Is the fictional word "Homophobe" simply a word used by homosexuals to deflect an argument they find they are losing?

Question Music

Is the fictional word "Homophobe" simply a word used by homosexuals to deflect an argument they find they are losing?

by The Simmering Frog Posted October 13, 2009 03:49:25

15 answers
Read all 49 comments
+4 / -2 raves

Answers
Results
Recommend This

Top Comment

+6 Me October 13, 2009 03:52:29

Answered: No
No, not at all. It is a valid term used to describe bigots who let their fear of and contempt for homosexuals blind their rationality.
View thread

Sort By

Most Raves
Least Raves
Oldest
Newest

text size

Comments

ack October 17, 2009 23:39:47

Answered: Yes
It's great they came out of the closet. But they should have left their sexual behavior in the bedroom.
Karadoll October 14, 2009 23:05:43

Answered: No
Is it sometimes used that way? Of course... but so is the word "fag".

But no, "homophobe" is not fictional, nor is homophobia.
☼ Homeward Bound ☼ October 13, 2009 17:33:26

Answered: No
It's another word created to further show what "victims" they are. (not)
+1
driley October 13, 2009 16:05:36

Answered: Yes
Once again, Frog, your well phrased question contained the best answer.
+1
The Sim... to driley October 14, 2009 02:06:18 (edited)
+1
Tony to driley October 16, 2009 01:43:24

I am not clear, are you saying that your a caveman like frog who can't handle anybody who is different from you. What a boring life that must be.
driley to Tony October 16, 2009 16:40:13

That's "cave woman" to you.
mistiblu October 13, 2009 09:32:38

Answered: No
ho·mo·pho·bi·a / ˌhōməˈfōbēə/
• n. an extreme and irrational aversion to homosexuality and homosexual people.
DERIVATIVES:
ho·mo·phobe / ˈhōməˌfōb/ n.
ho·mo·pho·bic / -ˈfōbik/ adj.
fictional? i didnt know the oxford dictionary used fictional words
+1
Tony to mistiblu October 16, 2009 01:43:54

Exactly!
Jon.A.Mortician October 13, 2009 07:30:34

Answered: No
A fictional word?
BiologyStudent October 13, 2009 04:51:21

Answered: Yes
I think the term is some kind of excuse.
Like "I hate gays."
"Woah why?"
"I'm just homophic!"
Oh ok. Like that makes all the difference. Your riddiculous phobia gives you all the pardon you need to hate them and not get in trouble for it.
Enigma October 13, 2009 04:43:55

Answered: Sometimes
Everyone uses words to communicate a thought(s). It all depends on how they are constructed and used. Many just "vent" in disgust, and still others spill hatred in words, which actually proves their own inner weakness.
+1
Michelle S. October 13, 2009 04:40:28

Answered: No
It's a valid term that some people actually have. If people were more accepting and not ignorant, the word would only be used to descirbe those who truly have a phobia. Also, no homosexual can lose and argument against someone who's not for their rights. Why? Because they're right, and those against their rights are just as bad as being enslaved without rights.
+1
G October 13, 2009 04:29:14 (edited)

Answered: Sometimes
I think some people are unaware of what a phobia is. It means "fear" not "dislike". Granted, some people certainly are exactly what the word "homophobic" means.
+2
JoysMojo October 13, 2009 03:57:44

Answered: No
No... and maybe it's just me... but I really don't understand how someone ELSE's sexuality is within anyone else's power to argue?!? Wow, if people put this much effort into thinking and reflecting on how they live their own lives rather than how they think everyone ELSE should live theirs... the world would be a warmer place. Can't we all just get along? For the record, I really don't care who ANY of you sleep with, as long as its consentual and makes you both happy.
+6
Me October 13, 2009 03:52:29

Answered: No
No, not at all. It is a valid term used to describe bigots who let their fear of and contempt for homosexuals blind their rationality.
The Sim... to Me October 13, 2009 04:08:56 (edited)

So tell me. How do you distinguish between those who criticize the gay lifestyle because of its' inherent limitations (as Darwin would argue) and those who you claim fear gay people?
+2
Me to The Sim... October 13, 2009 04:13:30

When one has to resort to attacking another's sexuality simply because they lack the intellect to make an intelligent argument, they are more likely than not a homophobe.
+1
Jester to Me October 13, 2009 04:17:13

You still did not answer the question. Be direct or give up.
+1
Me to Jester October 13, 2009 04:20:08

How did I not answer the question?
When you attack someone solely for their sexual identity is is a good indicator that you are homophobic.
+1
Jester to Me October 13, 2009 04:22:15

OK, let me put it in simpler terms. An individual disagrees with homosexual lifestyle on a personal basis. That denotes homophobia?

That is just nonsense. That is like saying that if an individual dislikes baseball, then said individual gets some form of sociological label as well?
+1
Me to Jester October 13, 2009 04:25:45

No, it doesn't and I never implied it did.
However when an individual attacks another solely on the basis of sexuality, they are more likely than not a homophobe.
Key word here is attacks.
Jester to Me October 13, 2009 04:31:23 (edited)

So that behavior should therefore be censored and we should all form a drum circle and sing Kumbaya?

I disagree with republican moral rigidity, and the democratic version is just as ridiculous. People should be free to like, hate, or be indifferent about whatever they so choose so long as they do not resort to violence to achieve their goals.

Using the knee jerk homophobe term is ever bit as absurd as using homosexual epitaphs.
+1
Me to Jester October 13, 2009 04:36:30

Jester! Chill the eff out!
You know better than to read into my words looking for meanings which were never stated nor implied.
One does not need to support a belief in order to respect it.
I do not support Atheism, yet I respect the Atheists right to be who they are.
People who resort to baseless personal attacks based on an individuals sexuality solely because they lack the logic and intelligence to do otherwise are homophobes, simple as that
You do not have to like, support, or believe in their lifestyle, however ones personal opinions do not give them a right to attack those different than them.
+1
Michell... to Jester October 13, 2009 04:43:01

You're a complete moron. They answered the question. Obviously everything needs to be put in more simple terms for you in order for you to understand. Seriously, grow up and learn that being intolerant is just as bad as being racist.
+1
Jester to Michell... October 13, 2009 04:45:18

Tolerance works in both directions, not merely in directives you happen to agree with.
+1
Michell... to Jester October 13, 2009 05:01:11

I have tolerance to those who don't agree with homosexuals. The only thing that no one should be tolerant about are people trying to deny rights. Seems like you're just too thick skulled and ignorant to not realise that. You can disagree with homosexuals all you want, but when you try to take away and keep their rights away, that's when it needs to be stopped. Also, there is no reason for those against homosexuals to use physical violence and verbal/mental abuse.
Jester to Michell... October 13, 2009 05:03:14

What rights did I advocate taking away exactly?
+1
Michell... to Jester October 13, 2009 05:15:09

None, I never said that you were the one, but you seemed to be defending those who are trying to prevent homosexuals from their rights. Also, I find it quite interesting that you didn't address anything else that I provided for you. I'm wondering if it's because you know you're wrong about it, or that you don't have anything that could go against it.
Jester to Michell... October 13, 2009 05:17:24

You can't dictate belief structure. Rights granted via the constitution are always paramount naturally. That being the case, with the possible exception of marriage, what rights are being denied here? I fail to see any.
+1
Michell... to Jester October 13, 2009 05:28:49

Read the fourteenth admendment. You'll easily see that rights of marriage, though created after the civil war but it was stated for all citizens, along with things like protection against attacks and what not are supposed to be for all. Many homosexuals are not protected as others are from violent attacks resulting in the death and brutal beatings that often go without proper punishment or protection. There are many other rights that you should already know by now that are being denied. With the right of marriage comes the rights of a married couple, which homosexuals are denied. Need I go on?

Also, I find it really sad that you don't see more than just the right to be married that are being denied. You truly are ignorant in atleast that stance, making it so what you previously have said is discredited by your lack of knowledge on the topic.
Jester to Michell... October 13, 2009 05:29:57

If gay marriage was added as a constitutional amendment, would you cease your advocacy campaign?
+1
Michell... to Jester October 13, 2009 05:31:30

No. I will not rest until all rights are given to homosexuals as there are heterosexuals. There shouldn't be rules for a group of people, but rules and rights for the nation, otherwise this isn't America as it was designed to be.
Jester to Michell... October 13, 2009 05:32:37

Careful you do not wander into the territory of "special rights"
+1
Michell... to Jester October 13, 2009 05:36:21

Of course not. I believe in equal rights. It can even be seen in how I think femenists in a country with equal rights, like America, are sexist women that want to be better than men. Femenism is great in countries with unequal rights, but in a country with equal rights, that's just going too far. I also have the same beliefs with race, so I wouldn't be worried about me if I were you.
Jester to Michell... October 13, 2009 05:37:25

I would love to continue this. It has been insightful, but I have class in the morning. I will catch up on your raves.
+1
Michell... to Jester October 13, 2009 05:40:15

Good luck with that.
+1
Tony to The Sim... October 16, 2009 01:54:23

There is no reason to distinguish those who "criticize" from those who "fear" They are both morons. I find it interesting that you speak for "Darwin", Darwin was brilliant and you, well your not! Why would a person choose to be part of a minority who is despised and hated by so many? Is there a thrill in being called a fag by strangers? What did Darwin say about the many species who can change their own sex back and forth as necessary?
+1
Tony to Me October 16, 2009 01:45:37

Exactly. I feel sorry for those people who hate everybody that isn't exactly like them.
+3
Amber V. (*Roni's Kitten*) October 13, 2009 03:52:18

Answered: No
Is 'fag' a word used by heterosexuals when they feel like they are losing and decide to turn to insults?