Young Black Lesbians: I'm just trying to understand

(This is an opinion piece. You are free to agree or disagree; which position you choose matters not to me since either stance will require some deep consideration and reflection - rumination -before you can argue your position. That is the entire point - to provoke thought that hopefully leads to constructive dialogue.)

The genesis of this Headroomination was an unexpected YouTube hit featuring a young woman who could easily be taken for Nicki Minaj in full "stud" mode talking about a sexual ep with Remy Ma http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzZQzJbl6PY&feature=channel. Whether it really was Nicki and whether her claims are true is irrelevant in the scope of this entry. Its importance is that it got me to thinking about a perceived rise in open lesbianism among young black women and girls. It's something I kinda noticed, but disregarded prior to viewing this video clip. Intrigued, I began Googling for information about this perceived, upward trend in lesbianism. Inasmuch as many folks like to expose their private lives online nowadays, I was hoping to find a blog or two or three written by young black lesbians that might offer some insight as to why they felt they were born as or became lesbian. I found no such blog, but I did stumble across some YouTube clips of young women who took stock of themselves and offered explanations. Please take time to view these clips before continuing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOcVjQI2WUU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Objo7kQ8vuA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73Z4twkL4FY&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mizLSdZyaws&feature=related

I found two things striking about these videos: 1) the lack of any firm assertions from these young women that they were "born this way," and 2) the great importance they place on having strong emotional connections to their romantic partners at such young ages. Having read about differences in brain structure between gay and straight men and women, as in this Time magazine article http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1815538,00.html, I've come to accept that people can be born gay. People can also be born with physical and mental disabilities, chemical dependence, abnormal melanin production (albino), etc. The list goes on and on. People possessing any of the above traits often live long, productive lives beneficial to themselves and others. LGBTs have long since proven they are capable of contributing positively to the larger society. So am I calling homosexuality a disability? If that's how you choose to receive this, then so be it. However, I am saying it is a human trait that manifests itself in small percentages of the population which is not aligned with norms in human development. It is counter to the processes that have resulted in the successful propagation of our species, and if homosexuality became the rule and heterosexuality the exception we would find the survival of our species threatened, sans the aid of medical technologies or old fashioned sperm donations. In a nutshell, it is my opinion that while homosexuality can be naturally occurring; it is far from the ideal.

What I found most interesting about these young lesbians was the way they framed the conversation about why they preferred women to men. In fact, I found any reference to men and boys was very telling. In short, the belief is that boys/men cannot provide them the emotional connection with an intimate partner for which these young women long. In this Psychology Today article, by Dr. Leonard Sax http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sax-sex/201004/why-are-so-many-girls-lesbian-or-bisexual , the idea of young male prospects as "losers" seems to reinforce the perception of these young women that men are somehow incapable of seeing to their emotional needs. I don't doubt this to be their experience. In a culture where the commitments of marriage are no longer taken seriously, and men are repeatedly told by the media and sometimes women themselves that women don't need men, we should expect an increase in the number of "losers" on the dating/relationship market. Our "capitalism without social responsibility" economy has driven spouses apart, the first teachers - women - into the workplace, and men away from their children. Great numbers of male children are not exposed to good examples of manhood, and many who are fortunate enough to have such exposure often see that example emasculated by the female parent who equates money with power, and is more and more likely to earn the greater salary. The sexes are becoming neutered at best and having their social roles reversed in the worst circumstances. In the absence of good male role models, young women are creating unrealistic ideas of what the so-called "perfect man/husband" should be, and young men are deprived examples of realistic good men after whom to fashion themselves. How can such young men be expected to know how to see to the needs of young women? We are built differently to begin with and don't perceive the world as women do in order to complement women's role in relationships, but in the absence of good examples some of these young men haven’t even acquired a the complementary skill set. That skill set is needed alternative to the unrealistic ideal man of their dreams that I believe on a deeper more primal level these women prefer to the "dream man."

In addition to all this, I am curious as to why these young women are looking for so such deep emotional connections outside their homes at early ages. Further refection leads me to think that maybe these desires are not manifesting themselves early, but that societal norms have been forcing them to repress them until later in life. Think about this: the modern human is estimated to come out of Africa between 50 and 100 thousand years ago, or has existed 6000 years if you're a Bible literalist. The Industrial Revolution began only about 300 years ago. The period of industry and technology is really insignificant in the scope of human history. Human social order was based around us being hunter-gatherers that evolved into largely agrarian societies for most of that history, and for most of that history, average human life expectancy was half of the 70 years we experience in modern times. Shorter life spans require earlier reproduction and more births per female to ensure species survival. Adolescence did not exist way back when; it is a relatively new social construct http://www.jstor.org/pss/349302.

The Social Construction of Adolescence

Humans went from childhood to adulthood without a buffer period between. So maybe the aforementioned young women are not developing these desires for emotional connection and commitment early, but rather, right on time biologically speaking. They are at ages where for the vast majority of human history they were paired off with spouses. While I am not advocating a return to teen marriage as a societal norm, I find it important to understand this aspect of our history as it helps bring current conditions into perspective. Increasing numbers of young males are not being socialized to take responsibility for a woman. Women deem this an archaic, patriarchal cast system that makes women second class citizens, but there is no denying the physical evidence of its success - our continued presence on this planet. I suggest that the feminist movements fought to attain the wrong goals. In my opinion, they should have struggled to have their complementary roles and contributions to society recognized and respected as being just as vital and indispensable as those of men. Instead they fought for the right to do the same things men do. Sorry, but if we all made motors, instead of motors and chassis, we'd have no cars.

It's easy to attribute this unwillingness of some males too take responsibility for women, and women's unwillingness to allow men to do so, to the growing number of households in which either parent is not regularly present, if present at all. I think this is a symptom of a larger problem - capitalism without social responsibility. There is no good and moral reason for any able bodied person who wants to work to go without employment that pays a living wage. And by living wage I mean, enough to provide adequate food, clothing, shelter and personal transportation without the need to work more that forty hours per week. Without radical social change toward a more equitable economic model, we will continue to produce males who shirk their responsibilities and females who don't realize how important the traditional male role is in the successes of marriage and child-raring. We will continue to produce males who are emotionally disconnected from women who are hard wired to need that connection. If they can't find it in men, they'll find it where it's available even if it is not the ideal situation. Chew on that...