14 Comments
User's avatar
Lynne Teperman's avatar

A long while back, early 2000s, the feminist psychologist Phyllis Chesler and two colleagues published the conversation the three had looking at the weird phenomenon of younger feminists denouncing efforts to remove the Taliban from power, as it was "Eurocentric" to impose western standards on Afghans and other none western people. (Pat, you may recall Judy Rebbick arguing that Canada should limit its involvement to "empowering Afghan women" to somehow free themselves from violent misogynists.) The three speculated that what these younger feminists seemed to be doing was seeking to burnish their credentials as victims of patriarchy by associating themselves with the seeming underdogs oppressed by "the west". That might go a long ay towards explaining the LGBTQs on "Team Palestine/Hamas".

Expand full comment
Wendy Graham's avatar

This is the same kind of thinking that led to "intellectuals" in "post-colonial studies" to argue that efforts to thwart the practice of FGM are cultural imperialism, white saviorism, or colonial paternalism. That anyone who advocates to reduce or eliminate FGM in any community or country is making external moral (offensive) judgments -- they don't understand context or culture.

Expand full comment
Lynne Teperman's avatar

Yes, exactly so.

Expand full comment
kathy's avatar

Fascinating observation.

Expand full comment
Ian Mark Sirota's avatar

Well, “Hanief” sounds like a ton of fun at parties!

Expand full comment
Elliott Steinberg's avatar

I can’t fathom any other explanation other than mental illness.

Expand full comment
Gefen Bar-On Santor's avatar

One of the pleasures of antisemitism seems to be to throw libels about Israel at Jewish people and watch them work hard to cleverly but anxiously prove that the libels are wrong. This is why the right to not engage is important for resisting antisemitism.

Expand full comment
kathy's avatar

Such an effective and intelligent way to think about this issue. Thank you, Pat.

Expand full comment
Heidi Schmidt's avatar

Thanks Pat ! Another good article.

Expand full comment
Mr. Ala's avatar

I believe you are mistaken, Mr. or Ms. Johnson. Queers for Palestine is not stupid. Its members know better than to go there (with, perhaps, one or two exceptions).

There is little in common between [“movement”] queers and Hamas. (“Palestine” doesn’t mean Palestine; it is code for “kill Israel.” Hamas will stand in for that.) But they do have one thing in common, which at least to the “movement” queers is the most important thing: their enemies. Us. Civilization. Order as such. (Jews first, of course.)

Both parties gain politically by their combination. There is nothing stupid about it at all. I would, however, freely use the word evil.

Expand full comment
Before's avatar

So Queers for Palestine means nothing because they don’t actually mean it?

So wise in your own conceit.

Expand full comment
Pat Johnson's avatar

I didn’t say they don’t mean it. I said they come to their irrational position from bigoted processes.

Expand full comment
Matt Pemberton's avatar

So well put!! I hadn't thought of it this way. Great piece, Pat!!!

Expand full comment
Jewn Cleaver's avatar

Much has been said about Horseshoe Theory. One of the most fascinating if not nausea-inducing phenomena of the last 20 months is that after years of MAGA willingness to withstand any level of self-destruction so long as they could "own the libs," the libs are now willing to withstand an even more dramatic level of self-destruction so long as they can own the Jews. It's bewildering that people who purport to spend so much time on self-reflection can't actually see themselves in the mirror.

Expand full comment