It has a meaning. You know it does.
It hasn't been used to suppress any views.

The only suppressing that has happened has been you and certain other people trying to suppress people's right to comment on and criticise Ann's discrimination.

Mine doesn't simply ignore the argument everyone else is making and pretend it doesn't exist. Yours does.

It is a recently made up word that is used by those with a particular agenda to label their opponents rather than debate them.

It is used to convince the easily led that people who disagree with certain viewpoints are suffering with an irrational fear or hatred and are therefore not even worth engaging with, and are there only to be diagnosed or insulted.


You can keep calling her whatever you want. But some of us are going to correct you and point out that the language you are using is highly manipulative.


Nobody is making any argument. They're just throwing around words like "Homophobia" and "Bigot" because they don't know how to make arguments.

You are incapable of comprehending what is being said and are fabricating illusions in your own mind.

Take it elsewhere.

:laugh:

I repeat... You don't know how to make arguments

Yeah guys...'racist' is a recently made up word by those nasty snowflakes on Twitter, duh!

https://www.etymonline.com/word/racist

Damn those social justice warriors and their new terminology!

Who mentioned twitter? And whilst I realise anything before the 1960s (or indeed anything before twitter) is ancient to some of you, 1932 is actually relatively recent. It had no objective meaning then. It had no objective meaning in the 60s when it was used against Enoch Powell (who nobody was ever able to define it to). And it has no objective meaning today. It, along with all the other "isms" and fake "phobias" of recent times is used exactly as I am pointing out the word "homophobia" is used.

I think they meant homophobe. Not sure why it being recent-ish has anything to do with anything... it's almost as old as Ann :laugh:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homophobia

So it's a word that came out of the 1960s during the cultural revolution in America, and was no doubt created for subversive reasons. There was something called the long march through the institutions that went on in America after the 60s. That would not have been complete until the mid-90s. People coming out of universities today are the first to be fully immersed in this kind of language. It should come as no surprise that all of these fashionable left wing causes are accompanied by it.

So what should hatred towards homosexual people be? Homo-hatred? You have to remember, that it was taboo for a very long time to even talk about homosexuality in popular media, especially in the US, where everything is more censored/watered down than in the UK.

I remember when it came into heavy usage here in the 90's, and homophobia was a "softer", more PC word than bigotry/"hate". It was usually centered around conversations about behavior modification, i.e. don't be afraid or fearful of showing your homosexuality, etc...

The most common example in conversation was centered around how men were fearful of having their man-card challenged because they find other men attractive... it was meant to break the stigma of homosexuality being synonymous with sun and made it more acceptable in popular culture.

PC culture often runs both ways, especially in the US. Conservative/average folk don't like to be told off. So being called a homophobe meant you should open your mind a little bit more... it wasn't meant to make you into a bigot, but someone who needed their minds changed. At least back then.

No, love, you're IGNORING the perfect arguments laid out before you.

Just because you refuse to acknowledge them does not mean they don't exist so why you bother pretending you want to engage in discussion when you simply ignore what's being posted is beyond me. I'll leave you to continue pretending dozens upon dozens of posts don't exist whilst refusing to actually provide an argument yourself beyond "these words don't exist. Ann isn't frightened of gays lolz".

Ok, so changing the definition of homophobe (etc), how would this change the perception of Ann's behavior by others? I'm not real sure what your point here is. I am an Ann supporter, but I do believe she is at least a supporter of a homophobic platform, at least as in how I would define homophobia...

Anyway, I posted my definition here in this thread. No reason to re-write to keep it simple...

I don't get the hang up over the word "homophobe".

Remove that word from existence and you still have a woman who has discriminated hugely against a minority. That's still laid out for criticism and seen for what it is.

But then you'd get hung up on another word, and another word until the only one left for us to use is "Ann....." who's the PC brigade again? Who's stifling free speech again?

Its probably as close to an excuse as you can get, and I mean that sincerely.

Think of the things that are unacceptable today, if one of those things becomes acceptable by the time I'm her age, am I really gonna change my mind on it? Probs not.

This just shows a lack of respect for Freedom of Speech. People are allowed to be any 'ist' they want to be and others are allowed to call them out on it. By making out that opposing opinions are essentially 'suppressing' the original view, you are trying to devalue that opposing opinion to a point it's no longer considered valid. You are in fact trying to suppress views you disagree with.

If one word is enough to 'suppress' anyone's argument then that doesn't say a whole lot about the person or their opinion. It's not the fault of the accuser if the accused can't deal with an accusation because it's true.