flags

Should African(-Diasporan)s Embrace Marriage Equality?

The recent legalization of “gay” marriage in the United States has exacerbated a growing divide in the Black Conscious and Civil Rights communities over sexuality and gender issues.  Some say that homophilia (homosexuality) and transgenderism are non-African imports from West Asian (European) culture and have no place in the African(-Diasporan) community.  Others insist that it’s hypocritical to call for equality, rights, inclusion and justice for some but not others.  So, should African(-Diasporan)s embrace marriage equality?

Abso-toodle-lutely!

Everybody else is doing it, so why can’t we?

African(-diasporan)s built the New World, and financed the Old World, and civilized Asia.  So we have the absolute right to marry according to our customs and traditions.

I can’t help who I love, I love women- why won’t people accept us?

I can’t help it, either- where are my rights?

I’m in committed relationships- just like any other couples.

All the justifications “they” use are just as valid for us, which means we have just as much right- no, more- in the countries we’ve sweat, bled and cried for.

Our similarities are greater than our differences

Polygyny might just be the one thing that can unite the spectrum of Pan-Africanists.  Whether you’re

  • Atheist,
  • Biblical (Catholic, Protestant, Jehovah’s Witness, etc.),
  • Indic (Hindu, Buddhist, Yogic, etc.),
  • Islamic (Five-Percenter, Moor, NOI, Orthodox, etc.),
  • Judaic (Hebrew, Israelite),
  • Kemetic/Ma’atic, or
  • Traditional (Candomblé, Vodun, Yoruba, etc.),

polygyny (multiple wives) is part of your heritage.

Modern Polygyny

Modern Polygyny

Biblical Polygyny

Indic Polygyny

Indic Polygyny

Hebrew/Israelite Polygyny

Hebrew/Israelite Polygyny

Islamic Polygyny

Islamic Polygyny

Kemetic Polygyny

Kemetic Polygyny

Traditional African Polygyny

Traditional African Polygyny

Balance and Reciprocity

Polygamy is part of the fabric of life all over Africa- north, south, east and west.

It’s not about sex- it’s about building.

Through polygamous marriages women in precolonial Africa often had greater personal autonomy. As new wives joined a compound, older ones could focus on their trading. And successful women traders, such as the Iyalodes in Yorubaland, had a lot of power. While autonomous female traders are traditionally linked to West Africa, studies have found a long history of women’s trading also in places such as among the Kikuyu in Kenya as well as groups in Uganda and Zambia. (knowledge of self)

Pan-Africanism is about families, the building blocks of societies and kingdoms.  It affirms men and women, masculinity and femininity, with equal emphasis.  Pan-African feminists must understand that there has to be a masculist discourse as well, or there is no balance.  Balance is ma’at.

He makes them all queens;  they all make him a king

He makes them all queens; they all make him a king

Why polygyny?  Why now?

Like you just read, balance.  “They” just made a major move to change us:  we must make an equal effort to assert our identity and heritage.  You do not choose your enemy’s tactics:  you counter them.  Now is the time to assert our values in every arena:  personal, daily lives, social media, legal status, everywhere.

Don’t respond with negative energy:  the Supreme Court of the United States just legalized same-sex marriage, everybody’s rainbowing their Facebook profile pic and posting pictures of 80-year-old men getting married in Texas.  You can’t stop or reverse that.  The worst thing you can do is respond with bigotry that’s only going to help the other side.

What you can do is…  you.  Assert yourself.  Develop arguments and talking points for African family values.  Come up with rebuttals to common arguments against those values (and share them here!).  Start up advocacy groups, the same ones that took same-sex promiscuity from pariah status to counterculture to mainstream in 40 years.  Best of all, practice what you preach:  get married and have kids!

…maybe not this many, though…

Fool me once, shame on you.  Fool me twice, shame on me…

What are they teaching, exactly?

What are they teaching, exactly?

Remember what-and who- it was that turned us against our family system then, because it’s the same thing turning you off from it now:

Of course, whatever autonomy polygamy afforded back then was subsumed by colonialism and the rise of puritanical missionary teaching. (knowledge of self)

Right now we have lots of missionaries:  feminists, social engineers, progressives, liberals, conservatives, lobbyists, Family Planning, welfare, music, TV, print media.  Ideologues and propagandists.  Systems and ideas that always put African(-diasporan)s last.

Our ancestors made and sustained us, and in doing so showed us the way to make and sustain life.

Whose call will you hearken?

The ancestors are calling

The ancestors are calling

maxresdefault

How Do We Know Rachel Dolezal Is “White”?

Where’s the line between a “black” person who can pass for “white”, and a “white” person who can pass for “black”?

Before the One-Drop Rule

I'm "white"...

I’m “white”…

America used to classify its ethnic African minorities into two categories.

Those with no known non-African ancestry were known as “Black”, “Negro” (apparently for Spanish speakers) and “Colored” because everyone else, apparently, was clear.

Anyone with African and any other ancestry, especially west Asian (“European”), were known as Mulattoes.

West Asians (also known as “Europeans”) with no visible or known African ancestry, were called “White” even though white is a color, so technically they were “colored”, too.  (If you are confused about the use of the terms ‘west Asia’ and ‘West Asian’, click here.)

At some point, the ‘Mulatto’ category was abolished, and all people with any African ancestry were lumped into the first category.  Thus formed the “One-Drop Rule”:  if you had any known or visible African ancestry, you were Black/Negro/Colored.

mulatto

Went to bed “mulatto”, woke up “black”…

But what about people with so little African ancestry, or specifically so few African genes expressed in their phenotype, that they appeared West Asian or “white”?

They ‘passed’ for “white”.  They hid their African heritage, abandoned the non-passable members of their family (often at their suggestion) and blended into the dominant west Asian society.  They did this to qualify themselves for affirmative action, also known as “white” privilege: 100% quotas at colleges and universities, 100% quotas on in the workforce, 100% quotas in the military, access to credit and housing, and basic human rights.

...no wait:  I'm "black"...

…no wait: I’m “black”…

You never know who could be passing for “white”.  With as much as 25% African ancestry, a person can have blonde hair and blue eyes.  Even without those, a person with African could have little enough of it showing to not be swarthier, as Benjamin Franklin, put it, than the swarthier races of west Asia.  (Keep in mind, as the first and frequent settlers in West Asia, Africans have contributed considerably to their genes and phenotype.)

It doesn't take much to pass for "white" when Italians can, too.

It doesn’t take much to pass for “white” when Italians can, too.

More importantly, a person could be passing and not know it.  If your father passed with 25% African ancestry, then you are a full 1/8th (12.5%) African, but your father obviously wouldn’t have told you.  Keep in mind that 12.5% is as much west Asian ancestry as the average African-American has, after centuries of pure Africans mixing with multi-ethnic and/or west Asians.

In fact, an estimated 28 million, representing ~10%, of west Asian Americans have African ancestry.  Those “white” people are “black” (according to the One-Drop Rule) and don’t even know it!  There are almost as many “whites” with “black” blood than there are “blacks”!

What About Rachel?

dolezal

Is she in that 28 million?

She wouldn’t even know it if she was, like the white supremacist who found out he was 14% African (making him, therefore, “black”). So how do we know she’s not?  How do we know that, according to the one-drop rule she shouldn’t be called “black” or African-American (Spanish was dropped as an official language at some point, so “Negro” is out of fashion)?

Only a genetic test could prove she has no African blood, and if she does, she’s “black”.  This isn’t a stretch.  We regularly celebrate and/or out supposedly “black” people who look completely white, because they have a mixed ancestor even generations ago.

Them Genes

jeans

Genes affect more than just phenotype.  That’s why Don Cheadle, with dark brown skin, tightly-curled hair, and broad facial features, can still be 19% west Asian:  his west Asian genes don’t express themselves in his phenotype.

His west Asian blood doesn't show on his face

His west Asian blood doesn’t show on his face

There are genes for everything:  immunity, hormones, metabolism and a lot of things we don’t think about.  Genes also affect behavior and personality.  Genes are even passed through breast milk- and how many west Asian Americans have been suckled by African women throughout history?  What’s more, memory is passed through genes.

So it’s perfectly normal, or at least possible, for a person to have genes affecting those areas coming from an ancestor that they don’t physically resemble.

This explains “white” people who identify with a distant African ancestor, and why so many African-looking people have difficulty opposing “white” supremacy:  it’s in their blood.

Gray Area

download

“Race is a social construct.”

That really is true.

Where I live in Arabia, “blackness” is defined by the opposite of the one-drop rule:  if your skin is not very dark, or if you have loosely-curled hair, or a thin nose or lips- signs of possible non-African ancestry, you’re NOT “black.”

My dark-skinned African-American friend, who inherited wavy hair from his Hispanic mother, was told by his Afro-Arab wife that he’s “white”!  “White” to them means one-drop of non-African blood!

Further, Arabs identify a person by his or her father.  No matter who the mother is, the child is an Arab if the father is Arab.  There are Indonesians who are 100% Indonesian in language and appearance, but are considered Arabs because there is an unbroken paternal line to Yemen.

By that logic, by having a “white” forefather, many African-Americans are actually “white”!

For Jews, it’s the complete opposite:  the child of a Jewish mother is Jewish, no matter who the father is.

By that logic, my dark-skinned African-American friend is “white” because of his West Asian maternal grandmother.  And the dark-skinned son of my friend, who has a west Asian mother and ethnic African father, is also “white”.

And I have one friend who is “white” to the Arabs because his skin is light brown, “black” to Americans because his father is ethnically African, and Jewish to the Jews because he has a Jewish mother.  He should go on tour!

A Black White Jew

A Black White Jew

The American concept of race, and every concept of race, and the concept of race itself, are all stupid.  Black?  White?  So what’s a “mixed” person, then-  Grey?  What should I call my friend’s wife who has a Chinese grandfather- Dark Yellow?  We’re just making it up as we go along- and mostly getting it wrong…

Don’t Ask Rachel

I’m not defending or attacking Rachel Dolezal.  Her family and identity issues are hers and her family’s:  not ours.

I just want to know why African-Americans get so happy when they find out a “white” person is really black, but offended when a “white” person says they are “black”.

She was denied a place on the Rose Parade for being "black."  60 years later, we celebrate her getting justice.

She was denied a place on the Rose Parade for being “black.” 60 years later, we celebrate her getting justice.

I wanna know how a west Asian woman pretending to be African can provide more leadership than ethnic Africans who claim to be African, and are supposedly proud of it.

That’s what matters- not what she did, but what you have.

Or haven’t…

Featured Image -- 1592

Jesus with Dreadlocks:  an illustrated guide to Christian and Islamic descriptions of the Messiah

taj-akoben:

The popular image of a West Asian (“European”) Jesus is the exact opposite of his description in Christian, and Islamic, sources. So what did he look like? What kind of man’s return are Christians and Muslims waiting for?

Originally posted on qãhırıï:

The popular image of a West Asian (“European”) Jesus is the exact opposite of his description in Christian, and Islamic, sources.  So what did he look like?  How can we recognize him upon his return?

“It doesn’t matter what Jesus looked like.”

This is an automatic response whenever the discussion is about someone being dark-skinned or African.  Whenever that person is pale-skinned, the matter is taken at face value.  That is the author’s opinion, but since the evidence is only anecdotal, we will explore this claim of colorblind religion according to the sources.

That’s a very unChristian thing to say.  The authors of several books of the Old and New Testaments were very careful to describe the skin color and hair texture of Jesus (as will be presented below).  The founders of Christianity, who debated heatedly about which books to include in the Bible, chose to include these descriptions. …

View original 2,036 more words