Super strict "test" of anti-gayness ...

[Jingthing]

I found the questions on this test thought provoking.

I reckon a large portion of the people that are not aggressively homophobic still could not FULLY pass this test.

Is this standard too high? Is the standard reasonable?

I guess the red flag question would be the one about the boy scout leader.

It may be tempting to look at homophobia as some rarely glimpsed, cartoonish evil that only reveals itself during hate crimes or appearances by the Westboro Baptist Church. But when we conceive of homophobia as a boogeyman responsible for only the most obvious and egregious horrors, we miss the finer, nuanced, harder-to-see -- and therefore in some ways more dangerous -- moments that are also homophobic (however "polite" they might seem) and have very real consequences.

So, to clear up any confusion, here's an easy test to see if you're anti-gay:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/noah-michelson/heres-an-easy-test-to-fin_b_4453662.html

[anon8]

Good test!

I know a guy back in Euroland, he does not consider himself anti gay, and a homophobe.

He feels gay people should have every right to live as we like, but only behind closed door.

He says 2 guys walking together hand in hand is simply wrong, 2 guys kissing out in the open is unacceptable for him.

He really believes what he says, we have spoken about this few times. I have tryed to explain to him that 2 guys kissing is in no way threat to him, those guys kissing wount attack him, and force him to join them. But I think he feels thtreatend. I suspect the thoughts in his head, when he sees 2 guys being intimate, terrify him.

And he honestly believes he is not a homophobe.

In his defence, he is not very bright guy. And I suspect he has terrifying thoughts in his head around bed time, thoughts about how he would eagerly blow his handsom friend, who he goes to gym together.

Edited December 17, 2013 by valgehiir

[LeCharivari]

I really detest people who constantly talk about "we", as if they have some God-given right to speak for "us".

"It's scary to challenge the people we love. It hurts to consider what could happen when we confront them and tell them that we will no longer accept anything less than truly unconditional love that embraces us exactly as we are. But how much is it worth? How much are we worth? And when we think about the alternative, do we really have any other choice?"

I get "unconditional love" from my dogs, but I don't want, expect or deserve "unconditional love" from anyone - nobody does.

We get what we earn in life, whether its love or respect, and in my view that's the way it should be whatever our sexual orientation.

[Jingthing]

It's great to hear the alternative voices here from gay people who don't buy into the basic values of the international gay civil rights movement. Just for the sake of diversity. Thanks for sharing! That said, the people that are making the DIFFERENCE for advancing gay civil rights globally are actual gay activists who DO identify with gay people as an IDENTITY GROUP that they DO belong to. If you don't feel that, fine, your call.

So you detest people who refer to gay people as WE. I guess that means you detest me. I can really, really live with that because I am on the side of this MOVEMENT and that, my friend, is a WE kind of thing,

Yes, Virginia, there are definitely gay people who are not supportive of this international movement. That's OK. Progress goes on with their voices and the voices of non-gay people supportive and not supportive as well. History is on OUR side. Gay activists and those who support gay activists, gay or not, are also working for these gay people who for whatever reasons do not identify with the movement. So you win too whether you like it or not. So there!

Edited December 17, 2013 by Jingthing

[anon8]

There are gay people who don't want to be included and identifyed as gay.

Self hating is very common among gay community. People who are not comfortable being gay dont want to be gay, and they certainly dont want to be part of 'we', and gay communiy.

It must be very stressful not being comfortable with who you are.

Sent from my C6802 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[uptheos]

Good test, but do forum rules only allow you to post it in the Gay section?

Surely, it's better suited to everyone......isn't it?

Just asking as after 4 posts it's going off the radar.

[Jingthing]

Good test, but do forum rules only allow you to post it in the Gay section?

Surely, it's better suited to everyone......isn't it?

Just asking as after 4 posts it's going off the radar.

I think it clearly fits best here in gaylandia as it's not specifically Thai related.

[anon8]

It doesnt take to be psychologist, amateur or pro, this is very basic stuff.

Sent from my C6903 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Jingthing]

There are gay people who don't want to be included and identifyed as gay. Self hating is very common among gay community. People who are not comfortable being gay dont want to be gay, and they certainly dont want to be part of 'we', and gay communiy. It must be very stressful not being comfortable with who you are. Sent from my C6802 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

I love these amateur psychologists who think that anyone who doesn't share their point of view must be 'self haters'.

I support your thought as far as the need to be careful in going overboard with GENERALIZATIONS. However, there are such people as self hating gays, gays with severe INTERNALIZED homophobia, etc. I think there are a lot of similarities to self hating Jews ... there are many of those as well. I would be a bit shy of rushing to label specific people that way though.

As far as the test in the OP, I think it might be too strict a standard. I have known people who are reasonably tolerant of gay people who still would have a problem sending their boy child to a gay boy scout leader. I know it is not fair to assume bad things about a gay boy scout leader only based on being gay, but I have some compassion for their fears about their children as well.

Edited December 18, 2013 by Jingthing

[OxfordWill]

One might react to the idea of something in a way that one does not necessarily condone or would normally act. The reaction to a man kissing a man repulses some who would otherwise be wholeheartedly in favour of equal rights among all sexualities. This might be in the same way that watching an ugly man kiss an ugly woman (ugle for that individual standards, say) would be repulsive to watch.

To confuse the lines that separate such reactions from considered thought/decisions is to further confuse an already highly charged and emotional topic. The author of this test is being irresponsible to all concerned.

Also it is not either anti or pro gay, there is more than the two positions available (ho ho)

Edited December 18, 2013 by OxfordWill

[Naam]

If you don't have anything against queer people but wouldn't want a gay man leading your son's scout troop, then you are anti-gay.

i [not so] humbly beg to disagree

simple reason: parental objections and thoughts concerning their children are usually subjective and not objective.

[anon8]

Agreed. It is never a good thing to generalize, it was just a thought from my part, and my post did not point at anybody.
Self hate is quite cimmon in all minority groups. And it is not difficult at all to have that trait, I believe it is very easy to slip into and it not very unusaual. It is just something people will never, never admit.

Sent from my C6903 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Edited December 18, 2013 by valgehiir

[Jingthing]

One might react to the idea of something in a way that one does not necessarily condone or would normally act. The reaction to a man kissing a man repulses some who would otherwise be wholeheartedly in favour of equal rights among all sexualities. This might be in the same way that watching an ugly man kiss an ugly woman (ugle for that individual standards, say) would be repulsive to watch.

To confuse the lines that separate such reactions from considered thought/decisions is to further confuse an already highly charged and emotional topic. The author of this test is being irresponsible to all concerned.

Also it is not either anti or pro gay, there is more than the two positions available (ho ho)

Well, I can see there are levels of tolerance and intolerance. If you forced me to get oral with a lady, I think I would freak out and yes be disgusted. Does that make me anti-straight?

[Scott]

There are gay people who don't want to be included and identifyed as gay. Self hating is very common among gay community. People who are not comfortable being gay dont want to be gay, and they certainly dont want to be part of 'we', and gay communiy. It must be very stressful not being comfortable with who you are. Sent from my C6802 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

The problem also includes those who are not comfortable with you and don't want you to be a part of their 'we'. As a matter of fact, some don't want there to be a 'we' at all.

[Jingthing]

Of course there is great diversity among minority sexuality people, but I don't see the way forward for political progress against discrimination without the power of an IDENTITY group. We don't all have to like each other, obviously we don't, but in many ways on some aspects of life we ARE in the same boat. A lot of the conflict on this forum seems to me to about being supportive of gay IDENTITY politics or being resistant to it. I'm for it.

Edited December 18, 2013 by Jingthing

[anon8]

The problem also includes those who are not comfortable with you and don't want you to be a part of their 'we'. As a matter of fact, some don't want there to be a 'we' at all.

Of course.

Quick example, I used to dislike feminine gay men when i was younger. I was into superbikes and boxing. I didnt want in any way being associated with feminen gay men.... No thanks, no way would i want to be part of their 'we'

But many topics here are about discrimating laws and violence in Russia, India, marriage equality.. Reading those topics, and knowing how dangerous it is for gay people in many places, I strongly, superstrongly feel part of the group, they are very much WE to me. It angers me when there is almost nothing I can do, to help my brothers in Russia.

Angers to the point that if I was there, and happened to witness beating a gay teenager in some park, in some godforsaken Russian town, I would get violent to defend him in less than a second.

But then i read posts here how things are not all that bad for gay people in India. Im sorry, it just idiotic thing to claim.

Edited December 18, 2013 by valgehiir

[sustento]

The problem also includes those who are not comfortable with you and don't want you to be a part of their 'we'. As a matter of fact, some don't want there to be a 'we' at all.

Of course.

Quick example, I used to dislike feminine gay men when i was younger. I was into superbikes and boxing. I didnt want in any way being associated with feminen gay men.... No thanks, no way would i want to be part of their 'we'

But many topics here are about discrimating laws and violence in Russia, India, marriage equality.. Reading those topics, and knowing how dangerous it is for gay people in many places, I strongly, superstrongly feel part of the group, they are very much WE to me. It angers me when there is almost nothing I can do, to help my brothers in Russia.

Angers to the point that if I was there, and happened to witness beating a gay teenager in some park, in some godforsaken Russian town, I would get violent to defend him in less than a second.

But then i read posts here how things are not all that bad for gay people in India. Im sorry, it just idiotic thing to claim.

If you actually read what was written rather than what you think was written you'll see that no-one has claimed that things are 'not all that bad for gay people in India'. What has been pointed out is that no-one has been prosecuted under their anti-gay laws for 100 years. It's also been pointed out that that doesn't mean that they aren't persecuted both by the police and by other parts of the Indian population. They are. I gave an example.

[Jingthing]

If you don't have anything against queer people but wouldn't want a gay man leading your son's scout troop, then you are anti-gay.

i [not so] humbly beg to disagree

simple reason: parental objections and thoughts concerning their children are usually subjective and not objective.

If you think a gay person poses a threat to your child, just because he or she is gay, you are a homophobe.

Gay people are no more of a threat to your child, than straight people. Subjectivly and objectivly.

Sent from my C6903 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

I agree with all that.

However, what percentage of people do you think would fully pass that test? I think small. So we've got to live in the world as it is, with some level of homophobia existing in most people we encounter.

Thinking about this I just thought about my parents. They both loved me but they both never entirely became homophobia free. Should I have rejected them for that fault? I think not. You deal with what's possible. Within reason of course. If the homophobia is really overt, that's another matter. I did find the questions in the OP thought provoking but I also think applying a homophobia free purity test in our own lives just doesn't cut it in today's real world. Well maybe for a small minority, like some gay ghetto gays.

Edited December 18, 2013 by Jingthing

[anon8]

I agree with all that.

However, what percentage of people do you think would fully pass that test? I think small. So we've got to live in the world as it is, with some level of homophobia existing in most people we encounter.

Thinking about this I just thought about my parents. They both loved me but they both never entirely became homophobia free. Should I have rejected them for that fault? I think not.

Of course, we have to realistic, and not expect every person to like us. Especially older generations, it is probably very difficult for a 72 yr old man to suddenly change his life long beliefs, and predjudices.

Your example abouy your parents.. Very well understood that they may never fully support your 'lifestyle'

But my reply was to Naam. Not trusting his kids to the care of gay teacher, or sports team trainer is simply wrong, and homophobic. If that is not homophobia, what is?

People often confuse gay man with a pedophile. That is simply ignonant. Why on earth do many think an adult gay man is a threat to a 10 yr old boy? How much more ignorant can it get!

Meanwhile the same parents trust their boys under the care of catholic priests.

Im sure you follow boy scouts news from US. Same exact issue there.

So when you say we have to be realitic, how accepting people are towards us, sure, we must know that these kinds of social changes take long time. But blatant hate and homophobia we can not tolerate, and make excuses for.

[Scott]

Let's be respectful of the feelings of other posters.

[LeCharivari]

If you don't have anything against queer people but wouldn't want a gay man leading your son's scout troop, then you are anti-gay.

i [not so] humbly beg to disagree

simple reason: parental objections and thoughts concerning their children are usually subjective and not objective.

I've got to agree with you.

As has been pointed out, gay people are no more threats to children than straight people, but some parents may not want a straight man leading their daughter's Girl Scout troop for similar reasons. That doesn't mean that they are somehow "anti-heterosexual" or that they think every straight man is a pedophile - just that they have some worries which in 99% (maybe more, maybe less) of cases have no foundation at all. Those worries should be resolved by reason, not by a dogmatic you are anti-whatever response.

.

Edited December 18, 2013 by LeCharivari

[OxfordWill]

One might react to the idea of something in a way that one does not necessarily condone or would normally act. The reaction to a man kissing a man repulses some who would otherwise be wholeheartedly in favour of equal rights among all sexualities. This might be in the same way that watching an ugly man kiss an ugly woman (ugle for that individual standards, say) would be repulsive to watch.

To confuse the lines that separate such reactions from considered thought/decisions is to further confuse an already highly charged and emotional topic. The author of this test is being irresponsible to all concerned.

Also it is not either anti or pro gay, there is more than the two positions available (ho ho)

Well, I can see there are levels of tolerance and intolerance. If you forced me to get oral with a lady, I think I would freak out and yes be disgusted. Does that make me anti-straight?

The author of the test would label you as such.

We have reduced his test (and the argument it hinges on) to absurdity and as such, can safely reject it as stupid.

Edited December 19, 2013 by OxfordWill

[Naam]

I agree with all that.

However, what percentage of people do you think would fully pass that test? I think small. So we've got to live in the world as it is, with some level of homophobia existing in most people we encounter.

Thinking about this I just thought about my parents. They both loved me but they both never entirely became homophobia free. Should I have rejected them for that fault? I think not.

Of course, we have to realistic, and not expect every person to like us. Especially older generations, it is probably very difficult for a 72 yr old man to suddenly change his life long beliefs, and predjudices.

Your example abouy your parents.. Very well understood that they may never fully support your 'lifestyle'

But my reply was to Naam. Not trusting his kids to the care of gay teacher, or sports team trainer is simply wrong, and homophobic. If that is not homophobia, what is?

People often confuse gay man with a pedophile. That is simply ignonant. Why on earth do many think an adult gay man is a threat to a 10 yr old boy? How much more ignorant can it get!

Meanwhile the same parents trust their boys under the care of catholic priests.

Im sure you follow boy scouts news from US. Same exact issue there.

So when you say we have to be realitic, how accepting people are towards us, sure, we must know that these kinds of social changes take long time. But blatant hate and homophobia we can not tolerate, and make excuses for.

even though i strongly resent your assumptions drawn from thin air you are excused because obviously you read my posting without your reading glasses. there was no mentioning of "my" children and there was no mentioning that i personally would act or have those reservations i mentioned.

like it or not, the fact remains that a majority of parents would strongly object that a gay male or lesbian female leads a group of teenage boy/girl scouts for "outings".

there was no reference in my post concerning teachers or trainers and the same applies to JT's post which mentioned a "boy scout leader".

by the way, those who do not accept "gayness" couldn't care less what you tolerate or don't tolerate; that's another fact. gay people, both genders, have come a long way within an extremely short time after centuries, respectively milleniae of be hounded, punished and treated as pariahs. being a German i still remember Paragraph 175 of our penal code and i remember people going to prison.

views and opinions are changing, outings of famous persons help(ed) a lot. patience is required, not unsubstantiated accusations based on assumptions.

[Jingthing]

One might react to the idea of something in a way that one does not necessarily condone or would normally act. The reaction to a man kissing a man repulses some who would otherwise be wholeheartedly in favour of equal rights among all sexualities. This might be in the same way that watching an ugly man kiss an ugly woman (ugle for that individual standards, say) would be repulsive to watch.

To confuse the lines that separate such reactions from considered thought/decisions is to further confuse an already highly charged and emotional topic. The author of this test is being irresponsible to all concerned.

Also it is not either anti or pro gay, there is more than the two positions available (ho ho)

Well, I can see there are levels of tolerance and intolerance. If you forced me to get oral with a lady, I think I would freak out and yes be disgusted. Does that make me anti-straight?

The author of the test would label you as such.

We have reduced his test (and the argument it hinges on) to absurdity and as such, can safely reject it as stupid.

Well, my example isn't exactly the same thing. The way the politics of DISGUST is used by anti-gay forces is a real thing and a big challenge for gay rights activists to combat. I mentioned being forced to do a sex act, of course that's an over the top example. Now if a gay man is viscerally disgusted by seeing two attractive straight people kissing on the street (as opposed to just not approving of PDAs) then that would be the equivalent of a straight person being similarly disgusted by seeing too attractive men kissing. I say attractive to eliminate the issue that people might be disgusted by unattractive people being sexual, period. Now as a discriminated against minority, not sure it really hurts anyone for gay people to be disgusted, but the straight majority DOES use disgust as a rationalization to continue to discriminate against gay people. So, again, NOT equivalent and the example does NOT negate the issues raised in the questions from the OP.

[CWMcMurray]

In general, I am ok with any of the things mentioned ... With only a couple of reservations...

The kissing in public... If it is just a fairly tame pec on the cheek or a short kiss, no problem

If making out / French kissing ... Not ok with it, but not because the participants are gay ... As would also not find this appropriate with straight couples either

If you want play a round of tonsil hockey .... Get A Room!!

The other is about the gay scout leader ... I feel the way about a gay scout leader as I would about a straight male Girl Scout leader...

If their son or daughter is a member of the troop.. No issues, but if they do not have a child in the organization ... It would make me feel uncomfortable

Was in the Boy Scouts when I was younger and all the parents in the organization were there because they had kids in the organization and that makes sense (to me)... In my opinion, any adult trying to be in this type of organization that does not have any kids in it, would raise red flags for me (regardless of their sexual orientation)

I would also feel this way for any man who was straight and wanting to be a scout leader but no kids in the organization

[Naam]

Well, my example isn't exactly the same thing. The way the politics of DISGUST is used by anti-gay forces is a real thing and a big challenge for gay rights activists to combat. I mentioned being forced to do a sex act, of course that's an over the top example. Now if a gay man is viscerally disgusted by seeing two attractive straight people kissing on the street (as opposed to just not approving of PDAs) then that would be the equivalent of a straight person being similarly disgusted by seeing too attractive men kissing. I say attractive to eliminate the issue that people might be disgusted by unattractive people being sexual, period. Now as a discriminated against minority, not sure it really hurts anyone for gay people to be disgusted, but the straight majority DOES use disgust as a rationalization to continue to discriminate against gay people. So, again, NOT equivalent and the example does NOT negate the issues raised in the questions from the OP.

i wish i could understand what you are trying to tell. alas, my poor English can't cope.

[anon8]

In general, I am ok with any of the things mentioned ... With only a couple of reservations...The kissing in public... If it is just a fairly tame pec on the cheek or a short kiss, no problem If making out / French kissing ... Not ok with it, but not because the participants are gay ... As would also not find this appropriate with straight couples eitherIf you want play a round of tonsil hockey .... Get A Room!!

I think it is really nice when 2 people kiss in public.

But not everybody likes to see people making out, long kisses. You can look away, really easy.

I also dont like when I see 2 young, beautiful people kissing out on the street. But for another reason. I envy them, I walk alone, while they are in love.

And another thing, Im envious of their youth. I see them, and I feel old and single

[CWMcMurray]

Agree that most people have differing opinions about PDA... I am stating mine... Which to be honest has changed a bit since having kids..

I don't have any problem with my kids seeing two guys or a guy and a girl holding hands or giving a small kiss to each other.. But would feel uncomfortable with my kids seeing anything more, as they are still quite young...

I'm all likely hood once my kids are older or grown... Would care less what people do in public

[LeCharivari]

Well, my example isn't exactly the same thing. The way the politics of DISGUST is used by anti-gay forces is a real thing and a big challenge for gay rights activists to combat. I mentioned being forced to do a sex act, of course that's an over the top example. Now if a gay man is viscerally disgusted by seeing two attractive straight people kissing on the street (as opposed to just not approving of PDAs) then that would be the equivalent of a straight person being similarly disgusted by seeing too attractive men kissing. I say attractive to eliminate the issue that people might be disgusted by unattractive people being sexual, period. Now as a discriminated against minority, not sure it really hurts anyone for gay people to be disgusted, but the straight majority DOES use disgust as a rationalization to continue to discriminate against gay people. So, again, NOT equivalent and the example does NOT negate the issues raised in the questions from the OP.

i wish i could understand what you are trying to tell. alas, my poor English can't cope.

Apparently because we are a "discriminated against minority" its quite OK for us to be "disgusted" by straight people, but because they are a "majority" its not OK for straight people to be disgusted by us .

So much for equality!

[Jingthing]

Well, my example isn't exactly the same thing. The way the politics of DISGUST is used by anti-gay forces is a real thing and a big challenge for gay rights activists to combat. I mentioned being forced to do a sex act, of course that's an over the top example. Now if a gay man is viscerally disgusted by seeing two attractive straight people kissing on the street (as opposed to just not approving of PDAs) then that would be the equivalent of a straight person being similarly disgusted by seeing too attractive men kissing. I say attractive to eliminate the issue that people might be disgusted by unattractive people being sexual, period. Now as a discriminated against minority, not sure it really hurts anyone for gay people to be disgusted, but the straight majority DOES use disgust as a rationalization to continue to discriminate against gay people. So, again, NOT equivalent and the example does NOT negate the issues raised in the questions from the OP.

i wish i could understand what you are trying to tell. alas, my poor English can't cope.

Apparently because we are a "discriminated against minority" its quite OK for us to be "disgusted" by straight people, but because they are a "majority" its not OK for straight people to be disgusted by us .

So much for equality!

That is not what I said and you know that.

I have mentioned this issue many times before and anyone who follows the global movement for gay civil rights understands how anti-gay groups often focus on their DISGUST of gay sex acts to justify oppression of US, from mild to killing us.

They do. It is known. It's a fact.

They have the POWER to do this.

Gay people have never in history legislated one law or policy to oppress straight people because some of us MIGHT be disgusted by straight sex acts. The truth is most of us are not disgusted by straight sex acts, we just don't want to do them, but it is also true that it is very common for straight people, especially men, who sincerely may be disgusted with even the IDEA of gay sex acts, much less having to see them.

Yes, it's not equal. The gay people are the oppressed class of people in this equation. How can gay people as a class POSSIBLY oppress straight people as a class, and a catty comment about someone dressing poorly doesn't count?

If straight people really are disgusted by gay sex acts, that is their right of course to feel that way, but part of our civil rights fight is to resist the straight majority USE of that disgust as any kind of excuse to oppress US. With civil rights issues, you do NOT have to like the group seeking civil rights, you don't have to party with them, the ask is to be treated equally under the law.

Edited December 19, 2013 by Jingthing