What Do Homophobic Bigots Really Think?

Aug 25, 2012 | Posted by: Rick in Kansas | Full story: www.slate.com

There were thousands of comments in response to my last piece at Slate, in which I lashed out against Chick-fil-A president Dan Cathy’s policy of funding anti-gay causes. I tried to dip in and out of the comment thread as often as I could while they were piling up, scanning them for interesting points (of which there were many). But I quickly lost track and had to get back to work on other projects.

Then a reader sent me a link to a discussion of my article at the popular conservative website Free Republic. It’s pure masochism for someone like me to wander such halls; I don’t need to read their posts to know just what ultraconservatives think of my “homosexualism” and me. But curiosity got the better of me. And my, my, my, they really do hate us queers over there. It’s not just Free Republic, of course. Similar anti-gay sentiments are a staple of many gathering places online, not to mention those in the real world.

People are free in this country to say what they will, nasty though it is, about gays and lesbians. What to do about it, then? I believe that treating bigots as scientific specimens is the best way to disarm their hate. I can’t tackle all such propaganda in a single article (I won’t be able to cover the all-gay-men-are-pedophiles argument, the-all-lesbians-just-hate-men argument, or the next-thing-you-know-we’ll-all-be-marrying dogs-and-horses argument), but for now I’ll dissect some of the other common rhetorical devices deployed by those with an anti-gay mindset.

Comments
1 - 20 of 41 Comments Last updated Aug 30, 2012
First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Pam

Grove City, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Aug 25, 2012
 

Judged:

4

4

3

Same old same old, with the possible exception of of that penis theory. That's a new one. Seems to me that uncircumcised penises (the way God made men) wouldn't fit that description.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Aug 25, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

He may have made them that way, but he clearly says on a number of occasions that they aren't supposed to stay that way. Christianity would never have grown outside Jewish converts, if not for the revisionism of Paul and the let's drop the circumcision requirement. Adult males of the Gentile variety would have freaked at the thought of that kind of commitment to this God he was peddling.

PS obviously you haven't seen one in a while, even the uncircumcised ones come with a coronal ridge, they're all designed, more or less, the same way.

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Aug 25, 2012
 

Judged:

2

Rick in Kansas wrote:
He may have made them that way, but he clearly says on a number of occasions that they aren't supposed to stay that way. Christianity would never have grown outside Jewish converts, if not for the revisionism of Paul and the let's drop the circumcision requirement. Adult males of the Gentile variety would have freaked at the thought of that kind of commitment to this God he was peddling.
PS obviously you haven't seen one in a while, even the uncircumcised ones come with a coronal ridge, they're all designed, more or less, the same way.
And they come in different sizes and flavors !

:)
hi hi

Philadelphia, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Aug 26, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Pam wrote:
Same old same old, with the possible exception of of that penis theory. That's a new one. Seems to me that uncircumcised penises (the way God made men) wouldn't fit that description.
Same old? Oh good, now you know how the pro-gay feel when they hear *E-X-A-C-T-L-Y* the same rotting nonsense over and over,

and over,

and over, and over, and over,

and over ...

What's *so funny* is that much of the antigay tripe is *NOT SUPPORTABLE BY FACT* and they even know this, the antigay won't take it into courts of law, they won't, you can dare them until the sun goes down and they won't go *near* the courts with it, while weirdly and strangely, the pro-gay have *SCIENTIFIC* hypotheses, and studies, and anectodal evidence *FROM THE GAYS THEMSELVES*, the very primary source from which anyone would logically get their information especially when millions of gays are saying the same thing,

and it really, really makes you wonder just how intense is the *goddamn hatred* of gay people from the antigay that they are still trying to convince the world that they, the antigay, are "correct," given those odds ...

Really makes you wonder what is the *point* of the hatred when the pro-gay have *SO MUCH* backing them up that would be admissible

in an eye-blink

in any court of law

in this nation.

But don't let any of that bother you; just keep *lying* and we'll all wait until the day any one of you,*one* of you,*one* of you dares to go into courts of law with your BS and present it to judges, because I'm still waiting and I now have a hunch that I am waiting for godot.

“Equality First”

Since: Jan 09

St. Louis, MO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Aug 26, 2012
 

Judged:

3

3

2

What Do Homophobic Bigots Really Think? They don't.
Huey

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Aug 26, 2012
 

Judged:

3

3

3

I wish the homosexuals would stop molesting little boys.

Since: Dec 08

Toronto, ON, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Aug 26, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Good article. The "choice" argument is often one that is promoted by religious women, such as the bitch who put the first post on this thread. Since it is now known that all women all inherently bisexual in their sexual response and that sexual orientation in women is based on emotional rather than physical considerations (as in men), this makes sense.

The problem with debunking any of the bigots' arguments is one thing: Any counter-argument based on science and knowledge will be attacked as being pseudo-science and rebutted with what really is pseudo-science. Any argument based on logic and reason alone will be attacked as non-religious. If the person promulgating such an argument observes the same religion as the bigot they will be attacked at being of a non-true cult. If of a differing faith or a non-believer, they will be dismissed as bound for damnation and
thus of no consequence.

I opine that it is virtually impossible to attack religion-based bigotry by argument. The only way this can be dismissed is for the religious person to have extensive and meaningful contact with the targets of her/his bigotry.

On the other hand, bigotry based on self-homophobia probably can only be quashed by self-realization of the bigot, so that most likely has to also come from within.

Hence while there arguments can be debunked in such a way that a truly neutral listener would be convinced of the debunking, they themselves are almost impossible to change from without by reason and argument alone.
Pam

Grove City, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Aug 26, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

JohnInToronto wrote:
Good article. The "choice" argument is often one that is promoted by religious women, such as the bitch who put the first post on this thread. Since it is now known that all women all inherently bisexual in their sexual response and that sexual orientation in women is based on emotional rather than physical considerations (as in men) this makes sense..
So now you admit that women have a choice. From all appearances it seems that women are the one's doing the "gay marriage" thing more than men. That means you are trying to change the definition of marriage to accommodate people who have a choice. Come to think of it, though, perhaps a lot of those women wouldn't have a choice to marry a man because no man would choose them. By the way, I highly doubt that a man chooses another man out of emotions rather than physical going by comments made by gay men about other men.(Frankly, I doubt if all straight men base their choices on emotional rather than physical consideration.) If gay men want to be seen as romantic and focusing on emotions rather than physical, then I suggest you cut out the nearly nude, suggestive dancing on floats in gay pride parades and stop decorating your websites with lewd pictures of men. That would go a long way toward changing popular perception of gays as just being into the physical and sex. Signed, The Bitch
Pam

Grove City, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Aug 26, 2012
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Rick in Kansas wrote:
He may have made them that way, but he clearly says on a number of occasions that they aren't supposed to stay that way. Christianity would never have grown outside Jewish converts, if not for the revisionism of Paul and the let's drop the circumcision requirement. Adult males of the Gentile variety would have freaked at the thought of that kind of commitment to this God he was peddling.
PS obviously you haven't seen one in a while, even the uncircumcised ones come with a coronal ridge, they're all designed, more or less, the same way.
Let's just say I'm not a slut or a gay man. I haven't seen but a few in my whole life.
Pam

Grove City, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Aug 26, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

hi hi wrote:
<quoted text>
Same old? Oh good, now you know how the pro-gay feel when they hear *E-X-A-C-T-L-Y* the same rotting nonsense over and over,
and over,
and over, and over, and over,
and over ...
What's *so funny* is that much of the antigay tripe is *NOT SUPPORTABLE BY FACT* and they even know this, the antigay won't take it into courts of law, they won't, you can dare them until the sun goes down and they won't go *near* the courts with it, while weirdly and strangely, the pro-gay have *SCIENTIFIC* hypotheses, and studies, and anectodal evidence *FROM THE GAYS THEMSELVES*, the very primary source from which anyone would logically get their information especially when millions of gays are saying the same thing,
and it really, really makes you wonder just how intense is the *goddamn hatred* of gay people from the antigay that they are still trying to convince the world that they, the antigay, are "correct," given those odds ...
Really makes you wonder what is the *point* of the hatred when the pro-gay have *SO MUCH* backing them up that would be admissible
in an eye-blink
in any court of law
in this nation.
But don't let any of that bother you; just keep *lying* and we'll all wait until the day any one of you,*one* of you,*one* of you dares to go into courts of law with your BS and present it to judges, because I'm still waiting and I now have a hunch that I am waiting for godot.
You have convinced yourself that it is hate, but it is not. I would be the first to admit that none of the Christian perspective is based in the kinds of issues that courts would or should address. Courts of law are not the final word, after all. And, while there was a time when courts tried to align themselves with the author of the final word, these days courts operate more in line with hubris than with God's law. I know you will saying I am lying, but I believe it when gay men say they are powerless to change. That and many other changes are beyond the power of man. That does not, however, mean that the defintion of marriage should be changed to accommoddate them. Gays are free to do whatever they want as long as it isn't effecting other people. Changing the definition of marriage effects everyone. No, I'm not talking about my own personal marriage being changed. I am talking about far reaching changes beyond that.
truth

Spokane, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Aug 26, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Pam wrote:
<quoted text>
So now you admit that women have a choice. From all appearances it seems that women are the one's doing the "gay marriage" thing more than men. That means you are trying to change the definition of marriage to accommodate people who have a choice. Come to think of it, though, perhaps a lot of those women wouldn't have a choice to marry a man because no man would choose them. By the way, I highly doubt that a man chooses another man out of emotions rather than physical going by comments made by gay men about other men.(Frankly, I doubt if all straight men base their choices on emotional rather than physical consideration.) If gay men want to be seen as romantic and focusing on emotions rather than physical, then I suggest you cut out the nearly nude, suggestive dancing on floats in gay pride parades and stop decorating your websites with lewd pictures of men. That would go a long way toward changing popular perception of gays as just being into the physical and sex. Signed, The Bitch
your quite wrong about gay men, my relationship is based purely on emaotion. we love and support each other through the bad times in life and try to lift each other above it. sex isn't important to us at all, and we don't even have anal sex which is what you claim all gay me do.
truth

Spokane, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Aug 26, 2012
 
Pam wrote:
<quoted text>
You have convinced yourself that it is hate, but it is not. I would be the first to admit that none of the Christian perspective is based in the kinds of issues that courts would or should address. Courts of law are not the final word, after all. And, while there was a time when courts tried to align themselves with the author of the final word, these days courts operate more in line with hubris than with God's law. I know you will saying I am lying, but I believe it when gay men say they are powerless to change. That and many other changes are beyond the power of man. That does not, however, mean that the defintion of marriage should be changed to accommoddate them. Gays are free to do whatever they want as long as it isn't effecting other people. Changing the definition of marriage effects everyone. No, I'm not talking about my own personal marriage being changed. I am talking about far reaching changes beyond that.
allowing gays to marry doesn't affect you mentally ill xtains at all. you can still marry and have your incestuous families all you want, nothing at all will change for you. your just trying to deny us the right to consolidate or relationship and deny us happiness and equality
Pam

Grove City, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Aug 26, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

truth wrote:
<quoted text>
allowing gays to marry doesn't affect you mentally ill xtains at all. you can still marry and have your incestuous families all you want, nothing at all will change for you. your just trying to deny us the right to consolidate or relationship and deny us happiness and equality
You sound like a different person in this post compared to the last one you made. First post actually stirred a little empathy. This one stirs only revulsion.

“Engaged to the love of my life”

Since: Aug 12

Montreal

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Aug 26, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Pam wrote:
<quoted text>
You sound like a different person in this post compared to the last one you made. First post actually stirred a little empathy. This one stirs only revulsion.
You actually sounded nor-
Wait no, you didn't.
Hate is defined by extreme dislike/aversion with a group of people or one individual. Through your religion, you have an extreme dislike of gay people. That is enough to say that you hate gays.
Hating a group of people that do not follow your views and being ignorant of anything they say is bigotry. Therefore you are a hateful bigot.
You fit the definitions of the words, there's no arguing it.
Next, as the nice commenter said before me, marriage equality doesn't affect anyone but the two people getting married.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Aug 26, 2012
 
Pam wrote:
Let's just say I'm not a slut or a gay man. I haven't seen but a few in my whole life.
As obvious as a point I was making, it's amazing that you still didn't get it. If you've seen one, you've seen the basic design of them all dear.

“Son of Abraham”

Since: Aug 07

Natural Deviant

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Aug 26, 2012
 
Huey wrote:
I wish I could accept it and be one of the homosexuals and I wish I would stop thinking about molesting little boys.
What he really thinks..

“Son of Abraham”

Since: Aug 07

Natural Deviant

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Aug 26, 2012
 
NoQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Please don't let me cry about being lil Fa$$ot. LMFAO
What he really thinks...
Pam

Grove City, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Aug 26, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Lacez wrote:
<quoted text>
You actually sounded nor-
Wait no, you didn't.
Hate is defined by extreme dislike/aversion with a group of people or one individual. Through your religion, you have an extreme dislike of gay people. That is enough to say that you hate gays.
Hating a group of people that do not follow your views and being ignorant of anything they say is bigotry. Therefore you are a hateful bigot.
You fit the definitions of the words, there's no arguing it.
Next, as the nice commenter said before me, marriage equality doesn't affect anyone but the two people getting married.
You dislike people who don't want gay marriage. Hating a group of people who do not follow you views and being ignorant of anything they say is bigotry. And you don't follow the definition of the words? I'm not even going to try to argue it. I know and you know that the definition fits you, but you'll never own up to it. So how does that make you better than me?
Pam

Grove City, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21
Aug 26, 2012
 
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>As obvious as a point I was making, it's amazing that you still didn't get it. If you've seen one, you've seen the basic design of them all dear.
Really? You make them sound pretty boring. Heck of thing to love so much you run afoul of society's social norms, isn't it?

“Luke laughs at hypocrites!”

Since: Sep 10

Palm Springs, California

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#23
Aug 26, 2012
 
Pam wrote:
<quoted text>
Really? You make them sound pretty boring. Heck of thing to love so much you run afoul of society's social norms, isn't it?
Why doesn't he do when YOU get bored, SNICKERS, change his name to something less prone to banning from Topix?

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••