• zed_proclaimer [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    I meant absolve as in excuses/removes culpability

    Culpability in what? An immoral act or sin. Again you are upset that the term isn’t moralistically loaded. You want it to aggressively impose guilt, this is a moral position and not a descriptive one.

    The same way you wouldn’t be too hard on a claustrophobic person for panicking in a small room.

    Claustrophobia relates to psychological fears. Homophobia comes from a different source, from sociology and scientific descriptions of reactions between two parties. You are again using the incorrect definition, again in relation to how much moral blame to assign.

    This is a fundamentally flawed way of analyzing society

      • zed_proclaimer [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        You know the scientific terms hydrophobic and hydrophilic used to describe various kinds of mechanical and chemical interactions? That is how sociology used the term “homophobic” when it created the term, describing that a certain group is anti-homosexuality.

        What you are doing is akin to going up to a chemist and saying “I don’t like how the term hydrophobic lets phospholipids off the hook for their bigotry”. It’s adding morality into what should be a cold mechanical description of forces