A Rare Glimpse Into Iran's Underground Gay Community

When then-President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad declared in 2007 that there were no gay people in Iran, he was correct in one sense. Because homosexuality is illegal and punishable by imprisonment, torture or execution, the idea of someone living their life openly gay in Iran is unheard of. 

But of course Ahmadinejad was wrong in that there are plenty of gay Iranians living in the shadows. It's just that the government chooses to ignore them — at least until it doesn't. 

And while we often hear about LGBT Iranians who've fled the country, what about those who choose to stay or can't afford to leave? 

In a story published Tuesday, Vocativ offers a compelling look at Iran's underground gay community through the eyes of three of its members: a 25-year-old single man who recently had the courage to come out to his parents, and two men in their early 30s who are in a relationship, albeit a very secretive one. 

It's a story of private parties whose hosts must pay off the country's moral police, and of wealthy married men who live parallel lives and cruise parks for young male prostitutes.

From Vocativ:

Gays from lower classes and rural areas, where stigmatization is often most severe, rarely have the ability to move out of the house before marriage, let alone leave the country. Even in more affluent communities in cities. there is generally little acceptance of homosexuality, but some middle- and upper-class Iranians have the means to create parallel lives, out of sight of their relatives or friends. These people—men like Saeed—are the lucky ones. 

“Ninety-five percent of gays in Iran will never come out,” Saeed says over pasta at one of northern Tehran’s coffee shops, where the atmosphere is relatively permissive. For all his friends who have dared, coming out has been a traumatic experience; parents lock their children inside the house, confiscate their phones and laptops, and force them to seek therapy.

Even "the lucky ones" like Saeed live in constant fear — "We are all so fucking scared," he told Vocativ. The Iranian government keeps extensive intelligence files on its citizens and presumably monitors gay apps like Grindr. But an even bigger threat to gay Iranians can be blackmail by other citizens who find out. 

The pressure is so intense in Iran that many gay men choose to undergo gender reassignment surgery. Being transgender is acceptable in Iran, where more people undergo GRS than in any other country except Thailand. 

Meanwhie, the country's HIV rate has increased nine-fold over the last 10 years, and 70 percent don't know they're infected. 

Still, there are signs of hope. 

A recent government study found that 17 percent of young adults in Iran said they were gay. And the government has begun to at least acknolwedge their existence — even if it's through backward policies like a ban on military service for those who can prove it. 

Hossein Alizadeh, of the International Gay & Lesbian Human Rights Commission, told Vocativ: 

“There’s a new generation of people who are more tolerant of these issues. But at the end of the day, it only takes one person to destroy your life.”

And in some cases, "destroy your life" can mean literally. 

  

Read Vocativ's full story here.

Two Iranian Men Reportedly Hanged For Being Gay

The Daily Beast reports that two Iranian men, Abdullah Ghavami Chahzanjiru and Salman Ghanbari Chahzanjiri, were hanged on August 6th, according to at least one report, for “consensual sodomy." Another report is not as specific about the crimes committed by these men but names them as “immoral villains.” Should it be proved that Chahzanjiru and Chahzanjiri were killed for being gay, the tragic event would only further propel the existing narrative that Iran doles out draconian punishments for its gay citizenry. 

In his piece in The Daily Beast, Jay Michaelson points out that this latest human rights infraction comes as the U.S. is seeking to “engage” Iran diplomatically as tensions continue to escalate in neighboring Iraq due to the emergence of I.S.I.S. and the subsequent unraveling of now ex-Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s government. Interestingly enough, however, is who amongst this country’s political elite have taken up the mantle of activist humanitarians where the rights of LGBT Iranians are concerned. Michaelson writes:

In the topsy-turvy world that is international LGBT politics, Iran’s record on homosexuality is more a conservative cause than a liberal one…When Iran persecutes gay people, conservatives in the United States suddenly become enamored of gay rights—and bash the Obama administration for not doing enough to defend them. Thus the administration is hit from all sides—at a moment in which it is trying to pursue its dicey diplomatic agenda.

Republicans Won’t Rest Until We’re at War with Iran

Upon hearing the news that a temporary deal had been reached concerning Iran’s nuclear programs, I knew without even seeing a single comment that Republicans were going to be against this six month trial run of diplomacy.

Because that’s all this is.  It’s a six month deal to see if all parties involved will keep their word.  At that point, another deal can be reached that takes bigger steps towards peace with Iran and preventing the Iranian government from building nuclear weapons.

But I knew the moment I heard the news that Republicans would throw some kind of hissy fit following this announcement.  After all, when have Republicans really ever endorsed diplomacy?

The truth of the matter is pretty simple though — Republicans won’t be happy until we’re at war with Iran.

To Republicans, almost all attempts at diplomacy are signs of weakness.  “We’re the United States, we don’t compromise!”  Then again, that’s the entire GOP philosophy these days anyway.  To conservatives, the idea of compromising is just as vile as the idea of becoming a “filthy America-hating liberal.”

If Republicans had their way, we’d sit there with Iran, tell them they’re going to do whatever we say and if they don’t like it — well, too bad.

Now this might sound like I’m defending Iran, and I’m absolutely not.  Their government for too long has been corrupt, shady, deplorable and sensationalistic.  I absolutely don’t trust them, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t give them a chance.

It wasn’t like this deal was only struck between the United States, China, Russia and Iran.  We had other allies involved such as Germany, France and Britain.  Of course Israel hates the deal, but as time goes on, I’m simply getting tired of the rhetoric coming from that country.  While I get why we support them, too often lately they remind me of that tiny friend who always likes to cause a lot of problems, yet can’t handle them on their own.  Always asking their more powerful friends to come help them out.

But I’m absolutely convinced Republicans won’t rest until we’re at war with Iran.  Hell, I believe had the Iraq War gone the way Bush thought it would (you know, a few months and over — “Mission Accomplished!”), Iran would have been their next target.

Republicans have built this platform that any nation which might be breeding grounds for terror must be dealt with.  Basically, if they feel a nation supports terrorism, we should go to war with that nation.

In other words, the United States would be perpetually at war.  Then again, war is great for big defense companies — which are huge supporters of the GOP.

So of course they oppose any mention of diplomacy with Iran, because that’s not what they want.  The Republican party has nearly always been the party for massive defense spending.  And what better way to facilitate more money for defense spending than by starting more wars?

Oh, and let’s not forget about big oil.  They would love greater access in countries like Iran.

I’m sure it’s just a pure coincidence that the Republican party is supported by huge sums of money flowing in from big oil and big defense — and the last two Republican presidents started wars in the Middle East. However, when it’s all said and done, this nuclear deal is nothing more than an attempt at diplomacy between nations that for many years have scoffed at any mention of such an idea.

Will it work?  Who knows.  I hope it does.  But if it doesn’t, we’ll take the appropriate steps at that moment.

At least if we end up having to take harsher actions towards Iran in the future (deeper sanctions, military action) history will have shown that we attempted diplomacy — and it simply failed.

Republicans, on the other hand, would rather shoot first and ask questions later.  Which is the exact kind of short-sighted ignorance that got us into the war in Iraq, resulting in the deaths of over 4,000 brave American men and women serving in our armed forces.