This isn't a discussion about homosexuality, but if you are against homosexuality, shouldn't you be called "antihomosexual" rather than "homophobic"?\n\nWhen broken down into Greek, "homophobia" means "fear of things that are the same".  What's up with that?
133516
Theoretically, you're absolutely right. The thing is, the word "homophobia" is a modern word of recent coinage. The "homo-" in "homophobia" isn't short for "homos" (Greek for "one-in-the-same"), it's short for "homosexual." Language is elastic that way.\n\n"Antihomosexual" might be preferable if "homophobic" hadn't become standard usage. Now, it would seem pedantic to try to change the standard. Words mean what people understand them to mean, that's all. If it were seriously confusing to use "homophobic," people would just stop using it.\n\nIn early Middle English, "uncle" was spelled "nuncle." Just because we lost the first "n" doesn't mean that the language was "bastardized." English is a hodge-podge of hundreds of languages. I'm an English teacher, but I understand that words change, and that there's no hard-and-fast proscriptive lexicon that won't be obsolete the moment it's published. The word "understand" doesn't mean to stand under anything. What's the point of expecting rules that never applied suddenly to apply now?
497513
what people use it for now is calling someone homosexual in a mean way. saying faggot instead of gay is supposed to be meaner. faggot used to mean a bundle of wood. not sure how it went from that to and insult, but whatever.
119542
Fag is another word in our culture for gay. Originally it means other things, but it has multiple meanings and gay is the most predominant. It's not a nice word to say, really, like the 'N' word for black people. A nice person won't say words like that.
123806
I think this has something to do with being branded gay themselves.It's stigmatic, although very narrow minded, it's still out there all over the world. People are afraid of anything, or one in this case who are different and make quick assumptions.Hey, I had two great big trucky guys living across the road from me, both looked like rough rednecks, but they where very gay.Lovely guys though. Men are very egoccentric when it comes to their own manhood.
283605
It's both! Look up my answer on "why's religion against homosexuality?" I suspect many homophobes are more afraid of something in themselves than outraged by the private act between two guys. The "holy rollers" have a paradigm of values dictated to them. This becomes their identity. Anything different suggests that they may be wrong. \n Why else are there so many religious replys here? If we don't like something, we avoid it. If something is a threat to us, we attack it.
138195
Really, really, freakin', absolutely, pathetically, why-hell-is-it-in-the-Olympics gay!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!\n\n\np.s. For the person who thought it was sad for you to use the word "gay": the word "gay" has about three usages right now. It either means "happy", "homosexual", or "dumb". The English language and it's slang words always constantly change or have more than one meaning. That's because it's a "living" language.
205358
It is normal for people to feel scared about what they either do not know or do not understand. It is unfortunate that people express their prejudices usually with violence (whether physical or vocal).\n\nI think that a lot of hostility comes from men who consider a homosexual man a threat to their masculinity. The thing is, most of those people are homophobic and have NO IDEA about you.\n\nThese people attack what they don't understand, and it IS wrong, but unfortunately hate-crimes and such like have been part of society for thousands of years. Most wars break out because of it.\n\nSome gay people (some that  know) counter-attack by going out of their way to express themselves in an ultra-gay fashion, which is just adding fuel to the fire.\n\nThe thing is this. Being gay is not about who you sleep with, but who you love. Peoples love lives are the same, and should not concern anyone unless it directly affects them.\n\nI would suggest opening your heart to these people and say to yourself that maybe they are not aware f how incredibly ignorant they are. As far as a human being is concerned, try putting it into context...\n\n'I was lying on the street, my heart had stopped and lungs given up, when a stranger came up and touched me. He touched me not with the love of a man for a man, but of a man for a fellow man in need. After that homosexual man had saved my life, he became my brother for the rest of it. I have since been grateful everyday for that man, not homo nor hetro, who gave me my life.'        - Chameleon Dreams, Jayden Walker.
130756
Many people associate homosexuality as something negative, thus they use the word "gay" as a general perjorative. Anything they dislike gets called "gay" not because it's homosexual, but because it's bad.\n\nThat's a very immature way of speaking, but it's out there.
487991
I'm not willing to say that most of them are, but I'm sure they make up a substantial chunk of the pie chart. Why else would anyone be so preoccupied by the subject?\n\nI've noticed that several people now have called this question homophobic. Why do you think that noting that some very narrow minded homophobic people might really be gay is derisive to gay people? Do you think that's a nasty word? Do you think it's mean to say the word homosexual? It's not. That's pathetic. Gay people have every reason to hold their heads high. \n\nWhat the asker is asking us to confirm is whether we've noticed that there are groups of people with very questionable opinions about homosexuality that may be reacting to their own sexuality like it's dirty, which is painfully funny, because only a sadist would pick a faith where the way they came from "God" is a cross that they must angrily pretend not to bear until they die -- and yes I have noticed.\n\nNow will all of you get off this "what's wrong with that?" business?
101384
Well, for most people it's mostly the propaganda that the media has been shoving down our throats recently. They have instilled the fear of Gay people in ourselves. Most people think of Gay people in a sexual concept, while it's not. Gay can mean happy, colorful, etcetera. I mean, why would they say "Don we now our gay apparel, Falala, lalala, la la la" if they thought Gay was all bad? A sin? I wouldn't think of it exactly as a sin, but most heterosexual people don't like the whole "doing it with another of your sex" thing. They think of Gays being all M.J. and "I'm gonna hump you" kind of thing.  If you watch Food Network, there is a show starring two Gay men in a cooking show. Has Food Network canceled it yet? I'm not sure, but I'm pretty sure they haven't. So what if two guys or girls like each other to get married or be in an affair? It's really none of our business, just the couple in qusetion's. If they have sex together, good for them! They're happy. Whoop-de-doo. It's not our business, but theirs. I don't think that God hates Gay people. He regards them as a way of life. Everyone truly is afraid of the way some people express their gayness.\n\n\nHope this helps!\nP.S. You spelled unnatural wrong.\n-crad010
230587
I'm a Christian and I am not "opposed to gay people". But when you tell me these two things then I have to respond in what I hope is a compassionate manner.\n\n"The discovery that some of us are created and/or shaped in our earliest infancy toward same-gender attraction was made in the last 150 years."\n\nThat may or may not be true although for the sake of discussion let's say that it is. Many people have a tendency towards a particular form of behavior. When they get old enough to make mature decisions they have to decide whether that behavior is beneficial or not and since we are talking about God, whether that behavior is in His will for their life or not.\n\nSome people seem to be born with a terrible temper and are prone to violent behavior. They either end up controling their urges or they reap the consequences of giving in to them. It could be a struggle that they have for their entire life and one that they cannot always win. Hopefully they don't commit murder or just give up and make themselves a menace to those with whom they come into contact.\n\nJust because homosexuality isn't exactly the same doesn't mean that there are not legitimate parallels. Someone who finds themself attracted to members of the same sex still makes a choice about how they are going to deal with that emotion just like someone who is prone to anger.\n\nWhen you talk about not bringing up the "Adam and Steve" argument I have to go outside of the guidlines you want to impose on this discussion. It is apparent from the command God gave to Adam and Eve to go forth and multiply that He created men to have sex with women for the purpose of procreation. God also made sex an enjoyable encounter between two people as an added bonus. So where does that leave today's "Adam" if he is not attracted to any of the "Eves" in this world but instead finds himself attracted to the "Steves" around him?\n\nThe book of Corinthians provides at least one answer to that question and Jesus spoke of another for those who were able to receive it.\n\n1 Corinthians 6:9  Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality,  (10)  nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.  (11)  And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.  (12)  "All things are lawful for me," but not all things are helpful. "All things are lawful for me," but I will not be enslaved by anything.  (13)  "Food is meant for the stomach and the stomach for food"--and God will destroy both one and the other. The body is not meant for sexual immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body.\n\nIn this passage the Apostle Paul is speaking to relatively new believers who have been born again by the Holy Spirit. He talks about how some of them USED to be things like drunkards and men who practice homosexuality.\n\nWhen I came to Christ at age 43 I had been a drunkard for many years and had developed a chemical addiction to alcohol. I haven't had a drink since a short time before becoming a Christian but it was a real struggle for me until I was born again. That doesn't mean that I'm never tempted to drink or that I've lost the desire to have a cold beer on a hot day but it does mean that now I have supernatural assistance to overcome my struggle.\n\nI don't go around telling people about how Jesus made wine for the guests at a wedding and how I would be justified in drinking since it's not illegal and doesn't hurt anyone else. Instead I know that it's not in God's will for my life to drink alcohol and so I consistently make the choice every day of my life
97024
I don't believe ANYONE would actually CHOOSE to be- I mean, it's kind of like choosing between driving a car uphill and walking on your hands, in the snow, with no gloves on,  backwards, while making a homemade apple pie. Not much of a choice here, is there? \nI apologize if that was a little over the top, but I get really frustrated by lack of understanding when it comes to matters of sexual orientation. A lot of answers you'll get will be "choice", but I assure you that NONE of THOSE answers will EVER come from someone WHO IS REALLY GAY. Why the heck would we, as heterosexuals, know better than someone who IS ACTUALLY HOMOSEXUAL??\n(again, I'm sorry if I sound nasty- as the saying goes, "One of my best friends is gay."- and he is.)
140742
Wait a minute. Who said people with phobias had an inferior mental state? The only person I know that's said that is you. Some people may have seemingly irrational fears but a lot of them make sense ie; fear of heights, fear of snakes etc. It doesn't mean you're mentally inferior. I'll admit the word 'homophobic' has always confused me a bit too but I very much doubt it was someone who was gay who first came up with the word.\n\nOh, okay. I guess that's fair enough.\n\nI've just found something. I'm not after the best answer, I just thought you'd like to know. The answer to who came up with the word is mentioned here: \nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homophobia\nHe's apparently heterosexual.
559447
Why are these descriptions used anyway?\nNobody says: "Look, there goes a heterosexual!\nWhat do you think of, when you hear that?\nSex? Of course you do - these words imply\na sexual orientation.\nTo use these words to describe somebody is\nrude and show that your mind is in the gutter.
395346
People hate because they are afraid of things they don't know much about. The Church goes against its own preachings by hating gays. Christianity says to love others, even if they are "sinners." You can argue about the nature of sin, but nowhere in the bible does it say "Good Christians bully gays." In fact, Jesus defends sinners as being only human and by saying,"He who throws the first stone..." Some Christians argue that gays are sinful, but few know what sodomy traditionally means. In biblical times, any sex that was done for just pleasure and not to make babies was viewed as a distraction to pleasing God and worshipping Him. So, naturally, gays were sinful for "having sex for fun." Nowadays, though, healthy relationships are driven by "fun sex", not the urge to make babies. Sexual attraction and a healthy sex life with your lover, not the need to make babies, is what primarily drives a healthy relationship of any kind! So in essence, what causes religiously-rooted homophobia is a misinterpretation of the bible. The other kind of homophobia is driven by people insecure in their own sexuality, and therefore need to bully others in order to feel powerful.\nEither way. I think your friend is just trying to find himself, so give him time.
424244
People say "that's gay" as a negative comment because to be gay is bad.    Being gay used to mean happy, which was a good thing.  But when it came to mean attracted to someone of the same gender, it had a completely negative connotation.\n\nPeople are not being honest when they claim it has nothing to do with gay people.  \n\nAnd people act like it's something new, when it's not.  People did it in the 'seventies.  Referring to something gay meant it was stupid or undesirable or something negative.\n\nPeople use that expression, and claim they have nothing against gay people and will claim they have so many gay friends and blah blah blah.  Well, I've never met a single gay person who liked that practice, though some will go so far as to say that if you know  the person doesn't mean it as an insult, it's not so bad.\n\nBut then again, the very first thing that comes out when the insults start to fly between heterosexual men is the word f-aggot.  Or they'll call the other guy a cocksucker.  Or just overall ridicule the guy by implying he's gay. regardless of whether it's true or not.   And if you call them on it, guess what a lot of them will say?  The same old b.s - they've got loads of gay friends and they don't have a thing against gay people. \n\nGay is bad.  That's how people think.  Or a majority of them, despite their protests to the contrary.  It's not being overly-sensitive to point it out, either.  It's being honest.
467317
I hope for the day that there is no stereotypes for hetero or LGBT people that we will one day just be people. \n So many Hetero/ homophobic types advocate stereo types that all lesbians are burly flannel shirt wearing, short haired, male hating females, and that gay men are limp wristed, effeminate, simpering, pink drink wearing scared of females type of guy. \nNow often LGBT people tend to think of straights as different or odd, they are all bible thumping, homophobes, who hate and want us all gone. \n I look forward to the day we can all just be people. not based on our sexuality, our skin color, our gender, or whom we love, but by the deeds we do, and the way we live our lives.