# 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:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2005, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-agree-on-what-homophobia-means/333541/41 "2005-12-02T13:56:10Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > While we’re nit-picking, I don’t think this is the correct way to view it. [Raphael Lemkin](http://www.europaworld.org/issue40/raphaellemkin22601.htm) coined the term modeling it after words like “fratricide” and “homicide”. I know some dictionaries quote the Indo-European root, but I don’t think that’s informative. Saying something is from an Indo-European root is rather meaningless since almost ALL of our words have Indo-European roots (including the Greek word _genos_). The -cide ending comes to us from the latin, _-cida_, killing. Finally! Someone has the outrage I’ve been looking for! 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2005, 2:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-agree-on-what-homophobia-means/333541/42 "2005-12-02T14:37:03Z")
Mostly, homophobia means “Irrational fear and/or hatred of gays and gayness.” But for some few gay people a homophobe is “Someone who doesn’t agree with me about everything.” ---
**Author:** ![lissener](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lissener/32/6139_2.png) [@lissener](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lissener)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2005, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-agree-on-what-homophobia-means/333541/43 "2005-12-02T23:03:41Z")
> [@Evil Captor](#): > > Mostly, homophobia means “Irrational fear and/or hatred of gays and gayness.” But for some few gay people a homophobe is “Someone who doesn’t agree with me about everything.” This is self-serving defensive bullshit. Unless you can cite an example to prove your point? Frankly, I’m pretty tired of this worn out straw man, this “just cuz I don’t agree with you about EVERYTHING.” For, when this gets trotted out, you can call the debate godwinned: it’s an indication that whoever you’re debating with has no intention of debating in good faith, and is not ashamed to feint and sidestep and avoid actual discussion of the actual subject. ---
**Author:** ![lissener](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lissener/32/6139_2.png) [@lissener](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lissener)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2005, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-agree-on-what-homophobia-means/333541/44 "2005-12-02T23:06:02Z")
eesh. > [@lissener](#): > > For **[me]**, when this gets trotted out . . . ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2005, 2:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-agree-on-what-homophobia-means/333541/45 "2005-12-03T02:14:47Z")
> [@lissener](#): > > This is self-serving defensive bullshit. Unless you can cite an example to prove your point? > > Frankly, I’m pretty tired of this worn out straw man, this “just cuz I don’t agree with you about EVERYTHING.” For, when this gets trotted out, you can call the debate godwinned: it’s an indication that whoever you’re debating with has no intention of debating in good faith, and is not ashamed to feint and sidestep and avoid actual discussion of the actual subject. You asked for a definition in good faith and Evil Captor gave you one. Personally I think we’ve been patient with you but you’re still not getting it. You’re not lissening. I asked you specific questions for a reason, I didn’t just pull them out of my ass. If you find them agravating or if you don’t like the definitions posted by other people then you might stop and ask yourself Why? ---
**Author:** ![lissener](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lissener/32/6139_2.png) [@lissener](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lissener)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2005, 2:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-agree-on-what-homophobia-means/333541/46 "2005-12-03T02:24:13Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > You asked for a definition in good faith and Evil Captor gave you one. Personally I think we’ve been patient with you but you’re still not getting it. You’re not lissening. > > I asked you specific questions for a reason, I didn’t just pull them out of my ass. If you find them agravating or if you don’t like the definitions posted by other people then you might stop and ask yourself Why? Dude, I did NOT ask for a definition. And Evil Captor’s offering was NOT in good faith; it was a straw man generalization designed to preemptively discount anything said by anybody that HE disagreed with. And I DID answer you. I told you to look them up. The standard, accepted, perfectly lookupabble definitions of the thread-diverting straw-words that you sidestepped the consensus with are not in question, and have never really been in question. That you are pretending there is a debate about the definitions of the words “prejudice” and “irrational” is something that you just made up, and is just ANOTHER strawman. Which is why I puzzle myself by even responding. The OP has been answered to pretty much everybody’s satisfaction. Then you and EC come in, fingers in ears, going, “well that depends on what your definition of ‘is’ is,” and I, fool that I am, rise to the bait. I apologize to everyone for my gullibility. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2005, 2:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-agree-on-what-homophobia-means/333541/47 "2005-12-03T02:49:03Z")
It is anyone who, for any reason dislikes OR fears OR hates Or denigrates OR discriminates OR is prejudiced against OR supports second class treatment of, etc etc etc. It is a catch all word for intolerance. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homophobia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homophobia) The term homophobia means an “irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals”, or “aversion to gay or homosexual people or their lifestyle or culture” According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the word homophobia in the meaning “fear or hatred of homosexuals and homosexuality” was first used in print in Time Magazine in 1969. [http://www.wordreference.com/definition/homophobe](http://www.wordreference.com/definition/homophobe) a person who hates or fears homosexual people [http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom\_phob.htm](http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_phob.htm) The word “homophobia” was invented by George Weinbert who defined it as “the dread of being in close quarters with homosexuals.” It grew to mean a general “fear of homosexuals or of homosexual behavior.” But the English language is in a continuous state of flux. Words develop different meanings as people develop new consensuses on their definition. … **Meanings based on actions** : Actively work towards defining homosexuals as a minority group which should be deprived (or kept deprived) of fundamental human rights which are enjoyed by other groups. This can be as simple an action as voting in a referendum to ban same-sex marriage. It can be as involved as being part of an anti-gay organization. Some rights being sought by many homosexuals include e.g.: The right to marry. Job security – to be not fired because of their sexual orientation, Being free of discrimination in accommodation, Being included as a protected group in hate-crime legislation. **Meanings based on belief and feeling** : Attempt to love the homosexual even while condemning homosexual activity as a sin that they feel is hated by God. As St. Augustine who said “Cum dilectione hominum et odio vitiorum” which means “With love for mankind and hatred of sins.” It is often loosely translated as: “Love the sinner and hate the sin,” a saying often incorrectly attributed to Jesus Christ. 1,2 The Kinsey Institute, in its New Report on Sex, defines homophobia as the “fear, dislike or hatred of homosexuals.” Hate or dislike of all persons with a homosexual orientation, perhaps even including those who choose to remain celibate. A belief that persons with a homosexual orientation are sub-human and can be physically attacked with impunity. The aggressors are often young males who regard gay bashing as a coming-of-age ritual. Have an irrational fear of gays and lesbians. Jim Rudd, editor of The Covenant News and Director of the Christian Street Preachers Alliance has introduced a novel definition: A homophobe is: “A person who is frightened to speak out against…homosexuality.” Rudd disagrees with the actions of the U.S. Supreme Court in Lawrence v. Texas (2003). Their ruling overturned over a dozen state laws which defined private homosexual acts to be criminal. Rudd still believes – apparently based on religious grounds – that homosexual behavior is inherently a criminal act. He feels that some people fear “some sort of retaliation from these malefactors. Consequently, the homophobe says and does nothing while homosexuals publicly promote and maintain their criminal activities.” ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2005, 2:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-agree-on-what-homophobia-means/333541/48 "2005-12-03T02:58:22Z")
> [@Larry Borgia](#): > > Nonetheless it is the common term and everyone knows what it means. If I say “John is a homophobe” You know what I mean. You know I mean “John is prejudiced against gay people.” Are you saying that _any_ bias at all against gays qualifies someone as a homophobe? Everyone from the assholes who beat up gays and Fred Phelps to the straifght person who who fights for gay rights but might not want to join a gym because it is 90%-100% gay and he’d like to look at chicks? That kind of renders the word meaningless, doesn’t it? Particularly when the word, divorced from it’s literal meaning (which most everyone has conceded is now the norm) clearly demonizes the target. > [@Larry Borgia](#): > > any pretense of pretending you don’t know what I mean is at best hair-splitting pedantry and at worst an attempt to derail the discussion by deliberate smoke-blowing obfuscation. So, if a term is being used extremely broadly and we are in a debate, it is NOT appropriate (and wise) to have you clarify how you are using the word? That is just ridiculous. And for the record, I started this thread as to not hijack a few of the discussions going on. I did suggest in a thread that it would be helpful if we could define the word because as a reader (I was not a participant in the debate) it seemed that not everyone waas using it to mean the same thing. But some of the participants copped the same attitude you did here. Language is a tool in fighting ignorance, but only if we all agree what the words mean. FYI, I decided to start this thread when reading [this one](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=345033) about gay scout troop leaders. Well into the debate, amid some back and forth between **Miller** , **brickbacon** , and **Diogenes the Cynic** it was revealed that a word used in the discussion, “homophobia”, was understood by each to mean something different. So here is a perfect example of how confusion can arise when someone does not take the time to define the term, or to question how someone else is using it: > [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > What did he say that was insulting? > [@brickbacon](#): > > He implied that everybody who doesn’t think homosexuals should be boy scout leaders is a homophobe. > [@Miller](#): > > It’s not an insult, it’s a basic definition of the term. People who discriminate against homosexuals are homophobes. Refusing to allow homosexuals to join the scouts is discrimination. Ergo, those who oppose allowing them to join, are homophobes. > [@brickbacon](#): > > Really, so if I agree with affirmative action, am I a racist and sexist? Discrimination isn’t always a negative thing. When you discriminate, as in differentiate or make a distinction, between homosexual and heterosexual scout leaders, it isn’t always bad. You know the term homphobe is negative, and tossing it around, pretending you are just stating the facts is disingenuous at best. > [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > I agree with him. Now how is that insulting? > [@brickbacon](#): > > Because the term is negative, and isn’t being applied correctly. > [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > Of course it’s negative but saying homophobes are homophobic is not an insult to you[/] unless you’re a homophobe. It’s also not being applied incorrectly. Any attempt to discriminate on the basis of sexual orentation is homophobic by definition. **JustAnotherGeek** then offers this definition of bigot, which he seems to be equating with homophobe: > [@Just AnotherGeek](#): > > Originally Posted by [dictionary.com](http://dictionary.com) > big·ot n. > > One who is strongly partial to one’s own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ. …to **Miller** > [@brickbacon](#): > > My point was that applying a word that may be technically correct, but has a completely different connotation is disingenuous. Some may fit a dictionary definition of a word in a strict sense, but words don’t exist in a vacuum, and to use such a pejorative word requires one to consider the context. I don’t think there are any positives about discriminating against gay people, but I don’t think everyone who doesn’t see it my way is a homophobe. …to **DioTC** > [@brickbacon](#): > > It is being used incorrectly because the connotation is pejorative, and nobody has come close to proving any sort of malice on the part of all the people who support the boyscouts. Discriminating on the basis of race technically makes you a racist, but calling someone who supports affirmative action a racist is a stretch. > [@Miller](#): > > What context is there that makes discrimination against homosexuals not homophobia? What, in your defintion, does homophobia even mean? **DioTC** addresses **brickbacon** , kinda: > [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > Affirmative action does not discriminate on the basis of race. It is not a policy which states that a given race cannot be hired for a given job regardless of qualifications. It is not analogous. Supporting a policy which completely denies a career path on the basis of sexual orientation is purely bigoted and purely malicious. > [@brickbacon](#): > > My problem with the logic you guys are employing is that you see this as a black & white issue. I keep hearing things like, “discrimination is always bad”, when that is clearly not an absolute. Life doesn’t have many of those. Assuming anyone who feels today’s climate makes it difficult for homosexuals to be effective scout leaders is a homophobe, is absurd. > [@Guinastasia](#): > > I’ve seen this problem before-people who want it both ways. On one hand, they want to be able to make bigotted remarks and discriminate against people they don’t like (in this case, homosexuals), but at the same time, they don’t want to be labelled a bigot or a homophobe. Guess what? It can’t be done. You want to discriminate? Fine, but be prepared to accept that you are a bigot/homophobe/racist/sexist/whatever. Don’t want to be called a bigot? Then don’t make bigoted remarks, or discriminate against people for stupid stuff. > [@brickbacon](#): > > Sometimes, the term applies. My problem is everyone here is working backwards. It’s different to say person X is a homophone because of A, B, and C. What’s going on here is that people are saying, if you believe in A, B, and C, you, person X, are a homophobe. That regression is problematic for a number of reasons. Especially since the malicious intent of the discrimination has been assumed without facts in evidence. > [@Guinastasia](#): > > If people are going to discriminate on the basis that someone’s being homosexual may be a “distraction”, that’s being a homophobe. It doesn’t matter if that’s negative, or they don’t like it, or find it insulting. That’s just too damned bad. They need to own up to the fact that yes, they are homophobes. Or stop trying to discriminate against gays. Again, you can’t have it both ways. > [@brickbacon](#): > > Again, you can’t throw around terms to guilt others into agreeing with you. > [@Guinastasia](#): > > Sorry, that’s not what I’m doing. I’m simply pointing out that you can’t act like a homophobe and then expect not to be called on it. > [@brickbacon](#): > > It is what you are doing. They are not acting like homophobes. They have an opinion. You are still trying your best to validate this regression. > [@Miller](#): > > No one is arguing rights at all in this thread. We’re arguing values, which are nothing but matters of principle. And one of the values promoted by the Boy Scouts of America is patently bigoted. The only way to argue otherwise is to change the definition of bigotry, which seems to be what you’re doing in this thread. > [@brickbacon](#): > > Wrong. You are arguing backwards that anyone who agrees with the Boy Scouts is bigoted. It doesn’t work that way. I’m not changing the meaning of words, I’m explaining why you are using incorrectly. > [@Miller](#): > > You’re not explaining anything. You’re babbling. Your position makes absolutely no sense. How is a person promoting an agenda designed to exclude or denigrate a homosexual not a homophobe? How do you, brickbacon, determine if someone is a homophobe at all, if we can’t deduce it by looking at their words and beliefs? Do you even believe that homophobes exsist? If you do, what do you think they are? These terms all have common, accepted meanings, and the way you seem to be using them do not fit any of them. So we have all this back and forth on something that **WAS NOT EVEN THE POINT OF THE DISCUSSION. And that is from just one two-page thread.** I know it’s happened before. I was hoping we could prevent wasting time in the future. That is why I posted this thread. Hence, the title. So, we have a term, “homophobia”, that is used often and not in a way that adheres to it’s literal meaning. Yet, there are some who not only don’t want to define it, but demonize any suggestion to do so. Maybe **furt** is right: > [@furt](#): > > It’s pretty pointless to try for a singular definition for a widely-used and vague term like that; other people are not going to concede to whatever you consider the “right” definition to be. > > All you can do in any given conversation is figure out the other person is using a term and go with it. If they are using a term in a wildly different way from you (e.g. “terrorism is any time someone hurts someone else”), that’s your clue that further conversation will likely be pointless. Or, at least, cumbersome, confusing, and frustrating. Oh well… ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2005, 3:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-agree-on-what-homophobia-means/333541/49 "2005-12-03T03:01:41Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Are you saying that any bias at all against gays qualifies someone as a homophobe? Yes. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2005, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-agree-on-what-homophobia-means/333541/50 "2005-12-03T03:09:27Z")
> [@lissener](#): > > The OP has been answered to pretty much everybody’s satisfaction. Then you and EC come in, fingers in ears, going, “well that depends on what your definition of ‘is’ is,” and I, fool that I am, rise to the bait… I must have missed the part about everybody knowing what it meant and was equally satisfied by that definition. I’ll just sit back and wait for it to ramble on to 20 pages and then you can tell me (intermittently) which posts are the correct ones. ---
**Author:** ![lissener](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lissener/32/6139_2.png) [@lissener](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lissener)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2005, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-agree-on-what-homophobia-means/333541/51 "2005-12-03T03:11:23Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Are you saying that _any_ bias at all against gays qualifies someone as a homophobe? A. Yes. B. There are various degrees of homophobia; some people are more homophobic than others. Also, some people are more likely to indulge in activity based on their homophobia, while others will not. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2005, 3:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-agree-on-what-homophobia-means/333541/52 "2005-12-03T03:22:16Z")
This thread is a bunch of semantic horse shit. We all KNOW what “homophobe” means, it’s been around long enough. Instead of “homophobe” I will use other words from now on. I suppose that means voluntary self-exile to the Pit for me, whenever this subject comes up. :eek: ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2005, 3:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-agree-on-what-homophobia-means/333541/53 "2005-12-03T03:44:26Z")
> [@SteveG1](#): > > This thread is a bunch of semantic horse shit. We all KNOW what “homophobe” means, it’s been around long enough. Have you read the thread? Have you read the long exchange I included at the end of the last page? If you have, then how in the world can you claim “we all know”? Can you not see that there is NOT consensus, except when the term is used to broadly as to render it meaningless? **lissner, Dio,** I direct this to you, as well: To claim that “homophobia” is both the hate that killed Mathew Shephard, and the difference of opinion that prevents a supporter of gay rights from not wanting to go to a gay bar to have a drink is ridiculous. Tell me, is there ANY part of the gay agenda that a straight person can not agree with and NOT be a homophobe? I have an openly gay friend who lives in the heart of the Castro (SF) who is of the opinion that gay men should not adopt children. Is he a homophobe? If I held that same position as a straight male, would I be a homophobe? ---
**Author:** ![lissener](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lissener/32/6139_2.png) [@lissener](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lissener)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2005, 4:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-agree-on-what-homophobia-means/333541/54 "2005-12-03T04:52:59Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Have you read the thread? Have you read the long exchange I included at the end of the last page? If you have, then how in the world can you claim “we all know”? Can you not see that there is NOT consensus, except when the term is used to broadly as to render it meaningless? > > **lissner, Dio,** I direct this to you, as well: > > To claim that “homophobia” is both the hate that killed Mathew Shephard, and the difference of opinion that prevents a supporter of gay rights from not wanting to go to a gay bar to have a drink is ridiculous. Tell me, is there ANY part of the gay agenda that a straight person can not agree with and NOT be a homophobe? I have an openly gay friend who lives in the heart of the Castro (SF) who is of the opinion that gay men should not adopt children. Is he a homophobe? If I held that same position as a straight male, would I be a homophobe? I once knew a person who had a little kissy-lip shaped birthmark on the back of her left hand. What argument can we make her sweepingly relevant to? Guess what, magellan, gay people don’t all hold the same opinions on everything! I know a straight guy who hates kids, and thinks it would be a better world if we cloned full grown adults. Is he a heterophobe? What the FUCK does your gay “friend” with who knows WHAT issues or agendas have to do with this discussion? Yes, if you as a straight male think gays should not be allowed to adopt children, then you are a homophobe. By even the narrowest definition of the word. If your friend has issues of self loathing and is what is known as a “gay homophobe”–like a Jewish anti-semite; it’s not a new concept–then he’s a psychologically complex person (like, say, you or me) and his existence does not invalidate the meaning of the word. To think that homophobia can’t mean a minor personal discomfort with gays, if it also means the hatred that killed Mathew Shepard, is like saying that the fire that lights a candle can’t be the same thing that Mrs. O’Leary’s cow used to destroy Chicago. The word “homohobia” does not, of itself, connote any particular degree of homophobia. It’s up to you to clarify if you are referring to extreme, violent homophobia or to minor personal discomfort. Blacks were kept out of the armed forces for a long time because white soldiers claimed the right to indulge their discomfort at sharing quarters with them. Is that racism? If so, then it’s homophobia to be uncomfortable around gays, in a bar, in a locker room, in a barracks. It’s an assumption that gay men will act, or will treat you, differently from how straight men would. This is irrational, it is a fear, it is homophobia. ---
**Author:** ![furt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/439d5e/32.png) [@furt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/furt)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2005, 5:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-agree-on-what-homophobia-means/333541/55 "2005-12-03T05:19:45Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Tell me, is there ANY part of the gay agenda that a straight person can not agree with and NOT be a homophobe? You haven’t been paying attention to the Pit. Merely stating that you don’t actively enjoy watching homosexual activity can qualify you in some eyes. ---
**Author:** ![lissener](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lissener/32/6139_2.png) [@lissener](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lissener)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2005, 5:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-agree-on-what-homophobia-means/333541/56 "2005-12-03T05:39:21Z")
> [@furt](#): > > You haven’t been paying attention to the Pit. Merely stating that you don’t actively enjoy watching homosexual activity can qualify you in some eyes. You have a cite for this, or is this more bullshit strawman? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2005, 6:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-agree-on-what-homophobia-means/333541/57 "2005-12-03T06:05:54Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > **lissner, Dio,** I direct this to you, as well: > > To claim that “homophobia” is both the hate that killed Mathew Shephard, and the difference of opinion that prevents a supporter of gay rights from not wanting to go to a gay bar to have a drink is ridiculous. No. It just illustrates a range of intensity and expression. Racism is both the hate that killed James Byrd and my grandmother telling me it was a “sin” to date a black girl. Your “gay rights supporter” who prefers to be around girls is not really an example of bias so it’s kind of a strawman but in theory, homophobia can be very mild and understated. No one is saying that all homophobia is equally bad, just like not all racism is equally bad. > [@](#): > > Tell me, is there ANY part of the gay agenda that a straight person can not agree with and NOT be a homophobe? You’l have to explain what the “gay agenda” actually is. I’ve heard of it before but none of the gay people I know seem to know much about it. Is there an official webpage or something? Since I’ve only ever heard of it from the religious right, I’m pretty sure it doesn’t exist. > [@](#): > > I have an openly gay friend who lives in the heart of the Castro (SF) who is of the opinion that gay men should not adopt children. Is he a homophobe? Maybe. It depends on what his reasons are. He may just be ignorant. It would not be at all unusual for a homosexual man to be ironically homophobic, though. That’s actually quite common. > [@](#): > > If I held that same position as a straight male, would I be a homophobe? Yes. ---
**Author:** ![lissener](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lissener/32/6139_2.png) [@lissener](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lissener)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2005, 6:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-agree-on-what-homophobia-means/333541/58 "2005-12-03T06:20:22Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > . . . Tell me, is there ANY part of the gay agenda that a straight person can not agree with and NOT be a homophobe? . . . I missed this. Anyone who uses the phrase “gay agenda” without laughing is a homophobe. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2005, 7:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-agree-on-what-homophobia-means/333541/59 "2005-12-03T07:12:04Z")
> [@lissener](#): > > Yes, if you as a straight male think gays should not be allowed to adopt children, then you are a homophobe. How about IF I have research that shows that kids do better raised by the more traditional male/female parent set? > [@lissener](#): > > Blacks were kept out of the armed forces for a long time because white soldiers claimed the right to indulge their discomfort at sharing quarters with them. Is that racism? If so, then it’s homophobia to be uncomfortable around gays, in a bar, in a locker room, in a barracks. It’s an assumption that gay men will act, or will treat you, differently from how straight men would. This is irrational, it is a fear, it is homophobia. So we come full circle. Now homophobia is back to its literal sense: 1. “an irrational fear of gays.” But wait, **SteveG1** has provided proof that the word does in fact mean that, and more. He thinks it means: 2)" It is anyone who, for any reason dislikes OR fears OR hates Or denigrates OR discriminates OR is prejudiced against OR supports second class treatment of, etc etc etc. It is a catch all word for intolerance. " And Wiki says (notice the addition of "aversion"to #1): 1. "The term homophobia means an “irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals”, or “aversion to gay or homosexual people or their lifestyle or culture” The Oxford English Dictionary, and [wordreference.com](http://wordreference.com) seem to agree the homophobia is:: 1. “fear or hatred of homosexuals and homosexuality” and “a person who hates or fears homosexual people” respectively. Yet, [religioustolerance.org](http://religioustolerance.org) defines it as: 1. “the dread of being in close quarters with homosexuals.” and “fear of homosexuals or of homosexual behavior.” But it warns us that the language is in a continuous state of flux. Words develop different meanings as people develop new consensuses on their definition. … The Kinsey Institute is of the opinion that homophobia even includes dislike of gays: 1. “fear, dislike or hatred of homosexuals.” According to **SteveG1** (if I understand his post correctly, the [religioustolerance.org](http://religioustolerance.org) site also has homophobia defined as: 1. “Actively work towards defining homosexuals as a minority group which should be deprived (or kept deprived) of fundamental human rights which are enjoyed by other groups. This can be as simple an action as voting in a referendum to ban same-sex marriage. It can be as involved as being part of an anti-gay organization. Some rights being sought by many homosexuals include e.g.: The right to marry. Job security – to be not fired because of their sexual orientation, Being free of discrimination in accommodation, Being included as a protected group in hate-crime legislation.” …and: 8)“Hate or dislike of all persons with a homosexual orientation, perhaps even including those who choose to remain celibate.” 1. “A belief that persons with a homosexual orientation are sub-human and can be physically attacked with impunity.” Then we have the definitions offered in this thread. **Tevildo** thinks it’s: 1. “prejudiced against gays” Kalhoun seems to be of the opinon ( I think) that it qualifies as a minor mental program: 1. “By definition, an irrational fear, or hatred, is a minor mental problem, if you ask me. It can be overcome, for sure, but the patient has to want to get well. Therein lies the rub.” In a very thoughtful and I think excellent post, **davenportavenger** says what it is not: 1. “…everyone is heterosexist since we have all grown up in a heterosexist society. But that’s different from being anti-gay or gay-hating, just like the fact that we’re all racist due to growing up in a racist society doesn’t mean we are all anti-non-white people or non-white-people hating.” (And in a later post adds:) … “‘homophobia’ is a lighter term than “anti-homosexual” or “gay hater” and elicits a different set of reactions. We all know what “fag” and “dyke” mean but most people don’t use those words in discourse (except as reclaimed words) because their negative slant would influence the discussion.” **Diogenes the Cynic** offers his definition, which allows for merely judging gay people (negatively, I assume): “Homophobia is a catch-all term for any attiude which is hostile to or judgemental of homosexuality or homosexual people. The intensity of homophobic feelings can range from the mild to the rabid.” And that doesn’t even include the nuances you can find in my long post, #48. I am quite surprised to see the level of hostility you and some others have expressed for us merely visiting the issue. If you are so clear on everything and so opposed to the discussion itself, why are you participating in the thread? Seriously. The answer can’t be that you want to fight ignorance, as you have not offered anything but piss and points to the dictionary. Do you still think that the word is clearly understood? Not only is there disagreement within this thread, but I included running experts from intelligent posters from another thread, and showed how confusion over this one word snuck up on them and interfered with—and nearly derailed—their discussion. Do you not see that as a problem? Why the hostility? In reading this thread over I think **Evil Captor** hit the nail on the head: "Mostly, homophobia means “Irrational fear and/or hatred of gays and gayness.” But for some few gay people a homophobe is “Someone who doesn’t agree with me about everything.” Keepiing the word vague I guess does have it’s benefits. If someone disagrees with anything, even a minor transgression, he can be slapped with the “homophobic” label. And using the label is so effective in crushing your opponent because through usage you (in the general sense) also equate with them gay-bashers, and the most disgusting gay-haters. This is not fair or intellectually honest. I think it is incumbent upon those in the gay community to limit the use of the term to mean one end of the spectrum or the other, then start using a different term for the other end. As his been pointed out by others, the term “racist” suffers from similar problems, but at least with it there is not a literal meaning that is being ignored most of the time the word is used. I don’t think people much care how you define homophobia, just that it be defined to be understood. Maybe it’s just outside the gay community that are confused. If that’s the case, don’t you want to be able to communicate with us? I think this defining the term and doing so more narrowly is wise for the movement, as people, like myself, who are on board for the vast, vast majority fo the gay rights movement do not think of themsleves as being anywhere near homophobic and strongly resent the label. Perhaps the only thing regarding this issue that I more is being bullied into a position. My reaction, which I’m sure others would have as well, is to say “Oh yeah, you self-righteous piece of shit, fuck you.” Given that I believe that homosexuality is not, wrong, or evil, or anything except something as natural as heterosexuality, I would hate to see an unnecessary rift develop. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2005, 7:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-agree-on-what-homophobia-means/333541/60 "2005-12-03T07:18:15Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > How about IF I have research that shows that kids do better raised by the more traditional male/female parent set? Let’s see it. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-agree-on-what-homophobia-means/333541.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-agree-on-what-homophobia-means/333541.md?page=4)