The Flip Side: A response to the MSM homeless controversy

Contributed by Concerned Citizen close to the happenings

also from the same advocate in 2010 on the then Safe House issue and its closure:

Response to the Shelter issue from a concerned advocate

THE FLIP SIDE: A RESPONSE TO THE HOMELESS ISSUE CONTROVERSY.

At the time of this article—August 23rd—

There have been no shortage of other articles dealing with the now much-discussed homeless boys’ situation. I am closer to this topic than most due to geographic location but also through advocacy as well. I am, however, firstly a private citizen and that is in the capacity with which this article is submitted. It is for all to understand with a broad mind the issues at hand. It is not to judge or profess support in any capacity. It is plainly a document that hopefully helps all to find a middle-ground.

The Observer story that came out this past Sunday raises more questions than answers. For one, it raises the acknowledgement that the street boys have been cast out of their homes and communities. Up to this point, I have not heard the media or even supporters of their cause hone in on this adequately. This abject, cultural homophobia must be analyzed first even before we can sensationalize the supposed ban by the two organizations, Jamaica AIDS Support for Life (JASL) and J-FLAG.

For, if families are educated to love their gay sons/daughters more, then it lessens the amount of homeless people both organizations have to deal with. I know that both organizations have been successful in re-tooling the thought process of many families to reunite them to the once castaways. In such a proposition, both organizations function. It is left up to the rest of civil society to now pick up on this issue and not rely on JASL or J-FLAG alone. It is time the Church, politicians and social groups realize that they too have a huge part to play. Advocates opposed to both organizations must realize as well the strain (financial and otherwise) on both and realize that we’re trying to do as much as possible with the little we have at our disposal.

My second point is that while some of the street boys claim that they have lost the support of both organizations, the media reports have not really analyzed this. These guys have not been ‘thrown out’ to the extent where they are not welcomed. In fact, even when JASL operated the safe house, a lot of the guys still preferred to be on the street vis-à-vis on the property. Essentially, the behaviour pattern of these guys has not changed overtime. This was the case before the safe house, during and now after. It’s not as if they were perfectly-behaving angels then as soon as the program ended they turned devils.

What the Observer doesn't credit either is the fact that the guys had a safe house to begin with. I do not know of any other organization locally that operates one and if that’s the case then isn’t it about time that changes? On the flip side though, the piece did not press either organization on whether they provide outreach services which the guys have flatly said they do not. If this is so, then both Boards need to clarify because there is a definite need out there.

I can confirm too that both Mr. Lewis and Miss Levermore (heads of the respective organizations) have tolerated more than most other organizations would have. So much so that they have borne the brunt of the close neighbours and the landlady of the premises on occasions. Their collective fault though is ca lack of communication…to neighbours, to the minority groups and for the various programs aimed at the community. They need to engage more and trust that there are others out there willing to assist. It isn't easy being in either’s shoes as there are many dissenting voices and an unwilling landscape. Everyone is waiting for their leadership to either elevate or fail. It is easy to look like a villain too when a minority complains and you’re the ‘big, bad bully’.

For one thing that these guys draw on quickly is how JASL expected them to change behavior overnight. I’m very iffy about this because that is a cop-out that no one buys. They behave when they want to and carry on badly when they want to. J-FLAG in fact never tackled the issue of behavior modification because it wrongly felt that threatened the rights of such persons…irrespective if that behavior was a threat to anyone else. In short, they ended up providing a sort of ‘special right’ to these guys, they very special right that the majority of heterosexuals are dead set against. It has only been recently that J-FLAG realized that this acceptance of bad behaviour was damaging and therefore it is the organization’s lack of forward-thinking that has caught up with it. If you allowed someone to do something before without much concern, of course they would react violently if you then start to intervene.

This homeless group is not a group to self-cleanse either, so they cannot be relied upon to weed out their own bad members. Their fights have shed blood on the compound, threatened staff and the other tenants and even draw the attention of passers-by in a very distracting manner, weakening their claims. And they were selling gay sex to begin with, that’s how they got in the homeless program to begin with.

Their claim of the care packages not being delivered is one JASL must answer to however as that is a serious allegation. Indeed, if JASL is intent on keeping the unruly ones out then that must be a type of solution. What is the real solution? I do not know but JASL and J-FLAG must be pro-active and show that their outreach efforts can help these guys but not be held hostage to them either. Everyone (from the former E.D. and sympathizers) must play their part too and help the guys understand that they are but a part of the organization’s target group, not the entirety. The sooner the better before things escalate even more.

ENDS

Some historical refernces

Here is some historical background that involves this man:

1) Disturbing Repeat homophobic cases - published February 2010

2) Former homeless man attacked again - published January 2010

3) Police Harassment of homeless men - published August 2009

4) Gay Party DVD reveller on the run - published June 2009

also from 2010 when the previous agitations from the ground occurred

MSMs employ Civil Disobedience to get Board's Attention ....

also see today's happenings

The dark side to the homeless issue ..............

AUDIO post on the proceedings

Other sides to the msm homeless saga by glbtqja2

also see this post from GLBTQJA on Wordpress

The Problematic “Battyman Entitlement” phenom, homelessness & LGBT safe spaces