Ivan Provorov, a professional hockey player, recently committed a major transgression in the eyes of modern secular activists. He refused to wear a rainbow-colored jersey and to participate in team activities in support of homosexual practices.
Based on the numerous articles written about him, he is ignorant, obnoxious, disrespectful of homosexuals, and homophobic. There were even demands that he be benched. In the name of diversity and inclusion, this foreign born player needed to be excluded.
He is not the only athlete, celebrity, or prominent public person to be labeled a homophobe. Such accusations are handed out nearly every day.
What is a Phobia?
As defined by Johns Hopkins medicine, “A phobia is an uncontrollable, irrational, and lasting fear of a certain object, situation, or activity. This fear can be so overwhelming that a person may go to great lengths to avoid the source of this fear. One response can be a panic attack. This is a sudden, intense fear that lasts for several minutes. It happens when there is no real danger.”
Based on this definition, homophobia should be defined as an irrational fear of homosexuality. But is it?
What behavior did Ivan Provorov exhibit that made him a homophobe? Did he exhibit fear, faint, have a panic attack, or convulse uncontrollably on the ice when he saw a rainbow? No. He simply refused to wear a rainbow-colored jersey during practice. He stated that participating in team activities to support the LGBTQ+ community would conflict with his belief as a Russian Orthodox Christian.
So, is choosing not to participate an irrational fear? It sounds like he thought it through rationally. So how can he labeled irrationally fearful of homosexuals or homophobic?
If Ivan Provorov refused to wear a jersey for the Anaheim Ducks citing the fact that he plays for another team, would he be labeled a duckophobe? Of course not!
What is the Real Definition of Homophobia?
Merriam Webster online defines homophobia as an irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or gay people. (Gay not meaning joyous, but rather homosexual.) This changes the scope of meaning. Now a phobia is not just a fear, but a very specific response to that fear. It is discrimination against homosexuals.
But even in the case of Provorov, how has he shown aversion to or discrimination against homosexuals? He did not wear a rainbow jersey. That is not discrimination.
Homophobia is being used and defined differently to control language. (Language is often controlled to hide sin.) The actual applied definition of homophobe is anyone who dares disagree, challenge, or refuse to capitulate to the demands of homosexual activists.
Labeling someone “phobic” because they disagree or do not participate in someone else’s activism, is a slander to shut down debate and discussion. This is on par with claiming to be in favor of diversity and inclusiveness and then trying to exclude anyone who’s opinion diverges from yours.
But phobic slanders are not limited to homophobia. Xenophobia is levied against people who want to secure our nation’s borders. Of course, the Ukrainians are not xenophobic for wanting to keep Russians from crossing their border. People who want to debate the practices of the Taliban or want to discuss Muhammad’s pedophile marriage to a 6-year-old girl are called Islamophobic. It is not hard to come up with many more examples.
Missing Phobia in Today’s Dialogue
However, it appears one phobia is clearly missing from today’s dialog. When looking at attacks on Catholic churches in the United States, it would appear that there are those who have a phobia (in the activist sense of the word) against Christians.
Over 250 attacks have occurred in the last 3 years. Vandals have tagged churches and beheaded statues. Churches have even been burned to the ground.
Could these people be Christophobic? Could these people be sinphobic? (This is not a fear of sinning, but rather the fear of speaking of sin as sin.)
According to Merriam-Webster online, Christophobia, or Christianophobia, or sinphobia do not exist. Now that is convenient. Activists can claim Christians have all sorts of phobias, but Christians . . . well, I think the point is obvious.
Personally, I do not believe Christians should use the word Christophobic or take this victimhood approach to debate. Others have addressed this point.
There is, however, a clinical defined phobia that I do want to bring up. Alethephobia is an irrational phobia or fear of hearing the truth. I do not think it is wise to tell people they are Alethephobic, but often, by just asking people if they know what it means, a stalled discussion can become a healthy debate.
Be Okay with Being Called Names
Persecution of Christians in the past was very violent. Christians were fed to lions, murdered in the coliseum, and crucified. And even today Catholics and Christians are being tortured and killed. In comparison to this, being called names is not a big deal.
Be that as it may, Christians should and need to stand up to our accusers. Christians (including me, personally) have been falsely accused of wanting homosexuals to be murdered. Of course, that is not true, my desire is to witness to people and motivate them to freely (not coerced) choose a path away from sin and towards redemption. To put it differently, I want to pull people from the fires of hell, not kick them in.
It is not uncommon these days for Christians who call sin a sin, to be falsely charged with advocating violence. In many cases, these accusations and slanders against Christians are projections.
The calls for Ivan Provorov to be benched over his actions were likely projections. The homosexual activists want to marginalize him, which is exactly what the homosexual activists accuse society of doing to them.
So, who has the phobia here?
The post So, Who’s Got the Phobia? appeared first on Catholic Stand.