Introduction
There is substantial evidence from various sources regarding the link between misogyny and homophobia. Misogyny can be defined as the “fear and hatred of women” (Murray and Roscoe 23). It is a form of psychological manifestation that represses all that was traditionally associated with females in society. It includes several factors, such as emotions, dependency, and religious attitudes (Bordo 28). On the other hand, homophobia is a collection of feelings toward homosexuality.
In other words, the feelings are directed to persons who are believed to be transgender, lesbians and/or gays in the community. The feelings can be expressed in many forms, such as antipathy, aversion and/or contempt. In the US, Black Americans are exemplified by relatively high levels of misogyny and homophobia for the reason that they promote their own oppression, which is mainly attributed to their failure to study their history.
Oppression Tools
It is widely held that black people in America are oppressed by various factors in society. However, people use the notions of homophobia and misogyny to cause divisions that go a long way in perpetuating patriarchy and capitalism. In fact, there is considerable evidence that many people are keen on using the two notions to maintain their status quo (Bordo 28).
It is amazing to learn that Black Americans oppress themselves on the grounds of the two issues of homophobia and misogyny, yet they were evident in ancient Africa (Murray and Roscoe 90; Teunis 176). For example, it is notable that some traditional male Africans were gays, while some females were lesbians. While Black Americans are busy oppressing themselves, many white people in the US are keen on increasing their trade and industries (Teunis 180).
A common phenomenon has been identified in cultural backgrounds that are founded on patriarchal systems. The phenomenon is related to the perceptions of females who are repressed by homosexual acts of men. The “Roman Catholic Church has been shown to be among the leading institutions that facilitate the expression of patriarchy” (Murray and Roscoe 87).
In ancient Africa, men could assume the passive coital role, which could not be tolerated for the reason that it was recognized and practiced based on the principle of insubordination of females to males in the community. In this context, it is worth to note that the theory held that males ought to be aggressive and dominant. Males who could act “like women were looked down upon by their friends” (Murray and Roscoe 34).
In fact, “they were told that they were dragging their fellow males down with them in their voluntary disgrace” (Murray and Roscoe 176). Thus, it would be important for Black Americans to realize the fact that the rationalization of various forms of sexual prejudices are fueled by false notions vis-à-vis sexual privileges, which are critical to establishing the traditional practices that are inherited from past generations.
When a Black American woman says that she does not want to be a female, then this can be viewed as a negative attitude toward her sexuality that could be caused by several factors, such as past sexual experiences or domestic violence. Such a person should be allowed to adopt what she likes. Most probably, she would end up being a lesbian, but her desire should not be utilized to deter her from achieving her goals. A Black American male could also express his desire to be a female, implying that he would end up being a gay (Bordo 28).
That notwithstanding, homophobia and misogyny are not associated with introducing or perpetuating capitalism and patriarchy in society. In the context of Black Americans, the two notions cannot be used to oppress them. They are committed to achieving long-term and short-term goals in their lives. It does not make sense to be deterred from achieving both personal and organizational objectives by adopting the notions of homophobia and misogyny.
In the contemporary world, just like in the traditional world, people make their own decisions regarding what they what to practice. For example, in the US, citizens have the freedom to decide whether they can be gay or lesbians, decisions that cannot negatively impact them in their roles in the workplace. Homophobia and misogyny cannot be used as instruments to promote divisions among oppressed persons. This is due to the fact that even though they are oppressed, they still have their psychological abilities to make critical decisions.
Conclusion
Personal beliefs are important in determining the extent to which people are impacted by some phenomena in the real world. Thus, it can be argued that homophobia and misogyny are personal beliefs that cannot negatively affect the whole population in terms of maintaining the status quo and high levels of oppression. In other words, the perceptions cannot have significant effects on systematic oppression.
From a sociological standpoint, persons are supposed to be united in society, but the issues of homosexuality and lesbianism cannot be applied to cause divisions since they are not practiced based on collective decisions (Murray and Roscoe 134). In addition, the fear of women and homosexuality matters cannot be used to propagate capitalism, which is firmly founded on strong economic platforms.
Works Cited
Bordo, S. Unbearable weight: Feminism, Western culture, and the body. California, CA: Univ of California Press, 2003. Print.
Murray, S., and Will R., eds. Boy-Wives and Female-Husbands: Studies in African-American Homosexualities. New York, NY: Macmillan, 2001. Print.
Teunis, N. “Same-sex sexuality in Africa: A case study from Senegal.” AIDS and Behavior 5.2 (2001): 173-182. Print.