Homophobia as a Tool of Statecraft

Abstract

This chapter demonstrates how the Iranian state, far from being the pawn of Western machinations, has varied its stance toward homosexuality in pursuit of its objectives—namely modernization, consolidation, and most recently, deliberalization. In doing so, it has refashioned family and gender relations, positioned itself concerning the imperial appetites of the West, and centralized and expanded its power. To trace how this happened, the chapter anchors the story around three moments in which anti-homosexual rhetoric and practice have been deployed. First is the modernization moment lasting from the early nineteenth century to the onset of the Iranian Revolution in 1979. Second is the Islamic nation-state consolidation moment following the revolution. Third is the conservative backlash following the attempted liberalization of 1997 and persisting until today.

THE POLITICS OF RECOGNIZABILITY: GIVING AN ACCOUNT OF IRANIANGAYMEN’S LIVES UNDER REPRESSIVE CONDITIONS OF SEXUALITY GOVERNANCE

“…In this respect what is iterated is a need for ongoing interrogation and reframing vis-à-vis the norms governing self-recognition and becoming/being recognized as a sexual subject under particular historico-political circumstances. 32 This position is consistent with Butler's stance concerning the political ramifications of how one is addressed as a particular subject. How one is addressed relates to an ethical consideration of what particular forms of address say about the framing of one's subjectivity or identity, and "the range of human possibility that exists, and even to prepare ourselves for or against such possibilities."…”

“We Are Not Gays”: Regime Preservation and the Politicization of Identity in Mugabe’s Zimbabwe

“…In these works, politicized homophobia is mainly understood as a tactic of othering, similar to other processes of nationalist construction stressing the distinction between the collective “we” and the outsiders (Slootmaeckers 2019). As such, it is usually deployed either in situations of political competition for control of the state, as in José Fernando Serrano-Amaya’s study of its role in political transitions, or as a tactic of regime preservation through the invention of a common enemy conjured up at critical junctures and against which the state can coordinate efforts (Amusan et al 2019; Bosia & Weiss 2013; Korycki & Nasirzadeh 2013 ; Serrano-Amaya 2018). It is in this context that politicized homophobia comes to encompass more than sexual minorities and is applied to all critics of the state, bundled together and dismissed through these attacks (Currier 2018), as was the case in Zimbabwe.…”

The anticipatory politics of homophobia: explaining constitutional bans on same-sex marriage in post-communist Europe

“…For example, whether family law discriminates against women appears to be related to the institutionalisation of religious authority (Htun and Weldon 2015). Scholars have documented religious involvement with LGBTI-related in places as far apart as Iran (Korycki and Nasirzadeh 2013), Romania (Turcescu and Stan 2005) and Zambia (Van Klinken 2013). It is conceivable that national churches drove the demand for constitutional bans on same-sex marriage.…”