Homosexuality and the Black community

[DOVE1920]

I'm not sure if this has already been discussed but why is homosexuality so hard to discuss within the Black community? Do we as a community need to evaluate our ideas of gender and sexuality? Is it our job as an organization to help bring some of these issues to light? While in college I've had the oppurtunity to discuss homosexuality with gay Black men and women and it made me very sad. Not only did they feel rejected from the Black community on campus but from the GLBT org. on campus.

[SoTrue1920]

There's an excellent book by Delroy Constatine-Simms called "The Greatest Taboo: Homosexuality in the Black Community." It deals with a great many aspects of the black community and how/why some black gay men and lesbians feel ostracized, and how others make their way within black communities.

I'm not going to preach tolerance, because I think respect is far more important. You don't have to like gay people or what they do, but recognize their basic humanity and it'll go a long, long way.

Originally posted by DOVE1920:
I'm not sure if this has already been discussed but why is homosexuality so hard to discuss within the Black community? Do we as a community need to evaluate our ideas of gender and sexuality? Is it our job as an organization to help bring some of these issues to light? While in college I've had the oppurtunity to discuss homosexuality with gay Black men and women and it made me very sad. Not only did they feel rejected from the Black community on campus but from the GLBT org. on campus.

[Chi_ZETABBW]

SOTRUE, I agree. In my family it simply just was not discussed. I assume an uncle is gay, I think I heard it mentioned once as a child, but no one ever talks about it, nor does he throw it in anyone's face, when I say "throw it", I mean he has never bought a friend around us. But if he does, my family has to be the most tolerant, unjudgemental people I've met in a long time. I guess that's where I get it from, LOL.

[CelestialBlu1]

hmmmmn...good question...i am conflicted on the issue...it is an extremely taboo issue for some...i personally don't care what people do in their own bedrooms...you got straight "freaks" to...but i being the liberal person that i am have always had this question on my mind when people justify or slam homosexuals...

if
male+female=life
and
male+male="death" (no possible production of human life)
and
female+female="death" (no possible production of a human life)
then
what purpose does the sexual act between male and male or female and female serve except to satisfy ones lower nature???

i do not believe homosexuality is an act that will send one to "hell" and that homosexuals are disfunctional people...or they are "sinning" when they engage in sexual activity...

but i do believe that the act serves the lower nature of a human being and inhibits spiritual progress...if that makes any sense...the male and female union is the most explosive, energizing, pure union there can be...and i love the brothahs...and would never make another person feel bad for choosing same sex partners...but it is taboo...and many people would rather not talk about it...for whatever reason...

[Shelacious]

Originally posted by DOVE1920:
I'm not sure if this has already been discussed but why is homosexuality so hard to discuss within the Black community? Do we as a community need to evaluate our ideas of gender and sexuality? Is it our job as an organization to help bring some of these issues to light?

Good question. I think it's hard to discuss because for all the liberal "economic" initiatives black folks support, we are indeed fairly socially conservative. As such, homosexuality/bisexuality/transgender has fallen far outside the comfort level of many black folks.

We really need to be more responsive to the needs of all in our community-gay/lesbian, straight, black, brown, rich, poor, town or country, single and married. The increase in HIV among blacks has been caused in part by our fear of admitting bisexual relations and avoidance of the issues is detremental to the growth and success of our culture.

Is it our job as a Sorority? To an extent. As we promote health and wellness, it is critical for us to set the standard for illustrating how to move beyond whether one approves or doesn't approve of anyone's private behavior, but recognize that you need to be empathetic to and understanding of other people's mental and physical health, and how you may be a stumbling block to the success of either by your own behavior.


------------------
Finer Womanhood: the "Cat's Meow" Since 1920

[DTH24]

In my family, I have a cousin that is gay. We don't treat him any different because of his sexual preference. I have male friends that have a hard time talking about homosexuality and freak out whenever someone who they think is homosexual approaches them. I personally believe that it is their choice and that is not my place to judge anyone.

------------------

[TRSimon]

Originally posted by DOVE1920:
...why is homosexuality so hard to discuss within the Black community? Do we as a community need to evaluate our ideas of gender and sexuality? Is it our job as an organization to help bring some of these issues to light?

Homosexuality is hard to discuss, especially within the Black community, in part, because of the deep relationship Black America has with the church, and the church's past stern condemnation of homosexuality. I believe that the myth of the Black Man's sexual prowess may also play a role.

We definitely need to evaluate and address our role in the treatment of homosexuals, and black women in general, especially in the wake of the skyrocketing rates of HIV infection among women of color. The current "don't ask, don't tell" policy in America is failing, big time.

As NPHC orgs, we were all founded to uplift our people through education and service. I believe that should, at the very least extend to treating GLBTs with the dignity and respect that all people are entitled to.


[This message has been edited by TRSimon (edited July 05, 2001).]

[SoTrue1920]

Originally posted by CelestialBlu1:

what purpose does the sexual act between male and male or female and female serve except to satisfy ones lower nature???

If you're going to use procreation as a standard for whether or not relationships are valid, then a whole lot of single heterosexuals who use birth control, and a whole lot of married folks who are infertile are in a world of trouble.

[CelestialBlu1]

Originally posted by SoTrue1920:
If you're going to use procreation as a standard for whether or not relationships are valid, then a whole lot of single heterosexuals who use birth control, and a whole lot of married folks who are infertile are in a world of trouble.

i was not using procreation to undermine the validity of homosexual relations...which have probably gone on since the dawn of time...i believe i stated that the act serves the lower nature...the instinctive desire to fullfill a sexual need...and if allowed to rule you will...in my opinion inhibit spiritual progress...and result in incompletion...as opposed to completion that is derived from the union of male and female...and as such is not "wrong"...but is regressive instead of progressive...in my opinion...so thinking from the perspective of evaluating the natural order of life...male and female...positive and negative...light and dark...sun and moon...opposite forces that push life forward instead of backwards...that is my rationale...but again...i do NOT feel that homosexuals are "sinning" and are wrong for choosing the partners they choose...it is my personal philosophy in observing life...and i believe i also prefaced my remark with "i am CONFLICTED on the issue..."



[This message has been edited by CelestialBlu1 (edited July 06, 2001).]

[DOVE1920]

As a sociology major I have taken classes on sexuality from a cross cultural perspective. We read books and articles about men and women who participate in acts we as North Americans would consider homosexual but it wasn't for them. And when they perform these acts they don't lose their identity as male or female. In fact these acts are seen as affirming their heterosexuality. I just wonder why some cultures allow for this and others don't...

[SoTrue1920]

Hey Celestial,
I didn't meant to make it seem like I was attacking you. That wasn't my intent. However, when I see words like "higher" or "lower" used to classify relationships, it seems to me that you're making a value judgement whether you like it or not. Binary oppositions like "higher/lower", "black/white", "good/bad" "natural/unnatural" only serve to keep a system of supremacy in place, whether it be racial supremacy, cultural supremacy, or heterosexism. When a paradigm is reduced to an "either/or" proposition, it's always a prejudicial choice between what you prefer and what you don't. Like you, I believe in the completeness of things, but I don't believe things have to be exclusionary to be complete. I've tried in my life to get out of the "either/or" mindset and to embrace a "both-and" way of thinking.

It's okay to be conflicted on the issue. Like I said, you don't even have to like gay people or what they do. But to somehow think that they're "base" or "succumbing to a lower nature" is perjorative and denies them their basic humanity. Gay people aren't only what they do in bed. They're people, first and foremost.

Originally posted by CelestialBlu1:
i was not using procreation to undermine the validity of homosexual relations...which have probably gone on since the dawn of time...i believe i stated that the act serves the lower nature...the instinctive desire to fullfill a sexual need...and if allowed to rule you will...in my opinion inhibit spiritual progress...and result in incompletion...as opposed to completion that is derived from the union of male and female...and as such is not "wrong"...but is regressive instead of progressive...in my opinion...so thinking from the perspective of evaluating the natural order of life...male and female...positive and negative...light and dark...sun and moon...opposite forces that push life forward instead of backwards...that is my rationale...but again...i do NOT feel that homosexuals are "sinning" and are wrong for choosing the partners they choose...it is my personal philosophy in observing life...and i believe i also prefaced my remark "i am CONFLICTED on the issue..."

[This message has been edited by CelestialBlu1 (edited July 06, 2001).]

[SoTrue1920]

What gets me about this is that societies that embrace this kind of behaviour are viewed by those in the west as "uncivilized". A trip, ain't it?

Originally posted by DOVE1920:
I just wonder why some cultures allow for this and others don't...

[CelestialBlu1]

Originally posted by SoTrue1920:
Hey Celestial,
I didn't meant to make it seem like I was attacking you. That wasn't my intent. However, when I see words like "higher" or "lower" used to classify relationships, it seems to me that you're making a value judgement whether you like it or not. Binary oppositions like "higher/lower", "black/white", "good/bad" "natural/unnatural" only serve to keep a system of supremacy in place, whether it be racial supremacy, cultural supremacy, or heterosexism. When a paradigm is reduced to an "either/or" proposition, it's always a prejudicial choice between what you prefer and what you don't. Like you, I believe in the completeness of things, but I don't believe things have to be exclusionary to be complete. I've tried in my life to get out of the "either/or" mindset and to embrace a "both-and" way of thinking.

It's okay to be conflicted on the issue. Like I said, you don't even have to like gay people or what they do. But to somehow think that they're "base" or "succumbing to a lower nature" is perjorative and denies them their basic humanity. Gay people aren't only what they do in bed. They're people, first and foremost.

i didn't feel attacked...and again...i said it was my opinion...and my philosophy...

[This message has been edited by CelestialBlu1 (edited July 06, 2001).]

[CelestialBlu1]

Originally posted by DOVE1920:
As a sociology major I have taken classes on sexuality from a cross cultural perspective. We read books and articles about men and women who participate in acts we as North Americans would consider homosexual but it wasn't for them. And when they perform these acts they don't lose their identity as male or female. In fact these acts are seen as affirming their heterosexuality. I just wonder why some cultures allow for this and others don't...

that is really interesting...that is part of the reason i am conflicted...because people assume that you are either straight...or gay...and that if you do certain acts...you are gay...but in other cultures...like you said...they are very much secure in their heterosexuality...cultural differences play a large role in how comfortable people are with discussing sex in general...let alone male/male female/female relationships...so since american black culture has been brought up with stern moral based value systems that often look down on those that engage in homosexual activity...it probably would be a task to get an open dialogue going about it...i am heterosexual but i don't have a problem talking about issues relevant to homosexuals because i am secure in my sexuality and my belief that this is what is right for ME...not everyone...obviously because you have gay people...bi-sexual people...and straight people...so to each their own...everyone has their own philosophy and beliefs as to what will help them attain the highest quality life...spiritual or otherwise...and what works for me may not work for the next person in attaining that...

[This message has been edited by CelestialBlu1 (edited July 06, 2001).]

[DOVE1920]

Nonetheless, with the rise of STDs in the Black community sexuality needs to be addressed. And its obvious that the programs that are currently in place aren't working as well as we would like. Why is that WE are spreading these diseases at such a rate?