Examining Israel’s Gay Rights Record

[King_David]

To the Editor:

“Israel and ‘Pinkwashing,’ ” by Sarah Schulman (Op-Ed, Nov. 23), is the perfect example of critics of Israel refusing to accept any good news related to that country.

The Israeli government is undoubtedly highlighting Israel’s largely progressive stance on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights and thriving gay culture.

That’s what’s called public diplomacy, and it’s what all countries, including the United States, do.

To label this as somehow sinister must mean that the United States is engaged in “jazzwashing” or “techwashing” when it uses music or touts its high-tech innovators to audiences and opinion makers overseas


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/24/opinion/examining-israels-gay-rights-record.html

[King_David]

1. ...more

Israel, like any other democracy, has its flaws. Its settlement policy is destructive, the occupation of the West Bank is untenable and its government is furthering the country’s isolation and distancing it from its original vision of being a “light unto the nations.” It is also quite advanced on lesbian and gay rights; we can only hope to make such progress here one day.

Rather than bashing Israel for promoting its lesbian and gay community (whose progress, considering the clout of religious political parties ever since the state’s founding, is all the more remarkable), Ms. Schulman ought to take off her blinders and laud such change.

There’s no pinkwashing here. Many of us can see Israel as it is, warts and all, and be happy that, with respect to lesbian and gay rights, Israel is still trying to live up to its original vision.

LEE WALZER
Arlington, Va., Nov. 23, 2011

The writer is the author of “Between Sodom and Eden: A Gay Journey Through Today’s Changing Israel.”

[King_David]

2. another

To the Editor:

Sarah Schulman, in support of her accusation that Israel engages in a “deliberate strategy to conceal the continuing violations of Palestinians’ human rights behind an image of modernity signified by Israeli gay life,” cites no evidence other than Israel’s public attempts to highlight its stellar record on gay rights in comparison with its Arab neighbors.

Moreover, Ms. Schulman does not — because she cannot — refute the fact that Israel is indeed far ahead of its Arab neighbors on gay rights.

Instead of feebly trying to distract from and denigrate Israel’s irrefutable human rights achievements, Ms. Schulman should give Israel the credit it deserves for protecting the rights of sexual minorities. Separately, we can discuss the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, about which reasonable people can disagree.

JAKOB SEBROW
New York, Nov. 23, 2011

[King_David]

3. ...yet another

To the Editor:

Sarah Schulman, by her inability to distinguish between lesser and greater evils, does a disservice to the cause of gay rights, which she champions.

Two examples: In a widely publicized 2008 case, Israel granted residency to a gay West Bank man to live with his Tel Aviv partner, citing risk to the Jenin man’s life if he were to remain in the Palestinian territories as a homosexual.

Unsurprisingly, a Palestinian gay rights group noted in the article, Aswat, is forced to operate out of Haifa out of fear of intimidation by the Palestinian authorities.

Ms. Schulman shouldn’t allow perceived failings relating to Palestinian rights to overshadow Israel’s profoundly progressive gay policies.

CHAIM KUTNICKI
Boston, Nov. 23, 2011

[shaayecanaan]

20. Israeli law requires any baby born to an Israeli woman to be expelled from the country...

once it turns twelve years old - if, and only if, the father of the said baby happens to be a Palestinian, Lebanese or Syrian. The above instance is a perfect example of pinkwashing. It is a single, isolated instance of magnaminity towards Arabs meant to distract from the blatant racism perpetrated against them on a routine basis.

[shira]

21. Think about that. What if the father of the baby is Egyptian or Jordanian? Then what?

If Israeli law is racist, what's the difference between the father of a baby who is Egyptian or Jordanian vs. Syrian, Lebanese, or Palestinian?

[shaayecanaan]

45. Are you defending this policy? (nt)

[shira]

46. I'm saying it's not racist since Israel has no problem with Egyptian or Jordanian fathers....

...or any Arab father within Israel. Obviously the law is based on fathers from countries currently at war with Israel.

So once again you're wrong in your attempts to portray Israeli policy as evil and racist.

Try again.

[shaayecanaan]

49. So presumably, a law that discriminated against Israelis...

would not be anti-semitic, as it would not apply to non-Israeli Jews. It looks like BDS is in the clear, then?

I wasn't aware that Israel was at war with 12-year old children (or Lebanon, for that matter). Presumably you would have no problem with expelling Afghan children from the US, seeing as the US is currently at war there?

[shira]

50. Criticize the law.... but calling it racist is demonization/delegitimization. NT

The very fact the law does not apply to Arab fathers from E.Jerusalem, Jordan, and Egypt shows it's not racist.

You're proving that hate blinds.

Imagine Team Israel here demonizing Hamas or the PLO based on weak, stupid claims.

[shaayecanaan]

51. Its clearly a racist law, and you are an apologist for it

and even if the law did apply to children sired by Egyptian or Jordanian sperm, you would simply say that it didn't apply to children born to an Omani or Bahraini father. And so on. That's what apologists for racism do.

[shira]

52. Irrational hate of Israel blinds...

"and even if the law did apply to children sired by Egyptian or Jordanian sperm..."

But it doesn't. And it's funny that someone who can't tell the difference between Muslims and Islamists is calling others racist.

BTW, is this your best "proof" Israel is racist?

Seems you're upset Australia has been proven to be worse than Israel. Presumably you're all for BDS against Australia, right?

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[shira]

54. Lame. Just more baseless ad-hominem attacks of racism...

Remember, the UN just called Australian policy apartheid. In that article a few posts up, you'll find Aborigines have an average life span 17 years shorter than other Australians. That's pretty damned bad don't you think? Such a significant disparity does not exist between Israelis and Palestinians.

To answer you, Israel's not at fault for Palestinian refugees still being exiled. They could live within the W.Bank, Gaza, and Jordan right now - just a few miles from their original homes. Also - Israel, like Australia, gives Arab citizens full citizenship rights. In fact, there was an Arab President in Israel 4 years ago named Majali Wahabi, the Knesset Speaker of Kadima.

You're also wrong about Australia not bulldozing Aborigines communities...
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2006/jun2006/dubb-j07.shtml

That took me about 2 seconds to google.

:)

Have you - unlike my sources - figured out the difference yet between a Muslim and an Islamist?

Or are they all still the same to you?

[shaayecanaan]

55. Perfectly appropriate charges of racism...

After all, I'm not calling for half-Aboriginal children to be expelled from Australia. And if I did, I'd be a racist. You're obviously happy for children to be expelled from Israel for the crime of being half-Palestinian. Fill in the blank.

"You're also wrong about Australia not bulldozing Aborigines communities http://www.wsws.org/articles/2006/jun2006/dubb-j07.shtm...

Actually, you're wrong. Gordon Estate wasn't bulldozed, instead the government closed it down as a housing estate and moved the residents to public housing within the town of Dubbo itself.

The houses in Gordon estate (which were always public housing, and never the property of the residents themselves) were then sold off to people who wanted to live there:-

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/national/property-boom-in-a-ghetto-reborn/2008/08/10/1218306664977.html

It should be noted that the government has also closed down mainly white public housing estates such as Macquarie Fields (that are also listed in your article). The rationale for doing so is that these are remote suburbs that are badly serviced particularly for poorer people who may not have a car or be able to pay for a lengthy commute each day. Instead the government thought it better to have public housing close to city centres where people would be better able to obtain employment and access services.

Obviously, this is a world apart from waking up one morning and finding an Israeli bulldozer about to run over the top of your house. Not that that matters to an apologist such as yourself.

[shira]

56. Where did you find that I support the Israeli law? I only argued it's not racist...

In a post above, I wrote you should feel free to criticize the law - but don't demonize.

Understand the difference?

As to bulldozing, here's a story from July 2011:

Aboriginal heritage, rare habitat bulldozed at Bulahdelah
http://www.greenleft.org.au/node/48090

Note that unlike yourself, I'm not accusing you of being elated about this.

[shaayecanaan]

57. So are you happy or not happy for half-Palestinian children to be expelled from Israel?

Because I must admit, you've done an awfully good job so far of looking like you're happy with it.

And your example, you must admit, is a fairly long bow. Knocking over a tree with a stone axe scar in it is not the same as bulldozing someone's home.

[shira]

59. No, and I'm certain no regulars here are happy about that...

Next time just ask before going all ad hominem with the demonization.

[shaayecanaan]

60. But of course, if any other country started expelling half-Israeli children...

then they would be racist, I presume? You seem to have the same blind spot for Israeli racism that you have for Israeli terrorism.

[shira]

62. The problem is you can't help but demonize Israel at every opportunity...

You still believe the story about Israel killing Palestinians in order to harvest their organs is legit, and in no way over the top.

Israel can do nothing right to you. It's an evil, racist entity and no criticism or demonization of Israeli policy is beyond the pale. Anything goes...

:eyes:

If Hamas/PLO state sponsored terror is brought up, you simply reply with some lame moral equivalency that Israel does the same and is no better in celebrating terrorists and their acts. As if Israel celebrates terrorists like Kahane and Goldstein in the same way the PA/Hamas celebrate and cheer on theirs....

You can't help but demonize Israel.

Also, you don't get to lecture others about racism when you have your own blind spots WRT Palestinian racism against Jews. A recent example being excusing the PA for its tolerance WRT Samaritans.

[King_David]

4. Sarah Schulman's article was a buncha shit. nt

[Warren DeMontague]

5. There are so many things wrong with that "piece", it's hard to know where to start.

Yeah, Israel only advances rights for GLBT citizens to enable oppression. Furthermore, criticizing the fucked up treatment Gays and Lesbians receive in other ME countries is, somehow, antithetical to the pursuit of human rights.


Just another example of someone so enamored with their own ivory tower echo chamber drivel and bullshit that they've lost all capacity to actually reason.

[azurnoir]

7. so exactly what in Ms Schulman's OP is "sh*t"? you have read right? is it this part?

Pinkwashing not only manipulates the hard-won gains of Israel’s gay community, but it also ignores the existence of Palestinian gay-rights organizations. Homosexuality has been decriminalized in the West Bank since the 1950s, when anti-sodomy laws imposed under British colonial influence were removed from the Jordanian penal code, which Palestinians follow. More important is the emerging Palestinian gay movement with three major organizations: Aswat, Al Qaws and Palestinian Queers for Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions. These groups are clear that the oppression of Palestinians crosses the boundary of sexuality; as Haneen Maikay, the director of Al Qaws, has said, “When you go through a checkpoint it does not matter what the sexuality of the soldier is.”

What makes lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people and their allies so susceptible to pinkwashing — and its corollary, the tendency among some white gay people to privilege their racial and religious identity, a phenomenon the theorist Jasbir K. Puar has called “homonationalism” — is the emotional legacy of homophobia. Most gay people have experienced oppression in profound ways — in the family; in distorted representations in popular culture; in systematic legal inequality that has only just begun to relent. Increasing gay rights have caused some people of good will to mistakenly judge how advanced a country is by how it responds to homosexuality.

In Israel, gay soldiers and the relative openness of Tel Aviv are incomplete indicators of human rights — just as in America, the expansion of gay rights in some states does not offset human rights violations like mass incarceration. The long-sought realization of some rights for some gays should not blind us to the struggles against racism in Europe and the United States, or to the Palestinians’ insistence on a land to call home.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/23/opinion/pinkwashing-and-israels-use-of-gays-as-a-messaging-tool.html?_r=1&ref=opinion

[King_David]

8. Nope nt

[azurnoir]

12. so you have not read her article just what is said about it ?

thanks just as I thought

[Warren DeMontague]

9. I wasn't the one who said it was shit, but I'll say it now.

It's shit. The whole thing. The premise that somehow it's unacceptable to laud Israel's very real, very positive record in terms of rights for Gays and Lesbians, because someone is pissed off about the occupation. Shit. Sorry, they're not the same thing. And while one does not excuse everything about the other, it doesn't negate it either.

What is ALSO shit is the tired viewpoint, predominant upon some guilt-laden and overly "politically correct" would-be liberals, that somehow "we" can't criticize Islamic fundamentalists for their fucked up views about women, or gays, yadda yadda. It's the same sort of idiocy I've seen here, when folks fall all over themselves to argue that something like porn or cheesecake-filled pancakes should be outlawed, but a practice like FGM deserves "cultural respect". It's BULLSHIT, pure and simple, and the fact is, Israel's track record on GLBT rights IS a good one, and the track record in the rest of the ME is fairly bad. Those are FACTS, and someone like Ms. Schulman doesn't get to change the facts just because they might cast someone she otherwise doesn't like, in a good light.

Facts are Facts.

[King_David]

10. +1

[azurnoir]

11. but your wrong wrong about liberals not criticizing fundimental Islam

what is bullshit is those who try to use Israel's record on Gay rights for its own citizens to excuse or even justify what Israel does in the OPT along with saying that it justifies the occupation and I have seen that here on DU more than once

what about Palestinian Gay Rights groups do you believe they should be ignored? I've seen that too here on DU

and more over the support that Geert Wilders and other racists have leveraged from they're 'liberal' gay rights stance does that in your mind excuse the other facets of Wilder's and his ilk take?

[King_David]

13. I do not think your versed on this topic

;)

[azurnoir]

14. oh but I have learned so much from our 'discussions' on it

should I post some past threads?

[King_David]

15. Sure this is a very important topic for progressives.

And a very revealing one.


People need to know how Israel is an Island of progressiveness surrounded by backward medieval states and territories vis a vie Gay rights.

[azurnoir]

16. well yes Israel is ahead of it's neighbors in the area of Gay Rights

that is a fact, however that one fact does not exonerate Israel from its human rights abuses vis a vis it's occupation of Palestine

[shira]

17. It's not just gay rights, now is it? But also women, children, and minority rights...

Environmentalism, Reproductive rights, freedom of expression and religion, due process, separation of powers, universal healthcare, food and tuition subsidies...

Israel is ahead of the USA on many of these issues.

Israel had an acting Arab President before Obama was elected. In addition, Israel's recent J-14 demonstrations for social justice united some 300-500,000 Jews and Arabs from a population of under 8 million.

Now tell us, do you believe Israel cynically and falsely acts liberal and progressive in all these respects for cover, or that Israel is advertising these values publicly in order to cover for their "evilness" against Palestinians?

[Warren DeMontague]

18. And has anyone actually said it does?

I'd be surprised if someone actually said that.

[azurnoir]

23. would you really be surprised? really?

I wonder do you feel that the 'lack' of Gay Rights in Palestine that equal those in Israel justify the occupation? because I have that stated quite plainly, here on DU

[shira]

24. Strawman. No DU regulars here in I/P have said that....

You're more than welcome to find evidence of such, however.

[azurnoir]

25. Thank you for asking that

here is one

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=124&topic_id=366616

[shira]

26. That's just an OP from an article and it doesn't say it. Which post in particular? n/t

[azurnoir]

27. all anyone has to do is read the replies

there is no 'one' reply that states that there are multiple replies where it is stated

[shira]

28. You've got nothing. If there was something in that thread, you'd have pointed it out already...

The problem is you're confused.

No one here on a progressive/liberal board should support ANY gov't as vile and regressive as the Palestinian one. That goes for other countries like N.Korea and Syria as well. To be AGAINST those other governments is not to be for occupation in those countries.

Not one pro-Israel person here would support a vile, regressive Israel if its government acted like the leadership in Gaza or the W.Bank. That does NOT mean we're for British occupation of Israel. It simply means we'd oppose such a disgusting state.

[azurnoir]

29. anyone including you can look at the thread

seems you are pushing for something and somehow I do not think its evidence as there is plenty on the thread

[shira]

30. Just edited the last post. See that WRT your confusion. n/t

[azurnoir]

31. There was no confusion shira

it seems your edit is tailored to fit a your needs but my first statement stands there are those on DU using Gay Rights to justify the continued Israeli occupation of Palestine

[shira]

32. You've got nothing. You'd have pointed out something if you had it. As it is...

...all you have are people who are disgusted (and rightly so) with the vile sickos running the Palestinian government, vying for a state that will be revolting and hopelessly rightwing.

If Israel operated in the same manner, there's simply NO WAY you'd support such a horrendous state.

No one would.

So why should anyone support such a Palestine?

[azurnoir]

33. seems you have a double standard as you repost threads making claims as to others opinions

without posting the actual comment with some frequency, why is that?

[shira]

34. LOL. You were wrong, admit it. Now you're deflecting with even more BS. n/t

[azurnoir]

35. shira I am not wrong and you know it

and anyone who reads this forum with any frequency knows that but onece again here is the thread in question

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=124&topic_id=366616

and actually it starts with the very first comment

[shira]

36. That very first comment is not a justification for more occupation. Gaza is unoccupied now but...

....the Hamas government is so disgusting and vile that THEY don't deserve recognition either.

No gov't that repulsive deserves recognition and support from the liberal/progressive community, and you damned well know it.

[azurnoir]

38. why do you keep this up?

the comment was about the West Bank and the PA not Gaza

[shira]

39. Because your argument is a strawman as no one is claiming a lack of gay rights justifies occupation.

Tell you what...

Ask around at DU/IP to see who's in favor of the IDF re-occupying Gaza due to the fact Gaza's record on gay rights is vile. If you find anyone who answers in the affirmative, you'll have your proof. If not, well....

:eyes:

[azurnoir]

40. why do keep yammering on about Gaza? and then yammer on about strawmen

unless of course your going on about your own ?

[shira]

41. Because if you can't find anyone here in favor of the IDF re-occupying Gaza...

...due to Gaza's abysmal record on gay rights, you have no case.

You see, it would logically follow that people who justify the occupation based on gay rights would prefer that the IDF re-occupy Gaza.

Got it?

Probably not, oh well...

[azurnoir]

42. your the one who threw in Gaza the discussion

which in fact related to maintaining the current occupation of the West Bank, thus the 'scarecrow' is your own

[shira]

58. Azurnoir, would you fully support a state of Israel with a record as atrocious and vile...

...as that of the PLO or Hamas on women's and children's rights, gay rights, and the rights of religious minorities?

I'd say there's not one pro-Israel poster here who would fully support such a state.

How about yourself?

[azurnoir]

61. you seem a okay with a state that allows Jews to refuse to rent to nonJews

with a state that maintains a violent military occupation, with a state that allows religious jurisdiction over both marriage and divorce .........

now you can but we're better than them all you want still doesn't change a thing does it?

[shira]

63. Stick to the question asked of you, please. One standard.

Would you fully support an Israel that acts like Hamas and the PLO in every way towards women, children, gays, and religious minorities?

[pelsar]

48. your interpreting, instead of reading....

the posts i suspect your referring to are stating that the PA is presently and it appears to be in the future to be nothing more than a dictatorship and therefor having no rights to be an independent state.

thats called using a single standard (note a single standard to judge by)...meaning no society that does not have basic civil rights as its base has no right to be an independent country.

that principle is to applied to every society where eve they are.

it doesn't excuse the occupation, its a statement of principle that many liberals believe in: promoting/aiding the creation of an additional facist state in the world is against our principles. It has nothing to do with the occupation.

[shaayecanaan]

19. Its worth noting that Israel does not, in fact, allow gay marriage...

nor does it allow gay civil unions or indeed even civil unions of a heterosexual kind. However, due an old concord that was made with the country's religious conservatives sixty years ago, the Israeli government must recognise a marriage officiated elsewhere.

That means that any Israeli, gay or straight, who wants to be married in a civil union must first go abroad (usually Cyprus for straights, somewhere like Canada for gays) and then apply to have their marriage recognised once they return.

[shira]

22. True, but Israel's still progressive WRT gay rights unlike Australia. Why do you think that is?

You know, there other issues in which Israel is more progressive/liberal than Australia.

Does that bother you?

[shaayecanaan]

44. No, because its not true (nt)

[shira]

47. Not true? Australia is also involved in wars with Iraq and Afghanistan...

...which have taken exponentially more lives than all Israel's wars combined. I wasn't aware Iraq and Afghanistan posed any security threats to even one Australian citizen.

Australia also doesn't have such a good record WRT racism against Aborigines, a people whose leadership - unlike the Palestinians - hasn't sworn or acted upon the colonists' destruction or ethnic cleansing. No blown up buses full of children, rockets on Sydney, kids shows starring bunny bombers. You'd think the white colonists there could find a way to share 3 million square miles of land in a nation 300X as large as Israel with only 3X the population.

(May 2011) 'Racist' Australia compared to Apartheid South Africa by UN Human Rights commissioner
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1390748/Racist-Australia-compared-Apartheid-South-Africa-UN-Human-Rights-commissioner.html#ixzz1f2rBzVyQ

Australia's immigrant policies also suck in comparison to Israel's.

[oberliner]

37. It is worth nothing that this is, in fact, not true

Israel does allow civil unions, both gay and heterosexual.

It is not true, as you wrote above, that "any Israeli, gay or straight, who wants to be married in a civil union must first go abroad."

Knesset approves 'thin' civil marriage bill

A minimized version of the civil marriage bill passed its second and third Knesset readings on Monday, with a majority of 56 Knesset members voting in favor of regulating the nuptials of "non-denomination" Israelis.

Four MKs voted against the bill. United Torah Judaism and Shas Knesset members were absent from the vote.

The new law allows non-Jewish Israelis, or citizens defined by the State as lacking religious denomination, to marry via the soon-to-be-formed marriage registrar bureau.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3863253,00.html

[shaayecanaan]

43. Your post is completely and utterly false

The limited civil option you referred to is intended to be available only to couples where both spouses lack any religious affiliation, that is, where neither spouse is considered Jewish, Arab, Druze or Circassian. Your own citation reveals that it is only meant to be available to 60,000 people in the whole of Israel.

The latest on that law reveals that very few people have been able to successfully access civil unions in Israel.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4130496,00.html

Additionally, the The Spousal Covenant Act for Persons Having No Religious Affiliation (which is the law to which you refer) is explicitly limited to couples where one is a man and the other a woman:-

www.justice.gov.il/NR/rdonlyres/8EC3AA4C-CB5B-4916-A7AB-0E50BAA5E487/23579/ChokZugiyutEn.doc

[King_David]

6. Israel's Gay Rights Record

Nov 23 2011, 12:30 PM ET

Israelis are justifiably proud of their country's record on gay rights, especially when that record is compared to that of its neighbors. This Israeli pride is too much for anti-Israel activists to bear, including one who on the Times op-ed page today accuses Israel of "pinkwashing" its real human rights record.

My in-box is filled with outraged responses from gays and lesbians (most, though not all, Jewish). Here is one response from a person who has been active in the gay rights movement who is an acquaintance of mine:

It's astonishing that someone would reduce the very visible presence of gay men and women in Israel, and their enfranchisement as members of the community in good standing as a mere public relations ploy. And not least because Jews have played an instrumental role in the struggle to secure those rights, in the U.S. and in Israel. It is part of Jewish culture's DNA to champion the cause of minorities, not a stratagem cooked up by some PR firm, as Israel's inveterate adversaries on the Left would have people believe. History shows as much, and certainly with respect to homosexuality.

Moreover, for someone putatively on the Left, the writer is doing harm to her own professed interests. Is she suggesting that a country shouldn't be proud of its record of championing a progressive cause, or cite it as evidence of the enlightened nature of its politics? And is she really unwilling to affirm those achievements? Does she begrudge Israel any praise for establishing a haven for those rights in a region not widely recognized for its hospitality to minorities?

She describes gay rights in Israel as an incomplete picture of civil rights in the country, which is fair enough, though as usual, it doesn't acknowledge the arduous efforts of Netanyahu's recent predecessors to grant the Palestinians almost all of what they purport to want. But its not in the nature of politics to be perfect, especially with regard to minority rights. It is always a struggle to build something inherently fragile in the face of a constant war of attrition against an often unyielding majority. If the Left is not willing acknowledge the tangible differences between Israel's treatment of its gay citizens and the persecution gay and lesbians face in many of the neighboring countries, and to throw its support to Israel, then it is risking seeing those hard-won gains evaporate.

She should be careful what she wishes for.


http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2011/11/israels-gay-rights-record/249027/

[vminfla]

64. No True Scotsman logical fallacy

Because Israel is not perfect, it does not meet her approval. No one, no nation, no individual can meet that standard and it is a silly, disingenuous logical fallacy.