Wouldn't heterophobic(Meaning fear of different things) fit better then. Homophobic does actually make sense as most people who use it are only afraid of seeing part of themselves in a homosexual person.

N.B. homosexual is a description not a noun. A person is not a homosexual but rather practices homosexuality.

Did you mean to say most people who use the word homophobic, or most people who are described as homophobic? because the former would be an absurd generalisation considering how widespread the use of it is. The latter is probably most certainly true (conjecture on my part), and also (agin conjecture) most homophobic people are also afraid that they might somehow be mistaken as being homosexual.

It may have been conceived with a holier-than-thou agenda, but now its simply a term, just like any other. The only holier-than-thou attitude in this thread is yours: "It is a pseudo-intellectual piece of tripe, used by feminazis, stunt-journalists, stunt-lecturers and anyone trying to score points with those tossers."

It does not imply that, you've simply inferred this for yourself.

Homosexualphobia is very cumbersome however, which is probably why whoever coined the the term homophobia did so. I guess they simply didn't take into account how anal some people are about demanding that terms be perfect. Kinda ironic really.

Oh, and homo is a prefix, not a suffix.

It's your definition of 'phobic' that is incorrect. Phobias are irrational and/or extreme, not irrational and extreme.

Since when was any book written infalable?

I dunno, any book that is revised as much as a dictionary can't be reputable. Get it right the first time

Books have a way of becomming out of date rather quickly.

Rubbish

What about two women? That's still considered holy, right?

Anyways, you spelled 'infallible' wrong. I'm just saying.

It's NyanKoneko. 'nuf said.

You really need a new catch phrase, 'are you on crack' is getting really tired.

I doubt that the original author of the term intended for it to be considered 'correct'. It's just a term. In case you hadn't noticed (perhaps you've had too much crack yourself), but many terms we use are not 'correct'. Some are coined because they sound catchy, some are coined because they are simplifications of an otherwise awkward terminology... I hope you're catching my drift, or has the crack not worn off yet?

It doesn't take much brain power to understand that the 'homo' in this instance is not being used as a 'correct' synonym for homosexual, but that it's used more like an abbreviation.

The homo in homophobic (which is really a shortened form of homosexualphobic is usually considered to be homo = same, not homo = man.

Who is calling anyone a homo?

The term homo (when used as a shortened form of the noun homosexual) is generally considered derogatory slang, at least in the US.. ie. "Are you a homo?" is generally taken as offensive. When used as a noun, I think homosexual is the only word not considered offnsive. Adjectives, though, have a bit more leeway. "Are you homo?" isn't quite as offensive, though not quite politically correct, either. "Are you gay?" is typically what you'll hear in non-offensive speech.

I have a problem with this statement:

Just what mail-order catalog did you pull "gay" and "and women" out of?

According solely to the above: If homo means man, and phobic is irrational fear, that would make homophobic an irrational fear of men. Which could refer to someone who was raped by a man and is now terrified of men in general.

I don't know. It's best not to refrain from talking about things just because they're taboo, at least on the Internet.

And besides, there's all kinds of interesting facts you find in these discussions like:

Yes, X-G understands what I meant to say.

smoking is bad, k?