The Reality of Living as a Gay Man in Egypt
One consequence of studying the contemporary Middle East is the two-fold worry that all new writing on the subject will, first, say what has already been said and, second, say it in a particularly long and tiresome way. To both of these points, ask yourself how many more turgid Edward Said-like riffs on “neo-colonialism” or “neo-imperialism” you could stomach, or how many analyses of the sociopolitical effects of Islam you could read, before you resolve to cast off such an ossified field for good.
It is refreshing, therefore, to pick up a collection of brief personal essays on the subject of what has been naively termed the “Arab Spring” and to be relieved with both clarity and brevity. Arab Spring Dreams, edited by the reformers Nasser Weddady and Sohrab Ahmari, brings together the personal vignettes of brave young writers from the region. The genre is what one might call flash non-fiction: brief, searing, emotional snapshots of life in repressive environments. Flash non-fiction works on the micro, not macro, level. We are spared geopolitical theorizing in favor of local color, to wit:
“The screech of tires snapped him back to attention, replacing the thoughts buzzing around his brain with an anxious immediacy. He stared at the cab driver behind the wheel, her mouth opening and closing over and over for no apparent reason. Her fillings flashed silver at him every few seconds. Her windows were up, rendering her comically mute despite her traffic-induced rage. He had had enough. He would walk the rest of the way. As he did, his mental disarray did not prevent him from giving due respect to the nonexistence of traffic laws in Cairo.”
The very slightly confusing pronouns aside, this passage could be many things: the beginning of a Frederick Forsyth novel, for instance, or one of those off-beat profiles of global eccentrics from The New Yorker. In fact, we have just been introduced to the twenty-two year old anonymous author-narrator of a piece titled “I Am Not Ayman!” Why is he not Ayman? Well, Ayman, a pseudonym for the author, is a gay man in Egypt, which is kind of like being a Jew in 15th century Spain: your identity is contingent on the whims of creed-obsessed despots. You can pretend to be something you’re not or you can take your chances on being who you actually are. In this case, the narrator is contemplating whether to identify himself to a potential lover. Doing so brings with it the possibility of being “outed” to the Egyptian secret police, as well as the more revolting possibility that the potential lover himself is the secret police.
Indeed, sexuality and intimacy figure prominently in many of these accounts, and this may be because these are always the first human impulses to be squashed by any kind of tyranny. We are reminded elsewhere that in Iran, gays are faced with the “choice” of either execution or “sex reassignment.” This is only slightly better than the Sudanese notion of “corrective rape,” which is as literal as it sounds.
Other stories come from writers in Morocco, Yemen, Lebanon, and Saudi Arabia. The themes are similar — political repression, inequality, family tension — but each story is beautifully unique in its style and delivery. It is hard to imagine a more enlightening and human book on a subject that is most often the province of robotic wonks and “analysts.” If there is one problem with the book, however, it must surely be the foreword by the aging feminist carnival-barker Gloria Steinem. This mendacious and pointless essay is written in the self-promoting tones of someone long out of ideas.
“This collection of brave and honest voices from the Middle East will inspire you,” writes Steinem, doing her best impression of a moderate. Those with longer memories may recall Ms. Steinem’s interview last year with Newsweek, in which she claimed that Mohammed Atta, leader of the terrorist-murderers of American Airlines Flight 11, was driven by his being “ridiculed by this authoritarian lawyer father who told him that even his older sisters were more masculine than he.” Therefore, “he became addicted to proving his masculinity. How clear is that?”
I’m not sure why “Arab Spring” is a naive term. It may not be a Spring of hope to us, but it is to Egypt. The fact is it is no longer a dictatorship but a country where people vote. So they fail as Westerners; why wouldn’t they, they’re a different culture. They’re not Westerners.
The Muslim Brotherhood and salafis didn’t seize power, they were voted in. The MB President won an extremely narrow vote, but a vote nonetheless.
From here on in, if Egypt has a Bill of Rights or no, a Constitution that is religious or no, it will be their decision, based on their culture. If they’re still stupid (in our eyes) that’s one thing, but at least it’s not one guy calling the shots. Before Muburak, anyone could be treated like a gay there.
If gays are discriminated in Egypt, at least there’s a mechanism in place that might lead out. Before there was none. We used to have Jim Crow. I doubt we thought much of other countries taking us to the cleaners on that one in 1960. If we’d had a dictatorship in place, Jim Crow would never have been dismantled until the dictatorship had been taken out. How would getting rid of the dictator have been an “American Winter?” Not changing and not being able to change are two different things.
Care to revisit your comment now that Morsi has declared himself dictator in all but name?
For what it’s worth, I agree with you that an Islamic democracy will not resemble a Western one because the cultures are too different. However, part of the difference will lie in the truth that Islamic religious law, Shari’a, does not lend itself to self-determination through voting. It is an autocratic, top-down system. The people of Egypt may very well have had their one and only meaningful vote.
The Muslim Brotherhood operates out of Chicago, and the so called “Arab-Spring” was planned. All eyes should be on Chicago
Patrick Fitzgerald and the Kabuki Dance of the Valerie Plame Thing
http://illinoispaytoplay.com/2012/11/24/patrick-fitzgerald-and-the-kabuki-dance-of-the-valerie-plame-thing/
IP2P gets to the real, bloody red meat. Good, good stuff.
Interesting points, I will say however – The MB said they wouldn’t run for office yet they did. Not to mention life under them will most likely get worse, not better.
Does this mean we’ve finally discovered the real BFE? Who would’ve thought…?
Most excellent! Kudos.
Discrimination against gays, women, whomever you pick matters in the big picture. Just by creating the perception that Republicans were anti everything we now have to deal with 4 more years.
It matters to the health of the overall competative economy in a big way. Egypt cannot afford to lose that.
Israel could not afford to lose the efforts of anyone in its early days. There is some controversy now about the Haredim, that aside for a moment. Morsi has in one sweep eliminated the judiciary. He did this on the heels of proving himself key to “resolving the cycle of violence between Israel and Gaza”.
Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss
…
And I get on my knees and pray
We won’t get fooled again
Snicker. A low blow, Matt.
As usual, Fail Burton really, really gets it. Broad vision, he has.
Just wanted to say this is an exceptionally well written piece.
More Mr. Wargas, please.
As sooner as a leader appears weak, the arab mob will turn on him.
Yes, it is indeed a pity that Egypt didn’t turn into the US after their revolution. What’s wrong with these people? Have we not shown them the way with our shining example? I guess not every country can be the Exceptional Nation.
Hate to be all cynical but are we sure these essays were written by “real” Arabs who have actually experienced the “Spring”? It’s just that we’ve been burnt so many times before and when I hear brave, gay, anonymous, emotional and well-written with a forward by Gloria Steinem it kinda sets off my internal alarm.
I’m not saying it can’t be legitimate but I find when things like this work out so perfectly, it’s best to view them with a gimlet eye.
I wish people wouldn’t basically equate being “gay” with being a woman or being black. There is no logical comparison and so demeans women and blacks. Being “gay” means choosing to engage in immoral sexual aberrations, while being black or female does not involve such choice. Also, a homosexual mind in a heterosexual body, like a (say) female mind in a male body, is a sure sign that something went wrong somewhere, is a sure sign of a disorder (a commonsense position taken by the APA for decades until it was corrupted by “political correctness”). And we know that it is irrational and immoral to treat disorders as though they were not disorders. The whole “gay rights” (sad wrongs) movement is regressive and needs to be opposed. Let’s progress not regress!
Well said Truthsayer. Some people try to make us believe that if you stick an artichoke between a peach and a banana it will somehow become sweet and earn the right to be called a fruit…
One can hide one’s sexual inclinations–sometimes. One can’t change them. During the millennia when homosexuality was a capital offense (until 1828 in Britain and to this very day in Iran and Saudi Arabia) there were always homosexuals. Would anyone simply choose homosexuality and risk one’s life in order to be annoying?
Judaism was defanged by the Talmud. Christianity was defanged by the Enlightenment. The only doctrines that have kept their fangs are Marxism and Islam.
“Dreams” is right. A similar story about gay men in Baghdad was published during the Iraq war. It was fake.
RE: the Gloria Steinham’s and their ilk, it is always utterly astonishing how, when the Western left is confronted with what Marx would’ve called “the inherent contradictions of (their ideology)”, namely the conflict between the values of the Western left, and the values of non-western, non-white peoples who that are in contradiction, they WILL choose the “sacred other” EVERY SINGLE TIME, and hurl their own leftist values over the side without a second thought.
It’s unfathomable. I remember a Norwegian “Minister of Women’s Rights” or some such, being asked about the proponderance of rapes by immigrant young men on Norwegian women, essentially saying “Well, we live in a multi-cultural society and we have to be aware, blah blah blah….” Translation: “Well, Helga, if you weren’t sashaying down the Trondheim boulevard in that short skirt of yours, this wouldn’t have happened, would it??”
In Berkley: QUIT…. Queers Undermining Israeli Terror. I’m sorry, which side has gay memebers of parliment, and which side kills them? I forget.
Again and again, the left will fight Americans and Westerners (conservatives) tooth and claw for A, B, and C…. but let a non-white immigrant take issue with those very things, and they will grovel before them, apologizing for their “judgementalism” or whatever other kind of masturbatory self-abasement will get them off at them moment with the magnificence of their own “tolerance”.
EVERY TIME they will make this choice, EVERY SINGLE TIME.
And given that that is the case, what DOES that make their true agenda. Gay Rights? Women’s empowerment? Don’t think so….. if that were true, the phenomena I speak of would never happen. Yet it ALWAYS happens. So those are NOT the true agendas here. It is in fact something else.
And I wonder what that might be??
“Liberal democracy” means, in realistic terms, the ability of a “liberal” elite to dictate to the rest of the people what their societal norms should be. The Arab Spring’s democratic movement has not brought liberal democracy to the Middle East any more than genuine democracy would have ever brought liberalism’s societal norms to the West. Given globalism’s cultural reach, however, there are still things we can learn from Islamic societies. For instance, Justices Ginsburg, Kagan and Sotomayor would all look better if they traded in their black robes for a burqa.
Only the restoration of colonial rule can save these people