Oy. Give me a fucking break already!
Look; I'm not a homophobe. I wish those who perceive their gender differently all the best.
Sooooo… based on that sentence, you can’t understand what homophobia is, since you don’t understand what sexual orientation and gender identity are.
Homophobia is dislike or prejudice against homosexual people (i.e. people who are attracted to the same sex). Homosexuality has nothing to do with gender identity. I’ll use myself as an example: I’m a gay man. That means I’m attracted to men. But there is no question in my mind that I am anything but a man. (So I’m a cisgender gay man.)
Transgender is tangential: it’s when your own gender identity does not align with your physical body. For example, a man feeling trapped inside a female body. But this is entirely separate from who the person is attracted to. A trans person may feel attraction to men or women, or both, just as a cis person can.
But puleeze, I'm not acquiescing to being forced to use your preferred pronouns.
OK, so you are transphobic.
I don't care what the fuck you do in your bedroom; I really don't want to know about it. Just keep it to yourselves, 'k?
OK, so you are homophobic after all, assuming that this statement means “I don’t want to be exposed to homosexual people” — since I am pretty sure you aren’t actually being forced to watch gay sex against your will. (Heck, I am gay and I don’t get forced to watch it…)
What certainly isn’t reasonable is to demand that gay people not talk about the same things that straight people can (and do) talk about.
It seems you're taking offense where it wasn't intended or warranted.
I should have expressed myself better in the post you responded to.
By saying I'm not homophobic I meant that I'm not offended or repelled by any form of sexuality other than cisgender, including homosexuality.
So it matters not to me what "gender" or what flavor of sexuality a person embodies. That's their choice (or destiny or whatever).
And just to be clear, any discrimination against a person based on their sexuality in employment or housing should absolutely not be tolerated.
Having said that, there are some things about expressions of sexuality that do bother me. One thing I particularly dislike is when someone shoves their sexuality in your face and forces you to confront it. To me this is over the line, transgressive.
It's like someone coming up to you at a cocktail party and proceeding to tell you not only that they're gay (or trans or whatever), but to describe in detail what positions they and their boyfriend like, what toys they use. (And you didn't ask for any of this information.)
I can't prove it, but I'm pretty sure that most people, for certain values of "most", agree with me here that past a certain point it's TMI. Well, let's say I'm limiting my sample here to non-bigoted people; bigots have no say in the matter (or shouldn't, anyhow).
It's one thing to mention that you're gay or lesbian or bisexual; no big deal there. But just as our constitution gives us not only the freedom of religion but also freedom
from religion, so is there an unwritten guideline that frowns on people imparting excessive information of a sexual nature. This is, of course, just a conjecture on my part, and I'd be interested to hear what others have to say about this.
If someone tells me that they're ________ sexually, I'll accept it (well, so long as ________ isn't outright delusional, like someone claiming that they're a female lesbian Siberian tiger); after all, who am I to question that? (If they did make such a claim I wouldn't argue it with them, but would just politely break off the conversation and move to another guest at the party.)
I really do not believe that there are 64 distinct genders, as proposed by some ivory-tower academicians; I think that's preposterous. But if someone claims they're one of them, again, I'm not going to argue the point with them; it's their choice, and they can call themselves whatever they want. My motto here is live and let live.
Just don't expect me to play along with it to the point of making sure to use their preferred pronoun or whatever. That's a bridge too far.
It's like a "differently-gendered" person applying for a job, an in-your-face gender warrior covered with tats and nose rings and torn clothing. If I were the employer I'd just flatly turn them down. Well, for a programming position in the back room? Sure, why not? But as a cashier in the front? No fucking way.
I'm not even sure how I feel about things like drag-queen story hours. It's one thing in San Francisco (or Boston or New York or ...). But at the library in Anytown, Iowa, a conservative community with zero gay/non-cis culture? It seems that some of these events are, again, in-your-face attempts to rile up the local populace. Is this really something admirable? or is it just asking for trouble? I'm not certain here, in such subjective territory. But I guess the point I'm trying to make is that it should be more than a matter of gay or differently-gendered folks asserting their rights: they should be aware of the effect that their actions have on others. Possibly pretty trite, but I think it bears considering.
So do I think that non-cisgender people should beat a hasty retreat back to the closet?
Or that we should embrace that cowardly and mendacious policy known as "don't ask, don't tell"?
No, certainly not. Again, I believe in strong safeguards for such folks, from anti-discrimination laws to efforts to tamp down attacks on them. (Physical attacks, that is, which still occur.)
But beyond that, no, I do not believe that people are so fragile, so vulnerable that they should be protected from even hearing language that they consider to be hurtful. "Sticks and stones" and all that. We should be more resilient than that.
Hopefully I expressed myself better this time. One doesn't always know ...