• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Homosexuality and Homophobia

The Kilted Heathen

Crow FreyjasmaðR
The Pagan Norse looked down on it too ("ergi", which was their equivalent of "****** ").
The others I will look into. But this one; nope. That is a Folkish talking point, and is not representative of what ergi and argr mean. This requires an understanding of just how gender was expressed in much of pre-Christian Norse society, in where ones actions were one and the same with gender. "Unmanly" (the closest translation for ergi) is not the same as "feminine", but more, to put it in modern terms, "being a b****." If a man is performing feminine actions, dressing effeminately or engaging in a homosexual relationship, that is not ergi. If they are doing work around the town, or on the ship, or whatever else and constantly complaining about it, or slacking off and letting others do most of the work, or being in general insufferable and taxing on the labor, that is ergi.
 

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
Womp womp.
View attachment 71370

When you redirect to Wikipedia it brings you to the page for Homophobia, which has this little section for "heterophobia".
View attachment 71371

"Heterophobia" is not actually a thing, it is simply some straight people whining that they've got it really hard too because their son/daughter/child came out as gay and now they hate them just because they're not gay or some other twaddlespeak. Completely bypassing what is done in action under homophobia. Straight people aren't systematically discriminated against for their sexuality.


You need to recognize that language evolves. You must understand this for this conversation to continue productively. Social phobias (homophobia, islamophobia, etc) are not the same as psychological phobias (arachnophobia, agoraphobia, acrophobia, etc). It does not suggest that someone is paralyzed in fear by the thought of being around homosexuals, or Muslims, or whatever else have you simply by the fact of their sexuality or religion. It denotes a hatred or prejudice and discrimination based on a social fear (fear of the unknown) that has little to no basis in rational fact.

"Heterophobia" is nonsensical and insulting in the face of daily evident homophobia in that the LGBT community's fear and/or caution around straight people is not irrational. It is not unfounded. It is born of the rational and necessary question: "Will this person harm me if they know I'm gay?"


I have no disagreement there; I do not think homosexuality is unnatural. Which is why I'm not weighing in against that; I am addressing the misnomer of "heterophobia" and eventual list of other nonsensical "phobias against normal stuff" that's bound to come up whenever homophobia is mentioned.
Obviously you didn't look at the references in periodical archives articles in the original link.
 

The Kilted Heathen

Crow FreyjasmaðR
Obviously you didn't look at the references in periodical archives articles in the original link.
The archives illustrate what I stated about application of "heterophobia" as a misnomer and twisted "me-too" applied by straight people who are not factually discriminated against. Please, do address that if you can.
 

The Kilted Heathen

Crow FreyjasmaðR
I have known gay folk who refer to heterosexual folk as breeders. It's not a term they use lovingly.
I have as well. That is bigotry, undoubtedly. It is a slur, yes. It is not discrimination. Does it actively affect your life if you're called a "breeder"?
 

Father Heathen

Veteran Member
I suspect that people who complain about "heterophobia" are the same people who've opposed LGBT rights. In their minds, by being prevented from persecuting, they've become the persecuted.
 

The Kilted Heathen

Crow FreyjasmaðR
Hijras in India and muxes in Mexico tend to be treated fairly horribly, for example.
Revisiting this as I've had some time to study up on it. Contrary to the claim against third gender peoples in antiquity and the traditions being "hijacked by the LGBT", hijras (kinnar) were honored in Indian society so much so that they have mention in the Kama Sutra. It was not until colonialism in the 1800's that laws were put in place (by the British) against hijras, and homophobic sentiments began to take root.

Muxhe is harder to discern; there is some disagreement whether it is pre-colonial or a modern practice dating to the 1950's. What is clear is that in Zapotec culture the muxhe are accepted as they are; they only face social issue in Mestizo culture which is a product of... colonialism.

And it is much the same for a myriad of third gender peoples the entire world over. Sources in antiquity either regard them with no bias one way or the other or celebrate them (as example of pre-colonial hijra). They feature prominently in myth and legend, and bear no social stigma. Until Western Colonialism, that is. The driving force of Eurocentric Christian culture is what has imposed negative stereotypes on third gender traditions and lazy translation of terms, so it is very disingenuous to try and suggest that this is a notion that has been "romanticized" by the LGBT, and that their modern mistreatment is something that always was.

It is no more than nuns slapping left-hand writers with rulers to "drive the devil from them".
 

rational experiences

Veteran Member
Consciousness uses DNA relived reborn returned from being deceased as humans pre conscious advice. Been expressed before..now are memories.

For family as warnings is mainly by the psychic healer human ideals. My life mind memories human returned. Healed.

Told to all humans why.

We know father mother came direct out of eternal once only. Our brother proves he mistsught that spiritual advice and self idolated. Claiming he had. He was born by sex.

After conscious human DNA and mind had bio mutated.

As baby adult historic is the human science theist.

Baby humans became changed human memory. A parent chosen sex act says both were virgins mutual human sex.

To gain a baby by natural law mutual equal sex.

Is not homophobia.

It's conscious idealism life continuance is threatened. We respond accordingly in behaviours to conscious advice.

Was the medical advice. Baby is born by natural law. Sexuality is mind aware motivation no longer corresponding to bio genetalia.

So a long time ago a summation story said why human to human sexual relationships changed. Seen to be notified as not like our origin humans.

Law.

So you see it to be life notified. Seeing it isn't science. It's Observed changed behaviours.

Summation says the only earth conditions changed and change was by men of the occult. Machines and machine reactions.

Consciousness is a heavenly man.

Gases notified by heavenly conditions first is an infinite not earths mass law.

Man gets his science gases out of mass not space and lied.

Why heavens conscious memory changed.

As he put an unnatural conscious shift into our bio heavens.

Human images and human voices. Not our owned DNA within or DNA now owned body image.

Seeing today billions of lives are living by bio human sex. Population human a long time ago maybe just thousands.

Percentage only of human sex behaviours are changed.

So if you have adult man or woman memory recorded. It's sexual. It's about baby birth. It's about owning generic DNA human. Yet not owning it now.

Humans know biological sex involves humans bio...blood chemistry bio cells.

Yet mind is proven falsifying information.

Muslim men Egyptian history star fall brain mind changed. Before technology were all just men too.

Then constant machine mind by man thought controls not biologies consciousness.... changed their mind.

AI introduced changed intelligence.

Known.

Say when I die I am rewarded with spirit sex with a lot of women virgins after.

Mother women human always first to baby man owned mind are a bio body virgin before sex. Physical.

All around world as nation earth our mothers origin human DNA given to her babies was damaged. She was the origin human bio sexual life partner.

Man's mind says I'm aware all nations was UFO sun ark mass attacked.

Our natural use of mind changed beliefs and life bio behaviours. Heavens mass changed. God body changed.

Proved it today by what he expresses as a belief.

So the heavens man woman sexual history is changed. Natural memory.

As a human is a human as a human always. How damaged a human is now was heavenly caused said legal.

Father mother loved all babies.

Even if our owned parents don't love us we remember by memory our origin parents always had.

Notified seen changes was quantified as a humans warning our heavenly mass is changing by man's machine AI science causes.

As it's a relived human truth...owning living proof.

Animals body mind DNA changed also by human men.

So of course it would be notified in behaviours.
 

Saint Frankenstein

Wanderer From Afar
Premium Member
Revisiting this as I've had some time to study up on it. Contrary to the claim against third gender peoples in antiquity and the traditions being "hijacked by the LGBT", hijras (kinnar) were honored in Indian society so much so that they have mention in the Kama Sutra. It was not until colonialism in the 1800's that laws were put in place (by the British) against hijras, and homophobic sentiments began to take root.

Muxhe is harder to discern; there is some disagreement whether it is pre-colonial or a modern practice dating to the 1950's. What is clear is that in Zapotec culture the muxhe are accepted as they are; they only face social issue in Mestizo culture which is a product of... colonialism.

And it is much the same for a myriad of third gender peoples the entire world over. Sources in antiquity either regard them with no bias one way or the other or celebrate them (as example of pre-colonial hijra). They feature prominently in myth and legend, and bear no social stigma. Until Western Colonialism, that is. The driving force of Eurocentric Christian culture is what has imposed negative stereotypes on third gender traditions and lazy translation of terms, so it is very disingenuous to try and suggest that this is a notion that has been "romanticized" by the LGBT, and that their modern mistreatment is something that always was.

It is no more than nuns slapping left-hand writers with rulers to "drive the devil from them".
The pre-Christian Greeks and Romans didn't have high views of feminine males/male effeminacy, either. There were a number of common insults towards them and one Roman emperor, Elagabalus, was assassinated partially because he so scandalized society with his effeminate behavior and breaking of religious and sexual taboos. A male Roman citizen could lose his citizenship by playing the role of a female in bed. As with many of these pre-Christian cultures, homosexuals and "third gender" people were usually relegated to being sex workers or some religious pursuit, which isn't that different from today in most of the world. (Like how it was/is common for LGBT people to become priests, monks and nuns.)

You're also wrong about what "ergi" means:
Ergi - Wikipedia

It quite clearly has anti-effeminate connotations. It was okay to be a top in male/male relations but you are giving up your manhood if you were the bottom. The man gives, and the woman receives. That's the fundamental basis for how they viewed things.

I don't know enough about the history of the other cultures to comment, but "homophobia" definitely did not begin with the Abrahamic religions and most expressions of it are not religious in orientation. It really just comes to down to sex roles, and then religion picked up on it as religion is a part of culture. I will say that being mentioned in the Kama Sutra perhaps doesn't mean what you think it does, as it's about sex and I did say that hijras are heavily involved with sex work... Also, having religious roles and representation in myth didn't mean they were celebrated and accepted by wider culture. It was common for there to be deities and guiding spirits associated with outcast groups, outlaws, etc. as with most everything else. Witches, witch doctors, sorcerers, shamans, etc. have always been a thing, too, and they've also always been both feared and scorned, as well as sought out by others - for having "special powers" - for their own benefit.
 
what doesn't seem normal in nature is homophobia; which is taught exclusively by humans in a religious context?

Human social relationships are different due to language. We can probably find approximate similarities though, or manifestations of similar behaviours.

Social animals do have actions and behaviours that are status enhancing or status diminishing.

Submissive actions are acknowledging the other animal’s greater status.

Traditional hostility was often towards the passive (“submissive”) male.

So perhaps we aren’t that different after all.
 

The Kilted Heathen

Crow FreyjasmaðR
The pre-Christian Greeks and Romans didn't have high views of feminine males/male effeminacy, either.
An oversimplification, and you're framing these through modern lenses. Namely through the use of "feminine" and "effeminacy". That was not the issue in Greek and Roman societies, and is not brought up in the negative. Rather it is being submissive, which was seen as the behavior of slaves and non-military castes.

and one Roman emperor, Elagabalus, was assassinated partially because he so scandalized society with his effeminate behavior and breaking of religious and sexual taboos.
No, he was hated because of his submissive behavior, flippancy toward marriage (even to a vestal virgin), and irreverence to the Roman pantheon. It was mostly his foreign conduct and provocation of Roman culture and customs that garnered animosity from the Roman elite. He was assassinated when he ordered the execution of anyone who showed favor to his cousin, Alexander, who was placed as a consul designatus next to Elagabalus, and who was in fact a favorite of the people.

A male Roman citizen could lose his citizenship by playing the role of a female in bed.
You're going to have to provide a source for that. The only ways I can find of a male losing his citizenship is through defecting from the army, maiming himself on purpose to avoid military service, or avoiding censorship to be disregarded for tax collection. In relation to being submissive in same-sex intercourse (only among males, it should be noted), the only "threat" that came with this was the possibility of being regarded as a slave. It didn't make one a slave, but it carried the connotation.

You're also wrong about what "ergi" means:
No, I am not. Did you notice that the examples and sources given discuss the Medieval period of Scandinavia? That's the years 1100 – 1600 CE, about 1-500 years after the Christianization of Scandinavia. Yes, that is relevant as the use of ergi and argr changed under a Christian culture. Yes, ergi means "unmanly", yet to understand what that means in pre-Christian Scandinavian society, it must be understood just what "manliness" was. Here, as well, you are running into the flaw of viewing the gender roles through a modern lens.

I will say that being mentioned in the Kama Sutra perhaps doesn't mean what you think it does, as it's about sex and I did say that hijras are heavily involved with sex work...
Do you really think that's all the Kama Sutra is? The name itself means "Principles of Love". "Attributed to Vātsyāyana, the Kama Sutra is neither exclusively nor predominantly a sex manual on sex positions, but rather was written as a guide to the art of living well, the nature of love, finding a life partner, maintaining one's love life, and other aspects pertaining to pleasure-oriented faculties of human life." And still yet, it is noted that mistreatment of hijra began after colonization.

Also, having religious roles and representation in myth didn't mean they were celebrated and accepted by wider culture.
Yes, it does mean that. The myths and legends of a peoples reflect their culture; that which is shunned and that which is viewed as normal and accepted.
 

1213

Well-Known Member
... You can't use your example in context with homosexuality. Homosexuality is generally the attraction of two things of the same species being attracted to one another....

But how do you know "homosexual" animals are attracted? It is possible the "homosexual" act is just mindless movement that is not really about attraction, but more like compulsive movement.

... The real question, is why do you even care?

Because I don't like when people are misled by false claims.
 

The Kilted Heathen

Crow FreyjasmaðR
But how do you know "homosexual" animals are attracted? It is possible the "homosexual" act is just mindless movement that is not really about attraction, but more like compulsive movement.
So you're suggesting it's like a default for animals?
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
Minorities that are outside the social norm and majorities for sexualities, religions, and ethnicities. Heterosexuality is the socially dominant sexuality, and ergo "heterophobia" is absolutely ridiculous, and not a thing.
You can be a minority and still be a bigot.
 

The Kilted Heathen

Crow FreyjasmaðR
Yes indeed, you certainly can. But "heterophobia" suggests broad-reaching, systemic oppression and persecution, on the levels that we see homophobia, transphobia, islamophobia, etc being expressed and implemented. Someone in the LGBT might be bigoted towards straight people, but no one is writing laws to limit how straight people are able to live and express themselves.
 

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
Yes indeed, you certainly can. But "heterophobia" suggests broad-reaching, systemic oppression and persecution, on the levels that we see homophobia, transphobia, islamophobia, etc being expressed and implemented. Someone in the LGBT might be bigoted towards straight people, but no one is writing laws to limit how straight people are able to live and express themselves.
phobias don't require laws.
 

1213

Well-Known Member
So you're suggesting it's like a default for animals?

I don't mean homosexuality is default for animals, or anyone else. I think the instinct or need to have sex may be. And it seems in some cases, like dogs, it is like an itch that they may scratch in any way, without any attraction, or idea about is it done with opposite sex, or with any random object.
 

The Kilted Heathen

Crow FreyjasmaðR
phobias don't require laws.
This has been discussed so much as to how '-phobia' is being used in terms of social injustices (e.g. homophobia, islamophobia). And as we have seen in recent years, there are laws being written to those effects.

I don't mean homosexuality is default for animals, or anyone else. I think the instinct or need to have sex may be.
So then we should not be so puritanical about who decides to have sex with who. (never mind that animals also form same-sex bonds like we do).
 

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
This has been discussed so much as to how '-phobia' is being used in terms of social injustices (e.g. homophobia, islamophobia). And as we have seen in recent years, there are laws being written to those effects.
i understand that extremely well as a person who has dealt with others views on how they believe someone should live.

but a phobia doesn't require laws. even if there were no laws the stigma would still exist because of peoples explicit behavior based solely on belief. you can criminalize anything, doesn't mean the person is going to change their behavior.


phobias have to do with fear. only the person who internalizes the belief and projects it can control the belief.


belief doesn't change reality. acting on beliefs changes reality and using fear doesn't usually work out well
 
Last edited:
Top