Critical Mass

On CNN.com this morning there is a video of a military recruiter telling someone to do a “gay voodoo jig.” CNN has labeled the video “Homophobic Recruiter.” Now, I don’t support the recruiter’s actions, but let me ask you something. What does “homophobic” mean? It means fear of homosexuals or homosexuality. There is a difference, though, between making fun of something or someone and being afraid of them. If I make fun of funny looking hats, it doesn’t mean I’m afraid of funny looking hats. It means I think they’re funny looking. Similarly, when people mock homosexuals (which I do not condone) it’s not because they fear them; they just don’t like them.

But were the media and the left to use a more accurate term, or talk about “anti-homosexuals,” they wouldn’t get to cast their enemies as scaredy-cat bigots. By claiming someone is afraid of something else, you get to imply a sense of inferiority and irrationality. Fear is seen as a symptom of failing to understand, of feeling threatened by. When someone is seen as afraid, they are seen as weak. So when you call someone a homophobe, you aren’t just calling them prejudiced, you’re also characterizing their prejudice as weak, irrational, and intimidated. By claiming someone is afraid of someone else, you empower those you claim they fear.

If, on the other hand, you simply - and more accurately - state that people are against another group of people or ideas, these negative connotations are not imparted. If someone is against something instead of afraid of it, it begs the question, “Why?” But if the left simply accused others of being against homosexuals, then they would invite a rational discussion of why they are against and whether their claims are valid. We would have to ask ourselves if there are reasons to not support homosexuals or homosexuality.

But rational discussion frightens the modern left because they rely on arguments of emotion (love, hate, fear, passion) and are prone to refutation by reasoned discourse. By labeling anyone against homosexuality as a homophobe they get to circumvent a discussion of the possible merits of the position they ridicule and instead immediately cast them in a negative, condescending light without ever making an argument as to why that' the case.