3 ms·

Maybe this is as good a place as any to mention a weird and confused use of the term 'homophobic'. I don't understand its use in certain places, so that's why I

Maybe this is as good a place as any to mention a weird and confused use of the term 'homophobic'. I don't understand its use in certain places, so that's why I'm bringing it up. It will often be used to describe aspects of a culture or belief system. Half the time it makes sense (i.e. throwing gays off roof tops) and the other half the time it doesn't make sense but still comports with the accepted definition (i.e. non-bigoted traditional gender role value systems). If I google "phobic define", I get something about an extreme aversion or irrational fear. If I google "homophobic define", I get something about a mere dislike OR a prejudice. To have a dislike for something is not sufficient for having an irrational fear or extreme aversion to something.

7952 7y ago
I don't think it matters particularly. But there is a tendancy for people to treat their negative attitude towards homosexually as an intellectual or moral position. This completey side steps their own behaviour which could be rude, bullying, abusive, invasive etc. There is simply no moral or intellectual justification for that behaviour regardless of what you feel or think. And using words like phobia reinforces that impression. It's a position that should be incomprehensible like being hostile to people with particular hair colour.
- anongraddebt 7y ago
  I agree that irrational fear, extreme aversion, discrimination not rooted in sincere religious/moral beliefs, and dislike simply for the sake of dislike should be incomprehensible. This, however, is compatible with the uncontroversially true belief that disagreement outside of the conditions stated above exists. Obviously, there is absolutely no sense in revising definitions such that they fail to account for the actual use of the terms. So, I get your point.
  - 7952 7y ago
    My point was rather that discrimination should be incomprehensible regardless of the moral or religious sincerity. To borrow from Christianity we should love and forgive our neighbor. Or from a secular point of view we should respect the rights and dignity of individuals. Of course that is a somewhat contraversial political opinion. And the way we speak and the words we us is also political motivated. But then why should our use of words or their definitions need to be politically neutral? The uncharitable nature of words can be a feature. And really it is amazing how forgiving society has been of homophobes.
RichardCA 7y ago
The word "homophobia" was derived, it's not a true phobia in the psychiatric sense. If it were, then there would be people who become irrationally terrified when presented with groupings of things that are all the same. It's more akin to a portmanteau. But that doesn't mean the phenomena it describes are not very real ones. I would argue that homophobia and transphobia are both describing the same underlying phenomenon. But I also respect that there is fierce debate around that question.
- SAI_Peregrinus 7y ago
  I'd say that the underlying phenomenon is classic xenophobia. These are just specific cases of it, where the "foreign/different/alien" thing is someone's sexual or gender preference, or even opinion on the validity of those things. (EG it's possible for a homosexual to be anti-homosexuality: their tribal affiliation's homophobia is stronger than their personal sexual orientation. Then you get headlines about a "Wide Stance".)

7952 7y ago

I don't think it matters particularly. But there is a tendancy for people to treat their negative attitude towards homosexually as an intellectual or moral position. This completey side steps their own behaviour which could be rude, bullying, abusive, invasive etc. There is simply no moral or intellectual justification for that behaviour regardless of what you feel or think. And using words like phobia reinforces that impression. It's a position that should be incomprehensible like being hostile to people with particular hair colour.

anongraddebt 7y ago
I agree that irrational fear, extreme aversion, discrimination not rooted in sincere religious/moral beliefs, and dislike simply for the sake of dislike should be incomprehensible. This, however, is compatible with the uncontroversially true belief that disagreement outside of the conditions stated above exists. Obviously, there is absolutely no sense in revising definitions such that they fail to account for the actual use of the terms. So, I get your point.
- 7952 7y ago
  My point was rather that discrimination should be incomprehensible regardless of the moral or religious sincerity. To borrow from Christianity we should love and forgive our neighbor. Or from a secular point of view we should respect the rights and dignity of individuals. Of course that is a somewhat contraversial political opinion. And the way we speak and the words we us is also political motivated. But then why should our use of words or their definitions need to be politically neutral? The uncharitable nature of words can be a feature. And really it is amazing how forgiving society has been of homophobes.

RichardCA 7y ago

The word "homophobia" was derived, it's not a true phobia in the psychiatric sense. If it were, then there would be people who become irrationally terrified when presented with groupings of things that are all the same. It's more akin to a portmanteau. But that doesn't mean the phenomena it describes are not very real ones. I would argue that homophobia and transphobia are both describing the same underlying phenomenon. But I also respect that there is fierce debate around that question.

SAI_Peregrinus 7y ago
I'd say that the underlying phenomenon is classic xenophobia. These are just specific cases of it, where the "foreign/different/alien" thing is someone's sexual or gender preference, or even opinion on the validity of those things. (EG it's possible for a homosexual to be anti-homosexuality: their tribal affiliation's homophobia is stronger than their personal sexual orientation. Then you get headlines about a "Wide Stance".)