I Don’t Get Homophobia
Every now and again, be it YouTube, blogs, websites, or just day-to-day life, I come across homophobic comments, insults and downwright bullying. And I don’t understand it. I mean… why? Just why? What’s wrong with being gay?
The Bible says so.
Now, I’m atheist, so that argument is already completely flawed. Society is not governed by society, and vice versa, so they should be treated separately. Besides, the Bible says a load of other crap. It states that adulterers should be stoned (gays, too, in fact) and that woman is below man. Also, slavery is encouraged. If a son lies to his father, he is to be beaten. None of these confirm today’s society, and if you can’t pick, why ignore these? Days move forward, but if you are Christian you will stay with the Bible at its prime or none at all.
There is not a single secular argument against homosexuality–not one. I have heard many attempts, mind you, but they are all pathetic:
It’s unnatural.
I have been told by gays that for them, it is the most natural thing in the world. It is unnatural for them to think about heterosexual sex, and yet, that is not wrong. (See my last post.)
Animals don’t do it.
Firstly, they do. A lot of animals have had homosexual sex, or at least, have mated and been together. Baring in mind that humans don’t have mating seasons and are more interested in love, typically speaking, that argument goes out the window when we ask, “Since when have animals produced our modern moralities?”
We also eat them.
If everyone were gay, humans would die out.
So what? Just because we accept gay people doesn’t mean everyone will suddenly become one. I mean, any gay person will tell you that they never chose their life, just as heterosexuals didn’t decide to be straight. They just are. If everyone were female, the world would die out. Does that make it morally wrong to be female?
AIDs is nature’s way of killing off gays.
I laugh at this one. I mean, honestly? Are you saying that all the millions of people in Africa, where being gay can be a capital offence, are, in fact, gay themselves? Besides, gays can easily get round the AIDS problem–wear a condom. The problem was that they thought it was unnecessary since no one can get pregnant.
No one can reproduce
Good. Humans have already overpopulated the Earth. Should condoms be thus destroyed? Should infertile people be culled? Besides, they can adopt and give a lone orphan a home.
Anyway. I reckon that in a few years, homophobes will die out; it’s the sudden change in society. The same thing happened when slavery was banned. Except, America had a sivil war over it, so it’s a little more extreme situation. =]
I also thinks it barbaric how, in America, gays can’t serve in the military. I mean, that’s… well, yeah, babaric. I don’t understand it at all.
…
Just googling around (not sure how I hit this blog but w/e)
In counter to your question I would ask what’s wrong with homophobia? Discrimination is one thing, tolerance another, but acceptance? It’s fine to ask for people to not discriminate, but they shouldn’t HAVE to like it or accept it entirely.
The snickers super bowl commercial* a couple years back is a good example of this. The moment it hit the airways the ACLU was screaming, as were many people in the gay community; and a word that came up many times was homophobia. But is it that wrong for two straight men to not want be considered gay? Believe it or not, most straight guys find the idea of kissing another guy to be disgusting. They also believe that many gays are rather feminine, despite the fact that may or may not be true.
I also have to say that I find the word “homophobe” to be thrown around far to easily. A good parallel for this might be misogynist, which I’ve found used too readily by some women. Ironically enough, in “History of women in the visual arts” class I took a couple years back, the word was used sparingly; this in a class of 24 women and 3 men taught in a class by a professor who may has well have “feminist” tattooed all over her body (perhaps it would free her body from the male gaze). Yet “homophobe” is used even more readily by just about anyone, gay or straight. I the way some people love to rant about political correctness, but I’d say there’s some validity to that argument when considering the use of homophobia.
Regardless, I find it unlikely that there will ever be true acceptance, homosexuality is a a minority demographic that is too drastically different from the societal norm. Getting to a point of increasing tolerance has taken quite a while on it’s own. You might even say that homophobia is a natural reaction.
I do agree on the issue of military service though. We’re not exactly in the best of company among countries in regards to policy on homosexual military service >.>
*http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHkoZ7ngAM0
Hey! Well, I’m glad you replied with such a constructive post to a rather lonely one.
I think that yeah, homophobia is much more difficult to eliminate from society simply because the minority is such a minority that it doesn’t reach much of this country or any, really.
I also like your interpretation of homophobia. I also agree with it. By that, I suppose heterophobia would be prominent in all gays. I mean, I haven’t really asked the issue but I suppose, logically, it’s the opposite in that gays find a man and woman kissing rather disgusting, especially so were they themselves to be enrolled in the situation.
But then, I don’t think acceptance itself governs not wanting to be gay. I mean, I wouldn’t want to be gay simply because it looks like such a depressing situation, and also because I’m happy as I am. But I don’t think, like in the advert, there should be necessity to prove that you’re “manly” when such a situation occurs.
But meh. That’s my opinion. =]
Thanks for the reply.
Mark
Well the thing is, from the few gay (a room mate at college and an [expletive deleted] at my high school) people I’ve known, I don’t honestly think gay people really care about straight people kissing; hell, that room mate was perfectly willing to talk with his girl friends about their sexual relations with their boy friends down to the tiniest detail. It might have something to do with them being a minority presence; or perhaps because they know that they will that they will never be accepted if they can’t accept others? Pure speculation there but w.e.
Ironically enough, I doubt straight people would care as much if homosexuality weren’t brought into to the public eye so often.
Hrm. I’d agree that acceptance doesn’t govern not wanting be gay. In fact, I’d say that it’s pretty much the other way around. That is, not wanting to be gay is what governs acceptance. Which is why I think that the idea of throwing the word homophobe around too much is a really bad thing. No matter how vocal a minority is, if they offend the majority it will almost certainly be an uphill battle.
As for the advert, it really represents the problems surrounding homophobia all too well. The word provides too much of an opportunity for knee jerk reactions; many straight men do indeed believe that gays are feminine, so rather than promote and ideology, the advert was using reflecting reality, which whether it’s good or bad , is where the best comedy finds its roots. Many gay people enjoyed the advert as well, which has made me wonder if the War against Homophobia™ (which I think could find some parallels with the War against drugs in its effectiveness) has the full support of the gay community in its activism/policy.
Np I can’t help but jump on discussions like these when I see them >.<;;
Just spent an hour reading up on people’s opinions on Shinedown’s cover of “Simple Man” compared to the original Lynrd Skynrd version for the same reason @.@