I don’t know if this belongs in GD or IMHO… but I’m starting in GD. (Language forum, anyone?)
The term “homophobia” has always seemed wrong to me when used to refer to hatred of homosexuals. So I don’t use it. “Gay bashing” is more accurate, but in my mind it’s actually too narrow, implying actions or words rather than a mindset.
Here’s why I don’t care for the term as it’s commonly used – it all comes down to objecting to the conflation of fear and hatred:
Implying that gay-haters are motivated by fear just seems off-base. Growing up, I knew some guys who would occasionally drive into the nearby big city, park their car in areas of certain municipal parks and other spots frequented by gays, have one pose as a young gay guy looking to hook up, get a fellow in the woods, then beat him up and sometimes rob him. They did this for fun. I don’t believe they were motivated by fear (conscious or unconscious) or that they had a fear of homosexuals or homosexuality. They were just mean, bigoted, mill-town rednecks who weren’t raised right. (For the record, I was also a mill-town redneck [still am?] juvenile delinquent with my own share of bigotry, but I wasn’t as mean or violent as these guys.)
The terms smacks of the old playground taunt “What are you afraid of?”. Seems like an attempt to shame gay-haters by implying that they’re cowards, and I don’t think that’s quite the problem.
If hatred of gays is really motivated by fear, there’s actually a shade of an excuse there. Let’s call it what it is – plain old-fashioned hate.
I once had someone tell me that “phobia” can refer to hate as well as fear, but I don’t see it being used that way elsewhere. People who are arachnophobic, acrophobic, and agoraphobic, for example, react to spiders, heights, and public places with fear, not with anger or gleeful agression.
Is there a more accurate term? Could one be coined? Or am I just off base?
Oh dear. I’ve been bashed in other fora because I stated I thought homosexuality was contrary to nature. Mind you, I voted in my state to allow homosexual marriages. I feel that it is none of my damn business who other consenting adults sleep with. Which part of “is none of my damn business” is unclear?
IMO, Heterosexism seems to be the more apropos term but homophobia made it into the lexicon. When I hear them side-by-side, homphobia doesn’t seem as bad as heterosexism, it’s more of a gentler term. Even if it does apply to bigots.
If I’m giving the wrong impression, I probably better clarify something right away…
The only issue I care to raise is whether the term “homophobia” aptly applies to (quoting the OP) “hatred of homosexuals”.
**It’s a question of linguistics.
I did not intend to open the question of whether, say, opposition to gay marriage for example is tantamount to hatred – or anything even remotely like that.**
“homophobe” may not be the best term for people who hate gays, just as “anti-semite” is not the best term for people who hate Jews. However both terms are in the common language, we all know what they mean, and they’re not going to go away. This just seems like a nit-pick, albeit a justified one.
As a committed arachnaphobe, I’d be inclined to agree, but I understand the OP’s point. “Phobia” is an unreasonable fear, and while I’m sure a great deal of hate is fear-based, it does sort of make an excuse for those who speak or act hurtfully.
I predict a tidal wave of posts purporting to say that derivation does not constitute definition.
But a phobic reaction is not always unreasoning fear – it can be loathing, disgust, striking out in anger (e.g., an arachnophobe killing a harmless spider), etc.
So yeah, the term is not altogether incorrect even from the derivational point of view.
I understand that. I don’t mean that it’s possible to say “this hate crime is forgiveable because it was acted upon due to unreasoning fear.”
Rather, that in order to address a phobia held by such a large number of people, it’s necessary to see that the hatred that is felt does stem from an unreasoning fear, and that education is a key part of correcting it.
Just like the equally incorrect and intentionally biased terms “pro life,” “pro choice,” “progressive,” “homophobic” is used to intentionally, unfairly frame the issue so that anyone who has any problem with homosexuality is somehow “a fearful brute, like the caveman who fears fire because his monkey-mind cannot comprehend it.”
Perhaps you misunderstand me. I’m not talking about people who don’t like homosexuality and therefore don’t engage in it but still treat homosexuals the same way they treat everyone else.
I’m talking about people who have a “problem with homosexuality” to the extent that they feel it necessary to stop homosexuals from having anything like a normal life, treat them like they have leprosy, cut children out of their lives if their children are gay, and actively seek to change/hurt/ostracize gay people. That is when the hate/fear has overcome reasoning and needs to be addressed.
‘Homophobia’ probably made it into the popular lexicon because the word has a greater degree of homophony than ‘heterosexism’–in short, because it sounds more pleasing to the human ear, it’s catchier and easier to remember, and we know what it purports to mean.
A definiton of hatred from my Current Dictionary of Oxford English:
“hatred: n. extreme dislike or ill will”
So, no mention of fear. The Greek root for hate is either misein (or miseo) or stugein, whomever you want to consult, and the Latin root is either contemno (to think meanly of, despise, condemn, hate) or odio (much the same thing).
So, if we could coin a new word out of those roots, it might be possible to get a better word for the exact definition.
I was around (and out) back in the days when this term started to appear, and it was first used by the relatively radical arm of the Gay Liberation Movement. It was used as a sort of defiant taunt: “Nya, nya, you’re afraid of a bunch of sissies; what does that say about you?”
But in today’s usage, the term has a firm basis on this equation:
Ignorance = fear = hatred.
Obviously these three words aren’t synonymous, but on a certain level they are so interactive as to be different facets of the same thing. The people who are ignorant of us are the same people who fear us and the same people who hate us. I think “anti-gay” or “anti-queer” are more accurate terms, but lack the “panache,” if you will, of “homophobic.”
The term “Homophobia” is based on the premise that no one would ever find homosexuality perverse, distasteful or immoral, unless they were irrationally bigoted against it; possibly because they see it as threatening to their own sexual identity. IMHO, it’s as ideologically biased a term as “class struggle”.
The biggest problem with “homophobia” is that the component parts “homo” (same) and “phobia” (fear) don’t add up to what the product word is supposed to mean.
We’ve had a lot of multi-page threads on this subject before. Those so inclined can look them up. Before this one gets to long, I’d like to say that it is factually incorrect to claim that the word “homophobia” could logically only mean fear of homosexuals. Phobia as a stand-alone noun means “fear”, “-phobia” as a combining form noun means “fear”, “hatred”, “intolerance”, or “aversion”. It is used this way in plenty of words that far predate “homophobia” – “hydrophobia”, “xenophobia”, and “photophobia” would be a few of the more common ones. “Xenophobia” is especially relevant here, as “xenophobia” and “homophobia” describe very similar attitudes.
The only problem with the popular use of “homophobia” from a strictly etymological perspective is that it’s less clear than “homosexualphobia” would be. That’s rather awkward to say though, and I don’t believe anyone’s ever been confused as to what the “homo” is meant to refer to. If we want to be really pedantic, the word “homosexual” itself is a rather ungainly hybrid itself, yet somehow the English language carried on.
I’m not so sure about that. My stepdad, for instance, is about as ignorant as you can get on gay culture, but he is neither fearful nor hateful toward homosexuals. (We once spent two weeks travelling with a tour group that included an openly – in some ways stereotypically – gay couple who lived together in the States, shared a room on the tour, etc., yet he had to be told who we were referring to when my mother and I later commented on how pleased we were that no one in this rather conservative crowd seemed to care one way or the other about their orientation.)
By the same token, I’m not biased against (or for) Hutus, Serbs, or Untouchables. This isn’t despite the fact that I’m ignorant of them, but rather precisely because of that fact. On the other hand, growing up I saw plenty of hatred among groups that lived cheek-and-jowl with one another and knew the intimate details of each other’s lives.
And while it might be true that some people who are ignorant of gays are also fearful of them and hate them, I have a hard time accepting that this is the norm. And the equation doesn’t work in reverse – people who hate are not necessarily fearful or ignorant of the groups they hate. Going back to the example of the guys who used to go “beat up fags” in the city… they really did hate gays, and while they certainly knew nothing about these men’s lives, I never saw any evidence that they had the least bit of fear of them.
Tangential note: I know that a couple of these guys eventually did “real time” in state prison. I wonder if their attitudes about male-male sex went through any adjustments.
