Reform UK most-supported party among gay and bi men, new poll shows

durangodawood · Jun 7, 2026

ThatRobGuy said:
I think there are some cultural differences between Indian populations and Muslim populations that are applicable to talk about in the context of "why are the Gay guys in England suddenly backing the anti-Immigrant party".

I could be wrong, but I don't think the Indian religions have the same track record of gay hostility as Islam.

Britain has long had a large Indian population (and a lot of Indian immigrants). That hasn't really triggered this kind of re-alignment behind an anti Immigration party like we've seen popping up in the UK and other European countries.

What's different about this recent (by recent I mean last 15 years or so) wave of a new form of migration that's driven so many people over to that side (despite espousing welcoming sentiments for the first year or two it was occurring)?

Islam was a huge Indian religion before partition into India and Pakistan (and later, Bangladesh). Still is even just in India. UK has a quite large Pakistani (India during the Raj) origin population. I would guess they are the majority origin of UK Muslims.

ThatRobGuy · Jun 7, 2026

durangodawood said:
Islam was a huge Indian religion before partition into India and Pakistan (and later, Bangladesh). Still is even just in India. UK has a quite large Pakistani (India during the Raj) origin population. I would guess they are the majority origin of UK Muslims.

Actually, you bring up an interesting aspect that I hadn't touched on or thought about yet.

That being, the country of origin.

Pakistani has been the the lion's share from post-ww2 through 2010.

However, things shifted a little bit after that and (if the stuff I'm reading is accurate), there's been a huge uptick between then and now from the following groups.

Afghan
Syrian
Sudanese
Somalian
(and to a lesser degree, Iranian)

I can certainly see where that would be a new wrinkle that would change the dynamic a bit.

Pakistan is notable more progressive than other Muslim countries on certain issues. (it's a low bar, but a little more progressive none the less, they had the first female prime minister of any Muslim country, and passed laws such as this).

They were also the same country where clerics issued the following fatwa:
It declared that robbing LGBT people of their share in inheritance was unlawful and that parents who deprive their sons/daughters of inheritance for such reasons were “inviting the wrath of God”.

It went to the extent of terming ‘haraam’ any act intended to “humiliate, insult or tease” them.

The fatwa ended with a word on last rites, declaring that all funeral rituals for a transgender person will be the same as for any other Muslim man or woman.

The clerics who issued the fatwa included Imran Hanfi, Pir Karamat Ali, Abu Bakr Awan, Masoodur Rehman, Tahir Tabassum Qadri, Khalil Yousafi, Gul Ateequi, Gulzar Naeemi, Intikhab Noori, Abdul Sattar Saeedi and Khizarul Islam.

So to use a domestic example involving our largest religion.
I can see where the people in a progressive SoCal town would have no problem coexisting with (and continuously having new arrivals from) people from the Episcopalian or Unitarian sects of Christianity for a long period of time.

However, if there started to be a large influx of Pentecostals or Southern Baptists from the deep south that started moving to their town in large numbers, I can see where their viewpoints on "Having a bunch of new Christians moving in" could change swiftly if the inflow became large enough that they started to gain some political power in the area.

There's also the differentiator between an immigrant, and a purely economic migrant (or a migrant fleeing violence).

With the former, there's a higher probability that the person was moving to UK specifically because they wanted to live and exist in a more open-minded liberal place, whereas with the latter, it can often be a person who was perfectly fine with the theocratic aspects of their home country and would have preferred to stay there if they could, but they merely wanted to escape a bad situation.

durangodawood · Jun 7, 2026

ThatRobGuy said:
Actually, you bring up an interesting aspect that I hadn't touched on or thought about yet.

That being, the country of origin.

Pakistani has been the the lion's share from post-ww2 through 2010.

However, things shifted a little bit after that and (if the stuff I'm reading is accurate), there's been a huge uptick between then and now from the following groups.

Afghan
Syrian
Sudanese
Somalian
(and to a lesser degree, Iranian)

I can certainly see where that would be a new wrinkle that would change the dynamic a bit.

Pakistan is notable more progressive than other Muslim countries on certain issues. (it's a low bar, but a little more progressive none the less, they had the first female prime minister of any Muslim country, and passed laws such as this).

They were also the same country where clerics issued the following fatwa:
It declared that robbing LGBT people of their share in inheritance was unlawful and that parents who deprive their sons/daughters of inheritance for such reasons were “inviting the wrath of God”.

It went to the extent of terming ‘haraam’ any act intended to “humiliate, insult or tease” them.

The fatwa ended with a word on last rites, declaring that all funeral rituals for a transgender person will be the same as for any other Muslim man or woman.

The clerics who issued the fatwa included Imran Hanfi, Pir Karamat Ali, Abu Bakr Awan, Masoodur Rehman, Tahir Tabassum Qadri, Khalil Yousafi, Gul Ateequi, Gulzar Naeemi, Intikhab Noori, Abdul Sattar Saeedi and Khizarul Islam.

So to use a domestic example involving our largest religion.
I can see where the people in a progressive SoCal town would have no problem coexisting with (and continuously having new arrivals from) people from the Episcopalian or Unitarian sects of Christianity for a long period of time.

However, if there started to be a large influx of Pentecostals or Southern Baptists from the deep south that started moving to their town in large numbers, I can see where their viewpoints on "Having a bunch of new Christians moving in" could change swiftly if the inflow became large enough that they started to gain some political power in the area.

There's also the differentiator between an immigrant, and a purely economic migrant (or a migrant fleeing violence).

With the former, there's a higher probability that the person was moving to UK specifically because they wanted to live and exist in a more open-minded liberal place, whereas with the latter, it can often be a person who was perfectly fine with the theocratic aspects of their home country and would have preferred to stay there if they could, but they merely wanted to escape a bad situation.

Pakistan is a huge population country with masses of extremely conservative Muslims no matter what liberal nods the central govt might make.

Regardless, we both seem to be speculating about exactly whats driving anti immigrant nationalism in the UK. My sense is overall economic decline - exacerbated by Brexit, of course, is pushing people to lash out and long for "a better time". Just like in the USA. That's the biggie. Dissatisfaction re standard of living. Also there's the clash of cultures, which is a real thing too.

ThatRobGuy · Jun 7, 2026

durangodawood said:
Pakistan is a huge population country with masses of extremely conservative Muslims no matter what liberal nods the central govt might make.

Regardless, we both seem to be speculating about exactly whats driving anti immigrant nationalism in the UK. My sense is overall economic decline - exacerbated by Brexit, of course, is pushing people to lash out and long for "a better time". Just like in the USA. That's the biggie. Dissatisfaction re standard of living. Also there's the clash of cultures, which is a real thing too.

Those "nods" (without much in the way of meaningful change) you mention are what I was referring to about the "low bar". But none the less, it's still more than what the LGBT communities get in other majority Muslim countries.

If economic decline was the concern, so much so that it led one to abandon the "mainstream" party in favor of a smaller one purely for a spite vote, wouldn't the other interests of a person factor into that decision, though?

Like I noted earlier, Reform wouldn't seem to be the logical choice for a disenfranchised liberal-leaning person if they were looking to make a move.

Fair to say you're closer to the left end of the spectrum than to right, yes?

If you became so fed up with the democrats and their inaction on certain economic issues, that you were willing to spite vote for a small party, and it was purely just about economics and not some other reason.

Would you be voting for the Green Party or the Libertarian Party? (I'm assuming the former right?)

If you came on here tomorrow and told us all you were voting for the LP, one would assume your concerns were something other than economics

Stopped_lurking · Jun 7, 2026

Hans Blaster said:
Let's see...

The OP is about "weirdly high" levels of support for a "MAGA-looking" party among gay men.

"Reform UK" is fundamentally a nationalist, anti-immigrant and by extension "anti-Muslim" party. Poster can't understand how LGBT people can be anti-immigrant/anti-muslim (intersectionality has been working too hard here)

Overwrought parallels with MAGA/GOP (which is less anti-immigrant than Reform and quite publicly anti-LBGT) lead to confusion and at this point seem to be building excusagetics for why Muslim immgirants actually are bad. (or why UK voters are justified in the wide spread support for an anti-immigrant party)

Sigh.

Yes, news from march are picked up in june to to build a platform from where anti-muslim rhetoric can be spouted.

Stopped_lurking · Jun 7, 2026

ThatRobGuy said:
To put it in very direct terms.

Because Gay men are supporting Reform UK more than they're supporting Labour and Greens.

Muslims (by in large) have a bad track record on the subject of gay rights (even when compared to staunch Christian conservatives)

Reform UK is the party that's pushing back the hardest on immigration from Muslim countries.

I was putting it out there as a theory for why a group that, on paper, seems like they'd be supporting one of the pro-LGBT parties, is backing the one that's arguably the least LGBT-friendly in the UK.

Yes, but being gay/bisexual reduces the intention to vote for Reform compared to being non-gay/bisexual.

There are many more gay/bisexual persons supporting LGB-positive parties (75% men and 88% of women). Not even the Tories are against gay marriage. Reform haven't presented an election manifesto against gay marriage.

Reform are not looking like they will form a majority government in the next general election. Anti-immigrant gay/bisexuals could just be betting on that they won't be effected if they vote for Reform.

Stopped_lurking · Jun 7, 2026

ThatRobGuy said:
There's other links that discuss it in more detail

https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2006/08/10/in-great-britain-muslims-worry-about-islamic-extremism/

The Pew survey found that British Muslims have a stronger Islamic identity than do Muslims elsewhere in Europe. Fully eight-in-ten (81%) British Muslims think of themselves as Muslims first rather than as British.

Whereas, in the US:

Muslims in America (Fall 2007 Trust Magazine article)

www.pew.org

One area that came in for considerable attention was the extent of religious identity. Of those surveyed, 47 percent thought of themselves as “Muslim first” rather than American first.

That would seem to indicate that British Muslims put a higher emphasis on religion than their American counterparts (at least with respect to how their prioritize it against their citizenship)

Is this just an attempt to muddy the waters?

Your summary regarding identities in the article you referenced were just plain wrong for two points (regarding ethnicity and religion) and made-up for the third (there was no data about attitudes regarding country of origin).

ThatRobGuy · Jun 8, 2026

Stopped_lurking said:
Yes, news from march are picked up in june to to build a platform from where anti-muslim rhetoric can be spouted.

A better descriptor would be "anti - certain forms of Islam - rhetoric"

The ideologies themselves are the issues, not the people who got roped into it.

It's not "xenophobic" or "anti-immigrant" (more broadly) for a person to have concerns about their country importing large numbers of people with potentially extreme religious ideologies.

As noted before, in the wake of the Danish Cartoonist incident, over 60% of British Muslims polled said that while they wouldn't support violence against someone who insulted or comically depicted their prophet, they would support prosecuting them.

While that may not be as extreme as what occurs in some of the Islamic Theocracies, the notion of "if you insult my faith, while I don't support physically harming you, I still think there should be some sort of legal punishment" is certainly not "un-extreme".

In the case of concerns coming from some gay men in Britain, I think there's certain cases where sometimes the simplest answer is the right one.
"you're importing a bunch of people who hate me, and I don't like that, so we'll back the party that's pushing back on that for the time being"

This commentator acknowledges it

Shock Poll Reveals Gay Men Turning to Reform UK: Here's Why It’s Happening - KIMU

A recent poll attributed to More in Common suggests an unexpected shift in political support among gay and bisexual men in Britain. According to figures circulated online, Reform…

karlismyunkle.com

ThatRobGuy · Jun 8, 2026

Stopped_lurking said:
Is this just an attempt to muddy the waters?

Your summary regarding identities in the article you referenced were just plain wrong for two points (regarding ethnicity and religion) and made-up for the third (there was no data about attitudes regarding country of origin).

No, it wasn't an attempt to muddy the waters. It was meant to highlight a practical difference between the Muslim immigrant populations in the UK vs. the US that could explain some of the backlash.

Stopped_lurking · Jun 8, 2026

ThatRobGuy said:
A better descriptor would be "anti - certain forms of Islam - rhetoric"

The ideologies themselves are the issues, not the people who got roped into it.

It's not "xenophobic" or "anti-immigrant" (more broadly) for a person to have concerns about their country importing large numbers of people with potentially extreme religious ideologies.

As noted before, in the wake of the Danish Cartoonist incident, over 60% of British Muslims polled said that while they wouldn't support violence against someone who insulted or comically depicted their prophet, they would support prosecuting them.

While that may not be as extreme as what occurs in some of the Islamic Theocracies, the notion of "if you insult my faith, while I don't support physically harming you, I still think there should be some sort of legal punishment" is certainly not "un-extreme".

In the case of concerns coming from some gay men in Britain, I think there's certain cases where sometimes the simplest answer is the right one.
"you're importing a bunch of people who hate me, and I don't like that, so we'll back the party that's pushing back on that for the time being"

There are always some, but since being gay/bisexual reduces the reported intent to vote for Reform it is unlikely that being gay/bisexual in itself is a reason for reporting such an intent in general. It is even more apparent if you look at gay/bisexual women. They are just as gay/bisexual as gay/bisexual men.

ThatRobGuy said:
This commentator acknowledges it

Shock Poll Reveals Gay Men Turning to Reform UK: Here's Why It’s Happening - KIMU

A recent poll attributed to More in Common suggests an unexpected shift in political support among gay and bisexual men in Britain. According to figures circulated online, Reform…

karlismyunkle.com

They don't show it to be true though. Are they a well known commentator? There is no new data presented. This is just someone's guess.

Their choice of words does not instill confidence, weasel word on weasel word.

"Regardless of the political framing, safety concerns can influence voting behaviour. When people feel that mainstream parties are reluctant to discuss certain topics openly, they sometimes gravitate toward parties that claim they will address them more directly."

Stopped_lurking said:
Is this just an attempt to muddy the waters?

Your summary regarding identities in the article you referenced were just plain wrong for two points (regarding ethnicity and religion) and made-up for the third (there was no data about attitudes regarding country of origin).

ThatRobGuy said:
No, it wasn't an attempt to muddy the waters.

So what is your explanation for your summary of the referenced document (the one about resource determinism)?

ThatRobGuy · Jun 8, 2026

Stopped_lurking said:
So what is your explanation for your summary of the referenced document (the one about resource determinism)?

That attitudes (with regards to prioritization of national identity, assimilation, and attitudes toward people who have a different faiths - or no faith) are very different between the US and UK Muslim populations. And in ways that can create political fracturing in was that would be otherwise unexpected.

Stopped_lurking · Jun 8, 2026

ThatRobGuy said:
That attitudes (with regards to prioritization of national identity, assimilation, and attitudes toward people who have a different faiths - or no faith) are very different between the US and UK Muslim populations. And in ways that can create political fracturing in was that would be otherwise unexpected.

I'm wondering how you got it so wrong in in your summary of that text? How did you get this from that text.

ThatRobGuy said:
A few pages down, it goes on to highlight that with or without controls for incomes and education levels, Muslims in the UK (and France) are fare more likely to still more strongly identify with their original country of origin, their ethnicity, and their religion, than their American counterparts.

There was no data about identification with country of origin, and that text didn't show that muslims in France and the UK were far more likely to strongly identify with their ethnicity or religion than their american counterparts.

ThatRobGuy · Jun 9, 2026

Stopped_lurking said:
There was no data about identification with country of origin, and that text didn't show that muslims in France and the UK were far more likely to strongly identify with their ethnicity or religion than their american counterparts.

It's inferred from the inverse.

For the graph where you highlighted (from the MIT link) the authors explain:
This means that Muslims in the UK and France who have the same income and education levels as American Muslims are remarkably more religiously intolerant. Turning next to questions of identity, we find that American Muslims are more likely to identify strongly with their country than Muslims in the UK and France. The differences are substantively smaller than the gaps in religious tolerance, but they are still substantively and statistically significant (approximately 0.25 on a five-point scale). When we use weights to control for demographics, the average identification of French Muslims with France increases, but still remains significantly lower than Muslim-American respondents. The identification of UK Muslims with the UK does not change. This suggests that demographically similar Muslims are more likely to identify with their country [if] they live in the United States than in Europe.

Turning to questions about identity, we find that Muslims in Europe identify more with their ethnicity and religion than non-Muslims. American Muslims are relatively similar to American non-Muslims

Stopped_lurking · Jun 9, 2026

ThatRobGuy said:
It's inferred from the inverse.

For the graph where you highlighted (from the MIT link) the authors explain:
This means that Muslims in the UK and France who have the same income and education levels as American Muslims are remarkably more religiously intolerant. Turning next to questions of identity, we find that American Muslims are more likely to identify strongly with their country than Muslims in the UK and France. The differences are substantively smaller than the gaps in religious tolerance, but they are still substantively and statistically significant (approximately 0.25 on a five-point scale). When we use weights to control for demographics, the average identification of French Muslims with France increases, but still remains significantly lower than Muslim-American respondents. The identification of UK Muslims with the UK does not change. This suggests that demographically similar Muslims are more likely to identify with their country [if] they live in the United States than in Europe.

No, we have no idea about countries of origin, that is not what is displayed in Figure 1. It is not an competitive question, they can be uninterested (or identify with both) in both their current country and their country of origin (which for many muslims in the UK and France is UK and France, for both France and the UK it is more than or approximately half iirc). The data doesn't put them in competition to each other.

ThatRobGuy said:
Turning to questions about identity, we find that Muslims in Europe identify more with their ethnicity and religion than non-Muslims. American Muslims are relatively similar to American non-Muslims

This is discussing Figure 2.

This was why I pointed out to you earlier that Figure 2 was a comparison between muslims and non-muslims in their respective countries. You can see directly in Figure 1, that UK muslims and french muslims straddle US muslims on the questions about ethnicity and religion.

"The results are shown in Figure 2, where we plot the difference in average responses to each question between Muslims and non-Muslims in each country."

This is the relevant quote (in relation to Figure 1).

"On questions of ethnic and religious identity, American Muslims are not distinctive from European Muslims (French Muslims identify with these groups less, UK Muslims identify more)."

Reform UK most-supported party among gay and bi men, new poll shows

re Member

Part of the IT crowd

re Member

Part of the IT crowd

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Part of the IT crowd

Part of the IT crowd

Well-Known Member

Part of the IT crowd

Well-Known Member

Part of the IT crowd

Well-Known Member

Similar threads