The gay marriage controversy speaks to a climate of persecution and victimization that extends far beyond the realms of political rhetoric. The use of the term \gay"" to connote something undesirable, stupid or sick is perhaps the most insidious form of discrimination gay people face on a daily basis. Its continual use in common discourse has found its way into the everyday language of otherwise well-meaning or even tolerant individuals, causing distressing social and emotional harm in ways that most of those who use the term do not understand.
Racist language is often pinpointed as a hot-button issue and has found an active voice of complaint in various social and political organizations. Every industrialized country in the world, with the exception of the United States, has adopted some form of anti-hate-speech statute and attempted to stem the tide of slurs and epithets endured in those various nations. But the United States remains a stubborn outlier in its attempts to codify the use of hate speech as illegal. To that end, the United States, first in the world in many things, falls dead last.
But many racial verbal jabs have, to a large extent, found their way out of modern parlance. Of course they exist, but they exist at a much more covert level than terms such as the word ""gay."" At least this obvious racism has been quelled to a degree, even while institutionalized racism does still exist on many levels.
It could be argued, however, that the verbal slings and arrows racial minorities face, while still despicable and deplorable in their own right, maintain a less obvious and less common position than the term gay. The expression ""That's gay"" or ""Stop doing X, you're being gay"" is still an oft-used and common term the likes of which exist very prevalently on our own campus. To continue to use such language not only directly contributes to an extremely homophonic, hate-mongering mindset, but reifies the dichotomy between straight as denoting acceptable or normal and gay meaning strange or, even worse, sick.
There are those who believe using the term is alright when joking or if a person in the social group at that particular time is not gay. That argument fails to recognize the difficult and destructive effect the word can have. To say with any certainty that you ""know"" you are in strictly straight company denies the existence of millions of people who, because of the use of such terms and the fear that coming out will make them a social outcast, refuse to do so. Even if that is not the case, the use of the term in a joking situation only serves to make light of the plight gay people suffer each and every day and re-entrenches the term as an accepted and common word. To demonstrate this kind of na??vet?? is absurd and wrong.
To passively accept the use of this word to describe undesirable situations, people and circumstances is not only deplorable on a moral level but, in a nation whose claim is equal opportunity and treatment for all, violates the very essence of American notions of freedom and equality themselves. Do not tacitly consent to the use of this term in your social groups or classrooms; do not be satisfied with continual verbal degradation even if it is not your mouth from which the hateful words emanate. Be an active advocate in the continual fight against the plague of outright discrimination practiced by your peers. To do any less sacrifices actual freedom at the alter of free speech.
Bob Probst ia a junior majoring in political science and legal studies.
