That Gok guy really annoys me.

[mutant]

We at least made the top 30 list (at 21) by forbes for the best country to be a women. Greece didn't even make it, even the US made it at 27.

and you call this a victory? that's why your women are beating you now pussies !!!

[incognito]

Simmer down mute. It's Christmas ffs

[paradox]

How is misogyny a misuse of the term? What exactly is it then? If you begin to decouple sexuality and gender, yet still see how they are (somewhat) intertwined, interrelated and *usually* congruent, you begin to realise it IS misogyny. It's an attack on gendered behaviour / roles that aren't typically aligned with males, and in this instance are aligned with (what we are assuming to be) a gay male. What else do you think it should be called?

fair enough i guess it's just semantics, i understand gender & sexuality are complex things but yeah i do agree with whats been said by others, i don't equate campness with femininity. but like i said it's complex & i see your reasoning.

Yes, you can make the argument that everything is really just stupidity. But apart from being an overly simplistic, abstract generalisation, this does not help to argue, debate or even to begin to understand the different aspects of stupidity. I'd much rather add some complexity and nuance to the conversation rather than just calling everything stupid and getting absolutely nowhere, but that's just me. High-level 'meta' views can help contextualise, relate and show the interconnectedness & unity of different ideas providing some illumination and further understanding, but to completely write off complexity is frivolous at best.

thats also a good point. my opinion regarding this (which i admit i have done a bad job of expressing & i clearly see why it could be interpreted in a lot of different ways) comes from a life of extreme over sensitivity.. i feel i have had some deep insights into human behavior along the way, though i admit they could just as easily be delusions.. it's impossible i feel to express these things but basically i feel that humans in general are profoundly delusional creatures, their reality is theirs to own & i really don't feel it's my place to tell tham how to think, just as i don't feel it's any one elses place to tell me ho to think. i can give my opinion buts thats completely different.. discussing the subtle nuances & complexity of stupidity with a stupid person will only drive you insane.. if i had not made the decision to detach myself from being emotionally invested in other humans psychotic delusions i would 100% be dead right now, i can guarantee that. life is too beautiful to take seriously the billions of different loads of stupid bullshit that is going on in most everyones head.

i'm basically a cynical person when it comes to humanity, i'm hard strapped finding ANYTHING in the culture at large that i don't think is a stupid load of bullshit, homophobia is one on an unfathomably long list, it's a matter of survival for me to not take it seriously & to be honest i truly think the most intelligent way to approach these things is seeing it for what it is, a bunch of bullshit in the skull of a bipedal ape.

to me it makes a lot more sense to prepare my self to deal with this kind of stupidity through meditation in order to transcend a 'lower' state of consciousness that might be tempted to address such stupidity as though it were worth the respect of giving it my attention & perhaps do some serious self defense training so i can feel confident that i won't fall victim to such blatant (& often violent) fools.

to me it makes sense to call a spade a spade. engaging a spade in a complex discussion about why it thinks it's a shovel seems like beating my head against a brick wall.

Quite probably. I haven't researched into the neurological / neuroscience of this much, but yes, a lot of attitudes are just base instict / emotions. There are some excellent psychological studies on this, particularly surrounding incest. When given the hypothetical scenario of two siblings engaging in once-off protected sex, most participants would react in disgust and label the situation as grotesque. The general consensus amongst evolutionary psychologists (and biologists) is that this is quite possibly an evolutionary trait "designed" (bad word to use, I know) to protect and nurture good genetics. Evolutionary Psychology can be highly speculative at times though.

Anyway, it seems that only after reacting in disgust will participants attempt to rationalise their view. People then fail to make any decent argument against the hypothetical and seem to instead fall back on emotions of disgust, anger, etc without any understanding or reasoning for why. I'm pretty sure (from memory) these studies extend to fMRI scans showing the differences in the activated regions of the brain when participants react in disgust versus rationalising their position. There are hypotheses that a similar thing is occurring with homophobia.

There are some terrific theories of consciousness that highlight MANY instances of the above (at neurological, psychological, chemical levels), suggesting consciousness arises as a transparent, self-model of organisms whilst providing and drawing some unsettling conclusions regarding free will / agency / determinism.

thats really interesting. to be honest i AM very interested in how human psychology functions, profoundly interested actually & i do think these discussions are very worthwhile, it's just when it comes to my emotional investment in human behavior theres only so much i'm willing to take seriously. it's self preservation, but in my opinion this is based on very worthwhile insights into the nature of the human mind, in relation to both my own relationship with the world & my internal universe & the psychology of other humans..

i don't really know how to express that in a way that might make sense.

i get in trouble sometimes because i don't expect anyone to necessarily take my opinion seriously just as i don't put much seriousness in the opinions of others. i'm a sensitive person, if i didn't take the path of attempting to broaden my perspective to a infinite universal perspective, the human predicament would probably be too much for me to bare. i don't expect anyone to understand that & fully realize that it may sound insane.. attempting to put it into words is bound to lead to trouble... it may be a personal delusion but i feel on one level, a fairly deep & meaningful level, human life is a game, to take ourselves or anyone else too seriously is a mistake.. thats not to say there is not things we should be taking seriously, but not necessarily because they are serious but because it's advantageous for a good life to take seriously certain things..

Anyhow, the above comment you've made is besides the point. Someone (well, people) made an attack on someone, and they were called out on it. In this instance, it's not as though queer allies (or whatever term you wish to use) went out actively finding something / someone to critique or attack. If someone attacks a group of people or set of attitudes, they can expect to be called out on it.

yeah, true. i should just say that there is very little human behavior that i don't find annoying. campness is not high on my list, well i don't have a list but actually i don't really find campness annoying at all, i find insincerity annoying, if someone is super camp & it's all just an act because the person has a huge ego then that is annoying.. it has nothing to do with the content of the behavior but everything to do with the basic human ego. but of course i realize that not all super camp people are egotists.. i also realize that people have been bashed & burnt & killed, oppressed, suppressed & treated like scum for centuries because of their sexuality, it's a very sensitive topic & i probably should have known better than to get involved. i just have a very strong compulsion to attempt to disarm prejudice with blunt arsed unbiased honesty. though i realize it's easily misunderstood.

i find corporate advertizing very annoying.. in originally responding in this thread all i was attempting to do was to separate the annoyance issue from sexuality & to be very blunt about the issue of campness & peoples attitudes toward words & sexuality

I'm assuming that's a rhetorical question. No, we shouldn't 'spend our lives crying about it'. Using the same logic, I guess women should never have fought for a right to vote or 'cried' about it? The same reasoning could apply to any issue surrounding civil liberties. I'm not sure what argument you're trying to make here, but it makes no sense and only serves to stifle debate and progress.

i don't think thats the same logic. what i'm getting at is that you can't solve any problem with the same level of consciousness that created the problem, to paraphrase a very well know physicist. i hear what you're saying & i basically agree, i just feel very strongly that the most meaningful way to achieve any kind of positive change is through (for want of a better way of expressing it) transcendence to a broader & more cohesive mental space. i feel strongly that reality is an interactive process & the surest way to change the world is to change yourself. human consciousness creates the 'human world' & so the only way to truly change the world is to change consciousness. seeing as we can't change anyone elses consciousness it means it's up to us to change our own. we need to rise to a higher place & that responsibility lies with each of us as individuals. otherwise we're just playing the game to the rules of the ones we're opposed to, those rules are fundamentally designed to be self perpetuating, it's losing battle & it's degrading to what i deem to be the great potential human intelligence.

[mutant]

Simmer down mute. It's Christmas ffs

hey come on I even deleted the parts I referred to ballzac

[incognito]

Good boy xx

[mutant]

to be more on topic, I feel misogyny is out of place, too. and I am not really willing nor skilled to go deep into semantics. the way i see it, its pretty simple (and the scientific papers offered are more than enlighting) .

this type of hatred to openly 'faggoty' behaviour comes not from hatred to women aka misogyny, but feelings of self hatred aka complexes of inferiority/superiority linked with the male archetype I feel.

males with female behaviour is not a female matter, but rather seen as a strictly man matter: female acting males are regarded as an insult to the rusty old archetype of match dominate man. a disgrace of some kind... which is pretty illogical if you come to think of it....

a big part of me , aside all wonderful irony and provocation stemming from this, feels, and this is instictive as well as mental, that these types of racists are linked with homosexual visions of their own. Y'know, kinky SM hardcore stuff

[Cimi]

I came to this thread because it seemed to have taken off, but it seems to be just full of navel-gazing. Plus Gok cracks me up.

I'll just leave this here: http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/abn/105/3/440/

Fun fact: it's a pretty well-replicated finding that males with homophobic attitudes generally exhibit stronger sexual arousal to homosexual stimuli.