Communist stance on homosexuality

[Nikolay]

I'm not to sure on what the communist stance is on homosexuality. I always thought that the progressive left supported homosexual rights. However, when you read how homosexuals were treated in communist countries, it becomes more confusing to understand. I always thought conservatives were the ones who were staunchly against homosexuals..

So what is the communist/socialist stance?

[TheGodlessUtopian]

Generally they are treated well. Much abuse was suffered from those in Marxist-Leninist countries, as Stalinist influence was very reactionary when it came to sexuality and identity, but modern day communists, with the possible exception of some European parties, fully support the Queer struggle (even if it is more of a sideshow tacked on with many western parties instead of a full blown enthusiasm).

[Trap Queen Voxxy]

I'm not to sure on what the communist stance is on homosexuality. I always thought that the progressive left supported homosexual rights. However, when you read how homosexuals were treated in communist countries, it becomes more confusing to understand. I always thought conservatives were the ones who were staunchly against homosexuals..

It is curious that the 'Communist' states in which you are referring to had horrendous positions on homosexuality (like Castro's Cuba for example). I however have always chalked this up to cultural backwardness though.


So what is the communist/socialist stance?

If you're not supportive of my rights as a human being and think I'm mentally deranged, perverted or whatever then you're no comrade of mine.

I think the Leftist stance on homosexuality is or should be "who the fuck cares."

[bad ideas actualised by alcohol]

Everybody is equal. Of course including gay's

[Alf]

What happened and still happens in 'Communist' countries doesn't tell us anything about the communist stance on homosexuality, because these are not communist countries. We have to go back to the early 1920s to find anything of value on this question from the USSR: the Stalinist counter-revolution completely reversed whatever gains for gay people that were brought about by the October revolution. The following is an appendix to an article published by the ICC in 2010, in response to the very repressive actions against gay people in parts of Africa. http://en.internationalism.org/icconline/2010/6/gay-oppression


The workers' movement and the struggle against homophobia

Homophobia has deep roots, and the workers' movement, including its most advanced elements, has not been free from it. In Origins of the Family, Private Property and the State, a magnificent broadside against the historical oppression of women, Engels himself presents homosexual activity in the ancient world as a pure product of decadence: "but this degradation of the women [Engels is referring to prostitution in ancient Greece] was avenged on the men and degraded them also till they fell into the abominable practice of sodomy and degraded alike their gods with the myth of Ganymede." Some of Engels' private views, expressed in correspondence with Marx, are even more obviously influenced by the dominant ideology.

Nevertheless, the workers' movement has consistently stood against laws repressing homosexuality. In the late 19th century, while countries like France had already, in the wake of their bourgeois revolutions, abolished such laws, Germany and Britain still retained them. Representatives of German social democracy such as Lassalle, Bebel and Bernstein all spoke in favour of abolishing these laws and any interference by the state in the private lives of its citizens. Bernstein, responding to the furor created by the trial of Oscar Wilde in Britain, wrote a series of articles on the question in Neue Zeit in 1895, using the historical method to show the relative character of sexual mores and challenging the notion that homosexuality was ‘unnatural'. However, he still tended to present homosexuality as an ‘illness' or a ‘pathology' that could perhaps be cured by the appropriate therapy.

The Bolsheviks in Russia continued the tradition of opposition to laws that repress different expressions of sexuality. All such laws were abolished in the immediate aftermath of the October revolution. However, with the Stalinist counter-revolution, with its cult of motherhood for the socialist fatherland, there was a flagrant regression and homosexuality was again subject to brutal punishment.

Since the onset of the counter-revolution in the 1920s, there appears to have been very little elaboration of marxist theory on the question of homosexuality, aside from the ‘negative' critique of the separatist and legalist campaigns and the ‘identity politics' that appeared from the end of the 60s onwards.

Contribution of psychoanalysis

However, the development of psychoanalysis at the beginning of the 20th century provides a theoretical basis for questioning the idea of homosexuality as a kind of illness. In a 1935 letter to a woman who asked Freud if he could cure her son of homosexuality, he wrote:

"I gather from your letter that your son is a homosexual. I am most impressed by the fact that you do not mention this term yourself in your information about him. May I question you why you avoid it? Homosexuality is assuredly no advantage, but it is nothing to be ashamed of, no vice, no degradation; it cannot be classified as an illness; we consider it to be a variation of the sexual function, produced by a certain arrest of sexual development. Many highly respectable individuals of ancient and modern times have been homosexuals, several of the greatest men among them. (Plato, Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, etc). It is a great injustice to persecute homosexuality as a crime -and a cruelty, too. If you do not believe me, read the books of Havelock Ellis.

By asking me if I can help [your son], you mean, I suppose, if I can abolish homosexuality and make normal heterosexuality take its place. The answer is, in a general way we cannot promise to achieve it. In a certain number of cases we succeed in developing the blighted germs of heterosexual tendencies, which are present in every homosexual; in the majority of cases it is no more possible. It is a question of the quality and the age of the individual. The result of treatment cannot be predicted.

What analysis can do for your son runs in a different line. If he is unhappy, neurotic, torn by conflicts, inhibited in his social life, analysis may bring him harmony, peace of mind, full efficiency, whether he remains homosexual or gets changed".

In fact, Freud's theoretical premises go further than the conclusion enunciated in this letter, where he defines homosexuality as a product of a "a certain arrest of sexual development". Throughout his work, Freud consistently posits an original bisexuality (sometimes referred to as the "polymorphous perversity" of the infant human being) which is then channeled in a particular direction through the process of repression - the origins of which lie in social relations conditioned by the struggle against scarcity. That would imply that heterosexuality as generally expressed in the context of present-day society is, no less than homosexuality, a product of arrested development. In any case, the debate about what a truly liberated human sexuality would be like in a society no longer dominated by exploitation and the day to day struggle for survival remains to be pursued by the revolutionary movement.

[NewLeft]

Socialists bring into question the role of the family and the ideology of sexism. The revolution of 1917 was progressive in that it brought advances to women from legalizing abortion and contraception. It is this undermining of the family structure and sexism that will pave the way for gay liberation. One of the reasons why homosexuals were repressed under communist regimes is due to the fact that certain revolutions (like the Cuban one) were focused on liberating from [American] imperialism. They did not bring into question the family structure as much as they should have and they adopted the bourgeois outlook that prevailed: homosexuality is an illness. That's not to defend their actions, but to stress the need for more radical outlook. It also shows that gay workers need to be involved in the struggle.

[Blanquist]

They asked Trotsky once what the soviet laws concerning incest are.

He said he never thought about it and there shouldn't be any laws as it isn't the states business.

He said if incest was banned and persecuted then humanity would really miss out, citing Lord Byron as an example.

[Nox]

communist countries

That's where the problem lies. Those "communist" countries were anything but.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

It also be might worth your while to read The Roots of Gay Oppression...

http://www.isj.org.uk/index.php4?id=310

[NewLeft]

I think the Leftist stance on homosexuality is or should be "who the fuck cares."
We care, how is that supposed to improve anything for gays if we don't address it and simply ignore it?

[Kronsteen]

The Bolsheviks in 1917 didn't have much to say about sexuality. They were not progressive as we understand the term, but under tsarism there were hundreds of laws banning pretty much any kind of sexuality that wasn't married couples procreating in the missionary position, and the bolsheviks swept almost all these away without any of their number complaining.

Laws against rape remained, of course. Under Stalin, the old laws were brought back, almost verbatim. Homosexuality was regarded as 'bourgeois' or a mental illness, which under stalinism is pretty much the same thing.

I'd characterise the bolshevik attitude to adultery, homosexuality, promiscuity etc. as "I don't like what you do, but it's not important enough to argue about."

I don't have a link to it, but there's a famous passage written by Engels in which he rants against 'sodomy'.

There's a 1978 article here (http://www.marxists.org/archive/cliff/works/1978/08/gays.htm), by British Trotskyist leader Tony Cliff, arguing that socialists should support gay rights...because gay people are oppressed, and socialists defend oppressed people. Interesting that it took so long for socialists to discover they should oppose homophobia, and even then on rather formalistic grounds.

[Lanky Wanker]

We love gay people. Nuclear family serves capitalism blah blah blah. I hope that helps.



We care, how is that supposed to improve anything for gays if we don't address it and simply ignore it?

I'm sure what he means is that we shouldn't care about whether a person likes penis or vagina because it's like hyping over someone's eye colour. If no one cares about who you're attracted to, no one discriminates you based on who you're attracted to. Obviously putting up "don't discriminate gay people!" posters isn't going to make everyone suddenly not care and thus end homophobia, so in that sense we should care.


That's where the problem lies. Those "communist" countries were anything but.

This makes me wonder if smaller anarchist movements had anything to say about homosexuality.

[Bostana]

Everybody is equal.

[NewLeft]

I'm sure what he means is that we shouldn't care about whether a person likes penis or vagina because it's like hyping over someone's eye colour. If no one cares about who you're attracted to, no one discriminates you based on who you're attracted to. Obviously putting up "don't discriminate gay people!" posters isn't going to make everyone suddenly not care and thus end homophobia, so in that sense we should care.
No one likes you La..

You're wrong. Homosexuality is not an arbitrary characteristic like someone's eye colour.

[Lanky Wanker]

Everybody is equal.

People can't really be "equal", but of course they can (and should, within reason) be treated equally.

[Lanky Wanker]

No one likes you La..

You're wrong. Homosexuality is not an arbitrary characteristic like someone's eye colour.

We're born with blue eyes and we're born with brown eyes, we're born straight and we're born gay; either way it only matters because people make it matter. Instead of "OMG YOU'RE GAY?!?!?! EUGH!" we should probably try for "cool, I like vagina (or penis)."

George - 1
Canadian John - 0

[MEGAMANTROTSKY]

Homosexuals deserve Marxism's highest support, along with all other social (which includes racial) minorities. Unfortunately, I imagine that one of the greatest challenges for the Marxist movement is to not get swept up in identity politics.

[Kronsteen]

we're born straight and we're born gay

This is commonly asserted, as is its contrary, but there's no conclusive evidence for either position.

Not that it makes a difference to the discrimination debate. If being gay is genetic, a homophobe will simply call it a genetic disease. If it's not, they'll call it a mental illness - and compare it to serial killing.

If people were to change skin colour partway through life as the result of contracting a disease, would we say they don't deserve defence from racism? Obviously not.

[Trap Queen Voxxy]

We care, how is that supposed to improve anything for gays if we don't address it and simply ignore it?

That's not what I meant, I meant, it shouldn't matter if you're gay, straight, bisexual, asexual or whatever as in "who the fuck cares if you're gay or not."

It's a private matter and shouldn't negate someones humanity.

[Ostrinski]

I'm in favor of violent terror upon bigoted individuals, but that's just my slice of banana bread.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

So what is the communist/socialist stance?
In the 21st century, it should be support for full equality for LGBT people and opposition to all manifestations of homophobia, biphobia, and transphobia.

[Offbeat]

Funny to see all the MLs advocating equality when their beloved Stalin persecuted gays, as did other ML regimes like Cuba.

[TheRedAnarchist23]

I think the first to support homosexuality were the anarchists, because our movement is libertarian.

[Lanky Wanker]

If people were to change skin colour partway through life as the result of contracting a disease, would we say they don't deserve defence from racism? Obviously not.

That's what I always say, that it being natural or unnatural is irrelevant anyway. Most evidence nowadays seems to point towards sexuality being a genetic thing though from what I've seen, even though that might not be the best comparison. In that case, let's compare it to coloured contact lenses...

[Franz Fanonipants]

They asked Trotsky once what the soviet laws concerning incest are.

He said he never thought about it and there shouldn't be any laws as it isn't the states business.

He said if incest was banned and persecuted then humanity would really miss out, citing Lord Byron as an example.

Homosexuality is not incest also Trotsky has been dead a long time

[Franz Fanonipants]

I think the first to support homosexuality were the anarchists, because our movement is libertarian.

Fuckin lol

[Lanky Wanker]

I think the first to support homosexuality were the anarchists, because our movement is libertarian.

:laugh:

[El Oso Rojo]

Funny to see all the MLs advocating equality when their beloved Stalin persecuted gays, as did other ML regimes like Cuba.


I heard anarchists like goldman was homophobic too, it was the good old days, where everyone was a homophobe including capitalists. Cuba apologized for their actions against gays, and now LGTBQ friendly,

I read this quote somewhere from this LGTB group from the 60's "Cuba proscute while America beat them to it" - meaning yeah Cuba proscuted us but America beat the living shit out of us.

[El Oso Rojo]

I think the first to support homosexuality were the anarchists, because our movement is libertarian.


Anarchist shouldn't even associate with homosexuals: "If you are an anarchist, that means that you are more morally upright and physically strong than the average man. This from an article about homophobia in Anarchist spain.

[El Oso Rojo]

Also, Just because certain individuals was homophobic in a certain tendecy, anarchist or leninism, or marxist leninism, don't mean they are homophobic as a whole and saying so is just opportunistic sectarianism. Don't use the gay question from sectarian bs. Its something that we have in all tendencies, it can't be help.

[seventeethdecember2016]

Those loyal to the Socialist cause should be allowed to do whatever they please.

To often, however, this question has been brought up for rhetoric purposes.

We are the Left, and we promote Liberty for all! Enough said...