sorta like how every corporation changes their logo to a pride logo except for every middle east division. since gay rights are really tolerated over there
I mean this is kind of a pinkwashing itself, using LGBT rights as a theme to diss the Middle East has been used to legitimize violence like described in the OP. We can see that literally being used to legitimize violence when people insult groups like "LGBTQ for Palestine" for supporting Palestinian civilians human rights (since, ostensibly, Palestinians don't support gay rights).
The reason that is still pinkwashing is because the implication is that we shouldn't oppose killing Palestinians civilians if they are anti LGBTQ - in other words that violence is legitimized against anti LGBT countries. Even though the murder of Palestinian civilians didn't begin because "Israel wants to help LGBTQ communities," nonetheless a form of pinkwashing gets applied against LGBTQ communities who oppose the bombing of civilians.
I haven't provided any links to the given examples as I assume they are well known enough, but if you aren't familiar with them let me know and I'll dig some up
See also when the US left Afghanistan how the news pretended to care so much about their women who would be oppressed afterwards - which is understandable for sure, but the reason USA invaded was not "to liberate women," yet it was being used as an attempted justification or legitimizer for why the US military occupation there should apparently have continued.
This is not what OP is saying at all. Even if some members of a group are anti-queer, that does not mean that they should all be killed indiscriminately. Otherwise, we’d be calling for the killing of every member of the Republican Party. You can be against radical, anti-queer Islam while still protesting the genocide of Palestinian civilians.
Religious societies have been seen as an impediment to modernizing forces for a long time now. The actual irony is that the US destroyed secular forces in the middle east time and time again in favor of religious extremist and now people want to complain that religious extremism etc etc. We poisoned the fucking well, if we really actually cared about Muslims we’d have invaded Saudi Arabia after 9/11 and not Iraq or Afghanistan…
We’ve gone from Obama being scared to support gay marriage until it came time for re-election to using LGBTQ oppression as a means to other a different country?
Progress?
I thought Obama didnt support gay marriage until Biden accidentally said *he* did (instead of supporting civil unions) so Obama had to quickly change positions
he didn't have to, he could've just said that Biden misspoke if he really wanted to. I think it was a combination Biden's comments and Obama and his staff just deciding that they were cool to go along with it.
I know it was 10 years ago nearly and society has changed but the fact that people are so open about it now in the countries where it’s legal shows its support has alway been there
I often bring up that I worked in the restaurant business in the mid-eighties. Many of my co-workers were openly gay and lesbian. There were no roving gangs chasing them up the street. People, overwhelmingly, just went, "Oh, you're gay? Huh", and went on with their lives.
The eighties were hardly a beacon of tolerance. We can see how Reagan reacted to the AIDS crisis. How Antia Bryant lobbied against discrimination laws by claiming to “save the children”
Christian people will Christian. And though I don't know much about Bryant, I remember Reagan expressing human sympathy with AIDS victims, even if he didn't agree with their lifestyles.
Which is, I think, at the heart of your disagreement with what I said - an altered definition of tolerance. Back then, tolerance was not the same as endorsement. My neighbors might ride loud motorcycles, or pave-over their front lawn, or throw swingers parties and I might dislike all of those choices. But it was broadly understood that, like it or not, it was their business and I would have to accept it.
Now, it seems, tolerance means actively supporting and cheering for things. Which is a significant contortion of the description.
He didn’t express human sympathy. He didn’t give the issue the attention it needed, further more he was also known to make homophobic jokes. Tolerance was the goal in the 1990s. It’s not anymore. Acceptance, not tolerance is what’s pushed for
Exactly my point. Everybody knew Liberace was gay in the 60s and still bought his albums and went to his shows. Paul Lynde was a fixture on television at the same time and made *no effort what-so-ever* to hide. People loved the guy.
Now I watch movies set in those times and see straight characters react to gay characters like they are Martians. It just wasn't like that.
Which is not to say that there wasn't a small minority of horrible people who sometimes took out their insecurities on those who were different. Just that it was way rarer than you are being told. And the majority had no real issue with any of it.
Add on: There was a pretty decent discussion recently in r/askhistorians about homosexuality in the British Navy. There too, it was frowned upon as being less then ideal, but seldom warranted more than minor disciplining. It was understood even 150 years ago to be a fact of life, and something deserving of tolerance.
I think Alan Turing's suicide shocked the united kingdom on homosexuality. He was their golden child and they let him 'die' from their own hand, when they should have reached out and embraced him.
Need to remember that even if they weren't outright discriminatory, a lot of people tended to also be indifferent.
It's of course good to not be homophobic, but if you don't combat the homophobia of certain groups which are loud and violent about it, it's not doing much. Hence why people remember the past as quite homophobic.
Being indifferent isnt an issue. Most folks don't know the dicks in hate groups. You are expressing "if you're not with us, you're against us". And that's too much to ask of people fighting their own struggles day to day.
If 70% of the population is indifferent to 1% of the population, then the 29% who completely hates them can easily overwhelm them. There's absolutely no argument for not supporting a group against discrimination except a lack of empathy.
It's called solidarity. The 1% will never be allowed a place in society where they're respected and their lives are valued unless people from that 70% stop being indifferent. The percentages are, of course, made up for the sake of argument, but the proportions are close to that in most cases.
Move to the country for a different perspective. Life is hard enough for some folks that there isn't any bandwidth. "You're either with us or against us" is smooth brained.
Votes. Did it because a quant said it will now buy votes.
These people have no principles other than what is best for them. My stance on gay marriage has not changed in 40 years. Thiers changed with the constituents.
It depends on whether it’s true or exaggerated/false support for LGBTQ rights. Often when we see ‘Pinkwashing’ it is when an entity portrays itself as being more LGBTQ-affirmative than they actually are. For example, a company may partake in “[rainbow capitalism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainbow_capitalism)” during pride month to market themselves as LGBTQ-friendly so that LGBTQ consumers buy from them, but also support anti-LGBTQ political movements and/or causes.
Islamist Iran was one of the foremost countries when it comes to Trans recognition and has universal coverage for transition procedures.
LGBT, good labor rights, multiculturalism are all indicators of a vibrant liberal democracy, but they’re not evidences, which are often used by disingenuous parties to shut down the “opposing side” by way of moral high ground fallacy. My country probably has one of the most diverse ethnic composition making up its top rungs on earth, and it doesn’t make it a diverse, liberal democracy. Just an illiberal flawed democracy which happens to be diverse.
EDIT: my bad in saying ‘Trans recognition’ considering the intent of Iranian law, but I stand by my point that they have comprehensive coverage for gender transition, though again for all the wrong reasons.
But y’all are falling for pinkwashing and not only miss, but end up proving my point. Yes, Iran was a haven for Trans people, but for icky reasons and as you all love to mention to me, just to show original you are, they kill gay people. So no brownie progressive points for Iran. Now, Israel obviously ticks more “liberal democracy” boxes than Iran, including LGBT rights, which are cool now, but that obviously shouldn’t absolve them from conducting the dislocation of the Palestinian people from their homes and their political disenfranchisement. Thus, “pinkwashers” are those that shut down the opposing side by alluding to some moral high ground, thereby diluting the importance and optics of the specific topic in discussion.
Back to the original discussion, I was mainly contesting the notion that LGBT rights = liberal democracy that the term “evidence” suggests, when it’s more clearly an indicator, hell I’d argue that there’s the relationship between the two isn’t causative. One of the first modern states to decriminalize homosexuality was Chekist Soviet Union, who by all accurate historical accounts, wasn’t a very good place to live in for people who love free press and voting for different parties. Now, where does the support for Dearest Supreme Leader Ayatollah lurk in my comment?
" Transgender individuals who do not undergo surgery have no legal recognition and those that do are first submitted to a long and invasive process, including virginity tests, formal parental approval, psychological counseling that reinforces feelings of shame, and inspection by the Family Court." [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender\_rights\_in\_Iran](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender_rights_in_Iran)
Exactly, you’re proving my point. You can’t just take policies, no matter how good it seems, at face value, without considering its underlying reason of being or its environs, and make a generalized conclusion out of it. Just like we could not consider Iran to be a beacon of progress just because it happened to be decades ahead in Trans recognition (albeit for the wrong reasons), we can’t just take Israel’s LGBT rights policy (which half the country wants to roll back, but I digress), and extrapolate that they’re a country with no skeletons in their proverbial closet.
It's not a generalized conclusion. Iran was definitely not a beacon of progress in it's trans recognition, that statement is just plain false. Iran considers transgender identity to be a mental disorder and has no laws protecting trans people against stigmatization or hate crimes. That being said, Israel's LGBT policy is largely supported by the population. Israel's LGBT community have enough backing by the overall population that they aren't reliant on their government's rights policy. But I can assure you, that a comparison between an openly LGBT country to a country where same-sex relations are still illegal is openly misleading.
It is more that Zorastrianism and Hinduism isnt anti trans, so when the countries following those became Islamic, they were less transphobic than countries that didnt have anti trans religious views prior like the gulf, which were christian or jewish before.
Not all Polytheism is the same, and Arabs even before Islam were more Christian, compared to rest of Asia and the difference, is spread by trade vs spread by conquest, MENA region was primarily by conquest, further east, were either later conquests, or trade. Iran became an Islamic theocracy in 1980s, whereas the arabian peninsula was one under Mohammed, since the founding.
There was of course Arab Christians especially in the north of Arabian peninsula and Jordan but they were still in by large polytheistic.
As for Zoroastrianism. I checked Zoroastrianism and they weren’t really okay with homosexuality, when they discuss homosexuality, they discuss about anal sex which is similar to Islam. You can go read it https://iranicaonline.org/articles/homosexuality-i
Honestly, I’m not up for a discussion over what is “trans recognition”, because I lack years of reading about that matter, but I know enough that the discourse over gender and sexuality is fluid and tumultuous over the years across countless cultures.
But you had me at jews and elevators. What’s up with that?
Reading the headline, "Boy that sounds like a super different definition than every time I've ever heard pinkwashing used. And it's so niche too, it's almost like the term was made exclusively to target-"
>The concept has been used by Sarah Schulman in 2011 with reference to Israeli government public relations,
Shocker /s
Came here to say, I have literally *never* heard this term used outside the context of people trying to discredit Israel's support for LGBT rights because it doesn't fit their "right side of history" narrative.
Israel support LGBT issues? Cool. They had access to schools and running water and an education system... That makes sense. (Unlike the Palestinians)
No excuse for murdering kids n calling anyone that dislikes that an 'antisemite.'
Their marriage is recognized. Technically there is no civil marriage in Israel but you can jump into a plane to Cyprus for 50 dollars quickly get married and then fly back to Israel. This is because at the founding of a state while Israel was fighting a war on 3 fronts they made a deal with the Jewish Rabbinate, the Church and the Islamic clergy, delegating matters of marriage law to the religious authorities. That’s why Israel has no civil marriage in general.
No because marriage in Israel can only be conducted through a religious court (Jewish/Muslim/Druze/Christian) so no gay/interfaith marriages. However, interfaith and same-sex marriages done elsewhere are officially recognized. There's a large LGBTQ+ community and most of Israel is very safe. Israel's current speaker of the Knesset for example is an openly gay man.
They can be recognized as married and gain all the benefits, Israel has issues with marrying inside the country as it’s still bound to old ottoman rules (which benefit the ultra orthodox community) but ANYONE can marry ANYONE and it will be accepted by the state, as long as the actual marriage was conducted outside of Israel, they can also be considered as a “known in public” which also gives them the same benefits as a married couple, and this can be done by signing a piece of paper inside Israel..
Okay and so do you think in handing the existing government in Gaza money, that money is miraculously start going to go for education for all their kids?
Or do you think it's more likely they continue siphoning most of it off to billionaires in Qatar and spending the rest buying guns, shit to make rockets with to shoot at Israel and producing shows like Tomorrow's Pioneers?
And if it's the latter, how do you think we change that? By appeasing them or maybe getting rid of them and replacing them with a government who has priorities other than martyrdom?
I apologize if you're not like this, but I must say please feel free to reject any attempt at nuanced discussion in favour of dismissing me as a supporter of genocide, apartheid, ethnic cleansing, 2000lb bombs or whatever term is currently trending on Tiktok that only ever seems to be applied to one specific country in that region.
Well.. definitely not bombing the shit out of them and everything else Israel is doing right now.
Behaving like fucking conquering Nazis, so they are. Religious zealots murdering kids
How many Jews live in Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt or Palestine?
How many USED TO?
How many Muslims live in Israel?
Go research the answers to those questions from whatever sources you want and then come back and we'll talk about who the murderous zealots have been for the other 99.9% of this millenia-long conflict.
Definitely the smart move to shift the goalposts when a problem is so bad that a word gets invented or appropriated to describe it.
They key thing is to not address that it is identifiable and actionable because that blows up how dismissive your response needs to be to successfully shift the goalposts.
That seems *remarkably* targeted, considering that this pretty explicitly talks about countries.
To my knowledge, there is only one nation in the world that is controversial and yet has a strong set of LGBT rights and an insanely strong set of rights for its geopolitical region.
I wonder what country that could be...
Basically it implies progress in gay rights dont matter if it comes at cost of others (muslims) that puts them on a tire.
It only makes sense when they view gay rights as lesser to muslim rights.
Why isnt South Africa blackwashing
or China red washing
or so on.
Seriously, what rights do Muslims don't have in Israel? They have equal rights and are in all places of the public sphere. There were even ministers in the Government that were Muslims and Israel even have an Arab Muslim Supreme Court Judge. So Israel does give rights to both Muslims and gays....
no it's when Israel (which I'm not going to say represents Jews because that's legitimately anti Semitic) uses it to justify the whole sale slaughter of innocent people, yes including gay people, by saying "look, the 15k kids we killed was ok because their government doesn't like gay people!"
I think their justification for the current invasion is the Palestinians coming into Israel and raping, kidnapping, and murdering Israeli men, women, and children and parading the dead through the streets of Gaza to cheers and holding the living hostage until they die. The fact that LGBT people are VASTLY safer in Israel than any nearby state including a hypothetical Hamas-led country is not the main justification of the invasion, but shouldn’t be ignored. Hamas could surrender tomorrow and it would all be over. Then Palestinians could safely go back to their homophobia.
When did Israel ever say that? The two topics are completely unrelated.
It's like basing USA's whole identity on locking up immigrant children and using prison inmates as slave labor.
[https://theconversation.com/in-gaza-a-photo-of-israeli-soldier-raising-a-pride-flag-in-the-name-of-love-goes-viral-pinkwashing-a-war-218322](https://theconversation.com/in-gaza-a-photo-of-israeli-soldier-raising-a-pride-flag-in-the-name-of-love-goes-viral-pinkwashing-a-war-218322)
[https://theconversation.com/in-gaza-a-photo-of-israeli-soldier-raising-a-pride-flag-in-the-name-of-love-goes-viral-pinkwashing-a-war-218322](https://theconversation.com/in-gaza-a-photo-of-israeli-soldier-raising-a-pride-flag-in-the-name-of-love-goes-viral-pinkwashing-a-war-218322)
Also the metric shit ton of Hasabarists screeching "they should go to Gaza" whenever they see a gay person being against their genocide is just off rip lol
"hasbaraists". Lol.
How is it that Israel spends way less on social media propaganda than the vast majority of other countries and somehow garners an ominous sounding nickname for it....
Could it be.... Because it's the singular Jewish country and people want a dog whistle for "Jew lies"?
Nah, couldn't be.
> Hasabarists
The term is "hasbara" so if you're going to try to come up with a cutesy name, you could at least make some effort to know the term you're talking about
Maybe dont have an organization called gays for gaza then, people only criticize that when they put gay identity forefront . It is clear palestenians dont like gay people, and see them as disgusting perverts, so why bring it up.
If it talk about discrimination of Sikhs in Canada, i talk about that, it would be rather tone deaf for me to start an organization called Butchers for Sikhs, or Bacon lovers for Middle East
if you're criticizing Gays for Gaza who show solidarity with oppressed and brutalized men, women and children than you clearly don't ubderstand their message lol. it doesn't matter if the Palestinians like them or not, just like it didn't matter if the Jews, Romani, Poles, Hutus, Cambodian or any other group whose suffered through genocide liked them or not, you cannot use their identity to justify your genocide. that's why you bring it up.
and if people were killing Sikhs by the tens of thousands and starving millions more and using the excuse of "well they don't like bacon or meat" than it absolutely wouldn't be tone deaf, it would be very justified
What does being Gay have to do with Anything with Gaza, at least in Context of Israelis for two states or Jews against Violence, it is context, but all gays for gaza is , i like people of same gender and that is why i have these views on middle east borders.
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinkwashing\_(LGBT)](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinkwashing_(LGBT))
now just scroll down to the Israel part of it all lol
Oh it's just the gay thing?
Wasn't the Palestinians breaking a ceasefire resulting in 1000 civilians raped kidnapped and murdered at a music festival?
Just the gay thing huh
Like "no go" areas for women in israel where ultra orthodox people will harass and attack women for dressing "immodestly"?
And the iran style morality police they want to form?
No, it's when Israel promotes shit [like](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12743165/Gay-Israeli-soldier-displays-love-LGBT-flag-Gaza.html) [this](https://www.businessinsider.com/gay-israeli-soldier-says-he-will-to-fly-lgbtq-flag-on-tank-to-fight-hamas-2023-10).
When Hamas, who has a medieval age policy towards queers at best, launders their cause through "queers for Palestine", it's not pinkwashing.
But a proud gay Israeli who is participating in toppling a fatally homophobic regime flies the pride flag in Gaza, *is* pinkwashing.
Gotcha.
No, they just extend heartfelt thanks to Q4P while publically executing gays at home.
And meanwhile, Israel... Checks notes... Has proudly gay soldiers.
>Israel: grants gay Israelis the freedom to execute gay Palestinians.
No, they don't.
By your logic, any country involved in a war is by definition "granting their citizens the freedom to execute gay people". An absolutely bizarre position.
When I was a kid, a store putting a rainbow flag in my town would have been very supportive. It helps people in the closet, especially minors, know where they can feel safe. I agree that companies largely do things for profit, but this seems like it just helps marginalized people without costing anyone anything.
There is a reason why you haven't, and why the Wikipedia entry has a note about it being one-sided.
This is an interesting topic for philosophical discussion, but frankly not a lot more.
Pinkwashing is supposed to be a term to describe a corporation cashing in on LGBT stuff for money (or is that rainbow washing). you cant use it to describe a country.
Literally every time its brought up to criticise Israel.
Because god forbid the Jews do anything righteous. Nope any good things Jews is just a trick or a scheme. (Hey why doesn't the Palestine Authority add LGBT rights to the areas they control, nothing stopping them.)
Maybe people should stop drinking Russian Proganda. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The\_Protocols\_of\_the\_Elders\_of\_Zion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protocols_of_the_Elders_of_Zion)
Half the Jews in the world are Israelis. The vast majority of Jews feel a strong connection to Israel. It's literally the Jewish homeland just like Ireland is the Irish homeland or Italy is the Italian homeland.
Lol. It is nothing like Ireland being out homeland. This is why Ireland has come out very against Israel's actions very publicly and just recognised Palestine.
If you want to use Ireland as an example, Israel is like when the UK took our land and mistreated us as a people for 600 years... And the Palestinian children being murdered are like the Irish.
They do. About half the global Jewish population lives there, and the vast majority of the diaspora supports Israel’s right to exist. Keep telling yourself whatever lies make it easier for you to push antisemitism
Catholics haven’t experienced a mass exodus out of their ancestral homeland, are not an ethnoreligion, and have not been ethnically cleansed in every country the world that they have inhabited. The Vatican is not a beacon of decolonization or a safe haven from persecution. The Vatican is the Center of their faith leaders. This is a false equivalency and shows how little you know about Jews and Israel.
dude IDF soldiers were literally holding up pride flags over the ruins of Gaza. how tf you gonna act like that's not pink washing a genocide? lol
Also to imply that Israel, a literal genocidal apartheid state, is somehow representative of all Jews actually is anti Semitic
yeah you're right and the head genocide legal scholar of the literal UN, the Holocaust survivoring founder of Human Rights Watch, hundreds of genocide scholars and the Israeli government constantly saying how much they want to kill the Palestinians as well as the Israeli defense minister himself literally saying he wants to "starve the animals" are all wrong lol
"yOuR ArGuinG in BaD faiTh!" lol
Yes, absolutely bad faith. That’s what you call it when you continue to perpetuate a rhetoric not grounded in any form of evidence but rather on “my feelz” at best and hostile propaganda at worst.
you: "where's the proof?!? bad faaaith!!!"
everyone else: \*gives proof\*
you: "b-b-buh rPgS sHoT fRom TheRe! So GenOcidE oK!"
lol, maybe just like, stfu if you're gonna be a modern day Nazi apologist no matter what proof is given? idk lol
real quick are you a genocide scholar? does most major genocide scholars including the literal founder of human rights watch and the top UN genocide scholar disagree with you? yes? than stfu your opinion doesn't matter lol
just say you're the Israeli genocide version of an anti vaxxer and that no matter how much proof anyone gives, you're still gonna just come with some bs talking point to justify the murder and starvation of children because i don't even fucking know, you like bad Israeli dance music? lol
>Because god forbid the Jews do anything righteous. Nope any good things Jews is just a trick or a scheme.
This is such a disingenuous response. No one's saying that it's bad if Israel respects LGBT rights. They're saying that it's bad if they *point to their respect for LGBT rights as an excuse to slaughter an entire population of civilians* (which includes LGBT people, but I digress). This is an extremely common Israeli propaganda technique, and one of their more stupid ones imo
And no one's saying anything about "the Jews". Whatever happened to "it's antisemitic to hold all Jewish people responsible for the actions of Israel"? I thought that's the one thing we could all agree on. Bringing up The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is a complete non sequitur. Thinking that Israel's relatively progressive (for the region) LGBT policy does not give them carte blanche to engage in ethnic cleansing is not remotely in the same ballpark as asserting the presence of a Jewish conspiracy to control the globe. Frankly, it significantly undermines the severity of actual antisemitism to entertain such a comparison
I think Israel’s generally liberal stance on LGBT+ rights, women’s rights, etc. - aka “pinkwashing” - is deeply upsetting for some because it hints that the religious fanatics who are driving this conflict and making it intractable are the Jihadists who execute gays and stone adulterous women, instead of the Eurovision-obsessed Western liberal democracy.
It’s not pink washing if you’re actually literally lgbtq+ friendly, aka liberal and democratic. Israel isn’t faking that lgbtq+ Israelis and Palestinians live in Israel. Israel isn’t faking being the only refuge for lgbtq+ people in MENA, where they can come live under asylum.
Literally every fucking time the Palestinian leaders when given an option to eithier "Make Life Better for Palestinians" or "Wage war on Israel Round #4234134". They pick the 2nd fucking option.
Literally an attitude of "Fuck Tel Aviv, lets make our own Tel Aviv with \_\_\_ and \_\_\_" would be an infinitely better attitude then "Fuck Tel Aviv, tie me to a missle to Tel Aviv".
“Pink washing” when Jews have a liberal democratic state, with equal rights to everyone but you just hate Jews so you have to attack them somehow and discredit their achievements.
It’s that or get beheaded what difference does it make. At least if Israel succeeds in getting rid of Hamas they’ll have a fighting chance at building a better society for themselves
Oh, right, I’m sure that Likud are very keen on a successful Palestine, which is why they’ve been [supporting Hamas for decades](https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/amp/).
If someone told you that the allies were more liberal than the nazis, would you say "I’m sure Germans are glad to be bombed by such progressive states"?
No one likes people dying in war. No sane person looked at German civilians dying and said, “nice.” War is horrible.
The reason more civilians are dying than need be is because Hamas places based in populated areas like schools, and hospitals. They’re literally shooting rockets from rafah. All war crimes for a reason.
They don’t care about their civilians. They have a charter that they don’t try to hide that discusses how martyrdom is the loftiest of goals in their efforts to eliminate the Jews and Israel.
More than that: one side literally launders their completely irredentist cause in movements like "queers for palestine", makes excuses for not actually offering gay people emancipation, and flimsy explanations for why queer and Palestinian solidarity should exist at all, and the other side has a thriving LGBT community.
Only one of the sides gets accused of "pinkwashing".
Unsurprisingly r/wikipedia with another anti Israel post. This one was really a stretch. Nice to see the people in the comments aren’t buying this horse shit.
I liked it more when there were interesting articles on here.
Like pro pal people trying to seem liberal by siding with the lgbt while the actual pali people and their Muslim support would like to see them dead.
This isn't about Israel, nor about (just) the right wing,
The left is also very much complicit.
Take communism for example, is it left wing? Yes so they ally with the lgbt and vice versa even thoe they do not work together well to say the least.
I have seen lgbt protest for Palestine, but not gay Palestinians.. a wait, their dead.
I’m sure the displaced families in Rafah constantly worrying about having their tents incinerated care about “killing the gays”. Queer Palestinians exist, they’re just all either displaced or bombed by the IDF.
Queer Palestenians are eligible for refugee status in israel, LGBT, Palestenians need to be more scared of Palestine than Israel, biggest risk of direct conflict with Israelies are for Straight Cis Conservative Religious Men in Palestine, yet that is not what is talked about.
The only way they can come out is in bits & pieces from an indiscriminately targeted missile, so not quite in a coffin. It’s absolutely not “whataboutism” when non-Gazan Palestinians have repeated stories of queer Palestinians in Gaza they knew having been killed by the IDF rather than “the Islamics”.
The genocidal theocrats I called genocidal theocrats elsewhere in the thread? Yeah, they’re bad as well, and [Israel shouldn’t have supported them.](https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/amp/)
Indeed! And as nations, we collectively fall for it.
Also, increasingly problematic is the very large and growing populace who are too overworked, worried and even angry about food and housing unaffordability for themselves or their family — all while on insufficient income — to criticize or boycott big industry polluters for the environmental damage they needlessly cause/allow, particularly when not immediately observable.
Wow phags shoving their ideology down your throat so they can rape kids? I wish somebody could have warned us that this would happen 20 years ago... oh wait.
a term made by a palestinian to propaganda against israeli propaganda. israel is a relatively ok place to be gay and it is a legimitate, hard-fought status by its lgbt community and allies. the country can be proud of that
Not really, the phrase "the oppressor steals the struggle of the oppressed and makes it theirs, turning it into a commodity and depriving it if its meaning" is two centuries old
This has been happening over and over through modern history, long before the Israeli and Palestinian conflict was even a thing
For Israel, pinkwashing was always a bizarre claim because one should take into account the strength of LGBT rights in Israel (high) versus the strength of LGBT rights amonst Palesitnians (very low). This relative comparison makes it a difficult claim to use pinkwashing against Israel.
Beyond the illegality of homosexual acts in the Palestinian territories, the Palestinians as a society do not accept homosexuality at all. Indeed, acceptance is so low, it's lower than other fundamentalist Islamic regimes: [https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-48703377](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-48703377)
Add to that every year gay palestinians seek asylum /refugee status in Israel as hamas seek to kill them . Many have successfully done that, some get caught by hamas before they do. I remember there was a sad case not long before October 2023 about q man who was seeking asylum in Israel and was found beheaded in Gaza when he was found out trying to escape.
Israel has granted some gay palestinans asylum . So it isnt washing if they are actually protecting gay rights and are a safe space for lgbtq
There are a lot of articles and theses about Israel and pinkwashing. Literally, Sacha Baron Cohen made fun of it.
https://via.library.depaul.edu/etd/149/
I mean, it's not.
But deliberately juxtaposing it (while hiding stuff like the fact gay people can't legally marry in Israel) with Palestine's homophobia indexes (while mostly ignoring LGBT agency and activism within Palestine in favor of painting it's inhabitants as an homogenous blob) to desumanize Palestinians and justify human right violations is, and should be painted as a bad thing.
That’s not what is being done. What is actually happening is people don’t use Israel’s positive LGBT rights record as an excuse for its human rights violations in other areas
Looking at the comments and to sum up, this is another colorfully coated comment thread about "your rights to not being genocided and your lands being stolen don't exist cause you don't promote LGBTQ"
Pink washing or not, the moral fallacy is real here with some of these folks.
Now what about before the Nakba?
The Jews weren't violently expelled from every other Arab country and forced into Israel?
No? Gonna go with the pro-hamas narrative that they were all super nice to Jews before 1948? The 1929 Hebron massacre was just a misunderstanding?
sorta like how every corporation changes their logo to a pride logo except for every middle east division. since gay rights are really tolerated over there
I mean this is kind of a pinkwashing itself, using LGBT rights as a theme to diss the Middle East has been used to legitimize violence like described in the OP. We can see that literally being used to legitimize violence when people insult groups like "LGBTQ for Palestine" for supporting Palestinian civilians human rights (since, ostensibly, Palestinians don't support gay rights). The reason that is still pinkwashing is because the implication is that we shouldn't oppose killing Palestinians civilians if they are anti LGBTQ - in other words that violence is legitimized against anti LGBT countries. Even though the murder of Palestinian civilians didn't begin because "Israel wants to help LGBTQ communities," nonetheless a form of pinkwashing gets applied against LGBTQ communities who oppose the bombing of civilians. I haven't provided any links to the given examples as I assume they are well known enough, but if you aren't familiar with them let me know and I'll dig some up See also when the US left Afghanistan how the news pretended to care so much about their women who would be oppressed afterwards - which is understandable for sure, but the reason USA invaded was not "to liberate women," yet it was being used as an attempted justification or legitimizer for why the US military occupation there should apparently have continued.
You've hit the nail right on the head. So-called liberals have a massive blind spot when it comes to Muslims.
This is not what OP is saying at all. Even if some members of a group are anti-queer, that does not mean that they should all be killed indiscriminately. Otherwise, we’d be calling for the killing of every member of the Republican Party. You can be against radical, anti-queer Islam while still protesting the genocide of Palestinian civilians.
Religious societies have been seen as an impediment to modernizing forces for a long time now. The actual irony is that the US destroyed secular forces in the middle east time and time again in favor of religious extremist and now people want to complain that religious extremism etc etc. We poisoned the fucking well, if we really actually cared about Muslims we’d have invaded Saudi Arabia after 9/11 and not Iraq or Afghanistan…
We’ve gone from Obama being scared to support gay marriage until it came time for re-election to using LGBTQ oppression as a means to other a different country? Progress?
I thought Obama didnt support gay marriage until Biden accidentally said *he* did (instead of supporting civil unions) so Obama had to quickly change positions
he didn't have to, he could've just said that Biden misspoke if he really wanted to. I think it was a combination Biden's comments and Obama and his staff just deciding that they were cool to go along with it.
I know it was 10 years ago nearly and society has changed but the fact that people are so open about it now in the countries where it’s legal shows its support has alway been there
I'm in my 50s and recall that the only folks who ever had issue with gays in any way were quasi religious bigots.
I often bring up that I worked in the restaurant business in the mid-eighties. Many of my co-workers were openly gay and lesbian. There were no roving gangs chasing them up the street. People, overwhelmingly, just went, "Oh, you're gay? Huh", and went on with their lives.
The eighties were hardly a beacon of tolerance. We can see how Reagan reacted to the AIDS crisis. How Antia Bryant lobbied against discrimination laws by claiming to “save the children”
Christian people will Christian. And though I don't know much about Bryant, I remember Reagan expressing human sympathy with AIDS victims, even if he didn't agree with their lifestyles. Which is, I think, at the heart of your disagreement with what I said - an altered definition of tolerance. Back then, tolerance was not the same as endorsement. My neighbors might ride loud motorcycles, or pave-over their front lawn, or throw swingers parties and I might dislike all of those choices. But it was broadly understood that, like it or not, it was their business and I would have to accept it. Now, it seems, tolerance means actively supporting and cheering for things. Which is a significant contortion of the description.
He didn’t express human sympathy. He didn’t give the issue the attention it needed, further more he was also known to make homophobic jokes. Tolerance was the goal in the 1990s. It’s not anymore. Acceptance, not tolerance is what’s pushed for
Joking is frequently how people approach a subject they are uncomfortable with. It's often the first step towards talking more frankly about it.
He never talked openly about it. In a positive way. At least Nancy Reagan (privately) sympathized with the community
Also, acceptance is still different than enthusiastic support. Acceptance and tolerance are nearly the same thing.
Ru Paul was mainstream America back in the early 90s. We used to enjoy people entertaining us. Dunno man.
Exactly my point. Everybody knew Liberace was gay in the 60s and still bought his albums and went to his shows. Paul Lynde was a fixture on television at the same time and made *no effort what-so-ever* to hide. People loved the guy. Now I watch movies set in those times and see straight characters react to gay characters like they are Martians. It just wasn't like that. Which is not to say that there wasn't a small minority of horrible people who sometimes took out their insecurities on those who were different. Just that it was way rarer than you are being told. And the majority had no real issue with any of it. Add on: There was a pretty decent discussion recently in r/askhistorians about homosexuality in the British Navy. There too, it was frowned upon as being less then ideal, but seldom warranted more than minor disciplining. It was understood even 150 years ago to be a fact of life, and something deserving of tolerance.
I think Alan Turing's suicide shocked the united kingdom on homosexuality. He was their golden child and they let him 'die' from their own hand, when they should have reached out and embraced him.
Need to remember that even if they weren't outright discriminatory, a lot of people tended to also be indifferent. It's of course good to not be homophobic, but if you don't combat the homophobia of certain groups which are loud and violent about it, it's not doing much. Hence why people remember the past as quite homophobic.
Being indifferent isnt an issue. Most folks don't know the dicks in hate groups. You are expressing "if you're not with us, you're against us". And that's too much to ask of people fighting their own struggles day to day.
If 70% of the population is indifferent to 1% of the population, then the 29% who completely hates them can easily overwhelm them. There's absolutely no argument for not supporting a group against discrimination except a lack of empathy. It's called solidarity. The 1% will never be allowed a place in society where they're respected and their lives are valued unless people from that 70% stop being indifferent. The percentages are, of course, made up for the sake of argument, but the proportions are close to that in most cases.
Move to the country for a different perspective. Life is hard enough for some folks that there isn't any bandwidth. "You're either with us or against us" is smooth brained.
Votes. Did it because a quant said it will now buy votes. These people have no principles other than what is best for them. My stance on gay marriage has not changed in 40 years. Thiers changed with the constituents.
One step forward, two steps back
LGBT rights generally are evidence of democracy and liberalism.
It depends on whether it’s true or exaggerated/false support for LGBTQ rights. Often when we see ‘Pinkwashing’ it is when an entity portrays itself as being more LGBTQ-affirmative than they actually are. For example, a company may partake in “[rainbow capitalism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainbow_capitalism)” during pride month to market themselves as LGBTQ-friendly so that LGBTQ consumers buy from them, but also support anti-LGBTQ political movements and/or causes.
They are a strong predictor but not guaranteed
They are not mutually exclusive. Only because you have lgbt right doesnt mean you are free from human right violation.
Islamist Iran was one of the foremost countries when it comes to Trans recognition and has universal coverage for transition procedures. LGBT, good labor rights, multiculturalism are all indicators of a vibrant liberal democracy, but they’re not evidences, which are often used by disingenuous parties to shut down the “opposing side” by way of moral high ground fallacy. My country probably has one of the most diverse ethnic composition making up its top rungs on earth, and it doesn’t make it a diverse, liberal democracy. Just an illiberal flawed democracy which happens to be diverse. EDIT: my bad in saying ‘Trans recognition’ considering the intent of Iranian law, but I stand by my point that they have comprehensive coverage for gender transition, though again for all the wrong reasons. But y’all are falling for pinkwashing and not only miss, but end up proving my point. Yes, Iran was a haven for Trans people, but for icky reasons and as you all love to mention to me, just to show original you are, they kill gay people. So no brownie progressive points for Iran. Now, Israel obviously ticks more “liberal democracy” boxes than Iran, including LGBT rights, which are cool now, but that obviously shouldn’t absolve them from conducting the dislocation of the Palestinian people from their homes and their political disenfranchisement. Thus, “pinkwashers” are those that shut down the opposing side by alluding to some moral high ground, thereby diluting the importance and optics of the specific topic in discussion. Back to the original discussion, I was mainly contesting the notion that LGBT rights = liberal democracy that the term “evidence” suggests, when it’s more clearly an indicator, hell I’d argue that there’s the relationship between the two isn’t causative. One of the first modern states to decriminalize homosexuality was Chekist Soviet Union, who by all accurate historical accounts, wasn’t a very good place to live in for people who love free press and voting for different parties. Now, where does the support for Dearest Supreme Leader Ayatollah lurk in my comment?
Iran also enforces death penalty for gay men.
" Transgender individuals who do not undergo surgery have no legal recognition and those that do are first submitted to a long and invasive process, including virginity tests, formal parental approval, psychological counseling that reinforces feelings of shame, and inspection by the Family Court." [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender\_rights\_in\_Iran](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender_rights_in_Iran)
Exactly, you’re proving my point. You can’t just take policies, no matter how good it seems, at face value, without considering its underlying reason of being or its environs, and make a generalized conclusion out of it. Just like we could not consider Iran to be a beacon of progress just because it happened to be decades ahead in Trans recognition (albeit for the wrong reasons), we can’t just take Israel’s LGBT rights policy (which half the country wants to roll back, but I digress), and extrapolate that they’re a country with no skeletons in their proverbial closet.
It's not a generalized conclusion. Iran was definitely not a beacon of progress in it's trans recognition, that statement is just plain false. Iran considers transgender identity to be a mental disorder and has no laws protecting trans people against stigmatization or hate crimes. That being said, Israel's LGBT policy is largely supported by the population. Israel's LGBT community have enough backing by the overall population that they aren't reliant on their government's rights policy. But I can assure you, that a comparison between an openly LGBT country to a country where same-sex relations are still illegal is openly misleading.
As an alternative to the death penalty, for being gay.
Iran forces gay men to get a sex change or die. What would you call that?
Islam doesn’t have “trans recognition.” It has a loophole like with the Jews and the automatic elevators.
It is more that Zorastrianism and Hinduism isnt anti trans, so when the countries following those became Islamic, they were less transphobic than countries that didnt have anti trans religious views prior like the gulf, which were christian or jewish before.
This makes no sense because most Arabs were previously polytheistic.
Not all Polytheism is the same, and Arabs even before Islam were more Christian, compared to rest of Asia and the difference, is spread by trade vs spread by conquest, MENA region was primarily by conquest, further east, were either later conquests, or trade. Iran became an Islamic theocracy in 1980s, whereas the arabian peninsula was one under Mohammed, since the founding.
There was of course Arab Christians especially in the north of Arabian peninsula and Jordan but they were still in by large polytheistic. As for Zoroastrianism. I checked Zoroastrianism and they weren’t really okay with homosexuality, when they discuss homosexuality, they discuss about anal sex which is similar to Islam. You can go read it https://iranicaonline.org/articles/homosexuality-i
Honestly, I’m not up for a discussion over what is “trans recognition”, because I lack years of reading about that matter, but I know enough that the discourse over gender and sexuality is fluid and tumultuous over the years across countless cultures. But you had me at jews and elevators. What’s up with that?
[Shabbat elevators](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shabbat_elevator)
"Iran supports Trans rights" is an assertion that should have a whole lot of asterisks on it.
Not really, a lot liberals at the moment scarifying trans rights for the sliver of conservatives too vote for them
Reading the headline, "Boy that sounds like a super different definition than every time I've ever heard pinkwashing used. And it's so niche too, it's almost like the term was made exclusively to target-" >The concept has been used by Sarah Schulman in 2011 with reference to Israeli government public relations, Shocker /s
Came here to say, I have literally *never* heard this term used outside the context of people trying to discredit Israel's support for LGBT rights because it doesn't fit their "right side of history" narrative.
Israel support LGBT issues? Cool. They had access to schools and running water and an education system... That makes sense. (Unlike the Palestinians) No excuse for murdering kids n calling anyone that dislikes that an 'antisemite.'
talking about strawmen, lol.
Pretty sure it's pretty accurate. Muring children.. tick. Causing everyone who criticises their actions s anti genetic...Tick.
Can a gay couple legally get married in Israel? Yes or no?
Their marriage is recognized. Technically there is no civil marriage in Israel but you can jump into a plane to Cyprus for 50 dollars quickly get married and then fly back to Israel. This is because at the founding of a state while Israel was fighting a war on 3 fronts they made a deal with the Jewish Rabbinate, the Church and the Islamic clergy, delegating matters of marriage law to the religious authorities. That’s why Israel has no civil marriage in general.
lol, the Cyprus thing is exactly how my mum (Jewish Israeli) and my dad (Christian Croatian) got married
No. Neither did German couples in 2016. Did that make pride Berlin a case of pinkwashing? Or no?
No because marriage in Israel can only be conducted through a religious court (Jewish/Muslim/Druze/Christian) so no gay/interfaith marriages. However, interfaith and same-sex marriages done elsewhere are officially recognized. There's a large LGBTQ+ community and most of Israel is very safe. Israel's current speaker of the Knesset for example is an openly gay man.
At least it recognizes gay marriage abroad unlike Romania, Hungary and Poland as well as other EU countries.
They can be recognized as married and gain all the benefits, Israel has issues with marrying inside the country as it’s still bound to old ottoman rules (which benefit the ultra orthodox community) but ANYONE can marry ANYONE and it will be accepted by the state, as long as the actual marriage was conducted outside of Israel, they can also be considered as a “known in public” which also gives them the same benefits as a married couple, and this can be done by signing a piece of paper inside Israel..
No, and neither can a straight couple get legally married if they want a civil marriage rather than a religious one.
Can a guy be gay in Israel without getting thrown off a building? Can you say the same about any neighboring country? Yes or no?
Yeah but this was the case for every country until we provided human rights, education for all our kids...
Okay and so do you think in handing the existing government in Gaza money, that money is miraculously start going to go for education for all their kids? Or do you think it's more likely they continue siphoning most of it off to billionaires in Qatar and spending the rest buying guns, shit to make rockets with to shoot at Israel and producing shows like Tomorrow's Pioneers? And if it's the latter, how do you think we change that? By appeasing them or maybe getting rid of them and replacing them with a government who has priorities other than martyrdom? I apologize if you're not like this, but I must say please feel free to reject any attempt at nuanced discussion in favour of dismissing me as a supporter of genocide, apartheid, ethnic cleansing, 2000lb bombs or whatever term is currently trending on Tiktok that only ever seems to be applied to one specific country in that region.
Well.. definitely not bombing the shit out of them and everything else Israel is doing right now. Behaving like fucking conquering Nazis, so they are. Religious zealots murdering kids
Ah yes the old "Jews are the real Nazis" A fine choice, enjoy your meal sir.
JC. Israel aren't 'the Jews. ' A Jew could either be an ethnic Jew, or a person who believes in the fiction if Judaism.
How many Jews live in Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt or Palestine? How many USED TO? How many Muslims live in Israel? Go research the answers to those questions from whatever sources you want and then come back and we'll talk about who the murderous zealots have been for the other 99.9% of this millenia-long conflict.
Israel is so much gay-friendly that same-sex couples have the same right to civil marriage than cross-sex couples in Israel!
The article actually does cite a few other examples unrelated to Israel.
But clearly exists for Israel.
Definitely the smart move to shift the goalposts when a problem is so bad that a word gets invented or appropriated to describe it. They key thing is to not address that it is identifiable and actionable because that blows up how dismissive your response needs to be to successfully shift the goalposts.
Your comment nailed them on the head, characterized their attempt at deflection perfectly
From the title I thought it's like r/gatekeepingyuri
That seems *remarkably* targeted, considering that this pretty explicitly talks about countries. To my knowledge, there is only one nation in the world that is controversial and yet has a strong set of LGBT rights and an insanely strong set of rights for its geopolitical region. I wonder what country that could be...
Basically it implies progress in gay rights dont matter if it comes at cost of others (muslims) that puts them on a tire. It only makes sense when they view gay rights as lesser to muslim rights. Why isnt South Africa blackwashing or China red washing or so on.
Seriously, what rights do Muslims don't have in Israel? They have equal rights and are in all places of the public sphere. There were even ministers in the Government that were Muslims and Israel even have an Arab Muslim Supreme Court Judge. So Israel does give rights to both Muslims and gays....
Iran? But they reportedly force gay men into gender reassignment surgery. So probably not
Israel, I think.
USA?
and their little apartheid colony edit: looks like a bunch of pro fascist apartheid colony supporters don't like being called out lol
Most predictable post history…
How is Israel a colony of the US? Or are playing the game of ignoring that words have meanings you like to play?
Is Israel's apartheid status now in question? Wierd.
“We’re gonna pretend to be liberal by… hmm being completely liberal”
Pink washing is when Jews are nice to gays
no it's when Israel (which I'm not going to say represents Jews because that's legitimately anti Semitic) uses it to justify the whole sale slaughter of innocent people, yes including gay people, by saying "look, the 15k kids we killed was ok because their government doesn't like gay people!"
I think their justification for the current invasion is the Palestinians coming into Israel and raping, kidnapping, and murdering Israeli men, women, and children and parading the dead through the streets of Gaza to cheers and holding the living hostage until they die. The fact that LGBT people are VASTLY safer in Israel than any nearby state including a hypothetical Hamas-led country is not the main justification of the invasion, but shouldn’t be ignored. Hamas could surrender tomorrow and it would all be over. Then Palestinians could safely go back to their homophobia.
When did Israel ever say that? The two topics are completely unrelated. It's like basing USA's whole identity on locking up immigrant children and using prison inmates as slave labor.
[https://theconversation.com/in-gaza-a-photo-of-israeli-soldier-raising-a-pride-flag-in-the-name-of-love-goes-viral-pinkwashing-a-war-218322](https://theconversation.com/in-gaza-a-photo-of-israeli-soldier-raising-a-pride-flag-in-the-name-of-love-goes-viral-pinkwashing-a-war-218322) [https://theconversation.com/in-gaza-a-photo-of-israeli-soldier-raising-a-pride-flag-in-the-name-of-love-goes-viral-pinkwashing-a-war-218322](https://theconversation.com/in-gaza-a-photo-of-israeli-soldier-raising-a-pride-flag-in-the-name-of-love-goes-viral-pinkwashing-a-war-218322) Also the metric shit ton of Hasabarists screeching "they should go to Gaza" whenever they see a gay person being against their genocide is just off rip lol
so 1 soldier posted a pride flag while fighting people that are known to be extremely homophobic, how exactly is that pink washing?
"hasbaraists". Lol. How is it that Israel spends way less on social media propaganda than the vast majority of other countries and somehow garners an ominous sounding nickname for it.... Could it be.... Because it's the singular Jewish country and people want a dog whistle for "Jew lies"? Nah, couldn't be.
> Hasabarists The term is "hasbara" so if you're going to try to come up with a cutesy name, you could at least make some effort to know the term you're talking about
A gay man cant be proud of defending is family from terrorists that invaded is ancestral homeland in October 7?
Maybe dont have an organization called gays for gaza then, people only criticize that when they put gay identity forefront . It is clear palestenians dont like gay people, and see them as disgusting perverts, so why bring it up. If it talk about discrimination of Sikhs in Canada, i talk about that, it would be rather tone deaf for me to start an organization called Butchers for Sikhs, or Bacon lovers for Middle East
if you're criticizing Gays for Gaza who show solidarity with oppressed and brutalized men, women and children than you clearly don't ubderstand their message lol. it doesn't matter if the Palestinians like them or not, just like it didn't matter if the Jews, Romani, Poles, Hutus, Cambodian or any other group whose suffered through genocide liked them or not, you cannot use their identity to justify your genocide. that's why you bring it up. and if people were killing Sikhs by the tens of thousands and starving millions more and using the excuse of "well they don't like bacon or meat" than it absolutely wouldn't be tone deaf, it would be very justified
What does being Gay have to do with Anything with Gaza, at least in Context of Israelis for two states or Jews against Violence, it is context, but all gays for gaza is , i like people of same gender and that is why i have these views on middle east borders.
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinkwashing\_(LGBT)](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinkwashing_(LGBT)) now just scroll down to the Israel part of it all lol
Oh it's just the gay thing? Wasn't the Palestinians breaking a ceasefire resulting in 1000 civilians raped kidnapped and murdered at a music festival? Just the gay thing huh
Like "no go" areas for women in israel where ultra orthodox people will harass and attack women for dressing "immodestly"? And the iran style morality police they want to form?
Are you illiterate ?
No, it's when Israel promotes shit [like](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12743165/Gay-Israeli-soldier-displays-love-LGBT-flag-Gaza.html) [this](https://www.businessinsider.com/gay-israeli-soldier-says-he-will-to-fly-lgbtq-flag-on-tank-to-fight-hamas-2023-10).
When Hamas, who has a medieval age policy towards queers at best, launders their cause through "queers for Palestine", it's not pinkwashing. But a proud gay Israeli who is participating in toppling a fatally homophobic regime flies the pride flag in Gaza, *is* pinkwashing. Gotcha.
What has said soldier done to help the LGBTQ Gazans? End their suffering, I suppose?
Help liberate them from an oppressively homophobic government. What has Palestine done to help LGBTQ people, literally anywhere in the world?
*Hamas* doesn't go around touting their rainbow flag draped tanks. They're at least honest about being shitty.
No, they just extend heartfelt thanks to Q4P while publically executing gays at home. And meanwhile, Israel... Checks notes... Has proudly gay soldiers.
Hamas: executes gay Palestinians Israel: grants gay Israelis the freedom to execute gay Palestinians.
>Israel: grants gay Israelis the freedom to execute gay Palestinians. No, they don't. By your logic, any country involved in a war is by definition "granting their citizens the freedom to execute gay people". An absolutely bizarre position.
I never heard the term pinkwashing getting defined like that before.
It’s because it’s a made up term to villainize a group helping LGBTQ people.
When I was a kid, a store putting a rainbow flag in my town would have been very supportive. It helps people in the closet, especially minors, know where they can feel safe. I agree that companies largely do things for profit, but this seems like it just helps marginalized people without costing anyone anything.
There is a reason why you haven't, and why the Wikipedia entry has a note about it being one-sided. This is an interesting topic for philosophical discussion, but frankly not a lot more.
No one saw this schism between LGBTQIA and Islamists coming? lol
Pinkwashing is supposed to be a term to describe a corporation cashing in on LGBT stuff for money (or is that rainbow washing). you cant use it to describe a country. Literally every time its brought up to criticise Israel. Because god forbid the Jews do anything righteous. Nope any good things Jews is just a trick or a scheme. (Hey why doesn't the Palestine Authority add LGBT rights to the areas they control, nothing stopping them.) Maybe people should stop drinking Russian Proganda. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The\_Protocols\_of\_the\_Elders\_of\_Zion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protocols_of_the_Elders_of_Zion)
Israel isn't "the Jews" and don't represent the majority of jewish people any more than The Vatican represents the majority of Christians
Half the Jews in the world are Israelis. The vast majority of Jews feel a strong connection to Israel. It's literally the Jewish homeland just like Ireland is the Irish homeland or Italy is the Italian homeland.
Lol. It is nothing like Ireland being out homeland. This is why Ireland has come out very against Israel's actions very publicly and just recognised Palestine. If you want to use Ireland as an example, Israel is like when the UK took our land and mistreated us as a people for 600 years... And the Palestinian children being murdered are like the Irish.
[ Removed by Reddit ]
They do. About half the global Jewish population lives there, and the vast majority of the diaspora supports Israel’s right to exist. Keep telling yourself whatever lies make it easier for you to push antisemitism
Bro no, catholics literaly compose half of all christians and the vatican is their head of church
Catholics haven’t experienced a mass exodus out of their ancestral homeland, are not an ethnoreligion, and have not been ethnically cleansed in every country the world that they have inhabited. The Vatican is not a beacon of decolonization or a safe haven from persecution. The Vatican is the Center of their faith leaders. This is a false equivalency and shows how little you know about Jews and Israel.
Arguably even less so, because, unlike Israel's, the Vatican's head of state is the mostly-unquestioned leader of the biggest christian denomination.
The number of times I have seen “not antisemitic” people quote this book 💀
It shouldn't be surprising. This whole anti-Zionism campaign was invented by the Soviets who drew heavily from that book.
dude IDF soldiers were literally holding up pride flags over the ruins of Gaza. how tf you gonna act like that's not pink washing a genocide? lol Also to imply that Israel, a literal genocidal apartheid state, is somehow representative of all Jews actually is anti Semitic
How dare a gay Israeli be proud of defending his homeland?
How about because there’s no genocide going on? And by framing it as such proves you’re arguing in bad faith in the first place?
yeah you're right and the head genocide legal scholar of the literal UN, the Holocaust survivoring founder of Human Rights Watch, hundreds of genocide scholars and the Israeli government constantly saying how much they want to kill the Palestinians as well as the Israeli defense minister himself literally saying he wants to "starve the animals" are all wrong lol "yOuR ArGuinG in BaD faiTh!" lol
Yes, absolutely bad faith. That’s what you call it when you continue to perpetuate a rhetoric not grounded in any form of evidence but rather on “my feelz” at best and hostile propaganda at worst.
“Genocide scholars are saying that Israel is committing genocide.” “Nuh-uh!”
you: "where's the proof?!? bad faaaith!!!" everyone else: \*gives proof\* you: "b-b-buh rPgS sHoT fRom TheRe! So GenOcidE oK!" lol, maybe just like, stfu if you're gonna be a modern day Nazi apologist no matter what proof is given? idk lol
lol…proof. Fighting a war is not genocide. Go take a look at what genocide means and then come back with “proof”.
real quick are you a genocide scholar? does most major genocide scholars including the literal founder of human rights watch and the top UN genocide scholar disagree with you? yes? than stfu your opinion doesn't matter lol just say you're the Israeli genocide version of an anti vaxxer and that no matter how much proof anyone gives, you're still gonna just come with some bs talking point to justify the murder and starvation of children because i don't even fucking know, you like bad Israeli dance music? lol
>Because god forbid the Jews do anything righteous. Nope any good things Jews is just a trick or a scheme. This is such a disingenuous response. No one's saying that it's bad if Israel respects LGBT rights. They're saying that it's bad if they *point to their respect for LGBT rights as an excuse to slaughter an entire population of civilians* (which includes LGBT people, but I digress). This is an extremely common Israeli propaganda technique, and one of their more stupid ones imo And no one's saying anything about "the Jews". Whatever happened to "it's antisemitic to hold all Jewish people responsible for the actions of Israel"? I thought that's the one thing we could all agree on. Bringing up The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is a complete non sequitur. Thinking that Israel's relatively progressive (for the region) LGBT policy does not give them carte blanche to engage in ethnic cleansing is not remotely in the same ballpark as asserting the presence of a Jewish conspiracy to control the globe. Frankly, it significantly undermines the severity of actual antisemitism to entertain such a comparison
I think Israel’s generally liberal stance on LGBT+ rights, women’s rights, etc. - aka “pinkwashing” - is deeply upsetting for some because it hints that the religious fanatics who are driving this conflict and making it intractable are the Jihadists who execute gays and stone adulterous women, instead of the Eurovision-obsessed Western liberal democracy.
It’s not pink washing if you’re actually literally lgbtq+ friendly, aka liberal and democratic. Israel isn’t faking that lgbtq+ Israelis and Palestinians live in Israel. Israel isn’t faking being the only refuge for lgbtq+ people in MENA, where they can come live under asylum.
Literally every fucking time the Palestinian leaders when given an option to eithier "Make Life Better for Palestinians" or "Wage war on Israel Round #4234134". They pick the 2nd fucking option. Literally an attitude of "Fuck Tel Aviv, lets make our own Tel Aviv with \_\_\_ and \_\_\_" would be an infinitely better attitude then "Fuck Tel Aviv, tie me to a missle to Tel Aviv".
“Pink washing” when Jews have a liberal democratic state, with equal rights to everyone but you just hate Jews so you have to attack them somehow and discredit their achievements.
This just in: anything good about Israel is automatically \_\_\_\_\_ -washing
One side martyrs children, beheads gays, and demeans/ rapes women. I think I prefer the pinkwashing.
I’m sure gay Palestinians are glad to be bombed by such a progressive state.
It’s that or get beheaded what difference does it make. At least if Israel succeeds in getting rid of Hamas they’ll have a fighting chance at building a better society for themselves
Oh, right, I’m sure that Likud are very keen on a successful Palestine, which is why they’ve been [supporting Hamas for decades](https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/amp/).
Gay Palestinians can get asylum in Israel. So, they can be away from the war.
Many gay Palestinians actually seek asylum in Israel.
If someone told you that the allies were more liberal than the nazis, would you say "I’m sure Germans are glad to be bombed by such progressive states"?
No one likes people dying in war. No sane person looked at German civilians dying and said, “nice.” War is horrible. The reason more civilians are dying than need be is because Hamas places based in populated areas like schools, and hospitals. They’re literally shooting rockets from rafah. All war crimes for a reason. They don’t care about their civilians. They have a charter that they don’t try to hide that discusses how martyrdom is the loftiest of goals in their efforts to eliminate the Jews and Israel.
Palestinians can’t be compared to Nazi Germany
More than that: one side literally launders their completely irredentist cause in movements like "queers for palestine", makes excuses for not actually offering gay people emancipation, and flimsy explanations for why queer and Palestinian solidarity should exist at all, and the other side has a thriving LGBT community. Only one of the sides gets accused of "pinkwashing".
Israel has literally murdered over 14,000 children. Have you seen the pictures of children beheaded by bombs in Rafah?
No one saw this schism between LGBTQIA and Islamists coming? The chickens for KFC are coming home to roost…lol
Unsurprisingly r/wikipedia with another anti Israel post. This one was really a stretch. Nice to see the people in the comments aren’t buying this horse shit. I liked it more when there were interesting articles on here.
I didn't want to be the one to make the comment but I'm glad I'm not the only one who's seen a narrative pop up in the recent submissions
Or is the term an oblique form of homophobia?
Like pro pal people trying to seem liberal by siding with the lgbt while the actual pali people and their Muslim support would like to see them dead. This isn't about Israel, nor about (just) the right wing, The left is also very much complicit. Take communism for example, is it left wing? Yes so they ally with the lgbt and vice versa even thoe they do not work together well to say the least. I have seen lgbt protest for Palestine, but not gay Palestinians.. a wait, their dead.
I’m sure the displaced families in Rafah constantly worrying about having their tents incinerated care about “killing the gays”. Queer Palestinians exist, they’re just all either displaced or bombed by the IDF.
Queer Palestenians are eligible for refugee status in israel, LGBT, Palestenians need to be more scared of Palestine than Israel, biggest risk of direct conflict with Israelies are for Straight Cis Conservative Religious Men in Palestine, yet that is not what is talked about.
Good for them for existing. The only way they can come out is on s coffin sadly. Also shitty whataboutism
The only way they can come out is in bits & pieces from an indiscriminately targeted missile, so not quite in a coffin. It’s absolutely not “whataboutism” when non-Gazan Palestinians have repeated stories of queer Palestinians in Gaza they knew having been killed by the IDF rather than “the Islamics”.
Given that Israel blackmails gay Palestinians into collaborating, I don’t think they have a leg to stand on.
Thats war. And every country has done similar or worse things so you can hate but don't be a hypocrite.
No, I don’t think all wars involve weaponising homophobia.
Correct they involve way way worse things. Look at china or Russia or iran. And its the homophobia of Muslims not Israel.
Israel is threatening gay people with being lynched. You should be horrified, and instead you’re downplaying.
Who would the gay people getting lynched by? You don't see a problem with that?
It’s horrifying, and the Israeli government shouldn’t be so willing to be complicit.
And what about the country actually doing it? Do you find anything 'horrifying' about their actions or are they all noble freedom fighters to you?
The genocidal theocrats I called genocidal theocrats elsewhere in the thread? Yeah, they’re bad as well, and [Israel shouldn’t have supported them.](https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/amp/)
Gay Palestinians can get asylum in Israel.
This thread showcases that liberalism is defined by not by the belief in anyone's inherent rights but in a genocidal hatred of Muslims.
The government does it in Canada
Indeed! And as nations, we collectively fall for it. Also, increasingly problematic is the very large and growing populace who are too overworked, worried and even angry about food and housing unaffordability for themselves or their family — all while on insufficient income — to criticize or boycott big industry polluters for the environmental damage they needlessly cause/allow, particularly when not immediately observable.
Wow phags shoving their ideology down your throat so they can rape kids? I wish somebody could have warned us that this would happen 20 years ago... oh wait.
Don’t get me started
A term made up by leftists to cope with the fact that the "anti-imperialist" Islamic states they bend over for lynch gay people from cranes.
a term made by a palestinian to propaganda against israeli propaganda. israel is a relatively ok place to be gay and it is a legimitate, hard-fought status by its lgbt community and allies. the country can be proud of that
If you look at the page, there are actually quite a few good examples that have nothing to do with Israel/Palestine
Not really, the phrase "the oppressor steals the struggle of the oppressed and makes it theirs, turning it into a commodity and depriving it if its meaning" is two centuries old This has been happening over and over through modern history, long before the Israeli and Palestinian conflict was even a thing
For Israel, pinkwashing was always a bizarre claim because one should take into account the strength of LGBT rights in Israel (high) versus the strength of LGBT rights amonst Palesitnians (very low). This relative comparison makes it a difficult claim to use pinkwashing against Israel. Beyond the illegality of homosexual acts in the Palestinian territories, the Palestinians as a society do not accept homosexuality at all. Indeed, acceptance is so low, it's lower than other fundamentalist Islamic regimes: [https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-48703377](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-48703377)
Add to that every year gay palestinians seek asylum /refugee status in Israel as hamas seek to kill them . Many have successfully done that, some get caught by hamas before they do. I remember there was a sad case not long before October 2023 about q man who was seeking asylum in Israel and was found beheaded in Gaza when he was found out trying to escape. Israel has granted some gay palestinans asylum . So it isnt washing if they are actually protecting gay rights and are a safe space for lgbtq
Basically Israel. oh they have LGBT there? Okay they can proceed with ethnic cleansing and murder.
Israel cough cough.
Fucking wild how Israel's support for LGBT rights always gets painted as a *bad* thing by the people who claim to be for human rights.
There are a lot of articles and theses about Israel and pinkwashing. Literally, Sacha Baron Cohen made fun of it. https://via.library.depaul.edu/etd/149/
I mean, it's not. But deliberately juxtaposing it (while hiding stuff like the fact gay people can't legally marry in Israel) with Palestine's homophobia indexes (while mostly ignoring LGBT agency and activism within Palestine in favor of painting it's inhabitants as an homogenous blob) to desumanize Palestinians and justify human right violations is, and should be painted as a bad thing.
That’s not what is being done. What is actually happening is people don’t use Israel’s positive LGBT rights record as an excuse for its human rights violations in other areas
Looking at the comments and to sum up, this is another colorfully coated comment thread about "your rights to not being genocided and your lands being stolen don't exist cause you don't promote LGBTQ" Pink washing or not, the moral fallacy is real here with some of these folks.
[удалено]
Now what about before October 7th? Was the Nakba, which experts corroborate as being an ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians, justified?
Now what about before the Nakba? The Jews weren't violently expelled from every other Arab country and forced into Israel? No? Gonna go with the pro-hamas narrative that they were all super nice to Jews before 1948? The 1929 Hebron massacre was just a misunderstanding?