The topic is persecution of LGBTQ+ folk
...where it's the result of colonialism.
There's not a soul that will deny the homophobia present in islamic states, but that's not the point of this article. You people just can't help yourself.
The point of the article is trying to explain the persistence of anti LGBTQIA+ legislation in the world. This is discussing an alternative (or in scientific terms, confounding variable) that challenges the absolute notions laid out in the article. I have no stake in this argument and am making no points against the British Empire or the Muslim religion, but to state that this discussion isn’t relevant to the article is frankly disingenuous.
As a bisexual man of historical UK origin, I can see and understand both impacts simultaneously. I also think we can discuss all forms of queerphobia simultaneously, and that it does a disservice to all my LGBTQIA+ comrades to dissent genuine discussion over the impacts of both colonialism and religion on the presence of queerphobia just because that’s not the specific angle of this specific article.
The tjing you quoted sure as hell isnt the title of it.
The main argument of the article is "Its all colonialism's fault" and people pointing put that its not.
Like yeah, you people, because anyone who critizes the treatment of minorities in Islamic States must be Islamophobic, just like anyone who critizises Isreal must be an Antisemite lol.
We get it you love doing an islamophobia and will jump at any opportunity to hate on it.
This isn't about islam right now bud, the topic's colonialism.
The topic is persecution of LGBTQ+ folk and unless we wanna exclude the majority of countries from that list, we should talk about Islamic Regimes.
Because surprise, surprise, a patriachical authoritarian religion will come down hard on dissenters :)
There's not a soul that will deny the homophobia present in islamic states, but that's not the point of this article. You people just can't help yourself.
The point of the article is trying to explain the persistence of anti LGBTQIA+ legislation in the world. This is discussing an alternative (or in scientific terms, confounding variable) that challenges the absolute notions laid out in the article. I have no stake in this argument and am making no points against the British Empire or the Muslim religion, but to state that this discussion isn’t relevant to the article is frankly disingenuous.
As a bisexual man of historical UK origin, I can see and understand both impacts simultaneously. I also think we can discuss all forms of queerphobia simultaneously, and that it does a disservice to all my LGBTQIA+ comrades to dissent genuine discussion over the impacts of both colonialism and religion on the presence of queerphobia just because that’s not the specific angle of this specific article.
The tjing you quoted sure as hell isnt the title of it. The main argument of the article is "Its all colonialism's fault" and people pointing put that its not. Like yeah, you people, because anyone who critizes the treatment of minorities in Islamic States must be Islamophobic, just like anyone who critizises Isreal must be an Antisemite lol.
We get it you love calling all objective criticisms of Islamic regimes Islamophobia and will jump an any opportunity to defend it.
He presented evidence that the proposition is faulty, bud. Address his evidence or keep scrolling.