# THATS SO GAY



## beached (18 Feb 2007)

I frequently hear the expression “*that’s so gay*”, usually said when something is lame or substandard.  In this context I find these words as repugnant as someone saying “that’s so nig*er”  

I can appreciate if this phrase was used to describe something campy, effeminate or so obviously screaming flaming kweer (sic).  But lets get something er… umh straight, being gay does not mean one is lame, inferior or sub par. I would certainly argue to the contrary.

In my platoon at bmq there were 60 or so recruits of which 3 were homosexual. One was an “out” lesbian, another a closeted gay male (who came out to me in the last week), and myself whom prior to joining the service was “out’, but when starting bmq did not actively announce my persuasion. The three of us were physically as well as academically placed in the top 1/3 of our platoon in the final rankings.  We had zero PO failures and passed every test with solid scores. We did not whine and moan like some of the others and I don’t think anyone of our fellow recruits or staff would describe us as being lame or inferior.

The CF is a family made up of folks from all walks of life, different races, religions, backgrounds, ages, gender, political ideologies, yadda yadda yadda. We are a diverse workforce in service to an equally varied country.  By using, or accepting the use of phrases that degrade any of these groups demeans the Canadian Forces and the citizens of this great country.


----------



## Michael OLeary (18 Feb 2007)

To all, consider carefully the serious tone of the poster's expressed concerns.  Attempts to make light of this topic or to ridicule the member will result in removal of posts and appropriate warnings where necessary.

Army.ca Staff


----------



## The Bread Guy (18 Feb 2007)

Well done!

Wouldn't it be great if we could judge ALL colleagues (not just military) for their performance, not what they do outside of work hours?

Keep up the good work!


----------



## GAP (18 Feb 2007)

I disagree. The saying is so generic that deliberately avoiding it becomes another PC function. 

It matters little if a member is homosexual or not, so long as they are pulling their weight and not coming on to other members. Leave it at home type thing. If the member comes across in a flaming effeminate manner, then they are going to be razzed. The military is a business, and the business is war....PC needs to stay in it's niche.


----------



## armyvern (18 Feb 2007)

beached said:
			
		

> I frequently hear the expression “*that’s so gay*”, usually said when something is lame or substandard.  In this context I find these words as repugnant as someone saying “that’s so nig*er”
> 
> I can appreciate if this phrase was used to describe something campy, effeminate or so obviously screaming flaming kweer (sic).  But lets get something er… umh straight, being gay does not mean one is lame, inferior or sub par. I would certainly argue to the contrary.
> 
> ...



Just a question...While I agree with your initial statement of "that's so gay" being repugnant; you can "appreciate if this phrase was used to describe something campy, effeminate or so obviously screaming flaming kweer??" You don't find something being described as "screaming flaming queer" offensive as well? I certainly do.

I don't think that you'll find on this board anywhere where one's sexual orientation has been used as the basis to degrade any of the above listed groups personal performance, job performance or course rankings/placements. Nor should it. To each...our own. I think the CF crossed over that bridge many years ago and has managed to carry on in it's professional manner. I'll also go ahead and add trans-gendered pers into your list and also let you know that, based on my experience, this had no bearing on their performance either. I'm also glad to hear that it had no bearing upon your course ranking, and congrats on a job well done to you.

Yes, some people find the above terms repugnant, and I am one of them; but one must be careful not to take that general statement and make make further implications of prejudice or biasness based upon it's use. One must put it's use into the proper context with which it was intended. 

In the 80s when one used the term "gag me with a spoon" it did not necessarily infer that one should actually be gagged (or had been gagged) with a spoon. Many terms are used very loosely these days, and offence is not necessarily intended.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (18 Feb 2007)

GAP said:
			
		

> I disagree. The saying is so generic that deliberately avoiding it becomes another PC function.
> 
> It matters little if a member is homosexual or not, so long as they are pulling their weight and not coming on to other members. Leave it at home type thing. If the member comes across in a flaming effeminate manner, then they are going to be razzed. The military is a business, and the business is war....PC needs to stay in it's niche.




I agree, when I use that phrase it has nothing to do with homosexuality whatsoever.

When I say the recruiting system is "pathetically sad", it does not mean I have tears running down my face........


----------



## George Wallace (18 Feb 2007)

I notice that the author has come onto the site and posted, then logged off, so I always have suspicions as to what the intent of the post was.  That aside, I do have a question of the author, and that is the statement that "they were in the upper third of the course".  To my knowledge, Course Reports no longer reflect that.  They indicate Pass/Fail, and only the top three students will be ranked.


----------



## Shamrock (18 Feb 2007)

_That's so gay_ is one of our tacit social controls that enforces homesexuality as aberrant behaviour.  Homosexuals as a group have managed to seize most of the power behind terms once very derogatory to them -- _queer_, for instance, used to be extremely offensive, but now is so commonplace it shows up during American prime-time TV as show titles.  

While the use of _that's so gay_ need not be socially accepted, at some point, people will have to accept that if they don't meet perceived social norms, they will be subject to these controls.

One of the problems with politically correct speech is that the utterer is robbed of his ability to charge his statement with meaning; the interpretation is placed entirely in the recipient's ear -- even if the recipient is unintended.  We are fast becoming a society whose greatest strength is getting offended.


----------



## The Bread Guy (18 Feb 2007)

Shamrock said:
			
		

> _That's so gay_ is one of our tacit social controls that enforces homesexuality as aberrant behaviour.  Homosexuals as a group have managed to seize most of the power behind terms once very derogatory to them -- _queer_, for instance, used to be extremely offensive, but now is so commonplace it shows up during American prime-time TV as show titles.



The same way some racial groups have "taken back" some terms once derogatory to them.


----------



## armyvern (18 Feb 2007)

My gay brother-in-law (out obviously - because I certainly wouldn't do that for him) uses the term "gay" to describe things quite often in much the same manner as "that's so gay." He certainly is not reinforcing (to paraphrase) "tacit social controls that enforce that homesexuality is aberrant behaviour."

It is all about the context/manner in which the term is used. Not the use of the term itself.


----------



## orange.paint (18 Feb 2007)

beached said:
			
		

> The CF is a family made up of folks from all walks of life, different races, religions, backgrounds, ages, gender, political ideologies, yadda yadda yadda. We are a diverse workforce in service to an equally varied country.  By using, or accepting the use of phrases that degrade any of these groups demeans the Canadian Forces and the citizens of this great country.



Beautiful.In a perfect world where everyone has no past life,no vices,not cultural/religious upbringing everyone will be accepted.Just for example I know a east Indian who absolutely hates any Pakistani due to cultural/family beliefs.I know Catholics who hate homosexuals.And I still know people who use the "N" bomb in behind closed doors.Unless everyone turns grey and speak one language,hate,religion there will always be racism,sexism etc.

Nice to think the army is a perfect Utopian civilisation,however I think you will find your extremely wrong.You do have rights and I doubt someone would verbally tell you "I didn't promote you this year because your a homosexual".But don't expect just because it's a government organisation that everyone in it have to agree with your lifestyle.

But as I said you do have rights,as do WO Bloggins who cannot say anything about your lifestyle, but due to his Catholic upbringing can believe what he wants.


----------



## Pencil Tech (18 Feb 2007)

I hear kids use this expression and it sounds to me like it's actually pretty far away from any actual reference to homosexuality. With honestly no homophobia on my part, I think its fair dues if the word "gay" gets corrupted again, as it wasn't all that long ago that it was common English word denoting "happy" , "jolly" or "bright". It then became completely co-opted by the "gay" community and any other usage of the word became impossible. So maybe on some Christmas in the future we'll be able to sing "Don we now our gay apparel" without all the usual lame jokes.


----------



## a78jumper (18 Feb 2007)

Can you imagine saddling a male child with the name "Gaye"; that was the charactor Clark Gable played opposite Marilyn Monroe in "The Misfits". How times change.


----------



## aesop081 (18 Feb 2007)

Post-and-run

Now thats .......gay    non-heterosexual      queer  !!!!

can't seem to find the right word


 ;D


----------



## Shamrock (18 Feb 2007)

Pencil Tech said:
			
		

> I hear kids use this expression and it sounds to me like it's actually pretty far away from any actual reference to homosexuality. With honestly no homophobia on my part, I think its fair dues if the word "gay" gets corrupted again, as it wasn't all that long ago that it was common English word denoting "happy" , "jolly" or "bright". It then became completely co-opted by the "gay" community and any other usage of the word became impossible.



Words will do that, pick up new connotations and denotations.  At one point, awesome and awful meant the same thing.


----------



## Armymedic (18 Feb 2007)

I think the poster mistook a phrase in common usage though out our population, and contexted with being in the military, as he/she (not much info on the profile) had never heard that term before basic training.

Too bad...real non politically correct military personnel do not use "Thats SO gay". That seems to be a nevuea twist on the dicription of so much in the military culture. We actually are a bit old fashioned and say:

"That fucking fuck is fucked". or short form "Thats fucked"

Obviously "that's so gay" is speak of the younger msn crowd.


----------



## George Wallace (18 Feb 2007)

St. Micheals Medical Team said:
			
		

> Obviously "that's so gay" is speak of the younger msn crowd.



I tend to side with you on your post.  I think it is more Valley Speak than MSN Speak though.   ;D


----------



## orange.paint (18 Feb 2007)

I hear it all the time.For example.

-The school is so f****** gay.

-This course is gay.

-F*** this is so F****** gay.

Not always from young guys either.
I don't use it.I have a colourful Newfoundland tounge that can spout off stuff most have never heard...or understood.


----------



## armyvern (18 Feb 2007)

Alright,

I think we can wrap this one up then. I think the point has been made that's it's not the remark but the context that needs to be considered.


----------



## muskrat89 (1 Mar 2007)

I know this was locked, but I thought this addition may be apropos

http://www.azcentral.com/offbeat/articles/0228sogay28-ON.html



> 'That's so gay' comment leads to lawsuit
> Associated Press
> Mar. 1, 2007 12:00 AM
> 
> ...


----------

