Despite conservative image, Israel becomes one of world’s top destinations for gay tourists

[King_David]

By Associated Press, Published: January 24

TEL AVIV, Israel — Tel Aviv has long been a gay paradise, one of the few places in the Middle East where gays feel free to walk hand-in-hand and kiss in public.

Now, thanks to its balmy climate, vibrant nightlife and a creative government-backed branding campaign, the city has become one of the world’s top gay tourist destinations.
As always in the Middle East, however, conflict is never far away, and some critics have accused Israel of using such tolerance as a way to divert attention from alleged transgressions against Palestinians.

Tel Aviv devotes about $100,000 — more than a third of its international marketing budget — to drawing gay tourists. Though no exact figures exist, officials estimate that tens of thousands of gay tourists from abroad arrive annually.

“We are trying to create a model for openness, pluralism, tolerance,” Tel Aviv Mayor Ron Huldai told The Associated Press. “Live and let live — this is the city of Tel Aviv.”


http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle-east/despite-conservative-image-israel-becomes-one-of-worlds-top-destinations-for-gay-tourists/2012/01/24/gIQATu8hMQ_story.html

[King_David]

1. More..Ha..

“We’ve long recognized the economic potential of the gay community. The gay tourist is a quality tourist, who spends money and sets trends,” said Pini Shani, a Tourism Ministry official who has been involved in the campaign. “There’s also no doubt that a tourist who’s had a positive experience here is of PR value. If he leaves satisfied, he becomes an Israeli ambassador of good will.”

That’s exactly what Israel’s opponents fear. They derisively call the embrace of gay culture “pinkwashing” — a conscious attempt to play down what they call violations of Palestinian human rights by Israel behind an image of tolerance.

[Ken Burch]

3. None of which justifies the settlements OR the Occupation

since neither are good for LGBT people.

[King_David]

12. Chicken Fingers

Are a tasty treat but an anatomically incorrect term .

[Ken Burch]

22. What other reason do you start these threads

other than to justify the settlements and the Occupation? Nobody on DU ever actually argues that nothing good has EVER happened in Israel.

[King_David]

24. You tell me ?

Why do I start these threads , huh?

[Ken Burch]

25. Beats me. There's no good reason for them.

It's actually embarrassing to Israel to have people doing these pathetic bragging threads. They don't address any of the real issues in the I/P debate and they make Israel look like it's far more insecure and in far more danger than it ever actually is. You just don't have to try this hard. It's beneath that country's dignity to use these tactics, ant it serves no purpose.

[shira]

28. Bragging threads? Tell me, is it embarassing to you to have so many threads here...

...that delegitimize Israel, portraying it as a horribly rightwing racist nation that should never have existed - and that it still remains a nation that really shouldn't be there but regretfully it is and they should apologize over and over to the Palestinians who have every right to be eternally mad and 'resist'?

When there's so much of that shit going around, can you really blame people for 'bragging' threads?

And tell me this, now that we're talking about "bragging"...

What do you think of Israel's liberal record compared to the USA? On just about every issue, Israel is more liberal than the USA. From gay rights to environmental issues, no death penalty, abortion rights, health care, social care, more liberal courts and press, stem cell research, immigration (think recently about all the Sudanese refugees), state subsidies for food and tuition to college. The issues above aren't even political talking points b/w left and right like they are in the USA. The military has proven to be more careful with civilians than the USA and is not waging wars thousands of miles away like the USA.

What do you make of all that?

Still think Israel had no right to be in the first place?

[Ken Burch]

29. I didn't SAY Israel has no right to exist, and you know it.

What I've said and continue to say is that Israel has no right to prevent a Palestinian state from existing. That's an entirely different thing.

And the point still stands...none of the things you mention in that paragraph about Israel's "progressive" record(btw, it doesn't take a hell of a lot for a country to be more progressive than the U.S.,and I've never said that Israel was to the RIGHT of the U.S.)justify the Occupation, and certainly none of them ever justified the invention of the settlement movement by Ariel Sharon in 1973. The Israeli government always knew that, at some point, there was no alternative to accepting a Palestinian state comprising the West Bank and Gaza, therefore it always knew that it had no justification in encouraging Israeli citizens to live in areas that weren't ever going to be part of Israel.

None of the things I've spoken out about here were necessary in any real way for Israel's survival, and none of them had anything to do with the things you mentioned in that paragraph.

And calling for the Israeli government to acknowledge and apologize for the historic injustices the Zionist project inflicted on Palestinians does not equate to delegitimizing Israel. It actually equates to strengthening Israel by creating better relations with the people it is going to have to accept always living next to. I also call for the United States to fully acknowledge and apologize for the things it has done to Native Americans, African Americans, and Americans of Mexican descent who live in areas the U.S. stole from Mexico-none of which would delegitimize the U.S., and all of which could only strengthen it by giving it a new foundation of justice for all.

[shira]

30. Oh, so now Israel's preventing a Palestinian state from forming...

Israel agreeing to the Clinton Parameters peace proposal in 2000 and Olmert's 2008 offer demonstrates Israel is not in any way preventing a Palestinian state. The PLO never even came back with a reasonable counter-offer. Your side still doesn't hold the PLO accountable in any way for rejecting peace and a Palestinian state TWICE. All your side does is argue Israel should've offered more. But how much more? The PLO never said what would be enough. They've never gone public with a reasonable offer that would, at the very least, start the process of bridging the gaps.

So the reality is that the Palestinians (or PLO) don't want peace and a reasonable 2 state solution. Worse, your side doesn't even hold them accountable in the least for rejecting 2 peace proposals without so much as a reasonable counter-offer. But you have the nerve to blame Israel and its supporters of not wanting peace and 2 states? The occupation and settlement enterprise could've ended more than a decade ago. How can you say YOU want those to happen but not hold the PLO accountable in any way for at least attempting to bring those things about?

Please explain.

And if you choose to move on and evade, remember this and do not attempt to ever argue again that Israel doesn't want peace and a 2 state solution.

[Ken Burch]

31. There was never ANY justification for the settlement process

The settlements never made Israel any more secure, and have had purely negative effects on the areas they've settled.

There was no reason for Ariel Sharon to create the settlers movement in 1973. If Israel had to have a presence in the West Bank, it should have been limited exclusively to IDF personnel on the highlands and at the Green Line. That would have been enough to stop any attacks on Israelis in Israel proper.

[shira]

32. Your silence goes to show that you're wrong about Israel and its supporters not wanting peace...

I pretty much knew you wouldn't attempt to debate what I wrote to you in my last post before yours. You evaded just like I thought.

So are we going to see again your accusations that Israel doesn't want 2 states and is stopping the Palestinians from having their own state free of occupation and settlements?

[Ken Burch]

33. Opposition to peace is the only rationale for the settlement project.

You cannot defend Israelis taking Palestinian land and STILL say you want peace. You can't defend domination of one side by the other(whichever side it is)and say you want peace.

And it goes without saying that the "land swaps" position is about preventing a Palestinian state, since the land swaps are about preventing Palestinians from having contiguous control of the West Bank, being able to travel from one part of the West Bank to another without ever having to go through an Israeli checkpoint(if you can't travel through your own country without the permission of another country's army, you don't have sovereignty...agreed?)

I believe the Israeli people want peace-the leaders, not so much. People like Bibi and Tzipi and Barak would lose all international relevance if there was peace...and no politician wants to become irrelevant.

[shira]

34. Cut the bullshit out, Ken. Israel offered TWICE in 8 years to end the settlements....

...in order to bring about peace and a Palestinian state. If settlements have killed the peace process, then the PLO should have never agreed to Oslo and then pretend they're for 2 states. Israel called their bluff and you don't have a problem with Palestinian rejection of having their own state.

Also, the fact is ancient Judea and Samaria (what those territories were called for thousands of years except for 1948-67) is NOT de facto Palestinian land as Jews ALSO have a valid legal claim to that land.

[Ken Burch]

35. If the West Bank has had an Arab majority for 1400 years, it is Palestinian land "du jure".

There's not much difference between saying "the settlements and the IDF Occupation of the West Bank are justified because of 'Judea and Samaria' having existed 2000 years ago" and Slobodan Milosevic's argument that he had the right to slaughter Albanians because of what happened at the Battle of Kosovo. There's only a difference of degree.

You've just said something in even using that phrase that illustrates a major flaw in your thinking-it is completely unreasonable to expect Palestinians to accept the idea that because of events hundreds of years before their community existed, events they had nothing to do with, somebody else has the right to come in and pre-empt them for the land without even asking. I support Israel's right to exist, but not the idea that 14 centuries of Arab residency in Palestine simply doesn't count. The reality of those 14 centuries has to be acknowledged, respected, and treated with at least some sort of respect-as does the reality that the people who identify as Palestinian have as deep a connection with the lands as do those who identify as Israeli. Respect begets respect.

And, in referencing "Judea and Samaria", you've outed yourself as a right-wing extremist. Nobody in the Israeli peace camp has ever accepted that the ancient existence of "Judea and Samaria" justified the Occupation and meant that the settlements were no biggie.

[azurnoir]

40. your question was answered a while back here when you made a similar comment

King_David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Thu Sep-29-11 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #104
146. Quite a few of my gay friends parents , brothers and sisters are settlers

I have been to quite a few of their houses and they do not hate their sons (or daughters)

So where did you get that information from


Oh yes...you made it up !

[Ken Burch]

42. OK...so some individual settlers might be gay friendly, at least in the presence

of an openly gay person.

That still doesn't vindicate the existence of the settlements. And it still makes the existence of the settlements a bad thing, on balance, for gays, because it runs the risk of associating them, a group that has faced and still faces repression on most of the earth, with the repression of another group of people.

Defending such a thing is not a sensible choice for any historically oppressed group-all those who are oppressed and have been oppressed should stand in solidarity with each other(and yes, it WOULD also help if Palestine was a gay-friendly place, before anyone jumps in with that).

The settlements also put those settlers who moved in to them because it was the only way to get low-income housing(and that was a major incentive various Israeli governments made to attract non-religious settlers) into a problematic situation. Those people were politically and economically marginalized in Israel itself; now, the same government that wouldn't do what it was supposed to and build housing for those people within Israel proper has physically endangered them by inducing them to live in, essentially, a combat zone.

[King_David]

44. Thank You

Well said .

[azurnoir]

45. your welcome

IMO it clarifies much, but I must ask why did you answer Ken in the demeaning manner you did in the first place? If your comment was so "well said" you should not have minded repeating it

[King_David]

46. Sorry can not answer that without breaking DU rules. nt

[holdencaufield]

2. When has Tel Aviv...

... EVER had a "conservative image"?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

4. Only in the minds of the uniformed

[azurnoir]

5. "ProgressiveProfessor 4. Only in the minds of the uniformed"

would that be the police or IDF ?

or did you mean uninformed?

however it would take someone truly uninformed to believe that Tel Aviv is anymore representative of all of Israel than Beit Shemesh is

[King_David]

6. Guessing you never been to Israel. nt

[azurnoir]

9. Guessing you perhaps don't read what is posted here

or are you saying Beit Shemesh is average?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

15. His point is that haredi and their actions are the exception

The comparison to Fred Phelps is a good one. IIRC at one point they were registered members of the Democratic party. Should we judge all members of the party by them?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

7. Spellchecker strikes again

Anyone who has spent any time in Israel knows that Tel Aviv is much more representative of Israel as a whole than the haredi in Beit Shemesh.

I have been to both places, have you?

[azurnoir]

10. I'm sure you have

but the volume of your defense speaks for itself

[ProgressiveProfessor]

14. And it says people making such claims are uninformed at best

[azurnoir]

17. claiming such things as TelAviv is one end of the 'social' spectrum in Israel

and Beit Shemesh is the other end? so logically the average is somewhere in between?

oooooh how dare i must be uninformed, cause apparently Israel can not be average it has to be better no the bestest ever

[ProgressiveProfessor]

20. Beit Shemesh is not the other end...

And you might want to consider some sort of weighting, or perhaps use the mean

Its a diverse nation, more progressive and more tolerant than any in the region. It has its nutcases and its faults, but when compared to its neighbors...

[King_David]

37. Do you even know how big Bet Shemesh is?

You are comparing a suburb to a city.

[azurnoir]

41. yes I realize that however I was not comparing size

but rather social attitudes which are definitely at opposite ends of the scale

[holdencaufield]

8. Newsworthy

Extreme Haredi are newsworthy in Israel for precisely the same reason that Fred Phelps and his followers are newsworthy in the USA. 90% of the population look at them and say "what tools... I never thought I would see that here"

They are newsworthy BECAUSE they are so unrepresentative of mainstream opinion.

"Dog bites man isn't news -- Man bites dog is." -- Alfred Harmsworth

[azurnoir]

11. Embarrassed by such stuff getting out ? should be kept quite in your opinion , eh? n/t

[holdencaufield]

13. Seriously?

Did you even read what I wrote?

[King_David]

16. What do you mean? nt

[azurnoir]

18. see post #17 for an explanation

this will be comment #18, 12 of the comments here are dealing with my poking fun at one poster over a typo, pity more weren't on the actual subject matter in your thread, but most here already know about Israel's Gay Rights and the amount of money Israel invests in using them in an attempt to re-brand itself, never mind that for most Gay Rights are not the issue when it comes to Israel, the on going occupation, blockade, and 'settlement' are, but good luck with it

[King_David]

19. Thats funny...

I do not think you get it though.

[Ken Burch]

23. Well, it started getting that way

when it switched its votes from Labor and Meretz to the conservative party Kadima.

Still, it's not like the people there are as right-wing as the settlers.

[oberliner]

26. Kadima is not the conservative party

Kadima is a centrist and liberal political party in Israel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kadima

[Ken Burch]

27. It's well to the right of Labor and Meretz is what I meant.

Not that it was the most right-wing of all.

Kadima has made it clear as well that it has no real interest in ending the war anytime soon.

[oberliner]

36. Yes, but Tel Aviv does not have a "conservative image"

Which is what you had stated about (using support for Kadima as your evidence of this?).

Tel Aviv is definitely one of the most liberal cities in Israel (and, I daresay, the world).

[Harmony Blue]

38. I agree that Tel Aviv

is one of the most progressive cities in the world. Most don't realize it because the extremists shriek too much for anyone to notice unfortunately.

[pelsar]

39. its very true....we don't want to end the war...

we actually love it when we send our kids to the borders, where they spend days and nights, in the rain in the cold sitting, looking and watching, wondering when an attack will come and possibly bring them home to us in a box

yes we have no interest in the war to end, our generals and politicians have no interest in their kids lives and prefer that they go to war, catch a few bullets, get their head blown up, as long as they can keep their careers.

we like wars, so we can send our kids to checkpoints where they can deal with the moral dilemmas and learn to make hard ethical decisions at age 18 about checking someone for a bomb or letting them through because they have a medical pass and are crying...

we don't want to end the war, we like wars.....more than we love our children, thats why so many voted for kadima...

see ken, we do agree on something

[King_David]

43. LOL

[2ndAmForComputers]

21. Me, I'd worry a lot more about those Ultra-Orthodox nuts than about Palestinians.

But there's not many of those in Tel Aviv, are there?