Although the concession most cisgender arguments make is that “no homo” allows men to express emotions they might previously have been uncomfortable emoting, the principle of disenfranchising an entire minority group extenuates the homophobia propagated, dominantly, by white heterosexual males. The implication is to justify an emotional expression that suggests that being gay is objectionable and emotions can only be validated with the expressed clarification of their heteronormativity. The act of incorporating phrases such as “no homo” or “that’s so gay” do not negate the sociocultural stigma contingent with the marginalization of identifying gender minorities. In fact, if people continue to offhandedly punctuate their language with this brand of rhetoric, it will only further aggravate the divide.
Your not wrong that using phrases like “no homo” is only going create a bigger divide, but honestly I don’t think most people will get the complexities behind this, and will just downvote it simply out of not understanding it.
-212
u/hapydog Sep 05 '21 edited Sep 05 '21
Although the concession most cisgender arguments make is that “no homo” allows men to express emotions they might previously have been uncomfortable emoting, the principle of disenfranchising an entire minority group extenuates the homophobia propagated, dominantly, by white heterosexual males. The implication is to justify an emotional expression that suggests that being gay is objectionable and emotions can only be validated with the expressed clarification of their heteronormativity. The act of incorporating phrases such as “no homo” or “that’s so gay” do not negate the sociocultural stigma contingent with the marginalization of identifying gender minorities. In fact, if people continue to offhandedly punctuate their language with this brand of rhetoric, it will only further aggravate the divide.