Is there any NON-RELIGIOUS reason to be a homophobe?

[King Tyrant Lizard]

The main reason for homophobia is not religion; religion is a justification.

Right, no one actually believes in their own beliefs, they just pretend to care about that mystical stuff to compliment their animalistic xenophobia.

 

[GoodKat]

Right, no one actually believes in their own beliefs, they just pretend to care about that mystical stuff to compliment their animalistic xenophobia.

They actually believe it, they just form those beliefs around what they already think.

 

[King Tyrant Lizard]

That makes sense. I know every little kid I know accepted their parents' religious views because doing so suited their own hatred of homosexuals.

 

[GoodKat]

That makes sense. I know every little kid I know accepted their parents' religious views because doing so suited their own hatred of homosexuals.

I might take offense if I wasn't such a sarcastic person myself. The parents likely plant the notion that homosexuals are different(and thus should be hated).

 

[RestrictedAccess]

There are plenty of non-religious reasons. You were molested by a homosexual, or you find homosexuality icky. You could believe that homosexuality detriments a growing human population by reducing the likelihood that homosexual individuals will reproduce. You could also believe that homosexuals are genetically, or mentally dysfunctional. The list could probably go on if I had the desire to keep adding to it.

 

[King Tyrant Lizard]

There are plenty of non-religious reasons. You were molested by a homosexual, or you find homosexuality icky. You could believe that homosexuality detriments a growing human population by reducing the likelihood that homosexual individuals will reproduce. You could also believe that homosexuals are genetically, or mentally dysfunctional. The list could probably go on if I had the desire to keep adding to it.

I agree. Someone could simply have the belief that the nucleus of society is a man joined with a woman.

 

[PuppetXeno]

Religion does not explain, justify or modify the nature of man. At best it emphasizes some parts, and suppresses other parts, yet only to a small degree. Homophobia is a xenophobia and is probably older than mankind. Though I haven't taken the time to observe monkeys much and I'm certainly not good at detecting the gay ones at the zoo, their social systems are quite similar to ours albeit more physical (where we tend to fling poo at eachother in a figurative manner, monkeys actually fling real poo at eachother). Monkeys certainly display xenophobia (in fact all animals do and that's probably a very healthy trait).

From an evolutionary point of view, homosexuality isn't selected for because that kind of mating behaviour isn't exactly very succesful. However, it is observed throughout the animal kingdom, and from what I understand homophilia is animals isn't strictly limited to individuals, but more an effect of circumstances. Even if you look at cows in the field - they frequently mount and lick eachother, probably due to the lack of bulls. But it's not hard to imagine that this kind of behaviour comes off as "inappropriate" in other circumstances. Individual animals "compete" for the attention of the other sex (a trait which is selected for) and if one individual starts making advances to one of the same sex, that certainly impairs one's chances in this competition. So it's inappropriate at that point.

We humans use words for this kind of behaviour, and we sometimes cling to their definitions, and we hang on to our values out of fear of losing control of our lives. So we have a tendency to reject the "non-functional" behaviour very rigidly. But some individuals learn to rationalize their emotions and overcome their inbuilt xenophobia (which you needed as a kid btw) and we discover that we don't lose control by being a little bit more tolerant toward our fellow humans.

 

[Xulld]

Seriously, why are you letting this troll rile you up? He's just another boring contrarian that you can find anywhere on the internets.

Anyway, back on Topic:
Some people claim that they have a natural homophobia - it may be programmed in by religion and such, but its hard to tell. I certainly find some things gross, and honestly anal sex of any sort is one of them. Anyway, its conceivable that there may be a genetic predisposition towards being repulsed by the same sex sexually. It certainly isn't evolutionarily advantageous to want to use all your sexual energy on members of your same sex.

You may be homophobic if you had some kind of experience that made you that way... Certainly seems plausible that a traumatic experience associated with homosexuality might cause you to become a homophobe.

Afraid that You might have homosexual tendencies.... this is a popular one. Some men who may have small attraction to other men overcompensate by acting like they are completely grossed out/hateful towards. If it were completely acceptable to be homosexual then this might not be a possibility, so could still be blamed on religion.

I'm sure there are other ones. Just trying to honestly answer the question - I personally have no homophobia.

Well said.

The emotion of hate, or dislike for homosexuality is no different then any other, people can have strong feelings about things that have had an effect on there lives one way or the other, I would think it would be fairly strange to have a strong emotional reaction about something that has no effect, where no indoctrination was used to build a rigid principle.


_______

PS Joe. hahahah cant stop laughing, great posts! Dont stop.

 

[Th1sWasATriumph]

There are plenty of non-religious reasons. You were molested by a homosexual, or you find homosexuality icky. You could believe that homosexuality detriments a growing human population by reducing the likelihood that homosexual individuals will reproduce. You could also believe that homosexuals are genetically, or mentally dysfunctional. The list could probably go on if I had the desire to keep adding to it.

I wish the originator of this topic had qualified it with "rational". There are clearly many reasons to be a homophobe, but I don't think any of them - including the ones you listed - are actually rational. Understandable yes, reasonable no.

 

[Trinitron]

That's pretty sad. You come off as an angry and ill-adjusted 14 year old. If you really are 39, you are a few years older than I am, but about 25 years behind me in maturity. I'm very sorry for whatever happened to you to make you what you are, but you need to stop taking it out on the rest of us.

I'm 14, and I am a little disturbed by his bull.

 

[RestrictedAccess]

I wish the originator of this topic had qualified it with "rational". There are clearly many reasons to be a homophobe, but I don't think any of them - including the ones you listed - are actually rational. Understandable yes, reasonable no.

That's actually what I was thinking as I wrote that. Now had they asked for rational non-religious reasons, I would be at a loss for words.

 

[Otokogoroshi]

There is no valid, logical, rational reason to be homophobic. Just as there is no rational, logical, valid reason to be a misogynist, racist, or what have you.

If all your life a white man came up to you and slapped you every day then yes, you as a single person would have a reason to dislike and flinch away from white men. That however is situational. If it has to be put into context and explained then its not a broad reaching reason. Even then that only gives you a reason to dislike the individual or individuals who are acting against you. Sure a Pavlovian response is to be expected and your emotions will tell you to flinch away from all white men but a single persons actions doesn't give you a logical, rational valid reason to dislike all white men.

Everyone is different. I don't mean we're all special little snow flakes with endless potential. I just mean that we are all shaped and built differently (mentally mind you). So you can't judge a whole swath of people for ANY reason. Not all nazis were bad. Not everyone who kills is evil. Even if the majority of a group does things that are horrible by any persons reasoning doesn't mean you can expect ever individual of that group to be like that.

Long story short. No. There is no reason. Humans are programmed to fear that which is different from them because something different back in the hay day was probably you enemy or at least competing for the same resources. However we still have those same triggers in a modern setting where they aren't as vital so they focus on all sorts of things.

BLAh I'm hungry. Don't feed the trolls.

 

[King Tyrant Lizard]

So you can't judge a whole swath of people for ANY reason.

I disagree. If a mob was chasing after me I would judge them all at one time. I wouldn't take into consideration the unique situation that brought each unique individual to a point in their lives where they are chasing me.

 

[Ozymandyus]

Hell, even religious people don't have any GOOD reason to be homophobic. The few passages in the bible that seem to condemn it are certainly contradicted elsewhere and are easy to ignore if you are willing to ignore the stuff about slavery, owning your wife and stoning people and what not.

I realize of course that most people on this forum would say religious people don't have any good reason for anything :lol:... but even if they DID, there would still be no good religious reason for homophobia.

Most religious people I know aren't homophobic, but I never run across evangelicals and creationists in my every day life. I sometimes wonder where all these people are hiding.

 

[GoodKat]

I sometimes wonder where all these people are hiding.

The American Southeast, my own personal hell.

 

[Otokogoroshi]

I disagree. If a mob was chasing after me I would judge them all at one time. I wouldn't take into consideration the unique situation that brought each unique individual to a point in their lives where they are chasing me.

A mob would consist of a variety of people from (possibly) such different people that it can't be defined by any one group (typically). Unless you walked up to a white pride parade and threw poo on them >.>

My point is being you can't hate all whites, all blacks, all Muslims, all Christians, all nazis (though the concept can be hated all you want! the individuals themselves at the time well... its complicated... neonazis are idiots but I don't hate them) etc.

You had to make your point situational which validates my point about not having valid reasons to hate a broad reaching number of people...

 

[King Tyrant Lizard]

You specifically said that it was wrong to judge any "swath" as a singular entity for any reason. I'm assuming that by "swath" you mean a number of people grouped together in some fashion, be it by similarities of person, circumstance, or activity. The point is that the people have some commonality between them and I created a situation where that common aspect between them gives me a full justification to judge the group as a group, and not go by on an individual basis.

If anything, you are proving me right by ammending your statements and bringing up white power mobs.

 

[Th1sWasATriumph]

I disagree. If a mob was chasing after me I would judge them all at one time. I wouldn't take into consideration the unique situation that brought each unique individual to a point in their lives where they are chasing me.

Yes, because the mob are united under some common cause (ie, beating your face off.) However, you could not judge wider society or people from that mob, as a mob is still a single entity (albeit made up of multiple individuals.)

 

[You]

I think the largest factor in, oh let's call it "secular homophobia", is a propensity in males to be hostile to effeminacy (not that there's anything not wrong with that). Now, this trait (effeminacy, not the hostility towards it) happens to occur in homosexual men; certainly not all of them, but it is part of the stereotype. We've all seen, even known, overly-macho bullies who enjoy picking on such people, regardless of their sexual preference. Combined with the unfortunately all-too-common tendency for people to be averse to "people who are different" and you get: secular homophobia.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

I think the largest factor in, oh let's call it "secular homophobia", is a propensity in males to be hostile to effeminacy (not that there's anything not wrong with that). Now, this trait (effeminacy, not the hostility towards it) happens to occur in homosexual men; certainly not all of them, but it is part of the stereotype. We've all seen, even known, overly-macho bullies who enjoy picking on such people, regardless of their sexual preference. Combined with the unfortunately all-too-common tendency for people to be averse to "people who are different" and you get: secular homophobia.

But when you come down to it, it still boils down to deep and abiding stupid from the homophobes, and signs of a deeply defective personality. I'm pretty hostile to swishy gayness on a personal level, but I'm also hostile towards rap music and sitcoms with laugh tracks. There's an incredible amount of narcissism and arrogance to go from finding something annoying to wanting to ban things associated with it, and restrict the rights of anyone who might do things that annoy you. Why should someone's personal pet peeves drive policy?