Thread: Marxism and Homophoebia

Results 1 to 20 of 25

  1. #1
    Join Date Aug 2006
    Location Erie, PA
    Posts 1,280
    Rep Power 15

    Default

    I have, most recently been reading up on marxist opinion towards that of women's rights and the feminst movement. I soon got caught into a sort of study into Marx's opinion of the gay rights movement as it was starting to take shape in that historical period. I ran into letters and other various works that pointed out that homosexuality was "not natural" or a "product of bourgeois decadence", as Lenin pointed out decades after Marx's death. I shortly discovered that many Maoist and "Stalinist" groups have taken a sort of policy that would exclude membership into organizations such as the RCP, for members of the Gay and Lesbian working-class community. Many theorists suggested that this "sexual perversion", would fade away as society faded into communism.

    Karl-Heinrich Ulrichs and Magnus Hirschfeld, two of the founding fathers of the gay rights movement, were blocked out from all sides of the political spectrum. They approached the growing socialist movement for support in the 1860s, sending literature that they wrote to Karl Marx. Marx passed it on to Engels, and they shared a general agreement of what they thought of homosexuals. Engels commented on Ulrichs' works saying that they were "pederasts" who are "extremely against nature", and described Ulrichs' platform of homosexual rights as "turning smut into theory". He later went on to condemn homosexuality further in Origins of the Family, Private Property, and the State, about how many men in Ancient Greece engaged in homosexual sex. Marx again, shared general agreement, stating that:

    "the relation of man to woman is the most natural relation of human being to human being"

    Marx and Engels came to see that any form of sexuality outside of a monogamous heterosexual marriage as a kind of degeneracy fostered by capitalism, which could be fixed by that of socialism. When Lenin and the Soviets seized state power in 1917, all former laws that focused on the discrimination of people of another sexual orientation were rid of; but Lenin shared a similiar view to that of Engels and Marx. When Stalin came to power though, a policy of violence was introduced to homosexual circles within the intellectual and working class. Gays were slaughtered, forced to work in the Gulags, or were bannished from the country. I am not aware if Mao or any other marxist leaders made similiar moves to destroy homosexuality.
    Look at 'em run, too scared to pull they guns
    Outta shape from them coffees and them cinnamon buns
    This shit is fun, how I feel when the tables is turned


    Dead Prez
  2. #2
    Join Date Jan 2006
    Posts 30
    Rep Power 0

    Default

    Marx and Engels are not infallible. Their vision of communism was based partly in their own beliefs and, yes, prejudices. I will not try to defend Marx by saying that "everyone was anti-gay rights back then." The modern communism movement had its start with Karl Marx and the Manifesto, but by no means did it end there. You ask anyone on this forum, and I guarantee you will not find two identical personal definitions of communism, and none identical to that of Marx and Engels.

    As for the USSR, it can hardly be classified as part of the communist movement, except in its revolutionary stage through Lenin's death. After that, Stalin enforced conformity to lower dissent, and homosexuals were among those who did not conform to their society as was seen fit.

    It is important that we understand the history of homophobia in the Left movement, because it makes it blatantly clear that past mistakes will not always be repeated. One day, most likely long after you and I and everyone currently on this board are deceased, our dream (to the extent which we share it) will come true, and it will be come unburdoned by all those mistakes, from the atrocities of Stalin right down to the prejudices of Marx.
  3. #3
    Join Date Nov 2003
    Posts 1,569
    Rep Power 18

    Default

    It’s not a surprise that they were Heteronormative. But I dispute the claim that Marx and Engles supported the institution of family. They considered it to be another form of ownership, of man over women.

    Of course whether or not the ‘family’ constitutes the same thing today as it did then is debateable. I’d be inclined to say it is not.
  4. #4
    Join Date Aug 2006
    Location USA
    Posts 440
    Rep Power 14

    Default

    The extreme 99.9% of popular opinion at the time was against gays, so I guess they didn't really see that as a problem for their time - so they just allow small predijuces to replace real study.

    Plus research is still being conducted to see whether homosexuality is a scientific trait or simply opinion oriented like if I like trees or something.

    As Bebel said that if communism is achived, equality between the sexes must be created - then I guess that is a neccesity.

    I don't really see why people would become gay in Communism though, I'm not sure why they do in general. (I don't know much about the subject ,sry)
    "Brought up in the darkness of barbarism, they have no idea that it is possible for them to attain any higher condition; they are not even sentient enough to desire to change their situation...

    They eat, drink, breed, work...and die." - 19th Century English Capitalist
  5. #5
    Officially vetoed by the BAâ„¢ Committed User
    Join Date Oct 2005
    Posts 6,652
    Rep Power 68

    Default

    I've had the "bourgeois decadence" argument thrown at me a few times, but I don't know anything about it. Any sources on the subject would be appreciated.
    What's the matter Lagerboy, afraid you might taste something?
  6. #6
    Join Date Aug 2006
    Posts 241
    Rep Power 14

    Default

    Originally posted by RevolutionaryMarxist+Aug 25 2006, 01:27 PM--> (RevolutionaryMarxist @ Aug 25 2006, 01:27 PM)I don't really see why people would become gay in Communism though, I'm not sure why they do in general. (I don't know much about the subject ,sry)[/b]

    I take it that you're a person that believes that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice..

    Quite frankly, I disagree. Homosexuality isn't a lifestyle choice. It's something you're born with. People don't choose to be discriminated against. Homosexuality brings disgrace and harrasment from your fellow humans. I'm guessing that many homosexuals would like to be the same as everyone else (Note: I have no evidence for that previous statement).

    And Homosexuality has been seen in penguins and other animals.

    Wikipedia
    Male penguin couples have been documented to mate for life, build nests together, and to use a stone as a surrogate egg in nesting and brooding. In 2004, the Central Park Zoo in the United States replaced one male couple's stone with a fertile egg, which the couple then raised as their own offspring.[12] German and Japanese zoos have also reported homosexuality among their penguins. This phenomenon has also been reported at Kelly Tarlton's Aquarium in Auckland, New Zealand.
    They never showed that in March of the Penguins....

    And I doubt that there is a way to make a homosexual a heterosexual. It would be like telling a straight male to start having sex with other men.
  7. #7
    Join Date Aug 2006
    Location Erie, PA
    Posts 1,280
    Rep Power 15

    Default

    Originally posted by Matthijs@Aug 25 2006, 02:23 PM
    I've had the "bourgeois decadence" argument thrown at me a few times, but I don't know anything about it. Any sources on the subject would be appreciated.
    Here is a few from MIA:

    Engel's letter to Marx

    Lenin on the bourgeois aspects of "Free love"
    This link doesn't neccesarily point out any specifics, but it was a self-declaration of what Lenin thought of the idea of "free love". I think it points out that he thought heterosexual marriage was strictly "proletarian", and any unnatural types of sexual expression was "bourgeois".

    I wasn't able to find a specific link on Stalin's opinion towards homosexuals, but I discovered that he criminalized it in 1933. Here is a few wikipedia entries on it:

    Gay Rights in Russia
    Look at 'em run, too scared to pull they guns
    Outta shape from them coffees and them cinnamon buns
    This shit is fun, how I feel when the tables is turned


    Dead Prez
  8. #8
    Join Date Apr 2003
    Location In flux
    Posts 6,095
    Rep Power 56

    Default

    Marx and Engels simply didn't understand the material (in this case, biological rather than economic) basis for homosexuality because they didn't have sufficent data, the research just didn't exist at the time, so they attempted to explain it in other ways.


    Marxism is a scientific approach to studying society and using any scientific evaluation is only as good as the data available, so Marx and Engels were simply limited by the information they had available at the time.

  9. #9
    Join Date Aug 2006
    Posts 58
    Rep Power 14

    Default

    Here's another wiki article on the subject.

    Socialism & LGBT Right

    I think my answer would be that, while in many cases Engels and Marx transcended the prejudices of the age, in this case, sadly they reinforced it.
    To them, the working class is so much raw material, a chaos which needs the breath of their Holy Spirit to give it form.

    (Marx)

    Notes From the Borderland Magazine
  10. #10
    Join Date Aug 2006
    Posts 23
    Rep Power 0

    Default

    When Marx and Engel were alive social persecution against homosexuals was considered "normal" - The same can be said about Thomas Jefferson with regards to slavery. It's irrational to hold individuals from another century to the same moral standards that we hold ourselves to today.
  11. #11
    Join Date Jan 2006
    Posts 30
    Rep Power 0

    Default

    Aw, great. Now I'm gonna look like an anti-communist bastard when compared to the rest of the posts here.
  12. #12
    Join Date Aug 2006
    Location Erie, PA
    Posts 1,280
    Rep Power 15

    Default

    Originally posted by Schleppy@Aug 26 2006, 12:15 AM
    Aw, great. Now I'm gonna look like an anti-communist bastard when compared to the rest of the posts here.
    What?
    Look at 'em run, too scared to pull they guns
    Outta shape from them coffees and them cinnamon buns
    This shit is fun, how I feel when the tables is turned


    Dead Prez
  13. #13
    Join Date Aug 2006
    Posts 93
    Rep Power 14

    Default

    One of the first Marxists to defend gay rights was Eduard Bernstein, the founder of "revisionist" Marxism, and the author of Evolutionary Socialism:

    http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/.../homosexual.htm
    "While there is a lower class, I am in it; while there is a criminal element, I am of it; and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free."- Eugene V. Debs
  14. #14
    Join Date Feb 2006
    Location Minneapolis
    Posts 1,737
    Organisation
    IWW
    Rep Power 21

    Default

    I think it's funny how many of the same people who excuse Marx & Engels for homophobia condemn Bakunin for anti-semitism, also a "prevailing viewpoint" at the time.
    The Industrial Workers of the World

    Revolutionary union consciousness, baby!
  15. #15
    Join Date Aug 2006
    Posts 15
    Rep Power 0

    Default

    Originally posted by Young Stupid Radical@Sep 1 2006, 04:00 AM
    I think it's funny how many of the same people who excuse Marx & Engels for homophobia condemn Bakunin for anti-semitism, also a "prevailing viewpoint" at the time.
    And then there's Proudhon.... *sigh*
  16. #16
    Join Date Jun 2005
    Location Australia
    Posts 2,344
    Rep Power 25

    Default

    Originally posted by RevolutionaryMarxist
    The extreme 99.9% of popular opinion at the time was against gays, so I guess they didn't really see that as a problem for their time - so they just allow small predijuces to replace real study.
    Just a point here, it really does bug me when people refer to homophobia (or sexism, or racism) as "small" issues. Why are they small, or less important? Small compared to what?

    And Young Stupid Radical has a point there.
    Hear the words I sing,
    War's a horrid thing,
    So I sing, sing, sing,
    Ding-a-ling-a-ling.
    --Baldrick, Blackadder Goes Forth

    Barricade Books

    The last time I was sentenced to death, I ordered four hyper-vodkas for my breakfast. All a bit of a blur after that... I woke up in bed with both of my executioners. Lovely couple, they stayed in touch! Can't say that about most executioners. - Captain Jack Harkness
  17. #17
    Join Date Aug 2006
    Posts 283
    Rep Power 0

    Default

    Originally posted by Young Stupid Radical@Sep 1 2006, 05:00 AM
    I think it's funny how many of the same people who excuse Marx & Engels for homophobia condemn Bakunin for anti-semitism, also a "prevailing viewpoint" at the time.
    and Marx's anti-semetism...


    that Socialism and LGBT rights article on Wikipedia was well interesting - thanks to the guy who posted it.
  18. #18
    Join Date Mar 2006
    Posts 957
    Rep Power 15

    Default

    It's irrational to hold individuals from another century to the same moral standards that we hold ourselves to today.
    Not at all. Moral standards are the same today as they have always been.
  19. #19
    Join Date Nov 2005
    Location Ipswich, UK
    Posts 282
    Rep Power 15

    Default

    Originally posted by rouchambeau@Sep 1 2006, 01:45 PM
    It's irrational to hold individuals from another century to the same moral standards that we hold ourselves to today.
    Not at all. Moral standards are the same today as they have always been.
    I disagree. Times change and as they do, morals and politics have to change to accomodate this. 20 or 30 years ago, no one saw homophobia as a prejudice. In fact, 20 or 30 years ago, you could get away with saying 'nigger' all the time, it just wasn't as unacceptable back then as it is today. In the very first episode of Eastenders (early 80's sometime), they refer tot he corner shop as a 'Paki Shop', but back then, it wasn't abusive, it was what everyone called them. Imagine if they repeated the same line in Eastenders today! They would be slaughtered by the press and by human rights groups. So I think moral standards do change. They are forever changing with more political correctness and what's accpetable and what isn't. We can't hold homophobia against Marx and Engels, back then it was acceptable. It was normal behaviour. I'm not saying it was right, far from it, but we should be grateful that moral standards have changed so that now, hoophobia IS deemed unnacceptable, whereas back then, it wasn't.
    MAKECAPITALISMHISTORY

    Economic Left/Right: -8.13
    Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.00

    It is better to die on you feet than live on you knees.
  20. #20
    Join Date Feb 2006
    Location Minneapolis
    Posts 1,737
    Organisation
    IWW
    Rep Power 21

    Default

    Originally posted by Tommy K
    Times change and as they do, morals and politics have to change to accomodate this.
    We leftists draw our morals from logic and reason. Therefore, morals do not derive from "the times" and "public opinion" in the slightest. If they did, we'd all be terribly immoral for believing such outrageous things as "capitalism is wrong," and "religion is the opiate of the masses"!

    Not to stray to far into philosophy or anything.
    The Industrial Workers of the World

    Revolutionary union consciousness, baby!

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 40
    Last Post: 12th May 2008, 18:37
  2. Analytical Marxism - Is It Marxism?
    By Oswy in forum Learning
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 5th September 2007, 17:46
  3. Marxism...the ultimate failure.... - Marxism is dead.
    By Jifster777 in forum Opposing Ideologies
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 8th May 2003, 12:55
  4. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11th January 2003, 20:16

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Tags for this Thread