Quote:
Originally Posted by BoLevi
Name calling (bigot, homophobe, racist, Islamophobe etc) are tacit admissions that you have a weak argument. If someone has a logically consistent point, name calling is unnecessary. It's a last resort in an attempt to defend totalitarian ideologies. Smart people see right through the ploy of course. People think words like racist and bigot are somehow magic. But whatever impact they had in the past they have lost. Consistent overuse has rendered those words meaningless in the context of these discussions.
|
Wait, so now the dictionary is part of the conspiracy out to get you?
Those are not name calling, they are words that in the English language have meaning.
homophobe - noun
a person characterized by homophobia
irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or gay people
To tie it back to this thread topic: Reimer though his actions demonstrated such an extreme aversion to gay people that he refused to participate is saying that everyone is welcome in hockey. So to call him a homophobe is in no way name calling, it is using the proper word in the English language to describe his actions.
This is no different than calling someone who jogs a jogger. If I did not want to be called a jogger, I would stop jogging. If I instead went on tirades about how it is name calling to say that I am a jogger and demand that people and the English language change, then I would also fit the definition of ignorant (lacking knowledge or comprehension of the thing specified).