Finally! Someone has the outrage I’ve been looking for! 
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.
eesh.
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.
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
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
a person who hates or fears homosexual people
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.”
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.
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 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:
JustAnotherGeek then offers this definition of bigot, which he seems to be equating with homophobe:
…to Miller
…to DioTC
DioTC addresses brickbacon, kinda:
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:
Or, at least, cumbersome, confusing, and frustrating.
Oh well…
Yes.
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.
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.
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:
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
Yes.
I missed this. Anyone who uses the phrase “gay agenda” without laughing is a homophobe.
How about IF I have research that shows that kids do better raised by the more traditional male/female parent set?
So we come full circle. Now homophobia is back to its literal sense:
- “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):
- "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 seem to agree the homophobia is::
- “fear or hatred of homosexuals and homosexuality” and “a person who hates or fears homosexual people” respectively.
Yet, religioustolerance.org defines it as:
- “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:
- “fear, dislike or hatred of homosexuals.”
According to SteveG1 (if I understand his post correctly, the religioustolerance.org site also has homophobia defined as:
- “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.”
- “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:
- “prejudiced against gays”
Kalhoun seems to be of the opinon ( I think) that it qualifies as a minor mental program:
- “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:
- “…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.
Let’s see it.