






































Microsoft Word - Dasaolu Homosexuality


                                                                                         Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2018; 9(2):26-37 

 

 

26 

 

On Efficient Causation for Homosexual Behaviours among Traditional 

Africans: An Exploration of the Traditional Yoruba Model 

 

Dasaolu, Babajide Olugbenga  

Department of Philosophy, 
Olabisi Onabanjo University, 
Ogun State, Nigeria. 
Email: dasaolu.babajide@yahoomail.com 
 

Abstract: In the face of the recent backlashes against homosexual persons in Africa, on the 
ground that the phenomenon is un-African and/or threat to procreation and marital values, it is 
pertinent to review the discourse in the light of how ancient Africans perceived the reality. This 
is imperative given the lack of consensus on the part of scientists to disinter a conclusive finding 
on what causes homosexual behaviours among humans. In this research, I employ traditional 
Yorùbá philosophy to provide a plausible justification for homosexuality among the people. In 
the face of this justification via Yorùbá folklore, I find that there is no documented evidence 
among the ancient Yorùbá that is suggestive of discrimination and stigmatization of homosexuals 
and inter-sex persons. As homosexual persons were respected but not criminalized, this study 
recommends the regurgitation of this outlook in the contemporaneous dealings with homosexual 
persons, beginning with the repealing of the Same-Sex Marriage Prohibition Act of 2014 in 
Nigeria, which is inconsistent with African values and outlooks on the subject. 
 

Keywords: Homosexuality; Philosophy; Causal Factor; Yorùbá Folklore; Africa 
 
Introduction: What causes homosexual 
behaviours among humans? Is there any 
conclusive scientific evidence for 
homosexual orientations? These are the 
questions that initiated this research in the 
first place. Upon a critical scrutiny of some 
of the foremost claims on the causative 
factors for homosexual behaviours, it is 
unfortunate that there is nothing conclusive 
or suggestive of clinical validation. The 
matter is unfortunate because homosexual 
persons have been perceived as less than 
normal humans. In some countries, they are 

even persecuted for being who they are. But 
must this continue? If there are no scientific 
validations, the cause of homosexual 
behaviours, is it possible to employ a 
traditional African outlook to examine the 
phenomenon for solace? How relevant and 
penetrating, the African position on the 
cause of homosexual behaviours? 
Furthermore, were homosexual persons in 
traditional Africa criminalized and 
stigmatized? These are the questions that I 
seek to explore within the pages that follow. 
I will end the inquiry with some thoughtful 



                                                                                         Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2018; 9(2):26-37 

 

 

27 

 

recommendations on how to deal with 
homosexuals in contemporaneous times. 
The Quest for Efficient Causation for 

Homosexuality in the Sciences: The search 
for the cause of homosexual behaviours has 
put psychologists, genetic scientists, 
psychiatrists and even philosophers to work. 
For those who are affiliated to the study of 
genes, biologism has been put forward as an 
approach. 
 
Biologism is “…the view that human 
behavior and social situations can be 
causally explained by an appeal to the 
physical mechanisms at play in the organic 
biological processes of the human body.”1 
The understanding here is that homosexuals 
have been determined by the genes and 
hormones in their bodies to have sexual 
orientations or affiliations as they do. In 
other words, they have been programed by 
genetics to be thus. Natalie Angier2; 
Christopher Daly3; Curt Suplee4 are few 
minds who have used media as a medium to 
publish these scientific findings. However, 
this perspective has come under scrutiny. 
The works of Stanton L. Jones and Don E. 
Workman5 and Richard C. Friedman and 
Jenifer Downey6 have served sharply to 
show that there is no conclusive scientific 
judgment “that homosexual orientation or 
attraction (much less behaviour) is 
biologically fixed or immutable.”7 In a 
related development, psychiatrists Richard 
C. Friedman and Jenifer Downey observe 
that:  

“At clinical conferences one often 
hears discussants commenting that 
“homosexuality is genetic” and, therefore, 
that homosexual orientation is fixed and 
unmodifiable. Neither assertion is true…The 
assertion that homosexuality is genetic is so 
reductionistic that it must be dismissed out 
of hand as a general principle of 
psychology.”8 
 
Other renowned minds that have made 
profound efforts to seek the what science 
claims to be the cause(s) of homosexual 
orientations in humans are: Simon LeVay9; 
William Byne and Bruce Parsons10; Simon 
Burton.11 The widespread accentuated but 
unfortunate outcome is that there is no 
proper scientific evidence to serve as 
effective causation for homosexual 
orientation in humans. Perhaps one may 
think that the lack of consensus among 
scientists, as it pertains to the causal factor 
of homosexual behaviours may be 
responsible for the malicious treatment and 
estrangement of homosexuals in several 
places in Africa, such an outlook lacks basis, 
especially when considers the scientific 
verdict on race and the endless 
discrimination on the basis skin colour. 
 
After several years of stigmatization and 
discrimination against Africans and people 
with black skin, the scientific community 
has come to the conclusion that human 
genetic diversity cannot be captured by race. 
In the 21st century, Francis Collins and Craig 
Venter, after extensive and rigorous 



                                                                                         Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2018; 9(2):26-37 

 

 

28 

 

laboratory efforts, conclude that human 
genetic diversity cannot be captured by the 
concept of race. They revealed as well that 
all humans have genome sequences that are 
99.9% identical.12 For Venter, the concept of 
race has no genetic or scientific basis.13 In 
the same vein, Collins and Mansoura 
chronicle: “those who wish to draw precise 
racial boundaries around certain groups will 
not be able to use science as a legitimate 
justification.”14 It is the case that even when 
most of these scientific validations on race 
arrived at the turn of the millennium, there 
has been the continuous interest on 
segregation on the yardstick of skin colour. 
When one applies this sense of reasoning to 
homosexuality, the analogy will be too 
glaring to require further elaborations. As a 
result, homosexuals will likely continue to 
suffer stigmatization in the face of scientific 
explanation (assuming there is at least, one). 
 
Furthermore, the presence or absence of a 
causative factor by scientists has not 
improved the situation of LGBQT in Africa 
since there has been the emphasis, mostly by 
African heads of government that 
homosexuality is “un-African, a disease of 
the morally corrupt West.”15 It is therefore 
pertinent, at this juncture to explore the 
popular response within Africa – rejection 
and stigmatization of homosexuals. 
 
Homosexuality from the Mainstream and 

Dominant African Perspective: My task 
here is to explore and attempt a 
reconstruction of the vehemence against 

homosexual behaviours in Africa from the 
hands of her heads of government and 
scholars versed with the African past. 
 
Despite the moral bankruptcy that has 
generally characterized leadership in Africa, 
it is interesting to note that most African 
leaders have denounced homosexuality as 
evil, unnatural and incongruent to African 
culture and psyche. A brief survey of some 
of their views is revealing: President Robert 
Mugabe of Zimbabwe compared 
homosexuality to bestiality and has ordered 
the Police to raid the offices of Gays and 
Lesbians.16 In fact, Mugabe claimed that 
homosexuals were “worse than pigs and 
dogs.”17 Namibian President, San Nujoma, 
was more antagonistic and vitriolic in his 
attack of the homosexuals. He declared that 
“the Republic of Namibia does not allow 
homosexuality or lesbianism here. Police are 
ordered to arrest you, deport you and 
imprison you.”18 Nujoma sees 
homosexuality as against God’s will and act 
that shows that the devil is at work. Indeed, 
Namibia’s Home Affairs Minister, Jerry 
Ekandjo urged the Police officers to 
eliminate gays and lesbians from the face of 
Namibia.19  

 
There are others beside those in the 
leadership cadre who feel that 
homosexuality is totally un-African and that 
it negates all the cherished values of a 
typical African. Thus the reactions of 
Africans may take the following forms: That 
homosexuality should not be accepted, it is 



                                                                                         Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2018; 9(2):26-37 

 

 

29 

 

not the plan of God…it is completely bad 
and it does not originate from Africa, it is 
satanic and controlled by the evil spirits. 
John Ernest is of the view that homosexuals 
should be disenfranchised in Africa; they 
have no rights to be respected. Ernest opined 
that “homosexuality is a curse and that God 
should punish those who are engaged in the 
act, just as God reacted to the people of 
Sodom and Gomorrah.”20 John Ernest 
continues that “Africa has no right to respect 
gays according to African tradition and even 
the Bible. In fact, the act of gay is immoral 
and should be condemned by all civilized 
nations of the world.”21 Yet there are those 
who feel that Africa would be throwing 
away its culture and ethics to the Western 
culture and principles and thus playing the 
fool if it should respect the right of the 
homosexuals. That is why there has been a 
strong reaction to the gay activist group’s 
effort to stall a bill seeking to ban same sex 
marriages in Nigeria.22  
 
Though there has been a few dissenting 
voices, the general consensus in the African 
milieu is that homosexuality should not be 
allowed to take root in Africa. It is foreign to 
African culture and religion. Thus, its 
manifestation should be treated as an 
aberration rather than a socially acceptable 
behavioural pattern. But is this in line with 
how traditional Africans viewed it? Ebun 
Oduwole, an erudite of great influence on 
traditional African bioethics disaffirms. This 
is a view some other minds such as Laurent 

Magesa, Placid Tempels may also share 
with Oduwole.  

 
In spite of her admission that there were 
instances of homosexual and inter-sex 
persons among the traditional Yoruba, Ebun 
Oduwole argues that it was generally 
frowned upon. In her words, Oduwole 
affirms: 

“…Homosexuality is not as alien to 
traditional African societies as some people 
would want us to believe. However, it is 
equally clear that while there were traces of 
the phenomenon in indigenous Yoruba 
society, for example, it was generally 
considered to be unacceptable. Hence, the 
Same-Sex Marriage Prohibition Act of 2014 
in Nigeria is consistent with our cultural 
values” (emphasis mine).23 

 
Oduwole makes two seemingly valid but 
erroneous claims in the above. I will 
summarily tend to these as I simultaneously 
pull the erroneous and misleading 
implications of her rendition. 

 
Her evidence that homosexuality “…was 
generally considered to be 
unacceptable…”24, in indigenous Yorùbá 
society derives from Ódù Otúrá Gorì-ìrete, 
one of the many verses of the Ifá corpus 
whose rendition in the English is thus: 

 
Two men are copulating 
Two men are copulating 
Two women are copulating, 
two women are mating 



                                                                                         Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2018; 9(2):26-37 

 

 

30 

 

Why don't we take a man? 
And then take a woman 
Why don't we take a man? 
And then take a woman 
Therein lies enjoyment and 
fulfilment 
Divination was cast for 
Erifobogbile 
The (Primordial) Head's 
diviner divined for it too 
When head was to site a 
domicile 
Head was told to offer a 
sacrifice 
May I trade and make profits 
My (primordial) head, may I 
have two thousand children 
May I trade and make profits 

 
Oduwole is assured that this Ódù “gives a 
vivid account of homosexuality and points 
to it as an exercise in futility.”25 However, it 
is strange how her perception that 
homosexual affair is an exercise in futility is 
enshrined in that Ódù. Even if we admit for 
the sake of argument, Oduwole’s conviction 
that homosexuality is an exercise in futility 
perhaps because procreation does not ensue, 
then Oduwole must be willing to shun 
heterosexual women with Mullerian 
agenesis from sexual intercourse since that 
too will be an exercise in futility. Medically 
certified barren women and women past 
menopause who are heterosexuals, will on 
the showing of Oduwole be performing 
exercises in futility. Her reasoning may even 
imply that they need not make love again. In 

retrospection, Oduwole may say that the 
Ódù reveals that a man-woman sexual 
intercourse is more enjoyable and fulfilling 
than a homosexual intercourse. She may use 
the Yorùbá saying that “His eyes are like the 
eyes of one who has anal sex” to justify this 
seeming lack of enjoyment. However, this 
reasoning too is flawed. As a result, 
Homosexuals engaged in anal sex have not 
come out to say that they lack enjoyment 
and fulfillment. To feed this proposition into 
their sexual orientation and then criticize 
same clearly indicates the Strawman 
Fallacy. Analogically, there are reported 
cases of vaginal intercourse where the 
woman complains of discomfort and pains, 
sometimes accompanied with bleeding. 
Whither pleasure and fulfillment? 
Obviously, enjoyment and fulfillment in 
sexual intercourse is an argument that may 
be deployed to both homosexuals and 
heterosexuals. It is not a yardstick to 
relegate or denounce the former and be mute 
regarding the latter. I find recourse to the Ifá 
corpus as a basis for the rejection of 
homosexual practices in traditional Yorùbá 
societies as inefficient. I will amplify this 
position in the next section. For the moment, 
I concern with Oduwole’s second erroneous 
and misleading claim.  

 
Oduwole stresses that “the Same-Sex 
Marriage Prohibition Act of 2014 in Nigeria 
is consistent with our cultural values.”26 
Here, she assumes that Nigeria is a 
homogenous political entity, where what 
holds in a predominantly Christian South 



                                                                                         Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2018; 9(2):26-37 

 

 

31 

 

with diverse ethnic groups obtains in a 
predominantly Muslim North where the 
Sharia operates. Moreover, I beg to differ 
from Oduwole to show that the Same-Sex 
Marriage Prohibition Act of 2014 is not 
consistent with African cultural values. 
Some instance will suffice here! 

 
Among the traditional Hausa in present day 
Northern Nigeria and the Lango people of 
Northern Uganda, there were men identified 
as yan duada and makudo dako respectively. 
In the words of Mathew Paige yan duada 
“… were effeminate men and were 
considered an option for other men to marry. 
Other traditions were found in the Nilotico 
Lango. There was the third gender makudo 
dako, which were people of the male sex 
who dressed as women, and treated as 
women. Marriage between men and makudo 
dako was a common practice.”27 Similarly, 
among the traditional Yorùbá the terms 
adofùrọ̀  and lakíríboto, are suggestive of 
gay and inter-sex persons respectively. 
There were no strict penal codes against 
these humans. They were respected and 
accorded their own rights as human beings. 
There were neither Sharia laws that made 
them death row candidates nor 
imprisonments of a decade and four years. 
To then insist as Oduwole does that that 
“Same-Sex Marriage Prohibition Act of 
2014 in Nigeria is consistent with our 
cultural values”28 is not anywhere close to 
the truth, unless of course she means our 
cultural values diluted with Euro-Christian 
and Arab-Islamic orientations. At this 

juncture, a critic may demand whether or not 
dressing is a sufficient determinant of the 
nature of humans to be classified into the 
popular binary sexual orientation of male-
female. This study ripostes that this may be 
necessary; it is not a sufficient condition. 
There are many straight males who dress as 
female just as gay males persist and dress 
like females. Dressing is not a sufficient 
yardstick granted that it is necessary to 
differentiate the two popular sexes.  
 
Thus far, I have been able to establish two 
crucial aims here. The first is that the 
African heads of government who tinker that 
homosexuality was alien to Africa are not 
enlightened enough regarding Africa’s 
history of sexuality. The second is the 
erroneous rendition by Oduwole and her 
disciples that in spite of the traces of 
homosexual, the reality was perceived as a 
threat to heterosexual marital institutions 
and procreation. 
 
Personally, I find these outlooks premised 
on the lack of proper scientific basis for 
homosexuality. In the remainder of this 
inquiry, I seek to unclad a more plausible 
trado-Yorùbá explanation for the existence 
and persistence of homosexuality among 
humans and why these persons were not 
discriminated against back then. 
 
The Trado-Yorùbá Discourse on the 

Efficient Causation of Homosexual 

Persons: In this section, I offer a causative 
explanation for homosexuality using Yorùbá 



                                                                                         Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2018; 9(2):26-37 

 

 

32 

 

myth as cue. However before disclosing this 
affair, it is important to offer that 
homosexual behaviours have received 
minimal causal explanation vis-à-vis 
realities like kleptomaniac. Whereas the 
kleptomaniac has an inherent genetic 
disposition to acquire by crook, what does 
not belong to them, the homosexual is on the 
defensive. The latter has no genetic 
explanation from research authorities of the 
mainstream and dominant scientific 
enterprise and also face stigmatization and 
persecution more than the kleptomaniac. 
The question there is: how have traditional 
Africans engaged and speculated on 
homosexuality, I use the traditional Yorùbá 
folklore as a cue. 

 
Before the advent of colonialism and the 
enchanted of the African mind with Arabic 
and Western values, cultures and religions, 
there were allegories used to explain why 
things are the way that they are. These 
allegories or myths have served as a way of 
understanding the world, for social cohesion 
and mutual coexistence. A critique may at 
this junction refuse to bat an eye, over my 
choice for myths as a basis even when it is 
the case that had already ceded that there is 
no scientific consensus on homosexuality. 
Hence, I need to provide an explanatory 
justification before exploring the indigenous 
Yorùbá creation myth as a plausible reason 
why there were no homophobic acts in pre-
colonial times. While speaking on the role 
that myths play in the development of 

scientific theories, renowned erudite Sir Karl 
Raimund Popper leaks: 

“I realize that such myths may be 
developed, and become testable; that 
historically speaking all – or very nearly all 
– scientific theories originate from myths 
and that a myth may contain important 
anticipations of scientific theories. Examples 
are Empedocles’ theory of evolution by trial 
and error or Parmenides’ myth of the 
unchanging block universe, in which 
nothing ever happens and which if we add 
another dimension becomes Einstein’s block 
universe...”29 

 
Obviously, several factors militating against 
the development of African Science will 
have made the development of African 
myths into testable scientific theories 
impossible. Factors as poor understanding or 
complete ignorance of indigenous cultures 
and tradition, the aftermath of Arab-Islamic 
and Euro-Christian values, education, 
religions, culture and traditions are 
foremost. But my contention is not to 
engage with these. My point is that the 
Yorùbá creation myth is pregnant with some 
testable truths which render homophobic 
ideas obsolete. I will now concern with the 
myth of the creation of humans as holds 
among the traditional Yorùbá. 

 
If there is any truth in the role that sexual 
selection play in reproduction, it is minimal. 
This claim is incontestable if one recalls that 
there are several cases of sexual relations 
that do not yield into conception, pregnancy, 



                                                                                         Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2018; 9(2):26-37 

 

 

33 

 

gestation and then finally delivery. In the 
words of Olanrewaju Shitta-Bey “it is a 
scientific fact that sexual intercourse does 
not necessarily result into pregnancy even 
when the spermatozoa of a man and the 
ovum of his female counterpart are 
medically proven to be satisfactorily 
active.”30 It is therefore not uncommon to 
have many sterile personalities among 
species in the plant and animal kingdoms. 
Contrary to the claim of Charles Darwin31, 
the traditional Yorùbá contests that sexual 
selection plays minimal role as the impact of 
other factors have not been take into 
consideration. In plain language, sexual 
intercourse as an aftermath of the 
evolutionary theory of sexual selection does 
not guarantee reproduction and ultimately 
the preservation of the species. If the Yorùbá 
evolutionary theory and the role of 
Olódùmarè (Higher God) and the òrìṣàs 
(divinities) are used to assess this reality, it 
becomes clear that even traditional Yorùbá 
has more consistency over Darwin’s theory 
of evolution through natural and sexual 
selection. At this juncture, a re-interpretation 
is needed to for the Yorùbá human creation 
account in order to put in the proper 
perspective, the role of Olódùmarè and the 
òrìṣàs in the affairs of the universe.  

 
It is not to be contested that the saying: 
“Olódùmarè ní ó n fún énìyàn ni ọmọ” 
(Olódùmarè, the Higher God is the giver of 
children) is permeating among the 
traditional Yorùbá. It is this additional 
condition that the traditional Yorùbá adds to 

the role of natural and sexual selection. This 
condition is the role played by Olódùmarè 
and the òrìṣàs during and after sexual 
intercourse. It is from this truth that when 
Olódùmarè and the òrìṣàs bless the union of 
a man’s sperm cell and a woman’s egg cell 
after sexual intercourse or manipulation over 
a petri dish (if it is a biotechnological 
process), that the Yorùbá may utter: “O ti 
fẹrakù” (Conception has occurred in her/it). 
This is seen by the Yorùbá as a sign that 
Olódùmarè and the òrìṣàs have granted their 
request toward procreation. One point must 
be noted here though! There is a large gulf 
between “O ti fẹrakù” (Conception has 
occurred in her/it) and “O ti l’oyun” 
(Pregnancy has occurred in her/it) for the 
traditional Yorùbá. This is “because the 
stages/processes involved between the 
moment of conception and the delivery of 
the baby (for instance, Orisha Nla may or 
may not carry the function of molding the 
Ara of the human person)”32 A proper and 
detailed account of the evolution of the 
foetus has been documented by Olanrewaju 
Shitta-bey. I will not pursue that case further 
to avoid digression from the aim of this 
research. Hence, I concern with the 
primordial deity called Òrìṣàńlá. Who is 
Òrìṣàńlá? How important is this entity 
toward the creation of a human? 

 
It is agreed that Ọbàtálá or Òrìṣàńlá (one of 
the primordial divinities in the Yorùbá 
world-view (fond of drinking palm wine) 
fashions a human body (ara) out of clay or 
sand. Meanwhile, Olódùmarè (Higher God) 



                                                                                         Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2018; 9(2):26-37 

 

 

34 

 

gives life-force or soul (Èṃí) to the ‘craft’ of 
Òrìṣàńlá. The animated ara then proceeds to 
Àjàlá’s abode (another primordial divinity 
who makes Orí) to make a choice of destiny, 
Orí.  

 
Granted, Òrìṣàńlá is the primordial divinity 
that casts a human body, it is very likely that 
he may cast inter-sex persons. He may omit 
the genitals of a woman, thereby creating 
confusion of the sex of the person.33 
Assuming a critic interposes at this juncture 
that Òrìṣàńlá has the capacity to cast a 
kleptomaniac. Would this not justify the 
stealing on the part of the human entity? On 
first showing, this observation is correct. A 
deeper reflection will however reveal to the 
critic that the condition of the kleptomaniac 
has genetic and scientific explanations. 
Homosexuality is however futile in 
explanation, hence the recourse to traditional 
Yorùbá folklore. Secondly, there are no 
recorded cases of kleptomaniac among 
traditional and even the contemporary 
Yorùbá. Such an act as kleptomaniac has no 
existence in the history and tradition of the 
people. It will therefore be a form of 
conceptual superimposition on the part of 
the critic, demanding that kleptomaniac be 
given causal validation as homosexuality 
from Yorùbá folklore. 
 
Extemporaneously, “Òrìṣàńlá could mould a 
woman with stronger bones and muscles that 
will make her more masculine. He may also 
mould women without womb.”34 
Furthermore, and in the most severe cases, 

he “may not carry the function of molding 
the ara of the human person,”35 and this 
could lead to miscarriage for the gestating 
woman. These are perhaps some of the ideas 
that inform the traditional Yorùbá position 
on sexuality. It therefore does not strike one 
that traditional Yorùbá sexuality is one that 
recognizes that aside the male and female 
sexes, there could be other sexes that 
emanate from the craft of Òrìṣàńlá. This is 
precisely why in the Yorùbá language, there 
is not gender-specific pronoun for the male 
and female sexes.36 In addition, “Biological 
anatomy is not a limitation to social status as 
that of husband, wives, mothers, or fathers 
among the Yoruba. In addition, the Yoruba 
language provides no pronoun for sexual 
distinction. The notion of gender among the 
Yoruba is complex and multidimensional.”37  
The climax of this study have served to 
reveal that among the indigenous Yorùbá, 
there is a likely understanding of 
homosexual and inter-sex persons as the 
crafts of Òrìṣàńlá, in a similar way that 
albinos too. There was no jail terms for 
these peoples neither were they restricted 
from social life. Clearly, traditional Yorùbá 
society is not a homophobic one. It was a 
kind of society where sex and gender are 
flexible and amenable.  
 
Some Recommendations: In the light of the 
arguments that I have put forward in the last 
section, it is the case that there is an 
established but unfair exposition by scholars 
regarding ancient Yorùbá explanation for the 
cause of homosexuality and the general 



                                                                                         Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2018; 9(2):26-37 

 

 

35 

 

acceptance back then. Hence, it is the 
recommendation of the study that since 
homosexuality was not frowned upon by 
African progenitors it is fallacious, to put 
this as a justification for the criminalization 
of homosexuals. It is for this reason that I 
propose for the repeal of the Same-Sex 
Marriage Prohibition Act of 2014, which is 
not consistent with African cultural values. 
Hence, similar laws in other parts of Africa 
should similarly be repealed. 

 
In addition to the foregoing, homosexual 
persons who have contributed to the 
development of the society through their 
efforts in various spheres of life should be 
celebrated and not be discriminated against. 
Through this, homosexuals may be seen 
beyond their sexuality but just like any other 
human. 

Thirdly, there is need for sexuality 
orientation for people who discriminate 
against homosexuals in social and work 
places. Information centers should be made 
available for citizens to get adequate 
resources on what homosexuality is about. 
Furthermore, they must be made to realize 
that the causative factor through the teaching 
of traditional African folklores. Here, 
schools should educate young people 
especially about it such that it does not come 
strange as they get older. 
 
Conclusion: This essay has explored the 
characterization and extent of three claims 
on homosexuality. First, that there is no 
scientific consensus regarding the cause of 
homosexuality. That there is no scientific 
evidence for homosexuality does not 
strengthen the case of most African leaders 
who condemn the reality. ‘Western’ science 
does not have the final answer to all things. 
These leaders are therefore left with the 
option of perusing indigenous African 
cultures for answers. It is however the case 
that the influence wielded by Christianity 

and Islam over the minds of contemporary 
African leaders is an impasse to the natural 
admission of homosexuality among the 
African forbearers. Second, that African 
leaders and scholars who have upheld the 
anti-same sex marriage either understanding 
of African culture or are just homophobes 
who do not wish to have any interaction 
with homosexuals. These persons have also 
used the glorious past of Africa to gird their 
resolve that homosexuality is un-African. 
Third, that the traditional Yorùbá 
community like many other pre-colonial 
areas in Africa was not against homosexuals 
since there is no evidence revealing that 
homosexuals were punished, discriminated 
and persecuted as they are in recent times. 
Impliedly, my contention is that 
homosexuality is not foreign to Africa and 
for the traditional Yorùbá, it is Òrìṣàńlá that 
stands as efficient cause for their being. It is 
therefore the recommendation of this work 
to revive this idea that it is Òrìṣàńlá that 
made the homosexual thus. Unless we do 
this, there is clear evidence that we in the 
21st century are vicious but not virtuous, 



                                                                                         Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2018; 9(2):26-37 

 

 

36 

 

lettered but not fully educated, in our 
dealings with ‘fellow humans’ whose places 
we may be, had Òrìṣàńlá taken an overdose 
of his favourite, the palm wine. 
Homosexuality by its very nature is neither a 
vice nor a virtue. It is a reality that relies on 
the context. The serial rapist, kleptomaniac, 
racists are deemed virtuous or otherwise 
within contexts and the science of their 
conditions. The kleptomaniac is clinically 
validated and the judge will be lenient. A 
serial rapist may in very rare cases get 
leniency since he could be medically 
validated to have mental disorders vis-à-vis 
the ‘one-off-rapist.’ Bias as to what 
constitute rape and mental state may also 
come to play. However, the homosexual is 
bogged down by prejudices and perceived as 
a threat to family values irrespective of 
context. Homosexuality is neither virtue nor 
vice. It needs to be contextualized before 
this disjunction can work. Strictly speaking 

the whole gamut of this inquiry has been 
dedicated to this. 
Author Contribution: Author developed 
the conceptual idea and wrote the 
manuscript. 
 

Conflict of Interest: Declared none. 
 

Acknowledgements: I wish to acknowledge 
the intellectual exploration of bioethics 
within the African purview as laid out in the 
reflections of Professor Ebun Oduwole, one 
of the prominent sages of the Ogun School 
of Philosophy, Olabisi Onabanjo University, 
Ago-Iwoye, Nigeria. More so, I desire to use 
this medium to relay my profound gratitude 
to a former student, Emmanuel Ofuasia 
whose critical comments, conceptual 
clarifications and accentuation on clarity of 
arguments has added value to this research. I 
thank him immensely. 

 

References: 
1K.A. Rodier. “Biologism and Simone de Beauvoir: 

A Phenomenological Re-Reading of “The 
Givens of Biology””. M.Phil Thesis Submitted to 
Department of Philosophy, University of 
Sasketchewan, Saskatoon, Canada 2007 , p. 10 

2See Natalie Angier. “Study Suggests Genes Sway 
Lesbian’s Sexual Orientation”. New York Times. 
March 1993a 12; Natalie Angier. “Report 
Suggests Homosexuality is Linked to Genes”. 
New York Times. July 1993b, 16. 

3Christopher Daly. “Study of Twins Suggest 
Lesbianism has a Genetic Component”. 
Washington Post. March 1993 15. 

4Curt Suplee. “Study Provides New Evidence of 
“Gay Gene””. Washington Post. October 1995 
31 

5Stanton L. Jones and Don E. Workman. 
“Homosexuality: The Behavioural Sciences and 

the Church”. Journal of Psychology and 
Theology. 1989 213. 

6Richard C. Friedman and Jenifer Downey. Sexual 
Orientation and Psychoanalysis: Sexual Science 
and Clinical Practice. (New York: Columbia 
University Press 2002) 

7L.D. Wardle. “The Biological Causes and 
Consequences of Homosexual Behavioural and 
Their Relevance for Family Law Policies”. 
DePaul Law Review. 56(3): 997-1034 

8Op. Cit., Friedman and Downey, p. 39 
9Simon LeVay . “A Difference in Hypothalamic 

Structure between Heteroseuxal and Homosexual 
Men”. SCIENCE. 1991 1034. 

10William Byne and Bruce Parsons. “Human Sexual 
Orientations: The Biological Theories 
Reappraised”. Archives of General Psychiatry 
1993 228. 

 



                                                                                         Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2018; 9(2):26-37 

 

 

37 

 

11Simon Burton. The Causes of Homosexuality: What 
Science Tells Us. (Cambridge: Jubilee Centre 
2006) 

12Michael Yudell. “A Short History of the Concept of 
Race.” In S. Krimsky & J. Sloan (eds). Race and 
Genetic Revolution: Science, Myth and Culture. 
Pp. 13-30. (New York: Columbia University 
Press 2011), p. 22 

13Rick Wiess & Justin Gillis. “Teams Finish Mapping 
Human DNA.” Washington Post. 2000 

14F.S. Collins, M.K. Mansoura. “The Human Genome 
Project: Revealing the Shared Inheritance of all 
Humankind.” Cancer. 2001, Vol. 92, p. S224 

15Op. Cit., Kahn-Fogel, p. 316 
`16K. Boykin “Homosexuality in Africa.” 

http://www.keithboykin.com/author/ africa.html. 
Posted January 11, 2001. Retrieved on the 11th 
April, 2018. 

17John Ernst. “BBC Africa Live”. 
http://www.mask.org.za/article.php?cat=ajd=74. 
Retrieved on the 15th August, 2018. 

18Op Cit., Boykin 
19Op Cit., Obasola, p. 84 
20Op Cit., Ernst 
21Ibid 
22Op. Cit., Obasola, p. 83 
23Ebun Oduwole. Philosophy and the Challenge of 

Relevance in African Society. 79th Inaugural 
Lecture. Olabisi Onabanjo University, Ago-
Iwoye, Ogun State. 20th February, 2018., p. 15 

24Ibid, p. 15 
25Ibid., p. 14 
26Ibid., p. 15 
27Op. Cit., Paige 
28Op. Cit., Oduwole, p. 15 
29Karl R. Popper. Conjectures and Refutations. 

(London: Routledge & Kegan Paul 1963), p. 36 
30Olanrewaju. A Shitta-Bey. “The Humanity of the 

Foetus: A Yorùbá Perspective.” African Journal 
of History and Culture. 2015 7 (2), p. 54 

31Charles Darwin. On the Origin of Species by means 
of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of 
Favoured Species in the Struggle for Life. (New 
York: Modern Library Edition 1949). 

32Op. Cit., Shitta-Bey, p. 54 
33Babajide Olugbenga Dasaolu. “Òrìṣàńlá made me 

thus: Arguing for Homosexuality using the 

Yorùbá Thought System as Paradigm.” LASU 
Journal of Philosophy. 2018 Vol. 1 (2), p. 201 

34Ibid, p. 201 
35 op. cit, Shitta Bey p. 54 
36See O. Oyewunmi. The Invention of Women: 

Making an African Sense of Western Gender 
Discourses. (Minneapolis: University of 
Minnesota Press 1997) 

37O. Olajubu. “Seeing Through a Woman’s Eye: 
Yorùbá Religious Tradition and Gender 
Relations.” Journal of Feminist Studies in 
Religion. 2004 20 (1), p. 42 


