Sick of all the gay

[Unbeatable]

My point... I like TV. I watch a lot of shows with my wife... it is something we like to do together. I am getting a little annoyed about what seems to be a "gay affirmative action" going on in entertainment lately. You can't get a new show on TV without a good helping of onscreen male on male face sucking. ENOUGH ALREADY. I get it. It is ok to be gay. Can you guys lay off the smearing it everyone's face all the time now?

You don't get it. They're not doing it to convince you that it's okay to be gay. Their decision-making process doesn't revolve entirely around you. That's the real problem that you're facing here-- the fact that the entertainment industry's decisions do not revolve around what people like you want as much as they used to. There are other viewers out there who also like TV, but who are not repulsed by depictions of male homosexuality. The entertainment industry is gradually starting to care more about those viewers and less about viewers like you. Which means your complaints are going to fall on deaf ears, because the central issue here is that your feelings just don't matter as much as they used to. You don't get as much of a say in things as you used to.

In other words, you are becoming a minority.

 

[Ford]

In other words, you are becoming a minority.

A minority that is surprisingly self-aware of their vanishing influence.

 

[Sajara]

Frankly, the thought of me, personally, having sex with a man produces similar physical reactions as the thought of me, personally, touching a spider, or being very high up on a ladder or ledge, or in seeing the flat horizon of the open sea.

But i'm quite comfortable with identifying that reaction as something sourced inside of me. Not a quiet 'clue' from one or more deities about the evils of gays or heights, or some sort of innate morality against gays or spiders, or an evolutionary bumper guard against gays and those flat, unfinished horizons. Those things really freak me out. Good thing you can't usually see the horizon on a sub, i'd have lost my shit regularly.

Anyway, for whatever reason, i have these phobias. And i'm certain that the problem, if it is a problem, is with me, not them. Well, I do know ONE of them actually is a problem. I dropped an air conditioner on my toes when a homosexual ran out of it and ran up my arm. Oh, wait, no, that was a spider.

Other than the limp i had for a week that time, and missing out on a missile-deck barbecue one patrol, my phobias don't really impact my life. I probably wouldn't have sex with someone who owned a tarantula, but no one's offered. And a standard working environment of 300 feet below sea level is a great place for an acrophobe. Other than drydock and locking the door on the handling wharf roof...

And the idea of legislating so that everyone has to live as if they had my phobia strikes me as an amazing lack of perspective.

I don't believe there is anything natural about fear of snakes and spiders or the smell of rotting meat. These are cultural and social learned behaviors. As such, one could expect almost everyone in the culture to share these traits, and for all practical purposes appear normal. As for acrophobia and agoraphobia, there maybe early experiences which cause these conditions, but new research may find an organic cause.

There was a time when a pheasant would be hung by the tail feathers until it dropped to the ground from its own weight. Only then was it thought fit to eat. Don't me started on kimchi.

Some Indian cultures revere snakes. Many people own them as pets. While I wouldn't want to be bit by a spider, I don't run in fear any time I see one. I like the smell of manure (maybe it is a farming thing).

Better cultural scenario...Americans freak out wen the drink sour milk...Russians specifically buy it that way to drink. Much of our fears are learned although I do have an unfounded fear of Sharks due to jaws so even though tat to is learned I realize instinct/illogic comes into play...

 

[rousseau]

I don't believe there is anything natural about fear of snakes and spiders or the smell of rotting meat. These are cultural and social learned behaviors. As such, one could expect almost everyone in the culture to share these traits, and for all practical purposes appear normal. As for acrophobia and agoraphobia, there maybe early experiences which cause these conditions, but new research may find an organic cause.

There was a time when a pheasant would be hung by the tail feathers until it dropped to the ground from its own weight. Only then was it thought fit to eat. Don't me started on kimchi.

Some Indian cultures revere snakes. Many people own them as pets. While I wouldn't want to be bit by a spider, I don't run in fear any time I see one. I like the smell of manure (maybe it is a farming thing).

Better cultural scenario...Americans freak out wen the drink sour milk...Russians specifically buy it that way to drink. Much of our fears are learned although I do have an unfounded fear of Sharks due to jaws so even though tat to is learned I realize instinct/illogic comes into play...

Agreed.

Repulsion from homosexual content may be naturally integrated into our psyche, but when you actually think about it there is no reason why this should be constant. The realization that people who experience this aren't making is that they're being irrational and are acting out learned, repetitive responses.

All it really takes is for an individual to recognize that two men kissing isn't a big deal and no reason for revulsion, and once society at large is taught the same, that fact will become a norm.

 

[Keith&Co.]

All it really takes is for an individual to recognize that two men kissing isn't a big deal and no reason for revulsion, and once society at large is taught the same, that fact will become a norm.

I'd rather think we'd get more mileage if society could internalize the fact that you being revolted by something is not a reason for Congress to act on it....

 

[Underseer]

I am happy that homosexuals have come such a long way in the US, with respect to their civil rights. Acceptance of gay marriage feels like it happened overnight. 'metrosexual' is a thing... or was a fad... or something that made "gay" "cool". Congrats gays! you did very well, so far.

If someone wants to smear shit all over their face and rub up against a tree, fine, I don't care. If someone wants to smear shit in my face and bang me up against a tree... there is going to be a strong, negative reaction. I am sure many gay folks will not appreciate the analogy that 'gayness' is like smearing shit on your face.. but that is my freedom to express... just like the gay folks have the freedom to express their affection for each other, publicly, like anyone else of other sexual orientations... except the pedophiles and beastiologists.. so not everyone.

OK, so now it is cool to be gay, or whatever... I am really fucking tired of seeing it. It is just.. ugly. I find it repulsive.. like, you know, the smell of shit. My biology is programmed to repulse that which is not right for me... things are gross that are gross to me... I like chocolate, you like vanilla... all the power to you... eat that vanilla.. suck it and fuck it all you want.

My point... I like TV. I watch a lot of shows with my wife... it is something we like to do together. I am getting a little annoyed about what seems to be a "gay affirmative action" going on in entertainment lately. You can't get a new show on TV without a good helping of onscreen male on male face sucking. ENOUGH ALREADY. I get it. It is ok to be gay. Can you guys lay off the smearing it everyone's face all the time now? It's like all the back people calling each other nigger every other word... I get it, you own the word now.. good for you... does it have to be used 5 times in every sentence??

/end rant

So... being gay is like smearing shit all over your face?

Golly, that doesn't sound homophobic at all.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I don't think it's proof of bigotry. Look at my post above--I'm repulsed by male-on-male sexuality also. The difference is that I recognize that it's my failing and don't try to translate my objections into actions. A lot of people have a hard time separating their own issues from right and wrong, though--failing to keep these things separate isn't bigotry, just a lack of understanding of psychology.

I would think that it is more likely evolutionary programming. If humans had been sexually attracted to their same sex and not to the opposite sex then there would be no humans. If humans had not had a natural revulsion to the smell of rotting meat, spiders, snakes, etc. then survival would be unlikely. Natural revulsion would be an evolutionary response not necessarily one dictated by society. Attraction and revulsion seem to be evolved responses. How we react to those evolved responses in a social species is a matter of societal expectations.

Good point.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I don't think it's proof of bigotry. Look at my post above--I'm repulsed by male-on-male sexuality also. The difference is that I recognize that it's my failing and don't try to translate my objections into actions.

There's more of a difference than just that. You did nothing more than simply state what it makes you feel like: you didn't go on at length about it nor did you go out of your way to post vulgar comparisons.

If all you do is matter of factly state your dislike of a thing; then that's not bigoted. Especially not if you add a qualifier by saying that if 'x' have the right to do the same thing, then 'y' does as well.

On the other hand, if you start ranting about the subject, draw insulting comparisons and repeat them for effect, all all but demand that reality rearranges itself so you don't have to be exposed to the subject you're ranting about... then yeah you're probably a bigot.

You miss my point. A lot of people don't recognize the difference between being personally repelled by something and that something being wrong--they see their personal feelings about it as a indication that it's something bad. I do not consider such a mistake to be evidence of bigotry--their reason is based in fact--just misinterpreted fact.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I don't think it's proof of bigotry. Look at my post above--I'm repulsed by male-on-male sexuality also. The difference is that I recognize that it's my failing and don't try to translate my objections into actions. A lot of people have a hard time separating their own issues from right and wrong, though--failing to keep these things separate isn't bigotry, just a lack of understanding of psychology.

This sounds like you just indicted yourself for bigotry.

No. Look around, you'll see I'm a supporter of gay rights.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If humans had not had a natural revulsion to the smell of rotting meat, spiders, snakes, etc. then survival would be unlikely.

Frankly, the thought of me, personally, having sex with a man produces similar physical reactions as the thought of me, personally, touching a spider, or being very high up on a ladder or ledge, or in seeing the flat horizon of the open sea.

The flat horizon? That's a phobia I've never heard of! Or do you mean a more general acrophobia?

Anyway, for whatever reason, i have these phobias. And i'm certain that the problem, if it is a problem, is with me, not them. Well, I do know ONE of them actually is a problem. I dropped an air conditioner on my toes when a homosexual ran out of it and ran up my arm. Oh, wait, no, that was a spider.

Phobias involve fear. There's no fear involved for me--seeing it is something distasteful, not something I'm scared of. Thus, while I think it's related to a phobia I don't consider it a phobia.

And the idea of legislating so that everyone has to live as if they had my phobia strikes me as an amazing lack of perspective.

Exactly.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I don't think it's proof of bigotry. Look at my post above--I'm repulsed by male-on-male sexuality also. The difference is that I recognize that it's my failing and don't try to translate my objections into actions. A lot of people have a hard time separating their own issues from right and wrong, though--failing to keep these things separate isn't bigotry, just a lack of understanding of psychology.

He called men kissing (kissing, ffs, we're not talking about gay porn at prime-time) each other on TV "shoving their sexuality in everyone's face", or something to that effect. This is ridiculous, and yes, bigoted. Two people kissing doesn't tell you what, if anything, those people might do beyond kissing in a more private setting, so it basically only tells you that the people involved might occasionally be interested in something sexy with a person of the same sex, nothing more specific can be deduced.

I'm bothered by seeing them kissing, thus I can understand how he feels it's being in your face.

He's wrong but I'm not sure "bigot" is the right label.

 

[krypton iodine sulfur]

Phobias involve fear. There's no fear involved for me--seeing it is something distasteful, not something I'm scared of. Thus, while I think it's related to a phobia I don't consider it a phobia.

The term 'homophobia' refers more to a social attitude of general antipathy (which could, but does not necessarily include fear) toward homosexuals. 'Xenophobia' and 'transphobia' are often used in the same way. While there may be a psychological form of this '-phobia' in the same sense as arachnophobia, I don't believe that is how it is typically used. While the root term 'phobia' does (if I recall correctly), stem from the Greek term for fear, it isn't always used that way. Hydrophobic molecules, for instance, are not afraid of water. Perhaps 'homophobia' was not the best term to use, but neither was 'homosexual'.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Frankly, the thought of me, personally, having sex with a man produces similar physical reactions as the thought of me, personally, touching a spider, or being very high up on a ladder or ledge, or in seeing the flat horizon of the open sea.

The flat horizon? That's a phobia I've never heard of! Or do you mean a more general acrophobia?

No, i don't. I'm all for wide open spaces. But there should be SOMETHING on the horizon. Mountains, buildings, coastal swamp... I have no problem being the foreward phonetalker on the way into port when we station line handlers. Or leaving port, with the big open sea ahead of us and around us in 6 of the cardinal directions, i'm fine. Made several port calls or deployments as the last topside phone talker to get inside the submarine, no problem, and as the small boat handling party phone talker.

But when we surfaced in the middle of freaking nowhere, and i did a 360, and saw nothing but this flat fucking line all the way around... It's unfinished. It's just wrong. Incomplete. Like the world has an edge and it's RIGHT THERE.

Three machinist mates couldn't get me out of that hatch. I had a death grip on the ladder until everyone after me climbed back down so i could get back to where i couldn't see that.

 

[skepticalbip]

The flat horizon? That's a phobia I've never heard of! Or do you mean a more general acrophobia?

No, i don't. I'm all for wide open spaces. But there should be SOMETHING on the horizon. Mountains, buildings, coastal swamp... I have no problem being the foreward phonetalker on the way into port when we station line handlers. Or leaving port, with the big open sea ahead of us and around us in 6 of the cardinal directions, i'm fine. Made several port calls or deployments as the last topside phone talker to get inside the submarine, no problem, and as the small boat handling party phone talker.

But when we surfaced in the middle of freaking nowhere, and i did a 360, and saw nothing but this flat fucking line all the way around... It's unfinished. It's just wrong. Incomplete. Like the world has an edge and it's RIGHT THERE.

Three machinist mates couldn't get me out of that hatch. I had a death grip on the ladder until everyone after me climbed back down so i could get back to where i couldn't see that.

Apparently you are not alone. I do know one other person that has the same reaction, though not as severe as you describe. He is fine when we go offshore as long as he can see a hint of trees on the horizon. However, when the tree line disappears below the horizon, he becomes frantic to turn around and return closer to shore. It limits how far we can go out for offshore fishing. I wish there were taller trees along our coast so we could get out a little further. I'll have to tell him that I now know of a case of whatever this is more severe than his. Now you have me wondering if this phobia has been studied.

 

[Keith&Co.]

I'll have to tell him that I now know of a case of whatever this is more severe than his. Now you have me wondering if this phobia has been studied.

Probably most people don't know they have it.
I grew up in Idaho, there was always something somewhere.
The navy had me on the shore on several bases, never felt at all inconvenienced.
One trip to Steel Beach for a Barbecue, and suddenly i have this phobia...

The most common reaction, of course, is not only disbelief that such a thing could be a phobia, but they point out that i sail on submarines. The apparent belief is that if i don't have claustrophobia, i can't have ANY phobias....

 

[Bronzeage]

Phobias involve fear. There's no fear involved for me--seeing it is something distasteful, not something I'm scared of. Thus, while I think it's related to a phobia I don't consider it a phobia.

The term 'homophobia' refers more to a social attitude of general antipathy (which could, but does not necessarily include fear) toward homosexuals. 'Xenophobia' and 'transphobia' are often used in the same way. While there may be a psychological form of this '-phobia' in the same sense as arachnophobia, I don't believe that is how it is typically used. While the root term 'phobia' does (if I recall correctly), stem from the Greek term for fear, it isn't always used that way. Hydrophobic molecules, for instance, are not afraid of water. Perhaps 'homophobia' was not the best term to use, but neither was 'homosexual'.

It's easy to pick apart the etymology of a word and deny its meaning in usage, but words mean what they are used to mean, not what we want them to mean. Homophobia is the word we use to describe the feeling of threat perceived when one encounters homosexual behavior, or any other manifestation of homosexuality. When there is no practical threat, we call it a phobia, for lack of a better word.

Just as usage defines words, out actions define us. A person who resents the presence of homosexuals on television and wishes they were not there because it bothers them, is demonstrating homophobia. There are many ways to rationalize this behavior. After all, few people want to admit to an unrealistic fear, but it is not a rational behavior.

 

[krypton iodine sulfur]

It's easy to pick apart the etymology of a word and deny its meaning in usage, but words mean what they are used to mean, not what we want them to mean. Homophobia is the word we use to describe the feeling of threat perceived when one encounters homosexual behavior, or any other manifestation of homosexuality. When there is no practical threat, we call it a phobia, for lack of a better word.

Threat, real or imagined, isn't really required with the common definition of the term, though it certainly isn't excluded.

[Canadian] Oxford Dictionary 2nd Edition (abridged, 2004)
homophobia - a hatred or fear of or prejudice against homosexuals or homosexuality.

That is the very general way in which the term is used.

 

[dystopian]

You miss my point. A lot of people don't recognize the difference between being personally repelled by something and that something being wrong--they see their personal feelings about it as a indication that it's something bad. I do not consider such a mistake to be evidence of bigotry--their reason is based in fact--just misinterpreted fact.

No, I didn't miss your point. It just isn't a valid reason for describing things as bigoted or not-bigoted.

It doesn't matter if someone's reasons are based in fact. It doesn't matter if their reasons are subjectively true or objectively true. What matters is how they interpret and apply those reasons to the world around them. The evidence isn't in them feeling repulsed; it's in how they express that repulsion.

 

[Malintent]

So, thank you for all the responses.. Firstly, I would like to say that I am not a homophobe at all, however that popular accusation in this thread speaks directly to what I am ranting about. It used to be that you needed to be hostile to gay people, violent, or in some way violating basic civil rights before someone would be called a homophobe. Now, just not liking to watch two men kiss passionately or otherwise engage in sexual acts is homophobic. this is exactly what I am talking about.

Perhaps it is the type of shows my wife and I watch.. Modern Family was an early example of a gay couple 'featured' on a sit com. They seemed to represent that culture very well. It has been on the air for years. This year was the first year that they had an on-screen kiss. It was not attractive... but whatever. It just shows a change has been happening.

Orphan Black is a relatively new show (on the third year now). A lot of gay people in that show.. over representative of the gay community.

.. and I guess that is really my point and the source of my "gay affirmative action" comment. Watching contemporary television now-a-days, if families and social circles therein represent American society in any way, then one must conclude that nearly 50% of society is gay, 50% of society is black, 50% of all children are adopted...

everyone gets a trophy. Everyone is represented in equal proportion.

Where are all the shows where there are as many unbelievers and believers? (OK, maybe "The Leftovers" is a unique example of that).

Part of my point in posting this rant was to validate my thoughts.. and you have all validated them. I can't express that the massive increase in male-on-male explicit sexuality on TV is ugly without being branded a homophobe. And THAT is the problem.

 

[Bronzeage]

It's easy to pick apart the etymology of a word and deny its meaning in usage, but words mean what they are used to mean, not what we want them to mean. Homophobia is the word we use to describe the feeling of threat perceived when one encounters homosexual behavior, or any other manifestation of homosexuality. When there is no practical threat, we call it a phobia, for lack of a better word.

Threat, real or imagined, isn't really required with the common definition of the term, though it certainly isn't excluded.

[Canadian] Oxford Dictionary 2nd Edition (abridged, 2004)
homophobia - a hatred or fear of or prejudice against homosexuals or homosexuality.

That is the very general way in which the term is used.

Threat and fear are intertwined. The threat maybe real or imagined, but why would anyone fear something which is not perceived as a threat?