Behind the Scenes: How I Created THE WHITEWASHED TOMBS

 Wed--Kwei

The Seed of an Idea for THE WHITEWASHED TOMBS

In the third novel of the Emma Djan series, LAST SEEN IN LAPAZ, I hinted that Jojo, Emma's favorite coworker, was gay. My Soho Crime editor, Rachel Kowal, suggested exploring this thread in the next book. Around the same time, Ghana's parliament was debating an anti-LGBTQ bill, with MP Sam Nartey George vociferously campaigning against LGBTQ Ghanaians. This political climate heavily influenced the narrative I was about to create.

Nancy Pelosi speaks to Ghana’s House of Parliament, 2019 (Image: Wikipedia)

Reality-Shaping Fiction

The political tension in Ghana provided a poignant backdrop for THE WHITEWASHED TOMBS. In the story, Emma's boss at Sowah Detective Agency investigates the murder of queer activist Marcelo Tetteh. Characters like Peter Ansah were inspired by real-life figures such as Sam George. This real-life context helped shape the narrative about hate crimes in Accra.

Sam Nartey George, Member of Parliament and spearheader of Ghana's anti-LGBTQ bill
(Image: Wikipedia)

History of the Anti-LGBTQ Bill

The controversial Promotion of Proper Human Sexual Rights and Ghanaian Family Values Bill, introduced in 2021, aims to severely restrict LGBTQ+ rights, just as Uganda has chosen to do. Supported by various religious and traditional groups, it includes harsh penalties for LGBTQ+ individuals and their advocates.

Modifications & Sponsoring Parliamentarians

The bill has undergone several readings and amendments in Parliament. It criminalizes the promotion and funding of LGBTQ+ rights. MP Sam George has been a vocal supporter, framing the bill as a defense of traditional Ghanaian values.

Passage of the Bill

In February 2024, Parliament passed the bill unanimously after rigorous debate. It imposes stiff penalties on LGBTQ+ individuals and their supporters, extending its reach to public advocacy and private support.

Legal Challenges in the Supreme Court

Following its passage, the bill faced legal challenges in the Supreme Court, with significant opposition from human rights groups. These proceedings are crucial in testing the bill against Ghana's constitutional protections for individual rights.

The Supreme Court of Ghana, located in Accra (Image: Guido Sohne)

President Nana Akufo-Addo's Stance

President Nana Akufo-Addo has not yet signed the bill into law, citing ongoing legal challenges. This has created tension between the legislative and executive branches and could impact Ghana's international relations and economic situation.

Broader Implications

Ghana, known for its stable democracy and economic progress, faces a significant departure from these ideals with this bill. The move aligns with increasing anti-LGBTQ sentiment in many African nations. As of 2024, 31 African countries still have laws that criminalize consensual same-sex sexual activity.

A Step Back for Human Rights

The bill is a regression in human rights and individual freedoms, contradicting global movements towards inclusivity. It tarnishes Ghana's image as a progressive society and impacts the lives of LGBTQ individuals.

Socio-Economic Repercussions

Punitive measures against the LGBTQ community could affect international relations and economic support. Balancing cultural values with human rights principles poses a complex challenge.

Conclusion

The struggle for LGBTQ rights in Ghana highlights the need for vigilant advocacy to uphold the dignity and rights of all individuals. Through THE WHITEWASHED TOMBS, I aimed to reflect these critical issues, using fiction to mirror the harsh reality.

Ghana’s Anti-LGBTQ Bill: An Update

Is Ghana’s Freedom and Justice Crumbling?

 

How We Got Here: Brief History of the Bill

The controversial anti-LGBTQ bill in Ghana, officially known as the Promotion of Proper Human Sexual Rights and Ghanaian Family Values Bill, was first introduced in 2021. The bill aims to severely restrict the rights of the LGBTQ+ community and includes harsh penalties such as prison terms for both LGBTQ+ individuals and those advocating for their rights. This legislation has been shaped by widespread support within the Ghanaian Parliament and is backed by various religious and traditional groups in Ghana​ (Human Rights Watch)​​ (Wikipedia)​.

Modifications of the Bill & Sponsoring Parliamentarians

The bill has undergone several readings and amendments in Parliament, reflecting intense debates on its constitutional validity and human rights implications. It criminalizes the promotion, advocacy, and funding of LGBTQ+ rights and activities. Key figures in these discussions include MP Sam George, who has been vocally supportive of the bill, positioning it as a defense of traditional Ghanaian values against foreign influence​ (Human Rights Watch)​.

Passage of the Bill

The Parliament passed the bill unanimously in February 2024 after rigorous debate and modifications. It includes provisions that impose stiff penalties on LGBTQ+ individuals and their supporters, and the law extends its reach to various aspects of public advocacy and private support for LGBTQ+ rights​ (JURIST—Legal News & Commentary)​.

The Bill Challenged in the Supreme Court of Ghana

Following its passage, the bill faced legal challenges in the Supreme Court, reflecting the significant opposition from human rights groups and concerns over its compatibility with international human rights standards. These legal proceedings are critical as they test the bill against Ghana's constitutional protections for individual rights and freedoms​ (The Star)​.

President Nana Akufo-Addo's Stance

President Nana Akufo-Addo has not yet signed the bill into law, citing the ongoing legal challenge in the Supreme Court as the basis for his hesitation. This situation has created tension between the legislative and executive branches of government, which has implications for Ghana's international relations and economic situation, as the bill could potentially affect international aid and support​ (The Star)​​ (Wikipedia)​.

Reflections

Ghana has long been regarded as a leader in Africa for its stable democracy, significant economic progress, and influential cultural contributions. It's often seen as a beacon of peace and governance standards on the continent. However, the introduction and potential passage of the anti-LGBTQ bill represent a significant departure from these progressive ideals, aligning Ghana with a troubling trend of increasing anti-LGBTQ sentiment and legislation sweeping across some African nations.

This legislative move is particularly disheartening given Ghana's reputation. It suggests a regression of human rights and individual freedoms, contradicting the global movement towards inclusivity and equality. Such actions not only impact the rights and lives of LGBTQ individuals in Ghana but also potentially tarnish Ghana's international image as a forward-thinking and open society. The enforcement of these measures can lead to increased discrimination, violence against LGBTQ individuals, and a general climate of fear and repression.

Moreover, the bill could have broader socio-economic repercussions. For instance, punitive measures against the LGBTQ community could affect international relations and economic support, as evidenced by warnings from international bodies and countries that value human rights and inclusivity​ (Wikipedia)​. The situation poses a complex challenge: balancing deeply ingrained cultural and religious values with modern human rights principles and global citizenship. This development is a stark reminder of the ongoing struggle for LGBTQ rights and the necessity of vigilant advocacy and dialogue to uphold the dignity and rights of all individuals, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity.

OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT AKUFO-ADDO OF GHANA

On July 7, 2023, Ghana’s 275 members of Parliament unanimously passed an extreme anti-gay bill, which is set to tighten laws against members of the LGBTQ+ community.  the bill, known as the 2021 Promotion of Appropriate Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill. 

Although not as severe as Uganda’s “Kill the Gays” bill signed into law by the clueless, corrupt President Yoweri Museveni, Ghana’s version is plenty draconian enough.

3 to 5 years of imprisonment for engaging in same-sex intercourse;

5 to 10 years of imprisonment for anyone who produces, procures, or distributes material deemed to be "promoting LGBT+ activities;"

A requirement for citizens and institutions to "promote and protect proper human sexual rights and Ghanaian family values";

6 months to 1 year imprisonment for a "public show of amorous relations" between people of the same sex;

6 months to 1 year imprisonment for a "public show of amorous relations " with someone who has undergone gender reassignment or who cross-dresses;

A ban on providing trans healthcare.

The language in this bill is written by a bunch of rabid, LGBTQ-hating, ignorant idiots. I cannot even express the depth of my disgust with these people. I draw your attention to the vague, subjective nature of some of the clauses in the bill: What does “promoting LGBTQ+ activities” mean? Answer: Whatever you damn well please.

What does it mean for "citizens and institutions to promote and protect proper human sexual rights and Ghanaian family values? I haven’t a clue. It could mean anything. 

Ghana’s bill is part of an epidemic of anti-gay legislation sweeping the continent of Africa. I’ll present a more in-depth review of the issues in a couple of weeks, but just for perspective, out of the 54 countries in Africa, discrimination against LGBTQ persons is illegal only in Angola, Botswana, Cape Verde, Mauritius, Mozambique, Seychelles, and South Africa. The rest have different penalties for homosexuality up to and including the death penalty e.g. Uganda, or are revamping old laws to render them more severe, e.g. Kenya. 

In Ghana, just as in the USA, the bill must go to Ghana's President Nana Akufo-Addo desk for his signature, or assent, as they call it. One might argue about how skilled a politician Akufo-Addo is, but he’s certainly not the idiot that Museveni is. Ghana enjoys a particularly elevated status with the USA. If Akufo-Addo assents to this bill, it will be an error of colossal proportions.

In view of this, I have written open letter to President Akufo-Addo, which you can read below. I sent it to his official email, but the chance that he or his Chief of Staff will actually read it is slim to none--Ghanaians don’t read emails. Okay, that was a little snarky. I think the problem is really that they don’t respond to them.

To: His Excellency, Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo, The President of the Republic of Ghana, Jubilee House, Kanda, Accra, Ghana.

12 July 2023

Dear Mr. President,

SUBJECT: APPEAL TO REJECT THE "BILL FOR PROPER HUMAN SEXUAL RELATIONS AND GHANAIAN FAMILY VALUES"

I write to you with deep concern and a fervent plea for you to consider the long-term implications of signing into law the Bill for Proper Human Sexual Relations and Ghanaian Family Values, which was recently passed by Parliament. While it is essential to uphold Ghana’s cherished cultural values and societal norms, it is equally crucial to protect the human rights and fundamental freedoms that underpin our democratic state.

As a Ghanaian-American deeply invested in Ghana’s future, I am anxious about the potential repercussions this legislation could have on our global reputation, our economy, and, most importantly, the lives of countless LGBTQIA+ Ghanaians who may be directly or indirectly affected.

This Bill infringes on the principles of equality, non-discrimination, and privacy that are enshrined in the Constitution of the Republic of Ghana. It threatens to marginalize and further alienate LGBTQIA+ individuals based on their sexual orientation and personal choices, which are inherently private and should not be subject to legal scrutiny. 

By endorsing such a Bill, we stand to compromise our collective commitment to human rights, which could undermine Ghana's reputation as a beacon of democratic values in Africa. Ghana stands head and shoulders above many African countries on many levels, and some look to Ghana for guidance. We simply cannotblindly follow Uganda’s horrendous example of their draconian “Kill the Gays” law. We are much, much better than that. In some ways, Ghana’s Parliament isn’t elevating Ghana’s international standing, it is taking a wrecking ball to it.

You know better than I that the enforcement of this Bill could have severe implications for our economy. Ghana's economic growth and development largely hinge on strong ties with international partners and stakeholders, many of whom champion inclusivity and human rights. Approval of this Bill could strain these relationships, potentially leading to reductions in foreign investments, trade, tourism, aid, and healthcare initiatives. 

According to UN AIDS, Ghana saw a 21% fall in the incidence of HIV between 2010 and 2021 due to the results of sex education, preventive measures, and the care medical providers render to LGBTQIA+ persons. The Bill threatens to reverse these gains because it will drive the LGBTQIA+ community underground and make individuals afraid to seek medical care. This will lead inevitably to the unchecked spread of HIV, which is not in Ghana’s interest.

I urge you, Mr. President, to strongly and deeply reconsider assenting to this Bill. I implore you to engage with civil society, human rights advocates, legal experts, religious leaders, and the wider Ghanaian public to carefully deliberate further on the implications of this law. Such a step would reinforce our democratic ideals of dialogue, compromise, and consensus-building.

Mr. President, Ghana has a long history of upholding human dignity and promoting peace. As we strive to build a society where all individuals are accorded their due rights and freedoms, it is imperative that we refrain from institutionalizing laws that may perpetuate division and discrimination. We simply cannot go backwards on human rights. We must strive forward.

I trust that you will put the best interests of the people of Ghana at heart, and continue to be a stalwart leader for human rights and inclusivity in our great nation. I know personally that your capacity for nuanced thought and reasoning far exceeds that of many African leaders. Thank you for your dedication to serving our country and its people.

Yours faithfully,

Kwei M Jones-Quartey, M.D.

Pasadena, California

 

AID TO AFRICA: Does it do any good?

Wed--Kwei

Does aid to Africa do any good?

Vice-President Kamala Harris landed in Ghana on Sunday March 26 at the start of a weeklong trip to the African continent. On her trip, Harris said she wants to promote "increasing investments," the "economic empowerment" of women, girls and young businesspeople, "digital inclusion" and food security in light of mounting challenges from climate change.

But all this in the face of China’s grip on Africa. Biden’s administration wants to re-engage the mighty continent in opposition to China’s foothold, but the attempt is probably too little too late. All over the continent, the Chinese build roads, dams, railways, bore-holes for villages, and they take over African cobalt and gold mines. Their reputation for ignoring human rights is legendary. Not to put too fine a point, they really don’t care. 

Following the usual MO of visits to Africa by western leaders, VP Harris promised $100 million in "aid to the region” (primarily security against terrorism) and the Biden administration is asking for another $139 million from Congress to "help Ghana reduce child labor, improve weather forecasting, support local musicians and defend against disease outbreaks.” Wait. Did you say improve weather forecasting and support local musicians? Simply knowing Ghana, weather forecasting is not going to improve (what do you need that for anyway in a tropical country?) and local musicians are not going to be supported, but the politicians will laugh all the way to the bank.

Why does Africa even need aid?

The history of aid to African countries dates back to the colonial era, when European powers provided assistance to their colonies in the form of infrastructure, education, and health programs. After African countries gained independence in the 1960s, aid continued to flow in from the West, with a focus on development projects such as dams, roads, and other infrastructure. China has largely replaced the West in that regard. Below I’ve listed some of the “pros”of aid with a rebuttal (in italics) for each.

1. Humanitarian assistance: Foreign aid can provide essential resources and support in the face of natural disasters, conflict, or other crises. It can save lives, alleviate suffering, and help people rebuild their communities.  During epidemic outbreaks like Ebola, this was certainly important, but eradication of disease in Africa has always been tied to politics and regional security, including the WHO and MSF (Doctors Without Borders). Medical aid frequently lauds the work of American and European doctors while ignoring the efforts of local physicians.
2. Economic growth: Foreign aid can help stimulate economic growth by providing resources for infrastructure development, education, healthcare, and other key sectors. But does it really? If a western government gives an African country aid but none of it goes to local farms and manufacturing, then where is the growth? Trickle-down economics doesn’t work here either.
3. Poverty reduction: Aid can help reduce poverty by directly providing resources to the poor, supporting social safety nets, and enabling access to education and healthcare.  There’s no evidence that aid helps reduce poverty to any significant extent in Africa. In fact, doling out aid can keep the recipients nations in endless poverty. French West Africa is a good example.
4. Capacity building: Foreign aid can contribute to strengthening local institutions and building capacity in areas like governance, public health, and environmental management. How? If there’s no political will at the ground level, there’s little point in receiving financial aid.
5. Technology and knowledge transfer: Aid can facilitate the transfer of technology, expertise, and knowledge from developed countries to African countries, promoting innovation and development. Africa always pays the price when it asks for aid, whether it’s in the form of technology, expertise or anything else.

The true effects of foreign aid

1. Dependency: Dependence on foreign aid can potentially undermine the self-reliance and self-sufficiency of African countries, making them vulnerable to the whims of donor nations. Begging is what African governments do best. It’s now a conditioned response. Meanwhile, the national debt of many countries continues to burgeon. Ghana’s was about $65 billion in 2021, about 82% of its GDP.
2. Corruption and mismanagement: This is the biggest problem. It’s a fact: foreign aid is misused or misallocated all the time due to corruption or poor governance, limiting its impact on poverty reduction and development.
3. Ineffectiveness: the effectiveness of aid in promoting long-term economic growth is very questionable and I would venture to say, totally unproved. Aid can actually hinder development by distorting local markets and discouraging domestic investments.
4. Foreign aid can be used as a tool for exerting political influence, as donor countries may attach conditions to the aid they provide, potentially compromising the sovereignty of recipient countries.
5. Lack of local ownership: In some cases, foreign aid projects may be designed and implemented without adequately considering local needs, priorities, and cultural context, which can lead to unsustainable or inappropriate interventions. It’s not uncommon when you visit a country like Ghana to see projects that are unfinished because a new government is in power.       

Bottom line

The effectiveness and impact of foreign aid in Africa depend on factors like the type of aid, the intentions of the donors, the quality of governance in recipient countries, and the specific context in which aid is provided. But like Moyo Dambisa, as well-intentioned as it may appear, much of aid is a bad idea. And I still can’t get over the improving weather forecasting.

                                                                        ~~~

WHAT IS TOXIC MASCULINITY?

 Wed--Kwei

Annamaria’s piece about the universality of girls’ suffering got me thinking about this phenomenon. I won’t get too much in the psychological weeds in this post, but although the post is a little “light,” the topic isn’t.

What is toxic masculinity?

Definitions: Masculine toxicity is a set of cultural and societal norms of masculinity that emphasize physical violence, aggression, emotional repression, as well as homophobic and sexist behaviour as the way men are “supposed” to act. The elements include

• Misogyny
• Homophobia
• Discrimination against anything other than heterosexuality
• Aggression
• Being “stoic"
• Physical and mental toughness (don’t cry like a little bitch")
• Emotional insensitivity
• Self-sufficiency (“I don’t need your help”)

Many of these are reflected in societally sanctioned aphorisms like, “don’t be a pussy/bitch;” “be a man:” “man up;” “boys don’t cry;” “suck it up;” “boys will be boys,” etc. In toxic masculinity, deviation from the traits above would be labeled as “weak."

Terminology of toxic masculinity

In response to a question, how or when toxic masculinity started, someone replied, “How far back would you like me to go?"

The societal concept of masculinity obviously dates back millennia, but in the modern age a movement called the mythopoetic men’s movement (MMM) developed in response to the second wave of women’s movement of the 1980s and nineties. It originated in psychoanalysis modeled on Carl Jung’s theories, and the term “toxic masculinity”arose then as well. But it was rarely used in media and almost never in academic writing until around 2015.

One result of the MMM is the Mankind Project in which males bond with each other in non-sexual fashion, including “wild men" excursions into the wilderness. Circles are made, and men are encouraged to share their feelings, listen and be listened to, and supported by their fellows. The excursions aim to liberate men from the usual shackles of society--phones, TV, social media, etc.

Cultural norms and toxic masculinity

When I was in Ghana in 2021, I went to a part of town called Jamestown, which happens to be where my father was born. Jamestown and neighboring Bukom are famously known to have produced five world boxing champions like Ike Quartey (possibly a fourth or so cousin). Boxing in Bukom is life itself. Kids start almost as soon as they can walk. Boxing is disciplined fighting, but on the streets of Bukom, it’s a different matter. If a fight arises or someone tries to “diss" you, you would have to protect your honor and either attack or defend yourself. While I was there, I witnessed one chaotic physical exchange between two young men as I was leaving a chop bar with a soda. The point is that fighting with one’s fists is thoroughly sanctioned in Bukom where boxing is king. Is it toxic masculinity? Arguably so, but if it’s an honor code in Bukom that you fight to defend yourself, is it really toxic masculinity, or is it social norms? I’m not sure, really. All I know is that fighting with my fists to solve an issue wouldn't be my first choice I probably wouldn’t survive in Bukom.

They start early

Toxic masculinity and social change

The #MeToo movement represented one of the most important challenges to toxic masculinity in the workplace. It called out bullying, misogyny, assault and rape in different settings and examined why particularly odious men like Harvey Weinstein in positions of power are permitted to serially offend and get away with it. It has opened many men’s eyes and new awareness of the garbage women go through--not only once in a while, every day.

Next: Toxic masculinity in the workplace

Diasporan Guilt

Definition of diasporan guilt

Diasporan guilt is the term I've coined to define a pervasive feeling of bad conscience for being fortunate to live in a prosperous country (usually UK, France, USA, Canada etc.) while people suffer with poverty in one's birth country in the global south. 

What is the African diaspora?

The word diaspora comes from the Greek διασπορά, meaning "a scattering.” Originally, its most common usage was in connection with the Jewish diaspora, but it’s been extended to other groups, particularly this century. The African diaspora is the global collection of African descendants dispersed throughout the world as a result of historic events, specifically the 16th- to 19th century slave trade from primarily West and Central Africa to the US, Brazil, and Haiti. An aside note, although we hear more about slavery in relation to the US, less than 5% of the total number of slaves were trafficked to the US. More of them went to the Caribbean and South America, particularly Brazil. 

In addition, the African diaspora often refers to Africans who have migrated from the continent but maintain a deep interest in the “motherland” and a willingness to contribute in different ways to the development of the continent. In fact, the African Union defined the African diaspora as "consisting of people of African origin living outside the continent, irrespective of their citizenship and nationality and who are willing to contribute to the development of the continent and the building of the African Union."

An estimated 11 million Africans were dispersed by the Atlantic slave trade. The modern-day African diaspora numbers about 140 million while the African continent’s population is 1.4 billion.

The African diaspora and politics

The African diasporan phenomenon digs deep into sensitive issues of racism, colonialism, and global domination. Slavery was a system that reflected all of those things and along with slavery came internecine warfare on the African continent. The partition of Africa , also called the “scramble for Africa,” a divvying up of the continent by Europeans in their own interest and not Africa’s, occurred from 1881-1914, during which time the colonization occurred at full speed. In 1884 the German chancellor Otto Von Bismarck held a Berlin conference the purpose of which was essentially to prevent Europeans from fighting each other over territory--who cared about the Africans?

No one knows what Africa would have been like without the slavery and colonization. The African geographic divisions imposed by the Europeans often ignored natural landmarks and political ethnic histories. Could there have been more African unity and development without all these partitions? Whatever the case, Americans and Europeans and Africans came into contact with each other and account for the mixed ethnic nature on either side’s countries to the extent that it exists. In response to a British person’s objection to Indians coming to the UK, standup comedian Russell Peters retorted, “Wait a minute, you started the whole thing!” 

We know many Africans in the diaspora in general do extraordinarily well in their adopted countries, some becoming highly skilled individuals like neurosurgeons. There’s a cruel irony that Africa is suffering from brain drain, and the continent’s best brains are successfully living in the same countries that continue to exploit Africa, particularly in the extractive industries like gold and oil. Foreign aid goes largely into the pockets of the elite ruling class, and I agree with Dambisa Moyo that foreign aid, which arose out of colonization, is not an effective solution to underdevelopment in Africa. It perpetuates the dependency relationship Africa has with the west, and now, with the Chinese.

How diasporan guilt affects me

I have a theory that the dependency relationship Africa has with the west extends to individual Africans. In Ghana, there’s an odd preference given to “asking/begging for stuff” than working to get it--both governmentally and individually. My three brothers and I have family in Ghana on my father’s side and the requests for funds and phones etc. are common. Carlos, the ex-caretaker of our family property in Ghana is barely making it, especially since unemployment and inflation are soaring in Ghana.  I’ve covered Carlos's family’s hospital bills, rent, school for the kids, and so on--apart from the expensive phones and tablets I take for them on my visits. Two of my brothers are quite firm in not getting involved with any such “charitable deeds.” They just don’t see the point, and in some ways I think they’re correct; and like Dambisa Moyo, this giving to the poor can generate a dependency that never ends. Indeed, in a way, my supporting Carlos, his wife, and four kids is a little ridiculous, not to mention unsustainable. But I still do it. Why? Diasporan guilt. I live in a nice house and buy sh*t on Amazon while they suffer in Ghana. Rational or not, it’s a strong sentiment.

Maybe the diasporan guilt was born of my leaving Ghana decades ago when the going got rough with the then-military government and the country’s accompanying economic collapse. Perhaps I felt I had deserted or abandoned friends and family members. My late father was Ghanaian, and even though I don’t even have a Ghanaian passport, the ties to Ghana are clearly still strong. But my always matter-of-fact Black American mother pointed out that even though I was born in Ghana, I’m American through her (jus sanguinis), so I have every right to live in the States. And think about it: if I had never moved to the US, I might well not have created Darko Dawson and Emma Djan. Isn’t life strange?