The Burdens of a Heterosexual

By Sean Smith

As if it were yesterday I remember every time I would visit my father I was faced with the daunting task of answering his questions. These questions didn’t pertain to my recent academic progress but rather my perceived sexual orientation; “you ain’t gay is you boy?” Knowing the emotional turmoil I would cause if I honestly answered his questions, I abided by the heterosexual rule of always answering no. In an effort to fuel the believability of my answer, I would go as far as showing him photos of women I had in my phone. I was and still am his only son. The hetero-normative society we live in says it is my job to carry on the family name, to spread my seed, to procreate, to get married to a woman and provide for a family. That same society is responsible for countless LGBTQ Teen deaths, who so desperately try to ‘fit in’.

As I grew older I found myself in similar situations that I faced during my childhood--the constant plaguing questions about my sexual orientation, the ridicule for playing tennis instead of football, reading instead of rapping, and engaging in extracurricular school activities instead of chasing after the plethora of single women gracing the halls of my high school.

Adult men are faced with a unique challenge when it comes to protecting the sacredness of their heterosexuality; it becomes intertwined with protecting their ‘masculinity’. We start battling with other men mentally, physically, and, believe it or not, emotionally. Who has the more attractive girl, whose biceps and dick is the biggest (contradiction?), which one of us is making the most money, and drives the fancier car. Our obligations to heterosexuality are loaded with living up to the expectations of similar systems of oppression; patriarchy, capitalism, and being adept on the latest homophobic slur. As men there are levels of heterosexuality that you must prove yourself worthy of reaching, not only to other men, but to women as well. The expectations are more stringent, and the consequences of being labeled the ‘punk bitch’ are even more detrimental to the wellbeing of one’s manhood.

Do we truly enjoy living with every microscopic detail of our lives being sampled and weighed accordingly on the scale of heterosexuality? Are there not enough oppressive expectations we ritually battle, as we progress through life? It is our duty as humans to not only challenge that which many of us have been indoctrinated to believe, but to take an uncharted individually invented journey into the free world of sexuality, gender, and sexual orientation. It is time we stop allowing toys, placement and type of jewelry, colors, social activities, and our desire to follow the oppressive rules of procreation and hetero-normativity control our lives. It is time women end this search for the mirage of a ‘real man’, and for women to stop being criticized for not being ‘lady like’. It is time for men to cease the perpetuation of the unwinnable masculine battle. Our masculinity is not determined by anyone else but us. There are no authentic guides, books, or maps to manhood. It captures us at the least expected moments, and is supposed to leave us vulnerable to the unexpected. We should be elated when certain expressions and behaviors are characterized as feminine; then and only then will we escape the egregious label of the savage beast.

While learning to accept my sexual orientation, there were moments where I distanced myself safely away from anything remotely feminine. In distance I felt that I was safe from the stigmatization and ridicule that effeminate men were plastered with; from their more masculine counterparts. In reality I was scared, lonely, and lost; to my surprise it was the very type of person I distanced myself from, who helped me come to terms with who I am. The vibrant and carefree nature of this person was who I wanted to be, not the imprisoned ‘masculine’ and perceived heterosexual person I was. We learn from each other and respect each other when we allow ourselves to be vulnerable around each other. Will we as a society open the window to let in that same vibrant and carefree air, or will we continue to suffocate ourselves and our children, with the stale air of obligatory and burdensome gender expectations of heterosexuality? Progression doesn’t come at the hands of passing a few laws, and learning to accept those which are unlike you. Progression comes when we cohesively begin to challenge the rules and expectations of society to which we have been obligated to follow.

Sean Smith is pursuing a B.A in Sociology and Spanish at Randolph-Macon College in Ashland, VA

Black Atheists and Reactionary Black Nationalism

By Norm R. Allen Jr.

Members of the Black Atheists of Atlanta are causing quite a stir on the Web with their provocative conception of Black atheism. They embrace a reactionary, African-centered worldview, from which they inevitably denounce homosexuality, Western civilization, and White people in general. In particular, they are all too willing to sacrifice the rights of LGBT people on the altar of African culture.

With so much conceptual confusion running through their minds, they are bound to experience much cognitive dissonance. For example, though they denounce Greek civilization and culture, they embrace the Greek term “atheist,” which means without a belief in God or gods. What is even more problematic is that many Afrocentrists, such as the late John Henrik Clarke, believe that atheism will never take root among people of African descent. Some Afrocentrists claim that atheism is so foreign to Africans that there is no word for atheism in any African language. The late Afrocentric scholar Asa G. Hilliard said that church/state separation is a concept that is totally foreign to Africans. How do reactionary, African-centered atheists deal with these problems?

To their credit, these reactionary Black atheists of Atlanta have learned well from the handbook of reactionary Black militancy. They poison the well by claiming that their critics are wrong because they are Whites, or Blacks that have been brainwashed by Whites. These dogmatic atheists are not above questioning the Blackness of their Black critics.

Ironically, the Blackness of reactionary nationalists is never questioned. Marcus Garvey formed an alliance with the KKK. Elijah Muhammad used Malcolm X to forge an alliance with George Lincoln Rockwell and the American Nazi Party. Louis Farrakhan formed an alliance with Tom Metzger and the White Aryan Resistance. Moreover, the Nation of Islam (NOI) leader has served as an apologist for bigoted slave owners in Sudan. If ever there is a time to question one’s Blackness, it surely ought to be when that person joins forces with the sworn enemies and murderers of Black people. Yet in these cases, reactionary Black leaders were given a free pass, while their Black critics were viewed warily.

The reactionary members of the Black Atheists of Atlanta view antipathy toward homosexuality as an African virtue. Due to exposure to good scholarship, however, they have quietly retreated away from the absurd claim that homosexuality did not exist in Africa before it was introduced by White Westerners. Still, they claim that Africans did not approve of it.

In truth, laws against homosexuality were introduced into Africa by White Christians. Today opposition to same-sex relations is fueled by White missionaries and Eurocentric Christianity. The proposed “kill the gays bill” in Uganda was deeply influenced by White missionaries. White missionaries have also influenced widespread homophobia in Malawi and other nations.

The reactionary nationalists of the Black Atheists of Atlanta insist that homosexuality is unnatural; hence they are opposed to it. However, this rationalization is weak. After all, for millennia, oral sex was considered unnatural, but today there are no major efforts to oppose it. Furthermore, men and women engage in anal sex, which for them could also be considered “unnatural.” Again, where is the outrage against heterosexuals engaged in this alleged abomination?

Regardless of what one thinks about homosexuality, consenting adults should have the right to do what they please as long as they are not hurting anyone else. Such an idea might be considered un-African by some, but it is a cornerstone of liberty.

These Reactionary Black Nationalists have much in common with religious fanatics. Religious fanatics insist that they have the one, true God. Similarly, these Reactionary Black Nationalists insist that genuine African culture and values are perfect. Conversely, all ideas that are believed to emanate from White people are to be immediately deemed suspect.

It is obvious to Reactionary Black Nationalists that Whites can learn much from Blacks. But should true knowledge and wisdom be color-coded? Can Blacks not learn a great deal about humanity from Shakespeare, about freethought and liberty from Robert Ingersoll, about philosophy from Bertrand Russell, etc.? Surely it only makes sense to embrace important truths wherever they are to be found, regardless of their source. This is what critical thinking is all about.

As quietly as it’s kept, one can be African-centered and progressive. The great freethinker Hubert Henry Harrison was consistently progressive in his pursuit for justice for people of African descent. W.E.B. Du Bois, considered by many to be the father of Pan-Africanism, was progressive. Today Black freethinkers such as Gary C, Booker of Atlanta and Kwadwo Obeng of California via Ghana are progressive African-centered thinkers.

Black freethinkers must not succumb to the seductive rhetoric of Reactionary Black Nationalists. With enough humanity, originality, and creative intelligence, Black non-theists can come up with a progressive vision for society that can positively transform the world.

For 21 years, Norm R. Allen Jr. was the only full-time African American secular humanist activist traveling the world promoting secular humanism. He is the editor of two books, The Black Humanist Experience and African American Humanism.

Discretion: The "DL" Problem

By Dexter Smith

The "Down-Low". A uniquely African-American slang term used in reference to an insidious subculture of deeply closeted African-American homosexual and/or bisexual men who, while carrying on their normal, day-to-day, public lives as heterosexual men, simultaneously lead secret lives engaged in sexual relations with other men. The meaning of the term, however, has expanded over the years to include all closeted African-American gay and/or bisexual men. Originally the typical "DL" man identified as "straight" despite his same sex attractions and liaisons. Today, many "DL" men accept that they are either homosexual or bisexual despite what they may tell the rest of the world.

Defined by its "cult of masculinity", the "DL" lifestyle shuns the traditional trappings of LGBT culture for secrecy and discretion. Many "DL" men are deluded into believing that they can somehow remain in the closet forever, carrying on a double life in secrecy for as long as they like. This of course seldom, if ever, works. These things invariably have a way of being exposed eventually. The "DL" lifestyle itself is symptomatic of the shame, fear, and ignorance that plague the African-American LGBT community. The African-American community itself, overwhelmingly Christian and therefore bound hopelessly to patriarchal beliefs and behavior, is not very welcoming to homosexuality.

The struggle to "come out of the closet" is nothing new. It is a transition that every gay and or bisexual person, African-American or otherwise, will have to experience. However, there is something different about the experience in the African-American community. It seems that heterosexism is even more densely concentrated amongst black people than it is amongst our white counterparts. We're deeply mired in a cult of hetero-normativity, devoted to a fallacy constructed by patriarchy. So much so that we've produced this dangerous "DL" subculture. A factor which has helped turn the African-American LGBT community into this backwards satellite of the wider mainstream LGBT community.

A friend once told me that sexuality is a "private thing”. That it was ok to be in the closet or "DL" because no one needed to know your sexual orientation. Especially since, as he saw it, being gay made things harder. The notion is not entirely without merit but it sets an unfair double standard. Why should my sexuality be private? After all, if you approached a heterosexual male or female and asked "Are you straight?” chances are they will respond honestly. If my sexuality is private, am I supposed to lie? Why should I advance heterosexism by keeping my sexuality "private"? After all, unless I indicate otherwise, most people would automatically assume that I'm heterosexual. I don't want that. If you're not free to be who you are then exactly how free are you?

Besides, how exactly are we to dispel the negative myths and stereotypes, eradicate the stigma and ignorance, and achieve equality by hiding? If we act like we have something to be ashamed of, people will treat us like we have something to be ashamed of. We must abandon the false notion that heterosexuality is superior. This is, in itself, the very root of many or our problems.

The plight of LGBT people has come a long way since June 28, 1969, when those brave pioneers of the gay rights movement stood up to this country’s institutionalized oppression of sexual minorities. On December 18, 2010, the discriminatory "Don't ask, Don't tell" policy which prohibited gays and lesbians from serving openly in the U.S. armed forces was repealed. American society has become very open, welcoming and tolerant, and with each year that passes the excuses for hiding dwindle in number and significance. Its 2011 and you're still so called on the "DL"? Excuse my use of common black vernacular but "Nigga please!” That is so last year.

I'm not hiding. I'm proud, I'm happy, and I'm free. Thank You.

Dexter Smith is a sophomore Political Science major at Morehouse College in Atlanta, Georgia.