Homophobia

[Sepalcure]

What does someone being a fan of Justin Bieber have anything to do with anyone? I wouldn't be surprised if Justin Bieber fans got more hate and oppression than gays do. The same may be said of those who support Ron Paul, republicans and those who believe in conspiracy theories.

What you're really doing is reciting the modern day mantra that gays should be considered above criticism.

Its a disguised attempt to deprive people of freedom of speech on the issue, in that anyone who disagrees with gays or dislikes gays is demonized and ostracized for having an opinion.

If I said that I knew gay dudes who hung out in park benches at night on a regular basis jerking off with other gays. And, gays who did other disgusting things which gave me a negative opinion of homosexuals in general, you would probably say I was wrong for judging gays or having an opinion that didn't mirror your own and that therefore I was a "bigot" and "homophobe".

What's the point in people talking about being open minded and tolerant when all they do is try to limit freedom of speech on the gay issue and persecute anyone who doesn't adhere to your personal views on the topic?

Let's make a deal.

If people stop judging conspiracy theorists, religious people, justin bieber & lady gaga fans, republicans, ron paul supporters and others -- I'll stop judging gays.

Why should people make a fuss about how gays shouldn't be judged and ignore all other examples of judgmentalism present in society? Why do gays merit special treatment?

I bet a ton of the people who are most vocal about "not judging" gays are the most judgmental, oppressive and douchebaggy people in existence.

If you want an example look at Perez Hilton and the Miss USA pageant candidate. That's a pretty decent example of someone being intolerant and oppressive towards freedom of speech, I'm thinking.

Alright ... I said you shouldn't judge someone solely because of their orientation. I didn't deny that we judged and are in turned judged for our actions. There is a big difference between judging someone because they are gay and judging a gay person that commits an atrocious act--like murdering someone or raping a little boy. I never said that you shouldn't judge someone AT ALL, I just said that I PERSONALLY would not judge someone based on their sexual orientation. That is to say, that I don't judge someone until I am certain of the legitimacy of their character and their actions. If someone is gay then I'll give them a chance and treat them with fairness because they have not, as of my meeting them, given me a personal reason to judge them.

I can't speak and account for everyone else and what they judge and whom they judge. I can not call someone a bigot or a heathen because they don't agree with my views on religion, sexual preferences, the constitution of marriage, etc. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, whether I disagree with their views on sexual orientation and a gay man's right to marry or I agree, has nothing to do with what they believe in. I'm not going to stop you or anyone else from expressing your sentiment. However, I DO have a problem with being labeled as a bigot, like you just claimed me to be. A bigot is someone who is obstinate in their expression of their opinions and is intolerant of the opinions or ideologies of another group of people. I'm not a bigot. I do not identify myself as one and I certainly would loathe being labeled as one. You are absolutely wrong. I try (keyword and operative word being "try") to give people a fair chance at my getting to know them. If I have ever disliked someone than it wasn't because of their being white, black, purple, Haitian, Jamaican, Trinidadian, French, Middle-Eastern, gay, straight, alien, or whatever--it was because of their actions, it was because of what they did. If I ever disliked someone it was because they struck ME as being intolerant of not even my opinions but of the opinions of someone else.

I can see why someone would be uncomfortable with homosexuality. I don't hate someone because of their decision on the matter of same-sex marriage; I don't care nor do I try to dissuade them from disliking same-sex marriages or gay people. That's their opinion, they will likely always stick to it, unless someone persuades them to change their mind or something happens and they freely change their mind without idle or intentional interference.

I'm not making a deal with you. This thread has NOTHING to do with any of the people you mentioned and you're going off-topic, as such, I'm going to respectfully ignore the brunt of what you posted about those miscellaneous public figures. So because I support and am verbal about people having fair rights and BECAUSE I support an LGBT movement and BECAUSE I choose to voice my opinions than by your logic I must be a douchebaggey, oppressive, and judgmental person. Right. Okay, I'll admit I'm nto one hundred percent perfect, I judge people subconsciously when I'm not even aware of it. I'm not admitting that I never ever judge anyone, I do, but I try to be fair and I try to be tolerant and I try to not be antagonistic in voicing my opinions. If you disagree with me in my sentiments and preferences than fine, I won't hate you or dislike you for that. It's like my grandfather always told me, "We shall agree to respectfully disagree." So for you, I'm going to agree to respectfully disagree with you, whether you hold up that end of my proposal is up to you. I don't consider myself an oppressive or a bigot and frankly I find that to be extremely offensive and ignorant of you to state that. You don't know me to really say whether I'm oppressive or not. Just because I'm very vocal in my opinions doesn't mean that I'm trying to oppress or shut out the voices and dissenting opinions of other people; I'm all ears and I think I've proven that by respecting the OP's opinions.

 

[Richard B Riddick]

To clarify, I never said you were a bigot. Why would you even think such a thing?

Those who support gay marriage have a tendency to be bigotted in labeling anyone and everyone who disagrees with gay marriage or has a negative opinion of gays a "bigot" or "homophobe". You can't criticize someone for being oppressive or intolerant by attempting to deprive them of their freedom of speech and authoritatively forcing them to believe in something.

Its not so different from forcing people to believe in religion because you believe they'll go to hell if they don't.

The fact that people try it only shows how ridiculous we all are.

...

To clarify a little more, I support gay marriage. I live in hawaii, a state where gay marriage was legal(I'm not sure if it still is). I have known and known of tons of gays, this place is practically a mecca for them in ways.

edit:

The U.S. state of Hawaii currently recognizes same-sex couples in civil unions and reciprocal beneficiary relationships. Civil unions provide the same rights, benefits, and obligations of marriage at the state level, and reciprocal beneficiary relationships provide a limited set of rights. Same-sex marriage is banned by state law, and lawful out-of-state same-sex marriages are considered civil unions in Hawaii.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recognition_of_same-sex_unions_in_Hawaii

I support gays adopting under the pre-condition that adoptees have a choice in whether they want to be adopted by gays or not.

I don't know that homosexuals raising children is a stable or reliable platform for a family. The divorce rate is high. But, I'm not sure to what degree gay divorce may be higher. It could be a risk.

But, even if gay marriage is the morally correct position, it doesn't give people the right to be oppressive or a dick about it.

 

[Harlequin]

Is tht the right way to spell it?

I had a major discussion with Frank Fontaine about homophobia.
I stated tht all gaymen are sissies.

Was I out of line? It might have been disrespectful and I apologize if I am.
But he called me a homophobic.

What is a homophobic precisely?
I have no issues with homos. They are still human beings.

What I do think is disgusting are men with children and are married and meet with men to havr sex with.

What I dont like are feminine homo sexuals.
I dont have issues with lesbians either.

Basicly I dont dislike homo sexuals as long they dont stick it my face or in public.

Does this make me homophobic?
Do I hate them? Am I afraid of them or something?

It's not homophobic to suggest that all gay men are sissies. It may be incorrect but certainly not homophobic. There's nothing wrong with disliking the idea of one man with another as well, in fact I'd argue it's perfectly normal for a straight male to react to the idea with distaste. Doesn't mean you hate anyone. To each their own and you're wholly entitled to your opinion of it.

 

[Will Graham]

It annoys me when people say things like this ^.

-Republicans bleed the same blood, have 99.9% of the same DNA, how can we judge them?
-Justin Bieber fans bleed the same blood, have 99.9% of the same DNA, how can we judge them?
-Ron Paul supporters bleed the same blood, have 99.9% of the same DNA, how can we judge them?
-Conspiracy theorists bleed the same blood, have 99.9% of the same DNA, how can we judge them?
-Rapists bleed the same blood, have 99.9% of the same DNA, how can we judge them?
-Serial killers bleed the same blood, have 99.9% of the same DNA, how can we judge them?

Obviously, we're judgemental individuals living in a judgemental society and judging people based on things that should be considered insignificant and unimportant is an integral part of reality.

Gays are judged just like everyone else.

Suggesting that gays should not be judged, that they should be considered above criticism or that judging them is 'wrong' is where things begin to get screwy.

Being gay is not a choice or an opinion, so it is not really the same as those examples at all. Saying people should not be judged FOR being gay is not the same as saying gay people cannot be judged

 

[CassinoChips]

It's not homophobic to suggest that all gay men are sissies.

Really? Every gay man is effeminate? You don't think that's a stereotype that plays on preconceived notions about homosexual men? That gay men can't truly be masculine, since they don't like banging chicks?

 

[Harlequin]

Really? Every gay man is effeminate? You don't think that's a stereotype that plays on preconceived notions about homosexual men? That gay men can't truly be masculine, since they don't like banging chicks?

Read beyond the first sentence please,

It's not homophobic to suggest that all gay men are sissies. It may be incorrect but certainly not homophobic.

If anything I suggested it was inaccurate to make such an assumption. I trust it was just an oversight you made.

 

[CassinoChips]

No, I'm saying stereotyping in that manner is, in fact, homophobic.

Your version is like saying it's not racist to think all black men are criminals. It's just "incorrect."

 

[Harlequin]

Taken from a quick google search:

ho·mo·pho·bi·a/ˌhōməˈfōbēə/

Noun: An extreme and irrational aversion to homosexuality and homosexual people.



How is suggesting they're all sissies an extreme and/or irrational aversion to homosexual people?

It's not the same as your racism comparison because suggesting they're all criminals would be far more adverse to any suggestion of femininity.

 

[CassinoChips]

The dictionary definition is nice, but it's not the practical usage of the word. I don't think a homophobe runs screaming from a gay man the way, say, an arachnophobe runs screaming from a spider. I don't think a homophobe gets the shakes at the thought of coming across a gay man the way, say, an agoraphobe gets the shakes when thinking about having to go outside. Homophobia is more equivalent to racism than is to xenophobia. That's the common usage of the word.

Connotation - noun - the set of attributes constituting the meaning of a term and thus determining the range of objects to which that term may be applied.

"It's not the same as your racism comparison because suggesting they're all criminals would be far more adverse to any suggestion of femininity."

Ah, I see. Stereotyping is ok as long as it doesn't hurt anybody.

 

[Naoto Shirogane]

Harlequin

Grouping the entirety of something based on one sterotype is insulting. Yes you will find the people who are the ones to give the reputation. But if you let that idea slip out by a non-sterotypical Gay person, expect to be Punched,Pushed or given the dirtiest glare.

Your also forgoing the fact that the definition's of those words are being warped. By modern standards, Homophobia = " The act of Dissing, Hating, and discriminating against gay people." And you do not have to diss it a lot. A quiet "All gays are sisses" WILL be counted as Homophobia by most people.

So in modern Day standards calling gays, sissies is homophobia.

 

[Richard B Riddick]

Being gay is not a choice or an opinion, so it is not really the same as those examples at all. Saying people should not be judged FOR being gay is not the same as saying gay people cannot be judged

Justin Bieber and Lady Gaga fans can't help what they like, either.

The topic is judging people. If your view is its wrong to judge people always and therefore: wrong to judge gays.

Then, you must explain why its unacceptable to judge gays and acceptable to judge others as that creates a double standard.

Choice has nothing to do with it.

 

[Harlequin]

I never put homophobia and arachnophobia in the same boat and you know that, that's not even what the definition suggests! Synonyms of aversion include repugnance, distaste, dislike, antipathy, disgust, etc. Where is fear on that list?

As for the stereotyping comment. Of course a stereotype is fine as long as it's harmless. The whole problem with stereotyping is that they're likely to cause harm, if they don't who on Earth cares?

But honestly Jesse, I really don't care enough to break the argument down into microscopic points. You win. My homophobia has been exposed.

 

[CassinoChips]

Then, you must explain why its unacceptable to judge gays and acceptable to judge others as that creates a double standard.

Nobody's making that claim.

Judging someone solely for being gay is wrong, as it's as ridiculous as judging someone because they have blonde hair. It's an inherent characteristic.

Judging someone because they say or do something stupid is different.

 

[Will Graham]

Justin Bieber and Lady Gaga fans can't help what they like, either.

The topic is judging people. If your view is its wrong to judge people always and therefore: wrong to judge gays.

Then, you must explain why its unacceptable to judge gays and acceptable to judge others as that creates a double standard.

Choice has nothing to do with it.

That is why I said not really the same, personal preferences and taste are generally not decisions. I said you can judge gay people all you like, just not for being gay. You can judge a person on most of their choices, but not their preferences. Well you can, but you shouldn't.

 

[Harlequin]

Your also forgoing the fact that the definition's of those words are being warped. By modern standards, Homophobia = " The act of Dissing, Hating, and discriminating against gay people." And you do not have to diss it a lot. A quiet "All gays are sisses" WILL be counted as Homophobia by most people.

So in modern Day standards calling gays, sissies is homophobia.

Sorry, but this is nonsense. The definition I provided may not be a colloquial, apologetic version but it's certainly the "modern standard" as it were. Or what, did you think I posted and old fashioned version of homophobia from a time when homosexuality itself was widely considered a mental disorder?

 

[Naoto Shirogane]

Then, you must explain why its unacceptable to judge gays and acceptable to judge others as that creates a double standard.

If you did something Idiotic, people would judge you as clumsy. If you had sometime that made you act clumsy, who would know? The world doesn't know you have an affliction that makes you act detached. People will judge you on your actions. Not on your affliction, because they don't know. This is unfavourable, but is something we as humans have trouble avoiding.

If you judge a homosexual. You know they like the same gender. They are open about it or have told you. You aren't judging them because they're acting gay. They ARE gay. Judging them because of it is wrong. Because you are instantly shoving them in with a group of thousands of others that are so very different when it comes to expressing their sexuality.

With the First point you are judging one person. With the latter, your judging thousands. This is where the mindset: "Judging based on action is right. Judging based on something else is wrong" Where in actuality BOTH should be wrong. We as humans, Just tolerate the first point more.

 

[CassinoChips]

I never put homophobia and arachnophobia in the same boat and you know that, that's not even what the definition suggests! Synonyms of aversion include repugnance, distaste, dislike, antipathy, disgust, etc. Where is fear on that list?

"Fear" is... pretty much the definition of "phobia." http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/phobia?s=t

As for the stereotyping comment. Of course a stereotype is fine as long as it's harmless. The whole problem with stereotyping is that they're likely to cause harm, if they don't who on Earth cares?

My point was more that because a stereotype theoretically causes less harm than another stereotype doesn't make it any better. No harm, fine, I'll grant that. But a homophobic stereotype is a homophobic stereotype, regardless of whether the harm it causes is a 5 or a 8.

But honestly Jesse, I really don't care enough to break the argument down into microscopic points. You win. My homophobia has been exposed.

Only judging what you said, not you yourself.

 

[Harlequin]

"Fear" is... pretty much the definition of "phobia." http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/phobia?s=t

You're talking about etymology now, not definition. Wikipedia tells me the name "Jesse" means "God Exists". So do you make that particular proclamation every time you utter your name? Of course not. Similarly, no one here (I trust) was talking about the irrepressible fear of encountering a gay person. We were all talking about it's definition and usage, which is what I posted.

 

[Richard B Riddick]

Nobody's making that claim.

Judging someone solely for being gay is wrong, as it's as ridiculous as judging someone because they have blonde hair. It's an inherent characteristic.

Judging someone because they say or do something stupid is different.

1. Being gay isn't always an inherent characteristic. They're are plenty of women who are inherently straight who are bi-curious. Unless you're advocating the existence of a gay gene, you have to admit we don't precisely know or understand the precedents nor causality behind homosexuality. Whether people realize it or not, there are people who decide to become gay sometimes for many different reasons. Some do it because they're mad at their parents or their family and its a way of lashing out. Others do it because they're male gendered and can't get laid and gay sex is easier to obtain. There isn't necessarily a standard of single reason for it.

2. Judging people is where tolerance comes in. It doesn't matter if you think people do or say things that are dumb. People should be tolerant and not look down upon others simply because they have a different opinion. As Voltaire was credited (mistakenly?) with saying: I may not agree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it. That would probably be the preferable standard if so many of us weren't egotistical and narcissistic judgmental assholes who constantly need to look down upon and degrade others to pretend we have value.[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif] [/FONT]This is also where the double standard relating to gays is visible. What if people think gays do or say dumb things, by your own definition criticizing them would be justifiable.​

3. Hence, in ignoring the fact that gays do and say dumb things sometimes. And, in suggesting that homosexuality is genetic and in no way a choice--without evidence. This may be considered a double standard and people distorting facts to satisfy a belief or preconceived notion.

That is why I said not really the same, personal preferences and taste are generally not decisions. I said you can judge gay people all you like, just not for being gay. You can judge a person on most of their choices, but not their preferences. Well you can, but you shouldn't.

If a person can judge someone for being a fan of Lady Gaga and if people can judge Lady Gaga for the music she produces -- they should be able to judge gays also.

Its not necessarily kosher to empower and allow the type of judgement-centric society we live in and then suddenly demand that people immediately cease judging others when someone decides they don't like it.

If you judge a homosexual. You know they like the same gender. They are open about it or have told you. You aren't judging them because they're acting gay. They ARE gay. Judging them because of it is wrong. Because you are instantly shoving them in with a group of thousands of others that are so very different when it comes to expressing their sexuality.

With the First point you are judging one person. With the latter, your judging thousands. This is where the mindset: "Judging based on action is right. Judging based on something else is wrong" Where in actuality BOTH should be wrong. We as humans, Just tolerate the first point more.

1. What makes you believe the only possible reason for judging gays is due to their sexual orientation? Clearly, there are many different reasons for it and pretending there is only one possible reason is twisting and distorting the issue.

2. I agree, both should be wrong & I try to avoid it whenever possible. But, that still doesn't change the double standards in play and how acceptable it is for people to be judgemental idiots simply because someone says or does things differently from how they do it.

 

[Squid]

I think the word homophobic is used very loosely these days. One tiny comment about homosexuals and someone throws the 'you're a homophobe' card at you. If you say a comment about straight people no one will tell you you're a hetrophobe :S

Now I am not a homophobe, I don't care if you're gay or lesbian or straight or whatever, I don't even care about seeing people of any gender kissing in public unless they're full on eating eachothers faces off, then it's just gross, gay or not.

I don't think it is right for people to bag gay people, to say they are unnatural or gross or anything, I think once you start using words like that you are definitely in homophobic territory but I don't think there is anything wrong with having an opinion such as "I do not like to see gay people kissing" It's a bit of a sheltered way of thinking these days but it's just an opinion and a preference and if you don't actually hate gay people then I don't see why not wanting to see or enjoying seeing that makes you a homophobe.

Stop labeling people because they do not see things the same as you. But once abusive words etc are used I think it is justified that you are labeled a homophobe.