irk so smrt

This has obviously become a trolling ground.
People have as much right to ask someone not to us a slur as they have to use a slur. The matter is highly subjective; my feeling is that it's best to not use phrases etc that can be offensive because you never know how someone will take something.
This thread should be locked since it's basically a back and forth flame-fest at this point.

Here's my exact problem with the premise of this thread, a nail that Armus has already hammered in pretty well:

It is PERFECTLY FINE to not want others to use a term you don't like around you. It's perfectly fine to not want to use it. What I have a problem with is the notion that using a term is inherently wrong, which is precisely what people in here have been arguing, when, as you said, it's highly subjective. To tell another person that regardless of his intentions he's "wrong" in using a word when he meant absolutely nothing by it is only going to alienate him further from your cause.

Note to all: Being politically correct and demanding others do as well stifles interpersonal growth. Stop it.

That's a good point too, and is really the main issue I was addressing from the beginning. While some people are drawing lines in the sand about what words are appropriate and which are not, there's an even bigger group of people trying to label any effort in the name of gay rights as offensive. Some people actually think that homosexuality is not politically correct.

Which does remind me of the Gay Pride parade. It is one of the biggest, showiest forms of expression, and, I don't think the parade should suffer any roadblocks from ultra-Conservatives or people who are stiffs about sex or whatever. And to think that a cause that only exists to achieve equality could be stood against by other people who enjoy freedoms that those minorities are trying to attain. In this country, if they don't like freedom of speech, then they can get over it.

That's sort of where I feel this topic comes full circle.

And P.S. Grey, I know the angle you usually engage in this topic from, and I totally get it, but to me, the tight-collared individuals who are typically against events like the Pride Parades shouldn't really have any weight in stopping them, because the parade itself is literally an exercise in free expression, with an actual message and a goal to get noticed. I have a feeling that for them, stomachs will turn at any attempt to allow gay people the freedom to get married.

Maybe alternative methods of conveying the message could be organized for people on the fence, (again, social climate— knowing how people react to things is helpful in planning strategically) however to me, stuff like this is what the world needs to come to accept. But it's a two-way street.

I respect that notion, Spellman. And you're right; my opinion shouldn't carry any weight at all when it comes to another community's decisions.

My point in these anti-pride posts I make is that I have gay friends, and they aren't flamboyantly gay. They're "normal", awesome people, who, if you didn't know already, you'd never label "gay". They don't alienate, and are very chill personalities in general. To me, they're the missing link between the majority and minority in this instance. They're the kind of people I could bring to my parents and have them get to know them, and possibly even change their view on just what "gay people" consist of.

Instead, people such as my parents, grandparents, etc. see the pride parades. They see ridiculous, overly sexualized lunatics, and think, "THEY want to get married? Hellllllllllllllll no!" They don't see respectable people, professionals, or reasonable people; they see glitter, rainbows and humiliating gestures in public.

Sure, these could eventually advocate change, but I honestly believe "pride" only hinders the community's goals. A soft-spoken pride, in almost every instance, works better than an outspoken one.

You obviously just created another argument when Armus already deemed said thing irrelevant and invalid. Either you didn't read his post or you need to read it again.

His and posts like this are why I said this has become a trolling ground.

This is why I said I avoid using slurs, which I have every right to say.  All this and much of other posts to is just trolling a subjective topic.  If no one's can give to the debate without trying to tell someone what they have and haven't read and/or can't say, this thread should end.

We should all just start saying queer.

ALL BRONIES WELCOME!

I agree with Rizen here and i most respect Grey in his counter-arguments, spellman too. @ spellman when you were talking about gay pride parades being a form of free expression, I think i personally don't like them besides the fact that they can work to gain rights for gay people. I used gay pride parades as a specific term instead of pride parades in general because gay pride parades generally have more "ridiculous, overly sexualized lunatics" and "glitter, rainbows and humiliating gestures in public." With all that asside, i would still be perfectly fine with gay pride parades as exercising people's rights of free expression, except that they also block off roads in already congested cities for long periods of time, which can negatively affect the people around them, which i consider inconsiderate. Also this is also probably the only way they will get the people's attention and make a statement to free themselves, so it works both ways. What i was trying to do in this thread was not really to tell everyone it is wrong to say something is gay in a negative way, but simply to understand what effect it can have on people without you noticing. This thread was designed to try to help others notice what really occurs when that word is used in a negative way all the time and that it happens more frequently than most people would realize. I'm expressing my point that i would not use the word because (insert all the things i have already said) and that i would like you to understand what those reasons are. After that i hope that you would agree with me and try to stop using the word in that way, but if not, that is your decision and we will simply disagree. After all points are made, there is nothing either of us can do to change our disagreement and will just have to accept the other person's opinion.

@ken2
I think it's perfectly reasonable for you to be critical of the parade. When we are part of a group that is misunderstood by a great deal of people, we want to have the best representatives possible. People look to the most vocal people in specific groups when making judgments about them, and the vocal people are usually part of an organization. A personal example: I'm an atheist. But one of the louder voices we have is the American Atheists organization. The head of the AA is filing a lawsuit against having the crossbeams that form a cross at Ground Zero, because they can be seen as a religious symbol. But not all atheists agree that the cross should be taken down, including me. It's unnecessarily hostile and doesn't do anything to help our cause.

But I digress— I understand where you're coming from.

I am also an atheist and i disagree with taking the cross down... I don't think it's necessary for atheists to have an organization. I feel like it should be the opposite of an organization.