Gay Rights versus Human Rights: A Response to Joseph Massad

Glq-a Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies, 2010

Millennium, 2018

Three recent books are discussed which offer queer analyses of attempts to protect lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) people from violence and discrimination using the international human rights regime. A common theme is the way in which equal rights are invoked and institutionalised to address prejudice, discrimination and violence. The take, however, is critical: while it may be a remarkable turn of events that the United Nations (UN) and similar institutions have become LGBTI advocates, such Damascene conversions generate their own dilemmas and rarely resolve structural and conceptual paradoxes. This article foregrounds the curiosity of queer scholars engaged with the application of human rights to matters of sexuality and gender, observes how they articulate the paradoxes and dissatisfactions that are produced in this normatively and politically charged field, and draws out the limitations and complexities of rights politics in combating systemic exclusion. Résumé La discussion porte sur trois ouvrages récents, qui utilisent la théorie queer pour analyser des tentatives de protection de membres de la communauté LGBTI contre la violence et la discrimination par le biais du régime international des droits humains. Un thème commun est la manière dont l'égalité des droits est convoquée et institutionnalisée afin de répondre au préjudice, à la discrimination et à la violence. Ce point de vue est toutefois crucial: les Nations Unies et d'autres institutions similaires, il est vrai, ont changé la donne de manière remarquable en devenant porte-paroles des groupes LGBTI, mais les conversions si éclatantes génèrent souvent leurs propres dilemmes, et manquent généralement de résoudre les paradoxes structurels et

The question of homosexual rights presents a formidable dilemma for contemporary Islam. And this is especially so as the Islamic world generally accepts human rights as valid aspirations, so much so that a number of scholars do not hesitate to include these as one of the higher objectives of the sharī'ah (maqāṣid al-sharī'ah). This is why when calls for homosexual rights or gay rights as valid human rights are made, they attract mixed reactions.

ackground: The sexual is a vital aspect human rights and should be inherent in a democracy as equality, privacy, liberty and dignity are. Aim: The aim of this study is to alert judicial officers, politicians and policy-makers to do away with discrimination of people on the basis of their sex and to afford homosexuals (gay and lesbians) the same constitutional rights of dignity and the expression of their sexuality. These aims or objectives are being achieved by basing the study mainly on a theoretical scope. Methodology: The databases from which the author draws are books, case law, and internet sources. This study is a serious inquiry based on original data. The article demonstrates knowledge on the latest research-based literature on the topic and is universal in nature. The research covered the notions or perceptions of several jurisdictions, such as New Zealand, South Africa, United States of America and Muslim countries in the Middle and Far East. By coupling these different countries the study evokes a holistic picture of the rights to be afforded to homosexuals. Result: An analysis of American case laws for example in State of Oklahoma v Neil and Bernina Mata and Middle and Far Eastern judicature on homosexuality, have established that the unjust and discriminatory treatment was meted out to certain people because they were homosexuals. South Africa, in case law National Coalition for Gay and Lesbian Equality v Minister of Home Affairs, posed a rather positive approach to these marginalized group of people to such extent that gay and lesbian rights are being recognized in its constitutional framework. Conclusion: The article pursues results where rights to liberty and respect for gay and lesbians and other minority groups to be established and these results been promulgated into law. In conclusion, it is worth note that the laws of South Africa paved the way for other countries to adopt a policy of tolerance towards homosexuals who also formed part of the community and deserved its protection like other heterosexual beings.

The culture wars over homosexuality in the Middle East are studied here in the context of the theoretical debate on culture in International Relations and, more specifically, through a critical examination of postcolonial international theory. The paper argues that, although postcolonialism can offer a useful framework, it also has, in its poststructuralist variants, significant limitations in addressing the controversial issues surrounding homosexuality as cultural battleground in the Middle East. These limitations derive from an unconvincing interpretation of the relationship between the Middle East and modernity; and a problematic approach towards moral agency. The paper serves a dual purpose. Through the use of the empirical material, it furthers the debate within postcolonial international theory by bringing evidence to bear in support of its humanist or materialist strands. The theoretical discussion, in turn, by highlighting the intertwining of culture and power in the debates on homosexuality, strengthens the case for respecting homosexual rights in the Middle East region.

Journal of Human Rights, 2019

Sexual minorities are the most vulnerable minorities on the planet. Their existence challenges cultural norms, traditions, and power structures. They have been treated as social pariahs and scapegoats for the economic, political, or social ills in their countries. However, countries vary widely in the extent to which they are protective or repressive toward lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender individuals. This article systematically analyzes the global persecution and protection of sexual minorities through the application of the F&M Global Barometer of Gay Rights TM (GBGR). Using GBGR world data from 2011 to 2014, we document the variance in levels of state and societal persecution and protection of sexual minorities in 188 countries. Our findings suggest that having a higher life expectancy, a democratic system, a lower percentage of rural population, and lower religiosity are significant predictors of whether a country will be more rights-protective toward its sexual minorities. All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. All human rights are universal, interdependent, indivisible and interrelated. Sexual orientation and gender identity are integral to every person's dignity and humanity and must not be the basis for discrimination or abuse. (International Commission of Jurists [ICJ] (2007) Although substantial inroads have been made in the Western world toward human rights legislation protecting sexual minorities, the global situation for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) 1 individuals is still perilous. The Ugandan, Nigerian, and Russian governments' implementation of harsh antihomosexuality laws suggests a dangerous counter trend to the advances in gay rights made in other countries. Sexual minorities represent the epitome of individualism, and are often perceived to be a threat to the collective, and to the very health of a society. They are often social pariahs and scapegoats for the economic, political and social ills in their countries. However, there is wide variance between countries and their protection or repression of sexual minorities. For example, in 2016 there were twenty-five countries in the world that allowed gay marriage, 2 and ten that punished homosexuality with death. 3 What accounts for this global variance in tolerance and intolerance of sexual minorities? This article systematically analyzes the persecution and protection of sexual minorities in 188 countries

On June 26th 2015, the United States Supreme Court legalized same sex marriage. Similarly, the adoption of the United Nations Human Rights resolution for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) rights during its 27th session in September 2014 by a 25-14 vote margin after more than an hour of debate, condemns violence and discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity across the globe. Some countries from the South such as Pakistan's representative to the U.N. Human Rights Council called it a " divisive and controversial initiative. " While Saudi Arabia's representative during debate said; " We feel there is an attempt to impose uniculturality that runs counter to religious and cultural practices of some countries; in my opinion, this (resolution) is a human rights violation. " As this resolution was passed, Russia's Constitutional Court upheld their country's anti-gay " propaganda " law 1. This paper is a desk review which explores contending theoretical debates on same sex marriage (SSM) discourse and suggests that SSM is not akin to sustainable human development. It advances a novel theoretical argument which classifies SSM as virtual and unsustainable union beyond human rights debate. It recognizes the emotions of LGBTs but argues for an alternative, namely; green sexuality-a union between a man and woman rooted in procreation and conjugal bliss. It demonstrates that SSM falls short of these criteria. The paper suggests that the union of man and man or woman and woman should have a distinct classification other than marriage in the conventional context. This theme is important in contemporary global sexuality debate both as analytical and policy instrument to reexamine Western rights notion and amenable ways to douse violent attacks ,stigmatization and discrimination on LGBTs, in particular, re –examine sexuality beyond Western " human rights " rhetoric or is the world experiencing a clash of sexuality?