What I see is that: 
 # You have chosen to raise an issue of homophobic language on may talk page less than 48 hours after a five years long ban was lifted by . You know that I raised an objection during the unblock discussion, that you contributing on this project without a firm commitment to avoid using off-wiki hounding to get your way, makes this project an unsafe space for users who have been, or feel they have been, targeted for derision or malicious abuse by your known off-wiki cohort/supporters. 
 # You could have easily apologised for your "anti gay" vandalism on Commons by email with me in the last six months.  You have chosen to make drama on Wikipedia (when your vandalism was on Commons), knowing full well the background of my experience of harassment. 
 # "X is gay" is regressive homophobic language, so yes it is "anti-gay". It derides LGBT people by making "gay" a term of abuse. In my eyes this should be treated as seriously as using "X is a Jew" or "X is black" as offensive terms. 
 # At the same time as writing here with a carefully phrased apology, that makes it falsely appear I have made anti-gay claims about you on-wiki, you were thanking your friends and supporters on Kohs website for calling me an "asshole" and having "sand in [my] vagina". For the causal reader of my talk page, this is my statement which included the description "anti-gay" but was supportive of a future unblock request by you: 
 I doubt Peter Damian and me will ever claim to be friends, due to past unpleasantness of a nature that I am unlikely to ever forget. However, saying this, I do think it the right thing to do to allow anyone the potential to appeal against indef blocks, were he able to come back to this project with a credible request explaining how he would like to help contribute to our educational content and how he can avoid past problems, so that this project remains mellow and a positive non-hostile environment for all our contributors. 
 His use of Commons has been deliberately disruptive, and appears to have included using Commons as a means both to remotely poke at Wikipedia, plus a really stupid jibe at one of our long term contributors which might be interpreted by some as anti-gay. I may have been encouraged to support a block review in the short term, had Peter's reaction not been to immediately attempt to create public drama about his block off-wiki rather than, say, trying a proper apology for the target of his apparent trolling; even if he feels this was a misinterpretation. Given this context, I suggest that Peter is encouraged to reflect on what the Open Knowledge scope of this project is, and whether he can ever really be interested in doing more than using this site to inflame drama like it was 4Chan. I don't know how long serious reflection takes, but considering the upset recently caused, a period where his talk page access remains blocked is probably wise both for him and others affected, and I can't see much point in another unblock request until well into 2015. Fæ (talk)  

 If you wish to pursue this, then you should be raising an unblock request on Commons. I see no value in you making a case here unless the outcome you are seeking is to cause me grief, or to give your off-wiki chums more material to continue their years long campaign of abuse and defamatory allegations.