Homosexual Iran - An essay by Kate

[nekokate]

What goes on in Iran is a matter for Iranians and of no relevance to non-iranians.

suppose some iranian student wrote an essay on the breakdown of social order in Britain, teen pregnancies, suicide rates, obesity etc, it would have zero moral value and I certianly wouldn't be reading it, i'd tell the guy to lobby his own gov't. I think that's the point mandy was trying to make.

Of no relevance? Are you such an isolationist that you balk at anyone taking an interest in countries other than the one they live in? Is the Israel/Palestine conflict also of "no relevance" to you, or to anyone who doesn't live there or hasn't been there? What about Zimbabwe? China? The Sudan?

If you really mean what you've just said, then I don't expect to see you in future passing any form of judgement whatsoever on any issues that revolve around any country other than the one you're living in, otherwise you'd be... what do they call those people again? Oh, yea: hypocrites.

As for considering an essay by an Iranian student on Britain being of zero "moral" value - I wouldn't be so dismissive. Infact, I'd love to read such an essay. Also, assuming you were making a direct analogy - I'm not a student.

Its a harmless essay and may interest some but the tinge of self-serving moralising in this thread in kind of pathetic, so what if the UK has a better record on gay rights than Iran. Iran's a third world country thousands of miles away with all sorts of internal issues that we don't know about, none of us have been there, we probably wouldn't be allowed we've got troops surrounding their borders.

It's called caring about everything, and taking an interest in everything, not just the things that are currently in leftist fashion.

And I'm directly inviting you to name those contributers to this thread you consider to be pathetic and self-serving. I'd like to think you have the balls to be something other than enigmatic, and I look forward to your candid answer.

[luke]

i think maybe what salim means is there no point in some of the arguments in this thread, and i think mandy just feels this kinda unwittingly adds to the war drums against iran - it could seem to some that it goes along nicely with the majority of the media in portraying them badly, although of course the conclusion of kates essay is we don't really know the true situation in iran.

but the arguments are kinda silly, i mean i think we all agree that people shouldn't be discriminated or imprisoned or anything for being gay, or christian, or black or blue or whatever - it should be equal rights for everyone, regardless of if you're a iranian this or english that, even northern monkeys

[faceless]

Salim, I gave you the chance even though you're a Ron Paul supporter, but you really are a fool, and as a humanist I find your comments about disregarding individual country's human-rights to be offensive.

By your token we shouldn't have an interest in anything that may exist outside our own perceptions - but you know what? The tree falling in the woods really does make a sound even if you can't hear it, you deaf twat.

[Mandy]

Depending on your definition of persecuted, gay people are effectively persecuted in every country.

Explain how the British State persecutes gay people.

Gay people are persecuted in day to day life (starting at school). Then there is the persecution in the Church. That it isn't state persecution as opposed to day-to-day life persecution doesn't make it any less palatable, after all if the state wanted to end it, it would. The British State went to war on the side of the world for "human rights" .. what about human rights at home ? Why was there not a strong reaction from the British State to the BBC report about school boy bullying using "gay" and other terms which associate homosexuality with negative traits/insults. This is the British state effectively condoning/turning a blind eye to homophobia .. and to some extents worse than official state prosecution in that the persecution is done by your own peers where you have no rights of attorney, no written rules etc.

[faceless]

The Bishop of Reading is gay - that's hardly persecution. Or do you mean the Catholic church? In that it's not exactly promoted, but neither is it a cause for persecution. Most people are pragmatic enough to realise that these days.

[Salim201]

By your token we shouldn't have an interest in anything that may exist outside our own perceptions - but you know what? The tree falling in the woods really does make a sound even if you can't hear it, you deaf twat.

My point was self-evident, we have NO interest in gay rights in Iran, it doesn't effect us, i'm sure you've already proved your compassion by sending money over to reformists groups or something, if you havn't then you can shove your armchair humanism up your arse.

You don't seem to grasp where I'm coming from but its understandable, its the kind of humanist idealism that lead to colonialism and expansion all over the world and I'm supposed to be the callous zealot for wanted people to mind there own business. You wouldn't have to resort to name-calling if you understood where we differ philosophically, its a statement of fact that the plight of Iranians is of no relevance to non-iranians, and I doubt many Iranians would want to see the kind of liberation bestowed upon Iraq and Afghanistan. So even if you don't like it, my position is the most moral, respect the sovereignty of states, stop moralising to "babaric" third world countries, that need to be taught how to live. Too often it just sounds like a load of "white man's burden" nonsense. I didn't mean to attack anyone personally and i don't expect that in return.

Also Iran seems to be "leftist fashion" at the moment, so not the best example of an independant moral compass.

[faceless]

For someone who 'didn't mean to attack anyone personally' you've got a massive lack of awareness of the words that you allow out. Your position is the 'most moral'? What arrogance! I'm sure your mother would be proud.

Piss off and pollute someone else's site...

And btw - Iran is not a third-world country by any stretch of the imagination.

[Mandy]

Note to Salim : We are trying to make the world a better place .. and thus we have to look outside our own countries.

The Bishop of Reading is gay - that's hardly persecution. Or do you mean the Catholic church? In that it's not exactly promoted, but neither is it a cause for persecution. Most people are pragmatic enough to realise that these days.

I was thinking about the Anglican Church :

https://notproudofbritain.blogspot.com/2 ... ng_18.html

Gay ultimatum for Anglicans in US
"Dr Rowan Williams was attempting to prevent a worldwide split"

Anglican leaders have issued an ultimatum to the US Church by demanding an end to the appointment of gay clergy and the blessing of same-sex couples.

[faceless]

The Bishop of Reading is Anglican, but the gay man who was elected to that post has now been replaced. Whatever the situation, to compare Britain and Iran is not the idea of this thread - it's about homosexuality in Iran.

[nekokate]

i think maybe what salim means is there no point in some of the arguments in this thread, and i think mandy just feels this kinda unwittingly adds to the war drums against iran - it could seem to some that it goes along nicely with the majority of the media in portraying them badly, although of course the conclusion of kates essay is we don't really know the true situation in iran.

I can't fully agree with that, Luke. Whilst I concede that some of the "arguments" do seem pointless, it's not me who started them. I took a lot of care writing that piece and I enjoyed it, so I'm going to defend it when it is misunderstood by people and its point is misrepresented and skewed, no matter how much of a mud-slinging match it might look to others. I don't allow people to get away with putting words in my mouth, or attributing moral and political standards to me that are not my own. It's not going to happen.

I don't know what you mean when you say it could be seen to go along nicely with the majority of the media's portrayal, either. The reason I wrote it was as an examination of the different ways the country is portrayed. It was a piece inspired by a thought process that can be boiled down to the following:

"Oh, there's a lot of crap being said about Iran lately... Oh, George has made some comments... Oh, Tatchell is 'OutRage!'d... I wonder who's really right, or if it's half-and-half... I'll see if I can shed a little more light on the reality so we can at least have the facts on the table"

It's as simple as that. When two knowledgeable people I respect disagree over something I want to know who's right. And if you read the piece properly you'll know that it actually comes out in favour of George slightly more than with Tatchell, and makes it clear that it is indeed dubious whether Iran summarily executes people "for being gay".

I won't have the likes of Mandy and Salim (people I'd call the militant left, leaning so far in that direction they're waving their arms about to topple) misrepersenting my intentions, misreading, misquoting and then calling me a tool of the right because I have the audacity to have an opinion and a genuine concern about getting to the bottom of a contentious political issue.

[til661]

Depending on your definition of persecuted, gay people are effectively persecuted in every country.

Explain how the British State persecutes gay people.

Gay people are persecuted in day to day life (starting at school). Then there is the persecution in the Church. That it isn't state persecution as opposed to day-to-day life persecution doesn't make it any less palatable, after all if the state wanted to end it, it would. The British State went to war on the side of the world for "human rights" .. what about human rights at home ? Why was there not a strong reaction from the British State to the BBC report about school boy bullying using "gay" and other terms which associate homosexuality with negative traits/insults. This is the British state effectively condoning/turning a blind eye to homophobia .. and to some extents worse than official state prosecution in that the persecution is done by your own peers where you have no rights of attorney, no written rules etc.

The mind boggles it really does. Pray tell how the state can stop people using the word gay as an insult?

The state with the exception of a couple of issues (civil partnerships separate but equal status among others) has been since the Blair government one of the most progressive in the world. All the state's job is to outlaw discrimination in the law which has been broadly done. See for example the anti-discrimination legislation for goods and services, housing, employment, civil rights.

There may be a minority of bigots (and they are loud beyond their importance) but what can you do apart from fix the legal issues and wait for the populace to catch up. Though if you read the survey done by Stonewall a vast majority of British people are generally sympathetic to LGBT people:

https://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2007/ ... .gayrights

Up to 90% of the British population support the ban on discrimination against gays and lesbians, according to new research.

Despite the protestations of some church leaders, as many as 85% specifically back the sexual orientation regulations, which make discrimination against gays and lesbians in the provision of goods and services an offence. The YouGov survey of 2,000 Britons shows that "people of faith" were as likely to support gay equality as members of the wider population...

Your continued attempt to imply a comparison between the treatment here and Iran is not only ridiculous it it borders on the offensive. People like...yes Peter Tatchell...fought a long battle to get us to where we are now and to dismiss the great strides that have been made to fit your own ideology is wrong.

The state criticises the use of homophobic language: https://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-4862.html

[til661]

i think maybe what salim means is there no point in some of the arguments in this thread, and i think mandy just feels this kinda unwittingly adds to the war drums against iran - it could seem to some that it goes along nicely with the majority of the media in portraying them badly, although of course the conclusion of kates essay is we don't really know the true situation in iran.

How does anything said here have any impact at all on the 'war drums'?

I won't have the likes of Mandy and Salim (people I'd call the militant left, leaning so far in that direction they're waving their arms about to topple) misrepersenting my intentions, misreading, misquoting and then calling me a tool of the right because I have the audacity to have an opinion and a genuine concern about getting to the bottom of a contentious political issue.

They are both on the right as far as I can tell.

[faceless]

Salim's account has been closed - prompting him to send an email accusing me of a 'great little purge in true stalinist tradition'. It's not the case that it was simply me removing a disrespectful dick from my own website, but a Stalinist purge! The last purge I was involved in was when I had a kebab after 6 pints of guinness.

[nekokate]

Salim's account has been closed - prompting him to send an email accusing me of a 'great little purge in true stalinist tradition'. It's not the case that it was simply me removing a disrespectful dick from my own website, but a Stalinist purge! The last purge I was involved in was when I had a kebab after 6 pints of guinness.

You should be flattered he considers this site important enough to equate its running to Stalinism!! You've created a monster, Face!!!

[faceless]

haha yeah, rrrrrrrrraaaaaaaaaawwwwww!