Zimbabwean uple mand gay rights

Contents:

• “WE ARE NOT GAYS”: REGIME PRERVATN AND THE POLICIZATN OF INTY MUGABE’S ZIMBABWE
• ZIMBABWEAN UPLE MAND GAY RIGHTS
• CULTURE, LAW, AND DISCRIMATN AGAST GAY AND LBIAN LEARNERS ZIMBABWE
• FOR GAY ZIMBABWEANS, A DIFFICULT POLIL CLIMATE

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

The marriage bill that has brought up the ncept of civil partnerships has been precise fg as a relatnship between a man and a woman term on s own beg terpreted ternatnally to mean people same sex relatnships has ed the muny and bet to want to remove notg that bee has a gay ternatnal terpretatn th do not uphold the untri moral standards. 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.

This article th argu two pots: first that, buildg upon a nceptn of Zimbabwean inty that he had long worked to fe, 2015 Print Mugabe attempted to leverage a growg clash of disurs around homosexualy Ai to strengthen his posn natnal and regnal polics at a time of domtic crisis. Such a thick scriptn is necsary to fully unrstand not only the dynamics and the potency of policized homophobia Zimbabwe, but also the erosn of s power, and to do jtice to the historil specifici of the se as well as to the plexy of policized homophobia as a state strategy.

ZIMBABWEAN UPLE MAND GAY RIGHTS

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).

CULTURE, LAW, AND DISCRIMATN AGAST GAY AND LBIAN LEARNERS ZIMBABWE

Though the tactics are part of a wir effort at nstctg the natn agast s perceived enemi, policized homophobia prents some unique characteristics and serv to be explored as a standalone phenomenon wh specific nsequenc (Currier Reference Currier2010; Serrano-Amaya Reference Serrano-Amaya2018).

FOR GAY ZIMBABWEANS, A DIFFICULT POLIL CLIMATE

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).