Homophobes of the world unite
Latvia's Gay Pride parade, which is due to take place in the capital of Riga tomorrow, has been banned.
The city council has refused a permit for the march on public order grounds, saying that they’ve received threats of serious, organised violence by homophobic religious, nationalist and fascist groups.
And councillors claimed that Riga Gay Pride is the "biggest security risk" since Latvia won its independence from the Soviet Union. Yeah. Right.
"We are shocked by the city council's decision, which we view as not only an unacceptable restriction of the freedom of assembly, but a major blow to democracy in the face of terrorist threats," said organiser Linda Freimane.
"We are preparing to challenge the decision in the Administrative Court today."
And in Zimbabwe, a raft of homophobic legislation has just come into force, expanding the scope of sodomy – previously described as only anal sexual intercourse between males – to include any act involving physical contact between males that would be "regarded by a reasonable person as an indecent act."
"A reasonable person", eh? That’s no way to talk about Robert Mugabe.
In Israel, Jewish and Muslim leaders have claimed that World Pride Jerusalem could trigger a series of riots even greater than those that greeted publication of the Danish cartoons of Mohammed last year.
Representatives of conservative Christian groups joined Muslim and Orthodox Jewish leaders in demanding that organisers of World Pride Jerusalem cancel planned events.
"We are faced with the prospect of six days of promiscuity and debauchery unparalleled in the Middle East," said American Rabbi Yehuda Levin, who has threatened bloodshed over the events – presumably because he's jealous that he isn't getting any of that lovely debauchery.
www.ynetnews.com is claiming that the main parade will be switched to Tel Aviv at the last minute as a result of Orthodox politicians uniting with Muslims, and the Chief Rabbi calling on the Pope. (The forum at the bottom of the linked report is full of delightful comments too)
Obviously they don’t have any more pressing concerns in the Middle East these days.
Isn’t it amazing how much reactionary scum floats to the surface when homophobia provides an opportunity?
And councillors claimed that Riga Gay Pride is the "biggest security risk" since Latvia won its independence from the Soviet Union. Yeah. Right.
"We are shocked by the city council's decision, which we view as not only an unacceptable restriction of the freedom of assembly, but a major blow to democracy in the face of terrorist threats," said organiser Linda Freimane.
"We are preparing to challenge the decision in the Administrative Court today."
And in Zimbabwe, a raft of homophobic legislation has just come into force, expanding the scope of sodomy – previously described as only anal sexual intercourse between males – to include any act involving physical contact between males that would be "regarded by a reasonable person as an indecent act."
"A reasonable person", eh? That’s no way to talk about Robert Mugabe.
In Israel, Jewish and Muslim leaders have claimed that World Pride Jerusalem could trigger a series of riots even greater than those that greeted publication of the Danish cartoons of Mohammed last year.
Representatives of conservative Christian groups joined Muslim and Orthodox Jewish leaders in demanding that organisers of World Pride Jerusalem cancel planned events.
"We are faced with the prospect of six days of promiscuity and debauchery unparalleled in the Middle East," said American Rabbi Yehuda Levin, who has threatened bloodshed over the events – presumably because he's jealous that he isn't getting any of that lovely debauchery.
www.ynetnews.com is claiming that the main parade will be switched to Tel Aviv at the last minute as a result of Orthodox politicians uniting with Muslims, and the Chief Rabbi calling on the Pope. (The forum at the bottom of the linked report is full of delightful comments too)
Obviously they don’t have any more pressing concerns in the Middle East these days.
Isn’t it amazing how much reactionary scum floats to the surface when homophobia provides an opportunity?
posted by Amanda Kendal at 11:42 am
3 Comments:
But...
People with homosexual feelings (feelings, beliefs, variety, flavour ???) still attend church to follow a religion that clearly does not want them as a part of society, some of them even rise to lead their church.
Fighting prejudice from within ?
Maybe.
If they'll stand up to be counted, more often than not though they'll hide their feelings in fear of homophobic attacks - mental and physical.
And why are governments so afraid of homosexuals that they'll seek to ban them - isn't that what Hitler did with his pink stars ?
Not all strands of all religions are unwelcoming or censorious, but it is still pretty mainstream for religion to be homophobic. If that's what gays and lesbians want to do, then fair enough.
In terms of politics, Mugabe has used homophobic legislation to distract from his other policies before, or to bolster his vote at election time.
Which illustrrates, I think, that gays, lesbians etc are easy scapegoats. HIV/Aids has been mana from heaven for the genuinely homophobic, of course, although I can't recall ever reading of syphilis being referred to a 'straight plague' - but the casually homophobic or simply un-informed won't really think like that.
And there's probably also something in the idea of male homosexuality being a threat to, a diminution of, masculinity. Few men who are worried by the idea of homosexuality, for instance, are bothered by the idea of fucking, but are horrified by the idea of being the fuckee – something that they perceive as 'feminine'. And many who would find gay men horrifying, are happy to entertain the idea of women together.
All in all, it seems that sex and sexuality are two of the biggest causes of human confusion around.
I was having a beer-sodden conversation with some friends (male and female) a couple of weks ago about two homosexual males that one of the group knew - he mentioned that he just could not envisage the pair of them engaging in anal intercourse, in fact the thought of it made him feel ill - apart from that the two males were "good lads" he said.
One of the females then pointed out that not all homosexuals need to "fuck" and that they can indulge in all sorts of sexual practices that we would consider "normal" in a hetrosexual couple.
It was a conversation stopper and not a point that I have ever really considered, I'm as guilty as most of always looking at two homosexual males and wondering which one of them takes it up the arse.
Post a Comment
<< Home