AfroerotiK

Erotic provocateur, racially-influenced humanist, relentless champion for the oppressed, and facilitator for social change, Scottie Lowe is the brain child, creative genius and the blood, sweat, and tears behind AfroerotiK. Intended to be part academic, part educational, and part sensual, she, yes SHE gave birth to the website to provide people of African descent a place to escape the narrow-mined, stereotypical, limiting and oft-times degrading beliefs that abound about our sexuality. No, not all Black men are driven by lust by white flesh or to create babies and walk away. No, not all Black women are promiscuous welfare queens. And as hard as it may be to believe, no, not all gay Black men are feminine, down low, or HIV positive. Scottie is putting everything on the table to discuss, debate, and dismantle stereotypes in a healthy exchange of ideas. She hopes to provide a more holistic, informed, and enlightened discussion of Black sexuality and dreams of helping couples be more open, honest, and adventurous in their relationships.

Friday, October 17, 2014

The Middle Passage


  
Question: Describe the Middle Passage as extensively as possible, speaking of diseases, philosophies of packing, day-to-day maintenance of the ship, etc.  Then discuss the psychological ramifications of this historical moment on the construction of a distinctly African-American identity.
The term “Middle Passage” is an emotionally benign and sanitized term that relates to the transportation of millions upon millions of African captives across the Atlantic.  Termed thusly for the second leg of the journey for vile, European slave “traders” on their expeditions of carnage and psychic destruction across the seas, it was the middle portion of their triangular, transatlantic journey.  For the captive African, it was their passage to the very depths of hell and evil. In many ways, for the enslaved African, it signified not a middle passage but the beginning of the end.   An end to freedom, dignity, self-sufficiency and the cultural legacy of a rich and varied homeland and signified a passage to the “sacrifice of living Africans on the altar of capitalist accumulation.” (Munford, Black Ordeal, p. 274)  The ideological origin of the term Middle Passage is disrespectful to the Africans that died and those that amazingly survived. The Malevolent Voyage, as it should be more aptly termed to reflect the egregious, inhumane nature of that fateful passage not only of time and distance but also of life, was an indelible marker in the destruction of African peoples.
Facing towards the setting sun, emerging from the dungeons of carnage in West Africa, the captive Africans faced their sea-bound destinies guilty of absolutely no wrongdoing, save that of being born with beautiful, black skin.  Clarence J. Munford brilliantly articulates the essence of the impact of the Middle Passage on the captive African:
For its victims, the Middle Passage meant an end finally to the trauma
of initial capture and the nightmare of coffles, barracoons and the first, flesh-searing branding, only to embark anew on a journey beyond hope, a voyage of fiendish torture and death that enabled the sadist among the white seadogs to realize some of their most fevered yearnings. (Munford, The Black Ordeal of Slavery . . . , p.273) 

The true tales of horror and destruction of the Middle Passage will never be known.  One can only imagine, pieced together from the recounted tales of emotionally bereft and pathological European seamen, what the experience was truly like for the captive African.  This author’s contemporary mind cannot fathom the conditions under which Africans had to survive to ensure the perpetuation of generations of African people throughout the Diaspora.  Ripped from their families and homes, their movements restricted under heavy chains, subjected to physical abuse, rape and torture, captive Africans survived aboard those floating coffins amidst the smell of urine, feces, sweat, blood, vomit, and probably the most paralyzing, the smell of fear. 
French, Dutch, Portuguese, British and Spanish in origin, slave ships traveled to the shores of Africa to gather their human cargo for transportation to the “New World.” Traded, sold, and kidnapped into captivity, the enslaved African was branded with a hot iron and renamed a European name and logged onto the ship’s manifest like sundry, inanimate provisions for the trip.  Coasting, or the process whereby slave ships lay anchor off the African coast to collect captives for a most profitable journey, averaged four to eight months in duration.  Able to see their beloved homeland and unaware of their fate, chained Africans were held beneath the decks, growing more anxious and more sick with each passing hour-- minute.  It was there, within swimming distance of Africa, that mutiny was most likely to occur.  Once out at sea, the hope for salvation, for freedom, faded like the distant horizon of their beloved motherland.
The ships themselves ranged in size from fifty to two hundred tons.  Commonly, a ship of standard proportions held anywhere between four hundred and six hundred captives. Generally, crewmen would be proportioned one man to three tons, with higher ratios occurring when the fear of mutiny was greater.  The more greedy captains were known as “tight packers,” forcing as many Africans on board with complete disregard to even the most remote concept of humanity, in an effort to reach the Americas with sufficient Africans for which they could make private transactions.  The concept was rooted in the belief that the more Africans that were on board, the more Africans that would make it to the final destination, thus greater profits.  They would simply pile bodies on top on one another with no respect for the human beings that they kidnapped and traded like cattle.  “Loose packers” were the individuals that felt that fewer Africans per square foot meant less disease, rebellion and death among the captives.  It was not out of concern for their “passengers” that loose packers based their philosophy but simply an effort to decrease the mortality rate and potential danger to crewmembers and increase the profits for the surviving Africans that fostered their practices. 
The conditions onboard were the most deplorable and contemptible conditions conceivable.  As to the space allotted for captives, Munford describes the common dimensions, “A ship of common dimensions had a battery or a between-deck.  This was a space between the spare deck and the first bridge, about 5 feet 8 inches high.  A platform, 6 feet wide, ran the length of the ship.  The space between it and the upper bridge was two and a half feet.  Captives lay stretched on the bridge platform and between-decks,” (p.281).  That meant that captives lay chained arm to arm, leg to leg, for the duration of a trip that averaged five to nine weeks, in a space where they could barely lift their heads.  In order to relieve themselves, chained captives had to crawl over the dead and dying to reach a barrel for elimination.  Dragging with them their fellow cellmates, for it was certainly a prison of sorts, the effort was most often futile and resulted in captives eliminating where they lay.  Pools of excrement and waste dripped into the eyes, mouths and open sores of anyone lying beneath or around someone too weak or physically unable to make that degrading sojourn.  Many times, small children lost their lives, suffocated at the bottoms of the vats of filth.  The excrement pails were emptied once a day, if at all, and occasionally the decks would be washed down with seawater and vinegar. 
The age of the captives ranged from preteen to early twenties, with only the most healthy and the strongest Africans being “selected” to make the journey.  It seems rather peculiar that any human being could be deemed strong and/or healthy after being subjected to the atrocities of the enslavement process.  If one were reasonably healthy upon boarding the ship, the voyage most certainly ensured that they would not be healthy at the end of the trip.  Unconscionable conditions existed not only to eat away at the bodies of the captives but also to consume their very souls.  The list of ailments attributed to enslaved Africans reads like a medical school journal of fatal, if not surreal, diseases; flux, dysentery, scurvy, typhoid fever, small pox, yellow fever, tuberculosis, leprosy et al. were common occurrences aboard the slave ships.  Yaws, a venereal disease that would cause its victims to itch themselves into a state of insanity and opthamalia, a condition that caused temporary blindness, were just a few or the exotic maladies to which African captives were exposed.  Plagued with parasites and rodents, housed in quarters with insufficient ventilation, and unlikely to receive any medical attention, each and every captive aboard the slave ships was exposed to unthinkable infection.  The medical “treatment” for captives oft times amounted to nothing more than being throw overboard, inconsequential fodder for predatory sharks. 
Mortality rates going as high as an estimated twenty five percent, crewmen learned that physical activity lead to a greater chance of African survival.  Weather permitting, slaves were led on deck to “dance” in small groups.  Forced to move to the beat of a drum, the captives had the chance to stretch their limb and feel sunshine on their skin.  Africans were not allowed the dignity of choosing a watery grave over the indignation of enslavement and certain precautions were made to ensure that no one jumped overboard.  Nets on the sides of the boats were in place to ensure that voluntary drowning was not an option.  Mothers, however, would occasionally manage to fling their newborns African babies beyond the nets and send their children to death, their bodies far from the reaches of their pale-faced captors, their souls forever free. 
Nutrition, or more aptly the lack thereof, contributed greatly to the horrific conditions of the African captives.  More than lack of food, lack of water was responsible for deaths of innumerous enslaved Africans.  Subsisting on a diet not fit for even the most vile of beasts, captive Africans suffered from dehydration and starvation.  Many times, in an act of defiance, captured Africans would refuse to eat the slop given them as a suicidal act.  The crewmen would threaten the Africans with burning, hot coals about their lips and force them to swallow it as an example to others that might consider death by starvation.  A mixture of horse beans and flour was not much incentive to eat in addition to the fact that it might be crawling with maggots and vermin.  Provisions were made for each African to have one barrel of fresh water per voyage.  If inclement weather or extenuating circumstances led to a miscalculation of supplies, crewmembers apportioned whatever water was drinkable for themselves, leaving the captive Africans to die or throwing them overboard so as not to have to hear their incessant moans. During the Middle Passage, the strongest may not have been the ones to survive the voyage; it might simply have been a matter of the ones closest to the food being able to survive.
Exactly how many Africans died during the Middle Passage will never be known.  Estimates including those that survived, those lost at sea, and those that were slaughtered and died before ever reaching the slave ships range from fifteen to one hundred million. There was little, if any, incentive to keep accurate records of accurate counts of the ships’ human cargo, allotting for extra profit from private sales between captains and eager buyers. Perhaps an even more elusive figure is the amount of money made from the trade of African lives for currency.  It can be considered trade only under the superficial guise of trading a human being for money.  On those vessels where the “cargo” was ensured, a captain could conceivably claim that all of the Africans contracted a fatal disease and that he had to throw them overboard, thus receiving the money owed on the policy on their heads and the money received from their “illegal” sale.  Piracy accounted for much of the loss of captives within striking distance of the final destination.  Sea-faring thieves could come along after the most arduous portion of the journey and commandeer the captive Africans for their own ill-gotten gains. 
Mutiny aboard the slave ships was not uncommon.  Armed with nothing more than the sheer will to live and the determination of survival, captive Africans often organized rebellions without the benefit of a common language among them and no hope for escape other than death.  Even the stories of the mutinies that have survived the passage of time are flavored by the storytellers themselves, white crewmen who were able to cease and desist the efforts of the enraged and willful Africans.  Buried at sea are the stories of the Africans who overcame their captors only to slaughter them and remain unable to navigate their way back home.  Plentiful are the stories of Africans who allegedly sold their brethren off to the European slave traders, but rare is the story of how Africans patrolled the coast of Africa in small boats, liberating captives on ships docked at port.  Sea captains had good reason to not report accounts of uprisings because it would jeopardize their future expeditions, and future income. 
One of the only first-hand accounts of the Middle Passage from the vantage point of the captive African is illustrated in the book, The Interesting Narrative of Life of Olaudah Equiano, or Gustavus Vassa, the African: an Authoritative Text/Written by Himself.  Written in the vernacular of the enslaver, Equiano speaks of his experiences of capture as a child of eleven years old.  He recounts the belief upon being brought upon the ship that he was going to be put in one of the large pots and eaten by the savagely brutal white men. He laments about the sensation of “death spirits” on the ship, and his desire for death as an escape to the abysmal conditions that surrounded him.  Tales of the captives’ experience written in the native tongues of Africa may not exist, and if they do, they have remained hidden or have been destroyed. 
The ramifications and psychological inheritance of the Middle Passage have never fully been examined.  S.E. Anderson suggests that the individuals that survived the Middle Passage possessed a different genetic makeup than those that remained on the shores of Africa.  For example, excessive sodium loss was common during transportation across the ocean.  He goes on to suggest that sodium-conserving descendents of Africans who were enslaved may be more susceptible to “salt-sensitive” hypertension than other people have a tendency to be (Anderson, Black Holocaust for Beginners, p. 101). Certainly, extensive physiological studies need to be conducted to ascertain the genetic damage to the immune systems of the African captives and their descendants and the role it plays on the health of African Americans.  Psychologically, the origins of distrust, self-hatred, and competitiveness all had some foundation in the experience of the Middle Passage. The forced competition for something as simple as fresh air among people that shared the same bonds but different ethnicities may very well be the origin of turf wars and gang allegiances that exist today. 
If one can speculate as to the origins of the breakdown of the Black male/female relationship in contemporary society, the genesis may very well lie in the bowels of the slave ships.  The ratio of men to women averaged two to one. Women and children frequently went unchained but were always housed separately from the male captives. Forced gender segregation, unhealthy ratios, and a barbarous, competitive climate certainly created a communication rift the likes of which may not have been transcended to this very day.  Certainly, it is in the interpretation of the instances of rape of the women aboard the ship that a misogynist slant lay. 
As Vincent Harding recounts in his work entitled, There is a River, “many Black women resisted the most personal of white invasions and instead, turned the situation to the purposes of their people’s fight for freedom (p. 12).  This sort of sentiment makes light of the psychological and emotional devastation of the act of rape and places the responsibility of resistance within the loins of captive African women. Harding speaks of the women who chose the struggle for black freedom over a privileged [emphasis added] bondage among white men, as if to say that repeated rape and defilement was in some way a meritorious benefit of those that did not slay their violators.  From such a statement, the assumption must certainly be made that the weak women submitted to such tortures to make things easy on themselves and because they were not committed to the act of revolution.  That is an absolutely absurd and insane presupposition that reduces women to a sexual object rather than human being and forms the foundation for the gold-digger stereotype commonly associated with Black women. 
Nowhere in his work does Harding mention the male victims of rape onboard the ship neither does he accuse the men of the being the benefactors of sex in exchange for comfort nor does he imply that they were responsible for mounting insurrections.  If the captive African male slaves believed as Harding does, that sex and rape are synonymous, that mindset essentially set the stage for the objectification of Black women and the concept of sex in exchange for goods and services that plagues the African-American community.  Perhaps, the African male captive simply died inside, seeing his sister, mother and wife, repeatedly abused, unable to protect her from such abuses.  Profoundly ashamed of the fact that he could not defend her, he turned his back on her, creating a chasm between Black men and women that has yet to be healed. Whatever the scenario, the blood that runs through the collective veins of Black people on this side of the Atlantic is the blood of those indefatigable spirits, those courageous women that somehow managed to survive repeated rape and degradation to live to see another day.  In essence, our existence is owed to the African women that did not stage rebellion and die at the bottom of the sea, but to those that internalized the pain and found a way to survive.
The end of the journey meant a new life of hell.  It was on reaching the New World that the captive Africans assumed their new title, that of slave.  John Hope Franklin discloses:
Perhaps not more than half the slaves shipped from Africa ever became effective workers in the New World.  Many of those that had not died of disease or committed suicide by jumping overboard were permanently disabled by the ravages of some dread disease or by maiming which often resulted from the struggle against the chains (Franklin, From Slavery to Freedom, p. 57).

The death and disfiguration toll of the Middle Passage is astronomical when multiplied by the hundreds of years that the transatlantic transportation of kidnapped Africans occurred.  There was no turning back, there was no going home. 
The Middle Passage was not an historical moment but rather an historical era of the most devastating dimensions.  It was the birthplace of disease, dysfunction, and destruction for Africans around the globe.  The Black Holocaust was nothing less than centuries of oppression and genocide perpetuated by Europeans on innocent, African victims that endured to live on in body and in spirit.  The Middle Passage is not over.  Dispersed Africans will forever be tethered and bound to the vessels of ruination, drowning in the sea of abandon, until the proper homage is paid to those that perished and those that dared to live on.  

Scottie Lowe 2003

Wednesday, October 15, 2014

The Bisexual Male Primer for the Black Community





The Black community never ceases to amaze me with the lengths they will go to in order to perpetuate homophobia.  Black men have to be masculine.  Not just masculine, they have to be hyper-masculine, a warped manifestation of part criminal, part abuser, part dictator in order to be considered a real man.  They have to control and command and lead the household and make all the decisions and make all the money and they have to have big dicks or the Black sexuality police will deem them gay and less than a real man.  They have to wear the right sneakers and their jeans have to be saggin’ or they will be considered girly and undeserving of the title of Black man.   Wait, their jeans can’t sag too much or that will mean that it’s some sort of secret prison sign of being gay, a homosexual beacon calling out to find those other disgusting gays.  OK, so there’s a fine line of how much your jeans can sag but you can rest assured that Black people will be able to tell you where that line is and anyone who doesn’t have the appropriate amount of heterosexual jean sag is a fag. 

The only problem is that the tightness of one’s jeans doesn’t indicate a person’s sexual preference.  The color of a man’s shirt doesn’t indicate his sexual preference.  The timber and bass of his voice doesn’t indicate his sexual preference either.  How articulate a brotha is or isn’t has nothing whatsoever to do with his sexuality.  I hate to break it to you but none of the absurd and asinine gay indicators that Black people (and Black women are the worst with your supposed gaydar so I’m calling you out specifically) use to identify gay men are valid and all they do is perpetuate a bigoted and uninformed mentality that perpetuates misogyny, sexism, and men hiding their sexual preferences, desires, and curiosities in further continuance of lying, denying, and stupidity. 

You want to know what does indicate a man’s sexual preference?  Nothing.  Not a damn thing.  Because we are so sexually immature, we don’t understand the difference between gender identity and gender roles.  But we have swallowed, hook, line, and sinker that men are supposed to be aggressive and violent and sexually promiscuous and that women are supposed to be submissive and genetically predisposed to cooking and cleaning and satisfying a man’s lusts.  There are real differences in gender but they don’t have a damn thing to do with masculinity and femininity.  They aren’t even all genetic.  And just as in nature, right is not better than left, night is not better than day, up is not better than down, male is not better than female.  And masculine is certainly not better than feminine. 

Masculinity and femininity are concepts not found in nature.  Masculinity and femininity are SOCIAL constructs, not biologic or genetic.  A female lion doesn’t say, “Oh, look at that juicy gazelle over there.  I would love to fix him for dinner tonight but I have to wait for my big, strong husband to do it because I’m too demure and girly and only males do that sort of yucky stuff.”  Elephant herds are led by the females, not the males.  Female elephants are not relegated to be inferior to the males, their contribution to the herd is not diminished because they bear the children.  Male penguins are the primary care-givers of their offspring.  They feed, shelter, protect, teach, guide and love their babies while the mothers are off frolicking in the semi-frozen surf.  But one thing you won’t see on Penguin Twitter is the entire penguin community in an outrage, demeaning the male penguins for being sissies.  But women will tell you with a quickness that they don’t want to get the oil changed in their car because only men are supposed to do those sorts of things.  They have been socialized to believe that “car stuff” is manly, as if, if you are forced to do the horrid job of taking your car to the mechanic you are going to grow hair on your chest and wear flannel.  Be believe that men have certain roles and women have certain roles and we don’t question where those rules originated or the significance of what it means to us as individuals. 

The concepts of masculinity and femininity are man-made, literally and figuratively.  It was men, very insecure and immature ancient men in fact, who deemed what role women were to have in society and what role men were to have and any deviation from those made up rules meant that that person was some sort of social leper.  It’s no accident that men decided that they were supposed control and rule over women. 

Black folk LOVE to falsely claim that homosexuality doesn’t exist in nature.  Except . . . it does.  In almost every single species known to man homosexual acts are commonplace.  What doesn’t exist in nature is homophobia.  That is a social construct as well.  Hating someone because they experience pleasure with the same gender is as illogical as hating someone just because they have a different skin color.  Homosexuality is not the going to end human population.  Loving someone, even having sex with someone for nothing more than pleasure isn’t bad or dirty or wrong.  It’s simply a different form of sexual expression from what is come to be accepted as the norm.   Your male dog isn’t going to start barking with a lisp and wearing a skinny collar if they have sex with another dog but my people, my poor, misguided, gullible people think that if a man has sex with another man, even if he is “the top”, that he is going to start singing Lady Gaga songs and going around saying, “Two snaps and a twist, gurl.” 

If I hear one more time, “I don’t want no man crying more than me,(sic) I need a real man,” I’m going to lose it.  Right, you don’t want a man to use his tear ducts because you have deemed you know more than perfect and divine Mother Nature that men aren’t supposed to use them.  If men weren’t supposed to cry, they wouldn’t have tear ducts.  No one wants a partner who is overly emotional, male or female, but crying is essential, we are human beings and we are supposed to process and release our emotions, penis notwithstanding.  The fact that men don’t cry, don’t express their emotions is the reason they are holding so much rage and frustration in and acting out in unhealthy ways.  Women are promoting it with their backwards thinking.  I’ve heard women say, “I knew he was gay because he liked his nipples stimulated and only women supposed to like that.(sic)”  That level of stupidity is astounding.  What biology class did you take that told you that men’s nipples aren’t supposed to provide them pleasure because you need to demand your money back? 

Let’s dispel some myths right now, shall we? 

1.        First and foremost, Bisexuality is an actual thing.  Yes, it’s very real.  Black people love to say that Black men can’t be bisexual, that if they have ever been with or thought about another man sexually then he is gay.  Bisexuality means that you enjoy, appreciate, and are aroused by sex with both genders.  It does not mean that you prefer both genders equally, in the same proportions and ways, but this whole concept that a Black man can only be straight or gay is really, really . . . not intelligent.  We don’t have a problem (behind closed doors) with female bisexuality but we are the original kings and queens of double standards when it comes to men being bisexual. 
2.        I know this is going to offend many a person but it has to be said.  EVERY male, every single solitary one, has the potential to experience pleasure when anally stimulated.  The nerve endings in the anus are the exact same as in the female and women have the potential to experience explosive pleasure, even orgasms when stimulated anally and women don’t have a prostate.  Men have a prostate, a gland located within the anus, that when stimulated not only provides pleasure, but it is healthy for them.  It’s not just some men, it’s not just gay men.  EVERY male has the potential to experience pleasure when stimulated anally.  Nature, biology itself, has set the stage for men to experience sexual pleasure when stimulated anally so let’s stop relegating it to only something only gay men like and let’s collectively mature to the point of understanding that a man experiencing sexual arousal and/or pleasure when he is anally stimulated has anything whatsoever to do with his sexual orientation. 
3.       The color, tightness, style, or cost of a man’s clothing does not indicate his sexual preferences.  It does indicate his style and his willingness to either conform or rebel against who and what society tells him he has to be.  It’s clothing, not a genetic marker.   Wearing a skirt does not make a man gay.  It does not make him feminine.  What men and women wear is nothing more than an evolution of Victorian and puritanical belief systems that have dictated that women were bras, makeup, heels, pantyhose, and dresses while men wear pants.  Indigenous men all over the planet, for millennia, have worn skirts and the population didn’t cease to exist because they were all in the closet gays.  Recognize your own level of brainwashing within the matrix and understand that clothing is nothing more than a socially-acceptable way to cover our naked bodies that we have been taught to be ashamed of. 
4.       Ladies, the more you make up these ridiculous rules about what makes a man masculine, about who is and isn’t gay, about what makes a man a “real nigga” you are going to force men to lie about their sexuality.  It’s no wonder so many men are in such denial about their real sexuality because Black women are quick to demonize anyone who isn’t a thug as less than a man.  And ladies, if you are continually measuring masculinity by how tight a man’s jeans are you are surely going to bed down with a man who is hiding his sexuality because you’ve already let him know that you won’t respect him if he admits to having same sex desires. 
5.       Black men are NOT responsible for the spread of HIV, the virus that causes AIDS.  Black women want to demonize bisexual men, point the finger of sanctimonious indignation at bisexual brothas for being down low and for spreading the disease.  Check it out, sista.  If you spread your legs and don’t care to get your partners tested first, you are a hypocrite and you need to take a long, hard look in the mirror because your HIV status is your responsibility, no one else’s.   
6.       The only way to truly ascertain a man’s sexuality is to be non-judgmental, open, honest, mature, and to effectively communicate.  The vast majority of young boys experiment with other young boys when they are young.  That does not make them gay or bisexual.  Lots of boys are molested by older males when they are young and many experience that molestation as pleasurable physical sensations.  That does not mean that they are gay or bisexual.  The problem lies in ridiculing, shaming, and shaming men when they tell the secrets of their past that haunt them.  We have to redefine what we want in a man and what it means to be a man.  If you want a man who is hard, aggressive, who is masculine, be prepared to accept him when he is abusive, distant, and emotionally immature and unavailable.    Just as a bisexual woman’s identity doesn’t change or become less desirable as they explore their sexuality with another woman, a bisexual man’s identity doesn’t make him an untouchable and disgusting.  Manhood should be defined by honesty, integrity, emotional maturity, and commitment, not some biblical edict that says that men are supposed to be aggressive and violent and women are supposed to be demure and submissive and can only be between men and women to be viable. 

There was a time in the past when I belonged to the “Black gay/bisexual men are yucky,” club.  As I evolved, I realized that sexuality has nothing whatsoever to do with who and what a person is.  I realized that I was wrong for my position.  There was also a time when I was asked if I thought everyone had the potential to be bisexual.  I rejected that argument summarily because I believed, or more accurately, I had been socialized to believe that heterosexuality was the norm against which all other sexuality should be judged and that bisexuality and homosexuality were abnormalities.  Today, I am of the mindset that bisexuality should be the normal, natural state for all human beings and that it is only our socialization, our conformity to repressive rules, rules that dictate that an individual should be repulsed by the very same sexual organs they have between their legs when viewed on another person. 

I now believe that bisexuality represents true enlightenment.  The ability to see the value and worth of a person, their essence as a human, the ability to acknowledge chemistry, both physical and spiritual, in another person regardless of their genitalia, in my opinion, is how we are supposed to be as humans.  I reject the idea that a person’s gender should dictate whom they love or with whom they seek pleasure.  I reject that men should screw any woman they can because it’s in their nature.  I reject that casual sex is no big deal and I believe that the energy exchanged when we have sex with another human being should be based on true connection and chemistry, not just recreation and certainly not manipulation.  We should be attracted to a person’s heart, their energy, their talents, their spirit, and their sensuality, not solely the bits between their legs.  That, to me, is the ultimate form of enlightenment. 

I do not think that all bisexuals are enlightened.  Not even close.  I think that our collective sexuality is so backwards, so distorted, so unhealthy that I believe that most bisexual people are in denial, they hate the part of themselves that is seeking pleasure with someone of their own gender and thus they are far from enlightened or evolved.  One thing I know for sure is that bisexuality is far more common than anyone wants to acknowledge.  It pains me to think of how many Black sons have been degraded and humiliated for their sexual experimentation by fathers who have engaged in all sorts of same-sex proclivities themselves all because the Black community wants to make manhood about being hyper masculine, one-dimensional, stereotypes of what manhood is supposed to be. 

Scottie Lowe