As straight men why do you think homophobia exists?

[Evenflow618]

There is a lot more bisexual and homosexual people than is being reported. People feel shame that they are until they find support and acceptance.

 

[Sagittarius84]

So I answered earlier, but hearing these responses, are making me pivot a bit because it seems like people are answering to more of a collective societal sense of homophobia then instead of why specifically straight men are so. I stand by my resentment hypothesis because I do think it's a layer present, but I think for whatever reason, people here are tiptoeing over the obvious basis of specific straight male homophobia, and how it relates to heterosexual sexual opportunities. What I've observed in the West is that amongst the small echelon of attractive, desirable, and powerful men, homophobia not only disappears but a lot more sexual fluidity and deviance seems to appear. Which is why your coworker seems to have gay panic near an openly homosexual man, but Tom Hardy can allude to having messed around with guys before nonchalantly. What I've also observed is in non western cultures where sex is considered more of an obligation that women are to bestow upon men, they've managed to societally reconcile non heteronormative interactions, up to and often including homosexual or transsexual encounters and couplings.
I don't know how an experiment could be set up, and I couldn't tell you how the the metrics would be extrapolated exactly, but I'm willing to bet could you take any significant population of straight men(in the west), and you'd find the "% of homophobia expressed" exists in an somewhat direct inverse ratio to "% of men deemed desirable by the average straight woman"
The few short men deemed desirable by women at large tend not to have short man insecurities. Broke men have no qualms about their socioeconomic ineffectiveness when they are successful hobosexuals. "Himbos" are often quite happy with being percieved as unintelligent. Every single aversion, phobia, insecurity, or negative projection common to straight men in some way shape or form exists as an inverse to their attractiveness to straight women, more specifically the opportunities their desirability conjures.

 

[huguest]

So I answered earlier, but hearing these responses, are making me pivot a bit because it seems like people are answering to more of a collective societal sense of homophobia then instead of why specifically straight men are so. I stand by my resentment hypothesis because I do think it's a layer present, but I think for whatever reason, people here are tiptoeing over the obvious basis of specific straight male homophobia, and how it relates to heterosexual sexual opportunities. What I've observed in the West is that amongst the small echelon of attractive, desirable, and powerful men, homophobia not only disappears but a lot more sexual fluidity and deviance seems to appear. Which is why your coworker seems to have gay panic near an openly homosexual man, but Tom Hardy can allude to having messed around with guys before nonchalantly. What I've also observed is in non western cultures where sex is considered more of an obligation that women are to bestow upon men, they've managed to societally reconcile non heteronormative interactions, up to and often including homosexual or transsexual encounters and couplings.
I don't know how an experiment could be set up, and I couldn't tell you how the the metrics would be extrapolated exactly, but I'm willing to bet could you take any significant population of straight men(in the west), and you'd find the "% of homophobia expressed" exists in an somewhat direct inverse ratio to "% of men deemed desirable by the average straight woman"
The few short men deemed desirable by women at large tend not to have short man insecurities. Broke men have no qualms about their socioeconomic ineffectiveness when they are successful hobosexuals. "Himbos" are often quite happy with being percieved as unintelligent. Every single aversion, phobia, insecurity, or negative projection common to straight men in some way shape or form exists as an inverse to their attractiveness to straight women, more specifically the opportunities their desirability conjures.

Woa !
complicated...
I think your still trying to generalise your feeling over every hetero man.
Your saying that there a class of men (sexier men) and potentially gay that could be a treat to some straight men and their heterosexuality ?!

A straight men doesn't care if is bro is sexy or not, He will not sleep with him, He is straight, that mean not interested in men. And if there is 5 gay men in the room with some lady's, it's 5 guy I don't have to compete with to get the women, (better for me)

The type of "homophobia" your referring too is when a gay men doesn't respect the personal space of someone and that someone react angrily at. It would be the same for a hetero violating the personal space of a women, that doesn't qualify her as a phobia for men, Just that he's a pervert.

For the "socio standing" your referring too, can be explain by the fact that gay men don't have kid's and are career oriented. So there's your social clash, Gay men don't have the same social circle. Most straight men will end up in a platonic relation. So not interested in the elusive aspect of the gay community.

It's not a phobia, it's just not the same social circle.

 

[Sagittarius84]

I don't think the social boundaries of gay men and straight men are naturally so well defined, I believe that to be artificial outside influence at play. I also think it faulty to assume effeminate flamboyance is the default operating state for gay men, and I think the notion of gay men not being prone to family life or being career oriented(average gay male income tending to outpace straight men) is a bug of an increasingly gynocentric social order not an inherent predominant feature to homosexual men.
I guess the question is we see the societally reinforced backlash that occurs to straight men when we define ourselves and purpose outside of the desires and "needs" of women, why wouldn't there be a push to align homosexual men's behaviors to the effeminate, when they cannot be motivated by sexual opportunities that women control?
In the early days of MGTOW, when "miosgyny" couldn't be lobbed as an insult because the men were simply opting out with no malevolent intent, do you think it was homophobic sentiment amongst other straight men that was the issue, or perhaps homoerotic projection upon men no longer bound by sexual opportunity by women that sought to still glean attention and resources from men in general?
Why is it that the archetype for gay male behavior as percieved by women aligns with a contestant of "RuPauls Drag race" and not the tragic couple portrayed on "The Last of Us"? Is one more authentically "gay"? Or is one in more service to the "attention economy"?

 

[huguest]

I don't think the social boundaries of gay men and straight men are naturally so well defined, I believe that to be artificial outside influence at play. I also think it faulty to assume effeminate flamboyance is the default operating state for gay men, and I think the notion of gay men not being prone to family life or being career oriented(average gay male income tending to outpace straight men) is a bug of an increasingly gynocentric social order not an inherent predominant feature to homosexual men.
I guess the question is we see the societally reinforced backlash that occurs to straight men when we define ourselves and purpose outside of the desires and "needs" of women, why wouldn't there be a push to align homosexual men's behaviors to the effeminate, when they cannot be motivated by sexual opportunities that women control?
In the early days of MGTOW, when "miosgyny" couldn't be lobbed as an insult because the men were simply opting out with no malevolent intent, do you think it was homophobic sentiment amongst other straight men that was the issue, or perhaps homoerotic projection upon men no longer bound by sexual opportunity by women that sought to still glean attention and resources from men in general?
Why is it that the archetype for gay male behavior as percieved by women aligns with a contestant of "RuPauls Drag race" and not the tragic couple portrayed on "The Last of Us"? Is one more authentically "gay"? Or is one in more service to the "attention economy"?

It's interesting reading you, I do admit I have a hard time following you stream of though.

When you say "artificial outside influence at play" your referring to what exactly?
I thing your right, most of the gay men are not flamboyant and they live a regular type of life.
Your saying that it's a bummer that the societal rules for women don't apply to gay men, I think it's a giver, why would it be?
It's all about Supply and demand, Women control the sexual opportunity because she's not the demander. In the world of Homosexual, your all suppliers with equivalent demander.

The "MGTOW" movement is a non sense, it's just a way to get the spotlight. I think it's just an other way of defining celibacy. Any men NEED to have sex, and if their only option is with a women, the MGTOW is a lie to themselves. I don't think celibacy is a homophobic reaction, it's a reaction to self victimisation in response to women increasingly egocentric behavior. "Phobia" is a incontrollable fear created by wrong values. MGTOW is not that.

Again, your referring to the gay archetype as a generalisation. You perpetuate this ideology yourself. I see most gay people as a normal induvial. In my head, my gay ref would be a tv show like "will & grace". But I don't stereotype anybody before at least a first contact. But that's just me.

When you say "attention economy" are you implying that wall street trick straight men into homophobia?
I would prefer that you give me some concrete example of homophobia instead of some generalisation. Because generalisation just perpetuate that feeling without been the actual case.

I think tv and movie industry give a maximum spotlight for the gay community at the moment. I don't remember the last time I saw something on tv without at least a gay or lbtgbq moment in it. And I do remember that the lbtgbq community represent just a small percentage of the population.

I think right now, white straight men divorced with kid's in their middle age are the scapegoat of society.
They got soo many bad reputation it's no wonder the suicide among them is sky rocketing.
- they are the most tax-imposed
- lost their children
- the least liberty (no money because of pension and low salary)
- not represented in the society (as positive individual)
- alone
- tagged by been violent, rapists, pervert, homophobic, white supremacies, paternalistic
- the direct support of the babyboomer generation.
- those who do the worst job
- hated by a generation of feminist

But all that I don't think it's heterophobia, just that the majority is the target of everyone.

 

[Sagittarius84]

When you say "artificial outside influence at play" your referring to what exactly?

I think that gay has been aligned with "female" and so the social cues and interactions thatbpeetain to them are projected unto straight men, and falsely offered as a societal reconciliation. Essentially a gynocentric social order which declares men not in pursuit of the feminine must be aligned with it.

The "MGTOW" movement is a non sense, it's just a way to get the spotlight. I think it's just an other way of defining celibacy.

I paid attention to the clearly days of the movement, and sex with women was never off the table, in fact most of whom subscribed to the early ideology would be described as desirable men. MGTOW recognized how cohabitation, and long term committed relationships tended to put men at the mercy of a woman's whims no matter how he prepared himself, so the best way to operate without disrespecting women or oneself was to limit interactions and relationships with women to casual, non committal encounters(a privilege only mostly desirable men could achieve anyways). When the ideology started to make sense on the mainstream front is when you started to see implications of misogyny and incels, when the only reason it became a social concern was because of the desirable demographic of men for whom it applied.

When you say "attention economy" are you implying that wall street trick straight men into homophobia?

No I mean that women (80+% of consumer spending, and 80+% of consumer debt) tend to participate in more in an attention economy, one that "rewards" based upon popularity and clout, and that they have passed this shortsighted ideology to gay men, really LGBT in general much to their mutual downfall. What I was referring to is when we look at the default "gay" man is it someone closer to a drag race contestant, or Anderson Cooper? And whom do you think "benefits" when the perception is the former and not the latter? The aversion from straight men to this comes because if it were practiced as thoroughly amongst straight men, it would be quickly and easily identified as the narcissism and delusion it is.

It's all about Supply and demand, Women control the sexual opportunity because she's not the demander. In the world of Homosexual, your all suppliers with equivalent demander.

Really, I was under the impression that gay men have categorized themselves in such a way that in no way are all "suppliers" equivalent demanders

 

[thickcockjames]

Like most forms of bigotry, its a fear of something/someone you don't understand.

 

[Markyoung873]

I think all men have internalized homosexual desires. Those that can't come to terms with their feelings express it as varying levels of homophobia.

Of course we do..

it probably exists because guys stareing at my dick in the urinals, not taking no thanks I’m not interested for an answer, that type of thing?

can’t speak for anyone else.

by the way my friends who are gay aren’t like this at all..