Personality Cafe banner

Are you homophobic? (anonymous)

  • Yes

    Votes: 4 2.2%
  • No

    Votes: 168 90.3%
  • Somewhere in between

    Votes: 8 4.3%
  • I don't know

    Votes: 6 3.2%
1 - 20 of 232 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,202 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I am wondering if INFP's have a tendency to be homophobic? My uneducated guess would be no, as I am all about feelings and helping people. Though, at times I forget to be myself and worry too much, then I seem to drift from pink colored glasses to black ones. There were times I caught myself thinking or sometimes saying "that's so gay", or feeling uncomfortable around someone I know who's homosexual...I do feel guilt afterwards. Hmm.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StElmosDream

·
Banned
Joined
·
770 Posts
I think everyone has the right to be who he wants to be and like what he really likes. Sayigs like "homosexuals are corrupt", or so just always gets on my nervse. People can't choose these things and we can't push them to be who they are not. But here is one "big deal"... I like to use this sentence "this is so gay" ...and I don't really mean it against homosexuals, 'cause I think being gay is bit insutling word and I mean it more like... it's not good...but I don't mean it like it is homosexual...being homosexual is fine, being gay is not...gay for me is the word for those people who can't really accept who they are and they fake it all over, or try to be more femine, or more male, than they really are. I just really dislike those people who say they are homosexual and take it more as an image, than as a real thing...and I really met people like this, who just wanted to be different, or interesting and they pretented to be homosexuals...people like this are gay... People who accept themsevles for who they are, don't have to predent anything and are true to themsvelves..these are homosexuals...just my deffitniotion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
652 Posts
I am wondering if INFP's have a tendency to be homophobic? My uneducated guess would be no, as I am all about feelings and helping people. Though, at times I forget to be myself and worry too much, then I seem to drift from pink colored glasses to black ones. There were times I caught myself thinking or sometimes saying "that's so gay", or feeling uncomfortable around someone I know who's homosexual...I do feel guilt afterwards. Hmm.
What does homophobic exactly mean? Phobia is a fear (irrational fear). I know a bunch of people who disapprove of gay marriage, but not a single one that fears gays. I think this term is incorrect and misleading.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,187 Posts
What does homophobic exactly mean? Phobia is a fear (irrational fear). I know a bunch of people who disapprove of gay marriage, but not a single one that fears gays. I think this term is incorrect and misleading.
If those people disapprove of gay marriage because they believe that gays would somehow 'destroy' the 'sacredness' of marriage or 'cause' straights not to want to reproduce (or marry each other)--then yeah...that's what I'd call 'fear'. 'Fear' doesn't only refer to feelings of 'conscious' aversion. Maybe 'heterosexism' might be easier to understand without the 'baggage'.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
652 Posts
If those people disapprove of gay marriage because they believe that gays would somehow 'destroy' the 'sacredness' of marriage or somehow 'cause' straights not to want to reproduce (or marry each other)--then yeah...that's what I'd call 'fear'. 'Fear' doesn't only refer to feelings of 'conscious' aversion. Maybe 'heterosexism' might be easier to understand without the 'baggage'.
Fear and aversion are not synonyms. Word phobia is made up for the purpose of political manipulation; labeling opponents in any case, but in this case opponents of gay marriage as fearful people who have no worthy arguments and need professional help instead of a debate - people who are to be dismissed at sight.
I agree that heterosexism would be much more accurate expression.

duh, it's about worldview, your or anyone's attitude and desire to live in society who shares it. Nothing fearful about it. Marriage as 'traditional' union is very sensible: 2 people taking care of their own children (not adopting that of others, nor abandoning their own- name any scenario that there is), the children they make and raise together.

That's what the essence of marriage is. The day you change that, you've compromised the marriage itself. And people will have to come up with an entirely new word for what I described in the above.

I understand some people's affection is restricted and determined by sex of their partner, but until science has advanced a lot they'll be a simulation of marriage/ family - people who have neglected their own ability to reproduce and continue to deny the facts of nature.

If I wanted children, there would be no sex question - opposite sex it would have to be (of course there would be affection as well) - we make our own children together and we raise them. No excuses, debates, politics or second thoughts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,166 Posts
I voted I don't know :D

I doubt I am for many reasons but who knows. I don't know if there aren't situations where seeing gay couple do certain things doesn't trigger a response of wtf. But I would attribute that perhaps to lack of exposure, I don't know many gay people, haven't met many, overall though I don't really care about people's sexuality. Who they fuck doesn't interest me unless i'm apart of that equation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
211 Posts
This thread has potential to become very ugly, especially on this forum.

So I will add my thoughts which may be very different from the majority but it's ok for someone not to agree with me just like it's ok for me not to agree with you.

This is homophobia to me: A man finds out his friend is gay and suddenly feels uncomfortable around him, doesn't want to associate with him anymore and worries if this means he might be gay or if others will see them together and think he is gay too. Or that it will "rub off" onto him. That is true homophobia and I have known people like that and it is upsetting.

This is disagreeing with the person but still loving them: A man finds out his friend is gay and recognizes that he is free to make his own choice. While he himself disagrees with that lifestyle but acknowledges that each person is free to make their own decisions and have their own views. He doesn't stop being friends with him and he doesn't question his own sexuality and he doesn't care who sees them together because he cares about his friend more than what others might think. That is not homophobia but rather still enjoying the person in spite of disagreeing with the person.

That is my take on the situation.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,187 Posts
Fear and aversion are not synonyms. Word phobia is made up for the purpose of political manipulation; labeling opponents in any case, but in this case opponents of gay marriage as fearful people who have no worthy arguments and need professional help instead of a debate - people who are to be dismissed at sight.
I agree that heterosexism would be much more accurate expression.

duh, it's about worldview, your or anyone's attitude and desire to live in society who shares it. Nothing fearful about it. Marriage as 'traditional' union is very sensible: 2 people taking care of their own children (not adopting that of others, nor abandoning their own- name any scenario that there is), the children they make and raise together.

That's what the essence of marriage is. The day you change that, you've compromised the marriage itself. And people will have to come up with an entirely new word for what I described in the above.

I understand some people's affection is restricted and determined by sex of their partner, but until science has advanced a lot they'll be a simulation of marriage/ family - people who have neglected their own ability to reproduce and continue to deny the facts of nature.

If I wanted children, there would be no sex question - opposite sex it would have to be (of course there would be affection as well) - we make our own children together and we raise them. No excuses, debates, politics or second thoughts.
Bad arguments are bad arguments--whether or not one calls it 'homophobia' or 'heterosexism' in any context.

So what's the difference between a 'worldview' and something borne out of fear? Are they mutually exclusive concepts? If we're talking in political terms, what's 'discrimination'? And what exactly is 'sensible' about marriage being a 'traditional' union? What if somebody in a heterosexual marriage doesn't want children or can't have children?

And how do you justify your belief as being the 'essence' of marriage? And even *if* marriage itself becomes 'compromised', what are the likely (and not imagined slippery slope) consequences? And now I'm curious: are you a history, anthrolopology and/or a sociology student who has studied marriage traditions and rituals from around the world?

What are the specific 'facts' of nature? There are infertile animals, animals that eat their offspring, etc... Should we also take those behaviours/practices into account to decide what we 'ought' to do?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,017 Posts
In all honesty, I used to be up until I was in college for various reasons. I came to an understanding through education, maturity, and empathy, and I now stick up for people who are ostracized because of their sexual preference. I don't think it is a type thing, it is an ignorance thing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
652 Posts
Bad arguments are bad arguments--whether or not one calls it 'homophobia' or 'heterosexism' in any context.

So what's the difference between a 'worldview' and something borne out of fear? Are they mutually exclusive concepts? If we're talking in political terms, what's 'discrimination'? And what exactly is 'sensible' about marriage being a 'traditional' union? What if somebody in a heterosexual marriage doesn't want children or can't have children?

And how do you justify your belief as being the 'essence' of marriage? And even *if* marriage itself becomes 'compromised', what are the likely (and not imagined slippery slope) consequences? And now I'm curious: are you a history, anthrolopology and/or a sociology student who has studied marriage traditions and rituals from around the world?

What are the specific 'facts' of nature? There are infertile animals, animals that eat their offspring, etc... Should we also take those behaviours/practices into account to decide what we 'ought' to do?
What is a 'bad' argument? One that doesn't fit into your world-view?

In this case they're not mutually present in all cases, not even half I'd say. Not every disagreement and aversion is fear.
It's about what the word marriage stands for. If the meaning is changed, it's lost entirely for many people and they'll have to come up with a new word for it. Right now they are fighting for its meaning.

Not a student, but I have some knowledge. It's a lengthy, fruitless and quite unrelated path to take in this conversation. But why in hell do I need a degree to discuss this, while a bunch of people who have different opinion from mine don't. ('political' manipulation again)

There's a difference between trying to have your children/family with opposite sex and failing and not even trying.

I never mentioned imitating nature, but acknowledging natural/biological facts. Speak of gay movements who gave us example of homosexual penguins to justify how natural it is.

You don't have to strangle your offspring, but you have to have egg cell and sperm to make it.

What I find fascinating are the cases which suggest that love is so sex-based, and sex-restricted that they can never come to love, have children and enjoy both emotional and physical aspect of sex with a person of opposite sex. THIS is the most baffling and ridiculous issue in this whole story.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,187 Posts
What is a 'bad' argument? One that doesn't fit into your world-view?

In this case they're not mutually present in all cases, not even half I'd say. Not every disagreement and aversion is fear.
It's about what the word marriage stands for. If the meaning is changed, it's lost entirely for many people and they'll have to come with a new word for it. Right now they fight for its meaning.

Not a student, but I have some knowledge. It's a lengthy, fruitless and quite unrelated path to take in this conversation. But why in hell do I need a degree to discuss this, while a bunch of people who have different opinion from mine don't. ('political' manipulation again)

There's a difference between trying to have your children/family with opposite sex and failing and not even trying.

I never mentioned imitating nature, but acknowledging natural/biological facts. Speak of gay movements who gave us example of homosexual penguins to justify how natural it is.

You don't have to strangle your offspring, but you have to have egg cell and sperm to make it.

What I find fascinating are the cases which suggest that love is sex-based, so they can never come to love, have children and enjoy both emotional and physical aspect of sex with a person of opposite sex.
If you've ever studied formal logic or philosophy, bad arguments may have 'faulty' (as in having no empirical basis) premises/assumptions; make wrong or unlikely inferences; or have conclusions that don't follow. Some arguments commit some or all of the above 'errors' .

So give us a concrete example: what is a 'disagreement' that's fear-based and what isn't? I'm not asking what marriage 'means' to you personally; I'm really asking *where* your 'definition' of marriage comes from and why your 'definition' is more 'correct' than other definitions. And so what if 'the' meaning of marriage becomes 'lost' for many people? Will that stop heterosexuals from wanting to 'marry' just because they feel less 'special' when other groups are included?

Should learning about other cultures be called political 'manipulation'? You're simply learning about other people's *worldviews* through their cultural practices. You don't have to be a student--but there's nothing wrong with doing *research*.

How is 'trying to have your children/family with the opposite sex and failing' versus 'not even trying' relevant to this discussion?

Acknowledging 'natural/biological facts' doesn't tell us *what* those relevant 'facts' (in your view) actually are. And why should 'natural/biological facts' be important in this discussion? People use modern technologies and medical advancements like antiobiotics, computers, etc... and they're not widely denounced for being 'unnatural'. The reason why gay movements bring up mention of homosexual penguins is to challenge a specific assumption/statement: 'homosexuality is unnatural because other animals don't engage in same-sex practices'.

Okay. So even if an egg and a sperm are required to make offspring, then so what? What's your point?

Your final statement has little to do with this topic. If you want to talk about the issue of sex in relation to love in romantic relationships, then start another debate/discussion thread.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,734 Posts
Clearly I'm not since I'm queer
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,202 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
How did the OP come to this idea in the first place that other specifically INFP preference are liklier to have homophobic inclinations? Where is the connection? Curious/
Well I was thinking that INFP's may be more aware of their feelings and more knowledgeable about romantic relationships.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
69 Posts
I am a staunch LGBT ally. People are who they are, and I choose to love and accept them, because I know what it feels like to be the object of hate and ignorance. They deserve everything anyone else deserves, because they aren't "them," or "those people," they're our brothers and sisters (and/or [insert gender-neutral appellation here].)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,458 Posts
I put that I'm not homophobic, and I can say I'm truly not. I've actually been hit on by more gay males than anything. While flattered, I always wished women would show me that attention. :laughing:

However, if I don't like something or think it's stupid, I will use the phrase "that's gay" or even more harshly and rarely, the term "faggot".

I don't care if it's not politically correct or whatever. I say it. They're just many of the phrases I use, and I'm not going to stop using it because some politically correct asshat tells me to.

That being said, I would never seek out or harass a gay person or couple. That doesn't bother me about sexual orientation and it's not my business.

I've had gay friends when I was in school. I've been hit on gay people and we both have a laugh when I turn them down.

I can tell the difference between true hate, and people being stupid. Me and my friends will sometimes jokingly call each other gay. We all know we are joking and we are not out looking to harass actual homosexuals.

However, I have seen someone truly harass a gay couple and it was quite disturbing. The hate in their voice was so obvious and clear. I felt almost sickened by it.

I called them out for it as well, and that was one of the few times where shit almost went down in public. Luckily, those men just called us a "bunch of faggot lovers" and left because someone apparently called security.

I guess though, if someone truly has a problem with it, then that's their choice in life.
 
1 - 20 of 232 Posts
Top