5-Point Program for 3 audiences – The Family, the Public/society and Religious community.

The winds of political focus on gay debate have now shifted to hostile territory –  with the politicians and lobby groups joining the fry. It is important to examine in greater details what this debate means for Kenyans. Every country has its own internal social-economic-and-political dynamics, and attempting to follow the Ugandan or Nigerian examples would be foolish.  We are in the 21^st Century, and the current toxic debate on gays has negative outcomes not just for gays, but also:

1. Their family members
2.  Kenya’s Economy
3. Religious Interests

Let us discuss each separately:

I am writing this hoping family members, policy makers and religious leaders will read. Help me to reach them by forwarding at least the relevant sections.

Families of gay and lesbian members

Families with gay and lesbian members, often experience social stigma, on account of having a member who is gay or lesbian. Since stigmatization is not a good feeling, many families choose to distance themselves from their gay relative, to lessen the pain. Moreover having been brought up in the same social context as everyone else, they are often in a curious situation of having to be in a close family relationship with someone they would ordinarily stigmatize. But the fact is; people who want to stigmatize will do so regardless of the internal distance the family members may create between themselves.

In some cases the gay or lesbian members, anticipating rejection, choose to distance themselves from other members of the family. By doing this they often hope to reduce family friction, and uncomfortable discussions about sexuality. Besides these family dynamics, there are other less obvious effects of social stigma – including negative policies and laws. These include:

1. Negating strong family bonds – Families rely on each other for support particularly during times of adversity. These adversities could be chronic illnesses, mitigating financial and economic challenges and even taking advantage of development opportunities such as educational or economic advancement. This form of CAPITAL within families and communities is called social capital. Studies in Kenya have shown, most businesses start from loans advanced by family members. Distancing any family member; especially one who is likely to have some disposable income, negates the formation of strong family bonds and opportunities for consolidating social capital.
2. Stigma and Blackmail – The situation Criminalization and lack of protective laws is a cash cow for blackmailers.  In some cases some gay and lesbian people dedicate a significant part of their monthly income to paying off blackmailers on routine basis. This diverts resources from the family. So when blackmailers and extortionists rob from the gay and lesbian people, they are in effect robbing the entire family.
3. Health and Well-being: There is quite a huge amount of literature now that demonstrates how this oppressive environment affects gay and lesbian people’s health and well-being. For the family members that should be enough to move into action in support of their gay or lesbian relative. But because, it is the family members who in most occasions HAVE to take care of their ill members – (including the associated financial and human costs), their interest in the policy environment affecting their gay and lesbian members, cannot be passive. It should be proactive and preventative. The whole family should be interested in preventing conditions that will cause ill health and reduced wellbeing.
4. Increasing Family Opportunities: Oppressive laws and policies are a major disincentive for entrepreneurship and wealth creation. In our context where unemployment among skilled and unskilled labour is reduced through absorption into family businesses, this disincentive has far reaching consequences. [Personally I would like to create a business and hire some within my own family, who are unemployed, but I can only withstand the current blackmail and extortion as it is].
5. Social Protection, especially in old age: Family members may not like that their gay or lesbian brothers are not building their own social protection by starting their own families and having children. They know however, that they are unlikely to abandon their gay relatives once they age – such would bring shame to the entire family. That is why it becomes necessary to support their gay and lesbian brothers as they form alternative social capital - that is grounded on protective laws.

What of the broader [Kenyan] Society

People, who do not have gay family members, tend to be ambivalent on this issue, but they should not be. Here is why;

1. International positioning: Kenya is home to many international organizations such as the UN offices of UNHABITAT and UNEP. It is also home to many international non-governmental organizations working in the region.  Kenya’s hosting of the UN offices has numerous tangible (financial) and non-tangible (positional & perceptual) benefits. Yet the presence of these offices in Nairobi is contested. The surest way of losing these offices is going the Uganda & Nigeria way. How can the UN for example guarantee that its internationally sourced staff members will not suffer the effects of criminalization, blackmail and extortion, including possibility of violence?
2. Regional Positioning:  Hosting regional offices of many NGOs supports enables the country to leverage Foreign Exchange rate stabilization – even when actual spending of the dollars happens in the neighbouring countries. Moreover the resident staffs spend and save a considerable amount of their incomes in the country, which transfers wealth to our people. Now the reason Kenya is a destination of choice is largely because of “psychological nearness.” Kenya has been perceived as a cosmopolitan country – at least Nairobi is.  We need to build on this positioning rather than threaten in with village inspired mentality.  
3. Tourism – The Kenya Tourism Board complains of being poorly funded. Now they have will have one additional challenge – of a negative image to deal with. South Africa must be looking with glee as their marketing campaign just got easier….South Africa Marketing slogan. It is not the big 5 & wildlife – Tanzania has better offering, many African countries including South Africa have them.
4. Cost of Health Care: Criminalization and lack of protective laws & policies worsens the health outcomes of the gay and lesbian Kenyans. It also adds to the burden of disease in the country. Moreover, as we have demonstrated in previous postings, there are externalities associated with one individual falling sick, in the society.  This situation is made worse if we are dealing with infectious such as HIV. As a resource-limited/poor country, should the real brainy thing to do, not be reducing the disease burden and factors that escalate the cost of health care?
5. Deepening our democratic gains: Every farmer will tell you that the way to protect one’s land from encroachment is by protecting every marginal inch. The last inch of the land may not be that important, in fact, by itself, it may not add much to the bottom line, but they know if they lose it, they will have started the process of further encroachment. A similar argument holds for human rights. The way to protect and deepen the democratic gains we have made as a country is by jealously protecting the rights of those at the margin of society – those whose rights are most likely to be abused. Building a case for protection of the rights and freedoms to privacy, association, expression etc. for gays, makes it infinitely easier to make a case for mainstream society. In fact, brainy social activists may want to focus on marginal societies because in so doing they mainstream the universality of human rights.

What of the Religious interests?

I have spoken to a number of high-ranking religious leaders, such as the late Arch-bishop David Gitari, Bishop Chai of Mombasa, Sheikh Hussein Ali, and Sheikh Juma Ngao among others. From one-to-one conversations, these leaders sound ardent in their search of a lasting solution on religious aspirations and reality of gay and lesbian members. Unfortunately their public pronouncements are not always so conciliatory.  Their public pronouncements are often perceived as pushing for these oppressive laws and policies. Unfortunately this public positioning of religion, fails in its track in the following ways:

1. Message is perceived to be vengeful & hateful: In private conversations, Sheikh Ngao, Bishop Chai and others may say the prophets and even Jesus did not come for the saints but sinners. And that they would like to attract them to their Mosques & Churches, yet tone and content of their message is anything but inviting. Of course, one understands the fear they have of “normalizing homosexuality” or making it appear as “socially acceptable.” But this is a trade-off they have to deal with – either they take a bitter and hostile positioning – which emphasize the seriousness of the sin of homosexuality and in the process chase away the homosexuals from them, or they take a compassionate and inviting approach – which makes their message less threatening and appealing. Sadly for them, they cannot have it both ways.
2. Crime by Association: Many religious people may not support the endemic violence against gay and lesbian people, yet they do not condemn it as much as they condemn gay people. Moreover, many people who perpetrate violence against gay people use religiously-inspired arguments often the same talking points used by religious leaders. Indeed in many occasions, it can be quite difficult to separate the hostile voices emanating from religious leaders and those advanced by violent homophobes. Over time religion is increasingly becoming a mouth piece for these homophobes and if the trend is not checked, a merger (hostile or friendly) seems to be in the offing.
3. Pain to family and Friends: Religious leaders may be oblivious to this simple fact – many family members actually do love their gay and lesbian relatives. As a result, when they are hurt by religious emanating or inspired hostile voices and actions, the family members hurt just as much as their gay and lesbian relatives. Over time this creates resentment and indifference. Religious leaders may be of the view that theirs is the “straight and narrow” but how they deliver this message has effect on the parents, brothers, sisters and other relatives. Like the drop of rain, it cannot fall on the ground and have no effect; if its clean water, it waters the ground and vegetation grows but if it is acidic, it scotches the earth.
4. Moral Benchmarking: Religious leaders must understand, that when they emphasize on this issue, relative to other social issues, which may be more urgent, and their impact far reaching, they are creating a moral benchmark. They too are human beings, and they have failings, some of which have only been too recent – pastor in a bar and the other dies in a woman’s house.  That the issue of homosexuality is more morally serious is increasingly flying in the face – soon or latter whatever little credibility they have left, will evaporate and dry up, never to be seen again.
5. Signs if the times: Society is changing and the church must learn how to engage with the people in these new times. I guess the best ever lesson to be learnt about this is the document by the Catholic Church in 1965 – Gaudium et Spes. While it’s a document of its own time, and some of the issues discussed are now dated, it was as the document states and attempt for the church to scrutinize “the signs of the times and of interpreting them in the light of the Gospel.”  Taking a fundamentally moralistic and calling on the state to use its coercive power to enforce that moral posturing, is most  unfortunate.