Homophobia makes me sick!

[Deleted member]

Must be just my luck then, because I constantly have the pleasure of sitting next to the crudest lesbians in history.

 

[Omnicron's Baklava Enterprises]

I could not care less what a persons sexual orientation is.
If someone came up to me and shouted "I'm gay!" I would have two responses...
1. Lower your volume.

2. I don't give a crap.

Homosexuals AND Heterosexuals should literally shut their mouths on their orientation.
Stop saying that you are gay, I do not care. Stop saying that you are heterosexual, I do not care.

You are a human being with a different genetic code than other people, who themselves do not have normal genetic codes.

Just being alive is what matters, really.

 

[Teran]

I admire you for not being one of those "OMG LESBIANS R HOT BUT HOMOS R DISGUSTING!" people.

 

[Old Amber]

You make a very good point, OP. Homophobia is one thing I despise, even though I'm straight myself. I think in a highly civilized society, anyone should be able to have any views they want, and all rights they need, as long as they do not pose a threat to others or intentionally disturb the peace.

Don't forget Caesar procreated with dudes.

 

[Man of Popsicle]

You are a human being with a different genetic code than other people,.

lol Genetics.
There isn't a gay gene.

 

[Falconv1.0]

lol Genetics.
There isn't a gay gene.

And you know this to be 100% beyond a shadow of a doubt becaaauuuuuuuseeeee why exactly?

 

[Teran]

*Facepalm*

Please stop before I have a stroke.

 

[Old Amber]

There isn't as much of a gene as there is a weakened resistance to the feminine influences on a male inside the womb. I think. Bah, I'm not good in life science anyway.

 

[Omnicron's Baklava Enterprises]

lol Genetics.
There isn't a gay gene.

There may not be a true 'gay' gene, yet there are genes that lead to (provided a certain environment) homosexuality. Those are actually behaviour genes.

 

[LordoftheMorning]

I never liked the usage of the word homophobia. The suffix -phobia suggests that it is a fear and yet the word is more often used to describe hatred. Or it at least suggests that people dislike or hate it because they fear it. However there doesn't seem to be a suffix for hatred. There is a prefix though, miso- meaning "hater of". They should be called misotramontanists (haters of things strange) or more specifically misohomoerotist (hater of homosexuality).

I guess while I'm making up words we would have to label you a misohomophobe for hating those that fear homosexuality.

Misohomoerotism makes you sick eh?

Don't blame The Bible though. While many people would use that as a justification for fearing or hating homosexuality, it might not be the cause. As there are homosexuals that are also Christian anyway. Not to mention the misotheists and agnostics that also find homosexuality wrong.

Misotramontanists are made uncomfortable by strange and foreign things. Its odd, its weird, its not what I would do. It should be done away with.

This guy knows his fuggin' roots. That's awesome.

Anyways, I might point out that by saying "____ people make me sick!", you are being intolerant as well. Being intolerant of others intolerance is not a good way to sway people, and it's not the right thing to do in my opinion. I think it makes you sound a little contradictory. The statement "I am intolerant of people who are intolerant" is very hypocritical, if you know what I mean.

 

[illinialex24]

This guy knows his fuggin' roots. That's awesome.

Anyways, I might point out that by saying "____ people make me sick!", you are being intolerant as well. Being intolerant of others intolerance is not a good way to sway people, and it's not the right thing to do in my opinion. I think it makes you sound a little contradictory. The statement "I am intolerant of people who are intolerant" is very hypocritical, if you know what I mean.

Thats a bit ridiculous. For example, during the civil rights movement, many black men were attacked by dogs, hoses, and other things because of racism. Saying you hate the racists who killed Emmett Till or the ones who are setting dogs on your or the ones who want you to become their slaves again isn't all that ridiculous.

 

[REL38]

You know when they scan your brain so it shows your brain activity in colors?

They scanned a gay guy and a straight girl to see the results.

The areas of brain activity were pretty much identical.

 

[illinialex24]

Yeah there was a study done that showed that gay guys have more similar neural connections than gay guys and straight guys.

 

[LordoftheMorning]

Thats a bit ridiculous. For example, during the civil rights movement, many black men were attacked by dogs, hoses, and other things because of racism. Saying you hate the racists who killed Emmett Till or the ones who are setting dogs on your or the ones who want you to become their slaves again isn't all that ridiculous.

Don't take me out of context. Murderers should not be tolerated, of course not, but merely having a prejudiced view of a certain people does not make someone a murderer. It is irrational to assume that just because someone dislikes someone else (for whatever reason), he will act upon it by violating the law.

 

[Man of Popsicle]

And you know this to be 100% beyond a shadow of a doubt becaaauuuuuuuseeeee why exactly?

If it were dominant I'm sure you know why.
And if it were recessive... Cases would be more secluded into certain areas, not as diffused as it is. If it were a blending trait somewhat like rose color, it would make more sense, but then it would seem there would have to be a gene for every sexual preference, wether you be a furry, a necro, or a pedo.


I'll put it a different way: A gay gene seems highly improbable and I am fairly certain it does not exist.

You know when they scan your brain so it shows your brain activity in colors?

They scanned a gay guy and a straight girl to see the results.

The areas of brain activity were pretty much identical.

Why would they choose people of different genders? You mean because they both like men?

Yeah there was a study done that showed that gay guys have more similar neural connections than gay guys and straight guys.

I'm confused.

 

[illinialex24]

Don't take me out of context. Murderers should not be tolerated, of course not, but merely having a prejudiced view of a certain people does not make someone a murderer. It is irrational to assume that just because someone dislikes someone else (for whatever reason), he will act upon it by violating the law.

Thats true but often people who have an irrational fear of something has it grounded in genetics (fear of someone who is genetically on average much more different from you and therefore much more of a competition for mates, disdain for those who can't pass on their genes because they are in a homosexual relationship) will act a certain amount on some level.

I'm not saying because there are genetic reasons for any of this that its justified at all, its despicable, but that there were reasons we have these reactions and its gonna cause people to act up who are homophobes or racists.

 

[REL38]

If it were dominant I'm sure you know why.
And if it were recessive... Cases would be more secluded into certain areas, not as diffused as it is. If it were a blending trait somewhat like rose color, it would make more sense, but then it would seem there would have to be a gene for every sexual preference, wether you be a furry, a necro, or a pedo.


I'll put it a different way: A gay gene seems highly improbable and I am fairly certain it does not exist.


Why would they choose people of different genders? You mean because they both like men?

I'm confused.

1) Those are fetishes. This is sexual preference. A guy will either like men or girls (or both, I guess). Those fetishes derive from that.

2) Maybe not a specific "gay" gene, but something similar. I dunno.

3) comparing brain activity shows that this is something that you're born with. You can't "make" certain areas of your brain to react like a woman or man's would. That's in your genes and all that jazz.

Comparing a gay guy's brain activity to that of a straight girl is showing the similarities between the two makes sense. It is showing how sexual preference is something designed into you from birth.

As to whether homosexuality can be learned . . . that's a different story.

4) My explaination makes you not confused :D

 

[deepseadiva]

Just something that should be seen if you haven't: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYMjXucTFaM

Pretty informative and credible.

 

[REL38]

Just something that should be seen if you haven't: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYMjXucTFaM

Pretty informative and credible.

Lmao
The guy was called Christian? Really? Lol

I actually did learn something though. Very informative.

 

[Cloudfox]

Whenever I ask homophobes why is being gay a "sin" or "abnormal", they stick to their religion. :/
I'm not against religion, but I want some realistic facts, not spiritual

Citing religious text tends to be the easy fallback for people to try and satisfy the argument with, despite the fact that it actually doesn't.

The very thought of two beings of the same gender together, as partners, ****s my mind over.

Yeah it's funny though, people actually don't need religion to make an argument against it, or to explain why it makes them feel uncomfortable - you'll also come across the old fashioned "it's just not natural". Which is lol because:

1: It's "not natural" for us to be driving around automobiles and debating things on the internets, but you don't see anyone rallying against that.

And 2: If you mention there being at least several hundred species of animal in which homosexuality has been observed, you may get a "well they're animals and we're higher beings, we're supposed to know better".

There actually isn't one *truly* valid argument you can come up with as to why homosexuality in and of itself would be "wrong", but people tend to be afraid of challenging social and religious dogmas.

 

[Teran]

If it were dominant I'm sure you know why.
And if it were recessive... Cases would be more secluded into certain areas, not as diffused as it is. If it were a blending trait somewhat like rose color, it would make more sense, but then it would seem there would have to be a gene for every sexual preference, wether you be a furry, a necro, or a pedo.


I'll put it a different way: A gay gene seems highly improbable and I am fairly certain it does not exist.


Why would they choose people of different genders? You mean because they both like men?

I'm confused.

There is a LOT more to genetics than elementary dominant and recessive alleles.

So just keep your belief and stop expressing it as fact.

 

[El Nino]

Anyways, I might point out that by saying "____ people make me sick!", you are being intolerant as well. Being intolerant of others intolerance is not a good way to sway people, and it's not the right thing to do in my opinion. I think it makes you sound a little contradictory. The statement "I am intolerant of people who are intolerant" is very hypocritical, if you know what I mean.

I don't see the point in fighting for an objective moral high ground. Morals are never objective. It boils down to a different set of values. If I have mine, and someone else has his, and we both collide, that's just how it's gonna have to be. He has his standards, and I have mine.

If it were dominant I'm sure you know why.
And if it were recessive... Cases would be more secluded into certain areas, not as diffused as it is.

Sure, if we were talking about the sexual orientation of pea plants, that'd probably be how it'd go down.

I'll put it a different way: A gay gene seems highly improbable and I am fairly certain it does not exist.

Many traits are heritable, meaning they are part genetic and part environmental. Sometimes, there are multiple genes that influence a certain type of behavior. Some traits are wired very deeply in biology, and regardless of whether they are mostly genetic or environmental in origin, choice to act on an impulse is not the same as the choice to possess that impulse.

There is a LOT more to genetics than elementary dominant and recessive alleles.

No way. Mendelian genetics explains everything. EVERYTHING.

 

[Firus]

Don't take me out of context. Murderers should not be tolerated, of course not, but merely having a prejudiced view of a certain people does not make someone a murderer. It is irrational to assume that just because someone dislikes someone else (for whatever reason), he will act upon it by violating the law.

Well, I think mountain_tiger has said more than once that this blog is about people who act on it, who talk about how horrible gay people are, actively dislike them in some way, shape, or form.

Also, I still see this as a rather stupid "Gotcha!" argument. It's not at all the same to be irked by people who hate all people of a certain race/gender/sexual orientation as it is to be the aforementioned hater. I'm not sure why so many people are saying it is.

 

[DanGR]

But, if you think about it, lots of the Bible has some passages that should be taken with a pinch of salt (even many religious believers think this). After all, it's not God's word; it's what people interpeted of God's words. Who's to say it wasn't tampered with and someone added that passage in? And the Bible was written a long time ago...

Christians believe the bible IS God's word- not the word of the people who have written passages in it.

 

[El Nino]

Also, I still see this as a rather stupid "Gotcha!" argument. It's not at all the same to be irked by people who hate all people of a certain race/gender/sexual orientation as it is to be the aforementioned hater. I'm not sure why so many people are saying it is.

I think a lot of people may not realize that "hate" is a word used in different contexts, and there are different levels of it. Hate of a specific individual for specific reasons is different from hate of a broad classification of individuals. Hating someone you know personally for personal reasons is not the same as hating a group of strangers all bearing one defining characteristic.

Also, homophobia and racism are things that exist at the gut instinct level. They often begin as emotional responses, which are later rationalized at the intellectual level. Intolerance of bigotry, on the other hand, works in reverse; it usually begins at the intellectual level, though it also ends up triggering emotional reactions.

I guess the difference is hating an idea (or even a person for his/her ideas), rather than hating what that person is. Bigotry is defined by an individual's ideology; race and sexual orientation are not.

 

[Man of Popsicle]

There is a LOT more to genetics than elementary dominant and recessive alleles.

So just keep your belief and stop expressing it as fact.

I said fairly certain.

 

[Falconv1.0]

There isn't a gay gene.

You might see where this tripped us up on the whole 'opinion being stated as fact' thing.

*head desk

 

[GwJ]

I could not care less what a persons sexual orientation is.
If someone came up to me and shouted "I'm gay!" I would have two responses...
1. Lower your volume.

2. I don't give a crap.

Homosexuals AND Heterosexuals should literally shut their mouths on their orientation.
Stop saying that you are gay, I do not care. Stop saying that you are heterosexual, I do not care.

You are a human being with a different genetic code than other people, who themselves do not have normal genetic codes.

Just being alive is what matters, really.

This is basically my thoughts. I don't give a rat's *** whether or not your gay, just don't try and change my views. But I have no bias towards homosexuals, I have gay friends, lesbian friends, bi friends, and straight friends. I have to admit though, that it can be weird hanging with someone you know to be gay when you're a guy, but that's just natural because you're scared of them coming onto you.

 

[§witch]

I just sit on my pedestal and laugh at their ignorance, as opposed to getting all incensed about it.

Unless they start chasing you with torches and pitchforks for being: A) homosexual, or B) a gay sympathizer, don't let it bother you.

 

[Chris Lionheart]

Link to original post: [drupal=2269]Homophobia makes me sick![/drupal]

It's sad, but it's natural human instinct. Entire wars are waged just because two groups are different.

Seriously, I really, really hate people that are actively homophobic. Just as much as I hate racists and sexists. Now, if someone secretly dislikes homosexuality, but keeps it to themselves, then although they're still prejudiced, at least they have the decency not to actively slate and attack gays/bisexuals. What I really can't stand are the people that do such things to make life harder for gays.

Nothing wrong with a secret prejudice that isn't acted on. Everyone has them. I admit, I don't enjoy the company of homosexuals, but I don't do or say anything to harm them. Frankly, I just want them to live their lives and keep their business to themselves.

Now, in the Western world, treatment of the LGBT community is getting much better. Homophobia is much less common (still prevalent, of course, but rarer), in some countries gays can marry or have civil partnerships, and all in all most Western people seem to accept homosexuality. There's still work to be done, but they're getting there.

Yet in the developing world, no such progress is taking place. In a number of developing countries, various penalties and discriminations still exist. In many African, South American and Asian countries gay and lesbian acts can be punished by imprisonment, and in a few can even be punished by the death penalty.

In Singapore, it is illegal for gays to live there. Interesting fact, no? Yes, it's quite sad. The developing world is a living Hell for almost everyone though. The economies are horrible, racial wars are frequent occurances in many developing areas... really, everyone there hates anyone who is not the same as them.

Now, here's what I don't get. Why should the private acts of two consenting adults be of any concern to other people? It doesn't affect them, so it's none of their business. Just because they find it disagreeable is no reason to actively go against it. Think about it. If someone had a peanut butter and banana sandwich, you may think that's a disagreeable sandwich, but would you imprison them for eating it?

Keeping their private acts private might be a huge help. Someone doesn't have to go spouting their sexuality.... Pride parades? What a joke. To hold such events is to establish discrimination in the first place.

The main reasons for homophobia seem to stem from either the Bible, or a lack of contact/knowledge with gay people. The latter one can be solved, but the former not so easily. But, if you think about it, lots of the Bible has some passages that should be taken with a pinch of salt (even many religious believers think this). After all, it's not God's word; it's what people interpeted of God's words. Who's to say it wasn't tampered with and someone added that passage in? And the Bible was written a long time ago...

I'm going to say this now. I am very upset by this. Every single blog you make always seems to bash religion and religious people. Why not just make a blog titled "Religion Makes Me Sick!" and be done with it, because you have shown absolutely no tolerance for religious groups, especially Christians, and have thus made a giant hypocrite of yourself.

And besides, you don't exactly choose to be gay. For instance, I'm bisexual, and if I'd had the choice I'd have chosen to be straight, no questions asked. Some kids at school used to think I was gay, and made my life hell. Why would anyone choose to be gay in a society where being gay is reviled? That would make no sense at all.

This is a really controversial statement. There is little proof that gay people, or anyone really, has no control over what they do. Of course, this is where the whole debate between homophobes and homosexuals/homosexual supporters starts in the first place. Personally, I fail to see how anyone with a working brain has no control over what they do with their life.

And actually, your last question is a self-explanatory one. There are often two groups of people: conformists (those who go out of their way to be normal in their society) and so-called "non-conformists" (those who go out of their way to be abnormal in their society). It would not be a stretch to say that one could choose to be gay in order to stand out and be different. I am not stating this as a fact, mind you, but it is a possibility.

So yeah, I just wanted to get all that off my chest. I'm glad that I live in a civilised society where this sort of freedom of speech is allowed and the LGBT community accepted in general. Chances are, if I wrote or said this in Saudi Arabia, I'd have my hands amputated or be imprisoned.

Free speech is great, is it not? Now I hope that you won't flame me again for expressing mine, as I have tried not to insult you as you have repeatedly insulted me in your previous blogs.

tl;dr Homophobic people, why are you homophobic?

Personally, I just find them a little creepy. I'm a paranoid little b******d who is afraid of being ***** or hit on by a guy. Actually, it may go deeper than that. I am already called gay enough in the ******** redneck town in which I live for no reason other than that I have no girlfriend (my reason being that I have failed on every single attempt I've made... -_-). Why would I want to associate with gays, thus increasing the amount of unwanted and undeserved abuse I take from one of the judgemental societies you so hate? Actually, I may just have a third reason. I hate girly girls, preferring to be around and attracted to those who actually have a bit more intelligence and a lot less annoyingness... why would I want to be around a gay guy, who often acts just like a girl. (I say often, because the majority of ones I have met are very very stereotypical, though there are always exceptions).

I just wish everyone would lay off the abuse towards other people. As long as one does not break the law or harm others, they are merely making their own personal choices in life, which should be respected to an atleast basic extent. Even Christians should realize that their Bible and their God allows people to make their own choices in life. All of the abuse towards other groups is completely unwarranted and unnecessary.

Now, I must ask you politely to cease your incessant bashing of religion, or atleast to do so in a respectful manner if you must. I do not appreciate having my beliefs brought into question, as if I am inferior or bad for having them, and I grow tired of having to defend them against intollerant people.

 

[Tyr_03]

I <3 homophobia

 

[Clownbot]

I <3 homophobia

I'm not quite sure if this is a pathetic attempt at expressing your belief, a pethetic attempt at being humorous, or a pathetic attempt at trolling.

Lionheart, I agree with your statements for the most part, but I think you may have layed it on a little thick as far as mountain_tiger's affairs go (I realize that many a blog of his is controversal and sometimes misguided/misinformed), but I haven't seen the posts in which he insulted you, so any quotes would surely help determine who's more at fault, just do it via VM because I don't want to spam the blog with user hating.

 

[CRASHiC]

Hey there tiger, I see we're both pink. Come party with me sometime.

I'll put on my fanciest font for you

 

[Cloudfox]

Also, homophobia and racism are things that exist at the gut instinct level. They often begin as emotional responses, which are later rationalized at the intellectual level. Intolerance of bigotry, on the other hand, works in reverse; it usually begins at the intellectual level, though it also ends up triggering emotional reactions.

I guess the difference is hating an idea (or even a person for his/her ideas), rather than hating what that person is. Bigotry is defined by an individual's ideology; race and sexual orientation are not.

Just wanted to say I found that a really fascinating observation. Never stopped to analyze the difference that way. Kudos.

 

[El Nino]

Personally, I fail to see how anyone with a working brain has no control over what they do with their life.

Take a neuroscience class.

Or:

choice to act on an impulse is not the same as the choice to possess that impulse.

I don't know why I bother.

Now, I must ask you politely to cease your incessant bashing of religion, or atleast to do so in a respectful manner if you must. I do not appreciate having my beliefs brought into question, as if I am inferior or bad for having them, and I grow tired of having to defend them against intollerant people.

Yeah, I don't know the past history between you two, but it seems a bit strange to say, "free speech is great," and then ask him to stop bashing religion. In all fairness, I can see why his statements on religion might be offensive to you, but your comments stereotyping and expressing your personal distaste towards homosexuals might also be offensive in the exact same way to a different group of people. In many ways, your statements are similar to his: broad generalizations of large groups of people and institutions based on personal experiences. He's entitled to not like religion in the same manner that you are entitled to not like "girly" gay guys.

Asking him to "cease" is kind of an odd thing to do. Trying to discuss with him your own experiences with religion and your own views of religion might be a more useful approach. It doesn't seem like you guys would be too far apart ideologically anyway (at least on this topic).

Edit:
@Cloudfox: Thanks. I just have way too much time on my hands.

 

[deepseadiva]

And besides, you don't exactly choose to be gay. For instance, I'm bisexual, and if I'd had the choice I'd have chosen to be straight, no questions asked. Some kids at school used to think I was gay, and made my life hell. Why would anyone choose to be gay in a society where being gay is reviled? That would make no sense at all.

This is a really controversial statement. There is little proof that gay people, or anyone really, has no control over what they do. Of course, this is where the whole debate between homophobes and homosexuals/homosexual supporters starts in the first place. Personally, I fail to see how anyone with a working brain has no control over what they do with their life.

Can I interject to highly recommend watching this video. I heavily apologize for the anti-Christian slant it has (it does annoy me), but it's very credible and debunks some of your misinformation. While homosexuals do have a choice in their sexual actions, they have zero input on their sexual preference. At this point, the options are either acceptance or suppression - suppression being incredibly unfavored if the health of an individual is of importance.

 

[justaway12]

Can I interject to highly recommend watching this video. I heavily apologize for the anti-Christian slant it has (it does annoy me), but it's very credible and debunks some of your misinformation. While homosexuals do have a choice in their sexual actions, they have zero input on their sexual preference. At this point, the options are either acceptance or suppression - suppression being incredibly unfavored if the health of an individual is of importance.

Ummm, the link is broken.

You mean this right?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYMjXucTFaM

 

[:mad:]

Broken link, Meno. What video?

Edit: Yeah, justaway has it.

 

[deepseadiva]

Yea, I double URL'd it for some reason. Thanks Just.

 

[Chris Lionheart]

Take a neuroscience class.

And waste my time? I'm an English major- not a psycology or science major.

Or:


I don't know why I bother.

He has a point. Even if one possesses an impulse, that does not mean that they cannot choose to not act on said impulse. Am I saying that it is their responsibility to act on their impulse... of course not... I'm saying that it is their right and choice to act of their own will.

Yeah, I don't know the past history between you two, but it seems a bit strange to say, "free speech is great," and then ask him to stop bashing religion. In all fairness, I can see why his statements on religion might be offensive to you, but your comments stereotyping and expressing your personal distaste towards homosexuals might also be offensive in the exact same way to a different group of people. In many ways, your statements are similar to his: broad generalizations of large groups of people and institutions based on personal experiences. He's entitled to not like religion in the same manner that you are entitled to not like "girly" gay guys.

Free speech is great... when it's within reason. Nothing gives one person the right to abuse, harass, or insult a large group of people based on race, religion, ideology, sex, or sexual orientation. And I am certainly not stereotyping homosexuals... I said the majority of ones I knew were stereotypical... but I atleast acknowledge that there are exceptions... perhaps many exceptions. I may just live in a place where everyone loves to be a giant stereotype for all I know. Did I ever say he wasn't entitled to not like religion? That's his right... but he had best know to live and let live.

Asking him to "cease" is kind of an odd thing to do. Trying to discuss with him your own experiences with religion and your own views of religion might be a more useful approach. It doesn't seem like you guys would be too far apart ideologically anyway (at least on this topic).

The idea was to ask him to cease his constant bashing, which serves no purpose other than to attack a certain group, ironic considering the fact that this thread is complaining about the abuse of a group. Notice that I also said "or atleast to do so in a respectful manner if you must". By this I mean I would like for him to quit grouping together and hating on the entire group. There is a huge difference between religion being bad (which it is not inherently) and those who follow it occassionally being the bad people (extremists) he is complaining about in the blog.

^^^Replies in yellow^^^