Homophobia is so gay

[Darth Rotor]

There are a few ways to look at this.

1 is the Boy George thing, which looks like a case of counting the hits and ignoring the misses.

2 is the common habit in people to get upset with other people for shortcoming they have of their own.

There are other ways, but I leave them to other folks.

 

[NeilC]

Since homophobia is rife in Jamaica does this mean that there are more latent homosexuals there too? Or that there are more gays in fundamentalist Judeo-Christian religious sects than the more tolerant ones? I don't think so. My dad's generation is far more homophobic then my generation yet they are not more likey to be closet homosexuals. I think there are many reasons to be homophobic and only one of them is latent homosexuality.

 

[Bad Lieutenant]

As no genetic test for homosexuality has been found, it seems likely that homosexuality is socially/environmentally derived. People not wanting to contract homosexuality (ie. people who have an interest in sexual reproduction (ie. nearly everybody)) should avoid and dismiss homosexuals and homosexuality. So homophobia is logical. Call it irationalstupidityhomophobia; it would still be logical.

 

[Marduk]

People not wanting to contract homosexuality (ie. people who have an interest in sexual reproduction (ie. nearly everybody)) should avoid and dismiss homosexuals and homosexuality. .

Oh really ?
I have this "friend" see

he's a fully functioning pansexual with two live in bisexual girlfriends, are his chances of reproduction greater or smaller than that of his heterosexual friends ?
because he has been known to engage in homosexual activity, as have his girlfriends, quite frequently
I have video proof

frequently you find that the relationship that typical heterosexual males have with Lesbians i.e. media viewing for fluffing purposes
is equally valid for women viewing male based homoerotica


also I have a gripe with porn producers, the smallest collection of women who could be described as Lesbians is two, so it is entirely unnecessary to label such videos "2 lesbians", counts should always start at three or higher

 

[Tatyana]

As no genetic test for homosexuality has been found, it seems likely that homosexuality is socially/environmentally derived. People not wanting to contract homosexuality (ie. people who have an interest in sexual reproduction (ie. nearly everybody)) should avoid and dismiss homosexuals and homosexuality. So homophobia is logical. Call it
irationalstupidityhomophobia; it would still be logical.

There is not one single human characteristic or trait that is not a combination of nature and nuture, so, no, homosexuality is not exclusively socially/environmentally derived.

Homophobia is not logical. It is socially derived in that it is a biased learned behaviour.

 

[Bad Lieutenant]

he's a fully functioning pansexual with two live in bisexual girlfriends, are his chances of reproduction greater or smaller than that of his heterosexual friends ?
because he has been known to engage in homosexual activity, as have his girlfriends, quite frequently

It's linguistically/semantically blurry because bisexuality sort of includes homosexuality and sort of doesn't. I usually don't refer to bisexuality as homosexuality if I can help it just as the participants aren't homosexuals.

I guess the word biphobia isn't prevalent because bisexuals aren't impotent (ie. there's nothing to fear).

 

[Safe-Keeper]

I guess the word biphobia isn't prevalent because bisexuals aren't impotent (ie. there's nothing to fear).

wut.

There's a whole range of reasons people dislike gays, only one of them being that they're impotent same-sex intercourse doesn't produce offspring. Come to think of it, I fail to see why this "impotence" in gays should scare anyone in the first place.

 

[Bad Lieutenant]

There is not one single human characteristic or trait that is not a combination of nature and nuture, so, no, homosexuality is not exclusively socially/environmentally derived.

The environment holds the trump card though - there's no certainty from genetics; the correct environmental influence is necessary.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

Evidence?

Oh, wait, better yet -- relevance? Because the way I see it, the whole "born that or become that way" debate is one giant red herring. If homosexuality is wrong, it doesn't matter if it's something you're born with or decided upon. Likewise, if there's nothing wrong with homosexuality, it still doesn't matter one bit.

The discussion might hold some importance to people trying to "cure" gays, but really, I see no use for it.

Edit: I'm of the same opinion regarding the "homosexuals do not reproduce" bullocks: so the **** what? How does this make homosexuality "undesirable" or "illogical"?

 

[Bad Lieutenant]

Come to think of it, I fail to see why this "impotence" in gays should scare anyone in the first place.

That's like saying you fail to see why somebody would be afraid to have their testicles cut off.

 

[Tatyana]

The environment holds the trump card though - there's no certainty from genetics; the correct environmental influence is necessary.

There is no certainty from genetics?

I think you need to provide an example.

Everything I have read has suggesting that genetics hold the key, however, they are influenced by the environment, not completely altered.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_via_Nurture:_Genes,_Experience,_&_What_Makes_Us_Human
Nature via Nurture: Genes, Experience, & What Makes Us Human

 

[Safe-Keeper]

That's like saying you fail to see why somebody would be afraid to have their testicles cut off.

Given that gays can have sex with anyone they want just like everyone else, I'm clueless as to why.

It seems to me that you're projecting here -- you have a very strong desire to reproduce, and you assume everyone else does too.

 

[Jono]

The environment holds the trump card though - there's no certainty from genetics; the correct environmental influence is necessary.

I don't understand that argument though. What certainty is there from enviromental influence on this note? And what would the correct enviromental influence be?

 

[Bad Lieutenant]

Given that gays can have sex with anyone they want just like everyone else, I'm clueless as to why.

There's the muddy linguistic issue again. As far as most people are concerned, gay people are homosexuals and homosexuals do not enjoy intercourse with the opposite sex; that's the prevailing definition IMO and you're muddying the water really with that "liberal" definition of the gay identity.

 

[Bad Lieutenant]

There is no certainty from genetics?

I think you need to provide an example.

A strong piece of evidence which leads me to conclude that it is the environment which overwhelmingly directs sexual orientation is that there is only a 20% concordance for monozygotic twins and homosexuality. The study was conducted in 2000 using the Australian twins registry, in order to avoid selection bias. No surprises that this study is not detailed on the primary researcher's wikipedia page as it is not compatible with the prevailing, politically motivated zeitgeist that homosexuality is not determined through environmental forces. An earlier, biased study which found a 50% concordance is detailed on the wikipedia page instead. Disgraceful really.

~Bailey, Michael J., Michael P. Dunne and Nicholas G. Martin (2000). Genetic and environmental influences on sexual orientation and its correlates in an Australian twin sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 3, 524-536.

 

[Moss]

Just a few probably irrelevant personal observations:
I'm slightly homophobic. The general idea of male homosexuality gets a gut reaction from me. But that does not mean I have to follow that gut reaction. In my case I am rather certain it has a lot to do with what I perceive as the ideal male role model. Which seems to be rather rigidly oldfashioned and problematic in many ways.
There's also the thing that I for myself have found that the times when I really criticize someone very harshly I tend to do that when it is a behaviour I myself have. For me it's a way to externalize a certain selfloathing in a way that keeps my own feeling safe while expressing that loathing. I have seen that same behaviour in others, but I know that is rather subjective and my experience does not warrant generalized assumptions about others or humanity as a whole.

 

[Marduk]

I don't understand that argument though. What certainty is there from enviromental influence on this note? And what would the correct enviromental influence be?

its been suggested in academia that a tribal group has more chance of survival if it has male members that the leader can trust to protect the women without impregnating them. Genetically of course this means that homosexuals won't breed as well as heterosexuals, so if there is a genetic component, its not a large one. So that just leaves environmental factors

Homophobia is a by product of religious idealism. In the ancient world it wasn't stigmatised
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etoro_people

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_ancient_Greece
http://epistle.us/hbarticles/neareast.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_ancient_Rome

In my case I am rather certain it has a lot to do with what I perceive as the ideal male role model. Which seems to be rather rigidly oldfashioned and problematic in many ways.

can you detail that ?

 

[Dessi]

People not wanting to contract homosexuality (ie. people who have an interest in sexual reproduction (ie. nearly everybody)) should avoid and dismiss homosexuals and homosexuality. So homophobia is logical.

So, people "contract" homosexuality by being around them? Nevermind the straight allies who have been members of LGBT organizations like PFLAG for years and years without ever "contracting" homosexual tendencies.

And heterosexuals become less capable of reproducing simply by being around gay people or supporting their rights? Nevermind that belief being so completely asinine and ridiculous it hardly merits refutation.

And it's logical for people with an interest in sexual reproduction to be prejudiced against those who don't or can't? Nevermind the implications that childfree people have an equally logical basis for being prejudiced against people who want to have children.

 

[crimresearch]

There's the muddy linguistic issue again. As far as most people are concerned, gay people are homosexuals and homosexuals do not enjoy intercourse with the opposite sex; that's the prevailing definition IMO and you're muddying the water really with that "liberal" definition of the gay identity.

How nice of you to set us all straight.

 

[Marduk]

So, people "contract" homosexuality by being around them? .

well you know sometimes a good looking gay guy can turn a guys head

stoke me a clipper, I'll be back for breakfast
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Red_Dwarf_characters#Ace_Rimmer