Is 'queer' an acceptable term again then?

This isn't meant to be a provocative type post btw, but I just find trying to keep up with 'proper' terms is getting harder.
I was scrolling through my news feed this morning and saw a headline querying whether one of the main Marvel characters was actually queer.
My first thought was they will get some stick for that term in this day and age , then noticed it was from 'The Gay Times'

 

If in doubt best not to use it. Even if it is acceptable it doesn't sound very nice to me.

 

Isn't that what the Q in LGBTQ+ means?

Edit: apparently it means "questioning". But there's that programme Queer Eye, so I'm guessing it's ok??

 

It depends who says it, how and in what context.

LGBTQ+ has expanded from LGBT and some do use the q in that regard, but not always.

Personally, I wouldn't be comfortable using it, purely because of how I remember its use back just a few decades.

 

It's a word that is acceptable to be used by those within the gay community, but not those outside.
A bit like the 'N' word.

That's my understanding of it, any road.

 

To be on the safe side, we should remove the letter Q from the alphabet. As an added bonus, there would be no more quangos, no more queues outside Oakwell, and the Queen would be removed from her position. Even those crappy adverts for Quickbooks would be gone forever.

 

If used like. " That's a queer coincidence." I see no issue whatever.

 

Wonder if there is an element of word ownership, as with "that" word?

 

That was my thought really

 

Yes, that's very much what it started as, but then morphed a little (couldn't tell you the reasoning) to be more ambiguous.

 

I'm pretty sure in the right context it's fine, same as gay and lesbian. There's a whole literary research field called "queer theory". If you call someone queer because they've spilled your pint or something then that's obviously not on.

 

Like the ghost of YN returning.

 

How so?

Reasonable question phrased in a reasonable way...

 

This; in a nutshell I think.

 

I think that’s also the case for calling someone “gay”, “black” or a “woman” if they’ve spilled your drink though. Perfectly acceptable ways to describe someone but the issue is referring to these characteristics when they’re in no way relevant to the issue at hand. As always, context is everything.

That said, if such a description was required I would generally refer to someone as being “gay” rather than “queer” just because it’s more commonly used (unless someone tells me there’s a difference?)

In terms of whether such a term can only be used by members of a certain community, I don’t buy into that. It’s the opposite of inclusive. It’s the context that’s important, not who said it.

 

Google is usually a better place to start if you’re unsure:

https://www.cjr.org/language_corner/queer.php

The term has been reclaimed by many, some still find it offensive and derogatory.

 

Beat me to it.

 

If some still find it derogatory, why does a highly rated and successful program have that word in its title?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queer_Eye_(2018_TV_series)

Many none LGBTQ people enjoy that show, so how do they discuss it without being derogatory?

 

Enid Blyton used it in regard to Uncle Quentin in one of the Famous Five books, all those years ago.

 

Had he written it folk would have been all over it.

Fair reply?