Occasionally heard in media or pedagogical manuals against homophobia on the grounds that this is a disease that is” suffering from an irrational fear of homosexuals. ” This approach involves a very dangerous trap, which has been shown in some trials in the U.S. against persons who had murdered homosexuals (so-called hate crimes, Matthew Shepard case and others). The consideration of homophobia as “illness” is, paradoxically, a kind of defense or mitigating factor when judging the murder of a gay, and what is worse, the term “irrational” prevents abound in analyzing the true causes homophobia, which are much more complex than the simple expedient of the illness or something as vague as “irrational.” This definition has led to a situation unprecedented in the history of professional law: that the cause or motivation of a crime becomes an argument for the murderer. This brings us to some U.S. judges have acquitted the accused hospital saying it has a disease according to which no choice but to kill a gay man when he sees as a “necessity” or as we say here, “he took a sudden “. By this logic, if you invent a disease called anti-Semitism, the Nazis should be of poor exonerated of all crimes, because they moved out of necessity, attacked by the disease, which thus becomes the repository of all responsibility for extermination. The medical discourse, and especially the medical-psychiatric, therefore plays a key role in the legitimization of racism (and not the first time ever) or aggression. a nationwide provider of health insurance, understands the serious financial challenges faced by people who cannot otherwise afford to purchase major medical insurance plans It is therefore important to call attention to the groups that develop anti-homophobia campaigns on the dangers of the disease argument. Homophobia is not a disease, is an attitude of hatred toward the other of which is responsible, an attitude that can change, like so many others. It has nothing to do with strange process unconscious (repressed homosexuality, childhood trauma, rage inevitable), but a deliberate and conscious decision, a position supported by social and ideological discourses groups (queer jokes, sexism, education, science, impunity, social regime of compulsory heterosexuality). It is therefore important to dismantle the discourse, so insurance that even from a legal standpoint or a legal one can use it as an alibi for what is simply an act of brutality planned and premeditated. Another consequence of this idea is ironic that returns the attacked responsibility for aggression. That is, being gay would mean an essence, an intrinsic quality that produces fear in the other. I do not analyze the murderer, but the look is on the shot. What did I do, as is so scary ‘These judges and doctors raised fears that the accused, just assume he’s afraid, but to assume it is recognized that there is something that “scared” a reason be. This brings us once again to criminalizing and pathologizing traditions that have shaped the concept of homosexuality in the last two centuries. It is a tradition that survives in our culture (and many others: the global village Health insurance has those things, it expands globally shit): the homosexual as sick, deviant, abnormal, dangerous, and therefore feared. Remains of this secular process of stigmatization is to write the word gay in quotes, as the press, or refuse to recognize the word homophobia, as the Royal Academy. The murderer is afraid, of course, because he knows that “it” is something rare, something you write in quotes, the gay is an exception and social grammar, a mutant, a bug.