Marxist-Leninists on gays and gay rights?

[FONT=Verdana]Time and time again I see someone say that Stalin banned gays in the Soviet Union. First I would like to know if this is true or false. If true what is the reason behind it. If false then where did the lie about him doing this come from? Also what is the current Marxist-Leninists view on gay and gay rights?[/FONT]

It is true that homosexuality was outlawed in the USSR. What was the reason behind it? Well, the general attitude towards homosexuality in those days, I'm afraid. LGBT rights played no role at all and Stalin isn't the only communist who was opposed to homosexuality, quite the contrary. For example, Engels refered to a homosexual follower of Lassalle as "the ass-fucker Hasselmann". Generally homosexuality was mainly seen as "bourgeois decadence" and somtimes as a form of male chauvinism.

Today the great majority of Marxist-Leninists and M-L parties condemn homophobia and discrimination because of somebody's sexual orientation along with racism, sexism, etc. and support gay rights.

Like everything we as communists evolve with broader scientific and social discoveries. We learn just like everyone else, this is why marxism-leninism is a science and not a dogma, incorrect or incomplete theories get replaced with more and more correct ones. We apply the scientific method to our theory and practice.

Yes, we must change theory to fit facts, and not facts to fit theory.Unlike the Ultra left which changes fact to fit there perfect theory of how the world should work.

Today the great majority of Marxist-Leninists and M-L parties condemn homophobia and discrimination because of somebody's sexual orientation along with racism, sexism, etc. and support gay rights.

I think we are fight for these right as it help lead to workers right, but do sometimes we put more eneregy into these fights, then we do in the fight for workers rights? I saw to Marxist-Leninists banned form this site for asking the same question.

along with economical and political changes come social changes. We fight for each of those equally. Respect and tolerance comes after class barriers are broken between people

I think that was there point, that if we did not get the economical and political changes we would also not get the social changes(like gay rights) that we also wish for.

I think we are fight for these right as it help lead to workers right, but do sometimes we put more eneregy into these fights, then we do in the fight for workers rights? I saw to Marxist-Leninists banned form this site for asking the same question.

As far as I am concerned I wouldn't say that we put too much energy into these issues. We have to take a clear stance on discrimination but of course we mustn't disregard class struggle. There are surely some parties/persons who do that but overall Marxist-Leninists should know that the discrimination and opression which "different" people face are inherent to capitalist society, that therefore these problems can never be solved under capitalism and that only a working class revolution, the overthrow of capitalist society, the construction of socialism and finally communist society will lead to equal rights for all oppressed and discriminated groups of society.

It's like you said yourself: "if we did not get the economical and political changes we would also not get the social changes."

As far as I am concerned I wouldn't say that we put too much energy into these issues. We have to take a clear stance on discrimination but of course we mustn't disregard class struggle. There are surely some parties/persons who do that but overall Marxist-Leninists should know that the discrimination and opression which "different" people face are inherent to capitalist society, that therefore these problems can never be solved under capitalism and that only a working class revolution, the overthrow of capitalist society, the construction of socialism and finally communist society will lead to equal rights for all oppressed and discriminated groups of society.

It's like you said yourself: "if we did not get the economical and political changes we would also not get the social changes."

The problem is, that if we had talked like this on the main fourm, we would of all ready been banned by the Ultra-Leftist, just like the other two were. In fact the point that both where trying to make is in fact the same one you just stated. It seems to me that the Ultra-Leftist have more Rep Power and Reputation ponits on revleft.

The problem is, that if we had talked like this on the main fourm, we would of all ready been banned by the Ultra-Leftist, just like the other two were.

Comrade Stalin, I am glad that you have mentioned that, because I have noticed it. I am very, very anti-homophobia, but I think that the ''ultra-leftsist'' mods are very hypersensitive when it comes to this issue, abortion (I am pro-choice, by the way, not pro-life) and sexism. The sexism bit is the most worrying because it feels unless you are not asexual, with no attraction to women whatsoever, you are a sexist. No, I support sexual equality, this does not mean I cannot see attractive women as attractive. Attractive women are my equals, but sexuality is not sexist or evil. And what is more, sexuality is almost irrelevant to our economic and political goals.

In fact the point that both where trying to make is in fact the same one you just stated. It seems to me that the Ultra-Leftist have more Rep Power and Reputation ponits on revleft.

That does not surprise me. We are one of the most discriminated against left-wing groups in the world. We cannot really even mention anything pro-Stalin in polite society without people thinking you are an evil mass-murderer, based on malicious propaganda. No, I love people, but I also love Marxist-Leninism and think it fights for the people.

I agree with Rjevan completely too, the main focus of communism should always be the class struggle. We should always fight for more rights for workers (and the often neglected peasants). When a communist society is achieved, equal rights for discriminated groups will follow.

The Socialist Equality Party in the US, which is Trotskyist, takes a firm line against identity politics. It doesn't mean they go around beating up homosexuals or calling women "****s." The SEP, as a result, is one of the better parties in the US, and often takes good lines on various national and international issues despite being very anti-Stalin.

Gay capitalists use the fact that homosexuality was not well regarded by early Marxists against Marxism itself, just as ultra-leftists use the homosexuality issue against "Stalinists" to criticize all aspects of "Stalinism" as "totalitarian" or other such words. But disregard for homosexuality itself is in no way connected to either Marxism or the theoretical views of Lenin, Stalin, etc. anymore than Marx believing in phrenology means it's something we defend.

I think Marxist-Leninists should simply fight against demagogues in these cases. If someone goes around talking about how gays are ruining the country, note who are actually "ruining" the country: the bourgeoisie. Note that so many conservative commentators and those opposed to homosexuality are often the same types who endorse or tolerate the commercialization of sexuality and other such activities.

Here's are two good reads on that last bit:
http://www.rationalrevolution.net/ar...t_in_ameri.htm
http://www.rationalrevolution.net/ar...sm_culture.htm

Indeed, people are so quick to use passed-homophobia against Marxism, and ''Stalinism'' especially, but homophobia is the product of the bourgeoisie and has been prevalent in capitalist society for hundreds of years. It is like the fact that any killing, any death, in a socialist country is blamed on the ideas contained within Marxism, yet deaths have occurred in capitalist countries too. What of the genocide of the Native Americans for land and profit? That was the work of a capitalist society.

I am not against people campaigning for gay rights, I am not anti-abortion, I am not sexist, but I do dislike the fact that many leftists, especially a great deal of Anarchists and Trotskyists, are overly sensitive about such issues, so much that you cannot even defend certain beliefs that you yourself do not agree with, but think are not too important in the overall scheme of things. Sometimes it feels as if you have to be gay and rabidly pro-abortion (I am pro-abortion, I just don't see why some Marxist-Leninists have been persecuted due to be anti-abortion. It s one of the issue the least associated with socialism), so that the Trots and Anarchists do not verbally attack you, online and offline. And I am especially against the way these issues have taken up more space than the bigger picture; the class struggle. Homosexuals have a great band of gay rights activists, and I think some would be homosexual Marxist-Leninists, likewise the anti-sexism movement has gone from strength to strength, and Christian fanatics have made most people very pro-abortion, so our socialist groups should focus on the revolution of the working-class as our main priority, and on discrimination against other groups as an important secondary goal.

This was originally a double post (my internet is so slow I sometimes press double-click twice to get it moving, usually it works, sometimes it just double-posts), so I want to say thanks to Ismail for his links.

[FONT=Verdana]Time and time again I see someone say that Stalin banned gays in the Soviet Union. First I would like to know if this is true or false.If true what is the reason behind it.

Whether or not that was a decision directly made by Stalin, I don't know. But I do know that homosexuality was viewed by him and others in the party as a bourgeois decadence. Also, many people at that time in the world thought that homosexuality was a mental disorder. It wasn't until the 1970's that it was taken off the list of mental disorders for the American Psychological Association.

Also what is the current Marxist-Leninists view on gay and gay rights?[/FONT]

Most ML parties these days seem to be in favor of protecting LGBT peoples and in favor of allowing them to have sexual freedom, have partners, adopt, and so forth.

I myself am a homosexual and am ML. Not only that, but I also uphold Stalin. I recognize this as one of the things that I am not in line with Stalin on, but I still support him over Trotsky and recognize his contributions to ML thinking, etc. Also, if I'm not mistaken, homosexuality and same-sex partnerships were legal in the USSR under Lenin.

Yes, we must change theory to fit facts, and not facts to fit theory.Unlike the Ultra left which changes fact to fit there perfect theory of how the world should work.

Well said comrade, well said!

Come to think of it. It is like pornography that many "leftists" seem to put their energies into combating it, usually by saying it is demeaning to woman (as if gay male pornography doesn't exist or ones featuring a woman in a non-sub-missive position). Frankly many workers (male and female) want to look at pornography and it should be treated like any other industry. being Anti-Sexist does not mean we have to be "prudes" (AKA following bourgeois sexual codes) though at the same time abusive pornography is wrong (non-consenting exploitative things like child porn for instance).

In the defence of most Marxist-Leninists they don't seem to let these things cloud the windshields of their minds to the bigger issue but many others do and I think it is setting our movements back; including the Marxist-Leninist movement by association back a bit. The left seems to be lumped together for better or worse I'm afraid.

I find it ironic that many ultra-leftists campaign against pornography for being sexist, yet are quite quick to defend paedophiles. It strikes me as a tad hypocritical.

Well my youth seems to be a little indifferent about the matter, like saying we don't care for sexual orientations, for us there is only male or female.

While my base organisation's <<leader>> seems to be a bit cautious towards gay-lesbian people... Maybe we need to talk...

Generally I don't think the ML have taken such a clear stance to the matter...

Whether or not that was a decision directly made by Stalin, I don't know. But I do know that homosexuality was viewed by him and others in the party as a bourgeois decadence. Also, many people at that time in the world thought that homosexuality was a mental disorder. It wasn't until the 1970's that it was taken off the list of mental disorders for the American Psychological Association.


Most ML parties these days seem to be in favor of protecting LGBT peoples and in favor of allowing them to have sexual freedom, have partners, adopt, and so forth.

Yeah, I see this stance surviving in some M-Ls!

[FONT=Verdana]Did someone mention that the Bolsheviks legalised homosexuality after 1917. The first state in history to do so I think.[/FONT]

Some countries didn't have any laws criminalizing it or making it legal. Usually it was just a societal taboo in different cultures. Ancient Greece immediately comes to mind for its view of accepting homosexuality and feudal Japan allowed it in society until westernization took effect.

I find it ironic that many ultra-leftists campaign against pornography for being sexist, yet are quite quick to defend paedophiles. It strikes me as a tad hypocritical.

I'm for pornography, yet very much against paedophilia! Even if we found out paedophilia was genetic, we should stand against it, because it still doesn't disregard the lack of consent amongst a child, and a lot of the time resorts to harming said child. So we'd have to find a way of containing such (possible) genetic thoughts (if genetic, that is).

Either way, equal distribution of porn for all! hahaha

Does any one know what the economic reason for being anti or pro gay would be?

Does any one know what the economic reason for being anti or pro gay would be?

Who says our movement/struggle deals only with economics? We stand on a cultural/moral ground as well; to be a voice of the oppressed by bourgeois oppressors.

Does any one know what the economic reason for being anti or pro gay would be?

There is no economic reason for either. Workers can be homosexuals and homosexuals can be workers. I am a homosexual, a proletarian, and a Marxist.

Who says our movement/struggle deals only with economics? We stand on a cultural/moral ground as well; to be a voice of the oppressed by bourgeois oppressors.

There is no economic reason for either. Workers can be homosexuals and homosexuals can be workers. I am a homosexual, a proletarian, and a Marxist.

It wasn't economic at all. Stalin believed that Homosexuality is just Bourgeoisie decadence he was obviously wrong unless Homosexual Proles are now Bourgeois.

Will this may not be ture. Marx talk in his work about people having a economic reason for doing thing. He normal calls this a "materialistic" reason for doing thing. Like for workers to join a union, is not because of some "cultural/moral" reason, or to fight "Bourgeoisie decadence", but is to gain a form of job security. This job job security normaly results in the higher wages that found a union. Hell Unions have economic reason for supporting there workers, as they are the unions, sources of income. Abortion are done for economic reason, not to show women right. Most of the time abortion are done because the mother, does not have the income to support the child.

Marxist-Leninists do make mistakes. When homosexuality was outlawed in the various Socialist states, it followed trends in psychiatry. Up until the 1970s the medical consensus was that homosexuality was a form of deviant behaviour.

Of course this was and is incorrect. The homophobia in the CPRF is inexcusable, but most Communist Parties today demand LGBT rights. Cuba and Venezuela have made great efforts to protect LGBT comrades from reactionary attacks.

Will this may not be ture. Marx talk in his work about people having a economic reason for doing thing. He normal calls this a "materialistic" reason for doing thing.

A person who is deeply homophobic and supports a pro-gay cause for their own ends does'nt make them any less of a bigot.
The same applies to someone who is heterosexual who has gay sex for money it does'nt mean that person is gay.

As far as I see it economics does'nt have a role in whether you are truly gay or whether you honestly support/not support a LGBT cause.

We should all be in support of the LGBT community regardless of what someone said or wrote a hundred years or so ago.