I read some comments on several articles today that made me question are we as the gay community too quick to call someone a homophobe. When someone says that being gay is a choice are they a homophobe, ignorant, uneducated, illogical, or do they have some ground to stand on? When someone claims that marriage is solely for the purpose of procreation are they a homophobe, ignorant, uneducated, illogical, or do they have some ground to stand on?
The Oxford Dictionary defines homophobia as “an extreme and irrational aversion to homosexuality and homosexual people”. So based purely on Oxford’s definition someone who truly believes that being gay is a choice is not a homophobe. That leaves intentionally ignorant, uneducated, illogical, or they actually have a leg to stand on.
Going even further in today’s day and age calling someone a homophobe is just as derogatory as calling someone a fag, dyke, or tranny. All of these are accepted by some but others take these as very offensive and puts you on the defensive.
So if we are calling people homophobes we are putting them on the defensive. What are the chances of convincing someone to change their thinking if you put them on the defensive? They are not going to be open to listening to things you say and will not think rationally. They are trying to protect their honor. I agree that some people are homophobes, but the way we sling this word around is too pervasive and not necessarily always the right word to use.
So what word should we use? My thoughts after the jump.
Read entire article.
The Colorado Springs mayoral campaign has been devolving into an argument of who is the biggest homophobe. First Mitch Christiansen called the Gill foundation a bunch of homos.
“Munger will not beat Skorman. He does not have the backing of the Gil foundation (homos),” – Mitch Christiansen
Then today Mitch Christiansen tried to prove that he is not as homophobic as Buddy Gilmore by pointing out an email Buddy Gilmore wrote with a picture of Richard Skorman in a gold suit asking “Fast forward: 2012 Colorado Springs Gay Pride Parade?”. (Picture can be found at the link)
Personally, I do not find Buddy Gilmore’s email to be all that homophobic. It is certainly tasteless and shows a lack of good judgement by Buddy Gilmore, but it is not rabidly homophobic. On the other hand Mitch Christiansen is definitely homophobic. His email calling the Gill foundation homos is tame compared to his response to Focus on the Family’s survey and specifically question 8.
” would not issue a proclamation for any gay exhibition as we have seen in this city. I believe the displays are a detriment to this city. My wife and myself made many trips to SF in past years. Due to vulgar display of homosexual behavior we have not nor will we return for a visit. Our friends come to visit us as we will not travel there.”
I guess the gay vote is really that powerful in Colorado Springs that some of our mayor candidates have devolved into the petty argument about who is the biggest homophobe.
I have a beef with Bank of America right now. A couple days ago I received this really important letter from Bank of America for a records request. Since I do have a loan with Bank of America right now I figured it had to be important.
Only it was not a really important letter for a records request. In fact it was probably one of the least important letters I have received from Bank of America. It is one of the most deceptive pieces of advertising I have ever received. In fact I believe this particular piece of marketing is worse than the phishing scams you are constantly receiving. Here is what is so wrong with this piece of marketing:
I usually consider myself to be very savvy and I had to read this letter 3 times before I was convinced it was just a cheap marketing ploy. In no way was this deceptive marketing a record request as it states.
Due to this letter I will NOT be opening any new accounts with Bank of America. I encourage you to join me in avoiding Bank of America where possible. Their cheap scum like marketing does not deserve your business.
The actual letter is after the jump.
Read entire article.
A couple weeks ago I posted about why I do not donate to the HRC. One very good example of why I do not donate is the New Yorkers for Marriage Equality campaign they have been running recently.
I have no problem with the campaign itself, but they are only running this type of campaign in New York. What about Indiana where there is currently a bill working through the state to ban gay marriage in the state constitution? Or what about Colorado where there is currently a Civil Unions bill that has already passed the state senate and is now headed to the state house? What about all of those other states other than New York?
Why would I donate to an organization that does not focus on my needs? The HRC is only running this campaign in New York. I do not live in New York. In fact I would bet a lot of HRC’s donors do not live in New York. If the HRC is only going to focus on their narrow view of the world rather than focusing on the entire world then they do not deserve my dollars.
Do they deserve yours?
More “New Yorkers for Marriage Equality” videos after the jump.
Read entire article.
Here is a quick look at what Chick-fil-A spends your money on. Is this what you want them spending your money on?
Ellen DeGeneres doing standup on Gay Marriage.