Hom and Camp [Hayley Thompson]

Hom argues that slurs always carry an inherent negative connotation regardless of how, when, and why they are used. Even when used by the target group, or in a 'positive' manner, these words still carry their pejorative power, which these groups may try to reclaim as their own.

Camp argues a perspectivalist view of slurs, which holds that the pejorativity of a word depends on the speakers relationship with a target group. The word is only pejorative if the speaker intends it as such or does not have an inside or close relation with the target group.

I tend to side with Camp over Hom, since words such as 'queer' may lose their negative connotations in certain groups and environments. While Hom (and Hornsby) makes a good point that groups may try to reclaim words for use of the power that comes with their pejorativity, I believe over time the words become normalized and start to lose their negative connotations. Since Seattle is a largely liberal city, many of us Seattlites know people who identify as 'queer' if we do not ourselves. The term, at least in Seattle, seems to have become so commonplace, that the 'queer' is acceptable or even preferred term to refer to the lgbtqia community and its members, regardless of whether the speaker is one, as long as its not said with negative context or attitude. In other words, the majority of Seattle has a relationship with the target group that warrants a non-pejorative use of the word. In more conservative locations, the word may be pejorative regardless of who says it.