Yes, I'm amused by the reports of those generous souls who took it upon themselves to suffer through the movie release for that sparkly-vampire story. All quite amusing. What is far from amusing is this tendency on the part of several reviewers to identify the sparkly-emo-vampire as gay.
Gay is not synonymous with 'stupid' or with 'lame'. This character is emo, stalkerish, and cardboard, but not homosexual. Anyone with two verbs and a noun to string together could at least put out the effort to find a more appropriate -- let alone colorful -- adjective to throw in the pot.
First off, the character is obsessed with a chick, so even if he shows latent homosexual tendencies (beats me, haven't read the book nor will I ever, ever see the movie), he's still obsessed-with-chick. It's probably a reasonable conclusion to say that he's at least predominantly heterosexual.
But more importantly, gay means the noun described likes the same gender. It does not mean the noun is strange, lame, freakish, twisted, stupid, or dresses up in bad 80s new-wave and smears its lipstick. Or even that it sparkles.
I have real trouble giving anyone the benefit of the doubt who complains about a story's typecasting women, and in the process of doing so, typecasts some other minority instead. Doesn't make it right, and it sure doesn't make it funny, and it sure as hell doesn't impress me.
Word choice, people. Learn it, live it, and get on with it.
Gay is not synonymous with 'stupid' or with 'lame'. This character is emo, stalkerish, and cardboard, but not homosexual. Anyone with two verbs and a noun to string together could at least put out the effort to find a more appropriate -- let alone colorful -- adjective to throw in the pot.
First off, the character is obsessed with a chick, so even if he shows latent homosexual tendencies (beats me, haven't read the book nor will I ever, ever see the movie), he's still obsessed-with-chick. It's probably a reasonable conclusion to say that he's at least predominantly heterosexual.
But more importantly, gay means the noun described likes the same gender. It does not mean the noun is strange, lame, freakish, twisted, stupid, or dresses up in bad 80s new-wave and smears its lipstick. Or even that it sparkles.
I have real trouble giving anyone the benefit of the doubt who complains about a story's typecasting women, and in the process of doing so, typecasts some other minority instead. Doesn't make it right, and it sure doesn't make it funny, and it sure as hell doesn't impress me.
Word choice, people. Learn it, live it, and get on with it.
no subject
Date: 22 Nov 2008 12:23 am (UTC)*would like to declare a moratorium on using "retarded" and "lame" for similar reasons*
no subject
Date: 22 Nov 2008 01:14 am (UTC)Retarded, yes, I agree with you -- and I'd add in the expression "crippleware" from the software world. I get the intention, but I hate the connotations. There's got to be some better way to put it.
no subject
Date: 22 Nov 2008 01:43 am (UTC)Crippleware? Seriously. *boggles*
no subject
Date: 22 Nov 2008 02:06 am (UTC)Like weak, feeble, rickety, derelict, spineless, wonky. Or I might call something inane, asinine, idiotic, ludicrous, witless, imbecilic, with the fun ones being harebrained, loony, whacked, screwy, and tetched.
Then again, I didn't like it when I heard 'gimpy' used in the same manner -- to describe someone as stupid, slow-witted, or useless.
(I do get annoyed when people think I'm being derogatory when I use the word 'niggardly', sheesh. Buy a freaking dictionary, people.)
no subject
Date: 22 Nov 2008 03:07 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 22 Nov 2008 05:06 am (UTC)However, until this language comes up with a label less mouthful-ly than 'homosexual', I hereby declare that 'gay' has not yet travelled far enough from its origins to be generally understood to mean 'lame' or 'stupid'.