From: HF.GTD@forsythe.stanford.edu (Gabrielle Daniels)
Subject: Re: Lee: Skip work to attend Malcolm X
Organization: Stanford University, California, USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 17:58:56 GMT

In article <stovall.715534629@ficus.cs.ucla.edu>,
stovall@ficus.cs.ucla.edu (Steven Stovall) writes:
>What is this, the "Culture War"??
>
>HF.GTD@forsythe.stanford.edu (Gabrielle Daniels) replies:
.
No, this isn't a culture war.  You're trying to separate Malcolm X
in two people and he's not.  He was one person.  As I said before,
he went from one extreme to another.  He was still the same person,
whether he was Detroit Red or Malcolm X.  Furthermore the book
states that he engaged in same sex relationships BEFORE he became
Detroit Red as a child and as a young adult.  Simply tamping down,
or trying to control natural instincts--positive or negative is
subjective, really--doesn't automatically turn you into a different
address or phone number.
.
Sorry, Steve.  But it's homophobia on trial here.  Your reaction
would be just about the same as Spike Lee's.
.
>>I say:
>
>>So why can't El Hajj Malik El Shabazz be pansexual as well as the
>>other folk interviewed for the book?
>
>El Hajj Malik cant be, but Detroit Red can be. It would just have to
>be asserted by a "credible" source. I doubt if such a source will be
>forthcoming (in particular, I doubt that the source in question is such
>a source). In the meantime, this smacks of West Village revisionism.
.
.
.
Steven, read the book before you smash Christopher and Castro
Streets.

>>Steve says:
>
>>>Whatever the truth of this allegation, by the time he entered public life
>>>as a minister of the Nation of Islam, Malcolm *was* the seminal blackman
>>>and was *not* the depraved Detroit Red.
>
>>I say:
>
>>Was he also depraved for being a male prostitute?  Receiving or
>>giving the smallest affection or pleasure as a young adult?  The
>>fine line ain't always so fine...and ain't even a line at times.
>
>Pimps, hustlers, dope fiends are depraved. But redeemable.
.
.
.
You conveniently ignore the childhood stuff.  Icons with feet of
clay, Steve.  Remember?
.
I say:

>>By the time he was Minister Malcolm he was certified "straight."  So
>>is this necessarily good? And the Nation of Islam is a very
>>"straight," conservative institution. Malcolm went from one extreme
>>to another.  Perhaps he was trying to reach for the center.  We'lll
>>never know for sure.
>
>Life in the Nation of Islam is a definite improvement over hustling.
>
>Trust me.
.
.
I'm not saying it wasn't. As I said, Malcolm went from one extreme
to another. Near the close of his life, he had backed off from the
Nation of Islam and was finding his own voice from what he had
learned from that experience and being at Mecca. Let's not get into
denial around this: we'll never know for sure who he would have
become. To me, Malcolm X is even more of a man in my opinion after
reading part of this book--not less.

>>Steve concludes:
>
>>>Understand that homosexuality is explicitly prohibited by the Quran.
>>>Al Hajj Malik Shabazz was a Muslim who believed la ilaha il Allah
>>>(there is no God but Allah) and Muhammedan Rasullulah (Muhammed is
>>>the Messenger of Allah), not to mention the Angels, the Prophets,
>>>the Quran, the Last Day...and that trangressors will be roasted
>>>at hellfire.
>
>>I say:
>
>>Jeez, Steve.  Calm down.  Pull up the stakes and send those wagons
>>of wood home.  Ain nobody burning anyone tonight, or any other
>>night.
>
>Hey, dont blame me. These are the words of Allah in the surah "The Event"
>(English by Pickthall) about the events of the Last Day:
>
>        But if he is of the rejectors, the erring,
>        Then the welcome will be boiling water
>        And roasting at hellfire.
.
.
.
Steven, the ends do not necessarily justify the means in this case.
 There are hundreds of Malcolm wannabes and assumers of the mantle.
Malcolm was a lot more than both kinds of folks.
.
What a shame he is gone, what a shame.