---

SELF-DETERMINATION

The greatest threat to freedom is the absence of criticism   Wole Soyinka

It is a human right for a people to shape those things which they believe are critical to the way they chose to define their humanity and the cultural process of that humanity. We are defined not by our black skin but by our values. Africans are not people with dark color, we are people we specific cultures. To keep alive the traditions which best represent that which makes us unique and defines our African orientation and sensibility: These things are self-determined. African culture is generally at odds with homosexuality. Principled moral disagreement with a life style which is taboo. African values cannot be measured against European standards; which relies on humanistic and relativistic morals upon which it builds its ethical structure. Nor should Africans, with these views, been perceived as backward, or hateful. Africans should not be persecuted for voicing opposition to the work of the Gay lobby, as what is happening in our communities under threat of losing your job, your fan base and your support.

Scope of the Problem Homosexuality Ancient Africa White Imposition Scope of Problem Health Risk Homophobia New Black? Homosexuality & Islam Homosexuality & Christianity Gay Marriage Downlow Brothers (DL) African Agency Gay Power FGM Marriage in Africa Comments*

This is a form of terrorism and political blackmail; it is therefore a core violation of the 'rights' pro-gay use in their argument. The casual association with all forms of disagreement as a form of hate, violence and homophobia is a gross violations of human rights appeal which are set-up to protect instances where those crimes do actually occur. And as oppose to labelling actually violence, they are using it as a political tool to drag down all plurality. We are living in a hyper-sexualized society, and this sexual lens is being used to process, with undue weight, many policies, positions and attitudes in all areas of study. Homosexuality is just one such aspect of this trend where sex is the new buzz word- everything linked to sex is high priority (FGM for example). So in this sexualized world, it is in Africa's health interest to avoid any and everything which exacerbated Africa's moral and cultural demise. For it is these moral-cultural structures that has preserved African humanity and human rights for so long.

And it is not for Tarzan to dictate to Africa how we construct notions of human rights and morality. Africans, such as the authors of this paper, are fully capable of realizing, determining and articulating the values and positions which we hold sacred. The assault on African agency and intelligence is an overspill of the neo-colonialist attitude towards a childlike people in need of moral schooling: And this contempt for African intellect is racist.

You notice when the West talks about Gay rights "advances" in Africa they always mention South Africa as the "model", well here are some other "models" we pray the rest of Africa never copies from South Africa: Rape capital of the World, highest crime in Africa, deeply immoral society, highest abortion rates per capita in Africa, white wealth 80%, terrible economic and social apartheid, non-representative democracy and the highest alcohol consumption in the world. It is funny that the most immoral country in Africa is also the one with the "gay marriage", while there is no direct correlation is it is clearly part of its immoral package.

A few notable times in history we listen to Europe's version of what was good for Africa:

1. we ended up enslaved,

2. We ended up as colonial subjects,

3. we ended up in apartheid,

4. We ended up in serious debt,

5. We became victims of globalization and under development.

The one last thing we have still standing is our CULTURE.

---

LINGUISTIC CHAOS

How far are we willing to go with chaos theory? To protect fringe vulgar abuses of "human rights" and "self-determination" set up for seriously oppressed people (who remain oppressed). The world has gone the long distance to accommodate "Men who sleep with men" These are not gays. "Trans gender men who are women but do not classified themselves as gay." [See images]Trans gender men who are gay. Trans gender men identifying women (don't believe having a penis makes them less of a woman, to suggest this would be racist and offensive and narrow minded). Women – Anyone who feels like a woman "Natural women" (offends some because they consider themselves women but without female parts, hence using "natural" is racist).

Women with non-female genitals. Men with non-male genitals. Nothing means anything anymore, parent, husband, wife, child, woman, man, sex, natural, taboo and marriage.

---

SCOPE OF THE PROBLEM

The central argument of the homosexuality has not been consistent. They have been moving from privacy argument to an equality argument. But the final evolution is that of supremacy. Initially the gay lobby argued for their sexual acts to be protected by law, and to decriminalize such liaisons. However since that victory has been won in most of the Western world the campaign has made a greater shift to demanding they be affording the same rights as other people, who nature has given the right to life to. And now we see elements of supremacy which almost demonize any form of plurality on the issue.

It would be illogical to expect homosexuals not to fight against violence and unfair discrimination. They are humans and not a separate species and we are them, and they are us. If the alleged gay rights are localized in this argument (not beng subject to violence) then we support them. Discrimination in areas where sexuality is not a factor is clearly wrong. What does someone's sexuality have to do with their ability to fix cars or trade stocks. And we agree sexuality for the most part is a private matter. So we cannot abuse someone for their sexuality. And we must as an advance society be able to understand and tolerate difference. However, sexual orientation discrimination takes on a whole new meaning in jobs where sexuality is an issue, an iman of an Islamic mosque, in the army, etc. Especially when we are discussing openly gay behavior which is incompatible with the harmony of specific jobs.

The core issue is the expansion of an gay ideology and the political furthering of their reach into sacred areas of our lives; Adoption, marriage, religion, education. What business does a school have telling an African boy that sex can be between a male-female but also a male-male? And why should a society whose stability is traditionally gender based be destroyed by having gender confusion? The male and female beings are no accident of nature, male-female stabilize humanity. Men behaving like women has always been a serious threat to our basic human construction. An assault on how most humans perceive masculinity and femininity. And a entire canon of conducts come out of this gender differential which are scared aspects of our world.

Why should adoption rights be given to two men, a right that nature has deliberately deselected them from? Some women and men have health reasons for not being able to have a child, but male and male are designed not to create life, so why should that privilege which nature has given to male-female be now a right for homosexuals? And we are not advanced enough to know the consequences of a child being raised with two fathers. Clearly nature selected male-female relationship for a higher purpose. And while single father households, and two brother house holds have successful raised children it is 1. Not the desired equation for success and 2. Those all male households do not have a sexual element where one male is playing a role intended for a woman.

It is our choice as a human civilization to say that we prefer our children to be raised ideally by a man and a woman so that the psychological gender socialization is sucessfully installed in the child to make them complete human beings. Already we know what happens to boy sheltered in female dominant relationships, so we are not qualified, considering the limits of human knowledge, to know the consequences of children being raised in same-sex relationships. There is more to raising a child than notions of love and the capacity to fiscally provide. Factors of socialization, self-pride, confidence in ethnic origin are factor proven to be also critical.

It is not about conversion because most people are hard wired to be repulsed by gay-sex. Pro-gay agenda has therefore exposed people to increasing volumes of gay activity to desensitized this natural adversion. However, this does not make gay sex less repulsive. Because if you continuously show people images of carnage they will naturally become desensitize also. This aversion to things gay is hard wired and desirable as it promotes healthy relationships that encourage, and reward, male-female relationships.

No parent says to their child "When you grow up I hope you become gay", regardless of their stance on homosexuality. Parents do not desire a homosexual lifestyle for their children. This does not make humanity "homophobic" if the term is overextended because it is not an irrational fear. Neither is God homophobic for only allowing male-female relations to produce children. All of this means that homosexuality is not a desired lifestyle and that the homosexual lifestyle is against human tradition of peoplehood. Where people differ is in tolerance for homosexuality after the fact; but acceptance is different to promotion.

---

SELECTIVE HUMAN RIGHTS

"Gay rights" linguistically looks like "Civil rights" and has been intentionally stealing sympathy solely on this bases. But regardless of the linguistic similarities, civil rights and gay rights are radically different in their moral and humanist foundations. Gay Rights, is a word in heavy circulation, but what does it mean "Gay rights", are there some special rights which should only be afforded to gays? Entire campaigns and arguments are solely reliant on this awkward construction. Do gay rights mean the right to be gay? And who should grant that right? In most countries no one is stopping what happens in private? Or does it mean the right to have children, a right denied by nature? Human rights already protect all human beings from persecution and abuse. So what are the values of gay rights that some people blindly jump on the bandwagon and support? What should communities do when the majority rights are threatened by minority gay rights? And where does it end? Can gay rights be so overextended that it imposes itself in the classroom, in areas held sacred by the majority? There is no "rights" when it comes to the recognition of marriage by cultures and the state. For the vast majority of Africans there is no "right" to be gay, it is offensive that two men should have "rights" to protect what is morally "wrong." The right for two men to mount and sodomize each other is hidden in the most beautiful human rights arguments, all masking the reality that we are speaking about an act which is anti-human. The right to safety, security, the right to worship all hug the central values of our humanity. What are the specific additional rights nested in this vague oxymoron?

It is almost amazing to see European nations, who allow all kinds of same-sex marriage under the banner of "human rights," then take issue with a Muslim woman's head-dress (Hijab) as a source of "cultural tension" (in Italy) or incompatible with our values (Jack Straw, UK). The same Europe that criminalise what dress it's minorities can wear in France is screaming gay rights at Africa.

In Africa we do not impose what head dress Muslim women can wear. And why if two men can get married is polygyny still criminalise? What arguments justify bigamy laws across many Western nations that now allow homosexual marriage? Polygyny is criminalized in the West, and carries a prison term and yet they fly the banner of "choice" and human rights in the face of the rest of the world. These are the questions which fly in the face of what most Africans see as a farce.

Just because a few people stand up in the street and shout "RIGHTS" doesn't mean the entire canon of human culture shifts to accommodate. "Human Rights" can be used by any group to achieve anything, however ridiculous. So screaming rights neither adds or takes away merit. Merit in human rights is in the domain of the majority cultures which wade through all kinds of considerations before granting merit. And since we, humanity, are the vicegerents on Earth we can only look to ourselves to resolve these issue.

---

BACKGROUND TO AFRICAN PEOPLE

As African people, the historical relationship between the African man and woman has been the bedrock of African civilization building and greatness. In the millennia preceding Christianity and Islam, African worldviews, rituals, art, language and works of wisdom celebrated the complementary relationship between the male and the female. After Christianity and Islam nothing has changed in respect to the centrality of life and pro-life systems. The harvest, the coming of the rains, the pouring of libation to the ancestors all speaks to the continuity of the life processes. According to Dr Molefi Kete Asante; professor at Temple University, USA: "the overall African philosophy is that life and the reproduction of life sit at the core of human society. Men and women have children who ritualize their parents and ancestors. In the process of building community, African culture has no place, no category and no concept that can accommodate homosexuality as a way of life because it does not fit with the view that humans should reproduce in order to be remembered for eternity”.  He goes on to state "Nothing is more important than the cycle of life from the unborn to the ancestors; anything that breaks that cycle, such as homosexuality as a way of life, threatens the very core of African society and philosophy."  (Quoted from The Encyclopedia of African Religion)

Most African people have no concept of the political goals and aspirations of the homosexual movement because homosexuality is a taboo topic that we usually try to ignore. Many of us believe that as long as it is not in our faces, there is no problem. However, when we investigate and explore the political ramifications of this Euro-American expression of sexual aggression, we discover that it is having a profound impact on the lives and future of African peoples. But before we proceed we have to addresses some fundamentals such as the language and concepts we use to engage in this conversation.

He who defines the terms controls the debate and by extension, public opinion. On this issue the terms have already been defined (in many cases invented) by the talented sophists of the “gay” movement. Sophistry, is the ancient Greek art of persuasion by subtly false reasoning. This is not about equal rights.  This is not even about us forcing our views on someone else.  This is about the legitimacy of African peoples and people of African heritage to even hold a differing point of view about the normality and acceptability of homosexuality; thereby denying the majority of Africans the freedom to practice and advance our cultures as well as to oppose cultural norms, beliefs and practices which we do not agree with or find socially acceptable.

The homosexual discussion in Africa is driven by Western interests, not African interests. Given all the other pressing socio-economic considerations that Africans are facing, homosexuality is not a top priority for the peoples of Africa. The exportation of Western mass media products all over the world is producing the one-way flow of messages or media products as a form of cultural dominance over African people. Media promotes the messages of Euro-American imperialism and ideological propaganda. One of the concerns is that it causes real damage through disruption of basic social and cultural institutions such as African sex and family norms which is having a deleterious effect on African communities. Ultimately, the value conflicts between the pro-homosexual lobby and those that oppose the rampant homo-sexualisation of society under the misguided notion of ‘tolerance’ is a battle to shape the minds of society, and ultimately the moral climate of our future.

This is about the legitimacy of African peoples to hold a differing point of view, and to have the freedom to choose what moral standards we desire to live and raise our families by. There is a growing trend in this country to indoctrinate people to the homosexual lifestyle. This goes beyond allowing them their freedom of choice.

As part of their ideological psycho-spiritual arsenal, there has been an attempt to impose the sexual mores and meanings of Euro-American societies unto Africans.  We cannot therefore underestimate the power and influence of the Western which, continues to impose western norms of sexuality onto African and African Diaspora societies. This is another form of cultural imperialism.

In different cultures (and at different historical moments or conjunctures within the same culture) very different meanings are given to same-sex activity both by society at large and by the individual participants. The physical acts might be similar, but the social construction of meanings around them is profoundly different. It follows that Western homosexuality as an identity is a recent (as a nineteenth-century) Western historical construction.  Evidence of the existence of homosexuality amongst Africans as a sexual practice express quite different beliefs, causes and meanings and social priorities to the Euro-American homosexual identity and agenda.

---

HISTORY OF COLONIAL IMPOSITION AND SLAVERY

I have not been an adulterer, homosexual or child molester   Book of the Coming Forth by Day

The colonial conquest, apartheid and enslavement were direct assaults on the African way of life and primarily on African lives. The destruction of systems which African used to govern their lives. The replacement of African values with those from Europe which made complicite slaves. And today African communities have never seen a cessation to this imposition which comes under the cover of human rights. A subject Europe have flunked for the last 1000 years. The C.V. of Europe is testimony to some of the worst violations of human and nature rights. So let the record show that Africans chose to find another path in search of what we define as our greater humanity.

The persecution of those who oppose the homosexually imposition are labeled as “hateful” and backward. There is nothing in this position which constitutes hate, immaturity or backwardness. So in a plural society where respect is being asked to be given why must opponents of the homosexual life style be branded with straw man arguments and statements they have never made? Opposing homosexuality is not "hate speech" nor is it a "lack of maturity." Being in disagreement with polygyny of FGM does not make someone Anti-African or racist. Could Africans then say that anyone who opposes polygamy is hateful or immature? The default retort to a principled moral objection cannot be you are backward when no counter argument is given.

And the subsequent colonial imposition is offensive since it implies that the West has some moral superiority in which to teach Africans how to be more human. (more European) This gay benchmark is the new way for the former colonial masters to gauge African development into modernity. Countries like South Africa are seen as progressive for accommodating gay marriage rights. However South Africa advanced gay rights on the eve of ending apartheid (which only is good for a minority of its citizens) but has failed to deliver basic rights for the people still oppressed by the system of Apartheid, albeit economic apartheid.

As much as sex is a private matter it has communal consequence and thus to some degree in the interest of the broader community. However the specifics of someone’s private life should not be worn on their sleeve. Sex or homosexuality is not the totality of any identity or lifestyle. Sex is an aspect of humanity not the totality and priority of human definition. Cultural integrity services the African way of life in all diversity by stimulating a resonates with nature and things Africans deem to be natural.

Scope of the Problem Homosexuality Ancient Africa White Imposition Scope of Problem Health Risk Homophobia New Black? Homosexuality & Islam Homosexuality & Christianity Gay Marriage Downlow Brothers (DL) African Agency Gay Power FGM Marriage in Africa Comments*

The political consequences of this imposition are an attack on the sovereign rights of countries like Kenya and Uganda. Who are no longer free to service the wishes of the people who elected them but must shape legislation to suit the visions of European countries such as Norway. With threat of cessation of aid, all to protect a life-style and sexual choice Europe is willing to starve an African country for representing its people’s interest. In other words gay-rights has a higher priority than health, education, housing, children, everything.  A flick of the news shows every minutia gay issue being front paged, at the expense of the priorities which afflict African people. 2 Homosexual have a gay parade is top news over 1000 people made homeless by a flood or a Pan-African school which educates 200 children. Normal is a subjective word, but what is normal to the majority of human beings is male-female relationships, had it not then none of us would be here.

No homosexual is born from a homosexual relationship. It cannot sustain life and is therefore not a trait which continues life or humanity. There is no denying that self-preservation is the most powerful force in nature, the mechanisms of self-preservation is through continuation our genetic legacy via male-female sex. This sex is supported by cultural systems such as marriage. The relationship is set-up to not only creates new life, but to create stable productive humans who carry on the traditions or those things which best define a people.

Africa communities are being persecuted by Homosexual imperialism. This imperialism is ruthless in attaining its objective via media, academic terrorism. If choice is the sacred word then our communities chose not to promote, encourage homosexuality in any shape or form. And if a honest dialogue is to begin it must start by neutralizing  the unilateral dialogue dominated by “what gays want”. We are aware of the persecution and gross intolerance, however, equally the persecution and imposition is being reversed. Any one who objects is being ostracized.

The unofficial law in the Western entertainment word is anti-Homosexual means anti-career. (Shaba Ranks, et al) Prince's play list was banned all over California because he objected to Homosexual marriage on religious grounds, athletes, artists have been destroyed for having any objection. Homosexuality is the third rail in American with the highest voltage. To touch it is instant destruction. Gone are the so-called freedoms of expression the entire gay argument predicates itself on.  So the freedoms are extended in one way. “I can shout out I am gay, but dam you if you shout in opposition” this is a violation of the majority rights. This is why the African-American list of popularity is all about people who overtly demonstrate their love of homosexuality. Not one of them can dare have a career and also have principled disagreement with homosexuality.

---

HOMOSEXUALITY IN ANCIENT AFRICA

Philosophical methods are well suited for unpacking the political, ontological, and epistemological conditions that foster racism and hold white supremacy in place. However, on the whole, philosophy as a discipline has remained relatively untouched by interdisciplinary work on race and whiteness. In its quest for certainty, Western philosophy continues to generate what it imagines to be colorless and genderless accounts of knowledge, reality, morality, and human nature   Alison Baile

The plethora of pro-gay websites and pro-gay celebrities supporting a position which supports the gay rights gives the illusion of conclusiveness to this study: That Africa is overtly "homophobic", because of the colonialist, and that homosexual being introduced by Europeans to corrupt African culture is now a myth - according to their new orientalist research. The new pro-gay assertion is that homophobia was introduced by the colonialist, and that Ancient Africa was as gay as they come. Now just because homosexuality exists in tiny micro-pockets of ancient Africa does not invalidate the fact that colonialism and the habits of the colonialist didn't bring another type of homosexuality; homosexuality as a distinct lifestyle for example.

Across Africa now and then sexual relationships have been imposed upon by certain cultural taboos. For example in Ethiopia, and most of modern Africa overt display of affection is culturally frowned on. While in Europe it is not uncommon to see two people tongue kissing in public. All kinds of sexuality related habits are governed by the majority culture of a specific location. It would be fair to say that modesty is the over riding theme in African sexuality in the public space.

Edward Said's work on Orientalism is related to the idea of the subaltern in that it explains the way in which Orientalism produced the foundation and the justification for the domination of the Other through colonialism. Europeans, Said argues, created an imagined geography before European exploration through predefined images of savage and monstrous places that lay outside of the known world. During initial exploration of the Orient these mythologies were reinforced as travelers brought back reports of monsters and strange lands. In the case of Africa the image that was formulated worked for the agendas best suited to creating justifications for exploitation via the misapplication of Eurocentric Christianity. The idea of difference and strangeness of the Orient continued to be perpetuated through media and discourse creating an "us" and "them" binary through which Europeans defined them by defining the differences.

This laid the foundation for colonialism by presenting the African as backward and irrational and therefore in need of help to become modern in the European sense. Today, with a change in so-called moral direction, Africa is again on the receiving end of notions of primitive desperately in need of reform by the superior Tarzan of Europe. This new relative morality paints the Africa as misaligned to modern advanced values of same-sex orientation. Again, African agency is attacked by suggesting all the opinions in Africa are the result of European imposition, the irony is those using this argument fail to see that they are the neo-European imposition, trying to impose European notions of human rights on a people they see as backward. The overview of this problem can be said to be:

* Africa had no issue with homosexuality, Europeans made Africans homophobic, since Africans have no agency. Now 'good Europeans' want to reverse what their ancestors did by teaching Africans about how to be better humans —like Europeans.

homosexuality in traditional Africa that Murray cites. Central Africa, Zande people: In this culture, men slept with and married boys, even when the men had female wives. The boys were called “boy wives.” Southern Ethiopia, Maale people: In this culture, men crossed genders, wearing female clothes, performing female work, and having sex with men. Angola, Ovimbundu people: In this culture, there were gays and lesbians. Women there made and used dildos. Southeastern Africa, Namu: Ditto. Tanzania/Zimbabwe border, Nykakyusa: In this culture, adolescent boys had sex.

The first thing these studies have done is start by seeking out everything that can be stretched and fitted into the broad definition of homosexuality. Two men holding hands in Ethiopia might even fit into their notion of homosexual behavior. Men kissing after Friday prays in Gambia might be fitted in as patterns of "homosexual" tendencies. And while these examples are extremes they are being made to sharply critique the methodologies of diagnosis.

I have not been an adulterer, homosexual or child molester   Book of the Coming Forth by Day

---

EUROCENTRIC ANTHROPOLOGICAL AGENDAS

Scope of the Problem Homosexuality Ancient Africa White Imposition Scope of Problem Health Risk Homophobia New Black? Homosexuality & Islam Homosexuality & Christianity Gay Marriage Downlow Brothers (DL) African Agency Gay Power FGM Marriage in Africa Comments*

Alan Merrian says “homosexual behavior was absent from the Bala men”, and then discussed Kitesha, a gender defined role, as homosexual. This contradiction is ironically cited in both Murrays work verbatim as in Murray’s book (almost a copy and paste job). But according to other anthropologists, who actually claim to witness these habits, did not find it noteworthy especially when these behaviors do not constitute an institutionalized aspect of the group. Here we see James Neill impose his Eurocentrism and double standards by stating that the general anti-homosexual culture in Africa should be treated with skepticism. But which one is it? Is Africa “homophobic” or is it “running wild with closet gays”? They seem to be in limbo and surf on the side of the logic which bolsters their argument; when the suits their desires.

African culture, as stated throughout the course of this document, is generally at odds with homosexual behavior. This cultural principled moral objection is also in the historical records and exist outside of Western, Eastern, Islamic, Christian, Westernization processes.

The anthropologic revisionist are actually making the case for us. Yes, homosexuality existed in African communities, a very few. And on extremely rare exception it was an institutionalized part of the culture. Outside of that when it occurred it was not in any way shape our form identical to the homosexualized cultures of gays in the West—a lifestyle and culture. They had no desire to take men over women, or marry men and live happily ever after. It was usually an adolescent phase which was opportunistic and quickly and urgently commuted as females became available. And in these rare instances there was no culture which encouraged it, and we must be clear on this to divorce practice from a people’s culture (Muslims drinking alcohol, for example, verses Islam’s prohibition: practice does not invalidate a cultural position.) So the entire study does nothing to Africa’s cultural position. How many boys and girls experiment with their cousins? Does this translate into the acceptance of incest in any society? Does the odd habit of baby rape in South Africa reflect a Zulu accommodation of this horrid tradition? How did the elders in Africa deal with wayward youth so sexually frustrated them sodomize each other due to an overwhelming heterosexual desire for a woman?

“The traditional Shona have no of the problems associated with homosexuality so obviously they must have a value method of bring up children, especially with regards to normal sex relations, thus avoiding  anormaly so frequent in Western Society” (1979,201) – Michael Gelfand

Now Stephen Murray, an open homosexual, does something strange he discussed prevailing attitudes of ethnocentric as being all too evident in these writers. But how is that same attitude divorced from his revisionism and super imposition of a pro-gay oriented anthropological revisionism? Murray is afflicted by the same flaw all studies have—the bias of the writer. In the clouds we all see faces which look like us. But Stephen Murray is an open homosexual? And would it surprise anyone to know he has been spending his career inserting homosexuality into every culture where it is traditionally taboo? His scholarship has only one objective, and that is the pro-gay agenda, and pretty academic text decorated with spot-research seems always, without exception, to makes the entire world glow pink. He has done it with Islam, and now with Africa. Anything and anyone who can be put in his little pink box he applies his gay-logic to. So Chaka Zulu didn't have a wife = can only mean he was gay. Is that serious logic that the Greeks would be proud of? And in this world the consequences of suggestion is all it takes for people to go from "Shaka maybe was gay" to "Chaka was gay"- all based upon lies.

The sex-tourism of North Africa and East Africa, which flourishs by the habits of Europeans, cannot be assigned to "gay choice." So it is possible for homosexuality in Africa to have multiply sources: and evidence of one (local) does not negate the merits of another (colonially imposition). And this is where we see that beyond male-male anal sex homosexuality in the west is a continuous lifestyle choice (two men marrying, living together, raising adopted children, living as men and women live). So in the mud of linguistics we need to clarify the specificity of the homosexuality so as not to cross-contaminate our study as many anthropologists have done. Mapping behaviors across cultures they do not understand is arrogance. The Wodaabe wear make-up and perform dances, which to the Western eye might make a connection to the transgender activities of their own culture. The significance of make-up and the antics of the Wodaabe are billions of cultural miles away from those of transgender, not only in intention but also in spirit.

The monolithic comprehension of African cultures is a direct left-over of colonial ignorance. And just because these books are well binded, printed on expensive paper, and reviewed in the New York Times does not add credentials to what is at best a Western fantasy and supremacist lens on African cultures. But the irony is the feedback, how these studies are read by "educated" Westernized African academics that in turn, being products of European institutions and methodologies, reproduce the identical Westernizations on their own culture.

Rites of passage are a critical aspect of African culture across the board, from Lesotho to the Swahili coast: The villages of Kenya (Kenyatta, Facing Mount Kenya) to the jungles of Congo. Puberty is the signal of adult hood, and ceremonies are made to denote that from now you are purely male or purely female. This stage is identical in many ancient communities and mirrored even in the Bible: When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. Rites of passage are the critical stage in African development where adulthood is confirmed by the community. At this stage gender, sex roles, are clarified.

In the case of men training on manhood begins and in women training in femalehood begins. Lamb in 1982 commented that "it is curious by Western standards that homosexuality in Africa is virtually unknown…Africa's traditions is rigidly heterosexual" (p37). While subsequent work by Appiah and Gates (Encyclopedia Africana) has shown communities which have elements of homosexuality. However these communities, when contrasted against the majority of Africa, in no way shape or form constitute anything close to even the assertions by Ben Anderson, and Murray, Roscoe, Pincheon. So Lamb in his observation only made one mistake "virtually", the correct word would have been relatively unknown. Our findings show a taboo across the continent, as with most of the world. While Bafia people. At menstruation, young women were strictly segregated to avoid unplanned pregnancies; at this stage, they were known as "ngon", or sexually inactive virgins. Some young men usually engaged in homosexuality during this stage and were known as "kiembe", youths. In this instance we see homosexuality, as in prison, is due to a circumstance due to lack of access to women. None of these Bafia boys can be compared to the homosexual lifestyle of the typical Western gay.

Bafia people are one community heavily studied for homosexual habits. At menstruation, young women were strictly segregated to avoid unplanned pregnancies; at this stage, they were known as "ngon", or sexually inactive virgins. Young men usually engaged in homosexuality during this stage and were known as "kiembe", youths who don't yet sexually associate with females. Many young men would develop a boyfriend type of relationship with a special lexan or "bosom buddy". A man who attempted sex with a woman of the "ngon" stage could face torture or even being sold into slavery. He was free to pursue a fully adult woman. Tessmann stated that, "the youth at this stage is rarely successful, since there is much competition. Now what is the motives for homosexuality here? can this society be mapped to the gay community of California? Are the sexual motives not out of duress? Would any of these Bafia boys pick a man if a woman was available? This is homosexuality out of circumstance. It cannot be used to support tolerance. No more than men having sex in prison can be used to suggest that these men are gays. Anal sex between men is one thing, being a homosexual with an hard wired sexual orientation for men is completely different. And it is dishonest to confuse them as being part of a homosexual monolith. (see Monolith)

---

MARRIAGE NOT A HUMAN RIGHT

See African Marriage and Coalition for Marriage

The majority cultural definition of marriage is exclusively male-female. Those values are then communicated in the institutionalize law to form the codes which govern our African societies and best reflect our sensitivities and orientation. As marriage is a sacred act defined by a society it is not a human right but a human privilege. Two dogs cannot get married; a man and a cat cannot get married. Brother and sister cannot get married because our societies deem these types of unions incompatible with the institution of marriage. These are just the many good limitations that have protected marriage, and have restrict us and our children from those harmful arrangements that may look like marriage but just aren't. Our human civilizations are built on foundations which secure certain standards critical to our humanity – marriage is just one of those age old human values. A sophisticated system created via the intelligence of those who went before us. There is nothing to be gained by corrupting the definition of marriage to accommodate a minority who are culturally, morally and spiritually at odds with the majority of African people.

---

MONOLITH MYTH OF HOMOSEXUALITY

The Diagnostics and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) has been the resource to diagnose mental health disorders since 1952. From 1952 until 1973 The DSM Manual classified homosexuality as a mental disorder. In 1973, with the sixth printing of the second edition of the DSM, homosexuality was reclassified as normal behavior. However, in 2001 psychiatrist Dr. Robert Spitzer, who in 1973 originally led the team to normalize homosexuality in the diagnostic manual, conceded that “reorientation therapy” (a patient/client’s efforts to diminish unwanted homosexual attractions and behaviors and/or develop one’s heterosexual potential through professional and/or religiously-mediated change efforts) can be effective.

Scope of the Problem Homosexuality Ancient Africa White Imposition Scope of Problem Health Risk Homophobia New Black? Homosexuality & Islam Homosexuality & Christianity Gay Marriage Downlow Brothers (DL) African Agency Gay Power FGM Marriage in Africa Comments*

Usually both the opponents of homosexual and homosexuals base their arguments in the notion of a Gay monolith, that homosexual is a singular experience. We also need to identify the segments and personalities of homosexuality—they are not all the same. The processes which create the different stratification of homosexual then bears out that the understanding of homosexuality must not be monolithic.  In Deconstructing the dynamics of behaviors which are labeled homosexual gay and lesbian it is critical to understand that the conditions creating Homosexuality are not the same, so therefore also the arguments and social consequences and engagement cannot be the same (monolithic). If for example a person is a homosexual because of trauma, say a woman was raped and then caught in a series of violent abusive relationships with men.

Her reaction, or coping mechanisms, cause her to seek same-sex lesbian relationships as a mechanism to dealing with that trauma. This not her natural orientation but a consequence of a series of abuse. it is destructive to continue to impose it on them as a choice. Because the reason there are homosexual is because of an reaction to a deep seated trauma. Continuing to feel victimized by that trauma does not heal them, it buries the self-hatred with a mask of “its okay to be gay”. In this situation treatment is critical and counseling to repair the damage of rape, abuse etc. to restore them to their lifestyle had the abuse or trauma not taken place.

• Trauma Gays – Created by abuse or homosexual rape, reacting to their abuse
• Circumstance/opportunistic gays: Prisons, boarding schools and other unnatural environments
• Natural Gays (People born with a sexual confusion who are hard wired to same sex attraction). Genetic sexual disorder
• Freak gays - cosmetic gay (I kissed a girl and I liked it, lip stick lesbians created by porn industry and lustful experimentation)
• Capitalistic Gays, a type of circumstance gay created by sex tourism and desperation due to poverty

 

BEING EDITED| And one of the biggest institutions producing "new homosexuals" is the prisons that our people over populate. [4] Prof..Zuberi talks about this in our film 500 Years Later, who helps them when they rape and have been raped, what happens to them when they finally get let out? Then you start to see a pattern if you have those conscious non-Eurocentric eyes. The first thing they do is throw a brother in prison... for sticking gum on the bus, they trying to get us in. What happens when he gets out after being gang raped? he is confused.

The Prison system which has a liberal hand at incarcerating African Americans is deliberaly reducing their male threat in the society by removing their from women folk and exposing them to a culture of homosexual rape associted with prisons. African Americans rape each other as well as prey on White innmates it is suggested that this is an act of disempowering the White males who is seen as the representative of White establishment. effeminize

---

DOWN LOW BROTHER | 3 'SINS'

Reports of closet homosexuality in the Black community suggest that highest cause of HIV in women is from closet (DL) homosexual husbands. Gay rights advocates blame the communities’ intolerance for the need for these men to keep their closet gayness a secret; which under duress is expressed in secret liaisons. So the suggested solution to the issue is for a more tolerant African-American community. It is a poor argument to allow something in order to accommodate ones weaknesses; it is identical to the drug dilemma. People want to do something bad so we should take away the shame so they can use drugs in public and not risk themselves? No. Morals stand for a higher reason.

Do these “down low” brothers want to give up their married life and their families? No they don’t. So they do not fit into the closet gay template. These are men who want the best of both worlds. Church on Sunday with the wife and kids, hot gay unprotected sex in the small hours of Sunday night. So what should we do? Let them be openly gay and also openly family men? Why is the burden on the African-American community to embrace this vile habit that is not only a gay issue (1)  but a fidelity issue (2) and a responsibility issue (3)? The community has every right to treat this behavior as a clear and present threat to its integrity and take appropriate steps to identify and excommunicate these people.

And one thing we must clarify as it often gets lost in the gay debate. Homosexuality is exclusively sex between people of the same sex. Homosexuality is not orgies, it is not promiscuity, it is not adultery, and it is not group sex. These are all separate issues. And part of the self-inflicting stigma of gays is the association with homosexuality and all kinds of other sexual practices. In other words some gays are monogamous and faithful to their partners and might not even have anal sex. We must look at these things in isolation and in union depending on the circumstance. Down low behavior is not just a gay issue in this context.


Can you have both worlds? The perfect husband and the perfect gay weekend lover? Most of these men are not just closet gays who married women and raise children because of pressure to conform from a homophobic community. They are simply freaks who like the rush from the closet sex and who bask in the taboo and novelty of the same-sex experience.


Shame is not the only reason why they sneak around on their wives with other men. And on that note, shame is a very important emotion in human civilization. Can you imagine a world without shame? Maybe that's why in the Diaspora we can have 3 unmarried women with 5 children and not feed our own children because we have lost our shame. We have enough family issues and now we must add homosexuality as if our families are not destroyed enough.

SIN 1 – Homosexuality is at odds with things necessary to rebuild the African family.
SIN 2 – Adultery is a violation of marriage vows and every community has a right to root out this practice. We must note that Polygamy is not a form of adultery.
SIN 3 – Irresponsibility. While pro-gay reports suggest that HIV is coming from down-low brothers it then makes a jump and suggest the communities intolerance is ultimately to blame. Now what does this “community intolerance” have to do with wearing a condom during anal sex?

They are gay/bi-sexual (one thing) they are still enjoying marriage (another thing), They are also very rarely having homosexual sex with one partner. (again an issue that has nothing to do with gay-rights or so-called community homophobia). So HIV is getting into the marriage bed because of a sick and vulgar irresponsibility that is 100% disconnected from so-called community homophobia or so-called gay rights.

Also many of these reports are another attempt to terrorize the Black community and constantly bombard and create issues which poke at African inherent moral culture which is anti-homosexual life style. It is an attempt to tear the family apart and create suspicion, and to fan issues and suggest that in every Black home is a closet down low brother.

---

LINGUSITIC NORMALIZATION OF HOMOSEXUAL AND HOMOPHOBIA

Normatively is the usage of language to suit one's rhetoric to the widest possible audience, without losing relevant information in the process . In government and business jargon is used to encrypts morally suspect information in order to mitigate reactions to it: for example, the almost benign phrase "collateral damage" to refer to the manslaughter of innocents. Homophobia is a political term used to stifly and lump all disagreement into a box painted as a form of racism.

"Language is a fundamental tool for shaping identity and community, including the expression (or repression) of sexual desire. Speaking in Queer Tongues investigates the tensions and adaptations that occur when processes of globalization bring one system of gay or lesbian language into contact with another.Western constructions of gay culture are now circulating widely beyond the boundaries of Western nations due to influences as diverse as Internet communication, global dissemination of entertainment and other media, increased travel and tourism, migration, displacement, and transnational citizenship. [5]

Linguistics today is used as a tool for politically maneuvering. We see words like homophobia, a word that is a neologism created in the American sub-culture in 1969 and has no parallel in any African language or ideology; and hence alien to the African paradigm. Correspondingly, being homophobic tends to manifest itself through an outward demonstration or behavior based on such a feeling. This, in turn, sometimes leads to acts of violence or expressions of hostility. The truth is that homophobia is not just confined to any one segment of society. But the real fact of the matter is that the term homophobic is merely a "politically correct" scheme used by homosexual activists and supporters in their attempts to deflect a genuine criticism .

These are political terms used to stall any form of plural disagreement, creating a third rail. Collapsing racism, oppression, civil rights, bias and homophobia is a tactic to give gravity to a neologism. It sets up the perfect straw man argument where any opposition to homosexuality is used to imply an attitude of gross violence and deep hatred. The introduction of two equal terms, homosexual and Heterosexual, for sexual preference is to normalize homosexuality as an equal reality. Just like the direction terms 'left and right', where 'left' or 'right' has no real social superiority.

All of this has to be stated to appreciate the power of language and thought and the power to alter human perception and expression. Now oppressing homosexuals is very separate from disagreeing with homosexuality, clearly, there is a fine line but oppression and disagreement should never be collapsed. Having laws which penalize homosexuality are borderline because one argument is that a society must construct laws to protect the culture of the majority. Which in itself is a primary human right any group should protect.
Behavioral scientists William O'Donohue and Christine Caselles concluded that the usage of the term homophobia "as it is usually used, makes an illegitimately pejorative evaluation of certain open and debatable value positions.” The term, like antisemtic, is used as an ad hominem argument against those who advocate values or positions of which the user does not approve. As far as homophobia goes the National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality, states, "Technically, however, the term actually denotes a person who has a phobia — or irrational fear — of homosexuality. Principled disagreement, therefore, cannot be labeled homophobia.

---

HOMOPHOBIA AND THE POLITICAL-LINGUISTIC LANDSCAPE

As mentioned previously a definition of homophobia is hard to find. This has been noted previously by Baraff(1984) who concludes the same. After some searching he settles for the definition of homophobia as: “Homophobia: literally, a phobia about men who are threatened by overt male homosexuality” (P89).

An internet search of ‘phobias’ produced many sites yet a definition or description of homophobia remained elusive. One short definition did come from Culbertson (1995) – “Homophobia – fear of sameness, monotony or of homosexuality or of becoming homosexual”.

More insight into the term ‘homophobia’ is provided by Keeton & Gould(1986) . In the biological sciences terms like ‘hydrophobic’ and ‘hydrophilic’ are used. In the term ‘hydrophobic’ we have the Greek roots of hydro – “water” and phobos – “fear’. On the other hand we have hydrophilic molecules meaning “water-loving”. This however is problematic because we have represented in these two terms the concepts of ‘loving vs fearing’. These are meant to represent opposites. However according to Schwarz(1991) and Foreman(1971), the antonym of ‘love’ is hate or loathing. It is not fear. The antonym of ‘fear’ is courage or unconcern. It is not love. It should be noted that in the English language there are very few true antonyms, most are approximations. However, love and fear are not even approximate opposites or antonyms.
One dictionary definition of ‘phobia’ is, “an irrational fear or hatred of something”. “A very strong dislike of something”[P1075], Sinclair(1987). The synonyms for ‘phobia’ are words such as – dislike, dread, fear, hatred.

This demonstrates that there are two concepts for the term ‘phobia’. The first being dislike and hate which are more of the angry family of feelings. Second there is fear or anxiety which are the scared family of feelings. This is further supported by the Chapman(1977) who actually separates the synonyms for ‘phobia’ into two distinct groups – one being ‘fear’, and a second being ‘hated thing’.

These ‘literary’ definitions are generally at odds with the technical definitions which equate phobia only with anxiety and fear. The idea of hatred is not included as such in the DSM-III and DSM-IV. An arachnophobic fears spiders he does not hate spiders. A phobia is not an angry or oppositional condition it is an anxiety condition.
An individual may fear an object but not hate or dislike it. Alternatively and individual may hate an object and clearly not fear it. Indeed some individuals who hate something may actively seek it which the phobic rarely does. For example some people hate or dislike homosexuals and will actively seek them in order to assault them. Hardly phobic avoidance!

Finally a search of the TAJ for the last 10 years shows that ‘homophobia’ is only mentioned in one sentence in a discussion of AIDS patients. “Underlying homophobia and self-hatred may surface, and they may experience themselves as pariahs even to other gay men”[P180], Simerly & Karakashian(1989). They do not discuss the definition or what the concept entails.

---

GAY POWER

For such a small population the gay issue is the third rail in Western politics. They have completely used every tool possible to defend and expand their homosexual ideology. Far more than being a bedroom choice gay is the new political power. This power expresses itself in all areas of people activity in the Western World. The wealth of the homosexuals influences Google ranking So a search “Homosexuality is a sin” return more results from gays than from religious communities. As a tactic bombardment is an art of warfare. Saturate every possible argument with distractions, straw man arguments and everything in your arsenal to hide anyone but the determined gaining access to information.

There is no need to mention the domination of gay issues in Hollywood. Every opportunity is used regardless of genre (V for Vendetta, Trembling before G-D, Tongues Tied, Law and Order, American Beauty, Constant Gardener, Alexander (Oliver Stone) ADD LIST) to project the agendas of the gay rights movement. And like in the character of Agent Smith in the fictional film the Matrix the issue is starting to consume everything and every priority in its path and is unstoppable and self-replicating at the expense of every other concern. Fighting hard and blind for any and everything, the new extremist fundamentalist have gone so far as to say God is homophobic and religious is a violation of their humanity

So pervasive and dominate is this power that it is next to impossible to find the truth and do authentic impartial research on the gay issue. The first 10 pages of google are dominated by every domain the gay lobby has purchased. Every conceivable combination (Gays of Jesus), Homosexual and  Christian.com, Gay Heroes, Black gays, gay and art, etc  is snatched up for the full time promotion of a gay lifestyle. The gay domain ownership is 1000 more times more than African-American ownership of domain names related to their lifestyles.

If any phrase which is typed into google looking for arguments against homosexuality is it swamped with pages of pro-homosexuality content. This is the nature of the deliberate war of information starvation and then supplanting that void with one vantage point, one set of arguments.

Media is used to collapse the rights of African people and gays into one similar civil rights issue. A sexual choice now has more political power than the rights of a race of people. Gay is the new civil rights but unlike the African-American civil rights struggle homosexuals are winning every single argument in the political world. They are winning cases of unfair dismissal and wasting gay as a gay-card. Terrifying anyone who says boo to them as being homophobic. Tying up precious court time and public funds with an argument rooted in a life style choice. They have used the media to coopt the African-American celebrities into supporting their cause.  Even priest such as Desmond Tutu and Al Sharpton. Who misrepresent the African community and play the obfuscating  games and linguistic gymnastics around the issues and why it is an issue for African people.

---

INCEST AND PEDOPHILLIA

Switzerland is considering repeal its incest laws to make sexual relations between family members legal. It claims the law is 'obsolete' and that the courts have dealt with just three cases since 1984. The upper house of the Swiss parliament has drafted a law de-criminalizing sex between adult consenting family members which must now be considered by the government.

If the argument of free will is used then this same argument can be applied to cultures who free will to have sex with minors and other socially harmful activities such as incest. The moral taboo of sex with minors and incest is no different to the arguments used by the gay lobby. The source of the opposition is moral repulsion. Some will cite age of consent, but age of consent is not a universal value, it is a legal term which has different values in time and location. Age of consent in old Arabia and ancient India might be 12 years old. So there is actually no moral objection to pedophilia only a legal argument which is only to do with age of consent . Now outside of age of consent what is the taboo associated with pedophilia? Legally the only thing which criminalizes or makes pedophilia a criminal act is the age of conscent. So as long as the age of conscent is shifted or removed so too goes the illegality of pedophilia. Clearly it is in the domain of how humans formulate moral values governing sexual relationships. And our societies generally find it taboo, and because of this taboo a legal age of consent is stipulated only to protect a moral argument. So the principle objection to homosexuality in African socities is a moral choice to eliminate and discourage behaviours which Africans seen as unacceptable an immoral.

What was pedophilia today will be “consenting adults” tomorrow. There are campaigns all over the West for the age of consent to be lowered and this is a euphemism for legalized pedophilia. It flies the same flag of Human rights and inclusion. But it just a sanitized way of being able to have porn with 16 year old boys and girls and say “consenting adults” the only barrier is at what age does someone become an adult conscious of their choices and consequences of their choices? Human rights and all the gay rights arguments also apply here. We must examine these social issues beyond the abstract names attached to their struggles for so-called liberation.

Why can’t we walk down the street naked, if we chose? Because a human chose must be weighed against the public sensitivity and orientation. The morals which contain communities and act as the fabric of their identities must be preserved. Santorum argued, "If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery."

---

HEALTH ISSUE

A 2005 study of young people in New Zealand, published by 365Gay.com (not exactly part of the vast, right-wing conspiracy), showed that homosexuality is "associated with increasing rates of depression, anxiety, illicit drug dependence, suicidal thoughts and attempts. Gay males...have mental health problems five times higher than young heterosexual males."

One of the nation's leading AIDS researchers, Ron Stall, reported in the June 2003 edition of the American Journal of Public Health that homosexual conduct is associated with "higher rates of multiple drug use, depression [and ]domestic violence" than in the heterosexual population.

BMCPsychiatry in August of 2008 published the findings of a review of 13,000 (!) papers on the subject of homosexuality and mental health, with a focus on the 28 most rigorous studies, and concluded that lesbian, gay and bisexual people "are at higher risk of mental disorder, suicidal ideation, substance misuse and deliberate self harm than heterosexual people."

Homosexual activists want you to believe that all these mental disturbances are the result of homophobia and discrimination. But alas for this theory, a study in the Netherlands, probably the most homosexual-friendly place on planet earth, showed "a higher prevalence...of mood and anxiety disorders in homosexual men." Once again, this study was not published by a pro-family organization but appeared in the January 2001 edition of theArchives of General Psychiatry.

Worse for the homosexual lobby, even their own medical specialists admit these problems. The Gay & Lesbian Medical Association states flatly that gay men "use substances at a higher rate than the general population," are affected by "depression and anxiety...at a higher rate than in the general population, " and "have higher rates of alcohol dependence and abuse."

Unlike natural sex, gay sex requires great preparation to meet some basic standard of hygienic. But you will struggle to get these truths online, because gay advocates dominate information on the internet. It is suggested anyone in doubt about gay sex look it up and watch for yourself. These sanitizing saltations fail to tell you of the smell in a room where two men have been at it. It doesn't tell you why gays do not buy white sheets. It doesn't tell you that if you use enough bleach, drinking for a toilet bowel is also safe.

Sexual relationships between members of the same sex expose gays, lesbians and bisexuals to extreme risks of Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STDs), physical injuries, mental disorders and even a shortened life span. There are five major distinctions between gay and heterosexual relationships, with specific medical consequences.

Gay or bisexual sex among men is on the rise, which may account for the increase in anal cancer. "The sharpest increase was among African American men, whose incidence of anal cancer has more than doubled in the past three decades. Black men also had a lower survival rate from the disease." The study reported that the five-year survival rate for African/Black men with early stage disease was 62 percent as compared to 79 percent for white men with localized cancer.

• Levels of Promiscuity
  
  Prior to the AIDS epidemic, a 1978 study found that 75 percent of white, gay males claimed to have had more than 100 lifetime male sex partners: 15 percent claimed 100-249 sex partners; 17 percent claimed 250-499; 15 percent claimed 500- 999; and 28 percent claimed more than 1,000 lifetime male sex partners. Levels of promiscuity subsequently declined, but some observers are concerned that promiscuity is again approaching the levels of the 1970s. The medical consequence of this promiscuity is that gays have a greatly increased likelihood of contracting HIV/AIDS, syphilis and other STDs. 
  
  Similar extremes of promiscuity have not been documented among lesbians. However, an Australian study found that 93 percent of lesbians reported having had sex with men, and lesbians were 4.5 times more likely than heterosexual women to have had more than 50 lifetime male sex partners. Any degree of sexual promiscuity carries the risk of contracting STDs.

• Physical Health

Common sexual practices among gay men lead to numerous STDs and physical injuries, some of which are virtually unknown in the heterosexual population. Lesbians are also at higher risk for STDs. In addition to diseases that may be transmitted during lesbian sex, a study at an Australian STD clinic found that lesbians were three to four times more likely than heterosexual women to have sex with men who were high-risk for HIV.

• Mental Health

It is well established that there are high rates of psychiatric illnesses, including depression, drug abuse, and suicide attempts, among gays and lesbians. This is true even in the Netherlands, where gay, lesbian and bisexual (GLB) relationships are far more socially acceptable than in the U.S. Depression and drug abuse are strongly associated with risky sexual practices that lead to serious medical problems.

• Life Span

The only epidemiological study to date on the life span of gay men concluded that gay and bisexual men lose up to 20 years of life expectancy.

• Monogamy

Monogamy, meaning long-term sexual fidelity, is rare in GLB relationships, particularly among gay men. One study reported that 66 percent of gay couples reported sex outside the relationship within the first year, and nearly 90 percent if the relationship lasted five years.
Encouraging people to engage in risky sexual behavior undermines good health and can result in a shortened life span. Yet that is exactly what employers and governmental entities are doing when they grant GLB couples benefits or status that make GLB relationships appear more socially acceptable.

---

CONCLUSIONS

The media has made the case for the gay Black male. He is funny, he is trendy, he is the best friend of the "Black" woman, you can go shopping with them, gossip with them, and they have an enchanting personalities. For the white world the gay man is impotent (will not breed with their women), non-threatening , generally the last to be located in African values, and has no power to continue what Public Enemy called "Fear of a Black planet." These are the "men" not selected by the African community, but selected for us by agents that do not wish us well.

Many continue, ignorant of the issues raised in this article, continue to look at this "gay" issue with the eyes of a 5 year old— all innocent: "Oh love is love", "What the problem if they care for each other", "Live and let live" as if those are the core issues surrounding this social dilemma.

The reason there is an "Africa" for us to learn from is because someone, somewhere, in the African world made sure that the values which we hold dear were transmitted across the generations. We, those living, must weigh, evaluate the wisdom of old against new knowledge, and in our sovereign way determine if these values have enough merit to be passed on. On the issue of a homosexual lifestyle, Africa— once again, for the thousandth generation running, most Africans (by a landslide majority) has determined it is not desirable and not to be promoted, harbored or encouraged.

---