15. Jin Haritaworn, with Tamsila Tauqir and Esra Erdem, "Gay Imperialism: Gender and Sexuality Discourse in the ‘War on Terror’".Racism is the vehicle that transports white gays and feminists into the political mainstream.
Haritaworn
et al discusses the interaction between gay rights and the "war on terror" -- namely, how some white gay activists have struck a mutually-beneficial bargain with neoimperialists, such that "concern" for Muslim queers is used to gay-wash Islamophobic agendas, in return for sexual rights being elevated to the status of a core social value, on par with "freedom" and "democracy." As a result, the social position of white gays is improved, while the position of queer Muslims is worsened. Haritaworn focuses the discussion on Germany and the United Kingdom, and draws parallels with similar neoimperialist bargains struck by white feminists.
There are a lot of rhetorical maneuvers here that are familiar to me. For instance, despite Muslim queers of color being the alleged central figures of the narrative, their voices are written out of the narrative (white gays speak "for" them) unless they are willing to testify in ways that are useful to the imperialist frame:
...the journalists wanted me to respond to the ‘difficulties’ of being gay and Muslim, as well as to the homophobia of Muslim communities in Britain and abroad. I often suggested shifting the focus to the considerable work being done within liberal and progressive Islam. Journalists reacted with silence when I asked them to report on progressive Imams who have conducted Nikahs (Muslim marriage contracts) for same-sex couples, or on parents who had supported their gay children.
Other rhetorical attacks white gay activists include framing people of color as straight oppressors of white gays and as possessors of unique privileges ("imagine someone getting away with saying that about a
black person"). Meanwhile, within Muslim communities, since gay-rights rhetoric so often acts as a carrier/justifier for Islamophobia, gay rights becomes equated with anti-Muslim racism, thus
worsening the position of Muslim queers.
Some maneuvers detailed by Haritaworn
et al are new to me. Most audacious, in my mind, is equating Muslim anti-gay rhetoric with the neo-Nazi anti-gay rhetoric of the British National Party, a move that paints Muslims and neo-Nazis as
allies (!?), and thus elevating gays to the ever-coveted "most oppressed" status.
The article is fairly heavy in academic language (I found it rough going in places), but it was well worth my time. Unfortunately, you'll notice that the link above goes to a Google cache of the original article: one of the white gay activists discussed in the paper
appears to have successfully pressured the publisher into declaring the original anthology out of print.
(
hat tip)
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
curious
chipper
recumbent
disgusted