To use the word “queer”?

[BowermansNose]

A few times recently I’ve found myself wanting to use the word “queer” to describe something odd or unusual (in the original sense of the word). I don’t know if I’m being influenced by some novels I’ve read of whatever. My parents also have an expression “up Queer Street”.

However, I’m obviously aware of the other meaning that relates to sexuality, and it has had pejorative connotations.

AIBU to use “queer” in the original sense?

@SilverySurfer: I’m not sure the abbreviation of Pakistani has always been offensive. As a kid we would go to the ‘p... shop’ because that describes who ran it, with no offence intended. And I’ve read Indian newspapers (inc ToI) which use Pak as abbreviation for the country and add the i as an abbreviated demonym. Although those two countries aren’t best friends so it might be intended as an insult! This was pre-modi (which is not an abbreviated demonyn of pre-moderated)

I’m just wondering how you know that the people running the “paki shop” found it simply an affectionate abbreviation? Not saying they didn’t of course......

It's very archaic language which would stand out now, which you know full well. You just want to look like a well-read smart arse, but a real smart arse would adapt their language to the times

As we've established, one person's archaic can be another person's everyday. It's not trying to look like a well-read smart arse to draw on your learning and knowledge gained throughout your life when communicating with others, it's entirely normal and what we all do. Should we go for the lowest common denominator and restrict our topics of discussion to trashy TV or Bingo just to avoid appearing elitist if we naturally wish to share our love of literature, language, history, art etc. with others - and never use words of more than five letters to make sure we don't appear to be trying to insult less educated people?

You wouldn't be able to talk about a dog or a tree if you hadn't learnt or read these words at a very young age, but it doesn't mean you're trying to show off your learning if you do use those words when talking to others. If you had a time-machine and went back to prehistoric times, a stereotypical caveman would hear you pronouncing the word 'tree' instead of just nodding and grunting and think you a terrible show-off!

Some of my friends, from a wide range of social backgrounds, despite having modern smartphones with full keyboards and predictive text, still only ever use text speak when sending messages or emails. I sometimes wonder if they consider me to be showing off or using archaic language when I type "see you later" or "are you...." rather than "C U L8er" or "R U". I really am not trying to prove any point, but it's just not 'me' to speak/text like that - using full words is my 'natural'. I didn't even do that in the 90s, when you sometimes had to jab a hard button four times and then wait a second to type a single letter.

We're just different people - I don't judge them and I hope they don't judge me.

I write properly, WeBuilt, I don't see how text speak/typing out words in full relates to using loaded, old-fashioned terms.

As for the corner shop comparison by pp above...speechless.

Are there people who would find it genuinely hurtful if I called my shopping bill queer?

As a gay man (representing, I acknowledge, the opinion of precisely one homosexual), I can say that I would not be hurt or shocked. I would also be annoyed if someone took offence on my behalf. The worst one can say is that queer in this context - and the other contexts the OP has given - sounds rather old-fashioned. The OP accepts this too.

@BertrandRussell

I’m just wondering how you know that the people running the “paki shop” found it simply an affectionate abbreviation?

Because it's the name they gave the shop. On a big sign.

Take the word retard.

Originally used to mean delayed / slow processing. Used as medical terminology.
Then used offensively.
Now no longer used as it’s obviously highly insulting.

Would you say “the project has been retarded due to external unforeseen circumstances?” No because it’s seen now as a dated word associated with offending a huge group of the community.

No different from queer in my eyes, but if you’re going to use the word queer please also use the word retard and tell us how it’s ok / the reactions you get.

OP, most of us know that symbols, like words, change over time and according to culture. For instance, many of us are aware that the swastika is a religious or heraldic symbol in many cultures -- it's a key symbol in Jainism, for instance, and is commonly used in Jain temples and ceremonies.

Would you, nonetheless, wear a swastika tshirt to a synagogue or to a Holocaust Memorial ceremony, exclaiming in deep indignation if anyone objected that you are being wilfully misunderstood, and that you are wearing your swastika in the spirit of cultural meanings which considerably predate Nazism?

I write properly, WeBuilt, I don't see how text speak/typing out words in full relates to using loaded, old-fashioned terms.

Merely to demonstrate that one person's vocabulary and/or use of language will not always correspond with another person's. To break it down to the most simplistic terms, a French person speaking French isn't doing it to get one up on me; neither do I speak English in order to show off to French people.

It seems quite absurd, from what some people are suggesting, that gay people are at liberty to use or not use the word 'queer' - to mean homosexual - as they see fit (nothing wrong there) whilst I, as a heterosexual person, am supposedly not meant to use the same word in an entirely different, much more long-standing, context which has absolutely nothing whatsoever do with sexuality, or even with people - just things and situations.

How long do things stay offensive for? Will it still be offensive to call someone a p... in 100 years time? Or a n....? Does a time come when we move on or will we gradually decide that everything has a derogatory background even if it stems from 500 years ago, and the English language becomes very restricted?

I thought you could shorten Pakistani in other countries and it was only in the UK that it was offensive.

AS for privilege, people often say on MN that people should just know that certain words/expressions are offensive (take "beyond the pale" as an example) and if they don't, they are ignorant and uneducated. Perhaps those people should check their privilege - of having a good education.

Many gay and lesbian people use "queer" to describe themselves. Take a look at a few Twitter bios.

take "beyond the pale" as an example

I must have missed that memo too. "Beyond the pale " is offensive?

In the quotes, these aren't the words of the characters, and in one of the books, the characters would have been thinking in German. I haven't the resources to do a search for the word queer in recent books, but I'd imagine it's not as outdated as you suggest. Language changes, but I'm not talking about quoting from Beowulf here.

If you are writing period literature, you have to keep your vocabulary period-specific even when the characters aren't speaking directly. Anachronistic language ruins reader immersion like nothing else. Conversely, using period-specific vocabulary keeps the reader conscious of where they are supposed to be. It's subtle worldbuilding.

This is especially important if you're writing a book from a first-person perspective, or a third-person limited perspective. The extracts you've supplied look like third-person limited to me, as far as one can tell from one phrase at a time, and in 3rd person limited, it is very important to word things from the character's perspective, up to and including period-specific vocab.

please also use the word retard and tell us how it’s ok / the reactions you get.

In context, as a verb, the word retard is completely acceptable. It is also the root of several other useful words like retardant.
If someone reacted badly to the word retard used correctly I would think they were monumentally thick.

Would you say “the project has been retarded due to external unforeseen circumstances?” No because it’s seen now as a dated word associated with offending a huge group of the community.

Actually, I think I would use the word "retarded", because again, the context is very clear and inoffensive.

Would you, nonetheless, wear a swastika tshirt to a synagogue or to a Holocaust Memorial ceremony, exclaiming in deep indignation if anyone objected that you are being wilfully misunderstood, and that you are wearing your swastika in the spirit of cultural meanings which considerably predate Nazism?

But that would be very different.

I can't imagine the "paki shop" not being somewhat offensive honestly.

In context,as a verb, the word retard is completely acceptable. It is also the root of several other useful words like retardant.
If someone reacted badly to the word retard used correctly I would think they were monumentally thick.

These conversations always remind me of adolescent boys finding excuses to quote the "dirty bits" in the Bible and following it up with "but it's the Bible, Miss!"

There is a difference between someone using it in specific circumstances because it's appropriate, and someone shoehorning it in order to say it. We all know the difference between those situations.

As it happens, the sentence given above, that the OP has just said she's fine with, sounds dissonant, so dissonant that I fancy it would strike every sensible reader as someone trying to get a rise out of the audience.

Hmm...

If you are writing period literature, you have to keep your vocabulary period-specific even when the characters aren't speaking directly. Anachronistic language ruins reader immersion like nothing else. Conversely, using period-specific vocabulary keeps the reader conscious of where they are supposed to be. It's subtle worldbuilding.

Fair enough, but one of the other books on my Kindle I didn't quote was Howard Jacobson's The Finkler Question (2010), set in the present day.

"Something had to explain the queer, passionate hatred of these people"

Actually, I think I would use the word "retarded", because again, the context is very clear and inoffensive.

Not deterred by the sentence sounding clumsy, then? If you used that sentence in anything I read, I would conclude that English wasn't your first language, or that you had constructed the sentence in order to use some conjugated form of the verb.

So would many others. Have a think about how you want others to perceive you.

As it happens, the sentence given above, that the OP has just said she's fine with, sounds dissonant, so dissonant that I fancy it would strike every sensible reader as someone trying to get a rise out of the audience.

I didn't write the sentence, but being clearer, I wouldn't particularly have a problems with the word "retarded" if it was used in the correct and very obvious context.

Have a think about how you want others to perceive you.

You too.

I can't imagine the "paki shop" not being somewhat offensive honestly.

If the Pakistani family who owned the shop chose that name for it I have to assume they weren't offended by it. Maybe you are one of the professionally offended who takes offence on behalf of those who don't, just because you think they should.

On the use of the word "retard", I searched my Kindle -

Why Nations Fail by Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson (2012). "This theory needs to delineate both the factors that create and retard prosperity".

I would be baffled if someone found that offensive.

Fair enough, but one of the other books on my Kindle I didn't quote was Howard Jacobson's The Finkler Question (2010), set in the present day.

"Something had to explain the queer, passionate hatred of these people"

Oh certainly. You've found an example of it in contemporary usage, and now...

A magic wand has been waved!

You now have a shield that will protect you and no-one will ever think you are using it to be deliberately antagonistic for the sake of it. Magic!

Yup, that's how language works.

“ If the Pakistani family who owned the shop chose that name for it I have to assume they weren't offended by it.”

You could assume that. Other possibilities are that they adopted a resigned, if you can’t beat ‘em, join em approach. Or they had very highly developed senses of irony. Or they hadn’t been in the country very long and genuinely thought it was an affectionate abbreviation. Or it was a cynical money making decision. Or it was an attempt to defuse what they felt to be a scary and threatening situation. Who knows? On balance better not to use the word. Just in case, eh?

I'm bi and I use it as it was originally meant--strange, odd, peculiar. I never use it to refer to people though, so I would never say "what a queer man" but I might say "what a strange man", but when referring to situations or other things such as buildings, yes I do.