It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is Homophobia Natural?

page: 6
4
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 31 2011 @ 08:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Stewie
 


But think about this. I would bet for EACH person that commits an hostile act against someone because they are perceived to be somehow homosexually inclined politically, physically, culturally or otherwise, there is at least ONE person doing just the opposite because of guilt, political correctness, or because they have bought into the victim status that homosexuals need protection from.


Oh really?

Where are gay people jailing hetersosexuals, throwing them off buildings, stoning and whipping them because of their sexuality? Please, name me one country.

Where are straight men and women taunted because of how they speak and move their hands, or because they kiss and hold hands in public? Where?

When was a straight person in the US tied to a fence and left to freeze to death because of their heterosexuality?

When did gay people ever do this to heterosexuals?
When do gay people beat straight kids for playing with stereotypical toys for their gender?
When do we send straight kids to military-styled camps to turn them gay?

When did gay people ever impose the theory that marriage can only be between a man and a man, or a woman and a woman on straight citizens?

What gay preacher calls you straight people worse than dogs and pigs, and child-molesters and serial killers on Sundays when you go to church?

When did gay people ever blame 9/11 and Katrina on heterosexuals?

When did gay people ever laugh at, and celebrate the fact that millions of heterosexuals are living with HIV/AIDS in Africa?

There is nobody that can say to an educated gay person: "You people had it coming."
How do you even know what gay people experience?
Are you gay?
I didn't think so.
You think we got it so good?
Think again.




posted on May, 31 2011 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by halfoldman
 

I am not sure we can communicate, but, what the heck, I will give it a go.
You seem to think that "gay" people are victims only, and incapable of committing crimes. Have you ever wondered, when a crime is reported, what the sexuality of the perpetrator was? Or, do you just pay attention to "hate" crimes?

Is it really necessary that we must actually KNOW the sexuality of someone? I don't believe any of us have a clue as to how many crimes are committed by homosexuals because that is not central to an investigation.

On another thread, the talk is about a Muslim girl that was raped "because" she attended a beauty contest, and she was raped "because" of Sharia law. Bull#. A criminal raped a girl.

MY point, that you missed, was this. There are a whole lot of people that are going OUT of their way for homosexuals, and it is not because THEY are homosexual, it is because homosexuals have defined largely by their victim status...or some other label, and there are always innumerable bleeding hearts that will come to the rescue.

It could be worse. Homosexuals could be ignored.



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 09:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Stewie
 

OK, please, ignore us.
Wouldn't that be great!
I wish they'd ignore us and didn't have special hate towards us, and they'd never written us as "special criminals" in their laws, their religious texts and hate groups.
And all that for what?
Because we commit crimes?
Our only crime ever was to love people of the same sex.
That itself is why they hate us.

That is a crime we do not commit against heterosexuals.
We do not judge them because of their sexuality.
You said for every crime committed against us we commit one back.
Well we have a lot of catching up to do.
That is an assumption pulled out of thin air with no evidence.

They label us as serial killers and pedophiles.
The worst of the worst.
Society must be saved from gays.

You have the victim position!
I hope some "bleeding heart" saves you from it.



edit on 31-5-2011 by halfoldman because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 10:14 PM
link   
Homophobia is a madeup insult, a pretty good one I guess.... Someone dislikes a homosexual, so you bait them and piss them off more by implying they are in fact a closet self-hating gay. Yeah, that would piss off someone who dislikes gay people.

I hate poisonous snakes and spiders, am I secretly a poisonous snake or spider? I doubt it. The thought of homosexuality disgusts me, probably because I am not attracted to males. I would rather not see two guys making out, it makes my vomit factor jump a bit, just like when I see someone slurp up an uncooked oyster. I don't know why I react that way, but it happens.

Do I dislike people for being gay, no, as long as you keep your personal sex life in the bedroom, same as straight couples should do. I don't appreciate having to look at anyone shove their tongue down someone else's throat in public, I guess I am a bit old fashioned in that aspect. Some of us would rather not see it, and will speak up about it too, it is who I am I guess. I don't apologize for it.

The only time I would beat up a gay person, is if they put their hands on me, but most times I would do the same to a straight guy I didn't know either.



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 10:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stewie
I would bet for EACH person that commits an hostile act against someone because they are perceived to be somehow homosexually inclined politically, physically, culturally or otherwise, there is at least ONE person doing just the opposite because of guilt, political correctness, or because they have bought into the victim status that homosexuals need protection from.


Which one of them ends up dead when we hear about it?



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 11:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Stewie
 


It could be even worse still.

People could think that gay people want Muslims to be segregated based on their religion.

Maybe you've never seen a gay parade?

Or is that too "in your face"?

All those people with signs and pickets about real modern issues of genocide and slaughter.... "rubbing it in"....

...And of course all they want to do is commit crimes...

...


Ignorance is hilarious...

...But only the first time.

Please, just stop. You've already been defeated by your ineptness to be knowledgable about what you're even talking about and/or forming a solid point at all, regardless of how many mutually ignorant mooks jump on board.

Back on topic, homophobia is a stupid "word". It defies all latin origins and mutilates the English language, although I will use it as it is semantically a word that everyone recognizes. "Homo" meaning of the self "phobia" meaning the fear of the former fragment. The word would actually mean fear of oneself, which is appropriate for some, but not for others. Either of them can be replaced by two separate words upon further analysis of the "homophobe" -- "complacent" or "ignorant".
edit on 31-5-2011 by TheOrangeBrood because: (no reason given)

edit on 31-5-2011 by TheOrangeBrood because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 02:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheOrangeBrood



You mean this website that looks like it was made in half an hour by a 64 year old man with a current 5th grade students' knowledge on web design? I think it's more likely that some nut from the GOP fabricated all this nonsense themselves to try and prove a 'point' that never existed.
.

Take it up with the women who run the site..Maybe I am too trusting, but I believed them...

V



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 12:56 PM
link   
reply to post by TheOrangeBrood


Back on topic, homophobia is a stupid "word". It defies all latin origins and mutilates the English language, although I will use it as it is semantically a word that everyone recognizes. "Homo" meaning of the self "phobia" meaning the fear of the former fragment. The word would actually mean fear of oneself, which is appropriate for some, but not for others. Either of them can be replaced by two separate words upon further analysis of the "homophobe" -- "complacent" or "ignorant".

Good points.
The term is very deritive of the dogged 19th century clinical Greek/Latin mixture: "homosexual".
The "homo" refers to "the same":

The term homophobia was formed like the names for many other phobias (e.g. arachnophobia) from homoios (όμοιος, greek for same) and phobia (φοβία, greek for irrational fear').

en.wikipedia.org...

The fear of, or relating to the self is called autophobia.

Interestingly "homophobia" was first used by the psychologist George Weinberg in 1969 to describe the fear of heterosexual male patients that others may think they are gay.
Since then it's pretty much taken on a life of its own, and split into several groups such as internalized homophobia, rationalized homophobia, emotional homophobia and more.

Since homosexuality isn't as clear in physically dividing the self from the other (such as race), it does give homophobia an extra complexity: men who are insecure in their masculinity may indeed fear they are secretly gay, and use homophobic slurs and violence as a distancing device from homosexuality.
However that would only be an issue in our current heteronormative societies, where being heterosexual is important for being accepted into especially same-sex environments. And being a male heterosexual in masculinity studies not only means being attracted to women, but also actively not being attracted to men.

Especially those who keep saying homosexuality is a choice thereby admit that anyone (including they themselves) could make that "wrong" choice and turn homosexual. To them gays are just very naughty straight people. So they have to see homosexuality in others in the most disgusting terms to distance themselves from making the "wrong choice". That makes homophobia unique amongst the phobias and prejudices.
Anyone can have gay sex or assume a gay identity, but the racist or arachnophobe will never turn black or into a spider.
Their arguments are actually so funny.
It's like the Calvinists of old, who constantly had to glance about for the devil to reassure themselves that they were amongst the elected.

So, often ignorance does play a part, but it can be a carefully selected ignorance.
If they researched that gays are very probably born that way, a lot of that insecurity would disappear.
Of course some would still hate gays either way because they are just bullies or sadists, and gays were an easy target with little legal protection (although that has changed in most Western countries).

edit on 1-6-2011 by halfoldman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 06:05 PM
link   
reply to post by TheOrangeBrood
 

Boy, your post speaks volumes.
Unintentionally, I am sure.
So Gay people are a "homo"genous group? No Muslim haters in the bunch. No segregationists, either?
I realize Gays are a small percentage of the population, but I didn't realize the ALL pissed sitting down.
(Let's see how that comment fares with the "victims" here.)



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 10:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Stewie
 

Here I must agree, gays are certainly not homogeneous, and they reflect all the race and class issues of wider society.
There are huge questions about representation, since the media and medical studies are often confined to gay urban enclaves, which are very much focused on clubbing, visibility and celebrating sexuality.
Gays in the suburbs are often ignored, and become invisible and are often completely omitted from statistics.
There's a lot of debate around the shallow nature of the "official urban scenes" and their issues of classism and ageism. This would probably vary between countries.
A lot of contact ads say "no fats or fems", which shows some internalized phobias amongst gays themselves.
Older men may complain of ageism when younger men aren't interested, but they would never date someone their own age.
In SA there's still huge issues of race and class, and who has access to the formerly segregated queer spaces.
We have a big organization for gay Muslims here.
Personally I have a problem with the Islamists who threaten to kill gay people - I'd be suicidal not to, but some gay Muslims are challenging them.
Then there's issues around HIV/Aids phobia (often tied to race).

Gays are indeed extremely varied, and it's not all rainbows and fabulousness on the pink planet.
However, the homophobes aren't exactly homogeneous either, ranging from neo-Nazis to Robert Mugabe.
Usually they also hate a whole bunch of other people along with gays (often anyone outside their in-group, or anyone who is different).
Often they feel victimized and offended by the mere presence of gay people, so imagined victimization describes the homophobes very well.

In SA we've had rapid changes, from a militarized segregation before 1994 (which punished all sex between two or more males with a prison sentence of 7 years), to legal gay marriage in 2006.
But we are working closer together already, with white gays taking an interest in homophobia in the black townships.
For example picketing the case of a black lesbian lady who was gang-raped in an attempt to make her straight (curative rape), and her case has been postponed for years. Every time she goes to court she has to share public transport with the men who raped her.


edit on 1-6-2011 by halfoldman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 10:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stewie
reply to post by TheOrangeBrood
 

Boy, your post speaks volumes.
Unintentionally, I am sure.
So Gay people are a "homo"genous group? No Muslim haters in the bunch. No segregationists, either?
I realize Gays are a small percentage of the population, but I didn't realize the ALL pissed sitting down.
(Let's see how that comment fares with the "victims" here.)



As I say: "There is no such thing as Gay Group Think".

They are humans who are as diverse as all of human population. They have one thing in common - - a birth right. Same gender attraction.



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 07:18 AM
link   
reply to post by halfoldman
 

That is the kind of balanced post that I really appreciate, thank you.
I grew up in Austin, Texas, where gays are not persecuted. The joke was that a gay was more likely to suffer physical harm at a gay bar, than at a straight one. Parties were often attended by gay and straight, at least the parties that I attended, and we could even joke about subjects that you get flamed for here on ATS.
I do realize of course, that this issue is a cultural one, and Austin is not the norm. But Austin gays are laid back as well for the most part.
I believe physical assault on another human being often is done for very different reasons that stated or supposed. The perpetrators are violent people, and the reasons given are usually excuses or justifications when this type of person would find something they didn't like. For instance, I doubt that people that would assault a gay person limits their assaults to gay people. They are all hate crimes.
Just my opinion. Thanks for the intelligent discourse.



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 06:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Stewie
 

I think one would have to look at the evidence in each case before one calls it homophobic just because gay people are involved.
I've heard that in the US homophobic crimes are labelled "hate crimes" (I believe since the Matthew Sheppard murder) with additional sentences.
Some of the heterosexist Christian books call this unfair, and biased against straight people (especially if they are victims of gay criminals).
I don't know too much about this, but reading Randy Shilt's biography of Harvey Milk it seems to come from a long history of violence against gays, including from the police and authorities.
I guess the point was to finally send out a message that gay bashing was not some kind of sport that was still condoned by the police, the legal system and the community.
There was actually a post in another thread on gay issues where somebody openly described how they would go out with baseball bats with the intention of bashing gays (it was removed by the mods).
So, all that being said, some crimes are definitely homophobic in nature, and are deliberately planned as such.

Ideally a crime should be a crime. However, law enforcement and the legal system consists of people who interpret the law through their biases, and I suppose the argument is that the state needs to send out a powerful message to all that certain minorities are not fair game.
During apartheid in some cases where white farmers killed their black workers, the racist judges would give them the minimum sentence of a fine.
The "gay panic" defense often resulted in reduced sentences in murder cases.
People who were gay bashed were often too afraid to go to the police.

Now we have very liberal laws, but we are learning that they mean very little if the police and the judges can use them as they like.
There was recently a case on the Carte Blanche program where a lesbian couple was attacked and they were going to rape the one with the stated intent of "curing her". Her partner ripped a pole out of the ground and fought off the attackers. The police then charged her for damage to property, and she was sentenced to 10 years in prison by a clearly homophobic judge, who pulled faces every time she mentioned her "girlfriend".
Luckily she studied law in prison, and got her case dismissed after three years.
So there's currently much debate on hate-crime laws in SA, because there's parts of the community that just don't get the message.

edit on 2-6-2011 by halfoldman because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2011 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by lestweforget
 


Found this video searching for something for another thread. I hadn't seen it before. It is extremely interesting but if you are a homophobe, this is going to be some disturbing content.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join