💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › meo-mun-queerphobia-in-vietnam.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 12:46:11. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

➡️ Next capture (2024-07-09)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Queerphobia in Vietnam
Author: Mèo Mun
Date: Apr 25 2021
Language: en
Topics: anti-nationalism, decolonization, gender, queer, sexuality, Vietnam
Source: https://libcom.org/blog/queerphobia-vietnam-25042021
Notes: Content warning: queerphobia, queerphobic slurs, discussion of genocide

Mèo Mun

Queerphobia in Vietnam

There is a tendency in some post-colonial societies to blame all social

ailments, such as queerphobia, sexism, and misogyny, on colonialism and

Western imperialism. Whilst the evils and destructiveness of colonialism

are indubitably pervasive, such reductive thinking is overly simplistic,

and can be detrimental to marginalised groups in post-colonial

societies.

Let’s explore this in the context of gender and sexuality liberation in

modern Vietnam. Some Vietnamese claim that homophobia is solely a

product of French colonialism, often citing the fact that the Vietnamese

equivalence of the f-word — “pêđê” — ​​​​​originated from the French

“pédéraste.” But is it truly the case that Vietnamese society was free

of queerphobia before French colonisation? And for those fighting for

liberation today, does it matter?

Pre-French colonisation, Vietnam was under the influence of

Confucianism, which became the prominent ideology during the Lê Dynasty

(15–​​​​​​​18^(th) century). An ideology that upholds patriarchy and places the

burden of preserving the bloodline on men will necessarily come with a

certain degree of homophobia. Historical records speak of prince Lê Tuân

(1482–​​​​​​​1512), whose preference to dress in women’s clothing cost them the

favor of king Lê Hiến Tông (1461–​​​​​​​1504), and subsequently the throne. To

this day, many still attack queer people using Confucian teachings. This

is, of course, a logical fallacy appealing to tradition; it should be

rejected wholeheartedly. In the olden days, Confucianism was used to

justify the divine right of kings; today, we cannot let violence against

marginalised groups be justified in the name of culture, religion, and

tradition. In modern parlance, bigots often combine this with an appeal

to nature, where they cherry-pick a slice of life from the animal

kingdom and apply it to humans, ignoring the fact that homosexual

behaviour, not necessarily sex, has been documented in hundreds of

species.

Nowadays, some groups amongst the Vietnamese LGBTQIA+ community are

beginning to expropriate queerphobic slurs for use in safe spaces: “Rất

đỗi bê đê”, “Ê Bê Đê cho ly cà phê”, “The Pónk Fellow” are a few

prominent examples. However, the process of reclaiming slurs is complex

and emotional for the targeted groups, and queer people’s expropriating

certain slurs is not a green light for non-queer people to use those

slurs at will.

As progress for LGBTQIA+ rights improves in Vietnam, so does the

reactionary backlash against it. Queerphobes, such as those amongst

nationalist and red-pill groups, are also evolving their vocabulary.

Let’s have a quick Vietnamese lesson on a few common slurs thrown around

by young Vietnamese:

Tràng” is a town of pottery makers in the outskirts of Hanoi, which has

the misfortune of sharing the same initial with the term LGBT. In the

beginning, it was used as a way to avoid automatic content filtering,

but has since become a full-fledged slur.

for the name of a TV brand are close enough to “Làng Gốm”. People would

come to queer spaces and post this intentional misspelling of LGBT as

thinly veiled aggression.

where it’s implied that queer folks (“bóng”) are somehow inferior

sub-humans.

[]

The view is that queer people should be content with the status quo, and

should not be so arrogant when demanding their rights. To these

reactionaries, the mere acknowledgment of queer existence is

unfathomable, and any further attempt at liberation is perceived as

“supremacy​​​​​​​” to be resisted at all cost.

“cánh tả” —​​​​​ leftists, and hence also used as a slur. Gender and

sexuality equality initiative often comes from liberal, pro-democracy

NGOs, and is looked upon with suspicion by Vietnamese nationalists.

this seemingly random statement “nước Nga là thành trì cuối cùng”

(“Russia is the last bastion”) when discussing same-sex marriage? It is

a dog whistle, referring to Russia’s restrictive policies toward queer

people, and they don’t mean it as a bastion against the Nazi, but queer

people.

More often than not, this rhetoric leads people down the vile path to

fascism. Nowhere is this clearer than in Vietnam’s small but rapidly

expanding red-pill movement. In a private red-pill Discord server, the

members nonchalantly discuss gassing the gays with Zyklon:

[]

That’s horrifying, yet not surprising of red-pillers. Alarmingly, many

Gen-Zs in Vietnam today would tell you that they know at least one

friend or family member who is familiar or interested in red-pill ideas.

Another reactionary force is the nationalists, who are much more diverse

and numerous, with similar attitude toward queer people. Recently, a

9^(th)-grade high school student rightfully pointed out, in a Tiktok

video, that Vienam’s Giáo Dục Công Dân (Citizen Education) textbook is

homophobic, because it says: “The state does not recognise marriages

between persons of the same sex.”

For this simple observation, she immediately got dog-piled. One of the

reasons Vietnamese nationalists are against same-sex marriage is that

they view young people as the engine of economic growth, and thus are

horrified of losing that population makeup due to queer people’s not

making babies. Nationalists would prefer to keep same-sex marriage in

the limbo between not being criminalised but still unrecognised, for the

sake of the economy. There are two logical fallacies in their argument:

appeal to law and appeal to nature. Economic development should not

depend on the exploitation of young people. As anarchists, we recognise

that the institution of marriage is deeply rooted in the exploitation

and economic oppression of women, but at the moment, the legalisation of

same-sex marriage is vital, for it will afford queer people

life-altering rights related to insurance benefits, inheritance, and

medical emergency.

In another recent incident, a group of high school students performed a

dance on the 90^(th) birth date of the Hồ Chí Minh Communist Youth

Union. They faced so much vitriol from Vietnamese nationalists that they

had to take the video down. Their sin: waving and saluting to the

rainbow flag on stage. Nationalists claimed that these students had

violated the solemnity of the occasion, that flying the rainbow flag

next to the national flag, next to Hồ Chí Minh himself, was a blasphemy

worthy of harassing minors.

In both instances, the dog-piling was initiated or amplified by

nationalist groups with hundreds of thousands of followers. Of all the

affiliated organisations in Vietnam, the Hồ Chí Minh Communist Youth

Union should be the one leading the charge in youth liberation as well

as gender and sexuality liberation, yet they did not defend these

children in any meaningful ways. If you cannot fly a flag that

represents your gender, sexuality, and humanity, in a revolution, is

that revolution worth fighting for?

To blame all social issues on colonialism and Western imperialism is not

at all productive, and helps perpetuate the myth of the noble savage.

Queerphobia had existed in Vietnamese society long before French

colonisation, and is gravely harming Vietnamese queer people today. It

is tempting to rid ourselves of responsibility and blame all problems on

our oppressors, but by doing so we will inevitably victimise the most

vulnerable, the most marginalised of us. A large part of autonomy is

responsibility, and present-day Vietnam needs to account for the many

hardships with which its queer people are faced. Any vision of anarchy

or a communist society is incomplete without taking into account all

oppressed groups.