This is not a 'white bird', it's just a bird. It's wings are not grey wings, they're just wings. It's tail is not a black tail, it's just a tail.
How does these things sound to you? To me, it sounds quite poetic, but in reality, I think it's just any language-teacher's nightmare. Saying that this is a bird, it has wings and it has a tail, it not very descriptive. Saying that it's a white bird, with grey wings and a black tail creates a quite different picture in our minds; exactly what we learn to do in school.
The problem is that as time goes, more and more adjectives gets banned from our language. Saying that this bird is 'white' is no problem, but imagine if it was a human. Saying that the human is 'white' would be a bit more dangerous. Now imagine if it was an African person - then commenting on his skin color would be pure racist. Saying that 'this is a picture of a black man' is not very well seen.
Skin color is not the only topic that's getting banned, though. Another thing that will probably soon be a no-go to talk about, if things keep on going as they do today, is sexuality.
'Gay', 'homo' and 'lesbian' are all words that are highly discussed these days. Is it okay to be gay, is it okay to be homofobic, is there a difference between being gay and being straight, or are all people the same no matter sexuality?
All these words and questions are being used obsessively in the public debates about the topic, but you really need to be aware of how, when and where to use them, 'cause too many people just take the fight too far.
I highly support gay rights and gay marriage, but what I do not support is statements like this: (Source: Freedom to Marry)
THIS is where I believe you take it too far. "It's not a 'gay marriage', it's just a marriage", really? Why are we not allowed to describe it further? I highly agree, gay marriage is just the same as any other marriage. But yet it isn't, because of the little fact: IT'S GAY. Or homosexual. Or whatever the politically right term is.
Marriage is just marriage, as much as a shoe is just a shoe. But shoes come in all sizes, colors, with different heels, different shoelaces, you name it. Just the same, we've got Christian weddings, Muslim weddings, Indian weddings. One is as much a wedding as the other, but they are in fact different from each other.
It is the same with straight and gay marriage. They're both accepted (of course not by all, and that's what we DO need to fight for) - but they ARE different. A gay and a straight couple are both equally worth, but they do differ in sexuality; just like a white and a black man are equally worth, but they in fact do not have the same skin color.
I know some of you excessive gay-rights supporters now will think: "Oh, well, then why don't we say "straight wedding" too instead of just a wedding?"
Well, why do we call it 'bacon' instead of 'pork bacon' (or how you would say it in English..), when there's also bacon made from turkey? Because bacon from a pig is the most normal. When you say 'bacon', I instantly think of something from a pig - but that doesn't mean that I'm repelled by bacon from a turkey, and it's just about the same for straight and gay marriage.
Please, everyone, think about this: Isn't it a shame that we and the people before us have been fighting for so long to remove the tabu from homosexuality, and now you're actually trying to get it back? 'Cause yes, that's what some of you - all of you who supports this comment by P!nk - are doing. You're prohibiting people from using words that describes you/others as they are. You put homosexuality back in the closet.
The whole misunderstanding is that while you think you're fighting for equality, you really just mark words as bad when they really aren't. The fact is, that being gay is outside what's defined as 'normal' (by which I mean it's different from the mayority). It's not relevant in all situations, no, but with marriage and wedding, which is what this P!nk quote is about, it is. Marriage is all about love and intimity, which also means sexuality, and thereby it's very relevant to mention that it's a mariage that's different from the majority. And that's not only when it's a gay wedding, but when it differs in other ways as well. I live in Denmark, a Christian country, and thereby I believe that it's a relevant detail if a wedding/marriage is Muslim, 'cause that's not something I just expect. I don't say that I NEED to know that detail, but it IS relevant. The wedding/marriage is still all the same, it's just a detail about it. A good detail.
I highly respect homosexuals, and I highly respect them and their supporters for fighting for their rights. But making the topic a tabu, is that really what you want? No, I don't think so. So please think it over once more the next time you want straight and homosexual people to be EXACTLY the same. We're different. Love and embrace that fact, instead of denying it.
Edit: I'm just going to be super cool and quote a thing I said myself. I just had a small conversation about this post, and I think this thing I wrote made my point more clear:
Of course it highly depends on the situation. When just talking about a couple that's getting married, there's no reason to mention that it's a 'gay wedding'. But when talking about human rights, for example, there IS a reason for it. If I go to the city and meet a nice, black woman, I think it's okay for me to go home and tell about this 'nice, black woman I met', 'cause that's just descriptive. But if I look for someone to hire for a job, it's of course not okay to comment/ask about their skin color. It all depends on the situation, and it's the same for 'gay marriage', but in some situations, it just fits to be a bit more descriptive. 'Cause that's what it's all about; putting details into our conversations, and that's not necessarily a bad thing.
I hope that can put some perspective on it, 'cause really, 'gay' is just an adjective like so many others. Please don't decrease our chance of explaining ourselves.