Is the term "gay friendly" ok?


  • Oct 07, 2010 12:06 AM GMT
    I have heard the term gay friendly all my life, and really never thought twice about it, until I saw an episode of Last Comic Standing. One of the comics asked why is the term gay friendly ok? If we heard jew friendly, or black friendly from a person or for a business it would be all over CNN. What do you guys think? Are gay people so used to second class status that we jump at the idea of some business or even person just being friendly to us? Hmmm makes you think........icon_confused.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 07, 2010 4:22 AM GMT
    With as much bigotry and intense hatred as there is in the world toward homosexuals, I would think that although, yes, even though it itself is bigoted, at least it is indeed a step in the right direction to be or say "gay friendly." Let's face it, we have a very long way to go to achieve an acceptable status as some other minorities have done. The biggest adversaries are the fundamentalist religions of the world and their leaders who preach hatred, and the occasional self-appointed basher.

    What people don't realize is that we, in actual fact, are not as much of a minority as is supposed. There are a great many more homosexual and/or people with homosexual tendencies in the world than are willing to admit, due to the fear that comes from the mad mob mentality the fundamentalist evangelists preach. I'd be willing to bet that many of them preach such hatred to take attention away from the fact that they themselves have homosexual tendencies. A typical mode of operation of those who are themselves guilty.

    This far into the 21st century, you'd think the general population would be beyond all of this, but the average person fears the unknown and probably always will. What happens after you die is unknown. So, people are afraid to not listen to preachers because they demonstrate such apparent, intense certainty that they know what will happen after you die if they aren't listened to.

    Based on that, I'll take "gay friendly" for now. Then, let's see what we can do to change things in the not too distant future. Additionally, I don't care for the word "gay" to describe homosexuals anyway. Based on the original definition or the word, it implies that we are all overly cheerful, flamboyantly festive and excessively feminine. None of which I am. It's a misnomer which I personally resent.

    Okay, a bit long winded, but...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 07, 2010 4:26 AM GMT
    I don't see it as a big deal.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 07, 2010 4:29 AM GMT
    You just move into a new apartment. Your neighbor comes by with a chocolate cake baked just for you. And, oh my, peanut butter frosting. You hate peanut butter frosting. Your neighbor is such a dick for baking you that fucking cake!

    I would rather let this one slide and deal with the bigots driving gay youth to suicide.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 07, 2010 4:38 AM GMT
    MunchingZombie saidYou just move into a new apartment. Your neighbor comes by with a chocolate cake baked just for you. And, oh my, peanut butter frosting. You hate peanut butter frosting. Your neighbor is such a dick for baking you that fucking cake!


    wtf that sounds delicious
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 07, 2010 4:39 AM GMT
    Sprinkle some coconut shavings on that cake and you've got a deal.

    I don't think it's that big of deal (yet) and with the way things are progressing now I can tolerate that term for now and just hope that things get better to where such a term won't be necessary.
  • acousticpunk

    Posts: 76

    Oct 07, 2010 4:40 AM GMT
    You make a great point. Instead we should say "Non-homophobic." It brings to light the reality of the situation, and calls out businesses that wouldn't otherwise market this way for what they are.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 07, 2010 4:40 AM GMT
    we if start using jew friendly or black friendly or fat friendly too perhaps others would stop using gay friendly
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 07, 2010 4:41 AM GMT
    tallblondemuscleguy saidI have heard the term gay friendly all my life, and really never thought twice about it, until I saw an episode of Last Comic Standing. One of the comics asked why is the term gay friendly ok? If we heard jew friendly, or black friendly from a person or for a business it would be all over CNN. What do you guys think? Are gay people so used to second class status that we jump at the idea of some business or even person just being friendly to us? Hmmm makes you think........icon_confused.gif


    we should adopt the term "straight friendly," claim we're not, bash breeders, then they'll start appreciating the term "straight friendly."
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 07, 2010 4:49 AM GMT
    It depends on where you are. If u end up in bum-fuck Idaho and saw a sign that said GAY FRIENDLY after miles or a time span of not seeing "likeness" I guarantee your ass would high tail it over there to that residence/business to seek a bit of solaceicon_rolleyes.gif and that's the purpose for those who feel alone...know you are not. You are supported... HERE, WELCOME!
  • Hunter9

    Posts: 1039

    Oct 07, 2010 4:53 AM GMT
    JAKEBENSON said
    tallblondemuscleguy saidI have heard the term gay friendly all my life, and really never thought twice about it, until I saw an episode of Last Comic Standing. One of the comics asked why is the term gay friendly ok? If we heard jew friendly, or black friendly from a person or for a business it would be all over CNN. What do you guys think? Are gay people so used to second class status that we jump at the idea of some business or even person just being friendly to us? Hmmm makes you think........icon_confused.gif


    we should adopt the term "straight friendly," claim we're not, bash breeders, then they'll start appreciating the term "straight friendly."


    quite an angry streak for you... who keeps pissing in your cheerios?
  • SF2PS

    Posts: 63

    Oct 07, 2010 5:03 AM GMT
    The Axel Hotel describes itself as "heterofriendly" . . . .
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 07, 2010 6:22 AM GMT
    This saturday Im going to Curacaos monthly "straight-friendly party"
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 07, 2010 6:44 AM GMT
    You donĀ“t get "black friendly" because if you refuse to serve blacks or take their jobs away on the basis of skin colour then you get sued. While gays are not given the same legal protection as others then you still need to know if someone is gay friendly.
  • mcwclewis

    Posts: 1701

    Oct 07, 2010 6:44 AM GMT
    MunchingZombie saidYou just move into a new apartment. Your neighbor comes by with a chocolate cake baked just for you. And, oh my, peanut butter frosting. You hate peanut butter frosting. Your neighbor is such a dick for baking you that fucking cake!

    I would rather let this one slide and deal with the bigots driving gay youth to suicide.



    I usually find myself agreeing with your posts but in this situation I can't.


    Allowing any room for bigotry is allowing bigotry. It may seem like splitting hairs while there are bigger issues but these smaller things are what drive the bigger issues and allow them to continue existing.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 07, 2010 6:53 AM GMT
    mcwclewis said


    Allowing any room for bigotry is allowing bigotry. It may seem like splitting hairs while there are bigger issues but these smaller things are what drive the bigger issues and allow them to continue existing.


    I highly doubt an establishment labeling themselves as "gay friendly" to show their acceptance and support in a society that clearly doesn't do so on a complete scale is "driving" the bigger issues homosexual people face such as marriage inequality or the overarching issue of hate.
  • mcwclewis

    Posts: 1701

    Oct 07, 2010 6:57 AM GMT
    It's aligning yourself with a group based on their weakness, which is implied in the statement itself. Aligning yourself with someone based on their weakness is affirming their weakness. Yes, there are bigger issues to worry about, but ignoring something that signifies bigotry is allowing the signification of bigotry to exist. Linguistically speaking, anything involving referrence to the secondary nature of a demographic is promoting said seconday nature, whether implicit or explicit.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 07, 2010 6:59 AM GMT
    mcwclewis saidIt's aligning yourself with a group based on their weakness, which is implied in the statement itself. Aligning yourself with someone based on their weakness is affirming their weakness. Yes, there are bigger issues to worry about, but ignoring something that signifies bigotry is allowing the signification of bigotry to exist. Linguistically speaking, anything involving referrence to the secondary nature of a demographic is promoting said seconday nature, whether implicit or explicit.


    wtf are you talking about?
  • mcwclewis

    Posts: 1701

    Oct 07, 2010 7:00 AM GMT
    Implied meanings in linguistic terms
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 07, 2010 7:00 AM GMT
    Over here in the gayest part of the gayest city north of San Fran and west of the Peg, every single business has a rainbow flag sticker on the storefront. Probably more cause if they don't they'd lose half their clientele.

    As said before, I'd take it for now - but imagine storefronts with star of David stickers on the door...
  • mcwclewis

    Posts: 1701

    Oct 07, 2010 7:02 AM GMT
    That is abstract as hell....




    I guess it isn't as big of a deal as it could be...


    I just don't like when people use "gay" where they wouldn't use the names of another demographic.


    "gay friendly" just seems patronizing to me.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 07, 2010 7:02 AM GMT
    mcwclewis saidIt's aligning yourself with a group based on their weakness, which is implied in the statement itself. Aligning yourself with someone based on their weakness is affirming their weakness. Yes, there are bigger issues to worry about, but ignoring something that signifies bigotry is allowing the signification of bigotry to exist. Linguistically speaking, anything involving referrence to the secondary nature of a demographic is promoting said seconday nature, whether implicit or explicit.


    You're trying to use rhetoric to address a convoluted real world issue. It's a huge, muddled gray area that cannot be solved by logical absolutism. Nothing in the real world can. The real world moves along through compromises. Stop making kids kill themselves through hate and you can have the term gay friendly. How bout we start with that compromise.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 07, 2010 7:04 AM GMT
    Tazo995 said

    As said before, I'd take it for now - but imagine storefronts with star of David stickers on the door...


    The world also functions through double standards. The star stickers won't fly. The rainbow flags do. It's just how it is.
  • mcwclewis

    Posts: 1701

    Oct 07, 2010 7:08 AM GMT
    Ciarsolo said
    mcwclewis saidIt's aligning yourself with a group based on their weakness, which is implied in the statement itself. Aligning yourself with someone based on their weakness is affirming their weakness. Yes, there are bigger issues to worry about, but ignoring something that signifies bigotry is allowing the signification of bigotry to exist. Linguistically speaking, anything involving referrence to the secondary nature of a demographic is promoting said seconday nature, whether implicit or explicit.


    You're trying to use rhetoric to address a convoluted real world issue. It's a huge, muddled gray area that cannot be solved by logical absolutism. Nothing in the real world can. The real world moves along through compromises. Stop making kids kill themselves through hate and you can have the term gay friendly. How bout we start with that compromise.


    I agree and disagree at the same time. Rhetoric and logical absolutism have subconscious effects on the way people think, and therefore act.

    I'm not quite sure what you mean by your last two sentences.... I'm assuming they're addressed generally and not directly to me. I guess I'm just an idealist, I'll attack any level of bigotry I can.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 07, 2010 7:10 AM GMT
    Ciarsolo said
    Tazo995 said

    As said before, I'd take it for now - but imagine storefronts with star of David stickers on the door...


    The world also functions through double standards. The star stickers won't fly. The rainbow flags do. It's just how it is.


    I guess over time progress is made.

    Where I grew up used to be this sign about 65 years ago:

    bigdutch01.jpg

    And now we have rainbow banners on Davie st indicating it's the gay neighbourhood.