Comments on: “Homophobia” here, “Homophobia” there, “Homophobia” Every, Everywhere!

By: GayPatriot » If you disagree with Barney Frank, you’re a bigot!

GayPatriot » If you disagree with Barney Frank, you’re a bigot! — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 00:15:34 +0000

[...] it.“Â Not sure I agree with him there, but I do share his distaste for the word.Â (He, like me, would prefer a term like “anti-gay [...]

By: GayPatriot » On “Homophobia” & Gay Marriage Debate

GayPatriot » On “Homophobia” & Gay Marriage Debate — Wed, 28 May 2008 18:53:52 +0000

[...] March, I pointed out why I don’t use the word, “homophobia,” a term which many gay people and even [...]

By: Academy Blog

Academy Blog — Wed, 05 Sep 2007 14:04:41 +0000

Academy…

Gaypatriot has a good review on academy ……

By: Peter Hughes

Peter Hughes — Wed, 14 Mar 2007 20:50:43 +0000

Uh, Willy, Vince doesn’t delete comments because this is not his blog. If you wish to know about those things, try asking Bruce or Dan, the co-bloggers on this site.

(Shaking head) A mind is a terrible thing to waste, eh Willy Wonka?

Does that make you a Wonkette?

Sorry, couldn’t resist.

Regards,
Peter H.

By: Willy

Willy — Wed, 14 Mar 2007 17:38:28 +0000

Vince, will you delete this comment because you don’t like it, too? Funny how a Cabinette like you runs from words he doesn’t approve of. You really are caricaturing yourself.

By: Vince P

Vince P — Wed, 14 Mar 2007 13:10:25 +0000

My objection with “homophobic” is that it’s a term impossible to counter. It means , “fear of homos”.

Do you think the Army guy is afraid of homos? I really doubt that. Instead he’s acting upon his convinctions as a Christian. Is Christianity afraid of homos? no.

The Bible expresses God’s disapproval of basically anything other than hetero marrage.

Its not malice that compells the statement but instead obediance to God.

Now how does a term like “homophobic” address that? It doesn’t. instead it adds to the polarization of the discussion by introducing an even more extreme term than immoral. It’s designed to shut off debate, not engage in one.

That’s why I object to it.

I dont object to objecting to the army guy, but to me, it takes more than rhetorical tactic to do it right,.

By: Pat

Pat — Wed, 14 Mar 2007 11:56:51 +0000

Vince, I disagree. I do agree with you that if a person wants to spew anti-gay venom, they are free to do so. But anyone is also free to call that person homophobic. Free speech works all sorts of ways. In fact, free speech allows anyone to say that anti-gay people shouldn’t be allowed to speak. And it allows people to say that the “[w]ords like’homophobia’ have no place in society,” like you just wrote, even though I believe it curtails free speech.

By: Vince P

Vince P — Wed, 14 Mar 2007 01:16:17 +0000

I’m not that concerned about it.

By: Willy

Willy — Wed, 14 Mar 2007 00:28:15 +0000

Vince, are you trying to be a self-parody or did that happen by mistake?

By: Vince P

Vince P — Wed, 14 Mar 2007 00:15:51 +0000

I’m sick of busybodies who go around monitoring the speech of other people. Words like “homophobia” have no place in a free society.

By: Willy

Willy — Wed, 14 Mar 2007 00:12:39 +0000

What’s your point? Is it that homophobia doesn’t exist, and therefore anyone who uses the term is making an invalid complaint?

By: Pat

Pat — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 21:31:38 +0000

Dan, I’m not a big lover of words as you are, so it doesn’t matter that the term homophobia is used the way it’s intended to be used. No matter what you call it, there is always the danger of overusing it, and have it lose it’s intended meaning.

Regarding Brokeback Mountain/Crash, I suspect it was because of homophobia that Crash won, but there is no way to prove it. Although I am sure that most of the Academy members who voted for Crash thought it was a better movie, I am also sure there are members who did not vote for it simply out of homophobia. Depending on how close the vote was, homophobia could very well have been a factor.

As for my personal opinion, I haven’t seen Crash yet.

By: Peter Hughes

Peter Hughes — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 21:00:01 +0000

No thank you, I gave up meat for Lent. I appreciate the thought anyway.

Regards,
Peter H.

By: markie

markie — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 20:38:19 +0000

rant on pattymelt

By: Peter Hughes

Peter Hughes — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 19:26:21 +0000

Libtrolls are even funnier when they sputter. Just my observation.

Regards,
Peter H.

By: markie

markie — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 18:54:27 +0000

you’re, doncha know.

By: markie

markie — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 18:53:41 +0000

you can censor all you want. doesn’t change the fact that your glad to be relegated to second class citizenship.

By: Peter Hughes

Peter Hughes — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 15:08:12 +0000

#4 – Lower-case-sean is wrong again. (What else is new?)

Ann Coulter has already apologized to the gay community for offending us by likening us to someone like John Edwards. And as a viable representative of such a community, I have accepted her apology on our behalves.

Get over it.

Regards,
Peter H.

By: Peter Hughes

Peter Hughes — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 15:06:57 +0000

#9 – No, you’re not a terrorist. Technically, you are a “useful idiot.”

Regards,
Peter H.

By: markie

markie — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 13:43:43 +0000

oh my, i must be a terrorist. rotf