‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
From Terra Incognita to Terra Firma:
The Logbook of the Voyage of Gay Men's Community
into the Israeli Public Sphere
Amit Kama, PhD (cand.)
Tel Aviv University, Israel
Journal of Homosexuality, 2000, 38(4), 133-162.
Amit Kama is a PhD candidate at the Department of Communication, Tel Aviv University, Israel. This article is part
of his in-progress doctoral dissertation supervised by Dr. Dafna Lemish. The author is thankful for her
encouragement. He also wishes to extend his deepest gratitude to Prof. Larry Gross for his meticulous comments
and helpful suggestions. Thanks are due to Ms. Sarah Schulman, too, for her insights. An earlier version of this
article was presented at the 48th Annual International Communication Association Conference, July, 1998,
Jerusalem, Israel. Correspondence may be addressed: Dept. of Communication, Tel Aviv University, Ramat Aviv,
69978 Israel.
1
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
ABSTRACT. This article charts the winding and tumultuous course Israeli gay men have taken in their
struggles to claim a visible and audible place within the Israeli public sphere. Whereas for the greater
part of history, Jewish gay men were symbolically annihilated by various social institutions, for the past
decade they have been active as agents of social change. The paper’s objectives are to offer an account
of the developments that enabled such a transformation, to review socio-political strategies in an arena
not yet discussed in academic literature, and to examine the roles mass media play in these processes.
The article is composed of four chapters: Literature review, detailed descriptions of the erstwhile and
present legal, social, and cultural status of gay men in Israel, and a brief discussion of Orthodox-Jews’
reactions. As this is a preliminary, and the first of its kind, study, it combines analyses of a diversified
melange of sources. By and large, the author deliberately employs an eclectic methodological
framework, nonetheless with an emphasis on newspapers as viable texts.
2
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
INTRODUCTION: JOURNEYS INTO PUBLIC SPHERES
The Habermasian public sphere1 is allegedly accessible to all modern, democratic societies' members
thanks to the role of the mass media. The latter have emancipatory potential because they are conducive
to unrestricted participation in the civic society's open-to-all discussions (Croteau, Hoynes & Carragee,
1996; Dahlgren, 1993; Habermas, 1989.) Thus, every citizen holds the right to take part in the public,
political discourse. Ideally, the public sphere is free for actors from all segments of the social and
political spectra. However, in praxis, the public sphere is accessible only to those actors who already
possess hegemonic power, and thereby can preserve their exclusive dominant status within the existing
societal hierarchy. These actors are highly reluctant to encourage the participation of actors from other
segments who may contribute to the decentralization of power within society. The involvement of alien
players can undermine the absolute status of the powerful (Alario, 1994.)
In the case of lesbigay people, it is far more 'dangerous' to allow these actors to actively participate
in the public sphere because their very existence constitutes a threat to morality and the 'natural'
dichotomy between the sexes that is utterly essential for the maintenance of the capitalist modern status
quo (Pearce, 1973; Sullivan, 1995.) Because society's dominant ideology incorporates heterosexual
patriarchy as the normal and sole condition, and perpetuates the gendered division of labor (Brittan,
1989), lesbigays' visibility is conceived of as a menace to these taken-for-granted assumptions.
Consequently, lesbigay migration into heterosexual strongholds may be thwarted by defenders of the
public order.
In recent decades, as part of various minorities' awakening and struggle for equality and fraternity
(or, sorority), the power relations between a dominant majority and non-consensual, disenfranchised
minorities have been introduced into the academic discourse. Media scholars, too, have begun looking
into the social and political reverberations of minority participation in the public sphere and its
discourse. Three main developmental stages have been delineated in this context: (1) Symbolic
annihilation of minority members, (2) Stereotypical representations based on negative prejudices and
3
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
folklore, and (3) Equal integration of actors whose minority status is largely irrelevant to their media
role. In other words, we can speak of invisibility versus caricatured and stereotypical visibility versus
fair representation and portrayal (cf., Clark, 1969; Greenberg & Baptista-Fernandez, 1980; Greenberg &
Brand, 1994; Tuchman, 1978, 1979.)
The cornerstone of the scholarly cum activist discourse on lesbigay people in the media was laid,
according to Gross (1996), when the British Film Institute published Gays and Film in 1977, edited by
Richard Dyer. In the two decades since scholars have systematically mapped the ways gay men and
lesbians participate in the mainstream media arena. A similar progression from annulment of lesbigay
images to ridicule to visibility was found in these contexts as well: Print journalism (Alwood, 1996;
Pearce, 1973), televisual fictional genres (Gross, 1995 [1989]; Kielwasser & Wolf, 1992; Montgomery,
1981; Moritz, 1994; Nardi, 1997; Weston, 1995), cinema (Dyer, 1993; Russo, 1987), theater (Clum,
1994; Hoffman, 1979), and advertising (Fejes & Petrich, 1993.) Schematically speaking, these trends
can be traced: Until the late 1950s media institutions collaborated with other social agents in a
conspiracy of silence. During the 1960s negative images of victims, vicious and/or pathetic gay men
become perceptible. Since the late 1970s more positive portrayals have been permeating the public
sphere, but only since 1990 these have become more fair and honest and less marginal2 (Gross, 1989,
1993, 1994.)
These and other lesbigay studies have traditionally focused on Western societies, in particular on
the US. The present analysis, being the first mapping of gay men in Israeli media and society, may shed
fresh light on processes that might be erroneously conceived as global and universal. Unlike other
arenas, Israel is rather distinct in the ways its public sphere incorporated gay men and their issues. The
following historical synopsis delineates an exemplary phenomenon in which public tensions and clashes
between pro-gay versus heterosexist practices and homophobic attitudes (Herek, 1993; Sears, 1997)
were quite abruptly resolved. Between 1988 and 1993 the Israeli public sphere underwent a tremendous
transformation3. The democratic nature of the Habermasian public sphere is nearing realization in the
4
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
context of Israeli gay men whose voice is now clearly heard, and taken into consideration in public
deliberations.
It should be clarified at the outset that the present paper encompasses neither lesbians nor other
sexual minorities. The Israeli lesbian community has evolved separately from, and in a distinctly
different trajectory than gay men's. Although Jewish and Israeli lesbians have never been ostracized,
harassed or persecuted due to their homosexuality through societal, religious and legal sanctions to the
extent homosexual men have endured, their current status is notwithstanding still quite marginal, and
their existence largely transparent4. It would, thus, be theoretically as well as empirically inaccurate to
discuss both female and male Israeli homosexuals under one framework. However, some of the
following discussions and references do apply to lesbians, and other sexual minorities. In these cases,
the term ‘lesbigay’ will be employed.
By and large, two main eras can be demarcated in the charting of Israeli gay men's voyage into
public spaces: The current period beginning in the early 1990s, when gay men have begun to be dynamic
actors within the public sphere and media discourse; and, the remainder of history, so to speak, when
images were very far between, and mainly consisted of stigmatized, sexually-obsessed malefactors.
What makes the Israeli case intriguing is the abruptness of the shift, and the permeable quality of the
boundary between these eras. In fact, a pendulum-like oscillation can be demonstrated by singular
instances.
TERRA INCOGNITA: THE AGE OF ANNIHILATION
In the early 1960s the Israeli Minister of Internal Affairs, Dr. Yosef Burg, declared that
"Homosexual Jews" is an oxymoron, thereby officially stating that the State of Israel is devoid of
(Jewish) men practicing or yearning for the Biblical abomination. Yet, these men did exist, leading
underground lives, never surfacing into the public sphere.
5
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
A remnant of British rule, the anti-sodomy law was incorporated into the Israeli legal code after the
British Mandate ended, and the State of Israel was founded in 1948. It stated that every man who
allowed another man to have intercourse with him risked to up to ten years of imprisonment5. In practice
it was rarely enforced, due to guidelines written by Israel's Attorney General in the early 1950s,
asserting that sexual behavior between two adults in privacy need not be a matter for police prosecution
(Har'el, 1996; Spivak & Yonai, 1996.)
The inherent threat of legal sanctions reinforced homosexual invisibility and social marginality.
Several other factors colluded in this process: (1) The Zionist ethos accentuating the hegemonic
precedence of a collective and united body of Israelis over personal needs and identities, especially in
the face of an enduring sense of immanent threat from Arab neighbors (Horowitz & Lissak, 1977; Katz,
Haas, & Gurevitch, 1997; Lissak, 1988.) (2) Zionism saw "the apotheosis of the masculine" (Hazleton,
1977, p. 94) embodied in the new Jew's strenuously virile ideal (Biale, 1992), thereby precluding and
repressing any signs of femininity in the Sabra (i.e., a Jewish native of Israel) (Gluzman, 1997). And, (3)
the mythical indoctrination to self-actualization by bearing as many progeny as was nationally desired. It
is perhaps redundant to conclude that Israeli society, by and large, expressed intolerant attitudes toward
sexual deviants, who egotistically broke the cherished ethos, and, therefore, might contribute to the
dissolution of the beloved country. In this ideological, legal and social climate, openly homosexual men
were, not surprisingly, excluded from the public sphere. This continued a dialectical process whereby
society would not tolerate outspoken homosexuals, who were therefore reluctant to come out lest the
(perceived as well as real) consequences be too dreadful.
The symbolic annihilation of gay men was ironically emphasized against the backdrop of periodic
journalistic reports of indictments of men who committed sodomy with boys or adolescents. For many
years it seemed that the only references to 'homos' (never using names or photos, thus emphasizing their
inhumanity) were in the context of illicit coercion of the younger generation into sexual temptations.
Routine coverage included phrases that directly and explicitly reinforced the homosexual-as-child6
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
molester stereotype. For instance, in 1978 HaAretz6 published a series of articles on a homosexual
brothel in the small town of Natanya. A "nest of wasps" was discovered in the home of two men where
they and their friends had sexual intercourse with 10 to 16 year-old boys. Several boys confessed they
were tempted by bicycles and various gifts into this house, where men in "women's underwear" were
"smoking and drinking cognac," and making out with other teenagers. "My hair was standing on end,"
declared the disgusted judge at the hearing. However, the routine and conventional formula for reporting
these cases was quite short (usually less than a hundred words) in small boxes. For example: "Factory
manager committed a series of sodomy acts on boys whom he earlier coerced into being drunk."
The routine portrayal and rhetoric of sick, disturbed, and socially- and morally-decrepit
homosexuals was abruptly averted when, in 1982, newspapers revealed that the "Homosexual
Syndrome7" was diagnosed in an Israeli hospital. The "homosexual disease" was looming large on the
public horizon with reports of every new "case" (linguistic selection probably not incidentally
inhumane.) Homophobia was readily served by this new angle on the homosexual predicament. During
1984 the term AIDS became more prevalent, and by 1985 the old terminology became obsolete. In late
1985 public panic reached its heights when the Israeli Broadcasting Authority (IBA) broadcasted a
documentary about the "Black Plague of the 20th Century," which triggered a heated although shortlived frenzy. Shortly thereafter, AIDS stepped down, so to speak, from the public podium; and was
discussed in the public discourse only twice since then. In January 1995 a gay teacher lost his job after
being interviewed on television, and publicly disclosing his HIV+ status. The other upheaval happened
in 1996, when new immigrants from Ethiopia found out that their blood donations were discarded due to
potential HIV contamination. Pandemonium reached new heights, but gay men were now absent from
the discourse: Theirs was an altogether different agenda. Except for these hysterical bursts, AIDS has
been scarcely discussed even within the gay community. The strategic ignorance evolved out of the
perceived menace of further stigmatization of gay men. The intracommunal discourse did not deal with
AIDS until 1995, with the founding of the first lesbigay group focused on advancing HIV/AIDS
7
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
awareness within the community. To be sure, the vast social, economic, political, and moral (Chesebro,
1994; Morin, 1993; Weeks, 1995) implications and ramifications of the pandemic in other Western
countries (especially, the USA) have not been felt in Israel8.
Television broadcasting was introduced into Israel in 1968 (Katz, et al., 1997), and proved to be the
medium most resistant to the infiltration of homosexuals into the homes of Israeli families. As late as
1982, Yosef Lapid, Executive Director of the IBA, vetoed an interview with a gay man because he did
not wish to "offend viewers who are sensitive to these topics." "Jerusalem is not San Francisco" was
Lapid's death sentence on the interview (HaAretz, October 12, 1982.) A year later, Another Shadow, a
short film by gay director, Ron Assulin, telling a young man's coming out to his family after falling in
love with another man, was also banned from Israeli families' screens. Tuvia Sa'ar, the Israeli Television
director, asserted that "we will not have relations between men on the screen [...] Cuddling between
men, and male nudity cannot possibly be aired in a channel that broadcasts to children, religious people,
and the entire nation of Israel" (HaAretz, June 28, 1983.)
The complexity of the Israeli public sphere, and the nonlinearity of its incorporation of lesbigays is
evident in the public uproar and journalists' mobilization against these heterosexist decisions and
utterances: The fiercest advocates of fair treatment of gays have not been lesbigays themselves. An
eminent TV critic wrote: "Homosexuality is probably allowed on our TV only when it is cloaked in
medical- scientific camouflage, but the executive director does not recognize it as a fact of life, and
certainly not as an Israeli fact. [...] I would not have been so angry except that a thriller whose dead
protagonists were all homosexual was broadcasted last Saturday night" (HaAretz, July 14, 1983.) In a
Letter to the Editor a cultural officer of a kibbutz writes: "The film Another Shadow was screened in our
kibbutz [...] during which the audience (including youth) was surprised because there were no
manifestations of embarrassment on our part [...] because all sexual scenes were embedded in a context
of a love story which is not any more ridiculous or deviant than any heterosexual love story." (HaAretz,
October 18, 1983.)
8
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
Thus, the situation during this period was not uncomplicated, and far from one-dimensional.
Despite the general format of annihilation, stereotyping, and marginalization of gay men, some
extraordinary hiatuses did exist. Being a socially and geographically small country, Israel exhibits a very
tight web of interpersonal relationships. Israelis are likely to enact various roles with the same persons
in different contexts (Cooper, 1985); therefore one is always, at least potentially, situated in a social
context where s/he is known by other/s. In other words, the anonymity sought by lesbigays in other
countries (Morris, 1997; Weston, 1995) cannot be achieved here. As a result, being out to some is, as a
matter of fact, being out to all. That is, compartmentalization of the knowledge (Davies, 1992) that one
is lesbian/gay is unfeasible in this social structure9. Consequently, the dark nebula encompassing the evil
image of an abstract homosexual is, in some instances, crystallized into a concrete, known and loved
human being. Accordingly, Israeli society, even at these times of maltreatment, could offer less
homophobic management of gay men.
For example, as early as 1962, HaOlam HaZe10 published a pseudo-ethnography of the
"Homosexual Underground." This three-page cover-story portrays "an underground movement of several
thousands of men, who need no longer to hide, but are out on the streets, particularly along the sea
promenade in Tel Aviv, which is the stock exchange of manly love." The anonymous journalist
categorizes the underground membership into several categories11. The historical context in which this
article appeared should be remembered. And, thus, while a third of the story conforms to the journalistic
practice of the age–elaborating on "a shocking and unique document in which two young men are
accused of having sex with boys under the age of 15"–it concludes with a relatively enlightened note:
"The liberal attitude towards homosexuals in Israel is so far well-justified [...] Only a few crimes were
committed on this background. The number of members of the underground who are interested in
minors is very small, nearly null."
The tension between abhorrence and empathy towards gay men was also illustrated when a private
theater in 1969 produced The Boys in the Band, "which exposes the world of homosexuals," and in
9
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
which "actors play the parts of deviants." A journalist echoed the allegation that gay men are not an
indigenous phenomenon, and, thus, that the play might mean nothing to the local audience. Oded
Teomy, one of the actors, replied that "the drama of our life here is indeed so strong that no theater can
compete with it [...] But the [homosexual] problem exists, and we must deal with all human problems"
(HaAretz, January 22, 1970.) The play was in temporary peril when the Council of Censure threatened
to stop its production. Somehow they relented; and then, a theater critic remarked that
the audience has an opportunity to peep beyond the barricade society has erected in its silent, yet
meticulous, war against one of the sexual deviancies, namely sodomy. And, surprisingly enough, the
spectator finds out that 'homos' are human beings as feeble and frail as those who are called 'normal'
(HaAretz, January 30, 1970.)
Another conspicuous island of tolerant recognition and acceptance during this era was a series of
articles in Davar12 published in 1980, entitled "Pictures from a Married Life." The writer, Tuvia
Mendelssohn, scrupulously and candidly portrayed mundane episodes of an expatriate gay couple living
in Amsterdam. And, yet, two attributes situate the narrative in its historical context: The characters' utter
anonymity, and their being Israelis who felt that their homeland had alienated them for good, and
immigrated to the Netherlands. The protagonist concludes: "But, really, what do they [gay men] need to
look for there [Israel]?" In a personal communication with the author, Mendelssohn maintained that his
brother was the inspiration and motivation for his involvement with such an extraordinary story, and
upon his life it was constructed.
Like their overseas contemporaries, Israeli gay media professionals hid in ""the newsroom closet"
(Alwood, 1996, p. 12); thereby reinforcing the general information vacuum prevalent at these times.
Nonetheless, two exceptional artists did come out, and ventured into the public arena. In 1976 Yotam
Reuveni published In Praise of Illusion, the first Hebrew novel about the homosexual experience.
Reuveni painstakingly tells his personal account of a never-ending yearning for the ultimate male sexual
organ; and his eternal obsession with finding the perfect mate. All in all, Reuveni did not offer any new
10
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
perspective that might have shattered contemporary prevalent stereotypes of sexually-driven gay men.
Amos Gutman, a gay film director, shares Reuveni's pioneer status for introducing cinema audiences to
the world of gay men13. Gutman's short-film, Afflicted, released in 1983, told the story of a confused
young man who descends into the infernal world of eccentric drag-queens. Both Reuveni and Gutman
produced other novels and movies14 that shared a similar ontological perspective: Gay men trapped in a
sordid existence where they remain forever outcasts unable to love or be loved. In Hodges and Hutter's
(1974) words, these men demonstrated the ultimate success of oppression: Self-oppression. In spite of
being the first 'heroes' to publicly come out, and produce gay-themed narratives, they were trapped in
self-hatred, and thereby unable to free their works from internalized homophobia.
Finally, during this era a gay community had begun budding. In 1975 the Society for the Protection
of Personal Rights (SPPR) was founded by a small group of men in order to provide a support network,
constitute a hub of social activities, and furnish a focus of communal identification for a heterogeneous
amalgam of disjointed individuals15. But for roughly the next thirteen years its impact on both the public
sphere and the lesbigay community was quite negligible. SPPR activists were still in the closet, and their
peers simply dreaded joining the organization.
An exceptional and singular event took place in 1979 (i.e., a full decade post-Stonewall), when the
SPPR tried to organize an international Jewish lesbigay conference. To their chagrin, no hotel in the
Holy Land was willing to accommodate such a group16. On Friday, July 20, 1979, some fifty lesbians
and gay men (most of whom were American Jews) congregated at the City Hall square in Tel Aviv to
protest and picket. The coverage of this historical event was in itself a historical yet acutely isolated,
milestone. Two aspects make the Yedi'ot Ahronot17 account significant in the attitudinal climate of the
period: (1) On the semiotic level: A large en face photograph of two gay men and two lesbians,
constituting an historical precedent in contrast with the faceless anonymity of previous (and, to some
extent, future) generations of homosexuals. (2) On the rhetorical level: The introduction and hence
symbolic construction of a disenfranchised minority. Quoting participants, the reporter advances the
11
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
brand new discourse of civil rights, and of the closet as an entity: "We live in constant terror lest we'll be
fired from our jobs," confesses one gay man, "we demand our rights to live and love, to organize and
congregate safely and openly."
TERRA FIRMA: THE AGE OF PRESENCE
In 1971, a Member of the Knesset (MK), the Israeli parliament, Uri Avneri initiated the first
attempt at amending the Israeli legal code in order to remove the sodomy clause. It failed. In 1978, five
left-wing MKs initiated another campaign. But, again, pressures from Orthodox-Jews MKs proved to be
insurmountable. Israeli society, by and large (not excluding gay men themselves), was quite indifferent
to these efforts: The country’s existential predicament invalidated personal issues, such as human and
civil rights, that were dismissed as petty, at best. However, the law was finally amended on March 22,
198818. Newspapers of March 23rd announced on their covers: "Sexual Liberalization in Israel:
Consenting homosexual relations between adults are no longer punishable" (Ma'ariv19.)
Parallel to these struggles within the Knesset, the SPPR was gradually taking a more vigorous
political stance. A few gay individuals joined to contest the legal system in order to amend laws which
relegated them to a second-class status. These men turned almost overnight into activists following the
footsteps of American gay liberationists. And, like other movements for social change (e.g., women's
organizations, Kempf, 1996; or ecological organizations, Alario, 1994), the SPPR sparked a shift in
public attention to new sites in the ongoing struggles of marginal groups to be included within the public
sphere. Here the media were central and primary agents (Dahlgren, 1993.)
The decriminalization of homosexuality proved to be the most vital incentive in the selfempowerment of the gay community. And, shortly thereafter, a lobbying caucus, Otzma (=power), was
founded whose agenda, according to Al HaMishmar20 (October 14, 1988), was promoting legislation in
order to give equal rights to same-gender couples, to enable gays to adopt children, etc. Six months later,
several newspapers reported the first conference organized by Otzma, in which several MKs
12
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
participated. One of these, MK Rubi Rivlin (of the right-wing Likud), declared that "homosexuals are
deviants but not evil. I will not fight for homosexuality, but I will fight for everyone who wishes to live
like that, and is consequently harmed" (Yedi'ot Ahronot, March 12, 1989.)
The collaboration between a progressively empowered community and a few dedicated MKs paved
the way for far-reaching political gains that enabled a fuller integration of lesbians and gay men into
Israeli society. The last sentence calls for a short interval in the present review in order to shed light on
the Israeli lesbigay tactics. Nowhere is the uniqueness of the Israeli gay community more obvious than
in the adoption of American-style frameworks, and means for political struggles, while forsaking the
ideological and practical leaning towards cultural, social, economic, and geographical segregation often
found among American lesbigays (Gamson, 1995; Gross, 1997.) There is nothing further from the Israeli
reality than the "Golden Ghettoes21" (Dario, 1992.) All of the legal, judicial, cultural, and social
achievements were but manifestations of the assimilationist ideology of Israeli activists, or, as Gamson
(1995, p. 395) puts it, their "inclusionary goals." For example, the American campaign to lift the ban
from gays in the military took place simultaneously as local endeavors to change the Israeli Defense
Forces policy. But the motivation behind these battles was strikingly distinct: While the Americans
fought for civil rights on the basis of equal employment opportunities, the Israelis fought for inclusion
into the principal Israeli secondary-socialization agent. For Americans this was a case of freedom of
opportunities, for Israelis it expressed the need to feel, and be part of this great crucible. This fight was
for a civil obligation, not personal benefits.
Another illustration of the Israeli strategies are the annual Gay Pride events that have been
celebrated in Israel since 1993. These are never in-your-face assertions of difference and otherness that
might foster and enhance the antagonism of the already homophobic segments of society. On the
contrary, these happenings not only enjoy the auspices and financial subsidies of municipal or
governmental bodies, but make every effort to diminish divisions between the lesbigay community and
the rest of society. The 1994 Gaystronomic Festival, for instance, was a food extravaganza hosted by the
13
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
best restaurateurs in Tel Aviv, catering to some 5,000 women, men and children of all walks of life. In
short, the Israeli lesbigay movement is basically and foremost liberal. And it is from this outlook that the
current paper should be read.
The next crucial site on the emancipatory voyage was the addition of sexual orientation to the Law
of Equal Rights at the Workplace in 1992. According to this amendment, an employee should not be
discriminated against on the basis of her/his sexual orientation in any aspect of his/her employment. So
far, three gay men have reaped the fruits of this legal gain. The first was Jonathan Danilowitz, an El Al
(Israel national airline) employee who requested free tickets for his lover (as is done with heterosexual
couples, regardless of their marital status.) After losing at the first two judicial levels, El Al appealed to
the Supreme Court, where it lost again. The media's response was enthusiastic. Yedi'ot Ahronot's
headlines of December 1st, 1994 read: "Same gender couples should not be discriminated against." Hon.
Aharon Barak, Vice President of the Supreme Court, in a decision that established the full equality of
homosexual couples in all domains of life, has uttered an oft quoted question: "Is parting from a same
gender spouse any easier than parting from a spouse of a different gender? Is a life of cooperation
between spouses of the same gender different in terms of collaboration, fraternity and management of
the social unit than a life of cooperation between spouses of different genders?" Al HaMishmar labeled
the decision "the most significant human achievement of the Israeli legal system." In a report summing
up 1994, the paper elaborated on the importance of the decision: "The authorities have acknowledged
the right to love [...] It turned out that sordid reality can be changed. The old world of oppression, racism
and prejudices can be demolished22" (December 30, 1994.)
Promptly afterwards, Tel Aviv University fully and officially recognized the same-gender spouse of
one of its employees, Prof. Uzi Even's23. Yed'iot Ahronot's January 22, 1995 headline read: "Tel Aviv
University acknowledges the rights of a homosexual couple." Another case that captured the public
discourse was Adir Steiner's struggle to be acknowledged by the military authorities as the late Colonel
Doron Meisel's widower in order to receive his pension and other lawful rights. Like Prof. Even, Steiner
14
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
was tenacious in mobilizing public empathy in order to create a social atmosphere in which the military
would be reluctant to refuse his demands. Most memorable was a short prime-time TV documentary on
January 2, 1996 in which Steiner was shown crying over his lover's tombstone. His words were utterly
moving when he told his dead lover that the army had forsaken him, and usurped his rights. Immediately
after the broadcasting of the film, the IBA conducted a telephone survey in which 47% of the
respondents were in favor of extending rights to gay couples. The consciously manipulative tear-jerker
had an enormous impact, at least in terms of this survey24.
After fifteen years of right-wing cum fundamentalist government coalitions, the political climate
took a twist in 1992 when Israeli voters caused a crucial shift in the political constellation: The new
government coalition was composed of the left-wing Labor and Meretz parties. Promptly, a newly
elected MK, Yael Dayan (Labor), formed a sub-committee for the prevention of discrimination on the
basis of sexual orientation. On February 2, 1993 it had its first meeting, which proved to be the second
crucial turning point in the history of the Israeli lesbigay community. Eleven MKs from various and
opposing parties, a psychologist, a rabbi, and some sixty lesbigays were enveloped by dozens of
fascinated journalists representing every local and international news agency and media institution. It
would be impossible to reproduce the impressive and unforgettable wave of unflinching support and
sympathy that stirred the public space in the next days. The IBA allocated more than four minutes of its
prime-time news to cover the event: "The assembled demanded that the state acknowledge their special
needs [...] A miracle occurred at the Knesset: Lesbians and homosexuals are out in the House."
The press was flooded with photographs and bold headlines during the following couple of days.
Yedi'ot Ahronot headline read: "Out of the Closet, and into the Knesset." Its front-page photograph was
captioned: "Proud25 in the Knesset: Some hundred homosexuals and lesbians (calling themselves proud)
disclosed the discrimination against them." Ma'ariv wrote: "They knew that an army of journalists and
photographers would wait in the Knesset, they were embarrassed, but came to the homosexual assembly
feeling that they must come out of the closet. That they must publicly proclaim their sexual orientation,
15
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
and stand up for their rights." Hadashot26 quoted Prof. Uzi Even: "I did not come to ask for mercy or
pity. Let us merge into society."
What Prof. Even did come to demand was the abolition of the discriminatory policy of the IDF,
listing all homosexual soldiers as mentally disturbed, automatically assigning them to psychiatric
examination, and barring them from security 'sensitive' positions. The New York Times (February 21,
1993) reports: "For 15 years Prof. Uzi Even had done top-secret research for the military [... A]fter a
security check 10 years ago turned up that he was living with another man, he decided he would no
longer hide his homosexuality [...] In short order, his security clearance was canceled, he was stripped of
his rank." The convergence of several factors made Even's tale a particularly newsworthy item: (1) The
simultaneous controversy over military discrimination in the US widely covered by the local media. (2)
The IDF's status as one of Israel's most revered and pivotal social and cultural institutions. Moreover,
the IDF constitutes a locus of shared values and positive identification, and serves as a central agent of
establishing and reproducing manhood and its images (Horowitz & Kimmerling, 1974; Sion, 1997.) (3)
Even's professional status and authority were conducive to the shattering of components of homosexual
stereotypes. And, (4) The explicit demand to share in the burden of the military service with the rest of
society. Thanks to this impetus, cabinet ministers directly intervened, and, after three months of
negotiations between military officers and gay activists, the IDF policy was amended. As of June 1993,
soldiers of both sexes27 can be recruited, placed and advanced regardless of their sexual orientation.
The effects of these events cannot be overestimated, for they sparked and ignited a rapid chainreaction in every aspect of the public domain: Legal, judicial and political gains that foster lesbigay
equality, decrease their formally-constructed marginality, and advance anti-discriminatory measures, and
gay arts and cultural output were produced and disseminated via a diverse array of channels. Haֿr, a local
Tel Aviv weekly paper, was probably the harbinger of good tidings. The predominance of openly gay
men in its newsroom was reflected and expressed in its unusually liberal, enlightened empathy towards
all things gay. In 1986 Haֿr published an autobiographical column chronicling the experience of a gay
16
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
couple. The narrator–known only by a pseudonym–and his lover represented the epitome of Israeli
mainstream society: Both were law-abiding citizens who function in conformity with what is implicitly
expected in our society. The fact that they were two men offering what may be termed 'a gay outlook'
presumably constituted an influential catalyst of the processes that were already gaining velocity. For
instance, on August 22, 1986, “Moshe” wrote
[...] In the evenings the couple sits and eats a watermelon. When guests are dropping by we also serve
vodka with orange juice [...] At a not-too-late hour the couple is going to sleep, turn their backs to each
other, read some more pages in the book and fall asleep. The friends love them dearly. A divine couple. It
is so nice to visit. Who cares that they fuck in reverse, and who decided that men can fuck only women?
Their friends also know that they are not those homos who run to the park, and change partners every
week. Their house is so clean that if an AIDS germ [sic.] arrives it will certainly run away. [...] The
couple has adapted to the demands. They do go to the park occasionally, even just to meet acquaintances
and chat. Their friends don't know that they do go home sometimes with a young rooster for the sake of
variety. The friends want them like themselves, and they comply.
As of 1993, there is coverage of gay men and relevant issues by various media on a nearly daily
basis. Gay men–fictional and real–now constitute a vital part of the public discourse. The pervasiveness
and commonness of this phenomenon may be illustrated with two cases: Florentin was a prime-time TV
series produced by and broadcast on the commercial channel during 1997. Florentin depicted a dozen
young adults on the verge of coming to terms with being adults. They are all old friends who live in the
eponymous southern quarter of Tel Aviv. The fictional time is late 1995. Being scripted and directed by
the same gay couple whose life unfolded in 1986 in Haֿr, one was not surprised to find that among the
protagonists was a gay couple. When they had sex, the camera oscillated between their steamy bodies
and a straight couple's intercourse, in order to highlight and emphasize the similarities between straight
and gay couples. It was thus not unexpected that no public uproar was triggered by the scene. But,
following another episode, in which one of the protagonists came out to his parents while they were
watching the late Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin's funeral, many TV critics voiced their shock at this
17
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
insolent coincidence. In early 1998, the same couple wrote and produced a prime-time TV film
portraying two young men falling in love with each other, as well as with a third straight guy. A
Husband with a Heart included the most explicit sexual scene ever shown on Israeli TV, yet no
commercials were withdrawn, nor was any enraged vehemence voiced in the public sphere28.
The following are the main trends of the past five years:
Naming. For many years, the only way to interview a gay man–if at all–was by hiding his face
behind a black strip, distorting his voice, and/or taking his picture from behind, and never using his real
name. As late as 1988, when Otzma was founded, its founders declined a photo opportunity. Their odd
message of political activism and personal anonymity was remarked upon by the reporter. But, no more:
Unless the person is a minor or a criminal defendant, gay men are now individuals who have names and
recognizable identities. Media professional codes have been modified accordingly.
Pride. A further dimension to the new 'public gay' (Lee, 1977) is a sense of pride that infuses the
discourse on gays and homosexuality instead of the dominant themes of distress and agony that
characterized the anonymous homosexuals of the past, those who were relegated to the social margins
due to their deviant inclination. The new actors on the public stage are of a different breed: They
vociferously and assertively demand equal recognition and full civil rights. Lamenting one's misfortunes
because of homosexuality is by now an extinct mode of address to the public.
Mainstreaming. The new gay actors on the public stage are members of mainstream Israeli society:
Mostly professional, educated citizens. This new profile serves as a preemptive means to combat
prejudices, and adds new, positive dimensions to stereotypes’ increasing obsolescence. Moreover, many
of the emerging public gays offer a novel stance: These are men who have settled into a heterosexuallike pattern of marriage, thereby conveying a message of integration and consensual 'normalcy.' The
impact of the mainstreaming trend was actualized even in fictional genres when, for instance, in 1996,
the IBA produced Seeton, a prime-time detective series. Three Seeton chapters unfolded the story of a
professional gay man whose ex-wife is suing him after she has found out he has a male lover. The final
18
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
chapter presents the gay couple in a state of bliss after they won custody rights over the children, who
have no trouble embracing their father's new identity29.
This reading reflects a liberal approach which distinctly distinguishes between 'good' and 'bad'
homosexuals. This ideology of full integration is achieved via minimizing the differences between
minority and majority members. Queer critics charge that 'positive' representations of gays as being "just
like everyone else" are no better than so-called 'negative' images, for they encourage "only bland,
saintly, desexualized mainstream figures who might as well be heterosexual" (Doty & Gove, 1997, p.
87.) Further- more, some even "reject the notion that any [sic.] positive portrayal of lesbian and gay
characters merits celebration [... because] many 'positive' portrayals serve as mechanisms to perpetuate
hetero/sexism" (Hantzis & Lehr, 1994, p. 118.) Assimilation, others add, is not truly the desired goal of
the queer community30. And, yet, the Israeli case demonstrates that in the long-run the "pictures in the
heads" (to paraphrase Lippmann [1974]) of politicians and other decision-makers do count.
Mainstreaming was probably instrumental, for instance, in the remarkable change of mind of Supreme
Court Judge, Hon. Ya'akov Kedmi. In the 1994 El Al case, Hon. Kedmi ardently disapproved of any
alternative to the Biblical coupledom. Three years later in the case of Klafim Ptuhim, a banned TV
program about lesbigay youth (to be discussed shortly) , Hon, Kedmi writes: "In a world progressing to
the year 2000, the phenomenon of lesbianism and homosexuality is no longer a 'deviancy' that should be
fought against, censured or condemned."
Reports from the Front. The unprecedented achievements have been intensively and regularly
covered by all means of communication. For example, on September 22, 1995 the National Statistician
declared that the forthcoming national census would count same-gender couples as families. Yediot
Ahronot's front page reads: "Lesbians and homosexuals will be recognized as spouses for the first time."
Gay activists have been taking advantage of the new atmosphere in order to promote their efforts, and
mobilize the public. Consequently, not only the end results, but also the struggles to attain them have
been fully reported (e.g., the Steiner case.)
19
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
Cooptation. Discussions of seemingly intracommunal affairs have been gradually coopted into the
public discourse by mainstream media. This trend refers to a quite conspicuous phenomenon of the
meticulous coverage of gay cultural and social events. From the coverage of dance parties and night-life
venues (e.g., a four page article in HaAretz on September 12, 1997, devoted to the "flourishing samegender scene") through an item on Mabat, the IBA prime-time news, in August 1995, in which the
opening of a "gay beach" in Caesarea is hailed, to the three-page celebration of HaZman HaVarod's (a
gay monthly magazine) first anniversary in Haֿr (August 29, 1997.)
The par excellence manifestation of this trend was Homogeny, a weekly section devoted solely to
the lesbigay community, running by Davar from 1991 until the paper's demise in 1996. Homogeny was
unrivaled in its mission to serve as a forum accommodating various voices within the lesbigay
community, and, thus, in a sense, it constituted a communal publication within a mainstream daily.
Being a national, mainstream newspaper facilitated closeted men and women around the country to, at
least passively, participate in the communal space without the perceived threat of purchasing a gay
publication, or the need to personally attend events in Tel Aviv, which is the Big City representing “a
beacon of tolerance” (Weston, 1995, p. 262.)
External Mobilization. The lesbigay community is not alone in its fights against homophobia and
heterosexism. Many non-gay actors have been mobilized, and whole-heartedly dedicated to the lesbigay
cause. Two incidents may illustrate this trend: During a Knesset hearing regarding a proposed
amendment to encompass same-gender couples in civil service regulations, deputy Attorney General
Prof. Nahum Rakover equated homosexuality to bestiality. The public outcry was passionately expressed
by many politicians, social-change organizations and journalists. Ma'ariv wrote on February 23, 1995:
"A primitive utterance of a professor. The miserable utterance of Prof. Rakover [...] succeeded in
outraging many, in the Knesset and outside. Everyone agrees that this is an abominable and
unenlightened statement, which denounces him first of all." Yedi'ot Ahronot's headline of the same date
20
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
reads: "Rakover [...] threw a bomb in the Knesset [... He] is considered a complete 'outsider' [sic] in the
Ministry of Justice. A man no one takes seriously."
In December 1996, the President, Mr. Ezer Weizman, met with high school students, and delivered
a speech about Zionism. After the speech, one of the boys asked the President for his opinion on
homosexuality. His answer, according to HaAretz (December 22, 1996), was: "I like it when a man
wants to be a man, and a woman behaves like a woman [...] By and large, I think this is an abnormal
phenomenon. I do not accept as a fact when people say they come out of the closet. [...] Personally, I see
homosexuality as a negative phenomenon." These words ignited the journalists present at the meeting,
who promptly reported the utterance, which was placed on the top of the national agenda in a matter of
minutes. On the same evening, the prestigious and popular news program, the IBA Yoman HaShavua,
had an unscheduled interview with two gay men to protest Weizman's homophobia. Within a week, after
heated protestations by many public figures, and a vigil in front of the President's residence, he issued an
apology. Yedi'ot Ahronot printed a full-page photo of the President captioned in large red characters:
"The President Apologizes31" (December 24, 1996).
Acculturation. Thanks to the social forces of recent years, an increasing number of gay artists need
no longer file their compositions in the closet. Their unabashed daring, together with some middlemen's
confidence in the commercial potential of gay-themed works of art, have been yielding an impressive
harvest. The artistic output ranges from literature, through photography and painting, to ballet, popular
music, and dramaturgy. The most conspicuous example for the acculturation trend is Words of His Own,
a theatrical piece based on Israeli writers' tales, produced and performed by gay men. The play was
performed through the 1994-5 season, and, then, chosen to represent Israel at the 1995 Edinburgh
Festival32. A film documenting the company's trip to Scotland was aired on Channel 2 on prime-time in
March 1996.
As during the former period, the gay voyage into the heart of the public sphere has not been entirely
smooth. For instance, although Israeli television has undergone transformation in recent years, including
21
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
the introduction of a commercial broadcast channel as well as cable (Weiman, 1996); and although the
public sphere is now effervescent with gay men and their images, Education Minister Zvulun Hamer
decided that homosexuality should be reconsigned to the closet. The 1982 arguments against
representation of homosexuality on the TV screen were resurrected in September 1996 when Mr. Hamer
banned Klafim Ptuhim. Unlike 1982, however, public pickets were followed by an appeal to the
Supreme Court. On September 21, 1997, the Supreme Court issued a decision requiring the Minister to
broadcast the program at the scheduled time (the 'educational slot' in the afternoon.)
The oscillating course of events manifest today is characterized by two phenomena:
Principle of Balance. Many articles and programs dealing with gay issues strictly conform to an
ethical code of presenting both sides to social dilemmas. In spite of the huge strides Israeli media have
taken in recent years, some editors are reluctant to let go of the traditional relegation of homosexual
issues to the 'social problem' category. Thus conceived, it follows that any pro must be matched with a
con. Political achievements, in particular, seem to necessitate heterosexist statements to allegedly
‘balance’ the issue, and “to propound [...] bigotry under the guise of providing ‘the other side’”
(Alwood, 1996, p. 323.) The El Al Supreme Court decision was considered "a great victory to
homosexuals" by Ma'ariv (December 1, 1994), nevertheless, there is a box containing various
declarations by "angry Orthodox Jews": MK Avraham Ravitz is quoted saying that "The Supreme Court
preaches to deviancies from the human norms that are accepted in the enlightened world. This is a
twisted message which legitimizes deviances." MK Rabbi Moshe Maya agrees that "this is a horrible
decision [...] The Bible of Israel already stated that the carriers of this disease should be punished by a
death sentence." Similarly, HaAretz balances the praises to the Klafim Ptuhim Supreme Court decision
with quotations by the Minister of Health Deputy, MK Shlomo Benizri: "The perversion is on the loose.
I am lucky not to have a TV set, so that I do not have to see this ugliness and its representatives"
(September 22, 1997.)
22
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
Blood, Semen and Tears. The incidence of violence within the Israeli gay community is rather low.
Yet, during the past five years some eight gay men were murdered33. All these were scrutinized by the
media, who invariably called these "murders on the grounds of homosexuality." For example, in 1994-5
three gay men were murdered, and the media responded by brutally renouncing their current attitudes,
and re-adopting the discourse of perversion and moral and psychological depravity. In short, these
incidents triggered a latent fascination with homos-in-the-gutters images. The first victim was a
university professor who, according to Yedi'ot Ahronot (November 4, 1994), was a prostitute who did
not inform his clients that he had AIDS. Moreover, he had paid them for not using condoms, so he could
infect many people. Three days later, the same paper's headline reads: "The murdered AIDS diseased
professor photographed his lovers while they were in action." Then: "The findings at his home
astonished the police detectives: They have found a huge quantity of photographs in which Demner was
shot with men he was having sex with."
The media had another field-day when a psychologist's naked corpse was found in a puddle of
blood. Yedi'ot Ahronot ignited a public hysteria: "The target: Homosexuals" (December 23, 1994.) Many
anonymous gay men are interviewed. One nameless man was quoted: "I ask myself: What is going on
here? Is there a murderer among us?" On Friday night, a thrilled Yoman HaShavua reporter traveled
back in time to long-forgotten days in which silhouettes of unnamed men are interviewed in a dark park
where unnatural acts take place, for which some will inevitably pay with their lives.
THE JEWISH-ORTHODOX SPHERICULE
The discussion of the Israeli public sphere so far deliberately avoided a substantial component: The
Orthodox Jews. This is due to the fact that nearly 15% of the Israeli population is self-contained in a
distinct sphericule whose means of communication are autonomous and separate (Liebes, Pery &
Grabelsky, 1996.) These close-knit communities maintain a segregated discourse whose own agenda
interfaces at times with the national one, while employing a heavily biased distinct sociolect, and
23
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
adhering to hostile Biblical and Halachic heterosexism (Boswell, 1994.) Hypothetically, the changes in
the public arena concerning the gay community could have gone unnoticed. However, their leaders
perceive the incorporation of homosexuals into society as a concrete threat to the very existence, moral
purity, and superiority of the Jewish people. Consequently, simultaneously with their political gains, gay
men became the objects of articles and editorials in the Orthodox press. For example, on February 5,
1993, following the Knesset gathering, HaTzofe34 made room for a full-page tirade:
The sect of deviants that gathered at the Knesset came to demonstrate that not only it is not ashamed of
its deviations, but claims recognition by Israeli society [...] It was a shameful and repulsive spectacle,
although the MKs expressed their sympathy [...] The media were compassionate, too [...] They are
deviants as well as sick. They need to be cured. In no way are they entitled to equal status in society [...]
Those who suggest to absorb the various deviants are sinful not only to the codes of ethics, but because
they may endanger the security interests of the state
In May 1996, a clerical, right-wing coalition was elected after a brief ‘window of opportunities’ had
been open for Israeli lesbigays. Representatives of the Orthodox Jews consist approximately one-fifth of
the 120 Members of the current Knesset. The majority of Cabinet Ministers piously comply to Biblical
laws. The likelihood of passing any pro-lesbigay legislation is now null. But, at least for the time being,
the trends of media representations delineated above remain valid, as A Husband with a Heart can amply
attest.
EPILOGUE: ARE WE IN THE PROMISED LAND YET?
The present paper is the first attempt to map the annals of the Israeli gay community in terms of
media practices, and public sphere participation strategies. The following tentative explanations of the
phenomena delineated above should be viewed as a proposal for further, rigorous analyses:
1. Adoption of American elements by local value systems:
24
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
i. The processes of "demedicalization" (Cain, 1991) and "depathologizing" (Nardi, Sanders, &
Marmor, 1994) of homosexuality which constituted a critical trigger that facilitated and eased
changes in the early 1970s in the US have been incorporated by Israeli professional communities.
ii. Ideologies initiated by the American Gay Liberation Movement as of the late 1960s infiltrated into
the Israeli lesbigay sensibility.
2. Transformations in cultural and social practices:
i. A diminishing strength of some tenets of the Zionist ethos and praxis. In particular, moving away
from the hegemonic supremacy of the collective identity toward greater self-indulgence (Katz, et
al., 1997, p. 17.) Self-realization is now an acceptable and desired goal.
ii. A growing legitimacy of a flexibility in the construction of manhood. The emerging new concept
of masculinity no longer stringently inhibits all expressions of affection and feelings. Thus,
sensual intimacy among men becomes less of a taboo.
iii. A burgeoning of images of men as sexual objects in the mass media, particularly in advertising; a
phenomenon found in the US and Europe, as well.
3. The fundamental, religious sphericule does not impede the liberalization trend of the public sphere
due to its closure and independence.
4. Community mobilization: Adopting the American model (Montgomery, 1981), the SPPR was diligent
in contacting media professionals (i.e., via letter writing) to protest insulting utterances, and in
soliciting 'positive,' fair representations.
5. Coming out:
i. The dismantling of structural limitations, and the declining impact of societal sanctions have been
conducive to the coming out processes. More and more gay men are nowadays willing to publicly
come out, and tell their stories, with a decreasing sense of fear, and a persistent, steady demand to
be heard and seen.
ii. Coming out publicly is perceived and utilized as a tactical means to achieve political goals.
25
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
iii. Dismantling the professional closet (Woods, 1994) by a growing number of media practitioners.
These men and women help restructure and redefine the semiotics and rhetoric of media discourse,
bring forth new gay-relevant issues into the public agenda, and compose fictional texts whose
protagonists are unstereotypical, or, at the very least, not homophobic. Moreover, coming out
within media institutions positively affects the attitude climate among the lesbigays’ colleagues.
6. The yellow road of sensationalism: The voyeuristic fascination of journalists with what was, until
very recently, beyond their grasp because gay men's lives took place behind the closet doors,
constitutes an impetus for their intensive coverage. Some genres (e.g., talk-shows) are especially
prone to this trend due to their built-in sensational prerequisites. Or, to put it less critically, since talkshows are founded on the premise that 'the intimate is public,' and are propelled by intense emotional
narratives (Liebes, 1997), gay men quite easily furnish sought-after material for these programs.
7. Transitions in the regime: Following the 1992 elections, a free and fair institutional treatment has
become feasible.
To sum up, the 1993 Knesset convention was a historical event which triggered constructional
changes in the geography of the Israeli public sphere. A new map has been laid out. One that demarcates
a distinct gay territory which, until the mid-1980s, was terra incognita. Expeditions into the unknown
heart of darkness were then sporadic. The emerging terra firma was gradually perceived through the
binoculars of a few media practitioners who collaborated with a handful of ‘natives’ during the late1980s. Is the terra firma of the past decade indeed the Promised Land? It is surely too early to know.
Political, cultural and social fluctuations are rife in this unstable country. But, whatever turn the local
scene takes–for instance, as Israel becomes increasingly clerical–it seems that attacks by antagonistic
forces will not go unchallenged. The Israeli public arena offers now many defenders: Legal measures,
dedicated politicians and advocates, mobilized media practitioners, and, most importantly, proud gay
men and lesbians.
26
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
NOTES
1
This statement needs to be theoretically hedged for Habermas asserted that the bourgeois public sphere is a
category characteristic of a certain age, should not be generalized into an ideal-type, and transferred unto other
historical periods (Wahrman, 1997.) Yet, its theoretical value and empirical usefulness cannot be overestimated;
thus it will be applied throughout this paper.
2
Not all critics of media texts agree in regards to this dichotomy between 'negative' and 'positive' images.
Queer readings oppose the notion that it is the pseudo-straight image that constitutes the 'correct' way of
representation. This alternative voice calls for a wider range of queer sensibilities, not necessarily reflecting the
liberal ideology according to which 'positive' lesbigays are only those who integrate into mainstream society (Doty
& Gove, 1997.)
3
A crucial hedge should be made clear: Any attempt at extrapolation from the public sphere unto the private
realms is unfeasible and unwarranted. What is true in regards to the public space is, more often than not, utterly
irrelevant to interpersonal relations, intrapersonal attitudes and/or individual behavior. This paper's brevity
precludes us from elaborating on the schism between the public sphere's relative tolerance, and the homophobia still
prevalent in private realms (see Kama, 1996.)
4
For a glance into the Israeli lesbian experience, see Moore (1995.)
5
This is a literal translation from Hebrew. All translations from Israeli sources are literal; and, therefore, may
sound awkward or cumbersome.
6
HaAretz is the most prestigious daily in Israel, and is similar to elite papers such as the New York Times
(Caspi & Limor, 1992.)
7
Interestingly, this was also the period when the term GRID (Gay-Related Immune Deficiency) was used in
the US (Larry Gross, personal communication, April, 1998.)
8
Some statistics are necessary to understand the marginal status of AIDS/HIV in Israel: The cumulative
number of persons with AIDS since 1981 is 440. Of those who stated their sexual orientation, 37% are homo- or bisexual men. The cumulative number of HIV+ persons since 1986 is 1,527. Of those who stated their sexual
orientation, 18% are homo- or bi-sexual men (Ministry of Health, 1997.) AIDS activists argue that the figures for
HIV+ persons should be quadrupled because HIV testing is not anonymous in Israel.
27
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
9These
are precisely the reasons why many Israeli lesbigays are apprehensive to come out in most social
contexts.
10HaOlam
HaZe was characterized by its combination of muck-raking stories, alongside a commitment to left-
wing ideology (Caspi & Limor, 1992.) The magazine is now defunct.
11This
is an interesting, and, surely naive, layman replication of Leznoff & Westley's (1956) categorization of
two sub-communities: The secret and overt homosexuals.
12
Davar, a daily newspaper established in 1925, was identified with the Labor party (Caspi & Limor, 1992.)
13
In fact, the very first Israeli homoerotic film was (straight) Danny Wohlmann's Hide and Seek released in
1980.
14
For example, Gutman's first feature, Drifting, follows a gay protagonist who "grows increasingly troubled
[...] by his aimless and frustrated life. His ennui causes him to reject his friends and lover, and withdraw into selfdestruction" (Murray, 1996, p. 406.)
15
Lesbians did not join the SPPR until the mid-1980s. A lesbian-feminist organized community (KLAF) was
founded in 1987.
16All
major hotels in Israel must comply with the Chief Rabbinate's Kosher regulations. Therefore, they feared
to lose their certificate if they hosted this conference.
17Yedi'ot
Ahronot is the most popular daily. Its circulation is larger than all other Israeli dailies combined
(Caspi & Limor, 1992.)
18
It should be noted that neither lesbigay individuals nor organizational efforts were behind any of these
initiatives (Yonai, in press.)
19
Ma'ariv is the second largest commercial daily (Caspi & Limor, 1992.)
20Al
HaMishmar was the official daily publication of Mapam, the United Workers Party (Caspi & Limor,
1992.) It is now defunct.
21
The word ‘ghetto’ connotes a heavy historical burden of confinement and extermination of Jews.
22
The choice of words reverberating with Communist undertones is not to be construed as cynical.
23
The author is Prof. Even's spouse.
28
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
24
Due to brevity constraints, a discussion of the controversy concerning the validity of public opinion surveys,
and their behavioral manifestations is deferred.
25
'Proud' translates into the Hebrew word ge-eh, which, due to its alliteration, sometimes denotes 'gay.'
26
Hadashot was a short-lived tabloid in the style of the New York Post (Caspi & Limor, 1992.)
27
This is the very first time lesbians are mentioned in an Israeli official document.
28
What reactions within private realms took place remains unknown.
29
Dr. Amit Schejter, former Legal Adviser to the IBA, reports that no audience responses were received at the
IBA following the screening of these chapters (personal communication, February, 1998.)
30
For instance, Harris (1998) asserts that "in our eagerness to assimilate, we leap like lemmings into the
melting pot and perform outlandish travesties as happy, healthy, monogamous heterosexuals" (p. 24.)
31The
President's apology to the gay community was an achievement in its own right, because he has expressed
similar insults, slurs and belittling attitudes towards other minorities–women, in particular–and never bothered to
retract.
32
Financed by a joint venture of the Ministries of Education and Foreign Affairs.
33Except
for one man, all were socially acquainted and/or sexually intimate with their murderers. Most
murders took place at the victims' homes, and were carried out by Israeli-Arab and Palestinian men, respectively.
34
HaTzofe is the official daily publication of Mafdal, the National Religious Party (Caspi & Limor, 1992.)
29
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
REFERENCES
Alario, M. (1994). Environmental destruction and the public sphere: On Habermas's discursive model
and political ecology. Social theory and practice, 20(3), 327-341.
Alwood, E. (1996). Straight news: Gays, lesbians, and the news media. New York: Columbia University
Press.
Biale, D. (1992). Eros and the Jews: From Biblical Israel to contemporary America. New York: Basic
Books.
Boswell, J. (1994). Same-sex unions in premodern Europe. New York: Villard Books.
Brittan, A. (1989). Masculinity and power. Oxford and New York: Basil Blackwell.
Cain, R. (1991). Disclosure and secrecy among gay men in the United States and Canada: A shift in
views. Journal of the history of sexuality, 2(1), 25-45.
Caspi, D. & Limor, Y. (1992). The mediators: The mass media in Israel 1948-1990. Tel Aviv: Am
Oved. [In Hebrew]
Chesbero, J. W. (1994). Reflections on gay and lesbian rhetoric. In R. J. Ringer (Ed.), Queer words,
queer images: Communication and the construction of homosexuality (pp. 77-88). New York:
New York University Press.
Clark, C. (1969). Television and social controls: Some observations on the portrayal of ethnic
minorities. Television Quarterly, 8(2), 18-22.
Clum, J. M. (1994). Acting gay: Male homosexuality in modern drama. New York: Columbia University
Press.
Cooper, R. L. (1985). Language and social stratification among the Jewish population in Israel. In J. A.
Fishman (Ed.), Reading in the sociology of Jewish languages (pp. 65-81). Leiden: E. J. Brill.
Croteau, D., Hoynes, W., & Carragee K. M. (1996). The political diversity of public television:
Polysemy, the public sphere, and the conservative critique of PBS. Journalism & mass
communication monographs, 157.
30
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
Dahlgren, P. (1993). Introduction. In P. Dahlgren & C. Sparks (Eds.), Communication and citizenship:
Journalism and the public sphere (pp. 1-24). London: Routledge.
Dario (1992). Contradictions and miseries of the gay ghetto. In S. Likosky, (Ed.), Coming out: An
anthology of international gay and lesbian writings (pp. 400-407). New York: Pantheon Books.
Davies, P. (1992). The role of disclosure in coming out among gay men. In K. Plummer (Ed.), Modern
homosexualities: Fragments of lesbian and gay experience. London: Routledge.
Doty, A., & Gove, B. (1997). Queer representation in the mass media. In A, Medhurst & S. R. Munt
(Eds.), Lesbian and gay studies: A critical introduction (pp. 84-98). London and Washington:
Cassell.
Dyer, R. (1993). The matter of images: Essays on representations. London & New York: Routledge.
Fejes, F., & Petrich, K. (1993). Invisibility, homophobia and heterosexism: Lesbians, gays and the
media. Critical studies in mass communication, 10(4), 396-422.
Gamson, J. (1995). Must identity movements self-destruct? A queer dilemma. Social problems, 42(3),
390-407.
Gluzman, M. (1997). Masculine Zionism. HaAretz, October 8, 1997. [In Hebrew]
Greenberg, B. S., & Brand, J. E. (1994). Minorities and the mass media: 1970s to 1990s. In J. Bryant &
D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (pp. 273-314). Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Greenberg, B .S., & Baptista-Fernandez, P. (1980). Hispanic-Americans: The new minority on
television. In B. S. Greenberg (Ed.), Life on television: Content analysis of US TV drama.
Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Gross, L. (1997). From South Beach to SoBe. In S. J. Drucker & G. Gumpert (Eds.), Voices in the
Street: Explorations in gender, media, and public space. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
31
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
Gross, L. (1996). Minorities, majorities and the media: variations on a scheme by Elihu Katz. Paper
presented at The media and the public: Rethinking the part played by the people in the flow of
mass communication. Jerusalem, Israel: May 7-9.
Gross, L. (1995 [1989]). Out of the mainstream: Sexual minorities and the mass media. In G. Dines & J.
M. Humez (Eds.), Gender, Race and Class in Media (pp. 61- 69). London: Sage.
Gross, L. (1994). What is wrong with this picture? Lesbian women and gay men on television. In R. J.
Ringer (Ed.), Queer words, queer images: Communication and the construction of homosexuality
(pp. 143-156). New York: New York University Press.
Gross, L. (1993). Contested closets: The politics and ethics of outing. Minneapolis: University of
Minnesota Press.
Habermas, J. (1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Hantzis, D. M. & Lehr, V. (1994). Whose desire? Lesbian (non)sexuality and television's perpetuation of
hetero/sexism. In R. J. Ringer (Ed.), Queer words, queer images: Communication and the
construction of homosexuality (pp. 107-121). New York: New York University Press.
Har'el, A. (1996). Homosexual rights in Israel — A new era?, Tat Tarbut, 2, 39-43. [In Hebrew]
Harris, D. (1998). The selling of the subculture. The Harvard gay & lesbian review, V(1), 24-25.
Hazleton, L. (1977). Israeli women: The reality behind the myths. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Herek, G. M. (1993). The context of antigay violence: Notes on cultural and psychological
heterosexism. In L. D. Garnets & D. C. Kimmel (Eds.), Psychological perspectives on lesbian and
gay male experiences (pp. 89-107). New York: Columbia University Press.
Hodges, A. & Hutter, D. (1974). With downcast gays: Aspects of homosexual self-oppression. The 1997
Internet version (no pagination).
Hoffman, W. M. (1979). Introduction. In W. M. Hoffman (Ed.), Gay plays: The first collection (pp. viixxxix). New York: Avon Books.
Horowitz, D. & Lissak, M. (1977). The origins of the Israeli polity. Tel Aviv: Am Oved. [In Hebrew]
32
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
Horowitz, D. & Kimmerling, B. (1974). Some social implications of military service and reserve system
in Israel. European journal of sociology, 15(2), 262-276.
Kama, A. (1996). Political bliss versus closet blues. In M. Ferrari (Ed.), Ferrari travel planner (pp. 111112). Phoenix, AZ: Ferrari.
Katz, E., Haas, H., & Gurevitch, M. (1997). 20 years of television in Israel: Are there long-run effects on
values, social connectedness, and cultural practices?. Journal of communication, 47(2), 3-20.
Kempf, R. (1996). "The quest for holes in the wall" - The interaction between women's protest groups
and the Israeli press. PATUAH, 3, 4-26. [In Hebrew]
Kielwasser, A. P., & Wolf, M. A. (1992). Mainstream television, adolescent homosexuality, and
significant silence. Critical studies in mass communication, 9, 350-373.
Lee, J. A. (1977). Going public: A study in the sociology of homosexual liberation. Journal of
homosexuality, 3(1), 49-78.
Leznoff, M., & Westley, W. A. (1956). The homosexual community. Social problems, 3(4), 257-263.
Liebes, T. (1997). Talk shows: The new public sphere? In D. Caspi (Ed.), Communication and
democracy in Israel (pp. 141-152). Jerusalem: The Van Leer Institute & Hakibbutz Hammeuchad.
[In Hebrew]
Liebes. T., Pery, Y., & Grabelsky, Z. (1996). Where does the real influence hide? Communication and
alternative communication in Israeli Elections 1996. Kesher, 20, 5-20. [In Hebrew]
Lippmann, W. (1974). The world outside and the pictures in our heads. In K. G. Johnson, J. J. Senatore,
M. C. Liebig, & G. Minor (Eds.), Nothing never happens (pp. 199-200). Beverly Hills: Glencoe.
Lissak, M. (1988). Various schools of perceiving the Jewish settlement. In N. Graetz (Ed.), Perspectives
on culture and society in Israel (pp. 32-46). Tel Aviv: The Open University. [In Hebrew]
Moore, T. (Ed.) (1995). Lesbiot: Israeli lesbians tell their stories. London: Cassell.
Ministry of Health (1997). HIV/AIDS quarterly, 1. [In Hebrew]
Montgomery, K. (1981). Gay activists and the networks. Journal of communication, 31(3), 49-57.
33
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
Morin, S. F. (1993). AIDS: The challenge to psychology. In L. D. Garnets & D. C. Kimmel (Eds.),
Psychological perspectives on lesbian and gay male experiences (pp. 557-566). New York:
Columbia University Press.
Moritz, M. J. (1994). Old strategies for new texts: How American television is creating and treating
lesbian characters. . In R. J. Ringer (Ed.), Queer words, queer images: Communication and the
construction of homosexuality (pp. 122-142). New York: New York University Press.
Morris, J. F. (1997). Lesbian coming out as a multidimensional process. Journal of Homosexuality,
33(2), 1-22.
Murray, R. (1996). Images in the dark: An encyclopedia of gay and lesbian film and video. New York:
Plume.
Nardi, P. M. (1997). Changing gay and lesbian images in the media. In J. T. Sears & W. L. Williams
(Eds.), Overcoming heterosexism and homophobia: Strategies that work (pp. 427-442). New
York: Columbia University Press.
Nardi, P. M., Sanders, D. & Marmor J. (1994). Growing up before Stonewall: Life stories of some gay
men. London: Routledge.
Pearce, F. (1973). How to be immoral and ill, pathetic and dangerous, all at the same time: Mass media
and the homosexual. In S. Cohen & J. Young (Eds.), The manufacture of news: Social problems,
deviance and the mass media (pp. 284-301). London: Constable.
Russo, V. (1987). The celluloid closet: Homosexuality in the movies. New York: Harper & Row.
Sears, J. T. (1997). Thinking critically/Intervening effectively about homophobia and heterosexism. In J.
T. Sears & W. L. Williams (Eds.), Overcoming heterosexism and homophobia: Strategies that
work (pp. 13-48). New York: Columbia University Press.
Sion, L. (1997). Images of manhood among combat soldiers: Military service in the Israeli infantry as a
rite of initiation from youthhood to adulthood. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University. [In Hebrew]
34
‫© כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר עמית קמה‬
Spivak, D., & Yonai, Y. (1996). Law and homosexuals in Israel: Myth and reality. Tat Tarbut, 2, 39-41.
[In Hebrew]
Sullivan, A. (1995). Virtually normal: An argument about homosexuality. New York: Knopf.
Tuchman, G. (1979). Women's depiction by the mass media. Signs, 4(3), 528-542.
Tuchman, G. (1978). Introduction: The symbolic annihilation of women by the mass media. In G.
Tuchman, A. K. Daniels, & J. Bennett (Eds.), Hearth and home: Images of women in the mass
media (pp. 3-38). New York: Oxford University Press.
Wahrman, D. (1997). Habermas's public sphere: Thought experiment or historical experience? Dvarim
Ahadim: Israel journal of communication, culture and society, 1, 34-45. [In Hebrew]
Weeks, J. (1995). Invented moralities: Sexual values in an age of uncertainty. New York: Columbia
University Press.
Weimann, G. (1996). Cable comes to the Holy Land: The impact of cable TV on Israeli viewers. Journal
of broadcasting & electronic media, 40, 243-257.
Weston, K. (1995). Get thee to a big city: Sexual imaginary and the great gay migration. GLQ, 2, 253277.
Woods, J. D. (1994). The corporate closet: The professional lives of gay men in America. New York:
The Free Press.
Yonai, Y. (In press). The law concerning homosexual orientation in Israel: Between history and
sociology. Mishpat & Mimshal, 4 [In Hebrew]
35