If a person were to join this forum making racist comments, using and implying racial slurs, and saying that racial minorities were disgusting, evil, and inherently inferior, they would certainly be swiftly banned (and rightly so!). This person could say the same things about women, people from certain countries, people with disabilities, and the reaction would be the same -- a swift ban.
However, on this forum -- which prides itself on civility -- people can make bigoted and untrue comments about lesbians, gays, and bisexuals with absolutely no consequences. Not so much as a warning. Certain members have been making blatantly homophobic statements for years without even a moderator comment.
Why the double standard? Why is racism banned, but homophobia and heterosexual supremacy tolerated? Are LGB people somehow a less-deserving minority?
Why is homophobia tolerated here?
Moderator: Moderators
- Danmark
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 12697
- Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 2:58 am
- Location: Seattle
- Been thanked: 1 time
Post #21
Read the rules:Beyonder wrote: So what is allowed? I am now confused so I can slander homosexuality? Race? And or religion? I can tell "Personal Attacks" are against the rules and all but what is the major offenses vs minor offenses vs not caring offenses.
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6
Re: Why is homophobia tolerated here?
Post #22Best to not rid as a Moderator/Admin of many sites freedom of speech is limited to how the staff feels sad but true to me if I see ignorant comments its a warning and comment deleted if the person backlashes its going to be a short ban.Haven wrote: If a person were to join this forum making racist comments, using and implying racial slurs, and saying that racial minorities were disgusting, evil, and inherently inferior, they would certainly be swiftly banned (and rightly so!). This person could say the same things about women, people from certain countries, people with disabilities, and the reaction would be the same -- a swift ban.
However, on this forum -- which prides itself on civility -- people can make bigoted and untrue comments about lesbians, gays, and bisexuals with absolutely no consequences. Not so much as a warning. Certain members have been making blatantly homophobic statements for years without even a moderator comment.
Why the double standard? Why is racism banned, but homophobia and heterosexual supremacy tolerated? Are LGB people somehow a less-deserving minority?
- Danmark
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 12697
- Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 2:58 am
- Location: Seattle
- Been thanked: 1 time
Post #23
I agree that belief systems may be attacked; that is integral to the purpose of the forum.otseng wrote: Your OP is a loaded question. I don't think a homophobe would describe everyone who opposes homosexuality.
Let me say that attacking homosexuality is tolerated here. Any belief system is allowed to be attacked. This includes homosexuality, Christianity, atheism, etc.
Homosexuality is a particularly sensitive topic. It is probably the most contentious issue on the forum since the very founding of this place. Many people attempt to skirt the line of personally attacking another when debating this issue. But really the only time a moderator would step in is when the line is crossed of personally attacking another.
However, I have trouble seeing homosexuality as a 'belief system.' Heterosexuality is not a 'belief system.' I agree that 'homophobe' should not apply to all who condemn or are opposed to homosexuality. Many who do so may be sincere in thinking it a 'sin' and a free choice.
But can we agree that we should not attack people for immutable characteristics such as race or gender or age? I think we have already come to the point where we have overwhelming evidence that for a significant segment of the population, same gender sexual attraction is an immutable characteristic like racial designations; that both classifications have been traditionally used to denigrate and devalue members of their respective classes.
Can we agree that if and when there is a stronger consensus that same gender attraction is not a choice and is an immutable, personal characteristic that attacking it will not be tolerated here?
- otseng
- Savant
- Posts: 20566
- Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
- Location: Atlanta, GA
- Has thanked: 197 times
- Been thanked: 337 times
- Contact:
Post #24
I would disagree that just because something is an immutable, personal characteristic that it cannot be attacked. It would be a necessary condition, but I don't think it's sufficient grounds for being closed to attack.Danmark wrote: Can we agree that if and when there is a stronger consensus that same gender attraction is not a choice and is an immutable, personal characteristic that attacking it will not be tolerated here?
- Danmark
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 12697
- Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 2:58 am
- Location: Seattle
- Been thanked: 1 time
Post #25
Let me try to examine the issues with an emphasis on clarity and explanation rather than argument, if that is possible.otseng wrote:I would disagree that just because something is an immutable, personal characteristic that it cannot be attacked. It would be a necessary condition, but I don't think it's sufficient grounds for being closed to attack.Danmark wrote: Can we agree that if and when there is a stronger consensus that same gender attraction is not a choice and is an immutable, personal characteristic that attacking it will not be tolerated here?
Am I correct that racism and misogyny and anti semitism are not tolerated here?
If that assumption is correct, and IF my suggested conditions are met regarding sufficient evidence of immutability and lack of choice, why are the first three classes protected, but not, prospectively, the fourth?
Another slightly different comparison:
We are allowed to attack Judaism as a belief system, but not Jewishness, or Judaism as a culture, correct? One can become a Jew by choice. I am permitted to attack his beliefs, but not his/her status, correct?
I agree there is a distinction between one's status as a 'homosexual'* and the practice of homosexual sex acts. Would this be an area where even at present, we could agree an 'attack argument' may or may not be permitted?
_______________
*I'm aware that "homosexual" is considered a pejorative term by some, but I am at a loss for another single word term that has the same clarity of meaning.
I also make a great distinction between "bisexuality" and "homosexuality" on the assumption that those in the former status operate under free choice, whereas the latter does not have a choice re: gender attraction.
Post #26
[Replying to post 24 by Danmark]
There's another wrinkle that seems to get very little attention. And (not because someone-or-other "came out" as one today) that's bisexuality. As I understand, any number (the vast majority?) of gays and lesbians also indulge in some point in their lives in heterosexual acts. A great numbers of mothers with adult children enter lesbian relationships in middle age. A great number of fathers with adult children enter gay relationships in middle age. Some number of "normal" heterosexual females toy with lesbian acts before marriage, supposedly college is a freguent setting for this. A great number, I suppose, of future gays are of an exuberant, non-sullen (normal teenage male) nature during teen-age years that makes them popular with girls and with more opportunity to engage in heterosexuality that I suspect they make use of?
There's another wrinkle that seems to get very little attention. And (not because someone-or-other "came out" as one today) that's bisexuality. As I understand, any number (the vast majority?) of gays and lesbians also indulge in some point in their lives in heterosexual acts. A great numbers of mothers with adult children enter lesbian relationships in middle age. A great number of fathers with adult children enter gay relationships in middle age. Some number of "normal" heterosexual females toy with lesbian acts before marriage, supposedly college is a freguent setting for this. A great number, I suppose, of future gays are of an exuberant, non-sullen (normal teenage male) nature during teen-age years that makes them popular with girls and with more opportunity to engage in heterosexuality that I suspect they make use of?
- Danmark
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 12697
- Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 2:58 am
- Location: Seattle
- Been thanked: 1 time
Post #27
I think it is fair to distinguish between those who may indiscriminately have sexual encounters with members of either sex, and those who felt compelled for many years to 'live a lie' or otherwise make their best efforts to fit in by living a conventional life due to tremendous social pressures.Korah wrote: [Replying to post 24 by Danmark]
There's another wrinkle that seems to get very little attention. And (not because someone-or-other "came out" as one today) that's bisexuality. As I understand, any number (the vast majority?) of gays and lesbians also indulge in some point in their lives in heterosexual acts. A great numbers of mothers with adult children enter lesbian relationships in middle age. A great number of fathers with adult children enter gay relationships in middle age. Some number of "normal" heterosexual females toy with lesbian acts before marriage, supposedly college is a freguent setting for this. A great number, I suppose, of future gays are of an exuberant, non-sullen (normal teenage male) nature during teen-age years that makes them popular with girls and with more opportunity to engage in heterosexuality that I suspect they make use of?
-
- Sage
- Posts: 910
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2014 12:41 am
Post #28
Let me break it down for you because it is actually quite simple. Sexual orientation is NOT entirely an uncontrollable matter. Behavior is also related to sexual orientation and can be a CHOICE unlike race, eye color, skin color, etc. What Christians are tend to attack is the behavioral aspect of sexual orientation.Danmark wrote:Let me try to examine the issues with an emphasis on clarity and explanation rather than argument, if that is possible.otseng wrote:I would disagree that just because something is an immutable, personal characteristic that it cannot be attacked. It would be a necessary condition, but I don't think it's sufficient grounds for being closed to attack.Danmark wrote: Can we agree that if and when there is a stronger consensus that same gender attraction is not a choice and is an immutable, personal characteristic that attacking it will not be tolerated here?
Am I correct that racism and misogyny and anti semitism are not tolerated here?
If that assumption is correct, and IF my suggested conditions are met regarding sufficient evidence of immutability and lack of choice, why are the first three classes protected, but not, prospectively, the fourth?
Another slightly different comparison:
We are allowed to attack Judaism as a belief system, but not Jewishness, or Judaism as a culture, correct? One can become a Jew by choice. I am permitted to attack his beliefs, but not his/her status, correct?
I agree there is a distinction between one's status as a 'homosexual'* and the practice of homosexual sex acts. Would this be an area where even at present, we could agree an 'attack argument' may or may not be permitted?
_______________
*I'm aware that "homosexual" is considered a pejorative term by some, but I am at a loss for another single word term that has the same clarity of meaning.
I also make a great distinction between "bisexuality" and "homosexuality" on the assumption that those in the former status operate under free choice, whereas the latter does not have a choice re: gender attraction.
Got it?
"
What is sexual orientation?
Sexual orientation is commonly discussed as if it were solely a characteristic of an individual, like biological sex, gender identity or age. This perspective is incomplete because sexual orientation is defined in terms of relationships with others. People express their sexual orientation through behaviors with others, including such simple actions as holding hands or kissing. Thus, sexual orientation is closely tied to the intimate personal relationships that meet deeply felt needs for love, attachment and intimacy. In addition to sexual behaviors, these bonds include nonsexual physical affection between partners, shared goals and values, mutual support, and ongoing commitment"
- American Psychological Association..
http://www.apa.org/topics/lgbt/orientation.aspx
- bluethread
- Savant
- Posts: 9129
- Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2011 1:10 pm
Post #29
Is it living a lie, if I do not advertise my personal sexual desires, refuse to take part in public discussions of personal sexual desires, and/or do not require that society officially recognize my personal sexual desires as socially acceptable and equal to all other sexual desires?Danmark wrote:
I think it is fair to distinguish between those who may indiscriminately have sexual encounters with members of either sex, and those who felt compelled for many years to 'live a lie' or otherwise make their best efforts to fit in by living a conventional life due to tremendous social pressures.
- Haven
- Guru
- Posts: 1803
- Joined: Sun Jan 12, 2014 8:23 pm
- Location: Tremonton, Utah
- Has thanked: 70 times
- Been thanked: 52 times
- Contact:
Post #30
There are some people who are bisexual: they experience attraction to members of two genders. Then there are some people, like myself when I was a fundamentalist Christian, who feel compelled by cultural, religious, and familial pressures to conform to a heterosexual lifestyle. This includes, many times, dating, marrying, and having sex with members of a gender to which one is not attracted. This isn't an "act" or a "choice" of sexuality, but a survival tactic--a desperate attempt to conform to one's belief systems and the expectations of family, friends, and community.[color=red]Korah[/color] wrote: [Replying to post 24 by Danmark]
There's another wrinkle that seems to get very little attention. And (not because someone-or-other "came out" as one today) that's bisexuality. As I understand, any number (the vast majority?) of gays and lesbians also indulge in some point in their lives in heterosexual acts. A great numbers of mothers with adult children enter lesbian relationships in middle age. A great number of fathers with adult children enter gay relationships in middle age. Some number of "normal" heterosexual females toy with lesbian acts before marriage, supposedly college is a freguent setting for this. A great number, I suppose, of future gays are of an exuberant, non-sullen (normal teenage male) nature during teen-age years that makes them popular with girls and with more opportunity to engage in heterosexuality that I suspect they make use of?
♥ Haven (she/her) ♥
♥ Kindness is the greatest adventure ♥
♥ Kindness is the greatest adventure ♥