If I could just gently steer this back on topic, we should maybe return to the issue of GAY as a label. After all, it is the labelling of a person as belonging to a specific subculture, of making certain lifestyle choices, of being part of a specific group, of exhibiting what would have been seen as deviant behaviour in the not too distant past, that is at issue here. (Geez, spot the sociologist anyone?)
Sexuality is something that is pretty central to your self identity for the vast majority of people, so it's quite important that the effects of labelling in that context are understood. Studies have shown that pigeonholing people into a predefined category that has negative connotations attached to it by a larger subsect of society changes the way people behave (I won't say majority, 'cos that's not my experience, and I am ever hopeful of a tolerant world).
In the case of Becker's labelling theory on deviance (and at the time was developed, homosexuality was still viewed as deviant behaviour), by ascribing a term with a deviant label, individuals moved on from the percieved primary deviant act, and incorporated secondary deviance, (those that went with the 'label') which they would otherwise have not necessarily experienced. Same with weed smokers - once they were 'deviant', they went from being experimenters to regular users, sometimes moving on to other drugs, as they were already labelled as deviant. Kind of 'might as well be hung for a sheep as a lamb.' In addition, labelling theory is also concerned with the linguistic tendency of majorities to negatively label minorities or those seen as deviant from norms, in order to maintan their dominance over the other group, and subjugate the other group by essentially giving them a set pattern of behaviour to follow, to keep them DOWN.
So labelling people 'dicks' or 'pompus egotistical asses' may or may not be an accurate description of their behaviour, but it's about facets of their individual personality and not something that is central to their sense of self. Unless it's you two, EB and Sco. I'm supposing both of you like to be seen as a bit on the combatative side. But I'm also supposing there are people who know you are both more than that.
There is no group of 'dicks' (unless you count the French Rugby Team) or 'pompous egotistical asses' (House of Lords, anyone?) - they don't exist as a predefined category with a set of negative behaviours attached. That is about opinion, and is just descriptive. Of course, if EVERYONE you knew used the same words to describe you, year after year, you may find eventually you percieve yourself as others do, so ugly, fat, stupid, or mad will eventually chip away at your self esteem. Labelling someone gay, who may or may not be experimenting, may change their behaviour, because it tells them the role they are to fullfil. Like you said EB, there a a number of youngsters who are on the boards who may just be finding out about themselves. When they say 'yup, I'm gay, so sue me' they are aware of both the negative connotations attached and have the choice to balance that with the sense of cameraderie they gain from being with like people and those who support the LGBT movement.
