Homophobia
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-09-2010, 09:46 AM
RE: Homophobia
Quote:Many people choose to be offended by the things that other people say, regardless of how stupid or ignorant those words may be. If there's no implied or overt threat, then there's only the objective words. Their ability to offend or demean is granted by the hearer. If you choose not to be offended or demeaned, you eradicate their power totally.

Fair point and I do agree with that. However, words never exist in a vacuum. There is always going to be intent behind them. I don't see how you can separate the two.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-09-2010, 11:04 AM
RE: Homophobia
Quote:Fair point and I do agree with that. However, words never exist in a vacuum. There is always going to be intent behind them. I don't see how you can separate the two.

I agree with this. It's the same reason why most people who curse would get at least a little offended at being cussed out.

Like, some good friends of mine I've had for years quite regularly make "fag" jokes around me, but from their tone and knowing them personally, I don't take offense because I know they're just joking around. They also get some fun out of the "straight" jokes I make back to them. Tongue

Intent is most important, but the clearest way (not to mention the most often-used way) to get across intention is through words.

"It does feel like something to be wrong; it feels like being right." -Kathryn Schulz
I am 100% certain that I am wrong about something I am certain about right now. Because even if everything I stand for turns out to be completely true, I was still wrong about being wrong.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-09-2010, 01:07 PM
RE: Homophobia
Hmm, could discriminating sexual minorities, which dońt reproduce, be somehow 'natural'? A gay uses resources, but does'nt reproduce (spread genes), so in a very primitive society with limited resources, discriminating gays would leave more for the reproducing heteros. This kind of cultures would have a slight advantage over cultures that accept gays.
Just a thought with no supporting evidence. And I probably have to mention (in case somebody points it up) that this thought has nothing to do with ''justifying'' discrimination, I was thinking about the origin of homophobia.

Correct me when I'm wrong.
Accept me or go to hell.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-09-2010, 01:49 PM
RE: Homophobia
Perhaps masculine men are jealous of effeminate men. Before, strong, rugged men got all of the ladies, and now women seem to be drooling over pretty boys like Brad Pitt, Leonardo DiCaprio, and Taylor Lautner (although the last one seems to only apply to teenage girls).
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-09-2010, 02:24 PM
RE: Homophobia
(17-09-2010 09:02 AM)athnostic Wrote:  the fact that so many derogatory statements that men direct at each other are actually statements about women says something about our society.

Not agreeing with you there.
I myself have been guilty many a time of using pussy, cunt, bich and so forth without putting any emphasis on the literal meaning of the word. Exemplified: pussy used (by me at least) in the way we are talking about is just synonymous with sissy, coward or chicken. And I´m certainly not dissing chickens. I love chicken! ( and women )
I would also not hesitate to call both men and women bitches or dicks. Though I might ad that men tend to be dicks more often just as women tend to be more frequently bitchy. I myself bitch quite a lot. ( or nag, as those words also can be synonymous in some cases )

Don´t get me wrong. I know perfectly well to original meaning of these words. At the time people started using them the way we do today, they WHERE sexist and demeaning! I´m with you 100% there! But if I should ever find myself in need of calling you a pussy, I hope you will find it is an insult to your person, not your gender.

As an endnote, cocksucker should never be used to describe a bad man. It´s a good woman!! Big Grin

I want to rip off your superstitions and make passionate sense to you
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-09-2010, 02:44 PM
 
RE: Homophobia
(19-09-2010 02:24 PM)ThinkingNorseman Wrote:  As an endnote, cocksucker should never be used to describe a bad man. It´s a good woman!! Big Grin

TTA must have set a record for the number of Carlin references during discussion. Perhaps we should create TTA's law. No matter what the topic, at some point during a discussion on The Thinking Atheist, a Carlin video will be linked to or a Carlin quote will be brought up. It seems his work reflects the general ideas of this site so well.

As for homophobia, at a young age such as mine, it is a naive attempt to secure one's emerging sexuality and assert and secure dominance in the primordial competition for mates by alienating gays, thus hoping to emphasize one's one manliness and curry the favor of females. I'm sure most teens don't think about that way, but most teens don't think. Period.

At a later age, you are either still going through puberty or you have been ushered to homophobia by religious pressures.
Quote this message in a reply
19-09-2010, 08:54 PM
 
RE: Homophobia
(19-09-2010 02:24 PM)ThinkingNorseman Wrote:  I myself have been guilty many a time of using pussy, cunt, bich and so forth without putting any emphasis on the literal meaning of the word. Exemplified: pussy used (by me at least) in the way we are talking about is just synonymous with sissy, coward or chicken. And I´m certainly not dissing chickens. I love chicken! ( and women )

But what does the name "pussy" really mean when a man uses it to describe another man? It implies that women (who have pussies) are sissies, cowards, or weaklings. Bitch implies that a woman has no more value than a dog used for breeding. "Son of a bitch" therefore implies that someone is the child of a worthless woman. The references go on and on.

I'm not militant and constantly angry in my daily life, however, the fact that men don't often think through the implications of the words that come out of their mouths (and how they will affect their daughters) kind of amazes me.
Quote this message in a reply
19-09-2010, 10:57 PM
RE: Homophobia
I think there's some real validity to thinking through the words we commonly use. Even when we don't intend to be sexist, we need to remember that some may see it that way. Does this condone people being over sensitive? No. But why not make an attempt to make those around you more comfortable? Pussy is a good example. As a kid, this meant coward. In fact, I knew it as a term for cowardess before I knew it was slang for "vagina". Now I do my best to avoid it. Not because it offends me, or even that I am terribly concerned that I am offending others (most people I know would know that I have no malicous intent). I do it to show my daughters that it matters how other people feel. I DO care about offending others. It sucks to feel like that. I don't want people to feel shitty, and I don't want my daughters to think it's ok to make people feel shitty. If Athnostic was at my home for dinner, and I called another guest a pussy in jest, I would make her feel shitty. Probably not really bad, but just that she would notice is enough for me to want to avoid that. I mean really, is it that hard to just re-think what you're saying? Say chicken instead. I promise, if you're at my place the chickens won't be offended. In fact, I'm pretty sure they don't speak english, and they're so stupid that if they did, they wouldn't know they're chickens!

Just visiting.

-SR
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-09-2010, 12:35 AM
RE: Homophobia
(19-09-2010 08:54 PM)athnostic Wrote:  But what does the name "pussy" really mean when a man uses it to describe another man? It implies that women (who have pussies) are sissies, cowards, or weaklings. Bitch implies that a woman has no more value than a dog used for breeding. "Son of a bitch" therefore implies that someone is the child of a worthless woman. The references go on and on.

This is where I think you are wrong! When I speak these words they do not hold the implications that you seam to think they do. It is only in discussions like these that I even consider their original meaning. The reason for this is that I have grown up with these words having a different meaning in everyday use than what was original intention. I´m glad you mention "pussy" btw, because it so brilliantly illustrates my point! when you call somebody a pussy, how many of you are thinking of a cat?

I want to rip off your superstitions and make passionate sense to you
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-09-2010, 01:57 AM
RE: Homophobia
I just started wondering if using words like this are influencing some people's attidudes, but not all. Many of these words and terms were made common when women were wrongly considered lower beings. The words remain the same, but scociety has made some changes. Women are considered to be more equal now than they were in most of written history, at least in some parts of the world. There are, however men who still feel that men are superior to women. Why? There is no one answer. Could the way these words are being use be contributing to the amount of men who feel superior to women. and if so, by how much? If society reduced the use of these words in this way, would it cause future generations to have a few less male chauvinistic pigs? I think there would be an effect.

Monkey see monkey do and monkey hear monkey do?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: