Talk:Mwanga II of Buganda

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by the Royalty and nobility work group.

	LGBT Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.

	Africa Portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Africa, which collaborates on articles related to Africa in Wikipedia. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Uganda. See also the Uganda WikiPortal.
Assessment comments This article has not been rated for quality and/or importance yet. Please rate the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

[edit] LGBT

The LGBT-related categories are supported by this text: "...defied the king by rescuing the young royal pages in their care from Mwanga's pederastic sexual exploitation..." Mwanga was a king who had sex with boys. His bio therefore justifies the LGBT and pederasty categories. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:56, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

I removed it because I thought it was offensive to comflate forcible pederasty with homosexuality. Do you not agree? Lobojo (talk) 17:37, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

While it would be mislabeling to cateforize the pages as LGBT, since it was forced on them, I think it is acceptable to state the somebody who is into porking said pages is indeed homosexual. Jeffpw (talk) 18:06, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

So consistency would imply that you would support including all the pedarsts who have articles on wikipedia in a Category:LBGT pederasts in cases when the abuser and the abused were of the same sex? I really think that this is offensive frankly. Diddling boys does not mean a man is gay; a man that abuses boys is sick and twisted and should not be grouped as though they were part of some LGBT community. Lobojo (talk) 18:14, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Lobojo, I don't think that it's offensive to acknowledge the actual, historical facts in a specific situation, even if these two ideas have been conflated into an offensive stereotype in modern Western culture. I'm sure that you would agree with me that a man can have sex with other males and also never eat meat (for example) without gay men typically being vegetarian. Similarly, it's entirely possible that a specific man could have sex with other males and also have sex with people who are younger than our social conventions permit, without anyone thinking that MSM are typically pederasts.

I believe that Mwanga's social conventions would have allowed him to have sex with girls of the same age; it was primarily the gender of his targets, and the abuse of his royal power in forcing their submission to his sexual advances, that offended his community, not the age of his targets. Furthermore, his sexual behavior was not merely a minor detail in his reign: command rape of these teenaged boys, and the execution of their protectors, is what triggered his eventual fall from power.

Since "being gay" is a modern political identity instead of a descriptor of behavior, I think it would be more accurate to file this article under Category:MSM than under Category:LGBT, but that category doesn't seem to exist. LGBT is the closest option that I could find in my search today. I'd be happy to hear alternative suggestions from you, if you can find anything more appropriate than what's currently in the article. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:16, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you for clearing this up, in the light of your comments I am inclined to agree the label should apply. Lobojo (talk) 22:36, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
• I think Lobojo is also not grasping the difference between Pederasty and pedophilia. Perhaps he should read the two articles before he continues this discussion. Personally, I get tired of having to explain the differences and distinctions to well-meaning editors. Jeffpw (talk) 20:18, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Why is everything a personal attack with you? I'm going to ignore the insults again, though this particular attack on my inteligence is very revealing. Lobojo (talk) 22:36, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
    • You apear to be saying that Mwanga is a pederast not a pedophile is that it Jeff? Dosent seem to be much of a mentor to the boys he is raping does he? Are NAMBLA pedoes or pederasts? Not many 10 year old members of NAMBLA last time I counted. Lobojo (talk) 22:47, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
      • I think it's frankly rather inappropriate to describe Mwanga II as guilty of "pedophilic sexual exploitation" given that discourses of paedophilia are very recent, and properly only date from the 1960s and 1970s. However exploitative we may judge Mwanga's escapades to be, in a different cultural context and at a different time in history, it seems to me to be rather incongruous to use such a neologism as 'p(a)edophile' (for that matter, it's also quite bizarre to describe him as LGBT!). 'Pederastic' (which as I understand it describes sexual acts rather than an intrinsic 'orientation') is still not great (having strong Greco-Roman overtones), but is at least more value-neutral and perhaps less emotive than the heavily loaded term 'paedophile'. I would remove the LGBT label, and change the terminology. 131.111.220.10 (talk) 16:16, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

(Unindent) So what categories would you prefer? Let's pretend that we have a reader who wants to find information about historical men who had sex with other males. Remember that we're not trying to definitively label the person when we categorize articles; we're just trying to group this article with others that might be related. We're getting a lot of "Oh, not that category -- that's not a perfect match" comments, but what we need is "I think this category is better than what we have now." If you have a suggestion for a more suitable category, I'm all ears. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:14, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sources

Does anyone know the age of the boys Mwanga was having (or wanting to have) sex with? If I did the math right, Mwanga was about 16 when he came to power, and he started killing the pages and their protectors almost immediately. If the pages were pretty much his age, then we have a case of neither pedophilia nor pederasty, but a pair of careless assumptions: that sexually abusive kings are middle-aged, and that sexually victimized pages are pre-teens or young teens.

I have also not seen any sources which discuss his sexual practices in his 20s and 30s (and he was only 35 when he died in exile). Can anyone else find anything? WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:45, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm. Maybe I am no expert on the subject, it is clear the pederasty is not approriate here either way. Even if it was I would opose the LGBT cat here, since pederatsy advocacy is generally rejected by the LGBT community, NAMBLA the most famous pederast advocacy group is widely shunned, though they try to present themselves as the "cutting edge" of the grouping. I wont remove the cat again though since I don't need any more abuse from Jeffpw for the next few days. Lobojo (talk) 18:54, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Lobojo, I don't understand your objection. If a 17-year-old male has sex with another male of exactly his own age, then you don't think the 17-year-old should be considered gay or bisexual, on the grounds that if a 50-year-old male has sex with a 17-year-old male, then it's pederasty or pedophilia? What exactly do you call a 17-year-old male who has sex with other teenaged males? WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:56, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm just argeeing with you and pointing out that based on the current information that we have we cannot say. But also adding that pederasty is certainly *not* the correct language, since this is rape. I do not know but if it is forced he isnt called a pederast. That much I know. Lobojo (talk) 21:02, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

So what exactly does your above statement, "I would opose the LGBT cat here" mean, if it doesn't mean that you don't think Mwanga was LGBT? Am I supposed to interpret "I would opose the LGBT cat here" as meaning "I would oppose the history of pederasty cat here"? WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:52, 31 December 2007 (UTC)