The concepts of homonormativity refer to the situation where there is some kind of neoliberalisation in as far as sexual politics is concerned. This concept of homonormativity mainly requires that the gay people in the society should be accorded some right to sexual privacy (Duggan, 177). The ideology of ‘pink washing’ by Jasbir Puar is a situation in which so much attention is given to the sexual minority groups at the expense of concentrating on the conflicts the US has with Palestine. In this regard therefore, homonationalism is a situation in which the gays are regarded as being individuals who are also motivated and that the share similar desires and their political aspect is inclined to the idea that they wish to have an identity that is stable. This stable identity should further be able to empower to have the same right to speak and even to make any kind of political claims just like the heterosexuals do. As such the lesbians and the gays are free to enjoy and share in a national ideology through the enactment of identities and even homosexual acts.
The concept of homornormativity can be seen in the case of Noam who is a young Israeli soldier and that of his fellow gay man. This is because Norman and his fellow gay partner are allowed to live their own private lives without experiencing any kind of interference. On the other hand homonationalism can be depicted when Noam falls in love with Nablus who is a Palestinian Ashraf. It is expected that the fact that they are homosexuals should not affect how the society views them because the society should be able to appreciate that they are just like heterosexuals who have desires. Therefore, Lulu who is a fashioner designer and a straight person cannot discriminate against them because homonationalism allows her to share the same national ideology on gayism and thus not criticize their sexual orientation.
The film is indeed an example of what Puar has referred to as ‘pink washing’ because of the fact that so much of the sexual minority groups who are the gays like Noam and Yali in this film. Focus has been given to gays at the expense of concentrating on matters of political importance. Even though Nablus comes from Palestine the film has focused on his sexual orientation rather than on matters to do with Palestine or the role that is played to help resolve any pending matters the country has with Palestine.
The culture of the Palestine’s is such that it does not tolerate gayism amongst its citizens. On the other hand the Israel culture has no opposition towards the culture of gayism (Ritchie, 560). The film shows that love can break any existing barriers and can unite warring groups. However, things like war and violence can be a limiting factor because it makes the union between the parties involved in a romantic relationship to be challenging. Even so, such acts of love can bring change to the world given that cases of gayism have forced several people and various nations across the world to embrace homosexual relationships. The US is one of such nations and this has even led to the enactment of laws that support gay relationships. Furthermore, it is evident from the film that it was immaterial whether Noam was a citizen from Israeli where gayism was supported while Ashraf was a Palestinian citizen where gayism was advocated against. Intimacy made it possible to overcome their different boundaries and thus their different backgrounds did not separate them.
Works Cited
Duggan, Lisa. "The new homonormativity: The sexual politics of neoliberalism."
Materializing democracy: Toward a revitalized cultural politics (2002): 175-194.
Ritchie, Jason. "How Do You Say “Come Out of the Closet” in Arabic? Queer Activism and
the Politics of Visibility in Israel-Palestine." GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 16.4 (2010): 557-575.
