What's on your mind?

kurczak

Section Moderator
WB
Best answers
0
NUQAR'S Kentucky "Nuqar" James XXL said:
...
But the fact that there are societies which have no religious injunctions against homosexuality yet are just as if not more homophobic than the USA should point out that religion is barely a factor. Hinduism has gay porn all over its temples for example, but it is a much worse environment for gay people.
...
I feel like there is a tendency for a lot of educated people to use oversimplified Darwinist utilitarian logic to try and understand unimaginably complex social phenomena like sexuality and culture. It just falls apart because you assume people will make rational decisions if they have access to all the information, and that anyone who doesn't is "ignorant" or "irrational". The problem is that by doing this you are ignoring the prime motivators behind most people's actions which are psychological. This is why some STEM nerds seem to lose their minds when someone is adamant that the Earth is flat even when they know all the information, because they are assuming that the flat earther's true motivation is the raw information, and not an interwoven web of other psychological and social motivators which are way harder to arrive at logically.

This line of thinking is also why economics is total psuedoscience, but Kurczak is here and she might kill me through the internet, so I'll stop.
I actually somewhat agree. There's a lot of circular reasoning in classical (micro)economics. But back on the gay track, my read of (male) homophobia is that very often it's simply, excuse the inconsiderate language, aesthetic revulsion. Not completely unlike when small children are grossed out by any kind of sexually charged activity. Where it comes from, I don't know, but since it's so common, the intuitive explanation is that it's innate, which doesn't necessarily mean it can't be changed, perhaps simply by exposure in reasonable dosage.
 

Adorno

Bedroom Assassin
WBNWM&BVC
Best answers
0
Psychology*/aesthetic revulsion doesn't explain why there are statistically significant differences in views on homosexuality.
Cultural background, religion/faith, political observation all plays a part.

https://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/views-about-homosexuality/


*I'm not even sure what this means: "the prime motivators behind most people's actions [...] are psychological."
All human actions can be measured and there are clear patterns (socio-economic positions).
 

kurczak

Section Moderator
WB
Best answers
0
hence
kurczak said:
which doesn't necessarily mean it can't be changed, perhaps simply by exposure in reasonable dosage.
People can learn to accept something. A whole lot of straight people will honestly tell you that homosexuality should be accepted, gay marriage should be legal, they totally have gay friends etc etc, but they still feel considerable aesthetic / emotional discomfort when watching gay porn or even the more flamboyant parts of a pride parade and I don't think it's hypocrisy. They are two separate things.

 

Flin Flon

Master Knight
Best answers
0
Analyzing assailants' self-disclosed motivations illustrates how a combination of primarily social factors, rather than a simple and singular psychological element such as hatred or repressed homosexuality, explains antigay violence. The mutually reinforcing melding of hierarchical gender norms, peer dynamics, youthful thrill seeking, and economic and social disempowerment explains how individuals as divergent as Brian, Andrew, and Eric ended up on such parallel missions. In a nation that glorifies violence and abhors sexual diversity, a minority perceived to violate gender norms functions as an ideal dramatic prop for young men to use in demonstrating their masculinity, garnering social approval, and alleviating boredom. This becomes more true as heterosexuality increasingly becomes a primary measure of masculinity and as gay men and lesbians become increasingly visible in the media and popular culture. Furthermore, for members of economically and socially marginalized groups, gay men in particular are ideal targets because of their symbolic identification with upper-class privilege.
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/assault/roots/franklin.html

TLDR: Homosexuality is perceived as an assault on masculinity that is instilled in boys from birth, irregardless of religiosity (telling your son to ''be a man''). Expression of homosexuality is associated with ''weakness'' (and a social signal to your surrounding that you are weak/not able to attract girls due to your weakness) hence (in part) the repulsion.

So yes, there are some psychological inclinations to homophobia but Franklin (a psychologist) attributes it primarily to traditions. My understanding is that psychological inclinations translate into traditions over time/scale. Personally, I stopped feeling gross when I saw enough gay people kiss and I was able to rationalize their existence. This to the point where the thought of myself with a guy does nothing to me.

Edit: Did some more reading and one of the reasons why it's attributed more to traditions as opposed to psychology is because specific genders (and the dissonance felt when these are challenged) did not always exist universally.
 

kurczak

Section Moderator
WB
Best answers
0
There's a distinct possibility this interpretation is upside down. On a let's say Newtonian level, it's the society. Your father makes one too many edgy jokes about the f-words, the kids in your 3rd grade beat up the kid who wears lycra shorts. You internalize the rules and join in. It's the society's fault. But humor me and consider the possibility that society is not some otherworldly happenstance that is inflicted upon you, but instead it's an expression of the collective soul of the people it consists of, of a set you are a unit of. It's not so much them, as it is we.
 

Flin Flon

Master Knight
Best answers
0
Kurczak unironically making the sociological argument that a strict public-private dichotomy is fallacious. We've come a long way since your libertarian leanings, I'm proud. :cry:

I call it ''psychological inclinations'' which are born out of cognitive limitations.1 Humans have a psychological(/biological) inclination to rape, however, the degree of that inclination is subject to the environment. Technological marvels and contemporary practical societal realities mean that we should and can forgo certain inclinations. For instance, think tribal or even 50s raping-your-wife-is-ok societies vs a ''modern'' one that rejects this. The thought of rape has been instilled as abhorrent due to the structure of our society as is despite psychological inclinations. Whereas in the past it could be ok to rape, we have since morally constructed rape as immoral because we cannot justify rape with other notions of justice that we have developed since. Meaning that it's not so much that we ''blame'' society, but rather that we look at solutions on a societal level when we have the justifications to make these normative claims (PATRIARCHII!!!!).

1. You can invoke categorical thinking (with regard to sexuality and genders), be an attractive guy AND not be a homophobe but the mind is fickle and dependent on heuristic thought-processes and subconsciously inclined to think that these are contradictory.
 

pentagathus

Baron
M&BWB
Best answers
0
Why does sexual violence disturb us more than physical violence? Or rather, why does the idea of sexual violence disturb us more? For example a family friend of mine used to be something like a gang enforcer, and was not a particular nice man in his youth. And yet since I knew him as a kind and chill old dude it didn't bother me, yet if he'd disclosed that he used to be a serial rapist I expect I would have been seriously freaked out by it. But afaik sexual violence does not necessarily cause more harm to victims than physical violence.
 

Adorno

Bedroom Assassin
WBNWM&BVC
Best answers
0
That's a complex question. First of all there are more social and psychological issues related to sex than violence.
A raped woman is - some places - ostracised (rape is common in wars, and used as weapon).
Rape is also closer to torture than mere violence (depending on the violence of course).
I'm guessing the mental damages from rape can be more severe than from being beaten. There must be some research in that area...
In terms of violence, it's not always black and white. Anyone can lose their temper. Who hit first? Was it self defence? Defending your honour?
There are many ways to excuse violence, but pretty much none when it comes to rape.
 
Best answers
0
Sexuality is more taboo in the States than it is in Europe too. Just look at the way films are rated: in Europe the emphasis is much more on violence whereas, in the US, depictions of sex are way more important when it comes to giving some film an R or NC17 rating.

I recommend watching the documentary This Film is Not Yet Rated on YT for more insights into the shady business of MPAA movie ratings in the US.
 

Adorno

Bedroom Assassin
WBNWM&BVC
Best answers
0
Anyone been following the censorship of Booksmart on Delta Airlines?
The director (Olivia Wilde) shares some of the things they've removed.
It pretty much includes anything related to female sexuality, including the word vagina (and 'genitals').

https://collider.com/olivia-wilde-booksmart-edits-delta-airline/
 

Flin Flon

Master Knight
Best answers
0
Big Bad Pent said:
Why does sexual violence disturb us more than physical violence? Or rather, why does the idea of sexual violence disturb us more? For example a family friend of mine used to be something like a gang enforcer, and was not a particular nice man in his youth. And yet since I knew him as a kind and chill old dude it didn't bother me, yet if he'd disclosed that he used to be a serial rapist I expect I would have been seriously freaked out by it. But afaik sexual violence does not necessarily cause more harm to victims than physical violence.
Because we don't really disapprove of violence in and of itself. Only who we direct it at. Violence can be used as a means to enforce justice (the state, for example, is constantly committing violence against law-breakers). We watch movies and play videogames where we mow down battalions of nazis and feel good about it because we feel it is justified. Moreover, physical violence is part of what is perceived as healthy physical competition that does not necessarily cause irreparable damage to anyone (depending on the circumstances). However, there is hardly a situation where sexual violence can be victimless or justified. Sexual bodily transgression is so personally, psychologically and emotionally scarring for numerous reasons we can never really reconcile with any notions of justice.

Edit: Word.
 

Feragorn

Marquis
M&BWBNW
Best answers
0
the grad school cycle has officially kicked off and shows no sign of stopping. I just applied to Amsterdam, so catch me beating up the frisiantwins with my cane if I get in there
 

Sarin

Sergeant Knight at Arms
Best answers
0
Current chat in PoP Discord made me realize something...can you be racist against a fantasy race?
 

crodio

Marquis
Best answers
0
Tolkien was obviously racist against orcs.for him orcs were the working class, Tolkien is ****ing cancelled if you ask me
 

kurczak

Section Moderator
WB
Best answers
0
Sarin said:
Current chat in PoP Discord made me realize something...can you be racist against a fantasy race?
What if people are just fantasy characters in God's dnd sesh?