# Can we agree on what "Homophobia" means? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 1, 2005, 9:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-agree-on-what-homophobia-means/333541 "2005-12-01T09:54:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 3\ **Page:** 18
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2006, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-agree-on-what-homophobia-means/333541/341 "2006-01-15T23:28:38Z")
**DMC** , Let’s recap: You dropped into another thread, typed some obtuse question, and then brought up something about this thread. :rolleyes: After I answered you, you said: > [@DMC](#): > > Ah, much like in the thread where you don’t like being called a homophobe, but refuse to come up with a better term for us to use to describe you, you choose a “humorous” answer. I responded: > [@magellan01](#): > > And my answer to you in the other thread (I went and checked what you were talking about) was intended to convey humility, not humor. In readiing it just now, I guess you could get a smile out of it, as well. This was understood by someone who explained it to you in the post directly following yours. And then I clarified it for you as well a little later. Sorry you didn’t understand the post at that first opportunity. Or the second. Or the third. Hopefully this fourth time will be the ticket. Then you responded: > [@](#): > > You might want to revisit post 322 again. You never actually responded to my request for an alternate identifier for those who have similar stances regarding the issues surriounding homosexuals. So there wasn’t a second, third, or fourth time. Hell, there wasn’t even a first. This is a hijack, so feel free to continue it in the other thread if you so desire. It only came up here because it was the same type of dodge. So let’s revisit. Your original question: > [@DMC](#): > > I’m open to the usage of more specific words to describe a person’s stance. For instance, what label do you think would best describe a person who shares your views of homosexuals, homosexuality, their rights, etc? Which I answered here (Explanation of my position #1): > [@](#): > > Rational, sane, objective, and fair. But, don’t we all? The meaning eluded you, which often happens among posters, either due to unclear writing or inattentive reading, so no biggie. It just so happened that another poster, **Malacandra** , understood my post and saw that you probably had misread it, then offered this in the post immediately following yours (Explanation of my position #2): > [@](#): > > Fairly sure that magellan01 meant that “we all” think our own stance is rational, sane, objective and fair… Then, a little later, feeling obliged to straighten out the confusion that may have been due in part to me, I offered further clarity (Explanation of my position #3): > [@](#): > > Let me rephrase: We all thiink think that our respective positions are “rational, sane, objective, and fair”. Most recently, in that other thread, when for some strange reason you inappropriately brought it up again, I said (Explanation of my position #4): > [@](#): > > And my answer to you in the other thread (I went and checked what you were talking about) was intended to convey humility, not humor. In readiing it just now, I guess you could get a smile out of it, as well. This was understood by someone who explained it to you in the post directly following yours. And then I clarified it for you as well a little later. Sorry you didn’t understand the post at that first opportunity. Or the second. Or the third. Hopefully this fourth time will be the ticket. As I think you know full well, the explanation I claimed had been provided to you three previous times had to do with my answer to you in this thread that you characterized as “humorous”. Yet, you responded in that other thread that had no such explanations had been provided to you at all. Why did you do that? Did you make a simple mistake? Or were you trying to be deceptive and lying? Given the very civil exchange we had in this thread I will assume it was a simple mistake. I was confused by what I interpreted as snarkiness that you brought into that other thread. And I didn’t understand where it was coming from. In reviewing this thread, I see that (as you mentioned) you asked me a question that I didn’t answer. If you felt insulted by that I apologize. But if you’ll look at the posts on the last page of this thread you’ll see that I didn’t respond to anyone after my post #319. If I recall, the Holiday was closing in and I had to finish up quite a bit of work and prepare for traveling home. I see that I also have questions pending with others. As you no doubt know, it is not uncommon for threads to get tired, wither, and die. We all have lives and decide where and where not to invest our time, and when. Still you asked a legitimate question and I will give you an answer. The answer to what word I would suggest for the 'tweeners, as you say, is I don’t know. If you reread my OP, I don’t much care either. I have some preference based on where the language is today, which you can see from some of my posts, but I was simply hoping that we could get the language to be more specific. It hardly seems helpful to any discussion to have the same word used to describe Phelps and someone who might disagree with say, gay adoption—who might even BE gay. Homophobe seems to be doubly ill suited the task in that it also has a clinical definition, similar to other “phobias”. That said, since I have no solution, and no one else has offered anything to be rallied around, we’ll have to accept moving along as we have. As has been mentioned, it probabnly helps if people can be more explicit in their writiing. And those who are engaging in honest debate will do so. I truly wish I had a better solution, as I think it would improve the discussion. I don’t, which is why I posed the question in the OP. Oh well, it was worth a shot. Again. I apologize if you felt I was leaving you hanging. I’m kind of still burnt out on this thread and don’t have the energy to immerse myself in it again, so I hope my answer suffices. As to the incorrect information in your last post in that other thread regarding the explanations that were, in fact, provided to you in this thread, I’ll leave you to correct that falsity or not, as you see fit. ---
**Author:** ![pizzabrat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e9c0ed/32.png) [@pizzabrat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pizzabrat)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2006, 2:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-agree-on-what-homophobia-means/333541/342 "2006-01-16T02:00:13Z")
Heh…I remember this thread. ---
**Author:** ![JustAnotherGeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/58f4c7/32.png) [@JustAnotherGeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JustAnotherGeek)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2006, 6:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-agree-on-what-homophobia-means/333541/343 "2006-01-16T06:32:07Z")
Oh dear god! Zombie! Kill, kill, kill! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-agree-on-what-homophobia-means/333541.md?page=17)