Homophobia Is Apparently Associated With Homosexual Arousal

[Miss Panda]

*snip*
I think Hitler's parents (or one of the parent) was Jewish, thus he was born as a Jew. So I think that's the opposite: Hitler was a Jew, yet he hated the Jews.No he fucking well was not!
Think before you spew such anti-Semitic shit!
OT
Sadly the sample size is to small to be scientifically valid. But I thought they did a much bigger study years that showed the same thing. Regardless it is always fun to wind up homophobes with this.

I'm very sorry for the mistake I made, but I don't think it's 'he fucking hell was not' as you say. This is what wikipedia says:

Spoiler

Ancestry

Hitler's father, Alois Hitler, was an illegitimate child of Maria Anna Schicklgruber, so his paternity was not listed on his birth certificate; he bore his mother's surname. In 1842, Johann Georg Hiedler married Maria and in 1876 Alois testified before a notary and three witnesses that Johann was his father. Despite this testimony, Alois' paternity has been the subject of controversy. After receiving a "blackmail letter" from Hitler's nephew William Patrick Hitler threatening to reveal embarrassing information about Hitler's family tree, Nazi Party lawyer Hans Frank investigated, and, in his memoirs, claimed to have uncovered letters revealing that Alois' mother was employed as a housekeeper for a Jewish family in Graz and that the family's 19-year-old son, Leopold Frankenberger, fathered Alois. No evidence had, at that time, ever been produced to support Frank's claim, and Frank himself said Hitler's full Aryan blood was obvious. Frank's claims were widely believed in the 1950s, but by the 1990s, were generally doubted by historians. No evidence of Leopold Frankenberger's existence has been produced. Ian Kershaw dismissed the Frankenberger story as a "smear" by Hitler's enemies, noting that all Jews had been expelled from Graz in the 15th century and were not allowed to return until years after Alois' birth.

It's a debatable thing.

It isn't debatable no reputable historian supports this. The places you'll find this spewed are holocaust denial and minimisation websites. And anti-Semitic ones. It is deeply offensive!
From the same source you quoted!
QUOTE

No evidence of Leopold Frankenberger's existence has been produced. Ian Kershaw dismissed the Frankenberger story as a "smear" by Hitler's enemies, noting that all Jews had been expelled from Graz in the 15th century and were not allowed to return until years after Alois' birth.[11][12]

Now can you stop slandering Jews long enough for us to get back on topic



Now OT
The thing that lets this idea down big time is if the study is true. Lets look at the most homophobic places in the world. The Middle East for example. I find it hard to believe that most men in the Middle East are gay. But if we believe this study then they must be. Same with Africa and with a lot of Asia. Not forgetting Eastern Europe. It is a nice thing to taunt homophobes with and I certainly believe there is an element of internalised homophobia with some homophobes but I don't think it it is with all or even most.

 

[omgpwn666]

Yeah, I don't believe this. But cool that some people do. This article is saying that people who don't like hanging around with gay people are gay? Sounds dumb to me.

Please actually read it if you want to take part in this conversation.

I did read it. I just worded wrong at the beginning of my post. It should've said "people who fear gays are gay? Sounds dumb to me". I don't fear gays, but I feared that gay. He was definitely making a "move"... And with that people could say I'm homophobic and gay. I don't like guys, I like women.. But hey, I guess I am gay anyways.

 

[Vulpes Abnocto]

Now can you stop slandering Jews long enough for us to get back on topic

Whoa, wait.

Presenting a viewpoint (though it may be unsubstantiated and unpopular) does Not constitute 'slander'.

I believe you're taking this just a little too personally.

 

[stinkoman]

No shit. Isn't this a pretty obvious fact? If you want to do something but can't you get all butthurt and tell everyone that they can't either. Just watch that bit of Bill Maher's Religulous where he talks to the dude from the place that "cures" homosexuality. Did he look happy? No.

 

[Lily]

The fact of the matter is, EVERYONE has the capacity to love ANYONE, male, female, black, white, whatever. Love is an intangible thing, felt for the person, not for the gender/body.

Arousal is just arousal. I don't care who you are, if they picked some good stuff, gay porn is just as hot as straight porn. In good porn, it's all about believability, confidence, and the ability to handle the equipment. Gay porn has that in spades! It's not like they have the fattest, hairiest men in those pornos either -- they usually have very hard bodied shaved and defined guys. (Welp, there goes believability..!) I don't believe that you're gay if you got aroused by gay porn. Sexuality is sexuality, and if your mind is open, you might be surprised at what you find.

 

[The Catboy]

I swear I heard this news along time ago and even used this once to win a debate

 

[Hop2089]

Karma strikes the homophobes, those who will be panicking better cut their dicks off.

 

[BlueStar]

Don't know if you can guess which way round the cause and effect goes - ie the assumption seems to be people have some homosexual feelings and therefore react by being overtly homophobic to try and convince others (and probably themselves) that they don't have those feelings or that curiosity. I think it could be the otherway round, the fact that they were originally so outraged/repulsed by it is what gives them a kick out of it? There's a thrill about something sexual which is 'naughty'. If you're a religious campaigner or an activist who's obsessed with how dirty, naughty, filthy and sinful it is to be homosexual, to have an affair, to have casual sex or whatever, and you keep going on and on and on about it like many of the do, that obsession with it could quite easily manifest itself into a sexual interest. 'Family Values' types certainly seem to think and talk about homosexuality more than is normal.

 

[Danny600kill]

I will definitely be using this in arguments when people just don't listen to what I have to say

Thanks Dave

 

[blackrider]

I'd say the arousal aspect only has to do with violent beat downs. I notice I always get aroused when i punch someone in the face. In fact it was a beat down that led to my first homosexual relationship. All the violence and blood, I new I was in love.

 

[_Chaz_]

I'm not a homophobe, but I can tell you that they must have gone through harsh things to become homophobic. What if you we're suddenly held down by a bunch of gay guys and done unwilling things? And yet you are jokingly saying that they too, are gay?

This is just absurd.
9.9964 times out of 10, that's not the case.
For the 0.0036 times that this actually happens, their probably not going to hate all homosexuals the way homophobes do.

Points like those are what would get your argument thrown out of a debate.

QUOTE(blackrider @ Jun 13 2011, 12:15 PM) I'd say the arousal aspect only has to do with violent beat downs. I notice I always get aroused when i punch someone in the face. In fact it was a beat down that led to my first homosexual relationship. All the violence and blood, I new I was in love.

You're what we call a "statistical deviant".
The things that arouse you are not of the norm, and stating that it's the only way (as you did in the very first sentence) would just be pure nonsense.

 

[blackrider]

How dare you judge my feelings. If you would open yourself to your own feelings you'd understand how natural my feelings of sexuality are.

 

[_Chaz_]

How dare you judge my feelings. If you would open yourself to your own feelings you'd understand how natural my feelings of sexuality are.

I never said it was a bad thing, nor did I judge.

 

[Antoni-YO!]

We're all human.. We should f*ck? Lmao jk.

 

[Kane91z]

I wouldn't call myself homophobic. I have homosexual, bi-sexual, and lesbian friends, however a few older gay men hit on me when I was in my adolescences, one tried to straight up kiss me and I think that's F*cked with my head a lot. I know how girls feel around sleazy guys now...

 

[ProtoKun7]

Well, I'm not homophobic, I just disagree with their practices and in my opinion it's abnormal.
Doesn't mean I'm scared of them, it just means I'd rather not associate with them wherever possible.
(I'm fully heterosexual)


I win.

 

[BlueStar]

I'm not predjudiced against Christians, I just disagree with their practices and in my opinion it's abnormal. I'm not scared of them, I'd just rather not associate with them wherever possible.

Starting a sentence with "I'm not homophobic, but..." or "I'm not racist, but..." is a bit like "I'm not saying my mother in law is fat, but...". Not wanting to associate with people just because they're black, gay, jewish or whatever is a pretty hard thing to justify just by putting such a qualifier in front.

 

[ProtoKun7]

Starting a sentence with "I'm not homophobic, but..." or "I'm not racist, but..." is a bit like "I'm not saying my mother in law is fat, but...". Not wanting to associate with people just because they're black, gay, jewish or whatever is a pretty hard thing to justify just by putting such a qualifier in front.

No it isn't. There's a difference between being frightened about a person and not agreeing with something a person may do. I'm not acrophobic but that doesn't mean I want to go and jump down the nearest ravine at the earliest opportunity.

On the other hand, it's pretty pointless to say "I'm not saying my mother in law is fat, but..." and then contradicting what you just said. That's something completely separate. Read what I said carefully. I have no phobia of the people, I just don't like what they've chosen. I didn't say I'm scared of them at all.

 

[Paarish]

Starting a sentence with "I'm not homophobic, but..." or "I'm not racist, but..." is a bit like "I'm not saying my mother in law is fat, but...". Not wanting to associate with people just because they're black, gay, jewish or whatever is a pretty hard thing to justify just by putting such a qualifier in front.
No it isn't. There's a difference between being frightened about a person and not agreeing with something a person may do. I'm not acrophobic but that doesn't mean I want to go and jump down the nearest ravine at the earliest opportunity.

On the other hand, it's pretty pointless to say "I'm not saying my mother in law is fat, but..." and then contradicting what you just said. That's something completely separate. Read what I said carefully. I have no phobia of the people, I just don't like what they've chosen. I didn't say I'm scared of them at all.


QUOTE

ho·mo·pho·bi·a
noun?/?h?m??f?b??/?
An extreme and irrational aversion to homosexuality and homosexual people

You're homophobic

 

[BlueStar]

I don't think homophobic means what you think it means, it's not like having a fear of spiders, where if there's a gay guy in the room you have to stand on a chair until you get a friend to catch them in a glass and release them outside.

Not wanting to associate with someone, regardless of how they act, what they do, say or whatever, but based solely on their sexual orientation is homophobia, if you like it or not. You probably know gay people right now - you may have been taught by them, be related to them, be a customer of theirs, chat with them at the bus stop or in the pub or be good friends with themr. Are you saying if somehow you found out they were a homosexual you'd stop associating with them? And by "found out they were homosexual" I mean somone mentioned to you that they happened to be gay, not that they rocked up one day in a pink tank top and roller skates and started hitting on you.