When is a spade a spade?

On the uses of language

I have often wondered about the proper balance between decorum and honesty in language, whether it's possible to be honest yet tactful and decent, without losing the substance and force of what I want to say, or whether I must consign myself to forever surf the cusp of the curling wave between accuracy and decency, never saying quite exactly what I mean in the interests of civility, if not congeniality. Most of us are well acquainted with the experience of the husband who is called upon to respond to the wife's question: "What do you think of my new dress, honey?" Few of us, even if we thought it, would likely respond: "My dear, at best it looks the color of rotting algae, at worst like the vomit of a sow who's gorged herself on spinach."

Recently Dale Vree, editor of the New Oxford Review, has suggested that in view of some of the disgusting acts homosexual men involve themselves in, we ought to quit abusing the otherwise denatured and erstwhile cheerful word "gay" in our references to them and just call them "fags." Vree even did a sort of brief etymological analysis of the term to justify his usage of it, as I recall. Anyway, we all know how completely horrid such words sound in our ears when we hear them. Vree's question, however, was one about accuracy and honesty.

I had a friend in grad school who always said that honesty was an "overrated virtue," arguing that a bit more mendacious side-stepping of the truth might help us get along better and smooth things out with those who don't quite think alike. He may have a point. Nevertheless, the issue raised its head yet once again in a recent Reuters News article about an eighty year old Belgian Cardinal, Gustaaf Joos, who insists, as the banner headline of the article declares, "Most Gays Are Perverts." Says the Cardinal: "I am willing to write in my own blood that of all those who call themselves lesbian or gay, a maximum of five to 10 percent are effectively lesbian or gay. . . . All the rest are just sexual perverts." Not shy about stepping up to the plate and batting his opinion out into the grandstands, the Cardinal declared: "I demand you write that down." According to Joos, "real homosexuals" don't wander in the streets in colorful suits, but are people who have to live with a serious problem and need help. "We have to help these people and not judge them," said Joos. (For the full article see Reuters report).

It is true, as Joos says, that the Catholic church rejects homosexual practice, but not the homosexual person. It is also true that the Church has been far too lenient, if not cavalier, in its screening procedures for admitting men into the priestly ministry, allowing pederasts and other perverts into the sacristy. It is also true that the vast majority of sexual abuse cases in the Catholic priesthood have been between homosexual priests and young men, and that this fact has never yet been faced squarely by the public media for fear of the "gay lobby's" influence.

On the one hand, I find words like "fag" and "pervert" tactless and offensive, and I doubt that I would ever want to use them as ad hominems. On the other hand, after spending a semester in England amidst the oppressive "propriety" and ubiquitous "understatement" of the Brits, and amidst the pussy-footing political correctness of our own media spokes-HUMANS, I have to admit that a part of me admires an 80 year old curmudgeon who can say to hell with his reputation and call a spade a spade.