A Reader Asks Us If We`re Letting Others Define Our Terms


NOTE: PLEASE say if you DON`T want your name and/or
email address published when sending VDARE email.

01/09/07 – A Florida Reader
Sees McDonald`s Propaganda—And Isn`t Lovin` It

Phil Wolf  writes from " Atlanta, Georgiafornia"

I very much enjoy your writing but wish to point out
one flaw if I may.  I adhere to the belief that words
mean things and that the party that defines the terms,
wins the argument.  Having said that, I write to point
out that

in your reply to M. Hayden Sutherland of 12-18
you
state:


I`m
afraid I`ll have to file these under

"Life is not like that."
However, VDARE.com is not
about gay issues, as such, and we continue to be less
homophobic than, say, 

Hispanic immigrants
,

Muslims
, and the

black community.
We do insist on calling things as
we see them, though.


Best
wishes,

James Fulford

If you are meaning to say that others have more of an
irrational fear of homosexuals than VDARE has, then I
apologize and stand corrected. 

Otherwise, we need to stop playing into the hands of
the extreme left in this country.  Everyone should know
that the gay lobby created this term to implicitly
communicate that dislike of homosexual behavior is
irrational, e.g. a phobia.  I urge you to influence
everyone you know to stop adopting the enemies
terminology. Either state anti-sodomy or
pro-heterosexual, but stop enabling the immoral enemy.


James Fulford
writes:
That was more or less what I meant to say.


 


Of course,
"homophobia"
is not a mental illness, or a moral
weakness, but rather, up to a point, the normal attitude
of most people at most times and places.


 



However, as John
Derbyshire



put it

"This ugly and etymologically stupid word has entered
general currency, so I use it here for convenience,
though under protest."


 



The links on



Hispanic immigrants
,



Muslims
,
and the



black community

refer to a tendency to commit actual violence against
gays, rather than refusing to let them be



Boy Scout leaders.


But there is a valid
point here; we do sometimes let others control the
language. Examples:



"xenophobia"

is supposed to be a bad thing, and so is



"nativism,"

while the term



"racist"

is, as we know, "so debased" that it now




simply means

"anyone who is winning an argument with a



liberal
."