Is Gay Pride anti Israel?

[jaycola]

Toronto's gay pride parade is about to get a lot of negative press and criticism for allowing an anti Israel Gay Lesbian group, Queers Against Israeli Apartheid, to display political banners during the pride parade.

"Its website says QuAIA seeks "to reignite Toronto's queer community in the fight" to brand Israel's occupation of Palestine as apartheid, opposing its promotion as "a tolerant, queer-positive democracy." "

Singling out Israel for criticizm in the pride parade, when it is easily the most accomodating country in the region to homosexuals, seems misplaced.

Who wants to see banners for Gays against, Darfur, Sri Lanka, China or Iran (which executes homosexuals) dominating the parade. They risk turning this event from a festival of love and acceptance into a festival of conflict and hate.

 

[allabootmatt]

I agree that it's weird beyond belief for these folks to go after Israel, of all countries, at a Gay Pride event, but this is nothing new; this or a similar group has been at every Pride I can remember. Colour me un-incensed.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

That's a bit of a silly title and making a mountain out of a molehill - letting a group with a certain message march doesn't equate to the event supporting the stance of the organization marching.

Which makes one wonder - is this about the event getting negative press, or you wanting it to at the receiving end of such?

AoD

 

[Brian69]

I find it odd too--making it solely an issue about Israel (instead of about human rights in general) makes about as much sense as those who did so at the Durban anti-racism conference. This melding of issues complicates things as Israel is well ahead of the curve on gay rights but are routinely attacked on the Palestinian issue. However, I suppose its up to the organizers and gay community at large how much this politicization is considered inappropriate or a distraction--perhaps it's small enough to simply leave it be as you can't really prevent them from marching.

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

Who wants to see banners for Gays against, Darfur, Sri Lanka, China or Iran (which executes homosexuals) dominating the parade. They risk turning this event from a festival of love and acceptance into a festival of conflict and hate.

why would they have to protest iran? there's no homophobia in iran. don't you remember what Mahmoud Ahma-there are no gays in iran-ejad said?

 

[jaycola]

Which makes one wonder - is this about the event getting negative press, or you wanting it to at the receiving end of such?

AoD

I read about it in the post a couple days ago, http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/06/10/martin-gladstone-pride-parade-gives-ground-to-anti-israel-gong-show.aspx

I Read about it in the Sun Todayhttp://www.torontosun.com/news/torontoandgta/2009/06/12/9771261-sun.html

I just heard about it on the Jim Richards Show on CFRB. http://www.cfrb.com/shows/501326

I don't think negative publicity is what I want. It is what they are getting.

I'm not gay and think Israel is a justifiable target for some level of criticizm.

The gay pride parade is not the forum for this. is it?

 

[kEiThZ]

What really makes their argument bizarre is that Israel is far more tolerant homosexuals than any of the Arab countries (including Palestine). And that doesn't even take into account the lack of nuance when using the term 'apartheid' to describe Israel. It maybe fashionable among some left-wing intellectuals (many of whom have never been to Israel) but it does not accurately reflect the reality on the ground. There's no doubt that Israel does not treat its Arab citizens well. And they deserve criticism for that. But fairness would then demand and equal level of criticism for the way Arab countries treat their Christian and non-Arab minorities. These so-called intellectuals routinely fail to note how the Arab world systematically decimated and eventually eliminated their Jewish minorities. To describe the treatment of Israeli Arabs as constituting an apartheid in the context of wider relations in the arab world is a gross misrepresentation of the situation. And its even worse when this term is applied to the Israel-Palestine problem where the issue is one of occupation and not necessarily a differential standard for human rights.

To me this just strikes me as over-reaching, turning one cause into another just because it's politically fashionable. In the process they are risking support for their own cause. In case they have not noticed, jewish communities in the west are far more charitable and supportive of gay rights issues than any of the muslim counterparts.

 

[OttoSchloss]

Not saying that gays should blindly support nations and ideologies which support other gays BUT seriously Israel is one of the few middle eastern nations where gays have any rights at all and liberal ones at that. Do they honestly believe a Palestinian nation would do anything but make homosexuality illegal?

If Pride should be about politicizing issues then maybe they should be about trying to better the lives of gays in oppressive nations not issues that have absolutely nothing to do with gay people at all.

It's ridiculous to allow them to march in the parade. Let them picket the consulate instead. If I were in town on Pride I'd be there if only to loudly boo these idiots.

 

[doady]

It doesn't matter how tolerant Israel is of homosexuals. You can't support human rights for gays but not for Palestinians, it is just hypocritical.

 

[kEiThZ]

^ But this whole 'Israel apartheid' business arguably ventures beyond supporting the rights of Palestinians into outright Israel bashing....not in the least because the term itself attempts to conflate two issues (the rights of Israeli Arabs and the freedom of Palestinians) to seek a political goal (an independent Palestinian state) that is not necessarily related to the human rights issues (there are significan human rights issues that do not arise from the occuption per se ie. the concerns of Israeli Arabs).

 

[Whoaccio]

This is a bad trend. The protesting class has this tendency to use any event to protest a wide range of issues broadly acceptable under a typical left wing rubric. So, for instance, someone will organize a march against the Iraq war. Great, tons of totally reasonable people can get into that. But then the "Israel Apartheid" people will show up, then the various types of anti-capitalists will show up. Pretty soon, anybody with any political grievance is out with some lame poster. The end result is that the news headline of the protest is basically a bunch of people desiccating Israeli flags at an event originally meant to protest animal rights in California's farms.

Gay pride should be about, duh, gay pride. Its a viscous cycle if it just becomes yet another left-wing protest day. It also discredits the original movement. I remember around the time of the recent Gaza conflict, there were tons of fairly reasonable people who showed up to voice concern for this and that. On top of that though were these professional complainers who just took it as an opportunity to issue anti-Israel diatribes and basically support groups like Hamas. Even a few skinheads showed up to do their thing. What was basically a normal protest ended up being painted as an anti-Semitic orgy complete with flag burnings and signs of questionable taste (Nazi references) by these kind of jerks.

Never mind the wholly odd notion of Gay Pride criticizing, by far, the most tolerant country towards homosexuals in the region.

 

[jaycola]

I pulled this off of the Pink News website. A web site for the european gay community.
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-116.html

Hamas, the militant and political group in the Palestinian Territories have said that [if] they win the Palestinian Authority Parliamentary election, they would ban men and women dancing together and will strip gay men and women of the few rights they have in the territory that they have at present.

Dr Mahmoud Zahar http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_al-Zahar, the groups leader in Gaza, in an article on an Arabic website condemned the rights that gays have in Israel and made it clear that he thinks that gays are perverts. "Are these the laws for which the Palestinian street is waiting? For us to give rights to homosexuals and to lesbians, a minority of perverts and the mentally and morally sick?"

So if Israel were to fall, who do they think would protect the rights of the gay (bi, trans...) community?

This was from a blogger who commented on an anti-israel protest where there were the gay community was represented.http://diogenesborealis.blogspot.com/2009/01/homosexuals-for-hamas.html

Israel is the most tolerant society in the Middle East with respect to homosexuals. Gays & lesbians are allowed to serve openly in the Israeli armed forces. Although gay marriage is not legal in Israel, the state recognizes gay marriages performed outside the country and treats gay common-law relationships as equal to heterosexual ones. It is the only country in the region where homosexuality is neither illegal nor cause for persecution by state authorities.

I know the "gay community" is predominantly leftist in political orientation, but how any western homosexual can protest in support of Hamas, an organization that advocates the death penalty for gays, and against the only country in the Middle East that treats homosexuals as human beings and equal citizens is just beyond parody.

David Bernstein at The Volokh Conspiracy sums it up nicely:

One might think that when the battle is between Israel on the one side, tacitly supported by the Palestinian Authority, Egypt, and Jordan, and Hamas on the other, supported by Iran and Hezbollah, one would at least hope for an Israeli victory, even if one is dubious about its prospects. But I get the feeling that for many, it's more important that Israel, and the world, learn a lesson about the "limits of military force" than that a violent, fanatical, backwards, illiberal, anti-Semitic terrorist organization be defeated.

 

[Whoaccio]

It doesn't matter how tolerant Israel is of homosexuals. You can't support human rights for gays but not for Palestinians, it is just hypocritical.

It works the other way around though, too. You can't support a group like Hamas and the wholly illiberal and repressive culture which it was born out of, and turn around and march in a Gay Rights parade. Even 'acceptable' groups like Fatah's members would hold opinions on gays, the role of women and liberalism which would make Phyllis Schlafly sound like Harvey Milk. Were you to take some kind of measure of aggregate adherence to human rights, it would be quite clear that Israel's human rights record is so incomparably superior to just about anything else in the region.

 

[jade_lee]

I'm alright Jack, pull up the ladder?

 

[kEiThZ]

This is a bad trend. The protesting class has this tendency to use any event to protest a wide range of issues broadly acceptable under a typical left wing rubric.

Very true and it's starting to get ridiculous. The Tamils have recently started using the whole left-wing appeal to get sympathy for their cause....never mind that they were supporting a group who make Hamas and Hezbollah look like Angels. And they love to prey on those who are ignorant about the issues. My brother was approached at his university and asked to support the cause because he was south-asian. No additional explanation. When he asked them about the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi the canvassers didn't even know that the LTTE had done that and said that is must be Sri Lankan 'disinformation'.

The whole Israel apartheid crowd here seems to be cut from the same cloth. While that term could arguably apply to Israel's treatment of their Arab citizens (with some major caveats at that) who face some notable obstacles, it is illogical to apply that term to Israel's treatment of Palestinians (who aren't Israeli citizens).