A few days ago, Bruce alerted me to Pat Dollard’s tweet reminding us that current MSNBC host Al Sharpton once referenced “Greek homos.” After a quick google search, I learned that the left-leaning pundit also used a term that caused the folks at HRC to get their panties all in a bunch when the daughter of a prominent Republican celebrity used it.
Although I could find no reference online indicating that HRC rebuked the bombastic Reverend for his use of the term, they did honor him in 2005 as one of their “Top 10 Straight Advocates for Gay and Transgender Rights“.
Now, people can surely change. And perhaps HRC did fault Mr. Sharpton when he made these statements and their rebukes are no longer online. But, that man did, in recent years, defend a prejudiced pastor who used anti-gay rhetoric.
Wonder why HRC and GLAAD are not calling for him to publicly rebuke his past statements in order to retain his post on MSNBC. I mean, if they called on Sarah Palin to apologize publicly for her teenage daughter’s remark.
Just sayin’ . . .
Color me confused. I went to Wiki and I find that the “fa***t” word is “a pejorative term and common slur used chiefly in North America against homosexual males.” The Wiki exercise then proceeds to blab away without ever explaining the “pejorative” aspect of the word.
Back in 1945, Ovaltine ran an ad: “Wake up GAY….” and at the time, there was no innuendo, pejorative or otherwise.
When I view the Gay Pride activities in NYC, I am not certain about what message I am to get. It seems a great deal of “pejorative” stereotyping is being played out.
Somehow, “gay” has achieved preferential nomenclature so long as it is not used in a pejorative manner in the eyes of the political correctness crowd. In polite society, one defers to the sensibilities of others. But we are locked into a debate about whether marriage between two of the same sex is a civil right. Prior to this debate, the marriage formula only considered male and female. Now the issue is two males or two females who differentiate themselves from the historic norm by their status of sexual preference/orientation. Therefore, we are confronted with identifying this third force by name.
So along comes Opie and Anthony showing clips of vintage Sharpton blathering about “Greek homos.” This was picked up by The Blaze. The purpose of presenting Sharpton using “pejorative” language is to put Sharpton on record. Sharpton is quick on the trigger if a white person uses the “n” word, so turn-about is supposedly fair play.
But, in my confusion, I can not quite parse what is pejorative about a whole list of words used to reference gays. It would appear that a distaste for homosexual acts has been elevated by some to the level of a form of bigotry.
This is being played out in bold by the media in dealing with Jerry Sandusky. Is he gay? He can not be gay, because that damages the agenda. He is a child molester. Whether he buggered little boys by orientation or preference is off limits. Funny how bigotry cuts both ways.
This kind of post gets regular traction here. We are on the right are well aware of the left’s “Good enough for me but not for thee” attitudes. The left will always be hypocritical because their values, morals and sense of right and wrong have been hijacked by moral relativism. Their social and political ideology trumps everything else.
I object to your calling Sarah Palin a Republican “celebrity”. She is a Republican politician. Calling her a mere celebrity is a perjorative attempt to diminish her.
Her status as a politician is arguable in the eyes of some – she currently fills no office nor aspires to one – but I agree she is more than just a celebrity. At this stage, probably “campaigner” suits best.
Democrats have no problems with double standards.
Helio brings up an excellent point. There are many on the gay left who choose to distance themselves from the sexual orientation of a male perpetrator when the gender of his victims is primarily male. They’re especially gleeful to point out when a male-on-male perp. is married, as if this somehow legitimizes his heterosexuality. I’d surmise the truth is probably a little more complicated than that.
Conversely, there are those who argue against same-sex marriage who contend that acceptance of the “deviant homosexual lifestyle” is a slippery slope to condoning NAMBLA-type relationships.
They’re both pretty extreme points of view, IMO, both reactions to the other extreme battling it over one side claiming ‘civil rights’ and the other claiming ‘moral protection.’
It’s funny how words like ‘gay’ and ‘faggot’ can change meaning over such a relatively short period of time. I find Sharpton’s use of the term ‘Greek homos’ a bit clumsy, mildly amusing and somewhat dated. But, it’s taken from 1994, no? That was 17 years ago and the HRC was only 14 years old at that point (over half its life ago).
As far as the pejorative nature of the word ‘faggot,’ I can only offer personal anecdotes from my youth. In each instance, I grew an increasing awareness of the name’s meaning, though, judging by the nasty, judgmental and mocking tone in which it was used, coupled with the cultural acceptance of the way it was being used, I was pretty certain I was accused of being something that was contemptible, disapproved of–something I might try avoiding being, although it was of my very nature. I was pretty middle of the road and participated in a lot of ‘normal activities. I got called that just because I liked flashy colors, fashion and had lots of girlfriends. I can’t imagine what would have happened to me in junior/high school if I had been swishy and pursued an interest in boys.
#4: “Democrats have no problems with double standards.”
When you hear a Democrat talking about ‘standards,’ just remember that the ‘double’ is always silent.
There are evil people among homosexuals just as there are among heterosexuals. If Jerry Sandusky is gay, then he’s gay. But it doesn’t really matter, the fact is he’s evil. And denying his homosexuality, if he is homosexual, just because he is evil is ignorant to the fact that evil doesn’t discriminate. Hopefully most people are intelligent enough that they can recognize Jerry Sandusky’s actions do not reflect on other homosexuals, just like Hitler’s actions do not reflect on other heterosexuals.
It’s like n**ger. It all depends on who is using it. I don’t think context has as much to do with it as who said it. And again, if one is offended by it’s use, who is the one with the problem?
I have more of a problem with Heliotrope not spelling out the word faggot than anybody using the word.
“Hopefully most people are intelligent enough that they can recognize Jerry Sandusky’s actions do not reflect on other homosexuals, just like Hitler’s actions do not reflect on other heterosexuals.”
ROFLMAO. Hitler was homosexual/bisexual as were the hierarchy of the Third Reich. Double standards, indeed. Sandusky is homosexual/bisexual as are all pedophiles/ephebophiles, men and women. Being married does not make you heterosexual. Not engaging in homosexual behavior makes you heterosexual. Being extremely neurotic does not make you homosexual unless you engage in homosexual behavior.
#1 – “When I view the Gay Pride activities in NYC, I am not certain about what message I am to get. It seems a great deal of “pejorative” stereotyping is being played out.”
Absolutely.
Fun story:
My sister has the same habbit that I do, of picking up slang from people around us. She had a bunch of Irish kids in her church camp and they went across to Canada. On the way back, she had to deal with border crossing.
Border Guard: Do you have anything to declare?
Sister: Huh?
BG: Anything to declare. Alcohol, ciggarettes anything like that.
Sister: *yells to the kids on the bus* Do any of you have any fags to declare?
BG: *gets really puzzled look on his face.*
And this:
is absolutely true.
And Al Sharpton being on MSNBC doesn’t change his evil either.
This ‘teaser’ article is one of the reason why I don’t come on this website as often as I used to.
Well, TGC, so long as I know that word is controversial, I will avoid it as I am not inclined to offend gratuitously. I didn’t spell it out, as you well know, because to do so would be a distraction for the hard core crowd who is waiting, spring loaded, to be offended.
But I not only take your point, I totally agree. The word has been politicized and is now a gateway slur to a possible hate crime. Leapin’ lizards, what hath political correctness wrought?
I am still musing over the Wiki entry declaring the word to be a pejorative and then failing entirely to explain why. I bet Bette Midler could use it at a bath house and get wild applause. No white person had better try to use the “n” word among blacks.
We end up in all sorts of snits when words become private domain and one has to have special license to use them. Of course, two syllable words can be dragged out condescendingly more easily than one syllable words. But then, “gay” starts with a hard G and a bigot can do a lot with that as well.
Ye olde double standard is still in force. I don´t see Sarah Palin as a celebrity; I think of her more as a cheerleader or a motivator for the Party.
Roberto: Try, “Kingmaker”.
#10
Is that a response to something I said? If it is, I have no idea what you are talking about.
#13. But we miss you Julie!