Okay, please check your emotions and rants at the door, as the subject is about semantics, not the specific example I chose to convey my point. All politics and religion aside, I have long wanted to comment on the terms "homophobia" and "homophobic." I have done a lot of marketing in my time, and appreciate a clever buzzword, so kudos to whoever came up with this one. By labeling a disagreement with the pro homosexual perspective as a position of fear, several things are accomplished before the discussion even begins.
First, the very word "phobia" refers to a psychological anxiety disorder, so immediately the use of the word paints someone as unreasonable, immature and irrational, or at least describes their opposition as such.
Secondly, by being pejorative before allowing a word to be uttered, the term is dismissive of any view the person may convey. Of course then, by comparative association, the person levying the charge implies they are superior in morals, ethics and mental stability.
Tactics such as these are quite effective at setting a tone, especially among those who, either due to apathy or lack of perception, are unaware of the suggestive influence being applied. So as disingenuous and misleading as the term is, I must applaud whoever coined it.
Do you have some clever and effective buzzwords that, regardless of your position relative to their intended purpose, you respect? Perhaps it is the ingenuity they were born of, persuasive success they have enjoyed or readiness with which they have been embraced into the common vocabulary that you appreciate, (or better yet, all three).
Phobia is simply correct, several studies have shown that the opposition to homosexuality is a fear response. Show people opposed to same sex unions for example an image of two men kissing and under a brain scan they get a fear response.
Josak leave out the image and just say the word ---- the same.
No, that constitutes a broad, general and therefore prejudiced assumption. Something many take offense to and rail against, but again, the point of the OP was buzzwords such as those used to convey strong emotions and perhaps influence people discretely. Got any clever favorites?
Nope it constitutes the results of dozens of studies and tests. It's simple fact.
The term was originally used to refer to feelings of being "carefree", "happy", or "bright and showy". The term's use as a reference to homosexuality may date as early as the late 19th century, but its use gradually increased in the 20th century. In modern English, "gay" has come to be used as an adjective, and as a noun, referring to the people, especially to males, and the practices and cultures associated with homosexuality.
Not quite sure I follow your thinking with that. I suppose "Benghazi" has become a buzzword of sorts, only because it is the name of the place where an attack on America and resulting murders occurred which have never been answered for. There are many who won't, (and IMO shouldn't), let go of this issue until it is resolved and those responsible both for perpetrating and allowing it are held accountable. In terms of the OP, I was thinking more along the lines of something clever and descriptive, not just a name.
So could the word Hetrophobia be used as homosexuals have a fear of what hetrosexuals think about them?
I wonder what sort of "fear factor" you would get if you showed lesbians pictures of men kissing.
Varies widely depending on religiosity. Show women that on the other hand and the numbers are very high (though not as high as the men).
Typically hypocritical the right has directed it's intolerance mainly at men while tolerating female homosexuality much more because it tickles their fancy.
Pro-choice is one.
Yeah, I respect it like I "respect" the viciousness of a rabid animal.
The term is simply an attempt to cover up the real definition of abortion----anti-life, or yes, murder.
Such a great example.
Automatic weapon comes to mind.
I don't disagree. It is as though, with the obvious exceptions, people don't have a choice of responsibility before getting pregnant. Mentioning we are talking about life injects the severity and stakes of the issue, while "choice" makes it sound like it is no more important than deciding which latte to buy today. Again, not to derail the thread, if we get "pro-life" let them have "pro-choice." I think that's fair.
I'm still laughing over that one. You still have to admire whoever spun it to get the word "intelligent" anywhere near it.
Actually, it is a bit redundant. Design by definition denotes intelligence, so you can't have design without it. Design means plan. Plan means look ahead, consider, analyze and plot a course for something. There must be intelligence and intent, by definition. As for the buzz phrase and what it has come to represent, you can't be more amused at people believing in it than I am amazed there are those for whom design in nature must not be obvious. Good choice.
Creation "science" (I can't write it without the inverted commas). Amazed by the sheer audacity of the term.
Xenophobia means "fear of outsiders," yet has been used to denote a distrust and rejection of outsiders (as opposed to fear of them) for centuries now.
Your point is moot.
My point is not moot, just missed by you. Your modification, even if allowed, does nothing to negate my point regarding the power of a clever buzzword.
Zelkiero who put a bug in your bonnet? Fear = distrust and rejection.
You are missing the point of the forum and being quick and cute.
wonderful forum topic. These words that ignite are just amazing. Here is one that is so common and causes all kinds of predetermined notions: Jesus. Good, bad or indifferent it can incite or rally.
Wetback. An immigrant that swam a river to get here. or someone who works hard in the sun so has a sweaty back. Then turned derogatory by white Americans, when it should have a badge of honor among those who struggled to arrive to work. An old one that I was called as a child due to my Italian American Heritage. WOPP. There were all kinds of jokes. What does an Italian car say when it has a flat tire - whop whop whop. But again should have been a badge of honor as it meant the Italian refugees who came here to work after WWII and were too poor to bribe for a passport hence With Out PassPort WAPP.
Here is a fun one. "phile" is a latin suffix meaning to love. Like a dear or beloved. It was not and never was a term referring to anything to do with sex or sexual attraction. More like Mom to Daughter.
But we have this wild ass term pedophile. Which today means twisted sickos interested in children. It should mean someone like a great teacher or wonderful nanny.
I could rant on about more -- but my un PC meter probably just hit the boiling mark.
"phile" has always denoted sexual desire, even in the original Greek.
Oh, by the way, it's Greek, not Latin.
Prove up Zelkiro Prove up! You are wrong
Do you have a negative thing to say about Philadelphia
I hate doing this, because it is not actually a response to the thread. The suffix "phila" from the Latin (originally from the Greek, yes) actually means warm, friendly, loving - in a brotherly (or friend) sort of way. The Greek word denoting any sort of physical (sexual) attraction is eros (hence, erotic).
Actually there are four Greek words for "love," while in English there is only one.
Agape - a total, unconditional love
Filia - a brotherly love, as toward a friend
Eros - a lustful infatuation or an erotic desire
Storges - a natural affection, as a mother for her child
If indeed 'phila' meant sexual desire or lustful attraction, then words like bibliophile or Philadelphia would be sorta creepy. Well, not even sorta - they'd be really creepy. I personally think the word pedophile is a terrible word in that due to its inherent meaning, it is used entirely in a wrong way.
Have you read the book "Don't Think of an Elephant!" by George Lakoff.
It's about FRAMING issues by claiming issues.
My personal (least) favorite in this arena is Pro-Life.
The obvious antithesis of that is not Pro-Choice, but obviously Anti-Life.
I would also be remiss in not mentioning Obamacare. This is a fascinating one.
The right created the term as an epithet.
Obama had a window of opportunity to claim and embrace it and SELL IT.
He has not done that successfully.
Therefore, the anti-Obamacare people still own and are exploiting the term.
I have to go for a bit but will definitely be thinking of other examples.
How come 'Pro-life' people are usually for the death penalty and endless war, and 'Pro-choice' people are usually for prohibition and socialism?
If we're going to use buzz words, let's be consistent.
What is the situation in which someone "pro-life" would possibly support death? Could it be for a person who has taken at least one life? Would you compare that convict on death row to the innocence of an unborn, and infer moral equivalence? Is that really so confusing or contradictory? Perhaps if you remember "innocent life," it will help.
But it isn't "Pro-innocent life" is it? The buzz-word is "pro-life" regardless of what people that use it might think it might mean. If what you're saying is true, "Pro-life" is actually about being Pro-life in certain circumstances. Those people then don't hold life as an absolute value, therefore making "pro-life" a misleading term.
No, it really isn't that confusing. You see a contradiction in a society allowing it's government to, through a process to assure innocents are not killed, punish those who take it upon themselves to kill others. I see consistency when taking an innocent life costs you yours. When a murderer is killed for that murder, the value of life is upheld. Pro-life and pro death penalty, I would argue, are consistent and complimentary.
So-called pro-life is really pro-fetus.
Life is sacred only when it is the "innocent baby" growing in a woman's womb.
Once that baby is born, it and the mother are on their own and certainly
And speaking of killing innocents, I do not understand the staunchly hawkish views of so many who proclaim themselves pro-life.
War is the ultimate mass murder.
It is also unfortunate that the other side of this issue is labeled "pro-choice."
Because yet, it does demean the magnitude of the decision to be made.
If it was up to me, I would rename the movement to "Pro FAMILY."
Because that is what family PLANNING is.
Guess what time it is!
It's George Carlin time!!
How about "pro-abortion", "anti-abortion"?
Aren't both valid? If, as proponents suggest, making abortion so easy is a noble cause, why not own and even be proud of the association? Do you think these are buzzwords, developed to incite, or are they just accurately descriptive?
How about pro-choice and anti-abortion.
Not hard to see why one side chooses "pro-life" while the other likes "pro-choice." Both sound so positive!
The "pro" part is strong.
It's what comes after the prefix that makes the difference.
Which resonates with people's emotions more?
Maybe pro-choice should be renamed pro-FREEDOM.
Choice is a "head" word.
Freedom is a "heart" word.
The main problem with the left (in general) is not using "heart" words enough and
thus being on the defensive when the right frames the argument first.
From a marketing standpoint you are correct. "Freedom" is a powerful buzzword to Americans...and I expect the older they are, the stronger it resonates. For me, it will be a sad day when someone makes the association stick between "freedom" and a "choice" that always results in dead babies. Of course "babies" is a heart word. I am sure the left would prefer the head word of "fetus", but regardless of what folks try to tell themselves and others to mask the truth, I have a hard time believing in each person's heart they truly don't know we are talking about babies.
Yes, odds are that they know. But some are in a sort of denial.
Hey, another buzz word or phrase is
that one's been used to try to cleanse the discussion about some subjects that should never even be on the table, they're so nasty, and nothing healthy can come from claiming the subject is even valid in the first place.
Statistically, most women contemplating abortion have already had a child.
I think it's safe to assume thy understand what a "baby" is and the responsibility
that comes with they are raising one.
It's difficult to project into every pregnant woman's mind.
But I think it is fair to say she is thinking about lives -- plural. What will
carrying this pregnancy to term mean for its life, her life, her other children's lives,
the father's life, perhaps even grandparents' lives...
So we come back full circle to my original point.
The narrowness of focus on the developing baby in the womb makes your side pro-fetus. If that sounds too clinical and cold, go with pro-baby.
Those who consider the mother's current situation in a broader and more nuanced and long-term (e.g., years and decades to come) context are the ones who are pro-life.
Thank you for the contributions MM. We are on different sides of most issues. I like and agree with the implication of "pro-life" but won't go into details, so as not to derail the intent of the thread. I do feel it appropriate to just make a passing comment on some of the choices people present.
I love the term "Obamacare" because it is an example where both sides ought to embrace it. If you really believe in the plan, put your name on it. I applaud Obama for embracing it, because frankly, I haven't seen him take responsibility or ownership of much else.
"American Exceptionalism" is another one I must take exception to.
Who is it we're trying to convince?
If you really are exceptional, you shouldn't have to go around boasting about it.
And if you do... well, you should not be surprised when others are insulted by your unmitigated arrogance.
'Terrorist' has come to be synonymous with anybody that might have an issue with police-statism and endless war. Also add 'racist' if their issue is with Obama, as well. But if, on the other hand, you have an issue with a country that the US government doesn't like, switch that to 'freedom fighter'.
Don't you love politic-ese?
I am loving that this thread is turning into a cornucopia of controversy. Just a tantalizing buzzword or phrase which gets juices flowing on both sides of the issues. I wonder how many threads will be inspired by the short exchanges here. Thank you to all those participating.
Sometimes it's who and in what situation the word or phrase is used that makes the impact and the direction of the impact.
Obama used the term "teachable moment" when he (only half-way) apologized for his racially-biased accusation of the Police Dept. in the Professor Gates incident.
His apology fell waaaayy short, yet he claimed the term "teachable moment" for his own usage basically, saying he hoped it would be a teachable moment for the whole Nation. It was actually him who should've learned something from the incident, but instead he wanted to act as teacher or boss himself while inciting racial unrest and vengeance. I think he's unteachable actually because he's so narcissistic. That phrase in his hands (mouth) is a manipulation of the English language, a manipulation of citizens's emotions & intellect, and a manipulation of his status as President.
That's how a harmless and good phrase can be turned into a harmful, bad, political weapon.
Oh, yeah, that's another term that's used to market the liberal agenda----------the word slavery, comparing everything to it.
When in fact it is the liberal agenda that's enslaving people already.
Only when laws or circumstances exist that like during slavery deny one group equal rights. Stop discriminating, oppressing and forcing others to live by your personal morals and faith and we will stop bringing it up. It's really not a hard thing to do to stop being bigoted and discriminatory. Beyond many conservatives however.
Thankfully more and more people are coming to their senses including (to their credit) more and more conservatives.
"soft tyranny" is another one, used as if it's okay as long as tyranny is "soft".
by weblog7 years ago
What causes people to be homophobic? What can be done to tackle homophobia?
by Stacie L5 years ago
Why have some of the nation's most vehement anti-gay activists Ted Haggard, Larry Craig had gay sex scandals of their own? An op-ed in the New York Times' Sunday Review section tries to explain. The authors of the...
by Callum7 years ago
We do not wake up in the morning and decide to be gay today, we are naturally born gay just as others are born straight, bisexual and whatever else. Each to their own I say, we have no choice in being gay its who we are...
by fierycj8 years ago
Everything has a scientific name these days, its crazy. I'll make you a bet, say or do one thing that has never been done before. I mean like never, ever been done. If even thats possible. But say or do it. And I bet...
by Carl Nussbaum5 years ago
Homosexuality is natures way of controlling an expanding population. I'm not a homosexual, but I do see it as a natural function. It is only taboo to those that don't see nature as it is.
by thetruthhurts20097 years ago
If evolution were true how do you explain homosexuality? If we are just here to past on our genes, doesn't homosexuality seem like a defect? If you're a evolutionist it does. You see what kind of problems the...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.