> > If you think it's a non-story, tell it to the people in Florida whose lives
> > this guy is helping fuck up.
> >
>
>That's gotta be one of the saddest examples of vapid moralizing I've ever
>seen on this list.
How so? You say it's a non-story. Why?
> > I think you're putting words in Doug's mouth. He said nothing about making
> > something a disorder in the clinical sense.
>
>
>What do you imagine a "phobia" to be?
That's gotta be one of the saddest examples of smarminess I've seen here. My point is Doug is not calling for a change in the DSM. He's asking that we think of this as something related to anxiety that should be paid attention to and not dismissed as a non-story.
> > As far as it being a disorder, there does seem to be at least more evidence
> > for that than there is for the vague suggestion that "material needs of
> > previous societies" somehow shaped attitudes toward homosexuality.
> >
>
>So how about presenting some of this supposed evidence?
A small amount of effort on your part would turn up info on the web. You'll find that there is no general consensus about use of the term homophobia but that it is a term widely used and seriously considered by a population far greater than the leftists who read Foucault group you constructed.
>You never read the Starr Report?
> >
>
>No, I didn't. I had, and have, better reading material. But I'm as familiar
>with its contents as anyone living in civilization at the time.
I doubt that. Certainly not as familiar as this person:
St. John, M. (2004). How to do things with the Starr Report: Pornography, performance, and the president's penis. In Linda Williams, Ed., Porn Studies. Durham: Duke
>What on
>earth is your point about it?
That there is more to it than you want to give it credit for.