Rainbow Washing in Representation

RepresentationPurpose Washing
Written By Jennifer Case

Image Source: Latana

Definition and Examples

Rainbow washing is when establishments use the LGTBQ+ community as a smokescreen to whitewash human rights violations or as a way to make money off of uninformed consumers. The rainbow washing used by companies is usually called rainbow capitalism. In many discussions and analyses, this concept is called ‘pinkwashing,’ especially in relation to Israel, but I prefer to use “rainbow” because pink was originally used to represent homosexuality and a rainbow is more demonstrative of all the LGBTQ+ identities.

June in the US usually sees a wave of rainbow and not just from those celebrating Pride Month; many companies display rainbow colors in their logos and sell rainbow-colored products. But when you examine each company’s policy towards LGBTQ+ employees, advocacy for the LGBTQ+ community, and what they do with the proceeds, you will find that many do not put their money where their rainbow-stained mouth is. For example, in 2020, major corporations (i.e. Walmart, Amazon, Home Depot, AT&T, etc.) who ‘celebrate Pride’ donated a great deal of money to back “politicians that voted against a landmark piece of legislation designed to protect LGBTQ+ people from discrimination.”

Disingenuous Multinational Brands

Multinational corporations based in the US often display rainbow-colored versions of their logos throughout June, though as previously shown, this doesn’t mean they back up this ‘support’ with tangible policies, funding, or advocacy. One clear indicator that a corporation is only using the rainbow symbolism superficially is to look at how it ‘celebrates Pride’ at its other branches: many corporations don’t use their rainbow logos in place like Southwest Asia and North Africa, where LGBTQ+ communities are severely marginalized or even criminalized.

Last year, I saw a lot of people (who were 1st or 2nd connections) making a fuss about LinkedIn’s rainbow logo (read: they didn’t like it and they didn’t like LGBTQ+ people). Lo and behold, this year, LinkedIn didn’t change their logo at all; however, I don’t necessarily think this is a bad thing. I couldn’t find any evidence of LinkedIn providing funding, policies, or advocacy in support (or against) the LGBTQ+ community, so perhaps this business-as-usual attitude is a more honest reflection of LinkedIn’s position on LGBTQ+ rights.

I would rather a company be upfront about how little they do for the LGBTQ+ community than wave rainbows around everywhere while they don’t actually support the LGBTQ+ community in any way. Multinational corporations like BMW, who selectively display their rainbow logos in the name of ‘cultural sensitivity,’ show that their ‘Pride support’ is merely a smokescreen to make money rather than actually support the LGBTQ+ community. I may not wave a rainbow flag or have a rainbow logo, but I don’t hide my support for the LGBTQ+ community. And this may deter some potential clients, but I’m ok with that because that means they’re not my ideal clients.

Homonationalism and the War on Terror

Homonationalism, which was coined by Jasbir Puar, is “the favorable association between a nationalist ideology and LGBT people or their rights.” If rainbow capitalism is tied to companies, then homonationalism is tied to states. The general idea is that certain countries claim that their particular ‘tolerance’ of sexual and gender minorities “supposedly gives them superiority over other countries ([read] non-Western countries) and thus legitimacy in the actions they undertake.” There is also an association of queerness with Whiteness, and LGTBQ+ rights are seen as a priority over other struggles (e.g., anti-imperialism).

After 9/11, the Bush administration and the media used LGBTQI+ rights as one of the ways “to reinforce the binary US=good/Arab countries=bad.” Employing this binary allowed the US to whitewash its actions in Afghanistan and Iraq; one of the reasons being “they’re homophobic, we’re helping Afghani/Iraqi LGBTQ+ people.” Meanwhile, the US military’s Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy was still going strong, same-sex marriage was banned more than it was legalized, and many more discriminatory practices aimed at LGBTQ+ people were in place at the time.

More than twenty years later, homonationalism is still used to achieve xenophobic political policies. Some politicians in Western countries tout their LGBTQ+ equality and point the finger at non-Western countries for being homophobic as they push for xenophobic immigration policies. Some right-wing politicians have also tried to attract LGBTQ+ voters by implying that immigration (of Muslims) would threaten LGBTQ+ rights in the host country. Ironically, this would shut the door on anyone seeking asylum for persecution on the grounds of sexuality or gender identity.

Today, many American politicians, who don’t support LGBTQ+ rights, wouldn’t hesitate to paint countries in Southwest Asia and North Africa (SWANA) as homophobic and use this point to elevate the US as superior to them because the US has a greater tolerance. However, while homophobia and queerphobia are serious problems in SWANA countries, each country has its own level of tolerance and a complex relationship between the state and human rights, including LGBTQ+ rights. There is also more advocacy for LGBTQ+ rights in the SWANA region than what US media shows. Honestly, at the moment, pointing at other countries for their intolerance is blatant homonationalism when we have the Don’t Say Gay bill in Florida, the latest anti-trans directive in Texas, the “Save Women’s Sports Act” in Ohio, which allows young girls’ genitals to be checked to prove their gender.

Rainbow Washing and Israel

Pinkwashing is usually the term associated with Israel, probably because all the propaganda I’ve seen is in relation to gay men, but again, I will be using rainbow washing to be more inclusive of other identities. One of the objectives that Brand Israel—an actual government strategy name, not an opposition nickname—is to present Israel as a gay haven amidst a host of homophobic Arab states. However, the reality on the ground shows that Israel is not necessarily a haven and definitely not a haven for everyone in the LGBTQ+ community.

When Netanyahu was in power, he took every opportunity abroad to reiterate Israel’s support for LGBTQ+ rights in contrast with Iran and Arab states. Yet there are many points that show this support is superficial: (1) Netanyahu’s allies in the coalition government were intolerant of the LGBTQ+ community; (2) he didn’t actively promote LGBTQ+ rights back in Israel for his domestic audience; and (3) queer Arabs are not welcome in this supposed ‘gay haven.’ Aeyal Gross, an associate law professor at Tel Aviv University, criticized Brand Israel’s work when the LGBTQ+ rights achieved in Israel were won despite the state’s opposition: “The state smugly lauds itself for rights and achievements that it actually resisted.” Nada Elia, a Palestinian scholar and activist, rights make the point that “she would never be allowed into Israel to take such ‘refuge’ precisely because she is Palestinian.”

Image Source: Joy Ellison

The homonationalism discussed in the previous section also plays a role in Brand Israel’s propaganda and the Israeli military. Israel simultaneously elevates itself as superior to Palestinians because ‘Palestinians are all homophobic’ while the government whitewashes human rights violations it commits by referencing supposedly uniform negative aspects of Palestinian culture, homophobia being one of them (see flyer to the right). Danny Kaplan compiled interviews of gay and bisexual Israeli soldiers, in which one solder recounted (with casual cruelty that haunts me) when another soldier sniped and killed a gay Arab man who was unarmed for no reason. In his own words:

We were fucking cruel. Cruelty—but this was war. Human life didn’t matter much in a case like this, because this human could pick up his gun and fire at you or your buddies at any moment. But the gay thing was pretty funny.

Image Source: Wikipedia

This dangerous stereotype of “gay suicide bombers” became a trope and is depicted in the Israeli film “The Bubble.” If you look at the image on the right (below the flyer), you’ll see the film’s official advertisement where “Asharf, the Palestinian character, is pictured with a target on his face. Unlike the other characters who are in sexualized poses, he looks like a corpse. This image shows Ashraf as profoundly different from the [other] characters and his death as predetermined.” Later on in the film, gay Palestinians were referred to as “sexy suicide bombers” by the film’s characters.

According to Decolonize Palestine, “Not only are homophobia and transphobia weaponized against Palestinians in such a manner by the magical rainbow state of Israel, it ends up leaving queer Palestinians vulnerable to the ramifications of queerness being associated with collaboration.” Al-Qaws, an organization advocating for the LGBTQ+ community in Palestine, has stated:

Indeed, this pervasive linking of non-normative sexuality and Palestinian collaboration has become a term and identity of its own in the Palestinian imaginary and reality: isqat…this false connection with Israel and collaboration associates queer people with treason, dishonesty, untrustworthiness, and fraudulence, and therefore works to substantiate a very specific kind of homophobic fear within Palestine.

Resources

Jennifer Case
Previous

Infographic Fun: Palestinian Embroidery (Part 1)
Next

Infographic Fun: Arabic Roots