Mainstream Muslims argue that homosexuality and the LGBT community go against their Islamic beliefs. But these beliefs may indict them on several Islamic charges. At a time when Muslims are facing Islamophobia on a global scale, queer Muslims are subjected to homophobia from within their religious community due to a biased practice of Islamic tradition.

“Our argument is, it’s not OK. It’s OK to be gay for you, but we are a majority Muslim community, this is a majority Muslim school — it’s not OK. Let’s get it out there, let’s get it straight, no beating around the bush, no water under the bridge, it is not OK for our children to be gay. Let’s just put it there.”

Proclaimed a confident Fatima Shah, who became the poster girl for the Parkfield Birmingham primary school protest against an anti-bigotry and anti-homophobia ‘No Outsiders’ lesson.

This denial of the existence of gay Muslims — a common mainstream Islamic belief — is nothing new. Most contemporary mainstream Muslims now view being gay and being Muslim as irreconcilable.

Across the globe, Malaysia Deputy Prime Minister — and the wife of Anwar Ibrahim, who was twice charged and sentenced for sodomy — recently tweeted,

Dr Wan Azizah Ismail on Twitter

Ini berita yang disiarkan pada 6 bulan lepas. Pendirian saya masih sama, LGBT haram disisi Islam dan bertentangan dengan norma masyarakat di Malaysia. https://t.co/PiAfgZux6S

“My stance remains the same. LGBT is haram in Islam and goes against the norm of Malaysian society.”

But mainstream Muslims like Fatima Shah and the Malaysian Deputy Prime Minister have one crucial thing to clarify:

What do they mean by “gay”, “LGBT”, and “homosexuality”? And more importantly, how do they view their own fellow Muslims and citizens who identify as both ‘gay’ and ‘Muslim’?

Does being ‘gay’ mean merely having same-sex desires? Does being part of the LGBT community only include those who are visibly queer (as reflected in their behaviours, mannerisms etc.), those who publicly identify as queer, or those who express their queerness publicly?

Does this ‘gay’ categorisation specifically only apply to those who have committed same-sex acts? Or are all of these facets of homosexuality interchangeable under the term ‘gay’ and applicable to anyone who identifies as gay, and/or appears gay like the transgendered community of Malaysia (commonly known as Mak Nyahs)?

The matter is not as “straight” as this, and there is “no beating around the bush” as Fatima Shah and other mainstream Muslims would like it to be. Worse, this willful ignorance may, in fact, cause them to commit several major Islamic sins in accordance with their own beliefs.

In his groundbreaking book, Before Homosexuality in the Arab-Islamic World: 1500–1800, Harvard-based Khaled El-Rouayheb shows how premodern Muslims made the distinction between same-sex attractions, expressions of love (and desire) for the same sex, ‘queer’ mannerisms, and same-sex acts (with focus on anal intercourse).

He notes that the conflation of all these into the concept of ‘homosexuality’ originated in the West around the 18th or 19th century.

Other distinctions which were made then include the differences between sexual and gender fluidity, anal and non-anal forms of sexual contact (the latter deem a “minor sin”) and more significantly, the distinction between the private and the public realms, and the laws that govern each realm.

The Ottomans, for example, created the dual legal system of the sacred sharia and the “secular” kanun, with the latter (which often supplanted the former) being characterised as leaning towards “pragmatism and flexibility”, and with a “live and let live” attitude even on cases of sexual transgressions.

These distinctions were crucial particularly among premodern Muslims who believe that illicit sexual intercourse (whether ‘straight’ or ‘gay’) is a severe sin.

This severity would necessitate in several “near impossible” prerequisites for the legal conviction of these sexual transgressions. For example, according to canonical Islamic beliefs, four male witnesses of “trustworthy character” will have to witness personally “the key entering the keyhole” (i.e. the act of penetration per se). What is regarded as “trustworthy character” is also subsequently a highly debated matter among Muslim scholars, alongside the debates on whether or not female same-sex intercourse should be equated to male same-sex intercourse.

All of these consequently contributed to the abovementioned “near impossible” nature of such legal convictions, and a reflection of the primacy of privacy within Islam.

Premodern Muslims would thus prefer to uphold the Islamic ideal and principle of avoiding calumny and slander — both major Islamic sins — on matters of sex, and “thinking well” (husn al-zann) of one’s fellow Muslims, even towards those who were expressly queer.

What happens then when one accuses another of sodomy?

According to the tradition of mainstream Muslims, false accusations of illicit intercourse (whether sodomy, adultery, or fornication) would be liable to eighty lashes, as stipulated in the Quran, under what has been termed the qazf ordinance — which is a major Islamic offence. What is regarded as a qazf offence is when all of the prerequisites mentioned above are not met.

This accusation is still considered false even if the accused was witnessed to have been caressing, kissing, or even committing intercrural intercourse with his/her partner.

Some premodern Muslim jurist-scholars even considered insults and derogatory attributes as formal accusations of unlawful intercourse. According to the Egyptian scholar Ahmad al-Dardir (d.1786) for example, calling someone a mukhannath (an effeminate man, or its contemporary counterpart — a ‘faggot’) is legally regarded as a qazf offence unless the caller can substantiate his claim. This is due to the then prevalent norm that the term mukhannath was used to describe the passive sodomite.

So to those mainstream Muslims who claim that they are operating within these established Islamic beliefs, what do they mean when they refer someone, particularly fellow Muslims, as ‘gay’? Do they make the crucial distinctions like their premodern counterparts did, or are they accusing all gay-identifying Muslims of illicit sexual intercourse?

Subsequently, what do they mean by ‘you cannot be gay and Muslim’, that ‘there is no such thing as gay Muslims’, or that “LGBT is haram”? Do they deny the faith of Muslims who identify as ‘gay’? Or are they claiming that the very inborn same-sex orientation is haram in itself? To deny someone’s faith is a grave sin within Islam, while the latter claim has no precedent in Islamic tradition.

Most importantly, where is the Islamic ideal of thinking well of others? Does it not apply to gay Muslims, even visibly queer Muslims? Or are the sins of calumny and slander not applicable when it comes to the LGBTQ community?

It is worth noting that many LGBTQ-identifying Muslims now do not adhere to this premodern Islamic tradition that same-sexness is a sin and provided their own form of ‘queer theology’. If mainstream Muslims are allowed to contextualise 7th-century Quranic verses on jihad, LGBTQ Muslims also possess the right to contextualise verses that pertain to pre-Islamic Canaanites, particularly amidst the vacuity of guidance and meaning from contemporary mainstream Muslim scholars.

However, if mainstream Muslims claim that they follow the aforementioned ‘Islamic beliefs’ on the sins and the severity of same-sex illicit intercourse when it comes to homosexuality and the LGBTQ community, they should thus make the same crucial distinctions, strive for the highest Islamic ideals, and follow the same ‘Islamic beliefs’ to a tee in the same manner that they expect from the LGBTQ community.

Mainstream Muslims like Fatima Shah and Malaysia’s Deputy Prime Minister need to scrutinize their attitudes and beliefs towards the LGBTQ community which have led to, on one hand, alarmism about a simple anti-hate class for children, and on the worse end of the other, unjust dehumanising policies and regulations for an already suffering minority.

The truth is, LGBTQ Muslims are now being targeted because they seem different and choose to be different publicly, not because they are committing sodomy or any other lewd acts in public.

They are targeted, discriminated against, attacked, and murdered by their straight Muslim counterparts just because they may speak, dress, or act differently. They are kicked out of their homes, disowned by their families, ostracised by their communities, and forced to remain underground — all while having their privacy stripped at the same time.

And when desperation drove them to risk their lives by publicly demanding their rights to human dignity, they are condemned.

This homophobia has been tolerated and even exacerbated in most Muslim communities on the selective basis of ‘Islamic beliefs’. This homophobia, however, has no religious or cultural precedent in Islamic history and has shamefully led to the dehumanisation of visibly queer Muslims.

But the road to hell is paved with many good intentions. After all, didn’t God say in the Qur’an:

“O you who believe, stand up as witnesses for God in justice, and do not let your hatred of a people lead you away from justice. Be just! That is closer to righteousness”.

What Mainstream Muslims Should Know About Their beliefs on Homosexuality was originally published in Think Queerly—By Darren Stehle on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.