Jpw2040,

"...You keep reminding us that I referred to you as neanderthal..."

Now now ambiguity is inherently a trap and it wasn't deliberate. There still seems to be confusion. Can I retrospectively substitute "took it the wrong way" in place of "fell prey to the ambiguity" to eliminate it ... or would you construe that as further deviousness?

"Indeed, I've got a suggestion for you:..."

No thanks boss. I'm already a neanderthal. If I copied and pasted that you would call me a chimp.

Is all that just because I noted that your over the top interpretations of my comments "sound paranoid"? Presumably you somehow consider that an actual challenge to your sanity? Dare I observe that that overreaction also sounds paranoid?

"...it's been clear from the start that you do..."

Sorry boss but how does answering when you attack me for something I didn't do, sound smugly superior?

"Nevertheless, far be it from me to lecture you on the morality of feeling superior to other human beings ... "

Is that because you yourself call them neanderthals and chimpanzees and would feel like a hypocrite?

"I've provided lots of references to your habit of sooling the homophobes onto homosexuals,"

Don't forget the ones you used to support that curious interpretation of that comment were wrong. Does the German expression apply to your comments or mine?

"...I don't expect anyone to keep abreast of legislative developments..."

But you implied that changing discriminatory legislation would stop small minded homophobics because they base their actions on current legislation didn't you? Perhaps even you don't take that wild claim seriously?

"Definition of homophobia: prejudice against (fear or dislike of) homosexual people and homosexuality ..."

That includes "or dislike". Then do you consider it a misleading term? The whole point of the name calling is to rely upon people's assumption that they have been diagnosed as fearing homosexuals or fearing they are a homosexual isn't it? Otherwise should I accuse people of being Christophobic if they don't like Christianity? Where would it end?

jpw2040, what a clever little chap, You've been viewing another thread (1341) and using a statement from it to try and discredit a statement on this thread. I see that you never made any contribution to 1341, maybe because there was no anal sex discussions there (apart from one slip-up from Philo).
WTF did you mean by 'serial vilifier'? If it is that I am opposed to your perversions and always will be, then so be it. I'd rather be a 'moral humanist' than an 'immoral sodomist'.
I see you're giving it to the dog again. Poor mutt.

“If I copied and pasted that you would call me a chimp.” And quite deservedly so. I’m mightily relieved that we headed off that particular little contretemps.

If you want to know more about the etymology of the word homophobia, go look. You asked for a definition and I’ve referred you to one. As in the word xenophobia, both fear and dislike are included in the meaning. I didn’t make it that way, so your proposition that it's a misleading term is pretty pointless.

“Don't forget the ones you used to support that curious interpretation of that comment were wrong.” You’re welcome to take issue with anything I’ve said, but please do so accurately. One, and only one of the references was wrong. I acknowledged this and apologised.

Your posting behaviour encourages others to post homophobic comments. I’ve supported this view extensively, so the denials are a little hollow.

“Can I retrospectively substitute "took it the wrong way" in place of ...” If it’s up to me, no. You fabricated a story about laying a trap for me to make yourself look clever, but now you're admitting there was no trap. What's the quote about logs in eyes?

"or would you construe that as further deviousness?" No, I wouldn't. I would construe it as another failure http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=1308#23668 to apply the standards to yourself that you expect of others.

You departed from your normal quoting behaviour to paraphrase me in this case: “you implied that changing discriminatory legislation would stop small minded homophobics.” Now I understand. This ‘paraphrase’ was simply another attempt to derail the discussion. I implied nothing at all, though I did state something completely different to what you’ve written: go back and read it. If you’ve got some arguments to support the view that the current inequalities for same-sex-attracted people are unrelated to the homophobia we face every day, let’s hear them.

In the meantime, if you’re going to paraphrase what I say, do it accurately.

"I'd rather be a 'moral humanist' than an 'immoral sodomist'." I have no doubt you would, Jack, but so far neither your claims to be one, nor your denials of the other are very convincing http://www.oogachaga.com/downloads/homophobia_and_homosexual_arousal.pdf

(wow, mjpb, this amateur psychoanalysis has a certain cheap appeal. Lowering the standards sometimes is kinda fun, rather like when a drunken opposition leader visits a strip club. Could this be a slippery slope? Will I wind up making generalisations about Tasmanians or Volvo drivers next?)

Great link, jpw2040. Kind of like saying that Leftism is a consequence of closet Fascist tendencies.

"like saying that Leftism is a consequence of closet Fascist tendencies"

I've not seen that particular piece of research. The parallel which came to mind is that most bullies are deeply insecure themselves and try to cover it up by "being tough". In the same vein is the old saying about those who protest too much.

I posted links earlier in the discussion regarding causes of homophobia. My impression is that the extreme homophobes are mostly people who have been socialised to believe that homosexuality is inherently wrong, disgusting etc then find themselves unable to just say "not for me" and leave it at that.

They have to emphasis just how "un-homosexual" they are. They protest so much because they are uncertain.

They are like the kid who has been brought up to believe that you must be tough and confident and they find insecurity and doubt within themselves. Instead of facing the doubt and learning what it means they beat up someone else to show that they are tough and confident.

R0bert