The criminalization of homophobia is a reality that the inhabitants of the Anglo-Saxon world will face tomorrow. Discussing this topic is as pointless as thinking that Kabul will have a chance to hold out until the new year. For now, the question on the agenda is “What should we do?” Essentially, we are talking about the fact that a person can be condemned for openly expressing his thoughts. And this is a very bad idea. It seems like we've been through this before, but have we learned our lessons? Legally, there are three categories of behavior in which homophobia can be considered a criminal offense. These categories are already actively discussed in Western discourse and are moving from the sphere of conversations on blogs on Facebook to the legal plane. That is, people who share these views make them part of their political program, which means the day is near when these norms will pass from the area of ​​the election program into the rank of law. Category 1 - Criminal activity caused by homophobic beliefs, for example, if a person was attacked or otherwise became a target of criminal activity because of his LGBT* identity. In other words, homophobia in this case will be equated to aggravating circumstances. Consequently, a gay or lesbian will be higher in social status than a heterosexual person. The question arises: will LGBT* people be subjected to more severe punishment if they attack a heterosexual or will the law only work in one direction? Category 2 - Directly harmful acts of discrimination based on homophobic beliefs, such as a manager repeatedly passing over a person for a promotion/promotion because of their LGBTQ identity*. What is this if not an infringement on the rights of heterosexuals. In this case, we are talking about quotas, i.e. leadership positions in the company should be proportionally divided between previously oppressed categories of citizens, namely: women, people of color and LGBT*. In other words, a lesbian woman of color can apply for a job and immediately apply for a high position, they will not be able to refuse her, because she will automatically file a claim for discrimination, and the company management will be held criminally liable. Category 3 - Indirect Harmful Acts/Discrimination because of homophobic beliefs, such as preventing someone from being part of a friend group or using homophobic slurs because of their LGBTQ*+ identity. In other words, a person cannot be denied friendship because they are gay. You cannot tell someone that “You are gay”, this is a direct insult and a reason to go to court. Only a gay man can call himself gay. If you think that I made all this up and am trying to stir things up, then I suggest you spend the evening studying the American and Canadian press, namely articles related to LGBT* issues. You will not be able to find a position that would contradict what I wrote above. Saying “I don’t like” gays is for completely marginalized individuals. This does not at all mean that the entire Western society approves and sincerely shares this position. The question is fear, no one wants to be scolded by LGBT* people - the NKVD. The problem is that this position causes anger among heterosexuals and religious people. Very quickly there will be a reason to openly express your anger. People don't like feeling guilty, they don't like living with a gag in their mouth. Such excesses will turn into even greater aggression against LGBT* representatives themselves. CBT 24/7. Effective help for Depression. Divorce. Anxiety. * LGBT is a movement whose activities are recognized as extremist and prohibited on the territory of the Russian Federation.