Human Rights - The unsettling language of sexuality

Christine Quinn is “the first openly homosexual leader of the New York City Council. … She suggested that the Ancient Order of Hibernians [the group that organizes Manhattan’s St. Patrick’s Day Parade] should permit homosexual activists the right to march behind the New York City council banner.”

There is something odd about this statement. Frankly, I have always felt that loaded language contributes greatly to the lowering level of discourse and actual content-filled discussion in our society. Now, there is nothing factually inaccurate in the sentence by the Associated Press, which is a good thing. Yet if I was editing the story, I would have substituted the term "gay" for "homosexual" in this context.

Seriously, very few people use the term "openly homosexual", and even then rarely ever in a remotely positive context. While it is true that technically gay is a synonym for homosexual, in my (anectodal) evidence I have found that gay is generally the preferred term. And there's a good reason for it.

Every May since 2001 a Gallup poll asked Americans “In general, do you think homosexuals should or should not have equal rights in terms of job opportunities?”

The yes responses are as follows: 2001: 85 percent; 2002 86 percent; 2003 88 percent; 2004: 89 percent; 2005: 90 percent/87 percent; and 2006: 89 percent.

Note in particular the percentages given in 2005. That year, Gallup asked half the respondents about equal rights for "gays and lesbians" instead of "homosexuals", and the result was a 3 percent higher approval, despite being the same question.

Loaded words aren't anything new. Tossing in the word "Nazi" into a discussion quite often condemns a person if the term is not brushed off as simply inflammatory and biased. The word "homosexual" also has its share of negative associations. (Note: This post is not translated into Chinese because to the extent of my knowledge, there really is no equivalent term for "gay") Even in fairly enlightened Christian organizations like that I am part of, people claim that Biblical passages condemn homosexuality; outdated medical and psychological journals declared it a disease until proved wrong later on; and some people just can't get their minds off of the word "sex". The fact that it is more clinical also arguably makes it easier to dehumanize queer people. (This is another thing that I have wondered about - using the term gay seems to exclude females, but queer isn't as popular yet.)

Now of course, no one should have to go into rehab for uttering the word "homosexual" like they have to when they use the word "faggot". Still, it would be nice if the mainstream media was aware of how they used the words to describe LGBT people. The terms used in a discussion definitely have the power to influence perceptions people have. According to the same Gallup poll mentioned above, the 2005 results noted that 7 percent believed that "gays and lesbians" should not have equal rights in terms of employment. Yet 11 percent said that "homosexuals" should not have equal rights.

Keep this in mind. To be sure, I'm not as confident about language nuances in other languages. If any one of my readers have found similar language connotations in other languages such as Mandarin, please feel free to share them in the comments.