Page 1 of 2 [ 27 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

puddingmouse
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Apr 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,777
Location: Cottonopolis

19 Jan 2011, 2:59 pm

Some time ago, I had a discussion with a friend about the origins of homophobia. I said it might be something innate in heterosexual males, since I've noticed that many heterosexual males have homophobic feelings despite their better judgement. They may try not to discriminate, but a less rational part of their mind is repulsed. I also put forward the idea that it might be to do with gender roles, which in part are biologically determined. Since homosexual men can act as a receptive partner, and seem to retain their masculinity despite this, it challenges men who feel that their gender identity rests on being the active partner and competing for women. This is also true for female homophobes who feel lesbians challenge their femininity.

Also, you get men who are not repulsed by male homosexuality, per se, but by camp. This can be because it seems artificial and like a camp person is putting themselves in a box that society accepts them in. Or it could be another gender role thing. The same is true for women who are not repulsed by lesbians but by butch lesbians.

My friend, however, put forward the idea that it is all to do with Abrahamic religions, since pagan societies were more accepting of homosexuality. This is not universally true, however, for example, Classical Roman and Greek homosexuality was only accepted by the aristocracy.

In short, I have no idea what the origins of homophobia are. I'm interested in hearing other people's theories because I am not homophobic myself and don't understand homophobia. I will admit that I am myself scared of being thought of as gay because of the negative attitudes that society has towards people who are different. Having ASD is bad enough. I nearly always hide my bisexual tendencies because of this. Maybe this could be another theory, in that fear of being seen as gay, and the negative consequences of this, causes a form of homophobia. The stigma itself creates more fear and even more of a stigma...but this doesn't explain the origins of the stigma in the first place.



Descartes
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Apr 2008
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,288
Location: Texas, unfortunately

19 Jan 2011, 3:25 pm

There's a difference between having revulsion toward gay sex and having revulsion toward gays in general. People who are revulsed by the idea of gay sex are sometimes not homophobic at all, they're just turned off by the sex aspect of it.

Also, by observing various opinion polls on the subject, it seems that women are less likely to be homophobic than men. I agree that it could be some masculinity complex that drives some men to be homophobic. I also think that religion plays a role in homophobia, as well as a belief that they are "unnatural."

There's also the fact that there is a long history of negative stereotypes regarding homosexuals. One long-withstanding stereotype is that gays are child molesters. Another is that they are so sexually promiscuous that they are incapable of forming monogamous relationships.


_________________
What fresh hell is this?


puddingmouse
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Apr 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,777
Location: Cottonopolis

19 Jan 2011, 4:00 pm

Descartes wrote:
There's a difference between having revulsion toward gay sex and having revulsion toward gays in general. People who are revulsed by the idea of gay sex are sometimes not homophobic at all, they're just turned off by the sex aspect of it.


I understand that and I don't. A lot of men are repulsed by anal sex when it's between two men, but not when it's between a man and a woman. Plus, it's not like anal sex is the only thing that gay men do. Some of them don't even do it, ever. I think it's more because it's between two (or more) guys rather than the actual acts involved.

Quote:
Also, by observing various opinion polls on the subject, it seems that women are less likely to be homophobic than men. I agree that it could be some masculinity complex that drives some men to be homophobic. I also think that religion plays a role in homophobia, as well as a belief that they are "unnatural."


I think women can be fairly homophobic towards lesbians. The general reaction against feminism amongst women can involve some homophobia, too, since some women seem to think lesbian = feminist and feminist = boring and prudish (two things that women don't want to be thought of as being). There's not really any discrimination against bi women, as long as they are very feminine and they like men a lot more than they like women. It's not that they're repulsed by lesbianism per se, just the perceived breaking of gender norms, and the resulting social stigma it entails. A lot of men and women are obsessed with social norms and their own image, but I think women are a little more into it (I could be wrong about this).

Also, I get the sense that some straight women perceive their sexuality as the 'correct' and 'natural' one because it's the one that makes babies. Women and babies are closely associated. Also, the puzzlement some of them have as to what two girls actually 'do' when there's no penis around 8O

Quote:
There's also the fact that there is a long history of negative stereotypes regarding homosexuals. One long-withstanding stereotype is that gays are child molesters. Another is that they are so sexually promiscuous that they are incapable of forming monogamous relationships.


Yeah, that child-molester association is weird. I guess its because historically, pederasty was a recognised predilection and has had a place in different societies in different periods. Pederasty isn't part of Western gay culture at all any more, but the association still exists in people's minds. Paedophilia towards girls was ignored for most of history (you had child-brides anyway) and it's never been a subculture the way that pederasty has.

I think the association with promiscuity is projection. It's what a lot of straight men would do if the dynamics of heterosexual relationships weren't the way they are (women historically were at a disadvantage from promiscuity because there wasn't any really effective contraception until quite recently).



visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Vancouver, BC

19 Jan 2011, 6:43 pm

Sexuality is a neurological phenomenon, and it's just another example of the neurotypicals beating up on the neurodiverse.

At root we are tribal. People who think like me, who behave like me, and who live their lives in a way that is compatible with me are part of my tribe. People who are different are part of another tribe. Religion, politics, sexuality, language, culture and nationality all contribute to tribe.

What's important is how we deal with our tribalism. I have an aversion to heterosexual intercourse. I am 'turned off' by the sex aspect of heterosexuality. But that doesn't make me a heterophobe. I don't speak Punjabi or worship in a Gurdwara, but that does not mean that I perceive people who are in the Sikh "tribe" as any less deserving of respect than people who belong to my tribe.

The sooner that we can make our diverse tribes a source of strength rather than a source of conflict, the sooner we can get on with the business of community.


_________________
--James


Salonfilosoof
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Dec 2009
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,184

19 Jan 2011, 6:58 pm

It seems to me that a lot of homophobia today is a reaction to liberals pushing the agenda that we must treat homosexuality as equally normal as heterosexuality. Having Asperger's Syndrome myself I'm quite used to considering myself as deviating from the norm, however somehow liberals feel it's unacceptable that homosexuals think of themselves the same way and we're thus all forced to regard them as "normal" in the sense of "not deviating from the norm". Whenever people are pushed in a certain reaction, their usual response is to go into the exact oposite direction. Much the same way antisemitism is becoming more and more common again as a response to Zionist propaganda, homophobia seems to be a reaction to what some like to call "the gay agenda".

I'm all for letting people be themselves, but please oh please don't force other people to think of certain groups as normal when they're clearly deviating from the norm.



Pistonhead
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Jun 2010
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,732
Location: Bradenton, Florida

19 Jan 2011, 7:27 pm

I've seen studies that say that the homophobic straight male is more gay than the non-homophobic straight male. Wonderful power of denial. "Eww two guys doing it gross" can mean that a man is denying that deep down he's turned on by manlove.


_________________
"Some ideals are worth dying for"
==tOGoWPO==


Salonfilosoof
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Dec 2009
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,184

19 Jan 2011, 7:38 pm

Pistonhead wrote:
I've seen studies that say that the homophobic straight male is more gay than the non-homophobic straight male. Wonderful power of denial. "Eww two guys doing it gross" can mean that a man is denying that deep down he's turned on by manlove.


There probably is some truth to that. Those who fight their own homosexual tendencies most are probably those who fight homosexual tendencies in others most because these people confront them with a part of themselves they do not want to be confronted with. That's psychology 101 for you :wink:



visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Vancouver, BC

19 Jan 2011, 7:46 pm

Salonfilosoof wrote:
It seems to me that a lot of homophobia today is a reaction to liberals pushing the agenda that we must treat homosexuality as equally normal as heterosexuality. Having Asperger's Syndrome myself I'm quite used to considering myself as deviating from the norm, however somehow liberals feel it's unacceptable that homosexuals think of themselves the same way and we're thus all forced to regard them as "normal" in the sense of "not deviating from the norm". Whenever people are pushed in a certain reaction, their usual response is to go into the exact oposite direction. Much the same way antisemitism is becoming more and more common again as a response to Zionist propaganda, homophobia seems to be a reaction to what some like to call "the gay agenda".

I'm all for letting people be themselves, but please oh please don't force other people to think of certain groups as normal when they're clearly deviating from the norm.


Your supposition would make more sense if you could demonstrate that the "liberals pushing the agenda" predates homophobia.

Institutionalized homophobia long predates any liberal agenda on the subject. People have been criminalizing sodomy and subjecting homosexuals to ridicule long before anyone thought to suggest that homosexuals are people just like the rest of us.

As for your narrow view of the word, "normal," it's a very nice way to use the language of the bigot while dressing it up in the language of the rationalist.

By your standard I am, indeed, a deviant and abnormal. But that is entirely irrelevant. I don't want to be normal. I don't want to conform to behaviours that are alien to my nature. But I do want the law to be applied to me in a fashion that is fair and consistent with every other person in society.

I don't have to be normal to be treated with respect.


_________________
--James


Descartes
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Apr 2008
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,288
Location: Texas, unfortunately

19 Jan 2011, 8:38 pm

Salonfilosoof wrote:
It seems to me that a lot of homophobia today is a reaction to liberals pushing the agenda that we must treat homosexuality as equally normal as heterosexuality. Having Asperger's Syndrome myself I'm quite used to considering myself as deviating from the norm, however somehow liberals feel it's unacceptable that homosexuals think of themselves the same way and we're thus all forced to regard them as "normal" in the sense of "not deviating from the norm". Whenever people are pushed in a certain reaction, their usual response is to go into the exact oposite direction. Much the same way antisemitism is becoming more and more common again as a response to Zionist propaganda, homophobia seems to be a reaction to what some like to call "the gay agenda".

I'm all for letting people be themselves, but please oh please don't force other people to think of certain groups as normal when they're clearly deviating from the norm.


I would imagine that most homosexuals do not see themselves as sexual deviants.

And homosexuality is normal. It is omnipresent in numerous animal species and has been noted for centuries. It is only fairly recently that homosexuals been pushing for the societal respect that they deserve. Just because some people remain adamant in their opposition to gay rights does not mean that homosexuals are the ones with the problem.


_________________
What fresh hell is this?


Salonfilosoof
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Dec 2009
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,184

19 Jan 2011, 8:53 pm

visagrunt wrote:
Institutionalized homophobia long predates any liberal agenda on the subject. People have been criminalizing sodomy and subjecting homosexuals to ridicule long before anyone thought to suggest that homosexuals are people just like the rest of us.


I was refering to homophobia today. Before the '60s, it was mostly a religious issue.

visagrunt wrote:
As for your narrow view of the word, "normal," it's a very nice way to use the language of the bigot while dressing it up in the language of the rationalist.


The origin of the word "normal" means "applying to the norm". Because of my AS I don't consider myself to be normal and I don't expect others to think of me as such. I don't see why some people should have the right to force others to think of them as such when they do in fact deviate from the norm.

visagrunt wrote:
By your standard I am, indeed, a deviant and abnormal. But that is entirely irrelevant. I don't want to be normal. I don't want to conform to behaviours that are alien to my nature. But I do want the law to be applied to me in a fashion that is fair and consistent with every other person in society.


You don't need gay marriage for that. It's like demanding that the meaning of the word "pregnant" is changed so it can also apply to men and thus men can get pregnancy leave when their wives are pregnant. I'm all for changing the law to allow men get leave when their wives are pregnant but that doesn't mean we should change the meaning of the word "pregnant". Yet, this is precisely what these liberal activists want with regards to the meaning of "marriage".

visagrunt wrote:
I don't have to be normal to be treated with respect.


Neither do I, but many homosexuals seem to disagree with that.

Descartes wrote:
I would imagine that most homosexuals do not see themselves as sexual deviants.


So? Psychopaths and child molestors may not consider themselves as deviant either, but that doesn't mean they aren't.

Descartes wrote:
And homosexuality is normal. It is omnipresent in numerous animal species and has been noted for centuries.


Siamese twins and other birth defects are also omnipresent in numerous animal species but no one suggests they're normal.

Descartes wrote:
It is only fairly recently that homosexuals been pushing for the societal respect that they deserve. Just because some people remain adamant in their opposition to gay rights does not mean that homosexuals are the ones with the problem.


Here in Western-Europe, no one really bothers about homosexuality anymore yet liberal activists just keep pushing their agenda up to the point they stimulate kids to question their sexuality and homosexuality is considered "cool". That's really a bridge too far !



Descartes
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Apr 2008
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,288
Location: Texas, unfortunately

19 Jan 2011, 9:04 pm

Salonfilosoof wrote:
Descartes wrote:
]I would imagine that most homosexuals do not see themselves as sexual deviants.


So? Psychopaths and child molestors may not consider themselves as deviant either, but that doesn't mean they aren't.

Descartes wrote:
And homosexuality is normal. It is omnipresent in numerous animal species and has been noted for centuries.


Siamese twins and other birth defects are also omnipresent in numerous animal species but no one suggests they're normal.


Homosexuals are not analogous to psychopaths and child molesters, and neither are they sufferering from any birth defect. Homosexuality is a normal variant of human sexuality that is utterly harmless.

Salonfilosoof wrote:
Descartes wrote:
It is only fairly recently that homosexuals been pushing for the societal respect that they deserve. Just because some people remain adamant in their opposition to gay rights does not mean that homosexuals are the ones with the problem.


Here in Western-Europe, no one really bothers about homosexuality anymore yet liberal activists just keep pushing their agenda up to the point they stimulate kids to question their sexuality and homosexuality is considered "cool". That's really a bridge too far !


I wouldn't accuse liberals of getting kids to question their sexuality as much as they're trying to convince kids to accept their sexualities as normal.


_________________
What fresh hell is this?


Salonfilosoof
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Dec 2009
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,184

19 Jan 2011, 9:18 pm

Descartes wrote:
Salonfilosoof wrote:
Descartes wrote:
]I would imagine that most homosexuals do not see themselves as sexual deviants.


So? Psychopaths and child molestors may not consider themselves as deviant either, but that doesn't mean they aren't.

Descartes wrote:
And homosexuality is normal. It is omnipresent in numerous animal species and has been noted for centuries.


Siamese twins and other birth defects are also omnipresent in numerous animal species but no one suggests they're normal.


Homosexuals are not analogous to psychopaths and child molesters, and neither are they sufferering from any birth defect. Homosexuality is a normal variant of human sexuality that is utterly harmless.


What criteria do you use to distinguish homosexuality from mental disorders and label it as normal? Asperger's Syndrome is utterly harmless, yet it's still considered a mental disorder and thus not normal.

Descartes wrote:
I wouldn't accuse liberals of getting kids to question their sexuality as much as they're trying to convince kids to accept their sexualities as normal.


Maybe that's the intention most of them have, but what they're doing is making people question their sexual preference when they would never have done so otherwise.



Descartes
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Apr 2008
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,288
Location: Texas, unfortunately

19 Jan 2011, 9:34 pm

Salonfilosoof wrote:
What criteria do you use to distinguish homosexuality from mental disorders and label it as normal? Asperger's Syndrome is utterly harmless, yet it's still considered a mental disorder and thus not normal.


The American Psychiatric Association no longer considers homosexuality to be a mental disorder.

Salonfilosoof wrote:
Descartes wrote:
I wouldn't accuse liberals of getting kids to question their sexuality as much as they're trying to convince kids to accept their sexualities as normal.


Maybe that's the intention most of them have, but what they're doing is making people question their sexual preference when they would never have done so otherwise.


I always thought it was normal for teenagers to question their sexualities, anyway.


_________________
What fresh hell is this?


Salonfilosoof
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Dec 2009
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,184

19 Jan 2011, 10:22 pm

Descartes wrote:
Salonfilosoof wrote:
What criteria do you use to distinguish homosexuality from mental disorders and label it as normal? Asperger's Syndrome is utterly harmless, yet it's still considered a mental disorder and thus not normal.


The American Psychiatric Association no longer considers homosexuality to be a mental disorder.


So? The fact that they NO LONGER consider homosexuality to be a mental disorder means they once did. On what do you judge that they're right today and were wrong in the past instead of vice versa?

Descartes wrote:
Salonfilosoof wrote:
Maybe that's the intention most of them have, but what they're doing is making people question their sexual preference when they would never have done so otherwise.


I always thought it was normal for teenagers to question their sexualities, anyway.


Most people don't question their sexual preference when they aren't aware there actually are options besides heterosexuality.



Subotai
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2010
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,036
Location: 日本

19 Jan 2011, 10:42 pm

I think homophobia is based on culture and upbringing.
But why did it enter in the first place? That I don't know.



waltur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 May 2009
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 924
Location: california

19 Jan 2011, 11:09 pm

Salonfilosoof wrote:
Most people don't question their sexual preference when they aren't aware there actually are options besides heterosexuality.


that's an interesting statement. i can see how you could arrive at that conclusion if you assumed it as your premise. how often do you suppose children play the "i'll show you mine if you show me yours" game before being told anything about sex? do you believe that this only occurs between male+female pairs unless prompted by an adult? perhaps most importantly, why do you think that "most people don't question their sexual preference when they aren't aware there actually are options besides heterosexuality?"


_________________
Waltur the Walrus Slayer,
Militant Asantist.
"BLASPHEMER!! !! !! !!" (according to AngelRho)