We give too much power to our leaders in Africa. We invest them with god-like status and then feel disappointed when they deliberately disregard the public good, or stray from the path we hoped we’d be on. Worse though is the fact that we influence who our leaders are, so African leaders’ (in)action is a reflection of what it means to be an African, and a reflection of ourselves.
A leader has an idea of the “good”. To be a leader, you necessarily have followers who hopefully share your idea of “the good”. Those followers give a lot of power to the leader to know the complexities and nuances of that good, so that they (the leader) can act on their (the followers) behalf.
So, leaders pursue particular actions that are in line with their good, and are accountable to certain stakeholders based on those actions. When they pursue actions that the stakeholders don’t find acceptable they’re out either in a quick and painless fashion (like Mbeki) or a drawn-out and bloody one (many examples, be imaginative).
So effectively we give leaders the power to know what’s best for us, to make decisions for us that structurally limit the decisions we can make in the future. By choosing a particular leader, we choose a particular developmental path to drive — one which is really difficult to reverse along. (If I’m being confusing, imagine deciding to get sterilised, after that, it’s pretty difficult to decide to have children.)
It is difficult though, because the leader’s idea of the good must necessarily come from her/his electorate and from the pressure of her/his own leaders. So this process is cyclical. We inform our leaders about what the “good” is, and s/he is our implementer of this worldview.
Does this mean that African’s are homophobic? Mike Baillie argues that claims that homosexuality is un-African are bankrupt, and simply justifications for violence. So what is African about this situation? Or is that just a hope to classify the unclassifiable, the classified (CIA sense of the word). Nevertheless, Baillie suggests that this cycle of homophobia is self-perpetuating. The more people fear being called gay the more people react against gays in an attempt to differentiate themselves from homosexuality so that they are not the next victim of violence.
What I’m trying to get at is that we inform our own community about its values. Our actions create a sense that we support or are against particular ways of interacting with one another. Silence is part of that action that informs the concept of what our values are. When we don’t stand up against homophobia, we reinforce the idea that homophobia is OK.
The trickle down in fact becomes a trickle up. Slowly our leaders are bolstered by our silence around homophobia and can tacitly assume that as Africans we are all for it. The people then who are allowing insane brutal judgements like the Malawi example to be passed are you and me.
If we allow our leaders to persecute homosexuals, a new African culture will be created. That culture will be violent and narrow-minded and ultimately destructive. If we allow them to do this, we will spend our time hoping that we are not in the next category of people that they will choose to persecute. If you don’t stand up for injustice against other groups, nobody will stand up for injustice against you.
It is essential to no longer allow ourselves to mislead our leaders about what it means to be African. Homophobia is never acceptable and until we start opening our mouths to tell our leaders that that is what we think, we allow them to have too much power and to craft a developmental path for us that is ultimately destructive and dangerous for all of us.
This entry was posted
on Wednesday, June 2nd, 2010 at 11:52 am and is filed under Perspective, News & Politics.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
36 Responses to “Mis-leaders: Understanding homophobia in Africa”
A disingenuous gross MIS-CHARACTERIZATION of homophobia in Africa. If you care to read between the lines you will see that these extreme homophobic views is yet another side-effect of the lingering colonial and imperialism in Africa. The ridiculous homophobic stance taken by some African government is the DIRECT result of evangelical Christians are fighting their proxy war in Africa.
Who would have thought that just a few decades ago the Episcopal Church who justified slavery under the New Testament, would now be headed by an African bishop!!! Mormons, known for their extreme homophobia, who are STILL plagued by systemic racism within the church, and refused for the longest time to admit blacks into their church, are now making great inroads into Africa http://www.sltrib.com/business/ci_14751371 These fundamentalist Christian groups are using Africa as their battle ground to garner support in order to impose their conservative views on homosexuality onto the world stage.
The exploitation of Africa by fundamentalist Christians continues…
if in a country we have a set of laws and that set of law prohibit certain actions and call them evil or bad then i suppose the step will be to go back both the people and the leaders to come up with laws that reflect their current norms, behaviour and expectations, but in the mean time the judge should apply the law to the letter.
Confront the truth. Homosexuality is regarded as illegal, depraved or sinful not only in Africa but in more than half the world. Even progressive liberal democracies like Australia only legalised it as recently as 1989 and if you’re in the US military, you’re expected to conceal your preference or face dismissal.
Mounting a western liberal-democratic moral high filly (for it is far too young to be a horse) is just as unfair on African leaders as what African leaders are on homosexuals.
For the record I want homophobia to go!
So Baillie and you are saying- because my villagers are afraid of being called gay they will hate on gays just to create distance.
No mate- thats poppycock. I lived in a village all pre teenage years if you had no gay mannerisms you had no fear of being labelled gay-never.The thing which bothered villagers with gays was there was no point to it. The whole purpose of being was to reproduce and it seemed gayness was the end of the line.A woman without child (barren we called it) was treated worse.She had to bring her brothers daughter for the man to procreate with.Polygamy promoted.The resulting children were the older womans. A man who shot blanks they rescued by allowing a brother to plant seed into his wife (genes were the same after all). Only for the purpose of procreation no more. wife knew husband knew whole village knew but children belonged to the husband.
They had absolutely no answer to gays. In fact they enticed gay guys with pretty young girls to break them out of it.
Mostly its not about individuals its about the herd the tribe.No slackers allowed.
I hear a lot of theories about why africans hate gays from people who know nothing about africans.
Its not the gay white preachers who told africans to hate gays.
Its a shame africans hate gays not for reasons pseudointellectuals say.Try the above reason
Silence on the part of ZUMA government and the people of SA about the horrendous brutal rape of lesbians in the hateful attempt to “correct” their sexuality - is tantamount to committing the violence itself. Simple - you live in a Society that cannot accept nor tolerate Homosexuality and the so called constitution is a facade.
http://lezgetreal.com/2010/05/outrage-south-africa-brutal-rapist-of-lesbian-released-on-bail/ Any international team who goes to South Africa is risking the taint of hypocrisy. The International community boycotted, and quite rightly so, South African Sports during apartheid, yet this unconscionable endemic assault on women in South Africa, despite many reports in media, is ignored.
I was born in the township many years ago. We had homosexuals and nothing happened to them. I never saw them violently attacked. They were a curiosity.
Today most black people were socialised by Apartheid into believing that homosexuality is a sin.
Then we had the Afrikaans culture with its Calvinistic direct line to God and I soon learnt that homosexuals were “Moffies” and I also learnt the whole repertoire of Afrikaans expletives used to describe them. I learnt that even God did not want them.
Sometimes in 1986 my local faithful Special Branch guys went to the local CNA and seized the whole edition of Vrye Weekblad because it had an undesirable article about one Johannes Kerkorrel.
I also learn these guys were serious about the spiritual purity of South Africa and they had a Publications Control Board and Immorality Act just to make sure that we remained pure in the sight of the NGK God. The NGK delivered a trillion fulminating sermons based on Pauline letters. Paul never minced his words about homosexuality.
Today its 2010 I still meet these guys in my local church. They are largely Pentecostal and now that the the SB’s cant do the violent work for them, they “pray” for homosexuals guys so that they can be “delivered from bondage”.
We have locked ourselves in a spiritual prison where we have God’s “infallible word” about homosexuality being a sin. Then we have Malawi ..
Given that it was the President of Malawi who pardoned the victims of the homosexual legislation, and that it was Malawi’s democratically elected parliament which passed that legislation, I suppose your definition of leadership and democracy in Africa is different from the one which would be accepted by all normal or informed people.
Majority of real Africans are against homosexuality, I am tempted to say that more than 99% are against it. I see it(homosexuality) as unnatural and indecent, We don’t need “expert to tell us what our views towards homosexuality should be. Our leaders should continue to represent our views and beliefs, it shouldn’t be like here in South Africa were majority of the people are against homosexuality yet it’s still thriving.
I think that the primary reason homophobia exists, is because homosexuality represents a threat to the established patriarchal order and the binary gender roles it prescribes. As we know patriarchy is rooted in cultures the world over, notably in Africa and Middle East, where women are forced to remain in traditional roles. Acceptance of homosexuality would represent acceptance of more fluid gender dynamics and acceptance of women’s emancipation - something these male-centric societies suppress.
Many African accross the continent are fundamental Bible believing Christians,moslems or African traditional religions which all are still very against Homesexuality.The question of homophobia is a coined term aimed at enforcing societal transformation that is routed in discrediting and classifying as backwards every culture and civilization that is against the notion of homosexuality, this is a deliberate attempt to compel people into the acceptance of values that they and their religion vehemently reject. The issue goes beyond the leadership of an individual to the disposition of a society,so whether you derive pleasure in treating the majority of Africans as backwards and primitive it remains a fact that even within SA as accross the continent if the issue of homesexually was placed on a referandum or one on one voting it will not be democratically passed as a law. Should this authorise violence on gays and lesbians?No! not any more than society should decide to lash out on adulterers, or corrupt government officials.Its all part of depravity and please forget about the fancy scientific arguements that are emerging now to justify this depravity, its just like some science suggesting that young boys who dont engage in sexual activity can become impotent .No person, no matter their motivation should go free after openly disregarding the laws of a sovereign nation, that’s the rule of Law and that’s democracy,we should not only promote these principles when they suit us, that’s dishonesty!!!
Thank you Tigere Haiwe for explaining the reasoning of Africa in this matter of homosexuality and to a degree polygamy. Infertility in men or women is totally random genetically and while I feel sorry if you find yourself unable to have children due to one or other partner in a marriage relationship being sterile I am totally opposed to the money making racket of in vitor fertilisation as practiced by Western or First World meds. I am equally in favour of a humane death where someone is terminally ill and suffering horribly. Certainly offer medication to ease the suffering but do not prolong that person’s life beyond reason if they have a sound reason and wish to be assisted out of life. While I can’t help wondering about the effect of the African way of getting around the problem in children and also on the party who is sterile it does make more sense. This is a bit off topic of homosexuality I realise but I wish to point out that gay men can donate sperm and pay a willing surrogate to have their child. It is fraught with legal problems as well as medical ones because hormones do strange things to women and it can lead to disputes of ownership once the child is born despite the best contracts etc. Children are the victims here.
Homophobia is word that has been coined with a profound politcal agenda.Lets separate the issues here. Violence against all indviduals in condemable in the strictess possible terms. Some societies administer popular justice when a thief is caught, its against the law but that’s their own way of expressing what the espouse as values to be promoted within their society. President JZ is not incharge of defining the broader good for SA because the consitution has already done that, he is there to enforce, that you dont agree with the laws of a country is no reason to suggest that the President or Judges were wrong in implementing them, you should ask yourself rather the critical question, do the people of Malawi find anything wrong with those laws?are the laws representative of their values? and contrary though with your logic above, their silence indeed says they’re in agreement with those laws and their values. To encourage the Malawian president to disregard the set of values his citizens have documented in the constitution is tantamount to requesting that JZ rules SA according to his personal convictions on good and Evil.but for the political rhetoric that comes with office JZ has his views on this subject…but u will be the first to jump at him for disregarding the constitution,so be consistent,communities make laws based on their values and change those laws as their their values change,and leaders only implement laws,an organic process!!respect this!!!
Whether we believe that homosexuality is wrong or not, is incidental. Whether God does or not, is also incidental. The fact is they exist and if we don’t learn to get along with them our only alternative is to commit unmentionable sins ourselves. As long as they don’t encroach or steal another’s property; rape or molest our children; murder each other or others, we have no good reason to find them offensive. Naturally, some are offensive, but so are a lot of straight people! So nu? What’re you gonna do?
I quote Cicero: Nihil humanun a me puto = I think nothing human is alien to me. All people, including African homosexuals are human, and should be treated with dignity.It is unfortunately the legacy of christianity and imperialism that caused the absurd dislike of homosexuality. Indeed those of us who are not homosexual should do some reading and try to understand it. There are thousands of homosexuals, black and white, in Southern Africa and many contribute considerably to the progress of the region.
This same subject came up a few weeks ago at a (failed) attempt to debate the issue at the University of Fort Hare. “Dr Dale McKinley stormed out of a debate at the University of Fort Hare after he was offended by a comment a church pastor made that not even “dogs or cats” behaved like homosexuals”.
Here is Dr McKinley’s response: http://www.dispatch.co.za/profiles/article.aspx?id=404702
As well as the pastor: http://www.dispatch.co.za/profiles/article.aspx?id=405079
I don’t think it is possible to have this discussion without considering the theological and cultural limitations and how they explain homosexuality. You cannot simply toss those opinions aside as bigoted or narrow-minded, because religion and tradition will always be part of peoples’ lives and how they explain their world. Rather, I think it is important to debate notions of homosexuality and homophobia from within these ideological limitations, as difficult as that may be.
What I find most offensive in the above links is the pastor’s assertion that “Homosexual practice and lifestyle is unnatural, inhuman and dehumanising to those who practise it”. But surely, from within an orthodox Christian paradigm, where we assume homosexuality is a sin, that is not your decision to make? Who are you to judge the ’sins’ of others - are you that judgmental and arrogant to assume to have that power of your god?
This may be applied to the Malawian example. (continue..)
(continued from above…)
I would pre-empt other peoples’ argument by saying we could apply this logic of god as the final judge to murderers, rapists, and thieves.
Here, the debate turns to the Western notion of ‘rights’. A murderer infringes on another’s right to life, and as such in our legal system we infringe on his right to freedom.
What right did the gay Malawain couple infringe on?
I know someone will think of some right they apparently infringe on, but if you look at it from a rational and logical perspective, they are not.
Lastly, if you say you disapprove of homosexuality, you are in fact saying you disapprove of the constitution that we and those before us fought for and died to obtain. I doubt Chris Hani, Steve Biko and the other apartheid legends would agree with any few refuting an individual their rights in the manner the Malawian government did this year.
A good article. I have to say that the first comment saying homophobia is a result of ‘colonialism and imperialism and fundamentalist Christians’, i.e those nasty, ugly pinks (I also can’t stand them on principle, dreadful..) is one of the more hilarious theories I have heard. Possibly a sober scientific analysis might answer the questions as to whether homophobia is widespread in areas with other religions (e.g. Islam, animism), whether it was widespread before Christianity, and whether it is more widespread in countries that are very Christian (Ghana is the best example) rather than countries with other religions (eg Sudan) or limited religious belief. However I don’t think homophobia is particularly African or particularly ‘leader led’, and it certainly seems to be reasonably widespread, and reassuringly uncorrelated to race, religion or social class, and rather based on the prejudice or lack thereof of the individual, which is maybe a positive message.
@Gail Invitro fertilisation- in my village- that i would like to see but in theory yes but let it trickle down to the village level.
I got a bone to pick with people who say its the politicians,mormons, priests who have caused this homophobia.The politicians, mormons et al have a message which resonates with the people on the ground. not the other way round. Example mormons and priests in my village have tried for years to stop people worshiping ancestoral priests and stopping witchcraft and inyangas and sangomas.They have all been given as the ozzies call it “the bird” (middle finger). No amount of preaching singing ululating or bodies of christ or Mohammed (PBTH) will stop my villagers beliveing in sangomas.
We give too much credence to these priests.On a saturday evening my father would partake of the most mesmerizing dance to honor amadlozi (yes there was umqomboti aplenty) then go deliver a powerful sermon on sunday the next day as a church elder.
In Malawi its illegal to be gay (this is morally not right) parliament says so constitution says so. To hide and say homophobia is not allowed by the constitution is ignoring the obvious. A constitution is what we would like to achieve.Not what is.Slavery in america was practised despite the constitution outlawing it.
Gays in my village were not tortured or killed they were looked upon as a different and odd.All unfair and wrong but fact
There is a saying that we cannot, and should not try to go against nature, as nature will always win in the end.
So if nature intended for a man to have relations with a woman, why is it an issue when people do not feel it natural or acceptable to be homosexual.
If certain people are going to insist that homosexuality is in fact natural, and it is only because of religeous views that society are against it, why would nature have seperated us into man and woman? If there was no specific design and intention in different sexes, surely we would have evolved into a species without sexual differences.
Also keep in mind that the overall majority of people in the world do not agree with homosexuality, and thats why finding out that your son or daughter is homosexual is so traumatic for parents.
It is not a matter of African culture, Calvinistic NGK views, or such, but it is the innate knowledge within everyone that it wasnt meant to be,
and no amount of pro-homosexual lobbying, is going to change this.
I however, like millions of others aspire to the view of, “live and let live”, and therefore will not judge anyone if they choose that lifestyle. However, we have to guard against attempts to force people to accept this alternate sexual view, as it will have the opposite affect.
Nobody — and certainly no black — was “socialised by apartheid” into being a homophobe. Apartheid certainly didn’t socialise the lawmakers in homophobic Malawi or Uganda.
And homophobia among Calvinist Afrikaners is no different to homophobia among Zion Christian Africans or brown Muslims or any other religious or ethnic denomination. There are homophobic atheists just as there are homophilic believers. Trying to slur an entire group because some of their number hold views offensive to you is just another form of bigotry.
Once again, patriarchy, which oppresses women particulary, and anyone one else who does not conform, comes to the fore. The contention that animals are always heterosexual can be disproved any day of the week. The greatest tragedy is, in fact man made. We are polluting our rivers and potable water with so many hormones that we are creating hermaphrodites from the chemical pollution. We are heartless people, totally self-absorbed and relentless. We are deswtroying ourselves with laws and fatwas. It is probably the right thing for the rest of the planet. They all deserve a break from this suicidal race called human.
Dale McKinley is a “leading academic” according to the article
Academic what may I ask?
Exactly what are his qualifications.
I agree with what has been stated above. Essentially homophobia is a word used by the west to try and force their point of view on Africa.
Let the homosexuals stay in the west.
We have more pressing issues.
@Mark Robertson
If you think the sudden extreme homophobic views in Africa resulting from influence of outside fundamentalist religion organizations, like the evangelical Christians. pushing their agenda in Africa, is ” is one of the more hilarious theories”, then its time you woke up from your delusion and ceased being an apologist for colonialism.
Try reading “Homosexuality and the battle for Africa’s soul - by Mark Gevisser” in M&G’s opinion section and get some basic education instead of blurting out of the wrong orifice.
Listen to what “haiwa tigere” says about the relative absence of homophobia in African villages.
Listen to what “mandla” says about the tolerance of gays in townships.
The recent rise of this EXTREME HOMOPHOBIA is the direct result of the fundamentalist Christian groups using Africa as their battle ground to wage their ideological battles on the international stage.
The majority of men thought women were inferior in every way, but that didn’t mean they were right.
There is no such thing as “natural” or unnatural. or rather everything that humans do is “natural” because we are part of nature. We are animals. If a man has an urge to sleep with another man, that is his nature. If he forces himself not to, that is unnatural because it goes against his nature.
Because humans are a part of nature, everything we do is “natural”, even rape and murder. What you are referring to is what we find “unaccepetable” which is a different thing because it is a social decision of the time and place.
I am interested to know how you determine if something is right or wrong. From your description of a leader taking what is right or wrong from an electorate, and then from the crowd of people, it would suggest that you believe right and wrong are determined by general consensus. (Ofcourse, here I need clarification because I don’t know if you subscribe to that).
The interesting thing about that, is that it suddenly forces you to have to allow other people who have reached a different conclusion from consensus, and to freely continue with that. You may protest because you disagree, but on what grounds? That you disagree?
I am not defending or criticising Malawi at this point, I have my view on the matter; I’m using this to try and unravel what is going on in this discussion… When someone emphatically says that something is wrong, on what grounds is that being said?
I truly believe there is a right and wrong (some people even deny that) - so I’m not trying to dismiss the issue… I just have a different way of determining it. How do you determine it, Jennifer? Anyone else?
The big problem is that our leaders surround themselves with a lot of yes men who get rewarded for their loyalty by fancy positions with a lot of money. A point in case is Zimbabwe and Mugabe. Is he the real power or is it his cronies who surround him. I doubt whether they will ever allow him to step down as they have gleaned some very rich pickings through him
Butch Hannan
Spot on @jennifer. In-justice is in-justice, no matter who is targeted or what rationalisation is offered for it, and it is essential that citizens speak out and act against it.
@Pro…
If you have made up your mind, that we are mere animals, no different from any other, then you have verified my very statements.
Animals do what comes naturally, and thats exactly why all other animals wont have actual sexual intercourse with another of the same sex, but will at times, mount another of the same sex, merely to assert dominance.
It is rather ludicrous to suggest that our natural sexuality has developed due to social conditioning. You just have to look at the physical structure of the male and female body and it is glaringly obvious that the two were naturally designed, to fit together sexually.
@Judith…
Unlike your view that heterosexuality in animals can be disproven any day of the week, is false, as actual sexual contact between same sexes of any animal species, but humans, has never been proven.
Jen, I don’t take issue with the core principle in your article. But the logic is confusing, the argument thin and just very rhetorical.
While I get that you’re addressing this to your fellow Africans - Your conceptual perspective on the collective that is ‘Africans’ and our subservience to ‘our’ leaders is quite patronising, and very didactic in tone and possibly, reflects what you think and not so much what is the reality. [Come on, tell the thousands of tortured MDC and ordinary Zimbos they are subservient.] Subservience certainly doesn’t reflect the on-going struggle in South Africa.
But bhat makes homophobia a problem anywhere in the world??
The broad and vague rhetoric in the article tells us nothing about a global problem rooted in stubborn patriarchy, reintensification of conservatism, and the instrumental use of state power by violent onservative political elites (incl. institutional power such as in the U.S. to prevent gay marriage.)
The argument of this argument fell into that common trap of so much analysis in mainstream media - which is to project an opinion on a principle without any substantive empirical knowledge on the political situation being analysed; in this case, homophobia in Kenya.
For we must ask in the first place, where does the bravery of these men come from? Clearly, they are not subservient. What is their local context, what is the queer movement doing in East Africa?
Note - I am using Africans as you are (geographically).
I enjoy your use of English although a lot of people will not really understand what you are saying. You mention the Zimbos who in my humble opinion must be very subservient as they have endured Robert Mugabe’s rule for just under thirty years.
This can also be said for many other places in Africa where the inhabitants put up with very cruel and oppressive regimes.
Butch Hannan
By definition a cruel and oppressive government is one which stays in power IN SPITE of what the people want. Hence the torture and imprisonment.
Apartheid lasted close to half a century - not because people were subservient.
Even in Swaziland the monarchy is bombing and torturing people for their resistance.
So what we have in fact, are South Africans who are ignorant of African politics and confusing the resilience of cruel regimes with people’s approval of them.
That’s just bull. Perhaps the problem is South Africans know VERY LITTLE about the continent. No really perhaps, it’s pretty much a fact.
Perhaps to summarise what I was saying in a way that others could understand -
I felt the article sees Africans as politically docile when it comes to bad leaders; in spite of the actual reality; that people are fighting dangerous battles on this continent and losing their lives for it.
Pick any country, and even a basic Google will reveal that our fellow citizens have been fighting despots for 50 years since the end of colonialism.
By definition, cruel and aggressive governments stay in power because they don’t care what people think. People don’t tolerate cruel governments, nobody does. They get more cruel precisely because people resist.
African leaders do not always reflect their people’s will. And the people’s will does not always reflect in what leaders do.
All comments must be approved by our editors, click here to read the editorial guidelines for comments. Please allow some time for our editors to approve your comment after posting.
profile
Jennifer is a young feminist, activist and advocate for women's rights.
She is a big fan of debate and discussion, and always keen for a good constructive argument. Her interests like with all issues relating to the body and to the many ways that government and society regulate our bodies.
She likes talking about uncomfortable issues so that they become a little easier to negotiate in our day to day life.
She has started a women's writing project called 'My First Time' which can be accessed using the link below. She is thrilled with the results. You can vote for the blog in the SA blog awards using the badge below.
She's working at Rape Crisis Cape Town Trust as the researcher, loving the feminist vibe and is working on bits and bobs here and there.
My First Time A writing project that has blossomed into a blog. Over 80 women have written stories for me on their 'first time' experiences that have impacted their lives. You can read their stories and comment by clicking on this link. You can also vote for the project in the SA blog awards using the badge above.
Rape Crisis Cape Town Trust An incredible organisation working to achieve justice for women, and to provide support to rape survivors and their loved ones.
Victim Empowerment South Africa A blog about the positive side of being a victim of crime, how victims can empower themselves and what the law and policy says to support them. Jen's working on this blog with a team of excellent writers and you are most welcome to submit your own stories on the blog.
Tick tock, tick tock. That sound is the passing of time, and lots of it has passed since the 50s, or at least I had hoped so. The love of my life has ...
I was lucky enough to be invited to the US Embassy in Cape Town last week to meet Fran Drescher of The Nanny fame, and to hear her speak. Yes, she doe...
I read with horror the reports of more gang rape in the DRC over the past weekend. Many women and young men were raped by soldiers (of a form), with g...
On Saturday night I made my way in a Rikki taxi to attend what I expected to be an Afrikaans sokkie-jol in the heart of a suburb of Cape Town. We pull...
I was reading an article about the rights that victims of crime have in terms of getting compensated after they have been to court. In this article, a...
Loading ...
A disingenuous gross MIS-CHARACTERIZATION of homophobia in Africa. If you care to read between the lines you will see that these extreme homophobic views is yet another side-effect of the lingering colonial and imperialism in Africa. The ridiculous homophobic stance taken by some African government is the DIRECT result of evangelical Christians are fighting their proxy war in Africa.
Who would have thought that just a few decades ago the Episcopal Church who justified slavery under the New Testament, would now be headed by an African bishop!!! Mormons, known for their extreme homophobia, who are STILL plagued by systemic racism within the church, and refused for the longest time to admit blacks into their church, are now making great inroads into Africa http://www.sltrib.com/business/ci_14751371 These fundamentalist Christian groups are using Africa as their battle ground to garner support in order to impose their conservative views on homosexuality onto the world stage.
The exploitation of Africa by fundamentalist Christians continues…
(Report abuse)