 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Editorial
As printed in the Jan.–March 1970 issue of Tangents magazine"You've come a long way from being gay, baby."
Auntie George, one of the principal freaks in E. F. Benson's amusing and perceptive book of the 1920's, The Freaks of Mayfair, was described as being "quite a gay little boy. He played with dolls rather than lead soldiers, and cried when he was promoted to knickerbockers." As Georgie grew older "he developed a sentimental rapture with stained-glass windows and ecclesiastical rites and church music."
Some homosexuals still play the Auntie George role today: they are caught up in their beaded bags, embroidery, the beauty of stained-glass and little else. Some others are still content to be labelled [sic] as "freaks" or "gay" little boys.
Used as an adjective the word "gay," of course, does describe certain kinds of homosexuals. It has a perfectly valid meaning when used in this sense. And we often use it in this sense. But the word unfortunately has the same suggestiveness as have words like swish, nellie, straight, jam, butch or kai-kai. All expressions of this sort are the product of the homosexual stereotypes left over from an earlier time — a time when homosexuals were themselves apologetic and defensive. Each of these adjectives describes a plastic" role assigned to homosexuals by a disapproving society. Each is a loaded term. Fortunately, the ghetto language of the homosexual disappeared as the need for it disappeared, as the myth that there was something different that had to be described disappeared. This is why the-supposedly camp language of last year's play, "The Boys in the Band," rang false to initiated ears.
Gay-ese glossaries died when most homosexuals gave up role playing around the year 1948. The vast majority of homosexuals now insist on being treated as individual human beings, not as types. They may at moments, be gay, or butch, or trade, or they may be none of these things. But they are no longer content to hide their sexuality behind a series of burlesqued terms any more than Black people will any longer tolerate the concept of Stepinfetchit or Uncle Tom.
Just as Black is the opposite of white (not colored or darky) so is homosexual the opposite of heterosexual (not gay or queer). This is why we think it is unfortunate that certain commercial interests have promoted the word gay into a noun and are now pawning it off as acceptable usage.
What (who) are Gays? Gays??? Sorry, there "ain’t” no such animal. There never was. Not even in the giddiest imagination. Gay is not a generic term so why the capital "G"? Homosexual is not capitalized; nor is heterosexual. The current misuse of the word "Gays" as a synonym for homosexuals is born of ignorance. It is a return to the somewhat mystical belief in a "homophile life style."
Ever since Benkert first used the word "homosexual" in 1869, the directness of the word has not been improved upon. It conveys honestly the only meaning that needs to be conveyed: "a sexual interest between members of the same sex." Is there anything wrong with that?
 |