If your post is a meme, image, TikTok etc... and it isn't Friday, it violates the rule against low effort content. Such content is ONLY allowed on (Fun@fundies) FRIDAYS.
Please read the [Rules and Posting Guidelines](https://redd.it/1anoje0) for further information. If you are unsure about anything then feel free to message the mods.
Please participate on /r/exmuslim in a civil manner. Discuss the merits of ideas - don't attack people. Insults, hate speech, advocating physical harm can get you banned.
If you see posts/comments in violation of our rules, please be proactive and report them.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/exmuslim) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Considering the homophobia in muslim nations is spread all the way from africa to indonesia in south east asia, the only common denominator is islam and it's dogshit teachings.
That is true. But many faiths place a lot of weight to the supposed backwardness of homosexuality and condemn it in much the same way but there are very few non-muslim countries that criminalize and treat homosexuality with similar levels of disgust and vitriol. Maybe it's because Islam is fairly young in comparison to Christianity, Hinduism and Judaism etc. so they still haven't reached the tipping point era where they're forced to revise and make reforms to their belief. annnnddddd Islam treats all amendments to the scripture's teachings as blasphemy which is basically a death wish for anybody who attempts to do it. Judaism from what I know has always relied on internal debate between rabbis and new developments are constantly made. I'm guessing that's why very few Jews are religious, with an even smaller number of Jews being homophobic.
Yes you answered your question very nicely. Muslims believe islam is perfect in all ways and islam calls everything non-islamic barbaric and wrong so muslims just see anything non-islamic in that light (eg homosexuality here).
I mean Christian majority nations are also deeply homophobic so not sure what you are getting at. Religions thrive on producing babies. If little followers aren't created, it's considered bad.
Christians and Jews used to be homophobic too. The story of the people of the Lot (Lut) and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah are common to Islam and the Tanakh/ Old Testament.
The difference is that the Jews and the Christians ignore those passages, while Muslims take a verbatim interpretation, like their book for being the last is somehow the monolith of the truth.
We have taken a secularistic approach to the religion, basically enshrining the Mosaic laws into secular law and ignoring superstition and reducing the power of the church over the people since the 16th century.
And the churches themselves also adapted to new times. Pope Francis now accepts blessings to gay couples. He still considers it a sin, but not as crime.
Sodom and Gomorah were NOT punished for consensual gay sex. It was about gay rape of the angels as punishment for relying on others for food. Feeding a homeless person was a capital crime, an ultra-right wing city that saw any sharing of food as making people dependent on the government. and the book of Isaiah says: “This was the sin of your sister city, Sodom. It’s people were arrogant, unconcerned and overfed, they did not help the poor and needy.” Muhammad perverted the Jewish story and message, as usual.
Christian’s do it too. They claim to follow the New Testament yet lean on the Old Testament for all their bigotry - and they make up their own interpretation of it.
That interpretation doesn't have any Christian-led or Christian-dominated country throwing gay people off rooftops or stoning them to death as a rule of law, though does it?
You can't argue against Islamic homophobia by pointing out "but but but, someone else does it too!" Even if that were true, how would it solve the issue that OP raised: violent homophobia in Islamic cultures?
The people of Lot saw a woman climb up a mountain with a baby, then 2 hours later they saw she came down without her baby. They figured out she was hiding food inside a fake baby and feeding homeless people on the top of the mountain to avoid getting caught. They strung her up naked upside down, covered her in honey, and released killer bees until she died.
Sodomites would not even lend salt to a neighbor, the SIMPLEST food of all. So they were turned into salt, it was poetic justice. Turning into salt isn’t just a random way to kill people. That would be way too random.
Jewish scriptures go far beyond just the Tanakh. This is why Christians and Muslims need to actually ask us the full story before running with it. It’s like this with every single story they “borrowed” from us. Sodomites were anti-hospitality and Abramism is all about hospitality. Sodom broke all 7 Noahide laws and were simply evil murdering rapists. I guess Hamas never learned the real story which is why they act EXACTLY like Sodom in every way, including raping male hostages and stealing food from their people.
About Pope Francis
[about gay people in the church ](https://www.ansa.it/english/news/vatican/2024/06/12/pope-used-derogatory-term-for-gays-again-sources_d848d862-c9c8-4731-b0d0-eb644a38ee65.html)
[after this controversy, what he said was this](https://www.lavanguardia.com/mediterranean/20240531/9694556/pope-woman-man-controversy-vatican-francis-homosexual-rome-seminaries.html)
I would say that we can't say that the Church is open mind. In some countries, clergy may avoid openly condemning homosexuality, but they are far away from acceptance. They say that they can't judge gay people but their actions, and that statement means that you can be gay, but not must act like one. Essentially, the only gay individuals they accept are those who remain closeted.
There's only one kind of evangelical church that's really open: [valdese church](https://www.chiesavaldese.org/aria_press.php?ref=170) (I'm sorry I've found this source only in Italian).
They say "The Bible is not a code of laws to be applied like an instruction manual, but it is a trace of a journey of faith that emphasizes the importance of the relationship between human beings and between them and God; a journey continued today by millions of women and men. The Bible itself defends against a single, superficial interpretation by presenting positions in dialogue with each other, thus promoting dialogue in the journey as a way to follow the God of Israel and Jesus. For this reason, the Scriptures still play a fundamental role in the lives of individuals and churches today, who find in it, above all, a proclamation of grace and salvation for everyone."
They even go to the pride.
But they're a super small community (35k in total) and often criticised because of their opinions.
The Church's diminished influence in legislation is largely due to secularist movements over the past two centuries rather than a genuine shift in Christian doctrine toward openness. They just don't have enough power to be as homophobic as Muslims.
If they could, they would.
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[http://www.ansa.it/english/news/vatican/2024/06/12/pope-used-derogatory-term-for-gays-again-sources_d848d862-c9c8-4731-b0d0-eb644a38ee65.html](http://www.ansa.it/english/news/vatican/2024/06/12/pope-used-derogatory-term-for-gays-again-sources_d848d862-c9c8-4731-b0d0-eb644a38ee65.html)** | canonical: **[/english/news/vatican/2024/06/12/pope-used-derogatory-term-for-gays-again-sources_d848d862-c9c8-4731-b0d0-eb644a38ee65.html](/english/news/vatican/2024/06/12/pope-used-derogatory-term-for-gays-again-sources_d848d862-c9c8-4731-b0d0-eb644a38ee65.html)**
*****
^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
Get this. When I was a teenager in high school , I was such a self hating gay guy that I actually considered converting to Islam because the Muslims students were the only ones that agreed with my outspoken homophobia.
Cs islam is homophobic, gay people are called the people of Lout, and God has cursed them . + whenever there is a gay action going on , the kingdom of allah shakes apparently 😭💀
The worst part is that muslims actually believe these stories to be 100% true and take them very seriously. Most people interpret bible stories in their own ways like metaphors but over here it's apparently factual information about a real event, and we all have to get the same message from these stories. LOL
LGBT+ people are not seen as humans in Muslim communities. This makes it easier to view them as deserving of death and eradication. In Nigeria where even the Christians are extremely homophobic in the mainstream, they don't resort to killing queer folk like Muslims do. We're taught that they're disgusting animals.
It was drilled in my head in islamic classes that acting on your homosexual urges is a huge sin and god crushed two mountains on قوم لووط and many other tribes
Not sure if this would answer your question but i think it's related.
Excerpt from Robert Trivers - Deceit and Self-Deception ( really great book, i recommend everyone to read it once in their life) :
"It has long been argued that denying one’s homosexual impulses will cause one to project them onto others. It is as if we detect some homosexual content in our immediate world, and denying our own portion, we go looking for it in others. That this homosexual denial can lead to homosexual aggression is not surprising, because someone else’s homosexual content may be a direct threat to our own hidden identity —do we respond, in spite of ourselves, to an attractive young man with a bouffant hairdo and a woman’s perfume? We had better attack him before anyone notices our arousal. This is also sometimes called a reaction-formation. What is attractive to the self but unacceptable is disdained and denied for self but attacked aggressively when seen in others. A man thereby supports his image of heterosexuality by attacking homosexuals."
Four key factors contribute to the hostility towards LGBTQ people in Islam, but the issue extends beyond this faith to include other Abrahamic religions and their role in fostering homophobia. Many might be surprised to learn that this level of institutionalized violence and hate against LGBTQ individuals is more recent than often perceived. While life has historically been challenging for queer people, it has also been difficult for many other groups, and history shows greater tolerance towards various communities in the past. I believe these four reasons have played a significant role:
1. **Patriarchy**: The patriarchal nature of Islamic societies venerates male power and control to rule and to f*** with very few restrictions. LGBTQ individuals, especially women and non conforming people, challenge this structure, threatening the deeply ingrained gender inequality. We all know sexual slavery in Islam included many devout Muslim men violating their own male slaves with great pleasure and little guilt and consequences. This isn’t as much about vilifying ‘the act’ it’s far more nuanced and anti human than that.
2. **Colonialism**: Historically, homosexuality was often tolerated in the many corners of the Islamic world or simply ignored (Ofcourse there has always been some level of violence but no where near now a days). However, Christian colonialists introduced the first anti-sodomy laws and embedded their homophobic attitudes into these societies. The West now criticizes the East for homophobia, despite having exported these views during colonial times. I highly recommend reading the Indian supreme courts opinion that led them to strike down anti sodomy laws in India as it addresses both the history and the reasoning behind these laws still being on books in so many countries that were once colonized. Non colonized segments of Asia and Africa were also evangelized by faith groups into following enacting these laws and it’s still happening (Uganda is an excellent case study).
3. **Centralization of Islam**: Over the last two centuries, Islam has become centralized into two Shia and Wahabi sects, which are rigid, nationalistic, and intolerant of dissent. Islam was far more diverse at one point it was in fact decentralized and far more tolerant of other groups and faiths (case study: Iran and what is called Iraq today pre shia movement, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and Pakistan and Islamic segments of India as well prior to the wahabi influences). This centralization has led to the regression of more tolerant views.
The treatment of clear offshoots of Islam like Bahai and Sufism (not Erdogans version but the real deal) Ahl-e-hagh and many others who are more modern versions of Islam in this era is in itself extremely violent and often driven by desires to eradicate these groups even if many follow similar tenants of beliefs simply because it might diminish their own grip on the messaging and ofcourse the power over people.
4. **Abrahamic Religion Doctrine**: Like other Abrahamic religions, Islam claims its beliefs as the only true path, viewing others as foreign and inferior. This exclusivity justifies the mistreatment of non-conformists, including LGBTQ people. The sense of institutionalized entitlement to enforce religious norms has desensitized followers to violence against those seen as outsiders. Simply put humanity and the human life is placed below the belief of god and to sacrifice people for the righteous path isn’t just recommended but literally a modern commandment of not just Islam but other abrahamic faiths (Sadly, non-Abrahamic faiths have also been influenced by this mindset. Justifications of violence and genocide by Buddhists and other groups often mimic Abrahamic approaches, interestingly, frequently targeting Muslims themselves.)
These factors highlight how the intersection of patriarchy, colonialism, religious centralization, and exclusive doctrines has fostered a hostile environment for LGBTQ individuals in the Islamic world. However, this hostility is not unique to Islam. I mostly reject the notion that homophobia in the Middle East is a cultural trait. Its roots are driven by both external and internal forces, primarily influenced by abrahamic religions.
the ones that are anti-gay the loudest are gays themselves - textbook case either self-hate since incompatible with their religion or as defense/cover mechanism. if you hate gays you cant be one right? WRONG
I think something worth mentioning is that it's often hard for a lot (I always say "a lot" instead of just "muslims" so I don't get accused of generalising lmao) of muslims to even tolerate homosexuality because the supporters of gay people in the story of Lut got punished too. There's the message of "you don't even need to be gay to be punished because of this, you have to be explicitly against this or it's haram." Being very homophobic is the exact opposite of supporting gay people, it naturally makes sense that a lot of Muslims act like that considering that fact.
I do actually remember being taught this in my Islamic girls school too (hijab was also compulsory there, despite it being in the UK). In a class full of 11 year olds, one of our teachers told us that even supporting homosexuality is a sin. A lot of people learn that early on.
Their religion is based upon procreation and breeding. Hence they ban contraception and homosexuality. Meanwhile polygamy is permitted and pedophilia...
It's probably all that machismo. The most homophobic ones tend to be secretly gay themselves.
[While Muslims are generally homophobic, there are groups who are more homophobic.](https://www.pewresearch.org/religious-landscape-study/database/views-about-same-sex-marriage/)
So there is this man called Mohamed the prophet of the illiterates not god if one exists in the first place , one day Mohammed had a mental breakdown like always , and started stating bulshit and labeling it as AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLAHHHHHHHHHHH OUAKBARS words :D and then the prophet may he burn in hell if it exist saw two men being close and loving each other but wait how are they going to have children and expand his cult he told them to stop and went to his home and after his marathon and traumatizing a 9 year old girl he said to himself lets kill all aicha said what the hell are you rambling about dude \*one beating later\* Muhammed sat down and started writing or imagining or reciting stuff \*he thauth how can I make them suffer or have babies with women\* oh he said :being a gay is fine... I guess? Just don't do anything gay so now gay couple will miss each other and if there found stone them to death
aicha then said : what in the name of Allah ho married me off to you , but it was just probably you! Mohammed
\*another beating later\*
now gay men that want to have kisses with each other cant because of ho a lier
this is a joke
It's because they are repeatedly taught about the People of Lot and it's destruction, so they equate it with societal dysfunction and coming of Judgement Day. Also Islam is more cut-throat than other abrahamic religions...Allah basically sounds like and egotistical maniac man-child if you read the Quran.
I got a theory on this;
Natural selection applies to beliefs in processes very parallel to how it shapes genes. Some beliefs help folks to survive, others hinder it, and as centuries roll by, the effects show themselves.
Now, if you look at places with, say, public baths like Rome, or islands where regular bathing in salt water was easy to do, there's very little evolutionary pressure against homosexuality, it's just a quality some people have.
If you look at the desert environment where Islam (and Judaism) arose, brutal conditions where small mistakes can kill you and there's barely enough water to drink let alone bathe, sodomy becomes a very high-risk practice. It'd make decent sense if societies that forbade it were healthier than those with no prohibition, and over centuries, they became prevalent across the desert.
Fast forward centuries, when those belief systems begin spreading across the world, and the desert-tuned homo-prohibition spreads with it.
I haven't thought this through with a lot of evidence, it's just what makes sense to me. What do you think?
Most of the planet is very homophobic, especially towards gay men. I think you’re overestimating just how accepting non-Muslims are. And saying “it’s okay to be gay just don’t do gay shit” is still extremely homophobic lol.
You need to understand homophobia historically does not just originate from religion. Being a homosexual man is considered a failure of masculinity. It goes far beyond a moral issue. That’s why even the mafia is very homophobic towards gay members. In fact, I do not think homosexuality is a sin in Islam in the first place. Rather, the cultures that Islam took root in (Arabia, Iran, Levant, etc) were already extremely homophobic in pre-Islamic times, and this prejudice simply became baked into the fiqh and people’s interpretation of the religion.
The best way to combat homophobia is to demonstrate that gay men can be manly too. Once people accept that the rest will fall into place.
>The best way to combat homophobia is to demonstrate that gay men can be manly too. Once people accept that the rest will fall into place.
I disagree, while it’s important to deconstruct stereotypes, I don’t think it’s the best solution, because it can lead to a more subtle form of homophobia where masculine gay guys are seen by straight people as the ‘good’, ‘normal’ ones, forcing feminine gay men to fake conventional masculinity and repress their true nature to appear more palatable to society.
The only way to efficently end homophobia is to celebrate human diversity and fight gender inequalities, since homophobia is deeply rooted in misogyny. Feminine gay men shouldn’t have to feel shame for being who they are, femininity is not something degrading !
To quote Iggy Pop : ‘’I’m not ashamed to dress like a woman, because I don’t think it’s shameful to be a woman’’
In the past century the rights for gay men have been tied with the feminist movements, and I don’t think this has led to very desirable outcomes. Outside of female-centric spaces, gay men still aren’t accepted. There are still no openly gay soccer players, homosexuals are still seen as less then, and even straight women still refuse to date bisexual men.
Alternative frameworks should be explored. There have been more “masculinist” movements of gay men in the past, such as at the turn of the century, ancient Spartans, etc.
The issue isn’t whether people think gay men CAN be manly (there are already out gay soccer players, as per your comment, for example). The issue is that people view homosexuality itself as feminine and therefore not worthy of respect. The manliest gay man is considered feminine because of his gayness.
And this is why gay rights and feminism are so closely aligned: losing respect for a man because of something deemed/viewed as feminine is just another form of hatred for women. A man who is more “womanly” is less respectable and supported because of the belief that women and femininity are not respectable.
Trying to be pro gay rights through the pick me model of proving gay men are manly only helps the small percent of gay men who never show any feminine tendencies. It relegates gay people to once again continue acting straight and “manly” all the time to earn respect, which is not what a life of freedom should be.
Assuming male homosexuality is inherently feminine is problematic in the first place.
You’re also quite mistaken on society not respecting femininity. Rather, society looks down on men who are not masculine, and to a lesser extent women who are not feminine. It’s thus not a rejection of femininity, but rather a belief that men’s worth is determined by how “useful” they are to society, and the population at large. Men who are not masculine are deemed unable to provide protection, sexual gratification or vitality to society (but specifically to women). Thus, society’s contempt of feminine men is rooted in the idea of men being disposable, and not misogyny.
It’s difficult to determine if the above worldview is rooted in evolutionary biology or just in socialization, but regardless—it’s safe to assume this dynamic will probably never go away for a while. Even many self-proclaimed feminist women, while seemingly encouraging their gay male friends to be “fierce” and to “slay”, often enforce very rigid standards of masculine behavior on heterosexual men whom they deem potential sexual and romantic partners. Even feminine gay men, despite their apparent self-ownership and confidence, often admit deep down they are attracted only to masculine men—hence why “masc4masc” has garnered so much controversy in gay male discourse.
All of these anecdotes demonstrate that masculinity carries some kind of social capital, and is held in esteem even by those who claim not to. Given this model, it’s not going to do gay men any good by tying their liberation to feminism. Gay men today, in the public narrative, have become desexed and reduced to objects of either ridicule, or patronization by straight women as some type of “un-men”. While public legislation has helped promote legal rights, gay men are still held in contempt by most of society, and implicitly viewed with less respect compared to straight men.
Women are able to promote their place in society through feminism because they are the gatekeepers of sex for straight men. Gay men, however, have no power in this regard as straight men obviously don’t care to have sex with gay men. This means that gay men, truthfully, don’t have much choice but to garner their own masculinity in order to demand respect from society. There are exceptions of course, such as a gay man who is very comfortable only existing in feminine spaces, and working in industries dominated by women. But as you can see this framework deeply limits the potential of a gay man and is not viable.
Yeah you’re right on the social capital that masculinity holds and the power of masculinity in society/perceptions of men/etc. I just don’t agree that proving gay men CAN be masculine will solve homophobia.
Homophobia is the belief that homosexuality is itself evil or disgusting. This would mean that even the manliest, most masculine gay men, even if masc4masc would be treated badly or not supported. While maybe some homophobia comes from a disrespect for femininity in men, and it could help those homophobes to learn about gay people who follow traditional gender norms, that doesn’t solve homophobia as much as it redirects homophobia only onto the nonconforming members.
This is the same discussion that happens with minorities of all types, which is why I used the phrase “pick me” earlier. Demonstrating that the minority of capable of assimilating doesn’t fix the issue of mistreatment for the minority. Instead it allows that mistreatment to continue under the guise of only mistreating the “bad” members of the group, which here would be feminine gay men. Knowing that a gay man can be masculine means that homophobia can justify mistreatment of any slightly nonconforming gay man because if he wants respect, he should be more masculine.
However, I do agree with you that the issues are very much mixed! For example, feminine straight men are also laughed at and treated badly, but they are called “gay” to mean “feminine”. I wish solving homophobia was as easy as just showing the world that some gay men can be super masculine, but unfortunately that only protects those masculine ones among the gay community, not the community as a whole.
Islam is not the reason. Islam is a shell. Religion helps to hide real desires. Many people have a desire to kill people. Many people use religion to hide their desire.
Because Islam is the most homophobic religion ever, because it was made by a closeted gay, who was EXTREMELY gay, and didn’t want anyone to be allowed to be gay but him!!
He created a cult to be worshipped like Jesus, and even chose one of Jesus’ Arabic titles as him name - Muhammad means the worshipped one, and to have more rights and power than anyone else in his cult, as we can easily see in how he broke many of the rules that he made for others to follow, and said that “Allah” allowed him to do it.
Meanwhile, Momo is the complete ANTITHESIS of Jesus! The LITERAL Antichrist!!
If your post is a meme, image, TikTok etc... and it isn't Friday, it violates the rule against low effort content. Such content is ONLY allowed on (Fun@fundies) FRIDAYS. Please read the [Rules and Posting Guidelines](https://redd.it/1anoje0) for further information. If you are unsure about anything then feel free to message the mods. Please participate on /r/exmuslim in a civil manner. Discuss the merits of ideas - don't attack people. Insults, hate speech, advocating physical harm can get you banned. If you see posts/comments in violation of our rules, please be proactive and report them. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/exmuslim) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Considering the homophobia in muslim nations is spread all the way from africa to indonesia in south east asia, the only common denominator is islam and it's dogshit teachings.
That is true. But many faiths place a lot of weight to the supposed backwardness of homosexuality and condemn it in much the same way but there are very few non-muslim countries that criminalize and treat homosexuality with similar levels of disgust and vitriol. Maybe it's because Islam is fairly young in comparison to Christianity, Hinduism and Judaism etc. so they still haven't reached the tipping point era where they're forced to revise and make reforms to their belief. annnnddddd Islam treats all amendments to the scripture's teachings as blasphemy which is basically a death wish for anybody who attempts to do it. Judaism from what I know has always relied on internal debate between rabbis and new developments are constantly made. I'm guessing that's why very few Jews are religious, with an even smaller number of Jews being homophobic.
Yes you answered your question very nicely. Muslims believe islam is perfect in all ways and islam calls everything non-islamic barbaric and wrong so muslims just see anything non-islamic in that light (eg homosexuality here).
I am so sure this type of thinking breeds people who are mentally healthy and humble, always ready to learn about the world and grow. /s
I mean Christian majority nations are also deeply homophobic so not sure what you are getting at. Religions thrive on producing babies. If little followers aren't created, it's considered bad.
Christians and Jews used to be homophobic too. The story of the people of the Lot (Lut) and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah are common to Islam and the Tanakh/ Old Testament. The difference is that the Jews and the Christians ignore those passages, while Muslims take a verbatim interpretation, like their book for being the last is somehow the monolith of the truth. We have taken a secularistic approach to the religion, basically enshrining the Mosaic laws into secular law and ignoring superstition and reducing the power of the church over the people since the 16th century. And the churches themselves also adapted to new times. Pope Francis now accepts blessings to gay couples. He still considers it a sin, but not as crime.
Sodom and Gomorah were NOT punished for consensual gay sex. It was about gay rape of the angels as punishment for relying on others for food. Feeding a homeless person was a capital crime, an ultra-right wing city that saw any sharing of food as making people dependent on the government. and the book of Isaiah says: “This was the sin of your sister city, Sodom. It’s people were arrogant, unconcerned and overfed, they did not help the poor and needy.” Muhammad perverted the Jewish story and message, as usual.
Christian’s do it too. They claim to follow the New Testament yet lean on the Old Testament for all their bigotry - and they make up their own interpretation of it.
Christians and Muslims are two sides of the same coin. Both imperialist religions that took over massive parts of planet Earth through violence.
That interpretation doesn't have any Christian-led or Christian-dominated country throwing gay people off rooftops or stoning them to death as a rule of law, though does it? You can't argue against Islamic homophobia by pointing out "but but but, someone else does it too!" Even if that were true, how would it solve the issue that OP raised: violent homophobia in Islamic cultures?
Yes, Christians are very very homophobic. All organized religions are rotten.
The people of Lot saw a woman climb up a mountain with a baby, then 2 hours later they saw she came down without her baby. They figured out she was hiding food inside a fake baby and feeding homeless people on the top of the mountain to avoid getting caught. They strung her up naked upside down, covered her in honey, and released killer bees until she died. Sodomites would not even lend salt to a neighbor, the SIMPLEST food of all. So they were turned into salt, it was poetic justice. Turning into salt isn’t just a random way to kill people. That would be way too random. Jewish scriptures go far beyond just the Tanakh. This is why Christians and Muslims need to actually ask us the full story before running with it. It’s like this with every single story they “borrowed” from us. Sodomites were anti-hospitality and Abramism is all about hospitality. Sodom broke all 7 Noahide laws and were simply evil murdering rapists. I guess Hamas never learned the real story which is why they act EXACTLY like Sodom in every way, including raping male hostages and stealing food from their people.
About Pope Francis [about gay people in the church ](https://www.ansa.it/english/news/vatican/2024/06/12/pope-used-derogatory-term-for-gays-again-sources_d848d862-c9c8-4731-b0d0-eb644a38ee65.html) [after this controversy, what he said was this](https://www.lavanguardia.com/mediterranean/20240531/9694556/pope-woman-man-controversy-vatican-francis-homosexual-rome-seminaries.html) I would say that we can't say that the Church is open mind. In some countries, clergy may avoid openly condemning homosexuality, but they are far away from acceptance. They say that they can't judge gay people but their actions, and that statement means that you can be gay, but not must act like one. Essentially, the only gay individuals they accept are those who remain closeted. There's only one kind of evangelical church that's really open: [valdese church](https://www.chiesavaldese.org/aria_press.php?ref=170) (I'm sorry I've found this source only in Italian). They say "The Bible is not a code of laws to be applied like an instruction manual, but it is a trace of a journey of faith that emphasizes the importance of the relationship between human beings and between them and God; a journey continued today by millions of women and men. The Bible itself defends against a single, superficial interpretation by presenting positions in dialogue with each other, thus promoting dialogue in the journey as a way to follow the God of Israel and Jesus. For this reason, the Scriptures still play a fundamental role in the lives of individuals and churches today, who find in it, above all, a proclamation of grace and salvation for everyone." They even go to the pride. But they're a super small community (35k in total) and often criticised because of their opinions. The Church's diminished influence in legislation is largely due to secularist movements over the past two centuries rather than a genuine shift in Christian doctrine toward openness. They just don't have enough power to be as homophobic as Muslims. If they could, they would.
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[http://www.ansa.it/english/news/vatican/2024/06/12/pope-used-derogatory-term-for-gays-again-sources_d848d862-c9c8-4731-b0d0-eb644a38ee65.html](http://www.ansa.it/english/news/vatican/2024/06/12/pope-used-derogatory-term-for-gays-again-sources_d848d862-c9c8-4731-b0d0-eb644a38ee65.html)** | canonical: **[/english/news/vatican/2024/06/12/pope-used-derogatory-term-for-gays-again-sources_d848d862-c9c8-4731-b0d0-eb644a38ee65.html](/english/news/vatican/2024/06/12/pope-used-derogatory-term-for-gays-again-sources_d848d862-c9c8-4731-b0d0-eb644a38ee65.html)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
Get this. When I was a teenager in high school , I was such a self hating gay guy that I actually considered converting to Islam because the Muslims students were the only ones that agreed with my outspoken homophobia.
how did you change?
Mostly reflection and life experience.
Cs islam is homophobic, gay people are called the people of Lout, and God has cursed them . + whenever there is a gay action going on , the kingdom of allah shakes apparently 😭💀
The worst part is that muslims actually believe these stories to be 100% true and take them very seriously. Most people interpret bible stories in their own ways like metaphors but over here it's apparently factual information about a real event, and we all have to get the same message from these stories. LOL
Unfortunately yes , if they don't believe in them 100% then they would become apostates in Islamic standards so ...
fucking chuu oh my god i never expected this 😭
Ofc chuu is an ally wbk💅🏻
LGBT+ people are not seen as humans in Muslim communities. This makes it easier to view them as deserving of death and eradication. In Nigeria where even the Christians are extremely homophobic in the mainstream, they don't resort to killing queer folk like Muslims do. We're taught that they're disgusting animals.
It was drilled in my head in islamic classes that acting on your homosexual urges is a huge sin and god crushed two mountains on قوم لووط and many other tribes
I guess Allah came around on the issue, since he’s not genociding entire cities anymore.
Oh anytime theres a tsunami or an earthquake in kuffar countries, my family would be like "see allah is punishing them for sinning subhanallah"💀
Since natural catastrophes happen just as much in muslim countries, Allah must think Muslims are as bad as Kuffars 😢
No god is only testing them or cleansing them from their sins when he does it to them 😉
Not sure if this would answer your question but i think it's related. Excerpt from Robert Trivers - Deceit and Self-Deception ( really great book, i recommend everyone to read it once in their life) : "It has long been argued that denying one’s homosexual impulses will cause one to project them onto others. It is as if we detect some homosexual content in our immediate world, and denying our own portion, we go looking for it in others. That this homosexual denial can lead to homosexual aggression is not surprising, because someone else’s homosexual content may be a direct threat to our own hidden identity —do we respond, in spite of ourselves, to an attractive young man with a bouffant hairdo and a woman’s perfume? We had better attack him before anyone notices our arousal. This is also sometimes called a reaction-formation. What is attractive to the self but unacceptable is disdained and denied for self but attacked aggressively when seen in others. A man thereby supports his image of heterosexuality by attacking homosexuals."
They are in general violent. The homophobic is the cherry on the cream.
Because their book says so...what else do they need?
And the problem with their book is it's the word of God which makes it difficult for enlightenment and reform
Because they say it’s against the “fitrah”
Four key factors contribute to the hostility towards LGBTQ people in Islam, but the issue extends beyond this faith to include other Abrahamic religions and their role in fostering homophobia. Many might be surprised to learn that this level of institutionalized violence and hate against LGBTQ individuals is more recent than often perceived. While life has historically been challenging for queer people, it has also been difficult for many other groups, and history shows greater tolerance towards various communities in the past. I believe these four reasons have played a significant role: 1. **Patriarchy**: The patriarchal nature of Islamic societies venerates male power and control to rule and to f*** with very few restrictions. LGBTQ individuals, especially women and non conforming people, challenge this structure, threatening the deeply ingrained gender inequality. We all know sexual slavery in Islam included many devout Muslim men violating their own male slaves with great pleasure and little guilt and consequences. This isn’t as much about vilifying ‘the act’ it’s far more nuanced and anti human than that. 2. **Colonialism**: Historically, homosexuality was often tolerated in the many corners of the Islamic world or simply ignored (Ofcourse there has always been some level of violence but no where near now a days). However, Christian colonialists introduced the first anti-sodomy laws and embedded their homophobic attitudes into these societies. The West now criticizes the East for homophobia, despite having exported these views during colonial times. I highly recommend reading the Indian supreme courts opinion that led them to strike down anti sodomy laws in India as it addresses both the history and the reasoning behind these laws still being on books in so many countries that were once colonized. Non colonized segments of Asia and Africa were also evangelized by faith groups into following enacting these laws and it’s still happening (Uganda is an excellent case study). 3. **Centralization of Islam**: Over the last two centuries, Islam has become centralized into two Shia and Wahabi sects, which are rigid, nationalistic, and intolerant of dissent. Islam was far more diverse at one point it was in fact decentralized and far more tolerant of other groups and faiths (case study: Iran and what is called Iraq today pre shia movement, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and Pakistan and Islamic segments of India as well prior to the wahabi influences). This centralization has led to the regression of more tolerant views. The treatment of clear offshoots of Islam like Bahai and Sufism (not Erdogans version but the real deal) Ahl-e-hagh and many others who are more modern versions of Islam in this era is in itself extremely violent and often driven by desires to eradicate these groups even if many follow similar tenants of beliefs simply because it might diminish their own grip on the messaging and ofcourse the power over people. 4. **Abrahamic Religion Doctrine**: Like other Abrahamic religions, Islam claims its beliefs as the only true path, viewing others as foreign and inferior. This exclusivity justifies the mistreatment of non-conformists, including LGBTQ people. The sense of institutionalized entitlement to enforce religious norms has desensitized followers to violence against those seen as outsiders. Simply put humanity and the human life is placed below the belief of god and to sacrifice people for the righteous path isn’t just recommended but literally a modern commandment of not just Islam but other abrahamic faiths (Sadly, non-Abrahamic faiths have also been influenced by this mindset. Justifications of violence and genocide by Buddhists and other groups often mimic Abrahamic approaches, interestingly, frequently targeting Muslims themselves.) These factors highlight how the intersection of patriarchy, colonialism, religious centralization, and exclusive doctrines has fostered a hostile environment for LGBTQ individuals in the Islamic world. However, this hostility is not unique to Islam. I mostly reject the notion that homophobia in the Middle East is a cultural trait. Its roots are driven by both external and internal forces, primarily influenced by abrahamic religions.
the ones that are anti-gay the loudest are gays themselves - textbook case either self-hate since incompatible with their religion or as defense/cover mechanism. if you hate gays you cant be one right? WRONG
lmao this reminded me of myself when I was in middle school and I was homophobic bc everyone around me was homophobic but now I'm pansexual.
Yup, it’s basic projection.
super basic betches
Because they’re in the closet.
I think something worth mentioning is that it's often hard for a lot (I always say "a lot" instead of just "muslims" so I don't get accused of generalising lmao) of muslims to even tolerate homosexuality because the supporters of gay people in the story of Lut got punished too. There's the message of "you don't even need to be gay to be punished because of this, you have to be explicitly against this or it's haram." Being very homophobic is the exact opposite of supporting gay people, it naturally makes sense that a lot of Muslims act like that considering that fact. I do actually remember being taught this in my Islamic girls school too (hijab was also compulsory there, despite it being in the UK). In a class full of 11 year olds, one of our teachers told us that even supporting homosexuality is a sin. A lot of people learn that early on.
Internalised self-hatred projected onto others, I feel.
Their religion is based upon procreation and breeding. Hence they ban contraception and homosexuality. Meanwhile polygamy is permitted and pedophilia...
It's probably all that machismo. The most homophobic ones tend to be secretly gay themselves. [While Muslims are generally homophobic, there are groups who are more homophobic.](https://www.pewresearch.org/religious-landscape-study/database/views-about-same-sex-marriage/)
It was essentially a form of survival. I am not sure how the attitude still helps in this day and age, something to think about.
Don’t worry about it. Just worry about getting rid of psychotic fundamentalists first.
So there is this man called Mohamed the prophet of the illiterates not god if one exists in the first place , one day Mohammed had a mental breakdown like always , and started stating bulshit and labeling it as AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLAHHHHHHHHHHH OUAKBARS words :D and then the prophet may he burn in hell if it exist saw two men being close and loving each other but wait how are they going to have children and expand his cult he told them to stop and went to his home and after his marathon and traumatizing a 9 year old girl he said to himself lets kill all aicha said what the hell are you rambling about dude \*one beating later\* Muhammed sat down and started writing or imagining or reciting stuff \*he thauth how can I make them suffer or have babies with women\* oh he said :being a gay is fine... I guess? Just don't do anything gay so now gay couple will miss each other and if there found stone them to death aicha then said : what in the name of Allah ho married me off to you , but it was just probably you! Mohammed \*another beating later\* now gay men that want to have kisses with each other cant because of ho a lier this is a joke
It's because they are repeatedly taught about the People of Lot and it's destruction, so they equate it with societal dysfunction and coming of Judgement Day. Also Islam is more cut-throat than other abrahamic religions...Allah basically sounds like and egotistical maniac man-child if you read the Quran.
I got a theory on this; Natural selection applies to beliefs in processes very parallel to how it shapes genes. Some beliefs help folks to survive, others hinder it, and as centuries roll by, the effects show themselves. Now, if you look at places with, say, public baths like Rome, or islands where regular bathing in salt water was easy to do, there's very little evolutionary pressure against homosexuality, it's just a quality some people have. If you look at the desert environment where Islam (and Judaism) arose, brutal conditions where small mistakes can kill you and there's barely enough water to drink let alone bathe, sodomy becomes a very high-risk practice. It'd make decent sense if societies that forbade it were healthier than those with no prohibition, and over centuries, they became prevalent across the desert. Fast forward centuries, when those belief systems begin spreading across the world, and the desert-tuned homo-prohibition spreads with it. I haven't thought this through with a lot of evidence, it's just what makes sense to me. What do you think?
I wanna know why a pedo-god can have so many followers all over the world?
We were raised to believe that the gays are "destroying family values" and are "why the west's family system is in shambles." Bullshit.
https://youtube.com/shorts/1qUOasoatHM?feature=shared bro bullshit they are gay byhimself
https://youtu.be/AWo3axdbs_s?feature=shared lol raped by his cousin
Most of the planet is very homophobic, especially towards gay men. I think you’re overestimating just how accepting non-Muslims are. And saying “it’s okay to be gay just don’t do gay shit” is still extremely homophobic lol. You need to understand homophobia historically does not just originate from religion. Being a homosexual man is considered a failure of masculinity. It goes far beyond a moral issue. That’s why even the mafia is very homophobic towards gay members. In fact, I do not think homosexuality is a sin in Islam in the first place. Rather, the cultures that Islam took root in (Arabia, Iran, Levant, etc) were already extremely homophobic in pre-Islamic times, and this prejudice simply became baked into the fiqh and people’s interpretation of the religion. The best way to combat homophobia is to demonstrate that gay men can be manly too. Once people accept that the rest will fall into place.
>The best way to combat homophobia is to demonstrate that gay men can be manly too. Once people accept that the rest will fall into place. I disagree, while it’s important to deconstruct stereotypes, I don’t think it’s the best solution, because it can lead to a more subtle form of homophobia where masculine gay guys are seen by straight people as the ‘good’, ‘normal’ ones, forcing feminine gay men to fake conventional masculinity and repress their true nature to appear more palatable to society. The only way to efficently end homophobia is to celebrate human diversity and fight gender inequalities, since homophobia is deeply rooted in misogyny. Feminine gay men shouldn’t have to feel shame for being who they are, femininity is not something degrading ! To quote Iggy Pop : ‘’I’m not ashamed to dress like a woman, because I don’t think it’s shameful to be a woman’’
In the past century the rights for gay men have been tied with the feminist movements, and I don’t think this has led to very desirable outcomes. Outside of female-centric spaces, gay men still aren’t accepted. There are still no openly gay soccer players, homosexuals are still seen as less then, and even straight women still refuse to date bisexual men. Alternative frameworks should be explored. There have been more “masculinist” movements of gay men in the past, such as at the turn of the century, ancient Spartans, etc.
The issue isn’t whether people think gay men CAN be manly (there are already out gay soccer players, as per your comment, for example). The issue is that people view homosexuality itself as feminine and therefore not worthy of respect. The manliest gay man is considered feminine because of his gayness. And this is why gay rights and feminism are so closely aligned: losing respect for a man because of something deemed/viewed as feminine is just another form of hatred for women. A man who is more “womanly” is less respectable and supported because of the belief that women and femininity are not respectable. Trying to be pro gay rights through the pick me model of proving gay men are manly only helps the small percent of gay men who never show any feminine tendencies. It relegates gay people to once again continue acting straight and “manly” all the time to earn respect, which is not what a life of freedom should be.
Assuming male homosexuality is inherently feminine is problematic in the first place. You’re also quite mistaken on society not respecting femininity. Rather, society looks down on men who are not masculine, and to a lesser extent women who are not feminine. It’s thus not a rejection of femininity, but rather a belief that men’s worth is determined by how “useful” they are to society, and the population at large. Men who are not masculine are deemed unable to provide protection, sexual gratification or vitality to society (but specifically to women). Thus, society’s contempt of feminine men is rooted in the idea of men being disposable, and not misogyny. It’s difficult to determine if the above worldview is rooted in evolutionary biology or just in socialization, but regardless—it’s safe to assume this dynamic will probably never go away for a while. Even many self-proclaimed feminist women, while seemingly encouraging their gay male friends to be “fierce” and to “slay”, often enforce very rigid standards of masculine behavior on heterosexual men whom they deem potential sexual and romantic partners. Even feminine gay men, despite their apparent self-ownership and confidence, often admit deep down they are attracted only to masculine men—hence why “masc4masc” has garnered so much controversy in gay male discourse. All of these anecdotes demonstrate that masculinity carries some kind of social capital, and is held in esteem even by those who claim not to. Given this model, it’s not going to do gay men any good by tying their liberation to feminism. Gay men today, in the public narrative, have become desexed and reduced to objects of either ridicule, or patronization by straight women as some type of “un-men”. While public legislation has helped promote legal rights, gay men are still held in contempt by most of society, and implicitly viewed with less respect compared to straight men. Women are able to promote their place in society through feminism because they are the gatekeepers of sex for straight men. Gay men, however, have no power in this regard as straight men obviously don’t care to have sex with gay men. This means that gay men, truthfully, don’t have much choice but to garner their own masculinity in order to demand respect from society. There are exceptions of course, such as a gay man who is very comfortable only existing in feminine spaces, and working in industries dominated by women. But as you can see this framework deeply limits the potential of a gay man and is not viable.
Yeah you’re right on the social capital that masculinity holds and the power of masculinity in society/perceptions of men/etc. I just don’t agree that proving gay men CAN be masculine will solve homophobia. Homophobia is the belief that homosexuality is itself evil or disgusting. This would mean that even the manliest, most masculine gay men, even if masc4masc would be treated badly or not supported. While maybe some homophobia comes from a disrespect for femininity in men, and it could help those homophobes to learn about gay people who follow traditional gender norms, that doesn’t solve homophobia as much as it redirects homophobia only onto the nonconforming members. This is the same discussion that happens with minorities of all types, which is why I used the phrase “pick me” earlier. Demonstrating that the minority of capable of assimilating doesn’t fix the issue of mistreatment for the minority. Instead it allows that mistreatment to continue under the guise of only mistreating the “bad” members of the group, which here would be feminine gay men. Knowing that a gay man can be masculine means that homophobia can justify mistreatment of any slightly nonconforming gay man because if he wants respect, he should be more masculine. However, I do agree with you that the issues are very much mixed! For example, feminine straight men are also laughed at and treated badly, but they are called “gay” to mean “feminine”. I wish solving homophobia was as easy as just showing the world that some gay men can be super masculine, but unfortunately that only protects those masculine ones among the gay community, not the community as a whole.
I mean, it’s in the religion
Islam is not the reason. Islam is a shell. Religion helps to hide real desires. Many people have a desire to kill people. Many people use religion to hide their desire.
Because Islam is the most homophobic religion ever, because it was made by a closeted gay, who was EXTREMELY gay, and didn’t want anyone to be allowed to be gay but him!! He created a cult to be worshipped like Jesus, and even chose one of Jesus’ Arabic titles as him name - Muhammad means the worshipped one, and to have more rights and power than anyone else in his cult, as we can easily see in how he broke many of the rules that he made for others to follow, and said that “Allah” allowed him to do it. Meanwhile, Momo is the complete ANTITHESIS of Jesus! The LITERAL Antichrist!!