It’s quite fascinating how the meaning of simple words can change so drastically over time. Take for instance the word “gay” – one that many of us use habitually to describe things we deem as stupid, worthless or inferior. The word has become so ingrained in society’s youth that we inadvertently use it on a day-to-day basis, regardless of whether or not we think we’re prejudiced. We use it as an excuse not to participate in activities that do not appeal to us, a rationale not to flee our comfort zones, and an elusive justification for our rigid opinions that prevent any further questions from being asked. If something is “gay,” then it certainly isn’t worth our time, is it? Sure, there may be no offensive intent in our regular usage of the term, but does enveloping a simple word (pertaining to a fairly substantial demographic, mind you) with such a negative connotation really seem appropriate in a society that is hypothetically making efforts to become more forward-thinking? I think not. After all, how would people react if we started dismissing things as “straight,” “white” or “masculine”?

But first I ask, what does this word even mean? The first definition that pops up in Webster’s New World College Dictionary is “1 joyous and lively; merry; happy; light-hearted.” But let’s not fool ourselves – no one under the age of fifty recognizes this meaning and you certainly aren’t going to hear anyone use it. No, I’m talking about the other meaning (the kind they don’t teach you in elementary school): “2 homosexual.” One of the world’s most established minorities throughout the past few decades, the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (GLBT) community has risen from being an irritant of the American people, to being an irritant of some American people. Don’t get me wrong – as far as tolerance and acceptance are concerned, we as a nation have made unquestionable progress over the years. If you don’t believe me, just turn on the TV and try to pinpoint a contemporary program (sitcom, drama, or trite reality garbage) that doesn’t include any gay characters. A scant amount at best.

Perhaps we do use these derogatory terms as a mental crutch of sorts – a fruitless effort of developing some sort of quasi-understanding of a subject so unknown to many of us that we have no other means of trying to simplify it.

With each passing year, more and more gays, lesbians and transgenders are abandoning their closets for the liberty of candidness. Homosexual celebrities such as Ellen DeGeneres, Rosie O’Donnell and Elton John have enjoyed prolonged success and consistently appear in the public eye. Renowned programs such as Stonewall Columbus (central Ohio’s principal GLBT community center) promote awareness and tolerance of alternative lifestyles. A more liberal-leaning media has made it easier for the public to become more conscious and benevolent towards this specific demographic.

So why is it that we have failed to abolish inane words like “faggot” from our everyday diction? Why are insults such as this considered acceptable by some – who may or may not have any intention of coming across as discriminatory – when we live in an age where it is allegedly accepted to be of a sexuality other than heterosexual? Maybe the answer lies within the question itself. In other words, perhaps this acceptance is nothing more than alleged – something advocates continue to endorse despite the reality that it hasn’t really caught onto the public’s frame of mind. Perhaps we just pretend that everything is all moonlight and roses in our varied communities but never really subconsciously consent to the differences of others. As open-minded as many of us would like to think we are, we all have instinctive biases that prevent us from comprehending the world around us with a panoramic view – that is, we allow our preconceived notions to prevent us from viewing certain things objectively. So maybe the thought of two men (or women) kissing just happens to gross us out. That’s fine; we’re all entitled to our phobias – this does not, however, give us the right to condemn the lifestyles of others. Although I am personally repulsed by public affection in general, I would never wish to deny one of the most valuable pleasures of life – to love and be loved – to anybody. In fact, love makes the world a pretty beautiful place to live in, wouldn’t you agree?

Obviously, most of us are not gay. Studies conducted in 2003 by the National Opinion Research Center have concluded that approximately 1.4% of females and 2.8% of males 18 or older report having same-sex preferences. Apply this statistic to a country with millions of people, and you’ll find that the ratio of gays and straights is not a particularly strong one. A lot of us may know members of the GLBT community but don’t necessarily realize it, and oftentimes the sensitivity of the topic precludes it from being a center of discussion. Therefore, it would be difficult for many of us to declare a comprehensive understanding of a subject that – at the very least, we perceive to be – so foreign to our lifestyles. Since the concept of homosexuality is not taught, or even touched upon, in most schools, and since it’s often unexplained or ignored in the household (save for children of same-sex parents), it’s not terribly effortless for many of us to try to make sense of such a mysterious thing.

It is my belief (call me naïve) that the majority of us really do make earnest attempts not to victimize others. And even though discrimination does and probably will always exist in varying magnitudes over time, it is clear that America has gradually adopted a significantly broader acceptance of various cultures and their idiosyncrasies. Hell, we elected a biracial president not even a month ago! But ironically, in that same week, a ballot proposition in California was passed eliminating the right of same-sex couples to be married within the state. Obviously, this case in point is part of a much bigger argument that I’ll discreetly refrain from delving into. The bottom line is, our approval of other lifestyles is inconsistent and much too flimsy to take seriously. If we can find it so easy to denounce usage of (for instance) the N-word, why then is it customary to brand someone a “homo” for their hairstyle, taste in music, or preference for certain types of clothing? In the background, I can hear people saying I’m comparing apples to oranges. I’ve heard this type of rationalization before, and I’m sure I’ll hear it again. But in the words of Maya Angelou, “all vulgarity is vulgarity, and if you mean to demean a person – to make him or her less than whole….it means that ‘this person is not worthy of my concern.’” Bigotry comes in all shapes and sizes, and that many of us can deprecate the discrimination of Group A all while remaining indifferent to the comparable discrimination of Group B reflects a stain of hypocrisy on our part, doesn’t it?

Perhaps we do use these derogatory terms as a mental crutch of sorts – a fruitless effort of developing some sort of quasi-understanding of a subject so unknown to many of us that we have no other means of trying to simplify it. If we are so unaccustomed to homosexuality, and if it is so against the grain of a routine we’ve steadfastly appended ourselves to, then perhaps this fear/confusion is merely natural. Then again, maybe it’s simply a handiwork of a society that has been too slow to evolve, and something we’ve learned involuntarily over a period of time. Regardless, what I ask is, will this assimilate well to a world that is (at least on the surface) constantly pushing towards a more broadminded attitude? And can we as a society truly embrace change if the thought of mere progress is too overwhelming? I can’t tell you what to believe, and make no mistake – I’m not going to. But hopefully the words that come out of my writing will get you to start thinking more about the ones that come out of your mouth. Words might just be words, but more times than not they’re packaged with meaning, and that is something much more powerful than any stick or stone you’ll ever throw. Pitch them wisely.