Man, this is a question that I ask myself every second of every day.
Personally, I think it’s because it forces people to recognize the fact that life is not as simple or black and white as they’d like. It’s difficult to appreciate that which you have no context or frame of reference to and respond with bigotry and hate. Given that gays have no discernible hate in their heart for straight people, why then are they hated in return? homophobia is not being afraid of gay people… homophobia is fear of understanding and accepting the truth of homosexuality. There is a huge difference.
6 responses so far ↓
Adam // April 23, 2007 at 2:49 am
First of all, I’ll say that I have absolutely no problem with gays and I see nothing wrong or immoral with the gay lifestyle. That being said, I have a couple of problems with that article, and with the general rhetoric that usually surrounds this issue. These problems center around the use of the word “hate.” There are certainly plenty of deplorable people in the world who have a true hatred of homosexuals and their lifestyle. I don’t like the assumption that everyone who has a problem with homosexuality hates gay people. That’s a bit simplistic for me. Why does it matter? To me it matters because in many cases that assumption clouds the true motivations of some people who object to homosexuality. If our goal is to understand these motivations and confront them, I think we should totally eliminate this assumption from the discussion. If we really want to change the way people think about homosexuality we should realize that not everyone fits into this mold. As I said there are plenty of people who hate gays. The douchebag preacher who travels the country and pickets the funerals of gays with signs proclaiming that all gays go to hell…he clearly hates gays. But I know plenty of religious people who believe that homosexuality is immoral and who also have gay friends. I used to be one of them. If my friends had bought into this notion that I simply hated homosexuality, I would probably still be one of them. The fact that they accepted that my beliefs were not motivated by hatred, but by an honest attempt to live by a moral code that I thought was right at the time, meant that we could have productive discussions. Instead of asking “why do you hate gays?” they asked “why do you accept this moral code?”…a much more poignant question that demanded my consideration.
I know that in this discussion these distinctions can easily be viewed as nothing but semantics when we live in a country where a large portion of the population is treated as second class citizens. But I believe that this distinction is crucial when it comes to changing the way people think about gays and homosexuality. Let’s face it…asking that preacher why he hates gays accomplishes nothing. He readily admits that he hates gays and has all of the self-righteous vitriol to explain his hatred. Asking this of any one of the rational, well-intentioned people who harbor objections to homosexuality also accomplishes nothing. They’ll simply respond that they don’t hate gays at all…and if we aren’t prepared to accept this as a perfectly valid response, then we aren’t prepared to change anyones mind.
Leon // April 23, 2007 at 3:17 am
Interesting. Another course of action is to hold a man to his actions. If you confront the preacher with “why do you hate the gays” and he says “I don’t hate the gays”… you prove him wrong by presenting him with his actions until he is forced to review the issue within himself. The problem with this is that those that hide behind “moral superiority” will passively condone this behavior instead of confronting it. Letting jokes, simple omissions go by the wayside is hatred. Many thought that black Americans were less than human 100 years ago. Not saying otherwise is tantamount to being complicit in the opinion… through omission, treating a class of people as immoral and sub-par is hatred however passive.
If we all laughed off Don Imus instead of force him to review his speech we’d condone similar hatred. It’s not moral code. It’s superiority by way of misinformation and ignorance. It’s just as damaging as the preacher with his signs and just as harmful.
It’s not that I disagree with your point, I do agree, civil discourse is powerful and important and talking with those that will listen with language that will help give them context is fantastic but the word “hate” is not incorrect and should not be omitted from the conversation.
My life and experience give me true insight to this topic. Hate comes in many forms and not all of them are violent or loud.
Leon // April 23, 2007 at 3:18 am
Ps- I think my avatar makes me look like a sinister villain that uses an iPod to thwart my nemesis!
Adam // April 23, 2007 at 2:39 pm
I understand your point. And as I said hatred certainly does play a big role here. It shouldn’t be removed from the discussion but it should be used when appropriate. We all have our own experiences that inform our beliefs. In this case my experience tells me that there are a lot of good people out there who are totally 100% wrong on this issue but who don’t have hatred in their hearts for anyone.
I’ll admit when I saw your avatar I cowered in fear! When I get my MBP (hopefully soon!) we will travel the country, smiting the enemies of reason with our Apple products!
Leon // April 23, 2007 at 10:10 pm
Word. Totally with ya.
and LMFAO! We are going out Mac-Ninja style!!!
Adam // April 29, 2007 at 2:18 am
Found this interesting article recently that cites some improving trends in this area…thought you’d find it interesting. Reason rocks and Rick Santorum is a douche!
http://www.reason.com/news/show/33524.html