Well it sounds like that would be the same way black people use the 'N' word amongst themselves. Its called reappropriation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reappropriation .
There is a difference between calling an admitted homosexual a homosexual, and using the word to insult someone who isn't.
I was using it to to refer to those who are homosexual. Usually it is just homosexuals, who use accusations of homosexuality in order to insult those who are not homosexual. Attributing someones opposition to marriage to their latent yet repressed homosexuality. Revealing that they view it as an insult.
Nope, seen plenty of people saying anyone who supports the gay rights movement has to be a homosexual. That's a two way street.
If he were Homosexual that would be just as pertinent or immaterial as him being an army vet. So your being hypocritical in your own posting.
Army vets dont have delicate as a flower sensibilities and likely wouldnt be insulted. What is and is not an insult on the forum is a subjective determination.
Say the wrong thing to a vet, and watch them bloom as a flower of rage. (Any human being can be readily insulted; if you don't believe that you're either willfully ignorant or naive.) You're dealing with HUMAN beings... live with it.
No, no, no! LGBT refers to a coalition of separate groups. It is not meant to be a replacement for gay, lesbian, bisexual, trans-identified or any other label.
I call people what they are (okay sometimes you might have to deviate from this because of safety or to avoid akwardness). If I have to refer to a gay man I cal him 'bög' (which translates to (*)(*)(*) I suppose), gay women is 'lebb' (short for lesbian) black guy is 'neger' ((*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)), handicapped people I call handicapped etc. I have to admit that since I was raised to consider these words insults it sort of feels wrong to use them but I use them because of principle. They have originally no negative meaning to them, if other people want to add negativety fine but I don't do that. Also, I'm annoyed at the new words that arise to describe the same thing until they too become offensive. And each step broadens the definition further making it harder to describe exactly what you are meaning. Take (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*) for example, everyone would understand what you were talking about, black is ok, but african american? white boers that move to brazil are african americans, see? ridicolous. Handicapped is straigt forward, physically challanged is pathetic. I'm physically challanged when I raise myself from my chair and thus I fall into the same category as people with down's. It hasn't gone too far with gays yet though. gay, (*)(*)(*), homosexual pretty much means the same things.
