1. To exist together, at the same time, or in the same place.
2. To live in peace with another or others despite differences, especially as a matter of policy
Re: “-phobia” language. In all honestly their point wasn’t even worth a response (AND YET), so you’ll have to click through to read it if you want.
[Snipped because it’s ridiculous —Nora]
A. The majority of the people who I’ve been seeing object to “-phobia” are queer,…
can you please clarify what you meant wrt xenophobia?
Yeah sure. Xenophobia was made up in the early 1900s. I don’t really know why, but I do know that newer “-phobia” words AREN’T based off of “xenophobia,” and I’ve never seen anyone call xenophobia a disease or “sickness” or “phobic behavior,” so it looks like that word is fine.
I’m much more worried about the trend of current words that use “phobia:” whorephobia, fatphobia, etc. because they seem to have taken the phobia-character failing connection and ran with it. Those words are usually based off of “homophobia,” which as a term was created to cast aspersions on people who hate queers…by suggesting that those people are mentally ill. Which is a shitty connection to make, especially when you consider the fact that hating minorities is a much bigger failing than freaking out because you saw a spider.
Since adopting the word “western supremacy,” I haven’t had as much use for “xenophobia,” but I have never heard people pull the shit that usually gets applied to newer “phobia” words with “xenophobia.”
My theory is two-fold: firstly, like Paris says above, xenophobia became a word around 1900-1905, whereas “homophobia” came into usage about 55 years later. So it’s possible that in 1912, “xenophobe” meant “disgusting, mentally ill, bigot,” but now because the word is relatively uncommon among popular discourse (few TV networks are called “xenophobic” for example), that usage has been dropped. I only really hear “xenophobic” in very conscientious settings that don’t usually need to play off of the “irrational, ridiculous phobia-haver” troupe. And then because “homophobia” set the precedent for “transphobia” and “fatphobia” etc, “xenophobia” is not included from the circle-jerk of ableism (though if you have evidence to the contrary, please feel free to let this blog know!).
The second part of my theory is that there is no dominant-culture-sympathetic section of American society that is rid of xenophobia. The whole point of “homophobia” was to pathologize and Other-ize bigotry, firstly by suggesting that bigots are themselves queer and then by generalizing “secretly queer” to “sick.” But “xenophobia” is used significantly less than “homophobia,” making it actually much more removed from public discourse (see point 1), and it’s hard to “Other-ize” anyone with a word that is distinctly “Other.”
lol what the flying fuck is this besides (a) ridiculous and (b) distinctly lacking in any kind of knowledge about what otherizing actually is? i will write more on this later when father’s day stuff is over