Sometimes, writers can become so egoistic, and begin to write for themselves instead of writing for the society, the people. Sometimes extreme knowledge can be deceptive, and the individual carrying the burden of such knowledge can easily be influenced by the environment where she finds herself.
I’m writing this to say that Nigerian writer, Chimamanda’s defence for gay and homosexual behaviour was written out of sentiment, and very much devoid of analytical reasoning, and social justice which a writer is supposed to promote. When an act is demeaning, there is absolutely no amount of prejudiced defence that can save the situation. What is bad is bad, and what is good is good-simple.
Nevertheless, the Nigerian-born writer has a right to personal opinion, just like her gay brothers have rights to self determination, but obviously, not here in Nigeria. It’s not part of our history-our culture. Ours is pure, regardless of any kind human right advocacy.
It was however shocking to have one of the few writers that I so much respect starting her defence with a very disparate analogy that does not in any way justify her logic on the controversial topic of criminalization of gay marriage in Nigeria. She obviously goofed when she used the analogy of Sochukwuma whom she said ‘’his-hers was an unquestionable difference.’’ What makes the ‘difference’ unquestionable? I’m as confused as everyone else.
Chimamanda has forgotten so soon that most offensive behaviours in Africa, if not all, are inherited. If a child steals, it’s likely that the history of stealing cannot be dismissed from his family or even his lineage; the same is applicable to all depraved individuals. Certain behaviours are traceable to their family background. That is why it takes extreme investigation and post-Morten before a marriage is sealed in our society down here. You need to know the family background- are they known for infidelity or some behaviour that the society abhors? Obviously, the African worldview is different from Chimamanda’s worldview. Her position is simply that, some thieves/armed robbers are unquestionably different because they inherited stealing from their parents or that some cultists should be pardoned because they were born with the behaviour. It’s obviously a matter of extreme knowledge luring one into the promotion of social-injustice.
The ‘killer’ question is this; does anyone go for ‘stealing’ training? No! If it’s in your blood, it’s there. You are definitely the owner of yourself; but the only time to get over such behaviour is when you grow up to meet a law forbidden that same behaviour of yours. You are then left with two options. You either go to jail or remain a free person by letting go such an odious behaviour. Imagine that some thieves are pardoned because they started stealing right from when they were in the secondary school or just imagine that some rapists are freed from prison with the argument that they started raping girls right from when they were in the ‘’University Primary School, Nsukka’’ Lol. Imagine that we treat virtually all crimes with levity and extreme sentiment; just imagine what would have become of our society today.
I’m strongly of the opinion that Chimamanda has been so influenced by some alien traditions that she now argues to support the popular gay rights.
If Chimamanda’s analysis on gay rights appears confusing, we refuse to be confused. We shall provide possible answers for ourselves. First, is that homosexual behaviour is a bad habit that people fall victim because they are sexually permissive and experimental. In a more critical analysis, homosexuals choose their way of life as a result of self-indulgence and their reluctance to play by the rules of the society. Based on my conclusion, no researcher has found verifiable biological or genetic differences between heterosexuals and homosexuals that weren’t caused by their behaviour.
No experts have been able to find a single ‘heredible’ genetic, hormonal or physical difference between heterosexuals and homosexuals – at least, none that is replicable. Even though, there is no doubt that the absence of such a discovery doesn’t prove that inherited sexual tendencies are not possible, it however goes to show that experts are yet to discover same because none exists at the moment. Findings have equally revealed that most homosexuals crushingly believe that their feelings and behaviour were influenced by social happenings as well as their environment.
Despite that I still hold Chimamanda at high esteem, it won’t be misplaced to say that she has disappointingly sold her ideas to sentiment, and unless she goes with her people in this matter, her purported political ambition will remain a mirage.
Comments