Why are people okay with blue eyed people but not gay people

Post Reply New Topic

Blue eyed people like gay people are a minority. Most people have brown eyes. Yet, are lots of people against blue eyed people? Do blue eyed people get harassed for having blue eyes? The answer is no. So why are gay people different?

I always see more blue-eyed and green-eyed people. I never really know who's gay just by looking at them. I don't see how they relate to reach other.

No worries. Science can do most things that would seem magical for most. Before they said blue eyes were going to get extinct, since brown eyes has a dominant gene. But now they say that can genetically modify the cnild so he gets blue eyes. And frankly blue eyes are beautiful. IMO. I got brown eyes. Yay! I am dominant.

On the surface it might seem like eye color and sexual orientation are two issues that are far apart from each other, but the analogy might hold up. Blue eyed people are the minority if you look at sheer numbers, that is true. But when you consider where most blue eyed people live, they are the majority or at least common in the areas where they live.
Green eyes on the other hand are fairly rare, and I've heard that green eyed people were more likely to be accused of being witches centuries ago, but I don't know if that's correct or a just more modern belief about the past.

Because blue eyes don't make people think of male sodomy, named after the city which god destroyed for he didn't approve of it, maybe?
And while religion is, in the western world at least, no longer perceived as THE major contributor to our culture today, it was up until our parent's generation.

But younger people in the west today are growing up with the view that homosexuality is a norm-variant, just like blue eyes. Just remember that we have to shed 2000 years of christian indoctrination, that maybe makes it easier to accept the bigots as just a bit behind. We haven't reached gender equality either, but think that today's employers are our parent's generation, where it was the norm for women to become stay at home mothers, and their mothers could barely have their own bank account without a man's approval. These societal shifts just move at a speed of one generation at a time.

Great scientists, artists and athletes are also minorities, but people don't have the same sort of issues with them as they have with homosexuals. So get this - the reason some people have an issue with homosexuality is not that they just like picking on minorities. The reason is that homosexual behaviour is dysfunctional.

Not where I live

The thread you opened on the 24 November was the place to continue your posts on this topic, not making a new thread essentially about the same thing in the same forum in the same week. Eye colour has nothing to do with socio-cultural mores. Trying to conflate eye colour with attitudes to gayness is nonsensical.

Reading the responses so far - and adding to that my own reading on the topic - the answer is pretty clear.

Conservative religions, specifically Judeo-Christian, and their effects on western cultures over the last thousand or so years.

Outside of those cultures, what are now called LGBT people in English speaking countries have often been either simply a part of the normal variation of people or in some cases even occupied a special place in the culture. Christianity itself didn't really have a problem with it until around 1100 CE, when the Church had a disagreement with England over taxing clergy. The first gay activist, now known as Saint Anselm (of Canterbury) pushed back against the Church's suggestion of a ban on gay clergy (which would've avoided a tax) and for a time the issue was dropped.

But really what it comes down to is that Judeo-Christian conservative religions build societies and social structures that are hierarchical in nature. And those hierarchies assume male superiority as embedded in their creation myths. This results in the necessary assumption that sex and gender can only exist as a single, pure male vs. female binary. LGBT people (and thousands of examples found in nature) are proof that this is not actually true, and thus are a threat to the conservative Judeo-Christian power structures.

Some people think homosexuality is a dysfunction.

Because there are no lines in the bible that people with blue eyes are an abomination and should be put to death. Minorities have no bearing on discrimination with reference to this, it is purely based on religious discrimination which in fact was written by a minority group of tent dwelling ignoranamuses who also thought shellfish was an abomination too. Unfortunately the religious zealots prefer to oppress the LGBT groups rather than wishing to ban shrimp. Look at Russia with their Christian Orthodoxy's push to have their bigotry written into law.

Blue eyes are associated with innocence and beauty. Many babies have blue eyes. Kittens have blue eyes the first time they open them. Blue is the color of the sky, and therefore associated with heaven, which is why people originally would dress their infant boys in blue (but not the girls because they thought girls were so worthless even demons had no interest in stealing them).

No has ever said "this person with blue eyes is evil and should be killed because the Bible says so."

My own eyes are green. But they look a lot greener when I've been crying because of the red contrast. My mom once said they looked like Christmas ornaments, which really didn't comfort me much... images of people hanging bloodshot eyeballs on a tree, thanks mom I'm so full of warm fuzzy feelings now.

Ah yes, the state of 10,000 Ole and Lefse jokes.

Actually the reason is that folks assume that homosexuality is a choice, and they assume that blue eyes are not a choice.

In reality having same sex urges is something that you're born with just like your eye color. But some folks assume that you choose it- so therefore its a sin.

Religion is one reason. Another is that it makes people uncomfortable, because homosexuality hasn't been accepted in society for very long, and a large part of society still doesn't accept it.

I think that some people will use religion as an excuse to dislike homosexuality because it makes them uncomfortable, and also use other excuses like "It's unnatural," so that they can justify the feeling. In my opinion, if people don't like it because they find it disturbing, they ought to just admit to it rather than trying to justify their opinions.

Because eye color is cosmetic, while gayness is behavioral - behavior is not identity, while eye color is used as an identifier.

Obviously, being a member of a minority does not automatically incur the contempt of the majority.

You have stated a False Analogy here - a fallacy in which an argument is based on misleading, superficial, or implausible comparisons - and thus your premise has failed at the outset.