[Editor’s note: “Jane” is not this person’s real name]
In order to balance out the recent lecture by Dr. Sahar Amer, “Arab Homosexuality & Lesbianism and the Politics of Naming,” would it not be a good idea to invite a representative from CAIR of the State of Michigan? As you probably know, Michigan CAIR is attempting to impose sharia law in central Michigan. I think it would be interesting to hear them talk about the treatment of homosexuals under sharia law. Specifically, it would be nice to know whether they actually support the public execution of homosexuals – as is widely reported. This is an unsettling prospect indeed. A discussion of the issue should be of interest to anyone interested in ideological diversity.
Since Dr. Amer addressed the harsh attitudes many Muslim countries hold towards gays and lesbians, including the possibility of execution, I don’t think it would be necessary. She is working against such archaic attitudes. Of course you would not know this, as you did not attend the lecture, even though your email seems to suggest you are in favor of ideological diversity.
However, given that you probably support CAIR in this position, and probably any having to do with women, why don’t you feel free to bring them to campus, as I know you are fully committed to ideological diversity. [sic]
But thanks for thinking of us. Groups such as CAIR demonstrate the necessity of the LGBTQIA Resource Office, and illustrate why our work is so important.
Please accept my sincere apology for anything in my previous email that would have led you to believe that my characterization of the execution of homosexuals as “unsettling” meant “good.” I don’t know anyone who isn’t Muslim who thinks that aspect of sharia law is “good.”
I wanted to correct one aspect of your previous message, which reads “This lecture will address the very rich indigenous literary and cultural tradition of alternative sexualities that has been prevalent in the Islamic world at least since the 9th century.”
Actually, the rich tradition of alternative sexualities in the Islamic world dates back to at least the 7th Century when Mohammed married a six year old girl and consummated the relationship when she was nine.
You said: Please accept my sincere apology for anything in my previous email that would have led you to believe that my characterization of the execution of homosexuals as “unsettling” meant “good.”
Mike, it wasn’t your previous email that made me think you are not bothered by the possiblity [sic] of executing homosexuals, it was your entire oeuvre from which I extracted that attitude.
Additionally, pedophilia is not an alternative sexuality, so I don’t need to go back to the 7th century for that. I know many, such as yourself, want to attempt to perform that rhetorical sleight of hand in an attempt to make homosexuality equal a crime, [sic] it is not. Pedophilia is a crime, beign [sic] gay is not. Pedophilia is part of a mental disorder, homosexuality is not. Although I am sure you disagree with that designation in the DSM IV.
Also, I have little interest in what Mohammed did not did not [sic] do, or in slamming any religion. I am not a believer in any religion, so I do not have any interest in upholding any doctrine. The lecture was looking at the culture in countries not exploring religion, agian [sic], attendance would have helped your understanding. If you are botherd [sic] by that passage in the Koran, then also worry about [sic] passage in the King James Bible that states, “But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.” Seems awfully similar.
Have a lovely day.
Your last message illustrates my principal problem with liberals; namely, that you lie in order to create “problems” which require “solutions” in the form of government funding. If you look over my oeuvre you will see that I have never claimed support for the execution of homosexuals. In fact, look over my oeuvre and you will see that I have taken the opposite position. Look over my oeuvre and you will see I have criticized Che Guevara for incarcerating suspected homosexuals. Look over my oeuvre and you will see that I have taken on CAIR in numerous columns.
But you don’t CAIR to look over my oeuvre. You just like to say the word “oeuvre.” And you like to defame people who present arguments you simply cannot rebut.
Your assertion that I want to perform a “rhetorical sleight of hand” in an effort to make homosexuality a crime is false. See my previous comment about Che Guevara. I never performed any sleight of hand to link the notion of “alternative sexualities” to pedophilia. That was done for me by Dr. Gilbert Herdt, founding Professor of Human Sexuality Studies and Chair of the Department of Sexuality Studies at San Francisco State. He says the following:
“The category ‘child’ is a rhetorical device for inflaming what is really an irrational set of attitudes against sex with children.”
I am perplexed by your admonition that if I am “botherd [sic] by that passage in the Koran” I should be more concerned about certain passages in the King James Bible. I am concerned that you are beginning to hear voices. I have never spoken to you about any passage in the Koran just as I have never uttered the phrase “kill the homosexuals.”
I am, in all seriousness, concerned about you for three reasons. First, you are a professor lacking any capacity to make reasoned and relevant arguments. Second, you teach English but cannot spell. And, finally, you are now an administrator charged with promoting tolerance for ideas other than one’s own.
God help us, Jane. And God help the taxpayers forced to fund your intellectual work product as well as your vision of tolerance and diversity.