Iranian filmmaker, actress and lesbian activist Kiana Firouz is in danger of being deported back to Iran for her “crime of unrepentant homosexuality“; for which the punishment is execution.

Kiana worked as an underground activist for LGBT women’s rights. During this time, she documented the horrific treatment of LGBT people in Iran and shot footage for a documentary about the commonplace horrific abuse of human rights there. When items of footage were discovered by Iranian Intelligence, Kiana was harrassed by agents in Tehran and fled to the UK as a student two years ago. Kiana has since directed and played a key role in Cul de Sac, the culmination of her work.

Her application for asylum in the UK was rejected by the Home Office, who were fully aware of the persecution Kiana faced in light of her sexual orientation. The Ministry argued that she could return to Iran and conceal her homosexuality. Seeing as the well-publicised evidence blatantly contradicts this ruling, it would seem that the Home Office is guilty of, at best, gross incompetence; at worst, wilful negligence.

LGBTQ rights in Iran

Iran’s “lawful” approach to sexuality; noosing two unidentified gay teens for their “crime”.

LGBTQ equality was once a reality in Iran, prior to the 1979 Islamic Revolution; a Gay Liberation movement was in the works and even publicised gay marriages were tolerated. Since then, the country’s laws regarding LGBTQ rights have been based on an extremely conservative interpretation of Islamic law. Homosexuality is punishable by lashing, or execution by hanging in more “extreme” cases; Transexuals are institutionalised and often forced to undergo hormone treatments; LGBTQ people as a whole undergo sex change operations for fear of extreme persecution. It is utterly disgusting.

Make no mistake; forcing Kiana to return to Iran is nothing short of marching her to her death. We’re talking about a women who, in the face of extreme oppression, had the courage to step forward and speak out against it; to put a face to the abuse suffered by Kiana and her LGBTQ comrades in Iran. Every free and liberal LGBTQ person has an obligation to stand with her in solidarity and prevent this travesty from taking place.

What the student community can do

First and foremost, please sign this petition and join this Facebook group and show your support. And please…spread the word. Raising national awareness of this issue is a crucial part of this campaign.

Both the Lib Dems AND the Tories pledged to change the rules specifically for asylum seekers; acknowledging the consequences suffered by LGBTQ people who – just like Kiana – were sent back and told to keep quiet under the previous Government’s policy. That being said…the new Minister for Women and Equalities, Theresa May, has consistently voted against LGBTQ rights and – in my humble opinion – was a poor choice for the job. Regardless, it is time for her to do her part to uphold her party’s pledges. I will also be writing to Lynne Featherstone, the Lib Dem undersecretary for Equality – who, by contrast, has an excellent voting record for LGBTQ rights – to doubly ensure that conservative views towards homosexuality in the UK do not further jeopardise Kiana Firouz. I invite you all to lobby your MP’s to take action on this issue.

This educational cartoon is both amusing and educational; they really should show it as part of sex education in schools. It’s very effective at busting some popular myths and old views about homosexuality.

Following the elections that took place online during the Easter holidays, your confirmed delegates for conference are as follows:

Open Place Matthew Ward Daniel Guzman Robert Unwin	Women’s Place Emma Cooper Sarah Green
Black/Ethnic Minority Place Kitten Camilla Onwordi	Trans Place Kai Weston

RedBrick released an article on November regarding a proposal by the EHRC to include sexuality in the national census. RedBrick contacted me for comment, which I eventually – other commitments aside – provided as a comment on the online article. This issue has come up a number of times this year and there’s a strong feeling (and frankly, ironically fascist) prevailing view that there is only one corrent opinion on the matter.

This proposed measure – which I regard as immature and in need of serious refinement (as I said in my comment) – is another instance of attempting to solve the problems of society with positive discrimination i.e. pedastooling a category of people who have been historically oppressed. While, in theory, it’s a viable short-term solution which encourages minority participation and forces greater diversity, it’s an extremely artificial measure of adjusting demographics that is not viable in the long term. Labour-dominated organisations such as the NUS and (to a lesser extent) the Guild and the LGBTQ Association over the past few years seem to believe that it is.

First and foremost, employing positive discrimination as a long-term solution presupposes that a certain minority (LGBTQ being a keen example) is consistently oppressed and will remain oppressed for the rest of time; therefore they deserve ongoing special treatment. However, it’s easy to lose perspective over time and we have to take a step back and ask ourself “why did we want this in the first place?”

• Are we looking for payback? Do we feel that majority groups must suffer as we [once] did?
• Do we quietly enjoy the extra attention we receive from society, and do we want to continue to continue exploiting it?
• Are we so afraid of history repeating itself that letting go of this special treatment will restore the oppression we suffered before?
• Is using “the historical oppression and misrepresentation of one group” a convenient cover for why – as an example – there is less involvement from women than men in a certain group?

Let’s not kid ourselves; positive discrimination is a balancing act and often breeds resentment among majority groups. They are made to feel powerless and as if they are being punished for the transgressions of others “like them” throughout history. It also encourages minority groups to retain their own resentment and ultimately perpetuates this endless segregation, which is hardly conducive to achieving equality in society.

Admittedly, one could argue that positive discrimination is part of the reason that the LGBTQ Officer position exists. I’d quite willingly accept that argument, even if it does put the viability of my job into question, and instinctively I’d try and defend it. In my mind, LGBTQ support is more about being there for people who feel isolated in a decreasingly heteronormative society, but aims to give them what they need to accept who they are within society; not to segregate themselves in isolated groups. Myself and the Officer team attempted to convey the importance of such non-segregation with the LGBTQ housing issue last year. The naive idealist in me hopes that, one day, sexuality and gender equality will evolve to the point where an LGBTQ Officer and Association are unnecessary.

Since stating these views on this particular RedBrick article, I have been attacked by several Labour advocates on campus and in the NUS who seem to believe that their view is the only correct view…confident that they are given the “divine right” by the fact that the government they support is currently in power – and I stress “currently”. I hasten to add that some of these reactions have been nothing but nasty and spiteful, and hardly deserving of consideration, but the sheer numbers of student who submit to these attitudes is deeply concerning.

Matthew Shepherd, tragic victim of a homophobic hate crime.

I believe that everyone should have a fair and equal chance to succeed in life, regardless of race, sexuality, gender, ailment or any other such irrelevant factor. If we respond to discrimination by discriminating in the other direction, so to speak, we may never overcome the borders of segregation.

The oppression suffered by LGBTQ people, ethnic minorities, women and disabled students – particularly in the past – was unacceptable. The oppression we are still – to some extent – subject to from certain groups is unacceptable. This oppression has manifested itself in some horrific tragedies over the last few decades and it is our duty to see that that they are never repeated. This is, after all, why we have liberation, but just remember that the point is to ensure equality for all; not battle for the supremacy of one group over others.

If you’re interested in being a delegate or observer for NUS LGBT Conference, nominations are now open! Please submit a manifesto to nus-delegate-elections@lgbtq.co.uk before next Monday 12PM.

Although funding is still somewhat of an issue, we presently have four delegate and two observer spots to fill in addition to myself, the LGBTQ Officer-Elect and the newly elected chairperson.

Nominations will close on Monday 12PM, at which point online elections will begin. Remember the voting link will be sent via the LGBTQ mailing list, so if you’re not on the list please contact or the committee secretary ASAP! xD

I’ve received a significant number of complaints about this in such a short time, so I’m going to clarify exactly what is going on with delegate elections for upcoming NUS LGBT Conference.

Due to a miscommunication, an impromptu vote was held on Wednesday during which most of the delegate positions were mixed up, as was who goes as the “current” officer, and the issue of how many people we can send (due to funding) has not yet been confirmed. This took place without my prior knowledge and without notice because of concerns that the Association would miss the deadline…which the NUS – in their infinite wisdom – have not bothered to disclose to any constituent Unions.

In any case I would like to sincerely apologise to all LGBTQ students on campus for this incident, especially those who were present on Wednesday.

Election to be re-held online

In any case, I have declared the Wednesday election as officially invalid and have made the following alternative voting arrangements:

1. An elections subcommittee has been formed of myself, the LGBTQ Officer-Elect and the newly elected Chairperson. The Secretary and one Open Place committee member (also recently elected) hold places on this subcommittee for oversight and accountability.
2. From 12PM on Wednesday 31st March, a 5-day nomination period will begin. Potential candidates, please submit your nominations to nus-delegate-elections@lgbtq.co.uk and you will receive a notice of confirmation with 24 hours of sending your nomination. I’d recommend a manifesto, like this really old one, describing to LGBTQ students why you’d make a good delegate and how you could contribute to Conference.
3. Nominations will close at 12pm on Monday, 5th April at which time a 3-day voting period will begin. This will take place online and every member of the LGBTQ mailing list will receive a unique voting link via email.
4. Voting will close at 12PM on Thursday, 8th April. Results will be announced over the following weekend.

Why online?

Normally I and the Chair would arrange an Emergency General Meeting (EGM), but with it now being the Easter holidays, rallying a sufficient number of students is nigh-impossible. Besides, we’ve always seemed to have better luck with our online communications this year

Why the mailing list?

The Guild operates an “autonomous liberation” policy in which only people that, through self-definition, fall under a particular category (i.e. ethnic minorities, LGBTQ, women). This is to ensure that the only the people who will be affected by an election in the long-term are allowed to vote for it; outside interference can be extremely disruptive to that end.

Every year, during the Guild Officer elections, this policy is flagrantly abused and liberation officer elections are disrupted into becoming a popularity contest. Using our mailing list gives us a greater assurance that LGBTQ students are the ones voting and gives us the added benefit of being able to prevent duplicate votes; uniquely identifying voters by their email address. I know it’s not exactly foolproof, but it’s a hell of a lot more reliable, accurate and far reaching than general meetings or the previous attempt at voting for delegates.

If you are an LGBTQ student and you’re not on the mailing list, please contact either myself/the Officer-elect or the committee’s secretary before voting begins to get yourself registered! As always, all information is treated as confidential.