvention at 4:31 PM on April 16, 2007
posted by EndsOfInvention at 4:31 PM on April 16, 2007
Banning words, in and of themselves, is a lazy way to deal with people. If someone's a bigot, the only sign of it won't be them saying something's gay, and they can clearly be a bigot without saying it. "That's so homosexual?"
posted by Mr. Gunn at 4:34 PM on April 16, 2007
posted by Mr. Gunn at 4:34 PM on April 16, 2007
Response by poster: Okay. I'm reading an overwhelming consensus on the issue. I'm marking the first response as best answer, but it took me the whole conversation here to get there. Thanks everyone.
Rule -
Passive or overt bigotry will not be tolerated, e.g., "That's gay".
Meaning -
Any variation of the phrase "that's gay" will not be tolerated in chat or voice. Abusers will get a polite whisper. There will be no debate, since there is an overwhelming consensus on the issue. People *are* offended by it, no matter what you might think, so please stop.
posted by Skyriss at 4:34 PM on April 16, 2007
Rule -
Passive or overt bigotry will not be tolerated, e.g., "That's gay".
Meaning -
Any variation of the phrase "that's gay" will not be tolerated in chat or voice. Abusers will get a polite whisper. There will be no debate, since there is an overwhelming consensus on the issue. People *are* offended by it, no matter what you might think, so please stop.
posted by Skyriss at 4:34 PM on April 16, 2007
thebrokenmuse: "My sister uses this phrase and it drives me nuts."
Nuts? Are you speaking negatively of the mentally ill?...
I think it's hard to say if you're going to offend someone with the phrase "that's gay". It seems to affect people differently. Since I have bipolar, I notice it when people say "nuts", "whacko", "psycho", "mental" and the like, but whether it bothers me depends on context. If you don't want people to use these types of phrases in your community, you can attempt to police it, but personally I think it's better treated on an individual level.
posted by veronitron at 4:50 PM on April 16, 2007
Nuts? Are you speaking negatively of the mentally ill?...
I think it's hard to say if you're going to offend someone with the phrase "that's gay". It seems to affect people differently. Since I have bipolar, I notice it when people say "nuts", "whacko", "psycho", "mental" and the like, but whether it bothers me depends on context. If you don't want people to use these types of phrases in your community, you can attempt to police it, but personally I think it's better treated on an individual level.
posted by veronitron at 4:50 PM on April 16, 2007
Perhaps you can could use an addon to filter the offensive text, just ignore it, or immediately kick the person out of the guild.
Or, instead, one might try taking the direct, forthright, decent approach, and let people know up front what is acceptable and what isn't, and only resort to harsher action once a user has demonstrated an inability to adhere to a community standard.
Remember, controlling speech is [insert your favorite pejorative here, bigoted or not].
No, it's not, and it's this kind of immature perspective that is fueling the ubiquitous argument of "I can't keep censorship and personal accountability straight! Someone better just ban me! I deserve to say anything I want on anyone else's dime, because I'm a Merrikan!!!!"
(I'm sure that sentence was ostensibly to be tongue in cheek, voxpop, but your "Minister of Hurt Feelings" bit and overall tone imply that you really think that the Internet should just be a free-for-all and that Internet community leaders have no responsibility.)
I disagree with all the posters who have suggested that the hypothetical "That's Gay"er had to have malice in his or her heart when it was said for it to be offensive. Ignorance of a slur's original intent or "it doesn't mean that anymore" or prevalent usage or "look, I have a gay friend" is no excuse for hate speech. If "nigger" won't be allowed, neither should "gay" be allowed as a synonym for stupid, dorky, lame, uncool.
Plus, the big-picture problem is not the hypothetical gay player who wasn't all that offended, or the hypothetical harmless speaker who just didn't think -- it's the lurking kid with latent homophobia who saw the transaction and just got an implicit permission to use the phrase in his own real world. Messages come from everywhere, all the time. It's not one huge bigotry manifesto that creates a person who can do something violent or cruel -- it's the millions of tiny whispers he's received over decades.
Skyriss, kudos on trying to do the right thing and set up a thoughtful place on the front end. Hope it all works out.
posted by pineapple at 4:52 PM on April 16, 2007
Or, instead, one might try taking the direct, forthright, decent approach, and let people know up front what is acceptable and what isn't, and only resort to harsher action once a user has demonstrated an inability to adhere to a community standard.
Remember, controlling speech is [insert your favorite pejorative here, bigoted or not].
No, it's not, and it's this kind of immature perspective that is fueling the ubiquitous argument of "I can't keep censorship and personal accountability straight! Someone better just ban me! I deserve to say anything I want on anyone else's dime, because I'm a Merrikan!!!!"
(I'm sure that sentence was ostensibly to be tongue in cheek, voxpop, but your "Minister of Hurt Feelings" bit and overall tone imply that you really think that the Internet should just be a free-for-all and that Internet community leaders have no responsibility.)
I disagree with all the posters who have suggested that the hypothetical "That's Gay"er had to have malice in his or her heart when it was said for it to be offensive. Ignorance of a slur's original intent or "it doesn't mean that anymore" or prevalent usage or "look, I have a gay friend" is no excuse for hate speech. If "nigger" won't be allowed, neither should "gay" be allowed as a synonym for stupid, dorky, lame, uncool.
Plus, the big-picture problem is not the hypothetical gay player who wasn't all that offended, or the hypothetical harmless speaker who just didn't think -- it's the lurking kid with latent homophobia who saw the transaction and just got an implicit permission to use the phrase in his own real world. Messages come from everywhere, all the time. It's not one huge bigotry manifesto that creates a person who can do something violent or cruel -- it's the millions of tiny whispers he's received over decades.
Skyriss, kudos on trying to do the right thing and set up a thoughtful place on the front end. Hope it all works out.
posted by pineapple at 4:52 PM on April 16, 2007
How about banning it when it's used to mean homosexual, and allowing it all other times; then there will be no ambiguity.
posted by blue_beetle at 5:16 PM on April 16, 2007
posted by blue_beetle at 5:16 PM on April 16, 2007
Use another word please. I am a little late to this party, but this link explains what one school did to address the issue.
posted by JohnnyGunn at 5:38 PM on April 16, 2007 [1 favorite]
posted by JohnnyGunn at 5:38 PM on April 16, 2007 [1 favorite]
FWIW, I think I just heard someone use the word straight instead of gay - as in "That's straight", but they obviously meant it in a "That's {lame\dumb\nuts}" fashion.
posted by niles at 6:37 PM on April 16, 2007
posted by niles at 6:37 PM on April 16, 2007
Casual bigotry seems to be pervasive among the young adults I'm around-- they KNOW they are not bigots and therefore assume that everyone *gets* that they're use of these words is ironic. I've asked many of these kids about it (general aged 16 to about 25), and they are oblivious as to the harmfulness of this language.
Casual bigotry and its verbal manifestations is corrosive, to the user, the listener and the inadvertent target.
Don't tolerate intolerance in any form.
posted by nax at 6:42 PM on April 16, 2007
Casual bigotry and its verbal manifestations is corrosive, to the user, the listener and the inadvertent target.
Don't tolerate intolerance in any form.
posted by nax at 6:42 PM on April 16, 2007
My preferred solution would be to stay with the "no bigotry" rule and only scold people who say things that are obviously derogatory. I'm just not sure where to draw the line, or if I'm just wrong about this phrase.
Go with your instincts. Don't waste time and energy trying to stamp out every little trace of bigotry. You're going to do a lot more harm than good. Instead focus on eliminating the most egregious offenses and trying to maintain a respectful atmosphere. If there are some members who insist on using such phrases and you think it's hurting the community then take them aside quietly and let them know the deal.
posted by nixerman at 6:47 PM on April 16, 2007
Go with your instincts. Don't waste time and energy trying to stamp out every little trace of bigotry. You're going to do a lot more harm than good. Instead focus on eliminating the most egregious offenses and trying to maintain a respectful atmosphere. If there are some members who insist on using such phrases and you think it's hurting the community then take them aside quietly and let them know the deal.
posted by nixerman at 6:47 PM on April 16, 2007
blue beetle: NO.
I am a queer person, and I find it incredibly offensive that people tolerate gay being synonymous with bad, wack, or stupid.
THINK ABOUT IT.
even if somebody "doesn't mean to be homophobic," they ARE BEING HOMOPHOBIC.
if somebody's retort is "but i'm not being homophobic," then the comeback is, "then how come you won't stop when you're asked?"
as the receptors of homophobia, queer people define what is unacceptable. and it's simply unacceptable to semantically argue a seperation between homophobia and associating gayness with general badness.
posted by entropone at 7:00 PM on April 16, 2007
I am a queer person, and I find it incredibly offensive that people tolerate gay being synonymous with bad, wack, or stupid.
THINK ABOUT IT.
even if somebody "doesn't mean to be homophobic," they ARE BEING HOMOPHOBIC.
if somebody's retort is "but i'm not being homophobic," then the comeback is, "then how come you won't stop when you're asked?"
as the receptors of homophobia, queer people define what is unacceptable. and it's simply unacceptable to semantically argue a seperation between homophobia and associating gayness with general badness.
posted by entropone at 7:00 PM on April 16, 2007
Am I the only one who interprets "that's so gay" in the original sense, ie "that's so lame" in the sense of "that's so Disney" - the gay happiness of Disney crap being an example of things so childish/annoying/absurd that they are cloying and lame. Ie, nothing to do with homosexuality at all?
I guess so.
posted by -harlequin- at 9:27 PM on April 16, 2007
I guess so.
posted by -harlequin- at 9:27 PM on April 16, 2007
FWIW, I think I just heard someone use the word straight instead of gay - as in "That's straight", but they obviously meant it in a "That's {lame\dumb\nuts}" fashion.
Very nice, that's awesome. Going to give it a shot.
posted by voltairemodern at 9:28 PM on April 16, 2007
Very nice, that's awesome. Going to give it a shot.
posted by voltairemodern at 9:28 PM on April 16, 2007
I'm bisexual and I use it to refer to things which aren't people all the time. YMMV.
posted by public at 5:26 AM on April 17, 2007
posted by public at 5:26 AM on April 17, 2007
No, harlequin, you're not the only one. I do think we're a dying breed, though...
posted by rmm at 8:20 AM on April 17, 2007
posted by rmm at 8:20 AM on April 17, 2007
Casual bigotry seems to be pervasive among the young adults I'm around-- they KNOW they are not bigots and therefore assume that everyone *gets* that they're use of these words is ironic.
In the context of a group of friends who know each other's intentions, "offensive" words don't have to be. My friends and I sometimes use slurs to refer to each other, but we all understand that it's a joke - in a way it's sarcastically making fun of the type of people who would say those sorts of things in earnest.
I might say something to my gay friend that would be taken as offensive by a gay stranger, but we both understand my intention and there's no offense taken. Like I said before, obviously in mixed company such things are rude and inappropriate, but it's not necessary to impute malicious intent to all uses of a given word or phrase.
posted by ludwig_van at 8:37 AM on April 17, 2007
In the context of a group of friends who know each other's intentions, "offensive" words don't have to be. My friends and I sometimes use slurs to refer to each other, but we all understand that it's a joke - in a way it's sarcastically making fun of the type of people who would say those sorts of things in earnest.
I might say something to my gay friend that would be taken as offensive by a gay stranger, but we both understand my intention and there's no offense taken. Like I said before, obviously in mixed company such things are rude and inappropriate, but it's not necessary to impute malicious intent to all uses of a given word or phrase.
posted by ludwig_van at 8:37 AM on April 17, 2007
I used to use it a lot in my casual vocabulary until one day, a couple years out of college, I was working for a new boss in NYC who was gay. He was pointing out a stupid method one of our sub-division employees was using for a calculations, and I blurted it out without thinking about it.
He continued on like I hadn't said anything, but I sat there unable to focus because of the big screaming OMG WHAT DID I JUST SAY voice in my head.
Since then, I try not to use it in business. Otherwise, I don't see it as that big of a deal. Like ludwig_van said, I too could use it with my gay friends and expect no offense to be taken (or at worst a constructive discussion like this one on the topic , but I doubt it).
posted by allkindsoftime at 9:46 AM on April 17, 2007
He continued on like I hadn't said anything, but I sat there unable to focus because of the big screaming OMG WHAT DID I JUST SAY voice in my head.
Since then, I try not to use it in business. Otherwise, I don't see it as that big of a deal. Like ludwig_van said, I too could use it with my gay friends and expect no offense to be taken (or at worst a constructive discussion like this one on the topic , but I doubt it).
posted by allkindsoftime at 9:46 AM on April 17, 2007
"So I'm starting a guild in World Of Warcraft."Oh my god, that's so... Nevermind.
posted by leakymem at 10:24 AM on April 17, 2007
I'm late to the thread, but here goes...
I've been in several different guilds where it's just not seen as a big deal. And one of them was a big raiding guild with a gay GM and several other gay members, who all used "gay" in this way themselves.
The one I'm in now is very tightly bonded and I think the use of the term in this way is one marker of this. In other words it's (just a part of) a way of saying "inside our circle, we can be as outrageous as we want". And this guild features much ribbing of each other of a very explicit and constant sort - calling each other "fuckfaces" and so forth, but the culture is such that nobody takes it seriously or personally. There is a way to insult someone for real, however - it usually involves calling into question their skills or some action they have taken, or ridiculng their spec. This can be quite harsh at times.
I've only been in a few guilds, but none have been anywhere near as tightly bonded as the core group in mine - they all grew up together and have been playing games together for a decade or more. So I'm sure that affects things.
Anyway, guild cultures vary. "That's so gay" (when not used to mean homosexual) actually conveys nuances not quite covered by "lame" but it's hard to put my finger on exactly how. I just know that the terms are not exactly interchangeable.
When I grew up, it was drilled into us how offensive "gay" and "retarded" were, so the people I hung out with just didn't use those words that way. I was aghast when I saw how prevalent such use has become lately.
Best of luck to you in fostering the environment you seek.
posted by marble at 1:59 PM on April 25, 2007
I've been in several different guilds where it's just not seen as a big deal. And one of them was a big raiding guild with a gay GM and several other gay members, who all used "gay" in this way themselves.
The one I'm in now is very tightly bonded and I think the use of the term in this way is one marker of this. In other words it's (just a part of) a way of saying "inside our circle, we can be as outrageous as we want". And this guild features much ribbing of each other of a very explicit and constant sort - calling each other "fuckfaces" and so forth, but the culture is such that nobody takes it seriously or personally. There is a way to insult someone for real, however - it usually involves calling into question their skills or some action they have taken, or ridiculng their spec. This can be quite harsh at times.
I've only been in a few guilds, but none have been anywhere near as tightly bonded as the core group in mine - they all grew up together and have been playing games together for a decade or more. So I'm sure that affects things.
Anyway, guild cultures vary. "That's so gay" (when not used to mean homosexual) actually conveys nuances not quite covered by "lame" but it's hard to put my finger on exactly how. I just know that the terms are not exactly interchangeable.
When I grew up, it was drilled into us how offensive "gay" and "retarded" were, so the people I hung out with just didn't use those words that way. I was aghast when I saw how prevalent such use has become lately.
Best of luck to you in fostering the environment you seek.
posted by marble at 1:59 PM on April 25, 2007
This thread is closed to new comments.