I’m definitely willing to buy NGO’s being bad, but LGBTQIA+ activism isn’t even remotely comparable to ideologies that have been brought over by colonialism or whatever. As you’ve stated these organizations have an active material interest in not supporting LGBTQIA+ interests, which implies that, unlike the majority of ideas imported from the West or as part of imperialism, there isn’t any active violence being used to force people to participate in it. It seems unlikely to me that there would be roving bands of white people killing in the name of gay rights, or “schools” being instated to force gay rights on people.

So it not having undergone “indigenization” is seemingly irrelevant. It’s silly and absurd to reject it on those lines, like rejecting germ theory because you first found out about it from a white person level silly.

Also, at risk of coming across as a “no true Scotsman”, any actual queer or LGBTQIA+ theory would account for different conceptions of gender locally.

So yes, this seems pretty homophobic. Also…

truthfully, gay people will not be affected if I claim to support them (or not support them) because I have only spewed words on a public forum. There needs to be action with theory - like you yourself recognise.

Ok, few things:

1. Homophobia is also a massive cultural issue, in this case, spreading homophobic rhetoric (and “LGBTQ+ is western invention” IS homophobic rhetoric) is active praxis in the wrong direction.
2. If you reject the premise of the first point, then that leads us to the direct inverse conclusion being an issue as well (yes I know shit, sorry): What, materially, would someone be doing wrong by saying they dislike the lack of queer rights (in a country they otherwise support, even!) on an online forum? Surely that needs praxis and not just words, too. Why does the responsibility to police one’s words apply to gay people but not to people complaining about gay ideas being “imported” in other countries? Seems like oppression Olympics to me.
3. In a similar vein to Marx being a writer from a Western country, most queer theory is pretty equivocally correct, even if it’s from Western countries. It is silly to say that this theory suddenly loses it’s value because Western interests have appropriated it. Western “Marxists” appropriate Marxism too, but we never say Marxism is valueless to other countries because of that.

Finally,

Before I start, I want to preface this by saying that even though it may not be obvious to foreign observers, believe me when I say that the rhetorics and contentions you all have has already been extensively discussed and debated by anti-imperialists in the Global South. It may not be in English, it may not be available in neat and easily read blogs, essays and articles, but it has been discussed and taken into account.

Have a little faith in the Global South, okay

In no circumstance do I reject this. I do, however, reject the idea that you entirely represent all discussion that has been had there, because not only does queer Marxist theory exist that has been written by non-white, non-Western people (how absurd and racist is it to even suggest otherwise?) but it is extremely unlikely to me that some random internet person could even remotely convey all of the arguments and ideas that an entire diverse and inclusive community has had (I do not mean this offensively- I am also a random internet person). Are you gay or queer in any way? This statement makes me curious about your experience with queer culture. I’m willing to believe that I am lacking a lot of information as a Western person, but the way you approach this conversation communicates to me that you are missing some experience in queer theory and ideas as well.