Rue and Lue, two South African males, sparked a social media frenzy by posting images of themselves kissing beneath Ghana’s renowned Independence Arch.
The couple, dressed in synchronised red clothes, posed fondly at one of Ghana’s most iconic national monuments. One of the males, who has light complexion, wore an oversized red and black tailored suit, while his dark-skinned buddy wore a red leather jacket, matching shorts, and a red shirt.
Their daring exhibition of adoration beneath the monument, widely considered as a symbol of national pride and liberty, has elicited a wide range of reactions from netizens.
Mixed reactions.
Some online users complimented the couple for bravely advocating for LGBTQ+ visibility in a region where homosexuality is still widely stigmatised and criminalised.
Many others, however, expressed significant opposition—not to their sexual orientation, but to the perceived disrespect of a national emblem.
Critics contended that the Independence Arch is more than just a tourist attraction; it is an important cultural and historical site.
This is demeaning to our nation’s culture. This has nothing to do with homophobia, but rather your blatant disdain for the people of our country. Why not capture these images in Saudi Arabia? Or Qatar?
wrote one user.
Saminiwaa, a media figure, chimed in on the debate with a post that acknowledged the importance of LGBTQ+ rights activism but questioned the execution.
I wholeheartedly support the struggle against homophobia and the movement for equal rights. But this is not the way to go about things. There is a difference between raising awareness and breaching legal or cultural boundaries. Disregarding rules or desecrating national symbols does not help the cause; it risks generating additional resentment and making it tougher for those who are truly harmed.
She wrote.
She continued:
Advocacy should encourage understanding, not elicit unneeded resistance. We need smarter and more courteous strategies to create change.
The matter took another turn when some users claimed that the conduct was part of a state-sponsored effort to gain international LGBTQ+ help and publicity. One comment, which referenced the monument’s visibility and the expected presence of security, suggested ulterior reasons for the photoshoot.
I believe this is a government-sponsored operation designed to draw aid and support from the LGBTQ+ community. How else can we explain the fact that this behaviour occurred within a defined security surveillance zone? Guess who uploaded it… KOD,
