Hate Words and the Dictionary

Though sticks and stones may hurt my bones, words can destroy my spirit. Derogatory language labels, limits and debases those that it attacks, even as it seeks to establish the speakers’ hold over their victims. Thus it is appropriate that minority groups seeking rights should object to the use of negative and offensive language that is directed against them.

Homophobic hate language can be found anywhere and everywhere, from the halls of Congress to our local schools. Though much of it comes from ignorance, we also find it in people and institutions that should know better. A few years ago GLBT activists went after Merriam-Webster, the self-proclaimed “foremost publisher of language-related works.” In addition to its best-selling print dictionaries and thesauri, Merriam-Webster has a well-used Online Dictionary and Thesaurus (www.m-w.com). At the time of the incident, the Online Thesaurus featured the following synonyms [syn] and related words [rel] for “homosexual,” whether it is used as an adjective or as a noun: P> “homosexual adj relating to or exhibiting sexual desire toward a member of one’s own sex....

“syn gay, homoerotic, inverted, queer, uranian

“rel androgynous, bisexual, epicene; transvestite; lesbian, sapphic; effeminate, swishy....”

“homosexual n one who is inclined to or practices homosexuality....

“syn fag, faggot, fruit, homo, invert, queer, uranian, uranist

“rel transvestite; fairy, nance, nancy, pansy, queen, swish; dike, lesbian, sapphist; pederast, sodomite....”

With the obvious exception of transvestite - and a few archaic words like epicene and uranian - all of the synonyms and related words in the Online Thesaurus were words that LesBiGay and Trans people themselves used to describe one another. “Fag” has been used by activists as diverse as Charley Shively and Dan Savage; while “queer” has taken on a new meaning during the last 15 years. Whether a slur is a slur depends on who uses the words and how they are used. For a friend to calls me “queer” or “faggot” is one thing. For a bigot to use the same words to express his fear and hatred is quite another.

In any case, activists were quick to denounce Merriam-Webster’s insensitivity: “We are shocked and disturbed to learn that terms like pederast and fruit are among those offered by a respectable resource guide like Merriam-Webster's thesaurus," said John McMullen of the GLOradio Corporation, whose GAYBC Radio Network broke the story in its “Daily Dose” news webcast. "One of our listeners made us aware of the inclusion of these terms and we felt that it was appropriate to give the matter national attention." Led by John Aravosis of Wired Strategies, queer activists spread the word across the Internet.

To its credit, Merriam-Webster took appropriate action. It pulled its on-line thesaurus in order to remove all the offending synonyms and related words. According to a statement issued by Merriam-Webster, Inc., the company “recently learned of problems regarding the inclusion of offensive words for the term homosexual in its thesaurus. Merriam-Webster acknowledges that inclusion of these words was the result of an error on its part, and it fully extends its apologies. Long-standing editorial policy for this thesaurus excludes offensive or disparaging terms from the word lists. This policy, mistakenly, was not extended to the entry for the word homosexual. The company is grateful to have this situation brought to its attention, and it is taking immediate action to ensure this policy is implemented consistently.” Merriam-Webster was as good as its word. Today, if you visit the Merriam-Webster Online Thesaurus, there will be “no entries found that match homosexual.”

GLBT activists were pleased with Merriam-Webster’s decision: “I applaud Merriam-Webster for taking such a quick and decisive stand against homophobia,” said John Aravosis of Wired Strategies. “We’re pleased to know that after reporting these matters to the Gay and Lesbian community the responsiveness of our listeners helped to drive a quick resolution to this unfortunate editorial blunder,” agreed John McMullen of GAYBC. At the same time, activists will continue to hold discussions with Merriam-Webster to “ensure that the review is done properly.”

Though I agree in principle with the activists’ objections and Merriam-Webster’s decision, I have a problem with any sort of censorship, no matter how worthy the objectives are. My views are closer to those of Cathy Renna of the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD), who asked not that the offensive words be removed but that they be “flagged” as derogatory. ”It’s not that they are words that people don’t know and don’t use, but in 1999, they are words that should be presented in some sort of context.” By putting these words in their proper place, we remove their power to hurt us, and our enemies’ power to use them against us.

Jesse Monteagudo is a freelance writer and unabashed lefty (in both senses of the word) who lives and writes in South Florida. Send him a note at jessemonteagudo@aol.com.