I was debating whether to insert this within LGBT+ or Islamic Leftism but I do think ultimately it might fit here better because it covers the specific experience of French indigènes, which makes it more relevant here.
I feel like in these sort of online Islamic “progressive” spaces, there’s no genuine discussions happening. These spaces are often almost defensive in nature - like the existence of this community is just to prove to disapproving whites that Islam isn’t this, or isn’t that. This is a result of being in a Western dominated space in general.
Gender and sexual minorities is a very important phenomenon that must require a response, yet it is almost ignored or never spoken about because this muslim-homophobia dichotomy is so engrained that people are (rightfully) scared to even talk about it, especially across the White left.
I’d of course invite everyone to treat this article critically, and contribute if you have any qualms against their conclusions, although I will admit my opinions have slowly drifted closer to the article as the years went by.
Oh, I didn’t mean that as in “queer is a disease”, but moreso it doesn’t have some detailed diagnostic criteria, like a condition or disease would. Sorry if I wasn’t clear.
But yes, it is very obvious what gay people are this is a thing that people have identified and defined clearly, it is not some abstract philosophical concept, and it is absolutely an innate characteristic of humanity. As even the author states how homosexuality has been present in human society for all of recorded history, and even further with archeological evidence.
Also if they still doesn’t answer to why the author believes that the west is forcing migrants to be gay, or why that’s phrased as a bad thing (no matter how absurd it is).
Lastly, religion and societal development is not an excuse for homophobia and oppression. Especially if even for reasons outside of their control, migrants travel to the west, and then take up arms against societal standards such lgbt acceptance. Especially when members of that migrant community come out as lgbt. The community cannot just say “Oopsie, we’re not ready yet, back in the closet”. That’s basically what they’re saying, they’re acting like the concept that there are lgbt members in “working class migrant communities” is laughable and some absurd notion, they straight say that marriage equality for gay infidividuals is something they are against and would cut their leftist allies off over, and that their communities are near devioud of LGBT influence except for dastardly western imperialist influence.They are living in some bizarre wonderland that they’ve constructed specifically to tailor to their worldview. Even though it is devious of reality.
Also there is not a homosexual/heterosexual binary in the modern day lgbt community, escept for deranged conservatives. That’s the entire point of the pansexual and bisexual orientations just to name a few.
Overall, I agree with most of your points and concepts, but you’re still playing a post hoc defense for an author who is most obviously not as charitable as you, and I doubt believe the things you are trying say. Hence their reactionary, homophobic, and extremely bizarre language and strances in several topics (hence my original post).
Hmm I’m not sure you’re picking up what I’m putting down. I’m saying that “homosexuality” is a relatively new concept (so is “heterosexuality” btw). It’s a word that people of the distant past definitely did not use and definitely did not identify with. It’s a word that many people of the present don’t identify with either, even if you can make the argument that they fit the criteria. But really, what does it matter? The goal of queer liberation should be to free people from discrimination, not to force all cultures to subscribe to the same notion of gender and sexuality.
I don’t know why you think the author is making excuses for homophobia. And I don’t think they meant to imply that straight and gay are the only sexual orientations (they say LGBT a lot and bisexual is right there in the acronym). I’m not trying to play defense for this person, I don’t know who they even are, but it feels like we’ve read completely different articles ngl :s
Anyway, I interpreted the author as saying that white people need to meet indigenous people where they’re at & allow their communities to deal with their social issues in their own way, at their own pace. And that it’s unacceptable for white people to demand them to change according to white standards. Especially when those same white people are apathetic to all their other economic and political concerns.
Like, if you’ve had to live with police brutality, unemployment, and homelessness all your life, would you believe that an outside movement to protect the gay rights of your community is sincere? When that movement is led by the very same people who subjugate you in the first place?