Poor reactions April 7, 2006
Posted by Rasheed Eldin in Homosexualists, Responses.2 comments
Some comments have eventually emerged with regards to my thoughts on "Pavgate", over at EdNet. It's a shame that they're not particularly insightful. For all that homophobia is considered such a cardinal sin in this lovely movement, could people not perhaps ponder over the points presented, and offer reflections on how we can solve these issues of tension? By all means critique me, but at least do so intelligently.
I've also been mentioned by Brett Lock of OutRage:
The blog run by the bizarre ‘StraightWay Foundation’ (that group of ‘ex-gay’ Muslims who supported Ken Livingstone’s drooling over Qaradawi) put Ms Hearn in her place.
He obviously didn't read my two posts following the one he quoted from, where I explained why We’re not “ex-gay” and also approvingly linked to Hearn's Response to Tatchell. Or maybe he did, I don't know.
EDIT: Brett Lock has now described the StraightWay Foundation as "a Muslim version of NARTH". I have nothing against NARTH, but just take a look at their site and you will find that this comparison is completely ignorant. NARTH investigate the issue from a scientific perspective, while StraightWay is about explaining the Islamic position and offering simple advice to people trying to live up to it. Brett, in his hatred of "ex-gays", seems unable even to appreciate these entirely different approaches.
See Mujahid's summary of the history of clashes between StraightWay and Lock/OutRage, including StraightWay's responses to their ignorant mis-characterisations:
Response to Tatchell (Tribune magazine) April 4, 2006
Posted by Rasheed Eldin in Homosexualists, Islam, Responses.add a comment
Via Islamophobia Watch… On 17th March, Tatchell wrote in Tribune: Alliance with bigots won't halt fascists.
A response appears in the current issue, written by Kirsten Hearn, "executive member of Regard, the national organisation of disabled lesbian, gay men, bisexual and transgendered people":
Discord cannot deal defeats to fascism
Read it!
More on Pav and FOSIS April 4, 2006
Posted by Rasheed Eldin in Media, Queer Muslims.add a comment
The debates continue. Now a story has been posted by Benjamin Cohen of PinkNews:
Gay Muslim claims Islamophobia denied him post as student leader He has also posted at Ednet asking for more opinions, saying: “it’s been hard to get all the facts straight”!
Well, I suppose it has. As I have said, if FOSIS delegates made a decision that took Pav’s declared sexuality as a factor, they could well be justified in that: not so much for his being gay, but rather for being a “gay Muslim”. Cohen says:
Last month, the Guardian published an article “Muslim students find a voice” in which they said that Mr Akhtar “will be hoping for the backing of Muslim delegates, but he doesn’t fit the fundamentalist stereotype. He’s gay.”
Following this “outing” by the Guardian, a posting on the Muslim Public Affairs Committee message board asked students if they would still back Mr Akhtar. One poster, ‘bro shabaz’ said: “he will never get my support if he is homosexual.” Another, ‘Muntasir’, said: “I think im gonna puke.” ‘Binty’ added: “the dirty homo can DO 1!!!” Other posters were more supportive of Mr Akhtar, ‘Khalid Bin I’ argued that “if FOSIS wishes to become a powerful organisation within the Political Arena it needs to changes it’s politics.”
OK, first I should point out that this was hardly an “outing” by the Guardian. People within the student movement, including FOSIS folks, were well aware. And come on Cohen, the MPACUK forum is hardly the place to judge another organisation’s political strategy! So what if some people posted offensive comments? Those posters might actually be kids, and such comments could be found in all sorts of places. They should not be given attention.
Incidentally, the MPACUK forum had a long debate about homosexuality round about the time of the C4 documentary, so at that point I decided to sign up and join the discussion. I think I could have enriched it! Sadly, the moderators seem to have banned my account, and haven’t replied to my request for an explanation. Could it be as petty as my having written that “The contents of the MPACUK site and forum don’t usually encourage me to come back for more”? I hope not.
We’re not “ex-gay” April 4, 2006
Posted by Rasheed Eldin in Concepts, Ex-Gay, Queer Muslims, Responses.6 comments
There are various people, including from religious backgrounds, who, becoming dissatisfied with the homosexual lifestyle, or rejecting it outright without acting on their same-sex attractions (SSA), take on the label “ex-gay“. For some people, that makes sense, in that they have lived the “gay” life and have since turned away. We just found that we have been added to a list of “ex-gay blogs”, even though we don’t identify ourselves that way!
Mujahid Mustaqim, founder of StraightWay, has always avoided this term, along with all the other eggs in the “orientationist” basket. Using words like “ex-gay” or even “heterosexual” are just as mistaken as using “gay”, “lesbian”, “bisexual” etc., if we maintain the philosophical position that people should not be categorised according to feelings, and that “sexual orientation” is an arbitrary (and mistaken) way of describing the empirical facts (which include that some people experience SSA to one degree or another).
Saying that you are “ex-gay” is, in a sense, admitting to having been once “gay”, i.e. affirming that such an identity is legitimate to speak of. Again, I say that while plenty of people hold that view, our understanding of Islam and its worldview leads us to the conclusion that SSA are not intrinsic to identity, and that in general, people should not be put into boxes according to whom they’re attracted to.
If we consider being “gay” as a whole package of feelings, actions and lifestyle, then using the term “ex-gay” can make sense but have a rather negative feel to it (why define yourself by your past?). If it refers just to feelings/attractions, then when does an “ex-gay” truly become “ex”? Not everyone overcomes their feelings completely; probably most people just can’t.
So, we disagree respectfully with the name choice of the person who set up the Ex-Gay Muslims discussion group, but it’s a good place to go for a chat anyway.
Pav and that presidential post April 3, 2006
Posted by Rasheed Eldin in Uncategorized.4 comments
There have been some rumours going around about the recent NUS presidential elections, and where the support of the Muslim delegates, largely coordinated by FOSIS, went – or rather, where it didn’t. I can also see from search engine entries that are leading people here that you probably want some more perspective on this!
The Muslim delegation at the Annual Conference in Blackpool last week would seem to have been anything between 70 and 100, depending on how well or badly coordinated they were in their voting strategies – they would almost certainly be the largest single “faction” at conference. Looking at the election results, it seems that they voted for Sian Davies for president. Sian didn’t get in; Gemma Tumelty did. The interesting thing is that Pav Akhtar 
narrowly missed out, and would certainly have won, had FOSIS given him their votes.
Pav has headed up the NUS Black Students Campaign this year, and has led campaigns against Islamophobia along with other forms of discrimination; he must be a significant political ally for FOSIS. He is involved in the Student Broad Left faction, to which it seems FOSIS gave 2nd-preference votes in other elections.
People are now reaching for answers as to why FOSIS did not back Pav Akhtar. Some kind of falling-out? Deals made with another faction/candidate? The fact is that it could be anything. But according to whispers on the Educationet forum, amplified by Harry’s Place, it could be for a more “sinister” reason: that they “didn’t want a gay national president”.
