The analogy to which you refer — “[objection to use of the word ‘gay’ as a negative adjective] seems comparable to complaining that black people can’t use ‘white’ drinking fountains in the days of slavery” — has absolutely nothing to do with race. I am saying that insofar as blacks experienced far greater oppression through slavery than through far more minor things like segregated drinking fountains, gays are receiving far greater oppression through things such as laws banning them from getting married than some 11 year old saying that his mom is “so gay” for grounding him.

The implication that anything less than slavery is not racism is sad but it’s also non-existent. Would you like to quote something specific?

My further comments on the word “nigger” are admittedly somewhat circular. That is to say, something cannot be made culturally acceptable under the justification that it is not culturally acceptable. Though bear in mind that if, for example, our president called a black man a “nigger,” there would be vast outrage against the statement against the president. Perhaps a small percentage of would-be racial supremacists would approve, but as a whole we don’t tolerate it. You are right that the further use of the word is not acceptable, but eventually its stigma must be overcome.

Lastly, though I’m sure Ohio is as culturally advanced a land as the movies would have us believe, the conversation in which you joined was between one native Minnesotan and another who has lived in the state for years. Who doesn’t understand whose culture here?

Enjoy your little space in cultural la-la land. The next time you have a conversation with someone who’s seen more than Minnesota or Norway, someone who might be of color and therefore offended by a word for good reason, be prepped to be quiet and be humble.

“The author of the blog admits that[…]”

Very passively said. And hardly an admission on the part of “the author of the blog.”

The author of the blog does admit, though, that it doesn’t need to be a perfect world for said change to happen, it does need to be a different world. Essentially, it seems a non-issue to the author of the blog. He maintains that bigger changes need to occur first, and that someone using the term “gay” as a negative attitude is just not the problem.

Maybe it’s the route to the real solution, but the author of the blog doesn’t think so.

The author of the blog admits that, “in a perfect world, people wouldn’t say it.” The fact that the world is not now ( and may never be) perfect, should not be a deterrent to making it better.

If people hadn’t complained about sexim or racism, “little things” like different drinking fountains for blacks and whites might still be in use. Little things are ussually indicators of larger issues.

“If gay people were held in high standing, if they were treated as equals, if they were allowed to marry, if they were allowed the freedom from worrying about their own physical safety, this might not be an issue.”

Exactly. I maintain that this is not the issue. Changing a societal attitude doesn’t happen overnight, and there’s no reason — at this point — to be concerned over “gay” as a negative term. In a perfect world, people wouldn’t say it. In twenty or thirty years when we hopefully grow out of this Christian Right phase, then we can complain about the little things.

It seems comparable to complaining that black people can’t use “white” drinking fountains in the days of slavery.

If gay people were held in high standing, if they were treated as equals, if they were allowed to marry, if they were allowed the freedom from worrying about their own physical safety, this might not be an issue. This background combined with the use (by anyone – seventh grader or adult) of ‘gay’ as negative slang is offensive and, yes, perpetuates the discrimination of homosexuals. Whether or not the people using this term intend it only as a slight blow to less desirable situations, the word gay as negative adj. is directly related to the noun gay and our cultural understanding and treatment of that group of people. Some words shouldn’t hold so much power, but they do because of how people act.