What is being homophobic?

Abomination

New member
Dec 17, 2012
2,939
0
0
Teshi said:
Abomination said:
You have to explain how a homosexual passes on their biology without stepping outside the confines of being a homosexual. Remember, we are talking about a homosexuality is a NATURAL dead-end when it comes to passing on one's genetic code.
Here's the short version, since it doesn't seem you have much background on the topic of natural selection: the particular individual with the trait doesn't have to pass on their trait through their own reproduction for the trait to be passed on. The trait can be carried unexpressed by siblings and other members of the family group (whether as a recessive gene or combination of genes, or inactivate due to an absence of a triggering environmental factor). Ergo, if siblings of the non-reproducing individual are more likely to survive and reproduce due to the presence of the non-reproducing individual, they can pass the potential for the trait on to the next generation, thus trait can be selected for in a population.
And as I repeat AGAIN.

This is not about passing on "homosexuality" it is about a homosexual passing on THEIR genetic legacy. The homosexual as an INDIVIDUAL.

explain how a homosexual passes on their biology
NOT how a homosexual passes on homosexuality.
 

chikusho

New member
Jun 14, 2011
873
0
0
Abomination said:
We were talking about biological evolution. Not scientific development or social progress.

Aaaaand, biological evolution is based on adaptations to the environment (that is, scientific development or social progress) created by influential people. It all goes hand in hand my friend.

I understand attraction very well. It seems others view distaste towards seeing something as hatred towards that very thing.
I said that you are misunderstanding _an_ attraction, specifically the attraction one or both of the men are feeling towards each other. Basically your mirror neurons are putting yourself in the situation you are perceiving, and you can't make sense of what you're seeing because you find it so fundamentally baffling. A theory for you, in any case.


So.. why does this need to be mentioned at all?
Because you brought it up? Because someone asked me what is negative about homosexuality? I gave the ONLY example I could think of is that it presents a barrier to passing on an individual's genetic legacy. Apparently though that means I must hate homosexuality or have homophobia for pointing out the only potential downside to the practice.[/quote]

Must have missed that line of reasoning then. Sorry if I painted you as a bigot for something that got taken out of context.
 

Teshi

New member
May 8, 2010
84
0
0
Abomination said:
Teshi said:
Abomination said:
You have to explain how a homosexual passes on their biology without stepping outside the confines of being a homosexual. Remember, we are talking about a homosexuality is a NATURAL dead-end when it comes to passing on one's genetic code.
Here's the short version, since it doesn't seem you have much background on the topic of natural selection: the particular individual with the trait doesn't have to pass on their trait through their own reproduction for the trait to be passed on. The trait can be carried unexpressed by siblings and other members of the family group (whether as a recessive gene or combination of genes, or inactivate due to an absence of a triggering environmental factor). Ergo, if siblings of the non-reproducing individual are more likely to survive and reproduce due to the presence of the non-reproducing individual, they can pass the potential for the trait on to the next generation, thus trait can be selected for in a population.
And as I repeat AGAIN.

This is not about passing on "homosexuality" it is about a homosexual passing on THEIR genetic legacy. The homosexual as an INDIVIDUAL.

explain how a homosexual passes on their biology
NOT how a homosexual passes on homosexuality.
If you are thinking about it only in terms of individuals you seriously don't understand how natural selection works.

In any case, all this is on the assumption that homosexual individuals don't reproduce (or that homosexual/homosocial behaviors preclude or inherently interfere with the production and raising of offspring) which is obviously incorrect.

It's really time to give up the "it's unnatural" line of argumentation.
 

Abomination

New member
Dec 17, 2012
2,939
0
0
Teshi said:
If you are thinking about it only in terms of individuals you seriously don't understand how natural selection works.

In any case, all this is on the assumption that homosexual individuals don't reproduce, which is obviously incorrect.
1. In regard to the INDIVIDUAL'S genetic legacy? It works exactly as I say. If they don't reproduce their GENETIC legacy is not passed on because THEY DID NOT REPRODUCE. It ENDS with THEM.

2. I said, and here I am repeating myself AGAIN... it is a BARRIER, not something that 100% prevents reproduction.

chikusho said:
Abomination said:
We were talking about biological evolution. Not scientific development or social progress.

Aaaaand, biological evolution is based on adaptations to the environment (that is, scientific development or social progress) created by influential people. It all goes hand in hand my friend.
The only thing I was talking about was the biological part. Just that ONE individual homosexual's biological legacy. YES there are indirect affects his existence could have had upon society as a whole. But his INDIVIDUAL BIOLOGICAL legacy will CEASE unless he reproduces.

I understand attraction very well. It seems others view distaste towards seeing something as hatred towards that very thing.
I said that you are misunderstanding _an_ attraction, specifically the attraction one or both of the men are feeling towards each other. Basically your mirror neurons are putting yourself in the situation you are perceiving, and you can't make sense of what you're seeing because you find it so fundamentally baffling. A theory for you, in any case.
I understand completely that the individuals in question find males to be sexually attractive. Here's the thing, I find males to be the exact opposite of that. I find them to be sexually UNattractive... and that makes me homophobic! (apparently)


Must have missed that line of reasoning then. Sorry if I painted you as a bigot for something that got taken out of context.
I must have quantified it enough times stating that homosexuality is not harmful to society, to individuals to cats and dogs and little babies enough times to STILL be labelled as a bigot.
 

Fdzzaigl

New member
Mar 31, 2010
822
0
0
The reasoning that evolution would somehow select against homosexuality has been proven wrong in the first place, that premise is invalid.
Read this: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13674-evolution-myths-natural-selection-cannot-explain-homosexuality.html

Evolution is not sentient, evolution doesn't hold any moral judgement, evolution does not care about whether we pass on our genetic potential or not, evolution does not care whether something is beneficial for us or not.

Social darwinism is so "passé" people.
 

k-ossuburb

New member
Jul 31, 2009
1,312
0
0
To be frankly honest, I'm not keen on anyone making out near me in public. It's uncomfortable and puts a complete halt to all conversation. I don't mind it in fictionalised form, like porn, because it's fiction and they've got editors, directors and special lighting to make it less gross. Plus I don't have to talk to the people having sex in my computer.

Straight or gay, it's a little rude. It's even worse when it's right in front of me and I don't even know them, because now two strangers have somehow managed to make me a third wheel in their relationship and I'm stuck there trying to ignore it and wishing my train would hurry up and get here so I can sit as far away from these people as possible.

So, if you're going to make out in public and I'm stuck there in a corner with nowhere else to look, I should be allowed to join in, I'm not going to be an awkward spectator, if you're going to do this while I'm stuck here then I should at least get the common courtesy of grabbing both of your dangle parts.
 

Delicious Anathema

New member
Aug 25, 2009
261
0
0
I think homos are disgusting and should seek help, but I have no choice to tolerate or avert my eyes at something I want unseen. Also, adoption by them makes me sick to the stomach.

It's sad that whenever people talk about finding a cure or a gene it's classified as homophobia. Judging by the amount of suicide in homos, one would think a cure would be welcome, or maybe some people like to do things nature intended.

Anyway, lesbians are sexy but I too think it's wrong, I'm openly hypocrite in that respect.

A couple making out in public is uncomfortable anyway, regardless of who it is, I have been fortunate enough to not catch men kissing though.
 

Alandoril

New member
Jul 19, 2010
532
0
0
Delicious Anathema said:
I think homos are disgusting and should seek help, but I have no choice to tolerate or avert my eyes at something I want unseen. Also, adoption by them makes me sick to the stomach.

It's sad that whenever people talk about finding a cure or a gene it's classified as homophobia. Judging by the amount of suicide in homos, one would think a cure would be welcome, or maybe some people like to do things nature intended.

Anyway, lesbians are sexy but I too think it's wrong, I'm openly hypocrite in that respect.

A couple making out in public is uncomfortable anyway, regardless of who it is, I have been fortunate enough to not catch men kissing though.
Perhaps homosexuals kill themselves because of people like you and the environment of baseless hate and fear you perpetuate?
 

generals3

New member
Mar 25, 2009
1,198
0
0
Fdzzaigl said:
The reasoning that evolution would somehow select against homosexuality has been proven wrong in the first place, that premise is invalid.
Read this: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13674-evolution-myths-natural-selection-cannot-explain-homosexuality.html

Evolution is not sentient, evolution doesn't hold any moral judgement, evolution does not care about whether we pass on our genetic potential or not, evolution does not care whether something is beneficial for us or not.

Social darwinism is so "passé" people.
I find it funny they talk about Bisexuality to counter an argument about homosexuality.
 

Fuzzed

New member
Dec 27, 2012
185
0
0
Homophobia is just like this thing that commonly occurs in states that are colored red during election times
 

Kartoffelmos

New member
Feb 8, 2010
21
0
0
As a bi woman, I would be very uncomfortable showing any kind of affection for my girlfriend around some of the people in this thread. I'd like to say "get over it and don't be an asshole", but I'm afraid it'd fall on deaf ears.
 

NemotheElvenPanda

New member
Aug 29, 2012
152
0
0
Kartoffelmos said:
As a bi woman, I would be very uncomfortable showing any kind of affection for my girlfriend around some of the people in this thread. I'd like to say "get over it and don't be an asshole", but I'm afraid it'd fall on deaf ears.
Ditto as a gay man. I have lots of friends that are straight, and we kid about sex and stuff all the time without any hangups, they accept me 100%, but when I'm not around them, I might as well be in the closet. All the guys here may say that they're not homophobic or whatever, but something tells me otherwise.
 

repeating integers

New member
Mar 17, 2010
3,315
0
0
Delicious Anathema said:
I think homos are disgusting and should seek help, but I have no choice to tolerate or avert my eyes at something I want unseen. Also, adoption by them makes me sick to the stomach.

It's sad that whenever people talk about finding a cure or a gene it's classified as homophobia. Judging by the amount of suicide in homos, one would think a cure would be welcome, or maybe some people like to do things nature intended.

Anyway, lesbians are sexy but I too think it's wrong, I'm openly hypocrite in that respect.

A couple making out in public is uncomfortable anyway, regardless of who it is, I have been fortunate enough to not catch men kissing though.
Do you hate homosexuals just because you think they're icky? Is it religious? Some biological or sociological reason?
 

101flyboy

New member
Jul 11, 2010
649
0
0
Abomination said:
101flyboy said:
chikusho said:
Your junk doesn't magically stop working just because you prefer to stick it in a dude rather than a girl.
You can father/give birth to a child just the same no matter what you're turned on by.
Committing a "non-homosexual act" doesn't change the homosexuality part of the people participating.
By your logic "not wanting to have a child" is more unnatural than rubbing your genitals on someone of the same sex.
There is no logic with that individual. If you go through the posts he has been making, it's clear that logic is not in the script.
You'll both notice I said 'barrier' not 'makes it impossible'. It adds a complication that can easily be overcome, I mentioned medical procedures along side engaging in heterosexual fornication.

But sure, flyboy, let's call someone having an opinion that differs from yours "illogical".
The problem is, you don't know what you're talking about, you're super defensive, and you're making categorical statements on something you have little understanding of. I'm not trying to be rude, but you know very little to nothing about evolution. So it's best if you didn't speak as if you did, because it's really a bad imprint on you.
 

101flyboy

New member
Jul 11, 2010
649
0
0
NemotheElvenPanda said:
Kartoffelmos said:
As a bi woman, I would be very uncomfortable showing any kind of affection for my girlfriend around some of the people in this thread. I'd like to say "get over it and don't be an asshole", but I'm afraid it'd fall on deaf ears.
Ditto as a gay man. I have lots of friends that are straight, and we kid about sex and stuff all the time without any hangups, they accept me 100%, but when I'm not around them, I might as well be in the closet. All the guys here may say that they're not homophobic or whatever, but something tells me otherwise.
Given that most of the guys here who have said they don't like same-sex kissing is because they find homosexuality unnatural, I don't blame you. I wonder if posters like Abomination will read this and see that their biases are actually pretty obvious for any gay person to spot and that their so-called tolerance really isn't enough to make anyone feel comfortable around him, or others with his views. And that's sad.

This thread also represents why there are events like Gaymercon. Why be around people who don't truly accept me 100% when I can associate with the people in my community and the millions of straight allies out there who are legitimately supportive? Just makes you realize that if you're gay, you have to pick and choose your friends very wisely.
 

101flyboy

New member
Jul 11, 2010
649
0
0
Kroxile said:
Abomination said:
101flyboy said:
But sure, flyboy, let's call someone having an opinion that differs from yours "illogical".
Thats all he's done all throughout this thread really.

The part where he called me patronizing without actually knowing anything about me or my homosexual friends is hilarious in itself really.

He's a hypocrite.
The fact you need to run to "my homosexual friends" to defend your homophobic viewpoint says enough. Am I a hypocrite for that? I don't think so.
 

101flyboy

New member
Jul 11, 2010
649
0
0
I will say the majority of people here don't appear to be completely irrational, suffer from internalized homophobia, or are simply hateful. Most people seem to realize being disgusted by two guys kissing is too far and they have no real issue with it or only slight discomfort they can easily get over. It's sort of like how it is in everyday society. Most people aren't completely backwards but there is a large and loud enough minority that is, that make our lives as LGBTQ persons living hell.

It's not fair. To the minority here disgusted by homosexuality or saying homosexuality is unnatural, you're not going to get a free pass because you "have gay friends". If your gay friends knew what you truly thought of them, they wouldn't be your friends anymore. You're not accepting. You're tolerant. You're respectful. You do not accept same-sex love as OK, as normal, as natural. That is what being accepting is. Not panicking when two guys kiss. Not considering it disgusting. Slight discomfort I can understand because it's something you're not used to seeing in society on average, but slight discomfort isn't something that is going to cause a person to turn their heads and make dirty faces.

You are in the wrong. If you have these negative views, you are in the wrong. That's the long and short of it. Why don't you look at the dozens of straight people on this very page not really bothered at all by same-sex kissing and homosexuality in general and start taking notes. Get over yourselves.
 

Abomination

New member
Dec 17, 2012
2,939
0
0
boots said:
Abomination said:
First of all, it speaks volumes that when someone asked you what is wrong with homosexuality, you found it so very difficult to say that there is nothing wrong with homosexuality, and instead went searching for all this very, very tenuous stuff that is based on what you've heard in passing about how evolution works.

But even if we accept that "a HOMOSEXUAL cannot PASS ON their INDIVIDUAL genetic legacy", you've still yet to explain why this is a negative thing. It's certainly not "wrong" from an evolutionary standpoint, because evolution DGAF. Evolution does not work on an individual basis.

You've argued that it's wrong because the individual might have had a rare and wonderful genetic trait that doesn't get passed on to future generations, but by the same token they might just have easily been carrying a recessive gene for a horrific birth defect or a life-threatening illness. Therefore homosexuality might just easily be "positive" as "negative", if you really want to go down the road of making value judgements about genetic traits that we don't even fully understand yet.

And above all, if you want to drop your statement about human beings carrying some deep, mysterious, inborn knowledge that homosexuality is unnatural and is not how we are supposed to work (I would if I were you), then you've yet to show how any of this is relevant to the topic of homophobia. Other than to justify it, of course.
Someone asked me a question IGNORING morality. I am not going to respond in a moral way as it was asked for no morality to be involved.

It is entirely possible that a homosexual will not have children because of their homosexuality. Having children is considered - by many - to be one of life's callings. Nobody is FORCED to have children but it has added a complication to the life of a homosexual if they WANTED to have children.

101flyboy said:
The problem is, you don't know what you're talking about, you're super defensive, and you're making categorical statements on something you have little understanding of. I'm not trying to be rude, but you know very little to nothing about evolution. So it's best if you didn't speak as if you did, because it's really a bad imprint on you.
Apparently stating that if someone doesn't have children means their personal genetic seed will not be passed on is an incorrect statement. Essentially I said "If you don't have children you don't have children." I was not going to get into the minefield that is evolutionary opinion and I most certainly did not speak of how HOMOSEXUALITY itself is passed from ancestors to child.

But you are determined that I am homophobic. You like to remind me every time despite not actually giving a clear and concise reason why a thought of revulsion that is also generated when one sees two ugly people performing the same thing in very specific circumstances, not acted upon, is homophobic. Do not say "I already explained it" because you did not. Explain it -again- in words that take into account the very specific circumstance and while you're at it realise that you're condemning someone as homophobic for thought crime.
 

The Wooster

King Snap
Jul 15, 2008
15,305
0
0
Aaron Sylvester said:
Okay firstly let me clear up where I'm coming from, I'm your typical heterosexual male aged in his 20's. And I have a dilemma - you see, I absolutely love the sight of two women kissing or getting it on. It's rather arousing, if not simply plain damn sexy as hell.
But the sight of two GUYS kissing makes my brain have a fucking seizure. I can't help it.
This is perfectly natural and acceptable. The thing about acceptance that a lot of people seem to miss is that you don't have to like what a person does, you just have to accept their right to do it.

As for the whole "guys like lesbians" thing, well that's not entirely true. What a lot of men like is two women who are attractive to men making out, they can still be quite hostile to those who aren't "lipstick lesbians."

Kartoffelmos said:
As a bi woman, I would be very uncomfortable showing any kind of affection for my girlfriend around some of the people in this thread. I'd like to say "get over it and don't be an asshole", but I'm afraid it'd fall on deaf ears.
Because they'd disapprove or because they'd break out the popcorn?