“Let The Gays Promote their Gay-ness” says Vernon Witter (December 10, 1979, Gleaner article)

“Let The Gays Promote their Gay-ness” says Vernon Witter (December 10, 1979, Gleaner article)

The following article appeared in the Daily Gleaner at the time dated December 10, 1979 some 19 years to the day prior to the formation of Jamaica Forum for Lesbians Allsexuals and Gays (JFLAG). At that time also the Gay Freedom Movement was the active voice even then public commentators were actively talking about GLTBQ issues. That kind of discourse now seems lowered and certainly with the availability of instant communications we ought to do more. This was filed in the archives of the GFM now held by it's founder Mr. Larry Chang since 2010 after they were successfully transfered to him in The United States. Pity the condition of the archives however when they were held here in Jamaica by JFLAG were not properly managed and kept in good condition. I am pleased they are now in the rightful owner's possession.

The article reads:
So the gays in Jamaica have decided that its time they come out of the closets. Well! Well! Well! Recently they have been rather reticent in jumping on the bandwagon of liberation movements. Now they are coming out into the open writing letters to the press and holding open discussions of homosexuality. They have even set up their own organization called the Gay Freedom Movement of Jamaica.

It is surprising that they took so long to get into the act. Jamaicans are known for catching on last to whatever is going on in the big cities of the world. The ayatollah had his followers here who held hostage the managers of C.M.P and of Cornwall dairies. When the hijacking of airlines was popular we had the hijacking of JOS buses. Now at long last the gays have made a start to defend their status.

Raise Gay consciousness

The aim of Gay Freedom Movement according to that body is to raise consciousness and awareness among members of the gay community in Jamaica and among the general public. How the Gay Freedom Movement plans to go about raising the consciousness and awareness of what it calls the general public, no doubt meaning the heteroes is not clear. Perhaps there will be more letters to the press, more public discussions, maybe even hold parades as their counterparts do in the big cities abroad.

We’ll just have to wait and see. One of the aims of the Gay Freedom Movement should be the decriminalizing of homosexuality. This is one of the absurd laws still on the statue books of Jamaica. What goes on behind closed doors of consenting adults has nothing to do with the state. Obviously the law must protect citizens from being forced into sex acts against their wills. Juveniles must also be protected. But if two men or two women wish of their own free will to do their own thing, let them. The absurdity gets worse when homosexuals are sent to prison.

Coals to Newcastle?

Decriminalizing homosexuality is not the same as approving it, as some will be quick to misunderstand. It is nothing more than keeping the state out of snooping in the private affairs of consenting adults. Homosexuality should no more be a crime than should prostitution.

The right to resent
The Gay Liberation Movement in the United States, Britain and other big countries has gone a long way in promoting the term they chose for themselves, that is gay. I suppose they have a right to resent being called faggots, limp wrists, fairies or whatever in the same way blacks resent being called niggers or Jews, kikes or Italians, wops. Let the locals promote their gay-ness if they will. Why shouldn’t they? Those of us who profess to have Christian charity in our hearts, while not condoning what it patently unnatural can at least try to understand their aberration and offer them our sympathy.
End

Peace and tolerance

H

Response to the Shelter issue from a concerned advocate

In a response to the coverage of the Homeless MSM shelter issues on this blog as it relates to Jamaica AIDS Support for Life mainly in the post named The Homeless Project, the meeting and more. Here is a response to the issues from another point of view that of the concerned advocate. He wanted to share his own views and in fairness to allow all views contending on the issue I have allotted space so to do.

Concerned advocate writes

1. While everyone agrees that the set up of such a project was a great idea, the processing of it was not fully analyzed before implementation. The former E.D. should take huge credit for the funding supplied etc but she did not come up with the idea on her own. I don't see it highlighted in many quarters that the last GLABCOM Steering Committee also pushed for such an idea. In fact, not many people know that initially a spot in the rural area was being targeted for the programme and so when the grounds of the office ended up facilitating the programme, it caught a lot of people off-guard...including the neighbours who the E.D. did not--nor the co-ordinators of the programme--even do the curtesy of alerting them to such.

2. Initially, the programme worked until the first set of inhabitants felt that the entire grounds was open to them to flaunt certain risky behaviour, with no regard for the two neighbours who--and I must stress--are NOT affiliated with JASL in any way and have persons who frequent them who were/are not gay or necessarily gay-friendly et al. Many of the guys started in a manner of caution until they became 'relaxed' and that is when their behaviour became more and more 'erratric'. For example, some would wear women's high heels in broad daylight on the compound, sashay the hips in a very obvious effeminate manner or hurl expletives at each other loudly so that no matter what, others must hear them (i.e, 'you girl, come suck out mi pussy, ect).

3. As this behaviour unfurled, the former E.D. was clearly encouraging of this behaviour and that is the main source of her popularity with them. I have spent a lot of time with her so I know that she champions the rights of gays being freely who they are but I questioned her on this point many times after the programme started. This is a tricky topic to get into but the fact is that the organization does not cater to homosexual needs only and as gay-friendly as it is, the specific clientele in the programme were not stressed on that enough and she openly encouraged it. This was a huge vexing point and may very well have been the initial step in what eventually 'forced' her to leave the organization.


4. The micro-management of the programme eroded quickly because of a few points. The most obvious was the number of boys (12) that were cramped in the unfurnished (initially), three bedroom house. Now, anyone reading this section will find that hard to believe but its true. With such a high number, the inner-fighting was bound to happen swiftly and while the handlers of the programme tried their best to calm them (morning prayers, strict counselling, meetings, ect) the boys needed more than that. Now, what more they needed is a question I'm sure everyone tried to answer but no clear disciplinary action worked, not even being banished from the house as they would resurface any way. In many ways, the organization must shoulder blame for this because if the foundation of a programme is optimistic at best and shaky at worst, then it is bound to fail. Alas, the programme had run its course long before the official end came.


5. Which leads to another point: the purpose of the programme. At times, the former E.D. herself seemed at a loss to explain what was actually being done. The boys in the programme, lured by her easy charm, eventually decided that they would 'run' it themselves. So, the organization could barely get them to volunteer. They ran up the light bill, have visitors way into the night, parade themselves loudly and disturbed the neighbours...all of this while staff members looked the other way. What the former E.D. did not see coming was the growing opposition to the running of the programme, spearheaded by the neighbours who, while friendly, were not willing to put their own safety in jeopardy just so that the boys could sleep at night. The E.D. began to get bogged down by concerns she apparently hadn't thought of earlier: security issues/ conflict resolution/ methods of selection, ect. By the end of December, I'm sure it became apparent to her that the end was near. The boys did not help matters by openly soliciting heterosexuals that visited the compound among other things. I want to stress here that while there were a few well-behaved guys in the programme, there were quite a few who exuded self-destructive behaviour that would make any liberal blush. The former E.D. took too long to weed them out and that was a critical factor to her demise.


6. With her gone, the programme sputtered until it ended. It was at that point that a lot of the guys realised the value of the programme and I'm sure if they could do it over again they would behave better. The organization has failed them in this regard and so has all the hangers-on who came around as their friends...where are they now in a time of need? Who will take in these boys in need? Of course, they continue to hang around ---a situation the organization needs to monitor but that is the least they can do. With the demise of GLABCOM and the lack of programmes and office personnel being dedicated to tasks, it is left to see how the boys will be assisted in the future. As for the organization itself, it is still trying to regroup but that process remains in tatters. It's at a critical juncture and the next few months will be critical.

Examining Homosexuality - Vincent Tulloch writes back in February 4, 1978

In an old Gleaner piece published on the date indicated above this columnist at the time introduced in essence The Gay Freedom Movement, Jamaica’s first gay organization as then ran by Mr. Lawrence Chang aka Larry Chang who now resides overseas. In a bid to capture past articles and relevant commentary to show how early the Jamaican LGBT experience has been enhanced or bedeviled by robust debate, homophobic remarks and unfair commentary here is another in the series of flashback posts. (see the flashback tag for more)

The piece was entitled “Examining Homosexuality” here are excerpts of the original article as was discovered in the old Gay Freedom Movement’s archives in 2009.
Mr. Tulloch wrote ………

Mr. Lawrence Chang’s public admission of a gay organization The Gay Freedom Movement will certainly send ripples through the society. It has come at a time when the society is trying to see just where morality stands on its agenda. The controversy sparked by the Jamaica Teachers Association’s resolution on unwed mothers is an indication of the battle Mr. Chang will have to face on the grounds of morality, the strength of the gay community in Jamaica is unknown so the political mileage to be gained is uncertain, the Gay Freedom Movement will have to go it alone now that it has shown it’s head…………

If I may return to the Gay Freedom Movement debut I must say it has picked the wrong banner to hoist. I cannot see the impact homosexuals can make on the island’s birth rate which stands at about 61,000 per annum If homosexuality was to be encouraged as the only civilized means of birth control………..

It comes as a surprise to me that the GFM did not take issue with the law that forbids the practice of homosexuality both in private and public places. The act is illegal even if it is done in private.
In my opinion homosexuals would probably get a more sympathetic ear if their organization in its first public comment had challenged some aspects of The Offences against the Persons Act Chapter 268, sections 69, 70 and 72. In section 72 particular reference is made to the male but is silent on the female……

Homosexuality has long been a very emotional and controversial subject and is discussed in a hush hush tone with a certain amount of fear. Even in the developed countries where it is accepted the controversy still rages.

Personally I believe that as long as an individual reaches the age of consent legally set by the state what he or she does in private in regard to sex is his personal business and none of the state. I am strongly against any one procuring children or forcing anyone into an act in which he does not believe, such offences may be treated as a criminal act punishable by a fine or imprisonment as the court sees fit. The Gay Freedom Movement of Jamaica is here and it will be interesting to see what its next move will be. The strong religious influence which at times is used to cloud issues will no doubt be organized now. This will be very strong especially in the rural parts where the Pentecostal have a strong grip on the minds of the people.
The relatively high illiteracy rate in the country will certainly play a role when the subject is being debated. Those who are less intolerant and do not subscribe to the aims of the movement need not panic there is nothing to fear. What we need to do is to take a very rational and realistic approach to the subject and it is hoped that the gays will not attempt to convert the whole nation because they will lose the support of most Jamaicans.

The Jamaican society has treated homosexuals with contempt which reveals our Victorian approach to sensitive issues which affects several hundred persons several of whom have no control of what they are.

We do not need any “Burn a Gay for Christ” slogans. The GFM has thrown a challenge to our much reverted democratic way of life.
This issue could be a test of our ability to tolerate minority opinion.
-END-

My two cents:
So this shows a historical perspective on just where the mindset was as far as public commentary was concerned nothing much has changed in 32 years except for the language and prescriptions of ways to execute LGBT people following on the church’s move to have signs that say “Burn a Gay for Christ” maybe this could be a hint as to where the dancehall community got the “Bun Out” (burn out or strong opposition) concept for the types of murder music over the years.

This was one of the entry points publicly for the Gay Freedom Movement a historical milestone lost to many in our present GLBTQ experience. I wanted to publish this in time for Black History Month but had some difficulty finding the original article as I remembered it from a cursory glance a couple years ago.

Remember these readers.

Peace and tolerance

H

Dutch protest after gays are denied communion

Gay rights activists in the Netherlands staged a protest yesterday over a Catholic church’s policy of denying gay people communion.

Several hundred people went to Mass at a church in ’s-Hertogenbosch and left shouting and singing when it was announced that the priest, who had been warned about the demonstration, had decided not to give communion.

Some protestors, wearing pink robes and wigs, handed out pink wafers and kissed.

The issue began several weeks ago when a nearby church barred an openly gay man from taking communion. The unnamed man had won a competition to be carnival prince in a nearby town.

According to the BBC, he said that he would accept being denied from taking communion if all other sinners were also barred.

The Netherlands legalised civil partnerships for both straight and gay couples in 1998. In 2001, it became the first country in the world to legalise gay marriage.

Capleton’s Dichotomy: Perception vs. reality in lyrics

(XNEWS site has been down for a while so hard copies of the issues were scanned)

With the headlines blaring in papers, on blogs and entertainment publications worldwide of Capleton’s woes in the United States and the cancellations of his concerts because of protests he has apologised to his fans for not being able to deliver. He was scheduled to perform in San Diego and Oakland California but was met with protest by GLAAD, Gay and Lesbians Alliance Against Deformation and the LA Lesbian and Gay Centre who asked promoters not to book the artist.


The Xnews quoted a Moss Jacobs who is said to be the promoter for Raggamuffin Festival as saying “We can’t put people on the show who are advocating violence against any group of people”
Other promoters after seeing this cancellation followed suit and axed the artist, his management was said to be shocked as they said he has not performed any anti gay songs due to his new lease on his music that of not inciting violence to any mankind and would no longer give gay issues any promotion. “We can prove that Capleton has been giving good performances without making any mention of gays,” his manager Claudette Kemp is quoted as saying in the Xnews dated February 25 – March 3 issue.

The Jamaica Star in the meantime has published parts of a statement in the February 27, 2010 edition from his management as well in a piece entitled Capleton’s Management Hits Back at Gay Rights Groups. The article basically spoke of his sadness at not being able to perform,
“They have once again used their strong arm tactics to intimidate concert promoters and venue owners, putting misinformation in the public about the artiste to further their own agendas. Capleton is very disappointed that his many fans who cross all races and creeds have not been able too see him at his scheduled shows in California this past week.

He has performed at the same venues and festivals over the last two years with no incident bringing a message of love for all through Reggae music, the barrage of protest from these groups is unwarranted and has been addressed many times in media in the past. The artiste has a forgiving heart for what has been done to him and will continue on the high path. Capleton will continue to spread a positive and spiritual message through music to the four corners of the earth and continue to stand firm that universal love can unite all mankind.” Released by Capleton’s manager Claudette Kemp

The trouble Capleton faces is that even if he may have not uttered a single word in a literal sense as other artistes have prescribing how gays should be dealt with his “Bun Out” philosophy and rhetoric may be also interpreted as just what the other more tersely worded songs have said over the years such as Buju Banton’s Boom Bye Bye and Beenieman’s Battyman Fi Dead songs in previous years. Perception is reality in this case I feel as many of Capleton’s performances are highly charged and the audience go into fits of frenzy when he delivers the songs such as Bun Out a Chi Chi (Batty dem a fuck and a suck too much Pussy) as could be interpreted to mean no to gay life or gays Anal sex they are having and he includes men who have oral sex with women and condemns the act.

He is one of the few remaining DJs who condemn oral sex (or Bowing) in his songs as many DJs have actually made a u-turn on that subject and some even have gone as far as to promote oral sex in their songs but from a receiving point of view.

The fits of frenzy as alluded to before also has scenes of persons igniting the pressurised spray canisters while spraying them to produce a steady flame as a symbol of burning out the offending agent or issue as described in the songs being performed at the time and I am sure that if any gay person was ever found nearby then god knows what would have become of them. Unfortunately his management out of convenience may see it as just his personal opinion being expressed in strong sentiments without the actual offending words but the public for all intents and purposes see it way more literal than that and will easily go from words to action in no time at all. The threat therefore is real despite the absence of the offending lyrics when compared to the aforementioned artistes.

Beenieman’s All Battyman Fi Dead (all gays are to die) clearly prescribes that copper and lead (gunshots) must be given to gay men but noticeably he doesn’t touch the lesbian community. The first refrain in the song says it:

Weh yuh nuffi do ? ----------------- Fuck Bottom (what you not to do? ......... fuck ass or anal sex)
Weh yuh nuffi do ? ----------------- Suck Pum Pum (have oral sex with women)

Bun Out a Chi Chi song by Capleton which is one of his signature anti gay pieces out of several others may be a subtle way to say kill the gays as his management seems to have overlook that interpretations are relative to the listener and this attempt by them to water down the thing to make him out to be this righteous person under the Rastafarian banner is not working, at least for me as I don’t buy.

I have witnessed live shows with him and other artistes who spew anti gay songs the audience is attuned to every word he says that relates to harming gays and lesbians they respond simultaneously and with one voice with some brandishing weapons at some events including guns. So the intentions are clear as day in the songs when performed by him without saying them in so many words.

see Sizzla's interview in Zimbabwe where he was to perform for President Mugabe's Birthday

Peace and tolerance


H

Further audio commentry:

Find more audio posts like this on GLBTQ Jamaica Members' LINKUP, send an email to lgbtevent@gmail.com to be approved

Scroll to the title that matches this post title double click or press play once highlighted to hear the audio response) (ignore snapvine references as they are now closed {March 31st 2010} as recorded then as my original audio hosts)

or

Capleton's Dichotomy Perceptions vs Reality in lyrics by glbtqja

NB snapvine was closed in March 2010 all audio is now hosted on Soundcloud

Reggae artistes blacklisted

BY STEVEN JACKSON

GERMANY, Europe's largest economy, has blacklisted 11 dancehall albums between 2008 and January 2010 this year because of their homophobic and violent content.

Albums by Sizzla, Elephant Man, Bounty Killer, Capleton, TOK and Baby Cham are on this list, or "index", compiled by the German Federal Department for Media Harmful to Young Persons (BPjM) Bundesprüfstelle für jugendgefährdende Medien in German.

Stakeholders counter that up to 35 dancehall albums or songs had been blacklisted since the BPjM's conception including Legalise It by reggae icon Peter Tosh, which was later removed.

The BPjM told the Sunday Observer that it is illegal to advertise these albums or to sell them to minors in Germany, with additional restrictions placed on their sale and distribution. "Breach of ...[the] indexing is punishable by a fine or imprisonment," stated Corinna Bochmann, BPjM spokesperson, in response to Sunday Observer queries.

Ten of the 11 albums were not only considered "harmful to young people" but also contained violent lyrics, according to the BPjM, with lyrics that incite hatred and propagate to kill homosexuals. The BPjM indexed these albums following complaints by certain groups such as the German gay lobby. "The BPjM can only act on the request of other administrative institutions, not by itself. Once an official request has been filed, the BPjM is obliged to act," stated Bochmann.

Ellen Köhlings, editor of German reggae magazine Riddim told the Sunday Observer that dancehall is ironically filliping the gay lobby's agenda. "These lyrics violate German laws which gives the lobbyists legal grounds to successfully censor music and gain media exposure," Köhlings said.

"The gay lobby is looking for cheap forwards just like some artistes look for a cheap forward," she stated.

Köhlings added that artistes could compromise by maintaining their anti-gay stance but avoid the use of violence. "At the end of the day there are much more urgent things to talk about than homophobia, and artistes should leave out, in my mind, the violent bashing of gays."

Riddim magazine has at times assumed the role of dancehall mediator, as the industry has no lobby in Germany: "We have been doing everything we can to restore the image of Jamaica, but we can do only so much. In the long run Jamaica needs to take action," Köhlings noted.

Violent anti-gay lyrics have been a feature of dancehall music for over 15 years with the Buju Banton classic Boom Bye Bye credited as its progenitor. The international gay lobby, in response, has petitioned the German government to ban shows and the sale of records by these artistes. Last year, Banton and Beenie Man were yanked from shows due to the lobby in the US, Australia and New Zealand. Local gay organisation J-Flag told the Sunday Observer that Jamaican deejays are not being unfairly attacked by the international gay community.

"Their music promotes violence, hate and hardship for members of a community that at no time has threatened or hurt them in any way. This is an unwarranted and unprovoked assault on a set of people who have a right to exist," stated Jason McFarlane, J-Flag programmes manager. He added that dancehall artistes who continue to perform "hate-filled music" must be held accountable. "The influence of music on any society must not be under-estimated. What must be understood is that artistes have a right to express what they feel but also must be held responsible for the possible impact they can have on people. Music, in particular Reggae and Dancehall, is universal and so we must be aware of the wide reach of the possible influence of any one artiste."

No Immediate Legal protection for your image captured in a public place?

Here is the promised follow up to the blog post on the legal ramifications coming out of a protest at an event in Kingston on February 12, 2010 as to the concerns of photo taking in a public place and their possible use or misuse in a defamatory way. Photos were taken of patrons and car license numbers that were parked outside the venue and it is not yet known if they have been used but as a precautionary measure legal advice was sought on the matter and here is basically the understanding arrived at after the consultation.

There is no law under our statute that can hinder anyone to capture photographs in a public place it is a very delicate area of the law, one does not have a right to ones image if it is taken in a public space without the subjects consent, the law offers no protection from having an image of a person or thing occupying that space. If the photo is used in any way to defame the subjected person(s) involved then under common law there is recourse.

At best a letter or warning of sorts from an attorney of the complainant can be sent to the photographers or the suspected individuals advising them that any use of the photos that were taken without the permission of the subjects would lead to action without any legal recourse to them. This is an option that can be reserved. In France for example members of the public have a right to their image so the photos basically could have been ordered destroyed and the relevant actions taken against the parties involved in capturing the shots.

Jamaican citizens however have the right to protection from defamation, in a common law scenario the court will have to afford protection from being viewed in a derogatory light, one is entitled to their reputation but one cannot protect a reputation that one does not have, the common law however does not allow for others to intrude in person’s privacy.

So the only option in the initial stage is a warning letter through an attorney advising them accordingly that one is aware of the photos captured without consent and the possible legal actions if said photos are used to defame any of the subjected parties.

So much for rights eh?

So as it turns out there is a major loop hole here in terms of personal safety still, what if years down the road these photos turn up then one would have to use legal recourse to stop any defamatory action. The law needs to offer more protection to citizens’ rights and privacy than just after the fact when my image or that of my property is captured and stored somewhere and can be drawn upon to be used without my knowledge or consent or where I can’t act even under suspicion that my image is stored somewhere to have it destroyed. This is a sad state of affairs though legally.

Peace and tolerance.

H

Comment | Copy This