A thought about anti-gay bigotry

[Orrex]

Whenever some media figure makes an idiotic anti-gay comment like that NBA whats-his-name or that dumbass from Grey's Anatomy just did, people invariably sprint to accuse him of secretly harboring homosexual feelings of his own, possibly hating himself for it.

I have two questions about such a line of reasoning:

1. Why should that be the case?
I can think of many types of bigotry that simply can't result from a projected self-hatred: a racist doesn't hate other ethnicities out of fear that he might secretly belong to that ethnicity; a sexist doesn't secretly fear being a woman; an anti-Islamic person doesn't secretly fear that he's a Muslim. Why should anti-gay bigotry be cast in its own category? To me, it doesn't follow logically, at least not in all cases. Sure, numerous virulent anti-gay crusaders have been discovered to be gay, but should these examples speak for all? It seems like lazy pop-psychology to dismiss a dangerous and irrational hatred as being motivated by self-disgust.

2. Doesn't that sort of let him off the hook?
Not in cases where actual crimes have occurred; these should be punished to the fullest extent of law. But by saying "he's just afraid to admit that he's gay," aren't we dismissing a longterm pattern of belief and behavior that in fact requires a more complex response than a one-liner? Such a quick dismissal strikes me as a snarky attempt to sweep it under the rug, or at least to ridicule the bigotry without actually addressing its causes or its perpetuation.

It's late and I'm kind of rambling--sorry. I certainly don't mean to seem as though I'm trivializing a widespread and dangerous form of bigotry. Quite the opposite, in fact.

I would be interested to hear your thoughts.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

1. I don't think most homophobes are gay.

I just think they're bigots.

Many people here tend to smear not only open homophobes, but any especially disdained Republican as gay, without ANY proof. They have plenty of reasons to hate them, but people instead go for the cheap gay shot. It sends a message that being gay is bad when anyone who is "evil" is somehow labeled "gay."

[Orrex]

5. That's a good point

There's a sort of kneejerk societal "gay = bad" message that's hammered home in countless insidious ways, of which schoolyard games of "smear the queer" are only the most obvious.

Meanwhile, actual evil is perpetrated more or less with impunity, and often by the same crowd that trips over itself in its zeal to condemn homosexuality.

[ZombieNixon]

28. Statistically, most homophobes probably aren't gay.

It's estimated that about 89% (or something like that...a vast majority) of the world's population are predominantly heterosexual (i.e. 2 or less on the Kinsey scale, let's say). So using that distribution, a large majority of homophobes are also predominantly heterosexual, especially considering that now it's much easier to come out and declare oneself openly gay than it was, say 20or 30 years ago. Sure, a few gay people might be in denial and hate themselves for it, but in most cases, people who hate gays are just, for whatever reason, afraid of "others" who are different.

[Erika]

2. Anyone who puts another group down has a self esteem problem

of their own. They exacerbate it by trying to make it someone else's problem. This guy is a stupid bigot with a need to feel superior.

[Orrex]

4. Very possibly

But a low self-esteem doesn't equate with suppressed homosexuality IMO.

Let the accusation be more precise, as yours is precise, rather than a blanket response of "he's gay."

[uppityperson]

3. kick to mark so I can check this thread tomorrow, interesting questions

sometimes people are bigoted against a (characteristic) because they fear them, not that they are like them, but they feel threatened in some way. Interesting questions, will check back tomorrow when I'm awaker also.

[OneBlueSky]

6. hate is the product of fear . . . and fear is the product of ignorance . . .

people who hate this group or that generally fear them for some reason or other . . . and they fear them because they don't know anything about them other than negative myths and stereotypes . . .

human sexuality is very complex, and heterosexual/homosexual exists on a continuum . . . it is very likely that no one is 100% either, i.e. that every heterosexual has SOME homosexuality in his or her makeup, and every homosexual has SOME heterosexuality in his or hers . . . therefore, a virulently negative reaction to gays can, in some cases, simply be a fear of the homosexual part of one's self . . .

then again, some people are just plain stupid . . .

[Kutjara]

7. It alsways strikes me as the equivalent of saying...

"You're a homophobe. That's so Gaaaaay." Using the very thing one purports to support as a barb indicates that the speaker is perhaps not as openminded as they think.

[Behind the Aegis]

8. Some thoughts.

1. Why should that be the case?
I can think of many types of bigotry that simply can't result from a projected self-hatred: a racist doesn't hate other ethnicities out of fear that he might secretly belong to that ethnicity; a sexist doesn't secretly fear being a woman; an anti-Islamic person doesn't secretly fear that he's a Muslim. Why should anti-gay bigotry be cast in its own category? To me, it doesn't follow logically, at least not in all cases. Sure, numerous virulent anti-gay crusaders have been discovered to be gay, but should these examples speak for all? It seems like lazy pop-psychology to dismiss a dangerous and irrational hatred as being motivated by self-disgust.

Actually, in the other cases that you mention, there are studies that suggest some of the animosity toward another group is because of shame the racist feels about his/her own group. However, for the most part, they simply hate the "differentness" of the other person, as if it makes the person being hated 'inferior.' In the case of homosexuality, there have been a few studies showing those that have the most virulent anti-gay attitudes may be suppressing their own homosexual/bisexual desires and do not know how to process those feelings and thus, take it out on those who openly display something they, themselves, for which they feel such shame. The vast majority of homophobes, IMO, are not latent homosexuals or struggling with issues of sexuality, but are taught to hate and revile gays, usually for religious reasons.

2. Doesn't that sort of let him off the hook?
Not in cases where actual crimes have occurred; these should be punished to the fullest extent of law. But by saying "he's just afraid to admit that he's gay," aren't we dismissing a longterm pattern of belief and behavior that in fact requires a more complex response than a one-liner? Such a quick dismissal strikes me as a snarky attempt to sweep it under the rug, or at least to ridicule the bigotry without actually addressing its causes or its perpetuation.

You provided a very interesting answer. It can be seen as a way of letting the offender "off the hook" because people feel a sense of pity for the offender. As you say, it can be an attempt to sweep it under the rug, but I feel that is an unintentional "side effect."

[dorkulon]

9. Forget my opinion; here's a scientific study supporting the link

I remembered hearing about this; here's the abstract:

J Abnorm Psychol. 1996 Aug;105(3):440-5.Click here to read Links
Is homophobia associated with homosexual arousal?

* Adams HE,
* Wright LW Jr,
* Lohr BA.

Department of Psychology, University of Georgia, Athens 30602-3013, USA.

The authors investigated the role of homosexual arousal in exclusively heterosexual men who admitted negative affect toward homosexual individuals. Participants consisted of a group of homophobic men (n = 35) and a group of nonhomophobic men (n = 29); they were assigned to groups on the basis of their scores on the Index of Homophobia (W. W. Hudson & W. A. Ricketts, 1980). The men were exposed to sexually explicit erotic stimuli consisting of heterosexual, male homosexual, and lesbian videotapes, and changes in penile circumference were monitored. They also completed an Aggression Questionnaire (A. H. Buss & M. Perry, 1992). Both groups exhibited increases in penile circumference to the heterosexual and female homosexual videos. Only the homophobic men showed an increase in penile erection to male homosexual stimuli. The groups did not differ in aggression. Homophobia is apparently associated with homosexual arousal that the homophobic individual is either unaware of or denies.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=8772014

Just one study, but makes a ton of sense to me.

[Change has come]

10. It has become a snarky one-liner...

for me. Because I don't want to admit there are people who hate me and want to harm me and my family because of my sexuality. It's a coping mechanism. I only wish it worked!

[dorkulon]

11. About the "snarky one-liner" thing

I would say that associating homophobia with closet homosexuality could be a very effective tactic in silencing such bigots. Nothing could be more fearsome to these people than to be thought gay. If the general public comes to believe in this link, it could create a great disincentive for bigots to shoot their mouths off.

[booley]

25. I am have never seen that work so far

Try it and that just makes them become even more homophobic.

Not to mention I then have to hear themgo on about how straight they are and how they would never 'take it up the poop chute". In fact, the number of times I have to hear the word poop chute becomes unbearable.

[ConsAreLiars]

12. If you chat with these bigots (the male versions) you will often discover that they are "disgusted'

when they see two guys who appear to be partnered because they cannot help but imagine the two involved in sex. And "of course" they find that offensive.

Now ask yourself, does any normal person react to seeing any pair of people holding hands in that manner? Do their thoughts also turn to fantasies of sex when they see two oldsters or two children being affectionate? Why this particular pairing stimulate such a, shall I say, such an intense "arousal?"

(edit to add a missing word)

[Orrex]

26. That, too, misses the point I think

By that argument, any expression of disgust must be viewed through the lens of self-denial. If not, then how/why does one isolate homosexuality as the one subject of bigotry that does imply self-denial?

Again, I fully believe that some vitriolic anti-gay bigotry may indeed result from one's own secret or suppressed desires, but that shouldn't be used as a blanket explanation for all homophobia.

[booley]

13. FINALLY!! THANK YOU!!!!

it just bugs the hell out of me when some homophobe comes of the wood work and so many normally intelligent liberals imply that this guy musy be secretly gay.

Why can't these homophobes just be ignorant bigots?

Thanks. I was beginning to fear I was the only oen that felt that way.

[ConsAreLiars]

14. "Merely ignorant bigots" generally don't care much one way or the other.

They are just repeating slogans. True homophobes get extremely worked up and spend a great deal of energy, whether from the pulpit or in a bar or a chat room, in denouncing "the queers" in whatever language will pass. Why so agitated? Problems. Problems related to same sex coupling fantasies.

[ThomCat]

17. I doubt that.

Because, again, that blames gayness as the source of the problem. The problem is not gays hating gays, it's straight people hating gays.

Claiming, without proof, that homophobes must be closet cases absolves heterosexuals as a group of responsibility for homophobia. It makes us the bad guys who are somehow responsible for our own persecution. It's as if you're saying that if we were all mature enough to come out of the closet there would be no more homophobia, and that's rediculous.

[booley]

18. With all do respect...

Merely Ignorant Bigots are quite passionate in thier defense of both thier ignorance and thier bigotry.

Perhaps I should have added they are WILLFULLY Ignorant, not just ignorant.

Bigots pretty much run the same course whether they are against Gays, Blacks, Mexicans or the mushroom people of Trollog 4.

They say things that are patently untrue (slogans or not) and they say these things to get themselves worked up (The GAYS are destroying marriage, the BLACKS are raping our women!, The Immigrants are raping our women and stealing our jobs!) and they dont' care if they are factually wrong.

So there is no reason to put homophobes in some special catagory of Bigot as regards thier motivations. I mean, it woul dbe great if they were all just secretly gay. Then all we would have to do is get them to accept themselves. And it''s not as if there aren't self haters. But self hatred by itself simply can't account for the number of homophobes.

Yes, Bigots have issues. Otherwise they probably wouldn't be bigoted. But that doesn't mean thoese issues are all self hatred.

[KamaAina]

22. Snarf! Let's suppose Hardaway was a mushroom-phobe...

Bigots pretty much run the same course whether they are against Gays, Blacks, Mexicans or the mushroom people of Trollog 4. :rofl:

"You know, I hate mushroom people, so I let it be known. I don't like mushroom people and I don't like to be around mushroom people," Hardaway said while a guest on Sports Talk 790,000 The Ticket on Alpha Miami 4. "I'm mushroom-phobic. I don't like it. It shouldn't be in the galaxy or in the solar system."

The host asked Hardaway how he would interact with a mushroom teammate.

"First of all, I wouldn't want him on my team. And second of all, if he was on my team, I would, you know, really distance myself from him because, uh, I don't think that is right. I don't think he should be in the kitchen while we are in the kitchen."

If he did find out that a teammate was a mushroom, Hardaway said he would ask for the player to be removed from the team.

"Something has to give," Hardaway said. "If you have 12 other ballplayers in your locker room that's upset and can't concentrate and always worried about him in the kitchen or in the refrigerator or whatever, it's going to be hard for your teammates to win and accept him as a teammate.""

:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

[booley]

23. interesting how you used the facetouse example

If someone had said that they didn't want to work around black people or mexicans, would that be so out of place? Would that be so hard to beleive?

Again, if you look at what all bigots say, you will see (unless you choose not too) that they pretty much used a lot of the same rhetoric. They change the words but the style remains the same.

For instance, alot of the arguements against Same Sex marriage are eerily similar to the arguements against mixed race marriages. Both sodomy laws and segregation were defended on the grounds that they were protecting the "natural moral order".

Most Bigotry is about protecting priviledge. Whatever particular group is seen as a threat to that priviledge is beisde the point.

And on edit, let me add that I do leave open the possibility that I miscontrued your meaning. If so, feel free to say so...

[KamaAina]

24. The intent there was to point out the absurdity of bigotry

see how stupid it sounds when it's directed against the mushroom people of Trollog 4? That's how stupid it all sounds, when you come right down to it. Besides, putting inflammatory racial or ethnic comments in Hardaway's mouth would at best have ignited the flame war du jour, and at worst gotten the thread locked.

[booley]

27. Ok then i apologize for misunderstanding

Sorry, communication is hard at the best of times. And I read so many snarky comments on forums that sometimes I come to expect them. I didn't mean to be an ass.

Yes you are right. Bigotry is by it's nature absurd.

[ThomCat]

15. It's a way of defending heterosexuality.

"He must be gay. He's one of them. So it's not us."

Straight people often adamantly refuse to accept responsibility for homophobia. It's just one more way of blaming the victim and projecting the crime onto the minority.
x(

[buckybadger2007]

19. It's funny that it's the homophones calling other homophones gay...

[mmonk]

16. That could be a reason.

However, I just think they are shit for people.

[Taxloss]

20. There is an important difference to racial or religious hate.

We're all a bit gay. Sexuality is a sliding scale, not a series of boxes - one might be 99.99% one way or the other, but there's still that 0.01%. And it's a curio of the human psyche that it often highlights its own marginal aspects in the form of insecurities.

[gollygee]

21. There are a number of reasons why someone could be bigoted against gay people

And that is one possibility but there are tons of them. Their religious leaders and/or parents could have taught them to hate gay people. They could actually believe the "gay agenda" bullshit and think that gay people are out after people's (read their) kids (propaganda is very effective). They could simply be angry and want someplace to lash out and that could be a convenient target. They could have been teased by being called "gay" when they were kids and could be reacting to that. There are probably dozens of reasons (or combinations of reasons).