->-bleeped-<- is seriously homophobic and shouldne't be in the vocabulary of someone like Flightybrood who can appear as quintessential dyke to strangers.

Tekla you really need to move on from those old 1930's whodunits as I doubt if anyone outside a dragclub uses ->-bleeped-<- as anything but meaning cigarettes.

Quote from: lilacwoman on December 23, 2010, 12:00:20 PM
Tekla you really need to move on from those old 1930's whodunits as I doubt if anyone outside a dragclub uses ->-bleeped-<- as anything but meaning cigarettes.

Actually I hear it a lot from gay guys and drag queens outside of the gay clubs in my city

I hear it from British crews traveling with British bands.  The Scots might use it too, but we've never been able to figure out what they are saying at all.

And in SF every bar is a drag bar if you dress right.

A welsh friend of mine uses it for cigarettes too.  It was kind of odd the first time he excused himself saying he needed a ->-bleeped-<-.

Quote from: tekla on December 23, 2010, 12:03:47 PM
The Scots might use it too, but we've never been able to figure out what they are saying at all.

That's the way they seem to like it.

Yeah, what he said.  Took me some time just to figure out that "UoouNAbooot" meant 'out and about'.

The term "->-bleeped-<-" is somewhat seen on par with the term "->-bleeped-<-" to allot of folks and so it somewhat depends on who is using the term and their usage of it

There are other "Derogatory" terms terms that are used between friends or by various groups in a non-derogatory way

i.e. A number of my friends and I would call each other "->-bleeped-<-er"... But if you call some stranger that it could be fightin' words

So if you and your friend are comfortable using "Derogatory" terms with each other then I guess that's your thing

Sorry, I guess I'm pinning a "Whatever" note to this one

Language only makes sense in context.

A lot of good points have been made that, yes, "->-bleeped-<-" and "->-bleeped-<-got" are considered homophobic slurs. The fact that some people are not offended by the terms, that is has a different meaning in another country, or that some gay people have 'reclaimed' the word, the same way that some black people have 'reclaimed' the n- word, does not change the fact that in MANY contexts it is still a slur.

So basically, if *someone* you are using the term around is bothered by it or thinks it's inappropriate language, it IS dude. Knock it off.

It is *only* ok in the US to use these terms in a context where you know it is cool. And it does not become cool because you can argue that SOME people have reclaimed the word or British people use it differently. The presumption is that it is NOT cool in the States.

And on a tangent, Dan Savage's original column used to be called "Hey ->-bleeped-<-got" and the publisher forced him to change it, and I think he's written about how he feels about it all now, years later.

I use ->-bleeped-<-.

I don't use ->-bleeped-<-got though.

See, where I live, about 85% of the black people call each other "->-bleeped-<-". I know a gay guy that say "That's so gay." to way too many things. I call myself a ->-bleeped-<-.

None of it is offensive, I've noticed, if you ARE it. If you ARE black, it's not offensive to call someone a ->-bleeped-<-. If you're gay, it's not offensive to call someone or something gay or a ->-bleeped-<-. Even if it is derogatory. That's just how it is.

I actually don't know many gay people that get offended if you call them a ->-bleeped-<-, but then again, it's because of where I live.

Quote from: spacial on December 23, 2010, 10:18:50 AM
Curious why you would use a word you know is offensive to some, even if it isn't to you?

Seems almost looking for problems to be honest.

Honest?

Anyway, I use lots of words that I know are offensive to other people. I've heard people complain about "homosexual" and "gay," for instance. And "transsexual"--not "->-bleeped-<-," but just "transsexual." My mother used to hate the word "stupid" and wouldn't let me use it because she considered it offensive.

I use "->-bleeped-<-got" occasionally to refer to myself, but not "->-bleeped-<-." I know a few gay men (mostly older guys with some history) who don't like the term, some who like it, and some who don't mind it. Same with "queer." I don't use these words to refer directly to them.

Some even object to "LGBT" for various reasons. Some like the G to come first, some want to get rid of the T, and some want to get rid of the B and the T (and even the L). I still use the term to refer to people in our "community." So, by implication, I'm including these objectors in that community. Sorry, guys, but it's a well-established acronym/initialism.

Bottom line? There's always someone who will object to something I say.

Quote from: lilacwoman on December 23, 2010, 12:00:20 PM
Tekla you really need to move on from those old 1930's whodunits as I doubt if anyone outside a dragclub uses ->-bleeped-<- as anything but meaning cigarettes.

I would estimate it's used 100,000+ times a day on the internet - it's one of the most common insults in MMORPG circles (you know, those things that have 11.5 million subscribers for just ONE of them).
You are totally out of touch.

Quote from: Devyn on December 23, 2010, 02:05:25 PM
I call myself a ->-bleeped-<-.

I've always had a bad visceral response to this, as it always jars when a FTM calls himself a '->-bleeped-<-'.
It's never been a word traditionally associated with trans men - it's universally used to refer to people who are perceived as 'men in dresses'.
I saw a trans man with '->-bleeped-<-' screen printed on his t-shirt and asked why he was using the word. He claimed to be 'taking it back' - to which I asked "Since when have people used it against you?" He then dissembled and said he was taking it back on my behalf, to which I replied "How misogynistic of you to presume and take action on my behalf".

Curious why you would use a word you know is offensive to some, even if it isn't to you?

Because once you work you're way through the list of words that are 'offensive to some' you're not left with that many left to use.

How misogynistic human of you to presume and take action on my behalf".  It's even more human when you've told them you don't need their help.  Even more human when you don't even want it, but are going to go ahead anyway, you know 'for my own good.'

I'm surprised no one has asked us to 'think of the children' yet.

Quote from: CaitJ on December 23, 2010, 02:32:12 PM
I've always had a bad visceral response to this, as it always jars when a FTM calls himself a '->-bleeped-<-'.
It's never been a word traditionally associated with trans men - it's universally used to refer to people who are perceived as 'men in dresses'.
I saw a trans man with '->-bleeped-<-' screen printed on his t-shirt and asked why he was using the word. He claimed to be 'taking it back' - to which I asked "Since when have people used it against you?" He then dissembled and said he was taking it back on my behalf, to which I replied "How misogynistic of you to presume and take action on my behalf".

I've seen '->-bleeped-<-' used against transmen, it's just more often used against transwomen. I'll admit that while people think of a 'man in a dress' when they hear the word '->-bleeped-<-', a lot of them wouldn't be hesitant to call a transman a '->-bleeped-<-'. Before I even knew transsexuals existed, there was a transman at my school and my best friend would call him a '->-bleeped-<-'. So, I mean, I don't know.
Then again, transmen aren't that heard of, if you think about it.
I've met people, told them I am a transman, and they admitted not knowing that you could even do that, they thought 'only men could become women'. So, it could have to do with lack of knowledge about transmen.

I have friends who affectionally call each other ->-bleeped-<-. They are straight, lesbian, bisexual and trans. But I don't use it with people other than that group of friends, because none of us are offended by it, although others are.

I don't use ->-bleeped-<- except when ridiculing trans bashers, the Religious Wrong (or right, as some put it), etc.

I never say ->-bleeped-<- about anyone ever.

Not gay, but words don't bother me, unless spoken with hate or intent to be hurtful.

I think too many people just look for things to get offended by. Yes, words can cut deep and sometimes worse than physical injuries but it just seems silly to go around getting offended because someone "used the wrong word".  I hear the words ->-bleeped-<-, queer and ->-bleeped-<- more around my gay and trans friends than ANYWHERE.

Contest is the key. Even if someone refers to you as a "transsexual", it can easily be said in an offensive way just dripping with hate and venom. Get over the symantics and go for the root of the problem which is hate and intolerance. Also, don't give in to turning into the PC Police and end up an intolerant hater yourself...

Quote from: StacyBeaumont on December 23, 2010, 03:51:40 PM
Also, don't give in to turning into the PC Police and end up an intolerant hater yourself...

PC police? What's so terrible about asking people to respect other people?
Frequently I hear the phrases 'PC police' and 'PC gone mad' used by people who get angry when they get told that they really shouldn't be ->-bleeped-<-s to others.
"But it's my right to be an ->-bleeped-<-!" is the most common reply.
Yes, you have every right to be an ->-bleeped-<-. But guess what? That makes you an ->-bleeped-<-.

But since they didn't seem to care about your opinion on their vocabulary or personality before, what makes you think they would after?