Atheist Homophobia: Oxymoronic?

smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Atheist Homophobia: Oxymoronic?

So the recent masturbation post--and a few other things that won't come as much of a surprise to anyone--made me curious about something. I'm surprised there's so much homophobia in here. I'm not saying that there's more of it here than in any other random forum, or that it's the same amount, I'm not even saying there isn't LESS of it here than other places. What I'm saying is that I'm surprised there isn't less of it here than I've noticed. 

As much as I think it's absurd coming from theists, at least I can understand what they think their reasons are for feeling that way: "cuz gawd sez so." That's good enough for them. I'm used to it coming from religious people who've been indoctrinated into a way of thinking that makes them feel safe. But from an atheist, especially someone who concerns himself with the rational facts (I think my use of the male pronoun it's understandable), I can't really imagine what could justify it. I'd like to understand how that works. It seems somewhat oxymoronic to me.

I don't buy it that the reason I'm not freaked out by women flirting with me or flirting with them back (innocently), is because that's "expected" behavior. I know plenty of gay men who'd shriek in terror at the thought of a vagina, and I know why. Because a lot of us come from backgrounds where our identities are in question or at risk: "have you tried NOT being a mutant?" This is even more acute for lesbians, from my experience. So along those lines, my first inclination is to suspect it derives from some ingrained insecurity. I'm comfortable with who I am, and flirting--even having relations TMI--never made me straight, it's just harmless fun.

I'm also not making this post to attack anyone for being uncomfortable with teh buttsecks. But I'd like to ask the rational, atheist straight guys in here who are squeamish about this stuff: if not for "religious morality" reasons, then why? It's been my impression that most of the people in here are unconcerned about what others (namely the religious majority) think about who they are (being perfectly willing to tell a stranger, etc.), so why is this different? In other words, "I don't like being thought of as something I'm not" isn't really valid if you don't care what others think, first of all, and secondly, are secure with who you are.


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2927
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
I don't know why your are

I don't know why your are surprised...homophobia is a cultural trait, and most here were raised in homophobic cultures.  Atheism doesn't have anything to do with that.

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.


Marquis
atheist
Marquis's picture
Posts: 776
Joined: 2009-12-23
User is offlineOffline
smartypants wrote:I'm

smartypants wrote:

I'm surprised there's so much homophobia in here.

 

Have you ever considered whether a good deal of homophobia actually might be self-fulfilling prophecies?

Most of the rational people that I know doesn't give a good god damn about homo hither or hetero thither; they consider it flagrantly irrelevant for all practical purposes who and where, how and why, you prefer to do this or that, in whatever direction, for however reason, with whomever. It's a private matter - and people just don't like to be forced to relate to other people's private matters, much less their private parts. By proudly stating "I am gay!" - as if that is some god damned badge of honour - you are in pragmatic effect demanding attention directed towards your sexuality. It's just stupid. Compare it to me suddenly stating "I like that my girlfriend sucks my cock!".  What are you supposed to say to that? "Uh... okay. Whatever." It is, in the vernacular, a bit more information than anyone really needs. You have to be realistic and consider the fact that most people are quite unimaginative, clumsy and boring in their sex lives, and they have no framework of reference for whatever it means to be gay. But they get visions. And it makes them uncomfortable. Not because you're gay - most people don't give a shit about that - but because you're making a point out of your sexuality. And people just don't know how to relate to that.

For the record, I am not saying that "you" (or anyone else on this forum) are doing that... only that something like this perhaps may occur every now and then. I am personally of the mind that sexual freedom is the only real foundation for political freedom; and it takes something quite extraordinary to raise my eyebrow when it comes to exotic sexual preferences. But you have to be realistic. A small victory here and there is better political currency than a big conflict with uncertain consequences. There was an old school motto in the world of sadomasochism: "Don't upset the villagers." Those are wise words to think a little about.

 

"The idea of God is the sole wrong for which I cannot forgive mankind." (Alphonse Donatien De Sade)

http://www.kinkspace.com


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
mellestad wrote:I don't know

mellestad wrote:

I don't know why your are surprised...homophobia is a cultural trait, and most here were raised in homophobic cultures.  Atheism doesn't have anything to do with that.

Most were raised in religious cultures, also, that didn't prevent anyone here from actively rejecting it. I don't understand your point.


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Marquis wrote:smartypants

Marquis wrote:

smartypants wrote:

I'm surprised there's so much homophobia in here.

 

Have you ever considered whether a good deal of homophobia actually might be self-fulfilling prophecies?

Most of the rational people that I know doesn't give a good god damn about homo hither or hetero thither; they consider it flagrantly irrelevant for all practical purposes who and where, how and why, you prefer to do this or that, in whatever direction, for however reason, with whomever. It's a private matter - and people just don't like to be forced to relate to other people's private matters, much less their private parts. By proudly stating "I am gay!" - as if that is some god damned badge of honour - you are in pragmatic effect demanding attention directed towards your sexuality. It's just stupid. Compare it to me suddenly stating "I like that my girlfriend sucks my cock!".  What are you supposed to say to that? "Uh... okay. Whatever." It is, in the vernacular, a bit more information than anyone really needs. You have to be realistic and consider the fact that most people are quite unimaginative, clumsy and boring in their sex lives, and they have no framework of reference for whatever it means to be gay. But they get visions. And it makes them uncomfortable. Not because you're gay - most people don't give a shit about that - but because you're making a point out of your sexuality. And people just don't know how to relate to that.

For the record, I am not saying that "you" (or anyone else on this forum) are doing that... only that something like this perhaps may occur every now and then. I am personally of the mind that sexual freedom is the only real foundation for political freedom; and it takes something quite extraordinary to raise my eyebrow when it comes to exotic sexual preferences. But you have to be realistic. A small victory here and there is better political currency than a big conflict with uncertain consequences. There was an old school motto in the world of sadomasochism: "Don't upset the villagers." Those are wise words to think a little about.

Well, the problem here is that gay people ARE "forced to relate." Every last TV show, every movie, every billboard, every song on the radio, EVERYTHING forces heterosexism down our throats in an endless barrage. The straight couple holding hands and making out in public places where we would be condemned for doing same is just the icing on the cake.

I, personally, do not make what I do in the privacy of my own bedroom anyone else's business. In fact, I feel obligated to regulate my behavior to the standards of the people I deal with so as not to alienate them--a burden of behavior, btw, that straight people are not confronted with. But straight people assert their heterosexuality in subtle and not-so-subtle ways--whether consciously or subconciously--every moment of my day. Personally, I don't see the difference.


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
Just because someone is an

Just because someone is an atheist doesn't mean they'll be understanding or permissive of the ways other people live. Personally I think random and senseless bigotry is part of the spice of life. It makes the world a more interesting place. Would you rather the world were full of slender, enthusiastic, young catamites flaunting their insatiable orifices impishly and straddling bodybuilders like pommel horses? Pic related:

 

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5098
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Last night

 

At a bar a man called Bret tried to pick me up. As he was going on with it I thought to myself 'listen to you mate - we're just completely different'. Not that this adds anything to conversation particularly. I guess what I mean is that it's hard to understand where other people are coming from if you're not able to empathise with them. I don't know what it's like to be gay. I can tell myself things about it and have a momentary understanding but I can't feel gay. What you say is interesting, smarty. I dunno. It couldn't be easy - being restricted in terms of doing what is natural to you - things straights just go ahead and do.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Conor Wilson
Posts: 451
Joined: 2008-01-07
User is offlineOffline
smartypants, I've gotta ask...

...homophobia?  What homophobia?  I've never felt threatened or dehumanized here.

 

Really, I mean it: what homophobia?

 

Conor


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5098
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
There have been some folks tossing off

Conor Wilson wrote:

...homophobia?  What homophobia?  I've never felt threatened or dehumanized here.

 

Really, I mean it: what homophobia?

 

Conor

 

About gays over on the wanking thread. I think the main guy was just being a pain in the arse and the other one was being misunderstood/over-read and he clarifed properly enough. But there were some decidedly harsh things said in a few places. It should be pointed out that the elders over there quickly established order and everyone loves each other again and apparently in new and enticing ways, if some of the posts come true...

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5486
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Let's see here: Homophobia:

Let's see here:

 

Homophobia: The hatred and bigotry against homosexuals.

 

Atheism: A lack of belief in God

 

 

 

I don't see the oxymoron.

 

 

 


v4ultingbassist
Science Freak
v4ultingbassist's picture
Posts: 601
Joined: 2009-12-04
User is offlineOffline
Yeah I was gonna say... I

Yeah I was gonna say... I haven't seen much at all.  If you've ever seen it from Brian37, it's sarcastic; he is not homophobic but is making fun of those that are.  That's really the only instance I've seen, outside of the jerking off thread.


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Gauche wrote:Just because

Gauche wrote:

Just because someone is an atheist doesn't mean they'll be understanding or permissive of the ways other people live. Personally I think random and senseless bigotry is part of the spice of life. It makes the world a more interesting place. Would you rather the world were full of slender, enthusiastic, young catamites flaunting their insatiable orifices impishly and straddling bodybuilders like pommel horses? Pic related:

 

People with differing backgrounds and experiences and opinions undoubtedly make this world a more interesting place to live. Bigots, on the other hand, make the world a far more ugly place to be for a great many people. Your assessment of the hedonism I expect is also insulting and childish, by the way.


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Cpt_pineapple wrote:Let's

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

Let's see here:

 

Homophobia: The hatred and bigotry against homosexuals.

 

Atheism: A lack of belief in God

 

 

 

I don't see the oxymoron.

Um, you seem like one of the more thoughtful folks in here, and one that I respect, but seriously...did you even read the post? 


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
v4ultingbassist wrote:Yeah I

v4ultingbassist wrote:

Yeah I was gonna say... I haven't seen much at all.  If you've ever seen it from Brian37, it's sarcastic; he is not homophobic but is making fun of those that are.  That's really the only instance I've seen, outside of the jerking off thread.

I'm not really interested in debating whether Brian is or isn't. That wasn't really the point of my post. Nor was it whether you "think" you've seen it or not.


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Conor Wilson

Conor Wilson wrote:

...homophobia?  What homophobia?  I've never felt threatened or dehumanized here.

 

Really, I mean it: what homophobia?

 

Conor

If you can't see it, I'm not going to burst your bubble. Carry on.


RatDog
atheistSilver Member
Posts: 562
Joined: 2008-11-14
User is offlineOffline
I have to admit that

I have to admit that sexuality in general makes me a bit uncomfortable.  I would probably feel better about it if I was actually getting some myself. 


v4ultingbassist
Science Freak
v4ultingbassist's picture
Posts: 601
Joined: 2009-12-04
User is offlineOffline
smartypants

smartypants wrote:

v4ultingbassist wrote:

Yeah I was gonna say... I haven't seen much at all.  If you've ever seen it from Brian37, it's sarcastic; he is not homophobic but is making fun of those that are.  That's really the only instance I've seen, outside of the jerking off thread.

I'm not really interested in debating whether Brian is or isn't. That wasn't really the point of my post. Nor was it whether you "think" you've seen it or not.

 

Except that you said you were surprised by the amount of homophobia here.  I'm surprised you found that because I haven't.  I just threw the brian thing out there because that's all I've seen that could be construed as homophobic (with the exception of our lovely visitor in the jerkoff thread).  You made a point about homophobia here, and I responded that I don't see it.  I think this is on-topic.

 

And I agree with Cpt.  Atheism and homophobia are unrelated.  Have you seen the politics threads?  The label 'atheist' is pretty much useless as any type of descriptor for anything other than religion. 

 

Now, as far as a straight guy's opinion regarding homosexuality, I have no problems with it.  One way that I can see people feeling justified for thinking homosexuality wrong is that successful procreation can't occur naturally between two people of the same gender.  I think this is a moot point given how procreation is no longer a central aspect of our evolution, so to say.  I also understand that telling someone they made a choice when they didn't is erroneous.  I know that gay people don't just decide to be gay.  Some people just don't get that, because, like you said, it is something that they don't understand so they are uncomfortable about it.  But atheism and homophobia really don't have a connection.


ClockCat
ClockCat's picture
Posts: 2265
Joined: 2009-03-26
User is offlineOffline
:o

 what is this masturbation thread people keep talking about that is full of homophobia?


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5486
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
ClockCat wrote: what is

ClockCat wrote:

 what is this masturbation thread people keep talking about that is full of homophobia?

 

I would assume this one

 

http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/16588

 

 

 


v4ultingbassist
Science Freak
v4ultingbassist's picture
Posts: 601
Joined: 2009-12-04
User is offlineOffline
ClockCat wrote: what is

ClockCat wrote:

 what is this masturbation thread people keep talking about that is full of homophobia?

 

I didn't know about it until I read about it.  For some reason it wasn't showing up in my recent posts section.


Marquis
atheist
Marquis's picture
Posts: 776
Joined: 2009-12-23
User is offlineOffline
smartypants wrote:straight

smartypants wrote:
straight people assert their heterosexuality in subtle and not-so-subtle ways

 

That's what you see. I see something else: Vanilla retards that are asserting their demented and disgusting puppy love. It makes no difference to me if they are hugging and kissing a boy, a girl, or a fucking dog; to me it beckons the *gag* reflex. However, I am smart enough to understand that I have no "rights" in this society. So I keep my stuff (mostly) private. I am 100% totally and absolutely non-interested in "soft sex". WTF is that all about anyway? I honestly dont get it. Unless there's Full Metal Jacket; blood and bone, dirt and gravel, tears and pain; raw animalistic lust with no holds barred, I quite frankly don't see the point - and I would much rather remain celibate than even consider laying my hands on some fucking monkey-ish imbecile of a virgin who has no clue.

So am I 'forced to relate' to the disgusting sentimental schmaltz of vanilla puppy love by every billboard, film, etc.? I suppose I am. Does it bother me? Fuck no. I'm just glad I'm not like that. The vanilla people seem like cuddle-horny zombies to me. Starved of any real sexual satisfaction, they chase rainbows and delusions in la la land instead, looking for a mythological concept they call 'love'... but all they find is grief and misery; boredom at best. They are like children in adult bodies, working to create a machine-like society which allows them to remain 'innocent' - which I call ignorant - pretty much throughout their whole life.

To conclude: Just give me a fucking break with your woe is me gay issues. The problem in our contemporary soiety isn't homophobia, it is a complete and utter denial of the 'dirty' and animalistic nature of human sexuality. The problem is that the growling fierceness of raw lust has been reduced to a doll-house nightmare of Prozac and idealistic gobbeldygook about 'love' - whereas the natural human propensity for sexualised rage gets translated into an utterly perverted desire to watch and/or take part in morbid acts of hatred and violence instead.

"The idea of God is the sole wrong for which I cannot forgive mankind." (Alphonse Donatien De Sade)

http://www.kinkspace.com


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13591
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Is it possible for atheists

Is it possible for atheists to be homophobes? Of course.

But I would warn not to confuse homophobia with orientation. If someone is not into something it is reasonable for them to have a reaction to it. I am not into broccoli and do respond with EWE when I see it or smell it.

I love watching two hot women go at it. I am sure gay men would not be into that. Does that mean gay men are phobic about lesbians. Not to mention the "lesbians" I am attracted to in porn DO NOT reflect lesbians in real life.

"Ewe" doesn't automatically make someone xenophobic. I think self introspection and awareness that something is simply not your thing makes the difference.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Marquis wrote:To conclude:

Marquis wrote:

To conclude: Just give me a fucking break with your woe is me gay issues. The problem in our contemporary soiety isn't homophobia, it is a complete and utter denial of the 'dirty' and animalistic nature of human sexuality. The problem is that the growling fierceness of raw lust has been reduced to a doll-house nightmare of Prozac and idealistic gobbeldygook about 'love' - whereas the natural human propensity for sexualised rage gets translated into an utterly perverted desire to watch and/or take part in morbid acts of hatred and violence instead.

For the record, I am not a whiner, nor am I militant about this, nor do I march in parades. In fact, IRL, I thankfully almost never have to deal with hatred because of where I live and work. What you fail to recognize, however, is that unlike what you've experienced--mild nausea to presumably some unfavorable reactions from conservative types--the reactions I'm talking about are fused to an underlying violence toward me and people like me. This is the violence that leads to hospitalization and death in its extreme manifestations, not sexual satisfaction. So you'll have to forgive me for considering it much more unacceptable.


Sterculius
Silver Member
Sterculius's picture
Posts: 161
Joined: 2010-01-05
User is offlineOffline
I am not homophobic or

I am not homophobic or against homosexuality.
I think it's completely natural.  My best friend and former roommate is gay and I stood up for him at his wedding in Windsor. (SUCH BS THAT THE US DOESN'T RECOGNIZE THEM AS MARRIED)...

 

So, I was joking around on the masturbation thread and said, "I think of myself when I do it... does that make me gay or just conceited"
I don't think that qualifies as gay bashing or homophobia.

I also stated that if anyone started nuzzling me or groping me without permission I would find that inappropriate behavior gay or straight.   It would be a violation of my personal space/person.  

I think in society in general there's homophobia because it was what people were taught and it presents an easy target.
What we see here (to a limited extent) and on the internets in general is passive gay bashing - This is so GAY! You're a fucking faggot...   Fag!  etc.
They use slurs which degrade homosexuals they wouldn't dare use for a race.    People also tend to be a bit bolder from the safety of their keyboard than they would be face to face where provocative or fighting words might lead someone to kick their scrawny ass. 

I also concurr with those that state that atheism and homophobia have no logical relationship so aren't oxymoronic.

What I do think is that this is one of the big difference between atheists and theists in that they can walk lock-step to their scriptures and beliefs which are all laid out but there's no 'atheist manifesto' to give you 10 commandments.    Give me 10 atheists and I'll give you as many different viewpoints on politics, etc as there are positions.  There are right wing atheists and left wing atheists.    The only thing we agree on in general is that there is no credible evidence for a deity.

 

 

"Lisa, if the Bible has taught us nothing else, and it hasn't, it's that girls should stick to girls sports, such as hot oil wrestling and foxy boxing and such."
Homer Simpson


jmm
Theist
jmm's picture
Posts: 837
Joined: 2007-03-03
User is offlineOffline
 well if atheism can be

 well if atheism can be taken to simply mean "lack of belief in god" separate from any sort of ideology, then this cannot be true.  


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Sterculius wrote:So, I was

Sterculius wrote:

So, I was joking around on the masturbation thread and said, "I think of myself when I do it... does that make me gay or just conceited"

I don't think that qualifies as gay bashing or homophobia.

I wasn't referring to you or any one specific person, just a general tone.

Sterculius wrote:
I also stated that if anyone started nuzzling me or groping me without permission I would find that inappropriate behavior gay or straight.   It would be a violation of my personal space/person.

I'm sorry, but I find it EXTREMELY difficult to believe that if a beautiful woman came over and started touching you, you'd have exactly the same reaction to this "violation of your personal space" as if a man did it.

Sterculius wrote:
I think in society in general there's homophobia because it was what people were taught and it presents an easy target.

That's just passing the buck. What reason would people have been "taught that "if not on religious grounds? What I'm asking is what reason--not based on religious doctrine--could an atheist have for holding onto that particular belief, after he's rejected all the rest?

Sterculius wrote:
I also concurr with those that state that atheism and homophobia have no logical relationship so aren't oxymoronic.

I hope I've made it understandable why I ask this question.

Sterculius wrote:
Give me 10 atheists and I'll give you as many different viewpoints on politics, etc as there are positions.  There are right wing atheists and left wing atheists.

I don't think politics is a valid analogy. Politics may occasionally concern itself with questions of morality, but for the most part, there are too many other issues that come into taking a political stance. 


Sterculius
Silver Member
Sterculius's picture
Posts: 161
Joined: 2010-01-05
User is offlineOffline
smartypants wrote:Sterculius

smartypants wrote:

Sterculius wrote:
I also stated that if anyone started nuzzling me or groping me without permission I would find that inappropriate behavior gay or straight.   It would be a violation of my personal space/person.

I'm sorry, but I find it EXTREMELY difficult to believe that if a beautiful woman came over and started touching you, you'd have exactly the same reaction to this "violation of your personal space" as if a man did it.

 

You don't know me - how the fuck do you presume to tell me how I feel?

I don't give a shit if you don't believe it - that's your prejudice shining through. 

You have already decided how me a straight guy must react.   Way to hate stereotyping and then use one.

"Lisa, if the Bible has taught us nothing else, and it hasn't, it's that girls should stick to girls sports, such as hot oil wrestling and foxy boxing and such."
Homer Simpson


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2927
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
smartypants

smartypants wrote:

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

Let's see here:

 

Homophobia: The hatred and bigotry against homosexuals.

 

Atheism: A lack of belief in God

 

 

 

I don't see the oxymoron.

Um, you seem like one of the more thoughtful folks in here, and one that I respect, but seriously...did you even read the post? 

 

The point is the two things have nothing to do with each other.  It is naive to assume Atheists are rational in every aspect of their lives, or even that they agree on various social issues.  Homophobia, racism, sexism...these are cultural traits that can exist easily totally outside of religion.  Example:  Japan has very little religion, and they are very racist.  Is that an oxymoron?  If not, then why would atheist homophobes be an oxymoron?

Having said that, I imagine that American and European atheists have a lower rate of bigotry per capita than theists, but there is zero reason why atheists will never be bigots simply because they deny God.

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2927
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
smartypants wrote:Sterculius

smartypants wrote:


Sterculius wrote:
I also stated that if anyone started nuzzling me or groping me without permission I would find that inappropriate behavior gay or straight.   It would be a violation of my personal space/person.

I'm sorry, but I find it EXTREMELY difficult to believe that if a beautiful woman came over and started touching you, you'd have exactly the same reaction to this "violation of your personal space" as if a man did it.

 

Pardon?  If a female whom I am not attracted to walked over and grabbed my junk I would be very offended.

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
smartypants wrote: People

smartypants wrote:

People with differing backgrounds and experiences and opinions undoubtedly make this world a more interesting place to live. Bigots, on the other hand, make the world a far more ugly place to be for a great many people. Your assessment of the hedonism I expect is also insulting and childish, by the way.

 

Would a homophobic website allow me to continually post homoerotic images that push the boundaries of decency and good taste like this?

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

 

I seriously doubt it.

 

Not only are people on this site not homophobic but they seem to be in some sort of gay contest to prove who is the least homophobic. And by "gay" I don't mean bad or stupid, I mean ravenously cock hungry. See, I even started posting in rainbow text!

 

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


ragdish
atheist
ragdish's picture
Posts: 462
Joined: 2007-12-31
User is offlineOffline
The one who is responsible

I started the masturbation thread to break the ice. And honestly, after reading through all the responses, I have yet to find anything homophobic. What I find curious is that often folks who belong to a marginalized group who have a huge chip on their shoulder take extraordinary pains to seek out and interpret prejudice where it is truly absent. This is simply not a site dedicated to wearing white sheets and cross burning. Yes, homophobia exists in society. And yes, there are folks who still derive sadistic pleasure in calling me a "dirty Pakki". But if anyone here cracks a joke about the God Shiva and his striped phallus or Apu on the Simpsons, I assure you all that I would not in the least regard this site as being in any way against Indians.

On a side note, I was called an anti-semite by Jeffrick for pointing out a peculiar devotion that atheist Jews have towards Israel. It is a legitimate question in my mind. Why should my hero Steven Weinberg feel his heart tug over a strip of land which is part of a never ending ethnic geopolitical conflict which has its roots in religion? I pose the same question to secular Indians who get emotional over Kashmir. If any of this is bigotry, then I'd better sign up at Stormfront as the token darky.

Too bad there's too many uptight folks on this site.


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2927
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
Gauche wrote:smartypants

Gauche wrote:

smartypants wrote:

People with differing backgrounds and experiences and opinions undoubtedly make this world a more interesting place to live. Bigots, on the other hand, make the world a far more ugly place to be for a great many people. Your assessment of the hedonism I expect is also insulting and childish, by the way.

 

Would a homophobic website allow me to continually post homoerotic images that push the boundaries of decency and good taste like this?

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

 

I seriously doubt it.

 

Not only are people on this site not homophobic but they seem to be in some sort of gay contest to prove who is the least homophobic. And by "gay" I don't mean bad or stupid, I mean ravenously cock hungry. See, I even started posting in rainbow text!

 

 

This type of art always confused me.  If you hid the nutsack it would look like a young girl...is that really it, just ten year old gymnast trannies?

It always 'seemed' like homoerotic art should emphasize masculinity, not glorify the feminine aspects of males.

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.


Sterculius
Silver Member
Sterculius's picture
Posts: 161
Joined: 2010-01-05
User is offlineOffline
ragdish wrote:On a side

ragdish wrote:

On a side note, I was called an anti-semite by Jeffrick for pointing out a peculiar devotion that atheist Jews have towards Israel. It is a legitimate question in my mind. Why should my hero Steven Weinberg feel his heart tug over a strip of land which is part of a never ending ethnic geopolitical conflict which has its roots in religion?

 

I'm not sure.   I think maybe the broadness of the statement might have been somewhat overdone.   I wouldn't call it offensive as much as inaccurate.

My wife is an athiestic Jew and has no love for Israel whatsoever.   In fact she hates zionism in all its forms.  So, she's a perfect example of the opposite of what you're talking about. 


I don't think it should be surprising that jews would support the right of other Jews to exist in a self-governed land. 
I don't think that there has to be a religious reason for it.  These are folks that clearly support Israel but  flat out say god doesn't exist and they should be free from the concept of supernatural authority.

Specifically in regard to Israel:
http://www.shj.org/MidEast.htm  
In regard to Secular Judaism in general
http://www.shj.org/FAQs.html
Same Sex Marriage
http://www.shj.org/MarriageEquality.htm

 

"Lisa, if the Bible has taught us nothing else, and it hasn't, it's that girls should stick to girls sports, such as hot oil wrestling and foxy boxing and such."
Homer Simpson


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13591
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
If Planters Peanuts sold

If Planters Peanuts sold their nuts in sacks instead of jars, would that make them "nut sacks"?

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
mellestad wrote:smartypants

mellestad wrote:

smartypants wrote:


Sterculius wrote:
I also stated that if anyone started nuzzling me or groping me without permission I would find that inappropriate behavior gay or straight.   It would be a violation of my personal space/person.

I'm sorry, but I find it EXTREMELY difficult to believe that if a beautiful woman came over and started touching you, you'd have exactly the same reaction to this "violation of your personal space" as if a man did it.

 

Pardon?  If a female whom I am not attracted to walked over and grabbed my junk I would be very offended.

Hence the adjective "beautiful."


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2927
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
smartypants wrote:mellestad

smartypants wrote:

mellestad wrote:

smartypants wrote:


Sterculius wrote:
I also stated that if anyone started nuzzling me or groping me without permission I would find that inappropriate behavior gay or straight.   It would be a violation of my personal space/person.

I'm sorry, but I find it EXTREMELY difficult to believe that if a beautiful woman came over and started touching you, you'd have exactly the same reaction to this "violation of your personal space" as if a man did it.

 

Pardon?  If a female whom I am not attracted to walked over and grabbed my junk I would be very offended.

Hence the adjective "beautiful."

If you are not attracted to men, it is not a fair comparison.  My scenario is more appropriate.

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
ragdish wrote:I started the

ragdish wrote:

I started the masturbation thread to break the ice. And honestly, after reading through all the responses, I have yet to find anything homophobic. What I find curious is that often folks who belong to a marginalized group who have a huge chip on their shoulder take extraordinary pains to seek out and interpret prejudice where it is truly absent. This is simply not a site dedicated to wearing white sheets and cross burning. Yes, homophobia exists in society. And yes, there are folks who still derive sadistic pleasure in calling me a "dirty Pakki". But if anyone here cracks a joke about the God Shiva and his striped phallus or Apu on the Simpsons, I assure you all that I would not in the least regard this site as being in any way against Indians.

On a side note, I was called an anti-semite by Jeffrick for pointing out a peculiar devotion that atheist Jews have towards Israel. It is a legitimate question in my mind. Why should my hero Steven Weinberg feel his heart tug over a strip of land which is part of a never ending ethnic geopolitical conflict which has its roots in religion? I pose the same question to secular Indians who get emotional over Kashmir. If any of this is bigotry, then I'd better sign up at Stormfront as the token darky.

Too bad there's too many uptight folks on this site.

Don't misunderstand me, your ice-breaker was great, and I thought it was a very funny question (my answer: flattered). Welcome to the site, btw.

Unfortunately, there was mention of violence against gay men. Forgive me if I don't feel like searching through to find a quote. It's not all that difficult to spot. I've heard the "personal space" argument many times before, usually followed by some backstepping along the lines of "but, but, but it'd be the same if it were a female!" Frankly, I have to call BS. I've hung around way too many straight men to buy it.

Would you accuse a woman who didn't want to come in here and have to listen to tales of rape as having "a chip on her shoulder?" Because I'm not going to apologize for not wanting to hear about violence directed at me for being who I am.


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
mellestad wrote:smartypants

mellestad wrote:

smartypants wrote:

mellestad wrote:

smartypants wrote:


Sterculius wrote:
I also stated that if anyone started nuzzling me or groping me without permission I would find that inappropriate behavior gay or straight.   It would be a violation of my personal space/person.

I'm sorry, but I find it EXTREMELY difficult to believe that if a beautiful woman came over and started touching you, you'd have exactly the same reaction to this "violation of your personal space" as if a man did it.

 

Pardon?  If a female whom I am not attracted to walked over and grabbed my junk I would be very offended.

Hence the adjective "beautiful."

If you are not attracted to men, it is not a fair comparison.  My scenario is more appropriate.

Okay. So two people who you find equally unattractive, one female, one male. Which one would you be least likely to punch in the nose for violating you?


ClockCat
ClockCat's picture
Posts: 2265
Joined: 2009-03-26
User is offlineOffline
:3

smartypants wrote:

mellestad wrote:

smartypants wrote:

mellestad wrote:

smartypants wrote:


Sterculius wrote:
I also stated that if anyone started nuzzling me or groping me without permission I would find that inappropriate behavior gay or straight.   It would be a violation of my personal space/person.

I'm sorry, but I find it EXTREMELY difficult to believe that if a beautiful woman came over and started touching you, you'd have exactly the same reaction to this "violation of your personal space" as if a man did it.

 

Pardon?  If a female whom I am not attracted to walked over and grabbed my junk I would be very offended.

Hence the adjective "beautiful."

If you are not attracted to men, it is not a fair comparison.  My scenario is more appropriate.

Okay. So two people who you find equally unattractive, one female, one male. Which one would you be least likely to punch in the nose for violating you?

 

I get your point but come on that is a loaded question.

 

I went through the masturbation thread, I saw the thing about violence, and yes shoving someone away from you is homophobic..but I'm pretty sure he doesn't intend to be. 

 

 

Yes things like this are unfortunately common. Yes, the excuse "well he was hitting on me" is often given, just like these guys that went out of their way to drive, stalk, and nearly murder someone because they are a "fag".

 

 

It is a good point to bring up. Hitting on someone is often given a double standard from people with regard to gender, especially stateside. However, I also think that the few individuals in that thread likely didn't think things through. I'd hope people take note of the double standard and give it some thought, but it doesn't seem like it was much beyond a gut reaction based in homophobia than anything else. I honestly doubt someone like Spike would try to beat gays just for hitting on him.

 

For the most part, the masturbation thread already seemed fairly full of the one guy being ego police. 

Theism is why we can't have nice things.


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2927
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
smartypants wrote:mellestad

smartypants wrote:

mellestad wrote:

smartypants wrote:

mellestad wrote:

smartypants wrote:


Sterculius wrote:
I also stated that if anyone started nuzzling me or groping me without permission I would find that inappropriate behavior gay or straight.   It would be a violation of my personal space/person.

I'm sorry, but I find it EXTREMELY difficult to believe that if a beautiful woman came over and started touching you, you'd have exactly the same reaction to this "violation of your personal space" as if a man did it.

 

Pardon?  If a female whom I am not attracted to walked over and grabbed my junk I would be very offended.

Hence the adjective "beautiful."

If you are not attracted to men, it is not a fair comparison.  My scenario is more appropriate.

Okay. So two people who you find equally unattractive, one female, one male. Which one would you be least likely to punch in the nose for violating you?

I would not hit either.  However, I would be more 'likely' to hit a man in the face, because I was not raised with a cultural stigma about hitting men.

 

This whole thread is a witch hunt, you really have to reach to find  something offensive in the masturbation thread (offensive to gays, you could argue the whole thread was offensive), and it seems like you are spending your time in this thread fishing for people to pounce on. 

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5486
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
I wonder if smartypants saw

I wonder if smartypants saw the thread about UFC being homo-erotic. [I can't remember which one it was]

 

 

 

 

 

 


Marquis
atheist
Marquis's picture
Posts: 776
Joined: 2009-12-23
User is offlineOffline
Define Homophobia!

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

UFC being homo-erotic

What is homophobia?

I once shocked the entire club where I was training at the time by loudly suggesting that any violent contact sport may be seen as ritualised homosexual sadomasochism. This seems obvious to me. And it is connected to how I would define "homophobia".

Which brings me to my point: I am kind of missing a coherent definition of what exactly it is that constitutes "homophobia". The way this concept is being used in society, it can seemingly mean just about anything - and it has the amazing superpower of being to change its meaning on the spot - just as long as it is convenient for the one who's calling it.

Myself, I see a repressed kind of denial-psychology complex which is orbiting a singularity of cause that unites sex and violence.

That's where I believe "homophobia" comes from. Attraction. People who are "homophobic" aren't afraid of gays, they are afraid of some unknown part of themselves. It is a very sick psychology indeed, and it works pretty much the same way that a Christian fucknut can (and often will) be deathly afraid of "the Devil" (and by virtue of this see "the work of the Devil" whichever way he looks, but he's never able to understand that he himself is in fact the Devil). Meaning that it is an attraction which is covered up with denial. The homophobic person is, the way I see it, curious about man sex. Really. Why else all this interest in the issue? Why so emotional about it?

Much of the violence against "gays" is no more homophobic than their being "gay" is an excuse for beating somebody up. There are males, usually in a number of at least three (which is the lowest possible number of a lynch mob dynamic system), who are actively looking for people to fuck up. They may pick someone who's "gay" or they may pick anyone else who provides a convenient excuse for starting shit. Which (sub)culture they belong to determines what sort of targets they think of as "allowed" (there's usually some vague idea at the bottom; that they are picking on "bad" people and "outsiders", cleaning "the trash" from the streets, etc., thus being hero-defenders of a value system; which, in turn, the way I see this, is a representation of sexual hysteria).

 

"The idea of God is the sole wrong for which I cannot forgive mankind." (Alphonse Donatien De Sade)

http://www.kinkspace.com


Sterculius
Silver Member
Sterculius's picture
Posts: 161
Joined: 2010-01-05
User is offlineOffline
smartypants wrote:Okay. So

smartypants wrote:


Okay. So two people who you find equally unattractive, one female, one male. Which one would you be least likely to punch in the nose for violating you?

 

 

Again, you demonstrate some extreme ignorance and make a lot of stereotypical assumptions about straight men.   We're not all club wielding neandrathals looking to either secretly score with gay guys or beat them to a pulp.  

1.  You might not understand but I happen to be married so I don't want anyone attractive or not, male or female trying to force unwanted sexual advances on me or violate my personal space.. 

2.  I'm not likely to strike either.   As a rule I don't hit people that don't attempt to strike me first.   Especially since I don't find either threatening in any way.

3.  My best friend is gay so I'm familiar with the gay scene and have gone to many clubs with my wife, him and his husband when his husband is doing drag shows.   I've been groped, hit on, etc.    I just take it as flattery but I will take someone's arm/hand and remove it and politely ask them to stop or tell them to back the fuck off if they don't get the message and persist after the polite refusal.    No one has EVER continued unwanted advances after I've first politely asked them stop and followed up with the rude message if they continued.   No one has ever tried to go beyond message 2.   By the same token I had a 60ish year old woman try to hit on me at a St. Patrick's Day party which I actually found MORE repulsive than most men that have ever hit on me.  Long story short I didn't punch her in the nose and I never punched a dude in the nose because none of them ever pushed me.

So, I'm sorry I still don't fit your stereotype.   It just isn't true of me.

"Lisa, if the Bible has taught us nothing else, and it hasn't, it's that girls should stick to girls sports, such as hot oil wrestling and foxy boxing and such."
Homer Simpson


Sterculius
Silver Member
Sterculius's picture
Posts: 161
Joined: 2010-01-05
User is offlineOffline
Cpt_pineapple wrote:I wonder

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

I wonder if smartypants saw the thread about UFC being homo-erotic. [I can't remember which one it was]

  

 

I've always wondered about how often the UFC had sweaty BJJ guys wrestling around while talking about the following:

Mounting

Ground and Pound

Submission Wrestling

"Lisa, if the Bible has taught us nothing else, and it hasn't, it's that girls should stick to girls sports, such as hot oil wrestling and foxy boxing and such."
Homer Simpson


Wonderist
atheist
Wonderist's picture
Posts: 2479
Joined: 2006-03-19
User is offlineOffline
smartypants wrote:But I'd

smartypants wrote:
But I'd like to ask the rational, atheist straight guys in here who are squeamish about this stuff: if not for "religious morality" reasons, then why?

Like many of my biases, I didn't even know I was homophobic until I finally befriended a guy who was openly gay, and realized, "What the fuck am I so uptight about? It's just a different sexual attraction/orientation." This was only a few years ago, maybe 4 or 5. Up to that point, I just felt homosexuality was 'weird' and 'gross', and didn't really understand the mindset of homosexuals, especially men. Probably a big reason I never had any out-gay friends was my not-so-subtle uncomfortableness with the topic.

I considered myself a non-homophobic straight guy who just couldn't feel comfortable being friends with a gay person. I now realize that that uncomfortableness *was* due to homophobia.

After thinking about it for a while after befriending this guy, I think the reason I was homophobic in the first place was simply lack of understanding and lack of exposure. You've got two obvious sexes, male and female, so it seems 'only natural' that there should be exactly two obvious sexual orientations male-to-female and female-to-male. Makes sense, right? That's how biology works, after all, right? So, anything that breaks that intuitive (but ultimately incomplete and wrong) understanding triggers the 'eww' or 'dirty' or 'unclean' emotion. This is a natural human emotion related to hygiene, illness, and in-group out-group discrimination. Anything that seems 'not normal' can trigger that emotion. It just depends on what you consider 'normal', what experiences you've had with differences, and how much importance you place on feelings of safety versus being open to new things. I think the pervasive culture can enhance such phobias, so that they become like taboos. Alternatively, the culture can also break down such innate fears by providing opportunities for safe exposure to new things.

So, when you hear everyone say how weird and unnatural homosexuality is, it just reinforces your basic 'fear of the unknown' and specifically the 'ick' emotion, hence creating homophobia. I think that's where I was coming from.

I'm really glad that things are changing. What good comes from such stigmatization of people? None. It's just a different sexual attraction/orientation. Nothing wrong with it at all. I like science fiction, someone else likes romance. I can't stand romance, someone else can't stand science fiction. It's just a preference, there's nothing wrong with either of us.

This is just one more reason to challenge religion. It hard-codes these phobias in 'holy' books and makes good social change more difficult, and can even cause regression of good social change, such as Prop 8. There should probably be more effort put into forming alliances between pro-secular groups and pro-sexuality groups. If religion is the source of much homophobia, an obvious strategy is to pull that weed up from its roots. Ditch the dogma, it's holding us back.

Wonderist on Facebook — Support the idea of wonderism by 'liking' the Wonderism page — or join the open Wonderism group to take part in the discussion!

Gnu Atheism Facebook group — All gnu-friendly RRS members welcome (including Luminon!) — Try something gnu!


Wonderist
atheist
Wonderist's picture
Posts: 2479
Joined: 2006-03-19
User is offlineOffline
Sterculius

Sterculius wrote:

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

I wonder if smartypants saw the thread about UFC being homo-erotic. [I can't remember which one it was]

  

 

I've always wondered about how often the UFC had sweaty BJJ guys wrestling around while talking about the following:

Mounting

Ground and Pound

Submission Wrestling

lol. How about the Rear Naked Choke? (Is that with reach-around or without?)

Wonderist on Facebook — Support the idea of wonderism by 'liking' the Wonderism page — or join the open Wonderism group to take part in the discussion!

Gnu Atheism Facebook group — All gnu-friendly RRS members welcome (including Luminon!) — Try something gnu!


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
mellestad wrote:smartypants

mellestad wrote:

smartypants wrote:

mellestad wrote:

smartypants wrote:

mellestad wrote:

smartypants wrote:


Sterculius wrote:
I also stated that if anyone started nuzzling me or groping me without permission I would find that inappropriate behavior gay or straight.   It would be a violation of my personal space/person.

I'm sorry, but I find it EXTREMELY difficult to believe that if a beautiful woman came over and started touching you, you'd have exactly the same reaction to this "violation of your personal space" as if a man did it.

 

Pardon?  If a female whom I am not attracted to walked over and grabbed my junk I would be very offended.

Hence the adjective "beautiful."

If you are not attracted to men, it is not a fair comparison.  My scenario is more appropriate.

Okay. So two people who you find equally unattractive, one female, one male. Which one would you be least likely to punch in the nose for violating you?

I would not hit either.  However, I would be more 'likely' to hit a man in the face, because I was not raised with a cultural stigma about hitting men.

 

This whole thread is a witch hunt, you really have to reach to find  something offensive in the masturbation thread (offensive to gays, you could argue the whole thread was offensive), and it seems like you are spending your time in this thread fishing for people to pounce on. 

The accusations that I'm being hysterical are becoming tiresome. You may have to "dig" to find things if you're straight and have never had to deal with discrimination or hate. For me, it required no "fishing" at all. In fact, it smacks me right in the face while innocently reading, strikes a blow to my enjoyment of an otherwise very funny thread. That's what's offensive about it, and the fact that you can't see that, frankly, stinks of hetero privilege.


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Marquis wrote:Cpt_pineapple

Marquis wrote:

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

UFC being homo-erotic

What is homophobia?

I once shocked the entire club where I was training at the time by loudly suggesting that any violent contact sport may be seen as ritualised homosexual sadomasochism. This seems obvious to me. And it is connected to how I would define "homophobia".

Which brings me to my point: I am kind of missing a coherent definition of what exactly it is that constitutes "homophobia". The way this concept is being used in society, it can seemingly mean just about anything - and it has the amazing superpower of being to change its meaning on the spot - just as long as it is convenient for the one who's calling it.

Myself, I see a repressed kind of denial-psychology complex which is orbiting a singularity of cause that unites sex and violence.

That's where I believe "homophobia" comes from. Attraction. People who are "homophobic" aren't afraid of gays, they are afraid of some unknown part of themselves. It is a very sick psychology indeed, and it works pretty much the same way that a Christian fucknut can (and often will) be deathly afraid of "the Devil" (and by virtue of this see "the work of the Devil" whichever way he looks, but he's never able to understand that he himself is in fact the Devil). Meaning that it is an attraction which is covered up with denial. The homophobic person is, the way I see it, curious about man sex. Really. Why else all this interest in the issue? Why so emotional about it?

Much of the violence against "gays" is no more homophobic than their being "gay" is an excuse for beating somebody up. There are males, usually in a number of at least three (which is the lowest possible number of a lynch mob dynamic system), who are actively looking for people to fuck up. They may pick someone who's "gay" or they may pick anyone else who provides a convenient excuse for starting shit. Which (sub)culture they belong to determines what sort of targets they think of as "allowed" (there's usually some vague idea at the bottom; that they are picking on "bad" people and "outsiders", cleaning "the trash" from the streets, etc., thus being hero-defenders of a value system; which, in turn, the way I see this, is a representation of sexual hysteria).

 

I agree with this definition probably 100%, 99% at the very least.


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Sterculius wrote:smartypants

Sterculius wrote:

smartypants wrote:


Okay. So two people who you find equally unattractive, one female, one male. Which one would you be least likely to punch in the nose for violating you?

 

 

Again, you demonstrate some extreme ignorance and make a lot of stereotypical assumptions about straight men.   We're not all club wielding neandrathals looking to either secretly score with gay guys or beat them to a pulp.  

1.  You might not understand but I happen to be married so I don't want anyone attractive or not, male or female trying to force unwanted sexual advances on me or violate my personal space.. 

2.  I'm not likely to strike either.   As a rule I don't hit people that don't attempt to strike me first.   Especially since I don't find either threatening in any way.

3.  My best friend is gay so I'm familiar with the gay scene and have gone to many clubs with my wife, him and his husband when his husband is doing drag shows.   I've been groped, hit on, etc.    I just take it as flattery but I will take someone's arm/hand and remove it and politely ask them to stop or tell them to back the fuck off if they don't get the message and persist after the polite refusal.    No one has EVER continued unwanted advances after I've first politely asked them stop and followed up with the rude message if they continued.   No one has ever tried to go beyond message 2.   By the same token I had a 60ish year old woman try to hit on me at a St. Patrick's Day party which I actually found MORE repulsive than most men that have ever hit on me.  Long story short I didn't punch her in the nose and I never punched a dude in the nose because none of them ever pushed me.

So, I'm sorry I still don't fit your stereotype.   It just isn't true of me.

If this is all true, then I will graciously offer you an apology. In my defense, however, you are not by any means the norm. Experiencing and recognizing trends in people's behavior based on their background and culture is NOT the same thing as harboring stereotypes. In some situations, it may even be a survival tactic.


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
natural wrote:smartypants

natural wrote:

smartypants wrote:
But I'd like to ask the rational, atheist straight guys in here who are squeamish about this stuff: if not for "religious morality" reasons, then why?

Like many of my biases, I didn't even know I was homophobic until I finally befriended a guy who was openly gay, and realized, "What the fuck am I so uptight about? It's just a different sexual attraction/orientation." This was only a few years ago, maybe 4 or 5. Up to that point, I just felt homosexuality was 'weird' and 'gross', and didn't really understand the mindset of homosexuals, especially men. Probably a big reason I never had any out-gay friends was my not-so-subtle uncomfortableness with the topic.

I considered myself a non-homophobic straight guy who just couldn't feel comfortable being friends with a gay person. I now realize that that uncomfortableness *was* due to homophobia.

After thinking about it for a while after befriending this guy, I think the reason I was homophobic in the first place was simply lack of understanding and lack of exposure. You've got two obvious sexes, male and female, so it seems 'only natural' that there should be exactly two obvious sexual orientations male-to-female and female-to-male. Makes sense, right? That's how biology works, after all, right? So, anything that breaks that intuitive (but ultimately incomplete and wrong) understanding triggers the 'eww' or 'dirty' or 'unclean' emotion. This is a natural human emotion related to hygiene, illness, and in-group out-group discrimination. Anything that seems 'not normal' can trigger that emotion. It just depends on what you consider 'normal', what experiences you've had with differences, and how much importance you place on feelings of safety versus being open to new things. I think the pervasive culture can enhance such phobias, so that they become like taboos. Alternatively, the culture can also break down such innate fears by providing opportunities for safe exposure to new things.

So, when you hear everyone say how weird and unnatural homosexuality is, it just reinforces your basic 'fear of the unknown' and specifically the 'ick' emotion, hence creating homophobia. I think that's where I was coming from.

I'm really glad that things are changing. What good comes from such stigmatization of people? None. It's just a different sexual attraction/orientation. Nothing wrong with it at all. I like science fiction, someone else likes romance. I can't stand romance, someone else can't stand science fiction. It's just a preference, there's nothing wrong with either of us.

This is just one more reason to challenge religion. It hard-codes these phobias in 'holy' books and makes good social change more difficult, and can even cause regression of good social change, such as Prop 8. There should probably be more effort put into forming alliances between pro-secular groups and pro-sexuality groups. If religion is the source of much homophobia, an obvious strategy is to pull that weed up from its roots. Ditch the dogma, it's holding us back.

I appreciated these thoughts, thanks.


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2927
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
smartypants wrote:mellestad

smartypants wrote:

mellestad wrote:

smartypants wrote:

mellestad wrote:

smartypants wrote:

mellestad wrote:

smartypants wrote:


Sterculius wrote:
I also stated that if anyone started nuzzling me or groping me without permission I would find that inappropriate behavior gay or straight.   It would be a violation of my personal space/person.

I'm sorry, but I find it EXTREMELY difficult to believe that if a beautiful woman came over and started touching you, you'd have exactly the same reaction to this "violation of your personal space" as if a man did it.

 

Pardon?  If a female whom I am not attracted to walked over and grabbed my junk I would be very offended.

Hence the adjective "beautiful."

If you are not attracted to men, it is not a fair comparison.  My scenario is more appropriate.

Okay. So two people who you find equally unattractive, one female, one male. Which one would you be least likely to punch in the nose for violating you?

I would not hit either.  However, I would be more 'likely' to hit a man in the face, because I was not raised with a cultural stigma about hitting men.

 

This whole thread is a witch hunt, you really have to reach to find  something offensive in the masturbation thread (offensive to gays, you could argue the whole thread was offensive), and it seems like you are spending your time in this thread fishing for people to pounce on. 

The accusations that I'm being hysterical are becoming tiresome. You may have to "dig" to find things if you're straight and have never had to deal with discrimination or hate. For me, it required no "fishing" at all. In fact, it smacks me right in the face while innocently reading, strikes a blow to my enjoyment of an otherwise very funny thread. That's what's offensive about it, and the fact that you can't see that, frankly, stinks of hetero privilege.

There was maybe one comment in the original thread that could be considered homophobic, if there were more please quote them here.  No-one is denying that homophobia exists in the atheist community, but your reaction seems out of proportion to what I have seen in this site.  Just my two cents, obviously you have a different perspective.

And get off your high-horse please.  Your reaction to what I wrote is exactly what I am talking about, I never even disagreed that homophobia existed, in fact I have been pointing out that it *does* exist even in this community, and you still find something to criticize.  Then you seem to assume that every straight guy is going to flip out and hit gays.  I've never hit another human in my life, straight or gay, and insinuating that I am teetering on the edge of a hate crime when you don't even know me is being hypersensitive.

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.