Homophobia, I hate the use of that word.

Golovkin P4P

It should mean a fear of homosexuals, but in everyday use it means hatred or bias against homosexuals.

Another one is "comparable".

People use it to mean similar. It should mean that something can be compared.

The Backwards Man

Your argument is moot.

Amirani

Your dictionary could be out of date.

Sarky

Language evolves. Deal with it.

krudler

It's a perfectly cromulent word

goose2005

look John you lost, get over it

MJ23

I'm not homophobic, I just don't like them.
Why would I be scared of them?

hatrickpatrick

One argument is that a dislike of a personal lifestyle which doesn't affect the "hater" in any way is most likely stemming from an irrational fear of it.

Razorfish

Everybody entitled to whatever they're into.

Cee-Jay-Cee

OP your argument is comparable to that of someone with homophobic tendencies.

MJ23

MJ23 wrote: »

I'm not homophobic, I just don't like them.

Do you know them all?

Homophobic is a reasonable word to use to describe an unreasonable prejudice.

RDM_83 again

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

One argument is that a dislike of a personal lifestyle which doesn't affect the "hater" in any way is most likely stemming from an irrational fear of it.

I'm afraid of Justin Bieber

hatrickpatrick

RDM_83 again wrote: »

I'm afraid of Justin Bieber

His fans scare me more!

Terry1985

Golovkin P4P wrote: »

It should mean a fear of homosexuals, but in everyday use it means hatred or bias against homosexuals.

Another one is "comparable".

People use it to mean similar. It should mean that something can be compared.

Its a term usually thrown out if someone disagrees with even a portion of their agenda.

I've no problem with civil partnerships, but I do with pandering to the LBGT community to extend the definition of marriage. I think it makes a mockery of an ancient tradition based very clearly on heterosexuality.

If I believed in technology but wanted limits placed on it, would that make me a technophobe?

Spunge

Can you be openly gay and homophobic

wazky

Spunge wrote: »

Can you be openly gay and homophobic

You can suck my cock but I won't enjoy it sort of thing?

Terry1985

Terry1985 wrote: »

Its a term usually thrown out if someone disagrees with even a portion of their agenda.

I've no problem with civil partnerships, but I do with pandering to the LBGT community to extend the definition of marriage. I think it makes a mockery of an ancient tradition based very clearly on heterosexuality.

If I believed in technology but wanted limits placed on it, would that make me a technophobe?

Pandering is a loaded term and quite telling. Just because something is old, such as the tradition of marriage, doesn't mean it can't evolve and be more inclusively reflective of a more modern society.

And wanting to limit technology, while not definitively technophobic, is certainly an element of it.

pablomakaveli

I think "I've no problem with gays or civil partnerships" is becoming the new "I'm not a racist but".

The reason homophobes have such a dislike of the word is they don't like the mirror being held up to them. They know on some level it's wrong to treat people the way they do but they like to convince themselves otherwise and when that is challenged they get upset.

Phoebas

Terry1985 wrote: »

If I believed in technology but wanted limits placed on it, would that make me a technophobe?

Quite possibly, but then 'technophobe' doesn't have the same level of negative connotation about it.

cletus van damme

Candie wrote: »

Pandering is a loaded term and quite telling. Just because something is old, such as the tradition of marriage, doesn't mean it can't evolve and be more inclusively reflective of a more modern society.
.

yes but in not agreeing to that evolvution or re-definition, which I think it is rather than evolution , he is not automatically a homophobic person.

deise08

Now, see, this is where I get confused. technically homo is the genus primates including all great apes, so wouldn't that mean that homophobia is a fear of primates and not gays?

always bothered me

cletus van damme

cletus van damme wrote: »

yes but in not agreeing to that evolvution or re-definition, which I think it is rather than evolution , he is not automatically a homophobic person.

Perhaps, but his use of the loaded term 'pandering' and his objection based on nothing other than marriage being a tradition, points in that direction.

Circumcision is also a tradition in some cultures, it doesn't make it worthwhile or valuable.

Civilisation has moved on to extend rights to all individuals, trying to exclude people on the grounds of sexuality is outdated, predjudiced, irrational, and very often phobic.

Dravokivich

Candie wrote: »

Do you know them all?

Homophobic is a reasonable word to use to describe an unreasonable prejudice.

No it isn't. It just implies that someone who doesnt like the idea of homosexuality holds that opinion because they are afriad of it. You dont call racism raciphobia. Its a superiority complex those who feel they are right hold against those who are wrong by throwing a phobia out there with it.

Annasopra

Terry1985 wrote: »

Its a term usually thrown out if someone disagrees with even a portion of their agenda.

I've no problem with civil partnerships, but I do with pandering to the LBGT community to extend the definition of marriage. I think it makes a mockery of an ancient tradition based very clearly on heterosexuality.

If I believed in technology but wanted limits placed on it, would that make me a technophobe?

Was it a mockery when 12 year old girls could marry in 1937?

amdublin

'I hate the word homophobia. It's not a phobia. You are not scared; you are an asshole.'




It's a good quote. But Morgan Freeman did not say it.

Annasopra

Spunge wrote: »

Can you be openly gay and homophobic

Yes you can. You can internalise homophobia against yourself. You can have an irrational fear of some traits that might be associated with being gay such as campness

chakademus

Terry1985 wrote: »

If I believed in technology but wanted limits placed on it, would that make me a technophobe?

For someone who has the opposite opinion, I believe this to be the most convincing alternative argument I have heard yet.

Friend Computer

deise08 wrote: »

Now, see, this is where I get confused. technically homo is the genus primates including all great apes, so wouldn't that mean that homophobia is a fear of primates and not gays?

always bothered me

Both homo and phobia have Greek--not Latin--roots, the former of which means "same". I thought that was well known.

P_1

mango salsa wrote: »

Yes you can. You can internalise homophobia against yourself. You can have an irrational fear of some traits that might be associated with being gay such as campness

There is a massive difference between having an irrational fear of something and it just not being your cup of tea though. Just some curiosity on my part but would you equate somebody who finds campness not to be their cup of tea as them being homophobic?

deise08

Friend Computer wrote: »

Both homo and phobia have Greek--not Latin--roots, the former of which means "same". I thought that was well known.

Nope. I have just learned something new there.

Holsten

Fear/hate... I mean they're pretty close.

Anyone who hates a person who is gay the hate is built upon fear.

Annasopra

P_1 wrote: »

There is a massive difference between having an irrational fear of something and it just not being your cup of tea though. Just some curiosity on my part but would you equate somebody who finds campness not to be their cup of tea as them being homophobic?

No.

chakademus

Strictly speaking the definition of marriage is the formal union of a man and woman.I personally believe that gay people should be allowed to enter marriage.

However I also believe that everyone, especially those who have already "married" under the terms of its original definition, are entitled to their opinion while not being labelled as being afraid or prejudiced. A huge number of these people could argue equally for civil partnerships, for gay people to adopt, for gay people to be open about their sexuality at work without being discriminated yet stand by what marriage is defined by.

Dravokivich

Dravokivich wrote: »

No it isn't. It just implies that someone who doesnt like the idea of homosexuality holds that opinion because they are afriad of it.

Phobia means more than just fear.

noun
1.
an extreme or irrational fear of or aversion to something.
"she suffered from a phobia about birds"
synonyms: abnormal fear, irrational fear, obsessive fear, fear, dread, horror, terror, dislike, hatred, loathing, detestation, distaste, aversion, antipathy, revulsion, repulsion; More

I'd be more focussed on the aversion part of the definition rather than narrowing it down to all homophobics being motivated by fear.

I think fear can often be an element, but by no means always.

And I think you're wrong about the superiority complex.

dees99

Hypothetical question

If a guy didn't like gays because they are gay and he doesn't believe a man should be with a man, but he didn't hate them or fear them. Does that make that guy a homophobic? For example if one asked him for directions on the street he would have no problem helping them but would never initiate conversation or hang around with them. He just didn't like them, does that him homophobic?

I just ask because the majority of people I know would be like that. ��

Golovkin P4P

pablomakaveli wrote: »

I think "I've no problem with gays or civil partnerships" is becoming the new "I'm not a racist but".

The reason homophobes have such a dislike of the word is they don't like the mirror being held up to them. They know on some level it's wrong to treat people the way they do but they like to convince themselves otherwise and when that is challenged they get upset.

The use of the word is ridiculous, people use it to describe people who discriminate against homosexuals, but it really should be used to describe those who fear homosexuals.

Golovkin P4P

Golovkin P4P wrote: »

The use of the word is ridiculous, people use it to describe people who discriminate against homosexuals, but it really should be used to describe those who fear homosexuals.

Phobia means fear or aversion.

Golovkin P4P

Holsten wrote: »

Fear/hate... I mean they're pretty close.

Anyone who hates a person who is gay the hate is built upon fear.

Nice sweeping generalisation.

MadsL

dees99 wrote: »

Hypothetical question

If a guy didn't like gays because they are gay and he doesn't believe a man should be with a man, but he didn't hate them or fear them. Does that make that guy a homophobic? For example if one asked him for directions on the street he would have no problem helping them but would never initiate conversation or hang around with them. He just didn't like them, does that him homophobic?

I just ask because the majority of people I know would be like that. ��

You need a new town to live in.

Jack Skellington

dees99 wrote: »

Hypothetical question

If a guy didn't like gays because they are gay and he doesn't believe a man should be with a man, but he didn't hate them or fear them. Does that make that guy a homophobic? For example if one asked him for directions on the street he would have no problem helping them but would never initiate conversation or hang around with them. He just didn't like them, does that him homophobic?

I just ask because the majority of people I know would be like that. ��

If he just didn't like all gay people for no other reason than they're gay then I'd say yeh he's homophobic.

Golovkin P4P

Candie wrote: »

Phobia means fear or aversion.

Really. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phobia

It's an anxiety disorder. The sufferer experiences fear or anxiety as a result of their phobia.

To mock and ridicule a sufferer of a phobia is like mocking someone with depression.

FouxDaFaFa

Terry1985 wrote: »

Its a term usually thrown out if someone disagrees with even a portion of their agenda.

I've no problem with civil partnerships, but I do with pandering to the LBGT community to extend the definition of marriage. I think it makes a mockery of an ancient tradition based very clearly on heterosexuality.

If I believed in technology but wanted limits placed on it, would that make me a technophobe?

Kind of, yeah. But it was also based on trading women as pieces of property, the transferral of ownership from her father to her new husband.

It's not like that anymore. Women have more rights. At least in Ireland. They don't have to leave their jobs. They can get divorced if their husband beats them (and vice versa) rather than just saying "oh well". The previous incarnation was unfair.

The current incarnation is unfair to gay people. So, it needs to be changed again.

Golovkin P4P

Golovkin P4P wrote: »

Really. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phobia

It's an anxiety disorder. The sufferer experiences fear or anxiety as a result of their phobia.

To mock and ridicule a sufferer of a phobia is like mocking someone with depression.

Look up the dictionary definition.

an extreme or irrational fear of or aversion to something.

When someone refers to another as being homophobic, they aren't making a medical diagnosis.

Ghost Buster

Terry1985 wrote: »

Its a term usually thrown out if someone disagrees with even a portion of their agenda.

I've no problem with civil partnerships, but I do with pandering to the LBGT community to extend the definition of marriage. I think it makes a mockery of an ancient tradition based very clearly on heterosexuality.

If I believed in technology but wanted limits placed on it, would that make me a technophobe?

The exact same argument could be used about votes for women

bnt

Calling someone's opinion a "phobia" is an attempt to diminish it as irrational. I don't have a strong opinion on homosexuality, but I have been called an "Islamophobe" for expressing my opinion that it (like all religions) has no basis in reality and needs to go away for the sake of mankind as a whole. I disapprove of it utterly ... but I'm sure as heck not scared of it.

dees99

Jack Skellington wrote: »

If he just didn't like all gay people for no other reason than they're gay then I'd say yeh he's homophobic.

But then your accusing him of hating gays straight away. Even though he doesn't.

So somebody who doesn't like gays, but doesn't hate them or fear them is a homophobic? Ok got it!

Golovkin P4P

Candie wrote: »

Look up the dictionary definition.



When someone refers to another as being homophobic, they aren't making a medical diagnosis.

A phobia is a medical disorder, that's why it's stupid to refer to someone who discriminates against homosexuals as homophobic.


http://psychology.about.com/od/phobias/f/dis_phobiadef.htm

A phobia is an illness which requires treatment, only an a55hole would ridicule someone because they suffer from an illness.

Jack Skellington

dees99 wrote: »

But then your accusing him of hating gays straight away. Even though he doesn't.

So somebody who doesn't like gays, but doesn't hate them or fear them is a homophobic? Ok got it!

I think I'd be right to. I've had this argument too many times, why would someone just not like a gay person without knowing them? What has their sexuality got to do with you?

Ghost Buster

Im guessing its just snappier than 'prejudiced against others sexuality, uncomfortable with your own, small minded god bothering gob ****e'

spurious

I think you'll find homophobic means being picked on by the gays for picking on the gays.
The Iona Institute told me - and they should know.

Golovkin P4P

Golovkin P4P wrote: »

A phobia is a medical disorder, that's why it's stupid to refer to someone who discriminates against homosexuals as homophobic.


http://psychology.about.com/od/phobias/f/dis_phobiadef.htm

A phobia is an illness which requires treatment, only an a55hole would ridicule someone because they suffer from an illness.

I know what a phobia is. You don't seem to to know what homophobia is.

You seem to be forgetting that we're talking about homophobia. It's not the same thing and pretending it's a medical disorder is disingenuous.