Leet linguobraniacs necesitan non lookseebooks: word. And anyhoo, it depends on what dictionario you look it. See my post above about Chaucerian English. :wally
So?
Yes it is. The only two counterexamples I can think of off the top of my head are “xenophobia” and “hydrophobia” (when referred to in a chemical sense).
it’s as much the connotation as the denotation. Despite being educated as to the denotation, it is not always possible to excise all connotation from a word. Reference my post about “black”.
I’m not a huge fan of the term “homophobia,” either. Sounds too clinical, like something you are afflicted with, as opposed to something you inflict on others. Still, the debate is pretty academic. Language does, indeed, change, but to date, no one has ever figured out a way to reliably guide that change. People use the words they want to use, and use them how they want to use them. As it is now, if you want the specific term for an anti-gay bigot, that word is “homophobe.” That may change someday, but it’s not going to change by haranguing gay rights activists to invent a new word.
If it was hate speech, it couldn’t have been in this thread.
I will say it again as I have said countless times before (in this thread, and more elaborately in the pitting of Sevastopol88 which I have completely abandoned in fear of being berated to death,) that I have absolutely nothing against gays. Or lesbians. Or bisexuals (which one of my parents happens to be, and I have no beef with it whatsoever.) Or transsexuals or transvestites (I was in a play with one two years ago and he was one of the most pleasant and entertaining people I’ve ever met.) Or anyone who supports their rights to marry or have children (I support both 100%)
I’ve never been called a homophobe by anyone (because anyone who knows me in person, which excludes anyone on this board so I’d say you’d be fairly unqualified to say otherwise,) so actually, that’s not my argument.
It’s the fact that I HEAR people throw around the word “homophobe” all the time when, in my opinion, it isn’t aptly used.
Let me make it clear that there are plenty of times when “homophobe” works perfectly. Here’s one that just came up the other day: I was watching American Beauty, with two of my friends, when, what do you know, the director has decided to regale the viewers with a full-on shot of a naked young man’s posterior! One of them says "If we were still in high school, we’d be saying, “ahhhhhhh! A man’s ass!!!”
People who recoil in fear of a man’s ass may well be homophobic. I do no such thing, being as I am a fan of Renaissance sculpture.
At least such a person would realize that “-phobia” can refer to hate as well as fear. As to their dancing around whether or not the word applies to them or not, well, I don’t see how adopting a new term would change that. If someone wants to deny being a homophobe, they’d probably try to deny being an “anti-gay bigot” or even a “gay-disliker” too.
*So what? Have I ever denied that “-phobia” can mean fear as well as hate? “Homophobia” is a word with multiple related connotations, and “fear of homosexuals” is one of them. Big deal. Anyone who thinks “fear” is the only possible meaning of “-phobia” is ignorant. Anyone who’s upset by the implication that their righteous, manly hatred of homosexuals might be tainted by some sissy emotion like fear isn’t a person whose opinions I care very much about.
It’s not like using the word “hate” or some new coinage like “homohater” would leave us in a very different position anyway. Any armchair psychologist will tell you that hate is often, perhaps always, rooted in fear. Webster’s gives “intense hostility and aversion usually deriving from fear, anger, or sense of injury” as the first definition of “hate”. So like “-phobia”, the word “hate” suggests the possibility that fear is involved. And once again, big deal.
It strikes me that if a segment of the population can’t disseminate their lies and decieve others as well as themselves about gays and lesbians they’ll try to get things mired in a semantic debate until one cannot see the forest for the trees.
Not everyone in this debate that is having a conniption over the semantics of the term homophobe falls under the catagory that I described. Some people cannot live without something to complain about, without some offense to take, even if that offense is by the offense they cause and their difficulty dealing with it.
Honestly, I think the horse has disintegrated and the dust has blown so far away that I doubt anyone would realize it ever existed.
If the word doesn’t apply to you, don’t worry about it. If the word does apply to you, why do you allow it to be part of your life? If you don’t know, I’d have to ask why is there a question in your mind and heart where this is concerned?
It isn’t about who you love or the genitals they have.
It is about the quality and strength of that love. It is about that love making you strong by loving and being loved in return. In the end, love is love.
Why does anyone care if that love exists between two men, two women, or any other consenting consentual combination under the sun.
Is there not enough for all of us to handle without adding policing the lives of others to that?
Tell you what: “homophobia” can be used as analogous to “xenophobia”, implying not only hatred, but also perhaps fear, and also hatred through fear. That’s what I think of when I hear the term. But many people who use it mean just plain hatred, ISTM, I could be wrong. Those people are the ones who I am complaining about.
I mean, sure, you can use words the way you want to, even if 90% of the population won’t know what you mean. Take the cold comfort of the dictionary agreeing with you. But realize it’s only a few steps away from full-blown Liberal-ism.
Why are you telling me what I’ve been telling you all along?
*Well, I think you are probably wrong about what they mean. But even if you aren’t, they’re still using the word in a proper, reasonable, and intelligable manner. I don’t see why this is worthy of complaint. If I said the sky was blue, would you be upset because the word “blue” encompasses a number of similar yet distinct shades that are not all necessarily seen in the sky?
*I don’t think that 90% of the population is confused about what the word “homophobia” means. A large percentage is probably unware of the word’s existance, but I have yet to see any evidence that anyone who has ever heard it in context took it to mean anything other than “fear or hatred of homosexuals”. The only objections I’ve seen (including your own) have been that the word shouldn’t mean what speakers intended for it to mean and what listeners understand it to mean. This objection is too idiotic to be believed.
Let me make myself perfectly clear, as you seem not to have picked up on this yet: When I say I don’t believe it, I mean that I do not believe it. I do not believe that the word “homophobia” bothers you. If it does, it is not for the reasons you have presented. I have chosen to address your arguments anyway, but I do not believe that you are making them in good faith. That is not merely obnoxious and dishonest, it is boring.
When I see the word, I am unsure of whether the writer means:
– Fear and hatred of homosexuals
– Acknowledged hatred of homosexuals
– Bigotry against homosexuals, perhaps rooted in fear or hatred
On the other hand, that’s not my major beef with the word. My major beef is with those that get all bent out of shape at those that misunderstand. After all, people use it in so many different ways that it’s hard to tell for any given person how they are using it.
Even in this thread, some are use it to mean xenophobia-like hatred and fear, while some are perfectly okay to throw it out any old time someone advocates an anti-gay position.
Go ahead, I don’t mind if you use that term. But it’s fair game if people call you on it.
Incidentally, since “homo” is generally a pejorative, don’t you think it’s odd that it’s mostly gays who use the term “homophobia” (aversion to homos)?
This is irony made manifest. You say the term “homo” is a pejorative as opposed to its various classical meanings, but you almost casually attribute phobia to mean “aversion,” which is only a recent development.
Word meaning truly is in the eye of the beholder, I guess. It’s a wonder any of us can communicate.
