# Do you have to be phobic to be a "homophobe?" **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [January 29, 2004, 4:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-have-to-be-phobic-to-be-a-homophobe/226524 "2004-01-29T04:42:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2004, 4:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-have-to-be-phobic-to-be-a-homophobe/226524/121 "2004-01-30T04:49:47Z")
Oops!..of using it ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2004, 4:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-have-to-be-phobic-to-be-a-homophobe/226524/122 "2004-01-30T04:51:23Z")
in this way. Starving Artist is having trouble hitting the wrong keys on his keyboard. Sorry to all. ---
**Author:** ![MrVisible](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@MrVisible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrVisible)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2004, 4:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-have-to-be-phobic-to-be-a-homophobe/226524/123 "2004-01-30T04:52:13Z")
> [@Starving Artist](#): > > What you are attempting to do is one of the oldest tricks in the book on debates. Yeah, it’s called ‘asking for facts’. > [@](#): > > Once again (damn, I have to say that a lot), I am not about to get bogged down on who says it, what their context is, why they said it or what their intent was, etc. To do so would only deflect once again from the OP which was intended to discuss the DISHONESTY You might want to think about the honesty of accusing people of doing something that you can’t prove they do. ---
**Author:** ![Gorsnak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gorsnak/32/7587_2.png) [@Gorsnak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorsnak)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2004, 4:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-have-to-be-phobic-to-be-a-homophobe/226524/124 "2004-01-30T04:54:42Z")
> [@Dewey Cheatem Undhow](#): > > Given that I have repeatedly expressed my full support for things like the repeal of sodomy laws and the passage of civil union legislation, your characterization of me as not “displaying one iota of concern” for gays and showing “blithe unconcern” for civil rights is wholly misplaced. This is argument by character assasination, not legitimate logical debate. I call it blithe unconcern, because while you express support, you condemn their seeking the only feasible means of redress available. You offer no realistic alternative, save waiting several decades\* while the general public awaken to the injustice. That is to say, you think that there are rules that are more important than their lives. I don’t think that makes you a bigot, exactly, but it certainly reflects poorly on you, in my opinion. Of course, being rather more versed than you in metaethics, I have softer opinions on such matters. I am much less certain of the truth than you are, because I understand just how debateable the underlying premises are, and hence I tend not to assume the worst about those who reach different conclusions. I see no reason to think that I should condemn Otto and Homebrew for not extending that benefit of the doubt. \*How long, exactly, was it between the first legalization of interracial marriage in the US, and the likely date of the last state abandoning antimiscegenation laws (i.e., if Loving hadn’t happened, when Mississippi or wherever finally repealed the law)? Was it only decades, or was it actually centuries? That’s the time frame you’re saying they should endure, rather than advocate a legal decision based on principles of jurisprudence different from your own. ---
**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:** [January 30, 2004, 4:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-have-to-be-phobic-to-be-a-homophobe/226524/125 "2004-01-30T04:58:50Z")
[QUOTE=Starving Artist] > [@kaylasdad99](#): > > By insisting on characterizing the term (and by extension, its users) as “dishonest,” you practically invite people to conclude your position in the larger debate. > > I had just finished posting to thank you about “toeing” when I had to leave the computer. Otherwise, I would have responded to this, too. > > Do you realize what you’re saying?..This term _is_ dishonest! Or in the case of those who have unthinkingly adopted the use of it, inaccurate. Is one to unquestioningly accept indiscriminate and abusive use of this term because to do otherwise would cause a person to quite rightly and logically be percieved as a bigot? > > “Go with the lie, or you’re a bigot!” Has anyone asserted this to be the case? Please provide a cite that something called the “gay cause” uses the term “homophobic” in a dishonest way. Please provide a cite that anyone at all insists that an inaccurate or dishonest use of the word should be tolerated. Please define exactly what would make a given use of the term “dishonest?” What do _you_ think constitutes bigotry? The whole point of your OP is to challenge (uncited) misuse of such a characterization against individuals who you believe are not guilty of such a slur yet you have also steadfastly refused to define where you think the line is. ---
**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:** [January 30, 2004, 5:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-have-to-be-phobic-to-be-a-homophobe/226524/126 "2004-01-30T05:09:17Z")
> [@Starving Artist](#): > > I’ve answered this before, buttpipe! (Sorry to everyone else. I can only overlook being called an asshole just so many times.) > > What you are attempting to do is one of the oldest tricks in the book on debates. Once again (damn, I have to say that a lot), I am not about to get bogged down on who says it, what their context is, why they said it or what their intent was, etc. To do so would only deflect once again from the OP which was intended to discuss the DISHONESTY I’m trying to get you to support the _premise_ for your OP, fuckbucket. You’re bitching about a phenomenon which you have failed to prove exists. It’s like you posted an OP complaining that goblins keep stealing food from your refrigerator and aren’t those goblins bastards. When asked for some sort of evidence that goblins actually exist and are raiding your refrigerator you get petulant and insist that we are ignoring your point about what bastards they are. ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2004, 5:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-have-to-be-phobic-to-be-a-homophobe/226524/127 "2004-01-30T05:12:01Z")
[QUOTE=MrVisible] I find this style of debate invigorating. All you have to do is reply to those who debate your position; you don’t have to address their points, or do anything to rebut them. Just reply. Excuse me, but is this a debate or is one supposed to just post something and sit back benignly to see what happens? You seem to be giving a mixed message here. For my part, I would have been happy to sit by and see what transpired, which is what I did regarding the early posts to this thread. I’m not going to sit idly by, however, when people deliberately or mistakenly misstate my opinions or attack me. And if someone seems to be earnestly and reasonably trying seek an opinion on something in this thread, that I did, after all start, I am going to feel free to respond. I started this thread and I believe I should be able to post as much as I like and I fully well intend to. To those of you who don’t like it, and who don’t want to address the thrust of my OP which has to do with HONESTY, not my stance on gay rights, you can go elsewhere or simply not read my posts. If someone doesn’t want me to respond to something they might say, they should go post it elsewhere. ---
**Author:** ![shy\_guy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a6a055/32.png) [@shy\_guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/shy_guy)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2004, 5:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-have-to-be-phobic-to-be-a-homophobe/226524/128 "2004-01-30T05:13:50Z")
I agree with **Diogenes** here, I think. Maybe, **Starving Artist** , if you could just clarify what you’re talking about? What beliefs do you (or someone you know or whatever) hold that cause you to feel that people are unfairly branding you a homophobe? “Not supporting the homosexual cause” just isn’t very specific. ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2004, 5:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-have-to-be-phobic-to-be-a-homophobe/226524/129 "2004-01-30T05:14:31Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > I’m trying to get you to support the _premise_ for your OP, fuckbucket. Dear Diogenes the Dipstick: How old are you, anyway? ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2004, 5:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-have-to-be-phobic-to-be-a-homophobe/226524/130 "2004-01-30T05:16:35Z")
> [@lel](#): > > Forgive me if I’m completely off the wall here, but my reading of this thread suggests that **Starving Artist** seems to be arguing that same point; namely, that there are more than two camps in the homosexuality debate. It seems more like an observation that there seems to be a tendency to put people into two camps. > > The problem I see is that there are people who could be considered in the middle. I believe **Polycarp** put forth a valid example of one who might be considered in between the two camps, and it appears that people are considering this person to be more in the “anti-” camp. > > Can a person be uncomfortable with homosexual acts and still be considered neutral in the homosexuality debate? How about a person that considers homosexual acts sinful? What is considered neutral? You are exactly right in your assessment of what I’m trying to say. And while this does consist of yet another post by me, I just want to say how refreshing it is when someone sees my actual point. Thank you. ---
**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:** [January 30, 2004, 5:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-have-to-be-phobic-to-be-a-homophobe/226524/131 "2004-01-30T05:27:15Z")
What do you consider “neutral?” you have to define that before the honesty or the legitimacy of “bigotry” accusations can be considered. What do _you_ consider bigotry? What do _you_ consider “neutral?” Who is calling the neutral people bigots? You have to clarify the predicates in your OP if you want a coherent debate.Oh…and as to my age…I’m probably old enough to be your daddy…in fact, I might _be_ your daddy. What’s your mom’s name? ---
**Author:** ![MrVisible](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@MrVisible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrVisible)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2004, 5:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-have-to-be-phobic-to-be-a-homophobe/226524/132 "2004-01-30T05:37:35Z")
I have come to a conclusion. Judging by the lack of coherence, the lack of language skills and the lack of comprehension displayed by **Starving Artist** , I have to conclude that he is a complete and total moron. Whatever his actual opinion on gay rights actually is, it is as irrelevant as any other opinion held by a moron. However he defines his terms, they’re terms defined by a moron, and so are equally irrelevant. Unlike him, I have evidence to support my position. Every post of his simply underscores my point. Now, basing my actions on this observation, I can happily sit back and make fun of him, given that arguing with a moron is never productive. Even if you win the argument, all you’ve done is won an argument with a moron. Now, who wants pie? ---
**Author:** ![Ferrous](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Ferrous](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ferrous)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2004, 5:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-have-to-be-phobic-to-be-a-homophobe/226524/133 "2004-01-30T05:41:54Z")
What you don’t seem to be getting, **Starving Artist** , is that your OP is so vague that there’s really nothing to debate. Your position, as I understand it, and correct me if I’m wrong, is this and only this: Sometimes people use the term “homophobe” to apply to people who are not homophobes. Okay, great. No one can disagree with that, as there are undoubtedly people who use the term incorrectly, either through ignorance or malice. Only an idiot would hold the position that that has never happened in the history of the world. So now what? What’s the basis for discussion? Who are these people who are using it incorrectly, in your opinion? Who are the people who are being unjustly accused of homophobia? We need some specific examples so we can discuss whether or not we feel that specific case is a valid use of the term. (And to answer a question you posed a few posts ago: No, it is not generally considered good form to simply post a general topic and then sit back and see what happens. It’s not a hard-and-fast rule, of course, but you’ll get more respect if you actually participate in the discussion you start.) ---
**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:** [January 30, 2004, 5:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-have-to-be-phobic-to-be-a-homophobe/226524/134 "2004-01-30T05:42:40Z")
> [@MrVisible](#): > > arguing with a moron is never productive. Even if you win the argument, all you’ve done is won an argument with a moron. May I use this for a sig? ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2004, 5:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-have-to-be-phobic-to-be-a-homophobe/226524/135 "2004-01-30T05:43:45Z")
> [@shy guy](#): > > I agree with **Diogenes** here, I think. > > Maybe, **Starving Artist** , if you could just clarify what you’re talking about? What beliefs do you (or someone you know or whatever) hold that cause you to feel that people are unfairly branding you a homophobe? > > “Not supporting the homosexual cause” just isn’t very specific. No one is branding me a homophobe, not prior to this thread anyway. I bacame annoyed because I’ve noticed that in the ongoing struggle for gay civil rights, there are those who favor it and there are “homophobes.” I believe this to be most noticable in the case of the media, Hollywood, politicians, and, increasingly, by the proponents of gay rights in the rest of society. I never see any discussion anywhere about those who may be personally uncomfortable with homosexuality but feel deep down that the movement is valid…they just find it hard to accept. I don’t hear anything about the fence-sitters who haven’t made up their minds, and I don’t hear anything about the apathetic who just don’t care. Nope. There are only the overt proponents of gay rights…and Homophobes! I believe that on the part of the media and Hollywood and many politicians that this is a deliberate (and deliberately dishonest) attempt to intimidate and villianize those who don’t necessarily agree with the gay rights movement as a tactic to further their societal goals. Phobias are personality or mental disorders. I simply object to using the term for people who are not phobic as a tactic to achieve societal goals. I posted a query as whether or not a person has to actually be phobic to qualify as a homophobe. I was originally trying to illustrate the basic fallacy of calling everyone not overtly behind the gay rights movement “phobic,” in an effort to see if perhaps someone could come up with a term that would adequately describe true bigots (those overtly opposed to gay people and their civil rights) in a more honest way, and which would also not paint those who are not overtly opposed to gay rights with a dishonest label in order to expedite their cause. You see the result. ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2004, 5:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-have-to-be-phobic-to-be-a-homophobe/226524/136 "2004-01-30T05:49:01Z")
> [@Ferrous](#): > > What you don’t seem to be getting, **Starving Artist** , is that your OP is so vague that there’s really nothing to debate. > > Your position, as I understand it, and correct me if I’m wrong, is this and only this: Sometimes people use the term “homophobe” to apply to people who are not homophobes. > > Okay, great. No one can disagree with that, as there are undoubtedly people who use the term incorrectly, either through ignorance or malice. Only an idiot would hold the position that that has never happened in the history of the world. > > Are you listening, Diogenes??? > > So now what? What’s the basis for discussion? Who are these people who are using it incorrectly, in your opinion? Who are the people who are being unjustly accused of homophobia? We need some specific examples so we can discuss whether or not we feel that specific case is a valid use of the term. > > See my reply to Shy Guy. > > (And to answer a question you posed a few posts ago: No, it is not generally considered good form to simply post a general topic and then sit back and see what happens. It’s not a hard-and-fast rule, of course, but you’ll get more respect if you actually participate in the discussion you start.) Excuse me, but have I entered the Twilight Zone? Participating in the discussion is exactly what you’ve recently been criticizing me for, i.e., too many posts, etc. The fact that I’m not giving you the answers you’re demanding (for reasons I’ve explained several times) does not mean I’m not participating in the discussion, either. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2004, 5:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-have-to-be-phobic-to-be-a-homophobe/226524/137 "2004-01-30T05:56:40Z")
[QUOTE=Starving Artist] > [@kaylasdad99](#): > > I’m not quite sure what you mean by the part about “not [toeing] the party line;” > > QUOTE] > > Thank you for the spelling correction. Knowing that one’s time to post before one of the frequent lock-ups occur, and that this can sometimes cause my reply to be lost, sometimes causes careless errors. 😕 – the FUCK? I contribute a point, and you respond to the fact that I corrected your SPELLING? How freaking obtuse is that? Shall I assume that if I had let the misuse of “towing” slide by, you would have ignored my post in its entirety? I do hope you’ll pardon me for being insufficiently grateful. A cordial suggestion\*: if your posting time is so limited, how about prioritizing it so you deal with substantive arguments FIRST, then turn your attention to the more pedantic matters, as time allows. \*Although, to be sure, my cordiality is growing more strained by the minute. ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2004, 5:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-have-to-be-phobic-to-be-a-homophobe/226524/138 "2004-01-30T05:56:44Z")
> [@Starving Artist](#): > > Excuse me, but have I entered the Twilight Zone? Participating in the discussion is exactly what you’ve recently been criticizing me for, i.e., too many posts, etc. > The fact that I’m not giving you the answers you’re demanding (for reasons I’ve explained several times) does not mean I’m not participating in the discussion, either. My apologies, Ferrous, for posting some comments that wound up among your post and which appear to be part of your post. Insofar as I’m new to this site, I’m going to need to get the hang of responding segmentally like so many of you do. Once again, even though you seem mystified by my efforts to be polite to you, I do apologize. (I must admit however, that being more polite than usual with you is something I’m less and less inclined to as time goes by. I originally thought you to be less judmental and condemning and more open-minded.) Anyone confused as to what Ferrous’ post was vs. mine should read his original posting. ---
**Author:** ![MrVisible](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@MrVisible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrVisible)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2004, 5:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-have-to-be-phobic-to-be-a-homophobe/226524/139 "2004-01-30T05:57:32Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > May I use this for a sig? I’d be honored. ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2004, 6:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-have-to-be-phobic-to-be-a-homophobe/226524/140 "2004-01-30T06:03:52Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > 😕 – the FUCK? I contribute a point, and you respond to the fact that I corrected your SPELLING? > > How freaking obtuse is that? Shall I assume that if I had let the misuse of “towing” slide by, you would have ignored my post in its entirety? I do hope you’ll pardon me for being insufficiently grateful. > > A cordial suggestion\*: if your posting time is so limited, how about prioritizing it so you deal with substantive arguments FIRST, then turn your attention to the more pedantic matters, as time allows. > > \*Although, to be sure, my cordiality is growing more strained by the minute. Good Fricking Grief!!! I misspell toeing, you respell it in brackets, and I’m a jerk for thinking you corrected me. I also thanked you sincerely and explained my error. What’s your problem? I thought you were supposed to be a prince of a fellow. My “limited” time on the computer is not a problem for me. I either post or will eventually post whatever I have to say. I have been accused by Ferrous, and some others in this thread, of avoiding issues and hiding out when a certain amount of time goes by and they haven’t heard my response to the points they have posted in an attempt to show me the error of my ways. Damn, I’m disappointed in you. And the rest of this is just getting tiresome. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-have-to-be-phobic-to-be-a-homophobe/226524.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-have-to-be-phobic-to-be-a-homophobe/226524.md?page=8)