Several years ago I wrote an article for ABC Religion and Ethics about the paradox that political progressives support Muslims against Islamophobia while rejecting Muslim views of sexuality as homophobic.
At one level the alliance makes sense, as LGBTIQ people and Muslims both face discrimination and harassment, homophobia and Islamophobia, etc. But, I had to ask, is being the victim of a “phobia” enough to maintain a political alliance of this order? Aligning marginalized groups/identities is one thing, but there are many things that can complicate such an alliance. The practice of, “I’ll defend whatever conservatives are against” is very shaking ground for a coalition of any kind.
As I said in The Spectator:
Progressives have a weird relationship with Muslims. On the one hand, they adopt a paternalistic and protective relationship with them because of Islamophobia. But on the other hand, progressives absolutely detest so much of the Muslim religion and Middle Eastern culture.
Which led me to the conclusion:
This is the unresolved paradox of the social progressives: advocating for LGBTI communities and for Muslims who generally do not share in the values of the West's sexual revolution and regard homosexuality with either indifference or disdain. Maybe the paradox exists because both groups are victims of prejudice and intolerance which enables social progressives to live with but never resolve the tension. Even so, I do wonder how long social progressives can turn a blind eye to Muslim indifference and/or hostility to LGBTI people.
Well, as it turns out, recent events suggest that the tension has been resolved by progressives turning against Muslims.