[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Shaun

The main problem with everyone saying no is they have got hung up on the idea that because it isn't a big thing it isn't a thing at all.

I could not put it better Shaun. So true.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Shaun

The main problem with everyone saying no is they have got hung up on the idea that because it isn't a big thing it isn't a thing at all.

Like I said since the start, I think gay people can be prejudiced against straight people, that can definitely be a thing but using the term 'heterophobia' will always be an issue since it will always draw comparisons to homophobia and, obviously, straight people will never have to suffer anything like that since they will always be the majority.

You can't use that term without the comparisons. If this topic was called 'Can gay people be prejudiced against straight people' then I'd definitely say yes but I just don't believe heterophobia is a thing.

[kirklancaster]

If someone in real life called me a 'breeder' you can bet I'd take offence.

[Ammi]

..I think I understand what Dezzy means, because it's nowhere near to the same extent as homophobia, not even remotely.. it's like giving power to it to a similar type of prejudice..?..

[Cherry Christmas]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Well, considering you're complaining over essentially nothing it's only natural for me to assume that you wouldn't cope with the struggles that LGBT people face.

If you read my post correctly you will see I consider being called a breeder funny, but I can understand why it could be deemed offensive.

[kirklancaster]

The OP asks:

"Does 'Heterophobia' exist?"

The dictionary defines the word 'Phobia' as:

states phobia
ˈfəʊbɪə/Submit
noun
an extreme or irrational fear of or aversion to something.

It only takes ONE solitary person to have an irrational fear or aversion to straight people and "Heterophobia" EXISTS.

It is totally stupid to assume that there is not one solitary gay person in this world who is not averse to straight people for no reason other than the fact that they are straight, and who 'shun' and 'avoid' their company for no valid reason. What is more, I actually know at least a couple of gay people who do just this - avoid and shun straight people for no other reason than that they are not gay.

This fact does not alter the fact that 'Gay' people are persecuted, ostracised, discriminated against and victimised, whereas straight people are not, because one fact does not negate the other.

I really do not understand - given the meaning of the opening question - just why this is still being argued and just why this thread has descended into the appalling personal 'slag-fest' which it has.

There is no need.

[Cherry Christmas]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

The OP asks:

"Does 'Heterophobia' exist?"

The dictionary defines the word 'Phobia' as:

states phobia
ˈfəʊbɪə/Submit
noun
an extreme or irrational fear of or aversion to something.

It only takes ONE solitary person to have an irrational fear or aversion to straight people and "Heterophobia" EXISTS.

It is totally stupid to assume that there is not one solitary gay person in this world who is not averse to straight people for no reason other than the fact that they are straight, and who 'shun' and 'avoid' their company for no valid reason. What is more, I actually know at least a couple of gay people who do just this - avoid and shun straight people for no other reason than that they are not gay.

This fact does not alter the fact that 'Gay' people are persecuted, ostracised, discriminated against and victimised, whereas straight people are not, because one fact does not negate the other.

I really do not understand - given the meaning of the opening question - just why this is still being argued and just why this thread has descended into the appalling personal 'slag-fest' which it has.

There is no need.

Great post Kirk and I concur with your final comment as well

[Liam-]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

The OP asks:

"Does 'Heterophobia' exist?"

The dictionary defines the word 'Phobia' as:

states phobia
ˈfəʊbɪə/Submit
noun
an extreme or irrational fear of or aversion to something.

It only takes ONE solitary person to have an irrational fear or aversion to straight people and "Heterophobia" EXISTS.

It is totally stupid to assume that there is not one solitary gay person in this world who is not averse to straight people for no reason other than the fact that they are straight, and who 'shun' and 'avoid' their company for no valid reason. What is more, I actually know at least a couple of gay people who do just this - avoid and shun straight people for no other reason than that they are not gay.

This fact does not alter the fact that 'Gay' people are persecuted, ostracised, discriminated against and victimised, whereas straight people are not, because one fact does not negate the other.

I really do not understand - given the meaning of the opening question - just why this is still being argued and just why this thread has descended into the appalling personal 'slag-fest' which it has.

There is no need.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

The OP asks:

"Does 'Heterophobia' exist?"

The dictionary defines the word 'Phobia' as:

states phobia
ˈfəʊbɪə/Submit
noun
an extreme or irrational fear of or aversion to something.

It only takes ONE solitary person to have an irrational fear or aversion to straight people and "Heterophobia" EXISTS.

It is totally stupid to assume that there is not one solitary gay person in this world who is not averse to straight people for no reason other than the fact that they are straight, and who 'shun' and 'avoid' their company for no valid reason. What is more, I actually know at least a couple of gay people who do just this - avoid and shun straight people for no other reason than that they are not gay.

This fact does not alter the fact that 'Gay' people are persecuted, ostracised, discriminated against and victimised, whereas straight people are not, because one fact does not negate the other.

I really do not understand - given the meaning of the opening question - just why this is still being argued and just why this thread has descended into the appalling personal 'slag-fest' which it has.

There is no need.

A pedantic definition is meaningless in all but theory. Gay people can be prejudiced but that's it as, at the end of the day, heterosexuality will always be the majority because biologically speaking, gay people will never outnumber heterosexuals. That's why the idea of heterophobia is ridiculous. When it comes to social issues like this, A majority cannot suffer in the same way that a minority will, that's why they are the majority.

I refuse the idea of Heterophobia as nothing more than false equivalence and I always will. I will not concede on this.

[Ashsleigh]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

A pedantic definition is meaningless in all but theory. Gay people can be prejudiced but that's it as, at the end of the day, heterosexuality will always be the majority because biologically speaking, gay people will never outnumber heterosexuals. That's why the idea of heterophobia is ridiculous. When it comes to social issues like this, A majority cannot suffer in the same way that a minority will, that's why they are the majority.

I refuse the idea of Heterophobia as nothing more than false equivalence and I always will. I will not concede on this.

More people like water than those who don't but aquaphobia still exists?

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

A pedantic definition is meaningless in all but theory. Gay people can be prejudiced but that's it as, at the end of the day, heterosexuality will always be the majority because biologically speaking, gay people will never outnumber heterosexuals. That's why the idea of heterophobia is ridiculous. When it comes to social issues like this, A majority cannot suffer in the same way that a minority will, that's why they are the majority.

I refuse the idea of Heterophobia as nothing more than false equivalence and I always will. I will not concede on this.

But you are BEING pedantic and by moving your argument OUTSIDE the parameters of the original question, so you are using 'Strawman' as well. This is NOT 'False Equivalency'.

[Cherry Christmas]

Originally Posted by Ashley.

More people like water than those who don't but aquaphobia still exists?

Great analogy

[Black Dagger]

Oop at yes winning x

[Kizzy]

Tories 'won' doesn't make them right

[Ashsleigh]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Tories 'won' doesn't make them right

You're not the only person who votes in elections. Clearly people like them and think they are right since they won the election. Don't mistake opinions with facts. The same applies for this thread.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Tories 'won' doesn't make them right

It does in the eyes of the voters - the only ones who count. Much like the result of this poll.

"A win by any other name would be as sweet"

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Ashley.

You're not the only person who votes in elections. Clearly people like them and think they are right since they won the election. Don't mistake opinions with facts. The same applies for this thread.

Only 37% were 'right' I haven't mistaken anything thank you.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

It does in the eyes of the voters - the only ones who count. Much like the result of this poll.

"A win by any other name would be as sweet"

Hmmm a forum poll yes that denotes the feeling of the nation
It's pretty much a split decision I'm happy with others having a differing opinion to me, I wouldn't put down anyone for their views.

[Ashsleigh]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Only 37% were 'right' I haven't mistaken anything thank you.

There's no such thing as right and wrong opinions.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Ashley.

More people like water than those who don't but aquaphobia still exists?

Bad analogy. People aren't scared of the gays, you're not gonna get anyone that will shriek and run away at the sight of Dale Winton. Water isn't exactly being persecuted for being water either. Social phobias and actual fear based phobias aren't really comparable.

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

But you are BEING pedantic and by moving your argument OUTSIDE the parameters of the original question, so you are using 'Strawman' as well. This is NOT 'False Equivalency'.

How am I being pedantic? You're literally just saying random words and hoping they stick. It's pedantic to quote a definition and be smug about it even though it doesn't really work as an example anywhere but in writing.

I'm not saying anything that can be construed as 'Strawman' either. The breeder thing is a perfect example of an actual Strawman argument.

[Tom4784]

A majority of people voted the Nazis into power so that was obviously the right choice because the majority wanted it amirite?

[Ammi]

...(I'm getting a little confused..)..but I think I'm with Dezzy on this now in the way that he's expressed his views through the thread..I personally don't feel that a heterosexual can be ostracised because heterosexual is seen as the 'norm of society' and it's society that ostracises...I don't think that heterosexuals can be discriminated against as such either because they're not a minority section of society...they could be or feel victimised by individuals or even in a collective, they could be bullied even..and yes, if it was a 'hetero' thing then it would be because of their sexuality...but if 'heterophobia' was a thing, to me that would be like giving it an equality with homophobia.../both the same and equal pegging but just applying to different sexualities/regardless of numbers or statistics/type thing...and no matter what gay laws are in the here and now, it's still a long way from how gay people are often viewed and treated by some sections of society...so yeah, it's pretty certain that some straight people will have been subjected to some bad stuff because of their sexuality at some points and some straight people will have been subjected to some pretty bad stuff for other things about them and other things that people have judged them for as well...because there are some pretty awful people who will do that and it's so wrong ...but I'm just not sure that it should have a 'label' though...


..anyways, quite tired and still a little fuzzled with this so maybe Dezzy and I will sit on the front porch and have a long chat about it some day/put it all to rights, as they say.......

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Ashley.

There's no such thing as right and wrong opinions.

I meant 'right' as in the right in fairness, I know there's no right and wrong opinions
I simply can't buy into the concept of 'heterophobes' that's just what we need in the world more accepted intolerance and 'labels' :/

[Cherry Christmas]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I meant 'right' as in the right in fairness, I know there's no right and wrong opinions
I simply can't buy into the concept of 'heterophobes' that's just what we need in the world more accepted intolerance and 'labels' :/

I agree there are no right or wrong opinions, but if over 50 per cent of the contributors to the poll agree that it is a "thing" it has to be called something for that section of society at least!

I'm ignoring the undecided when doing the maths before anyone jumps on me :

[Firewire]

Originally Posted by Cherie

I agree there are no right or wrong opinions, but if over 50 per cent of the contributors to the poll agree that it is a "thing" it has to be called something for that section of society at least!

Actually only 47.54% believe it is a thing on here.