Jump to content
Volunteer with Us at Naijalez: Empowering Nigerian Lesbian Community ×
Nigerian Lesbian Forum

"It's Unafrican to be Gay", I'm Not Buying it.


Modd

Recommended Posts

Source

Saw this interesting article. It's a long but interesting read.

 

So much for the argument that it is "unafrican" to break the norms on gender presentation and sexuality.

What is the "norm" anyway? Is Normal based on the teachings of the Bible that was brought to us by the Western world? Or based on what is practiced normally as defined by culture?

 

Me thinks normal is whatever you decide, not what legislation enforces or what religion preaches. Nothing is cast in stone. We live in an ever-changing world, I wonder why people expect things to remain the same.

People tend to misunderstand the fight for LGBT rights, they say our own is too much and we are corrupting/infecting others. (And yes a few are guilty of "confusing" some straight girls in the past :D ). For me, my (silent :rolleyes: ) fight is not to rewrite the Bible or try to change people's minds about what they think about sexuality. It's more of a fight to have everyone leave us alone and give us room to live, grow and function and stop all the judging and legislation hindering our lives.

You're a priest, oh you won't join me and my partner. That's cool, I'll find someone else who will. But, no. Instead, they come to the wedding and disrupt it holding anti-gay flyers et al. Or leak pics of a private ceremony online and jubilate in victory at the hate comments that come pouring in.

 

What is their problem with us exactly?

I'll soon start telling them that I'm just being true to my heritage and ancestry. As we all know: recessive traits skip generations and show up later... Oh really, sexuality is not normally considered a recessive gene. Whatever, I define what normal is ... Park well. B)

 

So peeps tell me, have you ever tried to look back into African or Nigerian or Tribal history as regards sexuality. Come up with anything interesting? Please share.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

well in igbo land, women were allowed to marry their fellow woman. for example, if a woman doesn't have a son and too old to bear a child, she could marry a younger girl and get a man to impregnate her. the younger girl gives birth for the older lady and sees the other lady as her husband, serves her and care for her.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...

well in igbo land, women were allowed to marry their fellow woman. for example, if a woman doesn't have a son and too old to bear a child, she could marry a younger girl and get a man to impregnate her. the younger girl gives birth for the older lady and sees the other lady as her husband, serves her and care for her.

 

Very Interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well in igbo land, women were allowed to marry their fellow woman. for example, if a woman doesn't have a son and too old to bear a child, she could marry a younger girl and get a man to impregnate her. the younger girl gives birth for the older lady and sees the other lady as her husband, serves her and care for her.

 

It's Nigerian movies that thought me about this practice. I've also heard of a woman marrying a woman on behalf of her late Son so the family name will continue. The old woman then effectively becomes the husband. I wonder what their daily interaction will be like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's Nigerian movies that thought me about this practice. I've also heard of a woman marrying a woman on behalf of her late Son so the family name will continue. The old woman then effectively becomes the husband. I wonder what their daily interaction will be like.

 

Actually, it happens. I have people who were born like this. Funny thing is, I am related to a few of them :) . It is only allowed if your father's linage is at risk of extinction. There are also instances when widows without children, and are unable to have any, are allowed to marry younger women to give birth to sons to carry-on their late husband's name. No form of sexual relationship exists between the women.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, it happens. I have people who were born like this. Funny thing is, I am related to a few of them :)/>/>/>/>/>/>/> . It is only allowed if your father's linage is at risk of extinction. There are also instances when widows without children, and are unable to have any, are allowed to marry younger women to give birth to sons to carry-on their late husband's name. No form of sexual relationship exists between the women.

 

This then is (exactly) the opium we are seeking for. Female husbands, still practised in various degrees and variations between women, accross Africa;

 

I admire mostly the style of the Nandi people of Western Kenya, where women who are older (beyond child-bearing age), never married and have no children are prime candidates to become female husbands. This is because they will want an heir to inherit their name, wealth and property. A woman in this situation will find a younger woman to marry and bear her children. She will become a female husband by giving bride-wealth and observing all the other the rituals asked of a suitor by the bride’s family. The wife may have children with any man she wishes, or a man chosen by the female husband, but the legal and social ‘father’ of the children will be the female husband. The giving and receiving of bride-wealth accords the female husband the same rights over the children as any other husband. As the social and legal father of the children, the female husband will support the children as would any other father, regardless of who the biological father may be. This is quite flexible?

 

 

Im not sure this culture is extinct yet in Nigeria though there seems to be a 'clause' like in the comment quoted above.

 

Check out though Ifeyinwa Olinke, an Igbo woman who lived in the 19th Century, was a famously enterprising woman, who socially overshadowed her less prosperous male husband. As a symbol of her prosperity and social standing, she married nine wives. Her husband did not have as many wives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This then is (exactly) the opium we are seeking for. Female husbands, still practised in various degrees and variations between women, accross Africa;

 

I admire mostly the style of the Nandi people of Western Kenya, where women who are older (beyond child-bearing age), never married and have no children are prime candidates to become female husbands. This is because they will want an heir to inherit their name, wealth and property. A woman in this situation will find a younger woman to marry and bear her children. She will become a female husband by giving bride-wealth and observing all the other the rituals asked of a suitor by the bride’s family. The wife may have children with any man she wishes, or a man chosen by the female husband, but the legal and social ‘father’ of the children will be the female husband. The giving and receiving of bride-wealth accords the female husband the same rights over the children as any other husband. As the social and legal father of the children, the female husband will support the children as would any other father, regardless of who the biological father may be. This is quite flexible?

 

 

Im not sure this culture is extinct yet in Nigeria though there seems to be a 'clause' like in the comment quoted above.

 

Check out though Ifeyinwa Olinke, an Igbo woman who lived in the 19th Century, was a famously enterprising woman, who socially overshadowed her less prosperous male husband. As a symbol of her prosperity and social standing, she married nine wives. Her husband did not have as many wives.

 

It's still in existence in Nigeria but I do not see how that is positive for the LGBT community. There is no sexual relationship between the female couples so what's the idea of wanting such? Why marry someone you can't hold or be intimate with?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's still in existence in Nigeria but I do not see how that is positive for the LGBT community. There is no sexual relationship between the female couples so what's the idea of wanting such? Why marry someone you can't hold or be intimate with?

 

Hilarious

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who says theres no fear of sexual relationships between the women, thats why that clause is there in the first place

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for saying that Calla! I know there was a book documenting female husbands where the white man was writing about the phenomenon, then he described how the 'husband' would even pinch the wife's ass in public but 'on;y in jest'. Many scholars have criticized him (though he is long dead) for his attempt at straight-washing it just because he didn't understand it. People did, and still do what they need to, to be together. As much as some of those relationships were just transactional in nature, protecting patriachial structures, it is not impossible to imagine that many of them were also emotional and sexual in nature.

 

Just cos people don't speak of something, people assume whatever they want to. All of us are 'best friends' in Nigeria and homosexuality does not exist. Isn't that what they always claim?

 

Basically, we need to start writing our own stories before we are erased from existence

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Basically, we need to start writing our own stories before we are erased from existence"

 

..I see.. People are coming around..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Basically, we need to start writing our own stories before we are erased from existence"

 

..I see.. People are coming around..

 

 

Calla, I have always advocated for telling our stories, ON OUR OWN TERMS. If you track far back as 2015, you'd see me looking for people to interview for a book. And you might learn a thing or two on how I went about people's safety...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You!!! Dont!!! SECURE!!PERSONS!!!!!!TO, ADVOCATE!

Hmmm...what you need is more a revolution not advocating. You protect those you advocate for. I understand the need to put a face to the issue but when it will cost lives, there are more subtle ways to advocate. Nigeria does not have laws protecting life, in general. We do not have the privilege of innocent until proven guilty. Once you show your face, you will be lynched. I am all for shinning the light on LGBT in Nigeria, however, if it took Americans this long to get to the point where they are "gay-wise", are we not asking a lot from a country that has barely finished teething in 50years?

 

Just thinking out loud.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You Calla, are a work of art! But first off, advocacy and security are not mutually exclusive.

See, your passion is admirable, but once in a while you might want to take a step back and think inside the box...

I know you mean well, but in a country where people die for legitimate causes (occupy, ipob, otodo gbame, etc) without the country giving a f***k, imagine what will happen to gay people that (at last count) 79% of the country doesn't even believe we deserve healthcare. Sigh

With leadership comes responsibility. If you insist that one doesn't secure persons to advocate, don't be surprised when we, your potential constituents, push back.

For examples of advocacy that took security into account, remember Nnoma Azua's book allowed people to be anonymous. Jude Dibia's walking with shadows was sold as fiction, TIERS is making LGBT movies with straight actors, and NOI is documenting these changes as they happen. Things are changing!

But back to the issue, many people will be openly in the spotlights: most of them will have the privilege of independent living, good jobs, friends support system, network of local and international NGOs, visas, and ability to buy tickets on short notice. And others will be behind the scenes because they still live at home with their families, they are still closeted at work, 70% of their friends don't know and probably won't be supportive, and if yawa gas, they will be on their own and at risk of being jobless, homeless, friendless, and publicly outted on all social media. The physical and emotional danger that would cause is immense no?

In conclusion, things are not as black and white as you insist here

You either advocate, or you die disbelieving, one or the other!

There is a lot of wonderful grey space for our people who cannot be out, but still have a role to play or a story to tell

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm...what you need is more a revolution not advocating. You protect those you advocate for. I understand the need to put a face to the issue but when it will cost lives, there are more subtle ways to advocate. Nigeria does not have laws protecting life, in general. We do not have the privilege of innocent until proven guilty. Once you show your face, you will be lynched. I am all for shinning the light on LGBT in Nigeria, however, if it took Americans this long to get to the point where they are "gay-wise", are we not asking a lot from a country that has barely finished teething in 50years?

 

Just thinking out loud.

 

Ok.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How you start matters a lot. Fifty years is half a decade. If we keep doing the wrong things we' ll keep getting the wrong results. The formative history and success of the USA is anchored on liberty, so they started properly. Dont expect changes if you arent structurally aiming to remould because in 700 years you ll be worse off than you were. Thats what activists are hoping to change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You Calla, are a work of art! But first off, advocacy and security are not mutually exclusive.

See, your passion is admirable, but once in a while you might want to take a step back and think inside the box...

I know you mean well, but in a country where people die for legitimate causes (occupy, ipob, otodo gbame, etc) without the country giving a f***k, imagine what will happen to gay people that (at last count) 79% of the country doesn't even believe we deserve healthcare. Sigh

With leadership comes responsibility. If you insist that one doesn't secure persons to advocate, don't be surprised when we, your potential constituents, push back.

For examples of advocacy that took security into account, remember Nnoma Azua's book allowed people to be anonymous. Jude Dibia's walking with shadows was sold as fiction, TIERS is making LGBT movies with straight actors, and NOI is documenting these changes as they happen. Things are changing!

But back to the issue, many people will be openly in the spotlights: most of them will have the privilege of independent living, good jobs, friends support system, network of local and international NGOs, visas, and ability to buy tickets on short notice. And others will be behind the scenes because they still live at home with their families, they are still closeted at work, 70% of their friends don't know and probably won't be supportive, and if yawa gas, they will be on their own and at risk of being jobless, homeless, friendless, and publicly outted on all social media. The physical and emotional danger that would cause is immense no?

In conclusion, things are not as black and white as you insist here

 

There is a lot of wonderful grey space for our people who cannot be out, but still have a role to play or a story to tell

 

Hey you! You must be something else too! Arent you?

 

I ll repeat, it depends on your level of 'activism/ advocacy' (if you can use that term)

 

Why will yawa gas? When no one compelled you to come forth?. Its if you ve been compelled then its 'yawa' when people find out. 'Coming out' (first to yourself and then, others), is a personal journey no one compells you. Yet that dosent mean you should flaunt your gayness before the law, its still criminal. That doesnt make you either an activist or advocate too. You are just a community member and if you happen to like posting information about community progress on activism, then you are into sensitization, which is fine and helpful. You might also be prepping in the nearest future, to come foward in the struggle.That also is a process.

 

I was trying to be kind earlier but its black and white.

 

An activist/ advocate has a face. Must have a face.

You can go undercover after you' ve shown your face, not the other way round.

 

Im not asking anyone to join in, except you are brave, fearless. Fighting for LGBT equality is a dangerous profession, and one done dedicatedly. No food, no water, just praying and fasting and running about, with a hat, to and fro town, from the mob and police. (ok just remove the last sentence)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand all the scenarios we might ve been trying to paint even before this thread, I purposely strung on the conversation because the terminologies and ideology is wrong. As an advocate, (which means you are working within the system, through lobbying, dialogue, anything subtle in action), perhaps you are alone or with a group that already understands the cause being fought for, your job isnt to lead people, or compell others to join you or for you to become their hero, or heroine. As an advocate, you are trying to say something you know is right and the most you need is the right audience to hear you out. It isnt guerilla too. It has a face, because when finally you are going to be heard you must come foward to explain your cause. Advocating for LGBT rights in Nigeria doesnt automatically make you gay either. I dont know how else to explain this.

 

Dont get it mixed up, the people in Unoma's books are not really the advocates, Unoma is. And she has a face. For all you know, she isnt even gay. Just an ally. So you mustn't be gay to fight these battles. Now the rest of the 89% can sit at home and be discreet until the law is decriminalized. Dont flaunt your sexual orientation, its criminal.

 

But hear this, an advocate has a face.

 

If you tell me security is an issue because of mob action which happens even to the non-gay person and is a Nigerian factor, then I know what you mean. But if you tell me you are an out and proud LGBT in Nigeria, which automatically makes you an ACTIVIST (take note of the changes in terminologies) then you must provide your security first. Not for those following you, you arent a leader, you are an activist. When others join you, they do so for themselves but when you compel them to join you, not only are you slowing yourself down and garnering more financial responsibilities, you ve missed the mark as an activist, you dont compel. The movement is not of population, it is of message. Two or three will do. So, protect yourself (especially from mob action) if you have to but remember you are fighting for your TRUTH. You MUST win or die trying. But you must have a face still.

 

Moreover arrests is the least worries a true fighter has. An activist who hasnt thought about arrest, police crackdown etc isnt thinking. Infact when it had gotten to that stage of government clamping down, they are now listening to you and often times it is the catalyst for further deliberation and more people coming out to join and even your more established counterparts, coming to identify with you, media etc. Some activists, haven done enough, seek attention to the tune of confrontation and arrest, just to throw the exact light needed on his plight. If as an activist you dont want to hear 'arrest' or you've not thought of 'in- case-of' crackdown, assylum, exile, (self imposed or sent) then you are teething.

 

 

But as an advocate you medium of operation most times is partnering engaging the system, like the last round table with TIERs and Dr Abati, its was a diplomatic move. Everyone including Abati was there, but no one could be called gay because they were all under civil rights orgz, which in that case the SSMPA Prohibits organization forming alliance with LGBT persons, so for all we know, police would've invaded that day, what do you think? That vocal lady 'dodged a bullet' though.

 

Get this, you are not asking for population, just an ear. You are not leading anyone, just asking for what is right. As a successful activist/ advocate you sit in your office, hear a knock on your door, and a kindred spirt is at the door saying, "I am here, lets work". I've met so many who are all talk and no work. They don't even know what the SSMPA bill says.

 

Most times there is a project; movie or book and we ask people to come foward, it is mostly to compile/ collate similar experiences, document it and grow our portfolio, there is a mark to meet up. Also to open up opportunities for like minds to 'jam'. And those people who came, can remain anonymous. Behind the curtains, they may have even been gratified to come. The true advocate can protect himself but you know exactly what cause you are fighting.

 

Now for the activist, who is more confrontational, and Out, and mostly working 'outside', the system, to have a face is yet paramount.

 

The crux I'm getting which is the confusion is that a lot of passionate LGBT persons are behind the scenes and screens, of their computer, typing. This is good also because you are sensitizing. You can grow into an advocate or activist, when you've resources enough to ruffle the waters, and the passion is hot still. Teminologies. Termibologies, terminologies. But if you just want to sit back and analyse, you are an onlooker or for the most, an ally.

 

People have to stand up and fight, and fight on the frontline. That is the trajectory of human rights everywhere, so you'll just doing what everyone has done before. And we need optimism to fight on.

 

"They can fight us, but eventually we will win this. We may lose some of the battles, but we will win the war"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Manifesto....

 

Not everybody will come out publicly, but that doesn't discredit them. A lot of people can't afford to draw attention to they sleep with and how. They don't deny it but they will never carry a placard. Some people have other life ambitions that they wish to be known for other than "Gay". They will rather be known as Doctors, Governors, SANs and Artist. Even in Gay positive countries a lot of people still don't come out publicly. It's life changing and some people don't want to overhaul their lives.

 

Lobbyist are most times not facially recognised but you can't discredit the work they do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...