2,732
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 176:
Line 176: +
→Back on Topic...
Ask them! Probably because "homosexism" doesn't sound as good, and muddled the issue with women's rights, which as a movement was not doing so well at the time, and would no doubt do better on its own. Imputing an invidious reason is just paranoid.-'''<font color="#007FFF">Ames</font><font color="#FF0000">G</font>'''<sub>[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!]</sub> 16:08, 6 May 2007 (EDT)
Ask them! Probably because "homosexism" doesn't sound as good, and muddled the issue with women's rights, which as a movement was not doing so well at the time, and would no doubt do better on its own. Imputing an invidious reason is just paranoid.-'''<font color="#007FFF">Ames</font><font color="#FF0000">G</font>'''<sub>[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!]</sub> 16:08, 6 May 2007 (EDT)
:Ah ha! So we have it right there! An admission they used a medical term to promote a politcal agenda. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 16:10, 6 May 2007 (EDT)
:Ah ha! So we have it right there! An admission they used a medical term to promote a politcal agenda. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 16:10, 6 May 2007 (EDT)
You're imputing an invidious ''mens rea'' where there is none. The term has never been used, even implicitly, to suggest that homophobia is a mental disease. Please try not to be so paranoid. On the other end, aren't you just using a medical term - gender identity disorder - to further your own political agenda?-'''<font color="#007FFF">Ames</font><font color="#FF0000">G</font>'''<sub>[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!]</sub> 16:13, 6 May 2007 (EDT)