(Dec 12, 2017 07:38 AM)Magical Realist Wrote: Quote:That can happen when you define things like homophobe to mean "people who disagree with me about gays"
But see that's the problem because there is no such thing as rationally disagreeing with someone else's state of being, It'd be like disagreeing with my blue eyes, or my brown hair, or my Texas accent. To disagree that way is pathological and indicates an issue with that person's own self. Why are they denying the reality that is another person's natural orientation? Why is that of concern to them at all, and why do they strive so hard to negate it? It shouldn't bother you what a person does in their own bed. But the fact that it does means you have an issue you need to look into. That's what homophobia is--a delusional state of overemotional hostility towards something you fear and don't understand in others. And there's therapy for that. I suggest you look into it, eh?
No one here is disagreeing with your "state of being", deary. They only disagree about the causes and consequences of that state...whether it's rational or healthy. I don't think sports fanatics are rational (and many aren't too healthy...just look at how they eat), but neither do I think they shouldn't exist. Me not liking sports and not wanting to be like them doesn't mean I hate them nor wish they didn't exist (nor secretly want to be like them). I just disagree with those motives and utilization of time. I don't think women are generally exceptionally rational, but I would truly miss them if they weren't around, even though I often disagree with the justifications for their opinions. I've argued quite a bit about emotionally-based opinions, but that doesn't mean I secretly want to be like them either. A lot of what makes life interesting is the variety of people and their peccadilloes. You seem to be mirroring the SJW notion that disagreement invalidates your identity. If your state of being is contingent on people agreeing with you...well, that's an extremely external locus of identity and
correlate of decreased mental health.
No one doubts your perceived orientation (and its reality to you), but "natural" is the subject of science. As with anything in science, it is open to skepticism. Presuming that a subject is beyond such skepticism would seem to belie that it is natural. If we cannot investigate causes, it is a matter of faith. And if we can investigate causes, it is open to being any ratio of nature to nurture. Disagreement on a thing's nature is not a negation of the thing.
When people call you names just because of your opinion, that tends to pique your curiosity. Look, I know there are people that will tell you that you're damned to hell for being gay, but I don't care what you do in private. Things like sodomy laws are silly, anti-American, and anathema to freedom...much like speech codes.
By all means, I wish you all the gay sex you desire. Any hostility you perceive about your orientation is either imagined or actually a natural response to your hostility to opinions you hate. People just tend to get hostile when you start calling them names. It has nothing to do with anything other than your attitude towards them. It's actually a mechanism called projective identification. Not only do you project your own hostility onto your interpretations of the actions/opinions of others, you actually seek to provoke such hostility in return to validate that projection. That's why you inevitably resort to name-calling and straw man arguments. If the justification for your hostility isn't there, you simply manufacture it.
God forbid I ever refuse to respond in kind. You'd lose your mind.
Dec 12, 2017 05:44 AM
(This post was last modified: Dec 12, 2017 05:56 AM by Magical Realist.)
