Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 11
ali smack

why is homophobia commonplace?

421 posts in this topic

How does being gay benefit Humanity? I personally don't see how it helps or how it is healthy for a society. :no:

A natural method of control of growth of population, perhaps? Maybe that's why it's often the rabidly nationalistic who get most worked out about it, as they still believe, just like those who framed the laws for the Tribes of Israel 3000 years ago, that the perpetuation of the tribe is all-important, and any sexual activity that doesn't contribute to that is wasted. It often seems to be the ones who are most paranoid about "Outsiders" threatening Western values (or Islamic Values or whoever's values you like) that are most paranoid about this.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many times has some outspoken homophobe been forced out of office by revelations of their hypocrisy? I think we saw just such a case this week in the RC British hierarchy.

There does seem to be a link between American homophobia and fundamentalist religion, and this may be derived from common psychological factors, but all that is rather speculative. I know that in Asia men and women get married and have children to keep the grandparents happy, and most of us never heard of homosexuality. We learn from the West.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I object to the term 'homophobia' because it is a deliberate attempt to equate fear and loathing. It is possible to dislike something without being afraid of it. To call someone homophobic immediately changes the discussion because it implies cowardice rather than mere dislike or difference of opinion. If I like tea and you like coffee does that make me javaphobic? Is the question any less ridiculous when applied to sexuality? If the gay community is seeking acceptance it seems to me they would make more progress by not accusing as cowards those whose acceptance they seek.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have to use words with the meanings they have, not the meanings one infers from their root origins. The meaning of "homophobic" is not "fearing gays," but more like hating them, and it is therefore often listed in the prejudices people exhibit.

You are right, however, in that the English suffix "-phobe" more often refers to irrational fear. If one is arachnophobic, one does not just fear spiders but is terrified of them beyond rationality. It's just that as the word evolved, "homophobic" has a different meaning.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I object to the term 'homophobia' because it is a deliberate attempt to equate fear and loathing. It is possible to dislike something without being afraid of it. To call someone homophobic immediately changes the discussion because it implies cowardice rather than mere dislike or difference of opinion. If I like tea and you like coffee does that make me javaphobic? Is the question any less ridiculous when applied to sexuality? If the gay community is seeking acceptance it seems to me they would make more progress by not accusing as cowards those whose acceptance they seek.

The thing is, you're not gonna try to ban me from drinking coffee, many people who dislikes homosexuality don't want homosexuals doing their thang and being homosexual, they want to prevent them from being seen as normal sometimes as well.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have to use words with the meanings they have, not the meanings one infers from their root origins. The meaning of "homophobic" is not "fearing gays," but more like hating them, and it is therefore often listed in the prejudices people exhibit.

You are right, however, in that the English suffix "-phobe" more often refers to irrational fear. If one is arachnophobic, one does not just fear spiders but is terrified of them beyond rationality. It's just that as the word evolved, "homophobic" has a different meaning.

The label 'homophobia' is applied to anyone who disagrees with what homosexuals are doing.

Homosexuality is no longer listed as a mental illness. When we search psychology to find out why we dont discover that psychologists found evidence showing it wasnt mental illness. What is revealed is it was taken off the list simply because human rights groops were demanding more freedoms for them.

Therefore I'm against homosexuality because I see it as a symptom of mental illness and specifically a sociopathic disorder. As a young child a combination of abusive parents, poor diet and genetics triggers a sociopathic disorder. The disorder stops certain areas of the brain developing properly including those that control sexuality.

I'm also against it on religious grounds however after reading the bible I think there are misconceptions promoted by the Church. The only unforgivable sin according to the Holy book is blasphemy. Homosexuality can be forgiven and theres passages in Matthew where homosexuals have been forgiven.

I'm also not a liberal I'm conservative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have any proof for homosexuality being a mental illness?

One of my best friends is a homosexual and he has never been abused. And classifying hm as a sociopath is, well, very very offensive to say the least. He lives a normal everyday life.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have any proof for homosexuality being a mental illness?

One of my best friends is a homosexual and he has never been abused. And classifying hm as a sociopath is, well, very very offensive to say the least. He lives a normal everyday life.

Ditto. My father's homosexual and he's perfectly normal.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have any proof for homosexuality being a mental illness?

One of my best friends is a homosexual and he has never been abused. And classifying hm as a sociopath is, well, very very offensive to say the least. He lives a normal everyday life.

Asking Mr Right Wing if he has any proof for his Opinions? :unsure2:

it is an interesting question to ponder as to why some people, who, as has been seen in this thread, are very keen to point out that they consider the idea of two men getting it On disgusting and that it revolts them to the pit of their stomach, do seem to spend an inordinate amount of time thinking about it, and coming up with fatuous cod-psychological "explanations". perhaps, if it does make them Sick to the Pit of their Stomach, people might prefer to devote their attention to other matters? Or is it that they're (as often does seem to be the case) afraid that the Gays will find them so irresistible that they're afraid (or are they? :unsure2::innocent: ) that they'll Try it On with them? :innocent:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really couldn't care what gender floats someone's boat. I find a person attractive based (first impression) on looks and then personality, more so than gender.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Asking Mr Right Wing if he has any proof for his Opinions? :unsure2:

it is an interesting question to ponder as to why some people, who, as has been seen in this thread, are very keen to point out that they consider the idea of two men getting it On disgusting and that it revolts them to the pit of their stomach, do seem to spend an inordinate amount of time thinking about it, and coming up with fatuous cod-psychological "explanations". perhaps, if it does make them Sick to the Pit of their Stomach, people might prefer to devote their attention to other matters? Or is it that they're (as often does seem to be the case) afraid that the Gays will find them so irresistible that they're afraid (or are they? :unsure2::innocent: ) that they'll Try it On with them? :innocent:

http://www.sociopath...sociopathy.html

Below the age of 5 your mind isnt developed. Any hiccups preventing correct development of your personality (psychological trauma, genetic traights) result in personality disorders. Certain regions are undeveloped in a sociopaths mind including the parts dealing with sexuality. Hence a sociopath has no set sexuality.

Are all homosexuals sociopaths? I'm not going to jump the gun based on what I or anybody else wants to be true. If someone can prove all homosexuals are not sociopaths then please be my guest but I will only accept a peer reviewed psychology paper and preferrably from a neutral country not a liberal one.

Edited by Mr Right Wing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't have to prove that they are not sociopaths, you have to prove that they are if you make such a claim. That's the way it goes.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.sociopath...sociopathy.html

Below the age of 5 your mind isnt developed. Any hiccups preventing correct development of your personality (psychological trauma, genetic traights) result in personality disorders. Certain regions are undeveloped in a sociopaths mind including the parts dealing with sexuality. Hence a sociopath has no set sexuality.

Are all homosexuals sociopaths? I'm not going to jump the gun based on what I or anybody else wants to be true. If someone can prove all homosexuals are not sociopaths then please be my guest but I will only accept a peer reviewed psychology paper and preferrably from a neutral country not a liberal one.

Do you actually know any Homosexualists? If you do, would you describe them as Sociopaths?

"oh no", you'll say, "i never have any contact with Them." Well, I think you might be surprised. There might well be, among the people you meet on a day to day basis, one or two Homosexualists among them. Yes, I know, believe it or not, it's not always immediatedly apparent.

And the funniest bit of all in your little cod-psychological treatise must be "preferrably from a neutral country not a liberal one." Like, lolz. What countries would meet your criteria them? Presumably not the US or Uk, or anywhere in Europe. Perhaps Saudi Arabia?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm also against it on religious grounds however after reading the bible I think there are misconceptions promoted by the Church. The only unforgivable sin according to the Holy book is blasphemy. Homosexuality can be forgiven and theres passages in Matthew where homosexuals have been forgiven.

I'm also not a liberal I'm conservative.

I would say that it is accurate to describe you as homophobic, in the sense of prejudiced. It is the racial equivalent of racist and the sexual equivalent of sexist.
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The claim that homosexuals are "sociopaths" is really beyond the realm of reasonable discussion, much like a claim that railroad trains are used to ship goods over the ocean.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The label 'homophobia' is applied to anyone who disagrees with what homosexuals are doing.

Homosexuality is no longer listed as a mental illness. When we search psychology to find out why we dont discover that psychologists found evidence showing it wasnt mental illness. What is revealed is it was taken off the list simply because human rights groops were demanding more freedoms for them.

Therefore I'm against homosexuality because I see it as a symptom of mental illness and specifically a sociopathic disorder. As a young child a combination of abusive parents, poor diet and genetics triggers a sociopathic disorder. The disorder stops certain areas of the brain developing properly including those that control sexuality.

I'm also against it on religious grounds however after reading the bible I think there are misconceptions promoted by the Church. The only unforgivable sin according to the Holy book is blasphemy. Homosexuality can be forgiven and theres passages in Matthew where homosexuals have been forgiven.

I'm also not a liberal I'm conservative.

Sorry I can't provide some sort of link, but way back in the 70's they had discovered that homosexuality has a genetic component. A certain combination of the X and Y chromosomes. It's old news.

Thus your claim that it is some sort of mental illness is not founded upon reality. Of the several gays I know, they were "born that way."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry I can't provide some sort of link, but way back in the 70's they had discovered that homosexuality has a genetic component. A certain combination of the X and Y chromosomes. It's old news.

Thus your claim that it is some sort of mental illness is not founded upon reality. Of the several gays I know, they were "born that way."

Genetics doesnt cause homosexuality because only 40% of people with the gene you refer too are homosexual.

Its one of the main contributing factors (I did point out genetics) but not the activator of homosexuality. The acitvation is in early childhood which is also consistant with homosexuals saying that they have been homosexual for as long as they can remember.

Edited by Mr Right Wing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Homosexuality is a mental disorder in the same vein as many other things (such as being artistic, apparently) in that it does not fit the narrow definition of neuro-typical decided upon by the elite.

Our society is going a little crazy with its concept of neuro-typical and mental illness, though.

On an earlier note: watching men make-out (whether with each other or with a female partner) makes my skin crawl because men don't have particularly attractive facial features or jaws. But I'm not going to tell people what they can and cannot do. I'd just prefer it not be done in public.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Genetics doesnt cause homosexuality because only 40% of people with the gene you refer too are homosexual.

Its one of the main contributing factors (I did point out genetics) but not the activator of homosexuality. The acitvation is in early childhood which is also consistant with homosexuals saying that they have been homosexual for as long as they can remember.

My point was that the gene even exists. That is all that matters. Homosexuality is normal in nature through many species. Why should man NOT be homosexual?

So you can keep your moral judgments to yourself, if you don't mind. I have my own.

Homosexuality is normal. Some people have hangups about it, and I don't. I don't care about percentage in society--how many of this or how many of that. The genetic part shows how long time ago it became a part of the human condition?

I have many good friends who are gay, and best I can tell, they were born that way, to borrow from Lady Gaga

Edited by Babe Ruth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point was that the gene even exists. That is all that matters. Homosexuality is normal in nature through many species. Why should man NOT be homosexual?

So you can keep your moral judgments to yourself, if you don't mind. I have my own.

Homosexuality is normal. Some people have hangups about it, and I don't. I don't care about percentage in society--how many of this or how many of that. The genetic part shows how long time ago it became a part of the human condition?

I have many good friends who are gay, and best I can tell, they were born that way, to borrow from Lady Gaga

I don't agree with the "gay gene" suggestion. How would a gay gene be passed on to off spring when it prevents, or at least reduces the chance of having, offspring? It would be the evolutionary equivilant of a genetic mutation that makes your head explode and therefor would be an evolutionary "dead-end".

Edited by Professor Buzzkill
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't agree with the "gay gene" suggestion. How would a gay gene be passed on to off spring when it prevents, or at least reduces the chance of having, offspring? It would be the evolutionary equivilant of a genetic mutation that makes your head explode and therefor would be an evolutionary "dead-end".

Im going to go crazy with my suggestion here.

Evloution is now taking a new step, never seen before - as humans have become intelligent, and can make babys out of a lab - I can only see that having babys the old school way (sex) is not the only way to have a population growth.

Therefore having 'sexes' will in the furture become pointless.....

Soooo really its not an evolutionary dead-end - we have just evolved...

Crazy theroy to add to the pot here...

Edited by The Id3al Experience
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The meaning of the term 'homophobia' (A fear or loathing of homosexuality) has been deliberately blurred to include those who merely disapprove of homosexuality, in a deliberate attempt to shame the latter into abandoning their disapproval. (Discredit the person to discredit their argument).

I don't hate or fear homosexuals - I don't disapprove of them as persons - I do however, dislike this constant "Look at me me me - I'm a victim" mentality and the clamour for preferential treatment that is constantly being shoved in our faces via the media etc.

(And if that makes me a 'd-bag' because I have an opinion that differs from those more 'trendy' than I, then so be it).

This multiplied by 10,000. "Homophobia" is overused as much as "racism" is. It's a cheap and easy way to silence critics who neither fear nor hate gay people. It's ironic that it's used to unfairly slur large groups of individuals with varying points of view.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On an earlier note: watching men make-out (whether with each other or with a female partner) makes my skin crawl because men don't have particularly attractive facial features or jaws. But I'm not going to tell people what they can and cannot do. I'd just prefer it not be done in public.

I think fear is underneath your revulsion here.

The Buddha identified three sources of suffering The most common is desire, which when unsatisfied causes frustration and when satisfied causes fear of loss. The second most common is revulsion, as we suffer when we can't avoid things that revolt us. (The third is delusion, but that isn't pertinent here).

It may be that the revulsion you experience when seeing two men kiss is minor and you can ignore it, but if it really bothers you, you should overcome it, as it is you who suffers, not the men kissing, and it is quite irrational. There is nothing in their act that should effect you in the slightest.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the "gay gene" is evolving for population control. In fact I don't think there is a "gay gene." There is probably a genetic component to homosexuality, but it is far more likely a combined effect of many genes plus other effects as the fetus is developing and who knows what else.

Homosexuals have always existed, and not just among human beings. To me that is evidence that the behavior plays some role in enhancing survival (maybe of the group rather than the individual) that we don't understand (since it is pretty obvious that actual homosexuals don't contribute genes to the next generation at nearly the same rate as do heterosexuals).

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... men don't have particularly attractive facial features or jaws.

:rofl:
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 11

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.