Interviewer: Do you think that it is something that is shamefully wicked and vile?

Iris Robinson: Yes, of course it is, it's an abomination.

Among other things, these comments were made in the context of a discussion around anti-discrimination policies in the province designed to ensure equal rights protection for gays and lesbians, which, ironically, her husband is responsible for. Mrs. Robinson was asked to respond to an especially vicious homophobic attack by a "gang of youths" against a 27-year-old gay man a few days prior. Left for dead in the gutter, the man had been stomped, punched, kicked and beaten while his attackers screamed gay epithets and spit at him - he was found unconscious with a head wound, broken ribs, a fractured hand and a leg injury. Mrs. Robinson encouraged the victim to seek counselling, not for, say, PTSD as a result of this traumatic experience, but to rid this poor man of the homosexual monkey on his back. Here's her helpful advice to the victim:

"I have a lovely psychiatrist who works with me and who tries to help homosexuals turn away from what they are engaged in. He is a born again Christian and has links all over the world, and I have met people who have been turned around to become heterosexual and who have gone on to get married and raise families. I'm happy to put any homosexual in touch with this gentleman."

There's no reason to waste precious blog space on the stunning naiveté of the ‘ex-gay' movement. You can read more about that ‘sexual re-orientation' nonsense here. Suffice it to say that therapy could sooner turn me into an elderly Asian woman or a magpie than make me attracted to the opposite sex. But what good are scientific data when you're the First Lady?

Oh, did I fail to mention that Iris Robinson is also the Chair of the Assembly's Health Committee - including mental health?

But don't be so quick to judge the esteemed MP. Let's let her clarify her position first:

"My Christian beliefs teach me that you love the sinner but hate the sin. But homosexuality is something that is an abomination. I stand up for moral issues and I will not be gagged because someone gets attacked. I condemn it wholeheartedly but that doesn't mean I don't have rights as a Christian to express my views. It is an offence to God, an offensive act and something that God abhors."

So, we can rest assured that Iris Robinson is God's chosen mouthpiece, at least. And, don't get her wrong:

"I am clearly not saying that I want people to thrash the living daylights out of a homosexual man or woman, because I don't."

No, no, it's not that. She doesn't want people to hurt us. That would just be wrong. Sticks and stones, right? She just wants us to be less nauseating. She doesn't want my partner and me sitting at the table next to hers in the café, ruining her expensive dinner. How inconsiderate of us to upset her stomach with our existence.

Perhaps if Iris Robinson were to talk openly to gay people, to get an insider's view of what it feels like to be told that one is disgusting and an abomination, she might be somewhat more, oh, I don't know, human? That's what the people from the local gay rights organisation, the Rainbow Project, were hoping when they invited her to an open discussion with gay men and lesbians. The director of this group felt that, "If she talks to gay people about their experiences then she, at least, may be able to understand the impact that her language can have."

But Iris is sticking firm to her bigotry. (Or is it Christianity, one can hardly tell the difference.) She's denied this invitation as well as similar others. "I don't need to stick my hand in the fire," she responded to the invitation, "to know I'll get burned." Is this hellfire rhetoric?

Iris Robinson's comments have sparked a major row among the people of Northern Ireland, drawing dividing lines along mostly secular and religious grounds. This is one moralistic banner under which Catholics and Protestants unite. It's actually a rather old public debate here, inspired originally by that tireless lion of the Loyalist party, Ian Paisley, who led the very vocal and unsuccessful "Save Ulster from Sodomy" (biblically inspired) campaign against decriminalising homosexual behaviour in the late 70s and early 80s. And just last year, his son Ian Paisley, Jr, gave an interview for a local magazine saying:

"I am pretty repulsed by gays and lesbians. I think it is wrong. I think that those people harm themselves and - without caring about it - harm society. That doesn't mean to say that I hate them. I mean, I hate what they do."

There's a common theme here: "Hate the sin, not the sinner" ... "I don't hate them, I hate what they do". But I'm pretty sure that if you unfurl this "love thy brother" flag you'd find the stain of judgement against both the homosexual and the homosexuality. I've mentioned some of the research on homphobia in a previous post, including findings demonstrating that the emotion of disgust precedes moral judgements. Moralistic ascriptions occur after the fact, as epiphenomena. In other words, it's not so much the case that "homosexuality disgusts me because it's wrong" but rather "homosexuality disgusts me and therefore it must be wrong."

On the one hand, as an objective academic researcher, I can appreciate the psychology of homophobia. It's fascinating stuff. People who are easily disgusted are more likely to be both conservative and homophobic, a not infrequent combination in the real world. On the other hand, after reading this empirical literature, one gets the sense that the recent extension of basic civil liberties to homosexuals is more of a begrudging exercise in political correctness than a genuine display of tolerance and acceptance. We're sort of the equivalent of the guy that nobody really wants at the party: "Ugh, well, I guess we probably should invite him ... I know, I know, it's the right thing to do..." That's what it feels like to be gay in most places today. We're the "...not that there's anything wrong that" demographic and we've grown up surrounded by that one word: Disgusting. It's a word not only spewed as a toxin by the religious right, but it's also in the subtext of prime time TV commercials, in the facial expressions of kind-hearted grandmothers, in the bodily reactions of restaurant waiters, everywhere. Disgusting. Are the Paisleys and Iris Robinson just saying out loud what everyone is feeling, even if they're not aware of it themselves?

This ambivalence between what is obviously right (tolerance and acceptance) and what feels right viscerally (homosexuality is gross) is, I suspect, at the heart of many contemporary debates on this topic. Our species' emotional instincts aren't keeping apace with our societies' moral advances. But, again, who needs research in this area when God and Iris Robinson are on the case? "Bible says No. Case closed."

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have an appointment with my therapist. It's been hard work, but I'm finally making progress on my dream of transforming into a water buffalo. (I have the most amazing therapist; drop me a line if you want his contact information, I'm happy to put you in touch.)

• Print
• Send to friend
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

33 Reader comments join the discussion here!

Tags: abomination, bbc radio interview, british parliament, discrimination policies, first minister, gay epithets, gays and lesbians, heterosexual, homophobic attack, interviewer, leg injury, mrs robinson, northern ireland, old gay man, peter robinson, poor man, reas