Hop Against Homophobia and Transphobia 2013

When I originally signed up to participate in this year’s hop against homophobia I was initially thinking of creating a piece similar to what I did last year.  A simple fact based empirical piece about how homophobic action leads to indisputable harm to society.  This however I believe is the wrong venue for such a piece.  The people following this hop are already well aware of these inequities, and I see no point in reinforcing pre-existing understanding. 

Instead I have based the following on the old story of the watermelon monster and the land of fools.  This is a story about regardless of how correct or accurate you are, in order to get a person’s thought process to change, they must be allowed to arrive at the conclusion on their own. 

I have had much success in getting people to re-evalute their homophobic thoughts and actions by helping them to arrive at a conclusion on their own, rather than tell them where they should end up.  In order to do this, I must bite my tongue and listen, I need to hear and understand how the person evaluates other concepts and ideas.  And lastly I never tell, I ask questions, loaded questions but ones that I know they don’t want to answer.  And if they refuse to answer I ask them why the clear answer makes them uncomfortable?

What follows are some of my go to lines;

At what age did you choose to be straight?  Was it a difficult decision? 

How are gay couples marrying in need of more regulation and government interference than fire arms purchases?

How many gay marriage related fatalities are there compared to fire arm deaths? 

Why are you more comfortable with depictions of two men killing each other than kissing each other?

How have the traditional marriages in X state changed since y date of same sex marriage legislation?

Are homosexuals marrying and forming monogamous long term relationships truly more damaging to the sanctity of marriage than the bachelor or any of the other such programs?  If this was truly about the sanctity of marriage wouldn’t as much effort be put in shutting down the marriage chapels all over Vegas?

If you are basing your true objection to marriage equality on biblical scripture, isn’t then stating it is based upon other issues against the lying commandment?

How do you justify not treating thou shalt not kill as strictly in interpretation as the Leviticus verse against men lying together? 

Note when using the bible I find it accomplishes more not to throw out other Leviticus verses.  I rely heavily on the 10 commandments. 

Finally I have spoken to a few people that object to being called homophobic because they are not scared of gay people.  I welcome this statement, because it allows you agree with them and say they are in fact straight superior.  They believe straight people are better than gay people, which is why discriminatory laws such as those that allow homosexuals to be fired for their sexuality are fine.

The key to finding success with these questions is to allow the person you are speaking to a chance to  answer.  Don’t rush them, don’t be abrasive.  I know this is incredibly difficult, but I am tired of an unending talking point battle.  If a person wants to speak let them answer a few simple questions.  Even when they refuse to answer, they are still thinking about it and I have to believe they are searching for an answer that will allow them to maintain their previous mindset.


Click here for a chance to win my newest short story.