Could you kindly deliver this letter to Mr Mullings ........ from an Average, Straight, Christian, Labourite.

Here is an interesting piece that has been making the rounds in social networking pages and groups, this is not new in terms of a response to the Leviticusal rebuttals from the church on homosexuality normally leaving out the other abominations and dishonestly zooming in on the same sex reference while also leaving out the historical context the book was written. In light of the Bible totting MP Clive Mullings at a recent JLP function. See for more on that here with the Sodom trope:

Mullings slams Simpson Miller over buggery law review plan
'No nation that seeks to move away from God's words can succeed'

If sin is sin then why is homosexuality made to be a greater sin than others? 

And since we have no record of Jesus himself condemning homosexuality are we sure that it is a sin in certain contexts?

Have a read of the piece and arrive at your own conclusion.

Dear Mr Mullings,

 

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your speech, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, 

I simply remind them that Leviticus
18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination... End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them.

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighbouring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Haitians, but not Cubans. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Cubans?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in
Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual unseemliness
- Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offence.
4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odour for the Lord - Lev.1:9.. The problem is my neighbours. They claim the odour is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbour who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2. clearly states
he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the Police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there'degrees'of abomination?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle- room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/ polyester blend). He also tends to
curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16.
Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can help.

Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Yours Truly,

The Average, 

Straight, 

Christian, 

Labourite.
**COPIED**

ENDS

Raymond Pryce ridiculed by JLP supporters on the strength on the queen of Jamaica comment made by Mrs Simpson Miller during the leaderhsip debate recently. 

What little LGBT support for the JLP has been dwindling fast and with photos like that above just by observation since the pronouncements by Daryl Vaz on Adam on Steve, also mayor of Kingston and candidate for West Kingston taking Bruce Golding's place also joined the fray and the recipient of this letter enclosed Clive Mullings also joined in. Very serious thinking is missing though in regards to the proposed conscience vote, while Mrs Simpson Miller may have our interest at heart on the face of it I continue to say there is method to madness and a conscience vote may very well put a complete stop to the agitation on LGBT rights etc. Of course the JLP has been attempting to capitalize on the stance taken by Mrs Miller, will it lead to a victory for them? Here is a video remix of both leader comments and a digitally voiced commentator suggesting a theocratic stance in governance:

also see: Has PNP received financing from gay community?- Vaz says JLP confident of securing 34-38 seats in Dec 29 poll


Mullings slams Simpson Miller over buggery law review plan - 'No nation that seeks to move away from God's words can succeed'


from Mark Wignall: PNP to review buggery law when?

‘Idiot plan that!’ - Many Jamaicans against Buggery Law review ...............

Peace and tolerance

H

Should Jamaica repeal its buggery law to maintain British aid? .......

The Gleaner's Have Your Say Blog has posed a question (see below) on the David Cameron statement matter and the withdrawal of aid to countries who host anti gay laws. On this International Day of Tolerance this question should rest in our minds I suggest as we try to make sense of the furor after the statement by UK Prime Minister David Cameron's supposed threat to withdraw aid from commonwealth countries who have anti sodomy laws on their books. Here is the question and some answers including my response:  

Should Jamaica repeal its buggery law to maintain British aid?

Since the British prime minister, David Cameron recently stated that Britain would begin withholding aid from governments that do not reform legislation banning homosexuality; it seems that the question of whether or not Jamaica should repeal its buggery law has become an even greater source of contention.

Mr. Cameron made it clear that countries being given British aid should either “adhere to proper human rights” or face the consequences.

This has not gone down well with scores of Jamaicans who believe that this is a blatant attempt by Britain to force sovereign states to conform to a British perspective. However, others believe that it is Britain’s right to give or withhold their aid for whatever reason they deem significant.


What is your opinion? Do you think Jamaica should repeal its buggery law in order to maintain British aid? Have your say…

My answer I hope they approve and publish was:

Yes it should be repealed or at least decriminalized but with CAREFUL and INTERACTIVE unemotional discussions between all or most of the contending parties and the public, the misconceptions about male homosexual life in particular are just the tip of the iceberg that clouds the issues whilst driving homophobia that need resolving, if not the opposing sides will always be at each other without any middle ground.

Issues such as:

The CLEAR demarcation between consenting male gay/bi men versus perceived predatory behaviors towards children

The fact that most same sex pedophiles are in fact not homosexual after psychiatric evaluation but very much hetero with deep issues troubling them.

We believe homosexuality is illegal in Jamaica when it is not but in fact it is BUGGERY/ANAL sex that is which also practiced by some heterosexual couples although in the minority.

Not all same gender loving men practice anal penetration, there are some who find it unpleasureable believe it or not but these days anal sex is not as untidy as years decades gone by, some pharmacies locally have become enlightened and sell cleansing agents quite openly in some locations that assist persons who practice anal sex in cleanliness and safer sex. Please do not judge homosexuals by simply the way we have sex, there is more to us than that.

All of the above (and more but too long to list) need proper ventilating in simple language so that the ordinary man understands it then he can determine how he feels about the issues afterwards
The big stick approach however by the UK is NOT the way to go as that will only infuriate Jamaicans and we don’t like to be dictated to

Finally if we are to burrow the Irish model as is proposed by the advocacy structure then we can also include the child defilement provision so as to ease any concerns by child rights advocates and the public have have that freeing up buggery will cause increased child abuse, so as in order to protect children as well as they are of the least resistance for abusers. Homosexual acts were illegal in Ireland up until the summer of 1993 and further amendments in 2006. The Offences against the Person Act lifted the ban, and declared the age of consent to be 17, the same as that for acts between heterosexuals. I suggest we look at this example and probably tweak it to our liking.

The Irish child defilement clause is clear in the ages of consent and the punishment(s).

3.— (1) Any person who engages in a sexual act with a child who is under the age of 17 years shall be guilty of an offence and shall, subject to subsection (3), be liable on conviction on indictment—

(a) to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years, or

(b) if he or she is a person in authority, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years.

(2) Any person who attempts to engage in a sexual act with a child who is under the age of 17 years shall be guilty of an offence and shall, subject to subsection (4) be liable on conviction on indictment—

(a) to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years, or

(b) if he or she is a person in authority, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 4 years.

Peace and tolerance

Mr. H

Other answers of course were as expected not in support of the issue of repealing the buggery law. For example:

Go to the site and add your voice: HAVE YOUR SAY

also hear my audio commentary concerns about how we have skewed the tolerance calls, do we really have any credibility to ask the nation for such at this time?

International Day for Tolerance 16.11.11 my concerns of our state by glbtqja3

UPDATE: November 25 I added this comment:

1. GayTimesWatcher says:

   Your comment is awaiting moderation. 
   

   November 25, 2011 at 2:25 am

   New developments, well the Brits have now said aid won’t be cut but redirected and apparently Jamaica was not included but the idea was more so for African countries seeing that they have been very active such as Uganda with the anti gay bill there and Ghana with similar actions towards LGBT people, so I guess we can stop panicking ………… Andrew Mitchell a UK Minister said the policy had been wrongly reported as a threat to cut aid.

   The government has confirmed plans to redirect aid away from overseas governments who fail to recognise human rights, but has said it will still ensure aid reaches those in need.

   Some African states reacted angrily to Secretary of State for International Development Andrew Mitchell’s comments that aid would be redirected away from governments to other bodies, believing that overall aid would be cut unless anti-gay laws were repealed.

   In October, he (Mitchell) said: “Taking money away from Governments does not mean you do not support that country. You find other mechanisms for trying to help the poorest with food, education and health care as well as building up business structures.”

   Several Commonwealth governments condemned the action as an attempt to influence domestic policy and introduce gay rights against countries’ wishes.

   Mitchell made the statement to a meeting at which Peter Tatchell, the Kaleidoscope Trust, Stonewall, Justice for Gay Africans and the International HIV/AIDS Alliance were present. Mr Mitchell also said: “We have been very clear on this – where we think Governments do not have respect for human rights, it will have a big effect on the way we carry out this funding. Taking money away from Governments does not mean you do not support that country. You find other mechanisms for trying to help the poorest with food, education and health care as well as building up business structures..

   It is not about taking money away from countries but finding other mechanisms to help them. We take a very clear line. In a number of countries in Africa that discrimination against homosexuality has concerned us. In Malawi when they kicked out the British High Commissioner we looked at the whole nature of that relationship.

   We were aware there had been some expenditure by the President. We were aware there had been some lack of human rights – the intention to criminalize lesbianism – all took a part in my decision to stop funding the government centrally.”

   Source: Pink News UK and glbtqja.wordpress.com

Peace and tolerance

H

Meet Gays Halfway But ... (Gleaner Letter) ........ what!, homosexuality is learnt behaviour? PART II

In part 1 we saw the original letter and the trope she the Boulevard Baptist Church member postured to the Gleaner. She went on to stress that homosexuality is learnt behaviour. A member of my Facebook group GLBTQ Jamaica Chat sought to reply in as respectfully as possible given the undertones of the original letter.


The initial response from the group member was:


"Dear Elvena,I just read your letter published in the Gleaner and as it's a public forum I feel free to comment. You are entitled to your hypothesis but interviewing 50 people doesn't make a study where you can make any real scientific conclusions. Why not leave it to the experts who have sampled thousands? I, as a homosexual, can tell you that I believe that I was born this way. I always knew as long as I could remember that I was different and later on realized what this meant.You are not in a position to define scientifically that homosexuality is an "abnormal behaviour" as you stated.


Homosexuality was removed from the DSM in the 1970's and I tend to get my information from credible sources, though my bias is self-serving, but at least it doesn't demonize people and support perpetuated violence to an entire group of people. You went on to suggest that accepting homosexuality is the same as accepting bestiality, "If we do, we may as well accept bestiality, or plainly put, man and dog.". That's just plain stupid, for want of a better word. As a University graduate you should know better. At least you didn't mention the school you went to, which I presume would be embarrassed that you are an reflection of the quality of their education. I hope it's not UWI.You went on to write, "We can only meet them halfway".


You are not even on the bridge, not even close. To have a meaningful dialogue between groups with opposing views you have to at least recognise that they are both human (bestiality references don't help) and that they are cognizant and coherent ( you wrote "Like any abnormal behaviour, such as bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, etc., homosexuality falls in a group of deviant behaviours"). When you get to that point, then we can have a conversation based on mutual respect, if not agreement."


 S. Macleish
St. Vincent and the Grenadines


But the letter writer answered and Sean rebutted:


"Hi Sean,

If you are comfortable with what you are doing, then so be it. It is beyond me to know why you always felt that you were homosexual. So you think that you are a born homo. Well well. How abour therapy? Most of the people in the world are heterosexuals so clearly you are different and logically there is therapy for every deviant behaviour. Do you have faily antecedents who are homos?

It is said that the vagina for the most part is very clean. Cleaner than the mouth so it is difficult for me to accept why a man should leave the vagine to insert his penis (which is a part of the sacred gift from God) into the exhaust system of the body that carries all the bacteria and will smell on your penis and hands."
EMAIL ENDS

SEAN'S REPLY

"Elvena,

Your feelings are not fact. I am not going to belabour your feelings about homosexuality because you can't argue with someone who does not deal with facts. Your analogy is erroneous. So to follow your skewed logic, Asia holds 60% of the World's population, so clearly the rest of us non-asians are "different", so what is the therapy for this? Maybe surgery to make us look more Asian?

You did get one thing right about vaginas being clean, so you must have paid attention in your Biology classes at University. Kudos to you. I respect vaginas and some of my closest friends happen to have one. However, you are misguided and misinformed. Homosexuals don't hold the patent on anal sex; heterosexuals partake as well. Also not all homosexuals participate in anal sex. Yes, vaginas are cleaner than a mouth, but what about oral sex? Is it acceptable to insert the sacred penis into a "dirty" mouth or the "dirty" mouth to a vagina? I didn't interview 50 heterosexual people like you did, but from what I have heard, oral sex is quite common.

It sounds like you may have had some experience with anal sex, you wrote,"...a man should leave the vagine to insert his penis (which is a part of the sacred gift from God) into the exhaust system of the body that carries all the bacteria and will smell on your penis and hands". I can offer you some tips here. Your anally receptive partner can douche prior to penetration to wash away all that bacteria, and you should wear a condom on your penis which will protect it from any unwanted smells. As for your hands, well if you don't like the smell then don't insert your fingers into the anus, or simply use soap and water."


Let me know how it works out.
Sean

Where will it end?

Clearly the conflation of homosexuality and supposed unprotected and unprepared anal sex is what drives this homophobic christian elder to produce such putrid hate when God says judge not and you shall not be judged, why are ignorant persons hung up on just homosexuals and the way we have sex? why can't we broaden our minds to the wider tolerance or acceptance of people as people and stop poking through our keyholes or using over active imagination about our sexual activities? As Sean rightly puts it not all gay or bisexual men practice penetrative sex.

We have a long way to go here folks as this letter writer is a symptomatic representation of others like her who are just plain dumb.

Peace and tolerance

H

Continued misconceptions of adult homosexuals being paedophiles

I cannot write enough about this continued twisted belief that we as MSMs and by extension same gender loving individuals are somehow hell bent on transforming pubescent children into homosexuals or force them to commit homosexuals acts without consent. The belief has been allowed to fester over the years in this country and has been hardly challenged by the pro gay movement or advocates for that matter, the tabloid press has been allowed to run roughshod basically through sensationalist stories about supposed gay life in Jamaica, one wonders by reading some of the articles that some of the authors' deep dark fantasies don't find their way in somehow.

In todays Gleaner an article appeared called Lesbianism A Concern for educators and several comments followed on the thread below however one particular comment drew my attention as it seem to have encapsulated all the mostly negative ones there, it read:

by Man of Justice

"People wake up!!! These Sodomites are just the same as pedophiles, rapists and sex offenders in general! They prey on the vulnerability of the young and the innocent children and rob them of sexually normal behaviour for the rest of their lives because of their desire to fulfill their selfish & perverted lusts, not caring about the long term psychological damage they are creating just to satisfy their abnormal short term desires.



Most of them can be found in places where children gather and act friendly towards them in order to entrap the innocent minds! I know all of this because my stepdaughters & their female friends regularly complain to me about these incidents of female to female sexual molestation taking place at their schools & places that they & their other friends go to. They even drive up to them on the road & blatantly make sexual advances towards them!



Whether male or female, homosexuality is wrong, and must not be forced upon our children subtly or otherwise by persons of influence in their schools or anybody else who plays a part in developing their minds. It is well known in Jamaica that the lesbians are not dealt with as harshly as their male? counterparts when found out. Their actions are more tolerated..



We as a country need to weed out these people from positions of influence that they now occupy, especially in areas where the welfare of our children are concerned. If they want to do their foolishness with another grown fool, then that's their business, but whereever our children gather to learn or play, then we need to root them out of these places so that they cannot use their position of authority to influence or coerce our innocent children into joining their morally barren behaviour & lifestyle. Rid our schools of these perverts!!!"

So I asked why do we believe homosexuality is some disease and that we are predatory beasts hell bent on getting into the panties and pants of pubescent children? and I linked my blogs to it, I am expecting mostly negative responses as per usual as I have commented on previous articles but when are we going to get it? here are some previous entries on the subject of paedophilia etc

Ephebophilia or hebephilia refers to the sexual preference for adolescents around 15-19 years of age. Experts use specific terms for age preferences: ephebophilia to refer to the sexual preference for late adolescents, hebephilia to refer the sexual preference for pubescent persons, and pedophilia to refer to the sexual preference for prepubescent persons. The term paedophilia, however, has also been used colloquially to refer broadly to sexual interest in minors, regardless of their level of physical development.



Ephebophilia is not listed as a paraphilia in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR), unlike paedophilia, which is categorized as a disorder in the manual.



Pedophilia or paedophilia has a range of definitions as found in psychology, law enforcement, and the popular vernacular. As a medical diagnosis, it is defined as a psychological disorder in which an adult experiences a sexual preference for prepubescent children.According to the DSM, pedophilia is specified as a form of paraphilia in which a person either has acted on intense sexual urges towards children, or experiences recurrent sexual urges towards and fantasies about children that cause distress or interpersonal difficulty. The disorder is frequently a feature of persons who commit child sexual abuse.



Nicholas Groth is a pioneer in the scientific study of sexual offenders against women and children, who has treated over 3000 child molesters over the course of two decades. A former director of the Sex Offender Program at the Connecticut Department of Corrections, Groth is the author of Men Who Rape: Psychology of the Offender, a work widely regarded as a classic textbook on the psychology of sexual violence.



He concurred in a recent debate on homosexuality vs paedophilia that Homosexuality and homosexual pedophilia are not synonymous. In fact, it may be that these two orientations are mutually exclusive, the reason being that the homosexual male is sexually attracted to masculine qualities whereas the heterosexual male is sexually attracted to feminine characteristics, and the sexually immature child’s qualities are more feminine than masculine. . . . The child offender who is attracted to and engaged in adult sexual relationships is heterosexual. It appears, therefore, that the adult heterosexual male constitutes a greater sexual risk to underage children than does the adult homosexual male.



The general belief in the stereotype that "Homosexuals are dangerous as teachers or youth leaders because they try to get sexually involved with children" or that "Homosexuals try to play sexually with children if they cannot get an adult partner." is very real in our scenario. Another category of persons that has helped to cement this belief are Priests in the christian faith and especially under the Catholic church where several public cases have brought shame to the priesthood.

See: a previous entry from June 2010

Paedophiles and female priests supporters are one?

One other important piece of the puzzle we have also left out everytime there is talk of paedophilia is the reverse, Teleoiphilia which is the erotic or sexual interest in adults usually by teens. Teleiophilia is not restricted by the teleiophile's age but has been slotted at 16 to 19 years as we see in our illegal buses where older men on bus crews have open sexual relations with young girls to include "no panty days" and sex on buses while in transit.

Let us begin to challenge this paedophilia belief levelled against us and separate the issues for clarity and progress.

Here is additional audio from a radio discussion in June 2010

Newstalk Interview on Paedophilia and Issues 01.04.10 by glbtqja



Peace and tolerance



H

That Innswood matter ......

I hesitated in carrying this particular incident as many of you my readers know my stance on when we cause our own behaviour to unravel all kinds of negative energy to ourselves and by extension casting a negative image of an already marginalized grouping to become more entrenched. The eight or so gentlemen in question reside at a house that one or two of them rented in St. Catherine, neighbours have been complaining not of their homosexuality according to the story aired on Television Jamaica recently but of the raucus behaviour, loud music and speeding in the community with their high end vehicles. We all know the battyman bit is somewhere there but for political correctness the last stories carried by the station have been very careful in the wording.

Here are some shots from the newsclip

Policeman pulled his firearm to restrain over zealous residents from attacking the leaving police motorcade with the men aboard
Jeering residents looking on and finding the whole affair funny

Male residents capturing the leaving police jeeps with devices (images captured in a public place by private citizens is legal it is the use of those images after that is of concern)

Police possibly deliberating or commenting in a huddle on the proceedings (love to have been a night-fly there)

Police at the home's entrance

What is undeniable though is the stance the men/divas/girls took they were not afraid and defiant to the end so to speak and even looked like they were about to wreck shop (or as we say in colloquial terms "block it") if they could when the residents heckled them as they left in the Jeep (see pic below), if it were a case of self defense by the men after an invasion it would have been so right but be that as it may not have been it ended pretty well, the professionalism of the police whether due to the presence of the televison cameras is to be commended.

They have since been released and the vehicle that was towed away by the cops also returned, they however have been cautious not to return to the house despite some belongings remaining to be collected.

Please let us be so careful people in how we also conduct ourselves wherever we are it may go against us.

Peace and tolerance

H

Some Poll results ........

So from my sister blog GLBTQJamaica on blogger the following poll results so far based on stepped up voting and re-arranging the poll locations on the page is encouraging as now you can see them and able able to cast your view.

The interpretations are just my views please view the questions and answers and determine your own point of view on them, also visit the blogs and vote on all the polls embedded therein.

Polls can be found on www.glbtqjmaica.blogspot.com and on this blog as well. GLBTQJA on wordpress has no running polls as as the creation of this post.

These polls are in no way the full reflection of the entire GLBTQ community and does not proport, represent or suggests so but for the purposes of discussion of the issues they highlight and for readership of the blogs named.

The first of the two chosen today asks, with the following results:

Do you think the Buggery Law should be? -

1) Fully Repealed - 7%

2) Amended Partially - 5%

3) Decriminalized temporarily - 16%

4) Discussed thoroughly before any action - 48%

5) Left alone for now - 5%

6) Not touched at all - 5%

The results suggest that many persons may need more information on the real terms and conditions in as far as the buggery law is concerned as reflected in answer 4 of 48% persons requiring that it not be touched seem to vote on similar grounds that it not be touched at all. Answer 4 suggests that there maybe some knowledge out there in the voting public desiring a temporary stay of the current legislation towards possible full repulsion. Clearly the lack of proper interventions and or discussions/fora on the matter of the law and how it impacts the community may have led us to this moment answer 1 and its low result suggest the knowledge base is extremely low not in terms of the exact letter of the law but just basic rights and possible action.

Please view results bearing in mind multiple answers were allowed for both polls, meanwhile the other poll which has been running is:

Are you ready to fight for gay rights and freedoms?

103 persons voted as at the creation of this post(the poll is still open)

1) I will do what it takes - 22%

2) No, not yet ready - 11%

3) Somewhat ready - 48%

4) Undecided - 6%

5) Scared - 4%

6) Will quietly do so - 38%

7) We should discuss our strategies and options - 79%

8) We should ask for overseas help - 63%

As in the poll for the buggery law above there seems to be a wanting for more information about what is if any is actually on the table from the advocates and the general public as to rights and freedoms accorded to LGBTQI people. The whopping 79% for answer 7 to discuss strategies and options is glaring suggesting much more discussion is needed in the community and by extension the public domain on the way forward. Answer 6 is encouraging suggesting some persons will quietly do what they can which may explain the increased online social network activity and activism by formerly non activists who are now venting, discussing, writing letters to the newspapers and blogging as 5 new blogs, three gay and two lesbian have been birthed since this year.

Answer 3 suggest some persons may be on the fringes waiting to quietly do so as in answer 6 or maybe some persons are in between and may have voted for both answers. Answer 7 suggests persons may be aware of the impact of highlighting the problems in Jamaica and homo negativity overseas especially through print and the belief that there is merit in continuing this alliance of sorts to push for rights and freedoms. Answer 2 suggest there are still some persons who are just not ready or interested in agitations for rights etc which is also a reality we must acknowledge. Answers 4 and 5 are encouraging suggesting persons are no longer fearful but again reinforcing answers 1, 3, 6, 7 and 8, overall we can conclude persons are ready but need a proper plan of action forward.

There are a set of seminars being planned by a lawyer in conjunction with JFLAG to attempt to supposedly expand the knowledge base within the community on rights and freedoms etc, let us hope this is a rise from slumber from the advocates and is truly an intervention and not another "project" to look good to the funders and persons looking on.

I hope the persons who really need this information are allowed to be there, usually seminars/fora/workshops such as this are attended or those invited are already exposed to this and similar typed information.

Peace and tolerance

H

An open letter to Carolyn Cooper's "Buju Banton's original sin" November 1, 2009 article

On November 1st 2009, Jamaican Professor of Literary & Cultural Studies at the University of The West Indies Carolyn Cooper complained about gay & lesbian advocates that have succesfully agitated for cancellations of Buju Baton's concerts overseas in a piece entitiled "Buju Banton's original sin."

A response worth republishing given the current trial of Buju Banton in the United States, Professor Udo Schuklenk Ethics Professor of a Canadian University and Journal Editor submitted the following response to her piece which was published in the Gleaner and on GLBTQ Jamaica on blogger, I like this answer as it was very succint and not rude or filled with emotions as some other have in their answers despite we know it is a sensitive subject.

The answer reads as follows:

To whom it may concern:

Professor Cooper's editorial, well-intentioned and unusually considerate (by Jamaican standards) doesn't add up. She complains essentially that a Jamaican singer whose repertoire included a song calling for the killing of gay people is still subjected to boycott campaigns by gays and lesbians in other countries. She calls such campaigns 'perverse'. Cooper considers the offending song's lyrics 'infamous', however anyone not wanting the singer to perform in their neighbourhood is acting under a 'particularly perverse pathology'.

Really, is my attempt at keeping such artists out of my country sick, Professor Cooper? So, our Jamaican artist sings infamous songs, while those who would be at the receiving end of his murderous art are sick (aka pathological). Nice touch professor, truly a well-balanced statement. You should be safe in homophobic Jamaica (whatever that means these days).

What reasons has Professor Cooper on offer for her take on the issue?

Well, for starters, she points out that our artist hero hasn't sung the song in question for awhile and launched recently a CD hoping it would be bought by amongst others gays, lesbians, and - guess what - even slim people. Let me just say that to the best of my knowledge, he has not yet apologized and retracted the song in question. That a more market savvy performer tries to increase market share is understandable, but surely shouldn't be seen as evidence for a changed mind set.

Comes the professor's next reason: the US based ACLU is defending the artist's 'right' to perform. The ACLU, of course, also defends the KKK's right to propagate its racist views in public. It's the result of a particularly silly bit of US Constitution that puts virtually no limits on speech acts, unlike any other country in the world. You could not make such statements anywhere in Europe (neither the Jamaican artist's 'lyrics' nor the KKKs racist rabble-rousing). The result is that such societies are more cohesive and peaceful than the USA.

And another lost-case type argument from our literary professor. She claims, citing an unsubstantiated statement from an ACLU activist, that there is no causal evidence that hate speech calling for violence against minority groups leads to such violence. There is an obvious reason for this: actions usually have multiple causes, some conscious, others unconscious. We do know that propaganda works; why it shouldn't work in a pathologically homophobic place such as Jamaica remains a mystery to me. Gay people have experienced time and again spikes in anti-gay violence following high-profile homophobic statements by artists or politicians and the like. Equally, many minority ethnic people in Britain were deeply incensed when the BBC permitted recently the BNP leader Nick Griffin to speak on a program.

They pointed out that the mainstreaming of racism will undoubtedly lead to an increase in racist violence. I wonder whether Professor Cooper fully appreciates the implications of her feeble attempt at denying the link between homophobic statements calling for violence against gays and lesbians and the occurrence of such violence.

Her last unsubstantiated claim is that fans potentially engaging in homophobic violence would not do so after dancing to artists' tunes encouraging them to kills gays and lesbians. Is she seriously suggesting that there might be people out there who were considering killing gays and lesbians and then these folks get prevented from doing this because they attend a concert with an artists calling on them to go through with their tentative plans? What can I say, this surely is a breathtaking empirical claim without any basis in fact.

So, there you go, now you know why us folks outside your island go out of our way to have your violence and art kept where it belongs, namely on your island - as your problem, not ours. Let Buju apologise for this song and we will welcome him with open arms.
ENDS

Peace and tolerance

H

Reggie asked, “Who will shed tears for the baby doves?” a poem for same gender suiciders

we can, no must cry, wail, moan laugh, sing, scream

tell these same gender loving stories

though they bruise our hearts speak these ugly facts

that parade as truth we must speak for those whose tongues

have been slashed at the root

stand for those who have been limbed from thigh to ankle

like trees in Jamaica sing for those whose songs

have been ripped from their throats dance for those stilled

by rhythmic blows to their bodies we must be the wind for the fledgings


trying to flex their wings we must bear them up

lift them hold them close dry their tears

feed them not cannibalize them

dispense generous doses of antidotes for hate

prepare them for the probability of exclusion

baptize them in limpid pools of love and light

thicken their delicate skin against insidious intolerance

teach them how to soar how to be


tell them show them they are loved

speak life to them teach them how to survive.



In memory of

Carl Joseph Walker-Hoover (11)

Jaheem Herrera (11)

Tyler Clementi (18)

Seth Walsh (13)

Billy Lucas (15)

Asher Brown (13)

Zach Harrington (19)

Aiyisha Hassan (19)

Nokia Cowan

Victor Jarrett (26)

Sakia Gunn (15)

Matthew Sheperd (21)

and the countless other same gender loving youth, whose names I do not know, who took their own lives or had their lives ended because of who they were….



(c) fabian thomas

Out a Road: DJs who "hit out" hiding something? ......

I had the fortune of being in the presence of a heated discussion by a popular pharmacy in Half Way Tree earlier today where a group of persons had gathered prior to my arrival it seems discussing the trust factor in several local dancehall DJs in respect to their sexual preference. I am only sorry I never arrived sooner when it began to get the full gist of the arguments.

Several big names were mentioned though and many questioned their sexual preference of course using the stereotypical ruler to measure or gage the possible answers. I wasn't able capture the points in any formal way or record it on my phone as my memory chip is full but from what I could remember here are some of the more important pointers.

Of course the recent controversy with Vybz Kartel and the Tag/Fag t-shirt where it was said he was wearing a shirt at an event with "fag" written on it was debated, in the meantime here is an entry linked below on a popular dancehall blog regarding the said shirt:

Click here: Vybz Kartel in FAG shirt?

His alleged bleaching techniques also came into question in the exchange with several of the women present defending him vigorously and saying he looked good with his even toned skin and exaggerated tattoos (my words).

The men as expected were not so accommodating at all and had harsh retribution for the dancehall star, some questioned what is he promoting as a black man lightening his skin?

Some of the males questioned if when the DJs who hit out publicly at homosexuality if they themselves have something to hide, of course the issue of oral sex or bow cats was married with that argument and the lone male who openly says he enjoys oral sex was vilified by the rest of the male participants with some females in support while others interestingly seemed intrigued.

Even that made me question if the women who hit out were doing so because they were in the minority and didn't want to have to defend their position on the issue, a kind of desire to conform thing.

It was with great interest I observed this exchange as I am always amazed by us Jamaicans even though we collectively "bun battyman" it is when one comes into the occasional discourse such as this you get to hear some of the real underlined opinions of some of those same so called homophobes.

Other DJs whose sexuality came into question surprisingly were Beenieman, Babycham, Wayne Wonder, Frankie Paul even Elephant Man and Tanya Stephens based on her strong or imposing persona and so called butchness. What is even more interesting is the knowledge base of the persons involved in terms of LGBT descriptions that were readily used that one would not normally hear in everyday conversations. "Butch" "Queer" "Dyke" and "Queen" (gay men) were used over and over again which set me straight in terms of not to underestimate the average citizen out there, they are indeed exposed far more than most of us in advocacy would like to believe.

Not to be outdone was the perceptions of downlow dons or area leaders, one woman said she was reliably informed of her area leader where she resides and was clearly upset that he was the first to punish anyone in his community who was deemed gay or proven so. Yet he known sexual relations with young girls in and around the community of which he presided according to the woman. The coinage "bad man battyman" which came from an old Beenieman song was used repeatedly to describe those who carry out a similar practice. Then other big names came up for mention there as well such as the known don who is now serving time for a murder he allegedly commit some years ago while the victim was performing oral sex on him which formed part of testimony during his trial.

see: TRIAL SHOCKER - Court told of oral sex act with man

Stories like these over the years have helped I feel to have persons arrive at this new found "cautious tolerance" towards homosexuality in as far as quietly practicing gays are concerned or ordinary gays and lesbians, I got the feeling from this particular instance that what upset persons is the hypocrisy of it, the hide and lick or downlow dishonesty as a front to cover what really is happening behind the scenes.

Buju Banton's woes were not left out of this heated and sometimes funny exchange not about his sexuality but about his authenticity as a Rastafarian with his involvement with cocaine and the underworld. There are those who still believe that he was set up by gays while others such as a taxi driver said he was disappointed that he got himself in that kind of dealings for a Rasta. Many said the Boom Bye Bye song is justified but he stopped singing it and was now singing clean lyrics. One woman went on to say he apologized but because he didn't go on to work with the gay community he is now being punished for it.

They concluded that he may have realized he was being watched as during the conversation about the warehouse he didn't see the yacht as he was to see when he accompanied the informant, so he slowly tried to back out of the deal but he was already recorded by the hidden cams. One thing was clear during the discourse is that most persons seem to conclude he is definitely involved drug dealings and may have been in such activities for some time.

Clearly this matter is in no way going to die down soon or persons minds are going to change from their strong beliefs but it is instances like this I like to use to test the temperature if only a small hint as to what's out on the road in the court of public opinion.

Peace and tolerance

H

Public Comments: Writing against the epistemological colonization of Jamaica by Homo-Activists

by Coddy Burru

The following is a critique of an article by Thomas Glave titled "Towards a Nobility of the Imagination: Jamaica's Shame" published in Small Axe, 7 March 2000 pp122-126. Glave's article marks a growing trend by gay and lesbian activists of trying to shape public opinion in and of Jamaica. My critique recognizes the epistemological dangerousness of this trend and is an act of critical counter insurgency. It is a modification of a paper I wrote in Grad School.

Thomas Glave's defence of his homosexual compatriots in Jamaica deploys the same name calling, sweeping generalisations and non sequiturs he deplores when deployed against his comrades. Therefore, this writer feels no obligation to be civil towards him. According to Glave, Jamaicans are ignoble, cowardly, brutish, hypocritical, smug, lacking in compassion and shallow in reasoning. Hypocritically, he purports to advocate tolerance, charity and consideration towards his group, even as he stereotypes Jamaicans as subhuman: "In truth, we, as a society barely know what the word 'humanity' means. For in failing to love and support our fellow humans who are gay and lesbian, we are hardly human." (123) If he believes this to be true, his call for compassion and love is a lost cause. After all, one cannot hope to persuade brutes to act like humans. Furthermore, Glave's central argument is manifestly shallow and invalid: Because one does not support his chosen lifestyle one somehow becomes inhuman?


Instead of his whining, sententious, fake so-called 'humanist' argument that everyone should love everyone, homosexuals included; he might do better to argue their right to be different. Instead, he declares: "We are everywhere: like you" (124). So what? Anyone with any modicum of intelligence knows that homosexuality has long existed. Does that somehow legitimise and normalise it? Many Jamaicans find sexual congress between members of the same sex reprehensible. This is our right. We are under no obligation to love homosexuals, whether indigenous or expatriate. Those who choose to do so, that is their prerogative. Even the late Rex Nettleford, an acknowledged homosexual and former Vice-Chancellor at The University of the West Indies regarded the recently hyped homosexual debate as a waste of time. He said: "A great many productive people throughout the world are supposed to have that (homosexual) preference. What is the big thing? The wasting of time on the discussion is what will deflect us from (other important issues)..."[1] Contrary to what Mr Glave thinks, for most Jamaicans, embracing homosexuals and lesbians is not among the "critical matters" (123) facing the nation.


Like every one else, homosexuals have a right to live their lives according to their choices, so long as they don't try to foist their lifestyles on others. Homosexuals are indeed subjected to some vigilantism in Jamaica. But no more so than paedophiles, rapists, thieves and others who transgress 'social norms'. Glave is right when he suggests that Jamaica has a problem of endemic violence bequeathed by a legacy of slavery. However, Jamaica needs to address its social problems in their entirety. Mr Glave's special pleading for homosexuals will get him or Jamaica nowhere. Betty Ann Blaine has rightly observed: "Any writer who wants to examine honestly and objectively anti-gay violence in Jamaica, must place that discussion within the broader context of the staggering levels of violence that exist ... [W]ithin the context of this ... culture of violence, no particular group is immune."[2] Jamaica has to relearn the value of all life. It also has more pressing concerns of combating poverty and its offshoots such as human trafficking, child exploitation, and growing scourges of sex-tourism in general and "homo-tourism" in particular. What Glave fails to do, despite his superficial invocation of Slavery, is to contextualise his analysis within the plantation framework of economic and sexual exploitation, denial of fatherhood rights, and the concomitant so-called black male irresponsibility. He has not engaged how those factors may have impacted attitudes towards homosexuals, as well as their performance of so-called "alternative masculinities." As a poor substitute for intellectually rigorous analysis, Glave offers a maudlin plea: "With such a brutal past ... we should be the noblest people in the world." (123) Glave needs to do much better than invoking Slavery and the mantra of black victimhood and the fear these can instil. His words totally fail to convince and ring hollow: "we are quickly on our way to becoming worse off than what many have consistently attempted to make us." (123) Others have constructed Jamaicans in particular uncomplimentary ways and Glave cynically tries to manipulate these images towards his ends.


Mr Glave and his local and overseas homo-activist friends utilise pieces like this to stir up sensationalist fervour and to promote the exaggerated claim that the average "heterosexist" Jamaican is just waiting for the opportunity to murder some hapless 'battybwoy': " 'We shoulda kill you the first chance we did get,' they would say. Shot, stabbed, stoned. Boom bye-bye." (123) The truth is not as simple as this. There is no genocidal design against homosexuals. But Glave would have the overseas audiences he melodramatically panders to believe this: Jamaicans, he claims, are possessed of "a willingness to persecute and destroy...gay[s] and lesbian[s] ...." (123) Betty Ann Blaine has commented on a malicious article published by Times Magazine, Wednesday April 12, 2006 which declared Jamaica "The Most Homophobic place on Earth" in the following manner: "the fact that an individual could openly and callously use one broad brush to tarnish an entire nation of people is reprehensible at best."[3] This statement is also applicable to Glave and some of those who support his project.

What Mr Glave neglects to note is that a significant number of murders of homosexuals in Jamaica are reprisal against economically well-off homosexuals by the men they have exploited. For instance, the much publicised murder of Brian Williamson, a late homo-activist (compatriot of Glave) turned out to be a crack addict 'friend' of Williamson who regularly 'visited' him for money. Also, a couple years ago Ambassador King was found with his throat slit while four other men were found asleep on beds in the house and the murderer escaped. There were no signs of breaking and entering (of the house at least). Also, a collection of homosexual pornographic tapes involving King, prominent members of Jamaican society (including medical doctors, politicians and even a dance-hall deejay) and exploited men and children were found. Figure it out Mr Glave. Or must we spell it out again for you, Sir? Blaine rightly notes that "many of the murders of gays that have been reported in the press have been classified as crimes of passion committed by other gays who are known to the victims. Why has the writer disregarded that type of evidence?"[4] The trial and conviction of Mr. Pusey for Ambassador King's murder lends support to Blaine's argument. Mr. Glave, you claim on behalf of the homosexual community that "we are none of the terrible things many would have us be" (123). This is not quite true. Half the story has never been told, Mr Glave. There is something quite rotten in upper middle class Jamaica. And, as Bob Marley said: "If night should turn to day a lot people would run away."[5]

In a newspaper article titled "Boys for hire and desire"[6] Betty Ann Blaine documents the disturbing sexual exploitation of Jamaican children generally and the sodomy of vulnerable boys especially. She notes that "the issue of the sodomy of our boys is something that many people know about, particularly people from the upper echelons of the society, but choose to cover up." But Mr. Glave advances a spurious claim of special nobility in gays who participate in the Jamaican economy and society: "We process your loans and bank accounts and teach your children ... And in this there is a kind of nobility ..." (124) The fact of the matter is that gays are not a special noble breed. Like other humans, they are capable of both ignoble and noble deeds. Who is he trying to fool with his mythification?

Glave would have us believe that gays in Jamaica are under constant threat of being mobbed and gunned down. Overseas agitators with an agenda of discrediting Jamaicans to advance their cause make reference to "rampant violence against gays"[7] in Jamaica. What about the violence perpetrated by them against our children? Most homosexuals who get chastised or killed in Jamaica are not innocent, slaughtered lambs. The instances cited above and myriad other cases suggest otherwise. Many of them are sexual reprobates and predators who become victims of their own bedfellows. One recalls Cliff Lashley, the UWI lecturer, who was slain by his homosexual lover. Also, there was the case of the fake soothsayer of a TV personality, Safa, who suffered a similar fate. What about the former track and field coach of Kingston College High School who was fired after years of sodomising his charges? What about the once famous former sports presenter who tried to molest a track and field athlete from Jamaica College at the Penn Relays? What about other prominent members of Jamaican society, some of whom are married, who are known to prey on hapless street children? What about the mentally challenged boy whom a "volunteer from some other country fondled and kissed ... and proceeded to place his penis in the little boy's rectum"[8]? What words about "Nobility of the Imagination" do you have for him and his parents, Mr. Glave? You are so full of it!

Glave unctuously appeals for special treatment for gays and lesbians by invoking Bob Marley and God! If Glave were truly attuned to Jamaican culture as he pretends to be, he'd recall that Bob Marley sang: "Man to man is so unjust, yah don't know who to trust."[9] Those who are in tune know that Bob was "throwing words" against homosexuality and those who tried to assassinate him. Homosexuality is against the tenets of Rastafarianism and Christianity. But Mr Glave is willing to affirm whatever is convenient to advance his specious arguments: "Our greatest prophet singer admonished us: we must free ourselves from mental slavery." (125) Glave has elsewhere mocked Marley's Rastafarian faith by dubbing himself a Jamaican "Rasta Battyman."[10] But now he wants to hug up Bob Marley's lyrics? He reminds me of those Danish cartoonists who disrespected the Islamic faith with derogatory images and then expressed surprise when the Muslim community responded in righteous indignation. Glave's gesture also recalls the boorish insensitivity of American soldiers during the Abu Grabe prison scandal. One cannot claim to be promoting tolerance by disrespecting others' beliefs.

Mr Glave needs to know that Jamaicans who are aware of the real situation will not be taken in by his "drama queen" histrionics. We will not be bullied. Nor will we be swayed by fake emotionalism. UWI's urban anthropologist, Herbert Gayle, offers a useful perspective: "Jamaica has to be a target because you want the culture that is most visible on this issue to bow ... if you can get Jamaica to accept something, you have not (simply) made a dent, you have literally closed a chasm. And that is what it is all about; it is not primarily about so many people being mistreated, because it is not true."[11] Glave and other local and overseas homo-activists need to know that the average Jamaican refuses to be used to further their perverse cause. Any change that takes place in Jamaica will be determined by its people of their own volition within the national context. Not by a wolf in sheep's clothing oxymoronically self-styled as a Jamaican Rasta battyman. We will not be controlled by remote. We naw bow to spiritual bankruptcy and decadence neither! Glave and his compatriots need to tek wey demself!

Endnotes

[1] Rex Nettleford, quoted by Peter Williams, "The Gay Debate" The Jamaica Observer, December 5, 2004 www.jamaicaobserver.com

[2] Betty Ann Blaine, "Jamaica the worst case on earth" The Jamaica Observer, May 02, 2006. www.jamaicaobserver.com

[3] Blaine, "Jamaica the worst case on earth"

[4] Blaine, "Jamaica the worst case on earth"

[5] Bob Marley, "Who the Cap Fit"

[6] Blaine, "Boys for hire and desire" The Jamaica Observer, March 28, 2006

[7] Tim Padgett quoted Times Magazine, April 12, 2006

[8] Blaine, "Boys for hire and desire"

[9] Bob Marley, "Who the Cap Fit"

[10] Thomas Glave, quoted by Tanya Batson-Savage, "Thomas Glave, a man in between" Jamaica Gleaner, February 12, 2006 www.jamaica-gleaner.com

[11] Quoted by Peter Williams in "The Gay Debate"