# PGh-13: Pathetic Groaning homophobes who act like they're 13 **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [November 27, 2005, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pgh-13-pathetic-groaning-homophobes-who-act-like-theyre-13/332952 "2005-11-27T20:40:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![tdn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/94ad74/32.png) [@tdn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tdn)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2005, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pgh-13-pathetic-groaning-homophobes-who-act-like-theyre-13/332952/141 "2005-11-30T23:14:21Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Well, keep in mind that three of the largest religions in the world all share common origins. It could be argue that Christianity and Islam inherited their homophobia from Judaism. Yes, that had crossed my mind. Though it’s interesting that they are very different from each other today, with the exception of a just a few points, homosexuality being one of them. > [@](#): > > I understand that Buddhism has no particular injunction against homosexuality. I have no idea where Hinduism stands on the issue, or even if Hinduism has a sufficiently unified belief system to make such a generalization. Here is a big gap in my knowledge. I don’t know how Asian and Indian cultures feel about the matter, but I always thought that they frowned on homosexuality as well. Maybe someone with a better understanding of those cultures could ring in. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2005, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pgh-13-pathetic-groaning-homophobes-who-act-like-theyre-13/332952/142 "2005-11-30T23:25:48Z")
> [@brickbacon](#): > > False comparison. I still can’t marry anyone I’d like. I can’t marry a kid, or another man if I wanted to. It’s being homosexual, it’s about marraige being defined as one man and one woman. A gay man can marry a gay woman if they’d like. Clearly they would prefer otherwise (and should be able to), but it’s not a valid comparison. Well hey, you know I don’t know why those damned uppity negros made such a fuss! They weren’t denied water fountains and bathrooms-they just had to use their own separate ones! :rolleyes: What is it with your eagerness to defend homophobia? ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2005, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pgh-13-pathetic-groaning-homophobes-who-act-like-theyre-13/332952/143 "2005-11-30T23:35:21Z")
> [@brickbacon](#): > > Yes they have provided reasons. Read the thread. Plus, it is circular reasoning. I did read the thread. I didn’t see any alternative reasons that were more likely than disgust. If you saw one, please point it out to me. > [@](#): > > People who place a different value on different kinds of kissing are doing the same thing people are doing with steaks and big macs. Which is exactly what I just said. They’re discriminating between two options. And when people do this with homosexuals, what do we call them? > [@](#): > > As are smokers, fat people, and Jews. Ditto. Cite for smokers and fat people being systematically denied housing and job opportunites? > [@](#): > > False comparison. I still can’t marry anyone I’d like. I can’t marry a kid, or another man if I wanted to. It’s being homosexual, it’s about marraige being defined as one man and one woman. A gay man can marry a gay woman if they’d like. Clearly they would prefer otherwise (and should be able to), but it’s not a valid comparison. What? This makes absolutely no sense. You can’t marry another guy because of our bigoted marriage laws in this country. Fifty years ago, in many states you couldn’t have married a white woman, because of bigoted marriage laws. How are these functionally different? > [@](#): > > Same could be said for fat people, etc. etc. And attacking or insulting someone just because they’re fat is also unacceptable, and arguably bigoted. What point are you trying to make, here? > [@](#): > > Not really. All you’ve proven is that homos are discriminated against. We both acknowledge that. It’s the reasons for this discrimination that makes the analogy poor. Why is discrimination against gays any more valid than discrimination against blacks? > [@](#): > > Yes, it does. The bathouses were for gay men. Plus, anal sex is more dangerous than vaginal or oral sex. OF course, straight people have anal sex, but the proclivities of men that live a homosexual lifestyle puts them at greater risk for diseases. [Cite](http://www.slate.com/id/2126643/) Define “homosexual lifestyle.” I’m currently dating a man. We’re monogamous. he’s the only man I’ve ever had sex with. Am I living the homosexual lifestyle? Being gay does not mean you’re promiscuous, or unsafe. A lot of gay men happen to be promiscuous and unsafe. A lot aren’t. And lesbians are the least at risk group for AIDS out there. So explain to me how this proves that homosexuality is inherently unhealthy, because I’m just not seeing it. > [@](#): > > Did I say it wasn’t in your self interest to argue your position? Now, I doubt you’ll be effective if you present the arguments you’ve presented thus far, but I respect and admire your willingness to work for what you feel is right. What I don’t respect is the intolerance you show for those who disagree. Why should I show tolerance to people who don’t show me any? How does that do anything but hurt me, and the issues I support? > [@](#): > > Should we have to? You haven’t produced anything to prove these people reacted out of disgust, and that that disgust means they are homophobic. If you want to convince me that I’m wrong in my assumption about these people’s motivations, yes. I’m not going to agree with you just because you tell me I’m wrong. You need to provide reasons. Look, we’ve got a theater full of people. They see a scene of a guy kiss a girl. There’s no reaction from the audience. They see a scene of a guy kissing a guy. Several people groan in unison. They see another scene of a guy kissing a girl. No reaction. They see another scene of a guy kissing a guy. Again, several people groan in unison. This continues for the entire movie. What other logical conclusion is there for those groans, other than they were negative reactions to homosexual kissing? Were they groaning in support? Is that even a thing? Do people do that? I’m open to alternate explanations, but I can’t think of any, and no one has offered any that make any sense, considering the facts. > [@](#): > > I would hardly classify groaning (a visceral reaction in all likelihood) could be described as passing judgment. Either way, passing judgment doesn’t make you a homophobe. If I say black athletes tend to be faster than white athletes, am I racist? That would be an observable fact, not a matter of judgement. If the numbers support you, clearly you aren’t a racist. If they don’t, and you continue to insist on it, then perhaps a different conclusion is called for. > [@](#): > > Making a value judgment, in and of itself, doesn’t make you a prejudiced person. Dependent on what you’re judging, and how you judge it, it certainly can. > [@](#): > > If I think male homosexuality is less appealing than heterosexuality, it doesn’t make me a homphobe. As a personal choice, for yourself, no, it does not make you a homophobe. If you can’t stand the sight of someone else expressing homosexual desire, then yes, you are a homophobe. That’s not preference, that’s intolerance. > [@](#): > > Our punishments are arbitrary. They are not based on an objective moral standard. It’s subjective. That’s why every murder isn’t punished the same way. If it were only about the morality of the act, a person would get the same time for killing a hooker as he would for killing a senator. They don’t because our system is subjective. Robbing a bank, and robbing a flower shop also have different penalties. Of course we distinguish between crimes, but that distinction is not objective. Again, I did not bring up the law to address objective morality, I brought it up to address objective _harm_. > [@](#): > > Hey idiot. That’s not very tolerant of someone who disagrees with you. > [@](#): > > Do you not understand the concept of falsifiability? I can prove the Holocaust happened by showing you survivors, and evidence. I can prove Blacks are not inferior by showing you test scores, studies, genetic tests, etc. Those crackpot theories can be proven false. You can not prove the morality, or immorality of homosexuality in any objective way. That’s what I’ve been saying this entire time. Okay, then, if there is no factual, objective basis for such a determination, why should I respect that determination? > [@](#): > > No, I accuse him of being a hypocrite for not attributing the same prejudice to his groaning as he did to others groaning. In no way did I say homosexuality are drug use were the same. Beause there’s nothing wrong with being prejudiced against IV drug use: it’s a dangerous, unhealthy, destructive activity. The same cannot be said for homosexuality. Therefore, the two reactions are in no way analogous. ---
**Author:** ![brickbacon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/898d66/32.png) [@brickbacon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brickbacon)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 12:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pgh-13-pathetic-groaning-homophobes-who-act-like-theyre-13/332952/144 "2005-12-01T00:19:52Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Which is exactly what I just said. They’re discriminating between two options. And when people do this with homosexuals, what do we call them? People who don’t find homosexuality palatable. > [@Miller](#): > > Cite for smokers and fat people being systematically denied housing and job opportunites? I’d like a cite showing \*\*systematic \*\*housing discrimination of homosexuals. [Smoke-free housing](http://www.smokefreeworld.com/housing.shtml) [Obesity](http://www.overlawyered.com/2003/12/obesityasdisability_and_housin.html) was not always considered a disability, and thus, limited housing options for severely obese people. > [@Miller](#): > > What? This makes absolutely no sense. You can’t marry another guy because of our bigoted marriage laws in this country. Fifty years ago, in many states you couldn’t have married a white woman, because of bigoted marriage laws. How are these functionally different? Because there will always be “bigoted marriage laws”. I’ll never be able to marry 3 women, or a dog, or a car. They are different because gender and miscegenation are not the same. There may have a similar result, but so would laws preventing adults from marrying kids, or multple women. > [@Miller](#): > > And attacking or insulting someone just because they’re fat is also unacceptable, and arguably bigoted. What point are you trying to make, here? That discrimination, in almost all forms, may be wrong, but it doesn’t mean they are the same. > [@Miller](#): > > Why is discrimination against gays any more valid than discrimination against blacks? The analogy is invalid, discrimination against gays is not a question of validity. > [@Miller](#): > > Define “homosexual lifestyle.” I’m currently dating a man. We’re monogamous. he’s the only man I’ve ever had sex with. Am I living the homosexual lifestyle? Yes, you are living a homosexual lifestyle. It, on average, puts you at greater risk for many diseases. > [@Miller](#): > > Being gay does not mean you’re promiscuous, or unsafe. A lot of gay men happen to be promiscuous and unsafe. A lot aren’t. And lesbians are the least at risk group for AIDS out there. So explain to me how this proves that homosexuality is inherently unhealthy, because I’m just not seeing it. Male homosexuality is what we are talking about. > [@Miller](#): > > Why should I show tolerance to people who don’t show me any? How does that do anything but hurt me, and the issues I support? Because that’s how progress occurs. It helps you, because you’ll be more accepted. > [@Miller](#): > > If you want to convince me that I’m wrong in my assumption about these people’s motivations, yes. I’m not going to agree with you just because you tell me I’m wrong. You need to provide reasons. You need to support your assumption. Once again, you have the roles reversed. > [@Miller](#): > > That would be an observable fact, not a matter of judgment. If the numbers support you, clearly you aren’t a racist. If they don’t, and you continue to insist on it, then perhaps a different conclusion is called for. Okay, what if I said black basketball players are better than white ones? My point is that you said making value judgments is prejudiced, I don’t think ti is. > [@Miller](#): > > As a personal choice, for yourself, no, it does not make you a homophobe. If you can’t stand the sight of someone else expressing homosexual desire, then yes, you are a homophobe. That’s not preference, that’s intolerance. Really. So if I don’t like seeing two horses having sex, do I hate horses? Am I a horseophobe? Am I prejudiced against horses because I don’t like watching them have sex? > [@Miller](#): > > Again, I did not bring up the law to address objective morality, I brought it up to address objective _harm_. It doesn’t do that either, since there is not objective measurement of harm. It’s subjective. > [@Miller](#): > > Okay, then, if there is no factual, objective basis for such a determination, why should I respect that determination? Because you’d like for people to respect you > [@Miller](#): > > Because there’s nothing wrong with being prejudiced against IV drug use: it’s a dangerous, unhealthy, destructive activity. The same cannot be said for homosexuality. Therefore, the two reactions are in no way analogous. Yes, it can be said for homosexuality, and has been said (in error) by many people for hundreds of years. There is a problem with being prejudiced against anyone for something that’s beyond their control. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pgh-13-pathetic-groaning-homophobes-who-act-like-theyre-13/332952/145 "2005-12-01T01:19:20Z")
> [@tdn](#): > > Who would these people be? It’s directed to the people who moan and groan and Broadcast how gross thy think it is, and who say they think it’s sick or disgusting, but are bent out of shape when they get called on it. Everybody has an opinion, but sometimes the rest of us don’t want to keep hearing it. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 1:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pgh-13-pathetic-groaning-homophobes-who-act-like-theyre-13/332952/146 "2005-12-01T01:42:43Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Cite for smokers and fat people being systematically denied housing and job opportunites? There is that one insurance company in the mid west - in an “at will” state. The owner decided to stop hiring smokers and gave his employees the choice of not smoking anymore (even at home), quitting or getting fired. It was in the news, several threads here, and even made Sixty Minutes. > [@Miller](#): > > Why is discrimination against gays any more valid than discrimination against blacks? Because it is still allowed and encouraged. The current “code speak” usually revolves around the words “family values” or “protect marriage”. > [@Miller](#): > > Define “homosexual lifestyle.” I’m currently dating a man. We’re monogamous. he’s the only man I’ve ever had sex with. Am I living the homosexual lifestyle? > Being gay does not mean you’re promiscuous, or unsafe. A lot of gay men happen to be promiscuous and unsafe. A lot aren’t. And lesbians are the least at risk group for AIDS out there. So explain to me how this proves that homosexuality is inherently unhealthy, because I’m just not seeing it. I’ve been with the same person for 24 years. We are monogamous. Back to the general idea of the OP - groaners, moaners and whale callers… We hear from the politicians, the churches, and whatever, that we are messed up, bad people. It isn’t too much to want to see a movie without the moans, groans, and other sounds of anguish and pain, or the snarky remarks. I personally don’t care if The Gay scares you, causes nightmares, or makes you uncomfortable. I really don’t. Just keep it to yourselves. Stop acting like jerks and then trying to defend dumbass public behavior. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pgh-13-pathetic-groaning-homophobes-who-act-like-theyre-13/332952/147 "2005-12-01T01:48:18Z")
> [@brickbacon](#): > > People who don’t find homosexuality palatable. And how are they functionally different than homophobes? > [@](#): > > I’d like a cite showing \*\*systematic \*\*housing discrimination of homosexuals. [Here ya go.](http://www.soulforce.org/article/648) > [@](#): > > [Smoke-free housing](http://www.smokefreeworld.com/housing.shtml) Seems to me there’s a difference between not allowing smoking in a rental property (because it can damage the property) and not allowing smokers to live there at all. > [@](#): > > [Obesity](http://www.overlawyered.com/2003/12/obesityasdisability_and_housin.html) was not always considered a disability, and thus, limited housing options for severely obese people. Good site. That’s every bit as prejudicial as forbidding housing to blacks or gays. > [@](#): > > Because there will always be “bigoted marriage laws”. I’ll never be able to marry 3 women, or a dog, or a car. They are different because gender and miscegenation are not the same. There may have a similar result, but so would laws preventing adults from marrying kids, or multple women. Actually, I think that anti-polygamy laws are also a form of discrimination, although not one that’s high on my list of Social Ills that need to be fought. Kids can’t get married because kids can’t enter legal contracts. I suppose that you could call that ageist bigotry, but in this case, there’s a good reason for it. Your examples about marrying a dog or a car are just stupid. Marriage is about property rights, more than anything else, and dogs and cars cannot own property. Being able to marry your car is not going to have any effect on that person’s quality of life, so forbidding him to marry his car is not a significant imposition on his rights. > [@](#): > > That discrimination, in almost all forms, may be wrong, but it doesn’t mean they are the same. Absolutely identical? No. But there are enough points of similarity between them that meaningful comparisons can be made. Arguing that anti-miscegnation laws are so different from anti-gay marriage laws that you can’t even compare them makes absolutely no sense to me. > [@](#): > > The analogy is invalid, discrimination against gays is not a question of validity. Why isn’t it, though? If I say, “Not allowing gay marriage is wrong, much like not allowing interracial marriage was wrong,” and you say, “Those are two totally different things,” it seems to me that you’re arguing that not allowing gay marriage is okay. If they are both wrong, why isn’t the comparison valid? > [@](#): > > Yes, you are living a homosexual lifestyle. It, on average, puts you at greater risk for many diseases. So, my monogamous homosexual relationship puts me in greater risk of disease than a straight guy who sleeps with a different woman every night? > [@](#): > > Male homosexuality is what we are talking about. Not any more, we aren’t. You want to argue that there are legitimate reasons to discriminate against homosexuals, you have to prove that for _all_ homosexuals, not just whatever subgroup of them you can find that fits your argument. > [@](#): > > Because that’s how progress occurs. It helps you, because you’ll be more accepted. Can you prove that? I know I can’t _dis_prove it - I don’t think it’s a provable proposition. > [@](#): > > You need to support your assumption. Once again, you have the roles reversed. I have. Repeatedly. You just keep ignoring it when I do. > [@](#): > > Okay, what if I said black basketball players are better than white ones? My point is that you said making value judgments is prejudiced, I don’t think ti is. I’m saying that all value judgements, about _anything_, are discriminatory. The question is, when is it appropriate to discriminate, and when it is inappropriate. > [@](#): > > Really. So if I don’t like seeing two horses having sex, do I hate horses? Am I a horseophobe? Am I prejudiced against horses because I don’t like watching them have sex? Horses aren’t people. > [@](#): > > It doesn’t do that either, since there is not objective measurement of harm. It’s subjective. Then how do we determine how to sentence people for various crimes? Dice? Dart board? Pull numbers out of a hat? > [@](#): > > Because you’d like for people to respect you Sure, I’d like people to respect me. What do I do when they don’t respect me? > [@](#): > > Yes, it can be said for homosexuality, and has been said (in error) by many people for hundreds of years. There is a problem with being prejudiced against anyone for something that’s beyond their control. Glad you finally came around. That’s what I’ve been saying this entire thread. Guess this means I win? ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pgh-13-pathetic-groaning-homophobes-who-act-like-theyre-13/332952/148 "2005-12-01T02:07:19Z")
> [@](#): > > Because that’s how progress occurs. It helps you, because you’ll be more accepted. Uh huh. Read the papers sometimes. We are going backwards. > [@](#): > > Because you’d like for people to respect you Yeah, right. We shouldn’t have to ASK for common simple respect. We shouldn’t be expected to accept disrespect. That sounds too much like saying "all them n\_\_\_\_\_s would get treated better if they knew their place and weren’t so uppity. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 6:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pgh-13-pathetic-groaning-homophobes-who-act-like-theyre-13/332952/149 "2005-12-01T06:23:09Z")
> [@SteveG1](#): > > Uh huh. Read the papers sometimes. We are going backwards. Nah, we’re definitely going forward. What you’re seeing is a backlash by people who can’t deal with it, who know they’re losing but think that if they scream loud enough, everybody will give in to them. It’s the last act of a desperate man, if you will. Younger people today generally don’t think being gay is a big deal, and I think that’s the major positive sign. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 6:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pgh-13-pathetic-groaning-homophobes-who-act-like-theyre-13/332952/150 "2005-12-01T06:44:07Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Nah, we’re definitely going forward. What you’re seeing is a backlash by people who can’t deal with it, who know they’re losing but think that if they scream loud enough, everybody will give in to them. It’s the last act of a desperate man, if you will. Younger people today generally don’t think being gay is a big deal, and I think that’s the major positive sign. I agree. What we’re seeing right now is the one step back after taking two steps forward. It’ll reverse again, soon enough, and we’ll make up the ground we’ve lot and then some. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 6:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pgh-13-pathetic-groaning-homophobes-who-act-like-theyre-13/332952/151 "2005-12-01T06:57:22Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > I agree. What we’re seeing right now is the one step back after taking two steps forward. It’ll reverse again, soon enough, and we’ll make up the ground we’ve lot and then some. Right. It’ll take a while, and it’s annoying to have to deal with this at all. But I do think that the continued progress is inevitable. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 9:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pgh-13-pathetic-groaning-homophobes-who-act-like-theyre-13/332952/152 "2005-12-01T09:18:32Z")
Interesting thread. I still think it wold help the discussion if “homophobia” was defined. **Miller** gave it some constraints, but beased on what I read from others (from both sides of the debate) I don’t think everyone would agree. A few thoughts. The groaning: I hate when people add commentary in a movie in any way. The worst for me are light comedies. As far as the gay scenes, it’s about being polite. I might find a particular scene distasteful, but I wouldn’t want to offend others. That said, sometimes a groan or other reaction is reflexive. I remember seeing The Crying Game and I think I let out a gasp or a groan. I didn’t see it coming and it was, as someone said, reptilian. Tolerance: To me tolerance doesn’t mean that you might not strongly object to something or find it downright wrong or disgusting. It means _even_ if you do consider it to be those things, you realize that everyone has an equal right to make whatever choices they choose. Homophobia: (using it as "hating gays) I do not think that finding gay sex distasteful means that someone hates gays. For me, I don’t get it, I’m not attracted to men at all, but hey, knock yourself out. Just as I cannot redirect what I am attracted to, I don’t think anyone else can. I had a girlfriend that was into some sex stuff that I found way strange. We’ve since parted ways. We’re not enemies. I still think she’s great, just not for me. Something came to me as I was reading this thread. I have a very good friend that I adore. I would do most anything for her, except have sex with her. You see, she’s quite overweight, and the idea of having sex with someone that fat kinda—no, make that—REALLY grosses me out. Yet, I don’t hate fat people at all. Neither do I not want fat people to have sex. Just not with me, as either a participant or an observer. I’m sure we all have these preferences and biases. And I don’t think that we have to apologize for them. That said, if I was at a movie and two fatties were getting it on on the screen and I let out a disapproving groan would that be okay? Well, I think it would be understandable. But it would also be very impolite. And if it escaped my lips I’d feel like a jackass. But that wouldn’t make me a fatophobe, it would make me human. (Then again, maybe it would make me a fatophobe, because I’m still not clear on how “\_\_\_\_ophobe” is being used.) ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 12:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pgh-13-pathetic-groaning-homophobes-who-act-like-theyre-13/332952/153 "2005-12-01T12:10:11Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Well, I think it would be understandable. I agree that it’d be understandable. What I’d object to (and what the OP is apparently objecting to) is when you try to make a _show_ of your disapproval for the amusement of your like-minded friends, who would then make a show of _their_ disapproval, until it become a competition over who can disapprove the most, disrupting the performance and ruining it for everybody that wasn’t part of your disapproval circle. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pgh-13-pathetic-groaning-homophobes-who-act-like-theyre-13/332952/154 "2005-12-01T16:16:53Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Nah, we’re definitely going forward. What you’re seeing is a backlash by people who can’t deal with it, who know they’re losing but think that if they scream loud enough, everybody will give in to them. It’s the last act of a desperate man, if you will. Younger people today generally don’t think being gay is a big deal, and I think that’s the major positive sign. Is that why various states are successfully passing “family/marriage” laws? Is that why the anti-gay rhetoric keeps getting more hateful AND more widespread, AND has the participation of many elected politicians (and they get away with it)? We are going backwards. ---
**Author:** ![tdn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/94ad74/32.png) [@tdn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tdn)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pgh-13-pathetic-groaning-homophobes-who-act-like-theyre-13/332952/155 "2005-12-01T16:48:54Z")
> [@SteveG1](#): > > Is that why various states are successfully passing “family/marriage” laws? Is that why the anti-gay rhetoric keeps getting more hateful AND more widespread, AND has the participation of many elected politicians (and they get away with it)? We are going backwards. Disagreed. This is just IMHO, of course, but my hypothesis is that what we are seeing is reaction to a positive change. If them uppity fags would just stay quiet like they’re supposed to, there wouldn’t be so much backlash. Things are going to get uglier before they get pretty, by I have hope that better times are on the way. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pgh-13-pathetic-groaning-homophobes-who-act-like-theyre-13/332952/156 "2005-12-01T17:16:48Z")
> [@Bryan Ekers](#): > > I agree that it’d be understandable. What I’d object to (and what the OP is apparently objecting to) is when you try to make a _show_ of your disapproval for the amusement of your like-minded friends, who would then make a show of _their_ disapproval, until it become a competition over who can disapprove the most, disrupting the performance and ruining it for everybody that wasn’t part of your disapproval circle. I didn’t get that explicitly fro the OP, but if that’s what’s on the table then I say slaps all around. Or maybe better yet, kisses. In my last post I didn’t comment on the empty seat between two friends (males). As an early poster stated, I think it is a an issue of personal space. I’ve been two plenty of movies with female friends (non lovers), and if the theater was empty had an extra seat between us. Generally, I guess I attempt to have the seating arrangement mimic what I would have watching a movie on my couch with a friend. If sh’e my girlfriend, we’re leaning on/touching each other. If she’s not, or if he’s a male, we use the whole couch and build in a generous buffer. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pgh-13-pathetic-groaning-homophobes-who-act-like-theyre-13/332952/157 "2005-12-01T20:02:51Z")
> [@SteveG1](#): > > Is that why various states are successfully passing “family/marriage” laws? Is that why the anti-gay rhetoric keeps getting more hateful AND more widespread, AND has the participation of many elected politicians (and they get away with it)? We are going backwards. Yes, that’s exactly why we’re seeing those things. There are plenty of people who are disgusted by it, but they’re frantic because gays are becoming more accepted by society. They can make a difference when they’re whipped into a frenzy, but if you look at younger people and “mainstream” people, gays are not a particularly big deal. As gays get more and more accepted, gay marriage eventually will, too. As I said, it’s the last act of a desperate man. We’re not moving backward. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pgh-13-pathetic-groaning-homophobes-who-act-like-theyre-13/332952.md?page=7)