Guest Alien Pirate Pixagi

I'm a Homophobe 'cause WHAT?

Recommended Posts

Guest Alien Pirate Pixagi

I just came across a thread in another forum I used to frequent. The thread asked what is and is not homophobia and follows an event where a poster was called a homophobe for not wanting to see Brokeback Mountain.

Breaking down the word "homophobia," we find that it's made up of two words, "homo" is "same" and "phobia" means intense, irrational fear. That would lead one to believe that "homophobia" means, literally, "An irrational fear of the same" which is an interesting thing to fear indeed. However, if we take "homo" to mean "homosexual," then "homophobia" would mean "irrational fear of homosexuals." Over time, that definition has broadened to mean anyone who has any level of distaste for homosexuals and their lifestyles. This gets translated in such a way where anyone who wishes not to see a homosexual scene played out in front of them is suffering from homophobia and/or is not comfortable with their sexuality.

That said, what exactly do you consider homophobia, and do you believe yourself to be suffering from this affliction?

Here's another thing to think about: Should the term homophobia be use to mean prejudice as well as fear? Does that term lessen the the seriousness of discriminating against homosexuals to any extent? It always seemed to me that by taking something like a form of prejudice and assigning a word to it that is a form of psychological disorder (phobia indeed is one) you're somehow making it oll korrect. So, in essence, people can treat it as if the person with the prejudice is not a bad or misguided person, but a person who instead has a mental condition, which makes them in turn not that bad, even if they did just kick that guy's head in for kissing other men. Not that people necessarily treat it this way, but it is something to wonder about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of people call me homophobic. I'm not. Like God, I don't hate them (in God's case they're his children after all) he hates their acts. I have two male friends that are gay (thankfully they don't know each other, I DO NOT need to choice sides if they get togher and break up, FUCK THAT!) and I have no problem with that. I slept with one of them (physically but not sexually) and he didn't to anything to me.

Don't get me wrong, when he came out FIRST thing I asked him (after asking how long he's known this) is if he found me attractive. He promptly said "No" and there was that damn ackward silence... then he asked "Why? Were you prepared for that?" I said "No, I had my feelings for a while. I'm not sure which answer I wanted more. If you said 'Yes' that means i'm attractive but you'll eventually want to nail me. You said 'No' which mean you don't want to nail me but I'm not attractive even to men."

I honestly don't care to see homosexual acts in general. Sure lesbians give me a bonar, sure I from time to time spank off that. I rather see a happy couple w/o sex honestly. Sex is WAY too over rated, I know. I've had it enough times to know that. If I see two guys kissing, I don't look away but I don't look interested. In other countries people kiss each other on the cheeks as a way of greeting each other. I hug my friends when I see them after a long time or when I leave and I'm feeling depressed. It really pisses me off when people say "i hate fags" because of my two friends they don't know about. Sure me and them have our good times and our bad. But EVERY relationship has fights. When someone says I hate all homos it pisses me off therefore, not alot of people know but my girlfriend/lover (not sure where we are, we're at times BF/GF at times we're not, but we do have sex) is a lesbian or bi-sexual. So how can anyone see how I hate either of those three? My guy friends give me the companionship, comedy, creativity I need to continue my exsistance. My gal pal gives me the physical reltionship I yearn for and I know deep down love that I've been un-actively searching for.

I see homophobia as what dem inbreds do by persecuting them for their actions. I don't think homosexual should marry, but I'm not going to kill an assload for no reason or prevent them from a civil union. I believe marrage is between a man and a woman who love each other. Don't get me wrong, there may be gay couples who last like ten years and now the average marrage is something like six years. I know there are heterosexual people who marry for tax benefits. I think homosexuals should be allowed to get the same benefits from a civil union. Otherwise take it off from the people who are married and we'll see a lot less of those. There should be a time table like if you're married over 5 years THEN the benefits kick in. But hey that's jut me.

Homophobia should just be the words extact meaning in my book. But hey that's just me.

P.S.: I don't want to see BBM unless I'm inclided to see such as a friends watching it yeah. Nothing better yeah. But I won't go looking for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Agaib

taker, I sometimes I really wish that you would try a little to keep your posts a little more grammatically coherent. I'm not saying you're dumb or anything but your post was a little hard to read. Please try a little harder. I hope you don't take that the wrong way.

On the topic of homophobia, I'd say that it means both fear and hatred of homosexuals. Despite the fact that it doesn't mean hatred of homosexuals literally in Greek, that seems to be the predominant usage even in the higher levels of education so it seems reasonable to allow that to be the definition.

Not wanting to see Brokeback Mountain is a silly reason to be classified as a homosexual. As taker said, not desiring to see homosexual acts shouldn't automatically qualify you as homophobic. It might qualify you as not a homosexual. I personally don't want to see Brokeback Mountain because I've heard its a depressing movie. I don't really care for sad stories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Homophobia - to me it means an irrational fear, and we tend to hate that which we fear - so both definitions fit. Everyone has their opinions and voicing the opinion that homosexuality isn't for you doesn't mean you hate them, it means you just don't dig it. It's all in the way you say it - and what you do about it that makes the homophobe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest echtrae

A big difference between not wishing to see a movie with a homosexual theme and cruising the streets with a group of thugs going gay bashing. One shows a lack of interest, the other a rather intense hatred of a certain type of people. In my experience, those who are capable of hating one group of people, frequently have a hatred for other groups as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, homophobia is tricky, just as being racist can be tricky. (That said, I am truly neither. I am an equal oppurtunity bigot. If you're name is not Foeofthelance then you are inferior being who should just shut up and do as your master commands! Sheesh, enough with second guessing me already!) That said, to me homosexualphobia is a rather general term meaning a dislike, distrust, and active persecution of homosexuals, albeit possibly in minor ways.

I object to the way some people go forth and say God may love homosexuals as his children, but is against them because of their nature. As an amatuer theologian (I was raised Roman Catholic, got Confirmation on a technicality, and then stopped going to church, yet I still take note of my religion. I cross in front of churches, donate regularly to various charities, etc.) this just rings false. First, Old Testament God gave forth Ten Commandments:

1) Thou shall not worship false gods

2) Thou shall not worship idols

3) Thou shall not take God's name in vain

4) Thou shall honor the sabbath

5) Thou shall respect thy mother and father

6) Thou shall not commit adultery

7) Thou shall not commit murder

8) Thou shall not steal

9) Thou shall not bear false witness against thy neighbor

10) Thou shall not covet they neighbor's belongings

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but where does it say Thou shall not be a homosexual? Even in the new testament, I've never seen the like. I've seen stories where crowds of people riot over it, but then Solomon threatened to cut a kid in half, David got one of his soldiers killed so that he could bang the guy's wife, and John (?) denounced Chirst three times. Sometimes the point of Biblical stories is to not emulate what the folks in old times were doing. This becomes especially complicated when all of the translations are brought to bear. The most common Bible is the King James version, which was written by a bunch of guys translating from greeks and romans who had in turn translated it from aramaic and hebrew. I'm sure everyone here is familiar with the old joke where the abbot goes back and reviews the old texts, and discovers it Celebrate not Celebate, no?

Now that that is said, time for me to be some what screwey. I think homosexuals should be granted all the full benefits of a civil union, as all other couples do. But whether they get married is up to the church. I think there may be some linguistic tying of knots because of the way things are typically done, but IIRC marriage is a sacrament of the church, which the government hung a few extra perks on to simplify a few things. Churches are public private organizations, are therefor allowed to limit their doings based on their beliefs. The government does not have the right to interfere there, on the grounds of seperationof Church and State. But yes, homosexuals should be able to enjoy all the benefits, such as inheritance, adoption, mutual healthcare coverage, etc.

Now, on the grounds of Brokeback Mountain...who the fuck cares? I'm a straight heterosexual guy. It's hard enough to get me to go to the standard romantic dramas, people think because its a couple of gay guys Im suddenly going to be interested? How does my lack of interest translate to being homophobic? Hell, I've seen plenty of lesbian action around, and I'm all for that! I know plenty of girls who swooned over this, but who don't think they'd ever do girl on girl. Are they homophobes too, or is it just because I'm a guy? Or is it because I'm a conservative, semi-religious guy? (If that seems a bit personal, well, I've had similiar accusations laid against me in the past.)

If someone wants to declare me or anyone as prejudice, they should probably see if I care about what ever it is their selling first.

Ok, fine, fine, I admit it. I cheered when Crash won. But Brokeback Mountain was over hyped as much as the next Harry Potter book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Madapple

This thread begs a response.

Warning: Religious discussion inside.

There is no direct across the board condemnation of homosexuality in the original texts of the Torah, Old Testament or New Testament. (I know because I've read them in the original languages: Greek, Latin and Hebrew, unfortunately I can't read Aramaic, but many of the words are close to Hebrew.)

However, if you look at Leviticus 18, the Book and Chapter which is most used in reference to homosexual condemnation, verse 2 states "speak to the children of Israel" this in Biblical terms means the Jews, and only the Jews. Those who follow the laws of Moses, not just written Ten Commandment law, but the unwritten oral law as well, which was later compiled into the Mishnah.

Lev. 18 continues with a series of laws intended for those who are "Children of Israel" and follow ALL the laws of Moses, not picking and choosing among them, as later Christians do. To my knowledge, Christians follow the Ten Commandments, but have no interest, or claim on, the other 613 Commandments, which begs the question, should any of them apply if they all don't?

So, in Lev. 18:22, when God says, "You shall not lie with a man as a woman. It is an abomination," said speech is specifically directed at the Jews. If you aren't Jewish and not partaking of the covenant God established with Abraham, then these 'laws', such as they are, don't apply to you and God doesn't care.

Getting away from Old Testament teaching, there is a New Testament story about Jesus saving the Roman Centurian's slave. The centurian came to Jesus asking Him to save the slave who was suffering from "palsy."

The actions of the centurion were unprecedented; indeed few centurions would have been concerned at all about the fate of a slave. A slave was the prize of war, if one was victorious, and considered property; if one died it was usually of no consequence to a hardened combat veteran, there were plenty of slavves to be had. They were easily replaced and not something that any ordinary Roman centurion would have humbled himself, and to a Jew no less, to seek help for.

Yet, if you review the meaning of the Greek word for slave, doulos (sorry Greek letters won't post), you realize that yes, it means slave, in this case and gender, it means masculine slave, but the word, doulos, the same as many Greek words has multiple meanings, and can also mean lover.

Which would mean Jesus healed the male lover of a Roman soldier, and probably knowingly. It certainly puts an interesting outlook on the whole homophobic religious zeal, doesn't it?

I don't understand homophobia. Like the bumper sticker says, "I'm straight, but not narrow."

But then I find people don't really need a reason to hate, they just need to do it. That and mean people breed little mean people, but that's a different thread.

Oh, and over hyped or not, I'm looking forward to the next HP book. happy.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agaib: I'm roughly going to say no. You said please to try harder for something, but you didn't say please try harder with your grammar. wink.gif No seriously, it made sense to me. But I need to stay FOCUSED more. I'm sorry, when a point I think pops in my head I gotta write it down or lose it. But by the time I finish I lost the previous and go to a new one. However because you said BBM is a depressive story, now I really want to see it. I LOVE TRAGEDIES.

Leonhart: I can agree and disagree. Not everything I hate I fear. I fucking HATE Paris Hilton with a passion that trascends all notions of good and evil, the thoughts I have of her and mutllating her would be considered illegal and I'm sure God doesn't really like those thoughts so I'm sure I'm going to Hell for them. I HATE Animate Skeletons but I fear them. I fear dogs but I LOVE my little doxies.

Foeofthelance: You're not Metallica, so I won't obey. In Metallica's case OBEY THE MASTER... MASTER *Guitar solo*

Seriously: That's a clear reference to me, and I interpret that as an challenge. I accept.

DENOUNCED IS THE WRONG WORD. PETER (the apostle you're looking for) DENIED Christ three times, he did not denounce him. God had Sodomy and Gamora destroyed because of their acts. God intended man to lay with women, it's even mention "Man shall not lay with man as man lays with woman." I'm 80% sure (haven't read my bible lately honestly) it also includes "Woman shall not lay with woman as woman lays with man."

Wait a second, homosexuals CAN NOT get/accept inheritance!? That's ludacis! I can KIND OF see the adoption part because they're afraid they'll bring a child up to be homosexual. All the homosexuals I've met never said they'd bring/force their children to be homosexual. They just said to more or less extent "if I had a child, and my child brough home a friend of the opposite sex and announced them as their significant other, I'd be happy for them. If they're really in love I'll be happy with their choice." same with some straight parents if their child was gay.

In closing to you: I agree the Harrp Potter book remarks. Was not all that great. It was GOOD but not great, I'd rate it 7.5/10 stars.

Madapple: That's where I must disagree with you about Christians VS Old Jewish Laws/Text. First what 613 other commandments are you talking about? Christians AND Muslims take from the learnings of Judaism, we use their books and laws with our own since the Jews do not recongize Christ as the son of God. Just because we're not directly from Jews (I'm Roman Catholic myself and like FOTL I do the same or like the Jews I'm buddies with I'm Catholic but I don't really practice I.E. goto church). God does ultimately care. He allows us FREE WILL to chose if he exists or not, our Free Will allows to determine if we're a Child of Abraham or of the Body of Christ or Diciple of Muhammed or a follower of Krishna or Pupil of Mao Tzu (Taoism) or Satan's Disiple or a step closer in reincartion of perfect being and become a part of God (Buddism) or even none at all or one I didn't mention. I don't recongize Scientology as a religion, just a bunch of assholes who believe aliens planted us here WELL OVER ONE BILLION years ago (Funny, the oldest part of our Solar System isn't even HALF a billion years old) and I cannot believe they're a recongized church and those cock suckers get tax breaks.

Muslims are the same, only they accept he's FROM God, but because son of God would mean God had a physical relationship with a woman, they do not accept Chris as Gods Child. They accept he'll return and slay the Anti Christ. Don't take that as 100% fact, I asked a Muslim Imam (YES A IMAM their equivalant of a Rabbi/Preist/Minster/Pastor).

We'll not know which one it means. If Doulos is Masculine Lover or Masculine Slave. Some may accept it ONLY as Slave, others with Lover, and others (like me) who say "I don't give a shit, it'll be answered at a later date."

I think the Bumper Stick means the drivers either A: Crazy or B: Bi-sexual or C: A Shitty Uppity Driver. I'm done with my rant until next time.

HP Book: The Next should end it, I heard that she left a bunch of loose ends. A friend of mine who has ALL the books and knows them pretty good said "What loose endings? She tied all those endings up by The Half Blood Prince or in the books they originated from." It's a little over hyped, namely because it's supposed to be the last book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Madapple
Madapple: That's where I must disagree with you about Christians VS Old Jewish Laws/Text. First what 613 other commandments are you talking about? Christians AND Muslims take from the learnings of Judaism, we use their books and laws with our own since the Jews do not recongize Christ as the son of God. Just because we're not directly from Jews (I'm Roman Catholic myself and like FOTL I do the same or like the Jews I'm buddies with I'm Catholic but I don't really practice I.E. goto church). God does ultimately care. He allows us FREE WILL to chose if he exists or not, our Free Will allows to determine if we're a Child of Abraham or of the Body of Christ or Diciple of Muhammed or a follower of Krishna or Pupil of Mao Tzu (Taoism) or Satan's Disiple or a step closer in reincartion of perfect being and become a part of God (Buddism) or even none at all or one I didn't mention. I don't recongize Scientology as a religion, just a bunch of assholes who believe aliens planted us here WELL OVER ONE BILLION years ago (Funny, the oldest part of our Solar System isn't even HALF a billion years old) and I cannot believe they're a recongized church and those cock suckers get tax breaks.

Muslims are the same, only they accept he's FROM God, but because son of God would mean God had a physical relationship with a woman, they do not accept Chris as Gods Child. They accept he'll return and slay the Anti Christ. Don't take that as 100% fact, I asked a Muslim Imam (YES A IMAM their equivalant of a Rabbi/Preist/Minster/Pastor).

We'll not know which one it means. If Doulos is Masculine Lover or Masculine Slave. Some may accept it ONLY as Slave, others with Lover, and others (like me) who say "I don't give a shit, it'll be answered at a later date."

I think the Bumper Stick means the drivers either A: Crazy or B: Bi-sexual or C: A Shitty Uppity Driver. I'm done with my rant until next time.

HP Book: The Next should end it, I heard that she left a bunch of loose ends. A friend of mine who has ALL the books and knows them pretty good said "What loose endings? She tied all those endings up by The Half Blood Prince or in the books they originated from." It's a little over hyped, namely because it's supposed to be the last book.

Taker, If you had bothered to read what I wrote, you would notice that I said that in addition to the 10 stone tableted commandments, God also gave Moses 613 oral law commandments. if you knew anything about Jewish tradition, you would know that. It is basic.

Early in the history of Christian religion, Christianity was a sect of Judaism, and there were Jews who accepted Christ. The schism between Christianity and Judaism occurred at the Council of Jerusalem ca. 50 CE, when those who were actually disciples, teaching the words of Jesus according to Jewish tradition, because afterall Jesus was Jewish, questioned how Paul, a self-proclaimed disciple and murderer of Jews, taught the teachings of Jesus. Paul's teachings served his own ends.

Christians picked among the laws of the Jews to form the basis of their religion. they used SOME of the laws and those who translated the writings into other languages often did so incorrectly. If you want more info on Biblical translation I suggest you look at Wellhausen's Documentary Hypothesis, beginning with the Tanakh and work your way forward.

In response to your OPINION about whether God cares, give me a scriptural reference, I'll be happy to correct the translation and shoot it down. Unless of course, you'd like to discuss this in the original languages. I would be happy to oblige.

Of course, Muslims don't accept Jesus as the child of God, that would be polytheism. He is a prophet though. This isn't a discussion about Jesus' divinity though is it? Although, if you are interested, perhaps you couold take a look at the Nicean Creed, where Jesus was finally decreed the Son of God, ca. 325 CE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I personally don't want to see Brokeback Mountain because I've heard its a depressing movie. I don't really care for sad stories.

It is... It is one of the most depressing movies I've seen in a looong time. Very pretty, but bloody depressing sad.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Madapple: If I give off a jewish vibe or that I seem I know a lot about Judaism, you would be mistaken. If memory serves right it was ~380 rules to dictated their aspects of life. It's doubtful Paul was in for number one. The apostles sspread the word among the jews, 'cept Paul was to spread the word among the Gentiles. Jesus says "Salvation first comes to the Jews then to the gentiles." Paul was the one who was to do that. Common folk, Scholars, etc. have it in for Paul calling sexist, homophobic, etc. Most people JUST DO NOT like the rules, it doesn't suit them. The ones ones with power would could read would change it to suit themslves and their lives. There is NO WAY of us knowing what was interpreted firsthand. God has a hand in this, he told his prophets his messages and laws and has an interest to make sure they were not perverted and we get salvation. There's proof of this in the Dead Sea Scrolls, one of the books found was Isiah, it was almost EXACTLY word for identical to a current day text of Isiah. Nothing major was mistraslated. THOSE ARE FREAKING THOUSANDS OF YEARS OLD! God's not going to sit by and let us fuck up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm I wonder how did this go from homophobia to religion?

-----

My thoughts on so called homophobia:

I don't think people should 'fear' homosexual people. I know at least five gay people, they're very nice! It's funny how people are judged on their sexual preference instead of on how they act!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Madapple

that's a good question DC, thanks for getting this topic back on track.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Foeofthelance: You're not Metallica, so I won't obey. In Metallica's case OBEY THE MASTER... MASTER *Guitar solo*

Seriously: That's a clear reference to me, and I interpret that as an challenge. I accept.

DENOUNCED IS THE WRONG WORD. PETER (the apostle you're looking for) DENIED Christ three times, he did not denounce him. God had Sodomy and Gamora destroyed because of their acts. God intended man to lay with women, it's even mention "Man shall not lay with man as man lays with woman." I'm 80% sure (haven't read my bible lately honestly) it also includes "Woman shall not lay with woman as woman lays with man."

Wait a second, homosexuals CAN NOT get/accept inheritance!? That's ludacis! I can KIND OF see the adoption part because they're afraid they'll bring a child up to be homosexual. All the homosexuals I've met never said they'd bring/force their children to be homosexual. They just said to more or less extent "if I had a child, and my child brough home a friend of the opposite sex and announced them as their significant other, I'd be happy for them. If they're really in love I'll be happy with their choice." same with some straight parents if their child was gay.

Ok, first, the Obey me, I'm master thing was a joke, and is not meant in any other manner. I do have a few people who would willingly call me master, (no, SJ is not one of them...yet. 8) )but I also have people who call me God, out of respect for the abberant amount of random knowledge banging around my skull.

Second, Sodom and Gamorah were special cases, much like the event of Noah's flood. Those places were not just cess pits infected with sin, they supposedly actively encouraged it, and were remoived in much the same way cancer was. Those were entire cities not individual people. Still, that does not disprove my point about some of the Bible's teachings being "Don't do what I did, do as God says." I accept the correction on Peter, as well as the correction in terminology. I don't see a difference, personally, but if you can spot one, it may be important enough to point out.

I will point out there is slight logical flaw in "God intended man to lay with woman, and woman with man" as the Catholic church, as well as most of the Christian denominations, if I'm, correct, hold copulation to be the "original" sin. (Personally, I vote for knowledge in that respect. Sex seems to have nothing to do with it, from any angle that I can see.) Many of those proclamations tend to be interpreted by man, which has caused flaws. Prime examples being the Commandment against murder, and the burning of witches. Many places mistranslate Murder to Kill, which makes the entire affair untenable, as man must kill to survive. The burning of witches is another one. The bits concerning rooting out and burning witches is way of dealing with traitors, not mystics. Yet it has been used to attack so called pagan religions instead.

Finally, I should probably have been a bit clearer on inheritance. I was referring to unwritten wills, in which property is normally handed over to a spouse in the event some one dies and does not have a written will. Part of being married includes being counted as next of kin. Until homosexuals are granted the same legal acknowledgements, if one half of a couple dies their estate passes back to blood relatives, instead of their significant other, either if that would not be the right thing to do. This was why I seperated civil unions from the sacrament of marriage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
that's a good question DC, thanks for getting this topic back on track.

Haha no prob.....figured someone needed to do it and since I was reading it ......

BTW:

I love gay people! They're hot! LMAO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, this is Aimless Babble after all, but I agree....

Taker, quit derailing the thread!

Now for my .02¢:

pho·bi·a (fō'bē-ə)

n.

  1. A persistent, abnormal, and irrational fear of a specific thing or situation that compels one to avoid it, despite the awareness and reassurance that it is not dangerous.

  2. A strong fear, dislike, or aversion.

prej·u·dice (prĕj'ə-dĭs) pronunciation

n.

  1.

  a. An adverse judgment or opinion formed beforehand or without knowledge or examination of the facts.

  b. A preconceived preference or idea.

  2. The act or state of holding unreasonable preconceived judgments or convictions.

  3. Irrational suspicion or hatred of a particular group, race, or religion.

  4. Detriment or injury caused to a person by the preconceived, unfavorable conviction of another or others.

Number three under prejudice seems to me to be the best way to describe homophobia, but I can understand why phobia is often used. I do agree that phobia makes it sound more acceptable (lacking the negative connotations that prejudice implies).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Alien Pirate Pixagi

dry.gif This thread got derailed SO early on... erg.

I am NOT asking how ANYONE feels about homophobia AT ALL. I asked the following questions:

1: WHAT do you consider homophobia to be?

2: ARE YOU homophobic yourself?

3: SHOULD homophobia be the term we use to describe this particular prejudice.

That's ALL I ASKED. I don't care what you're personal ethics say about homophobia, or what religion has to say about the matter either. THREE BLOODY QUESTIONS! THAT'S ALL! Maybe a story of how that same situation happened to you (someone assumed you were a homophobe because you chose not to watch/partake in homosexual behavior). THAT IS ALL!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1: WHAT do you consider homophobia to be?

2: ARE YOU homophobic yourself?

3: SHOULD homophobia be the term we use to describe this particular prejudice.

1: I consider homophobia to be a disguise. For someone who just hates homosexuals or think the way the live is wrong.

2: I am NOT homophobic considering I don't consider it a REAL phobia. I have quite a few gay friends.

3: No it's shouldn't. If you don't like gay people just fuckin say it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who can resist a good fill-in-the-blank?

think.gif

Please excuse the rambling nature of my thoughts...

1. What is homophobia? Homophobia is a fear of homosexuals or homosexual behavior.

Most fears, in my experience, stem from a misunderstanding of whatever causes the fear. A phobia is, as Nan so helpfully posted, an irrational fear. Take a fear, make it irrational, and mix in several misconceived notions and you get a dangerous combination.

I know several people who think homosexuality is wrong, and they aren't homophobic. They have an opinion and I respect that.

I also know several people who are homophobic. Why would I call them homophobic? Because they think that any and all homosexuals will try and convert straight people into gay people. (Irrational, anyone?) These people also seem to think that all gay people are promiscuous, or all gay people carry at least one STD, or homosexual people have a mental disorder that makes them feel and think the way they do.

2. Am I homophobic? No. To paraphrase Rubeus Hagrid, that's all codswollop, in my opinion. Homosexual, heterosexual, and bisexual are labels. I'm proud to say I see people, not labels.

As with all things in my life, it boils down to coffee. I could never hate or judge someone because they like sugar and cream, or just sugar, or just cream, or if they take their coffee black, or if they don't like coffee at all. Should we segregate Starbucks just in case the sugar people are afraid the creamer people will try and cream their coffee when they're not looking?

3. Should we use this term to describe the prejudice? Maybe not, but as an irrational fear that affects a person on a base level, perhaps making them a danger to themselves and others, sure.

Xenophobia is the fear of foreign people. That's the only one that comes to mind just now, but I'm sure there are other phobias that define a fear of other people or groups of people. Hate is one thing, fear is another. However, fear breeds hate, so making the distinction between a genuine phobia and a prejudice seems like trying to walk a very fine line indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does this have anything at all to "You caught teh gay" thingy that was happening in some random Game thread?

meh. Lets see. If I've met any gay person, I certainly had NO clue whatsoever, since I don't ask people when I meet them: "are you gay?" or, "are you straight?" I did stare at a gay guy once, who had come to church, and was clearly very ill, and his partner was practically carrying him everywhere, and I finally clued in after a bit, the wheels of my mind slowly turning: "Hey, is this guy gay or something?" But it was sad, really. All I wanted to do was hug him, but only because he was so ill. HOwever, it is not in my nature to actually hug people (amazing how I gave birth to five children, I must tell you that story sometime)

I'm totally clued out as to why people are the way they are, or why they choose to label themselves and one another in such ways.

To me, homophobia is something only men suffer from. I've never heard of a woman suffering from it But perhaps I am wrong.

Do I suffer from it? Maybe I do. I've never been tested really. The world is all about me, you know, not anyone else. HAHAHAHAHAHA! <- maniacal laughter.

And the term? Well, you heard me. No idea. How about Queenaphobia for those fearful of transvestite queers? or Flamingqueenaphobia for those fearful of flaming fags? Or how about Fagophobia, just for the succinctness of the word rolling off the tongue?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh, I figure I should apologize as well then. Taker wouldn't have anything to respond to if I wasn't posting replies back. Can't blame a fish if it takes the bait, after all. I just can't resist a good debate though!

AS for the three questions, I answered the first two in my original post I believe, but in regards to using Homophobia in regards to those with a prejudice against homosexuals, I think that the term is rather acceptable. Why not? We have terms to identify just about any other interest group out there. My only objection is when it is applied to people who simply don't care, or those who only get aggressive when the matter is shoved in their faces. If someone wants to voice their opinion that is fine, but if someone is hounded for it, I would only expect them to be angry with the hounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Should we segregate Starbucks just in case the sugar people are afraid the creamer people will try and cream their coffee when they're not looking?

That just struck me as exceptionally funny (and a tad bit perverted) for some reason. rofl.gif

I have had guy friends who are bi & gay and I'm totally fine with it.

I got hit on by a girl once when I was young and naive, and it freaked me out at the time. (Jeez how I wish I knew then what I know now! laugh.gif) Does that make me homophobic towards lesbians? unsure.gif I don't think that it would bother me now ... in fact ....

At any rate. I think Poly summed it up quite nicely. thumbsup.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To me, homophobia is something only men suffer from.  I've never heard of a woman suffering from it  But perhaps I am wrong.

Okay - Women do suffer from it - all you have to do is speak to my mother for five minutes and you'll realize it. Do you know how hard it is to raise accepting and non-prejudiced children when their Grammy spouts off about homosexuals whenever she gets the chance?

She even told me once that if I or one of my children turned out to be gay she'd disown us. Now when the same subject came up about my younger brother and sister (and her kids) she did a complete 180... but that's my Mum. I've learned to ignore it. Calling her on it only causes fights and her swearing up and down that she's not prejudiced in any way (you should hear her when she spouts off about any race other than white - it's scary).

I sometimes wonder how I grew up to be as accommodating as I am... my sister grew up to be accepting as well - the only one she poisoned is my brother... but I have theories about that one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FOTL: The whole master thing was playing WITH the joke, why do you think I brough out Metallica? I FUCKING HATE METALLICA! Time for the fun of Dictionary.com...

Deny:

–verb (used with object), -nied, -ny·ing.

1. to state that (something declared or believed to be true) is not true: to deny an accusation.

2. to refuse to agree or accede to: to deny a petition. (Peter's case)

3. to withhold the possession, use, or enjoyment of: to deny access to secret information.

4. to withhold something from, or refuse to grant a request of: to deny a beggar. (Again Peter's case)

5. to refuse to recognize or acknowledge; disown; disavow; repudiate: to deny one's gods. (Peter's MAJOR case and point)

6. to withhold (someone) from accessibility to a visitor: The secretary denied his employer to all those without appointments.

7. Obsolete. to refuse to take or accept.

—Idiom

8. deny oneself, to refrain from satisfying one's desires or needs; practice self-denial.

Denounce:

1. to condemn or censure openly or publicly: to denounce a politician as morally corrupt.

2. to make a formal accusation against, as to the police or in a court.

3. to give formal notice of the termination or denial of (a treaty, pact, agreement, or the like).

4. Archaic. to announce or proclaim, esp. as something evil or calamitous.

5. Obsolete. to portend.

There IS a difference. I agree the Original Sin is Knowledge or Convening something I.E. stealing the Apple. I won't give up that it could have been a mate or even LITERALLY a piece of fruit. The reason I don't see it as Sex is God said "Go forth, be fruitful and MULTIPLY." I'm sure God knew we'd figure out what to do with our respective reproduction organs. I won't denie that those so called "Christians" the ones who burned witches and killed pagans *see below*. Real Christians DO NOT kill unless God comes to them asking them to do so such as when the the Macabee's declared war on the Romans who took over the Temple. Then again how WILL we know it's God when it could be Lucifer OR even isanity? I think we'll JUST KNOW, nothing in cement there.

Thank you very much for clearing up the inheritance part. I still think it's fucking Bull Crap that Homosexuals cann't get even that. I may not be 100% into homosexual marrages but they deserve to be just as happy AND MISERABLE as us (the heterosexuals). I'm not trying to get up your ass, that is NOT my intention. I appologize if I come off hostile. I just get a little defense when it concerns my major: History and Religion. I appologize if you took anything offensively.

Nanea: SCREW YOU! *Spams up the forum* wink.gif. My intention isn't to derail, but some of my views are religious views and I gave my view which comes from a religious view. How's about a new rule...

If you don't like what my views are: FUCKING IGNORE MY VIEW THEN! Easy peesy, yup and easy.

Pixagi:

1: WHAT do you consider homophobia to be? : Fear of homosexuals.

2: ARE YOU homophobic yourself? : I would have to decline. I'm not afraid of my homsexual friends, I love them but not in love with them.

3: SHOULD homophobia be the term we use to describe this particular prejudice. : I would have to decline again.

Some people assumed I was, so just to shut them up, i started fondling their ass. They did not like that. It shut them up that's for sure, sure I did have three people try to beat me down but it really didn't all that great. I miss the jacket that was destroyed though.

Story Junkie: I'll listen to the stories. I like stories.

FOTL: Hey we can still have our intellectually stimulating debates! SCREW EVERYONE ELSE! I REQUEST WE RETURN TO OUR DEBATES! WE GOTTA SEE WHO THE MASTER DEBATOR IS!

Pagan: –noun

1. one of a people or community observing a polytheistic religion, as the ancient Romans and Greeks.

2. a person who is not a Christian, Jew, or Muslim.

3. an irreligious or hedonistic person.

–adjective

4. pertaining to the worship or worshipers of any religion that is neither Christian, Jewish, nor Muslim.

5. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of pagans.

6. irreligious or hedonistic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I got hit on by a girl once when I was young and naive, and it freaked me out at the time. (Jeez how I wish I knew then what I know now! laugh.gif)

I got hit on by this rather large women while walking around a museum a few months back. Only I found out when my mother kindly pointed it out later and afterwards I spent the next half-hour trying to smother myself while asking the universe why she couldn't have been shorter then me (and maybe a but cuter too). Needless to say Mom found this rather funny ph34r.gif

And now for the thread!

1: WHAT do you consider homophobia to be?

A: A fear of same-sex partnerships combined with either religious ignorance or the constant fear of being molested by the same-sex.

2: ARE YOU homophobic yourself?

A: I don't think so. I like to consider myself bi as I'm always turning my head when I see a pair of long legs with a nice bum walking past (not to mention if she's short enough to nuzzle then that only adds to the package!). Or, for a guy, Wide shoulders and big hands can turn my attention too.

3: SHOULD homophobia be the term we use to describe this particular prejudice.

A: Maybe we need to come up with a new term or something? Homophobia has, in itself, become a phobia all unto its own...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now