The Dumbest Word in the English Language

To kick off “Pride Pervert Month”—best known as June—the degenerates of West Hollywood paraded this (warning: graphic) in front of children:

Men wearing underwear and f*tish gear dance provocatively in front of children at a “family friendly” pride parade in California pic.twitter.com/7JYwsCW3Zk

— Mr. zhang (@zhangkuancheng) June 1, 2025

Libs of TikTok, Nancy Mace, Turning Point and others reported on this evil debauchery. Likewise, after airing a “‘pro gay’ episode” that featured “prominent zesty cross dresser Johnathan Van Ness,” Sesame Street has been accused of “grooming” children.:

Parents, BEWARE!

Sesame Street is grooming your kids.

This show is aimed at TODDLERS and what do they promote?

- covid vaccines
- BLM protests
- transgender kids
- pride month
- lgbtq propaganda

GROOMERS. https://t.co/VEyMpxnt7J pic.twitter.com/4mShlAooko

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) June 1, 2025

That sure looks like grooming to me! Of course, when you or I call out this evil for what it is, almost certainly we get labeled with what I have long referred to as “the dumbest word in the English language.” That word is “homophobe” (which stems from the equally dumb word “homophobia”).

“Homophobia” was coined by psychologist and gay activist George Weinberg in his 1972 book Society and the Healthy Homosexual. The book was published one year prior to the American Psychiatric Association removing homosexuality (by a vote of 5,834 to 3,810) from its list of mental disorders. The word became an important tool for homosexual activists and their allies. Weinberg gave them a “medical” phobia with which to attack their opponents.

Weinberg defined the word as “the dread of being in close quarters with homosexuals,” adding “It was a fear of homosexuals which seemed to be associated with a fear of contagion, a fear of reducing the things one fought for—home and family. It was a religious fear and it had led to great brutality as fear always does.”

Merriam-Webster defines homophobia as “discrimination against, aversion to, or fear of homosexuality or gay people.” One problem with the word is that it makes no sense etymologically. “Homo,” from the Greek, means “the same” and “phobia,” from the Greek, means “fear.” So literally, homophobia means fear of the same.

However, my greatest complaint with the term does not stem from its etymological shortcomings. The English language, like most languages, is in constant flux and is full of silly words. The biggest problem with homophobia and its variations is that they have become “snarl” words—words that, when used, are intended to insult and induce a negative response from listeners or readers. Such words commonly appeal to people’s emotions rather than their reasoning.

In other words, “homophobe” is used much like “racist.” Like “racist,” “homophobe” is virtually never used with honest context. Almost every time I hear or see “homophobe” (and its derivatives) used, it’s used as a snarl word. Virtually everyone—especially Christians—who speak out against the wide array of homosexual perversions are called a “homophobe” or labeled “homophobic.” This is particularly true at this time of the year.

Likewise, those who speak the truth about homosexuality—namely that homosexual behavior is a sin and nothing to celebrate—are labeled “homophobes.” Simply quoting the Bible when it comes to homosexuality often also leads to snarl-word attacks, or worse. Many nations are now putting people in jail for merely telling the truth—including quoting Scripture—on homosexuality.

Thus we see that the false idea of “homophobia” has become so ingrained in many nations—especially those corrupted by liberalism—of the world that it is illegal to be a “homophobe.” Despite the avalanche of attacks against truth-tellers on homosexuality, the simple truth is that “homophobia” is virtually non-existent. Likewise with “homophobes.”

When these abominations of the English language are used, the left is attempting—as they so often do—to shame their opponents into silence. This is because they are again on the wrong side of the truth!

The left—the Democrat Party, their media lackeys, et al—is on the wrong side of the truth on virtually every significant moral issue of our time. Whether abortion, sexual activity, sex (males/females), marriage, war, healthcare, and so on, the modern left gets it grossly wrong. Therefore, they lie repeatedly (they have to!) in order to further their agenda.

Their lying efforts often lead to a gross butchering of language. Note how difficult it is for most leftists to simply define “woman.” This perversion of thought has reached the highest levels of our culture. Leaders in our schools, corporations, legislatures, courts, executive offices, and the like, have all taken to abusing language in order to distort and deceive.

For another prominent and recent example, consider “transgender” (a close second for the title of “the dumbest word in the English language”). There is no such thing as a “transgender,” and it is impossible to change one’s sex. Nevertheless, the left persists in using this word and has even stooped to lying with pronouns to help perpetuate the “transgender” lie.

Boys and men are repeatedly referenced using female pronouns, as are women with male pronouns. CNN did this just this week as a high school boy in California again took trophies away from high school girls. Thank God lawyer Julie Hamill was having none of it! The left lies like this with a straight face and acts like were all supposed to just play along. They’re often aghast when we refuse.

We need more like Julie Hamill who will refuse to play along with the rampant linguistic lies of the modern left. This is especially true when it comes to the major moral issues.

(See this column at American Thinker.) 

Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
www.trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor is the author of the The Miracle and Magnificence of America
trevorgrantthomas@gmail.com

 

 

The Dumbest Word in the English Language

There was a significant statement made in the media recently that was probably missed by most, due to the evil events in Aurora, Colorado. Well, that, along with the fact that it was on MSNBC.

Recently liberal mouthpiece Frank Rich was on the Rachel Maddow show, and the subject was Mitt Romney and his tax returns. First, a video of Mitt’s wife Ann Romney on ABC news was shown. Mrs. Romney was defending her husband and his tax returns, noting that he is a very generous man, and that, among other things, as a couple they donate 10% of their income to their church every year.

Rich then pointed out that, “The Mormon Church was one of the single biggest bankrollers of some of the most homophobic stuff that went on in Proposition 8 (the California ballot measure that defined marriage as a union of one man and one woman) in California.”  In his best conspiratorial tone Rich next asked, “So did any of that (Romney) money go there?”

In other words, Romney and his church are homophobes because they supported traditional (biblical) marriage (along with a solid majority of Californians, along with a significant majority of Americans in 31 other states that have placed traditional marriage on a ballot).

I submit to you that there is no dumber word in the English language than “homophobe” (and its derivatives).

The word was coined by psychologist and gay activist George Weinberg in his 1972 book Society and the Healthy Homosexual. The book was published one year prior to when the American Psychiatric Association, with a vote of 5,834 to 3,810, removed  homosexuality from its list of mental disorders in its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual. The word became an important tool for homosexual activists and their allies. Weinberg gave them a “medical” phobia with which to attack their opponents.

Weinberg defined the word as “the dread of being in close quarters with homosexuals,” adding “It was a fear of homosexuals which seemed to be associated with a fear of contagion, a fear of reducing the things one fought for—home and family. It was a religious fear and it had led to great brutality as fear always does.”

Merriam-Webster defines it as “irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals.” One problem I have with the word is that it makes no sense etymologically. “Homo,” from the Greek, means “the same” and “phobia,” from the Greek, means “fear.” So literally, homophobia means fear of the same.

However, my greatest complaint with the term does not stem from its etymological shortcomings. The English language, like most languages, is in constant flux and is full of silly words. The biggest problem with homophobia and its variations is that they have become “snarl” words—words that, when used, are intended to induce a negative response. Such words commonly appeal to people's emotions rather than their reasoning.

That was exactly Frank Rich’s intention—to paint an extremely negative picture of the Mormon Church and of Romney, to a very friendly audience, arousing their emotions against Romney and all those who see homosexuality differently than he does. In fact, nearly every time that I have heard “homophobe” uttered, or seen it written, it has been as a snarl word.

Other words, such as “racist,” “sexist,” and so on, can be used in a similar manner. Yet most all of us have seen or heard, whether firsthand or not, real racism and sexism in practice. On the other hand, almost exclusively those labeled as “homophobe” have a biblical conviction against homosexual behavior, and nothing more. They have no “irrational fear” of homosexuals, or a “dread of being in close quarters” with them.

A friend, language expert, and fellow Christian, Dr. Danny Evans, notes that the common use of homophobe is a “completely erroneous use of the word. Most of us know that a phobia is a fear of certain things or situations. It's interesting that those who oppose homosexuality are categorized as ‘homophobic,’ especially since fear has nothing to do with the opposition to homosexuality. From a Christian viewpoint, homosexuality is not feared, but rather opposed based on the biblical explanation of it. We love people, no matter what their sexual preferences may be. It is the sin we despise.”

As I have already noted (here and last week), every state in the U.S. that has put same-sex marriage before its electorate has seen it soundly rejected (an average of 67% to 33%). Three more U.S. states have referendums on the ballot this November: Maryland, Minnesota, and Washington. No doubt that, in each of these states, homosexuals and their supporters have been, and will continue, screaming “homophobia!” in an attempt to demonize their opponents.

.As Jonah Goldberg editorialized in December of 2008, “It's often lost on gay-rights groups that they and their allies are the aggressors in the culture war. Indeed, they admit to being the ‘forces of change’ and the ‘agents of progress.’ They proudly want to rewrite tradition and overturn laws. But whenever they're challenged democratically and peaceably, they instantly complain of being victims of entrenched bigots, even as they adopt the very tactics they abhor.”

Unquestionably, one of the things homosexuals “abhor” is the name calling. If they want to make their case intelligently and peacefully, it is time for the word “homophobia” to become “anachronistic.” (Look it up.)

(See this column on American Thinker.) (See a previous version of this column here.) 

Copyright 2012, Trevor Grant Thomas

At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
Trevor and his wife Michelle are the authors of: Debt Free Living in a Debt Filled World
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com

The Dumbest Word in the English Language

In a recent interview with the gay news website 365gay.com, Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank, speaking of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), said, “At some point [DOMA] is going to have to go to the Supreme Court.” He continued, “I wouldn't want it to go to the United States Supreme Court now because that homophobe Antonin Scalia has got too many votes on this current court.” I submit to you that there is no dumber word in our language than “homophobe” (or “homophobia,” or “homophobic”).

The word was coined by psychologist and gay activist George Weinberg in his 1972 book Society and the Healthy Homosexual. The book was published one year prior to the American Psychiatric Association, with a vote of 5,834 to 3,810, removing homosexuality from its list of mental disorders in its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual. The word became an important tool for homosexual activists and their allies. Weinberg gave them a “medical” phobia with which to attack their opponents.

Weinberg defined the word as “the dread of being in close quarters with homosexuals,” adding “It was a fear of homosexuals which seemed to be associated with a fear of contagion, a fear of reducing the things one fought for—home and family. It was a religious fear and it had led to great brutality as fear always does.”

Merriam-Webster defines it as “irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals.” One problem I have with the word is that it makes no sense etymologically. “Homo,” from the Greek, means “the same” and “phobia,” from the Greek, means “fear.” So literally, homophobia means fear of the same.

However, my greatest complaint with the term does not stem from its etymological shortcomings. The English language, like most languages, is in constant flux and is full of silly words. The biggest problem with homophobia and its variations is that they have become “snarl” words—words that, when used, are intended to induce a negative response. Such words commonly appeal to people's emotions rather than their reasoning.

That was exactly Barney Frank’s intention—to paint an extremely negative picture of Justice Scalia to a very friendly audience, arousing their emotions against him and all those who see homosexuality differently than he does. In fact, nearly every time that I have heard “homophobe” uttered, or seen it written, it has been as a snarl word.

Other words, such as “racist,” “sexist,” and so on, can be used in a similar manner. Yet most all of us have seen or heard, whether firsthand or not, real racism and sexism in practice. On the other hand, almost exclusively those labeled as “homophobe” have a biblical conviction against homosexual behavior, and nothing more. They have no “irrational fear” of homosexuals, or a “dread of being in close quarters” with them.

A local language expert and fellow Christian, Dr. Danny Evans, notes that the common use of homophobe is a “completely erroneous use of the word. Most of us know that a phobia is a fear of certain things or situations. It's interesting that those who oppose homosexuality are categorized as ‘homophobic,’ especially since fear has nothing to do with the opposition to homosexuality. From a Christian viewpoint, homosexuality is not feared, but rather opposed based on the biblical explanation of it. We love people, no matter what their sexual preferences may be. It is the sin we despise.”

Recently (April 3), the Iowa Supreme Court struck down the state’s Defense of Marriage Act, declaring it to be in conflict with Iowa’s constitution. Almost certainly (as has already occurred in 30 other states, with an average approval of nearly 70%) there will be a significant effort to add a marriage amendment to Iowa’s constitution—and just as certainly, those who pursue this avenue will viciously be labeled as “homophobes.”

We have to go back only to last November when Californians passed Proposition 8, which amended their state constitution to read, “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California,” to see how quickly homosexuals and their supporters will start screaming “homophobia!” in an attempt to demonize their opponents.

As Jonah Goldberg editorialized in December of last year, “It's often lost on gay-rights groups that they and their allies are the aggressors in the culture war. Indeed, they admit to being the ‘forces of change’ and the ‘agents of progress.’ They proudly want to rewrite tradition and overturn laws. But whenever they're challenged democratically and peaceably, they instantly complain of being victims of entrenched bigots, even as they adopt the very tactics they abhor.”

Unquestionably one of the things homosexuals “abhor” is the name calling. If they want to make their case intelligently and peacefully, it is time for the word “homophobia” to become “anachronistic.” (Look it up.)

Copyright 2009, Trevor Grant Thomas

At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason

Trevor and his wife Michelle are the authors of: Debt Free Living in a Debt Filled World

tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com