4 ms·

Gay can still mean that, but in the context it does not.

SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
In which context? In the context in which the dictionary entry was written for English academics in 1889, "gay" most certainly did mean "happy" and not homosexual. "Gay" did not come to commonly mean "homosexual" until decades later. Grandparent post has the wrong end of the stick: no prudery is being inserted, outdated _English_ that would be misinterpreted by modern readers has been changed. Ancient Greek is a dead language. English is living.
- chmod775 5y ago
  Note that, as others have also pointed out elsewhere, "gay woman" used to mean prostitute.
  - SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
    Right. I have doubts about the academic writer in 1889 using that meaning of "gay", as a phrase it was ambiguous then, and is _differently_ confusing now. Removing it seems like clarity not prudery. Indeed the opposite of prudery, it removes (literally) Victorian assumptions about the wearer of fancy clothes.
- JoeyBananas 5y ago
  The original definition mentions that the sandals were worn by "fops," but the new definition doesn't say anything about an association with effeminate men. So, they're being prudish about bringing up something that can be interpreted as homophobic.
  - klyrs 5y ago
    The irony for me is that historians have been purging records of homosexuality and gender nonconformity since time immemorial. To me, this looks like a potential historical record of of queer culture, replete with "queer coding" that we use to identify ourselves to others in the know. Might as well erase it, on the chance it might offend...
Zenst 5y ago
True, though not the go to definition people learn towards these days. But it's still in the dictionary as a definition of usage. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/gay https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/gay https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/gay_1 https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/englis...

In which context? In the context in which the dictionary entry was written for English academics in 1889, "gay" most certainly did mean "happy" and not homosexual. "Gay" did not come to commonly mean "homosexual" until decades later. Grandparent post has the wrong end of the stick: no prudery is being inserted, outdated _English_ that would be misinterpreted by modern readers has been changed. Ancient Greek is a dead language. English is living.

chmod775 5y ago
Note that, as others have also pointed out elsewhere, "gay woman" used to mean prostitute.
- SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
  Right. I have doubts about the academic writer in 1889 using that meaning of "gay", as a phrase it was ambiguous then, and is _differently_ confusing now. Removing it seems like clarity not prudery. Indeed the opposite of prudery, it removes (literally) Victorian assumptions about the wearer of fancy clothes.
JoeyBananas 5y ago
The original definition mentions that the sandals were worn by "fops," but the new definition doesn't say anything about an association with effeminate men. So, they're being prudish about bringing up something that can be interpreted as homophobic.
- klyrs 5y ago
  The irony for me is that historians have been purging records of homosexuality and gender nonconformity since time immemorial. To me, this looks like a potential historical record of of queer culture, replete with "queer coding" that we use to identify ourselves to others in the know. Might as well erase it, on the chance it might offend...

Zenst 5y ago

True, though not the go to definition people learn towards these days. But it's still in the dictionary as a definition of usage. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/gay https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/gay https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/gay_1 https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/englis...