To be honest, using 'gay' to slag something off makes me feel sick. It is backwards, goes totally against thinking of gay people as equals and people who are using it are thinking like morons.

You can pretend it's taken on a completely disconnected meaning but that's bullshit. It will always be connected and just serves to reinforce abusive, ignorant prejudice.

Regardless of the colloquial variation of it's true meaning, it's is still a standardised, accepted term for homosexuals, and one they themselves embrace and accept. To have that name smeared with derogatory quips to invigorate some controversial hype about a man as vile as Elliot Gleaves is hardly a blessing.

The word "gay" clearly has a sexual connection. Don't be a fool.

Crisps are cool.Gays are cool.No issues here.

Well it's called Twitter because it's full of twits.

I really dislike Example and refuse to buy any of his records. It's a shame because he makes good music but he ruins it with his stupid immature personality.

It is offensive. I'm a straight female and I think it's offensive. It's implying that Gay people are crap or something. Like he is pretty much saying the UK monster munch crispare the real deal, the "straight" guys, and these ones were the Gay ones because they weren't as good. Even if he didn't mean it towards humans, crisps can't be "gay" so he obviously took his inspiration from humans.

And saying "that's so gay" is offensive. It doesn't matter if people aren't meaning to be homophobic. It originates from homophobia and people need to stop saying it. It's pathetic. Some people are gay. Get over it.

Example is a twit.

Sorry but that's crap.

I'm 100% gay and couldn't care less about this. My bisexual older sister is constantly telling me how things she doesn't like are "gay" and non of us are offended. If someone is offended by this then they are WAY too touchy.

Hmm interesting to hear you say that. I've worked in a few schools in recent years and the #1 insult I heard mainly from from boys was to call someone or something "gay". Literally anything bad or not cool is "gay" apparently. Maybe young people are so used to hearing it that it's not seen as offensive, even to some young gay people like yourself (I'm assuming you're fairly young, sorry if you're not).

really really dislike example, he is a complete arrogant TWIT!
and what a dumb-ass topic to get trending anyway. how bored is he?? he clearly doesnt have enough work on!
plus its just another way to feed the trolls, i quit twitter because quite frankly it depresses me and really does give the true lowlife of society a voice. i can already imagine the taunts of 'queers, puffs, faggots, homo's' popping up now thanks to this trending topic.

nonsense.
im gay and i also am not offended by the comment in the slightest and completely 'got' the joke (albeit not a very funny one!)
but this is not the point, its the aftermath of comments from other twitter weirdo's which are offensive. and example should never of said it in the first place, it was always going to cause trouble, and a comment like that from someone with thousands of followers was always going to leave gay people or people who are offended, open to abuse.
is example completely stupid? i know he comes across as a plonker in interviews, but hes clearly thick as pigshit aswell

Example is a prat really, end of. He doesn't know when to shut his mouth and seems to make a career out of slagging off other artists on Twitter.

It isn't the case of being touchy. Someone's sexuality is a very personal thing. Are you aware of the teens that have killed themselves due to "touchy insults" like this?

You know your sister on a very intimate level. Or at least, it's intimate compared to the chasm between Example and his fans. So if you are personally not offended by your sister's "gay" comments, then that does not give you the right to believe that this apathy towards such offence can be generalised to other gay people.

At the end of the day, your sister knows you, and knows that even when she calls things "gay" the effect is diluted because there is more room for explanation there. There is no explanation between one over-hyped airhead and two-hundred thousand idiots subscribed to Example, hence why such a remark is deeply offensive.

That was the first thing I thought of when I started reading this thread.

Even my 9 year old grandson managed to grasp the concept that using the word gay in a derogatory way to describe something was not acceptable and why, so I'm not sure why some adults are struggling to understand it.

This guy is beyond DULL!

Dictionaries are descriptive, not proscriptive. They describe the common usage of language, which is quite accurately why the Oxford English Dictionary gives one definition of 'gay' as this:


Example may be a tool, but his usage of the word 'gay' in this context is perfectly in tune with it's modern definition, and when used in this context was clearly not meant to be homophobic.

Well not comments "like this" no. Homophobic bullying and someone calling a pack of Discos gay just isn't even close. Not by a mile.

The latter of course may lead to the former given enough time and the right set of social circumstances.

No, no it wouldn't. Because the word gay has two meanings (three if you count 'happy', but that has largely fallen by the wayside), which are not related to each other. The idea that calling a packet of crisps "gay" because you don't like their flavour could lead to you becoming a raving homophobic bully is crazy, insulting, and it's just plain wrong.

It's like suggesting that if you say "I have a tear in my jeans", the next day you'll be too confused to say "I have a tear in my eye". Same word, two different meanings, and this is exactly the same situation.

The meanings are sort of related though. You can't tell me that people started using "gay" to mean bad for no reason at all. It was just a random choice was it?

Probably not, but the etymology of words is often fascinating. We are living through a change in the usage of the word, which is why it still causes controversy. Ten years from now, teenagers will think even less of it as a homosexual slur than they do now. The easiest way to tell whether it is being used as a homophobic insult or not is simply to interview the group who mostly use it, which is teenagers.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7289390.stm


We can see that Example's use of the word clearly fits into this modern definition.

It seems the distinction people are making is that you wouldn't call a person gay (as in lame) but it's OK to class an object ("your jeans are gay") or an abstract concept ("Christmas is gay") or actions and behaviours ("dancing is gay") as such.

There is a point to this, I suppose, that gay in this context is removed from its definition of a person's sexual orientation since inanimate objects cannot be gay or straight or anything else, so the term is not meant as an insult to gay people.

However, the issue still remains that the word in itself is pejorative and that anyone who considers themselves gay will now find that the word is associated with negative connotations.

Yes, but even as we've seen from this thread, many homosexual people can see that it isn't meant as a homophobic slur, and that alone is enough to disarm any harm it could cause.

One of my best friends is gay and he's calling things "gay" all the time. There's no conflict there for him, because he knows it means two different things in two different contexts.