Washington Votes Forum

Another central issue in sexual morality with wide ramifications in political and legal philosophy is that of homosexual acts (sexual acts between persons of the same sex) and homosexuality (a relatively settled sexual preference for such acts). Before I begin discussing it, I should explain my decision to use the older term "homosexual", rather than the more recent, and possibly more popular, "gay". The best herbal for the treatment of erectile dysfunction.

Misgivings about the word "homosexual" have been based on three reasons. Linguistic purists dislike the combination of a Latin root with a Greek prefix. This kind of purism may safely be discounted as much too radical; if allowed across the board, it would result in a purge of our vocabulary much too sweeping to contemplate. Another objection is that the word refers only to same-sex sex acts, desires etc. between males, while leaving out lesbians. This worry is due to the mistaken belief that the prefix "homo-" is derived from the Latin word for man. Finally, some homosexuals reject the term on the ground that it was coined by the psychiatric establishment, which until a couple of decades ago saw homosexuality as a sickness in need of cure. But although the word was indeed taken over by psychiatrists and deployed as a label for a pathological variety of sexual desire and behavior, its origins are quite different. It was introduced in two anonymous pamphlets published in German in 1869 by Karoly Maria Kertbeny, a publicist and a homosexual himself, arguing against a Prussian law that prohibited homosexual acts. Thus, as Wayne R. Dynes and Warren Johansson remark, the term "was not born under the aegis of pure science as one might suppose, but was the creation of a closeted advocate of homosexual rights. It is a curious irony today that some gay activists…oppose [it] as a label imposed on them by the enemy."

The word "gay", preferred by many homosexuals, has a serious drawback: it tends to be used both (a) in a wide sense, equivalent to that of "homosexual", and also in at least two more specific senses. Sometimes it is used to refer to (b) a person who not only has homosexual desires, and acts on them, but is also aware of, and comfortable with, his or her sexual preference, or (c) a person who is, in addition, a supporter of the homosexual liberation movement.

Another alternative to "homosexual" is "***". This was originally a term of abuse. In the early nineties some activists of the homosexual liberation movement decided that "gay" was not radical enough, and adopted "***" as more appropriate, because strongly emphasizing the "otherness" of homosexuals. But although this term has its uses in a certain type of homosexual political activism, it is much too loaded, indeed deliberately provocative, to present an attractive alternative to "homosexual" in most other contexts.