Homophobia (originally Russian Homophobia)

[Taiji]

You should never regret hearing honest opinion, no matter how horrifying it is. It may be disheartening to see so many people ruled by hate over all other things, but that is the nature of the market-place of ideas and public fora, not everyone is rational or has basic human empathy, it is better to know this and confront it with open eyes, rather than shy away from it.

I think it's one thing to have an ideal for yourself, but it's quite another to tell others what they ought to be willing to put up with.

With the 'appeal to ridicule' nonsense we've seen from some religious people recently I think what you're saying applies well. But we, who are making them whine, aren't saying anything that can be construed as deliberately hurtful. It's not a personal insult, it's not even about people, it's about logic and argument.

I think here is where it changes. Homophobia is endemic in our culture for no apparent reason. That may need challenging but we know there was no sensible argument for it in the first place. Explaining things to homophobes doesn't fix them. Just like it doesn't fix equinophobes, etc. So it doesn't stop them being antisocial and hateful, which homophobia usually causes, it just invites them to flaunt their flaws.

Extract from UK hate-speech laws regarding racism:

A person who uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting, is guilty of an offence if—
(a) he intends thereby to stir up racial hatred, or
(b) having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby.

But in contrast here we find you effectively asking them to make a case for homosexual hatred.

I don't mean to say that UK law is a good source of wisdom about what is good and bad, it obviously isn't, but it might give one pause for thought.

[Himster]

I think it's one thing to have an ideal for yourself, but it's quite another to tell others what they ought to be willing to put up with.

I see where you're coming from, but there is a bigger issue: for evil to triumph all it takes is for good people to do nothing. The threat of homophobia implicates the apathetic and the silent and the lazy as part of the problem, a minor part, sure and ironically to force these people to do what they aren't willing to do would make me as bad as those whom I oppose. When fighting monsters it's very easy to become a monster.
But still, I stand by what I said: nobody should "regret" reading honest opinion, regardless of how horrifying it may be.

Explaining things to homophobes doesn't fix them. Just like it doesn't fix equinophobes, etc. So it doesn't stop them being antisocial and hateful, which homophobia usually causes, it just invites them to flaunt their flaws.

It's not for the benefit of homophobes that we say what we say, it's for the benefit of everyone else. Hate movements thrive in darkness and shadows, bring them into the light for all to see, then it's clear how irrational and obnoxious bigotries actually are with crystal clear clarity. Ignoring a problem does not magically make it go away. The more their position is flaunted the weaker it becomes, it's something to be drawn out, like poison from a wound.

[Taiji]

It's not for the benefit of homophobes that we say what we say, it's for the benefit of everyone else. Hate movements thrive in darkness and shadows, bring them into the light for all to see, then it's clear how irrational and obnoxious bigotries actually are with crystal clear clarity. Ignoring a problem does not magically make it go away. The more their position is flaunted the weaker it becomes, it's something to be drawn out, like poison from a wound.

Nah, hate movements thrive out in the open, buddy. They make graffiti slogans, smash people's windows, burn down their homes, sing songs at football matches, etc. It's all good publicity, because they just want publicity, because they thrive out in the open. Freaks who want us to believe there's a lot of them succeed like that.

[Himster]

Like I said, you're being idealistic and then sanctimonious on how to respond to offense.

It's the way I speak.
What's a better way to respond to bigotry? Ignore it? What do you think?

Nah, hate movements thrive out in the open, buddy. They make graffiti slogans, smash people's windows, burn down their homes, sing songs at football matches, etc. It's all good publicity, because they just want publicity, because they thrive out in the open. Freaks who want us to believe there's a lot of them succeed like that.

Other than football matches (which are an anomaly IMO) the scenarios you describe take place in the shadows, isolated, alleyway thugs. Their publicity invariably make them look foolish, like a monster in a horror film: the horror diminishes more and more when more and more light is shone on it.
Look at the BNP, one step forward two steps back every-time publicity comes it's way, it only thrives when nobody is talking about it.

Should bigotry be ignored, to be allowed to fester unseen and unheeded: endorsement through apathy? I don't think so.

[Stario]

Divorce is specific to homosexuals? Eh, no, Not specific to homosexuality at all. Loveless marriages cause harm, especially to he children

Suppose loveless marriages cause harm as you claim, still this does not disprove my argument re: "homosexuality being harmful because it leads to a type of family structure/dynamics casing behavioral deficits in children".
You continue to constantly misrepresent my position while failing to address the proposition in question.

The real harm there was caused when his brother was forced, or tricked, or bullied into pretending to be heterosexual, again it was homophobia causing harm, like always, victim blaming again, like always. I'm beginning to sense a pattern.

You got that from user "Basics" post?!

You provided absolutely no evidence

I linked a recent study as evidence. You probably just never bothered to read/understand the study.

Why not equally point out that children raised by black parents are 5 times more likely to not go to college...

Why? For obvious reasons, this is a thread re: homosexuality NOT race.

Behavioral deficits are also caused when fathers are travelling salesmen, is being a travelling salesman also "wrong"? Being breastfed for too long can cause behavioral deficits, is breastfeeding also "wrong"? Being born albino can cause behavioral deficits

Suppose behavioural deficits are also caused by all the things you just listed, how does this disprove my argument re: homosexuality & "behavioral deficits" in children.


The straw man fallacy- occurs in the following pattern of argument:

1. Person 1 asserts proposition X (homosexuality --->family structure/dynamics---> casing behavioral deficits in children).
2. Person 2 argues against a false but superficially similar proposition Y (being born albino can also cause behavioural deficits), as if that were an argument against person 1's position.

[Himster]

Suppose loveless marriages cause harm as you claim, still this does not disprove my argument re: "homosexuality being harmful because it leads to a type of family structure/dynamics casing behavioral deficits in children".
You continue to constantly misrepresent my position while failing to address the proposition in question.

I have never denied that white, middle-class, heterosexual families offer a higher standard of living on average. But for your claim that homosexual families are immoral to make sense: you're also claiming that black families are immoral, single parent families are immoral, lower class families are also immoral. Or marginal statistical variations are meaningless.

Why? For obvious reasons, this is a thread re: homosexuality NOT race.

You either have to be consistent and apply the same moral judgement on all sections of society (including poor people, black people, single parents etc.) or reveal that your claim is a mere fallacy of special pleading.

[Ciciro]

Suppose loveless marriages cause harm as you claim, still this does not disprove my argument re: "homosexuality being harmful because it leads to a type of family structure/dynamics casing behavioral deficits in children".
You continue to constantly misrepresent my position while failing to address the proposition in question.

Actually, he isn't. When you say homosexuals shouldn't raise kids because its harmful, then you must also compare just how harmful it is compared to other parenting. Otherwise banning just homosexuals from raising children would just look arbitrary.

[Taiji]

What's a better way to respond to bigotry? Ignore it? What do you think?

As what? A policeman? Politician? Housewife? Small child? etc. The question is huge. I guess some people ought to be tackling it, and some people ought to be ignoring it while protected from it.

Should bigotry be ignored, to be allowed to fester unseen and unheeded: endorsement through apathy?

No, these days I quite like the idea of expressing it being a crime

[Himster]

As what? A policeman? Politician? Housewife? Small child? etc. The question is huge. I guess some people ought to be tackling it, and some people ought to be ignoring it while protected from it.

I agree with that.

No, I quite like the idea of expressing it being a crime

Bigotry isn't a crime.

[Taiji]

Bigotry isn't a crime.

I want expressing it to be one

[Himster]

I want expressing it to be one

You English good.

[Taiji]

You English good.

No you

[Himster]

No you

Well this is the most stimulating conversation in this thread.

[Dracula]

It's quite stupid to see people proud of that they are fond of a hole and trying to deny other people right to another hole, manifest on streets in support of that (homophobia). And as defenders of morals to that.

[Denny Crane!]

It's quite stupid to see people proud of that they are fond of a hole and trying to deny other people right to another hole, manifest on streets in support of that (homophobia). And as defenders of morals to that.

I'll bet you 50p/c that this made more sense to you than anyone else who read it.

[Dracula]

I'll bet you 50p/c that this made more sense to you than anyone else who read it.

Russians heterosexuals fond of a particular hole, protest against other people not to use another hole ... Do I have to say it that evident ? Don't expose me

[Denny Crane!]

Russians heterosexuals fond of a particular hole, protest against other people not to use another hole ... Do I have to say it that evident ? Don't expose me

[conon394]

Bigotry isn't a crime.

As a thought perhaps not, but acted on it is or should be.

[Geronimo2006]

Russian LGBT activists have exposed homophobic messages and photos of those posting it on social media. Some of them include threats to murder. Russians who support Putin are fond of telling the West we are just as bad, but honestly I have never anything like this in the West. Story here from Radio Free Europe.

[basics]

Taiji,

If homosexuality was natural why is it that without artificial intervention, no homosexual by his nature has a future? To reproduce in the case of a man he has to go outside his nature to do that meaning that there is something fundamentally wrong with his nature. If survival of the fittest is the natural way then the homosexual comes bottom of the league, indeed is relegated, from nature.