Yes. Please send me a dollar.
Ah, well, the mod count now stands at five.
I’m in the pool for October 2.
EddyTeddyFreddy! I am shocked. I can’t believe I’m hearing this from you. Personally, I think Paul will reflect on his behavior, take a break from the boards for a while, and come back a lot calmer.
Besides, they’re paying 100:1 for that bet. 
I’ve always been a sucker for the long shot. Just look at my mentoring friendship with Starving Artist. 
LONG shot? St. Jude’s got nothin on you.
Yes, and look how far you’ve come as a result.
You should see the files he’s got on me, though. He’s blackmailed me into burying fifteen statues of him around my house so far.
Daniel
Whew! It’s not just me, then.
It seems to me that Paul is really upset about what the word “fear” means , not the word “phobe”.
Sin.
We’re back to the old prescriptivism vs descriptivism fight again. I think it’s funny that a lot of people think that people fighting for gay rights are using the word “phobia” wrongly, but in turn, you are telling them that they are using the term “phobia” wrongly. Insert comment about still speaking Chaucerian English here.
If advocates of tolerance want to communicate effectively with people, they should use words that do not have different popular meanings.
Much the same as those who think that whites are, by default, racist, should use different terminology if they really want to communicate their ideas of institutional prejudice rather than simply getting folks angry at them.
It matters not that you are historically more correct about the meaning of “phobia” than the above example: many amongst the populace would be put off by thinking that advocates of equality are so “shrill” due to their misinterpreting the word “homophobia”.
You’re confusing the individual word “phobia” with the combining form “-phobia”. The former evolved from the latter, but the meaning is not identical. The noun “phobia” does indeed mean “fear”, especially an exaggerated or irrational fear. If I said “You have a phobia about homosexuals” I would be stating that you are unreasonably afraid of homosexuals.
“-phobia” can be combined with another word to indicate a fear of, hatred for, or aversion to that thing. Several useful and fairly mainstream words (notably the already-mentioned “xenophobia” and “photophobia”) use “-phobia” to mean something other than simply “fear”. Yet I’ve never heard anyone complain about this. Perhaps the only people stupid enough to think that “-phobia” can only mean “fear” are too stupid to have heard of “xenophobia” or “photophobia”.
Or perhaps people make these ill-informed complaints because they have some agenda other than promoting proper word choice. Perhaps they are simply grasping at straws in their attempts to belittle the gay rights movement without seeming too. . .homophobic.
Again: we’ve moved past the education phase of the “movement.” The resources are out there, you’ve had your chance. We’ve reached the point where ignorance is no longer a shield. Just like a racist wouldn’t get a pass nowadays because he thought “nigger” was a perfectly acceptable word. Well, OK, if that were true you wouldn’t impute malice, but you’d correct him firmly and move on, and not suggest that it’s not his fault that not everyone uses that word in the same way.
My POINT is, like all such “movements,” the gay rights movement has been through its early phases of trepidation and education. The train has left the station. If you’re not on it, you’re not gonna get anywhere.
He’s on probation for “hate speech” or some shit like that.
I saw that he was on his final warning, but “on probation”? Link?
Final warning. Probation. Same same.
Lissener, Lamia, you don’t control the English language. Sure, it would be great if everything had one clear definition, but that’s hardly ever the case.
Is it really worth it to write off a whole swath of people as unreachable simply because you disagree on the definition of a word?
IMO, the word does contain the implication of irrational fear, since the most common use of that suffix is to denote a psychological condition of irrational fear. There’s no way around that, at least when I hear the term.
It’s much like using the term “black” both to describe negative things, and to describe a person’s skin color. Sure, I can and do use “black” in both ways, but I see how people commonly referred to as having that skin color can take offense at it. In the context of trying to establish better relations with the community at large, it would do no good to use a phrase such as “today is a black day for the civil rights movement”. Nor would it do any good to refer to “homophobes” if another phrase, such as “unclefelching bigots”, does just as well.
There’s no way you can have read this entire thread.
Here’s the thing: the people who aren’t reachable are choosing not to be reachable.
- The word is defined a specific way in the dictionary.
- The root word they’re objecting to is used in a perfectly valid fashion, from an etymological standpoint.
- The implication to which they object is not an implication in the word’s common usage.
- Their objection is based entirely on cognates of the word to which they object.
In other words, their objection is weaker than the objection to the word “niggardly,” inasmuch as “niggardly” is an extremely rare word whose meaning is very obscure, whereas most folks involved in this discussion understand the denotation of “homophobe.”
It’s fine to educate people; but if someone refuses to be educated and refuses to use words according to their commonly-held meaning based on an incorrect understanding of the word’s etymology, that’s their problem, not the problem of the speaker.
Daniel
Oh yes I do!
*Gosh, I thought that’s just what I’d been saying. “-phobia” doesn’t just have a simple definition like “fear”, it has a slightly more complex meaning.
When it comes to the word “homophobia”, however, the definition is pretty clear. It means fear of, hatred for, or aversion to homosexuals. I do not believe for one second that anyone is actually confused about this. The OP displayed an understanding of the intended meaning, he was objecting on the grounds that the word shouldn’t mean what it does mean. This would be an idiotic objection even if it weren’t based on a misunderstanding of the meaning of “-phobia”.
*I am not sure why this question is directed at me, as I’m not the one writing off the gay rights movement based on the mistaken belief that they are guilty of misusing Greek suffixes. Although to be fair, I don’t really think anyone has actually done that. People don’t do such things because of their love of proper etymology, they do it because they’re ignorant, bigoted, or both. Yet here I am, wasting my valuable time carefully explaining why they are wrong.
*What do you mean by “most common”? There are probably more individual words in which the “-phobia” is used in that way, but these words do not appear frequently in ordinary conversation. “Xenophobia” isn’t an everyday word either, but I’ve certainly used it far more often than I have used any of the names of the clinical phobias. Even were this not the case, it wouldn’t matter. If a word or word part has multiple possible meanings, we don’t just declare the most popular one the winner and drop all others from the language.
In any event, the word “homophobia” is intended to include the idea of being afraid of homosexuals. That’s not it’s sole meaning, but it’s certainly part of the meaning. The reasons for this should be obvious. Some people do fear homosexuals, and some hate them at least in part because they’re afraid of them. (It’s arguable that all hatred is rooted in fear.) Even in a relatively enlightened forum like the SDMB I’ve seen anti-gay remarks made that weren’t simply anti-gay, but clearly expressed an unfounded fear of being anally raped by gay men. Is there a better word than “homophobia” to describe such sentiments?
*Ah, so this is really about your personal opinions then.
*Yes, I’m sure people who object to being called homophobes would vastly prefer “unclefelcing bigot”, thus improving community relations and bringing about a new Golden Age. As sole arbiter of the English language, I shall institute this change immediately.
See, that’s exactly my point. Many people do, indeed, have a deep-seated fear of homosexuals. But many people will say “HA! I’m not a homophobe! I dont hate em! I just dont like em!” Some of 'em will be lying, perhaps most of them: you and I will never know.
The point I have been hammering on is exactly that although people here have been saying it’s perfectly okay to use the term to refer to hatred, it still implies fear through it’s suffix.
Sort of like having your cake and eating if too if you, for instance, called someone racist because of their colour of their skin and you got the “bigoted” part for free.