Conservatives think they’re the ones being oppressed. They see gay people as getting extra benefits from society that they don’t deserve.
Agree w all the wise posts upthread.
Here’s another angle not yet mentioned …
Conservatives, and especially the current frothing reactionary sort are perfectly content that their various contentions are not internally consistent.
Further there’s vast inconsistency between various contentions. Why is gay a choice, but criminality, or racial inferiority, or … is built-in?
As Obi-wan almost said, “The congitive dissonance is strong in those ones.”
Yeah, that lack of logical consistency seems to be a core feature to conservatism. Lost the link to it, but years ago on another forum somebody posted a really old article on the matter from IIRC the 1920s (funny to think that’s a century ago now).
One of the most interesting parts of the article was noticing just how little the conservatives have really changed - the content has shifted some over time, but they follow the same pattern. Both back then and now they hold a collection of mutually incompatible beliefs and goals (that are disconnected from objective reality), while completely ignoring that.
Conservatives simply don’t value truth, facts or logic. In some cases outright saying so, like conservative opposition to “critical thinking” or claiming that evidence against their beliefs was created by Satan. The Right favors blind faith, loyalty to the leadership and hatred of the Other.
The food? I hear the food’s great.
Lesbians get free woodworking tools. The irony.
And a Subaru, I’m told.
No, it’s nowhere near a majority. Not even close.
Look, humans are really good at hating other humans. There’s no secret reason that makes it all explicable. Racists aren’t racist because they’re secretly Black. Anti-Semites aren’t anti-Semitic because they’re secretly Jewish. Misogynists aren’t misogynist because they’re secretly women. And vast, vast majority of homophobes aren’t homophobes because they’re secretly gay. They’re just people who see something different and think, “‘Different’ means ‘bad,’” and who see someone weaker than themselves and think, “I can hurt them and get away with it.”
Agree completely.
I"d tack the following coda onto your excellent last sentence: “… while enjoying doing so.”
IMO/IME “bully” is just another word for "conservative ".
I think that there are two completely different types of homophobia. One is the type that you and @Miller are talking about: Men who feel a strong urge to have sex with men, and believe that all men must therefore have those urges. The other is based on simple unfamiliarity: Since they don’t know of any gay people, it’s different and strange, and the fear of the unknown kicks in.
Fifty years ago, I imagine that most homophobes were of that second type, and even thirty years ago, there were probably still a fair number of them. But nowadays, there are enough folks out of the closet that I think almost everyone knows someone, and so that sort of homophobia has become extremely rare. So I do think that, nowadays, the vast majority of homophobia is of the self-loathing kind, and that, therefore, most remaining homophobes are gay.
Band name, perhaps…?
Complementary U-Haul rental on the third date. (Hey, don’t hit me…I got that one from multiple friends who are lesbians!)
Everybody is oppressing conservatives! If it isn’t “The War On Christmas” or throwing Mike Lindell into bankruptcy by not buying his shitty pillows and mattress topers, it is advertisers boycotting “X” because they don’t want their products associated with racist memes or college students protesting a ‘conservative’ campus speaker who is openly advocating fascist ideals. They’re being metaphorically held down and virtually raped by people who don’t want to be literally held down and raped by ‘conservatives’ who think The Handmaid’s Tale is a pretty good start but Gilead has too many non-whites and uppity women with too many fingers.
Stranger
I’d say it’s going the other way - up through the '80s and '90s, there was a significant “conservative intellectual” movement that was genuinely invested in creating logical and moral justifications for their beliefs, which included a certain subset of people who were born with same-sex attraction, and were struggling to reconcile that attractions with their expressed political beliefs. With the absolute collapse of right wing intellectualism, along with the sharp increase in acceptance of homosexuality in general, there’s no longer interest on the right in justifying their beliefs. Most of the modern right is pure tribalism, and “Is okay with gay people,” is part of the Other Tribe. The modern homophobe isn’t internally conflicted over their sexuality, they’re just brown-shirt thugs who are reveling in attacking the designated Other. Certainly, some of them are queer and closeted, because they don’t want to be rejected from their social/family groups, but I doubt that they’re any more queer, as a percentage of the group, than the national median. Probably less, because it’s a lot easier to find acceptance (outside of conservative circles) as an openly queer person than it used to be, so you’ll have fewer people stuck in the denial/self-hate stage of the coming out process.
Actually, I think that “I want to hate someone, anyone, and the gays are as good a target as anyone” is a third type of homophobia. It’s not the same thing as someone who’s just not familiar with homosexuality. But it only works because gays are an “acceptable” target for hate (at least, among certain segments of the populace), and they’re only acceptable because of the existence of homophobia. So this particular sort depends on the existence of other sorts of homophobia.
This was a thing 20 years ago. Is this still a thing today?
Latest poll I can find is from 2013, and says 42% of Americans believe that.
Well…gay. It’s right there in the name.
I consider having gay sex to be a lifestyle choice. I also think having straight sex is a lifestyle choice. Abstaining from sex is a lifestyle choice as well. The notion that stereotypical conservatives think sexual orientation is a choice is absurd. Traditionally deviant sexual orientation was considered a mental disease, which view I remind members may not be defended on these boards. There is an obvious benefit to having one’s sex life match his or her sexual orientation.
~Max
It’s also true. Both in the sense that it’s what they actually believe, and that it’s the stereotype of them. Calling it a choice gives them the excuse to label homosexuals as willfully evil and persecute., beat and kill them. Just as labeling it a mental illness gives them the option to medically persecute, torture and kill homosexuals.
All that changes it what excuse they prefer to use to justify and enable their fundamental bigotry and malice - the core values of conservatism, in all times and places.
There were no benefits to being straight or gay where and when I grew up. I was just sexual and never understood why people chose one over the other, but I was also smart enough to NEVER bring it up. I grew up in Northern Idaho back in the late 60’s to mid 70’s, and if I acted straight I would be miserable, and if I acted gay I would be dead, probably by the hands of my father. What I did was act weird, clumsy, geeky…generally the guy nobody even considered dating. There were people I would definitely date today if given have a chance, but I didn’t hate any of them enough to date them then. I know one thing though-I never chose. I always knew what I was.
Good point. So to the core question - why do conservatives think someone would willingly choose to be gay in a society where the benefits are outweighed by disadvantages. It is my opinion that for some people, deciding to have gay sex is not rational. This is not exclusive to gay sex. It is well known in many contexts that sex drives men and women to act against their own interests. Acting on lustful impulses have ruined many a marriage and I’m sure bisexual and gay people are not immune. For many people though, I believe the benefits outweigh the disadvantages, because people decide for themselves what is or isn’t important. It’s not for me to say how important your (generic “you”) sex life is to you, or what weight you give to publicly or even privately expressing your own identity. I may have opinions, of course, and my opinions may or may not affect yours, but it is ultimately not up to me to decide how important something is to you.
~Max