The real Palestinian suffering, arising from the oppression of gay Palestinians — a grave societal issue in the environment of Palestinian culture permeated by Islam — is hidden by anti-Israel propaganda, which focuses on various political issues, publicizing a plethora of images aimed at delegitimizing Israel, like these below, obviously taken out of context:
Courtesy: The Ugly Truth Colateral damage occurring despite Israel’s strenuous efforts to prevent civilian casualties
Courtesy: The Ugly Truth Unavoidable collateral damage in Israel’s defense military actions
This pro-Palestinian propaganda manages to distract our attention from the fact that even in Israel, which proudly calls itself “the gay capital of the world,” the Palestinian (called “Israeli Arabs”) gays are shunned and shamed by their own community.
By contrast, the open-minded Jewish attitude, informed by the spirit of social and political justice, explains why only Jews (in Israel and elsewhere) react with understanding, sympathy and support to the victims of Palestinian/Muslim bigotry and attempt to bring the world’s attention back to the essential core of Palestinian suffering: anti-gay oppression.
In this regard, the article below touched me deeply. The Jewish author interviewed three Palestinians, I mean Israeli Arabs, with sensitivity and percipient understanding of their pain. The Jewish humanism, ready to embrace non-Jews (if only they were embraceable), shows in the author’s observation that the three Palestinian gays interviewed cleaned up so nicely that they could almost pass for Jews!
I was also moved to read that the Palestinian gays suffer as much as the Israelis from the rockets rained on Israel by Hamas. Nevertheless, fully fair and objective, these gays admit that there are issues they are inconvenienced by even from the Israeli side. One of the Palestinian gays describes some of the obstacles he encounters in Israel as a Palestinian, like for example the fact that on the airport (albeit obviously Palestinians travel as freely as Jews), while his Jewish lover is already shopping in the Duty Free Shop, he, as a Palestinian, is still being processed by Passport control. I recommend reading this highly informative article (below) in its entirety.
A personal observation: It is sad to see that while Jews are actively involved in helping Palestinians to see and rectify the infringement of the human rights of the gays and the badly needed emancipation of women in their community, the Palestinians continue to be deaf to the cries of help of the oppressed Jewish women in Israel.
Such backward and injurious practices demeaning Jewish women — amazingly still in force in the only democracy in the ME — like the “get,” or the sheet with a hole in the middle, etc, are never even mentioned by any progressive Palestinian human rights advocate. In fact, there is not a single Palestinian NGO that devotes any attention to the plight of Israel’s largest minority: women. No reciprocity of interest in the human rights problems: it is all unidirectional, from Israel to the Palestinians.
This Monday, July 27, 2015 photo shows Khader Abu Seif, from left, Naeem Jiryes and Fadi Daeem, protagonists of the documentary movie “Oriented” during an interview with The Associated Press in Jaffa, mixed Jewish-Arab part of Tel Aviv, Israel. The privately funded film is British director Jake Witzenfeld’s first feature documentary. It premiered in June at the Sheffield Film Festival in England and the Los Angeles Film Festival in the United States but has not made it to the Middle East yet. (AP Photo/Eyal Warshavsky)
TEL AVIV, Israel (AP) — During last summer’s Gaza war, Khader Abu Seif was living with his then Israeli boyfriend in Tel Aviv, wondering whether Hamas rockets could reach them from the coastal strip.
He thought yet again of the dichotomy of his life as a gay Arab Israeli citizen considered an outcast by the Palestinian society for his sexuality and viewed with unease by some Israelis for his brand of nationality.
The rockets were not the only thing that made him feel unsafe.
Outside, Israeli extremists rallied on the streets against Hamas’ attacks with chants of “Death to Arabs.” Abu Seif was afraid to speak Arabic, his mother tongue, in his native Tel Aviv, the Middle East’s most gay-friendly city.
For the 27-year-old, a well-known socialite in Tel Aviv’s LGBT community, the city is a haven for gay men, but Abu Seif says he considers himself a Palestinian and that as such, he can never fully integrate.
His struggles, along with those of two other protagonists are the subject of “Oriented,” a new Israeli documentary, touted as the first to focus on gay Palestinian citizens.
The privately funded film is British director Jake Witzenfeld’s first feature documentary. It premiered in June at the Sheffield Film Festival in England and the Los Angeles Film Festival in the United States but has not made it to the Middle East yet.
During an interview this week at a spacious apartment in Jaffa — the mixed Arab-Jewish city merged with Tel Aviv — the three protagonists of “Oriented,” sporting the latest trend in beards, could easily be mistaken for any hip Jewish residents of Tel Aviv.
The liberal Israeli city is considered a gay refuge in an otherwise largely intolerant Middle East, where in some places, gays are persecuted and sometimes killed. Same-sex relations are punishable by death in Iran, Mauritania, Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Yemen. Some gay Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip have fled their conservative homes to come out in Tel Aviv. Even in Jerusalem, the same gay friendly climate does not always thrive.
Abu Seif is critical of Israel, his country of citizenship, over its policies toward Palestinians but also criticizes the Palestinian society, where homosexuality remains taboo and where there is little tolerance for gays.
On his documents, he is an Arab citizen of Israel, like the two other protagonists in “Oriented” — 27-year-old Fadi Daeem and 26-year-old Naeem Jiryes. The Arab minority makes up about 20 percent of Israel’s population.
All three are fluent in both Arabic and Hebrew and easily switch between the languages. But while in Tel Aviv their sexuality is hardly an issue, they say their national identity is.
“At the airport while my Jewish partners … are already at the duty free, I’m still being checked,” said Abu Seif, referring to the extra level of scrutiny Arab Israelis often face. “So I’m for sure not an Israeli gay man. I’m gay something. So I’m gay Palestinian.”
Daeem, who works as a nurse, said he was initially hesitant to be part of the documentary because of the stigma among some Palestinians that such films “normalize” relations with Israel.
His colleagues in Israel often “don’t understand how a guy living in Israel still identifies himself as Palestinian, especially when he’s gay,” Daeem added. And to add another complex layer to his personal life, Daeem is now living with an Israeli partner.
In addition to their Palestinian identities, the film also explores how each of the three friends dealt with their families’ reactions when they came out.
Daeem’s family, the more liberal one, has entirely accepted his lifestyle, while Abu Seif says he is close with his mother but has not been in contact with his father, who refused to accept that he is gay.
Jiryes, the most shy of the three, came out to his conservative family during the shooting of the film and their relationship has been strained since — his parents insisted that he see a psychiatrist, arguing that he must be “sick” or “in a phase.”
This Monday, July 27, 2015 photo, shows Fadi Daeem, from left, Khader Abu Seif and Naeem Jiryes, protagonists of the documentary movie “Oriented” during an interview with The Associated Press in Jaffa, mixed Jewish-Arab part of Tel Aviv, Israel. The movie follows the lives of the three gay Palestinian friends in Tel Aviv, confronting their national and sexual identity. (AP Photo/Eyal Warshavsky)
Despite the freedom of coming out, Daeem said he would not urge every Palestinian to do so because of the difficulties it entails. “I’m always careful to talk about it to tell people to come out,” he said.
In the film, the three grapple with contradictions that are part of their lives as gay Palestinians and Israeli Arab citizens, and compare themselves to Palestinian gays living in the West Bank and Gaza.
“I think that in the Palestinian society, the (LGBT) struggle exists underground,” Daeem said, citing a growing gay life in Ramallah, the central Palestinian city in the West Bank. “It evolves gradually.”
Witzenfeld, the British director, said that as a Jew, he was “intrigued by this Palestinian national gay voice coming out of Tel Aviv.”
“The film is shifting people to these gray spaces were you are forced to confront these complicated identities,” Witzenfeld said.
The three friends plan to someday show the film in Israeli and Palestinian communities, though they say “it will be hard” to do so.
For Abu Seif, it’s important that he identifies himself as a Palestinian, rather than an Arab Israeli.
“This is my basic right to define myself as a Palestinian, because if I didn’t do it, my people will be forgotten,” he said. “And I think if I didn’t do it my (Palestinian) people will not have to face the fact that I exist” as a gay man.
Ah, the Jews…trying to get you to see how it’s really the Palestinians who are evil for not supporting gay rights, while Jews burn babies alive with white phosphorous. What will Jewish marketing come up with next?
I’m sorry, but why is this homosexuality rubbish being pushed on to TUT? You keep doing this your credibility will erode. Guaranteed.
Citizen, what exactly do you think is being “pushed”? What “homosexuality rubbish”? Your comment doesn’t make it clear. Be so kind to explain so I may understand your p.o.v.
I agree with citizen t, I am very much turned off by the contents of this article. I am wondering what kind message in this article it is trying to convey? Since the article does not give the source, I can only guess it comes from Jewish source. It is tasteless Jewish homosexuality rubbish.
@ Ariadnatheo
There are two things missing in this post:
1) is not given the source
2) No editor’s note – that means the person posted this article completely in agreement with its
tasteless content
Citizen and truthforever99:
Guys,
1. Click on the title in blue, New film Highlights Struggle, etc. It takes you to the original source, which was this: https://www.yahoo.com/movies/s/film-highlights-struggles-gay-palestinians-israel-064633490.html
2. Just because there are no ‘editorial comments” flagged as such does not mean that the “person who posted it” (that would be me…) is “in complete agreement” with anything in that article. You can tell that by the PRESENTATION of the issue.
Can you seriously think that the claim that the slaughter of Palestinian children (with two large photos as illustrations) is a side issue to the “suffering” of Palestinian gays?
Did you think that this statement:
“The Jewish humanism, ready to embrace non-Jews (if only they were embraceable)” was anything but sarcasm? If none of that screams “sarcasm” I don’t know what does.
Read it again, please. Keep in mind that everything outside of the article is in fact editorial comment.
NLG got it right. Thanks, NLG.
@ ariadnatheo
I believe you are fairly new as an editor on TUT.
I would like to make two suggestions re your future posts on TUT:
1) Please always give the source in the beginning of your post, so there would be no misunderstanding between the person posting the article and his/her reader. For example, since
this article “Palestinian Suffering: The Gays” is not given the source, I thought you (the person posting the article) wrote it, even worse, since TUT allowed you to post it, that means the article represents TUT’s stand for the issue.
I believe most readers are just like citizen t and me, we are not as keen and patient as NLG. After reading the first several paragraphs of this pure Jewish propaganda rubbish, we would just dump it in disgust before we can judge it is just “sarcasm”
2) For a controversial article like “Palestinian Suffering: The Gays” it would be better represented with editor’s note, the readers would like to know editor’s opinion and analysis on the issue. For example, in my opinion, Mark Glenn’s editors notes usually are the real gems of his posts on TUT.
Yes, I am new in the neighborhood, truthforever, so I don’t know my new audience well. I am not sure that most readers, as you say, have difficulty detecting sarcasm but even if only two of them have this problem it is sufficient for me to take your advice into account.
It is true that TUT uses the format of placing an editorial comment before the article and the two never mix. Will definitely keep it in mind.
The article “Palestinian Suffering: the Gays” as published originally had a different title, as you can see from the link. I gave it that title to underline the absurdity and cynicism of this diversionary Jewish propaganda ploy.
I don’t know why you call it “controversial,” which implies there might be two sides to the issue. I would have gone for–take your pick — nauseating, disgusting, outrageous, cynical and deceiving.
Thanks again for your comment. Will aim for real gems myself henceforth.
PS to my comments to truthforever99:
I have re-read my entire editorial comment that precedes the actual article and for the life of me I still don’t see how it can be taken for anything but HEAVY SARCASM from beginning to end. The sarcasm is obviously directed at the Jews but I delivered a glancing slap to the Palestinian gay as well:
to anyone who knows the torture endured by Palestinians as checkpoints (including seriously ill people and pregnant women), the whining of the Palestinian gay for not being able to join his Jewish lover in the Duty Free shop fast enough is disgusting.
@ ariadnatheo
In the past I was regularly donating some small quotes ($US 10…30.- I am on very tight budget, alas).
Now, when you showed your true position, I will not donate even a cent, how long you wil stay at the TUT.
Jacek, please know that:
1. Donations are obviously voluntary. There is only one reason to donate, a strong one, valid for all at all times; there are scores of personal reasons to choose not to at a given point in time.
2. No explanations are needed for NOT donating
3. What “true position” of mine you are talking about is a mystery to me. Please don’t use me as a pretext.
See #2.
The article was written by some one who does not understand the suffering of the Palestinian people and I just took it as a sarcasm from the people who wrote it. At least we in this blog know the reality of what its going on there.
I’ll keep donating. in this blog I can have people who share my thinking.
Yes, Isaac, it was all sarcasm, not blindness to the suffering of Palestinian people. The disgusting noise made by the Jews who profess to worry about the “suffering” of Palestinian/Arab gays, the same tribe that directly or indirectly supports the slaughter of Palestinian children can only be treated with sarcasm.
They can no longer fool anyone and I think the number of people who see the reality for what it is is larger than the readers of this bog and growing.
@ Ariadnatheo
How come you don’t understand that the your version of “sarcasm” can be taken as the truth – by younger or less educated about suffering Palestinians?
Jacek, I grant you there are still too many people (not all young or otherwise uneducated) who are unaware of the Palestinian suffering. They have the Jewish-owned mass media to thank for it.
I thought, however, than common sense would make even them do a double take at the proposition presented (in something marked “Satire” to boot) that:
• The Jews are keen to end Palestinian suffering, namely that of ….. Palestinian gays (forget incinerated children, forget thousands imprisoned without charge in “administrative detention, forget house demolitions, etc);
• We should sympathize with the Palestinian gays interviewed, one of whom is frustrated by not being able to join his Jewish lover soon enough in the Duty Free Shop, because, see, the article is so “objective” it tells us that the guy suffers not only the rejection of his bigoted countrymen but also the inconveniences of Israel’s laws and regulations (forget the open-air prison that is Gaza, forget the road blocks where Palestinians wait for hours to pass from one village to another in their own land).
I seem to have thought wrong and my sarcasm (not my “version”: sarcasm is sarcasm, is sarcasm) was not as readily apparent as I believed.
Nevertheless I now rest assured that should this befall me again, this kind of dialog in the Comment section will put the issue to rights.
If you allow me, I’d like to designate you my Catcher in the Rye. Watch me, Jacek. Watch me like a hawk and if I falter again, pull the alarm. (NOTE: this was NOT sarcasm, just a humorous, Jacek-friendly and sincere way of putting it.) All you have to do is write a comment that just says: “Proceed with caution: SID! (“Sarcasm Improvised Device”). Deal?
Ah, the Jews…trying to get you to see how it’s really the Palestinians who are evil for not supporting gay rights, while Jews burn babies alive with white phosphorous. What will Jewish marketing come up with next?
I’m sorry, but why is this homosexuality rubbish being pushed on to TUT? You keep doing this your credibility will erode. Guaranteed.
Citizen, what exactly do you think is being “pushed”? What “homosexuality rubbish”? Your comment doesn’t make it clear. Be so kind to explain so I may understand your p.o.v.
I agree with citizen t, I am very much turned off by the contents of this article. I am wondering what kind message in this article it is trying to convey? Since the article does not give the source, I can only guess it comes from Jewish source. It is tasteless Jewish homosexuality rubbish.
@ Ariadnatheo
There are two things missing in this post:
1) is not given the source
2) No editor’s note – that means the person posted this article completely in agreement with its
tasteless content
Citizen and truthforever99:
Guys,
1. Click on the title in blue, New film Highlights Struggle, etc. It takes you to the original source, which was this:
https://www.yahoo.com/movies/s/film-highlights-struggles-gay-palestinians-israel-064633490.html
2. Just because there are no ‘editorial comments” flagged as such does not mean that the “person who posted it” (that would be me…) is “in complete agreement” with anything in that article. You can tell that by the PRESENTATION of the issue.
Can you seriously think that the claim that the slaughter of Palestinian children (with two large photos as illustrations) is a side issue to the “suffering” of Palestinian gays?
Did you think that this statement:
“The Jewish humanism, ready to embrace non-Jews (if only they were embraceable)” was anything but sarcasm? If none of that screams “sarcasm” I don’t know what does.
Read it again, please. Keep in mind that everything outside of the article is in fact editorial comment.
NLG got it right. Thanks, NLG.
@ ariadnatheo
I believe you are fairly new as an editor on TUT.
I would like to make two suggestions re your future posts on TUT:
1) Please always give the source in the beginning of your post, so there would be no misunderstanding between the person posting the article and his/her reader. For example, since
this article “Palestinian Suffering: The Gays” is not given the source, I thought you (the person posting the article) wrote it, even worse, since TUT allowed you to post it, that means the article represents TUT’s stand for the issue.
I believe most readers are just like citizen t and me, we are not as keen and patient as NLG. After reading the first several paragraphs of this pure Jewish propaganda rubbish, we would just dump it in disgust before we can judge it is just “sarcasm”
2) For a controversial article like “Palestinian Suffering: The Gays” it would be better represented with editor’s note, the readers would like to know editor’s opinion and analysis on the issue. For example, in my opinion, Mark Glenn’s editors notes usually are the real gems of his posts on TUT.
Yes, I am new in the neighborhood, truthforever, so I don’t know my new audience well. I am not sure that most readers, as you say, have difficulty detecting sarcasm but even if only two of them have this problem it is sufficient for me to take your advice into account.
It is true that TUT uses the format of placing an editorial comment before the article and the two never mix. Will definitely keep it in mind.
The article “Palestinian Suffering: the Gays” as published originally had a different title, as you can see from the link. I gave it that title to underline the absurdity and cynicism of this diversionary Jewish propaganda ploy.
I don’t know why you call it “controversial,” which implies there might be two sides to the issue. I would have gone for–take your pick — nauseating, disgusting, outrageous, cynical and deceiving.
Thanks again for your comment. Will aim for real gems myself henceforth.
PS to my comments to truthforever99:
I have re-read my entire editorial comment that precedes the actual article and for the life of me I still don’t see how it can be taken for anything but HEAVY SARCASM from beginning to end. The sarcasm is obviously directed at the Jews but I delivered a glancing slap to the Palestinian gay as well:
to anyone who knows the torture endured by Palestinians as checkpoints (including seriously ill people and pregnant women), the whining of the Palestinian gay for not being able to join his Jewish lover in the Duty Free shop fast enough is disgusting.
@ ariadnatheo
In the past I was regularly donating some small quotes ($US 10…30.- I am on very tight budget, alas).
Now, when you showed your true position, I will not donate even a cent, how long you wil stay at the TUT.
Jacek, please know that:
1. Donations are obviously voluntary. There is only one reason to donate, a strong one, valid for all at all times; there are scores of personal reasons to choose not to at a given point in time.
2. No explanations are needed for NOT donating
3. What “true position” of mine you are talking about is a mystery to me. Please don’t use me as a pretext.
See #2.
The article was written by some one who does not understand the suffering of the Palestinian people and I just took it as a sarcasm from the people who wrote it. At least we in this blog know the reality of what its going on there.
I’ll keep donating. in this blog I can have people who share my thinking.
Yes, Isaac, it was all sarcasm, not blindness to the suffering of Palestinian people. The disgusting noise made by the Jews who profess to worry about the “suffering” of Palestinian/Arab gays, the same tribe that directly or indirectly supports the slaughter of Palestinian children can only be treated with sarcasm.
They can no longer fool anyone and I think the number of people who see the reality for what it is is larger than the readers of this bog and growing.
@ Ariadnatheo
How come you don’t understand that the your version of “sarcasm” can be taken as the truth – by younger or less educated about suffering Palestinians?
Jacek, I grant you there are still too many people (not all young or otherwise uneducated) who are unaware of the Palestinian suffering. They have the Jewish-owned mass media to thank for it.
I thought, however, than common sense would make even them do a double take at the proposition presented (in something marked “Satire” to boot) that:
• The Jews are keen to end Palestinian suffering, namely that of ….. Palestinian gays (forget incinerated children, forget thousands imprisoned without charge in “administrative detention, forget house demolitions, etc);
• We should sympathize with the Palestinian gays interviewed, one of whom is frustrated by not being able to join his Jewish lover soon enough in the Duty Free Shop, because, see, the article is so “objective” it tells us that the guy suffers not only the rejection of his bigoted countrymen but also the inconveniences of Israel’s laws and regulations (forget the open-air prison that is Gaza, forget the road blocks where Palestinians wait for hours to pass from one village to another in their own land).
I seem to have thought wrong and my sarcasm (not my “version”: sarcasm is sarcasm, is sarcasm) was not as readily apparent as I believed.
Nevertheless I now rest assured that should this befall me again, this kind of dialog in the Comment section will put the issue to rights.
If you allow me, I’d like to designate you my Catcher in the Rye. Watch me, Jacek. Watch me like a hawk and if I falter again, pull the alarm. (NOTE: this was NOT sarcasm, just a humorous, Jacek-friendly and sincere way of putting it.) All you have to do is write a comment that just says: “Proceed with caution: SID! (“Sarcasm Improvised Device”). Deal?
No, thanks