probably not technically a homophobe but it’s as arbitrary distinction to make really
disagreeing with homosexuality is stupid and makes no sense
it’s like saying you disagree with bananas or something
Mate, homosexuality isn't an object like a banana...that's not at all a valid comparison.
Once homosexuality is defined properly, then we can discuss whether or not someone can disagree with it. But whatever you think it is, it is certainly not an object. That's for sure.
I've seen all kinds of different ways homosexuality has been defined. And unfortunately the definitions are not consistent. And because of that, people inevitably draw different conclusions regarding what constitutes homophobia and everything else surrounding the topic.
From what we know in psychology, at the root of sexuality is preference. Things you like sexually and things you dislike.
E.g. a straight male likes to be with females sexually, and dislikes being other males sexually.
This concept of loving/hating sexual themes goes a lot further than simply disagreeing, if you notice. It evokes raw emotions.
And some in the LGBTQ movement have taken to defining homophobia so broadly, that they view any kind discriminatory attitude which singles out gay sexual relationships as being inherently homophobic. Such as loving straight porn but hating gay porn.
They view that on the same level playing field as liking to watch white people but disliking watching black people.
Remember, according to many of them, sexuality should be treated exactly like race. Homophobia is basically like racism, they explicitly say that.
They have to come up with a definition of homophobia which takes into account the fact that to be straight, literally means, not liking and actually being turned off by the idea of gay sex.
A legal definition of homophobia is easy to come up, because it's clear when discrimination occurs from a policy perspective e.g. a shop which doesn't serve openly gay people or a business which refuses to hire homosexuals.
But they want a moral definition of homophobia, that goes beyond the legal one, and that's not at all easy to come with.
The closest analogy with sexual preference, is ironically, the analogy which the LGBTQ social movement actually REJECT which is other kinds of preferences, like religious preference or political preference etc.
Basically the idea that "I respect your right to hold your ideas/do what you want, but I prefer to have my own ideas/to do things my way".
That's a concept which is very easy to understand and yet, which they strongly resist. Because they'd prefer sexuality as a whole to be viewed more in line with something intrinsic to the human being which they have no control over and which defines their identity - like someone's race or height for example.
And you can see the tension between the two radically different concepts even on Redcafe. If you scroll up, you can see one of the users mock religious people and he basically says (paraphrasing) "can you believe that people actually believe in a man in the sky telling them what they ought to do...blah blah blah".
Basically criticizing someone's religious preference is not considered discriminatory obviously.
But if that same person says "can you believe some guys actually like to have anal sex with other guys..." And proceeds to mock people's preferred bedroom activities, I'm assuming that would constitute some kind of hate speech.
But at the root of both, is preference. And that's inescapable.