Free speech and African homophobia

Submitted by Troy Thiel

The recent homophobic writings of Jon Qwelane and the subsequent LGBT community reaction have highlighted many questions about where the borders of free speech lie and journalists’ responsibility regarding the effect of their words.

With visible examples of hate crimes, this is an emotionally charged subject. Respectfully, I would, however, like to examine this problem from some different angles. Should Qwelane be punished or educated?

Democratic South Africa, 14 years on, is still a really young democracy and, like anything humanly created, by no means perfect. Freedom of expression means that both advocates of an idea and those who speak against it should have equal opportunity to have their voice heard. Lessons from all around the world teach us that in the interests of civil rights, governments should not have strict control over free speech — even if the ideas are unpopular.

Constitutionally we are protected against prejudice based on race, religion or sexuality, but this does not mean that the idea of prejudice cannot be or is not held by people in our country. Many times in South Africa people turn to the government to protect their rights when these are catered for in the Constitution. I would suggest that these rights should more often be defended by the use of free speech, and it is every citizen’s obligation to do so. Defending the sanctity of the Constitution is our job.

The grey area of the argument against “hate speech” surfaces when trying to assess when the expression of ideas constitutes an action of prejudice (the legal wording in the Constitution refers to direct discrimination). While I mourn the victims of hate crimes, I wonder at the difficulties surrounding the accusation of hate speech. I ask how rationally complex it must be to try to connect someone’s hateful words with the enraged actions of some groups and individuals (particularly as a legal and not an emotional argument).

The spirit of the Constitution hopes to engender tolerance among the diverse people that make up our country. This is more easily said than done. Majority groups tend to wish to impose their beliefs on minorities; African culture, even though communally based, appears to follow this same trend. The point for education of the masses here is: different is good — for we are all in essence different. In the words of the statesman Haile Selassie, made famous by Bob Marley: “Until bigotry and prejudice and malicious and inhuman self-interest have been replaced by understanding and tolerance and good-will; until all Africans stand and speak as free beings, equal in the eyes of all men, as they are in the eyes of heaven; until that day, the African continent will not know peace.”

I, for my part, choose to live in a South Africa where Jon Qwelane expresses his prejudice (offensive as it is) so that we may challenge his homophobia with ideas of our own. Is this not more tolerable than living in a world where prejudices are whispered behind masks and acted upon in secret?

In many cases actions are preferable to words, and though community protests are certainly an outlet for rage and do sometimes cause political manoeuvring to placate the aggrieved, I feel they are not a long-term agent for change. If anyone wishes to change the way millions of people think, the best tool I can think of is education. As with most things, this begins at home. Educate your family, those with whom you work and especially the people who object to you. For the brave who decide to take up this challenge, especially in arguments surrounding sexuality, I have three tips for you:

1. Keep in mind that people are inclined to think that only their view is correct. Views on sexuality are also generally based on centuries of moral judgement and reinforcement provided by society, culture and religions. Be patient.

2. As a point of departure, perhaps base your discussion on the universality of prejudice. There is a reason why race, religion and sexual orientation are dealt with in the same clause in the Constitution, for they are all doorways to similar oppressions.

3. Use good examples to try to explain that sexuality is diverse and, according to mountains of historical evidence, has always been. Should you be inclined to wish to use some scientific study to bolster your argument, the most inclusive and thus far accurate study on human sexuality is the work of Alfred Kinsey. If you choose this foundation for discussion, be prepared also to introduce the idea of a range of sexuality (people falling between a zero and a six on a scale) rather than the widely used concept of categorisation (that is, gay, bisexual or straight).

Troy Thiel is a DJ without a show. He has a mutable opinion on almost everything and he’s happiest when nobody believes him. He likes free thinking, chocolate milk and electronica. He lives and survives smog in Johannesburg