Can Homophobia Be Justified?

[New Astri]

Well, you see, the distinction between gay and straight people is that gay people like only the same gender and straight people like only the opposite gender. It's interesting that you would call such a objective and harmless categories "harmful," and "plainly wrong," to say the least.

I consider your take of human sexuality to be rather ridiculously reductionist. It is sad that you try to force people like this into specific boxes and categories.

I'm not really sure how you're equating my acknowledgement that
1. Homophobia exists
&
2. Gay people are not a root of homophobia
with treating gay and straight people like different species.

I also don't really understand what point you're trying to make here, but frankly, you sound pseudointellectual right now.

My point is that you keep talking as if gay and straight people are two separate human races. You may not notice it but you do.

Saying that some people like only the opposite gender and some like only the same gender is forcing them into boxes now? You serious? By your line of thinking, saying "That person has brown hair" is also forcing people into specific categories.

And I would absolutely love to know how quoting the literal definitions of "gay" and "straight" or acknowledging that homophobia is straight people's fault is treating the two sexualities like different species.

[Greater Mobile]

This philosophical point of “gay people and straight people aren’t that different” is besides the point when talking about homophobia.

Its totally to Astri's point of painting gay and straight people as basically different human races. That plays right into the narratives of homophobe types.

Because yes, while you’re correct, I’m have much more in common with straights than I have different from them - the fact remains that homophobes do not believe that. Not only do they believe that we are extremely different, they believe that we are scum on their boots.

No disagreements here.

I can tell you mean well, and that we’re on the same side here, but I think that your good faith arguments are just in bad taste. Almost like when a white person compliments a black person by calling them “articulate”. Yes, it’s a compliment, but the implications wrapped up in good intentions are bad. It does feel like you are saying that homophobia is largely something that the gay community does to itself.

I am myself genderqueer and bi-sexual but...

Lastly, as a gay man, I don’t want you to look at me as being the same as a straight man. I want equality, but I don’t want it to come at the expense of my identity. I don’t want you to “not see color” in a sense, I want you to see the struggles my community faces, empathize with them, and stand against those who would oppress us. That is what all disenfranchised and oppressed people want. Treat me with equity and kindness, but do not forget what we had to endure in order to make people think we deserved it.

...I do not share your worldview.

The fact that you are part of he LGBT community is besides the point. We are specifically talking about homophobia, and your argument has negative implications about the Gay community.

You may not share my worldview, and that’s fine - but what you’re doing is advocating for gay erasure, and saying that we should just “merge” with the heteronormative societies we find ourselves in.

We are not all the same. Ignoring our differences is not progressive, it is actively harmful, and works to undo the struggle those before us have endured

[SD_Film Artists]

Its totally to Astri's point of painting gay and straight people as basically different human races. That plays right into the narratives of homophobe types.



No disagreements here.



I am myself genderqueer and bi-sexual but...



...I do not share your worldview.

The fact that you are part of he LGBT community is besides the point. We are specifically talking about homophobia, and your argument has negative implications about the Gay community.

You may not share my worldview, and that’s fine - but what you’re doing is advocating for gay erasure, and saying that we should just “merge” with the heteronormative societies we find ourselves in.

We are not all the same. Ignoring our differences is not progressive, it is actively harmful, and works to undo the struggle those before us have endured

What would be an example of not 'merging'?

[New Astri]

The fact that you are part of he LGBT community is besides the point. We are specifically talking about homophobia, and your argument has negative implications about the Gay community.

You may not share my worldview, and that’s fine - but what you’re doing is advocating for gay erasure, and saying that we should just “merge” with the heteronormative societies we find ourselves in.

We are not all the same. Ignoring our differences is not progressive, it is actively harmful, and works to undo the struggle those before us have endured

What would be an example of not 'merging'?

Nakena is arguing that establishing ANY difference between straight and gay people, even one as slight as "gay people like the same gender, straight people like the opposite," is "forcing others into boxes." In this situation, I think "not merging" is as simple as acknowledging that the LGBT community has a history distinct from straight people and that gay people are different from straight people both culturally and by simple definition.

[Nakena]

The fact that you are part of he LGBT community is besides the point.

According to your point earlier it is absolutly the point here.

We are specifically talking about homophobia, and your argument has negative implications about the Gay community.

Both homo and queerphobia have the similiar origin. Internal disharmony and hatred turned into exogenic hatred and sometimes even violence.

You may not share my worldview, and that’s fine - but what you’re doing is advocating for gay erasure, and saying that we should just “merge” with the heteronormative societies we find ourselves in.

So wait. What. You want gays to be separate from society?

We are not all the same. Ignoring our differences is not progressive, it is actively harmful, and works to undo the struggle those before us have endured

Ohahahaha. no.

I don't believe in that people are all the same. Not in the slightest.

The joke is on you.

[Nakena]

I consider your take of human sexuality to be rather ridiculously reductionist. It is sad that you try to force people like this into specific boxes and categories.



My point is that you keep talking as if gay and straight people are two separate human races. You may not notice it but you do.

Saying that some people like only the opposite gender and some like only the same gender is forcing them into boxes now? You serious? By your line of thinking, saying "That person has brown hair" is also forcing people into specific categories.

lol.

Now you get into the slippery slope of sixy shades of sillyness.

And I would absolutely love to know how quoting the literal definitions of "gay" and "straight" or acknowledging that homophobia is straight people's fault is treating the two sexualities like different species.

Because thats your whole line of argumentation across the past posts. I mean its obvious. But if you don't get it... well then I dont know either. I mean you give that impression.

[Daarwyrth]

Its totally to Astri's point of painting gay and straight people as basically different human races. That plays right into the narratives of homophobe types.



No disagreements here.



I am myself genderqueer and bi-sexual but...



...I do not share your worldview.

The fact that you are part of he LGBT community is besides the point. We are specifically talking about homophobia, and your argument has negative implications about the Gay community.

You may not share my worldview, and that’s fine - but what you’re doing is advocating for gay erasure, and saying that we should just “merge” with the heteronormative societies we find ourselves in.

We are not all the same. Ignoring our differences is not progressive, it is actively harmful, and works to undo the struggle those before us have endured

I find myself quite in agreement with what you say. We should all have the same rights, we should all have the same access to equality and equity, but indeed I wouldn't want my experiences and identity to be erased. Is my homosexuality part of my identity? I'd say it has shaped my identity, an identity I am happy with, proud of and very much satisfied with. I wouldn't want that to disappear, I would want it to be visible, but I don't want to be treated as a lesser being for it. I don't want to have less civil or political rights because of it.

In essence, I just want to be treated as a human being with his own unique story, just like I think every single person on this planet should be treated. Equal as humans, but unique through our experiences and stories.

[Nakena]

Nakena is arguing that establishing ANY difference between straight and gay people, even one as slight as "gay people like the same gender, straight people like the opposite," is "forcing others into boxes." In this situation, I think "not merging" is as simple as acknowledging that the LGBT community has a history distinct from straight people and that gay people are different from straight people both culturally and by simple definition.

Here you are doing it again. Uncharitable takes at 5. Two can play that game. Mind you.

Basically you keep argueing they are separate. Like Greater Mobile has argued too. So if we go by extrapolation (something you love to as proven) then we should perhaps also talk about segregation according to other... differences amongst humans?

In the end we get Apartheid.

Is this what you want?

I doubt so.

[New Astri]

The fact that you are part of he LGBT community is besides the point.

According to your point earlier it is absolutly the point here.

We are specifically talking about homophobia, and your argument has negative implications about the Gay community.

Both homo and queerphobia have the similiar origin. Internal disharmony and hatred turned into exogenic hatred and sometimes even violence.

You may not share my worldview, and that’s fine - but what you’re doing is advocating for gay erasure, and saying that we should just “merge” with the heteronormative societies we find ourselves in.

So wait. What. You want gays to be separate from society?

We are not all the same. Ignoring our differences is not progressive, it is actively harmful, and works to undo the struggle those before us have endured

Ohahahaha. no.

I don't believe in that people are all the same. Not in the slightest.

The joke is on you.

There's no such thing as "queerphobia." Queer is a slur that some LGBT people can choose to reclaim. It is not its own distinct identity, and there is no form of discrimination directed specifically toward "queer people."

I don't mean to be rude at all here, but at this point, it feels like you're just saying pseudointellectual things that (you think) sound smart or progressive, but in reality, all lack logical backing or even common sense.

Also, "exogenic" means "formed on the surface of the earth."

[SD_Film Artists]

What would be an example of not 'merging'?

Nakena is arguing that establishing ANY difference between straight and gay people, even one as slight as "gay people like the same gender, straight people like the opposite," is "forcing others into boxes." In this situation, I think "not merging" is as simple as acknowledging that the LGBT community has a history distinct from straight people and that gay people are different from straight people both culturally and by simple definition.

That sounds like segregation. Is Alan Turing not part of British history? Isn't inclusion all about the non-marginalisation of LGBT people?

[New Astri]

Nakena is arguing that establishing ANY difference between straight and gay people, even one as slight as "gay people like the same gender, straight people like the opposite," is "forcing others into boxes." In this situation, I think "not merging" is as simple as acknowledging that the LGBT community has a history distinct from straight people and that gay people are different from straight people both culturally and by simple definition.

Here you are doing it again.

Basically you keep argueing they are separate. Like Greater Mobile has argued too. So if we go by extrapolation (something you love to as proven) then we should perhaps also talk about segregation according to other... differences amongst humans?

In the end we get Apartheid.

Is this what you want?

I doubt so.

> Accuses me of using the slippery slope fallacy
> Then proceeds to say that acknowledging that gay and straight people have differences will literally lead to racial segregation

This is just a dedicated troll, right?

[Nakena]

Here you are doing it again.

Basically you keep argueing they are separate. Like Greater Mobile has argued too. So if we go by extrapolation (something you love to as proven) then we should perhaps also talk about segregation according to other... differences amongst humans?

In the end we get Apartheid.

Is this what you want?

I doubt so.

> Accuses me of using the slippery slope fallacy
> Then proceeds to say that acknowledging that gay and straight people have differences will literally lead to racial segregation

This is just a dedicated troll, right?

No thats how it feels when one's post is interpreted in the most uncharitable fashion possible, with the worst extrapolations added and inserted.

[New Astri]

Nakena is arguing that establishing ANY difference between straight and gay people, even one as slight as "gay people like the same gender, straight people like the opposite," is "forcing others into boxes." In this situation, I think "not merging" is as simple as acknowledging that the LGBT community has a history distinct from straight people and that gay people are different from straight people both culturally and by simple definition.

That sounds like segregation. Is Alan Turing not part of British history? Isn't inclusion all about the non-marginalisation of LGBT people?

How is acknowledging that gay and straight people have differences even remotely similar to segregation? The human population is comprised of so many different cultures and subgroups, all of which are different. Acknowledging those differences isn't "segregation," nor is it denying all similarities. Turing is part of both LGBT and British history. People can be different to each other in some ways and similar in others.

Non-marginalization is about the idea that LGBT people aren't worse for being different in some ways, not that we're not different at all.

[Farnhamia]

Here you are doing it again.

Basically you keep argueing they are separate. Like Greater Mobile has argued too. So if we go by extrapolation (something you love to as proven) then we should perhaps also talk about segregation according to other... differences amongst humans?

In the end we get Apartheid.

Is this what you want?

I doubt so.

> Accuses me of using the slippery slope fallacy
> Then proceeds to say that acknowledging that gay and straight people have differences will literally lead to racial segregation

This is just a dedicated troll, right?

If you think someone is trolling, report them. Pointing and calling out "Troll!" is a rules violation in and of itself.

[New Astri]

> Accuses me of using the slippery slope fallacy
> Then proceeds to say that acknowledging that gay and straight people have differences will literally lead to racial segregation

This is just a dedicated troll, right?

If you think someone is trolling, report them. Pointing and calling out "Troll!" is a rules violation in and of itself.

Oop, sorry, mb. I didn't remember that bit from the rules. I'll keep that in mind.

[Daarwyrth]

Nakena is arguing that establishing ANY difference between straight and gay people, even one as slight as "gay people like the same gender, straight people like the opposite," is "forcing others into boxes." In this situation, I think "not merging" is as simple as acknowledging that the LGBT community has a history distinct from straight people and that gay people are different from straight people both culturally and by simple definition.

That sounds like segregation. Is Alan Turing not part of British history? Isn't inclusion all about the non-marginalisation of LGBT people?

Absolutely, the non-marginalisation is a crucial step forward in building wide and thorough acceptance of gay people. However, at the same time we need to acknowledge that LGBTQ people have their own history that is unique to them, shaped by their experiences as a minority. The struggle to equality and equity is a unique experience that has shaped much of the collective identity of the gay community. What is being advocated by Astri is not the segregation of LGBTQ people, but the celebration of the diversity of human nature. Give us equality, give us equity, but keep our identity and history intact at the same time.

As I said before, I want to be treated equally as a human being, but a human being with his own unique experiences, identity and story.

[Nakena]

There's no such thing as "queerphobia." Queer is a slur that some LGBT people can choose to reclaim. It is not its own distinct identity, and there is no form of discrimination directed specifically toward "queer people."

Uh oh. So identity for thee but not for me?

I don't mean to be rude at all here, but at this point, it feels like you're just saying pseudointellectual things that (you think) sound smart or progressive, but in reality, all lack logical backing or even common sense.

Also, "exogenic" means "formed on the surface of the earth."

I already went through that on the past pages. Do you want me to go again through it, do the copypasta and add some extra sauce for ya?

[SD_Film Artists]

That sounds like segregation. Is Alan Turing not part of British history? Isn't inclusion all about the non-marginalisation of LGBT people?

How is acknowledging that gay and straight people have differences even remotely similar to segregation? The human population is comprised of so many different cultures and subgroups, all of which are different. Acknowledging those differences isn't "segregation," nor is it denying all similarities. Turing is part of both LGBT and British history. People can be different to each other in some ways and similar in others.

Non-marginalization is about the idea that LGBT people aren't worse for being different in some ways, not that we're not different at all.

You said ' a history distinct from straight people and that gay people are different from straight people both culturally and by simple definition.' This implies an otherness, that straight people cannot 'own' Turing's legacy in the same way that a gay person can; in a way this is true as the gay person would have a more personal understanding of what Turing went through, but the gay person may also be of a totally different ethnicity and profession whereas the straight person could be a British programmar/mathematician who's parents may have worked with Turing.

[New Astri]

How is acknowledging that gay and straight people have differences even remotely similar to segregation? The human population is comprised of so many different cultures and subgroups, all of which are different. Acknowledging those differences isn't "segregation," nor is it denying all similarities. Turing is part of both LGBT and British history. People can be different to each other in some ways and similar in others.

Non-marginalization is about the idea that LGBT people aren't worse for being different in some ways, not that we're not different at all.

You said ' a history distinct from straight people and that gay people are different from straight people both culturally and by simple definition.' This implies an otherness, that straight people cannot 'own' Turing's legacy in the same way that a gay person can; in a way this is true as the gay person would have a more personal understanding of what Turing went through, but the gay person may also be of a totally different ethnicity and profession whereas the straight person could be a British programmar/mathematician who's parents may have worked with Turing.

It implies an otherness because there is an otherness. Gay people are different than straight people. There's nothing wrong with acknowledging that. It's not progressive to pretend that difference isn't there. It's progressive to acknowledge, respect, embrace, and value that difference--as well as all of the other differences people have.

I don't think anyone really "owns" Turing's legacy, but gay people can certainly relate to his struggles with homophobia more than straight people. And perhaps a straight person could relate to his job experience more than some gay people. Once again--there's nothing wrong with acknowledging that different groups of people have differences, and that those differences impact how they interact with others.

[Daarwyrth]

How is acknowledging that gay and straight people have differences even remotely similar to segregation? The human population is comprised of so many different cultures and subgroups, all of which are different. Acknowledging those differences isn't "segregation," nor is it denying all similarities. Turing is part of both LGBT and British history. People can be different to each other in some ways and similar in others.

Non-marginalization is about the idea that LGBT people aren't worse for being different in some ways, not that we're not different at all.

You said ' a history distinct from straight people and that gay people are different from straight people both culturally and by simple definition.' This implies an otherness, that straight people cannot 'own' Turing's legacy in the same way that a gay person can; in a way this is true as the gay person would have a more personal understanding of what Turing went through, but the gay person may also be of a totally different ethnicity and profession whereas the straight person could be a British programmar/mathematician who's parents may have worked with Turing.

I believe that if people started to think of one another more as humans rather than nationalities, it would help with creating a society wherein the intertwining of diversity can become truly possible. Because all the experience we go through, based on our sexual orientations, our skin colour, or any other characteristic, we form one human history with that. So while I believe we should all view one another as humans, as one people, as one species, I see so much room for diversity and the celebration of diversity to flourish within that human identity.

What does it mean to be human? It means to be straight, to be gay, to be asexual, to be agender. It means to be a man, it means to be a woman, it means to be conservative, it means to be progressive. It means to be black, it means to be white, it means to be American, it means to be Chinese, it means to be Russian. It means to be Christian, it means to be atheist, it means to Muslim, it means to be Buddhist. To be human means to be diverse, yet equal in our diversity. To be human means to be one people, but a beautifully diverse people with a myriad of cultures, histories, experiences, languages and religions. To be human means all these things, and I sincerely hope that is a viewpoint we can work towards as a civilization. Equal, but diverse.

Those are my own views mixed with how what I think Astri means. Please correct me if I am wrong!

[Loeje]

You said ' a history distinct from straight people and that gay people are different from straight people both culturally and by simple definition.' This implies an otherness, that straight people cannot 'own' Turing's legacy in the same way that a gay person can; in a way this is true as the gay person would have a more personal understanding of what Turing went through, but the gay person may also be of a totally different ethnicity and profession whereas the straight person could be a British programmar/mathematician who's parents may have worked with Turing.

It implies an otherness because there is an otherness. Gay people are different than straight people. There's nothing wrong with acknowledging that. It's not progressive to pretend that difference isn't there. It's progressive to acknowledge, respect, embrace, and value that difference--as well as all of the other differences people have.

I don't think anyone really "owns" Turing's legacy, but gay people can certainly relate to his struggles with homophobia more than straight people. And perhaps a straight person could relate to his job experience more than some gay people. Once again--there's nothing wrong with acknowledging that different groups of people have differences, and that those differences impact how they interact with others.

I don't personally think that there is much of a difference. The only difference is sexual orientation, and nothing else.

[Goatmoon]

Also , what's up with the majority of gays subscribing to Marxist/Communist beliefs? Maybe if you were more like Frederick The Great, Ernst Röhm, or Jack Donovan, less people would have complaints.

[The New California Republic]

Also , what's up with the majority of gays subscribing to Marxist/Communist beliefs?

Lol try to provide a source that shows this. Try. Please. Try.

[Nakena]

Also , what's up with the majority of gays subscribing to Marxist/Communist beliefs?

(X) for doubt. And NSG isn't representative. Theres an disproportional amount of users here who subscribe to marxism. Irrespectively of their sexual preferences.

Maybe if you were more like Frederick The Great, Ernst Röhm, or Jack Donovan, less people would have complaints.

You forgot Alexander the Great and Yukio Mishima.

[Daarwyrth]

Also , what's up with the majority of gays subscribing to Marxist/Communist beliefs? Maybe if you were more like Frederick The Great, Ernst Röhm, or Jack Donovan, less people would have complaints.

Source? Still, leftist ideologies espouse equality, unlike the conservative/right wing ideologies that tell us we're abominations? Like, I don't want to follow an ideology that tells me I am sinful/unnatural. I want to follow an ideology that tells me I am equal to others, worthy like others, that I deserve the same rights as others.

Maybe if conservatives/the right wing became more progressive and open to diversity, more LGBTQ people would join them. But until they're calling us wrong/unnatural/evil, they're literally pushing us towards the left, which actually accepts us.