Like many women, I was filled with disappointment and a deep sense of frustration when I read about the seminar The Dynamics Of Domestic Violence- An Assault On God’s Image, where the all-male religious leaders from the SDA and Roman Catholic church met at the Bay Gardens Hotel in Rodney Bay to discuss solutions to the problem and their role in curbing the epidemic of abuse. Instead of an enlightened 21st Century discussion it was nothing more than the same old religious avoidance, oversimplification and non-comprehension issues that block their sense of responsibility and ownership in stopping domestic violence. It was like a slap in the face of women everywhere. It gave a clearer picture of the uphill battle anti-abuse-activists in the Caribbean face. But how do we do it? These leaders hold powerful sway over their communities and perpetuate century-old mores. If we want to transform and inspire new thinking we must incisively tackle their dogma inspired excuses and ignorance head on every time it rears its ugly head. Here are some ways to start.
WEIGH UNJUST BIBLICAL TRADITION AGAINST DEEPER HUMANE TRUTHS
What many of those who are quick to whip out the bible to justify the superiority of the male prerogative fail realise is that simply because something is “traditional” or even “biblical” does not make it fair, ethical, or humane. Case in point, it was once a traditional practice in the bible to own slaves. Exodus 20: 20- 21 and Leviticus 25: 44-46 gives instructions on how to buy, sell and how to beat slaves. Paul in Ephesians 6:5, 1Timothy 6:1 and Titus 2: 9-10 urged slaves to accept their role and be obedient to their masters in all fear and trembling. Is that just? No. Are slaves wrong in running away, seeking freedom and rebelling against their masters? No. Today we know slavery is wrong. We also know that women have inalienable rights. They are not property and not designed to be subservient creatures irregardless of what any religious book says. Once you discover that not everything in scripture is humane or even ethically acceptable you can start to use a discerning mind to distinguish between dogma and the timeless truths which never become unethical or irrelevant, always help and never causes harm.
EXPOSE DOGMATIC CONTRADICTIONS AND HYPOCRISY
Concerning the role of women, many religious leaders love to quote from Paul’s letters. They conveniently leave out a far more important commandment given by Jesus in Matt 7:12, ‘Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” Christ said this is the greatest commandment that fulfills the entire law. So I imagine the question religious leaders should be asked is “Would you like to be treated in the manner you are advocating or excusing, even if it comes from Paul’s letters?” Most of the same religious leaders would balk if they were to be treated in the same manner they believe to be justified for women. Most would be deeply hurt if violence against them was being excused in any manner. Christ said what you do not like for yourself do not do to another person. To do otherwise is not only contradictory but hypocritical. A second contradiction is revealed when we take a closer look at the assertion that some women “deserve” the abuse. For a Christian leader of any denomination to suggest such a thing like the pastor who did at the Bay Garden’s seminar, shows the extent of their disconnection with Jesus’ teachings which recommended we “turn the other cheek”. According to the bible, wrath and fits of rage are sins, irregardless of what triggered them. So no man has any right to abuse a woman no matter how annoying she may be. Abuse can never be “earned”. Yet another contradiction is exposed when we look at the reluctance on the part of the male religious leaders to acknowledge that men are the ones largely responsible for domestic abuse. Don’t forget, they are the ones who keep asserting that men are the stronger sex; men are the God appointed heads of the household. Great power comes with great responsibility. So how come they want to shirk main ownership in the epidemic of domestic abuse? It seems scripture is used to prove women are the weaker vessels only when it suits male convenience. When it means taking responsibility for greater capability and culpability in inflicting emotional, physical and sexual damage, suddenly they are the helpless victim in the situation and the excuses start: “But some women abuse men too.”, “But women stay in the abusive relationship”, “But women nag.” After designating such authority on themselves as men, these excuses are contradictory and cowardly. Men who understand what true “leadership” means always say, “The buck stops with me.”
STRESS THAT DOMESIC PROBLEMS REQUIRE HOLISITC SOLUTIONS.
I do not doubt the bible has timeless wisdom but I am also a realist who acknowledges that there are limitations to the issues that can be addressed by a book whose most recent authors lived over 2000 years ago in a different culture and time. Using the bible alone as a marriage counseling guide is not adequate in solving all problems. This is especially true of domestic violence. Modern psychology and counseling can identify and diagnose personality flaws, mental and emotional dysfunctions that go unchecked by religious standards.. An abusive man is not that way simply because he is not following Ephesians but because he has severe emotional problems, self worth issues, repressed rage and feelings of sexual inadequacy. A woman being abused does not need to, “obey her husband and submit to him in all things” according to Eph 5: 22-24. In fact quite the opposite is needed. She must gain independence and tackle self worth issues. The professional standard of intervention needed is something most religious leaders, who serve as the de facto therapists for the masses are unqualified to deliver. Some even lack basic gender sensitivity training and do not know how to talk empathetically to a woman let alone one who has been abused.
When we have religious leaders who are fearful of secular knowledge and refuse to deviate from the same old formula for every problem, they unwittingly cause more harm than good. I have seen it happen with my own eyes, having grown up in a staunch evangelical household. There was scriptural oversimplification of far more complex problems. Husband goes and complains to the church leaders his wife is giving him the cold shoulder in bed and the wife is reprimanded with the apostle Paul. Suppose the husband is a terrible lover and gives her no pleasure? Suppose she has sexual abuse issues in her childhood? Suppose it physically painful for her? Suppose the husband demands are unrealistic for her and it is he who needs to compromise? The solutions almost always favored the man in the relationship. The wife complains to the church leaders that her husband is harsh with her. First things first they make sure to advise her to be “longsuffering” and ensure she is submitting as per Paul. The husband is merely advocated to love his wife as he loves himself. But suppose he cannot love himself due to a host of hidden emotional issues and like most men his self-hatred is expressed as anger and violence towards others? Suppose there are deep incompatibility issues that make their relationship the combination of nitro and glycerin? When secular professional therapy is frowned upon these questions never get asked. Emotional and mental issues can be easily masked under an appearance of righteousness and religious zeal. Growing up in the church I saw women in abusive situations encouraged against leaving their husbands or pressing charges and seeking sole custody of the children. Young women I knew as bright, energetic, attractive bachelorettes would become subdued, dull and worn down after marriage, yet their husbands were as vibrant as ever, enjoying their new status as heads of household and clearly taking full advantage of it. At religious gatherings I would observe the visibly dysfunctional and unhappy couples grinning and baring it, trying desperately to meet the ideal of the “Happy Christian Family” sales pitch. Many marriages fell apart (including my own parents’ marriage) and meet with disapproval, ostracism and gossip by church members instead of support for the wronged parties, which were usually the women and the children involved.
GET REAL ABOUT DIVORCE!
It is an unflattering reality that Christian denominations must face, especially those of the evangelical/born again kind. Believe it or not but according to US National Divorce Statistics this religious grouping has the highest divorce rate of any group (even the atheists and pagans) in the United States, with conservative red state Texas (not even liberal New York or Massachusetts were close) leading the way as the state with the highest divorce rates/annum. While divorce rates are an indicator that marriage problems are not being effectively handled, at least divorce is an excising of the infected area. Compared to allowing the gangrenous situation to fester for years, it is a better option especially when there are children involved. Growing up with divorced parents is no picnic, I can tell you firsthand but growing up in an unhappy, abusive marriage is even worse. Unlike Americans, Caribbean women are not as financially and emotionally empowered to demand divorce in unhealthy relationships and the culture still frowns on it, so the toxicity drags on, poisoning the children. My grandmother stayed in an emotionally and at one time physically abusive marriage till her death, a total of over fifty years. Talk about long-suffering! Before you applaud her wifely devotion and Paulian submissiveness, you should know that today every single one of her children and some of her grandchildren in my generation now have disastrous marriages and relationships infested with emotional dysfunction. The church, they just watched it all happen while ineffectually quoting the Apostle Paul at marriage counseling sessions.
In an ideal world, our spiritual life should not only help us cultivate a sense of purpose in the universe but it should also work towards self-improvement, self-actualization and personal responsibility. It should not keep us in bondage to unhealthy situations but set us free of them. Those whom we count on as spiritual leaders are supposed to have our best interest at heart whether we are men or women. Unfortunately the male dominated religious autocracy continues to treat the fight against domestic violence with suspicion as though women are asking for “special rights” and not human rights. This is sad because it is mainly women who comprise their congregations. It is mainly women who give contributions of time and money to religious causes. It is mainly women who drag the often disinterested children and husbands to worship. Without women, these priests, pastors and ministers would not even have a profession. So when are they going to show some acknowledgement of our worth instead of taking the easy dogmatic way out?
February 08, 2006
Black On Black Racism In Paradise
Last year, two female tourists, best friends from England, decided to check out the Seafood Friday night festivities at Anse La Raye on their visit to St. Lucia. For those of you who do not know, Anse La Raye is a sleepy little fishing village on the west coast of my temporary island home. Every Friday night the village wakes up and transforms into a street fair with stalls on either side of the road displaying a cornucopia of delights from the sea. Pubs blast music out into the street encouraging visitors to come in and have a little beer and a turn on the dance floor. This is where we find our carefree female tourists, inside a popular bar along the main street.
Standing behind the two foreigners are two burly St. Lucian men dressed in ordinary liming attire and one of them is a little inebriated. He stumbles forward into one of the Englishwomen and she spins around and with a little shove tells him to, “Watch out!” Unbeknownst to her, the stumbling man is a plain clothes police officer. He flies into a rage and proceeds to shove her back. His fellow officer and drinking buddy wastes no time in also jumping into the fray and they proceed to try to restrain the tourist who is now vigorously fighting back and cussing to high heaven. After all, as far as she is concerned these are two men attacking her for no apparent reason. Finally the other Englishwoman snaps out of her state of shock and rushes to help her friend who is now being dragged outside while being kicked and punched. The second Englishwoman flies at the two plain clothes officers. She jumps on the back of one, screaming and throwing some punches of her own. For some reason, the officers refuse to fight this woman back and use non-violent resistance, suffering under her blows as they concentrate their full attention on the first woman on the ground while her companion screams, “Leave my friend alone! Why are you doing this?”
Wait did I forget to mention that the first Englishwoman being restrained, kicked and punched is black and the second one rushing to her defense is white? Sorry my bad.
The night ends with the black tourist being arrested and put in jail for assaulting the police officers leaving her white friend protesting outside the station refusing all medical aid being politely offered to her. Meanwhile her black compatriot lay in pain inside a nasty jail cell for a day and a half. Then the station officials got the shock of their lives when they finally checked their detainee’s identity and found a British passport and heard testimony from eyewitnesses. Oops! This was not another nameless black local woman but a British citizen, so badly beaten and swollen she could not talk. Making matters worse, her irate, horrified white friend was not going to keep quiet. She threatened to contact the British consulate and media. The police began trying to appease her, offering a free island tour, boat trips anything. She would not budge and in a few days the incident was all over the local and foreign news and the black Englishwoman displayed her bludgeoned face for all to see. All of St. Lucia was forced to look at itself and its ugliness, police brutality and inculcated racism against its own people.
Yes, racism. Why? For a minute I want you to imagine that those two black police officers in Anse La Ray where two white troopers in Alabama in the 1950’s and they were beating up on a black woman yet not laying a single finger on her white female friend who was also fighting with them. They arrest the black woman and charge her with the criminal offence of assaulting a police officer but not the white woman. They express concern and offer first aid to the white woman but not the black woman. I am sure you would not hesitate to call that racism if two white cops did it. Now if both women were assaulted and arrested this would be an article on police brutality and violence against women. But the officers in Anse La Raye did not dare lay a finger on the white Englishwoman even when she was jumping on them and hitting them. Do not forget that all it took to set this incident in motion was a little shove and rebuff from her black friend. They went to great lengths to appease and comfort the white Englishwoman while treating her black compatriot like a common dog because they assumed at first she was local and one of them and of lesser worth thus justifying their actions. If she indeed was a St. Lucian we probably would have never even heard of this incident. Shame! Bystanders just watched it happen, mentally powerless and anesthetized against feeling outrage. Shame! Journalists who blew the whistle and made it headline news were rebuked by the Ministry of Tourism who wanted the incident swept under the rug for fear of repercussions on the tourism industry. Shame!
That incident is repugnant on so many levels. Two burly men beating on a single woman- (and the underlying reasons behind this will be explored in a separate article) is the ultimate act of cowardice and brutality. However it is the race issue that I want to explore now. It is so clear to me that the Anse La Raye police scandal is the height of internalized self-hatred and a prime example of how people can also be racist against those of their own race. Black people are particularly guilty of this. It is the worst kind of racism there is because it keeps entire populations in a state of low self-esteem, lack of morale and solidarity. Even after so many years have passed since emancipation we still have the ingrained belief that a black person’s life is less valuable than that of any other race. It is as if we believe we are expendable and detached from all the aspects that help the human being transcend mere animal flesh and animal urges. You see it in the casual way black people take the lives of their brothers and sisters whether in the ghettoes of Lavantille, Kingston, City of God or South Central L.A. We kill and brutalise our own people at will and not even for any great philosophical cause (not that it justifies killing) but just for the most mundane of reasons. Suddenly it’s so clear why we don’t need a colonial power or Jim Crow to oppress our own people anymore. We can do it just fine on our own. Our self hatred ensures we stay mired in underdevelopment for a long, long, LONG time.
Our colonial parents’ knew exactly what they were doing. Theirs was a long term, multi-century plan when they enslaved and treated our ancestors as if we lacked any higher purpose in life, be it academic, spiritual, humane or personal. They inculcated us to fear intellectual development and individualism and be content with the basest of animal needs- food, fight for survival and sex. Sadly that became our self-perception. We grew up learning the only way to rise up and gain respect, is to brutalize and dominate, withhold valuable resources and laud any position we attain over others. The old colonial system favoured our lighter skinned brothers who rose to power under it and found opportunities to transcend and in turn inflicted the same crushing class/”high colour” grading system on their own people. And so our self hatred grew. I have lived and worked in the Caribbean all my life and it is my observation that the ill effects of our shared history has not been challenged in the Eastern Caribbean islands with the force needed to uproot much of the old thinking. Trinidad had its indigenous Afro-centric cultural revolution that birthed our carnival, calypso and innovation of our steel pan; our violent labour movements in the 1930’s and a deeply affecting black power and academic movement in the 1960s and 1970’s. All of this home grown uprising helped empower our Afro-Caribbean population. Trinidad’s early independence from Europe, oil industry, large merchant and civil class and the infusion of East Indian, Chinese and Syrian people and exceptional mixing of the races that followed all helped to disperse and divert a lot of the direct ill effects of colonialism. Wealth trickled down freely, opportunities, entrepreneurial and innovative endeavors flourished and there was upward class movement for many. Other Caribbean islands were not so fortunate. Their societies remained in Master/White/High Colouer vs. Slave/Black mode for a much longer time. In fact, St. Lucia is almost feudal compared to Trinidad. Farmers still toil on land they do not own. Everything is still pretty much owned by the very same old money white and “high coleur” French Creole and English families from way back in colonial days. The class system is very fixed with wealth barely shifting or trickling down save for the few cases where highly educated black professionals fight their way up mostly through the public sector. In fact, the country has never had a successful Prime Minister with dark skin even though dark skinned people comprise 90% of the population. That speaks volumes.
What makes healing self hatred for islands like St. Lucia even harder is that its economy is now overly-dependent on tourism. Save for a dying banana industry (which was supported on European charity but no longer) there are very little home spun industries where the people themselves invent and export a product they can take pride in. There are little natural resources and almost everything is imported from abroad. Even the majority of food is imported despite the island having one of the most fertile volcanic soils in the region and topography high enough to support even some temperate crops. Why? There is minimal land ownership by the local farmers and outmoded plantation style single crop-agricultural practices. So, selling the country is all that is left. Every day poor and working class black people must kiss mostly white visitors’ butts to eek out a living. They smile and act the happy natives, while enviously watching tourists enjoy a quality of life they can only dream about. They serve food to foreigners that they cannot afford to buy for themselves and families; I am not talking caviar and champagne but simple things like chicken and cheese. They keep hotel residences in pristine condition during the day and return to their smelly ghettos or under developed villages at night. It’s like a new kind of colonial plantation system all over again. You often sense the underlying feeling of hostility among certain people working in the tourism trade. Of course, this would not even be an issue if the government also took good care of its own people and stopped stealing and wasting revenue and foreign aid on nonsensical projects (yes we have overpriced stadiums in the middle of nowhere here in St. Lucia as well) handed out in corrupt no bid contracts to their friends. If the government ensured that everyone had access to affordable utilities, fair justice, reliable communications, healthcare, nutrition, education and a productive edifying existence, then natives’ welcome of visitors would stem from genuine love and hospitality instead of a passive-aggressive hustle to survive that diminishes their self pride. Finally our tourism board slogans like, “St. Lucia, Simply Beautiful!” would ring true. At present, St. Lucia is only “Simply Beautiful” for foreigners. Life has been so hard, dirty, cut throat, demeaning and disappointing for so long that the locals cannot even see and respect the beauty in themselves far less that of each other or that of their country.
I get lots of opportunities to observe more harmless forms of the Anse La Ray incident because my partner and a few of our friends are white. I note how St. Lucians lay on thick, the politeness, extra consideration; hassle free access to beaches by hotels we aren’t even staying in and just general respect. Lucian men even bite their tongue instead of risking sexually harassing my white friends, even when they wear the skimpiest of outfits. It’s almost pathological how predicable it is, even when my fairer coloured friends and I all speak with the same Trini accent; share the same culture and grew up right here in the Caribbean. I guess because we all work in the creative profession, we try to see the humour in it. My girlfriend and I make bets on whether the waitress will just for once assume that I am the one paying for lunch or dinner (which is often the case) and place the bill in front of me for a change. But underneath our humour, I can sense the discomfort. My friends feel uncomfortable being singled out for special treatment because in our little circle our skin colour fades into insignificance. This is what is commonly known as being “colour-blind”. Being colour-blind isn’t non-recognition of racial and cultural differences, (I love gloating to my partner about not having to constantly apply sunscreen at the beach) what it is about is not allowing racial differences to have any bearing on your valuation of the individual’s worth. When you concentrate solely on the spirit and personality of the individual, you actually do “forget” about their race. It's true, you honestly do not “see” it, until some relevant practical circumstance (like the sunscreen) brings it into focus in a purely superficial way. People who are incapable of doing this and keep racial features (and their own character assumptions and stereotypes) constantly top of mind in all their dealings with other people are racists. Racists never forget race, ever. It was far easier for my friends and I to “forget” in Trinidad (this was a few years back I know things have changed drastically since. I understand the races and classes have become more demarcated and insular). However, tourist economies like St. Lucia make it harder to be colour-blind. You are reminded of the racial and accompanying class differences all the damn time!
All my friends are sensitized to the situation and fully understand the history of slavery and culture of oppression motivating the actions of the local waitress, hotel security officer or beach bum in question and hate it as much as I do. However my white friends are not subjected to the shitty end of the stick because of it and can afford to be magnanimous in the face of ignorance. I on the other hand, cannot. It matters more to me for reasons they are aware of but can never fully understand. I get angry and disappointed with black people who still have internalized racism and misjudge or disrespect me because of it. How could they not see in my skin colour their own reflection and our shared struggle? Do they not realise they insult and do injustice to themselves more so than to me? Lately I have been trying to turn that anger into empathy and patience in order to be more positive about ending it by confronting those individuals calmly or just letting it roll off my back. But on some days, it is very hard to do. I wish black people would treat their OWN race with that same respect with which they feel they must treat others regardless of which class they assume you fall into. When will they realise we are all one human race and equally worthy? I hate to admit it, our islands may be independent of our colonial parents but we are far from being emancipated from mental slavery. I’m so sorry Bob Marley.
Standing behind the two foreigners are two burly St. Lucian men dressed in ordinary liming attire and one of them is a little inebriated. He stumbles forward into one of the Englishwomen and she spins around and with a little shove tells him to, “Watch out!” Unbeknownst to her, the stumbling man is a plain clothes police officer. He flies into a rage and proceeds to shove her back. His fellow officer and drinking buddy wastes no time in also jumping into the fray and they proceed to try to restrain the tourist who is now vigorously fighting back and cussing to high heaven. After all, as far as she is concerned these are two men attacking her for no apparent reason. Finally the other Englishwoman snaps out of her state of shock and rushes to help her friend who is now being dragged outside while being kicked and punched. The second Englishwoman flies at the two plain clothes officers. She jumps on the back of one, screaming and throwing some punches of her own. For some reason, the officers refuse to fight this woman back and use non-violent resistance, suffering under her blows as they concentrate their full attention on the first woman on the ground while her companion screams, “Leave my friend alone! Why are you doing this?”
Wait did I forget to mention that the first Englishwoman being restrained, kicked and punched is black and the second one rushing to her defense is white? Sorry my bad.
The night ends with the black tourist being arrested and put in jail for assaulting the police officers leaving her white friend protesting outside the station refusing all medical aid being politely offered to her. Meanwhile her black compatriot lay in pain inside a nasty jail cell for a day and a half. Then the station officials got the shock of their lives when they finally checked their detainee’s identity and found a British passport and heard testimony from eyewitnesses. Oops! This was not another nameless black local woman but a British citizen, so badly beaten and swollen she could not talk. Making matters worse, her irate, horrified white friend was not going to keep quiet. She threatened to contact the British consulate and media. The police began trying to appease her, offering a free island tour, boat trips anything. She would not budge and in a few days the incident was all over the local and foreign news and the black Englishwoman displayed her bludgeoned face for all to see. All of St. Lucia was forced to look at itself and its ugliness, police brutality and inculcated racism against its own people.
Yes, racism. Why? For a minute I want you to imagine that those two black police officers in Anse La Ray where two white troopers in Alabama in the 1950’s and they were beating up on a black woman yet not laying a single finger on her white female friend who was also fighting with them. They arrest the black woman and charge her with the criminal offence of assaulting a police officer but not the white woman. They express concern and offer first aid to the white woman but not the black woman. I am sure you would not hesitate to call that racism if two white cops did it. Now if both women were assaulted and arrested this would be an article on police brutality and violence against women. But the officers in Anse La Raye did not dare lay a finger on the white Englishwoman even when she was jumping on them and hitting them. Do not forget that all it took to set this incident in motion was a little shove and rebuff from her black friend. They went to great lengths to appease and comfort the white Englishwoman while treating her black compatriot like a common dog because they assumed at first she was local and one of them and of lesser worth thus justifying their actions. If she indeed was a St. Lucian we probably would have never even heard of this incident. Shame! Bystanders just watched it happen, mentally powerless and anesthetized against feeling outrage. Shame! Journalists who blew the whistle and made it headline news were rebuked by the Ministry of Tourism who wanted the incident swept under the rug for fear of repercussions on the tourism industry. Shame!
That incident is repugnant on so many levels. Two burly men beating on a single woman- (and the underlying reasons behind this will be explored in a separate article) is the ultimate act of cowardice and brutality. However it is the race issue that I want to explore now. It is so clear to me that the Anse La Raye police scandal is the height of internalized self-hatred and a prime example of how people can also be racist against those of their own race. Black people are particularly guilty of this. It is the worst kind of racism there is because it keeps entire populations in a state of low self-esteem, lack of morale and solidarity. Even after so many years have passed since emancipation we still have the ingrained belief that a black person’s life is less valuable than that of any other race. It is as if we believe we are expendable and detached from all the aspects that help the human being transcend mere animal flesh and animal urges. You see it in the casual way black people take the lives of their brothers and sisters whether in the ghettoes of Lavantille, Kingston, City of God or South Central L.A. We kill and brutalise our own people at will and not even for any great philosophical cause (not that it justifies killing) but just for the most mundane of reasons. Suddenly it’s so clear why we don’t need a colonial power or Jim Crow to oppress our own people anymore. We can do it just fine on our own. Our self hatred ensures we stay mired in underdevelopment for a long, long, LONG time.
Our colonial parents’ knew exactly what they were doing. Theirs was a long term, multi-century plan when they enslaved and treated our ancestors as if we lacked any higher purpose in life, be it academic, spiritual, humane or personal. They inculcated us to fear intellectual development and individualism and be content with the basest of animal needs- food, fight for survival and sex. Sadly that became our self-perception. We grew up learning the only way to rise up and gain respect, is to brutalize and dominate, withhold valuable resources and laud any position we attain over others. The old colonial system favoured our lighter skinned brothers who rose to power under it and found opportunities to transcend and in turn inflicted the same crushing class/”high colour” grading system on their own people. And so our self hatred grew. I have lived and worked in the Caribbean all my life and it is my observation that the ill effects of our shared history has not been challenged in the Eastern Caribbean islands with the force needed to uproot much of the old thinking. Trinidad had its indigenous Afro-centric cultural revolution that birthed our carnival, calypso and innovation of our steel pan; our violent labour movements in the 1930’s and a deeply affecting black power and academic movement in the 1960s and 1970’s. All of this home grown uprising helped empower our Afro-Caribbean population. Trinidad’s early independence from Europe, oil industry, large merchant and civil class and the infusion of East Indian, Chinese and Syrian people and exceptional mixing of the races that followed all helped to disperse and divert a lot of the direct ill effects of colonialism. Wealth trickled down freely, opportunities, entrepreneurial and innovative endeavors flourished and there was upward class movement for many. Other Caribbean islands were not so fortunate. Their societies remained in Master/White/High Colouer vs. Slave/Black mode for a much longer time. In fact, St. Lucia is almost feudal compared to Trinidad. Farmers still toil on land they do not own. Everything is still pretty much owned by the very same old money white and “high coleur” French Creole and English families from way back in colonial days. The class system is very fixed with wealth barely shifting or trickling down save for the few cases where highly educated black professionals fight their way up mostly through the public sector. In fact, the country has never had a successful Prime Minister with dark skin even though dark skinned people comprise 90% of the population. That speaks volumes.
What makes healing self hatred for islands like St. Lucia even harder is that its economy is now overly-dependent on tourism. Save for a dying banana industry (which was supported on European charity but no longer) there are very little home spun industries where the people themselves invent and export a product they can take pride in. There are little natural resources and almost everything is imported from abroad. Even the majority of food is imported despite the island having one of the most fertile volcanic soils in the region and topography high enough to support even some temperate crops. Why? There is minimal land ownership by the local farmers and outmoded plantation style single crop-agricultural practices. So, selling the country is all that is left. Every day poor and working class black people must kiss mostly white visitors’ butts to eek out a living. They smile and act the happy natives, while enviously watching tourists enjoy a quality of life they can only dream about. They serve food to foreigners that they cannot afford to buy for themselves and families; I am not talking caviar and champagne but simple things like chicken and cheese. They keep hotel residences in pristine condition during the day and return to their smelly ghettos or under developed villages at night. It’s like a new kind of colonial plantation system all over again. You often sense the underlying feeling of hostility among certain people working in the tourism trade. Of course, this would not even be an issue if the government also took good care of its own people and stopped stealing and wasting revenue and foreign aid on nonsensical projects (yes we have overpriced stadiums in the middle of nowhere here in St. Lucia as well) handed out in corrupt no bid contracts to their friends. If the government ensured that everyone had access to affordable utilities, fair justice, reliable communications, healthcare, nutrition, education and a productive edifying existence, then natives’ welcome of visitors would stem from genuine love and hospitality instead of a passive-aggressive hustle to survive that diminishes their self pride. Finally our tourism board slogans like, “St. Lucia, Simply Beautiful!” would ring true. At present, St. Lucia is only “Simply Beautiful” for foreigners. Life has been so hard, dirty, cut throat, demeaning and disappointing for so long that the locals cannot even see and respect the beauty in themselves far less that of each other or that of their country.
I get lots of opportunities to observe more harmless forms of the Anse La Ray incident because my partner and a few of our friends are white. I note how St. Lucians lay on thick, the politeness, extra consideration; hassle free access to beaches by hotels we aren’t even staying in and just general respect. Lucian men even bite their tongue instead of risking sexually harassing my white friends, even when they wear the skimpiest of outfits. It’s almost pathological how predicable it is, even when my fairer coloured friends and I all speak with the same Trini accent; share the same culture and grew up right here in the Caribbean. I guess because we all work in the creative profession, we try to see the humour in it. My girlfriend and I make bets on whether the waitress will just for once assume that I am the one paying for lunch or dinner (which is often the case) and place the bill in front of me for a change. But underneath our humour, I can sense the discomfort. My friends feel uncomfortable being singled out for special treatment because in our little circle our skin colour fades into insignificance. This is what is commonly known as being “colour-blind”. Being colour-blind isn’t non-recognition of racial and cultural differences, (I love gloating to my partner about not having to constantly apply sunscreen at the beach) what it is about is not allowing racial differences to have any bearing on your valuation of the individual’s worth. When you concentrate solely on the spirit and personality of the individual, you actually do “forget” about their race. It's true, you honestly do not “see” it, until some relevant practical circumstance (like the sunscreen) brings it into focus in a purely superficial way. People who are incapable of doing this and keep racial features (and their own character assumptions and stereotypes) constantly top of mind in all their dealings with other people are racists. Racists never forget race, ever. It was far easier for my friends and I to “forget” in Trinidad (this was a few years back I know things have changed drastically since. I understand the races and classes have become more demarcated and insular). However, tourist economies like St. Lucia make it harder to be colour-blind. You are reminded of the racial and accompanying class differences all the damn time!
All my friends are sensitized to the situation and fully understand the history of slavery and culture of oppression motivating the actions of the local waitress, hotel security officer or beach bum in question and hate it as much as I do. However my white friends are not subjected to the shitty end of the stick because of it and can afford to be magnanimous in the face of ignorance. I on the other hand, cannot. It matters more to me for reasons they are aware of but can never fully understand. I get angry and disappointed with black people who still have internalized racism and misjudge or disrespect me because of it. How could they not see in my skin colour their own reflection and our shared struggle? Do they not realise they insult and do injustice to themselves more so than to me? Lately I have been trying to turn that anger into empathy and patience in order to be more positive about ending it by confronting those individuals calmly or just letting it roll off my back. But on some days, it is very hard to do. I wish black people would treat their OWN race with that same respect with which they feel they must treat others regardless of which class they assume you fall into. When will they realise we are all one human race and equally worthy? I hate to admit it, our islands may be independent of our colonial parents but we are far from being emancipated from mental slavery. I’m so sorry Bob Marley.
January 11, 2006
HAPPY NEW YEAR FELLOW ALIENS!
Ahhh, 2006!
It has a nice even feel to it and I hope my suspicions are correct and this year brings to all of you a sense of balance and return on investments both material and emotional.
Just as I did last year, I will renew my commitment to keep up my blog. I am back from a glorious, well-deserved three week vacation and ready to pounce on the issues that get me all hot and bothered. There is a lot to discuss- Crime and poverty admist staggering wealth in Trinidad and Tobago where unbridled capitalism has gone haywire; CSME; spirituality, religion and fundamentalism; women's issues with men and each other; advertising and the professional world here in the Caribbean; SEX SEX SEX and of course loads of cartoons.
I want to thank those of you who have been reading and commenting on the blog. Your comments and encouragement even criticism is encouraging. Keep up the good work and I'll try to do the same! To all my fellow bloggers, dear friends and accomplices- Nicholas, Michele A, Sue Ann, Vonetta, Michele B, Spec, Melvina, Tisha, Nazma, Jonathan and everyone else, I wish you all PEACE, FREEDOM and above all else LOVE for 2006!
It has a nice even feel to it and I hope my suspicions are correct and this year brings to all of you a sense of balance and return on investments both material and emotional.
Just as I did last year, I will renew my commitment to keep up my blog. I am back from a glorious, well-deserved three week vacation and ready to pounce on the issues that get me all hot and bothered. There is a lot to discuss- Crime and poverty admist staggering wealth in Trinidad and Tobago where unbridled capitalism has gone haywire; CSME; spirituality, religion and fundamentalism; women's issues with men and each other; advertising and the professional world here in the Caribbean; SEX SEX SEX and of course loads of cartoons.
I want to thank those of you who have been reading and commenting on the blog. Your comments and encouragement even criticism is encouraging. Keep up the good work and I'll try to do the same! To all my fellow bloggers, dear friends and accomplices- Nicholas, Michele A, Sue Ann, Vonetta, Michele B, Spec, Melvina, Tisha, Nazma, Jonathan and everyone else, I wish you all PEACE, FREEDOM and above all else LOVE for 2006!
November 24, 2005
Why We Hate Homosexuals So Much
As talk of decriminalizing homosexuality (to be more accurate, anal and oral sex between two men) sweeps through the Caribbean region and the resulting outrage ensues, I cannot help but ask myself, how come our people hate gays so much? Some would say, “We are islands that embrace Christian values and the bible says it is a sin.” However it is an oversimplified response. The most virulent homophobes are usually not Christian nor strict bible adherents. Dancehall artists famous for calling for violence against gays are certainly are no bible behaving saints. In fact most of us in general, do not abide by strict biblical law in everything, from eating pork to losing our temper to premarital sex to our Carnival revelry to gossip. They are just a drop in the bucket of biblical sins most of us are guilty of, yet we are very quick to quote scripture when it comes to homosexuals. Our “bible says so” explanation is more of a convenient excuse than anything else. In an effort to find out the root of our hatred and intolerance we need to dig deeper beneath the predictable reactions and religious arguments. We need to look at our history, our origins because our fear, shame and hate of gay people (men in particular) is far more universal a modern cultural phenomena among black people whether we are from the Caribbean, America or Africa. Therefore I must ask, what is our common experience? What is our common heritage?
An unbiased historical and anthropological look back will show us what our past feelings towards homosexuals were probably like when we were back in our indigenous tribes in West, Central and Southern Africa long before the arrival of the European colonialists. I know many Afrocentrics often deny that homosexuality was a feature of African cultures in ancient times. They love to spread the myth that homosexuality is primarily a modern phenomenon, a “white man’s disease”. Ironically, they have been unwittingly anglicanized to have this myopic view. Every great ancient civilization or culture has had homosexuals in it, whether tolerated or not. For two centuries at the height of the Han, China was ruled by ten openly bisexual emperors, whose names have been recorded in the official histories of the period by Sima Qian and Ban Gu. There is the legendary "nanshoku" loves recorded by writers and shunga painters who immortalized "shudo," the love between samurai warriors in feudal Japan. There is an abundance of homoerotic art from ancient Rome, Greece, Inca and Mayan civilisations. French colonists have recorded accounts of the “bedarches” among the Native Americans and “fa’ faine” of the South Pacific. During the Islamic Renaissance, famous Iranian and Arab poets such as Hafiz i-Shirazi and Abu Nuwas wrote pages of homoerotic poetry. Therefore homosexuality and bisexuality are ubiquitous, existing in all cultures, and at all times in history. How come these Afrocentrists want us to believe that our mother land was somehow the exception to the rule? Simple, they are being dishonest and it begs the question: “Other races and cultures have owned up to gays in their history, why is it a source of shame and fear for our descendants of ancient African civilisations to do the same?”
The answer is we were taught to feel that shame and fear by the same colonial influences we now speak against. So deep is the indoctrination we cannot even look at our own Motherland honestly. Dictator Robert Mugabe is such a prime example of such a person. He accuses the British of bringing the “disease of perversion” to his country of Zimbabwe and refuses all attempts to foster tolerance and equal rights as “colonial interference”. What Mugabe does not or chooses not to recognise is that that homosexuality existed in Zimbabwe long prior to European contact. We know this because the "San" people, a tribe indigenous to that country did rock paintings that date back many thousands of years which depict sexual acts between men. The Bantu-speaking peoples of the plateau country have also admitted to ethnographers that homosexuality has been traditionally present in their culture. In Nigeria, another place where advocacy for tolerance is dismissed as “European meddling”, the native Hausa people of northern Nigeria and the surrounding countries offer interesting examples of homosexuality among their people for thousands of years before British colonialism. They speak of, 'yan dauda, which is usually translated as "homosexual" or "transvestite" and 'dan dauda, which translates as a “homosexual wife." There are many stories among the Pangwe of Camaroon of men within their tribe who even when offered a large bride price, still prefer to court other men. The indigenous Igbo people of Nigeria allow “female husbands”, women who display more masculine tendencies are treated as men and allowed to hunt and to marry other women. On the Swahili coast and among many tribes in Lesotho romantic love or intimacy between women was allowed because the perception was that two women could not have sex and such interaction was non-threatening. That these behaviours existed prior to European contact is evidenced by the richness and number of these anthropological findings. Contrary to Mugabe's and other Afrocentrists' assertions, analysis of the old colonial court records shows intense prosecutions of homosexual behaviors among the indigenous peoples of the Shona, Ndebele, Xhosa, Basotho and Zulu by early colonialist courts.
It may seem weird to many that so many people, from the Native Americans to the peoples of the South Pacific to Africa were permissive of homosexuality. However, we must keep in mind that among non-Abrahamic/Judeo/Christian cultures, homosexuality was usually tolerated and even celebrated because they simply had a moral code influenced by different values. First peoples revere nature for life’s lessons and in nature they found abundant examples of sexual anomalies (which modern science has now begun to understand) like hermaphrodites, same-gender sexual behaviour among animals even species that could physically change gender. Therefore to many indigenous tribes around the world, a man who manifested feminine traits was not seen as unnatural or immoral. Gay people were often seen as “twin-spirits” possessing both male and female souls and thus gifted with invaluable talent and insight as spiritual guides, healers, artists and craftsmen. The indigenous peoples often demonstrated an acute awareness and acceptance it took colonial societies years to achieve. On the other side of the world, the European people had long converted from their shamanistic earth religions by a powerful Roman Catholic Church which since the 1200s began to rule with an iron fist. They had a rather different view, one they would end up forcing upon our ancestors.
The history of the church in Europe reveals that there was once tolerance of homosexuality throughout the middle ages. Believe it or not, (though the Church tried to sweep it under the carpet) it is now publicly known that many of its priests and abbots prior to the 1200s were openly gay. Some even left us literature celebrating their gay lovers, among them Marbod, Bishop of Rennes (d. 1123 C.E.) and Saint Aelred whose poetry lives on to this day. However after a dismal loss in the Crusades the church began an intense legalistic campaign that would climax with the Inquisition and last until the 17th Century. Of course, this led to all kinds of repression. The first to feel it were the Jews and Muslims of Europe, then came all women practicing midwifery and traditional healing, all racial minorities and of course homosexuals. In the face of growing Islamic threat from the Mediterranean and Middle East and pagan invaders from Eastern Europe, Mongol and China, there was a zealous thrust to replenish diminished European armies and increase the population and power of the Church’s domain. It was at the Lateran III Council of 1179 the Church took its first official position to outlaw all forms of non-procreative sex. In the 1200's the writings of Thomas Aquinas, reinforced the new thinking of the Catholic Church that semen was thought to be life itself and must never be wasted. Early illustrations of sperm in those times depicted them as tiny human souls. Sex was for pleasure was sinful, even between a husband and wife and should only be used for reproduction. Any men caught in the act of anal or oral copulation were burned, this traditional punishment led to the derogatory term of “faggot”, which means a piece of wood for burning. This was the Europe that came to colonise Africa. Can you picture the culture shock European colonialists felt when they came upon our people?
Writings of Belgian, Dutch, French, Spanish and British colonists to the new worlds in Asia, Africa, North and South America are filled with their horror over the polygamous, sexually-liberated, minimally dressed people who because of their reverence for the earth regarded sex in general as a perfectly natural, life-affirming even spiritual. They could not believe many of the tribes didn’t view homosexuality with the same severe condemnation they did. Among the earliest references to this are some of the records of the Inquisition in Brazil. From the Denunciations of Bahia, (1591-1593): "Francisco Manicongo, a cobbler's apprentice is known among the slaves as a sodomite for 'performing the duties of a female' and for 'refusing to wear the men's clothes which the master gave him.' These passives are called jimbandaa in the language of Angola and the Congo, which means passive sodomite. The accuser claimed to have seen Francisco Manicongo "wearing a loincloth such as passive sodomites wear in his land of the Congo and immediately punished him." It’s funny how today we may see Europeans as sexually liberal when thousands of years ago, they were the prudes. They were the homophobes. Of course they were being immensely hypocritical (just like we are now after being indoctrinated by them) because the fact remains that while they were punishing what they saw as sexual deviancy in our various tribal cultures, homosexuality was still rampant in their own ranks. Europe had a great double standard with richer classes and royalty being excused from prosecution for homosexual acts while the plebs felt the full wrath of the iron fisted church. Indeed, among noted homosexuals was King James, the royal for whom a version of the bible was named. Added to this their racism led to their presumption they were innately and culturally superior to our people. They forced our ancestors to wear their impractical style of clothing in the boiling tropical heat, to cover the naked human body which they felt was shameful. They forced us to practice their form of religion and its moral code and laws. Our culture was condemned by foreigners too close-minded to understand it. They embarked upon a well-financed campaign to indoctrinate our people to feel violently ashamed, fearful and hateful of their own traditions and of each-other.
Abused victims turn their fear of punishment and hatred of the punisher inward. As is often the case, the new convert becomes more of an extremist zealot than the one who converted him, especially when there is much at stake for him to gain if he proves his utter devotion and dire consequences if he does not. Therefore we began to fear and hate our own deities, earth and ancestral spirits. We began to fear and hate our skin colour and features. As for the minorities who love people of the same gender for whom many tribes had a special place in their traditions, we began to hate them too. To make matters worse, the morally hypocritical Europeans, used anal rape during the slave trade as a means of humiliation and emasculation especially on mentally and physically strong black men to break their spirit. Paedophilia was rampant in the new slave based colonies because a culture of repression, injustice, violence and hypocrisy always breeds dysfunctional predatory behaviours. Many young African boys were sexually abused by their white masters and especially picked because they had no recourse. In addition, the family unit was split, black men kept in isolation from their women, they were housed together in cramped barracks and this as well led to many non-consensual releases of sexual frustration and the resulting anger and shame about it. All the ill-feelings created by this common experience among our people have been handed down, distilled, supplemented with religious belief from generation to generation down to this day. So now even after emancipation, even after the fight for civil rights, most black men’s impressions of homosexuality are related to either violent events stemming from being incarcerated, degraded or emasculated in some way. The systematic destruction of the black man’s worth as a man for hundreds of years; the resulting desperation to prove his manhood as well as the fear of being “soft” in tough, racist, poverty-stricken societies all have led to a culture of accepted homophobia, a common thread among all Afro-ethnic communities worldwide. Ironically when we feel we are lashing out against “Babylon system” by bashing our gay brothers and sisters, we are really lashing out at a part of our own African heritage which they represent. Colonial racism and homophobia go hand in hand. White racists who believe black people are supposed to be subhuman slaves and the bible justifies it also persecute gay people as well. Who would have thought that dancehall artist Buju Banton and David Duke Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan have something in common?
Today Europe and America continues to apologize for its contribution to slavery and oppression that imprisoned people like Nelson Mandela. They have long since condemned their old laws used to imprison gay people like Oscar Wilde as discriminatory and inhumane. Even the Catholic Church has acknowledged the atrocities of the Inquisition, forced conversion and slavery (although they still cling to the legislation formed during that time with regard to non-procreative sex) were wrong, unjustified and have attempted to be more compassionate towards homosexuals. However, we who live in the Caribbean and places like Zimbabwe cling to colonial fear and intolerance, claiming it as our own even when the nations that forced it upon us have long reconciled them to be unjust. So deep is that colonial wound that even when we try to “return to Mother Africa” we refuse to relinquish the homophobia inculcated in us by Europe. It would be a different story if our intolerance was helping us in some way, but unfortunately it is doing the exact opposite. Coretta Scott King, the widow of Martin Luther King, speaking four days before the 30th anniversary of her husband's assassination, said, "I still hear people say that I should not be talking about the rights of lesbian and gay people and I should stick to the issue of racial justice, but I hasten to remind them that Martin Luther King Jr. said, 'Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.’” Speaking before nearly 600 people at the Palmer House Hilton Hotel, she called on the civil rights community to join in the struggle against homophobia and anti-gay bias. "Homophobia is like racism and anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry in that it seeks to dehumanize a large group of people, to deny their humanity, their dignity and personhood," King stated. "This sets the stage for further repression and violence that spreads all too easily to victimize the next minority group." ** We may be predisposed culturally to this form of hatred, but we do not have to let it run our lives. It’s time that we black people whether from the Caribbean, Americas or Africa emancipates ourselves from homophobia which is only another form of mental slavery.
References: Homosexuality and Civilization by Louis Crompton, Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality- Gay People in Western Europe from the Beginning of the Christian Era to the Fourteenth Century by John Boswell, Male Colors: The Construction of Homosexuality in Tokugawa Japan by Gary P. Leupp, Changing Ones : Third and Fourth Genders in Native North America by Will Roscoe “Boy-Wives and Female-Husbands- Studies in African-American Homosexualities” by Will Roscoe and Stephen O Murray , ** Chicago Defender, April 1, 1998, front page.
An unbiased historical and anthropological look back will show us what our past feelings towards homosexuals were probably like when we were back in our indigenous tribes in West, Central and Southern Africa long before the arrival of the European colonialists. I know many Afrocentrics often deny that homosexuality was a feature of African cultures in ancient times. They love to spread the myth that homosexuality is primarily a modern phenomenon, a “white man’s disease”. Ironically, they have been unwittingly anglicanized to have this myopic view. Every great ancient civilization or culture has had homosexuals in it, whether tolerated or not. For two centuries at the height of the Han, China was ruled by ten openly bisexual emperors, whose names have been recorded in the official histories of the period by Sima Qian and Ban Gu. There is the legendary "nanshoku" loves recorded by writers and shunga painters who immortalized "shudo," the love between samurai warriors in feudal Japan. There is an abundance of homoerotic art from ancient Rome, Greece, Inca and Mayan civilisations. French colonists have recorded accounts of the “bedarches” among the Native Americans and “fa’ faine” of the South Pacific. During the Islamic Renaissance, famous Iranian and Arab poets such as Hafiz i-Shirazi and Abu Nuwas wrote pages of homoerotic poetry. Therefore homosexuality and bisexuality are ubiquitous, existing in all cultures, and at all times in history. How come these Afrocentrists want us to believe that our mother land was somehow the exception to the rule? Simple, they are being dishonest and it begs the question: “Other races and cultures have owned up to gays in their history, why is it a source of shame and fear for our descendants of ancient African civilisations to do the same?”
The answer is we were taught to feel that shame and fear by the same colonial influences we now speak against. So deep is the indoctrination we cannot even look at our own Motherland honestly. Dictator Robert Mugabe is such a prime example of such a person. He accuses the British of bringing the “disease of perversion” to his country of Zimbabwe and refuses all attempts to foster tolerance and equal rights as “colonial interference”. What Mugabe does not or chooses not to recognise is that that homosexuality existed in Zimbabwe long prior to European contact. We know this because the "San" people, a tribe indigenous to that country did rock paintings that date back many thousands of years which depict sexual acts between men. The Bantu-speaking peoples of the plateau country have also admitted to ethnographers that homosexuality has been traditionally present in their culture. In Nigeria, another place where advocacy for tolerance is dismissed as “European meddling”, the native Hausa people of northern Nigeria and the surrounding countries offer interesting examples of homosexuality among their people for thousands of years before British colonialism. They speak of, 'yan dauda, which is usually translated as "homosexual" or "transvestite" and 'dan dauda, which translates as a “homosexual wife." There are many stories among the Pangwe of Camaroon of men within their tribe who even when offered a large bride price, still prefer to court other men. The indigenous Igbo people of Nigeria allow “female husbands”, women who display more masculine tendencies are treated as men and allowed to hunt and to marry other women. On the Swahili coast and among many tribes in Lesotho romantic love or intimacy between women was allowed because the perception was that two women could not have sex and such interaction was non-threatening. That these behaviours existed prior to European contact is evidenced by the richness and number of these anthropological findings. Contrary to Mugabe's and other Afrocentrists' assertions, analysis of the old colonial court records shows intense prosecutions of homosexual behaviors among the indigenous peoples of the Shona, Ndebele, Xhosa, Basotho and Zulu by early colonialist courts.
It may seem weird to many that so many people, from the Native Americans to the peoples of the South Pacific to Africa were permissive of homosexuality. However, we must keep in mind that among non-Abrahamic/Judeo/Christian cultures, homosexuality was usually tolerated and even celebrated because they simply had a moral code influenced by different values. First peoples revere nature for life’s lessons and in nature they found abundant examples of sexual anomalies (which modern science has now begun to understand) like hermaphrodites, same-gender sexual behaviour among animals even species that could physically change gender. Therefore to many indigenous tribes around the world, a man who manifested feminine traits was not seen as unnatural or immoral. Gay people were often seen as “twin-spirits” possessing both male and female souls and thus gifted with invaluable talent and insight as spiritual guides, healers, artists and craftsmen. The indigenous peoples often demonstrated an acute awareness and acceptance it took colonial societies years to achieve. On the other side of the world, the European people had long converted from their shamanistic earth religions by a powerful Roman Catholic Church which since the 1200s began to rule with an iron fist. They had a rather different view, one they would end up forcing upon our ancestors.
The history of the church in Europe reveals that there was once tolerance of homosexuality throughout the middle ages. Believe it or not, (though the Church tried to sweep it under the carpet) it is now publicly known that many of its priests and abbots prior to the 1200s were openly gay. Some even left us literature celebrating their gay lovers, among them Marbod, Bishop of Rennes (d. 1123 C.E.) and Saint Aelred whose poetry lives on to this day. However after a dismal loss in the Crusades the church began an intense legalistic campaign that would climax with the Inquisition and last until the 17th Century. Of course, this led to all kinds of repression. The first to feel it were the Jews and Muslims of Europe, then came all women practicing midwifery and traditional healing, all racial minorities and of course homosexuals. In the face of growing Islamic threat from the Mediterranean and Middle East and pagan invaders from Eastern Europe, Mongol and China, there was a zealous thrust to replenish diminished European armies and increase the population and power of the Church’s domain. It was at the Lateran III Council of 1179 the Church took its first official position to outlaw all forms of non-procreative sex. In the 1200's the writings of Thomas Aquinas, reinforced the new thinking of the Catholic Church that semen was thought to be life itself and must never be wasted. Early illustrations of sperm in those times depicted them as tiny human souls. Sex was for pleasure was sinful, even between a husband and wife and should only be used for reproduction. Any men caught in the act of anal or oral copulation were burned, this traditional punishment led to the derogatory term of “faggot”, which means a piece of wood for burning. This was the Europe that came to colonise Africa. Can you picture the culture shock European colonialists felt when they came upon our people?
Writings of Belgian, Dutch, French, Spanish and British colonists to the new worlds in Asia, Africa, North and South America are filled with their horror over the polygamous, sexually-liberated, minimally dressed people who because of their reverence for the earth regarded sex in general as a perfectly natural, life-affirming even spiritual. They could not believe many of the tribes didn’t view homosexuality with the same severe condemnation they did. Among the earliest references to this are some of the records of the Inquisition in Brazil. From the Denunciations of Bahia, (1591-1593): "Francisco Manicongo, a cobbler's apprentice is known among the slaves as a sodomite for 'performing the duties of a female' and for 'refusing to wear the men's clothes which the master gave him.' These passives are called jimbandaa in the language of Angola and the Congo, which means passive sodomite. The accuser claimed to have seen Francisco Manicongo "wearing a loincloth such as passive sodomites wear in his land of the Congo and immediately punished him." It’s funny how today we may see Europeans as sexually liberal when thousands of years ago, they were the prudes. They were the homophobes. Of course they were being immensely hypocritical (just like we are now after being indoctrinated by them) because the fact remains that while they were punishing what they saw as sexual deviancy in our various tribal cultures, homosexuality was still rampant in their own ranks. Europe had a great double standard with richer classes and royalty being excused from prosecution for homosexual acts while the plebs felt the full wrath of the iron fisted church. Indeed, among noted homosexuals was King James, the royal for whom a version of the bible was named. Added to this their racism led to their presumption they were innately and culturally superior to our people. They forced our ancestors to wear their impractical style of clothing in the boiling tropical heat, to cover the naked human body which they felt was shameful. They forced us to practice their form of religion and its moral code and laws. Our culture was condemned by foreigners too close-minded to understand it. They embarked upon a well-financed campaign to indoctrinate our people to feel violently ashamed, fearful and hateful of their own traditions and of each-other.
Abused victims turn their fear of punishment and hatred of the punisher inward. As is often the case, the new convert becomes more of an extremist zealot than the one who converted him, especially when there is much at stake for him to gain if he proves his utter devotion and dire consequences if he does not. Therefore we began to fear and hate our own deities, earth and ancestral spirits. We began to fear and hate our skin colour and features. As for the minorities who love people of the same gender for whom many tribes had a special place in their traditions, we began to hate them too. To make matters worse, the morally hypocritical Europeans, used anal rape during the slave trade as a means of humiliation and emasculation especially on mentally and physically strong black men to break their spirit. Paedophilia was rampant in the new slave based colonies because a culture of repression, injustice, violence and hypocrisy always breeds dysfunctional predatory behaviours. Many young African boys were sexually abused by their white masters and especially picked because they had no recourse. In addition, the family unit was split, black men kept in isolation from their women, they were housed together in cramped barracks and this as well led to many non-consensual releases of sexual frustration and the resulting anger and shame about it. All the ill-feelings created by this common experience among our people have been handed down, distilled, supplemented with religious belief from generation to generation down to this day. So now even after emancipation, even after the fight for civil rights, most black men’s impressions of homosexuality are related to either violent events stemming from being incarcerated, degraded or emasculated in some way. The systematic destruction of the black man’s worth as a man for hundreds of years; the resulting desperation to prove his manhood as well as the fear of being “soft” in tough, racist, poverty-stricken societies all have led to a culture of accepted homophobia, a common thread among all Afro-ethnic communities worldwide. Ironically when we feel we are lashing out against “Babylon system” by bashing our gay brothers and sisters, we are really lashing out at a part of our own African heritage which they represent. Colonial racism and homophobia go hand in hand. White racists who believe black people are supposed to be subhuman slaves and the bible justifies it also persecute gay people as well. Who would have thought that dancehall artist Buju Banton and David Duke Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan have something in common?
Today Europe and America continues to apologize for its contribution to slavery and oppression that imprisoned people like Nelson Mandela. They have long since condemned their old laws used to imprison gay people like Oscar Wilde as discriminatory and inhumane. Even the Catholic Church has acknowledged the atrocities of the Inquisition, forced conversion and slavery (although they still cling to the legislation formed during that time with regard to non-procreative sex) were wrong, unjustified and have attempted to be more compassionate towards homosexuals. However, we who live in the Caribbean and places like Zimbabwe cling to colonial fear and intolerance, claiming it as our own even when the nations that forced it upon us have long reconciled them to be unjust. So deep is that colonial wound that even when we try to “return to Mother Africa” we refuse to relinquish the homophobia inculcated in us by Europe. It would be a different story if our intolerance was helping us in some way, but unfortunately it is doing the exact opposite. Coretta Scott King, the widow of Martin Luther King, speaking four days before the 30th anniversary of her husband's assassination, said, "I still hear people say that I should not be talking about the rights of lesbian and gay people and I should stick to the issue of racial justice, but I hasten to remind them that Martin Luther King Jr. said, 'Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.’” Speaking before nearly 600 people at the Palmer House Hilton Hotel, she called on the civil rights community to join in the struggle against homophobia and anti-gay bias. "Homophobia is like racism and anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry in that it seeks to dehumanize a large group of people, to deny their humanity, their dignity and personhood," King stated. "This sets the stage for further repression and violence that spreads all too easily to victimize the next minority group." ** We may be predisposed culturally to this form of hatred, but we do not have to let it run our lives. It’s time that we black people whether from the Caribbean, Americas or Africa emancipates ourselves from homophobia which is only another form of mental slavery.
References: Homosexuality and Civilization by Louis Crompton, Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality- Gay People in Western Europe from the Beginning of the Christian Era to the Fourteenth Century by John Boswell, Male Colors: The Construction of Homosexuality in Tokugawa Japan by Gary P. Leupp, Changing Ones : Third and Fourth Genders in Native North America by Will Roscoe “Boy-Wives and Female-Husbands- Studies in African-American Homosexualities” by Will Roscoe and Stephen O Murray , ** Chicago Defender, April 1, 1998, front page.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)