a response - on malcolm supposedly being gay - may 2005i received an e-mail in mid-may 2005 asking me to send in a protest letter in response to an article suggesting that malcolm x was gay. this was my response. i have been villified for it, but it remains my opinion:
what are we supposed to be protesting here? if malcolm was gay of what consequence is it to the great work he did? a protest would be as shallow as the publication of the article itself - are we suggesting that gay people can not contribute to the black struggle? alvin ailey made great contributions to the profile of black people in america; e. lynn harris, one of america's bestselling authors, with an astiounding work rate, is a great role model for writers; james baldwin, lorraine hansberry (who wrote "raisin in the sun"), june jordan and audre lorde were gay, angela davis - the activist - is gay... the list goes on; which only goes to show that the guardian don't do proper research because it's absolute CRAP to say there are/were no openly gay black role models. besides that the most silly thing they've done is to trivialise people's achievements by making their sexuality an issue. a protest denying malcolm was gay will achieve nothing; it will just fall into the same shallow pit the guardian have dug...
Labels: politics, society
