DS Forums

 
 

The gay boy?


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Yesterday, 11:34
mrtrobz
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 585
Reminder: She is a Scientologist. They hate gay people.
Just like Tom Cruise and John Travolta...
mrtrobz is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old Yesterday, 11:45
All_seeing_eye
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 1,811
Just like Tom Cruise and John Travolta...
Have either of them come out yet?
All_seeing_eye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 11:45
Dr Z
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,617
Scientologists hate gay people? No-one bats an eyelid.

I know another faith that throws them off buildings, but name them and you'll be called a racist, xenophobic bigot.
Dr Z is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 12:02
Master Ozzy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 16,505
She referred to a gay person as "a gay boy". What's the bloody problem? As a gay man myself I wasn't offended by anything she said. People love to take things, twist them and get carried away.
Master Ozzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 12:12
Stellen11
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 7,579
Some of the other HMs visibly took offence. She immediately backtracked and passed it off as a joke. She has no courage or conviction. Or maybe it was just first day nerves and she will stand up for herself a bit more as the days go by.
Stellen11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 12:18
BillyLagan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 782
I'm more offended by her being a Scientologist.
BillyLagan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 12:23
acet19
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 7
People are missing the point. It wasn't the fact she called him the 'gay boy.' It was her calling him the gay boy and implying that since he was gay it could make other people uncomfortable. Personally, I thought it was a bit derogatory.

If someone made the same assumption on her being the 'black woman' people would be throwing the racist card all over the place.
acet19 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 12:24
Boo Radley75
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Essex
Posts: 1,277
Scientologists hate gay people? No-one bats an eyelid.

I know another faith that throws them off buildings, but name them and you'll be called a racist, xenophobic bigot.
You really wouldn't.
Boo Radley75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 12:30
BlondeGremlin
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: North East
Posts: 757
People are missing the point. It wasn't the fact she called him the 'gay boy.' It was her calling him the gay boy and implying that since he was gay it could make other people uncomfortable. Personally, I thought it was a bit derogatory.

If someone made the same assumption on her being the 'black woman' people would be throwing the racist card all over the place.
Exactly this.
BlondeGremlin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 12:33
cavalli
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 14,896
People are missing the point. It wasn't the fact she called him the 'gay boy.' It was her calling him the gay boy and implying that since he was gay it could make other people uncomfortable. Personally, I thought it was a bit derogatory.

If someone made the same assumption on her being the 'black woman' people would be throwing the racist card all over the place.
Yes indeedy.
cavalli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 13:16
BBoldie2013
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 182
Please bear with me, I am old and struggle to keep up with this generation perpetual state of offence.

Is it offensive to call a gay boy a gay boy now?

What are we allowed to call him? A homosexual adolescent?
Yes it is. You wouldn't refer to a heterosexual as that 'straight boy'.

These are terms that single people out as the minority ie different from the 'norm'.
BBoldie2013 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 13:25
Dr Z
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,617
Yes it is. You wouldn't refer to a heterosexual as that 'straight boy'.

These are terms that single people out as the minority ie different from the 'norm'.

If there was a room full of homosexual men, and one straight one then of course I'd be likely refer to him as the straight boy! Why on earth wouldn't I?
Dr Z is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 13:40
Donna65
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,151
If there was a room full of homosexual men, and one straight one then of course I'd be likely refer to him as the straight boy! Why on earth wouldn't I?
This is a very interesting point DrZ and one I agree with. I'm so worried these days about what is and isn't politically correct I sometimes say the wrong thing inadvertently. Surely context and tone are all important too in how something was meant. When you don't know someone's name, then you inevitably pick on some distinguishing feature to indicate to someone else who you mean. For example, I'm a teacher and when we get a new intake in each year it takes a while to learn their names. If I wanted to refer to a pupil in the staffroom and I did not yet know their name, then I would have to use other distinguishing features to show who I meant. So, presumably it's ok for me to say "the little blond girl with glasses", or "that tall ginger lad"? So if this is ok, why would it not be ok for me to say "the black boy" (we have very few ethnic minorities in our school, so his colour would be a distinguishing feature)? How is that in any way racist and yet I'm sure that some would say it is? I feel Stacy's comment was similar to this. Is it the term "gay boy" that people are objecting to? If she'd said "that gay lad" would that have been any better? If that was the only way she could distinguish him from the other men at the time, as she didn't know his name, I don't understand why anyone should think it's homophobic. Surely the way she said it, the context and the fact there were no derogatory comments associated with it, mean that it shouldn't cause offence?
Donna65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 13:41
All_seeing_eye
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 1,811
If there was a room full of homosexual men, and one straight one then of course I'd be likely refer to him as the straight boy! Why on earth wouldn't I?
I think I've seen that film.
All_seeing_eye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 13:41
wordfromthewise
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,523
Please bear with me, I am old and struggle to keep up with this generation perpetual state of offence.

Is it offensive to call a gay boy a gay boy now?

What are we allowed to call him? A homosexual adolescent?
This is exactly the reason why we have what some people would call 'a culture of being offended'.....political correctness came about to make people aware that they need to treat others with respect,no more and no less :

Referring to people as 'gay boys' in the way the term was used before civilisation was wrong then and is wrong now and I'm afraid people who can't see that are a much bigger problem than the easily offended brigade.

As for the particular instance in BB ,it certainly didn't look good or respectful and was at best a bit throwaway but we have more to fear from self confessed old timers who think of gay boys the way they did when those same boys were being beaten up due to their sexuality.
wordfromthewise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 14:00
Pitman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London
Posts: 16,515
you would think in america they would be more sensitive to such terming...
but they are not because it is only in pc uk you cant use an orientation or a colour in a sentence without it being highlighted as meaning more than it does.

all i noticed was how fast James was to make sure that reply was as highlighted as possible,,, not only making her repeat it but then to put a soundbite joke at the end to ensure it got highlights time

and to take the opportunity to make sure once and for all that everyone knows "I'm straight"
Pitman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 14:02
Dr Z
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,617
This is exactly the reason why we have what some people would call 'a culture of being offended'.....political correctness came about to make people aware that they need to treat others with respect,no more and no less :

Referring to people as 'gay boys' in the way the term was used before civilisation was wrong then and is wrong now and I'm afraid people who can't see that are a much bigger problem than the easily offended brigade.

As for the particular instance in BB ,it certainly didn't look good or respectful and was at best a bit throwaway but we have more to fear from self confessed old timers who think of gay boys the way they did when those same boys were being beaten up due to their sexuality.
See this is the problem as I see it - Being beaten up for your sexuality is wrong, no question.
However, its no more (or less) wrong than being beaten up for your weight, your hair colour, your name being funny, wearing glasses, because your sister is promiscuous, because your dad is a morris dancer, because you choose to play a musical instrument, because you support the wrong football team or ANY OTHER REASON that an innocent person gets beaten up.

During my lifetime I have seen all the examples I have given above, and I struggle to understand why those examples should be any different from and of the trendy "isms" (racism, sexism, Homophobia)

A civilised society would see the "beating up" as the problem, not the reason for it.
Dr Z is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 14:04
Pitman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London
Posts: 16,515
This is exactly the reason why we have what some people would call 'a culture of being offended'.....political correctness came about to make people aware that they need to treat others with respect,no more and no less :

Referring to people as 'gay boys' in the way the term was used before civilisation was wrong then and is wrong now and I'm afraid people who can't see that are a much bigger problem than the easily offended brigade.

As for the particular instance in BB ,it certainly didn't look good or respectful and was at best a bit throwaway but we have more to fear from self confessed old timers who think of gay boys the way they did when those same boys were being beaten up due to their sexuality.
yes 'gay boy' is offensive as would be 'black boy' whereas 'gay bloke' is fine, course she is a bloody foreigner though (too many Americans, it's a British show for British people ) so in her culture could be a term of endearment and respect
Pitman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 18:12
wordfromthewise
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,523
See this is the problem as I see it - Being beaten up for your sexuality is wrong, no question.
However, its no more (or less) wrong than being beaten up for your weight, your hair colour, your name being funny, wearing glasses, because your sister is promiscuous, because your dad is a morris dancer, because you choose to play a musical instrument, because you support the wrong football team or ANY OTHER REASON that an innocent person gets beaten up.

During my lifetime I have seen all the examples I have given above, and I struggle to understand why those examples should be any different from and of the trendy "isms" (racism, sexism, Homophobia)

A civilised society would see the "beating up" as the problem, not the reason for it.
True but a separate issue to not understanding why bygone phrases like gayboy are offensive which is what your previous post clearly indicated.
wordfromthewise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 18:46
Dr Z
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,617
Personally I'd rather be called "white boy" than White Trash, as per Jermaine Jackson, but I seem to recall anyone who took offence to that was generally told to lighten up.
Dr Z is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 18:50
All_seeing_eye
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 1,811
Personally I'd rather be called "white boy" than White Trash, as per Jermaine Jackson, but I seem to recall anyone who took offence to that was generally told to lighten up.
I took offence for that as well.
All_seeing_eye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 19:13
sutie
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 25,445
she just can't remember the names yet, in another scene she referred to James J as "knob boy"



In that case I'm warming to her.
sutie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 19:25
sutie
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 25,445
This is a very interesting point DrZ and one I agree with. I'm so worried these days about what is and isn't politically correct I sometimes say the wrong thing inadvertently. Surely context and tone are all important too in how something was meant. When you don't know someone's name, then you inevitably pick on some distinguishing feature to indicate to someone else who you mean. For example, I'm a teacher and when we get a new intake in each year it takes a while to learn their names. If I wanted to refer to a pupil in the staffroom and I did not yet know their name, then I would have to use other distinguishing features to show who I meant. So, presumably it's ok for me to say "the little blond girl with glasses", or "that tall ginger lad"? So if this is ok, why would it not be ok for me to say "the black boy" (we have very few ethnic minorities in our school, so his colour would be a distinguishing feature)? How is that in any way racist and yet I'm sure that some would say it is? I feel Stacy's comment was similar to this. Is it the term "gay boy" that people are objecting to? If she'd said "that gay lad" would that have been any better? If that was the only way she could distinguish him from the other men at the time, as she didn't know his name, I don't understand why anyone should think it's homophobic. Surely the way she said it, the context and the fact there were no derogatory comments associated with it, mean that it shouldn't cause offence?



I think the fact that she's a Scientologist makes a fair case for judging her remark in a negative way. Scientologists are not known for their love of the gay community.

Regarding the actual term 'gay boy,' I've never heard it used in an affectionate, or even neutral way. In much the same way as 'Jew boy.'

Context is (almost) everything I suppose.
sutie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 20:22
MissD1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 248
Reminder: She is a Scientologist. They hate gay people.
Haha. it is true. And their cult does not have any gay people in it. *cough cough*
MissD1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 20:25
mmpfb
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 8,884
People are missing the point. It wasn't the fact she called him the 'gay boy.' It was her calling him the gay boy and implying that since he was gay it could make other people uncomfortable. Personally, I thought it was a bit derogatory.

If someone made the same assumption on her being the 'black woman' people would be throwing the racist card all over the place.
She's not wrong though. A lot of straight men would find sleeping in a bed with a gay man problematic, especially one that they've only just met. That's not to say they're right or reasonable to feel that way, but it's definitely a thing.

So, was she being offensive? Or was she just asking a fairly obvious question in a rather clumsy way?

My money's on the latter.

I'm a 'gay boy' btw. I wouldn't be particularly offended if a straight man expressed a preference to share with a fellow straight man rather than me. People have varying boundaries when it comes to personal and intimate space. It doesn't take too much effort to respect those.
mmpfb is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:59.