Born sick
- eusocanthsoc
- Dec 28, 2020
- 6 min read
Updated: Mar 21, 2021
By Eleanor Jefferys 14/02/2021 (first written 02/2019)
This short essay will compare the attitude towards homosexuality and the language used to discuss it in official legal documents in the UK and Egypt. I will examine Egypt’s Supreme Council for Information’s policy on the prohibition of ‘the appearance of homosexuals or their slogans in the media’ (see more here). I will compare it with Section 28 (also known as Clause 28) of the UK’s Local Government Act 1988, which was enacted in 1988 and repealed across the whole of the UK only in 2003 .
I wrote this essay from a linguistic standpoint, considering what is meant and understood by the term 'promotion' of homosexuality and 'homosexual slogans'(translated from the original Arabic) in these documents (see more here).
Author's notes:
This essay was written in 2019 for a formative assessment in forensic linguistics. Given the word limit, certain things were omitted such as more in depth cross-analysis of religion in the Christian and Muslim contexts.
On reflection, there are bits that I would change.
but in respect to my thinking at the time, I have left the essay unabridged. Perhaps one day I will add the bits that I consider are necessary and missing.
The title is a reference to the song Take me to Church by Hozier which tackles the lyricist's exposure to religious doctrine and homophobia in a Catholic church. To learn more about the origins of this song please see this interview with Hozier.
Caption: Appearance of homosexuals on any media outlet was banned after rainbow flag was waved during Cairo concert in 2017
Considering the linguistic tools used in official government documents, I will compare how homosexuality was valued in the UK and Egypt, at time of enactment, and how these countries have tried to regulate the dissemination of materials pertaining to homosexuality, with focus on the contrasting definitions of ‘homosexual slogan’ and ‘promotion.’
In 2017, Egyptian authority, The Supreme Council for Media Regulation, released a policy (EGMR) prohibiting the appearance and spread of homosexuality in ‘print, audio and visual media’ in a campaign to eradicate ‘homosexual slogans’. The document is the longer of the two, largely due to the frequent descriptions of the believed ‘social constants and religious [constants].’ Comparatively, Clause 28 remains mostly free from descriptions of cultural mores in the UK, instead primarily focussing on the prohibition of “promoting homosexuality by teaching or by publishing materials.” Having been enacted in 1988, and later repealed in 2003 across the UK, at a time before the internet was widely available in the UK, the phrase “publishing materials” likely solely refers to printed publications. It seems odd that Clause 28 was enacted several years after the legalisation of homosexuality in the UK until we understand the homophobic ideologies circulating due to the increased media exposure of the AIDS “plague” (Gander, 2017).
The Egyptian government is aware of the supposed threats that media has to their cultural values, thus they enforce legislation liberally, as evident in the case of the Mashrou' Leila, a popular Lebanese band, concert in Cairo, 2017 which saw dozens of people arrested for “promoting sexual deviancy” (al-bab.com) in waving a rainbow flag, a symbol synonymous with LGBTQ+ acceptance. More recently, infamously homophobic interviewer Mohammed al-Gheity has been prosecuted and sentenced to 12-months in prison for interviewing a homosexual ex-sex-worker (Guy & Nada, 2019). In both cases, the accused were indicted under the regulations of the EGRM policy, the latter case was brought by notorious Egyptian prosecutor Samir Sabry who claimed that in the mention of the interviewee’s historic sex-work, the interview was promoting the financial benefits of homosexuality (Guy & Nada, 2019).
Cultural values are integral to the creation and application of the laws detailed in both documents. In Egypt, anything critical of the governmental regime or traditional concepts of Islam is punished harshly; both philosophies strongly opposed to homosexuality (Deshmukh & Abdallah, 2015 and Memri, 2002).
Such societal prejudice towards homophobia in Egypt is displayed in the EGRM policy. Whilst it is clear in Clause 28 that it is the sole responsibility of “a court” to “draw such inferences as to the intention of the local authority” regarding the dissemination of “material” promoting homosexuality, the EGRM document implies that society-as-a-whole should take action to eradicate the “disease” of homosexuality, supported by the general “recognition of and acknowledgment of the mistake of conduct” of homosexuality.
To define the terms ‘homosexual slogans’ and ‘promotion’, I used both English, most notably the OED and Cambridge Dictionary, and various English-Arabic dictionaries. I also consulted Arabic specialist Dr Sam Hellmuth for translations of the EGRM document. I must add the disclaimer that, as someone with no knowledge of Arabic languages, I have tried to find the most accurate translations and definitions available. All English renderings of the EGRM policy, other than Dr Hellmuth’s, are provided by the official website of the Egyptian government. If otherwise mentioned, all Arabic terms cited below have been cross-referenced by Dr Hellmuth and with online and in-print dictionaries.
The word “المثليين”, ‘same-sex’, is used interchangeably with “مثلي”, ‘gay’, as both noun and adjective (Reverso) throughout the document. The word ‘gay’ in English connotes informality and can be used pejoratively, it is therefore unsurprising that it does not feature in an official document such as Clause 28. I am unsure whether “مثلي” carries the same connotations in Arabic, however, given the bias of the document neither term to express homosexuality is spoken of favourably. The phrase “لشعارات” which, when broken into its grammatical constituents, can be translated as “ل”, ‘to, by, with’ and “شعارات”, plural form of ‘to signal, show.’ When combined, these words translate as ‘slogan.’ This raises the question of how to measure a ‘slogan’. English dictionaries define ‘slogan’ as a ‘short phrase that is easy to remember’ (Cambridge Dictionary) or a ‘distinctive phrase….associated with a political party of movement’ (OED). These definitions jar with the definition of ‘homosexuality’ as the psychological ‘state’ of being ‘sexually…attracted’ to members of one’s own sex (OED) as, in English, homosexuality is not classed as a ‘movement’. Furthermore, these definitions seem to jar with some of the offences of promoting homosexuality for which Egyptian citizens have been prosecuted; for example, is waving a flag a ‘slogan’ when it involves no verbal rhetoric? Rather than specify the forms in which promotion can appear, Clause 28 restricts all “intentionally promot[ed] homosexuality”, making it easier to prosecute as promotion of a cause can manifest in many non-linguistic forms.
The word “الترويج”, 'to spread, promote, circulate', is a “neutral term” (Dr Hellmuth). The term ‘to spread’ can also be translated as ‘انتِشار’, which only appears in the text pertaining to homosexuality. Although “الترويج” is “neutral”, when cross-referenced with dictionaries only, “انتِشار” was found to be only used pertaining to disease. Equally, in Clause 28 ‘spread’ is only used in relation to "disease.” I would have liked to further discuss the use of the word ‘disease’ in these documents. The EGRM document relies heavily on it as a metaphor for homosexuality, whilst it appears only once in Clause 28 in reference to the “spread of disease” likely caused by sexual homosexual activity. The negative associations of ‘disease’ play to the author’s view of homosexuality in the EGRM policy. Homosexuality is further translated as “فساد” ‘a corruption’ and “شذوذ” ‘anomalies’ (Oxford English-Arabic Dictionary), exemplifying the presence of religious rhetoric in Egypt’s judicial system and language.
The EGRM policy could be condensed yet retain the same stance towards the proliferation of homosexuality, however, the author(s) presumably thought it more effective to repeat notions of homosexuality as a ‘disease’ and the religious and societal consequences of promoting it. Conversely, Clause 28 only prohibits the promotion of homosexuality in print media and “maintained schools”. There are, therefore, no strict prohibitions of discussion of or acceptance of homosexuality outside of these restrictions.
The terms ‘homosexuality’ and ‘promotion’ have differing effects within the contrasting contexts of the two documents. Both outline the goal of the given legislation, with obvious varying degrees of tolerance and ideologies towards homosexuality within law and within the societal framework.
Special thanks to Dr Sam Hellmuth.
References:
Gander, K. 06/01/17. The Terror and Prejudice of the 1980s AIDS Crisis Remembered by a Gay Man Who Lived Through It. Independent (online). Article accessed 11/02/17.
Unknown Author. 26/09/17. Egypt's war on rainbow flags. al-bab.com. Article accessed 11/02/19.
Guy, J. & Nada, A. 21/01/19. Egypt TV host handed 12-month jail term after interviewing gay man. CNN (online). Article accessed 28/01/19.
Deshmukh, J. & Abdallah, A. 07/01/17. Egypt gays live in fear under Sisi regime. Mail and Guardian. Article accessed 14/02/19.
Unknown Author. 06/03/02. Egyptian Press: 'Since Egyptian Gays Have No Rights, Their Rights Need No Defense'. Memri.org. Inquiry & Analysis Series No.88. Article accessed 28/01/19.
Dr. Samantha Hellmuth, personal communication, 12/02/19.
Oxford English Dictionary. 2019. Online resource: www.oed.com. Accessed 05/02/19.
Cambridge Dictionary. 2019. Online resource: www.dictionary.cambridge.org. Accessed 05/02/19 & 14/02/19.
Reverso Dictionary. 2019. Online resource: www.dictionary.reverso.net.org. Accessed 14/02/19.
Awade, N. & Smith, K. 2004. Arabic Dictionary. England, London: Bennett & Bloom
Oxford English-Arabic Dictionary. 1982. (Ed) Doniach, N.S. England, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Comments