Back to the Basics: What is "homophobia?"

[Behind the Aegis]

Given recent events at DU, especially concerning the GBLT posters, I feel there needs to be a discussion about the actual problem: homophobia. I have seen some wonderful posts and appreciate the efforts of those who got this process underway, but I feel it is starting to stall and has the potential to backfire. As I have seen, IMHO, tempers are starting to flare again, along with frustrations, I thought it might be a good thing to really flesh out the central issue: Homophobia.

–noun
unreasoning fear of or antipathy toward homosexuals and homosexuality.
Dictionary.com Unabridged
Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2011.

— n
intense hatred or fear of homosexuals or homosexuality
Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition
2009 © William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd. 1979, 1986 © HarperCollins
Publishers 1998, 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009

Function: n
: irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals
Merriam-Webster's Medical Dictionary, © 2007 Merriam-Webster, Inc.

The above definitions are what most of us will agree is "homophobia." However, the "book" definition doesn't always translate easily into real life situations. "Faggot!" "Dyke!" "Fudge-packer!" "Muff diver!" The aforementioned slurs are pretty easy to identify as homophobic by, in my opinion, the vast majority of the members of this site; as such, they will be deleted and the commenter may even have his/her account deactivated. There are other obvious homophobic remarks which aren't epithets, such as; "gays are pedophiles.", "gays recruit people into their lifestyle.", and "gays are sexual deviants." Again, these are usually easily identified as bigotry against GLBT people. These examples don't really exemplify the problems here. The problem is more with nuanced or covert homophobic remarks and behaviors.

I have seen posters routinely use the term "lifestyle" when referring to our sexual orientation. This could be from ignorance as to why that term is offensive, so the poster may not be a "homophobe," but the use of that word in regards to our orientation is offensive. The poster, however, demonstrates his/her homophobia when s/he repeatedly uses the term, despite being told why it is offensive. This is a more common form of homophobia I see at DU. There are other examples, of course, such as referring to our civil rights as "a pony" or "special rights." Equality is not a 'pony' nor should it be regarded as "special." I could go on, but I feel I have made my point; if I haven't, then I will gladly supply more examples or one can view closeupready's crosspost of the wonderful Sapphocrat's examples: you may be a homophobe, if....

I guess what I am saying is the way to "mend fences" is that we all need to come to a consensus about what homophobia is at DU. Nothing will make everyone happy, but in order to move on, the administration/moderators need to understand the reality of homophobia here and we, GLBT posters (and our true allies), need to make certain we are being clear. I write this not as a gay man who has suffered from, encountered, and battled homophobia the majority of my life, but as someone who has actually studied, researched, written about, and presented on homophobia.

[pnwmom]

1. Back in 2003, I had gay friends who thought it would be more

effective to push for civil unions first. So did my (gay) father. They had a different political strategy than you, certainly. But why does that make them homophobic?

(It seems to me that the strategy worked. I think eight years of civil unions and gay marriages have paved the way for getting rid of DOMA.)

[Behind the Aegis]

4. A swing and a miss.

The OP is about the current issues between the GLBT community here and DU. Your "some of my best friends" addition is irrelevant.

[pnwmom]

5. But you're quoting from comments in 2003 and 2004.

Times have changed since then. Why aren't you quoting from recent comments?

[Behind the Aegis]

6. They are examples.

There are certainly recent comments. Denying equality is bigoted. For some, delaying it with ploys, is just as bigoted.

[pnwmom]

7. Why was it a "ploy" to have thought that civil unions should be the focus

of efforts in 2003? Are you saying that was bigoted?

Even today, they only have civil unions for gay people in England, and yet I never hear anyone here complain that all the British are bigoted.

[Behind the Aegis]

8. Pandering. Look it up.

Advocating for "seperate, but equal" is usually understood as being bigoted or, in the very least, a poor attempt at equality.

But thank-you, an example was needed.

[pnwmom]

26. No, it was advocating for one step at a time,

with civil unions as the first step. (And as I said, I think those steps beginning several years ago have paved the way for marriage everywhere now.)


You didn't answer my question about England, where they only have civil unions. Why do I never hear England criticized here for that?

[Behind the Aegis]

29. Your "question" about England was a strawman.

"Separate, but equal" is never the way to go.

[pnwmom]

30. In your opinion, but you don't speak for every gay person in the U.S.

much less in England. And you don't acknowledge that the context was different in 2003 than it is today.

[Behind the Aegis]

31. And another logical fallacy pops up.

The danger of using logical fallacies, is that more are needed to continue the "debate."

[pnwmom]

32. You're the expert in the practice of logical fallacies

so I guess you would know.

[dipsydoodle]

33. Its well worth remembering

something Bobby Kennedy once said :

What is objectionable, what is dangerous about extremists is not that they are extreme, but that they are intolerant. The evil is not what they say about their cause, but what they say about their opponents.

In this case those they perceive to be their opponents which is a misplaced perception anyway.

:hi:

[Behind the Aegis]

39. And another one. Seems the "expert" here is you.

[pnwmom]

46. You obviously don't know the meaning of the term.

Google is your friend.

[Behind the Aegis]

55. Apparently, google de-friended you, otherwise you'd know the definitions.

You'd also realize your statements are lacking logic and serve as a prime example of some of the problems we are facing in this forum.

[dipsydoodle]

9. You just hit the nail on the head

If anyone straight mentions that some of their friends are gay they immediately get attacked here.

At times you are your own worst enemy.

[Behind the Aegis]

11. I think you just hit the nail on the head, but don't even realize it.

Thanks for yet another example.

[FreeState]

12. Because it's being used as a position of authority asserting that the GLBT persons opinions are not

Important or relevant or equal. Using "I have gay friends/family" comes from a place of privilege. It's as homophobic as it is racist to say "I have black friends" so my opinion on your rights is equal to all your experience.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

22. well said. nt

[pnwmom]

27. Why is it homophobic to say that not all gay people have had a uniform

opinion on civil unions vs. gay marriage -- especially as long ago as 2003 -- and to cite gay people you know to show that?

Or is every gay person who disagrees with you on tactics a homophobe, too?

[FreeState]

35. It's not - but to prop your position up by stating you have GLBT friends or relatives is

Who you know or who you grew up with has nothing to do with well thought out policy disagreements. It's a tactic used to make minorities opinions irrelevant.

One could very easily believe that insisting that GLBTs go after only civil unions and wait for the public to feel better about us is homophobic. The key word there being only.

[pnwmom]

63. I never insisted that GLBT's go after only civil unions.

But I questioned which would be the more effective strategy for reaching a common goal -- which was marriage. Years ago, I thought the goal would be achieved more expeditiously by concentrating on passing civil union legislation in as many states as possible, and then moving on to marriage.

The point of my mentioning other gay people's opinions was to counter the idea often expressed here that gay people had only one, monolithic opinion on the best route to opening marriage to gay couples.

[FreeState]

64. Very few gay people support civil unions as a path to marriage equality

Pointing out that you know a few that do does nothing to bolster your case and inflames those that are tiered of such rhetoric. You will get more people agreeing to your point of view if you stick to why you believe it's a good option.

I have never come across anyone gay person here stating that all GLBT persons have the same opinions - I've seen the exact opposite among LGBT members here. All one has to do is go to a gay bar too see that.

[pnwmom]

65. I agree that's true today

but it was less true 8 or 10 years ago, and that's the period I've been talking about, because those quotes were drawn from those years.

"You will get more people agreeing to your point of view if you stick to why you believe it's a good option." As I've tried to make clear in other posts, I think we've already prepared the ground with the years of civil unions and gay marriage that we've had and it's time to move to gay marriage in all states.

[Creideiki]

68. Not all African Americans held a uniform opinion toward civil rights in the 50s and 60s

Many thought that there would be repercussions for rocking the boat and that it would ultimately delay civil rights. The problems are manifold and obvious. First, as Dr. King put forward on that subject, justice delayed is justice denied. Second, while some people, like Condi Rice, have lived a charmed life and therefore think that everyone is just as lucky, the vast majority is not. The reason we call certain people "exceptional" is that they are exceptions. Third, the Civil Rights Act happened despite the beggars and pleaders--not because of them.

It's a parallel, not an exact mirror, but a parallel.

[Cronus Protagonist]

2. Homophobia is a fear of your own homosexuality

Which you direct towards others you perceive as being like you.

[Behind the Aegis]

3. Actually, that is "internalized homophobia."

It is but one form of homophobia.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

13. yeah, its why everyone's grandfather is a homophobe.

:eyes: cos you know that whole generation...really fucking gay

[Cronus Protagonist]

43. Mine isn't

You appear to have a skewed frame of reference from the norm.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

49. LOL. read the stats on anti-gay feelings of people in their 70's

your grandfather is an anomaly not the norm

[closeupready]

10. For years, gay people seem to have grown fearful of the term "homophobia"

and substituted "anti-gay" in its place.

Aegis, does that annoy you as much as it does me?

There is nothing redeeming about homophobia in any form, and to neuter its impact by giving it a more generic name is lame, IMO.

[Meldread]

34. I stopped using the word homophobia.

I replaced it with the word bigot. I've found that too many people associate the word homophobia with a "fear" of gay people rather than a hatred or aversion to gay people. So if you're dealing with a person who is by definition homophobic they might reply: "I'm not afraid of gay people. I just don't want their sick perversion near my family." On the other hand, I've found it cuts MUCH deeper when you call someone a bigot. They get very defensive, almost as if you've called them a racist.

No one wants to appear as intolerant, but that is really what homophobia is in the end - a form of bigotry. So I've found it's best just to call a spade a spade.

[Cronus Protagonist]

45. Me too - "homophobia" is tossed around by too many unqualified armchair psych majors

"Bigot" is the correct word for what I see around me regarding violence (verbal, social, institutionalized, physical and all other manifestations of violence) against people who happen to like things the majority doesn't. I see no need for the word "homophobia" at all, unless one is diagnosing a patient who has a fear of gay people (who might be or are like him or herself).

[dipsydoodle]

52. btw

Every now and then, some dispute flares up in the United States that reminds us that sensitivities over language in that country run especially deep.

The specific occasion was a meeting of the Sacramento City Council last week, reported in the Sacramento Bee, in which one speaker, to emphasise his point, said “I think we should call a spade a spade”. A Councilwoman, African-American, objected to this vigorously, saying it was an “ethnically and racially derogatory remark”.

Most people know that to call a spade a spade means that we should avoid euphemism, be straightforward, use blunt or plain language. Most Americans also know that spade is a rather outmoded derogatory slang term for an African-American. Putting the two ideas together, though, requires a person whose sensitivity to possibly offensive language is greater than their knowledge of word history. (Nothing new about that, though: remember all the fuss in Washington in 1999 over the word niggardly, and all those in the US who think picnic refers to the lynching of a slave.)

http://www.worldwidewords.org/topicalwords/tw-spa1.htm

The fact that African-Americans regard that expression as an “ethnically and racially derogatory remark” should be sufficient not to use it - since you mentioned bigotry.

[Meldread]

67. Learn something new everyday!

I was obviously using the term in the colloquial sense, and thus hope no one took offense.

I was rather surprised to learn that it was considered ethnically and racially derogatory; so I decided to ask the almighty Google about the phrase... and sure enough. Basically, from what I've learned: The phrase originated in ancient Greece with "to call a fig a fig, a trough a trough." It was first recorded in Aristophanes' play The Clouds (423 B.C.), and is still in use in modern Greece. However, the meaning of the phrase has shifted toward the meaning typically used in English. Originally, it was used to denote a rude person who spoke his mind in a blunt fashion, and it was used as a pejorative. Now, like in English, it is considered to be a positive thing: to speak plainly so that there is no misunderstanding.

Ironically, due to a mistranslation the word "trough" ended up becoming a "spade" in 1542 when the play was translated by Nicholas Udall. That's when the phrase as we know it began to come into being: "to call a spade a spade."

The phrase didn't become associated with an ethnic and racial slur until 1928. The original "spade" referred to the digging tool. However, when it became a racial slur the word "spade" became associated with the spades in playing cards (such as the Ace of Spades), which is obviously black.

I personally had never heard it used in that fashion up until this point. My understanding of the meaning of "to call a spade a spade" was to speak bluntly without obfuscation. However, I did associate the word spade with the playing card rather than the digging tool. I always assumed the phrase originated as a poker term, another way of saying: "I'm laying all my cards on the table." But "calling a spade a spade" differed in that you were calling out someones bluff and you were calling them out in an extraordinarily blunt fashion.

It sucks that racist bigots had to muck up a perfectly good phrase, and now I'm going to have to find a new phrase to use that isn't tainted. :(

[Creideiki]

69. This post has been brought to you by the Letters "D", "C", and the Tu Quoque Logical Fallacy

Thank you!

[closeupready]

59. That's actually a really great line of reasoning for it.

I respect that. :)

[Behind the Aegis]

71. It is very annoying.

To be honest, I see it as a form of intimidation. It is intellectual dishonesty disguised as "legitimate" debate. People who try to say things such as; "I don't fear them...," "Some of my best friends/family members are...", and "Homophobia really means (see post down below)..." add nothing to meaningful debate and are often using dishonest tactics to minimize or even ignore homophobia. I see the same type of "bullying" when it comes to the misuse of the word "anti-Semitism" and it is just as dishonest and is more about denigrating then it is educating. Can you imagine if someone "defended" pedophiles here because the word literally means "child lover?!" "See, they aren't really bad people, it's right there in the name; child lover." This site would go ape shit!

I understand the other poster's points, and there are good ones, but I refuse to allow bigots, bullies, stupid people, and/or intellectually deficient people prevent me from using the correct terminology because they want to play games.

[laconicsax]

73. +1

[xchrom]

14. this is being unreced? nt

[FreeState]

16. Yep

This is DU after all, couldn't have a discussion about our lives with out that happening could we?

It was still at 0 after my K&R

[xchrom]

17. huh. -- color me surprised. nt

[La Lioness Priyanka]

15. the actual problem isn't so much homophobia but aversive homophobia

the very nature of bias has changed over the years in america.

quoting from my own paper on homophobia:

Modern theories on prejudice state that while overt expressions of prejudice has decreased more subtle forms still persist (Dovidio & Gartner, 2000). Most of the studies on subtle prejudice have been conducted on racial bias, but this type of bias also manifests against women (Swim, Aiken, Hall & Hunter, 1995). Modern bias manifests when people profess egalitarian attitudes, but do not support policies aimed to help women or blacks. This framework of modern bias can also be applied to sexual minorities.


... modern homonegativity is a belief that homosexuals make unnecessary demands to change the status quo, discrimination against homosexuals no longer occurs and that homosexuals “exaggerate the importance of their own sexual orientation thereby perpetuating their own marginalization (Morrison, Morrison & Franklin, 2009, p. 525). Old fashion prejudice in this case is defined as prejudice stemming from religious and moral beliefs about homophobia. "

[closeupready]

18. This post deserves to be Kicked and Recced all on its own.

Thanks for adding it. :hi:

[La Lioness Priyanka]

19. thanks

:)

[FreeState]

20. homonegativity

Love that term and agree;)

[La Lioness Priyanka]

21. not my term, i think morrison and morrison created it

[Cronus Protagonist]

47. I'm going to start making that word part of ordinary conversation

I'll do my part! :D

[Behind the Aegis]

23. See? We can't even agree on the type of homophobia that's the problem.

LOL! **snicker***

BTW, what is the name of the book you are quoting (Morrison, Morrison & Franklin)? Looks like something right up my alley.

"...homosexuals “exaggerate the importance of their own sexual orientation thereby perpetuating their own marginalization" has been exemplified in this very thread in part.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

24. not books, journal articles

Morrison, M.A, & Morrison, T.G. (2002). Development and validation of a scale measuring modern prejudice towards gay men and lesbian women. Journal of Homosexuality, 43(2), 15-37.
Morrison, M.A, Morrison, T.G., & Franklin, R. (2009). Modern and old-fashioned homonegativity among samples of Canadian and American university students. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 40 (4), 523-542.

[Behind the Aegis]

25. Thanks.

I used to get the Journal of Homosexuality, but haven't in years. I'll have to see if I can find that article.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

28. pm me your email address and i can send them to you

might save you a few $

[Behind the Aegis]

72. Thanks for the offer. Check your PMs.

:hi:

[mitchtv]

37. Good post

This thread has me stunned

[mitchtv]

36. I am not finished , I'm speechless

K&R

[The Philosopher]

38. My thoughts:

(this is brought on by reading some of the replies in this thread, rather than what's said in the OP)


It's discriminatory to believe that a marginalized person can't be bigoted toward themselves. Unless we want to make statements like, "You're white, therefore you're always racist" or "You're straight, therefore you're always homophobic," or "You're male, therefore you're always sexist," a person who is gay can be homophobic. They can accept the ideas of homophobes. They can even support them.

People who are LGBT aren't different from those who aren't. When you're interacting in the world of the LGBT, one should keep that in mind. To discriminate is an attempt to make invisible. One way is to differentiate from the accepted group. The accepted group wants and needs to say, "That other group is different from us." Therefore, they need to be separated from us; not a part of us. "Let us push them away from here, so that we may not see them; let them not be a part of our lives." In the political sphere, we have to deal with that always. "Let them not be a part of our lives."

This can be pushed to the extreme, as history has shown us. To many of the accepted group, their life is the only one worth living. Therefore the assumption is: their life, which is not our own, is not worth living; they themselves are not worth living. The marginalized group is no longer a living creature, but an object of offense.

There are many ways to participate in this discrimination. There's hard ways and soft ways. But both ways are on the same path. One should be careful about accepting a soft way, simply because they have an excuse, whether through ignorance or a perception of acceptance.

[William769]

40. self delete.

Posted in the wrong place.

[louslobbs]

42. Ok, now that I'll buy, thanks for the comment.

Lou......born gay and proud to be a 40 year old gay man. I am no less than or any better than anyone else. I am a human being, an American, born gay, but first and foremost I am a man, a decent, fair, open minded, free thinking, loving and caring man.
Lou

[William769]

41. Oy vey.

Drama queens & bigots is all I seem to see here. Not directed at the original OP.

If this post gets deleted, so be it. This is the kind of shit I don't care to see in the GLBT forums.

[Canuckistanian]

44. It literally means "fear of being the same"

"Homo" = Same, consistent, equivalent
+
"Phobos" = Fear

[Cronus Protagonist]

48. That is correct

Someone suggested the word "internalized" be added to it, but that is redundant. It is a fear of similarity between the patient and his projected hate-object.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

50. "Weinberg is credited to have coined the term homophobia,

defining it as the fear of being in close proximity to homosexuals (as cited in, Rye & Meaney, 2010). "

homophobia doesnt mean fear of similarity or the same or anything like that.

[dipsydoodle]

54. His first use of the word appears to have been in a different context.

George Weinberg is credited as the first person to have used the term in speech.<9> The word homophobia first appeared in print in an article written for the May 23, 1969, edition of the American tabloid Screw, in which the word was used to refer to heterosexual men's fear that others might think they are gay.<9>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homophobia#cite_note-herek-8

[La Lioness Priyanka]

51. you're wrong. not about the roots but about the actual meaning of the word

Weinberg is credited to have coined the term homophobia, defining it as the fear of being in close proximity to homosexuals (as cited in, Rye & Meaney, 2010).

[FreeState]

53. +1

Not to mention that the misused definition is used over and over by those that dont support our rights in an effort to frame the argument in a way that dismisses the actual harm that is there.

[mitchtv]

57. +1

not educated, but I get it, and understand the meaning of "homophobia", despite various attempts to cloud that meaning

[Canuckistanian]

62. That's fine

I was just saying that from a strict linguistic POV, it means "fear of the same".

The ACCEPTED meaning is different, that's all.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

66. no. your root word definitions are correct, but even from a strict linguistic POV

the meaning of the word is incorrect.

unlike other phobias homophobia also is not a psychiatric diagnoses. so in many ways, interpreting the roots words to define the word, is incorrect.

[Smarmie Doofus]

56. Language evolves. We all know what it means now. nt

[laconicsax]

58. That doesn't stop people from pretending it doesn't exist. n/t

[Canuckistanian]

61. Well, it's like "anti-semite"

Semites are Arabs as well as Jews, but we take it to mlyean "Anti-Jewish" only

[Smarmie Doofus]

60. Hmmm. Is it better to delete these kinds of posts or to *refute* them?

They may be ( definitely are, actually) unsympathetic. They may be... as you say.... "garbage". I'm not sure we don't strain credulity by applying the term "homophobia" to arguments advanced by others .... whose orientation is , after all, unclear.... that deal with tactical considerations:


>>>“You DO need to get over it! You are a citizen of the United States before you are gay. You owe a responsibility to your country FIRST!! Yeah, you’re gay, many people are, we cannot allow the you know who’s to use gays as the new ‘blacks’ to divide our country with the gay marriage issue.”

“I think the Democratic Party should not even come close to this issue. The farther away the better. If this becomes a major issue with leading Democrats crusading for gay marriage, George McGovern will end up looking like a successful candidate.”

“my gay friends, delay marriage … Just delay till December. Why hand Republicans 5 percent more of the vote, when you can stay quietly on the sidelines and deny them this issue?”

“I Am Outraged By Gay People … Well, not really. But I am kinda annoyed by their (meaning those forcing the issue, not all gays) impeccably bad sense of timing. … By pushing this into an unpopular culture war during an election year, these gay activists are screwing up their own agenda. If they demonstrated a few months of patience, it would serve them well.”<<


If we ban this kind of expression, what else might we ban? To me, this is not the strictest or most judicious application of the term.

I don't know: it doesn't get much thornier than this. I'd rather engage these people than drive them underground.

[William769]

70. Homophobia: The Fear Behind The Hatred

If you look up "homophobia" in the dictionary, it will probably tell you that it is the fear of homosexuals.

While many would take issue with that definition, it is nevertheless true that in many ways, it really is a fear of homosexuality or at least homosexuals, as we will see in this essay.

Homophobia is widespread in America, far more widespread than most heterosexuals realize, and it is far more subtle, too. The discrimination it inspires touches the lives of many Americans, not just gay Americans, but all Americans. And America pays a very dear price for it as we shall see.

http://www.bidstrup.com/phobia.htm