The politics of holding: home and LGBT visibility in contested Jerusalem

Abstract

This article explores LGBT politics of space in Jerusalem, a contested and fractured city. By interpreting the challenges and contradictions inherent in the Jerusalem Open House (JOH), a social movement and community space in Jerusalem, the article will show how the discourse and the practice of the JOH lead to a politics of holding. This LGBT spatial politics consists of striving to include oppositional politics, emphasizing the consolidation of public and private LGBT politics of home. The JOH persistently maintains a politics of holding, continually balancing inclusion, creating a home-like space and framing the organizational space as a shelter for all LGBT individuals in Jerusalem, while adopting a politics of visibility. This visibility enhanced processes of politicization which at many points stand in contrast to the JOH’s goals of being accessible, inclusive, and safe. The politics of holding illustrates the religious, political, national, and ideological fractures’ at work in producing a unique kind of LGBT spatial politics in the conservative Jerusalem space.

Resumen

Este artículo estudia la política LGBT del espacio en Jerusalén, una ciudad disputada y fracturada. Al interpretar los desafíos y contradicciones inherentes en la Casa Abierta de Jerusalén (JOH, por sus siglas en inglés), un movimiento social y espacio comunitario en esta ciudad, el artículo mostrará cómo el discurso y la práctica de la JOH conducen a una política de contención. Esta política espacial LGBT consiste en luchar por la inclusión de la política oposicional, enfatizando la consolidación de la política LGBT pública y privada del hogar. La JOH mantiene persistentemente una política de contención, equilibrando continuamente la inclusión, creando un espacio similar al hogar y enmarcando el espacio organizacional como un refugio para todxs los individuxs LGBT en Jerusalén, mientras se adopta una política de visibilidad. Esta visibilidad resalta procesos de politización que en muchos puntos contrastan con los objetivos de la JOH de ser accesible, inclusivo y seguro. La política de contenerse ilustra la fractura religiosa, política, nacional e ideológica que funciona para producir un tipo único de política espacial LGBT en el espacio conservador de Jerusalén.

摘要

本文探讨LGBT在耶路撒冷这座备受争议且破碎的城市中的空间政治。透过诠释“耶路撒冷敞开大门”（JOH）此一耶路撒冷的社会运动与社群空间内部的挑战与矛盾，本文将展现JOH的论述与实践，如何引发“支持政治”。此一LGBT的空间政治，包含了力图将反对政治纳入其中，并强调LGBT的公共及私人家庭政治的巩固。JOH持续维持着“支持政治”，不断地平衡包容，创造了像家一般的空间，并将组织空间架构成为耶路撒冷每位LGBT的避风港，同时採取可视性的政治。此般可视性，促进了政治化的过程，该过程在诸多时刻与JOH的可接近、包容且安全的目标形成对比。“支持政治”描绘了在保守的耶路撒冷空间中创造特殊LGBT空间政治的过程中所上演的宗教、政治、国族与意识形态断裂。

Keywords:

• Contested cities
• LGBT/queer space
• public and private space
• LGBT visibility
• LGBT in Israel
• sexuality and space

Palabras clave:

• Ciudades disputadas
• LGTB/espacio queer
• espacio público y privado
• visibilidad LGTB
• LGTB en Israel
• sexualidad y espacio

关键词:

• 备受争议的城市
• LGBT／酷儿空间
• 公共与私人空间
• LGBT可视性
• 以色列的LGBT
• 性慾与空间

Acknowledgements

I wish to thank Orna Sasson-Levy for her invaluable assistance with this article. I am grateful to Sarai Aharon, Lital Pascar, Tanya Zion-Waldoks and my doctoral working group, as well as the anonymous reviewers, for their insightful comments.

Notes

1. I use the term LGBT. Whenever the term homosexual or gay/lesbian was originally utilized, the original term is applied.

2. My usage of the public and private binary is political and serves to illustrate the possibilities of subversion. It does not indicate compliance with its disciplining agenda or with the power structure and logic it represents.

3. In Hebrew there is no linguistic difference between the word home and house [Ba-yit]. This distinction refers to the affective function of the space and charges it with emotive meanings relating to security, privacy, intimacy, and belonging (Blunt and Dowling 2006).

4. For further reading on experiences of the home see: gender (McDowell 1999), race (Hooks 1991), relating to age (Dupuis and Thorns 1996; Gorman-Murray 2007), sexuality (Johnston and Valentine 1995), and nationalism (Blumen, Fenster, and Misgav 2013).

5. As well as for heterosexuals who do not live within traditional family structure.

6. The Green Line is the common term used to mark the dividing line between Israel and the Palestinian occupied territories.

7. Michael Oren, Israeli ambassador to the US, speech on 5/5/2012 at the ‘Equality Forum’ in Philadelphia.

8. For further information see http://joh.org.il/index.php/english/legal-struggle-history-of-joh.

9. For more on Jerusalem pride parades and the religious vs. LGBT conflict see Sex and the City: The Politics of Gay Pride in Jerusalem (Adelman 2014).

10. Zalman Shoshi is the name of a well-known cross-dressing Israeli sex worker. He is mentioned here to symbolize the shame and embarrassment that characterized gayness in the 1980s, relegating it to sex-work. It is also an indication of the change the Israeli LGBT community has gone through since. As such, mentioning his name in this context serves to highlight longevity and the tendency to forget past hard times.

11. Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions [BDS], a global campaign to end the Israeli occupation and colonization of Palestinian or Arab land, equality for Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel, and respect for the right of return of Palestinian refugees.

12. See, e.g. Saar (2010) http://www.mouse.co.il/CM.articles_item,1018,209,53009,.aspx. Or the formal request of Sheikh-Jarrah activists (Solidarity - Sheikh-Jarrah 2010) for people participating in the demonstrations to wear modest clothing http://www.justjlm.org/358.