Caribbean LGBTI Citizens Demand Action from Commonwealth Leaders

Saint Lucia is among fifty-three (53) member nations included in a report calling on Commonwealth leaders take action to stop widespread human rights abuses against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) people. “SPEAKING OUT: The rights of LGBTI citizens from across the Commonwealth” is published by the Kaleidoscope Trust in advance of the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Sri Lanka this November 2013. It features United and Strong, Saint Lucia’s sole LGBTI representative organization, with a testimony from U&S secretary Jessica St. Rose.

Kaleidoscope Trust notes that this report is compiled by the biggest ever coalition of LGBTI organisations from across the Commonwealth. Speaking Out documents human rights abuses against LGBTI people and demands that Commonwealth leaders take action.

Sir Shridath Ramphal, former Commonwealth Secretary-General, penned the foreword of the publication. He quotes Archbishop Desmond Tutu who said, ‘All over the world, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people are persecuted…We make them doubt that they too are children of God – and this must be nearly the ultimate blasphemy.’

Dr. Ramphal reminds that, “For most of the countries of the Commonwealth, the desecration of our fellow citizens began in the law. The unreformed law of England was transported through criminal codes by imperial masters to far-flung outposts of empire….today 41 of 53 Commonwealth countries have virtually the same legislation enacted almost as a matter of course by colonial administrators – not by the societies they governed. That law is still on our statute books – a relic of empire that has no place in a modern Commonwealth. As with the abolition of slavery, the decriminalisation of homosexuality in our time must be an act of law.”

In the introduction Dr Purna Sen former head of human rights at the Commonwealth Secretariat and Chair of the Kaleidoscope Trust, says to Speaking Out “is a vivid testament to why that organization (Commonwealth), which claims in its Charter to be ‘implacably opposed to all forms of discrimination’, continues to let down millions of its own people... Over half the countries in the world that criminalise homosexuality are in the Commonwealth.”

“But the voices in this report reflect demands that are not going to go away just because Presidents and Prime Ministers try to close their ears to them. The people whose testimonies are contained here refuse to be silenced. Sooner rather than later the Commonwealth is going to have to tackle the justice deficit that leaves some of its citizens without the rights to which all are entitled.”

Speaking Out calls on all Commonwealth governments in countries which continue to criminalise same-sex sexual activity to repeal this legislation in accordance with:

• The Universal Declaration on Human Rights and other international instruments.

• Article II of the Commonwealth Charter.

• Recommendations of the Eminent Persons Group adopted by the Foreign Ministers of all Commonwealth members.

As an immediate step towards meeting the obligations set out in these and other commitments to equal rights for all citizens it also calls on all Commonwealth leaders to:

Engage in meaningful dialogue with their own LGBTI communities.

Put in place an immediate moratorium on the enforcement of existing laws criminalising homosexuality.

Commit to open and free debate across the Commonwealth on the decriminalisation of homosexuality.

Support public education initiatives to inform the people of the Commonwealth about the case for LGBTI equality.

Support the right of an LGBTI Association to register with the Commonwealth alongside all civil society organisations and be free to express its views and engage in public debate.

Fully include LGBTI people in development and other programmes on an equal basis with the rest of society.

Commit to include a discussion on equal rights for LGBTI citizens as a substantive agenda item at the next CHOGM.

In Saint Lucia, consensual same-sex sexual activity is illegal under indecency statues, and some same-sex sexual activity between men is also illegal under anal intercourse laws. Indecency statutes carry a maximum penalty of five years, and anal intercourse carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison.

– ENDS –

More on the report at: http://kaleidoscopetrust.com/speaking-out

Rights And Write-Offs - Balancing Ethics And Human Rights

Joan Grant Cummings, Guest Columnist

It wasn't even a month ago that I was lamenting with a 'sistah-activist' about the lack of both movements and governments that had values and real agendas based on a people and/or rights-driven philosophy.

There used to be a real Left and a real Right. You knew where you stood. You had something to argue and reason about. We lamented that our land of mainly peaceful revolution in the 1970s, especially, that had inspired whole countries and actors in various global spaces, seemed to have lost its voice and appetite for leadership and human rights.

In 'those times', our country was a voice that was proclaimed 'leader of the global South', a voice that many countries endeavoured to follow, not for our music but for our political attitude as it pertained to dealing with social exclusion.

We sighed with nostalgia in remembrance about the fight and victory for the minimum wage; access to education for all; the right to maternity leave with pay; pay equity; the bauxite levy; the Agricultural Marketing Corporation; my personal favourite, the incomparable National Housing Trust; and the right of inheritance for children born out of wedlock or who were deemed 'illegitimate' or 'bastards'. We spontaneously broke into song, "... No bastard nuh deh again".

We wondered how many of the young female managers in the private sector knew that their beautiful locks and other natural hairdos were once against the corporate dress code - written or unwritten. In fact, they wouldn't be allowed to apply for a job, not even at entry level.

Or how many tertiary-level students understood the importance of and/or knew the history as to how they got there. Nowadays, female students steer far from being associated with women's rights or, heaven forbid, feminism! Amid the junk science that created the male marginalisation thesis and the call at student election time for "no panty government", I wonder how many of these young men and women, largely raised by 'single mothers', knew that not long ago, this would disqualify them from accessing and controlling many spaces.

They would have been deemed 'write-offs' by some elements in the society. 'Bastards!'

And then it happened! Amid the IMF distraction to the exclusion of everything else, a bold, young female minister put back the concept of human rights, specifically women's human rights, on the public agenda. She declared that she supports a woman's right to choose. The abortion debate was back. Even The Gleaner came out in support of her and adopted a pro-choice position!

The last joint select committee on abortion chaired by the then minister of health, Rudyard Spencer, evaporated into thin air. No report has been made public, and since that time, a shower of changes in the law has been made, making it even harder to 'win' a constitutional challenge, especially one related to sex and sexuality.

As if one jolt wasn't enough, we received another. A young gay activist decided that enough was enough. Rights are rights, and he would not be treated like a disposable write-off. He took a bold move to challenge being evicted because of his sexual orientation. He has filed a constitutional challenge of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms, alleging that, among other things, his rights to privacy and equality have been infringed.

Shock and awe! Immediately, the 'anti-gay Opposition', to protect the "Jamaican way of life", lined up to rebut his argument. Would the owner of the house have been 'uncomfortable' with three women living there, one openly lesbian?

It is amazing how, as Jamaicans, we canturn up or down our barometer to measure when we break the law and need to act. We have a major problem with people assisting the police in solving crimes. Yet, a whole community will organise to 'inform' on a girl who has had an abortion or a man whom they 'think' is gay!

Additionally, J-FLAG is taking on our sit-on-the-fence politicians again, about the offensive buggery law. It's ironic that the same offensive law, the 1864 slavery-driven Offences Against the Person Act, in one fell swoop has managed to deny, block, deprive the rights of women; people of different sexual orientations; and married women who are raped by their husbands.

ETHICS, THE LAW AND PEOPLE'S RIGHTS

So why bother to have the charter if we are going to make provisions through using some fancy legal gymnastics called the savings law clause to write off our rights as invalid? This move gives the State the right to use some old law to defeat and undermine the provisions in the charter.

Yet there is something more sinister afoot here, and we need to discuss this as a nation - a nation that has decided that integrity, accountability, transparency, good governance and an anti-corruption environment are necessary to assure our development; fairness in our judiciary, especially, accountability and honesty among our politicians; and the protection of people's rights.

Unless we now live in a dictatorship or a theocracy, Jamaican society is based on democratic principles, and we are supportive of people's human rights in this struggle between pro-choice and anti-choice forces and anti-gay, pro-gay, sexual and reproductive health and rights.

Jamaica has already given its commitment to protecting the human, sexual and reproductive rights of all its citizens. It is at best a failure and betrayal, and an act of cowardice at the worst, that as a State, we have not moved to protect or enshrine these laws nationally.

Next year is the 20th anniversary of the signing of the International Covenant on Population and Development which seeks to guarantee citizens' sexual and reproductive rights and health. Do we intend, as a nation, to report to the United Nations that we're moving backward or forward on this issue? Or, that we have decided that Vision 2030 and the recently signed Partnership Agreement only applies to some Jamaicans?

Further, by any definition of ethical, it is grossly unethical for any of the State's lawyers and/or judges to be active members of the same groups seeking to deny rights to some citizens. In the case of abortion rights, it is denying 51 per cent of the population their full enjoyment of their human rights, the right to bodily integrity and the God-given right of choice!

BOUND BY RELIGION

How can the Lawyers' Christian Fellowship have standing in any case regarding sexual and reproductive rights and health issues, when the solicitor general and key members of the attorney general's offices belong to this group?

Where is the fairness in such a system that would make all Jamaicans confident to rely on our judiciary to mediate justice and fairness in our society?

The dictator Pinochet was set free as one of the law lords had made a donation to Amnesty International, a group with standing in the case against him! The minister of justice and, by extension, the State, must put in place the necessary countervailing measures to right this power imbalance and even the perception of a conflict of interest.

Jamaicans who are committed to human rights for all are pro-choice and pro-life. What we are not is anti-choice. Making available the appropriate information on sex, contraceptives, abortion and sexuality is not "coerced abortion or murder".

It is disingenuous and hypocritical for anyone to claim this when their anti-choice stance actively incites communities to violate, and even murder, members of the LGBT community and cause the social exclusion of girls and women who continue to risk their lives and die because they had to choose to terminate an unintended or an unwanted pregnancy. The latter, in particular, speaks to our high rate of gender-based violence through coerced/early initiation sex, rape, including marital rape, incest or sexual exploitation.

How come there's no back door dealing with politicians to write this in law, bearing in mind the high levels of impunity with which women and girls are violated.

All of us are born with the right to bodily integrity, the right to the expression and enjoyment of our sexuality, and the safeguarding of our health. In democratic societies, where human rights are practised and respected, a key ethical principle is that the social, political and economic inequalities that exist among some segments of the society which is a disadvantage, must be used to advantage them. In other words, we must protect our 'minorities and vulnerable' groups.

While there are no explicit laws separating Church from State in Jamaica, that is not a sound reason to extend the right to some church members to control how our laws are enacted and higher offices of the judiciary, as well as politicians. We do not need a church lobby among politiciansm, and with Politicians, and other state machinery such as the judiciary. This is theocracy by stealth.

It will result in greater social exclusion towards the realisation of Vision 2030. The State needs to act to reassure ALL Jamaicans that they can have confidence in their justice system and that the State is the people's human-rights champion.

Failure to do so will create even greater schisms in the social contract and subvert the goals of the new Partnership Agreement.

Joan Grant Cummings is a gender and environmental specialist. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com.

Equality doesn’t mean justice

I didn’t know if I should have entitled this entry as a question, a definitive statement or a mere headline so I left it for the latter but it can be all three given the circumstances that now obtain, I was struck by the above split photo though showing the differences in how equality versus what is just and fair is depicted. The word “Equality” has been banded about so easily by LGBT groups and influentials I guess as a rub off from the North American agitation for such in the business of same sex marriage in a far more tolerant society and a justice system that provides room for seeking redress though itself is not perfect but when the state or another citizen runs afoul of the law remedies come and come sometimes swiftly (the Boston bombings case comes to mind). What is equality though in a rights based sense? Some may say marginalized groups getting the same treatment if not rights as privileged groups, the Collins Gem English Dictionary I have at home defines the word as “State of being equal, uniformity” but is this really real given our local context and the struggle for overall justice.

It struck me as the photo above was posted in the Jamaica for Justice Facebook page some time ago and some comments on it since has had me thinking for real. JFJ has given support to a recently launched online campaign by JFLAG entitled “We are Jamaicans” while it looked sleek and laudable on the face of it the populations that are really affected by the societal challenges and indifference were nowhere present in the close to twenty videos released thus far almost presenting a false sense of who are LGBT people and their allies really when the lower socio-economic groups get overlooked coincidentally with the homeless MSM challenges and the agency themselves becoming office-less via an eviction notice from their landlord related to the behavioural challenges from the same homeless over the years. Just a small percentage of the “community” feeling the impact of JFLAG’s work while the vast majority out there either do not trust, are unsure of their role and or are totally ignorant of the campaigns and objectives. Community engagement is still low save and except for remote sanitized outreach via Facebook the real forumatic activity is nonexistent and may be so for a time to come as they hunt for new office space.

Some questions come to mind:

Is it coincidental or sheer consequence that the agencies are made to become homeless themselves following the failure of nerves to directly address homelessness in key representative populations?

Is the eviction fiasco an attempt to start afresh so as to avoid addressing some key issues, a different location and geographical change connotes isolation and insulation from the problematic homeless populations?

Do you believe equality must also be an ideal to strive for within the LGBT community?

Was Jamaicans for Justice clandestinely sending a message to groups like JFLAG that their agitation is a mere peripheral attempt to seek LGBT rights in Jamaica or the decriminalization of buggery?

Is mere equality just a hairy fairy schism ideal just to play catch up with the heterosexual privilege?

Is it that due to the inability for one to live ones truth one is forced to be pretentious hence this practice to live in stealth has becoming engrained in the population’s psyche?

Why not go for the greater goal that of justice and true fairness?

What about the context of a marginalized group being wholesome within itself before it attempts to reach out to more privileged populations?

Do we have a hypocritical advocacy then in terms of asking for virtues that are not espoused generally by them or leading the populations to such espousing?

Why are we afraid to really be truthful in our scope and ideologies towards truth inclusivity, equality and justice for ALL?

Should persons at leadership of the agencies by held accountable for the recent evictions and failure to properly address the welfare issues?

And if after all the proper agitation devoid of the schisms and buggery is repealed, what is next?

Where is genuine openness and truth in the scheme of things?

Are you expecting any resignations given the recent developments?

When campaign decisions are planned are the general community issues taken into account and a plan B in case of a fallout?

My mind has been changing on this call for equality in Jamaica by the LGBT lobby not even a name change to an old campaign has convinced me thus before seeing this photo and now it has sped up my resolve, the ideal is indeed JUSTICE not just to be mere observers by the fence struggling to see over it on tippy toes as captioned in the little boy or the centre figure. The left partition of the photo suggest mere playing to the needs or hue and cries of aggrieved groups more so than the right partition showing ALL on an equal footing but also espousing the correctness of it where the crates are not mere rights handed out to silence a noisy penny section but rights privileges and freedoms on a truly equal footing to all concerned.

If on the onset the least amongst us are not viewed as equal then it should not be surprising that the corresponding programs, systems, strategies, public relations campaigns and so on will reflect those ideologies which explains why the only time in essence there is serious attention placed on any individual is when their lives are at risk via near death homophobic fallout and even that is troubling as after a while when they recover there is hardly any follow up. Overall then we can deduce that the one of the self made reasons why we seem stuck with very little gains made over the three decades plus is the oversight, dithering and ignoring of some key front-line issues that affect the representative populations chief among them homeless MSM, same gender loving women and transgender persons as the buggery law gets first priority. The fact that the present advocacies are male dominated is an issue as far as SGL women issues are concerned and the leaders in the groups are often way removed from the realities while getting close to them after the fact when the aggrieved makes a report. The threat levels as well for most concerned is minimal so there is a feeling of distance from the on the ground matters in a “that won’t ever happen to me” mindset or a tragic case of individualism. The “followers” as it were and apologists for the agencies also seem occasionally display the contempt and disregard for the lower socio-economic groups sans any reprimand or correction by the leadership or superstar advocates, just check the social media landscape on any given day and you see the indifference spewed whenever the subject matter is raised, the thrust is all about repealing or decriminalizing buggery, who cares about some dirty gay men under our the radar?

The agencies have and seem to be continuing to systematically ignore queer homeless as legal challenges, media presence and how agencies look from a public relations and programmatic standpoint are prioritised as more important much to their peril and to the greater community’s peril.

Our flawed advocacy has repeatedly failed to deliver on several fronts with the lack of principled centred leadership, reinforcing societal deficiencies, lack of proper planning and strategizing in community issues versus the national platform, poor timing and roll out of programs (or lack of relevant programs), warped ideologies both within the structures and outside of them in the LGBT populations itself on the backdrop of a national psyche that evokes separatism, classism and elitism. Anancyism is also a major problem in many respects many of us LGBT people have been forced over time to be circumspect or operating in stealth normalizing ourselves to fit the hetero-normative and hetero-patriarchal constructs and in so doing we adopt a deceptive way of living which seems to have crept into every other facet of our lives. Ideally one would have imagined an advocacy that would be far more open and indeed honest about many of the tiers of issues affecting us yet we tacitly support half truths, deceptive methods of toying with very important international support while advocates ingratiate themselves in spots and play on a gullible LGBT population in the name of speaking on or behalf.

And then we wonder why that after some thirty plus years of agitation between the two major groups that have been at the forefront of this be they Jamaica Forum for Lesbians Allsexuals and Gays, JFLAG and its predecessor GFM, Gay Freedom Movement and we seem stuck in a groove hardly moving from where we were with more social welfare challenges than ever and a roofless JFLAG presently along with its parent Jamaica AIDS Support for Life, JASL? The escapists response is the usual rebuttal for scrutiny inclusive of historical references in abid to dismiss criticisms about the stewardship of the groups/individuals with strong support from the apologetics. Then how are we to ever achieve over freedom with this kind of mindset. NGOs these days in HIV/AIDS and LGBT agitation look and feel more like quasi-political bodies mimicking the political directorate’s indecisions and bereft of new objective thought along with bureaucratic committees, bi-laws and organizational systems that impede more than assist with service delivery, program development and rollout, funding accessibility, fiduciary responsibility, flawed ideological positions, poor and slow decision making and execution of same, non community based consensus, corporatism and elitism.

That could also possibly explain the now disturbing 34% rate of HIV infection in the MSM populations despite a robust and well funded national program of which the NGOs do part take via Global Fund. When the target groups for such programs are not seen as equals to those in the annals of power and influence. Leadership is all off here to me why we cannot build on what has been laid down over the three plus decades and we just merely settle for “Equality” as our main demand. The decriminalization of buggery is the penultimate goal in JFLAG’s mind as I see it having been in the system myself any other activities are obviously distractions or secondary in the scheme of things, case in point the homeless msm in New Kingston and the agency’s dithering on developing meaningful programs to address that massive problem that was allowed to get so.

True equality has to come from within the so called community as it now stands and how we treat with those who are the least amongst us at every level – socially and the NGOs that claim to stand for the representative groups yet barely address the concerns via the needed programs/objectives and if so it is usually for PR to deflect scrutiny on the face of it, inclusivity and true equity not just a piece meal approach for show to impress our foreign allies and funders to get continued assistance. It is interesting for example in the middle of a tolerance campaign in 2011 by JFLAG with help from AIDSFREEWORLD and JASL that JASL was already effecting a ban on homeless MSM from their offices due to the behaviour of a few yet no rehabilitation, engaging and behaviour change responses came from any of the aforementioned agencies and the public spat that played out left the editors of both major newspapers, the opposing religious right and the public the impression that the men were “abandoned” by the NGOs. 

Another disturbing perception on the ground is that persons who do come through the systems do so to their own advantage, a young MSM in his early twenties recently asked (paraphrasing) why are so many older gay activists seem so well off and or reside overseas and don’t seem to care about the other persons locally? It shows that there are some who are watching and wondering hence the mistrust as well and the apparent lack of engagement even refusal to make reports to the NGOs by those persons who have suffered at the hand of abuse. Far too many persons are becoming more aloof and cynical at the whole set up.

Where is the credibility therefore or the moral authority to launch sleek and flowery worded campaigns on such virtues as tolerance and equality (outside of a justice call) and on what ethical strengths can such campaigns seek to make any impact on a cynical society about male homosexuality. That cynicism is fuelled also by the poor crisis communication over the three plus decades as well or half truths on issue by some who seem to be on a narcisstic quest to win awards, pats on the back and praise at the expense of the rest of us while no real change is happening on the ground due to their farcical agitations. The rejected tolerance adverts even after the initial one based on an HIV/AIDS premise was more acceptable for example was the clearest case yet that proved to those within the LGBT populations who were observant and objective and the opposition in the religious right movement as well as secular anti gay voices that we have a serious class problem and related ideologies within. The use of an Italian Jamaican face who hardly resides here or is remotely affected by direct homophobia to try to soften same in Jamaica ended up reinforcing the already hardening positions towards homosexuality from the anti gay voices and that the agitation was foreign/uptown influenced support and that Jamaicans were being forced to accept a foreign lifestyle with the added ingredient of disbelief that homophobic violence is real, most persons on the face of it still believe the sometimes public gay related incidents are gay on gay related violent episodes. Here again the quality of leadership and the decisions at the campaign levels have to be questioned, were they not cognisant of the “not our culture” perception over all these years and why are they still reaching for campaigns devoid of the new realities being taken into considerations.

Despite the fact that our motto says Out of Many, One People

The point is therefore that if we expect to gain such virtuous goals and ideals as tolerance (in the purest sense of the word), inclusivity and justice to include equality then the change MUST begin within the populations, systematically and at the leadership levels. Fiduciary responsibility these days at the leadership and influential levels is much to be desired just the recent evictions of JFLAG and JASL has brought his front and centre or at least it ought to but the code of silence (anancyism) has set in and then we expect laws to be changed to suit us, a society to suddenly accept homosexuality, HIV/AIDS infection rates to go down and the other problems to suddenly disappear? Lofty mid range objective in a restructured JFLAG for that matter as mere equality in not enough as equality is part and parcel of a greater whole that of JUSTICE. I am surely expecting far more sophistication and a total paradigm shift on advocacy overall, the “community”

Think on these things.

Peace and tolerance

H

Jamaican Clinical Sexologist on Human Rights for All

Clinical Sexologist Dr Karen Carpenter hit the nail on the head on some things with our advocacy and the areas they have been afraid or refused to properly engage.

The myths and misconceptions surrounding the practices of the community can only be dispelled if those organisations that advocate for LGBT rights also advocate for the protection of the child, the encouragement of safe-sex practices, and all other behaviours that support the human rights of all citizens.

Protect The Rights Of All Jamaicans

Karen Carpenter, Contributor

IN JAMAICA, when it comes to the sexual orientation of minority groups, we are perhaps most familiar with the terms 'homosexual', 'bisexual', and 'lesbian'. Same-sex attraction and activities have not generally been accepted as part of the sexual culture of the country. Additionally, how Jamaicans view themselves sexually - as opposed to how they are viewed by the world media - differs.

Rebecca Schleifer of United States Human Rights Watch produced a report after three weeks of extensive interviews with members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community, non-governmental organisations and government officials. She dubbed Jamaica "the most homophobic place on earth" (November 2004, Vol. 16, No. 6 (B)). It seems this label has been accepted by the foreign press without much consideration for Jamaica's cultural norms, or the history of the LGBT movement in Jamaica.

In contrast to Schleifer's comments, former Assistant Commissioner of Police Les Green of the Scotland Yard Police asserted, after three years of working in law enforcement in the island: "I think Jamaica is far more tolerant than the public hype. There is a vibrant community in Jamaica, and there isn't the sort of backlash that some people say." The gap between what is often given media coverage and what obtains on the ground is large. Few attempts have been made to provide a balanced argument that considers both the perspective of the local community and the foreign press.

HOMO-NEGATIVE ATTITUDE

Jamaica's reputation for being irrationally fearful of, or aversive to, persons who are same-sex-attracted, or 'homophobic', is not supported by the statistics regarding the numbers of such persons living undisturbed in communities. That Jamaica, as a society at large, does not support, condone, or accept same-sex attraction and activities is indeed true. Evidence of this is easy to find in numerous public opinions published in the newspapers and broadcast on radio and television; however, it is important to distinguish between a fear of homosexuals and a negative attitude towards homosexual behaviour.

Jamaicans are generally homo-negative. The attitude towards same-sex activity is that it is biologically unnatural, medically unhygienic, and it goes against Christian values. A few weeks ago, I participated in a radio discussion about Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller's comments on same-sex-attracted persons serving in Parliament and the nature of same-sex attraction. One of the most impassioned remarks came from a Christian woman who described my neutral approach as "demonic".

The truth is, in a democratic society, people are entitled to their opinions and to have these opinions heard. What we are certainly not entitled to is denying the rights of others in the pursuit of our own beliefs. All citizens must enjoy the rights and share in the responsibilities of a nation.

Curious to find out what exactly are our rights and responsibilities as Jamaicans, I visited several websites. The first search for 'gays in Jamaica' turned up over 34,200 results and 'homosexuality in Jamaica' 15,200 results. Several of these were captioned with Ms Schleifer's now-infamous comment.

RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES

The civics section of the National Library of Jamaica provides a very user-friendly and easy-to-understand definition of citizen: "Citizenship is defined as membership in a state, nation, country, with guaranteed rights, privileges as well as duties and responsibilities. Citizenship of Jamaica is acquired through birth, marriage, or naturalisation."

The section goes on to outline 12 rights shared by all citizens of Jamaica:

1. Protection of right to life;

2. Protection from arbitrary arrest;

3. Respect for private and family life;

4. Protection to privacy of home and property;

5. Protection of freedom of conscience;

6. Protection of peaceful assembly;

7. Protection from discrimination;

8. Protection of expression;

9. Right to fair trial;

10. Right to vote;

11. Freedom of worship;

12. Freedom of movement.

There is a much shorter list of four responsibilities:

1. Pay his/her share of tax that is levied for the good of the community;

2. Obey the laws of the land;

3. Serve as a witness in the court if summoned;

4. Serve on a jury if called.

These rights are not subject to the approval of one group of individuals over another, but neither are the responsibilities restricted to any one group of persons, and certainly not on the basis of sexual orientation. The section goes on to cite that "one of the greatest rights of citizens is to share in the government of the country". (http://www.nlj.gov.jm/?q=jamaican-civics)

Supporters of the LGBT community here and abroad point to the archaic Offences Against the Person Act, Sections 76, 77, 78, which speak to"the abominable crime of buggery, committed either with mankind or with any animal". I suspect that few persons actually know that the so-called 'buggery law' does not actually constitute a law against same-sex activity. Further, according to an interview carried out by The Gleaner Company's Western Bureau with attorney Clayton Morgan of the Cornwall Bar Association, attempts at prosecuting men for violation of the same law have been unsuccessful due to the practical and legal requirements for proving that the law has been breached.

Advocates further point to the international conventions, which have been signed by the Jamaican Government, supporting full human rights for all members of the society. What has not been made clear by these proponents is that the laws and constitution of a country have priority over international conventions.

What, then, are we left with 50 years after the Constitution, given its shortcomings?

The current prime minister of Jamaica came in for considerable criticism for her public support of persons of all sexual orientations being part of the business of the country. More public information is needed, not on the international conventions which may not be reflected in the country's Constitution of 1962, and which cannot supersede the Constitution, but on the basic guidelines that allow us to maintain civility and agree to disagree, even where our personal beliefs may not support the lifestyle.

Recently, we witnessed the rather civil statements made by dancehall king Beenie Man when he, too, demonstrated his respect of and tolerance for all persons regardless of sexual orientation, which he deems a private matter. Beenie Man's declaration shows that he, too, has 'evolved' away from the anti-homosexual vitriol to a more reasoned acceptance of the right of others to be different. And while this has not stemmed the tide of anti-gay pro-gyalist lyrics emanating from dancehall, it is a step in the right direction. Many other artistes need to take a page from his book if they are to regain international respect and the privilege of working abroad in societies where these rights are observed.

SECURING RIGHTS

What started off as the Gay Freedom Movement of 1974 has evolved, and new groups have been formed to protect and lobby for the rights of LGBT and persons affected by and infected with HIV/AIDS. The most well known of them are the Jamaica Forum for Lesbians, All-Sexuals, and Gays and Jamaica AIDS Support for Life.

These organisations have worked hard to secure the rights of sexual minorities in Jamaica. The challenge is to uphold the responsibilities and to protect the rights, not just of the community, but of all Jamaicans. It is the responsibility of the LGBT support groups to participate fully in the life of the country - in those areas of public life that affect sexual minorities as well as all aspects of citizenry. It is short-sighted to believe that any real justice could be had by speaking out only when there is violation of the rights of the LGBT community.

We need to examine the real, or imagined, aversions and fears of the larger society, and address these honestly. Some of these include the belief that same-sex-attracted persons prey on underage boys and girls, and that same-sex practices are inherently more likely to increase the spread of HIV/AIDS. Other objections include what some see as inappropriate public displays of affection, displays which heterosexuals themselves do not perform in public. If the first thing a person knows about you is your sexual orientation rather than who you are or what you do, you may also be inviting public commentary on and reaction to your private life. This is indeed a challenge which immature heterosexuals and homosexuals alike face.

The myths and misconceptions surrounding the practices of the community can only be dispelled if those organisations that advocate for LGBT rights also advocate for the protection of the child, the encouragement of safe-sex practices, and all other behaviours that support the human rights of all citizens.

There used to be a Virginia Slims cigarette advertisement that had as its slogan, "You've come a long way baby". The same is true of the LGBT community. The very fact that this article and so many others exist is testament to that fact. There is a bigger picture and perhaps we need to return to public education on civics if we are to behave in a civilised manner.

US Human Rights Watch has emphasised in its recommendations ways in which the Jamaican Government could better meet external criteria for guarding the rights of all sexuals. However, other than the suggestion for the repeal of the commonly termed 'buggery law', little attention has been paid to the existing laws, statutes, and civil agreements that ensure the human rights of all citizens and how these can be upheld. More focus needs to be placed on these to ensure that the rights and responsibilities of all Jamaicans are protected.

Karen Carpenter, PhD, is a lecturer at the University of the West Indies, Mona.

(Guyana) The debate on decriminalising homosexuality – conscience vote, not party affiliation

Decriminalising homosexuality is a heated debate today all around the world. Recently, two distinguished Guyanese: Sir Shridath Ramphal(photo below), a former minister of foreign affairs and former secretary general of the Commonwealth and Ralph Ramkarran, former Speaker of the National Assembly, argued that Guyana and the Caribbean should decriminalise homosexuality.

Guyana’s National Assembly by motion also established a special select committee to address this question. This was a bold move by the National Assembly, since this is a provocative and emotional issue that is deeply polarising in all of the Caricom countries.
The United Nations Human Rights Commission (UNHRC) has mandated Guyana to adjust its laws in relation to corporal punishment in schools, the death penalty for crimes, and laws against homosexuality and to bring them in compliance with the human rights guidelines. The move to allow a special select committee to address these issues in our Parliament is as a result of the guidance from the UNHRC.

Times Notebook recently came out in support of the banning of corporal punishment in our schools. Times Notebook is also against the death penalty. We believe that the debate on the decriminalisation of homosexuality will be highly emotive. We believe that the position of Sir Shridath and Ralph Ramkarr an to decriminalise homosexuality is brave and reasonable and is consistent with the 2009 United Nations Resolution to decriminalise homosexuality. The USA and 66 other countries supported the UN Resolution.

“Unbiblical”

Recently, a South African pastor warned Jamaicans not to go down the road to decriminalise homosexuality. In Uganda, lawmakers want to subject homosexuals to the death penalty. Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe vilifies gays, lesbians, and transgender as “unbiblical” and “worse than dogs”. His characterisation of homosexuality is shared by many African leaders.

The debate relating to decriminalisation of homosexuality is not new. The Old Testament and Islam forbid sex between men. Plato who lived up to 327 years before Christ rejected homosexuality. But Aristotle who died in 322BC defended homosexuality. The Netherlands, France, and other countries with legal systems based on France’s Napoleonic code, however, removed “homosexual offences” from criminal sanctions centuries ago. Other countries in Europe also were early in decriminalising homosexuality. These include Poland (1932), Denmark (1933), and Sweden (1944).

But England, Wales and Canada decriminalised homosexuality only in 1967. Scotland did not decriminalise homosexuality until 1980. It took a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2003 before all State Statutes decriminalised homosexuality in the USA. Nicaragua abolished the crime of “sodomy” in November 2007.

Progressive developments

There have also been progressive developments enshrining provisions against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in the constitutions of Ecuador, Fiji, Portugal and South Africa. The Supreme Court of Nepal in December 2007 issued directive orders to the government of Nepal to end discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. Also in December 2007, the Bolivian Constituent Assembly approved a clause that would make Bolivia the first country in the world to prohibit in its constitution discrimination on the basis of gender identity. The Supreme Court in India ruled in 2009 that the law against homosexuality is unconstitutional.

Still, there are 76 countries in the world where homosexuality is still a crime. Guyana and all the Caricom countries fall in this category. There are also five countries in the world where homosexuality is a crime punishable by death.
Laws criminalising homosexuality exist on all continents, albeit in different forms. In some countries, consensual sex between adults of the same sex is criminalised as “sodomy”, “the abominable crime of buggery”, “crimes against nature”, “deviant sexual intercourse”, “corruption on earth”, “outrages on decency”, “unnatural acts”, or other such terms. In others, vague provisions such as “immoral acts” or “public scandal” are used to criminalise sexual behaviour of lesbians, gay men and same-sex practising, bisexual or transgender people.

Many acts of discrimination and violence are committed against people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, same-sex practising and transgender people because they are perceived as immoral. In many parts of the world, homosexuality is considered a sin and same-sex relations are dubbed “unChristian” or “unIslamic”. Many of the criminalisation laws dating back to the Victorian period of the British Empire derive from Christian religious law. Sumit Baudh notes that “the case law from India makes frequent references to bestiality, buggery and Biblical notions of the sin of Gomorrah and the sin of Sodom”.

Capital offences

In Kuwait on January 22, 2000, two women writers and their male publisher were fined and sentenced to two months in prison for writings that were said to cause harm to religion and to morality because they mentioned lesbian relationships. In March 2000, the Misdemeanours Appeal Court handed down fines to the two women. The Iranian penal code makes particular types of same-sex sexual relations capital offences under the category of hodoud crimes – crimes against divine will, for which the penalty is prescribed by Islamic law.

In December 2011, at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Australia, the Harper Government of Canada announced they will work with Commonwealth countries where homosexuality remains a crime to decriminalise homosexuality. The same announcement has been made by UK Prime Minister David Cameron, who threatened to withhold development assistance from countries unless they decriminalise homosexuality.
Times Notebook is eagerly awaiting the debate in Guyana’s National Assembly. It will be an opportunity for those who take a “rights-approach” to fundamental human rights and those who take a strict moral approach, arguing that morality takes precedence even in consensual behaviour in private. Times Notebook urges all civil groups, not just the churches, to become engage in determining the way forward for Guyana. This is an issue that must not be decided only by the politicians, but by all Guyanese.

We believe that the debate and the decision should not be based on political affiliation or ideological approaches. Times Notebook believes that this subject should be one in which our MPs debate and decide based on their own views, guided by their conscience, and not merely following party dictate.

Source

Know Your Legal Rights & Responsibilities: Detention, Arrest, Bail!!! (updated)

DETENTION
Police officers often lock up persons without charging them. The lawful detention period without charge is 24 hours. Amendments were made to Sections 50B and 50F of the Constabulary Act as part of the ‘Anti-Crime Bills’ in 2010 which extended the detention period without charge to 72 hours for a year. This was extended for another year to July, 2012 but was not re-extended afterwards.

§ You have a right to freedom from arbitrary detention.

§ The police should have reasonable grounds for detaining you and they should tell you the reason for your detention.

§ If you are being detained and not told the reason, you have a right to ask politely, the reason for your detention.

§ When detained, you have a right to communicate with and be visited by a spouse, partner or family member, religious counsellor and a medical professional of your choice.

§ You also have a right to communicate with and retain an attorney-at-law.

§ If you are detained for more than 24 hours without being charged, you can get the duty counsel or lawyer to go to court for an order for the police to release you if they are not going to charge you. This is known as habeas corpus. Habeas Corpus which literally means “bring the body” is a writ or legal action through which a person can be released from unlawful detention.

NB. The detention period may be extended under State of Emergency circumstances. However under these instances, new stipulations will be made known.

ARREST
§ The police should normally have a warrant before they arrest you.
§ They can arrest you without a warrant if:
a. you have committed a felony or the police have reasonable grounds to suspect that you are about to commit a felony;
b. you have committed a dangerous Breach of the Peace;
c. if you refuse to give your name, address, licence to a uniformed police officer after you have committed a road traffic offence.
d. if you are caught in the act of committing some minor offences.

RIGHTS ON ARREST
§ You have the right to freedom from arbitrary arrest.

§ The police should advise you of the charge against you; or if they are not charging you, they should tell you why they are arresting you.

§ When you are arrested the police should advise you that you do not have to say anything.

§ They should tell you that anything you say can be taken down and given in as evidence.
§ When arrested, you have a right to communicate with and be visited by a spouse, partner or family member, religious counsellor and a medical professional of your choice.

Responsibilities
§ NEVER Resist Arrest! 

§ SAY NOTHING Until Advised By A Lawyer.

RIGHTS ON ARREST

FINGERPRINTS AND PHOTOGRAPHS
§ You have a right NOT to have your fingerprints or photograph taken but remember you can agree for them to be taken

§ If you are suspected of being involved in certain serious offences, a Superintendent of Police or officer of higher rank can authorize that they be taken.

§ They can be taken if you are deemed incapable of consenting, eg. If you are mentally challenged.

§ A court can also order that your fingerprints be taken.

RIGHTS ON ARREST

LEGAL AID – DUTY COUNSEL
§ When arrested and taken to the police station, the police should ask you if you have an attorney.

§ If do not have an attorney, then he should refer you to a list of ‘Duty Counsel.’ You may choose one to represent you.

§ Duty Counsel is a lawyer who has agreed to provide legal aid assistance to persons arrested & detained.

§ A Duty Counsel is paid by the government – Never give Duty Counsel any money.

§ Duty Counsel is usually a ‘regular lawyer’ who donates a portion of his/her time to providing legal aid assistance – he/she is not always an Attorney from the Legal Aid Department. Even if he/she is from that department, he/she is equally capable to handle your case.

§ Once you have asked the police to contact Duty Counsel on your behalf, they should not question you until your lawyer arrives.

§ The police should allow Duty Counsel to meet with you somewhere where they cannot hear your conversation.

§ Remember everything you say to a lawyer is confidential!

§ If there is to be an identification parade ensure that your lawyer is present.

§ If you are charged and the case goes to court, the Duty Counsel may represent you for your first court appearance.

RIGHT TO BAIL – POLICE
§ Once you are charged you have a right to bail.

§ Bail must be considered within 24 hours of you being charged. 

§ For most offences bail can be granted by the police. This is known as station bail. 

§ If you are charged with an offence for which you cannot be imprisoned then the policeSHOULD in most cases grant you bail.

RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES TO BAIL – COURT
§ If police deny you bail you can request bail before a Resident Magistrate (RM).

§ If you are charged with an offence for which the police cannot grant you bail then ask to be taken to a judge as soon as possible.

§ If a court denied bail at first, you can keep applying to the same court or you can apply to a judge of the Supreme Court

TO GET BAIL
§ One (1) passport-sized picture signed by a Justice of the Peace (J.P.)

§ A valid form of identification

a. National ID

b. Drivers’ Licence

c. Passport

§ Two (2) letters of recommendation

a. JP

b. Sergeant of police or police of higher rank

§ Collateral

a. Motor vehicle statement

b. Land title without caveat

c. Bank statement

§ Proof of Address

a. A recent utility bill

UN Secretary-General's remarks to special event on "Leadership in the Fight against Homophobia" - New York, 11 December 2012

Secretary-General's remarks to special event on "Leadership in the Fight against Homophobia"
New York, 11 December 2012

Thank you all for coming to this remarkable meeting. What a meaningful way to commemorate Human Rights Day. I welcome all of the activists, supporters and others here today.

The very first article of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaims that, “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.”

All human beings – not some, not most, but all.

No one gets to decide who is entitled to human rights and who is not.

The United Nations has a proud record of combating racism, promoting gender equality, protecting children and breaking down barriers facing persons with disabilities.

We have a long way to go in all of these areas. But we are turning the tide on discrimination in both law and practice. Slowly, some old prejudices have started to dissolve.

Yet others remain in place, with horrendous consequences.

Around the world, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people are targeted, assaulted and sometimes killed. Children and teens are taunted by their peers, beaten and bullied, pushed out of school, disowned by their own families, forced into marriage … and, in the worst cases, driven to suicide.

LGBT people suffer discrimination because of their sexual orientation and gender identity at work, at clinics and hospitals, and in schools – the very places that should protect them.

More than 76 countries still criminalize homosexuality.

I am pained by this injustice. I am here to again denounce violence and demand action for true equality.

Let me say this loud and clear: lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people are entitled to the same rights as everyone else. They, too, are born free and equal. I stand shoulder-to-shoulder with them in their struggle for human rights.

I am proud that as Secretary-General I have a global platform to highlight the need to end violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

The United Nations should lead by example. I recently reiterated to all senior managers that discrimination against staff on the basis of sexual orientation will not be tolerated. I have also asked that the UN’s rules and policies be examined to ensure that the rights of our LGBT staff are protected.

More and more governments are working to tackle homophobia. Last year, the Human Rights Council adopted the first UN resolution on human rights, sexual orientation and gender identity, which expressed “grave concern” at violence and discrimination against LGBT people.

The High Commissioner for Human Rights published the first UN report dedicated to the problem, which was then debated at the Human Rights Council, marking another UN first.

The past decade has seen far-reaching reforms in Europe, the Americas and a number of Asian and African countries ... and extraordinary shifts in social attitudes in many parts of the world.

I applaud Argentina for introducing some of the most progressive legislation in the world on same-sex partnerships and gender recognition. I am pleased that we are joined today by Blas Radi, from Argentina, who helped drive the gender identity law adopted there earlier this year.

I also welcome Olena Shevchenko who leads an important human rights effort in Ukraine.

In a number of countries, including Ukraine, draft laws have been proposed that would criminalize public discussion of homosexuality – potentially making meetings such as this one illegal. I deplore these kinds of measures wherever they are introduced. They threaten basic rights, feed stigma and lead to more abuse.

We are also pleased to have Gift Trapence, a prominent human rights defender from Malawi. When I visited Malawi in 2010, two young men had just been sentenced to 14 years of hard labour for the so-called “crime” of celebrating their wedding. At my request, the then President Bingu wa Mutharika pardoned them, on the very day when I asked him, but he defended criminal sanctions. Now under the new leadership of Her Excellency President Joyce Banda, Malawi is weighing possible changes in the law. I hope Malawians take the opportunity to turn a page.

Distinguished friends,

We must all speak out against homophobia, especially those who are considered leaders in society as well as others in the public eye.

Let me say a big Bienvenido to pop sensation Ricky Martin. Muchas Gracias!
You are a wonderful role model for LGBT youth and for all people. Thank you.

I am again honoured to share the stage with Yvonne Chaka Chaka – a global superstar and a champion of development, including as a Goodwill Ambassador for UNICEF and Roll Back Malaria. Thank you very much.

Yvonne, you are known as the Princess of Africa. Today, you are our Queen of Equality.

Our guests – and you here today – have helped to open a door. We cannot let it close.

It is an outrage that in our modern world, so many countries continue to criminalize people simply for loving another human being of the same sex.
In many cases, these laws are not home-grown. They were inherited from former colonial powers.

Laws rooted in 19th century prejudices are fuelling 21st century hate. In other cases new discriminatory laws are being introduced.

These laws must go. We must replace them with laws that provide adequate protection against discrimination, including on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.

This is not optional. It is a State obligation, based on the principle of non-discrimination – a fundamental tenet of international human rights law.

We also need a broad public education effort to spread understanding and counter fear.

When I meet with leaders from around the world I raise my voice for equality for LGBT people.

Many leaders say they wish they could do more. But they point to public opinion as a barrier to progress.

I understand it can be difficult to stand up to public opinion. But just because a majority might disapprove of certain individuals does not entitle the State to withhold their basic rights.

Democracy is more than majority rule. It requires defending vulnerable minorities from hostile majorities. It thrives on diversity. Governments have a duty to fight prejudice, not fuel it.

I am deeply grateful to the cross-regional LGBT core group of Member States for bringing us together. I hope many other countries will join you.

You and I and people of conscience everywhere must keep pushing until we realize the promise of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights for all people. The freedom, dignity and equal rights that all people are born with – must be a living reality each and every day of their lives.

Thank you very much.

Is Jamaica Ready For The 'Coming Out' Party? (Gleaner commentary)

Please read and share what you think .......

George Davis, Contributor

Those of us who are living and will die by the precepts of a heterosexual lifestyle are having to confront an unpleasant but immutable reality.

This reality is that homosexuality is now firmly mainstream after years of strategic effort to have it permeate popular media. Yes, children, the moment many would've wagered would never arrive is finally here.

Rather reluctantly, the world, generally, has seemingly agreed to tolerate this alternative lifestyle, even as Christian and other groups mourn the acceleration towards perdition. Of course, Jamaica has seemingly fallen into line, despite venomous protestations written in song and chanted in the dancehall arena.

In this reality, heterosexuals have an important decision to make. How do we reconstruct our views of this new world to survive and thrive in it, with mass suicide or, for that matter, mass murder, not exercisable options? Clearly, there's need for a whole new menu of coping strategies!

But how did we get here? How did homosexuality wriggle its way into the mainstream, to be front and centre everywhere we look? The answer is startlingly simple: television.

Television's mass appeal makes it the ideal vehicle to drive home this tolerance of the gay lifestyle. The first gay couple on screen was Martin Sheen and Hal Holbrook in the 1972 ABC-produced, made-for-TV movie,That Certain Summer. The first sitcom to have an openly gay character was Soap in 1977, with acclaimed actor Billy Crystal playing the role of Jodie Dallas.

Those two programmes, especially the latter, forced the door ajar and sought to establish homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle. This early momentum was particularly important, given the lifestyle's setback during the mid-1980s towards the fin de siècle when it was associated with the spread of HIV/AIDS. Several series, including the wildly amusing British comedies Are You Being Served? and Allo Allo, featured characters that were obviously gay but which were toned down by the producers as a kind of 'soft sell' to the audience.

Productions such as Melrose Place, Roseanne and Friends all cast gay characters before the ABC drama series, Relativity, turned things up a notch with an openly lesbian scene with passionate, open-mouthed kissing. Then followed Queer as Folk and The L Word. Hit sitcom, Will & Grace, about a gay 'couple' and their heterosexual women friends, mirrored the real-life experience of girls and their cosy relationship with 'guys'.

American television then delivered a poster girl for homosexuality in the form of talk-show host Ellen Degeneres, who broke ground for people like British funnyman Graham Norton. The role these persons played helped to foster gay lifestyle tolerance and helped the rest of us to see gays as being ordinary people too.

Nowadays, you can watch nothing on TV without homosexuality having some thematic relevance. Animated series such as Family Guy, The Simpsons and American Dad have gay references in almost every episode. For those repulsed by this lifestyle, there's literally nowhere to run.

SPORTS PERSONALITIES 'COMING OUT'

Television exists for news and information, but mainly for entertainment. Sport is the biggest element in the entertainment industry. Gays have not missed the chance to leverage the lifestyle through sport.

The first high-profile sportsman to admit to homosexuality was NBA player John Amaechi. The Briton wisely did so only after retiring from the game. The former captain of the Welsh rugby team, Gareth Thomas, stunned the manliest of all sports by announcing he was gay in 2009. England's reserve wicketkeeper, Steve Davies, announced he was gay in 2011 after admitting to the torture of having to hide his orientation from teammates. Only last month, the Manchester United goalkeeper, Anders Lindegaard, wrote an article imploring gay footballers to come out. Those of us who support the Red Devils breathed a sigh of relief when he mentioned 'my girlfriend' in the article!

The relevant question for heterosexual Jamaicans is, how will we cope in this age of the homosexual? The joke among my friends is that in 20 years' time, it'll be us, heterosexuals, who'll be in the minority. How much do we tolerate? How do we react to the flaunting of this lifestyle? How do we raise our children? How do we respect the rights of others while enforcing our right to be respected?

This thing called life. It isn't easy at all.

Selah.

George Davis is a journalist. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and george.s.davis@hotmail.com.

Meanwhile a response has come:
Letter sent to the “journalist” who wrote this ridiculously uninformed piece.

Hello Mr. Davis,
Thanks for your column published in today's edition of the Jamaica Gleaner under the caption "Is Jamaica ready for the 'coming Out party.' It provided me with a good laugh.

I was particularly amused by your expressed fear that heterosexuals will someday be in the minority if homosexuality is legalized. Implied in that statement is a belief that most heterosexuals (perhaps you included?) are closet gays who are just waiting for the legalization of homosexuality so they can come out! Although I don’t know you, I rather doubt that you are gay. Quite frankly, I would be disappointed if you were. As Professor Rex Nettleford, Vice Chancellor of the University of the West Indies, is reported to have responded to one of his many homophobic attackers: “Homosexuality is an intellectual disease to which you are immune.”

As much as it pains me, I will address the “substantive” point in your article. In this regard, please note that in South Africa, homosexuals have been constitutionally protected for nearly 20 years, and yet the country still manages to maintain a heterosexual majority! France legalized homosexuality in 1792 and yet, the French still are mostly heterosexual. I could cite other examples, but I think you get the point. The fact is, as far back as 1948, the famed researcher, Kinsey identified that only about 9-10% of any population is homosexual. Recent research has shown that figure to be closer to 3-5%. This variation in human sexuality has been mirrored in nature where close to 450 species (including swans, lions and penguins) have exhibited homosexual tendencies.

And as for your other concern about how you poor heterosexuals will handle the "flaunting" of homosexuality, I guess you will just have to develop the coping mechanisms we gays have had to in order to deal with heterosexual “flaunting”, which is simply to mind your own business. I am sure you are able to survive when you visit such countries as the US and Canada, where homosexuality is not criminalized and where people have learned to "live and let live."

Frankly, your "fears" reveal a startling lack of knowledge for a journalist. Please save yourself from future embarrassment and do some rudimentary investigations before you attempt to speak on something as controversial as human sexuality. I am more than willing to provide you with research material and until then, perhaps the cartoon animation in this link will prove enlightening as it communicates at the level you clearly can understand http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYMjXucTFaM.

Without such basic information, your pieces will feed into the vicious anti-gay animus which has had horrific consequences in our country, as evidenced by the UTech attack. And that, I assure you is decidedly NOT amusing.

Best regards,
Maurice Tomlinson

Kingston Homeless MSM Evicted (yet again) ...........

After the first town hall meeting held in years by the Jamaica Forum for Lesbians Allsexuals and Gays, JFLAG on November 7th as planned by the country control representative of Jamaica from the Global Fund with the other major parties absent and the last major discussion on the matter on Television Jamaica's All Angles program as hosted by Dionne Jackson Miller myself and others concerned were relieved in a sense but cautiously optimistic and guarded as to what was being told to us as we knew the previous Safe House Pilot project experience and its subsequent dubious closure has made us the wiser to many things.

The town hall meeting was to have addressed the designated shelter facility JFLAG was said to have secured and had even gone as far as to cost the labour repair bill at approximately $1.5m, they had also decided to go with the facility as is, the procurement of furniture was also said to be in full swing yet the planned opening date never seemed to have materialised which was slated for December 1. A draft of the programme was slated for the ready by November 12th and the assessments to select who would be deemed suited for the facility was slated for November 14th. All of the developmental work and or achievements were to be communicated or disseminated to those in attendance at the meeting as per questions raised by yours truly on the breakdown of the programs and the psycho social activities for the men and other matters.

None of the aforementioned has come as promised by the Executive Director Mr Dane Lewis which is not surprising to those who have had to communicate with JFLAG over the years as follow-up is not one of their strongest features and is a complaint echoed by others who engage the J, 

now a full month after that infamous town hall meeting and 6 days after the scheduled opening of the shelter comes this news of another public spectacle eviction of the men with the authorities involved this time around, the last such one in August of this year only had the truckers/movers involved and that too was filmed and broadcast on television in prime time. 

See CVM TV's previous story in August HERE and More on Cargill Avenue Homeless MSM Eviction

Word has also come that the deal to rent the intended facility has fallen through but not a word was said to most. The planned shelter would have gone counter to the respective town planning codes and no insurance available it was scrapped, all this came to be sans the grand announcement and townhall meeting which to me was foolhardy to have been called in the first place without properly ensuring all was well and signed off on.

How many errors must we continue to see happen with the J's programs personnel? 

How many more such news as this eviction are we to continue to see with this population?

When are the appropriate responses to come into full effect?

Will JFLAG or Jamaica AIDS Support for Life for that matter under whose leadership the previous Safe House Pilot project was set up and controversially closed ever own up to some responsibility with this see-sawing involving themselves and the populations?

Are the agencies really serious about social issues or more concerned about the legal advocacy and the repeal of buggery?

It was just on December 3 that there was another standoff between the men and staff at JASL where one of the men in particular stripped bear before gracing the staff with the colourful Jamaican curse words that there are. Then after the eviction the cops took the men to none other than JASL's office grounds and the cops were there again today. There was also a major clash between a male JFLAG staff member and a member of the homeless group after the World AIDS Day function ended at the Jamaica AIDS Support for Life grounds where a machete was allegedly pulled by the member on the man, the man however left the property soon afterwards. Things just seem to be spiralling uncontrollably. 

Bearing in mind also that some of the present set of males in this very group were once apart of the defunct Safe House Pilot with peer educator training and all to boot and were incarcerated at one point yet here we have this rebellious behaviour which clearly tells anyone objective enough that simple peer educator HIV prevention training is NOT rehabilitation and to pass off such to anyone is flat out dishonest as has been done before when the aforementioned agencies refer to trying other mechanisms to engage the men but they have not worked. 

Can problematic homeless MSM be engaged without the necessary pre-stabilization work first be done before any form of re-socialization is brought to bear? 

Everyone else seems more interested in the lime light of buggery reviews, accepting awards and such at the expense of some dirty homeless men, who cares really? The real work that is needed with this group nobody in advocacy really want to take that on as it won't involve major sound bites or hyped media appearances so the group is systematically ignored save and except for a view persons like me or when national TV stations carry the challenges nationally in prime time. 

Past members of the GLABCOM (gay lesbian bisexual community) committees for example who helped to form the ideas together for the initial homeless shelter back in 2008/9 now look on in shock and are wondering how our work has gone down in vain when such a solution was enacted though problem plagued and poor management but the project as I always say could have been tweaked, things never had to reach this stage.

See some historical posts on this matter from related blogs:

Gay Jamaica Watch

GLBTQJA (Blogger)

GLBTQJA (Wordpress)  

Also see the double murder story of two of the men in June of this year (not a homophobic crime) and my response.

The inherent lack of attention to social justice issues over the years and more emphasis on the anti buggery agenda has also caused the issue to go unnoticed for extended periods as MSM are often only engaged via HIV prevention messaging more so than anything else by respective NGOs.

latest podcast (subject to updates)

The agency has hired 24 hour canine security for their offices, yet again to avoid the clashes within the last couple of days. Please see the Television Jamaica December 6 version of the story below where we get more insight into the various places the men have moved to, remember also to check the homeless MSM tab below for previous entries from as far back as 2009 when I first started looking at this issue from the announcement of the ultimatum by Jamaica AIDS Support for Life at the time and subsequent closure in December 2009. Their voices count too and as Human Rights Day comes with the theme; My Voice, My Right, My Voice Counts it is sad that most times the men get some news on them it is from the mainstream or bloggers like myself and all for the wrong reasons yet JFLAG when it does speak on the issue is usually when it is called to defend itself in a sense or from other non LGBT representatives such as the member of parliament for the area as the video clip will bring to bear.

On the blog of the former Executive Director of JASL she shared her views on the Safe House Pilot Project she was attached to and helped initiate with assistance and valuable input from the defunct GLABCOM (Gay Lesbian Bisexual Community) Steering Committee of which I was apart, now you can appreciate my long standing interest in this matter and why I blog the way I have been doing since 2009 regarding the homeless MSM, eyebrows were raised from December 2009 when the ultimatum was given by JASL for the men housed at that facility to move due to uncontrollable behaviour without the possible tweaking and stabilization work being done, the building was turned into JFLAG's office soon after which has left a bitter taste in the mouths of many.


see this post from 2009: Homeless MSM to feel the pinch as JASL issues ultimatum then we started to see the early consequences of the closure: Complaint of "Freaky Gays" Harassing New Kingston .. and Homelessness still a major problem the cracks had gotten wider to the present scenarios. 

click below to see more - 

The pilot homeless shelter programme – the original truth

also see from the June 13th (non-homophobic)double murder click: 

JFLAG’s needs to accept some responsibility for the Trafalgar Murders ….. homelessness not properly addressed


Here is my podcast then on the shelter idea when it postured on national television


Peace and tolerance

H

(editorial note: MSMs has often been used instead of the correct acronym "MSM" as a colloquial expression more so than a typographical error, thanks for the observation readers none the less)