This year, in part due to growing global support for Palestinians, an analysis of pinkwashing is on more people’s tongues than ever before. Ghanem and Koval both organize in Raleigh, North Carolina, where Out! Raleigh Pride, the city’s major pride event, agreed to join the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement for the first time this year. This week the organizers of Out! Raleigh Pride confirmed via email that they will give back funds the organization received from pro-Israel entities in order to become BDS compliant. That may make Raleigh the first major mainstream pride event in the U.S. to formally join the BDS movement.
Queer people should support the Palestinian people. Pinkwashing has become increasingly ridiculous. Corporations are signaling they support queer people and then donating to Republicans. Israel’s genocide isn’t improving the conditions of queer people anywhere or spreading tolerance of any kind. We shouldn’t allow ourselves to be used as a wedge issue against the interests of the Palestinians when corporations have no interests upholding or forwarding the rights and aspirations of either group.
https://popular.info/p/these-25-rainbow-flag-waving-companies
I’m against what Israel is doing 100%. But mixing LGBT+ rights with support for an anti-LGBT+ country is not the way to go.
Civil rights are civil rights, my guy.
everyone knows that being bombed regularly is the best enviroment for positive social change /s
OK? As I said, I’m against what Israel is doing. I will defend the right to live of Palestinians even though most would rather see me dead. I just won’t wave their country flag.
there are queer people in Palestine too, it’s not like the missles are dodging them
I know, that’s why I’m against this stupid war, and hate that my taxes are supporting it. That’s the first sentence in my comment. I will defend the right to live of all Palestinians. But you won’t see me waving a flag of a flag that would rather see me dead.
Nopes. Not this old faggot.
https://static.project2025.org/2025_MandateForLeadership_FULL.pdf
Here is an excerpt from Project 2025 from page 481.
Protect faith-based grant recipients from religious liberty violations and maintain a biblically based, social science–reinforced definition of marriage and family. Social science reports that assess the objective outcomes for children raised in homes aside from a heterosexual, intact marriage are clear: All other family forms involve higher levels of instability (the average length of same-sex marriages is half that of heterosexual marriages); financial stress or poverty; and poor behavioral, psychological, or educational outcomes.
For the sake of child well-being, programs should affirm that children require and deserve both the love and nurturing of a mother and the play and protection of a father. Despite recent congressional bills like the Respect for Marriage Act that redefine marriage to be the union between any two individuals, HMRE program grants should be available to faith- based recipients who affirm that marriage is between not just any two adults, but one man and one unrelated woman.
Republicans view heterosexual marriages as superior to homosexual marriages. Republicans came for Roe v. Wade and they are going to come for Obergefell v. Hodges. Gay men aren’t done fighting for their rights no matter how old they are. Using intersectionality as a road map to allies in our fight for LGBTQ+ rights is essential. This includes the Palestinian people. Allowing ourselves to be divided plays right into the hands of the people who want to take our rights away.
Finding allies is one thing, but bringing periferal issues into the umbrella of “gay rights” is another. Don’t dilute our efforts and make us lose our focus (which is what they want). There are too many grassroot interests to place them all under the same umbrella of gay rights. Political strength will be watered down. Never assume all share your thoughts on every issue.
The groups that want to take away the rights of gay men and queer people in general are the same groups that want to take away the rights of the Palestinians. Since we are in a shared struggle against the same organizations there is no dilution of effort in taking up each other’s causes. edit: typo
Thinking you might have a wee bit more research to do?
How so? Pinkwashing corporations that are complicit in Israel’s genocide and the Republican Party sound like shared antagonistic organizations to me.
Since you have to ask and can’t look it up yourself:
https://www.queermajority.com/essays-all/british-imperialism-didnt-cause-palestinian-homophobia
Don’t dilute our efforts and make us lose our focus (which is what they want).
One doesn’t lose focus on human rights by focusing on human rights…
Focus:
- Verb Form [intransitive, transitive] to give attention, effort, etc. to one particular subject, situation, or person rather than another
My focus is human rights. I’m not sure what yours is, but it’s not that…
to place them under the same umbrella of gay rights
This might be your key misunderstanding! 🙂 With emphasis, this is not what the article is saying nor what is happening.
When pride leadership associated itself with the Civil Rights Movement, it was not an adoption or enrollment of the Civil Rights Movement into LGBT rights. It was an alignment and an extension of mutual support and solidarity, recognizing that both communities had individuals and resources in common and faced a common enemy in the form of white supremacy.
When pride leadership associated itself with the feminist movement, it was not an adoption or enrollment of feminism into LGBT rights. It was an alignment and an extension of mutual support and solidarity, seeing that both communities had individuals and resources in common and a common enemy in the form of gender-based discrimination. Historically, many early feminist activists, such as those in the 1970s, also championed LGBT rights, recognizing the interconnectedness of their struggles.
When pride leadership associated itself with the labor movement, it was not an adoption or enrollment of the labor movement into LGBT rights. It was an alignment and an extension of mutual support and solidarity, understanding that both communities had individuals and resources in common and a common enemy in the form of economic injustice. For instance, the 1980s saw significant collaborations between LGBT activists and labor unions, particularly in advocating for workplace protections against discrimination.
When pride leadership associated itself with the indigenous rights movement, it was not an adoption or enrollment of the indigenous movement into LGBT rights. It was an alignment and an extension of mutual support and solidarity, acknowledging that both communities had individuals and resources in common and a common enemy in the form of colonialism and cultural erasure. During events such as the 2016 Standing Rock protests, many LGBT activists stood in solidarity with indigenous peoples, highlighting the shared struggles against marginalization.
When pride leadership associated itself with the Black Lives Matter movement, it was not an adoption or enrollment of BLM into LGBT rights. It was an alignment and an extension of mutual support and solidarity, recognizing that both communities had individuals and resources in common and faced a common enemy in the form of systemic racism. For example, during the 2020 protests, many LGBT organizations showed solidarity with BLM, acknowledging the unique challenges faced by black LGBT individuals.
When pride leadership associates itself with the pro-Palestine movement, it is not an adoption or enrollment of the pro-Palestine movement into LGBT rights. It is an alignment and an extension of mutual support and solidarity, seeing that both communities have individuals and resources in common and a common enemy in the form of occupation and human rights violations.
In all cases, this alignment of communities served to amplify the voices of all parties. “Dilution of political power” by doing solidarity is just not a thing that happens.
No, we are not. Sorry but protests outside of LGBTQ+ rights do NOT belong here. Whether you agree or not. Sorry.
Did you read the article?
No, we are not.
The article describes multiple queer activists and groups supporting BDS as a component of Pride.
protests outside of LGBTQ+ rights do NOT belong here
The article also describes the direct link between BDS and Pride.
Who cares what an article says?
me i do i think it’s cool that these leaders are fighting for human rights across the gamut and i appreciate reporters that identify and celebrate this action
in the fight for a free Palestine the “your identity would get you killed in Gaza” has been used as a pro-Israel pro-genocide weapon and erasure of of queer Palestinians. it is objectively good for queer leadership to align itself with other instances of human rights activism.
Anyone participating in this discussion in good faith
I am.
you’re not.
encyclopedia britannica definition of “intersectionality”
involvement between feminism and pride
involvement between BLM and pride and another
involvement between the anti war movement and pride
involvement between the civil rights movement and pride
and there are more. you should ask yourself why you think you have the right to pick and choose what movements Pride relates itself with.
Because I am an old man and I know what it took to get to where we are today. And watching other unrelated “movements “ try to latch onto gay pride as something to do with it is something quite disingenuous and sickening really.
some of these movements you deride are as old as or older than you, and all of them have been mutually beneficial.
the “disingenuous and sickening” position is yours, unfortunately. i don’t have the resources to help you through this but i hope you can start to learn from this conversation.
Vastly more people care about the article more than your uninformed opinion that contradicts reality
solidarity? what’s that?
Goddamnit Patrick, transgender is not a noun.
“I got mine. Fuck you.”
Actually, we did get ours and it was a hell of a lot of work. Surviving the AIDS crisis, Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, “conduct unbecoming” in the military, strung up on fence posts in Wyoming, public arrests, family disenfranchisement, discrimination in housing, marriage, legal rights…just getting started. If that means fuck you because I don’t equate a war between Israel and Palestine as the same thing, then yes, “fuck you, Trevor”.
war between Israel and Palestine
Not a war. It’s a genocide, and it’s Israel that is perpetrating it.
Surviving the AIDS crisis, Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, “conduct unbecoming” in the military, strung up on fence posts in Wyoming, public arrests, family disenfranchisement, discrimination in housing, marriage, legal rights…just getting started
Cool. And you’ll get absolutely nowhere with reactionary sentiment like “fuck you, I got mine” as a part of your movement. The people that want to allow the genocide to continue are the same people actively working to take those rights away from LGBTQ+ people, and they’re not gonna let up just because reactionary twats like you think it’s okay. Not to mention the fact that the rest of the LGBTQ+ community doesn’t even have all of the rights you mentioned, but that’s none of your concern, I’m sure.
The fact is that rights movements and struggles for social justice will continue to largely ignore backward sentiment like yours, as it is necessary for the progress of all of the groups that struggle for them and your attitude toward people other than yourself would only lead to an erosion of those rights.
Yes, we are,
stay winning 💪💪💪
I thought pink washing was fake support for women’s rights and rainbow washing was fake support for queer rights
https://femmagazine.com/feminism-101-what-is-pinkwashing/
Pinkwashing was first used to refer to companies that superficially supported breast cancer awareness. It has since been used to refer to companies that superficially support queer people. Given the context of the op’s article, pinkwashing or rainbow-washing could be used interchangeably. Using pinkwashing to refer to companies using the pink ribbon for disingenuous marketing campaigns is still a valid usage of the term.
That’s what I thought. It made sense in context but I thought it was about something else
