Monday, May 17, 2010

The Political Culture of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity in Africa

1. Topic Proposal/Introduction

With over fifty sovereign states spanning a population of over one billion people, thousands of languages, and a religious “Triple Heritage” derived from Islam, Christianity, and various indigenous religions, the African continent is a densely-layered tapestry of cultural diversity and heterogeneity. But despite the fact that individuals and communities from countless walks of life reside in Africa, information regarding the living conditions, political rights, and upward mobility of its population of lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and the transgendered (LGBT) remains elusive. On the basis of cultural and religious norms, homosexuality remains stigmatic at best throughout much the continent – and in some cases, open acknowledgement of queer identity in Africa carries harsh legal repercussions. Despite recent strides in cultural acceptance and political recognition of gay rights in the Western world, the BBC reports that “homosexuality is outlawed in 38 African countries.”1

Normative attitudes and the extent of its legality fluctuates wildly throughout the continent – from South Africa, the only African state which has formally recognized same-sex marriages, to Uganda, where a controversial parliamentary proposal to impose the death penalty for homosexuality was recently scrapped in the midst of international outrage. For the intent of this paper, I will seek to determine the extent to which African policies towards homosexuality are a manifestation of rigid, inflexible cultural fixtures or subject to liberalization. Which, if any African societies, may be compatible with contemporary Western conceptualizations of gender identity and sexual orientation? Can globalization, through cross-cultural communication, increasing homogenization of culture, and the integration of transcontinental societies under Western economic hegemony convert African values – thereby transforming African policies toward gay rights? If recent events in Uganda serve as any example, the international community – led by North America and Western Europe, where several states recognize same-sex marriage – has become increasingly intolerant towards harsh African suppression of gay rights. Is there a correlation between sociopolitical acceptance of homosexuality and the individual nation-state’s global reputation in the 21st century?

2. The Reality of Pre-Colonial African Homosexualities: Misconceptions Dispelled

Despite the deceptive claims of some, notably Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe, that “homosexuality is for whites only and is an anathema to African culture” 2 and “a Western phenomenon imported to Africa by the European colonists,” 3 the history of same-sex partnerships on the continent predates European colonial occupation. However, it is important to qualify that such relationships in Africa have often been more nuanced and sociologically divergent than contemporary conceptualizations (or widespread oversimplifications) of homosexuality in the West. In this sense, rather than an all-encompassing and universally applicable “homosexuality,” numerous “homosexualities” have existed throughout a myriad of historical, geographic, cultural, religious, ethnic, tribal, and/or social spaces and contexts in Africa. Although written statistical data pre-dating European colonialism in Africa ranges from sparse to nonexistent, Western anthropologists and other scientists documented homosexual practices in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Indeed, according to German anthropologist Kurt Falk and contrary to the fallacious assertions by Mugabe and others, “same-sex practices were certainly a part of traditional Bushman and related Khoi societies in southern Africa”4 – located, ironically, in present-day Zimbabwe, as well as Botswana. “One Bushman painting in a cave in Zimbabwe … shows several males engaging in sex acts together. It dates from at least one thousand, but more probably two thousand years ago.” 5 Furthermore, British anthropologist Sir Edward Evan Evans-Pritchard wrote that among the Zande people of Central Africa (who lived in parts of present-day Sudan, the Central African Republic, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo), “Homosexuality is indigenous. Zande do not regard it as at all improper, indeed as very sensible for a man to sleep with boys when women are not available or are taboo…some princes may even have preferred boys to women, when both were available…and also that they sometimes do so on other occasions, just because they like them.” 6 In addition to distinguishing the pluralism of African homosexualities from our contemporary understandings of “homosexuality,” these findings constitute a resoundingly substantive rebuttal to the common falsehood that homosexual relationships are universally incompatible with African cultural values. Still, they cannot be applied to the multifaceted and diversiform whole of African tribes and ethnic groups.

3. The Chronology of Homosexualities and Homophobia Through the Prism of Western Colonialism, Christianity, and Islam

Although largely obscured in contemporary African society on the basis of its comparative homophobia, some policies, misconceptions, and negative or fearful sentiments towards homosexuality throughout the continent are arguably rooted in the legacy of non-indigenous religious, cultural, and political forces upon Africa. This can be affirmed by the values imposed by the most influential Abrahamic Middle Eastern religions, Islam and Christianity, as well as the Western moral and judicial philosophies imparted by European colonialism itself. For instance, despite his oft-repeated claims that homosexuality arrived on African shores as an undesired export of White European decadence, it is the legacy of British colonialism in Mugabe’s Zimbabwe that originally established statutes criminalizing practices of homosexuality, specifically sodomy, in then-Rhodesia. 7 Two major events in Zimbabwe over the past two decades have crystallized the state of its institutional disposition toward homosexuality: the sexual assault allegations lobbied against its disgraced former founding president, Canaan Banana, and Robert Mugabe’s grandstanding decision to exclude an organization called Gays and Lesbians of Zimbabwe (GALZ) from participating in the 1995 Zimbabwe International Book Fair (ZIBF) despite its annual thematic slogan: “human rights and justice.” 8 Mugabe’s decision ultimately had the unintended effect of galvanizing and reinvigorating Zimbabwe’s repressed gay rights movement, drawing considerable attention from international audiences for his bombastic and highly controversial remarks calling homosexuals “worse than pigs and dogs.” 9 Mugabe’s staggering devaluation of “human rights and justice” speaks volumes about the veracity of his commitment to it.

Meanwhile, Canaan Banana’s behavior can be considered prevailingly embarrassing for Zimbabwe not because of the homosexual nature of his crimes, but for the severity of the offenses – rape and sexual assault are morally loathsome regardless of whether they are heterosexual or homosexual acts. Zimbabweans were also humiliated by the blatantly hypocritical discrepancy between Banana’s public and private lives. As a former Christian Reverend who had publicly criticized homosexuality among men as the manifestation of “the poor upbringing of girls,” 10 Banana was ultimately convicted of all eleven charges of sexual assault and sentenced to ten years imprisonment. According to The Guardian, Banana’s trial also “exposed Mugabe's virulent anti-gay stance - untypical of wider Zimbabwean public opinion - as a facade, because it included testimony that his own officials had covered up for Banana and refused to help victims of his sexual demands.” 11 In this sense, both Banana and Mugabe’s public posturing fell far short of the reality of their respective behaviors, uncovering flagrant deception and duplicity among the most powerful men in Zimbabwe as well as calling the legitimacy of their anti-gay stances into contention. One can only assume that Mugabe knowingly attempted to conceal Banana’s behavior in order to prevent it from compromising his own political standing – and that if the gravity of Mugabe’s public sentiments were legitimate, he would have acted in a transparent manner to punish rather than protect his subordinate. To this end, it becomes clear that Mugabe’s corrosive anti-gay rhetoric is merely an insincere affectation crafted to consolidate political power, though I believe it is rooted predominantly in Zimbabwe’s existing British anti-sodomy laws and an appeal to the traditional mores of Christianity. Unfortunately, the Canaan Banana episode reinforces the negative stereotypes surrounding homosexual lifestyles that Zimbabwe’s leadership has propagated.

In Nigeria, where the Islamic Sharia penal code is the supreme judicial authority in twelve of its predominantly Muslim Northern states, “homosexuality by Muslims in those states can attract a sentence of 100 lashes if the defendant is unmarried or stoning if married or divorced,”12 according to the British government’s corresponding travel advisement report on its website. Corporal and even capital punishments for convictions relating to homosexual behavior exist elsewhere in Africa, but crucially, the authority of Sharia courts in Nigeria exemplifies the codification of anti-homosexual laws as a manifestation of Islamic rather than indigenous African values. This is not to say that Islam lacks sufficient African credentials, nor does it ignore that the religion of Muhammad has existed for centuries as an influential and perpetually expansive continental force. With millions of followers, especially in Northern, Eastern, and sub-Saharan Africa, the Islamic religion has long since imbued itself into the African cultural psyche. However, it is significant to observe that having originated in the Arabian Peninsula, Islamic values are not inherently African. As such, the jurisdiction of Sharia courts in Nigeria reflects extrageneous rather than native customs.

It is my belief that modern African attitudes and policies towards homosexuality are not necessarily the product of indigenous cultural fixtures, as evidenced by its practice in pre-colonial tribes (though its application vacillates in accordance with the sheer diversity of ethnicities and cultures native to the continent). Moreover, contemporary homophobic policies and values within the African continent reflect the enduring influence of antiquated Western, Christian, and Islamic impositions and their gradual institutionalization into its complex and multilayered political culture. But beyond the residual dominance of former occupiers and missionaries, can today’s unprecedented forms of ever-increasing globalization subvert contemporary attitudes, thereby institutionalizing a sense of progressive acceptance toward gay rights? Will it ultimately expand civil rights to gays over time and liberalize contemporary African policies and attitudes? If there is a modern state serving as a model for incremental progress in the aforementioned direction toward egalitarianism for sexual minorities, it is most certainly South Africa.

4. The South African Exception: Marriage Equality on the Geographic Cusp of its Antithesis


Although nearly eighty percent of African states have made homosexuality an explicitly criminal offense, with most of the remaining African states bearing no criminal statutes pertaining to homosexuality by wholly ignoring its status, South Africa stands uniquely as the only country with legalized same-sex marriage and constitutional anti-discrimination protection. Following the end of Apartheid in 1994, the equality clause of South Africa’s interim constitution, ratified in 1996, declared that “No person shall be unduly discriminated against, directly or indirectly…on one or more of the following grounds in particular: race, gender, sex, ethnic or social origin, colour, sexual orientation, age, religion, conscience, belief, culture, or language” 13 - sweeping protections unprecedented not only within Africa, but for any constitution in a modern state. On the basis of its liberal constitution and over the objection of Christian and Muslim leaders alike, South Africa extended its institutional sexual orientation protection even further when it enacted The Civil Union Act in 2006. In doing so, it granted legal recognition to same-sex couples seeking marital unions – with caveats allowing “clergy and civil marriage officers to turn away gay couples for reasons of conscience.” 14 Considering the dismal legal status of homosexuality throughout the rest of the continent, how can South Africa’s solitary strides towards civil equity be accounted for? And has its progressive stance on gay rights bolstered its international reputation among Western states? The answers to these questions remain ambiguous.

With regards to the sweeping protections in South Africa’s constitution, Neville Hoad posits that “the lateness of South Africa in the postcolonial moment is significant…given the illegitimacy of the regime being replaced and the imperative to incorporate the most …advanced forms of human rights, the timing of the South African constitution in the history of postcolonialism facilitated the entrenchment of lesbian and gay human rights.” 15 This perspective suggests that South Africa’s constitutional concerns for gay rights is the result of historical happenstance more than anything else: the combination of the nation’s resolve to obliterate all forms of discrimination to break with its traumatic Apartheid past, as well as the serendipitous virtue of being drafted during an era in which the struggle for rights among sexual minorities had gained visibility elsewhere in the world. As for South Africa’s global reputation, some reports have suggested an insufficient international commitment to gay rights. The Guardian reports that despite its constitution, South Africa has engaged in arbitrary and perplexing voting practices in its capacity as a United Nations member-state. In response to two 2007 requests for consultative accreditation from LGBT rights organizations, South Africa “sided with authoritarian states that abuse gay people, and against the western democracies where gays live freely.” 16 In light of this inexplicable discrepancy, I assert that its constitutional protections reflect the country’s internal politics and condemnation of Apartheid more significantly than an external effort to appear tolerant to Western countries. If the latter were the case, South Africa would be a steadfast supporter of gay rights within an international multilateral organization such as the UN.

5. The Ugandan Controversy: International Backlash in Defense of LGBT Rights

In the past several months, Western media outlets have reported upon a controversial piece of legislation known as the Anti-Homosexuality Bill of 2009 before the Ugandan parliament. Lambasted as “odious” by U.S. President Barack Obama and widely condemned throughout the Western community, the set of proposals would impose extremely severe penalties of capital punishment or life imprisonment for the commission of homosexual acts. In a particularly controversial subsection, the bill defines a separate category for “aggravated homosexuality,” a capital offense, as engaging in a homosexual act while being HIV-positive, among other categories. In lieu of the unexpected scope of the backlash, Uganda’s leadership, including President Yoweri Museveni and Deputy Foreign Minister Henry Okello Oryem, has attempted to disassociate themselves from the proposed changes. 17 In my belief, this arguably renders the proposal a startling eugenics program with the aim of inhumanely eradicating individuals afflicted with a disease – in this particular case, HIV. Another highly controversial aspect of the issue is predicated on the role played by U.S. Evangelical Christians in advancing the legislation. The three men – Scott Lively, Caleb Lee Brundidge, and Don Schmierer, are associated with the notion of “converting” homosexuals into heterosexuals through counseling and faith. 18 Although the American individuals claim they oppose the malignant consequences outlined by the bill, the episode serves as another stark reminder of the prevalence of non-indigenous Western influence, vis-à-vis Christianity, upon contemporary African mindsets pivoting towards condemnation rather than acceptance of homosexuality, further undercutting the notion that the West has encroached Africa with homosexuality. Indeed, Western contributions to African homophobia seem more prevalent than its mythologized appropriation of homosexuality.

6. Conclusion

Despite the fact that African homosexualities have been made manifest to varying capacities within diverse sociological groups and geographic locales throughout history and even prior to colonization, as documented among Bushmen, Khoi, and Zande ethnic groups, the vast majority of African states have today illegalized the practice. Some particularly incendiary heads of state such as Robert Mugabe have suggested that homosexuality is a product of European imperialism. Contrary to such assertions, although a pervasive sense of homophobia may very well have permeated the contemporary African psyche, I believe the research I have documented suggests that these sentiments and their codification are primarily the product of external Western, Christian, Islamic, colonial, and post-colonial influences that have shaped African culture – not a reflection of indigenous African values. In Nigeria, a fundamentalist interpretation of Islamic Sharia law has percolated throughout prevailing mindsets and mentalities, culminating in its stoning penalties for homosexual acts. And in Zimbabwe, Mugabe’s efforts to scapegoat homosexuality – predicated on outmoded British ordinances – have aided him in perpetuating a perniciously anti-gay Zimbabwean identity, directly implicating Western values in contemporaneous homophobia, though the vitriolic nature of his remarks have also helped to raise awareness regarding the plight of sexual minorities in Zimbabwe among the international community.

Despite these findings, it is important to avoid making sweeping generalizations with regards to this immensely complex and largely unstudied topic. Although South Africa exists as a distinct and praiseworthy example of social justice for sexual minorities, its society – and indeed, its leadership – has not been entirely forthcoming or consistent in promoting its own policies elsewhere, as evidenced by its bewildering opposition to relatively innocuous United Nations resolutions favoring the advancement of gay rights. To put this into perspective, we must consider that voters and lawmakers in liberal democracies such as the United States have also been unwilling to accept certain elements of the gay agenda. California and Maine have both voted to repeal existing laws sanctioning marriage equality in the past two years despite recognitions of its legality by courts elsewhere. South Africa, like the United States and other parts of the Western world where homophobia remains a factor, has at least illustrated incremental progress towards the ultimate realization of egalitarianism. With the advent of globalization as a liberalizing and secularizing force, it remains distinctly possible that other African countries will slowly begin to follow South Africa’s lead over the next several generations. Ironically, this path towards the reduction of homophobia and the expansion of civil rights could bring Africa culturally closer to its former Western colonizers – even though current homophobia is largely the product of vestigial Western homophobia, which has now begun to wane. But even if Africa on a whole can undergo a period of conviction-altering ideological transformation similar to that which has been experienced in the West, Christianity and Islam will remain rigidly opposed to any recognition of homosexuality – a significant obstacle. The question remains as to whether or how monotheistic religious influence upon society can be minimized, moderated, or liberalized.

VII. Notes

1. BBC News. 27 February 2008. “Africa’s lesbians demand change.” http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7266646.stm (21 April 2010).
2. Hoad, Neville. African Intimacies: Race, Homosexuality, and Globalization. (Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 2007). 15.
3. Murray, Stephen and Will Roscoe. Boy Wives and Female Husbands: Studies of African Homosexualities. (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1998). 223.
4. Murray, 26.
5. Gays and Lesbians of Zimbabwe. Unspoken Facts: A History of Homosexualities in Africa. (Avondale, Harare, Zimbabwe: Precigraph, 2008). 24.
6. Gays and Lesbians of Zimbabwe. 24.
7. Hoad, xii.
8. Murray, 247.
9. BBC News. 12 August 1998. “Homosexual and Hated in Zimbabwe.” http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/crossing_continents/143169.stm. (21 April 2010).
10. Gays and Lesbians of Zimbabwe, 140.
11. The Guardian. 12 November 2003. “Obituary: The Rev. Canaan Banana.” http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/2003/nov/12/guardianobituaries.zimbabwe (21 April 2010).
12. United Kingdom Foreign and Commonwealth Office. 21 March 2010. Nigeria Travel Advice. http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/travel-and-living-abroad/travel-advice-by-country/sub-saharan-africa/nigeria?ta=lawsCustoms&pg=3 (21 April 2010).
13. Hoad, 86.
14. The Washington Post. 1 December 2006. “Same-Sex Marriage Law Takes Effect in S. Africa.” http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/30/AR2006113001370.html (21 April 2010).
15. Hoad, 87.
16. The Guardian. 21 August 2007. “South Africa’s Gay Betrayal.” http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/aug/21/southafricasgaybetrayal (21 April 2010).
17. BBC News. 5 February 2010. “Uganda gay bill ‘will be changed.’” http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8499798.stm. (21 April 2010.)
18. The New York Times. 3 January 2010. “Americans’ Role Seen in Uganda Anti-Gay Push.” http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/04/world/africa/04uganda.html. (21 April 2010).