The Battle of Language Continued

In Conor Kennedy's article, "The Battle of Language," in the May 1994 Community News he mentions that, "the term 'homosexual' is so outdated and inappropriate that even the venerable old New York Times has begun its abandonment." Okay, so far. But he ends his article by saying, "We declare ourselves queer--men, women, drag, and transgendered--with the right to choose our language and our lives." For whom is he speaking when he declares this right to chose the language? Switching from "homosexual" to "queer" doesn't solve anything in my book, even though "queer" seems to have passed the 90s PC test with flying colors.

I don't understand how the word "queer" became fashionable. It seems a distortion, a misuse of language. One of my Webster's says of this word:

"1. Strange or odd from a conventional viewpoint. 2. Of questionable nature or character; suspicious; shady. 3. Not feeling physically right or well; giddy, faint or qualmish. 4. Mentally unbalanced or deranged. 5. Slang. a) homosexual. b) bad, worthless or counterfeit."

Why would I want to be strange or suspicious or faint, let alone mentally unbalanced or worthless? And speaking of negative connotations, I'm not too fond of "lesbian" either, for similar reasons. The first time the word "lesbian" was ever used in my presence, it was hurled at me with contempt. The person who spat that word in my face meant it to hurt. And it did. It is that powerful a word. Of course that was many years ago. But the word still rankles. And it always will. I would like to banish it, the way blacks--people of color--banished "negro." Not for their inherent definitions but for what these words have come to represent.

What is so wrong with the word "gay"? Why have we latched onto something so--well, strange, as "queer?" In 1965 a group of brave "homosexuals" stood in front of the White House and chanted "gay is good." Why didn't we latch onto that slogan? Or even "gay is OK." (How enlightening it was in the 1960s to hear that affirming chant, "black is beautiful.") And other thing: Why is it PC to say "gays and lesbians" and not PC just to say "gays?" Why can't women be gay, too?

These are questions that constantly reverberate in my head. But lately I find myself questioning all such words anyway, even the innocuous "gay." In my life, I've thought of myself as straight/heterosexual, bisexual/bi, and lesbian/gay, etc. I'm tired of trying to accept these labels, of worrying if they identify me, of caring whether they are PC or not. They don't feel like me anyway. I'm a woman. The end. I would find it inappropriate to be labeled a Catholic woman or an Irish woman or an English woman--all of which could be considered true to some degree but such labels would be misleading--and I find the same goes for words that attempt to define sexual orientation. I know I sound angry. Well, I am angry. I'm tired of these words, these labels, correct for one decade, incorrect for another. I'm tired of their power to hurt, to categorize, to define me. None of them do.

- Nuala Hallinan


Community News -- October 1994 -- Volume 2, Number 2