AA, latin and arabic cultures tend to be very machismo biased, looking down upon effeminate or gay men---kinda like old skool Euro cultures did in the US and Europe.
Ok.
But, when you have a culture where the women are the primary parents (this beginning with the baby boomer generation), you started to see more men exhibit feminine mannerisms.
1. What makes these inherently feminine mannerisms? I've never seen any evidence that women are inherently more manipulative or passive-aggressive than men, let alone evidence that they are this way such that it cannot be explained by historical contingencies (e.g., culture) -- the occasional kunt aside, that is. Your best bet to find actual evidence for such a claim would be sociobiology: the realm where intrinsic (biological) differences between the sexes are postulated and given a scientific glean. But it seems to me attempts to objectify fuzzy, subjective notions like "passive aggressiveness" would be laughable.
That leaves us with your intuitions and a bit of pop psychology; not the sort of stuff we use to find out how the world really is, I'm afraid.
2. While your claim that "feminine" traits (as you define them) have increased in prevalence among African American men, I'm not sure what evidence you could use to back it up. You can't exactly measure eye rolls per minute (
). You also need to square it with your claim that AA culture is machismo-based: is it machismo-based but less so than before due to the increase in feminine qualities among AA men, or what?
I dug up a random clinical psychological meta-analysis of Bem Sex-Role Inventory (BSRI) and Personal Attributes Questionnaire (PAQ) scores from 1973-1994, apparently widely accepted measures of gender stereotyped traits. The results indicate that both men and women have become more masculne over the time period in question, but especially women (I'll leave out the explanations, which you are free to read at the link below). Granted, the study focuses on college kids and hence underrepresents African Americans. But, absent contrary evidence, it is still
prima facie support for the negation of your claim about the feminization of dem dere neeguls.
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF02766650?LI=true#page-2It's been said that black folk are the "canary in the cave" or the barometer for what will happen for the rest of the country
If African Americans were canaries in the cave with regard to the issue of feminization, we'd expect less homophobia in their communities. Here's why: you claimed that due to single motherhood, African American culture has an increased prevalence of feminine traits; the increased frequency of these traits in turn ought to lead to less homophobia (at least, I would think so). Since African American culture has more single motherhood than white cultures, it follows that all things being equal it ought to have less homophobia than such cultures.
Yet that isn't the case; instead, the opposite is true. So perhaps AA culture is the opposite of a bellweather, at least in a lot of ways: it retains some of the nasty features white cultures are abandoning (or have abandoned), (homophobia, low levels of education and wealth, more crime, a relative failure to homogenize, and so forth.)
FINALLY, though interesting, I'm not sure of the relevance of your comments in the first place since we're discussing homosexuality -- a genetic predisposition -- not merely feminine traits and their relative prevalence in this or that community.