zk_html/diary/2012-11-27-3-ap-bans-homoph...

32 lines
1.8 KiB
HTML
Raw Normal View History

2020-04-25 04:55:06 +00:00
<!doctype html>
<html>
<head>
<title>Zk | 2012-11-27-3-ap-bans-homophobia</title>
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="/style.css" />
<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width" />
<meta charset="utf-8" />
</head>
<body>
<main>
<header>
<h1>Zk | 2012-11-27-3-ap-bans-homophobia</h1>
</header>
<article class="content">
<hr />
<p>post: link
link: http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/associated-press-bans-word-%E2%80%98homophobia%E2%80%99271112
title: Associated Press bans the word 'homophobia'
slug: ap-bans-homophobia
date: 2012-11-27</p>
<hr />
<p>...and 'transphobia' and 'Islamophobia'...</p>
<p>On the one hand, I can sort of understand their argument, and those made when I brought this up online, that phobias are certainly real, medical things, and the tunnel-vision-racing-pulse-headache-shallow-breath panic attack that comes with any window or balcony over about two stories certainly agrees with that. </p>
<p>However, it's easier for me to see the other side presented. A hatred is born in fear, just like a lot of fear is involved in the whole zero-sum game so many think is being played when it comes to gay rights being improved. Either way, though, if the press is going to stop the use of 'homophobia' and other such words, they'd certainly better come up with something to replace it, something with as much meaning and power that homophobia has picked up over the years. I don't think they can, really, and it makes me wonder if there's not some effort in this directed at knocking down the power that the word has gained.</p>
</article>
<footer>
<p>Page generated on 2020-04-24</p>
</footer>
</main>
</body>
</html>