Changing terms without changing minds?

Gay as it relates to "happiness?" My you are older than I thought.

"Don we now, our gay apparel....."

But as a euphemism for Homosexual ( which I think you're getting at, ) its entirely successful. It hasn't erased Homophobia, nor has it hindered acceptance among sympathizers. But when coined, and the word "gay" meant "gladsome" ( another one which went out of vogue ) it gave a better spin and pretty much eliminated "invert."

However, all of this it tangental to the issue of terminology. The antis don't love GLers and hate the word "Pedophile." They hate and misunderstand the people the term refers to. You can either chose to make us truly unspeakable by eliminating any terminology referring to us, or you can expect ( so long as Anti attitudes exist ) to continue to see pages online "exposing" the term "ChildLover," "CUTE," ( remember that? ) "MAP," or any neologism as a "code word" Pedophiles use to hide behind.

Running from the confrontation with the liars and the deluded doesn't change their attitude. At some point we stand our ground and say, "you're demonstrably wrong about us." And since it doesn't really matter what self-descriptor we use when we finally stand our ground, I'll go with the one I first saw defended against the conflation with "rapist." I'm Pedophile and proud.

And while I'm not an exclusive Pedophile, I know what I am and I know what I'm not. I've got a strong imagination and a great deal of empathy, and I can cry at a well told gay love story. But I cannot create a sexual orientation on demand to satisfy your political ambitions that we express more diversity.

Part of being unafraid of our true sexuality is acknowledging and honoring it.

And yes, I suspect that those raised in repression who find a "taboo" sexuality in their make-up may emphasize it moreso than their "acceptable" orientations while differentiating themselves from the repressive culture.

In fact, its even possible that when a repressive culture loads the taboo with nearly magical significance, that it may cause social rebels who lack these feelings to identify themselves as members of the sexual minority for the shock-value. ( GC has had more than a few who, upon reflection weren't that into LGs. )

But for many who have successfully differentiated and are not going through a "rebel phase," telling them that they're a liability to the movement if they can't manufacture amorous feelings on demand is asking them to live a lie.

And why do we want a movement at all? So we don't have to feign feelings we don't have when Aunt Gertrude tries to set you up with her Orthopedist's niece ( or nephew. )

Sexuality exists across a multi-dimensional spectrum. Those who insist that some cannot exist in an exclusive corner of that spectrum are just as deluded as those who insist that all must really share only the dominant socially approved sexuality. We don't have to have all possible feelings existing simultaneously within us to respect diverse feelings.

Gays won Gay Rights by demanding Gay Rights, not by pretending that they were Bi, or by stepping back into the shadows and allowing only the Bisexual to ask for respect.

And bully for you if you are all 31 flavors of queer. But claiming that one is not something, is not the same as saying that its impossible. Its more like saying, if I haven't fallen for an adult male in my first 40 years on this planet, I find it unlikely that I'm gonna suddenly do so in the next 40.

I'll leave you with two thoughts; ought implies can. ( And most everybody outside of feverishly Homophobic religious maniacs don't believe in the efficacy of reparative therapies. )

And; De gustibus non est disputandum.

Dante