The Thought Police

It is the dream of all dictators - and the nightmare of his oppressed people - to make bad thinking a crime.

To speak or act in any way contrary to the often arbitrary and shifting ideology of the dictator is, of course, observable and dangerous.

But better for he who would control all, is to make people so cowed, so beaten, so corrupted that they dare not think a single thought that is not totally owned by those in power. (East Germany under the Stasi, USSR under Stalin and the KGB, Cambodia under Pol Pot, North Korea under the Kims, father and son - some modern examples.)

And so it would seem we have finally achieved such a dictatorship in this country, for two old people who believe homosexual practice, as a thing in itself, to be "morally wrong" were interrogated by the police and quizzed for over an hour about the possible criminality of their beliefs.

They had made no comment or complaint about the actions of an individual, they had used no intemperate or threatening language, but had merely informed their local council that they wished to be allowed to distribute some leaflets outlining their view - based on their understanding of Christianity - that homosexual practice was morally wrong.

Not only did the Council refuse their request but then also it reported them to the police, who commenced a criminal investigation resulting in these two people being formally interviewed about their morals in their own home by two uniformed officers.

It matters not that the couple have received an apology and an out-of-court settlement, which they have donated to charity. What matters is that this could and did happen in this country today.

I, like many, abhor 'homophobia', though not for the same reason as people who say they detest the thoughts and beliefs of others with whom they disagree. I cannot stand the word itself. It is a rubbish word, a philological abomination and a neological nonsense.

'Homophobia' has two possible meanings - depending on whether 'homo' is from the Greek or the Latin root - and neither bears any relation to its usage in practice to mean 'being anti-gay.'

If from the Greek - which is linguistically correct and one can tell it is being used correctly by the short 'o' sound of the first syllable - then it means merely "fear of sameness." If from the Latin - incorrect and voiced with a long 'o' - then it means "fear of mankind."

Now I can perfectly understand anyone who fears people in general, for the human race can be a very dangerous species to itself and to the rest of creation. But I am not aware that being frightened of one thing being the same as another thing is a commonly encountered pathological state of mind. (One also allows that where there is fear there is often then hatred - Hunter S Thompson nailed Western paranoia perfectly with his "Fear and Loathing in/at/of..." books.)

The word people should be using in such circumstances - if they must attempt a single word at all to describe a thoroughly complex and difficult subject - is "heterophobia", a 'fear of difference.'

That's what they say they mean - and it is still a very presumptuous ascription of hostile motive or intent to someone who does not approve of what you do - so why not say what they mean!