gender and language

[Sonja Franeta]

I am really glad this list suddenly got so active. It's a very interesting
discussion. About your question of the use of the word "queer"--I have a lot
to say, but not enough time now. I agree that the word queer is not used in
the inclusive and respectful way it might be used as it is in "queer
theory," but I think it has to do with politics and the lower status of
queers in society--no matter how faddish it is to speak of them (us). It's
still a put down to be "queer." I think the term is more inclusive but it is
still not comfortable for people to use because of social attitudes.
Sonja Franeta
----- Original Message -----
From: "Uri Horesh" <urih at BABEL.LING.UPENN.EDU>
To: <GALA-L at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG>
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 4:33 AM
Subject: Re: gender and language


> Since I am incapable of replying with a learned argument supported by
> references, let me just throw a few questions into the air. Do people feel
> that the emergence of the term "queer" in the scholarly literature and its
> use in everyday life are parallel to one another? My impression is that
the
> latter is still in transition, at least in American English, and may be at
> even earlier (or simply different) stages in other varieties of English
and
> in other languages. Here at Penn, the Lesbian Gay Bisexual Alliance has
> recently changes its name to the Queer Student Alliance. We still have the
> Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered Center, but it hosts events like
> the Queer Men's Coffee Talk and the Queer Women's Coffee Talk. Fewer
people,
> I gather, use "queer" in more casual speech. And when they do, I suspect
> that Brits and Yanks may mean different things by it. In Modern Israeli
> Hebrew, we just say "homo", "lezbit", and if we're really PC we'll add
"bi"
> and "trans". Occasionally one might hear the borrowings "gay" and "queer"
in
> a more scholarly or political context. (A nice pun, which didn't really
> catch on in casual speech, is "ge'ot", "ge'im", literally 'proud' [pl.f. &
> pl.m., respectively]. Sounds like "gay" but has an added political value.)
>
> I guess my other question is, if indeed "queer" is becoming a more widely
> accepted blanket term (that's easier to pronounce than "LGBT") is it
really
> aiding us in being more inclusive, thus more accurate in our accounts of
> what constitutes the non-straight speech community, or are we in fact
> eliminating the fine-grain distinctions, which perhaps ought to be made in
> accounting for language variation? I feel that we're conflicted between
the
> desire not to leave anyone out and the urge to be precise.
>
> Any illuminating thoughts?
>
> Uri
>
>
> --
> ------------------------------------
> Uri Horesh
> Graduate Student
> Department of Linguistics
> University of Pennsylvania
> 619 Williams Hall
> Philadelphia PA 19104-6305
>
> Phone: (215) 732-7133 (Home)
>        (267) 475-5594 (Cell)
>
> E-mail: urih at babel.ling.upenn.edu
> http://www.ling.upenn.edu/~urih/home
> ------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> on 10/25/01 12:50 AM, Suzanne Evans at suzanne at SAS.UPENN.EDU wrote:
>
> > However, much depends on how one defines the subjects of one's study as
> > gay(queer). We have to rely on speakers' self-identifications, yet as
Zwicky
> > points out in "Queerly Phrased", these are not always reliable. This is
due,
> > in part, to the continuum of sexual self-identification that encompasses
not
> > only gay/straight, but bisexual and many other shades of sexuality.
>