LGBTspeak? Better name?
01-01-2015, 05:09 AM
[MENTION=18962]Arkansota[/MENTION]
A couple of things.
First, if your professor was annoyed with you, annoyance is about behaviors. I used to teach, and one teacher has over 100 students most semesters, and some of them are pretty darned annoying at times. But, as has been noted in this thread, annoyance at a behavior and a full-blown dislike of a person are not the same thing. Revisit what you perceived that the professor objected to.
The LGBT renaming is simply a bad idea. Gayspeak is what it is. LGBT is a political alliance, for advocating for change, but rarely much that can accurately be termed a "community." It is a segment of the population, or more exactly, a confederation of segments. Think "coalition government" to get a comparable alliance. If the term "gayspeak" ever meant something, it probably was the speech and vernacular of gay men. Lesbians have their own lingo, as do some of the other subsets.
In the end, LGBT and the other DNA-like strands of "other" have about as much shared identity as those currently labelled as "Asian." As if. There IS no such people or ethnicity or race. "Asian" is only a term to avoid saying "Oriental" for politically corrected reasons. And, if you leave the US, it doesn't even mean "Oriental" or "East Asian." It more likely will mean Indian if you are in Europe.
So, LGBT-Speak wouldn't signify anything. And likewise, Queerspeak suffers from the use of it as an epithet, and is not universally embraced by gays or others, any more than "nigger" is embraced by Black Americans, even though often used in jest to describe one another or self.
Leave it be.
A couple of things.
First, if your professor was annoyed with you, annoyance is about behaviors. I used to teach, and one teacher has over 100 students most semesters, and some of them are pretty darned annoying at times. But, as has been noted in this thread, annoyance at a behavior and a full-blown dislike of a person are not the same thing. Revisit what you perceived that the professor objected to.
The LGBT renaming is simply a bad idea. Gayspeak is what it is. LGBT is a political alliance, for advocating for change, but rarely much that can accurately be termed a "community." It is a segment of the population, or more exactly, a confederation of segments. Think "coalition government" to get a comparable alliance. If the term "gayspeak" ever meant something, it probably was the speech and vernacular of gay men. Lesbians have their own lingo, as do some of the other subsets.
In the end, LGBT and the other DNA-like strands of "other" have about as much shared identity as those currently labelled as "Asian." As if. There IS no such people or ethnicity or race. "Asian" is only a term to avoid saying "Oriental" for politically corrected reasons. And, if you leave the US, it doesn't even mean "Oriental" or "East Asian." It more likely will mean Indian if you are in Europe.
So, LGBT-Speak wouldn't signify anything. And likewise, Queerspeak suffers from the use of it as an epithet, and is not universally embraced by gays or others, any more than "nigger" is embraced by Black Americans, even though often used in jest to describe one another or self.
Leave it be.
![[-]](https://gayspeak.com/images/duende_v3_local/collapse.png)
Sagittarius
