Well, it seems like you're dismissing me because of that. It was meant to be a minor point anyway, part of a whole.
And I don't see what's wrong in pointing out that words change meaning. It's BECAUSE they change meaning that "gay" became an insult in the first place. And why there's resistance to "lame" being one--because it hasn't been used to refer to disabled people in a very very long time. It just doesn't mean that any more, unlike gay, which still has and will continue to have for a long time the meaning of liking the same sex. People just don't consider words that lost group meaning ages ago to be considered still insulting to that group, and frankly why should they? It's asking us to delve back into ancient etemology that's past our parents' ages.
As stated, it's different for words like "gay" where the group meaning is still in the here and now. But "idiot"? "Lame"? I really can't see that, and I'm in a group that likely would have been termed "idiot" if I was around in those ages.
no subject
And I don't see what's wrong in pointing out that words change meaning. It's BECAUSE they change meaning that "gay" became an insult in the first place. And why there's resistance to "lame" being one--because it hasn't been used to refer to disabled people in a very very long time. It just doesn't mean that any more, unlike gay, which still has and will continue to have for a long time the meaning of liking the same sex. People just don't consider words that lost group meaning ages ago to be considered still insulting to that group, and frankly why should they? It's asking us to delve back into ancient etemology that's past our parents' ages.
As stated, it's different for words like "gay" where the group meaning is still in the here and now. But "idiot"? "Lame"? I really can't see that, and I'm in a group that likely would have been termed "idiot" if I was around in those ages.