Agent Steel wrote:A phobia is described by psychologists as an uncontrollable aversion for something.
The message we hear from the LGBT community is that we ought to tolerate their sexual orientation, as it they did not choose it.
By that same logic, people do not choose their aversions to homosexuals.
It is not consistent to judge and berate a person for being "homophobic", since their phobia is not something they control.
Furthermore, if it is true that a phobia can be unlearned or overcome, then surely it should also be that a homosexual orientation can likewise be unlearned and overcome.
This is actually an interesting point and it reminds me of an incident from 5+ years ago where a gay man (who I believe was Jewish) and was in a relationship with a non-white guy ended up calling a black person the n-word during a racial altercation...
His lover came forward and talked about how his boyfriend has OCD, and he has obsessive, intrusive thoughts, and it just so happens that some of these thoughts are racist,
and that he consciously fights these intrusive thoughts,
and then that day during the argument he was just triggered and lost all sense of personal control as people often do during a fight, hence the regrettable racist language.
Now... That doesn't sound crazy. It does sound like it could be a very convenient excuse, but it also doesn't sound crazy.
It also doesn't sound crazy for someone to say I am just really disgusted by X, Y, or Z and I get really triggered and worked up.
The issue is that this is ideological... It isn't beneficial for either side to say that it has a significant psychological component.
It is also the case that we expect adults to behave in a socially acceptable way, and so if people threw public fits regularly and blamed it on their psychological issues, it would fall on deaf ears...
But what if the soft spoken middle aged woman simply says "Look, I have OCD. I have a lot of intrusive thoughts on this. It also happens that I just don't believe in left wing social justice values... I am not going to ask anyone to change their behavior, but I am going to ask people to be aware that I could get snippy if I am confronted on this, and I'd prefer that anyone who wants to broach the topic with me only do so in good faith, because I can't promise that I won't say some hurtful, petty shit if you get combative with me, OK?"
I think this is sort of a game changing attitude...
What rancid said, summoning Qatz
Words, are basically marketing. The words chosen are designed to invoke emotions, or pigeon hole people into false dichotomies. This might be what you are thinking about.
Even words that can have very legitimate uses, like "racist," or "Communist," can be employed purely for marketing, and nefarious purposes of branding someone as a bigot or an extremist to unfairly strip them of their basic human dignity & rights.
And taht is how "homophobe" is often used.
My recommendation is to describe actions or policies as "homophobic," but to be careful describing anyone as such who isn't using bigoted language but simply describing their beliefs on it.
Flaunting the fact that the media consensus agrees with you and and oligarchs have learned that they get a lot more umph these days bombing the world channeling the symbolism of the rainbow flag and not the Christian cross is not pozzi.