I am sure there was. I am not blaming the Cuban government for that. I am blaming it for the specific actions it took with regard to queers.
> I think you want to blame Castro's government for
stuff that really should be blamed on Cuban/Latin
American society.
Did Latin American society force the Cuban government to persecute queers the way it did?
By that logic, one could argue that American culture should be blamed for the invasion of Iraq and that the individuals who made the decisions were only obeying the dictates of society and, therefore, not responsible.
from Jerry:
> Just a hypothetical situation
Actual queer lives were destroyed. Why do we need to deal with hypotheticals? Also, to equate being queer with the sexual practices of a hypothetical ecstatic mystery cult is dismissive and offensive. Maybe a tad too much eggnog while you typed (I hope).
Why don't we stick to the actual situation at hand?
The Castro government persecuted queers. The question on the table is what is the appropriate response to the fact of this persecution.
a) We can try Chris' approach, but as I noted above, the "devil-society-made-me-do-it" defense permits a lot of bad shit to occur with no one ever being held responsible.
b) We can argue that queers presented a clear and present danger to the revolution and needed to be neutralized. I do not think this was the case since many queers welcomed Castro's actions. It seems that their persecution was based solely on the fact of their being queer, as if queerness itself were a threat to revolution. But if queerness were a threat to the revolution, then the question must arise of why Lenin and his crew rescinded laws against queers.
c) It could be that Castro wanted to demonstrate his strength and decided to persecute a group that was already hated in Cuban society, namely queers. Through this display of seriousness, he lets it be known that he is in charge and will not stand for any crap.
The question now is: is the persecution of queers in order to demonstrate the strength of revolutionary conviction justified? Should queers be sacrificed on the altar of the "we-mean-business" cult? If yes, then criticisms of this persecution are, of course, unwarranted.
d) Another argument that could be offered would start with an admission that Castro's persecution of queers was wrong. But to forestall any criticism, a caveat would quickly be promulagted: such persecution was a minor wrong in light of all the good he did. But then my question becomes: what constitutes a minor wrong? Additionally, is persecuting queers always and everywhere a minor wrong, or are there moments when it is a major wrong?
Finally, would persecution of women or Backs or Jews or (fill in the blank) be a minor wrong?
Brian