Should Gay Press Be Asylum Litmus Test?

As millions of Americans await immigration reform, one gay man, Artur Chmielewski, received word today that his appeal for asylum has been denied. Chmielewski came to America in 2003, and, upon filing for asylum, testified that he had experienced discrimination and anti-gay violence in his native Poland. The government disagreed and then denied a new hearing because, like so many others, he didn’t follow a timely procedure in his appeal. It’s an interesting and all-too-familiar case, yes, but not nearly as fascinating as one of the government’s original arguments.

During the 2005 hearing, the government, then under the Bush administration, used some queer materials to justify their asylum denial. Despite human rights evidence that gay activists had been attacked during a march earlier that year, the government offered its own articles detailing that gay people are safe and accepted in Poland, whose current President Lech Kaczyński has said gay relations will destroy humanity. From today’s appeal opinion:

The government responded by submitting articles of its own, which discussed the successes of the gay rights movement in Poland since the fall of the communist government. One article noted Warsaw’s “lively gay tradition” dating back to the eighteenth century… and a July of 2005 article from the Travel section of Gay Times, Great Britain’s well-known adult gay male magazine, gave Poland, a member of the European Union, 3½ “pink stars,” out of a possible 5, for being tolerant and even accepting…

That vote indicated a “surprising level of tolerance,” despite that fact that gay pride parades have regularly been forbidden in the country and the state department’s human rights report from that year detailed right-wing violence against gay people. Of course, that didn’t fit into the government’s narrow view of Chmielewski’s case, so they simply ignored their own data. Now it’s looking like this young man will be deported.

It’s strange to me that the government, in denying this young man access to America, should rely on gay press as a litmus test. A travel journalist and a native no doubt have vastly different experiences. In writing a review on a country, one focuses primarily on the positive aspects, rather than living the negative. But, let’s give the review the benefit of the doubt and say it was spot on. The government’s still wrong to use Gay Times, for a description of the magazine is clearly slanted: “adult gay male magazine.”

The word “adult” indicates GT is in someway pornographic. While, sure, there are some pictures of beautiful men, GT also publishes interviews with actors, cultural figures and politicians. Just this week GT journo Martin Popplewell did interviewswith David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Gordon Brown, all of who are running for Prime Minister. Clearly Gay Times isn’t “adult” in the naughty sense, as suggested in the government’s definition.

It seems to me that the government, moving forward, should rely less on gay press and more on gay people in making immigration decisions. I may be a member of the press, but I can admit we get it wrong sometimes, just as the government has in denying Chmielewski’s asylum.

Image via eisenbahner’s Flickr.