When African States like Senegal ratify international human rights treaties and supposedly new instruments of protections for vulnerable groups become available, the steps taken in the sense of increasing individual rights are seen as socially progressive. The rate of ratification of such instruments has been high in the country, to such an extent that certain people state that Senegal is a country of human rights. Gender rights and sexual and reproductive rights have been widely promoted both at the governmental level and at the grass-roots level, but not those of LGBTQ people. The rights of LGBTQ contrast absolutely with this scenario and violence upon people belonging in this category is very common. Public humiliation, social commentary made by local personalities and high profile religious leaders, and at times even forthright violence like lynching, are outcomes of a very stressed relation of Senegalese society with non-normative sexual identities, especially homosexuality. The country, seen as a “good student” in human rights is at the bottom of the scale of respect for the rights of LGBTQ people. Despite the pressure from the international community for the country pass new laws, it has stood ground, choosing as the interlocutors of the political debate religious groups of pressure and society at large. This ‘non-compliance’ stance can be explained by looking further into the sociocultural context under appreciation. This communication will explore the general framework of gender and intergenerational relations, as well as provide examples, that will help to give meaning to why LGBTQ movements in Senegal haven’t been able to come through.

Ricardo Falcão . CEI-IUL . ricardo_miguel_falcao@iscte.pt

It is almost a truism that Africa did not inherit homosexuality from colonial occupation; homophobia is the actual colonial legacy. In a sense, this is almost trivial, yet not banal: this point is of utmost concern to LGBTQ activism across Africa. Scholars have now contributed evidence that tries to prove the existence of same-sex practices prior to the advent of colonialism, thereby trying to counter the traditionalist “argument” about homosexuality’s un-Africanness. Such arguments, seeking out an ethnographic archive for evidence, will hardly be heard, because adversaries and supporters of LGBTQ concerns are not engaged in a debate that strives to find out what is authentic, genuine or true. In fact, any attempt at providing more scholarly evidence in favour of “homosexuality’s Africanness” might rather backfire, since it might easily be interpreted by those opposing LGBTQ rights in Africa as trying to foster a western agenda. (Think of the fierce, yet understandable, reaction to western politicians trying to tie development cooperation to LGBTQ concerns.) Rather than pursuing similar arguments, we suggest to look at precise mechanisms by which maybe homosexual practices, but definitely homophobic regulations have left their imprint on popular views on same-sex relations. Entanglements between colonial legislation and postcolonial homophobia are similar across the African continent, but we miss local differences too easily. Public opinion gleaned from lusophone online media speaks of a different kind of attitude towards LGBTQ concerns. Thus moving beyond a simple binary of ‘colonial/Western’ versus ‘African’, we investigate the entanglement between (former colonial) Portuguese norms and actions and current public opinion in countries like Angola and Mozambique.

Axel Fleisch . University of Helsinki . axel.fleisch@helsinki.fi
Lena Seppinen . University of Helsinki . lena.seppinen@helsinki.fi