Dear friends,
Over the last few years a number of timely publications have illuminated the connections between gender and sexuality, the War on Terror and racialisation. One of these is Out of Place: Interrogating Silences in Queerness/Raciality, edited by Adi Kuntsman and Esperanza Miyake and published by Raw Nerve Books in 2008. An edited collection examining intersections between race and sexuality in the United Kingdom, Out of Place joins Jasbir Puar's Terrorist Assemblages as a key contribution to this debate. Alongside other contributions in Out of Place, the chapter "Gay Imperialism: Gender and Sexuality Discourse in the War on Terror", by Jin Haritaworn, Tamsila Tauqir and Esra Erdem pointed to the continuing deployment of queerness as a symbol of "freedom" to rationalise the continuing wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and future wars in Iran and elsewhere, as well as to rationalise restrictive and racist immigration policies in "Western" or "liberal" nations. "Gay Imperialism" uses the work of activist Peter Tatchell, founder of Outrage!, as an example of how white gay activists can become complicit with this agenda by painting Islam as inherently homophobic and misogynist, and appointing themselves as the saviours of non-white queers.
On September 7th, Raw Nerve Books declared Out of Place to be out of print, removed it from circulation and sale, and issued an online apology to Peter Tatchell. Presumably this is the result of threats of legal action by Tatchell and Outrage!. The apology quotes its own publication to apologise for what it accepts as defamatory statements and misrepresentation of Tatchell and Outrage! by Haritaworn, Tauqir and Erdem. These include:
1. that Tatchell is "Islamaphobic" and "part of the Islamaphobia industry"
2. that Tatchell is "racist"
3. that Tatchell "sling[s] mud onto Muslim communities"
As one sees if one reads "Gay Imperialism", these so-called accusations are all taken grossly out of context and reduce the complexity of Haritaworn, Tauqir and Erdem's argument. The apology continues by obsequiously praising Tatchell and Outrage!'s "anti-racist" work, and making further accusations against a number of African LGBT activists, who had refused to work with Tatchell precisely because of his paternalistic attitude, and who are cited in "Gay Imperialism".
It seems likely that Tatchell's lawyers presented Raw Nerve with an already-written apology and asked them to sign and publish it. Tatchell is notoriously litigious. He is equally notorious for staging highly publicised, "one man" actions that appear to have just as much to do with his public image as a gay celebrity activist as any political work. However, Tatchell himself is not important here. What is important is that this critique is evidently so threatening to Tatchell and to the book's publishers that it must be removed from circulation, and the authors must be condemned as liars.
This incident proves something about how difficult it is to do anti-racist work. Pointing out racism, no matter how carefully we might phrase it and no matter which arguments we have about the use of the word 'racism', is often perceived as a personal and individual affront. Those so accused often appear to find it wounding or traumatic -- psychically wounding, but more importantly, wounding to their public image. "How dare you accuse me of racism? I am not racist; I have lots of friends who are people of color!" goes the cliched defensive response we are all familiar with. This way, the person or organisation critiqued can escape engaging with the content of the critique and put the burden of proof back on the person who raised the issue. It is not coincidental that the person making a critique of racism is often non-white, deploying old colonial stereotypes that people of colour are untrustworthy ingrates who don't know what's good for them. This problem of white, "well-intentioned" activists ignoring or actively silencing the desires of the people they profess to help in order to maintain the myth of their own generous self-sacrifice is endemic to many struggles: feminist anti-"trafficking" activism; indigenous land and rights struggles; migration activism; the backlash against the wearing of hijab by Muslim women in France and elsewhere, and on and on. The only way it might ever stop is for its perpetrators to acknowledge their role.
Meanwhile a really amazing book is being censored. The authors of the chapter and the editors of Out of Place are unable to comment due to UK libel law. It's unlikely that Raw Nerve will reissue the book, even if the editors wanted this. Meanwhile the authors' reputations are themselves besmirched. There are several things you can do about this situation:
1. Circulate this and your own commentary among your friends, companeros, colleagues.
2. Circulate "Gay Imperialism" -- a PDF is online here:
![](/img/extlink.gif)
3. Write letters in support of Jin Haritaworn to:
The Gender Institute,
The London School of Economics and Political Science,
Houghton Street, London
WC2A 2AE, UK
Please pass this around, respond, send it to other listservs and read the other statements written about the censorship of Out of Place:
"Out of Place, Out of Print: On the Censorship of the First Queerness/Raciality Collection in Britain" by Johanna Rothe, Monthly Review,
![](/img/extlink.gif)
"On the Censorship of 'Gay Imperialism' and Out of Place", X:Talk website,
![](/img/extlink.gif)
In solidarity,
Aren Aizura
Aren Aizura is a Post Doctoral Fellow at the Department of Gender Studies of Indiana University, Bloomington.
Comments
Hide the following 10 comments
Tatchell accused of censorship in book row
05.11.2009 16:38
Raw Nerve Books, which published the book Out of Place in 2008, made an apology to Tatchell earlier this year because one of the chapters in the book contained untrue allegations made against him and gay rights group Outrage.
Tatchell said: “Many of my detractors now claim that I forced the book to be withdrawn from sale and that I pressured the publishers to declare it ‘Out of Print.’ Not so.”
Tatchell added: “The book was listed as ‘Out of Print’ on the Raw Books website before I contacted the publishers and challenged the lies and falsehoods they had published about me."
According to Tatchell, the chapter entitled ‘Gay Imperialism: Gender and Sexuality Discourse in the War on Terror’ - by Jin Haritaworn, Tamsila Tauqir and Esra Erdem, suggest that he is “anti-Muslim”, has engaged in “racial politics”, and accused him of being “part of the Islamophobia industry.”
However, since Raw Nerve Books’ decision to abandon plans for a second edition the authors' friends and supporters have been “spreading further smears” according to Tatchell.
Tatchell added: “I have no objection to Out of Place being reprinted, providing it does not include the lies and fabrications about me.”
None of the academics were available to comment.
Emma Marvin
Homepage:
http://news.pinkpaper.com/NewsStory.aspx?id=1912
An intelligent thought-provoking debate to be had here, not about Mr T
05.11.2009 23:01
"Critiques of racism are reduced and misheard as personal attacks, which is what blocks a hearing of the critique. In the end, the situation becomes re-coded as a question of individual reputation and good will: we lose the chance to attend to the politics of the original critique...
"We need to reflect on what we are talking about when we are talking about racism. Racism in speech does not simply depend on the explicit articulation of ideas of racial superiority but often works given that such associations do not need to be made explicit. So for example politicians might use a qualifier ‘this is not a war against Islam’ and then use repeatedly terms like ‘Islamic terrorists’ which work to associate Islam with terror through the mere proximity of the words: the repetition of that proximity makes the association ‘essential’. In other words, proximities becomes attributes...
"One of the hardest aspects of this process if how even languages of liberation and freedom, which we might assume to be ‘our languages’, to be oppositional, to be about challenging dominant norms and making possible new forms of flourishing, can be used in this process: freedom can be what ‘we’ have or even what we are. Other critics have pointed out how the language of freedom can be a technology for distinguishing ‘an us’ from ‘a them’...empire itself was justified in these terms, with a description that remains extraordinary for its precision: ‘white men saving brown women from brown men’...
(from Sara Ahmed's comments)
foo
e-mail:
h
out of print
06.11.2009 00:09
dave
Unreality
06.11.2009 00:24
Hmm, what happens if the terrorists themselves define themselves as 'Islamic' as they tend to do? Are we meant to censor or hide the fact, or take it upon ourselves to decide they are not really Islamic?
Once you start retreating into this sort of unreality things rapidly become ridiculous and people don't take it seriously any more. Such a distortion may have worked in a closed society like the old Soviet Union but in one with a relatively free media it is simply open to public ridicule.
Ed
Cutting the Gordian Knot: Fighting both islamophobia and homophobia
06.11.2009 04:42
Hi, here is my take on the debate over “Gay Imperialism: Gender and Sexuality in the war on Terror” and Tatchell:
Cutting the Gordian Knot of Oppression. The Intersections of Homophobia and Islamophobia.
more at:
cheers,
Barry Kade
Barry Kade
Homepage:
http://barrykade.wordpress.com
Queer MBE (Member of the British Empire)?
06.11.2009 12:25
However it becomes difficult to understand from what perspective Tamsila Tauqir is calling Tatchell to account, when only this year (2009) Tauqir accepted being honoured as a Member of the British Empire (MBE) for work with Muslim communities in Britain from the very same government which is currently actively promoting and waging war on Muslims, whether straight or gay, both inside and outside Britain.
It seem that while Tatchell is using Racism as the "the vehicle that transports white gays and feminists into the political mainstream", his queer Muslim critics are using British state Honours and Patronage for themselves to achieve the same goal.
Xece
hmmff
06.11.2009 20:29
People seem to think calling someone a racist actually has an effect - if you just ignore it they are then completely stuck for words because they are so used to being able to win arguments by saying the magic word that they have forgetten how to think and debate
lok
?
07.11.2009 04:03
wtf
Tatchell says "not all culture are equal" - what does that mean?
07.11.2009 16:51
Is he really suggesting that concepts such as the Enlightenment, Democracy or Science are the preserve of some cultures and not others? And what about cultures that has a history of both good things and bad – such as our own (fascism is a very, very European phenomena). And if some cultures are all bad, what should be done with them? And by whom?
If some was to write or say: “All peoples possess an ethnicity, but this does not mean all races are equally valid and commendable. Some values and ideas are better than others. The Enlightenment was better than the Dark Ages. Freedom is better than slavery. Democracy is better than fascism. Scientific knowledge is better than superstition.” They would be called a racist. Does changing ethnicity for culture really change the central thrust? And if so how?
Richard Farnos
e-mail:
Farnos@btinternet.com
religion IS "...inherently homophobic and misogynist"
09.11.2009 00:10
"Gay Imperialism" uses the work of activist Peter Tatchell, founder of Outrage!, as an example of how white gay activists can become complicit with this agenda by painting Islam as inherently homophobic and misogynist...
Islam, in common with all mainstream religions, IS inherently homophobic and misogynist.
Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism. etc. - apart from all being based on untrue fairy tales, also involve dogmatic brainwashing and encourage discriminatory behaviour like homophobia, racism and sexism.
Sorry to break it to you, but there is no magic invisible person in the sky controlling things. Religion is just made-up bullshit - learn to think for yourselves.
@theist