this post was submitted on 07 Oct 2025
847 points (97.5% liked)
People Twitter
8309 readers
1995 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician. Archive.is the best way.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Almost like the first one isn't true either.
This study kind of illustrates it may be true. It's not a huge sample size, but its difficult to deny there is at least a significant correlation.
I only need to open Grindr at a Republican convention to know for sure. Also, good luck with the servers not crashing.
That's not what the study says??
I don't have access to the full text, but it certainly doesn't state most homophobes display attraction to gay porn.
It says there is a correlation. If 5% of the population is gay and 10% of homophobes are gay, then homophobia is correlated with being gay.
But stating most homophobes are gay would require evidence that >50% are gay, not just that there exists a correlation.
As noted, its a small sample size, and even in that sample size the homophobic participants exhibited "arousal" to all sexual stimuli.
I don't think that makes someone gay.
You also have to consider the subset of self described homophobes who would consent to having a device strapped to their genitalia while they are shown gay porn...
They may not be a representative of the larger group.
The key factor is that only the homophobes experienced arousal when shown gay porn.
Also, a small sample size doesn't instantly invalidate a study.
The key factor is that it neither answers nor proves the claim. Linking it shows a failure to read even the abstract.
wierdly how you dont think homophobic people are not gay themselves, you do realize how many people have sham marriages/relationships because they are secretely gay. if you go to any platform where gay people of experiences coming out, many of them had relationships with straight people to appear straight.
This is a strawman, and not what I claimed at all. Please read my comments more carefully if you wish to understand what I am saying.
Statistically speaking though...
Yeah... statistically speaking.... its not true.
Well, secretly bi then.
Why is there such a high frequency of republican conventions crashing grindr, if it's not men with repressed desires for man-on-man sex that daren't reveal their location in their home town?
Why do conservatives claim that the gay lifestyle is a choice, if they themselves didn't choose the straight lifestyle?
If they were completely straight, why would they think that seeing gay relationships in books entices young people into gay relationships? Surely someone 100% straight would be unaffected and it wouldn't occur to them that it was attracting young people who weren't already that way inclined.
Every fear conservatives have of gay people only makes sense if they're coming from a bisexual perspective themselves.
Imagine you don't find lizards at all appealing as pets and you think the vast majority of people feel the same way. Do you complain when they show people who own lizards on the television on the grounds that it entices lizard ownership? No! Now imagine you find lizard ownership really really appealing but you think it's a disaster ecologically and cruel for the lizard or something. Now you're writing angry social media posts saying they ought not to depict that on television because it only encourages it.
Purely straight men have nothing whatsoever to fear from gay men. Only reluctant bi men worry about it and ask society to remove the temptation.
they come from in-groups, religious communities that shun lgbtq+ they dont want to lose access to that community, so they performatively "project:
Where did the stigma come from initially in your little fantasy world?
Conservatives. Conservatives are renowned for stigmatising LGBT folk out here in the real world. I thought most people knew this, but apparently not you.
But only gay conservatives according to you.
And the reason they stigmatise queer people is ... because they're conservative.
If you insist that according to logic homophobia comes from queer people in denial, you need to bridge that last gap to avoid circular reasoning.
I never claimed they were at all logical. Conservatives? Nope.
To actually answer your question, though, it's a vicious cycle passed down from generation to generation. A bit of teasing others for being different is normal in children because of the fear of others, but responsible adults and parents teach children that that's not OK and a lot of people learn to share and be kind. Not so much conservatives. Conservatism is a developmental/learning disorder.
The ones that go on as adults to be loud homophobes and start making all kinds of claims about how it's a choice and objecting to the existence of gay literature or gay porn or out gay people are clearly still frightened, but of what? Why do they feel the need to make it so clear they want nothing to do with it? Why do they call gay porn temptation if it isn't tempting? Why do they worry that young people will see something gay and feel the urge to join "the gay lifestyle" if it left them cold and unmoved? Why so they call it a lifestyle choice if they never had to choose? The answer is really simple but somehow you can't see it and you instead deny it strongly.
Just because you believe something to be true, does not make it true. Its really important you grapple with that fact.
If the origin of homophobia is from fear of the other, why can that not persist as a major cause going forward. Especially as you note people do not, at scale, act rationally.
This is the only bigotry where people try and pin it mostly on the minority who suffer from it.
You would never accuse misogynists of being secret women, or racists of being secretly black.
Its only here where the difference is invisible that you like to deny, diminish and downplay the involvement of the majority in upholding bigotry.
No one feels a lot of sympathy for a bunch of hypocrites being extraordinarily nasty to LGBTQ+ folks just to cover up their own shame and self hatred.
No. Your sob story is BULLSHIT.
I'm not asking you to have sympathy for bigots.
I'm asking you not to blame victims of bigotry for the existence of thst bigotry.
You can't have it both ways, either they're hypocritical closeted LGBTQ+ Republicans who crash grindr when their GOP convention turns up, turning their self hatred into a horrible climate of fear that keeps people miserable and closeted, (in which case they're not just nasty, they're betraying each other), or they're not victims.
So, again, NO.
Your sob story is BULLSHIT.