Friday, April 6, 2012

I wasn’t riled or angry about this…until now.

It seems like wherever I go on the internet among black folk these days I eventually run into the topic of black men whose sexual orientation is bi-sexual.  Sometimes multiple times.  Yesterday on Baller Alert it reared its head again as a member posted that she had just found out that the guy she had been talking to via the Internet for the past year was bi-sexual.  Yesterday he had only been with one guy.  Today it is up to two.

We offered her support and advice that ranged from drop him to safe sex to being friends without benefits.  Then a member chimed in that it made him/her (not sure because they are relatively new) angry when black women don’t accept a black man whose sexual orientation is bi-sexual.  He/she admonished us about accepting them.  A long time member replied, if accepting them means having sex with them then no.  I paraphrase but yeah that is my feeling, too.

So I hopped over to my women’s group on FB to discuss it, yet again *chuckle*.  This was the first time I had ever brought up the topic though.  Anyway, we had a good discussion and I finally got my perfect answer that no one seemed to be able to refute though they did a lot of dancing around it.  It is this:

“I'm not disputing that women cheat. I'm just saying that I trust a woman not to cheat more than I trust a man not to cheat. The articles proclaiming that black bi-men who end up infecting their female partners with HIV/AIDS because they were denied the ability to be honest about their sexuality always fail to emphasize one point: if they hadn't been cheating in the first place then they never would have gotten HIV/AIDS. Doesn't that mean that black bisexual men can't be trusted to be faithful?”

I copied that direct from our post. That was my stand and I’m sticking to it.  Me and one lady agreed to disagree and parted happily enough.  I think the other two are miffed with me. *chuckle*

I know a few of the ladies in our group are bi-sexual.  I think they believe that what I think of men who are bi is what I think of women who are bi.  That just isn’t true.  Women and men are wired differently.  Men keep telling us this and we keep ignoring them.  I’m listening and paying attention, fellas, finally!

See, I may have stated it before and I’ll state it again and keep on stating it.  You cannot stop a black man from doing anything he wants to do or make him do what he does not want to do.
Nothing brought this home to me more than this news story from right here in Maryland.

BALTIMORE -- Quiet suffering continues more than five decades after a law tore apart a Baltimore couple and put their child in an orphanage.  Shirley Howard Billy has since returned to the place that held her captive in the 1950s: the former Pine Street Women's Jail, now an historic site.

Officials indicted and arrested Shirley Billy after she became pregnant by a black man. Now, at age 75, Billy and her 76-year-old husband, John, recently visited the former jail and reflected on how their relationship has endured.

"I never forget about it. I always think about it. I know it has been a long time, but it doesn't go away. It's creepy," Shirley Billy said of her time in the jail. "I cried all night. I was afraid I'd never get out."
Woman Indicted For Carrying Black Man's Child
Pictures help tell the story of the Billys' 53-year-old marriage, but in 1956, hair and clothing styles were much different, and so were social attitudes about interracial couples, WBAL-TV 11 News I-Team reporter Barry Simms said.

The indictment from May 1956 claims "Shirley Ann Howard, who was then and there a white woman, unlawfully suffered and permitted herself to be begotten with child by a negro or mulatto, to wit, John Moses Billy."

The penalty she faced amounted to 18 months to five years in prison.

"I had to go down to the grand jury to verify that I was the father of Shirley Howard's baby, and I wasn't about to deny it," John Billy said.

At the time, John Billy was a 21-year-old musician performing with a band known as The Honeyboys, and Shirley Howard was 20. To this day, she still has questions.

She said she has questions about "how this all came about. Why they pursued it with me and not other people. I could never get answers."

Officials Put Couple's Son In Orphanage
Shirley Billy spent one night in jail before getting bailed out, but that was only part of the ordeal. Social Services and Child Welfare officials took the couple's son, Johnny, and placed him in an orphanage, St. Elizabeth's Home for Colored Infants and Children, where he spent nearly two years.

"My son was in St. Elizabeth for quite a while," Shirley Billy said. "I had every day to think about how to get him home."  Shirley Billy's attorney argued that the origins of the Maryland law that landed her in jail dated back to 1663 and slavery. A later version in 1715 penalized white women who got pregnant by black men. The Billys said the law had never been enforced until Shirley Billy's arrest.

"I think, at the time, they wanted to take Shirley and make an example out of her," John Shirley said.
To get her son back, Shirley Billy had to prove to the court she was working, had a place to live and was married. John Billy said he was drafted into the Army during peacetime, but after basic training, he returned home and the couple married in 1958.

"We had to go to D.C. to get married," Shirley Billy said. "It was illegal in Maryland."

Case Dismissed; Apology Requested
A judge dismissed the case against Shirley Billy, which she said she never knew because her attorney told her not to go to court that day. The state since abolished the law, declaring it unconstitutional in 1957, but the impact of all of this estranged Shirley Billy from her family for more than 20 years.
Shirley Billy said her mother didn't get to know the grandchildren -- Johnny, Gregory and Terry -- until they were adults.

"I always said my mother ... missed out because they were really, really good, nice children," Shirley Billy said.  The Billys said they have suffered quietly, and now they are only seeking one thing.
"My position is an apology she should have gotten from the state of Maryland and from the city of Baltimore," John Billy said.  "John wants it for me. It's a thorn in his side. He wants it for me, and if he gets it, that's fine," Shirley Billy said.  "I want closure for you," John Billy said.

John Billy sent the following letter to Gov. Martin O'Malley in November: "My wife was arrested and put in jail because she broke a 275-year-old law in Maryland ... The law has since been taken off the books but the damage has already been done. I feel the state of Maryland and the city of Baltimore owes my wife an apology."

The Billys are still waiting for a response, something to prove the state of Maryland regrets the humiliation of the past. John Billy has yet to make a formal request for an apology to the city of Baltimore.

Read more: http://www.wbaltv.com/news/30460297/detail.html#ixzz1rJ9EsXqH

He’s lucky he didn’t get lynched when he got home.  Maryland is the old line state. Don’t let the bougie black people fool you.  There are places here in Baltimore that I would tell a black person to stay away from in the daylight hours let alone the night.

So in a time when a black man could be killed for dating, let alone marrying a white woman, you couldn’t stop them.  How is it that in 2012 they are being prevented from being bi-sexual?  Not gay.  Just bi-sexual.

Yeah.  Right.

I don’t understand why I don’t have the right to keep my vagina free of fecal matter.  That stuff gets all up in their peens and there is no peen douche.  Then they ejaculate it all into their women.  No thank you.  We can be friends if he likes but that is all. *shrug*  My body and my health.  HIV/AIDS is not the way to die if you don’t have to and for the most part you don’t.

I discussed the statistics that I got from the CDC mind you.  And I’m not much on stats either because they can be manipulated any which way you want.  But what I do notice is that they have yet to trace a single lesbian to contracting HIV/AIDS from homosexual activities.  All women who have gotten HIV/AIDS on the CDC’s stats either got it from blood transfusion, sharing dirty needles, or sex with a man who was HIV/AIDS infected.  The latter is the leading cause of women contracting HIV/AIDS.

Slide 5: Diagnoses of HIV Infection among Adult and Adolescent Females, by Race/Ethnicity and Transmission Category, 2009—40 States and 5 U.S. Dependent Areas
                                        
This slide shows the distribution of diagnoses of HIV infection among adult and adolescent black/African American, Hispanic/Latino, and white females by transmission category.  Blacks/African Americans had the highest percentage of diagnosed HIV infections attributed to heterosexual contact among the three groups (87%), followed by Hispanics/Latinos (83%) and whites (77%).  The percentage of diagnosed HIV infections attributed to injection drug use was highest among white females (23%) followed by Hispanic/Latino (17%) and black/African American (13%) females.

The following 40 states have had laws or regulations requiring confidential name-based HIV infection reporting since at least January 2006: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. The 5 U.S. dependent areas include American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

Data include persons with a diagnosis of HIV infection regardless of stage of disease at diagnosis. All displayed data have been estimated. Estimated numbers resulted from statistical adjustment that accounted for reporting delays and missing risk-factor information, but not for incomplete reporting. 

Hispanics/Latinos can be of any race.

Heterosexual contact is with a person known to have, or to be at high risk for, HIV infection.

Slide 3: Diagnoses of HIV Infection among Adult and Adolescent Females, by Race/Ethnicity, 2009—40 States
                                        
This slide shows the estimated rates of diagnoses of HIV infection among adult and adolescent females residing in 40 states with confidential name-based HIV infection reporting since at least January 2006.

Among adult and adolescent females in the 40 states, the overall rate of diagnosis of HIV infection in 2009 was 9.8 per 100,000 population. By race/ethnicity, the rate for blacks/African Americans (47.8) was nearly 20 times as high as the rate for whites (2.4) and more than 4 times as high as the rate for Hispanics/Latinos (11.9).  Relatively few cases were diagnosed among Asian, American Indian/Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian/other Pacific Islander females and females reporting multiple races, although the rates of diagnoses of HIV infection among females of all these races/ethnicities were higher than that for white females.

The following 40 states have had laws or regulations requiring confidential name-based HIV infection reporting since at least January 2006: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

Data include persons with a diagnosis of HIV infection regardless of stage of disease at diagnosis. All displayed data have been estimated. Estimated numbers resulted from statistical adjustment that accounted for reporting delays, but not for incomplete reporting. 

Hispanics/Latinos can be of any race.

Race or Ethnicity
Estimated # of AIDS Diagnoses, 2009
Cumulative Estimated # of AIDS Diagnoses, Through 2009*
American Indian/Alaska Native
155
3,700
Asiana
429
8,324
Black/African American
16,741
466,351
Hispanic/Latinob
6,719
190,263
Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander
50
839
White
9,467
426,102
Multiple Races
686
12,726
* From the beginning of the epidemic through 2009.
a Includes Asian/Pacific Islander legacy cases.
b Hispanics/Latinos can be of any race.

Now, I don’t know when HIV/AIDS made its official debut on the scientific scene.  I just know that at 13 years of age I picked up a Time magazine and the cover read something like this: AIDS KILLS THE SEXUAL REVOLUTION.  *chuckle*

I remember being sad about it because I had been reading my friend’s father’s dirty mags and sex sounded like fun.  We couldn’t wait until we were old enough to join in the fun.  AIDS killed all those happy thoughts for us real quick. 

I am 44 years old now.  So they’ve been tracking HIV/AIDS cases for over 30 years now.  And the only way to date that a woman has gotten the disease is through blood transfusion, sharing dirty needles, or having sex with a man who is HIV/AIDS infected.  The leading cause for all women is having sex with a man who is HIV/AIDS infected.  And you want me to trust that a bi-sexual man is not going to cheat with another man?  Seriously?  Really?

Chile please.  The only reason they don’t want to come out of the closet is because they know they aren’t going to be faithful.  If the wife/girlfriend doesn’t know she should be checking how much time he spends with his male “friends” then he is free and in the clear to jump in as many booty holes as he wants to and vice versa.

I just don’t get the hostility toward me or anyone else who is not interested in DATING or MARRYING a person whose sexual orientation is bi-sexual.  Why don’t I have that right?

Those whose sexual orientation is homosexual are fighting for the right to a civil marriage.  Do I have to fight for the right not to be dating/married to a bi-sexual man?  I don’t even understand why I have to explain myself.  I don’t ask transgendered persons to explain themselves beyond what they say their mind is telling them.  Why is it my fault that my mind isn’t wired to be sexually attracted to a man who is bi-sexual?

If I were dating a man and he told me his sexual orientation is bisexual he would be moved to the friend zone.  Why?  Because I just don’t trust that he will be faithful.  Why set either one of us for a lot of suspicion, mistrust, and eventual heartbreak.  I don’t knock any woman who does it.  I would tell her to be safe and keep it moving.  It isn’t for me and I don’t understand why I’m wrong?

Is he wrong for wanting to sleep with men and women?  What about all the diseases and infections I could be opening myself up to by having sexual relations with a man whose sexual orientation is bi-sexual?  There isn’t just HIV/AIDS.  Don’t forget E. coli infections; hepatitis A, B; and C; and thank you American Cancer Society for letting me know that most of the people who get anal cancer, the rarest form of cancer, usually contract it through the anal sexual transmission of the Human papillomavirus.  Now I know why they want to vaccinate boys and girls for Human papillomavirus.  Risk Factors for Anal Cancer ACS

So when I add all that up it doesn’t seem worth it for me.  *shrug*  How about he accept my friendship?  Because if the only way for me to show acceptance of a man whose sexuality is bi-sexual is to have sex with him then call me a non-accepting heffa cuz I ain’t doing it.

*rolls eyes, sucks teeth, and chucks the whole lot of men who are bi-sexual the peace sign*

No comments:

Post a Comment