>>3519
>I don't understand why people are homophobic.
Nobody has a problem with fags. It's fags and LGBT that have a problem with everyone else, and for multiple different reasons. And it's
from those problems that they have with everyone else that everyone else then has a problem with them.
Let's start with the subject of
gay marriage. People don't have a problem with that because of morality or any of that bullshit. And don't repeat the lie about how fags and dykes cannot see their significant other in the hospital because they're not "related", everyone knows that narrative is bullshit. The reason people have a problem with gay marriage is because
marriage is a politically defined term that carries with it certain connotations and implications in how a government and it's people operate. When two people are married, they receive certain tax advantages that one doesn't receive being single. And the reason
FOR those tax advantages stems from the fact that it's supposed to be an incentive to procreate. To make it easier for that couple to have a child, which then opens them up to even more tax advantages and other incentives (Cheaper By The Dozen was one such IRL annecdote of this).
Yes, people don't "always" do that, but such discussion starts going down the path of entirely pointless discussions like asking why theft is "illegal" when it clearly doesn't deter people from stealing. Allowing for same-sex marriage completely destroys that concept. If a same sex couple is treated as politically equal to that of a traditional couple, then all the incentives to keep a nation going evaporate beause there goes the incetives to procreate. Not because the country is going to be taken over by fags, but because everyone else is going to then take advantage of those tax incetives whether they're gay or not. So you'll be having 100% straight men "marrying" just for the purposes of getting a tax advantage and other incentives.
And, no, adoption is not a solution to this problem, especially with all the reports coming out about how kids growing up in homosexual households are more screwed up than kids growing up with a single parent. Yes, that's not true of "everyone", but it happens often enough to be a problem.
Another topic worth pointing out how is fags hate religion. Now, I don't agree that religious beliefs should be imposed upon people, and I cannot think of a person (
Outside of the Muslims and the Christian Nationalists) who argues that should take place. However when it cames to fags, none of that matters. They want any and all religious belief wiped off the face of the Earth for the very simple reason that it considers homosexuality to be a sin or it introduces limits their lifestyle. And they're not alone in being the only ones making this proclamation:
https://redirect.invidious.io/watch?v=e_f06HkrKG0&t=725
It doesn't matter how much people argue or point out that, in the case of Christianity, they love them and treat them as a fellow person despite their lifestyle being seen as sinful according to their Christian beliefs. For some people, that's not "good enough". Because there's a belief out there that people disprove of their lifestyle or actions, then they must launch a crusade against the people who have said beliefs. And the result is, naturally, normal people hating fags as a result of that because of fags trying to force their lifestyle upon everyone else.
And if you try to bring up the point of how it wasn't "always" that accepting in the past, I want to you to honestly answer the questions of ARE YOU DOING THIS BECAUSE YOU HONESTLY BELIEVE IT SHOLD BE DONE OR BECAUSE YOU WANT REVENGE?! Yes, things where shit in the past, a lot of people did a lot of stupid shit that in the past that they should have never done and was even considered immoral in THEIR days. No one is denying the fact that shit happened. The problem is are you going to accept it and move on, or are you going to play a victim all your life and drag everyone else down?
Now that's two points that deal directly with homosexuals. The next point that I will bring up has nothing to do with them and will be aimed squarly at the concept of LGBTQ+. Why? Because LGBTQ+ is a political and religious ideology known as Queer Theory, and is entrely disconnected from homosexuality. And they even admit this. In one of the defining books on Queer Theory entitled "Saint Foucault : Towards a Gay Hagiography", the author outright states:
https://archive.ph/nRpxa
<Unlike gay identity, which, though deliberately proclaimed in an act of affirmation, is nonetheless rooted in the positive fact of homosexual object-choice, queer identity need not be grounded in any positive truth or in any stable reality. As the very word implies, “queer” does not name some natural kind or refer to some determinate object; it acquires its meaning from its oppositional relation to the norm. Queer is by definition whatever is at odds with the normal, the legitimate, the dominant. There is nothing in particular to which it necessarily refers. It is an identity without an essence.
<...
<“Queer,” then, demarcates not a positivity but a positionality vis-à-vis the normative—a positionality that is not restricted to lesbians and gay men but is in fact available to anyone who is or who feels marginalized because of her or his sexual practices.
What this means in layman's terms is that being LGBTQ+ means being at odds with whatever is "normal" in society. And what that would mean in practice is that a society that accepts homosexuals as a normal part of it would be at odds with the concept of LGBTQ+ despite the name. And the
ONLY reason why they use the acronym LGBTQ+ is for the purposes of using fags, dykes, and bisexual as human shields so that they can advance their political agendas. It's why they constantly try to conflate hating trannies and queers as being the "same thing" has hating fags and dykes, which it isn't.
And with that I come back to my thesis that people don't have a problem with fags, it's fags who have a problem with everyone else.
>being a young girl in a misogynistic world
Message too long. Click
here
to view full text.