Runaway homophobia: In defence of Binyavanga

The Kenyan media have been unfair and sensational in their coverage of Binyavanga Wainaina’s announcement on December 1 (World Aids Day) that he is HIV-positive. The 1971-born writer is also openly gay, and his homosexuality has got everything to do with why our media are out to portray him negatively.

The Caine-winning artiste and founder of the Kwani? journal also suffered a stroke recently, and our cynical media seem to be happy about this state of his health. They want to link the stroke to his non-normative sexuality.

As a journalist and former editor, I’m ashamed of the mediocrity and cynicism with which I share space in the Kenyan newspapers.

It is populist and sensational to gay-bait in the Kenyan media, but journalists biased against sexual minorities and the disabled belong to the club of morons, not respectable media houses.

Binyavanga (Binya to me) did the right thing to openly say that he is HIV-positive. Given the stigma attached to HIV, his speaking out is a voice for so many others in Africa and beyond who can’t speak about their HIV status. He should be commended for his strong courage and conviction.

Writing about animals and the environment, which can’t speak, my favourite essay at the moment is Linda Alcoff’s 1992 ‘The problem of speaking for others.’

The beautifully written essay discusses the problems confronting an intellectual who seeks to speak on behalf of the silenced minorities. It asks: can an elite white feminist, for example, speak effectively on behalf non-white poor women?

Alcoff shows that we run the risk of distorting or appropriating the voice of the oppressed when we try to speak on their behalf. Indeed, I have been accused by some queer critics of using a wrong word or two when writing about the representation of gay people in African literature.

I have also noticed a few people trying to ascertain my sexual orientation in Google searches and personal communication, as if there’s a metric of locating one’s queerness in the spectrum that is sexual identity.

Alcoff is emphatic that in spite of the risks that come with trying to represent others, it is irresponsible not to speak on behalf of those who have been silenced.

In a recent reiteration of this argument, she includes animals, the environment, and the whole cosmos. In the same vein, it would be irresponsible for Binya not to speak for his fellow gay men and people with HIV.

The lesson I have learnt over the years is to be sensitive when we write about any minorities — gay people, the disabled, children, the poor, and anybody who has been historically silenced.

When reporting about Binya’s HIV status, the best  and the most ethical newspaper in East Africa used an anonymous ‘reporter’ who used an unnamed ‘literary critic’ to dismiss Binya’s capacity to speak on behalf of gay people.

In a jarring and unfounded diatribe, the ‘literary critic’ argued that Binya lacks both ‘physical’ and ‘intellectual’ energy to speak for fellow gay people.

The reliance on such anonymity when one is expressing a strong opinion for which one cannot be sued or harassed by the government or an employer reeks of cowardice and moral depravity.

MALICE

In seeking anonymity, the ‘literary critic’ was aware that he or she was being malicious.

In granting that anonymity while publishing the criticism, the media house is complicit in the homophobia and bias against people who are HIV positive.

It is easy to tell who the ‘literary critic’ is, because in our humane circles, there is only one person in the whole planet who is capable of the kind of oxygen-sapping vindictiveness and homophobia expressed in the article against the most creative 21st-century Kenyan writer.

Binya is a public intellectual who could have used the Press if he wanted to, but he had not written to that newspaper. He revealed his status in a tweet on a special day. In fact, he was repeating the information because he had published a similar post online in October.

It is the homophobic-agenda-setting newspaper that followed Binya with the aim of sensationalising the revelation. It quoted all sorts of moronic responses on the social media in order to fuel ignorance and homophobia. Why couldn’t the newspaper just leave him alone if it had no capacity to cover HIV issues sensitively?

Only a badly trained ‘literary critic’ like the anonymous one cited in the newspaper would fail to recognise that Binya has the pedigree, the language, and the courage to speak on any issue. He is an inspiration not only to gay people and those who are HIV positive, but also to millions of people who continue to live on the fringes of society in Kenya and across Africa.

A globally recognised intellectual, Binya’s work has been published in some of the best venues in the world, not just in Kenyan newspapers, some of which cannot tell that some ‘literary critics’ are frauds.

Binya’s ability to communicate ideas is special. We should applaud him for this, especially when we remember that as anonymous newspaper ‘literary critics’ we haven’t written any cultural criticism worth writing home about.

Twitter: @evanmwangi