Homophobia

[Six]

Actually, you're not allowed to have a gun in the Netherlands unless it's an alarm pistol (which is different, even if it looks like an actual pistol you might not be allowed one), and with that you have to go through a bunch of papers in order to get it anyway. So, unless you're not talking about legal, and illegal stuff here... I'm not following.

As far as stating all gay men being sissies goes, I think that's completely your opinion. I don't think anyone can state facts on this, and everyone is entitled to their own opinion. It might have been disrespectful to the other person, because they might think differently, I think apologizing for upsetting someone else because they think differently is appropriate, but I wouldn't apologize for my opinion.

I think people fling words around way to easily. "Homophobia" avoid them at all cost, don't talk to them, are disgusted by them. Or "Homophobia" Ew, I kinda dislike you but you're okay, I guess.

People need to start reading up on things before slapping a full fact based opinion on to it, you might disagree with something, and state YOU think differently, but unless you want to actually know what everything is about, get some reading done without having a defensive opinion ready. *Shrugs*

That's just my opinion.

As far as gay men go, some might just be as 'sissy' as any straight man or woman. So, uh... I disagree, I think. If that was even the topic anymore. Derailers.

 

[Nocturne]

I dont care either way if someone is gay or straight. It doesnt really affect me nor will I rally for or against the cause.

But I never really understood why if someone says they dont agree with homosexuality, they will get lambasted over it. Some people dont find certain ethnicity's attractive yet that doesnt mean someone is racist. Essentially what it comes down to is people see things and different people see things as pleasing to see and other things not so. If you are going out of your way to bash the way someone looks, then that's fairly stupid. Not everyone is going to agree with everyone's views on everything. I think overall people need to get some tougher skin.

For example, a big thing recently is people who are gay getting picked on and committing suicide in school. Yes it's terrible, but people are ridiculed for alot less important things such as music they like, being poor, etc, so I think it's a slap in the face to people who get just as much ridicule and emotional abuse, when people who are gay get preference over these types, that is until someone else with a different problem brings a gun to school. Instead of picking and choosing, I think people need to learn to accept others opinions and realize hey, not everyone is going to agree. Do I think people should bash someone for any of these? No, but we dont live in a perfect world and quite honestly, we never will. So the best way to get over this is if society will stop being so shallow and dont care about what petty people will say about you. But then again, I also dont think society (at least American society since I live in the US) is going to change for the better (though it will definitely get worse). I see the more people preach acceptance, those same people equally stop accepting anything that doesnt go along with their agenda. Personally Im not for universal tolerance. On the outside that may sound bad or weird, but honestly, if everyone agrees with everyone, life and society will stagnate and zero progress will be made. Sometimes it's bad progress, sometimes it isnt, but life stays somewhat interesting in that part. Paradise at times can be said to be dull.

In summary, people are cruel and it isnt going to completely change so people need to stop caring what those who dont necessarily affect their lives, say or dont care what a bully in school says. If that were the case I wouldnt have kept watching anime, I would have started drinking and partying to fit in with the crowd, I wouldnt have kept listening to jrock, and I would have felt alot worse about myself. It all comes down to what YOU think of yourself. So message is - if you can look at yourself in the mirror and have no regrets, you are living life correctly, to your own moral code.

 

[Sheechiibii]

But I never really understood why if someone says they dont agree with homosexuality, they will get lambasted over it. Some people dont find certain ethnicity's attractive yet that doesnt mean someone is racist. Essentially what it comes down to is people see things and different people see things as pleasing to see and other things not so. If you are going out of your way to bash the way someone looks, then that's fairly stupid. Not everyone is going to agree with everyone's views on everything. I think overall people need to get some tougher skin.

I agree with most of your post, there's justa few things I'd like to add.

There's a huge difference between dissagreeing with Homosexuality and finding a certain skin colour unattractive. To dissagree with homosexuality means you think people shouldn't be attracted to someone of the same gender, basically that homosexuals shouldn't exist. That's like saying someone of a certain skin colour shouldn't exist. It's bigotry to the extreme.

There's nothing wrong with not finding homosexuality attractive, but there's a major difference between not wanting to see something and wanting it not to exist.

The problem with kids commiting suicide is that as a young person they can't be thick skinned like adults can and when they are being bullied for who they are as a person it's a little different from being bullied for what kind of music they like.

 

[Nocturne]

I agree with most of your post, there's justa few things I'd like to add.

There's a huge difference between dissagreeing with Homosexuality and finding a certain skin colour unattractive. To dissagree with homosexuality means you think people shouldn't be attracted to someone of the same gender, basically that homosexuals shouldn't exist. That's like saying someone of a certain skin colour shouldn't exist. It's bigotry to the extreme.

There's nothing wrong with not finding homosexuality attractive, but there's a major difference between not wanting to see something and wanting it not to exist.

The problem with kids commiting suicide is that as a young person they can't be thick skinned like adults can and when they are being bullied for who they are as a person it's a little different from being bullied for what kind of music they like.

It's bigotry to the extreme in both cases yes, which my point was, that if someone says they dont agree with homosexuality, the majority of the time, people get defensive over it and act like those people want it to disappear when in reality, they just dont find it attractive. It's the same with people saying they dont find black, asian, or white people attractive. People instantly jump to say that person is racist, etc. Just because someone doesnt think a certain ethnicity is unnattractive, doesnt mean they are a racist bigot. It's essentially the same concept is what Im saying.

I agree not wanting to exist and not wanting to see something are different. Honestly, since Im not gay, Id rather not see two men making out. But am I going to try and make it so they cant? No Im not. Truthfully I dont like seeing anyone throwing themselves at each other in the middle of the street because I think people need more modesty, but it happens. And wanting something not to exist can be a good trait and you can make an argue for it. Should homosexuals not exist? Whoever says yes is stupid, it's the same argument as genocide essentially. But for example, I feel alcohol shouldnt exist. It's a chemical/drug that makes people physically dependent, spills over into domestic life, pushed down your throat in advertisements to think it's something funny when it kills you slowly by corporations that dont give a damn about your well being. I think people should rally behind getting rid of it, not something as harmless as homosexuality or heterosexuality (because it goes both way, there are just as bigoted gay people who think heterosexuals should be eliminated. Both sides are equally as stupid).

But you have to look at the suicide thing on a different level. Suicide has generally gotten more rampant over the years. People were much more bigoted and less tolerant 50 to 100 years ago and there was, Id say the same amount of abuse, but people took it for the most part. Not saying they didnt grow up with any problems, but suicide wasnt as common. I think now political correctness and shielding children from the truths of life are making them weaker emotionally and mentally. If you try to make everyone accept everything then people dont know how to deal with it when others dont agree with them. I feel it's a very dangerous road to be going down. Parents need to teach their kids (if you can get alot of parents to actually take a REAL active part if their childrens lives) to be comfortable with who they are and to stick up for themselves regardless of what adversity they face. Sadly in this day and age, that could get you killed, but then again through the lens of the past, people were killed for much much more petty reasons. So humanity has evolved in some ways and de-evolved in some social aspects as well.

I disagree though on being bullied over homosexuality and music. It's the same base problem. Someone is picking on your for because they think what you do/like is wrong. When you attack someone's interest, especially one that may grant that person a great deal of solace, they tend to take it personally. Little things to some people are bigger to others and may help them get through a shallow looking outward existence. If you are constantly barraged with hate, then it's going to affect you. That's where having a good grounded foundation would go a long way. If you have someone teaching you that it doesnt matter if someone doesnt like what you like, just keep on being true to yourself and let others go on with their lives, it's going to be more fulfilling in the long run than telling your child to fake who they are to fit in, which is just awful awful advice that you see people giving into or being told all the time. I absolutely hate alcohol and dont put myself in situations where Ill be around, but there are times when I had to be. If someone tried to get me to drink and I said no, most people dropped it, some were obnoxious, and yes it was irritating, but Im not going to let it affect me if someone thinks Im uptight because I dont want to drink. We dont agree with each other and thats that in my eyes. If they enjoy life, good for them, if they make a huge mistake because of it, yeah that sucks but Im not going to weep over their misfortune either.

Like I said, people need to learn to accept that not everyone will agree with what everyone does. Instead of trying to ban or make a law against something, they should just accept that simple fact and move on. There are times when doing one of those can be warranted, but everything is sensationalized and blown up into huge things in our age and it's rather ridiculous.

 

[Mr. Zombie]

I hardly believe all of them are sissies:

(In fact, you don't need to be gay to be a sissie)

Was you out of line? For some yes, for some not. I personally don't know, because I'm unaware your level of relationship with this Frank Fontaine, nor if he's gay or not (gay is a strange term to describe one's sexual orientation, so I'll refer to it as "HS" henceforward).

"Phobia" means fear, so "homophobic" means "fear of homosexuals". You feel disgust towards them, not fear, so technically you're not homophic. I don't think you hate them, nor is afraid, it's just disgust.

But try to not use words you think are harsh, try to follow your feeling of judgment .

 

[Ohri-Jin]

Mr.Zombie

Yeah lol ofcourse I know not all gaymen are sissies, but if you make a joke like this suddenly im homophobic. Thats just bs, but honestly I genuinely wondered if I actually was. I know now thanks to this thread I am not a homophobe.



People also like to take my words out of context and judging me for shit Im not. Hypocrits the lot of them.

 

[Jacqui]

You may not be homophobic, but you did make a homophobic comment. This may not relate to what you really think, but the fact still stands that you made a comment that can be taken as homophobic. And I'm not saying this to lay into you, because I don't know you, I don't know what your personal opinion is, but you've apologised for the comment, yet the comment is still in the original post, and can be clearly seen by hovering over the link to go into this thread. That might be where a lot of the anger is coming from. People see that before they've even clicked on the link, and that's enough to get someone riled up. And perhaps they shouldn't get riled up before reading the whole thread, but because it's clearly seen by a person who is about to click into the thread, it's practically like you've named the thread with that comment.

It doesn't make them hypocrites, it means they're offended. Perhaps they're wrong to see that, and jump straight in with their arguments without reading any more of the thread, but I think that this is a big part of why people are doing this. Because it's clearly there, and it's one of the first things people see, after the title of the thread.

Personally, regarding the topic of the thread, I believe that you can't help who you are attracted to. Male or female, whether you're male or female. And I can't understand how anyone can be so against two people who love and care for each other, whoever they are.

 

[Catnip]

Homophobia is a joke. It's almost 20fucking13 and we're still going on about it like being gay is a big deal. It's not a big deal. It's not gross, you're just another fuckin robot sheep who was programmed to think a certain way. How can you be grossed out by something and not understand why? You're either in denial of being a homophobe or you really just don't understand the way things work with yourself. It's pretty sad. Just let people do what they want. Do they control you? Hell no. Leave eachother alone. Don't dig into it, seriously. It's not complicated. It's just minding your own business, which I guess nobody knows how to do.

 

[Dragon Mage]

Let's just be clear and break down what homophobia actually means.

"Homo" means 'man' and "phobia" means 'fear.

Therefore it literally means 'fear of man'. Now, considering the depths of savagery, cruelty, and petty-minded viciousness that humanity is capable of, I'd be afraid of people too!

Really though, I'm just pointing out that the term 'homophobia' is being misused horribly by liberal media to mean 'fear of homosexuals' which just goes to prove that the media really CAN NOT do the research.

Anyways, a phobia is an actual fear of something. Like arachnophobia, for example, which I have. I hate spiders. Won't stay in a room that has one and I will shy away from the area of a spider-sighting for weeks. If you do not actually fear homosexuals, then you are NOT a homophobe, if we are going to use the term correctly. Honestly, making a biased or over-generalized statement does NOT equal fear of homosexuals and thus the desire to kill them all off (kinda like how I want to kill all spiders). That's just media overreaction in my opinion and I think several people would agree with me.

Honestly, if we're going to brand everyone that makes an un-informed statement a 'homophobe' then we might as well get out the black markers and start writing 'hydrophobe' on people who can't swim or 'misogynist' on anyone who's never had a girlfriend. That's how silly it is.

Really, Ohri here has a viewpoint a lot of people can sympathize with to a degree -- even me. Like Ohri, I have absolutely no beef with gay folks unless they shove it in my face. I've known a few that are like that and they are extremely confrontational about their sexuality -- of course, they are assuming that I care about their orientation. Honestly, I couldn't care less. Am I religious? Yeah. But nowhere in my religion does it dictate that I should tell others who they can and can't love and live with. So, outside of a fanatical crusade, I see in no way how their orientation has ANY bearing on me. Orientation does not dictate the end-all and be-all of a person and the very confrontational types don't seem to get that. Thankfully though, they are very few and far in between, but they do make the whole demographic look bad.

Basically, for me and a lot of people out there, the reaction is like this:

Person: I'm gay.
Me: Okay.

AND NOTHING ELSE HAPPENS. Yes, it can really be that simple.

As for not liking gay couples kissing in public, eh, I can understand that because I don't like seeing ANYONE -- gay or otherwise -- rabidly gnawing their partner's face off in public. That's just.... yeah. Disgusting. So it depends on the kissing I guess, I don't care if folks give each other a peck, but please -- everyone, keep the serious making-out indoors. Much appreciated.

So yeah. Unless anyone actually sees a gay ninja and runs away screaming -- I remain unconvinced that homophobia actually exists.

 

[Shu]

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.

Yes, because you generalized. Homosexual men are not even sissy. Some are on the fem side, and some are on the more drag side. The only gay men I do not get along with or associate with, are the ones into the fast lane. As in .. always gossiping/aka talking crap, always hip on the entertainment, when to me entertainment is very trivial. So it's more of a conversational piece I'm lacking. It has nothing to do though with them being gay or not. I get along just fine. The diva quality just sort of drives a nail in me, due to women I've been with.. when they strike up a diva attitude, they are so unattractive.

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.

Huh? I guess you mean homosexuals who married a woman, but have infidelities with men? Infidelity in general is disgusting, sex or race or age.

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

Ah the ole double standard. So then yes, you are homophobic and a sexist. You are fine with lesbians but not gay men, that right there might be your own issue. You in fact might be a little afraid because you might be afraid you are a little gay.

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?

Well you said a mouthful. I think you are afraid, and fear can turn to hate. You are afraid, because you haven't been exposed to it enough. You keep your eye on what you think is right, and stick to it. That to me is very closed minded.

 

[Ohri-Jin]

Yes, because you generalized. Homosexual men are not even sissy. Some are on the fem side, and some are on the more drag side. The only gay men I do not get along with or associate with, are the ones into the fast lane. As in .. always gossiping/aka talking crap, always hip on the entertainment, when to me entertainment is very trivial. So it's more of a conversational piece I'm lacking. It has nothing to do though with them being gay or not. I get along just fine. The diva quality just sort of drives a nail in me, due to women I've been with.. when they strike up a diva attitude, they are so unattractive.



Huh? I guess you mean homosexuals who married a woman, but have infidelities with men? Infidelity in general is disgusting, sex or race or age.



Ah the ole double standard. So then yes, you are homophobic and a sexist. You are fine with lesbians but not gay men, that right there might be your own issue. You in fact might be a little afraid because you might be afraid you are a little gay.



Well you said a mouthful. I think you are afraid, and fear can turn to hate. You are afraid, because you haven't been exposed to it enough. You keep your eye on what you think is right, and stick to it. That to me is very closed minded.

No man you got it all wrong @Shu.
I formulated that first post the wrong way. It got all screwed up out of context.
The first three pages explains all my thoughts.

People focus too much on the first page and thats my fault tbh.


First of all I have no problem with gaymen only with FEMININE gaymen! I know my sexuality. A feminine gayman is someone that acts like he is a woman. He is not crossdressing so not a transsexual hell I even have a transvestite colleague at work and we always greet. I get along cause even though she dress in women attire she doesnt act like a woman at all (for now).

feminine gaymen irl are drama queens, snapping their fingers and what not and talking so girly and shit. I dont like it.

So I dont know if the only part you read was the first page or post, but who is close minded aye. I dont expect you to read the whole thread but people should at least read a few pages before posting?

So even you almighty Shu are using the word Homophobe way too easily. That was the whole point of this thread.



I dont like certain aspects of gayness and other aspects Im cool with TOLERANT and suddenly Im a homophobe? Thats bullshit and you know it. It made me doubt in the beginning but SneakerPimp opened my eyes.





From the beginning I havent edited my initial opening post nor will I, but I will gladly elaborate my post to people tht are too lazy to READ BEYOND THE FIRST PAGE!!!

 

[Shu]

Yea, I didn't exactly read through it. Three pages, of a lot of off topic stuff.. sort of made me skip it all. I just wanted to address your questions really. I'm not calling you homophobic strictly, I'm saying you are if you have that state of mine where all feminine gay guys are bad peoples.

From a Man to Man angle:

A lot of straight men feel super uncomfortable around men when they are labeled gay. Period. I've seen the reaction like a catalyst. It's like.. "Oh that's not human, I need to disassociate myself." Though there is a double standard to this, I've seen gay men do the same thing to straight men. I think it's because they sometimes fear you won't accept them, or treat them normally, because all the other assholes in the world don't.

Listen, think of it this way. How would you react if your best friend were to come out to you in confidence. They had dated more women than you and have had straight sex, but you knew they couldn't hold a relationship for more than a month or two. They couldn't tell anyone else, due to their family might outcast them, or their social circle, but they trusted you enough. Let's say.. they were extremely depressed because they knew they would never be able to date a dude normally, which translates to them being single and feeling not loved. Other than online dating, they had no way to live the way they actually wanted to, so they had to fake being straight.

If they asked you.. "What should I do?" How would you react? Would you think they were hitting on you, since they only told you and you were to keep the secret in confidence? Would you feel if they started talking about men sexually around you?

These reasons are why most gay men and straight men, can not be on the same page. They feel as if men talking about men is like a flu symptom, and they might become gay by being around that type of conversation. Gay is not a choice, it's born. Now some might not be self aware enough to know they are truly gay, but you notice those types are either homophobic or really estranged or just haven't had enough sexual experimenting to know that women were not for them.

All I know is, why be something you aren't? Why be anything less than yourself to fit the social norm? Luckily these days, gay people can assimilate more to the straight folks. If someone were to come out to me.. meh.. no biggy. I wouldn't have much to say about the men spectrum, but I wouldn't say.. "no you can not hang out with my group of friends"

 

[Dragon Mage]

A lot of straight men feel super uncomfortable around men when they are labeled gay. Period. I've seen the reaction like a catalyst. It's like.. "Oh that's not human, I need to disassociate myself."

These are why most gay men and straight men, can not be on the same page. They feel as if men talking about men is like a flu symptom, and they might become gay by being around that type of conversation.

Actually, Shu, I think what you are describing has very little to do with anyone being gay but is actually a symptom of deeper sociological issues. Consider this: Men don't talk about feelings. Men don't talk about relationships (unless, of course, they are bragging about 'conquests'). Men don't cry (at least not in front of other men.) Men rarely confide personal issues with other men.

I could go on, but you get the picture. There is a structure in American and European society where men have to have this stoic, cool, masculine image they must constantly assert or else be seen as less than manly. Due to stereotype associations, 'less than manly' has been more or less become synonymous with being gay. Therefore, if you aren't beating your chest and thrusting at everything with high heels and boobs, you must be gay. The 'gay' part, however, is actually quite recent, but the idea has been the same: Men must assert their masculinity constantly or else that very quality will be called into question and they will be scorned for it.

This is a sociological problem we've been dealing with for a VERY long time now, but only really became aware of it during the feminist movement. Any TRUE feminist will tell you that women are not the only ones socially oppressed -- but men are as well. Men suffer social constraints just as women do, and in some ways, it's worse. A woman can be a politician, cook, mother, CEO, scientist and racecar driver. No one bats an eyelash at that. But men cannot be a fashion designer, model, hair stylist, secretary, or pet groomer unless they are gay. See the double standard? Whereas we've made plenty of progress for women, not much has been made for men.

In fact, gay men tend to be a lot more open minded than most because they themselves have had to cross social chasms of non-acceptance. So what's one more? Go ahead and talk about your feelings. Go ahead and cry if you really need to. It is not as much a stigma for them as it is for other men because, being gay, they have bigger problems to worry about than proving one's ability to crush a beer can on the forehead.

So I wouldn't say that straight men talking about men like a flu symptom is a problem towards gays, but is in fact evidence of sociological issues that force men to behave in a certain, narrow-minded way. Because, obviously, gay men do not prescribe to this manner, straight men don't know how to act around them. In a world where being a man is partially defined by how many pretty girls you've ever 'conquered', how do you talk to a person that not only doesn't conform to this, but actively goes against it?

In order to change the kind of behavior that you are talking about Shu, you have look much deeper. It isn't necessarily just because some men are gay -- in fact, I'd say it's because most of the men in our societies have been trained from day one to avoid everything a gay person must openly confront and (thanks to negative stereotypes) has come to be a representative for.

I'm not calling you homophobic strictly, I'm saying you are if you have that state of mine where all feminine gay guys are bad peoples.

Whoa, pause a second there -- I think you've got him wrong and he just isn't expressing himself correctly.

I don't believe he ever said feminine gays are bad people, he just said he doesn't like them, and I can sympathize. They kinda irritate me too, after a while, and I'm not the only one.

Look at it like this:

Here is a gay man. And he fits every inch of the stereotype. Too trendy clothing. A fake lisp. Flapping his wrists around like they're made of rubber. Wearing way too much perfume (not cologne, perfume.) Possibly has a small dog tucked under one arm. Starts nearly every sentence with 'oh my gawd'. Has that certain 'gay accent' that consists of a high-pitched voice and lots of gasping.

Take a good look at this person. Because this person is annoying. In a world where the gay community is campaigning for greater acceptance and trying to show that they are just people too, this person damages everything the community has been working for. I've met people just like this where I could TELL it was a fake lisp because the guy forgot sometimes.

In all honesty, it just smacks of trying too hard. Granted these folks may actually, 100% genuinely be just like this -- but in all the cases I've ever met in person, it looked like they were going out of the way to adhere to a stereotype, and that's just silly. It's entirely unnecessary to act like this, especially since stereotypes are harmful. I've actually met a gay person (you would never know he was gay beyond his ability to dress impeccably) who hated 'flamers' as he called them, and would yell at them if he saw one. Why? Because, behaving the way they are, they are hurting the entire demographic. For every step forward the gay movement makes in getting people to realize that the silly, overblown stereotype is just not true, it's kinds like these that set them back two steps.

That is why I, personally, dislike it when gay folks do this. The costume, the act, the persona -- it does more harm than good in the long run. And when all is said and done, it simply isn't needed.

Also, after a while, it really starts to feel confrontational: they wear their orientation so incredibly loudly that it feels like a challenge almost. Why do I need to be so aware of their orientation? Why can't I just have coffee with a fellow classmate who is gay working on a group project and not JUST a gay person? It is the very aggressiveness, if you will, of being so loud about their orientation that is off-putting, makes me -- personally -- feel like I'm under scrutiny, like if I say something wrong, I'll somehow end up insulting them, and I'll bet you dollars to doughnuts that Ohri can corroborate this feeling. It's like trying to discuss nuclear power plants with a die-hard Russian communist that calls everyone Comrade and trying to avoid any kind of connection with nuclear missiles or the Cold War. In the end, you're stressed out that you'll set off a landmine in the conversation and YOU will be the bad guy because of it. It literally makes one terrified of causing offense unintentionally.

Again, I may be in danger of slipping into over-generalization myself, but like I said: The folks like this that I've personally met struck me as entirely affected behavior. I could run a checklist off of them and in so doing give you the whole stereotype, like they were conjured out of a bigot's nightmare. The whole point about stereotypes is that they are rarely ever true, but are a speck of truth mixed in with a whole lot of derision, lies, and myth. The chances of finding a person that fit such a stereotype to the letter and are that way naturally just strikes me as being the next best thing to impossible.

So, 'not liking' feminine gay guys is by no means indicative of being 'homophobic'. There are plenty of good reasons why there can be a dislike that has nothing to do with bigotry and irrational fears/hates/whathaveyou. So I ask you to please consider all that I have said to you before painting anyone with the homophobia brush. Disliking something is a world of difference from being a bigot against something. And we all know that once someone has been labeled as a homophobe, it will never go away, just like being labeled a sex offender. I am very earnestly and politely asking you to be very thoughtful before naming anyone a homophobe, because there are certain circles where the reaction to that can be totally savage and vicious.

 

[moogling]

don't even attempt a dictionary definition. "homophobia doesn't exist" smh. homophobia is a severe aversion to homosexuality. if being horrified by the prospect of same sex marriage or being grossed out by same sex couples kissing in public isn't a phobia then i don't know what is. don't trivialize the oppression people have to deal with every day because you don't think the word suits.

honestly i'm not reading 12 pages of bullshit so i mean disregard me or whatever man i don't care but

why does this thread exist. if you "don't like" seeing gay men kiss in public, while you couldn't care less about a straight couple doing the same, you are being homophobic. you are being intolerant. simple logic. you don't need to be called a homophobe with just that much information but your behavior is undoubtedly homophobic.

HOWEVER!!! i think what's happening here is getting "i'm not attracted to ______" mixed up with "i fucking hate ______". it's okay to not be attracted to something. you don't particularly enjoy seeing two men kissing because you're not attracted to men. you probably do enjoy seeing lesbians kissing because you're attracted to women. (i can't say i'm comfortable with this as it's clearly fetishization which is also a huge problem but i'm certain it's the truth in this case) but you aren't actively against two men getting married and being afforded the same rights as straight couples, from what i've read. so no i'm not going to call you a homophobe.

but the point here is that the idea that people shouldn't be allowed to be or do something you aren't attracted to, and that they shouldn't be afforded respect is a problem.

ultimately you're allowed your opinion on whatever it is but if you use that defense then people are also allowed to believe you're a homophobe. "my opinion/i can say whatever i want" isn't going to protect you from the backlash of saying something dumb. (i don't even know if that was brought up but i'm saying it now anyway because this is usually the mentality in situations like this) (clearly it's late)

 

[Dragon Mage]

don't even attempt a dictionary definition. "homophobia doesn't exist" smh. homophobia is a severe aversion to homosexuality. if being horrified by the prospect of same sex marriage or being grossed out by same sex couples kissing in public isn't a phobia then i don't know what is. don't trivialize the oppression people have to deal with every day because you don't think the word suits.

Not sure if you're talking to me or to Ohri here, but I'll address this part.

My entire point of breaking down the what the word means was to show that actual fear -- true, deep-down, unadulterated fear -- of homosexuals doesn't exist. I've YET to see a single person be introduced to a gay person and then immediately hitch up their skirts and run screaming. I want to be precise as to what 'homophobia' is in the true meaning of the word so there is no room for doubt of what I'm talking about here. So, if we actually look at the true meaning of the word, homophobia does not exist.

However, this does NOT preclude the existence of hatred to homosexuals. I never contested that, merely that the word itself is improper.

Now, if you mean homophobia to mean a severe aversion to homosexuality, well, that word is being horribly misused as it entirely inaccurate, and I wish to be as accurate as possible when addressing such delicate matters. I don't think same sex marriage has even been mentioned, actually. But if being grossed out by someone, anyone -- gay or otherwise -- having a major make-out session in a restaurant is homophobic, well, that's just silly. Like I said before, it depends on the kissing, but when it comes to heavy-duty French kissing sessions, I prefer the couple, gay or straight, take it somewhere private. I simply don't need that kind of scenery while I'm in line for lunch and this is in no way an unreasonable or homophobic desire. I'm certain many people would agree. A long/short kiss on the lips, a peck on the cheek however -- these things are of no consequence to me.

I would never trivialize anyone that is oppressed. I'm a woman aren't I? I know how that end of the stick feels. My disapproval of the use of the word 'homophobe' is aimed at the people so casually throwing it around. You, in fact, are an excellent case in point. Just because you don't like something DOES NOT mean you are a bigot of that thing.

Like you've just said: Don't like gay couples kissing? HOMOPHOBE!

Ah, no, it isn't that cut and dry. I know very well that there are people who will abuse you, physically, emotionally, socially, and mentally if they even hear the word 'homophobe' remotely applied to a person in the long and distant past. Using this word is dangerous and people are far too quick to slap that label on others for the slightest of things -- such as not liking gay couples have heavy make-out sessions at Wendy's. It's like watching children playing with grenades -- this word hurts people, this word is dangerous, and it should be used carefully and ONLY when it is true. These days, being called a homophobe is like being called a sex offender -- it's become one of the dirtiest, nastiest stigmas one can apply, it would make you lose your job, make people shun you and ridicule you because ONE person on the internet saw that you didn't like gay couples making out on the bus and automatically declared you a homophobe. Imagine if an employer saw someone call you that on Facebook. Do you think they'd take the time and read the whole discussion, to think over and consider the accused's defense? Hell no. They'd just immediately deny your application. "We don't want people like that representing us." All because of one, tiny, dislike of over-the-top PDA's that isn't limited to just gays.

Using this word so lightly is dangerous. That is why I broke it down to its roots, that is why I pointed out that if making an un-informed statement about gay people makes you a homophobe, we might as well call people that can't swim hydrophobes. I did this just to point out that one does not automatically equal the other. If we are going to treat everyone this word has been applied to as I've described above, then we better be damn sure it's true. Otherwise we get this, a disproportionate response to someone who simply wants couples to keep the heavy kissing private. This is why I attacked the word, not the problem. In my opinion, the word itself IS a large part of the problem. Homophobia is rapidly becoming synonymous with 'hate crime' and THAT is why this word is dangerous.

Consider, if we let this word be used so lightly but treated with such vehement hatred and abuse, then we will face a future where a person can use their orientation as a court defense over trivial things, where the accusation of being homophobic is the greater crime than the actually felony. Hate crimes are nothing to laugh at and should be responded to by the utmost extent of the law: But when a person doesn't like couples making out at the bus stop is considered homophobia, do you really think it's necessary to call that a hate crime?

In that light, is Ohri a homophobe? No. Not in the least. He's just a modest guy that doesn't like affected personalities. In no way do I see that being the same as a hate crime. It isn't even an aversion, it's just a simple dislike. I can only hope that others read what I've written here and agree with me.

 

[Jacqui]

So I wouldn't say that straight men talking about men like a flu symptom is a problem towards gays, but is in fact evidence of sociological issues that force men to behave in a certain, narrow-minded way. Because, obviously, gay men do not prescribe to this manner, straight men don't know how to act around them. In a world where being a man is partially defined by how many pretty girls you've ever 'conquered', how do you talk to a person that not only doesn't conform to this, but actively goes against it?

In order to change the kind of behavior that you are talking about Shu, you have look much deeper. It isn't necessarily just because some men are gay -- in fact, I'd say it's because most of the men in our societies have been trained from day one to avoid everything a gay person must openly confront and (thanks to negative stereotypes) has come to be a representative for.



Whoa, pause a second there -- I think you've got him wrong and he just isn't expressing himself correctly.

I don't believe he ever said feminine gays are bad people, he just said he doesn't like them, and I can sympathize. They kinda irritate me too, after a while, and I'm not the only one.

Look at it like this:

Here is a gay man. And he fits every inch of the stereotype. Too trendy clothing. A fake lisp. Flapping his wrists around like they're made of rubber. Wearing way too much perfume (not cologne, perfume.) Possibly has a small dog tucked under one arm. Starts nearly every sentence with 'oh my gawd'. Has that certain 'gay accent' that consists of a high-pitched voice and lots of gasping.

Take a good look at this person. Because this person is annoying. In a world where the gay community is campaigning for greater acceptance and trying to show that they are just people too, this person damages everything the community has been working for. I've met people just like this where I could TELL it was a fake lisp because the guy forgot sometimes.

In all honesty, it just smacks of trying too hard. Granted these folks may actually, 100% genuinely be just like this -- but in all the cases I've ever met in person, it looked like they were going out of the way to adhere to a stereotype, and that's just silly. It's entirely unnecessary to act like this, especially since stereotypes are harmful. I've actually met a gay person (you would never know he was gay beyond his ability to dress impeccably) who hated 'flamers' as he called them, and would yell at them if he saw one. Why? Because, behaving the way they are, they are hurting the entire demographic. For every step forward the gay movement makes in getting people to realize that the silly, overblown stereotype is just not true, it's kinds like these that set them back two steps.

That is why I, personally, dislike it when gay folks do this. The costume, the act, the persona -- it does more harm than good in the long run. And when all is said and done, it simply isn't needed.

Also, after a while, it really starts to feel confrontational: they wear their orientation so incredibly loudly that it feels like a challenge almost. Why do I need to be so aware of their orientation? Why can't I just have coffee with a fellow classmate who is gay working on a group project and not JUST a gay person? It is the very aggressiveness, if you will, of being so loud about their orientation that is off-putting, makes me -- personally -- feel like I'm under scrutiny, like if I say something wrong, I'll somehow end up insulting them, and I'll bet you dollars to doughnuts that Ohri can corroborate this feeling. It's like trying to discuss nuclear power plants with a die-hard Russian communist that calls everyone Comrade and trying to avoid any kind of connection with nuclear missiles or the Cold War. In the end, you're stressed out that you'll set off a landmine in the conversation and YOU will be the bad guy because of it. It literally makes one terrified of causing offense unintentionally.

Again, I may be in danger of slipping into over-generalization myself, but like I said: The folks like this that I've personally met struck me as entirely affected behavior. I could run a checklist off of them and in so doing give you the whole stereotype, like they were conjured out of a bigot's nightmare. The whole point about stereotypes is that they are rarely ever true, but are a speck of truth mixed in with a whole lot of derision, lies, and myth. The chances of finding a person that fit such a stereotype to the letter and are that way naturally just strikes me as being the next best thing to impossible.

So, 'not liking' feminine gay guys is by no means indicative of being 'homophobic'. There are plenty of good reasons why there can be a dislike that has nothing to do with bigotry and irrational fears/hates/whathaveyou. So I ask you to please consider all that I have said to you before painting anyone with the homophobia brush. Disliking something is a world of difference from being a bigot against something. And we all know that once someone has been labeled as a homophobe, it will never go away, just like being labeled a sex offender. I am very earnestly and politely asking you to be very thoughtful before naming anyone a homophobe, because there are certain circles where the reaction to that can be totally savage and vicious.

I can honestly say that I have never met anyone, gay, straight, whatever, who acts in the way you describe. I'll be honest, I thought that this was an exaggeration on slightly effeminate people by actors, or people who make their living on the television. But I'll be willing to believe that people such as the person you described do exist, but I do believe that they don't exist everywhere.

I think that it is a stereotype, but a stereotype that some people live, sometimes because they're trying too hard, as you said, sometimes as a defense mechanism (I've known someone get very upset because his friend didn't realise that he was gay, then got all offended when he found out- he said that if he'd been more flamboyant or effeminate then he wouldn't have been in that situation because he would never have ended up in what he saw was a firm friendship), or some just because they want to be that way.

There are many reasons that people have for the way their personality shines, and I don't think that you can automatically make assumptions as to why they have that personality.


As for not editing the first post, well, that's your call, but as I pointed out before, some members here may see the first post by hovering over the link for the thread, and may dive in to the discussion based on what they see there. To be honest, that's why I first replied, but I had a bit of a nosy around the thread first to see what else had been said. So that's up to you, but I don't think that you can go mad at them for it.

People can get passionate and worked up about comments that they feel are inappropriate or wrong.

 

[Shu]

Actually, Shu, I think what you are describing has very little to do with anyone being gay but is actually a symptom of deeper sociological issues. Consider this: Men don't talk about feelings. Men don't talk about relationships (unless, of course, they are bragging about 'conquests'). Men don't cry (at least not in front of other men.) Men rarely confide personal issues with other men.

I am talking about a man who clearly wants to be a woman, aka drag, aka acts and dresses and feels like they are a woman, and clearly admit to wanting to be a woman. So no, this has nothing to do with being a social condition. You are describing alpha male vs effeminate male syndrome. This has nothing to do with being gay at all.

I could go on, but you get the picture. There is a structure in American and European society where men have to have this stoic, cool, masculine image they must constantly assert or else be seen as less than manly. Due to stereotype associations, 'less than manly' has been more or less become synonymous with being gay. Therefore, if you aren't beating your chest and thrusting at everything with high heels and boobs, you must be gay. The 'gay' part, however, is actually quite recent, but the idea has been the same: Men must assert their masculinity constantly or else that very quality will be called into question and they will be scorned for it.

I'm trying to re-read anywhere where I might have been misunderstood, but not sure what bashing guys in general has anything to do with it. Manly men aren't bad, as long as thy don't self assert themself and tell non alpha males how they should be. If there weren't alpha males.. life would be indistinguishable. There needs to be a balance. Though beating your chest, and thrusting.. that's a bit.. extreme.

This is a sociological problem we've been dealing with for a VERY long time now, but only really became aware of it during the feminist movement. Any TRUE feminist will tell you that women are not the only ones socially oppressed -- but men are as well. Men suffer social constraints just as women do, and in some ways, it's worse. A woman can be a politician, cook, mother, CEO, scientist and racecar driver. No one bats an eyelash at that. But men cannot be a fashion designer, model, hair stylist, secretary, or pet groomer unless they are gay. See the double standard? Whereas we've made plenty of progress for women, not much has been made for men.

I can agree with this. It's purely society driven. It has nothing to do with psychology unless brain washed to believe in it. It's just what "people" in general are "used to". They rather everyone confide to their pretty little molds, than be different and out there. Jealousy in the root of the problem, and or remaining "comfortable" (aka boring as crap).

In fact, gay men tend to be a lot more open minded than most because they themselves have had to cross social chasms of non-acceptance. So what's one more? Go ahead and talk about your feelings. Go ahead and cry if you really need to. It is not as much a stigma for them as it is for other men because, being gay, they have bigger problems to worry about than proving one's ability to crush a beer can on the forehead.

I disagree. Gay men can be as closed minded about other subjects if not more so, just as heterosexual men. It does not matter if you are straight or gay, but about the experience and wisdom you have gained in your life. They are as equally opinionated and biased as heterosexual men, just about different subjects. Some gay men, still believe in Jesus Christ and the ability to go to Heaven. In my opinion this is hilarious considering due to Old Testament verses, they will never get into Heaven as long as they "act" on their sin. This isn't a religious debate, so straying from that subject.

So I wouldn't say that straight men talking about men like a flu symptom is a problem towards gays, but is in fact evidence of sociological issues that force men to behave in a certain, narrow-minded way. Because, obviously, gay men do not prescribe to this manner, straight men don't know how to act around them. In a world where being a man is partially defined by how many pretty girls you've ever 'conquered', how do you talk to a person that not only doesn't conform to this, but actively goes against it?

Sexually one may consider it disgusting, as Ohri here explained. Where as showing bias towards heterosexuality in public. That's the part I don't get. The most homophobic people I know actually turned around to be a homosexual. They are fearing that they are becoming something that they were told they would be in Hell, or Parents would send them to a psychologist, or even worst.. electroshock therapy. So that's the flu symptom I speak of. Sexually some narrow minded arse holes, feel that being around that type of sexual talk, that they might "choose to be gay". Again, gay is not a choice, you are either born that way, or else.

In order to change the kind of behavior that you are talking about Shu, you have look much deeper. It isn't necessarily just because some men are gay -- in fact, I'd say it's because most of the men in our societies have been trained from day one to avoid everything a gay person must openly confront and (thanks to negative stereotypes) has come to be a representative for.

I think that's a bit draconian. I see most "sensitive" men have relationships, where most manly men.. are in it for the feeling and or social bragging rights. Though I do see women are more attractive to Confident men though. So if you are always down on yourself, and or have a negative attitude about yourself, the woman might already have one about herself. When those stigma's clash.. it's a turn off. No one, man or woman, wants a cry baby all the time, or someone they have to nurse psychologically.

Whoa, pause a second there -- I think you've got him wrong and he just isn't expressing himself correctly.

I don't believe he ever said feminine gays are bad people, he just said he doesn't like them, and I can sympathize. They kinda irritate me too, after a while, and I'm not the only one.

And why is that? Do you prefer masculine women?

Look at it like this:

Here is a gay man. And he fits every inch of the stereotype. Too trendy clothing. A fake lisp. Flapping his wrists around like they're made of rubber. Wearing way too much perfume (not cologne, perfume.) Possibly has a small dog tucked under one arm. Starts nearly every sentence with 'oh my gawd'. Has that certain 'gay accent' that consists of a high-pitched voice and lots of gasping.

Take a good look at this person. Because this person is annoying. In a world where the gay community is campaigning for greater acceptance and trying to show that they are just people too, this person damages everything the community has been working for. I've met people just like this where I could TELL it was a fake lisp because the guy forgot sometimes.

In all honesty, it just smacks of trying too hard. Granted these folks may actually, 100% genuinely be just like this -- but in all the cases I've ever met in person, it looked like they were going out of the way to adhere to a stereotype, and that's just silly. It's entirely unnecessary to act like this, especially since stereotypes are harmful. I've actually met a gay person (you would never know he was gay beyond his ability to dress impeccably) who hated 'flamers' as he called them, and would yell at them if he saw one. Why? Because, behaving the way they are, they are hurting the entire demographic. For every step forward the gay movement makes in getting people to realize that the silly, overblown stereotype is just not true, it's kinds like these that set them back two steps.

You are generalizing though. This is one feminine gay man. This is not all.

That's like me saying all Pretty/Hot women are independent and strong. That's like me saying all strippers have daddy problems. That's like me saying all over confident political woman are lesbians, due to the masculinity she has to assert.

That's like me saying fairer women are more likely to be over critical douche bags about female models and will only settle for a dumb, sensitive man - as to have little face to face conflict, and to be praised every day for their wit and beauty.

That's like me saying.. any girl that wears a coach bag, a burberry coat, gucci sun glasses, or loui vuitton shoes.. is a gold digging ho-bag who is only going to settle for someone easy she can divorce if things get tough.

These are all generalizations.

That is why I, personally, dislike it when gay folks do this. The costume, the act, the persona -- it does more harm than good in the long run. And when all is said and done, it simply isn't needed.

You are disliking something they enjoy though. How does it affect you? I think only a gay person can represent their views when it comes to this. It can give a bad stereo type to us, but who I am to judge?

Also, after a while, it really starts to feel confrontational: they wear their orientation so incredibly loudly that it feels like a challenge almost. Why do I need to be so aware of their orientation? Why can't I just have coffee with a fellow classmate who is gay working on a group project and not JUST a gay person? It is the very aggressiveness, if you will, of being so loud about their orientation that is off-putting, makes me -- personally -- feel like I'm under scrutiny, like if I say something wrong, I'll somehow end up insulting them, and I'll bet you dollars to doughnuts that Ohri can corroborate this feeling. It's like trying to discuss nuclear power plants with a die-hard Russian communist that calls everyone Comrade and trying to avoid any kind of connection with nuclear missiles or the Cold War. In the end, you're stressed out that you'll set off a landmine in the conversation and YOU will be the bad guy because of it. It literally makes one terrified of causing offense unintentionally.

I can quasi agree with you. I do not like being gay/being straight or black/white or a woman/man or chinese/japanese or .. etc give you any additional privilege. It should not exactly be recognized publicly as a "Hey look I'm...." Though gay parades.. to me are more of a gathering of oneness. Although I'm not gay, I can understand them, due to I meet with Secular movement councils in sort of the same manner, which most Christians would chastise me for thanks to being in the Bible Belt.

Again, I may be in danger of slipping into over-generalization myself, but like I said: The folks like this that I've personally met struck me as entirely affected behavior. I could run a checklist off of them and in so doing give you the whole stereotype, like they were conjured out of a bigot's nightmare. The whole point about stereotypes is that they are rarely ever true, but are a speck of truth mixed in with a whole lot of derision, lies, and myth. The chances of finding a person that fit such a stereotype to the letter and are that way naturally just strikes me as being the next best thing to impossible.

I don't mind it.. as long as they keep their mouth on their own business. Aka drama free.

So, 'not liking' feminine gay guys is by no means indicative of being 'homophobic'. There are plenty of good reasons why there can be a dislike that has nothing to do with bigotry and irrational fears/hates/whathaveyou. So I ask you to please consider all that I have said to you before painting anyone with the homophobia brush. Disliking something is a world of difference from being a bigot against something. And we all know that once someone has been labeled as a homophobe, it will never go away, just like being labeled a sex offender. I am very earnestly and politely asking you to be very thoughtful before naming anyone a homophobe, because there are certain circles where the reaction to that can be totally savage and vicious.

[/quote]

He used the word Sissy. So yes, that's a homophobic and or demeaning word. If he didn't mean it.. that's fine.. but it's an observation. I don't consider Ohri a bad person, he is just expressing his opinion here, nothing to get all in a hustle about.

 

[Nocturne]

Homophobia is a joke. It's almost 20fucking13 and we're still going on about it like being gay is a big deal. It's not a big deal. It's not gross, you're just another fuckin robot sheep who was programmed to think a certain way. How can you be grossed out by something and not understand why? You're either in denial of being a homophobe or you really just don't understand the way things work with yourself. It's pretty sad. Just let people do what they want. Do they control you? Hell no. Leave eachother alone. Don't dig into it, seriously. It's not complicated. It's just minding your own business, which I guess nobody knows how to do.

Wow, I seriously think this is one of the worst posts of the entire thread. Granted I didnt read anything after this one.

This is one of the exact problems I was talking about. You sit here and preach how everyone should mind each others business and not let anyone tell you what to do, yet you are telling people how they should act. Once again, no everyone likes, agrees with, or finds the same things alright, as you do. Just because someone is grossed out by something, doesnt mean they automatically mean they hate that thing with a passion. Example, not everyone likes dogs, but just because they dont like dogs, doesnt mean they want to wipe them all off the face of the Earth or make it so no body else can have them. They just rather not see it. And by all means, that is their right.

I'm REALLY tired of the whole "You should agree with my views, yet all of yours are wrong" point of view. It's doing the exact opposite of what you are preaching. People with this mentality are just as bad as the people who actually do wish homosexuality to be wiped out.


----------------------------

On the whole topic of wearing their sexuality on their sleeves, it does get really annoying quickly. I absolutely despise the macho guy attitude where they talk about getting with so many women and sleeping with them. It's pathetic and demeaning.

I also despise when I'd be talking to someone who is gay, and they have to bring it up every 5 seconds. I think it would get rather annoying if I was talking to someone and kept bringing up the fact that Im straight or not gay. It's just highly irritating. I've had gay friends who did and didnt do this and the ones that didnt were much more enjoyable people just for the fact that they didnt sound like a broken record all day.


Pretty much, what it comes down to, is people like to act like they are superior for their beliefs in something. Those people that tend to try and herald social rights, end up being just as bad as the people they claim to be fighting against. Essentially, people just need to accept that no everyone will agree with them on every subject and stop bickering like 3 year olds over who is right and wrong. It's the same thing with the Atheist vs Christian thing. Who the hell cares if Atheists dont like the term Christmas Tree or like seeing it everywhere. Guess what. Suck it up and deal with it. Same thing with Christians who don't like to see gatherings of people who dont agree with them. Making laws to make things illegal or taken out of certain organizations because you dont like it is stupid.

Every Christmas time, you ALWAYS hear about the whole Holiday Tree thing now. If calling a tree a Christmas tree really offends you that much, then you really either have no life at all or have much deeper rooted problems. Just my little semi rant that's off topic. Somewhat related.

 

[Catnip]

Nocturne You haven't thought this one through at all, have you?

So by your logic, anyone can go on about killing someone's dog for fun, plan to do it, and I should just "mind my own business" because I should keep my disagreements to myself? That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

We're all adults who should know the difference between right from wrong. Granted, some people like to add their own definitions to the terms, but the point is having a voice and utilizing its ability to disrupt a disruption.

 

[Harlequin]

Consider this: Men don't talk about feelings. Men don't talk about relationships (unless, of course, they are bragging about 'conquests'). Men don't cry (at least not in front of other men.) Men rarely confide personal issues with other men.

I could go on, but you get the picture. There is a structure in American and European society where men have to have this stoic, cool, masculine image they must constantly assert or else be seen as less than manly. Due to stereotype associations, 'less than manly' has been more or less become synonymous with being gay. Therefore, if you aren't beating your chest and thrusting at everything with high heels and boobs, you must be gay. The 'gay' part, however, is actually quite recent, but the idea has been the same: Men must assert their masculinity constantly or else that very quality will be called into question and they will be scorned for it.

I wholeheartedly agree with what @Dragon Mage has said here. I see far too many men and women measuring a male's masculinity on the factors DM described. If you're not constantly chasing girls you're not asserting your masculinity enough and could well be gay. If you're expressing emotional "weakness" you're not being masculine and may just be gay.

The reality I find is that it's far more masculine to do whatever it is you decide on rather than be pressured one way or another. For example, it's more masculine IMO to not fuck a hot chick who wants to fuck if you don't actually want to/feel like fucking her, rather than feel as if it's your duty as a straight male to do so just in case anyone calls your masculinity into question. In fact, if the reason you did is because of the latter IMO you've just undermined your masculinity all by yourself. I find these hyper-masculine males really exhausting to hang out with. If you really like and appreciate women then great, but there's nothing more masculine IMO than self-assuredness.

why does this thread exist. if you "don't like" seeing gay men kiss in public, while you couldn't care less about a straight couple doing the same, you are being homophobic. you are being intolerant.

Get serious!! People have sexual preferences and as many people on this very forum repeatedly suggested and came to an agreement on a few months ago in some thread about sexual attraction (found it: http://www.finalfantasyforums.net/threads/53457-Something-About-Sex), males' sexual arousal is supposedly heavily influenced by visual stimuli. Now think of the personal reaction a straight male will have to two men kissing in public. My reaction is a genuine revulsion whenever I see that and honestly, when I see two (albeit hot) ladies kiss, a slight arousal. No one's opinion of what I think is going to force me to try to change that particular feeling I have towards it and quite frankly I feel as if any attempt to change how I think about it would fly in the face of the very spirit of tolerance they're trying to incite in me.

Again, gay is not a choice, you are either born that way, or else.

If you're stating that as fact I'd like to see some proof. In my opinion there's far more to suggest people are a product of their environment and upbringing both personality wise and sexuality wise, rather than born into a category. I feel as if this very possible misconception of people being born with a predetermined sexuality is undermining the whole tolerance campaign. It's patronising. If it's not a choice then fine but if it is a choice then good for you for making that choice, there's no reason to feel ashamed if you believe it's the correct choice for you.

Although I'm not gay, I can understand them, due to I meet with Secular movement councils in sort of the same manner, which most Christians would chastise me for thanks to being in the Bible Belt.

Earlier in your post you stated you didn't want to turn this into a religious debate despite having dragged the subject in yourself and a few paragraphs later you've gone on to bring it back up again. Just to quickly clarify "most" Christians don't live in the Bible Belt of America. "Most" Christians don't live in America.