HOMOPHOBIA

[Ken_Kaneki]

For the sake of clarity for everyone in this thread, why are Hannah's comments homophobic?

Disclaimer: this is NOT me saying they aren't homophobic.

It is homophobic because that whole comment she included religious people that clearly have no love for people that like the opposite gender. Why would she include that if she wasn’t being homophobic? Why would she also include all black people if she wasn’t racist? I’m not the brightest person but the context of what she said is crystal clear. Why? Because everyone knows Luka is gay and everyone knows I’m black….she meant what she said but I find it hilarious she’s not standing on it. Please someone correct me if I’m wrong but isn’t this gaslighting?

 

[Deleted member 263960]

It is homophobic because that whole comment she included religious people that clearly have no love for people that like the opposite gender. Why would she include that if she wasn’t being homophobic? Why would she also include all black people if she wasn’t racist? I’m not the brightest person but the context of what she said is crystal clear. Why? Because everyone knows Luka is gay and everyone knows I’m black….she meant what she said but I find it hilarious she’s not standing on it. Please someone correct me if I’m wrong but isn’t this gaslighting?

HI Ken.

I was going to say this same thing to Fin, but in all the fireworks, no one noticed the user didn't say "all gays" or "all LGBTQ" I noticed that right away. No one else seems to have.

 

[Finn2.0]

HI Ken.

I was going to say this same thing to Fin, but in all the fireworks, no one noticed the user didn't say "all gays" or "all LGBTQ" I noticed that right away. No one else seems to have.

Come on, how pedantic do you want to be. Her post starts with "Gay people will never get my support...". So she didn't say all gay people, but she didn't say certain gay people either.

 

[Ken_Kaneki]

Her comment was very disgusting boss. I’m sorry to say this but if she said this to me in person or to anyone I cared about that’s clearly gay words would not be said at all.

 

[Inkandtatts]

I stated in OP the question. I was looking for a definition we could all agree on.

That's fair enough but then you delete a comment posted by another user where he says it's already defined.

This thread- doesn't involve race.

No but it's a good equivalent to help you on your learning journey

None of this thread has anything to do with being a UM. As a user, I want to know what the definition is, not a grab bag of definitions from all over " goo gle"

How does that ^^ fit with this...

In fact, Im looking at a post by you, where you suggested to all UMS a definition of Homophobia here would be useful. This thread, is my contribution to your suggestion.

That suggestion was made in the hopes that the other UMs could educate you because you clearly don't understand the concept.

It's either to do with being a UM or it isn't - which is it please? You've given two different versions in this post alone

This thread, is my thread, and the topic is clearly spelled out. Its also in the General Forum. Feel free to have anyone you want delete Hanna's post on her page. I declined because in my opinion, it's simply her opinion.

Just because you or others don't like a user, or because a history of chat dramas, does'nt mean an objective onlooker would agree they are not entitled to their opinions.

What does this have to do with homophobia? It appears to me that it's more to do with your personal views and your inability to be objective. If you want to discuss specific users then feel free but don't then complain that things are off topic.

Its only relevant as Its a timely example - there are a lot of people who feel anything they say that , in one way or another, that is deemed"derogatory" to LGBTQ will have them unfairly labelled, attacked and such.

I don't understand what this means but you are the very reason many people expressing certain views find themselves having comments made to them which you perceive to be "attacks" because you enable them in their homophobic/transphobic comments.


@Ken_Kaneki 's post came up just as I was replying so to avoid double posting:

Why would she include that if she wasn’t being homophobic? Why would she also include all black people if she wasn’t racist?

^^ EXACTLY this!!!!! Using a personal characteristic in an attack is homophobic/racist/etc.

Someone who annoys you becuase they pull out in front of you at a junction when you're driving:

You're an idiot! = fine
You gay idiot = not fine
You n-word idiot = not fine
You lesbian idiot - not fine
You old idiot = not fine

I was going to say this same thing to Fin, but in all the fireworks, no one noticed the user didn't say "all gays" or "all LGBTQ" I noticed that right away. No one else seems to have

See my comments above. Ken gets it. You simply don't, you old fool (see - bringing age into it = ageist). "You fool" while insulting isn't any kind of "phobic" or "ist" but throwing in the age bit is. Saying "you gay fool" would be a homophobic comment, saying "you Asian fool" would be a racist comment, saying "you psychotic fool" to a schizophrenic when you know they have schizophrenia would be wrong too.

Are we getting any closer to you understanding homophobia yet?

 

[Deleted member 263960]

And homophobia is nothing but a series of opinions. It isn't some hard and fast fact written in the annuls of time. I can simply express my homophobia by something as simple as giving a negative reaction to every user who doesn't identify as straight, or I can express it with outdated opinions posted on my wall.

If you're looking for one clear, succinct definition of homophobia, you're not going to find it because it comes in many forms.

There is a reason certain Forums users are disliked. If we're going to keep using Hannah as an example, and I don't see why we shouldn't because you specifically used a snippet of her post in your original post in this thread, then her opinions on things like sexuality are one of the many reasons she is so unliked. Many unbiased onlookers can clearly see what she posted was both homophobic and racist. Yes, it was indeed her opinion, but it doesn't change the fact that it was intended to belittle the LGBTQ community.

The problem arises when certain things are action and certain things aren't. You claim Hannah is being targeted simply because she's disliked. This is something that has been directed at you in the past, with claims made that you action people based on favouritism. Again, as a clear example, you felt that Hannah's post didn't violate any terms and didn't action it. Yet, I made a comment saying Princessa was having a manic episode, and it was edited within minutes to remove the word manic. I'm not sure if you were the one to make the edit on my post, so please correct me if I'm mistaken.

But it seems incredibly counterproductive for my comment to be seen as problematic, when someone can generalise and insult both the LGBTQ community and the black community in a single sentence, and this be left alone on the basis of it being an opinion.

actually you gave a definition that made the most sense to me, that Ive seen, here on this site. If no one can rationally look at a friggin sentence, leave out the "who" and give give their perspectives like adults without it widening to a shitpile. No wonder there is confusion.

Im defending nothing. I simply asked a question that people are afraid to ask here.

 

[Deleted member 307803]

HI Ken.

I was going to say this same thing to Fin, but in all the fireworks, no one noticed the user didn't say "all gays" or "all LGBTQ" I noticed that right away. No one else seems to have.

Wow, now the debate is going to get rich.
Because in my opinion, racism, homophobia and transphobia are linked, due to the same history of struggle of minority groups.
For example, when black people were ostracized during apartheid in South Africa (racism) and the USA. And when all gays were ostracized because of AIDS (homophobia).
This discussion has everything to become interesting...

 

[Deleted member 263960]

Her comment was very disgusting boss. I’m sorry to say this but if she said this to me in person or to anyone I cared about that’s clearly gay words would not be said at all.

I get that ken no worries. I was just picking up on the fact no one noticed "ALL LGBTQ" or gays or whoever, wasn't actaully said

edit: no need to be sorry for saying what you think.

 

[Inkandtatts]

actually you gave a definition that made the most sense to me, that Ive seen, here on this site. If no one can rationally look at a friggin sentence, leave out the "who" and give give their perspectives like adults without it widening to a shitpile. No wonder there is confusion.

You should probably not refer to leaving out the "who" when you openly defend and enable certain users here that are known for their views, particularly making this comment in a thread about homophpbia

I simply asked a question that people are afraid to ask here.

You asked a question which didn't need to be asked because people generally understand what homophobia is. If you genuinely don't understand, this should have been a private conversation between you and your fellow UMs, to agree a set of standards.

I suspect the truth of the matter though, is that you don't agree with your fellow UMs on what homophobia is and the purpose of this thread is to reference it in any contentious discussions you have with them when people report homophobia.

 

[Deleted member 263960]

You should probably not refer to leaving out the "who" when you openly defend and enable certain users here that are known for their views, particularly making this comment in a thread about homophpbia


You asked a question which didn't need to be asked because people generally understand what homophobia is. If you genuinely don't understand, this should have been a private conversation between you and your fellow UMs, to agree a set of standards.

I suspect the truth of the matter though, is that you don't agree with your fellow UMs on what homophobia is and the purpose of this thread is to reference it in any contentious discussions you have with them when people report homophobia.

its ok to ask questions. You can "suspect" anything you want.

 

[Ken_Kaneki]

Also NOT choosing sides with this either. This happened in real life. At my boyfriend’s job he works night shift, so that shift has three supervisors. Two females and a male supervisor who is gay. One of the female supervisors who is also the head supervisor did not like the male supervisor clearly because of her slick remarks towards him due to him being gay. One day the female head superviser called the male supervisor in front of EVERYONE (the whole office) the derogatory gay slur (the F word). Afterwards a couple days went by and there was no sight of the head supervisor. So my boyfriend received word from his other coworkers and the male supervisor that the female head supervisor was fired. Why? Because she called him the F word that’s a derogatory slur towards gays. That male supervisor reported her for that because he’s gay and of course he took offense to that word. Now my boyfriend got into it with a woman last month and she called him the same derogatory word (F word) and she was not fired for that. Why? Because she’s cool with the mid shift supervisor….

 

[purplerose]

im not sure If my post is still here or in the other thread or deleted as a lot of crappiery took place this morning. so I will state what I said again. Last year ( or the year before I'm not quite certain) Hannah went around forums/chat claiming she was a lesbian. from todays comments and her standpoint today. that announcement was just a troll/dig at the LGBTQ+ community with the intent to harm/cause discourse. shes entitled to her views, however to be going around for a year (or more) with that being out there makes this seems more of a way of life than an off handed/not thought out opinion. the hate is deep rooted. off hand or not, she did it with intent to harm the community.

For the sake of clarity for everyone in this thread, why are Hannah's comments homophobic?

Disclaimer: this is NOT me saying they aren't homophobic.

+ s/s to post in other threads

 

[Deleted member 263960]

I've seen enough examples of homophobia that you refused to deal with, that other UMs educated you on - so I'll say it as it is - it's a fact not a suspicion. I'm glad you're trying to learn though, that's at least something. You're free to participate in my thread in the GLB forums when examples are posted of homophobia and we can talk through real-life examples to show why they are homophobic. It might be useful for you.

Feel free to link them here. I will say, its very normal, for people to have different opinions who work together. UMS wont always agree That's a good thing, because it means they are actually thinking. but again, that or your "suspicions" has nothing to do with this thread.

 

[Inkandtatts]

Feel free to link them here too. I will say, it’s very normal, for people to have different opinions who work together. UMS wont always agree That's a good thing, because it means they are actually thinking. but again, that has nothing to do with this thread.

I’d rather not go to the effort of getting too detailed in this thread when I’ve seen evidence of you deleting comments that you don’t support, which is why I made another thread.

It’s not about whether UMs agree or not. On something like homophobia, in the same way as racism or ageism or anything else that targets people with specific characteristics, there should be a united approach. As much as you don’t like to see the correlation with racism, there would be no disagreement with UMs if a black user had racist comments made to them. Comments based on sexuality should be no different.

 

[Deleted member 307803]

I’d rather not go to the effort of getting too detailed in this thread when I’ve seen evidence of you deleting comments that you don’t support, which is why I made another thread.

It’s not about whether UMs agree or not. On something like homophobia, in the same way as racism or ageism or anything else that targets people with specific characteristics, there should be a united approach. As much as you don’t like to see the correlation with racism, there would be no disagreement with UMs if a black user had racist comments made to them. Comments based on sexuality should be no different.

I agree with you on this. I think it is impossible to build a civilized space without respecting the space of others.
For example, if the User in question knows that the space is occupied by blacks, gays, trans people and other minorities who will feel offended by certain personal opinions directed at groups and individuals of people, why say them? If you disrespect the space of others, obviously, you will receive retaliation for it. It is no different from a Zionist who enters a pro-Palestine demonstration raising the Israeli flag. Obviously, this Zionist will make many Palestinians angry because he disrespected their space. And it is no different in an internet forum, if your opinion will offend certain minorities, just don't say it.

 

[Inkandtatts]

I agree with you on this. I think it is impossible to build a civilized space without respecting the space of others.
For example, if the User in question knows that the space is occupied by blacks, gays, trans people and other minorities who will feel offended by certain personal opinions directed at groups and individuals of people, why say them? If you disrespect the space of others, obviously, you will receive retaliation for it. It is no different from a Zionist who enters a pro-Palestine demonstration raising the Israeli flag. Obviously, this Zionist will make many Palestinians angry because he disrespected their space. And it is no different in an internet forum, if your opinion will offend certain minorities, just don't say it.

Precisely this too!

 

[Deleted member 263960]

I’d rather not go to the effort of getting too detailed in this thread when I’ve seen evidence of you deleting comments that you don’t support, which is why I made another thread.

off topics will go correct.

 

[IamDave]

On topics to

Fyi this has been moved/deleted from another thread

 

[Deleted member 263960]

It can be considered homophobic because it relegates all members of the LGBTQ community to a harmful stereotype and implies they all share characteristics because of their sexuality.

^This I can understand. Sidestepping the fact no one said "All Members" - Id like to ask a couple of questions and make a point or two. ( Im sorry I am needing to use your post-)

You seem to suggest- that generalizing a group= homophobia. Am I correct? (if not please say so)

You seem to suggest- that generalizing a group- by calling a group, in whole or in part "judgemental" is a "harmful stereotype" ?

You seem to suggest (again if im wrong please say so) that if a protected group does exibit "judgemental " behaviour they are in some way or should be, sheilded from that critisism? Would it matter if the stereotype could be shown to be true/accurrate?

Someone wanted to add race to muddy the water- reluctantly ill ask a hypothetical-

Someone says " BLM is too militant" or something like that- would that be a harmful stereotype?

 

[Deleted member 263960]

Come on, how pedantic do you want to be. Her post starts with "Gay people will never get my support...". So she didn't say all gay people, but she didn't say certain gay people either.

The reason I picked up on "all" was because of this post you made:

It can be considered homophobic because it relegates all members of the LGBTQ community to a harmful stereotype and implies they all share characteristics because of their sexuality.

EDITED🤧 added bold