MovieChat Forums > Lethal Weapon (1987) Discussion > Okay, so were the 80s were even more hom...

Okay, so were the 80s were even more homophobic than I'd thought?

posted 9 years ago by sugar_n_spice
117 replies | jump to latest

I was born in the early 90s, so I missed out on the apparently magical time that was the 80s (it seems like a lot of pop culture now is nostalgic for that decade). However, I do know that HIV / AIDS was a huge (and for way too long, poorly-researched) issue back then, and that the victims of the disease were often ignorantly categorized as gay, heroin-addicted, or black (with some overlap) - but heavy emphasis on the first category. But from what I know of the 80s - and even before and afterward, really - most of the ire directed at "the gays" particularly singled out gay and bisexual men (and you had it even worse if you were a gay man of color). It would seem that people didn't mind lesbians as much. Pop culture - particularly the straight men / characters in it - often fetishizes lesbian relationships, viewing them as "hot."

"So what does any of this have to do with Lethal Weapon?" you might ask.

I bring this up because I watched the movie tonight, after I hadn't seen it for a while. First time I'd watched it was in my teens, and I usually put it on at least once a year. It's a good background movie. Anyway, this time... a line jumped out at me.

When Murtaugh and Riggs are at the shooting range, hashing out whether Dixie could've killed Amanda Hunsaker, Murtaugh says something to the effect of, "So up till now we've assumed that the person in bed with Amanda the night she jumped was a man, but suppose it was a woman?" Then Riggs replies, "Okay. disgusting, but okay."

Ummmm... wtf was this line doing in the movie? It's said so nonchalantly that I never noticed till tonight, but now I'm surprised I could've missed something so pointlessly hateful. Because seriously, what was the purpose of Riggs randomly calling two women in bed together "disgusting"? To show that Riggs strongly disliked (to put it mildly) lesbians? What's the point of having Riggs strongly dislike lesbians? How does that have any meaningful effect on his character or the plot?

All a line like that did was serve to alienate potential members of the audience. I'm a straight woman, but after hearing that line I tried to imagine what how I would've felt if I were a lesbian or bisexual woman in the theater when this movie came out. How I would've felt by a soon-to-be beloved action hero randomly calling me disgusting.

I can't be the only person to be shocked by how hateful and out-of-place this line is.

http://greens-end.myminicity.com/

[–] Beagle200 (18) 4 years ago

Lesbians were NOT anymore accepted, and to say the people did “not mind lesbians as much as gay men” is 100% false. Talking from personal experience here. ALL homosexuality was deemed taboo, dirty, and deeply stigmatized during the 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s, and lesbians were seen just as much as degenerate perverts and freaks as gay men were. Lesbians faced the same stigma and hatred as gay men, and were forced to live closeted lives. You simply have seen more gay jokes directed at gay men because society was and is male-based, but the line in Lethal Weapon is a good example of the same homophobic stigmas that targeted lesbians. I promise that lesbians faced the same homophobia, lack of acceptance, and hatred as gay men. Please do not think otherwise. I lived through it as a gay woman, and it was absolutely horrible.

Ellen Degeneres, for example, came out in the 90s. Her show was cancelled, she was labeled “Ellen Degenerate,” and she was out of work. Her career over, she was shunned by society and deemed as a disgusting freak. Nobody would hire or come near her because they did not want to associate with a known “queer.” Sodomy laws in the United States criminalized lesbians and gay men for same sex activity, but not heterosexuals for the same activities, until 2003. Police officers would target, harass, and abuse lesbians, lesbians would be denied jobs and child custody rights, and they were just as alienated from society as their gay brothers.

Furthermore, please do not confuse fetishization with acceptance. While some straight men get turned on by “girls kissing girls” in porno, they can only handle it when it is ideal, ultra-sexual, gay-for-pay, “hot” actresses. (“I’m okay with lesbians as long as they are both hot.”) The same homophobic men who fetishize and dehumanize lesbians as sex objects are also the first ones to hate, mock, harass, abuse, rape, and kill lesbians in real life because they are “disgusting dykes” who need to be “fixed.” This is why lesbian rape statistics are so disproportionately high. Meanwhile, many ~

[–] Beagle200 (18) 4 years ago

~ straight women actually love and even fetishize gay men while hating lesbians because they are “gross.” At the end of the day, all homophobes will harass and gag at the sight of any same-sex couple, male or female, even if it’s a homophobic man who watches lesbian porn when nobody is watching. (Because in fake porn it’s somehow “different).

Finally, that brings me to today. Lesbians are not anymore accepted than gay men, and they face the SAME homophobia as gay men. They also just get a lot more homophobia in the form of sexual harassment and sexual abuse. They still get called “disgusting” by homophobes, still get slurs shouted at them for holding hands with another girl, still have hate crimes being committed against them, still get the same stigma and judgment from society as gay men. They also just get homophobia in the form of sexual abuse for being female— straight men dehumanizing them as sex objects in porn but hating them in real life and anywhere else BUT porn, telling lesbians that they could “turn them straight” and that they can “fix” them. This is not being “more accepted” in any way, shape, or form.

Cis white gay men have been the face of the LGBT movement since forever, and therefore have gotten the most recognition and acceptance in society today. Unfortunately, the mere word “lesbian” is still deeply stigmatized, taboo, and seen as “dirty” by society today, including to much of the LGBT movement and to lesbians themselves, and this is largely due to the homophobia against lesbians being ignored and unattended to (because male issues have always come first). Sadly, the prevalent homophobia toward lesbians has been ignored and even tolerated in much of society until recently, where people are finally becoming to give gay women and their abuse the same attention gay men have always gotten.

So in conclusion and to answer your question, YES. The 80s were much more (and equally) homophobic toward all gay people, regardless of their sex, than you realized. Anybody who lived through these times, and even most people who didn’t, can tell you this in a heartbeat.

[–] Beagle200 (18) 4 years ago

That being said, the mindset of “two women = gross” is nothing out of the ordinary and is even expected homophobia. ESPECIALLY for the 80s.

Many times, I have been called a “disgusting dyke” just for holding hands with another girl in public. I have been told by straight men that they could “turn me straight,” and me and my girlfriend were sexually assaulted for being “disgusting dykes.”

My point is, lesbians are not and never have been deemed more acceptable by society. Even the homophobes who fetishize us in porn (which is homophobia in itself) think we are “disgusting dykes” when we aren’t in porn, and treat us as such.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Only thing incorrect about what you said is using the term homophobia. It isn't really homophobia as much as it is bigotry. If it were truly homophobia then those people would be running in fear of the lesbians instead of just treating them like dirt. I do wish people would stop using the terms homophobe and homophobia when the more appropriate terms are bigot or bigotry.

[–] Beagle200 (18) 4 years ago

Thank you for agreeing! It is always nice seeing a fellow person who has also lived through these less-than-accepting times and therefore understands. Likewise, it is often only fellow LGBT members who can fully understand the hardships and stigma that still target LGBT people today.

“Homophobia” is generally the term that people use regarding any anti-gay behavior nowadays. It is actually defined as: “dislike of or prejudice against homosexual people.”
Which is exactly what this “bigotry” is.

People who hate LGBT people are not usually actually “afraid” of them. Yes, they get uncomfortable at seeing a same-sex couple kiss, but their bigotry comes in from disgust, from seeing it as dirty or sinful, from being angry that a woman or man is not fulfilling their “duty” to act as a true woman / man, or simply not being able to understand.

Yes, there has been recognization that the actual term “homophobia” is not exactly accurate to describe the hatred toward gay men and lesbians (as well as other LGBT members), but it is still the generic term that is used nowadays to describe anti-gay sentiments and behavior.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

I understand that lots of people misuse the word, but being a lawyer I tend to be a stickler for using the right word to describe something. The American Psychological Association still defines it as having fear and dread, which is why I prefer to think of what people like to call homophobia today as actually being bigotry. In large part because when people start over using a word like homophobia as they currently do it begins to move the word into the land of over used cliched words like racist or antisemite which have become so over used by many people that it becomes a bit of a joke like the boy who cried wolf. If people want to use words that have very specific meaning it's best if they really apply and aren't just used as a catch all which is what has been happening with homophobe.

[–] freddie1768 (18) 4 years ago

[deleted]

[–] freddie1768 (18) 4 years ago

EXACTLY. I could not have said any of this better myself.

Poor gay women were absolutely experiencing the same homophobia and hate during this time. It is a shame that gay men often prioritized their issues over gay women, even though they were experiencing the same issues for being homosexual. To believe that any gay person at this time, male or female, was deemed anything CLOSE to "okay" or acceptable is simply absurd. LGBT people are still alienated and stigmatized by much of society today.

Lesbians were just as hated and rejected as gay men were during the 70s, 80s, and 90s, but unfortunately lesbians had a harder time than gay men when it came to getting society to recognize the abuse they were constantly experiencing (AGAIN, because society will listen to homosexual men saying "We want change" MUCH sooner and easier than they will listen to a group of homosexual women saying the same thing.

Thus, it eventually became better recognized that lesbians were facing the same homophobia and intolerance as gay men, but that their abuse had simply been ignored because they were women. And, thus, "GLBT" was then changed to "LGBT." To finally give acknowledgment to the disproportionate and accepted abuse that lesbians were facing at the time.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Actually sodomy laws applied to straights as well as gays, but unless you were caught in the act or one person filed rape charges against the other person it was never taken to court. But you can find lots of instances where sodomy laws were applied to straights during that time. In fact sodomy charges against gay or lesbians was not that common, the most common time that they were applied was in rape cases or child molestation cases.

[–] Beagle200 (18) 4 years ago

In 4 states, same sex relationships were illegal while the same activities did not criminalize heterosexual relationships.

Here is an insightful source on more recent cases:

https://www.aclu.org/other/examples-sodomy-laws-used-discriminate-against-lesbian-and-gay-people

https://www.aclu.org/other/why-sodomy-laws-matter

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Your logic is flawed. If you look at the sodomy laws in the states the ACLU mentions the only one that actually had sodomy laws specific to homosexuals was Texas, in all the other states the ACLU pursued the sodomy laws applied to both straight and gay couples. It only caused problems in those states because if you are living a gay or lesbian lifestyle with a partner then it is presumed that you are committing sodomy since you couldn't be having any type of sexual relationship that wasn't considered sodomy in that relationship. Like it or not the vast majority of states that had or have sodomy laws apply them to bother straight and gay couples.

[–] Beagle200 (18) 4 years ago

Yes yes you are right!

The fact is that due to the nature of these sodomy laws, gay men and lesbians were disproportionately targeted. As you said yourself, living a “gay or lesbian lifestyle with a partner then it is presumed that you are committing sodomy since you couldn't be having any type of sexual relationship that wasn't considered sodomy in that relationship,” that in itself is an example of how sodomy laws were deliberately used to target the “deviant” homosexuals.

While homosexuality was directly illegal in 4 states until 2003, homosexual activity was still illegal in all of the other states because of the nature of homosexual acts. Thus, this was used to directly discriminate against and target LGBT individuals.

In some states, for example, police officers took the sodomy laws so extremely that gay man and gay women were targeted and abused simply for holding hands with each other in public.

I think you mistook my wording. When I said “sodomy laws that applied to homosexuals but not to heterosexuals,” I was stating that there *were* certain sodomy laws that applied only to homosexual couples. I was not denying that, in most states, the laws couldn’t be applied to heterosexual couple (they sometimes were).

But the truth is that, especially toward the 70s, 80s, and 90s, sodomy laws, while most in theory *could* be used against heterosexuals, they were primarily being used to discriminate against gay men and gay women. Sodomy laws that were originally created against persons regardless of their sexuality were now being used deliberately against homosexual people, and it was even stated by LGBT defendants in several court cases that a heterosexual couple would not have been convicted in the same manner, even if such a conviction was technically legal. And four states did deliberately amend their sodomy laws so that they only applied to same-sex couples.

Sorry for any confusion. :)

[–] Beagle200 (18) 4 years ago

And I quote:

“Lawrence only directly invalidates sodomy laws in four states that have laws that only apply to gay people: Texas, Oklahoma, Missouri, and Kansas.”

Lawrence referring to the case of Lawrence v. Texas, where these laws were deemed unconstitutional.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

In general while the police might use those laws to target gay and lesbians, that doesn't equate to any convictions because you would still need to find a prosecutor that would take the case to trial and most would know that it was a no win case as you have to prove the act was committed to the jury. Unless the cops saw the couple engaged in the activity it is not something a prosecutor would waste their time with. The cases where it was taken were ones in which there was an actual witness to the act. That is why while you will find numerous cases where sodomy laws were used against rapist or child molesters you will almost never be able to find any where it was two consenting adults gay or lesbian unless they were foolish enough to engage in the act in public... which frankly is and of itself an illegal act of indecent exposure.

[–] Beagle200 (18) 4 years ago

There are many documented cases of police officers following “suspected” homosexual couples home from bars or public places. There is an alarming number of cases of police officers watching homosexual people engage in intimacy from the “safety” of their houses. In one instance, the officer used a drill to watch as a couple engaged in homosexual activity.

Because of the stigma and hatred against LGBT people at the time, these blatant invasions of privacy often were not even acknowledged in court.

But yes, I understand your point. Of course, these blatant violations of privacy became less prevalent as time progressed. That definitely makes sense that cases of rape and pedophilia were commonly convicted, like you said. The fact that these laws were still being used with the intention to target and criminalize LGBT people, however, is upsetting and inexcusable. Even in cases where lesbians and gay men were assumed and deemed “criminals” in that they must be committing illegal acts under the sodomy laws, this was used to deny LGBT people job offerings, child custody rights, etc. Given the blatant bigotry in society against lesbians and gay men during this time, I think it’s safe to say this is not surprising.

Thank you for your insights! 😊

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

If I were a gay man and a cop drilled a hole in my house to see what I was doing in bed and then was foolish enough to arrest me for it I would feel like I won the lottery as there are so many serious violations in that that no city attorney in his right mind would dare to take it to court and would immediately move to negotiating a payout from the city.

If they weren't acknowledged in court it was likely because the prosecutor realized that such evidence wouldn't be allowed in the trial, if the gay couple involved didn't file a lawsuit against the police department they were either poorly represented by an even marginally qualified attorney or possible just too embarrassed by everything to do anything about it. Which was often the reason the police were able to get away with a lot of things in the past, the victims of the police action would often rather just ignore it and move on down the road when the charges were dropped rather than file a lawsuit and get their faces plastered in the local papers.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

I was in college in the 80's and you have some perceptions of what was a fact completely wrong. To begin with there was research on HIV/AIDS going on during that time because it was know that the virus could be transmitted from contaminated blood and there were straight people that were diagnosed with it after having surgery which causes people to become even more fearful of surgery than they would have been prior to the HIV/AIDS outbreaks. I remember friends that would go to a dentist out in the middle of fucking nowhere because they were afraid they might get infected if they used one in the city because cities had a higher concentration of gay men. Which brings of the fact that you don't understand. In the beginning with HIV/AIDS it was truly a near pure gay disease with the exception of people contaminated from blood during medical procedures. It was not considered a black or heroin disease either in the beginning. Over time heroin users were the next big group to get hit beyond the gay men, and only later were blacks in the US hit with it. Lethal Weapon was from the early 80's when neither heroin or blacks were big percentages of the ones infected.

You also forget the age of Murtaugh at the time of the movie he was getting close to retirement age so he was supposed to be from an older generation at the time of the movie which would have made his view of lesbians quite normal. I know there was a lesbian 2nd cousin in my family and while my parents would speak about her and had no problem being around her to her own parents who would have been closer to the age of Murtaugh, she was dead. The disowned her. So it whether you like the way they created his character or not, it was a normal view from a person his age at that time in history.

Lastly, you have to remember that gays and lesbians make up a very small minority in the population. Most reliable data puts the number between 1 and 3 percent... studios didn't care whether they upset that group.

[–] AnubisRaydeen (7897) 4 years ago

I'm class of 87 and though there was rampant use of the term "fag" as a pejorative (but generic like you never meant someone was literally a "dick" if you called them that) and plenty anti-homosexual sentiment in high school, the general lean of society was not one of hate against gays. It was there, sure but people were pretty tolerant. The bad behavior toward them came from very very small % of people. Those instances were not acceptable but they were inflated and run up the flag pole as being indicative of the gestalt. I worked with many homosexuals in nearly every job I ever had from the mid 80s to 2000s. Never saw unfair nor hateful treatment of them ever. So that there was any at all wasn't cool but there's hate for everyone or anything if you look for it. Hate of gays started to be something far worse than hate for anyone else.

I recognize it as a problem but I also recognize the fact that victim mentality needs the offense to exist in perpetuity so no improvement is allowed lest the value of the victimhood be diminished.

I never took that line in the movie as being anti-lesbian.

[–] Gd5150 (11851) 4 years ago

It’s really sad being born in the 90s you have no idea how you’ve been brainwashed to waste a vast majority of your life being triggered about crap that literally has zero impact on it.

There used to be a saying “sticks and stones”...etc.

The is the result of people having such a comfortable luxurious lifestyle they are desperately searching for a reason to be a victim. To make excuses for their shortcomings. Because it’s easier than working hard to achieve success. These same losers are now burning down cities and being encouraged and exploited by the Democrat party.

It’s helps no one. It inspires no one. It doesn’t create jobs. It doesn’t bring happiness into anyone’s life.

In 30 years you’ll be the “racist ignoramus” laughed at for using terms that have been redefined as “shocking and offensive”. You are being played simply to empower a different group of people. They use language and victimization to empower themselves. In the end It accomplishes nothing. Pay attention, remember these days, you’ll see.

[–] freddie1768 (18) 4 years ago

No hun... I can't blame you for not knowing this since you weren't around at the time, but lesbians were just as "disgusting" and stigmatized as gay men were during this era. I'm assuming you are less aware of this simply because a male dominated society will always prioritize male issues over female ones. That does not mean that homophobia and abuse toward gay women was any less prevalent in society, and people always "minded" lesbians just as much. Also, if you haven't noticed the jokes, stigmas, and homophobia against lesbians during the 70s, 80s, and 90s, look harder. It was ever-prevalent in media, in the default mindset, in society as a whole.

If you were a homosexual, you hid it. Getting outed as a gay man or a gay woman meant losing your career, possibly being disowned by your family, and being rejected by society. There is a reason that gay women were fired after getting outed, would lose child custody rights after getting outed, would be ridiculed and shunned by society for getting outed.

I recommend watching the film "Boys Don't Cry." It depicts the true, tragic story of Brandon Teena, a transgender man born in 1972, who faces endless homophobia in America because of his identity. He is constantly being threatened, beaten, and abused by hateful homophobes when people incorrectly perceive him as a "f*cking dyke," and he is shunned by society because society takes him as a lesbian. Tragically, the film ends with some of his "friends" realizing that he is, in fact, biologically a female who is in a relationship with another female. This evokes disgust, outrage, and hatred in Brandon's "friends," and in a horrific and unthinkable scene, they brutally and repeatedly rape him before murdering him. This is what lesbian women (and gay men and trans people) were dealing with during this time. These horrible, prejudice views still exist today among homophobic bigots, of course, but the fact is that in the 70s, 80s, and 90s, lesbians were deemed "disgusting and filthy queers," and they had to hide their sexuality for their own safety and reputation. I will emphasize again, gay women were NOT anymore tolerated than gay men. If anything, they suffered double in that they faced traditional homophobia, homophobia in the form of sexual abuse, and had their struggles ignored for so long (Also don't forget that sexism was also much more prevalent in the 70s, 80s, and 90s. Society was far less willing to listen to a group of "queer" women advocating for "equal rights" than they were to listen to a group of homosexual men advocating for the same thing).

Lesbians were just as hated and rejected as gay men were during the 70s, 80s, and 90s, but unfortunately lesbians had a harder time than gay men when it came to getting society to recognize the abuse they were constantly experiencing (AGAIN, because society will listen to homosexual men saying "We want change" MUCH sooner and easier than they will listen to a group of homosexual women saying the same thing.

Thus, it eventually became better recognized that lesbians were facing the same homophobia and intolerance as gay men, but that their abuse had simply been ignored because they were women. And, thus, "GLBT" was then changed to "LGBT." To finally give acknowledgment to the disproportionate and accepted abuse that lesbians were facing at the time.

Gibson's comment regarding homosexuals wasn't anything out of the ordinary at the time-- it's nothing out of the ordinary for homophobes to say about lesbians or gay men today, either. It just wouldn't be put into a movie nowadays.

(My own father happens to be a shameless homophobe who is the first to say "Eww that is sick, I'm gonna puke" when we are watching a movie and two women kiss. My grandma is nauseated at the very mention of two women behaving intimately or romantically together. Some homophobes get off to gay male porn or lesbian porn (LGBT people are also deeply fetishized and dehumanized while simultaneously creating a "gag" reflex in society), but they don't tolerate these people anymore in actuality. Sadly, this is just the way homophobes are).

[–] freddie1768 (18) 4 years ago

Also, like someone else said here, homophobic guys who jack off to lesbian porn still have the response of "ew a filthy d*ke" when seeing a lesbian in a normal or romantic context. Liking lesbian porn has nothing to do with tolerating homosexual women, and male consumption of lesbian porn actually perpetuates negative stereotypes and objectification of gay women.

When a homophobe jacks off to the fake lesbian porn that is made for male consumption, the context is purely: "These 2 porn stars are kissing to turn on a man who will soon enter the scene and have sex with both of the women." But when the same homophobe then sees two women kiss in a movie or setting where the context is NOT purely "hot heterosexual women performing for a male audience," their reaction is "EW gay," just as their reaction would be if it were 2 men. There is the same "ick factor" of seeing any same-sex couple to a hetero-normative society. This relates to how straight women love and fetishize gay men when it is their "ideal" context of gay men, but absolutely hate lesbians because they are "gross."

Society, of course, is not going to admit to this blatant hypocrisy, so unfortunately lesbians get blasted with both the same homophobia you see being directed at gay men, ON TOP of homophobia via sexual exploitation and abuse. Please do not mistake homophobic fetishizations of lesbians as them being anymore "accepted" or "less hated on." Lesbians always have and always will be included in the hated "gays" that you are referring to-- this is simply known, especially by people who lived through these times or people who are LGBT today. The fact that homophobic straight men treat lesbians like sex objects in porn doesn't change the fact that gay women have always faced the same hatred, homophobia, and abuse as gay men... as well as additional abuse from these homophobic straight men who hate lesbians in actuality. A homophobe who hates "disgusting homosexuals" doesn't like or treat a homosexual women any better than they do a homosexual man just because they get off to lesbian porn. Too many straight male homophobes watch lesbian porn at night and the go mock, harass, beat up, rape, and kill homosexual women for being "filthy and disgusting dykes" the next day.

The same goes for straight women who love and fetishize gay men while hating "gross" lesbians. The difference is that these women aren't hating and abusing the gay men they fetishize. Homophobic straight men who fetishize lesbians in porn more often than not hate and abuse actual homosexual women in real life.

So it is very fair what someone else here said regarding all of this: Having lived through the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s myself, I, as well as millions of others, can testify that the same stigmas and homophobia DID exist and still DO exist toward gay women and gay men; gay women's experiences are simply undermined because society centers its attention toward men. Gay women were (and still ARE) just as stigmatized and hated as gay men... Yes, even by the dehumanizing homophobes who watch lesbian porn and then think, say, and do the worst things to homosexual women imaginable.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Your argument would make more sense if it were logical. If some guy is jacking off while watching lesbian it isn't a sign of homophobia. It goes beg the question of why someone would find it arousing and yet claim that lesbians were disgusting. But this is one of those instances where you are using the word "homophobia" incorrectly and it lessens your argument. In fact that first paragraph where you think some man that gets off watching lesbians is homophobic makes taking anything else you say impossible to take seriously.

I would suggest you try to make your argument without using the word homophobic at all, I'm guessing you could do it and it would be a much more believable argument than the one you've made here. If you see a man running in fear of lesbians or gays then feel free to use the term homophobic... but if you don't see that happening consider you are over using the homophobia word and making yourself look like an idiot.

[–] freddie1768 (18) 4 years ago

Why do you feel the need to invalidate an important and very real argument that I am making here, and on a stupid basis?

Clearly, you are one of the few people who still take the word "homophobia" as having the literal definition meaning the "fear" of homosexuals.

In this instance, I am using "homophobia" the way the MAJORITY of society does today. Turning lesbians into nothing more than sex objects but then hating homosexual women in real life because people despise homosexuality and deem it as "disgusting" is, yes, what society today would call "homophobic."

You are free to have your own opinions on the "accuracy" of that word, but don't act like I am an idiot for using a term in a manner that the VAST majority of society recognizes as valid today. Acting like I am stupid or that my argument doesn't make sense simply because YOU don't agree with the "evolved" and widely accepted version of this word makes YOU, in fact, look like the "idiot." Not me.

Sorry that the word "homophobia" has come to have the simultaneous meaning of "bigotry against homosexuals" in today's society, but that is not my fault. In this case, you knew exactly what I meant, so pretending like you think that my argument "doesn't make sense" just because I am using a word that has evolved in a way that you personally disapprove of is ignorance on your own part. Not mine. Maybe it doesn't make sense that the word "homophobia," originally meaning fear ("phobia") of homosexuals ("homo"), has adapted the meaning of "bigotry against homosexuals," but I don't make the fricking rules. As someone already told you here, the definition of "homophobia" is literally listed now as "dislike of or prejudice against homosexual people." That is a widely adapted concept of what "homophobia" is today.

By trying to make ME look stupid just because I am using a term that, whether the evolution of it makes sense or not, DOES make sense to society in today's context, you are just making yourself look ignorant and unnecessarily problematic.

Sure, take every use of "homophobia" in my previous argument and replace it with "bigotry against homosexuals" if that makes you happy. I promise you, most people are knowledgeable enough to grasp the same meaning regardless. But in today's society, "homophobia" WOULD be a more common and expected word in this context, whether you like or agree with that or not.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

There was a time when the vast majority of the world thought the earth was flat, simply having a vast majority believe something doesn't make it right. The majority of American call retarded kids special, but it doesn't really mean they are special now does it? Or do you want to redefine every word to make yourself feel better. A word which is so rooted in Greek from two very clearly defined words is not so ambiguous to lend itself to idiots bastardizing the words meaning. Or should we say that the sky is green and the grass is blue and ignore the actual meaning of green and blue as well.

[–] freddie1768 (18) 4 years ago

You're crazy lol. I'm not making myself feel "better" about anything, I was literally just using terminology that is most recognized and applicable in society today. Nobody has a problem with using the term "homophobia" in the exact manner that I did, except for you.

I think the problem is that you are far too concerned about dated word meanings, and you don't know how to adapt and evolve along with society. You knew what I meant from the beginning, as ANY half-knowledgeable person would, and, once again, you simply chose to be a problematic know-it-all. What is even more baffling is that, judging off your own comments on this thread, you and I were on the same page regarding everything else that I said (save for the "homophobia terminology" that you, personally, cannot accept, even as society has).

The meaning of "homophobia" has adapted in society, and a new meaning has been widely adopted.

"Homophobia encompasses a range of negative attitudes and feelings toward homosexuality or people who are identified or perceived as being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. It has been defined as contempt, prejudice, aversion, hatred or antipathy."

Get over it.

Also, fuck you for using the R word. Get a life, asshole.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Wow you're so woke you can't even say retarded? No point in saying anything else to you as it would be like trying to teach a snail to sing.

[–] freddie1768 (18) 4 years ago

All you had to say was that "bigotry" is, technically speaking, a more appropriate word than "homophobia" when referring to prejudice against homosexuals (since it clearly means so much to you). NOT come at me as if my entire argument is flawed simply for using a term that, whether you like it or not, has been adopted to have the exact meaning in the way that I was using it. Especially being that, judging off of your other comments on this thread, you and I were on the same page.

[–] freddie1768 (18) 4 years ago

Also, I hope you realize that this entire thread was referring to the bigotry against homosexuals as "homophobia." Again, because "homophobia" has adopted a new and widely accepted meaning in society. Throwing fits because of this isn't going to change the facts, and acting like everyone else is stupid for using a word that YOU simply refuse to admit has evolved in meaning, and pretending that society has not adopted this widely accepted definition / understanding of "homophobia," is stupidity on your part. I don't care if you have a problem with the way the word "homophobia" has evolved in society. I do have a problem with you pretending like the word isn't widely accepted and used in the EXACT way that I was using it, simply because you think it shouldn't be. Just because you think it shouldn't have that particular meaning in today's society doesn't change the fact that it does, so stop pretending otherwise. It is ludicrous. Goodbye.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

What did you mean when you said goodbye? Oh, that's right you intended it to mean what it has always meant... same thing applies to homophobia, it means fear and dread not dislike. Learn English and use the proper words then you might make sense.

[–] acidraindrop (3055) 3 years ago

Lipids are hydrophobic. Does that mean that the fat cells in your body are literally afraid of water?

[–] [deleted] 3 years ago

Good lord you are stupid aren't you... Do you see cells having brains and thoughts? You fucking moron. Now does fat react with water as if it were afraid of it? Why yes it does as both water and fats react as if they are avoiding each other.. but clearly they don't think.

Of course that has nothing to do with what was said you ignorant cunt.

[–] YoungWolf346 (1) 4 years ago

The fact that you are actually trying to invalidate a very good and accurate argument and calling it “illogical” because they used the term “homophobia”—which EVERYONE uses when referring to prejudice against homosexual people in society today—makes you look like the idiot, for God’s sake.

I don’t usually comment on these sorts of things, but you are the one who is impossible to take seriously. Not Freddie1768. 😂

[–] BourbonKing (5782) 4 years ago

If you're not gay and weren't alive when this movie came out then there's no point to your comment, especially when you pretend to be offended.

[–] kuatorises (7467) 4 years ago

Samuel L. Jackson's character in Die Hard 3 is racist. Who cares? Art reflects society. Some people are flawed, have different beliefs than you, or times were simply different back then. People talked and were allowed to talk like that. Who cares? It's a 33 year old movie.

[–] Cognoscente (2720) 2 years ago

Ironically, Die Hard 3 was at one point considered to be a Lethal Weapon sequel.

[–] Jsully9 (377) 3 years ago

No gives a shit, you don't like the line then throw the movie away. It was a different time and the LGBTHVXDE bullshit didn't have it's ass kissed like today.

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7818) 2 years ago

I gotta say while I understand people are gay, and I don't care for that line either, I don't care to see gay sex scenes or sexuality at all in movies. It has to do with the fact that I am an American born in the 80s who never watched any movies growing where there were same sex couples. It just wasn't a thing in movies.

Because of when and where I grew up I never even met a gay person until I was in highschool. I have only met a handfull of people who were gay and they kept their sexual relationships to themselves.

At the same time I don't feel right talking about mine or other peoples' sexuality gay or straight. I felt uncomfortable in highschool when all these straight kids in my class were talking about having sex with each other in the school and on the bus going home. It's like they didn't care about what was appropriate for a public setting. It made me so uncomfortable and I am straight by the way. These things in the real world should all be private. Oh and I hated seeing people make out with each other in highschool. I'd see people do that right inside of a building.