Redefining Black Masculinity and Manhood: Successful Black Gay Men Speak Out

Whenever someone asks me w h a t the topic of my research is, I normally take a deep breath and launch into my summary, which goes something like this: I'm looking at successful, black gay men and issues of social responsibility toward the larger black community. This summary is normally met by silence, after which I am invariably asked t w o questions, why? and how? Why did I decide to study gay men, and how did I go about finding them? It always intrigues me that out of all t h a t I say in my summary the one thing that stands out most, and w h a t I t h i n k most people react to, is the word gay. Interestingly enough, these t w o questions, why and how, do not change, whether the person asking is gay or straight, male or female. My own interests in understanding the complexities of the black experience in the United States fueled me. Having spent 10 years doing development work in West Africa, I felt it was time to study my own, meaning African Americans in the United States. A n t h r o p o l o g y seemed the natural choice, given its unique qualitative approaches. I wanted to be able to explain as well as demonstrate the usefulness of anthropological methods in a way that black people, particularly, could understand and relate t o in their daily lives. SHEILAJ. WISEservesas an ethnographystrategistfor Context-BasedResearchGroup, an anthropologicalconsulting firm in Baltimore, Md. Her primary responsibility!s to helpcompaniesunderstandandthen useethnographicapproachesto informtheir businesses.Her researchinterestsincludethe socialconstructionof genderand intra-group difference.

S h e i l a ,J. Wise

This article explores the literature on masculinity

and manhood, specifically the masculine socialization process and

hegemonic masculinity as they relate to successful, black gay men. In doing so, the article reveals the lack of an incorporation

of homosexuafity into discussions of black masculinity and manhood. Throughout the article, the successful black gay men, who were the focus of a research study, reveal their own ideas, perceptions and experiences of masculinity ancJ manhood.

4

J o u r n a l of A f r i c a n A m e r i c a n M e n

THE CONTROVERSY In some ways, I knew that choosing to study successful, black gay men would be, at the very least, controversial, Many black people see the role of the black man as being integral to the black family and the larger black community. Choosing men who are not only successful but also gay puts an interesting twist on the role of black men. Certainly the word "success" for many conjures up images of material assets. Even more so, success implies prosperity, wealth and position. To refer to a black man as successful is to refer to his assets as well as his contributions. Inherent in this discussion of success is the unwritten obligation for successful, black men to "give back" to their families and communities. I demonstrate that implied in this idea of a successful, black man is the assumption that he is heterosexual. For these reasons, the successful, black gay man may in some ways contradict the idea of a successful, black man. My hope is that this research will force black folks to examine their moral "standards" and principles for inclusion within the black community.

The Impetus October 1995, in Washington, D.C., as the nation's capital, "Chocolate City" and the "black gay Mecca," provided a distinctive backdrop for the intersection of sexual orientation, race and social responsibility. The occasion was one of the weekly organizing meetings for the Million Man March. I was there, in the role of researcher, for an applied anthropology course during that semester. The following events described here provide the foundation and impetus for this research. The basement of the Phi Beta Sigma Fraternity, Inc. headquarters was filled to capacity. This was the site for the weekly organizing meetings for the Million Man March. With each week the numbers grew; more and more black men came. The attire of the men ranged from business suits to baseball caps and jeans; young and old; the healthy and the physically challenged. It was the first time in a very long while since I had seen such a diverse group of men. There were Muslims, ministers, local officials and pan-Africanists, to name a few. They were all assembled in one room for one purpose, to plan for participation in the Million Man March. On one Wednesday, two weeks before the March, a black man stood and stated that he had been--and is--an active member of the D.C. community. Until this point, nothing seemed out of the ordinary. In fact, this had been the typical protocol for the meetings. Anyone who had something to contribute to the March would stand, and begin by saying, "In the

Wise

spirit of the Million Man March, I . . . " A l l of this was done within an open. forum setting. These "contributions" by the men were like "testimonials," heart-felt and emotional. This particular black man then went on to list his various outreach activities within the community--voter registration, political activism through the local Advisory Neighborhood Commission (ANC), and ward campaigns-most of which was centered in an economically depressed area of the city. In my opinion, this was a black man who appeared committed to the positive development of black people. After summarizing his contributions, he then asked, "whether a black, gay man was going to be represented on the platform on the day of the March." You could have heard a pin drop in the room. Finally, after a substantial period of silence, another black man responded from across the room, "This March is about MEN!" What followed was a flurry of gay-bashing comments including, "We don't want any faggots in h e r e . . . " W h a t struck me most profoundly about this scenario was how all the contributions stated by this man seemed to be discounted and/ or dismissed because he mentioned the word gay. I must stress that he did not say that he was gay. He asked whether or not a black gay man was going to be represented on the platform. I came away from the meeting questioning the meaning and definition of black manhood. MAIN ISSUES

Sexuality A theoretical emphasis on sexuality can generate textured and significant data on intragroup difference. Additionally, exploring homosexuality among black men allows for a deeper investigation of the assumed connection between sexuality and gender. The tendency within some of the literature is n o t t o distinguish gender from sexuality. Gender refers most directly to ascribed roles, i.e., man and woman and how those roles are lived out daily. Sexuality refers to one's sexual orientation, i.e., heterosexual or homosexual. When discussing gender, or more specifically, men and women, the assumption is that those being discussed are heterosexual. I also explore how and why certain ideas of manhood are perpetuated and revered. In that vein, I explore answers to the following question: How do black gay men experience constraint in defining or redefining gender? More specifically, I am interested in understanding how the successful, black gay men in this study make meaning of manhood and gayness in their daily lives and the lives of other black people.

5

6

J o u r n a l of A f r i c a n A m e r i c a n M e n

Gender

When conducting scholarly research on black men the following three things should be considered: 1) black masculinity; 2) black manhood; and 3) the assumption that black men are or should be heterosexual. Black masculinity is a concept that denotes a form of male behavior or expression. For some, black masculinity incorporates certain physical attributes and material possessions while for others it incorporates more intrinsic qualities. The behavior can vary depending on the situation and the variables involved. Black manhood denotes a more permanent state of being. Arriving at manhood is a process. This process includes ascertaining certain values, morals, and experiences and enacting specific responsibilities. Black manhood also implies understanding this state of being in relation to family, community and the larger society. It is necessary to emphasize race in relation to masculinity, manhood, and gender because the definitions and characterizations within the literature reflect the oppression and racism that black men have had to endure in the United States. This reality reinforces the interlocking processes, i.e., the intersection of race, class and gender, which are currently being debated within much of the social science literature. The voices of the men in this study have not only integrated these variables, they have the added variable of sexual orientation. Their experiences as black men are compounded in a city and society where "a black man in a $600 suit can not get a cab" (Cary: 1999). As successful black men they are charged w i t h the task of giving back. Yet, their own c o m m u n i t y oftentimes compromises their status as men because of their sexuality. The factor of race distinguishes black masculinity from masculinity in general. For black men, their definitions of masculinity are situated in the context of having been born, raised and currently living in the United States. Their lived experiences include the historical and psychological effects of racial, political and economic oppression. Many researchers have examined how these factors impact expressions of black masculinity (Hare 1985; Hooks 1995; Julien and Kobena 1992; Majors and Billson 1992; Marable 1995; and Staples 1982). Clyde Franklin argues that, "[M]asculinities are constructed. Black masculinities, in particular, are constructed under the cloud of oppression" (1994b: 278). I agree with Franklin's analysis that masculinities are not only constructed, but constructed under oppression. My hope is to shed light on how a masculine ideology influences the lives of the successful, black gay men in this study.

Wise

THE PERCEIVED AND REAL PROCESS OF BECOMING MASCULINE WHEN YOU'RE BLACK AND MALE: Clyde Franklin asserts that for most black men the socialization process of masculinity is triangular in that there are three different entities or influences that contribute to the process. He characterizes these factors as follows: the "black male's primary group," "black male peer group" and "mainstream society and black males" (1994). For the purposes of this discussion, I think it is important to examine this socialization process as an inverted triangle. This approach will reveal the unique, complex and seemingly contradictory position of the black gay male in this socialization process. Franklin argues that mainstream society has constructed, maintained and perpetuated a hegemonic definition of masculinity by focusing on "proscriptive" instead of "prescriptive teachings" to black men (1994: 14). Thomas Gerschick and Adam Miller broaden this argument, through their research with physically disabled men, by asserting that there are certain characteristics associated with masculinity that are established, maintained and revered within society such as: independence, strength, autonomy, sexual prowess, athleticism, occupational accomplishment, and procreation (1997). Franklin then examines the role of the black male peer group as a critical aspect in this socialization process. He notes, "the Black male peer groups often serves as an anchor. He [the black male] often finds refuge with those who are undergoing the same conflicts, apprehensions, pleasures, and preparation for adulthood" (Franklin 1994: 13). Franklin delves deeper into the role of the black male peer group and in doing so reveals the dual role that the group plays in confirming one's masculinity. He states, Fortunately or unfortunately, the peer group slowly becomes more and more a significant self-validating agency supplanting, for a time, the primary group's importance to the Black male. Certainly, it is not unusual for the Black male peer group to become the young Black male's most significant other nurturing his masculine identity. 13). Similarly Roger Lancaster states that "machismo" for Nicaraguan men is not only about relations between men and women. Of equal note is the fact that machismo is about power relations among men. The following provides a good example of how important it is to have other men validate your masculinity: Like drinking, gambling, risk taking, asserting one's opinion, and fighting, the conquest of women is a feat performed

7

8

Journal of African American Men with two audiences in mind: first, other men, to whom one must constantly prove one's masculinity and virility; and second, oneself, to whom one must also show all the signs of masculinity (Lancaster 1992: 236-237) The first element that Clyde Franklin outlines as key to the masculine socialization process for black males is that of the black male primary group. He forwards that, [T]he typical Black male's primary group mirrors mainstream societal values and norms, but usually from a Black community perspective... The version of American values and beliefs imparting Black male socialization typically is tempered by the Black experience in this country (Franklin 1994: 12). This parallels M a t t h e w Gutmann's research in Mexico. He asserts that, Many Mexican men are curious about what it means to be a Mexican, and what it means to be a man. One is not born knowing these things; nor are they truly discovered. They are learned and relearned (Gutmann 1997: 201). This is particularly relevant to the experiences of black men because it illuminates ethnicity, race and gender and how those w h o share this same ethnic group or primary group shape and prepare their men through a particular type of masculine socialization process. Gutmann alludes to the conditions in which a man learns how to be masculine and what it will mean in the larger realm of society. With this as a background for understanding a socialization process of masculinity, I contend that many successful, black gay men absorb each of these elements along with the added factor of their homosexuality. Because of their sexual orientation, black gay men are often depicted as anything but masculine by the mainstream. The ridicule that the black gay men receive from their peers and the silencing, which they receive from their primary group, compromises their masculinity. These competing pressures shape how the men think and express their masculinity. Successful, black gay men provide an Interesting case for exploring Gerschick and Miller's concept of hegemonic masculinity because they for the most part have or partake in a majority of the above-mentioned characteristics, with the exception of one; that of perceived strength. The hegemonic masculinity construct asserts strength as a descriptor for men and a gay man, because of his sexual orientation, is often perceived and/or represented as weak. Interestingly enough, when asked, "What does

Wise it mean to be a black man?" the majority of the men included the f o l l o w i n g t w o adjectives "strength" and "responsibility" in their responses. Whitehead's research on masculinity among Jamaican men reveals t h a t respect and reputation are attributes of strength and all men are measured by the influential community of men to which they belong for their ability to exhibit strength (1992). Strength as it used by the black gay men in this study refers to perseverance and endurance. It is a character trait as opposed to a physical look or ability. When I asked Phil this question, his initial response was a long period of silence. His discomfort w i t h the question was reflected in his body language as he continuously switched positions in his chair. Each time he w o u l d begin to say something, he w o u l d then stop and w a i t a f e w more minutes. It was clear that he was searching for the right words to express his ideas. His f o l l o w i n g response reveals the layered quality of his emotions, thoughts and experiences. He begins, I think about the lack of relationship with my father. At age 43 I'm coming to some clarity about him. He had so much pain in being a black man in the community. He inflicted that pain and struggle on us through his alcoholism and violence. [pause] Struggle to be a man in our own terms not based on the larger white America power structure. That context has definitely affected our manhood.., for many in our community it means to exercise power, economically or physically because when I think about my dad because he couldn't exercise power economically and socially he chose to do it physically (1999). With the above as background, it becomes clear h o w and w h y Phil defines manhood the way he does. He adds, To be a man is to be strong. To be in control, to be in power. To be in control of your emotions. Be in control of your family. To the extent you can be in control, you're going to be in control, To be a real man which means being powerful and in control of emotions, to be in control as much of your life as you can be. For many of us to be a real man means that you have that physical power and strength, control of emotions, to have a cool pose. To be this masculine image that we uphold. The standard that we have even though we sleep with other men there's still this mask that we have to pretend to be considered a real man in the larger black community [pause]. To be a man means THIS and it means everything that's not associated with being feminine which means being feeling, being creative, nurturing. I'm not say-

9

10

Journal of African American Men ing it's true for everybody, but where I grew up that was the case (1999)• Literally days later, Phil expressed t h a t the f o l l o w i n g should also be included: My personal experience, when I looked at the vast majority of kids in the neighborhood where I grew up. We were the only ones who had a dad at home, who was there, who worked• Some of them didn't know who their father was... [pause] Strength to endure the pressure• To make a place where there wasn't one. My dad stayed on a job for 30 years• Alcoholism aside, he kept a roof over our head. [pause] Strength of will, strength of character (1999). Phil's comment begins to get at the conflictual nature of being a black gay man. He is very aware of what is considered masculine based on his experiences with his father• He outlines the behavior that is expected of a "real man" and in doing so reveals his understanding of a masculine socialization process. More specifically, Phil acknowledges a key component; "power" in what Michael. Kimmel refers to as a "hegemonic manhood" (1994). This process, coupled with Phil's thoughts on manhood, demonstrates that as a gay man he is still very much aware of what is expected of him as a black man by the black community. The assumption is, of course, that a black man is masculine. Phil's description of being a man is not so much a facade as an internal struggle to balance or reconcile w h a t he knows and has learned about being a real man with his sexuality. Both are important, but they can often compete and conflict with one another. A question arises: How do successful, black gay men respond to these pressures? Gerschick and Miller, based on their research offer the following possibilities as responses to a hegemonic masculinity: .. 1) reformulation, which entailed men! s redefinition of hegemonic characteristics on their own terms; 2) reliance, reflected by sensitive or hypersensitive adoptions of particular predominant attributes; and 3) rejection, characterized by the renunciation of these standards and either the creation of one's own principles and practices or the denial of masculinity's importance in one's life (Gerschick and Miller 1997: 106). •

In their varied responses to a hegemonic masculinity, the men reveal the disparity between what they know and have learned as black men. This disparity is nothing less than the sociocultural meanings of masculinity and manhood within the

Wise context of a white society. They also reveal the gap between their own lived experiences as black gay men within the larger black community. This relates to the "complex interlocking processes of political, social and cultural forces" which are integral elements of hegemony (Williams 1992: 108). Many of the men are not able to entirely articulate these connections, but they try to work out some way of living with it, In doing so, they develop a triple consciousness, one of being a black man within the context of a larger white society, another of being a black man within the context of the larger black community, and finally being a black man whose sexual orientation differs from the majority. What is interesting is that strength comes to define how some of the men view themselves not only as black men but as black gay men. Theo illustrates this point, Being a black GAY man sometimes it can relate to a black man being better, being the best and being strong. Strength is a huge thing just being a man period, let alone a black gay man because of the taboos in our community which are strong and deep-rooted and can be overwhelming... They can be just so BURDENSOME They can be such a burden to a black gay man; they can bring you down if you don't have enough strength to rise above them (1998). I contend that these influences sometimes manifest themselves in contradictory ways as the men strive to make sense out of the relationships and interactions dictated by these various consciousnesses, and hegemonies they represent. It is clear t h a t this process is not static; it changes as the men come to terms with w h o they are as men, and gay men in the black community. Perhaps those w h o are most fully out challenge these hegemonic notions in a different way. They do so by taking the emphasis off the implied heterosexuality as a prerequisite for manhood. Melvin fully embraces his sexuality and views it as a source of spiritual power that is to be shared. He says the following about what it means to be a black man, which goes beyond his sexuality: We're very enlightened men and we have to also let people understand that to be gay does not mean not to be a man. A definition of a man is not who you sleep with and whether you play an aggressive or passive role in a given conjugal environment, but how responsible and strong you are to stand your ground on issues and circumstances (1999). I assert that successful black gay men both embrace and resist Gerschick and Miller's notion of a "hegemonic masculin-

11

12

Journal of African American

Men

ity" (1997). I will also demonstrate how the men have integrated their experiences as black gay men within the context of the larger black community.

Value of Masculinity The men clearly understand the value placed on masculinity both within the black gay community and the larger black community. For example, Theo a 38-year old physician, has stated that, as a black gay man, [you] are considered " ... undesirable if there is anything effeminate about y o u . . . " (Theo 1998). He adds, " . . . w h a t is expected is this masculine black gay man. In other words, a straight man who just happens to sleep with men" (Theo 1998). Dwayne states rather matter-of-factly that the "value" of being masculine is "obvious" (1999). He draws a slight parallel between the value of being masculine within the black community and the black gay community. He supports his view by stating, "It's been my experience that t h e people I know would rather be with a man who was masculine as opposed to one who wasn't" (Dwayne 1999). Other gay men are more succinct in their description in simply stating, "You can't be a weak bitch" (1999). Alternately, Kevin, a 35-year old TV producer who stands 6 feet 2 inches tall and has colored his hair blonde, notes that his hypnotizing walk is somewhere between a switch and a swagger. Kevin reveals how others outside the black gay community perceive the public affection of two men as a surrendering of their masculinity. This reflects the degree to which masculinity is highly prized and considered a great loss within the context of a homosexual relationship. Embedded in his statements is the fact that who ever gives away his masculinity also gives away his status and power as a man. He notes, "when people see two men being publicly affectionate, the instant issue is... Who sacrificed their masculinity? Which one of them is the woman? Which one of them has given their power away" (Kevin 1999). "Marcus" offers another interesting perspective in terms of bow masculinity is valued and perceived by others who are not gay, particularly black straight men. He asserts that fear is one of the contributing factors that impedes real communication between black gay and straight men. Because masculinity is so highly regarded among heterosexual men, the mere association of a straight man with a gay man is enough to discredit the straight man's masculinity. "Marcus" elaborates, "1 also think that heterosexuals, particularly men, are afraid that if they are in any way affiliated or connected with gay men that somehow

Wise

reflects or undermines their masculinity"(1999). This observation by "Marcus" reiterates Clyde Franklin's point that, When Black males are peer group controlled, the types of masculinities evolving generally are based on the key traits of aggressiveness, violence, competitiveness, heterosexuality, cool poses, dominance, sexism, and passivity/indifference in mainstream society (Franklin 1994: 15). Franklin's analysis of peer group controlled masculinities illuminates how heterosexuality becomes valued as a trait/descriptor for masculinity among many black men. It also reveals that black gay men, because of their homosexuality, may not be perceived as masculine by black straight men. Who's Masculine

Biggest misconception is that masculinity and black gay men cannot be used in the same sentence (Theo 1999). I have had informal conversations with black straight men about my research. Interestingly enough, when I ask them to define masculintiy, they have difficulty doing so. The same is actually true for black gay men. Both can more easily say what masculinity is NOT. However, the difference lies in the fact that black straight men state that, "masculinity is NOT a way in which they describe other men. No black [straight] man goes around saying he's a real masculine guy. Gay men do that becaue they feel they HAVE t o " (anonymous 1999). Another critical factor that plays into black straight men's view of masculinity is the distinct history of the black man in America. His masculinity, after years of physical and mental oppression and emasculation, seems to have become directly connected to his ideas of manhood and his effort to overcome that history. For some of the men I talked to being gay or more specifically engaging in homosexual activity reduces or minimizes one's standing as a masculine black man. A Plurality o f Masculinities: An Idealistic or Practical Solution

One method of moving beyond the more polar or dichotomous examination of masculinity is to construct a masculinity that incorporates difference, a "plurality of masculinities" (Conway-Long 1994). The theoretical approaches to masculinity, according to Conway-Long, do not recognize the diversities that exist within a group. He forwards that the acknowledgment of these diversities has eluded many ethnographers. ConwayLong contends that those researchers whose theoretical frame-

13

14

J o u r n a l of A f r i c a n A m e r i c a n M e n

work is devoid of diversity fall prey to the following assumption: when a man just doesn't fit, deviance becomes the stock framework for analysis" (1994: 61-62). It is imperative that black men expand their idea and expressions of black masculinity to black masculinities; moving from the singular to the plural. Bell Hooks calls for a reconstruction of black masculinity (1995). She argues that black masculinity has shifted from the patriarchal to the phallocentric because black men live in a capitalist society, which deprives them of their rights and exploits their labor. Hooks contends that this has moved black men away from patriarchal power toward a masculine status that depends exclusively on their penis (1995). Hooks asserts that challenging this phallocentric expression would also entail combating the compulsory heterosexuality that is embedded within it. She forwards that phallocentric masculinity undermines black solidarity (1995). Hooks adds, "If black men no longer embraced phallocentric masculinity, they would be empowered to explore their fear and hatred of other men, learning new ways to relate" (Hooks 1995: 87). Although Hooks' proposition of shifting from a phallocentric masculinity is encouraging, I think it is more easily said than done. Part of the difficulty in achieving this shift is rooted in an inherent need--based on our history as black people in the U.S.--to exclude homosexuality from discussions of black masculinity because to incorporate it would somehow diminish our perceived strength in the eyes of others. I anticipate that a pluralistic approach to masculinity will be unsettling for most black men, particularly those who are rooted in their ideas about what is a "true . . . . . real" and/or "correct" masculine man (Akbar 1991; Majors and Billson 1992; Madhubuti 1990). For most black men masculinity is linked, explicitly and/or implicitly, to notions of black manhood. When engaging issues of homosexuality, such ideas seem to be automatically dismissed if dealt with at all. Difference in sexuality ultimately questions the very definition and "authenticity" of traditional masculinity (Harper 1996; McBride 1999; Thomas 1996; Riggs 1999). THE DEVELOPMENT OF A BLACK MANHOOD Black manhood and the manifestation of black masculinity in many ways have been subsumed by the ideas of American manhood. What complicates this further is that many black men, because of their unique historical circumstances, have been socialized to accept these ideals of manhood as their own, so much so that these ideas of manhood have become firmly entrenched as a part of how black men think about manhood and

Wise

how their masculinity is expressed. I contend that the successful, black gay men in this study embrace as well as resist these hegemonic notions of manhood and provide reasons why they do. The men's ideas about masculinity and manhood will also serve to deconstruct how and why we think about manhood and masculinity the way that we do. Keeping Our History in Mind The historical factors of enslavement and oppression are critical to understanding how views of black masculinity and manhood have been shaped. Each phase of development as black men in America produced a different type of man. I offer the following examples, enslavement: "the stud;" freedom: "patriarchal man;" segregation: the " m i l i t a n t " versus the "assimilationist;" integration: "the accommodationist;" and postintegration "the buppie" versus the "afrocentric, self-defined man". As historical events occurred, they influenced the way in which black manhood was perceived. These events also altered the criterion for how black men defined manhood. The changes or influences are based initially in racial oppression, and later in political and economic constraints. Who's A Man ? During a conversation with a black straight man about my research, some of his ideas about homosexuality prompted me to ask whether he considered black gay men to be men. He responded, "No, I consider them to be MALE." Based on the clear distinction that this man made, I returned to the literature on black men to understand how maleness might differ from manhood. Akbar (1991) outlines maleness as the initial phase toward manhood. Maleness is followed by the "boyhood" phase and ultimately the manhood. He describes that the male mentality is dictated by appetite and physical determinants. This mentality is one guided by instincts, urges, desires or feelings" (Akbar 1991: 3). It appears that the male mentality is devoid of discipline; a characteristic that Akbar asserts is critical to achieving manhood. I was driven by this conversation, and Akbar's delineation, to explore whether other straight black men felt the same way. I asked black men, who had identified themselves as "straight," the following question, "Do you consider black gay men to be indeed men or males?" Based on a small number of informal inquiries, approximately 10, the first set of responses was about 50•50. More specifically, half of the men responded with males. They cited two

15

16

J o u r n a l of A f r i c a n A m e r i c a n M e n main reasons: 1) because they don't have children or raise families and 2) the fact that they have sex with other men makes them male, but not men. For those straight men who said man, it seemed t o reflect a personal experience. One [straight] man noted t h a t his impression of gay men has changed because he works with them and has talked extensively with them. He added, "We have shared some things and I respect them and in my opinion they are men." Upon reflection he noted, I didn't feet t h a t way t w o years ago, but I do now." (1999). This suggests that personal contact and friendship can alter a man's opinion about what it means to be gay, and what it means to be a man. This same man goes on to say, "1 have more respect for the brother w h o comes out because that lets me know that they are comfortable with who they are" (1999). Other responses included having to get to know the person before determining whether he is male or man. These men also noted that they would not consider a straight man to be a man if he is not responsible for his actions. What is important to note and understand is how some of the straight men challenge or outright deny the gender of black gay men because of their homosexuality. Their position is supported by American culture and reflects the degree to which they have internalized it. Charles Callender and Lee Kochems reiterate this point. Our gender system recognizes only the two gender statuses of men and women. Homosexual men, by choice of sexual object, are perceived as behaving too much like women to be real men. Rather than forming another gender status, American ideology perceives them as imperfect members of the men's status (Callender and Kochems 1985: 175-176). This informal questioning supports the notion that entry into manhood is given by other men. Kimmel reiterates this point, We are under the constant careful scrutiny of other men. Other men watch us, rank us, and grant our acceptance into the realm of manhood. Manhood is demonstrated for other men's approval. It is other men who evaluate the performance (1994: 128). I t h o u g h t it was equally important to come back to the black gay men w h o were participating in this study and share my findings from the black straight men. Phil provides an interesting perspective that perhaps counters black straight men's ideas about black gay men as men. He states,

Wise all black gays don't sleep with other men. There are some black men that have chosen not to act o n . . . It's more than a dick thing or a butt thing, it's a heart thing, a soul thing, a life thing. I think of my own experiences of people in communities where black gay men are raising children. When you disown somebody based on their sexual orientation or lifestyle or what ever you want to call it, you're throwing out the baby with the bath water because a person is much bigger than that. There's a whole lot more to a person than that. But that's the thing that gets me because people don't know me. When they're talking about sex, they're not talking about me, they don't know anything about my heart, my soul, my life. [pause] Cut it out and I'll still be a gay man (1999). All of this dialogue contributed to my understanding of manhood. It similarly made the men explore the whole notion of manhood for themselves. Bryan's comment in some ways seems to epitomize t hei r t h o u g h t s and feelings. He states, "[S]traight men only have exclusivity on being straight not on ma n h o od" (Bryan 1999). These findings perhaps speak to the larger issue of h o w sexuality is only discussed in a limited context, within the black community. I argue that sexuality for black men is not only subsumed but also presumed with regard to manhood. The sexuality of the black men in this study challenges the conventional gender ideology. It forces me, as a researcher, to look beyond the categories, activities and statuses that are often associated with gender. By examining the lived experience of successful, black gay men it challenges me to examine h o w such categories, activities and statuses are constructed and maintained, particularly when the aforementioned are not always included in this gender-making process. It is not until you go against the norm that you realize how firmly entrenched our notions are about gender. It is almost as if talking about gays and lesbians is different than talking about men and women, which is again different from males and females. As is evident, there are competing forces that affect and shape black gay men's perceptions of masculinity. Their existence is indeed complex as they struggle to deal w ith the hegemonic structures that influence their ideas about masculinity. But on a m o r e p e r s o n a l level t h e y also e x p e r i e n c e t h e marginalization by other black people. More specifically, the men have expressed how their sexuality has been monitored by parents, siblings and black straight men. In doing so, they reveal the "boundaries of m anhood" that being homosexual can cre-

17

18

J o u r n a l of A f r i c a n A m e r i c a n M e n

ate (Rotundo 1993:279). My research thus contributes new insight into the ongoing debate regarding the social construction of masculinity, sexuality and gender. It also challenges the essentialist notions of black manhood. Forms o f Black M a n h o o d

One concept of manhood that evolved primarily during the Great Migration was known as the Race Man. Hazel Carby (1998) and St. Claire Drake and Horace Cayton (1945) note that this concept primarily served a dual purpose: 1) to serve in opposition to the white racist system that oppressed him; and 2) as a role model for other blacks. Attributes assigned to the race man were "the pursuit of race consciousness, race pride, and race solidarity" (Carby 1998); all with the goal of "advancing The Race" (Drake and Cayton 1993). Drake and Cayton make distinctions between the roles of the Race Leaders, The Race Man and The Race Hero; all figured prominently in the experiences of black people in the United States, and all in very different yet integral ways. "Race Leaders are expected to put up some sort of aggressive fight against the exclusion and subordination of Negroes" (Drake and Cayton 1993: 393). But at the same time they are expected to "needle, cajole, and denounce Negroes themselves for inertia, diffidence, and lack of race pride" (Drake and Cayton 1993: 393). According to Drake and Cayton "The Race Man", while in the white world, remains "proud of his race and always tries to uphold it whether it is good or bad, right or wrong," because he sees "only the good points of the race" (Drake and Cayton 1993: 395). The Race Hero is described as: If a man 'fights for The Race,' if he seems to be 'all for The Race,' if he is 'fearless in his approach to white people,' he becomes a Race Hero. Similarly any Negro becomes a hero if he beats the white man at his own game or forces the white world to recognize his talent or service or achievement (Drake and Cayton 1993: 395). A few emerging authors argue for a vision of black manhood that is self-defined (Akbar 1991; Marable 1995). Some of these black scholars make their point by saying that in order for the black man to understand himself he must understand the conditions and historical factors that have put him in this position, including racism and economic oppression (Akbar 1991). The black man should also recognize African history as a means of redefining manhood in a way that is more reflective of his culture and heritage. These black authors, through their writings, are asserting that black men should develop their own cri-

Wise

teria for what a man is and how he should act out his social responsibility (Madhubuti 1990). Na'im Akbar describes the development of black men as a process. Within this process he outlines three stages. They are maleness, boyhood and manhood. Akbar asserts that the transition from maleness--which is based on biology--to boyhood is marked by "discipline" and "learning to exercise control over one's self' (1991: 12). He adds that the "force that transforms a person from a boy to becoming a man is knowledge" (1991: 12). Through this process Akbar forwards a "self-defined" and selfmaintained standard for and by black men that should be adhered to, to ensure black manhood. He states, the process of educating our boys requires that we require of them to tackle real life problems and watch them find solutions. They should have early work responsibilities, management responsibilities, and social responsibilities (13). These authors highlight the economic, racial and political factors that have contributed to the black man's inability to be socially responsible in the eyes of the larger society. Even still, adjectives such as "real," "true," and "correct" are incorporated into their definitions of man and manhood (Akbar 1991; Madhubuti 1990; Majors and Billson 1992). By doing this these authors covertly create both an authentic black man, and an authentic notion of black manhood. I argue for new definitions of black masculinity and manhood because the current definitions are limiting, prejudiced, and oppressive. The literature on black masculinity and manhood tends to assume that the men are heterosexual. Anything written to the contrary has been primarily if not exclusively by gays or lesbians. Why is this so? There seems to be an inherent need to connect one's sexuality with gender. The research that I have conducted will perhaps clarify that a plurality of black masculinities, which includes homosexuality, does not signify a weakening of black masculinity or an ineffectual state of black manhood. Actually, it could be seen as a creative way of achieving black solidarity. This expanded view of masculinity avoids the pitfalls of "black essentialism" (Dyson 1993; Harper 1996).

An Absence of Sexuality In much of the literature on black manhood, sexuality is alluded to within the context of procreation and male/female relationships. These references imply that the black men in question are heterosexual (Julien and Kobena 1992, Madhubuti 1990;

19

20

J o u r n a l of A f r i c a n A m e r i c a n M e n Majors and Billson 1992 and Marable 1995). It would appear that mostly openly gay black authors produce literature exploring the relationship of homosexuality to black manhood, and their arguments are just as distinct. Joseph Beam asserts that, [A]s Black gay men we have always existed in the AfricanAmerican community. We have been ministers, hairdressers, entertainers, sales clerks, civil rights activists, teachers, playwrights, trash collectors, dancers, government officials, choir masters, and dishwashers. You name it, we've done it--most of them with scant recognition. We have mediated family disputes, cared for and reared our siblings, and housed our sick. We have performed many and varied important roles within our community (1986: 16). Essex Hemphill expresses the rigidity of gender within the black community. He cites the following as an example from his personal experience: "Only sissies cry." When that was told to me, I said, "Fuck this. I'm not going to live like this." Those stories or fictions of "real" masculinity are learned early in life and then become ways of toughening young boys. That sort of information isn't useful to our community. I think there should be more of an investment in unlearning those codes, because they end in breeding a certain inhumanity (Hemphill in Belton 1995:211). Marion Riggs, specifically through his t w o films Tongues Untied and Black is~BlackAin't brings the subject of homosexuality and black manhood to the forefront. He charges that black filmmakers have avoided dealing w ith homosexuality, opting instead, for "safe political subjects such as racism, discrimination, Afro-American h i s t o r y . . . " (1992:190). Riggs asserts that these black filmmakers act as if "the subject of homosexuality within the black community didn't exist" (Riggs in Simmons 1992: 190-191). In Black Is~Black Ain't, Riggs builds on personal experiences as a black gay man by examining the historical notions of manhood. They range from the black man's "code of silence" and the feeling that "vulnerability was associated with femininity" to the "black man trying to reclaim w h a t he has not had, the need to rehabilitate the patriarchal model" (1995). An assumption based on the argument above is that homosexuality is not a part of black manhood. This restricted debate on black manhood demonstrates h o w gender is highly policed in keeping "difference" in line. How could a man be a man and homosexual? It is as if the two, homosexual and man, are incongruous.

Wise

SUM MARY The men's voices and experiences about masculinity challenge more than they confirm some of these earlier mentioned constructs. Perhaps what is most revealing is the manner in which the men redefine the concept of masculinity to incorporate their sexuality. Another point to reflect upon is that change in ideas about masculinity comes from not only rejection of the standard" or hegemonic attributes of masculinity but also perhaps the lack of acceptance by individuals such as black gay men who exist on the margins and therefore redefine the "standard" for themselves. What becomes clear is that the triangular socialization process that Franklin lays out, and that I assert each of the men has experienced by virtue of being a black man, is subsequently marginalized on each of these same levels. The fact that the men's masculinity is u n d e r m i n e d by stereotypes is marginalization on a more structural level which Franklin refers to as "mainstream." Additionally, the fact that the men experience name-calling, from early childhood to adulthood primarily by other blacks, reveals how secondary marginalization and internal policing perpetuate a hegemonic masculinity on a community level which Franklin terms "primary group affiliation." Lastly, the fact that some black heterosexual men who for all intents and purposes could be considered peers refer to them as males instead of men. Franklin suggests that the black male peer group serves as a vehicle to transmit, validate and confirm ideas about masculinity. In doing so these black straight men strip black gay men of any masculine status because they engage in homosexual activity. This socialization and subsequent marginalization contributes to the complex and conflictive existence of the men. As noted by Franklin earlier, masculinities are constructed, but for black men specifically they are constructed under oppression. Just as Franklin suggests that racism and hegemony oppress black males, so too are some black gay men oppressed by other blacks in terms of their masculinity t h r o u g h forms of internal policing and secondary marginalization. The men attempt to make meaning for themselves by reconciling what they have learned with what they know to be an equally important part of their lived experience, their gayness. For those men who outwardly reject this process, they may risk being further alienated by others. This creates some level of turmoil and consternation for some men. There is a seemingly intrinsic need to be accepted, particularly by one's own. As demonstrated by the literature and the voices of the

21

22

Journal of African American Men

men, there is a link between masculinity and manhood. I argue that for the men in this study, strength denotes perseverance and is their redefined idea of masculinity. They also cling to the historical, notion of black men as responsible members of the black community. It is truly in the men's perceptions and acts o responsibility that the complexities of their lives are made clear. The necessity in being responsible as a black man to his community which sometimes, perhaps oftentimes, does not embrace him fully. What is truly perplexing is how or why these black gay men, given their complex existence, manage to remain committed in word and in deed to other black people. Although "James" stated, "Until black people learn to appreciate each other for who they are and not what they are we will continue to chase valuable resources out of the larger black community" (1999). Each man and the "resources" that he brings could contribute or add to the social and cultural capital of the black community. The marginalization that is perpetuated in al the various levels could potentially lessen this contribution of "capital."