Robert Mugabe to the UN: We are not gays | PkNews

Contents:

• WORLD LEAR TO U.N.: ‘WE ARE NOT GAYS’
• WE ARE NOT GAY!
• “WE ARE NOT GAYS… DON’T TELL ME THOSE THGS”: ENGAGG ‘HIDN’ MEN WHO HAVE SEX WH MEN AND TRANSGENR WOMEN HIV PREVENTN MYANMAR
• HOW DO YOU KNOW IF YOU’RE GAY, STRAIGHT, OR SOMETHG BETWEEN?
• ROBERT MUGABE TO THE UN: WE ARE NOT GAYS
• WHY ROBERT MUGABE JT SHOUTED "WE ARE NOT GAYS" HIS UN SPEECH
• ROBERT MUGABE TO THE U.N.: ‘WE ARE NOT GAYS’
• “WE ARE NOT GAYS”: REGIME PRERVATN AND THE POLICIZATN OF INTY MUGABE’S ZIMBABWE
• ‘I AM GAY – BUT I WASN’T BORN THIS WAY’
• 10 ANTI-GAY MYTHS DEBUNKED
• NOTGAYS
• HOW TO KNOW IF YOU ARE GAY

WORLD LEAR TO U.N.: ‘WE ARE NOT GAYS’

There is an opportuny to strengthen muny-based HIV preventn programs by ensurg all peer staff are prehensively traed to both regnize and al wh the psychosocial stggl, cludg ternal stigma and homonegativy, experienced specifilly by men unwillg or unable to disclose same-sex general, rpons to HIV are often based on easily intifiable risk tegori, cludg “MSM” and “TW”, which many have argued tract om properly appreciatg the plexy of genr and sexual exprsn and the way this shap HIV vulnerabily and risk [33, 34, 35], cludg the Asian ntext [36, 37, 38]. Myanmar is currently experiencg a perd of signifint transn and velopment, which has clud an evolvg terpretatn of homosexualy (cludg the adoptn of more ‘Wtern’ termology such as ‘homo’, ‘gay’ and ‘queer’, particularly among younger, urban dividuals and/or those nnected to the NGO sector as monstrated by some study participants; [14, 18, 41]).

The Zimbabwean dictator has ma overt homophobia official policy for years, and has equently uched this cricism of Wtern untri (which have sanctned Mugabe for his appallg human rights rerd), sometim sayg that Wtern lears wish to impose not jt acceptance of LGBTQ rights but homosexualy self on Zimbabweans or Ains generally. Frossard Sgy fills this gap wh a thorough examatn of the strategi of policized homophobia ployed by the Robert Mugabe regime, their nnectn to hegemonic masculy, the liberatn war, and land qutns, and the ndns which led them to lose their potency and ultimately fail to save Mugabe om mountg domtic challeng. Frossard Sgy preenche ta lacuna através uma análise exstiva das tratégias polização da homofobia utilizadas pelo regime Robert Mugabe, a sua relação a masculida hegemóni, a guerra libertação e os problemas da terra, bem o as circunstâncias que levaram a que persse eficácia e abasse por não nseguir proteger Mugabe face aos crcent safs ternos.

The, as well as other important parts of the prepared speech, actually reflected a recurrg theme of Zimbabwean polil disurse, the ia that Print Mugabe and his party (the Zimbabwe Ain Natnal Unn-Patrtic Front [ZANU-PF]) stood as a bulwark of antilonialism agast the Wt’s imperialist attacks, which clud the so-lled promotn of homosexualy.

WE ARE NOT GAY!

Though there have been some misgivgs related to the e of homophobia as overly foced on fear and elidg lol specifici (van Klken & Chando Reference van Klken and Chando2016; Thoron Reference Thoron2014), most of the recent lerature begs wh the ia of gog beyond personal hostily to foc on the strategic e of the negative meangs associated wh same-sex sexuali by actors seekg to achieve polil goals—gog beyond the notn of fear self to the parameters of s stmentalizatn (Currier Reference Currier2010; McKay & Angotti Reference McKay and Angotti2016; Serrano-Amaya Reference Serrano-Amaya2018). This analysis th follows Ashley Currier g the term “policized homophobia” to bt reflect the ia of a purposive strategy leveraged agast multiple forms of opposn, what she terms a liberately activated public spectacle, but a siar ncept of purposeful state strategy n be found unr the umbrella of polil homophobia most works on the topic (Bosia & Weiss Reference Bosia and Weiss2013; Currier Reference Currier2018; McKay & Angotti Reference McKay and Angotti2016).

“WE ARE NOT GAYS… DON’T TELL ME THOSE THGS”: ENGAGG ‘HIDN’ MEN WHO HAVE SEX WH MEN AND TRANSGENR WOMEN HIV PREVENTN MYANMAR

This distctivens has been approached two ways: s unique relatnship to masculy and s nstctn as a genred strategy, wh thors relyg on femist lerature showg how homophobia works as a stctural, stutnal mechanism of reproductn of a normative masculy associated wh the natn and bolsters masculist ntrol over the state, often by rewrg s history the procs (Currier Reference Currier2010, Reference Currier2018; McKay & Angotti Reference McKay and Angotti2016); and the ia that policized homophobia is often ed pre-emptively, plac where there are none or few pre-existg mands for gay rights along a Wtern mol, which distguish om other strands of inty polics that rely on lolly entrenched divisns (Bosia & Weiss Reference Bosia and Weiss2013). In the Ain ntext, the other characteristic of policized homophobia found almost unanimoly the lerature is s pictn of the Wt as an imperialist force which needs to be risted; most lears mobilizg policized homophobia ually do so by associatg homosexualy wh “whe culture” and nstctg as an outsi force threateng the lol sovereignty, culture, and valu that the natnalist rhetoric seeks to fend, th both nttg and externalizg homosexualy (Bompani Reference Bompani, van Klken and Chando2016; Currier Reference Currier2018; Kaoma Reference Kaoma2018; van Klken & Chando Reference van Klken and Chando2016; Manyonganise Reference Manyonganise, van Klken and Chando2016; McKay & Angotti Reference McKay and Angotti2016). There is also agreement on the rise of policized homophobia Ai recent years and the need to nsir s regnal dimensns, cludg the e of siar rhetoric and trop such as the “unAinns” of homosexualy and s immoraly (McKay & Angotti Reference McKay and Angotti2016; Bosia & Weiss Reference Bosia and Weiss2013).

However, the parallels mt not be nsted as signs of a uniform or unifyg phenomenon; though policized homophobia has risen as a key element of many polil stggl, be policized for different reasons and through different mechanisms each untry, and most scholars ll for a nuanced, -pth approach of each se to weigh the fluence of a wi range of factors such as socenomic tensns, relign, mocratizatn, and specific historil trajectori (Awondo et al.

Kapya Kaoma has hypothized that the succs of the anti-gay movement is due to the existence of domtic and global astctur for social mobilizatn and to the impact of globalizatn, which mak cultural imperialism a potent threat (Kaoma Reference Kaoma2018); and Tara McKay and Nile Angotti state that anti-homosexual disurs “are ma meangful through their tersectn wh other social and cultural logics particular historil moments” (McKay & Angotti Reference McKay and Angotti2016:401), th unrlg the need to explore each se separately. Therefore, “the reassertn of male power amed much of the natnalist disurse, ” and those who did not support the armed stggle “were brand as sell-outs/quislgs, loyal ‘lapdogs, ’ effemate (and often homosexual), too wardly to lay down their life for fay, culture and natn” (Parpart Reference Parpart, Parpart and Zalewski2008:187). Some have attributed this phenomenon and Mugabe’s dislike and creasgly equent attacks agast homosexuals to his relig tn and personal views (Epprecht Reference Epprecht2005, Reference Epprecht2013a), wh three episos often mentned to expla his vilence, cludg the outg of former print Canaan Banana, which led to persistent mors about past and prent officials and durably embarrassed the ernment (Gaidzanwa Reference Gaidzanwa and Ndlovu-Gatsheni2015); the 1999 attempt by Brish gay activist Peter Tatchell to have Mugabe arrted for torture, an episo which “angered Mugabe so much that he lled Tony Blair and his ernment ‘ltle men’ and acced them of ‘g gay gangster tactics’” (Gaidzanwa Reference Gaidzanwa and Ndlovu-Gatsheni2015:163); and the accatns of same-sex relatns leveraged agast the Mister of Informatn Jonathan Moyo 2002 which aga embarrassed the ernment (Human Rights Watch 2003).

HOW DO YOU KNOW IF YOU’RE GAY, STRAIGHT, OR SOMETHG BETWEEN?

Ined, his first famo attack me 1995 at the Zimbabwe Internatnal Book Fair; the ernment prohibed the Gays and Lbians of Zimbabwe (GALZ) anizatn om attendg the Fair, and Mugabe jtified his actns by sayg that he “[found] outrageo and repugnant to [his] human nscience that such immoral and repulsive anizatns like those of homosexuals, who offend both agents of the law of nature and the morals and relig beliefs poed by our society, should have any advot our midst or even elsewhere the world” (Campbell Reference Campbell2003:155). “Such unprecented assertns of dividual eedoms, gay inti, and the right to cricize if not outright mock one’s elrs were seen by the lg party as a dangero foot the door heraldg wir attacks om civil society” (Epprecht Reference Epprecht2013a:178), which explas the mountg attacks agast the anizatn. The choice of homosexuals as spegoats is not surprisg; as argued by Aarmo, homosexualy me to be viewed as a eful symbol bee reprented an ial other to this natnalist nstct, “a simple, bary opposn to the extend fay, the heterosexual, patrileal stutn that nstut the ‘cultural backbone’ of the cultural tradn Zimbabwe, ” even if this culture was actually an artificial nstct (Aarmo Reference Aarmo1999:268).

ROBERT MUGABE TO THE UN: WE ARE NOT GAYS

Notably, as Mugabe’s domant rhetoric shifted om liberatn history to a reemphasis on the Wt as the central enemy, homosexuals went om symbolizg the subordate masculy over which the liberators triumphed to the anti-Zimbabwean agents of imperialism, a rhetoril evolutn which allowed them to ntuoly embody the “other” of the natnalist nstct and be readily available to shore up support as requted by the circumstanc (Epprecht Reference Epprecht2013a; McKay & Angotti Reference McKay and Angotti2016). By September 1995, the Zimbabwean Parliament had voted favor of reprsg homosexuals, and Marc Epprecht relat that durg the trial of Canaan Banana’s bodyguard 1997, who admted to murrg the man who had lled him Banana’s wife, “the judge still felt that to name this relatnship public nstuted an sult so horrible that dimished [the murrer]’s rponsibily, ” betrayg the pth of prejudice agast homosexuals (Epprecht Reference Epprecht2013a:4). Durg the 1999 heargs related to the amendment of the Constutn, a sizeable number of people sought a ban on homosexualy and a Human Rights Watch Report found that “homosexualy […] galvanized prs and public alike” (Human Rights Watch 2003; Aarmo Reference Aarmo1999; Campbell Reference Campbell2003; Hoad Reference Hoad2007).

WHY ROBERT MUGABE JT SHOUTED "WE ARE NOT GAYS" HIS UN SPEECH

Ai had long been scribed by lonial ethnographers as a land of primive pury and th naturally heterosexual, a nsens which was later adopted and perpetuated by Ain scholars, ntributg to the imagg of homosexualy as foreign to Ai or limed to the darkt rners of lonial opprsn (Campbell Reference Campbell2003; Epprecht Reference Epprecht2008; Msibi Reference Msibi2011).

The HIV/AIDS epimic, dismissed as “a whe man’s disease or a surge amongst the few black men who, perhaps out of too much love for money, agree to be ma ‘wiv’ by whe perverts’” (Gundani Reference Gundani and Harold-Barry2004:97) as well as the disproportnate visibily of whe gay men, particularly South Ai, also ntributed to the image of homosexualy as whe, foreign, and distant (Hoad Reference Hoad2007).

It is th not surprisg that as South Ai was velopg s mocratic nstutn, which clud protectns for gay rights, Mugabe creasgly sought to portray his regime as the regnal protector of Ain valu agast “the South Ain polil learship’s pulatn to the ternatnal pal” (Campbell Reference Campbell2003:269). South Ai was rid for not beg Ainized enough and not havg won a ary victory; ed, “the class power Zimbabwe nsired themselv guardians of Ain male power, and the silent text of many of the tellectuals and lears Zimbabwe was that South Ai had succumbed to a nstutn that gave rights to gays and lbians bee s liberatn movement had not nquered power and were, hence, not ‘real men’” (Campbell Reference Campbell2003:166; McKay & Angotti Reference McKay and Angotti2016). Horace Campbell stat that “Prints Arap Moi of Kenya, Yoweri Meveni of Uganda, and Sam Mujona of Namibia reproduced [Mugabe’s] homophobic statements” (Campbell Reference Campbell2003:179); ed, “Print Sam Nujoma of Namibia vowed to ‘uproot’ homosexualy om Namibian society […] on December 6, 1996, employg almost intil rhetoric to that of his Zimbabwean unterpart” (Hoad Reference Hoad2007:77).

ROBERT MUGABE TO THE U.N.: ‘WE ARE NOT GAYS’

Former Tanzanian Print Jakaya Kikwete spelled out siar views an terview wh Christiane Amanpour (CNN 2014) while his succsor, John Magufuli, attacked gay rights activists 2017 by sayg that they brought to his untry “homosexual practic that even ws disapprove of” (Vox 2017), and was acced of enuragg harassment and policy btaly agast LGBTQ dividuals (HRW 2020). In addn, mt be noted that Mugabe’s speech created such an uproar the media bee was an easy source of dignatn, ftg nveniently wh the narrative of a homophobic and backward Ai, but was ma possible part by the rhetoric of the Wt, which promoted this view and pretend to e to the rcue whout nsirg lol practic or perceptns (Rao Reference Rao2014).

“WE ARE NOT GAYS”: REGIME PRERVATN AND THE POLICIZATN OF INTY MUGABE’S ZIMBABWE

It is likely that the dire material ndns Zimbabwe ultimately overtook inty ncerns and the specifici might not apply to other s where polil turnover had been more equent or socenomic ndns more favorable More rearch is th need to evaluate the populary and potency of policized homophobia different natnal ntexts and to asss the generalizabily of the fdgs. It therefore risks prentg more opportuni for each si of the bate to sre domtic polil pots (Kaoma Reference Kaoma2018) than allowg for any kd of progrs the protectn of mory rights and perpetuat harmful stereotyp about an overwhelmgly homophobic Ai when the realy, as shown, is much more plex.

‘I AM GAY – BUT I WASN’T BORN THIS WAY’

You so obvly nnot be gay, was her implitn, bee this is good was 2006, a full five years before Lady Gaga would set the Born This Way argument atop s unassailable cultural perch, but even then the popular unrstandg of orientatn was that was somethg you were born wh, somethg you uldn’t change. Throughout the same perd, the number of Amerins who believe homosexualy is “due to someone’s upbrgg/environment” fell om jt unr 60% to ias reached cril mass pop culture, first wh Lady Gaga’s 2011 Born This Way and one year later wh Macklemore’s Same Love, the chos of which has a gay person sgg “I n’t change even if I tried, even if I wanted to. In fact, the homophobic and non-homophobic rponnts he studied shared siar levels of belief a Born This Way Samantha Allen not at The Daily Beast, the growg public support for gays and lbians has grown out of proportn wh the rise the number of people who believe homosexualy is fixed at birth; would be unlikely that this small change opn uld expla the spike support for gay marriage, for stance.

The APA, for example, while notg that most people experience ltle to no choice over their orientatns, says this of homosexualy’s origs:“Although much rearch has examed the possible geic, hormonal, velopmental, social and cultural fluenc on sexual orientatn, no fdgs have emerged that perm scientists to nclu that sexual orientatn is termed by any particular factor or factors.

” Acrdg to LeVay’s rearch, a specific part of the bra, the third terstial nucls of the anterr hypothalam (INAH-3), is smaller homosexual men than is heterosexual as they might, scientists have stggled to inty any particular gen that nsistently predict the directns of our love and sire (Cred: Ignac Lehmann)Read moreYou n spot the problem wh this study a e away: were the gay bras LeVay studied born that way, or did they bee that way? Bis the dividual criqu leveled agast each new study announcg some gay gene disvery, there are major methodologil cricisms to make about the entire enterprise general, as Grzanka pots out: “If we look at the raveno pursu, particularly among Amerin scientists, to fd a gay gene, what we see is that the ncln has already been arrived at. “Limg our unrstandg of any plex human experience is always gog to be worse than allowg to be plited, ” he gay rights activists pared sexualy to relign - a ccial part of our life that we should be ee to practise however we like (Cred: Ignac Lehamann)So what are we to do wh the Born This Way rhetoric?

10 ANTI-GAY MYTHS DEBUNKED

There is a level of social and systemic privilege not afford to many members of the LGBTQ muny North Ameri, and certaly many untri around the is herently polilPri has been celebrated every year June sce 1970 after the 1969 Stonewall rts New York, when police raid the Stonewall Canada, Toronto’s Pri was lnched siar fashn after protts epted when police raid four bathho Febary 1981 and arrted hundreds of gay motive has always been — and should rema — polil.

NOTGAYS

The slg back of hard-earned rights and protectns of LGBTQ people, particularly transgenr people, is difficult to when straight people ask why there is a need for gay pri or wonr why there aren’t straight pri celebratns, feels a lot like they are sayg ntributns by LGBTQ people — a mory group that fac nstant adversy — are simply not worthy of regnn. Tuday September 29, 2015 Mugabe has a long history of homophobic remarks Rters Zimbabwe's lear cricised Wtern natns' attempts to 'proscribe new rights ntrary to our valu, norms, tradns and beliefs' Mugabe ed the Uned Natns podium on Monday eveng to attack homosexualy ont of the General Assembly. Ever sce born-aga sger and orange juice pchwoman Ana Bryant helped kick off the ntemporary anti-gay movement some 40 years ago, hard-le elements of the relig right have been searchg for ways to monize gay people — or, at a mimum, to fd arguments that will prevent their normalizatn society.

HOW TO KNOW IF YOU ARE GAY

But addn to hawkg that myth, the legns of anti-gay activists who followed have add a panoply of others, rangg om the extremely doubtful claim that sexual orientatn is a choice, to unalloyed li like the claims that gay men molt children far more than heterosexuals or that hate crime laws will lead to the legalizatn of btialy and necrophilia. The Amerin Amy of Child & Adolcent Psychiatry affirmed 2013 that “[c]urrent rearch shows that children wh gay and lbian parents do not differ om children wh heterosexual parents their emotnal velopment or their relatnships wh peers and adults” and they are “not more likely than children of heterosexual parents to velop emotnal or behavral problems.