Well I can somewhat understand the assumptions, but they are just that…assumptions.
But it has been discussed but ultimately can never really be proven, that Carver was castrated at a very young age by his adoptive white parents around the age of 7. The reason for this is because they did not want Carver to de-flower their white daughter when he hit puberty and have some lil mix nigglet churr’in tarnishing their pristine white southern image.
Personally I do believe he was castrated. History shows through out the slave trade THOUSANDS of men and boys were castrated. It was noted that black slaves were castrated “based on the assumption that the blacks had an ungovernable sexual appetite.”
Many times the master wanted boys to work in the main house and the castrated boys fetched a higher price by the slave traders. Many slave codes or laws also noted castration as punishment for certain offenses based on the severity.
So if he was castrated, how could he be homosexual or heterosexual? There is little to no documentation of Carver’s personal life.
Okay I understand you can be homo, hetero, or bi-sexual in mind and not have any sexual contact; however, if his scrotum or his penis and scrotum was severed at around age 7 and there is no record of his personal desires or him expressing any interest in males or females…Why then is he listed on many LGBT sites concerning black homosexual historical figures?
I feel this is re-writing or making up history. I feel these LGBT sites are falsely characterizing or putting Carver in a sexual classification box as to lay claim to another world genius who was on “OUR” team.
We have an abundance of great LGBT historical figures alive and dead that we don’t need to make one up. What do you think?