Politicians walk hand in hand towards the building where they’re holding formation talks.
A couple of weeks ago, a local Dutch news item on men holding hands went viral. You’ve probably seen the photos of Dutch politicians walking towards government buildings with their hands clasped, in response to a violent incident fueled by homophobia. Two men had been assaulted for nothing other than walking back home hand in hand. People cried in outrage, and one of those calls led to the symbolic action of men holding hands, eventually resulting in the cheap photo-op that went viral.
Yes, you read that correctly - a cheap photo-op. While I am of course happy to see the initial outrage at the homophobic violence being echoed around the world, and the subsequent international praise for the action - it is extremely important to remain critical of the national circumstances under which this photo was taken. I understand that the picture and the given byline of politicians standing up for equality and tolerance (one of those terms the Dutch love applying to themselves) provided the perfect opportunity for social media momentum and virality, but it is also incredibly dangerous to celebrate something without knowing the context.
First of all, let’s establish that it’s a complete lie to state that homophobia does not exist in the Netherlands. Incidents like this happen frequently - it was not a unique situation. Tolerance in the Netherlands might be higher than in other countries, but tolerance does not mean acceptance, nor does it mean equality in practice. There is still a lot of progress to be made, which is why this needs to be addressed. So what made this incident stand out? Was it just the final push that tipped people over the edge, or were there other motives at hand?
It is important to understand that this incident happened right after our elections. It’s a volatile time in terms of politics. For the first time in years, there was an immense international interest in Dutch political processes - all because of the current polarizing rhetoric that centers around the ‘self’ vs ‘others’ debate. Identity politics, sometimes meant to heal the world, sometimes meant to hurt everyone but ourselves (whoever that may be). In a time where there is a quest for establishing a national identity and people vying for the populist vote, it makes sense that any political party would happily show exactly what ‘Dutch norms and values’ they stand for.
This ties into the main aspect of why there was this sudden call to activism (or perhaps what is better typified as ‘slacktivism’ - a quick, easy way of showing you support a cause, without actually putting in the necessary work to realize that cause ). The attackers were identified as a group of young men, teenagers really, with a non-Dutch ethnicity.
And isn’t that just wonderfully convenient. Because that ties in perfectly with the entire identity debate - “if you’re not Dutch, you don’t belong, because you don’t conform to our norms and values.”
But why does the issue of homophobia only become politicized when its perpetrators don’t have blue eyes and blonde hair or whatever stereotypical looks people apparently associate with Dutch people?
The answer seems pretty clear to me. And that’s why it disgusts me. Because in October, there were men vandalizing a rainbow-painted crossover and filmed themselves screaming Heil Hitler, motioning the Nazi salute and all. They were a group of young, Dutch, men from a fraternity who claimed it was all ‘just a joke’. And no one walked hand in hand to show their support. No politician showed up to personally come and repaint the rainbow. When months ago, a lesbian couple was harrassed and assaulted, nobody jumped to their defense and paraded up and down the street hand in hand. And months before that, there was another incident involving two gay men being beaten, and again, nothing happened. Common denominator: the perpetrators were your average dude-bro Dutch guy.
People report homophobic violence at least three times a week in the Netherlands. And that doesn’t even include the probable amount of people who choose not to report it, because they’ve unfortunately had to accept that even in a country like the Netherlands, people can be hateful and hurtful and ignorant.
It’s too easy for politicians to make this statement, and ignore any other incident of homophobic or transphobic violence. It’s too easy for them to blame yet another instance of our own intolerance on immigrants or a ‘foreign’ religion, when statistics show that this is just not true - the majority of incidents were perpetrated by Dutch nationals. That is not to say that religion or culture (and this includes Christianity and Dutch/Western culture too) don’t play into homophobia, because it is apparent that they do, but that doesn’t excuse the Dutch, nor does it give politicians a free pass to close their eyes when numbers show that homophobia is just an overall issue of our society - still 1/3 of the Dutch population say they find it ‘difficult’ to see LGBT people engage in PDA.
Panel of football analysts who’ve previously made various homophobic remarks hold hands to show their support for the two men who were assaulted in April.
It’s too easy for a sports panel of well-known men to hold hands in an effort to show solidarity, when those same men feel the need to express how incredibly straight they are and definitely not gay, followed by a stream of homophobic remarks, including the ever-repeated ‘there are no gay men in football, because it’s just not a sport for [insert homophobic slur].’, as well as a completely unnecessary analysis of Gay Pride, stating that it ‘isn’t the best advertisement for gays,' and they ‘ask for it by putting feathers up their ass’.
So no. Unless those same men make an effort to refrain from making homophobic remarks, and undertake action to stop others from engaging in homophobic behavior, and will actually become continuous, outspoken allies of the LGBT+ community that call for inclusion and visibility, that offer a platform to LGBT+ people in all parts of society - and not just when a photo-op will give them a temporary popularity boost; well, until then I’m going to remain really critical.