By Eusebius McKaiser
As a gay African, with a background in analytic philosophy, the most annoying opposition to my sexual orientation is the claim that my lifestyle is un-African. It is annoying because historic and anthropological claims about the origins of behaviour seldom offer principled reasons why a lifestyle should never be allowed.
Colonialists are often accused of bringing homosexuality to Africa. Yet they never get attributed with a likelier anthropological truth: introducing penal codes to the continent that outlaw gay sex. An irony that bypasses homophobic leaders such as Zimbabwe’s president, Robert Mugabe, is that anti-sodomy laws on their countries’ statute books were first designed and implemented by the former colonial powers now accused of exporting homosexuality. Should former colonial masters not rather be accused of teaching Africa how to codify homophobia?
There is no anthropological evidence that homosexuality first occurred in Africa after colonisation began. The linguistic markers that draw attention to same-sex attraction – “faggot”, “gay”, “homosexual”, etc – may be inventions of the English language. And homophobic taxonomies distinguishing sexual identities that are “normal” from those that are “abnormal” may have first flowed from psychological studies in the west. But basic same-sex attraction, without linguistic markers or psychological theories, occurs in all societies where human beings find themselves. It would be rather strange for fundamental human experiences to be so highly relative that homosexuality was time- or place-bound.
A more serious problem with the claim that homosexuality is un-African is that it is a feeble normative assertion. For one thing, the mere existence of gay men and women who are African constitutes a counter-example to the claim. You can only insist that homosexuality is un-African if you maintain that a few individuals are entitled to define what being African must mean. It is not clear why gay Africans cannot craft narratives of African identity that includes the fact that they are homosexual. Why is same-sex attraction inherently un-African? I have yet to see homophobes across the African continent answer this question without simply asserting that it is so.
Of course, assertions, especially in the hands of men and women with massive political power, can quickly become reality. Hence the constant reports about the repression of gay Africans. But that is just evidence of the might of state power. It is not a compelling moral argument just because a majority of citizens swallow the homophobic rhetoric of political leaders.
And this relates to the biggest lie about homosexuality’s place in African societies. Even assuming homosexuality does not predate colonialism, which it does, it would not follow that homosexuality should not be permitted here. Why should African beliefs and traditions not be subject to moral criticism and revision?
Any African leader, who thinks tradition for its own sake is worth preserving, inadvertently promotes the continent as a place where critical self-examination is not allowed. That is nothing to be proud of. Any custom, homophobic or otherwise, that cannot withstand critical evaluation should simply be assigned to a dustbin of historic embarrassments. Since homosexuality is not harmful to gay men and women, or to any gawking bystander, there is no reason to outlaw it in Africa or elsewhere. Opposition to homosexuality, let’s face is, at best aesthetic – “Yuk!” – and at worst prejudice that is handed down to us. It is homophobia, rather than homosexuality, that is ultimately an embarrassment for Africa.
Eusebius McKaiser is an associate at the University of Witwatersrand’s Centre for Ethics, based in Johannesburg. His first book, a collection of critical essays, A Bantu in my Bathroom, has just been published by Pan Macmillan and is available from Amazon. Follow him on Twitter @eusebius
Many of gay rights opponents’ claims about homosexuality are glaringly stupid anyway, and yet, they are taken up and vocalised by politicians, rogue journalists and otherwise moronic individuals until they become the official response to the so-called ‘gay assault’. It appears that opposition to gay rights does not have to make sense or be intelligent anymore (was it ever?). I think I understand why. Homosexuality is claimed to be ‘unnatural’, that the pieces don’t fit and that it goes against norm. After that, what else is left to say? The rest, like the alleged unAfricanness of homosexuality, is just gravy. Very thin soup indeed.
(Just an aside, don’t call being gay a ‘lifestyle’….straights have lives, gays have lifestyles. Sometimes the language we use does not help the cause. Otherwise, good article.)
I am very much a “non homosexual” man. But I do appreciate the many friendships I have (had) with men and women with the other orientation.
Live and let live.
Mistreatment of gays, mistreatment of women, mistreatment of farmers, workers … we don’t need individual group rights, we need human rights, where everyone is treated the same and given the same protection. In Africa? Ha, that’s just a (wet) dream….
Many things that are ‘unAfrican’ are currently acceptable and used by political tyrants like Robert Mugabe: e.g. Catholicism, presidential helicopter, presidential Limousine, his cadinni suits, his spectacles, the cutlery in his statehouse, his presidential jet, Italian shoes he puts on, his smart phone, his laptop – even his beloved ZTV / ZBC. We should not condemn things merely on the basis that they are ‘Western’ – otherwise we are no different from Boka Haram [Nigeria] or Taliban fundamentalists. Even in the Christian Bible, we hear Abraham and Lot being told about the ‘evil’ of Sodom – not necessarily limited to sexual behaviour. Most serial murderers are heterosexual, so was Hitler.
And so if the ‘holier-than-thou’ Mugabes of this world want to condemn human behaviour, they should start with themselves – impoverishing a whole nation and murdering 20 000 innocent villagers. His cronies plunder national resources, diamonds are smuggled as hospitals run out of drugs and electricity. I live in a modern urban home, but have no running water. Did you mention ‘homosexuality’? Oops, I forgot, I was still mourning about ‘real bread and butter’ issues!
Let me say, for the record, that I’m an Italian man (62), hetero and married.
I’d like to support your statement in the title (“Homosexuality is African”) with a simple recollection of a few things:
1.- Mankind came out of Africa. We are all Africans, a few steps removed.
2.- Homosexuality is not a disease or a lifestyle, and is not a purely human phenomenon.
3.- Plenty of other animals, some closely related to humans, others less so, have been investigated and found to exhibit elements of homosexual behaviour.
4.- In our species the amount of homosexual is roughly between 5 and 10 percent, and this is historically verifiable across epochs and countries.
5.- How can this be explained, considering that active homosexuals should not be able to spread their genes in the usual way, ie. to their offsprings? First of all, some gay men and women are indeed parents, but essentially the point of dissemination would be their relatives, sharing with them to some extent whatever genes are involved in determining (or facilitating) such behaviour.
6.- And the reasons for perpetuating it is also not so complicated: as their siblings (or parents) have offsprings, gay men and women can help raise them. And this is what must have happened throughout the millennia of our existence as human beings.
I’ve always suspected that Robert Mugabe may be a closet homosexual. I may be wrong, but he certainly seems to protest and denounce way too much…
Personally, I’ve got no issues with whatever anyone’s sexual persuasion is. Or their gender. Or their race. Or their age, for that matter.
@JandrO, many of the tribal chiefs in Africa had sex with boys and girls. The African sold boys into slavery to the Arabs for sexual purpose along with young girls. The big myth about homosexuality is that it’s occurred among men but, most of the same sex practices are among women. The Europeans, starting with the Greeks, were the first to write about same sex and other forms of sexual behavior that were being practiced in Greece. In the western countries, many people are openly practicing their sexual behavior that’s being practiced in Africa behind close doors. One of the most common form of sex in Africa is sadism and it’s being practiced all over Africa. One will be shocked at what goes on in the homes with these old men in Africa with multi- wives.
Love Rejoice Ngwenya’s comment, and agree…. However, would add that as Luciano Dondero says, it is a human/animal condition which crosses all borders, nationalities and skin colours. I’ve no issues with it and we have many delightful friends who are Gay. Hmmm…. Robert Mugabe a closet homosexual? He certainly doth protest too much, but then he does about practically everything which doesn’t suit him.
It never fails to leave me confused when I hear the horrible things said about gay people in Africa. You would really think that a group of people who were oppressed because of something they have no choice over (their skin colour) would make them less inclined to persecute others in the same boat.
I take my hat off to Eusebius and all the other gay people (especially those ekasi) who will not be cowered. They certainly have more testicular fortitude than most straight people. To stand up in the face of such overwhelming prejudice is awe inspiring.
It works both ways, remember it takes two to tango.
My point is, homosexuals shouldn’t be prejudiced against heterosexuals as well.
Remember we’re all human and homosexuals are not exempt from common decency.
Otherwise as long as a gay man doesn’t look at me sexually (creepy) and hasn’t got a problem with heterosexuals, then I don’t have a problem with them.
But that doesn’t mean I have to live with them or even be their friend. I’m just not that way inclined and I prefer to stay away from them.
Being it all life is said to have originated from Africa, and heredity happens, I guess then “Homosexuality is Global” would be better fitting!
would like to know whether this eusebius is a proper african in the strictest sense.looks may be deceiving but i dont think he is african.i stand to be corrected.homosexuality has no no place in african society and if assertions by eusebius are anything to go by,the onus is on him to provide us with evidence where it was practised-pre colonial times.the fact that south africa is the only country in africa that condones
homosexuality means that homosexuality has never been part of our african culture.it is a practice exported to africa by eusebius’s friends and must be resisted with brute force.while europe cannot stand polygamy,which is proper african culture,in their society,the same obtains for homosexuality in african society.the less said about rejoice ngwenya’s comments the better.eusebius’s supporters may claim to be african by virtue of having been born in africa,but there are not africans and do not have an inkling of what african culture stands for.jesus was born in a manger,but did that make him a horse.
Well, well…
Bonobos are close cousins of chimpanzees and cousins of us humans. They are as African as one can be — like chimpanzees, they only live in a small part of central/Southern Africa — and, surprise, surprise, they practice homosexuality as much as they practice heterosexuality. That is, they do it all day long…
So much for homosexuality being “European”.
What’s European? Anything that was developed in Europe between, say, ancient Greece/Rome and the Fifteenth century, when America entered the story, might qualify as such.
Except that there was continuous interaction with Asia and Africa as well — Hannibal’s elephants invaded Italy going across the Alps. Afterwards, Northern Africa was part of the Roman empire. And unless you are going to redefine “Africa” as being “South-of-Sahara Africa”…
So in the world there isn’t terribly much that is strictly European, oh yeah, various European languages, as well as certain ideas that were developed more fully there (here where I sit now) — for example, the notion that human beings are just one race, or that life originated in Africa. Charles Darwin was European (English).
Slavery, one of the greatest crimes of mankind, was practiced by Europeans and Arabs against black people (as well as others, and against each other as well), but is a pretty old game — the Bible in fact sanctions it…
And so on.
Erasmus must be supported in his efforts!
“Erasmus must be supported” should read “Eusebius must be supported” (I must have been thinking of Darwin’s grandfather….)