The "crazed homophobe must be gay" mindset is getting old

[ruggerson]

and the fact that it rears its head at liberal sites (not just DU) tells us all we need to know why we don't have equal civil rights.

I used to believe that liberals were uniformly on our side. No more.

I used to believe that other minority groups saw kindred souls in our struggle. No more.

I used to believe that progressives would not use the language of the far right when discussing gay people. No more.

Don't get me wrong. There are a lot of enlightened straight people. And a lot are here at DU.

But, far, far too many just don't get it. And actually are belligerent about rejoicing in their ignorance.

And you have to wonder how many of them are crawling around Capitol Hill or have a White House Pass.

[mitchtv]

1. K&R

thanks Ruggerson, I wish I could be as clear as you, +1

[imdjh]

2. I've never really cared for that construct.

It might apply with some regularity to high school boys acting as bullies, but it's not terribly reliable for older more ideologically driven hate mongers.

[Tyler1987]

3. I agree

It is OFTEN true that the crazed homophobe turns out to be gay, and the reasons for this are numerous.

However, it's also OFTEN true that he is indeed not gay, and it is certainly disappointing to see people jumping to that conclusion with no more information than the simple fact that the person is indeed homophobic. And on top of that, it's much more disappointing to see people basically making fun of the homophobe in question and his alleged predilection for penis. That just shows you're on the same immature level as all those others who shout "Icky!" whenever the phrase "gay men" is uttered.

[mitchtv]

7. welcome Tyler 1987

that kind of shit gets tired

[ZombieHorde]

79. Welcome to DU! nt

[deep1]

4. " I used to believe that other minority groups saw kindred souls in ours struggles".........

Minorities,in particurlarly black folks, hate when gay rights advocates link gay struggles to their own. That is disrespectful to many blacks who were constantly lynched, raped, brutalized, denied the right to vote, segregated, etc. The brutality of blacks in America for centuries is greater than other groups in this nation.

Your own struggles are distinct but they do not need to be compared to the blacks.

One can hide their sexuality and escape persecution, but you cannot hide your dark skin.

[ruggerson]

5. Yes some minorities are like that

others have brain stems.

[muffin1]

11. Thanks for the

:rofl: before I turn in for the night.

Like you Ruggerson, I wonder why everything you covered isn't obvious on a "progressive" site. I get so tired of comments like the one you so hilariously just responded to.

Good luck with the rest of the thread. Will check in tomorrow...:toast:

[QC]

31. DU is not a progressive site and hasn't been one for a couple of years now, at least. n/t

[muffin1]

36. True, that.

I should have used the qualifier "self-described" progressive site.

[QC]

42. LOL, "self-described" is good. Also, "alleged" and "purportedly" work. n/t

[tbyg52]

61. So-called. nt

[QC]

63. Nominally. n/t

[TokenQueer]

68. Progressive adjacent n/t

[QC]

84. Self-styled n/t

[TokenQueer]

85. Liberal leaning n/t

[mitchtv]

8. "One can hide their sexuality and escape persecution"

SOME people can, some can't, and those that do pay a heavy price

[tbyg52]

60. >>"One can hide their sexuality and escape persecution"

Next question: Why the hell should they have to?

[JackBeck]

9. And there have been many examples of GAY people of color

That have been lynched, raped, brutalized and segregated by their OWN community to warrant this apt comparison.

Don't deny that queer people of color exist, and that there are queer people of color who cannot hide their sexuality, let alone their skin color.

[ruggerson]

69. +1

thanks, Jack. Dead on.

[Prism]

10. Ever heard the phrase "A rising tide lifts all boats?"

Greater civil rights lift all citizens.

[msongs]

13. yeah screw all those lgbts how dare they do such a vile thing to you an yours lololol nt

[muffin1]

15. That is a disgusting position to take.

I don't know if you are black or not, but you seem to be taking up the mantle for those who have that sentiment. Will you not be happy until all of the horrors you just described befall the gay community?
I'm guessing you've never heard of gay-bashing? And I don't mean verbals slurs, which are bad enough. I mean a couple walking down the street suddenly being met with homophobes bearing baseball bats? Gay establishments being raided by police, who then beat and arrest the patrons?
And then there's poor Matthew Shepherd, beaten, tied to a fence and left to die - and the hundred of thousands ('m sure) just like him that go unreported?
Ever hear about upstanding citizens being denied the right to lead a Boy Scout troop, teach a class, or have anything to do with a children's group for fear that molestation will surely occur? Ever hear of decorated soldiers and interpreters being losing their careers for being gay?
Ever hear of a person not being able to visit their dying loved one in the hospital because they're gay, and not allowed to marry?

I've had enough of people with your attitude. Everyone, EVERYONE deserves equal rights - why the fuck isn't that obvious?????????????

[Prism]

16. Don't bother

What is obvious to us and should be obvious to all will never be. I find through experience that those who throw down racial grounds as excuse to be antagonistic are more often than not antagonistic towards our struggle in every other arena as well. It's nothing but a cloak behind which to hide the contempt for our movement while trusting that our fear of being racially insensitive will stay us from standing up for our dignity and our rights in the face of it.

People miscalculate.

And they think we're dumb.

[QC]

32. This new poster sounds very, very familiar, don't you think? n/t

[mtnester]

73. It is gone on to the underworld it crawled from

super troll....however, it will be back like all bad trolls are

unless it was a parody troll

[Duncan Grant]

19. Tell it to the 11-year old boys (of all colors) who are tormented for being "gay".

One can hide their sexuality and escape persecution? That's the voice of entitlement talking.

Same game, different name - MF.

[TokenQueer]

25. I awoke this morning to a revolting stench.

I followed the rank smell to your steaming pile of a post. Go ahead, hang your bigotry out there for all to see. Just don't expect us to respond like Dwan Prince ( http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2009/08/gay-bashing-victim-i-deserved-it-and.html ).

:middlefinger:

[QC]

33. We have smelled this particular stench several times before, under different names. n/t

[imdjh]

38. That's disgusting. Let's write that one off to brain damage.

Because in the absence of brain damage, a person might want to beat the shit out of that guy.

[Tyler1987]

26. Don't bother quantifying pain

To try to quantify all the pain experienced throughout the history of the world categorized by identification and at the hand of discrimination is a nearly impossible task.

The point is, both manifestations of discrimination are equally wrong and equally unjustified.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

27. i can no more hide my gayness than i can my skin. so go fuck yourself.

[Toasterlad]

29. And You Cannot Hide Your Bigotry.

Your homophobia is glaringly obvious. I hope truly horrible things happen to you.

[QC]

30. I wondered how long it would take you to come here and start singing that song again.

In your previous incarnations, you headed right for the homophobic baiting like a horny boy lunging for his prom date's panties. But in this one you have learned how to be a bit more subtle about it, and not until now did you really tip your hand.

You're getting much better at this, but you are still a bit too impetuous.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

37. northernspy?

[QC]

41. Great suggestion, but I am thinking of another one who signs up and gets banned every few days.

The dead giveaway is the tirade about those awful queers having the gall to compare themselves to decent people.

That's when he gets banned.

Then in a few days he shows up again.

He seldom makes it to more than 30 or 40 posts without the tombstone descending, so this incarnation is doing much better than earlier ones.

[DarkTirade]

45. Wait, what did I do?

:P

[QC]

62. Ladies and Gentlemen, deep1 has been tombstoned again.

I wonder what his next incarnation will be?

I have a feeling he is back on DU already.

[Starry Messenger]

64. Obvious troll was obvious.

Getting a little more subtle like you said. He managed to get on the Greatest Page this go-around. I hope he's getting well-paid.

[QC]

65. He posted a thread over in General Discussion: Cheerleading that had

the regulars in the throes of ecstasy.

Loins were quivering to beat the band!

[ruggerson]

66. Well

at least this thread was useful for that. :)

[TokenQueer]

70. You picked off the scab and all the gnats swarmed.

Oppression Olympics, race-baiting, wanna-be-Kinseys, infighting instigation trolling, self-closeting recommendations and a cage match smack-down courtesy of Prism... this thread kicks ass!

:hi:

[create.peace]

67. ???

on second thought this guy has been here for a month....hint, on gd now

[TokenQueer]

71. So deep1 got deep-sixed?

Sweet.

[QC]

72. It's probably back already, making innocent posts to build up the post count. n/t

[Deep13]

77. So he didn't even make it to Deep2?

That's very sad.
:evilgrin:

[Deep13]

76. "constantly lynched, raped, brutalized, denied the right to vote, segregated, etc."

I can't speak to the right to vote since I'm not aware of any anti-gay discrimination on that point (maybe it exists, but I haven't heard about it.)

Still, I don't see how you can say gay people have not been lynched, raped, brutalized or segregated. In much of this country, it remains completely lawful to fire or evict someone (or not to hire or lease to someone in the first place) for the stated reason that said person is a homosexual. And the reason for violence against gays is the same as the reason for violence against Blacks: folk prejudice enshrined as a divine injunction be religion. While the specifics are different, the fight against discrimination is always a fight for rational humanitarianism against superstitious ignorance.

God made the races seperate. Who are we to go against that? The bible authorizes slavery. God made them man and woman, therefore, homosexuality is an abomination. God gave man dominan over woman, so the 19th Amend. is evil. God put management in a position of authority and, therefore, organized labor subverts God's will. God gave man dominion over the Earth, so environmental laws subvert the natural order. Book-learning turns people away from the Bible, so public schools are evil.

All irrational prejudices that keep us divided and weak.

[donco6]

86. Not this shit again.

And I won't even bother with the fucking picture.

[QC]

87. It's been tombstoned anyway. n/t

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[theHandpuppet]

12. Thanks, Ruggerson

I've been sick of it for a long time now but I guess I just gave up trying to explain or argue the point.

[create.peace]

14. K & R nt

[Prism]

17. This is so ridiculous

Now we can't even have a calm, constructive discussion about how people have a hard time even recognizing this kind of homophobia?

[ruggerson]

18. there are straight folks, of all ethnicities and races, who simply get it

but sadly they are out shouted by their indignant, ignorant peers.

[create.peace]

22. how many times on this and other 'liberal' boards have we seen this!!?

i am really having a hard time being succinct about this issue. when i hear someone say that some politician, or preacher, is probably gay, because of the homophobic things they espouse, it somehow lets the accused off the hook. as if they aren't really homophobic. and the accuser comes off sounding shallow and homophobic him/herself. i am so glad someone brought this up here, because i am sure that a lot of socalled progressives don't realize the hate in this accusation. am i off here? misogynists are categorized as women, though they hate and/or fear women, and may BE women. racists are not accused of being whatever race they hate.....
this kind of talk is something i wouldn't have tolerated in my home when my children were growing up.

[create.peace]

39. to late to edit, but corrections are below

misogynists are NOT categorized as women, is what i meant!

here is a new example:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=359198&mesg_id=359305

[QC]

34. Calm, constructive, rational discussions are impossible here now

because the loudest, most combative, and in many cases dumbest, members are now allowed to run herd on everyone else.

[closeupready]

78. This is the truth. I have never understood the objections here

to raising the question of, 'if Shakespeare was correct that the lady who doth protest too much is guilty herself, in terms of homophobes being more likely to be gay than a random person', since this dovetails with the personal experiences of many here, myself included.

This is one discussion for which people who want an intelligent discussion are bashed, discussion is closed, end of discussion. And frankly, one reason why I spend less and less time here in this forum.

[PHIMG]

20. There was a scientific study that showed

That self-identified straight homophobic men are more likely to be turned on by gay erotic imagery than self identified gay friendly strait males. So there is some basis for this. I believe it to be true that the most obnoxious homophobes are acting out of frustration for what they hate about themselves, that which they supress.

I think its very silly to say that saying that a homophobe might be latent is some how a slur on a gay people unless you have a very childish mind.

The homophobe's obnoxious behavior is clearly the result of self hatred not being gay. In this respect we liberals can have some measure of compassion for the homophobe. Society taught the homophobe that the feelings they are having are so horrible that he cannot acknowledge them on a concious level and acts out in order to keep them supresssed and also to prevent anyone from catching on.

Then there is the experience that a lot of gay men have of later in life being hit on by the very homophobic bullies that tormented them in high school.

[Prism]

21. There is a vast difference

between idly speculating if someone's visceral hatred is sparked by shame and hatred of their own orientation, and outlining that potential by tossing out gay jokes, graphic depictions, and demeaning slurs and comments that, if directed at an out and proud LGBTer, would be deeply offensive.

Imagine, for a moment, if there was a topic about Clarence Thomas views on affirmative action. Imagine if, in the course of that discussion, a white person referred to him as the n-word. Imagine if people were upset by that.

Would you be telling those people they have childish minds? Would you be leaping to post multi-paragraph explanations and apologies for that kind of comment?

I don't think you would.

There is no difference. None.

[PHIMG]

35. OP doesn't talk about all that

Just that the idea that attributing homophobia to latent homosexuality is somehow an insult to gays and I don't get that mindset at all.

So why don't you respond to what I actually wrote instead of some weird strawmen.

[Prism]

46. The OP is in reference to those things

That behavior and what the OP talks about go hand in hand, and what prompted Ruggerson to make this OP is the behavior I described above. However, I cannot blame you if you were unaware of the threads and sentiments that were behind the OP's creation. DU can be a bit nebulous at times. So, I'll address your point more directly.

The problem with assigning latent homosexuality to individuals possessed of serious, distorting hatred is that you cannot separate that divination from other forms. Every single day, people make snap judgements about whether or not a person is gay and treat them accordingly, whether they are correct in their assumptions or not. That treatment generally arrives in an unerringly negative context. Rather than merely criticizing the individual's odious views, the orientation itself is held complicit and the negative connotations surrounding homosexuality become inextricably meshed in the commentary.

Perhaps this perception is down to personal experience. I have never ever, in any context, heard someone with negative feelings toward a person declare "I bet he's gay" and not detected a negative sentiment towards the orientation quietly bubbling underneath. It just doesn't happen. It doesn't help that these people who engage in this sort of "speculation" - again, in my experience - tend to have other markers of antipathy towards different orientations that arise if you listen to them long enough.

It's a minefield, and you never know an LGBTers' experience with people who are quick to "declare the gay" against anyone they personally dislike. From Karl Rove to Bush himself, I just spent eight years watching self-described liberals and allies endlessly speculate about the secret homosexuality of the most evil members of our society. You see that enough, and there is simply no way to claim "Oh, there's nothing homophobic in this." Yes, there is.

Generally speaking, people shouldn't do it. Not only is it hitting our tripwires for detecting who's really homophobic but has so far flown under radar by chanting the right words to prove their liberal cred, but it perpetuates a deeply offensive and damaging stereotype that homosexuality and evil go hand in hand, a theme in literature and culture that has endured for centuries.

The only time I ever, ever want to hear someone speculating about someone's sexuality is when it's a matronly, affectionate aunt who's sitting on a patio, wondering if that waiter is gay because she'd just love to find someone for her gay nephew to date.

If that's not the context, people should refrain.

[PHIMG]

50. PROJECTION!

There is theory with evidence to support it that homophobes are likely to be repressed/latent homosexuals. Relaying this does not make me homophobic and I don't have to take responsibility for all this other stuff you are spouting off. You really are coming off as quite silly.

[Prism]

51. You're promoting bad science

You're confusing correlation and causation. Nevermind the sample size of the experiment you're holding like a talisman was pitifully small. Furthermore, you neglect to note that there were multiple explanations for the stimulus response to homosexual imagery with the most prominent alternative theory being anxiety.

This idea that "This one experiment showed they were secretly gay!" is an irresponsible conclusion reached and asserted by lay people who do not understand empirical research in the slightest, who obviously didn't read the study and analyses at all, and are simply eager to "declare the gay" because, well, see all the reasons laid out above.

I think you're coming off worse than silly. You're coming off as dismissive and grossly underinformed.

[PHIMG]

53. Oh yes...anxiety is very stimulating!

I'm not going to argue with people who are on a mission to make everyone in the world homophobic.

[Prism]

54. The scientists who conducted the study seem to think so

Wait, so now the authors of the study are wrong because their explanations do not comport with what you want to be true? That's even worse science.

But, we're not really here to discuss science. We're here to discuss why LGBTers never know what we're talking about when we say "This is a bit anti-gay." No, we need other people to tell us what is and isn't ok to be bothered about.

Because that never gets tiring.

[QC]

58. Things are only homophobic if straight people think so.

You should know that, you silly goose.

[Behind the Aegis]

59. Apparently, to some it is.

"Masters and Johnson, whose study of human sexual behavior focused on the physiology of sexual response, viewed anxiety (e.g., performance anxiety) as playing a key role in causing sexual dysfunction. Later researchers tested this idea using psychophysiological methods and found that anxiety indeed has a negative effect on sexual response in sexually dysfunctional men. However, they also found that in men without sexual dysfunction, anxiety was often associated with an enhancement of response to sexual stimuli. In looking for an explanation for this intriguing difference, researchers explored the idea that the negative effects of anxiety may be mediated by cognitive processes. A man who has difficulty becoming sexually aroused may be worrying about whether or not he will become aroused. This thought interferes with the excitatory mechanisms that would normally cause a sexual response. Researchers tested this theory by observing how distractions affect responses to sexual stimuli. The surprising result was that for normal men, distractions did impair ability to become aroused, but for the men with erectile difficulties, in some cases the distractions actually enhanced this ability. This result seemed to indicate that for men with erectile difficulties the distractions provided in the laboratory setting (sexually neutral distractions, like having to mentally solve a puzzle or work out a problem) reduced the attention paid to the sexually negative distractions the man was giving himself, and hence facilitated erectile responses." (emphasis added) source

[Toasterlad]

47. I Think It's Very Silly To Assume That All Homophobes Are Gay Because a Study Says So.

You want to read some of the studies that were done before homosexuality was declared to NOT be a mental illness...and some that have been released after?

Not all homophobes are gay, and not all people who accuse assholes of being gay have the best of intentions.

As for your compassion nonsense, I certainly feel for anyone struggling in the closet. That feeling ends when they raise their hand to another person, or use their position to argue against equality for gay people. No compassion for the likes of Larry Craig and Trent Lott.

[mitchtv]

55. I might get aroused if my penis was wired anf then showed

me any kind of het porn. It wouldn't make me a het, or anything close. It was a study, the conclusions are open to intepert. It certainly gives no one the right to apply them to third parties, just because we hate them, and we then have a chance to vent homophobic bile and the target.your use of A study is no validation for hate speech.

[Touchdown]

89. And there it is. The old reliable justifier... The "scientific study" to prove...

... See? It's not bigotry when we do it. There's a scientific study which gives us permission to say Pat Roberston is gay, so we are justified! We can't say David Duke wants to be black, because there's no "scientific study" for that. :eyes:

Ah' this wonderful, beautiful and darn snappy dresser "scientific study" performed in a university. A study done on 19 year olds who get boners when the wind shifts directions.

It's the DU equivalent of "Well, it's in the Bible!"

[lib_wit_it]

23. Forgive the ignorance, but I *don't* get it and am not rejoicing in my ignorance. I respect your

take on this, but still don't quite get the reasoning. Sorry. I'm sure it seems obvious to those who see it, but how about a clearer explanation?

[WillParkinson]

28. Check the video section...

An anti-gay preacher whom everyone assumes MUST be gay because he looks the part.

[create.peace]

40. QED:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=359198&mesg_id=359305

[Starry Messenger]

24. Some "liberals" pull the lever for team Democratic Party.

And that's all the party asks for. I guess the rest of it was just slogans.

I don't know where the "crazed homophobe must be gay" trope comes from either. Some people say it's from some scientific study. Frankly I don't trust a lot of those studies. Hell, it wasn't quite so long ago that it was "science" to give electroshock therapy to LGBT people to "cure" them (at least in the mainstream). Fortunately we've moved away from that kind of barbarity. But we are still a country that is cruel to minorities. The indifference to dignity in the system that our government has become creates a shield for bigotry of all kinds. Just because the names on the office doors have changed doesn't mean that everything is happy funtime for anyone but the people who usually benefit from that kind of sea-change.

I've had a hard time articulating to people that being anti-Republican is not quite the same thing as being progressive. There's a lot of overlap obviously, but there is also a difference. I don't know if that's a conversation that DU can have, since it is mostly set up to be anti-Republican, which is fine, but that creates a very different kind of user base, as we've seen.

[Tyo]

43. k&r

[galledgoblin]

44. it's true in some cases, so sometimes I'll let it slide, but

I also hate the constant use of this meme. it's a "blame the victims" cop-out. if all homophobes are gay themselves, then the implication is that homophobia is an internal problem to the gay community.

[Toasterlad]

48. Bingo.

[lib_wit_it]

74. I haven't seen that to be the belief. The accusation is meant to point out the hypocicy of the anti-

gay Republicans who, in fact, practice what they so vocally and hatefully preach against. Even saying something like, "Obviously he's a faggot himself," at least in the instances I've seen, is not to bash gays, but to turn the haters own words back on him.

So, are you saying that respect should be given to the homosexuality of the anti-gay but secretly gay themselves)hypocrites?

I am not being snarky. I'm just really curious about what I'm missing.

[galledgoblin]

75. I'm not sure how to further explain that point

if you imply that all homophobia is self-hating gays, then it's internal to the gay community, restricted to cowards who will not come out of the closet, when in fact homophobia is a MUCH larger problem that needs to be addressed by all communities.

and "obviously he's a faggot himself"? seriously, you don't see a problem with that statement? maybe you can deconstruct that to be GLBT-supportive, but I see that clearly as someone continuing to use homosexuality as an insult and very obviously a homophobic statement.

[lib_wit_it]

80. I just don't see that implication in the accusation that Bob Allen, Ted Haggard, Larry Craig, and

Glenn Murphy Jr. are monumentally despicable divisive hypocrites fanning the flames of America's rampant homophobia (which, btw, is a weak word, implying fear as opposed to outright hatred.) As if any obscure gay-bashing bigot isn't bad enough, these twisted fucks flaunt their homo-loathing from the bully pulpit as if to certify its righteousness. And, they influence public policy. To see their actions as an especially vile affront to human decency and political progress is hardly to place the nexus of the anti-gay problem within the LGBT community.

Personally, when I've made the "so anti-gay must be so gay" accusation, it's been out of the same frustration at and incomprehension of the RW vision of the "real" America, and of what is good and decent in a person. When the word faggot has been used, it has been to affront the perpetrators with a word I know they consider an insult, and as wink and a nod to the irony of the situation and the hypocrisy of the culprit, not to suggest that there's a damn thing wrong with those *they* like to label as such.

I don't know how I can explain that any clearer to you, but if I could, I would.

[closeupready]

81. Yes, homophobia is a weak word, but remember, it was

coined during a time when the official position of the American Psychology Association was to consider homosexuality a mental disorder, i.e., a time when gay people were - as a political force - weak and quasi-illegitimate.

Times have changed, and perhaps our vocabulary needs change in order to reflect progress with regard to gay rights? It's funny how I feel so old sometimes when I come here to discuss things, and I realize that I am in the minority that, for example, I remember Anita Bryant's "Save the Children" campaign, or, as Blaze sang, not only do I remember house, I remember BEFORE there was disco. :D

[lib_wit_it]

83. The only thing I ever liked about disco was that I had great times hitting the Philly gay bars with

my "flaming faggot"--as they would describe themselves (self-loathing? Seemed more like an attempt to defuse the power of the word by taking it from the haters, or maybe they never thought it through)--college buddies, who would take their less party hardy friends to where the real action was. We had thought we were party animals, but we had to hand it to them. What a scene! "Turn the beat around, love to hear per-cus-sion!"

Ah, back when we regularly shook our booties. Where did that energy come from? Oh, never mind. I remember now.

I thought back then that full acceptance and total equality were just around the corner. I'm shocked that we are still a country that gives credence and power to those who vilify people for their sexual orientation, or even give a crap about what has nothing to do with them. Maybe that's why the "so anti-gay must be gay: meme is popular. It's an attempt understand the otherwise pointless hate. At least the idea of some guy using gay-bashing as a cover seems to, possibly, make some sense. Not much, mind you.


I could almost sympathize with such a tactic, for a regular Joe, but when it's a politician with direct power to make laws, or a religious "leader", it becomes downright heinous. We struggle to find a way to adequately denounce such dangerous behavior.

[Touchdown]

90. Those guys can't be fanning any flames of homophobia...

because the implication is that every gay hater out there is gay themselves, so flames don't need to be fanned.

[sui generis]

49. Well ACTUALLY

there is real science behind it. Where we get lost is claiming that someone acting out on their internal discord at homophobic/homophilic signals is socially "gay".

Gay is a whole 'nother thing: not related to just waking up with wood after ingesting pepperoni and having a confusing dream.

No those crazed homophobes are homophobes because they're crazed, regardless of what set them off. They likely have a long list of Things They Hate, but to say that they hate them because they're secretly closeted WHATEVER (catholics, jews, aye-rabs, one-eyed injuns) falls short of real sophistry.

[Prism]

52. There's one study

One study of 64 people. Furthermore, the researchers very responsibly note that there are competing theories and possibilities for the differences in arousal.

http://www.philosophy-religion.org/handouts/homophobia.htm

While I'm sure repressed orientation does play a role in some instances of distorted homophobic thinking, it is the height of irresponsibility to always pinpoint it as the culprit. Worse is to use one tiny study with uncertain conclusions as the total proof for this line of thinking.

[sui generis]

82. have you read Scientific American lately?

A LOT more than one study, but that's a recent one that quote several studies.

Go to the site and search "gay panic" (I think - the article shines a cankerous light on the term and defense).

Anyway, the point being that I think we are hardwired to hate anything that might weaken the collective or distinguishes us from the collective as weak. Run that up against some expectation that the world is either black OR white, and no other colors and you end up with psycho-pathology.

Is it the first thing to jump at? No. But neither should it be dismissed, when there is NO rational reason to do so.

I GET that with just a little twist the argument makes the case that gays are crazy, ergo, but that's not an adequate reason to not address root causes.

[Prism]

88. Wasn't able to find the article

I'd be interested to read it, though.

I think you and I are on the same page. I'm not sure about the rules of cross-posting from other threads, but I had a back and forth with closeupready about, I think, similar themes that started here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6388840#6389234

I think your ideas about being hardwired to hate perceived weakening dovetails with the hypermasculinization process during the socialization of boys.

[VMI Dem]

56. Anyone that doesn't think the majority of heterosexuals are homophobic to some degree is a fool.

You see it everywhere, from the White House to the elementary school yard. People that make claims of homophobes being closeted homosexuals are engaging in a form of homophobia themselves. It is an attempt to make gays somehow responsible for their own persecution.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

57. thats EXACTLY what i think. nt