The unease with the advocates

Well for some yes it was an uneasy time as last night's April 20th Open Mic Open Soul free expression session that occurred at the Oasis with several persons turning up earlier than normal as the guest for the evening was AIDSFREEWORLD Consultant and letter writing advocate Maurice Tomlinson. The session was to discuss the recently passed Charter of Rights and the missing elements relating to sexual orientation among other things plus some upcoming activities from his end and the usual poetry and expressive activities, also present was the Executive Director of Jamaica Forum for Lesbians Allsexuals and Gays, JFLAG, the brown teddy bear Mr. Dane Lewis. Well apart from their lateness and the fact we had to wait a while for the proceedings to begin a few persons were asking why was there this aloofness by the gentlemen from the rest of the audience?

Things go off to a start non the less and we were all expecting to get far better particulars of the recently passed Charter of Rights instead what we got was a shortened version of sexuality rights in Jamaica with the Charter and a direction to google the Charter and read it for ourselves and then a list of what JFLAG has done and intends to do which bored the audience with persons walking around while some remain seated at one point, in essence a PR stunt to sedate the criticisms coming from the community, this had many after the guest's part of the session ended wondering what was that all about? One upset female voiced her concerns and said she wanted to understand the Charter better as she had seen Mr. Tomlinson on television some nights before on the issue and didn't quite understand some of the nuances, she continued that as a teacher she wanted to go back to her students to have a better exchange with them on the matter, she questioned what was going to be done towards those on the streets? ironically a cry that has been championed on this and my sister blogs. It was refreshing to hear another same gender attracted female voice openly concerns for sections of the MSM community, it shows persons are thinking and want more than just the run of the mill.

There were several pronouncements which also waxed cold with some members of the audience and left many to wonder if this is the kind of forumatic activity we should expect in the near future as according to Maurice they want to engage the community further, this of course came after the prodding of the hostess the capable Stacy who voiced her opinion that all parties in their own right need to be brought together to attack the issues at hand, she also said her space is available for meetings and other activities deemed beneficial to the community. The pomp of the gentlemen not using pseudonyms in their advocacy work as if to suggest those who do are somehow of a lesser breed was not well received, I ignored it but I realized afterwards when there was a suggestion to have them return for follow up sessions, two persons in particular were vociferous in their resolve and vowed they wouldn't attend any of those sessions because of the perceived contemptuous tone.

This is the first appearance by Mr. Tomlinson at the Oasis let's hope persons who were in attendance last night do not have that negative impression of him forever as they say first impression last.

AIDSFREEWORLD and the J seemed more interested however in the Buggery Law and its decriminalization more so than any inter community issues which many felt are also to be dealt with hand in hand as we try to move forward along with the poor communication issues. Again another excuse was given that there are demands locally and internationally on JFLAG's time (this while the ED of JFLAG himself is sitting quietly which was the clue that persons used to arrive at the PR stunt position) as Mr. Tomlinson explained away, the JFLAG ED then broke his silence and commented that the Pink Report (local bloggers) were seconded to do that part but they haven't been doing so, that explanation was not accepted by some in the audience as evidenced in the unease. So it seems that there is a image repair campaign going on but it's not going down well, another clear evidence of the unfavourable feelings that persons have of the group was evidenced in the expression section of the night's activity, the poems, recitals and opinion pieces that followed the departure of the two gentlemen immediately after their presentation were deeply questioning where are we as lgbt people and the feeling of ineffectiveness, one individual in particular lamented that he was tired of the foolishness, for my part in the exchange that followed I suggested that ordinary people are going to have to make up their minds to do their part however small to move us forward and leave or ignore the establishment, it's up to us now.

Many agreed with the conclusion made by a male participant when he answered his own question of why the J doesn't have the community support? he said because they are not prepared to properly engage the community and see people as people not numbers or victims.

"They must embrace the community or forget it, mi nuh have nuh time fi waste"

More and more persons though not exposed to advocacy either as volunteers, recipients of services and interventions or through other means are seeing the glaring disconnect and elitism. Another female from the audience likened the tone and presentation of the guests as local politicians who feel they are the be all and end all and we are to just follow.

I observed as best as I could the proceedings to try and get a glimpse of how persons are feeling and also not to obstruct the other voices that are starting to come through especially at this space, there are no other spaces at this time that offer this kind of cathartic activity coupled with the recognition of community development on a regular basis.

There were some good points however those on the history of the Buggery Law and some reasons for its removal, the need to used allies, the need to do proper research and documentation and reporting matters to the police were well received.

for some ........... If we are to move forward:

1) this feeling that there is a race to see who is doing it better has to go

2) this feeling that they (the advocates) are our betters and we must be relegated as subjects must go

3) we must agree to disagree

4) remove the grandstanding and self promotion and get the work done

5) allow other points of view to flow and develop

6) remove the insulation and secrecy

7) see people as people, human rights are for humans not for intellectual masturbation on paper or legal gymnastics

Those were just some of the ideas, pointers and suggestions put forward afterwards but this is not the first time we have had sections of the community voice their concerns, problem is they are not often voiced loudly enough or sent directly to the targets of the criticisms or placed as opinion pieces as I do here on this medium.

It was only some weeks ago on April 7th when the same attitude was exhibited by the Programs Manager of the J who was guest speaker at the same Open Mic event where he also tried to present JFLAG's view of how they think they are to be speaking on our behalf of course this is without any form of serious consultations or feedback from the body politic. Sadly the international community has been duped for a long time into believing that all is rosy on the representation front by the advocates in Jamaica on LGBT issues when more than 3/4 of us (my terms) are not even recognized but that is slowly being ebbed away by the coming out of more independent voices. There are young folks out there who have never heard of advocacy or JFLAG for that matter, we better recognize that.

See from the Wordpress Edition:

The More Things Change The More They Stay The Same ….. JFLAG’s Prescriptive Culture Still Exists

and from Gay Jamaica Watch

Real Advocacy or not?

I do hope that they the presenters also picked up on the mood of the audience at this session and realize that a major change in attitude, image and culture is required urgently, I go even further to suggest a total paradigm shift. I am looking for an organization with an open door policy, just as how it asks for tolerance directly or through its emissaries of the mainstream it should be tolerant of the very ever diversifying community it says it serves. We also on the outside cannot sit and wait for their transformation, we have to take matters into our own hands as well.

A special thanks to the Couture Elements team despite the ostracism and difficulties of the past in another dispensation found it needed to accommodate the J, this shows a high level of maturity and the recognition of the greater need of the community as a whole

Peace and tolerance

H

Anthony Gomes on the Discrimination debate (Sexual Orientation)

Again we see what could possibly be described as an attempt to hijack the debate on sexual orientation to sneak in all kinds of non essesntials to the mix, this notion that the United Nations is imposing some new way to human rights simply because it doesn't please some "moralists" Anthony Gomes included is sticking some folks the wrong way it seems.

So rights must be for some but not for others because they are of a different sexual orientation Mr. Gomes?

Have a read of his latest below and determine the issues for yourself as published in the Jamaica Observer:

The discrimination debate

The newspaper article, "The right to discriminate" strikes at the heart of the fundamental right to discriminate as a tenet of free will, that resulted in a flurry of recrimination by readers who considered Deacon Peter Espeut's opinion to be out of order. Democracy at work!

The first part of his article deals with a clause in the Charter of Rights which would make discrimination on the basis of language unconstitutional. He makes a strong case against any move to introduce patois as a second language. His observation includes an example of the possibility for bilingual labelling, to be used as a non-tariff barrier for the importation of foreign products. He states: "It is overkill to enshrine in the Constitution the right of non-discrimination on the grounds to achieve judicial equality for Jamaican Creole speakers who are not proficient in Standard English - a problem caused by the failure of the education system." Canada and Wales are two bilingual countries where fluency in both national languages is necessary for government employees, and public notices must be in both languages in designated areas.

The second part of Deacon Espeut's treatise deals with the thorny issue of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. The British Government introduced the Sexual Orientation (Provision of Goods and Services) Regulations which are diametrically opposed to the Christian teaching dealing with homosexuality, casting the state in the role of moral transgressor. An adverse side effect of the British-proposed regulations could force Christian marriage preparation, guidance counsellors, retreat houses, conference centres and hostels to accept gay couples. Teaching that homosexuality is the moral equivalent of heterosexual marriage could also be compulsory in religious schools.
In Jamaica, could this ever come to pass at Campion College, St George's College, Immaculate Conception High School, Alpha Convent of Mercy School, Holy Childhood High School and the list of Roman Catholic schools continues... in addition to the many other Christian schools? The official Vatican newspaper reported: "The Catholic Church contests these revolutionary innovations which in the name of freedom, seek to legitimise a union regarded by the universal consciousness as going against nature." In 2000 the British Government reduced the age for permissible gay sex from 18 to 16 to provide equality under the law for homosexuals and heterosexuals.
As with the British leadership, there could be a raft of adverse side effects if the Jamaican churches clash with the state on non-discrimination against homosexuals. It should be recalled that Jamaica is considered to be a Christian country with a profonderance of Christian schools, where the characters of the young are forged on the basis of Christian principles that do not accept homosexuality as an alternative lifestyle for marriage between a man and a woman. This is the essence of Jamaican culture that precludes gay sex that is deeply unpopular as evidenced by both the Observer and Gleaner polls. Any government which attempts to displace this long-standing tradition and belief by repealing the sodomy law would be committing political suicide.

There are numerous pressure groups attempting to infiltrate Jamaica's culture by asserting their lifestyles as normal practice. Besides homosexuals, these groups include the pro-abortionists, the ganja lobby, the polygamists and the polyandrous protagonists, the believers in euthanasia, the supporters of decriminalisation of drugs and those lobbying to legalise male and female prostitution. This is happening in parallel with the media concerning lewd and sexually explicit public expression, which had developed unfettered over the years until it has reached critical and culturally damaging proportions, resulting in the recently publicised reprimand issued by the Broadcasting Commission. Any attempt to enshrine non-discrimination in the Charter of Rights on the basis of sexual orientation would be fallacious, as the male lifestyle includes illegal associations which do not conform to the national standard of natural behaviour.

The Declaration of Human Rights and Sexual Orientation tabled in the United Nations in 2008, as reported by Attorney-at-law Shirley Richards, sought to expand the existing human rights concept to include "sexual orientation" and gender identity as human rights. The declaration was not supported by Jamaica. Simultaneously, a contrary proposal stated that the declaration was an "attempt to introduce to the UN notions that have no legal foundation in any human rights instrument". There appears to be no UN consensus on including sexual orientation and gender identity as human rights. Obviously, the power brokers at the UN are hell-bent on imposing a new version of human rights on the rest of the unwilling world. It is an attempt to assert the moral equivalence of all forms of sexual preferences and to harm moral and sound discernment, all in the name of "human rights".

This point deserves serious recognition by the government, particularly with regard to the potential for lifestyle deviation of Jamaican youth.

A prominent columnist asserts that "homosexuality is not an unpreventable disease, it is an option. It is learned behaviour, practised by more and more people who simply disregard the limits of personal conduct as well as God-given principles and morals". Apart from being in tune with the changing times, contemporary liberalism has gone beyond the realm of propriety in its expectations. Society is replete with demands to liberalise the very constraints that are there to protect citizens from doing themselves harm.

With that said, we welcome the newly appointed Archbishop of Kingston, Charles Dufour, in anticipation of his entry into the debate on discrimnination.

Smear campaign on Hedonism III using biphobia ??

So it seems as the longstanding rift between the Gordon Butch Stewart owned Sandals Resorts versus the Issa owned Hedonism properties has once again spilled over into the public domain coincidentally the Jamaica Observer where the spillage has taken place is also owned by Gordon Butch Stewart, the rivalry between the powerful names in the hotel industry is not lost to us remember the nude wedding drama years ago that was supposed to have taken place at Hedonism III which caused a national uproar especially from the Christian right movement with the papers blaring? among other things.

The world's largest Nude Wedding. February 14th 2003 at the Hedonism III Resort in Jamaica. http://www.nakedworldrecords.com/wedd.htm

The largest nude wedding took place 2003 in Jamaica with 29 couples getting married at the same time. The wedding was held at Hedonism III in Runaway Bay, Jamaica on Valentine's Day. The couples involved people of various cultures, ethnicities, and backgrounds including a person from Russia, a Canadian, and an American Indian person from the Crow Tribe. The ceremony was conducted by Rev. Frank Cervasio of the Universal Life Church in Florida. Participants of the event were required to stay a minimum of 4 days, and arrive on February 12, two days before the marriage ceremony.

All of a sudden the Observer publishes parts of the transcript of the suit filed by the Issa camp recently, what's the intent of that? and to use such a bi-phobic line (see below) to push their agenda is disturbing indeed. To use so called moral suasion playing on society's caustic regard for anything deem gay or such while ignoring the valued privacy people are free to enjoy, so what if persons subscribe to an event to be held on private property for a fee they should be free to do so what the hell is the Observer trying to get at?

Here is the article, you decide for yourselves:

'Wild Women Vacation' promoted bisexual party at Hedonism

ON March 29, 2005, the Observer published a letter titled "Naked flights to Jamaica" criticising the promotion by a travel website on behalf of Hedonism III, operated by SuperClubs. Its chairman, John Issa, sued the newspaper for defamation in the Supreme Court, in connection with which a ruling was recently handed down. Following are excerpts from the transcript of the trial in Justice Kay Beckford's court:
Charles Piper (Observer's attorney): "...It says, in the (online) ad itself it says 'Wild Women Vacation the No 1 bisexual fantasy is now a reality'?...Is that part of the image of your hotel?"

Issa: "Well, this being advertised it is part of the image."

Piper: "And it has always been part of the image of the Hedonism brand?"

Issa: "No."

Piper: "... It advertise Threesome Week'?"

Issa: "Yes, I see that."

Piper: "Do you know what that means?"

Issa: "No."

Piper: "Well, let's read on and see if we get some understanding. It says, 'January 9 to 16, 2010, and there is no place better to fill these desires but at the place where pleasure has been perfected, Hedonism III.' Who attend this event? And here is the answer: 'Couples who already have a girlfriend seeking similar couples. Couples who want to learn how to go about starting a MFF relationship, lesbian or female bisexual couples looking to expand their experiences with others'. That was what was being sold, correct?"

Issa: "Yes."

Piper: "...Do you know what is a 'MFF Relationship'?"
Issa: "No."

Piper: "I am suggesting that it's a male female female relationship. Your answer, sir?

Issa: "Oh, what's the question? Justice Beckford: "It's a suggestion."

Piper: "...I want you to read those words again."

Issa: "Which words?"

Piper: "Couples who already have a girlfriend seeking similar couples. Couples who want to learn how to go about starting a MFF relationship, lesbians or female bisexual couples looking to expand their experiences with others."

Issa: "Yes, I see that."

Piper: "...Very well. So the person who was there placing the ad is Wild Women Vacation, correct?"

Issa: "That's what it appears to be."

Piper: "Well let's look at page 204?...I want you to look at the fourth paragraph. It says:

'The first bisexual party Sunday night at our hospitality suite is different on every trip. Sometimes it can get very active, very fast while other times virtually nothing occurs. It all depends on the women. Some women are exhibitionists who love to stir things up quickly, while (some) are voyeurs and others are only seeking an intimate one and one relationship with nobody around except maybe a husband or boyfriend. We do have an adjoining room for those who wish privacy or once you find those whom you are comfortable with, returning to your own room with your new friends is not uncommon. Husbands and boyfriends are invited to attend but can only watch. They all manage to survive.' You agree with me that that is part of the vacation package which was being offered by Wild Women Vacation."

Issa: "That's what it appears to be."

Piper: "And these women were being accommodated in Hedonism III, your hotel?"
Issa: "The people booked by Wild Woman Vacation were accommodated at Hedonism III and also some were in Las Vegas."

To be continued

Rev Clinton Chisholm on Defending Discrimination & Consensual Sex Revisited

In a letter to the Gleaner well respected Theologian Rev Clinton Chisholm challenges that the call for repulsion of the buggery law using consent is not a convincing argument, also below is one of his latest blog posts as well:

Consensual Sex Revisited

THE EDITOR, Sir:
"To be clear, our position is neither an endorsement nor rejection of homosexuality. Frankly, we do not care. How consenting adults choose to live their lives is none of our business." (Gleaner editorial, April 1, 2011)

To some, the above sentiment of the editorial is progressive, politically correct and defensible. To me, it is dangerous and disingenuous.
I say the editorial's posture is disingenuous because it seems to reflect a neutral position about homosexuality, but this veneer of neutrality is blown to pieces by the realisation that the position of the editorial is not neutrality, but indictable moral ambivalence/indifference about homosexuality summed up in the words " we do not care".
How can a responsible and prestigious media organisation - which influences public opinion - claim it is none of its business "how consenting adults choose to live their lives"?

The editorial's posture is societally dangerous in that how people live their lives sexually is critical to the society's health concerns and even continued existence.

Ponder the societal consequence of universalising homosexuality as the sexual norm!
Can one be really socially responsible but ambivalent about consensual homosexual sex, consensual adultery, consensual incest, consensual sadomasochistic sex given the relational implications of such acts beyond even the health costs of dealing with AIDS and other STIs? Has the editor given thought to the social cost of pregnancies deemed unwanted by putative parents, and especially, the impact of absentee father figures on the lives of our young men?

Not enough moral justification

Let us get it clear in our minds: Consensuality, even along with privacy and age maturity, does not constitute adequate moral justification for sexual behaviour, without more, as the lawyers would say.
If we hold the view that a certain sexual behaviour is morally defensible, let's have the moral courage to be upfront and say so and not hide behind a thin veneer of neutrality. Homosexuality may indeed need to be decriminalised and the buggery law expunged, but the reasons for doing so must be more convincing than simply moral ambivalence or apathy about what consenting adults do sexually.

I am, etc.,
CLINTON CHISHOLM (Rev)

clintchis@yahoo.com

The Blog post

Defending Discrimination:

In the Jamaica Gleaner editorial of April 1, one aspect of the new proposed Constitutional Charter of Rights was given prominence; freedom from discrimination. There is much conceptual fuzziness and thus an indefensible aversion to the term discrimination.

As I argued in my 1997 book A Matter of Principle, “[discrimination] is not necessarily a bad thing. For me the essence of the wrongness of racial or gender discrimination is not that people, on the basis of ethnic stock, colour or gender are discriminated against but that they are demeaned and despised specifically on the basis of colour, ethnic stock or gender…

One does, indeed one has to discriminate in selecting a spouse, employees, lecturers, students, journalists, columnists, speakers and others.

The criteria of discrimination may vary depending on what are considered vital qualifications in the minds of those doing the selection, but we do discriminate, that is, we preferentially select or choose not to do so.

As long as the individual or group being discriminated against is not thereby demeaned or despised, discrimination seems justifiable.”(p.78)

I would now modify the sentences with “demeaned and despised’ to read demeaned, despised or [economically] deprived of what is due and deserved…”

We need conceptual clarity in public discourse. In another piece I’ll raise definitional questions on the editorial’s use of ‘sexual orientation’, ‘homophobia’ and even the term ‘homosexuality’.

ENDS

Rev. Clinton Chisholm studied at the Jamaica Theological Seminary (B.Th.), the Jamaica School of Music (L.R.S.M., A.T.C.L.), theUniversity of the West Indies (B.A.), Sheffield University, England(M.A.), the International Academy of Apologetics, Evangelism & Human Rights, France (F.C.A., Fellow in Christian Apologetics) and Biola University, USA, (M.A.) In 2005 he was awarded the honourary Doctor of Divinity degree (D.D) by the Caribbean Graduate School of Theology in Jamaica where he served as a Guest Lecturer since 1993. The Rev. Mr. Chisholm has been involved in education at home in Jamaica and abroad, having served as High School teacher, lecturer at the Jamaica Theological Seminary, guest lecturer at the Caribbean Graduate School of Theology (Jamaica), tutor in Philosophy at the University of the West Indies (Mona, Jamaica), tutor in Business Ethics at the University of Technology (Jamaica) and teaching assistant in Hebrew at Sheffield University, England. He has produced 25 educational audio cassettes, the latest being “Homosexuality: Clinical & Biblical Perspectives”, “Afrocentrism & Black Consciousness: Challenges for Christianity” and “The Church’s Impact on Western Civilization”. He is the author of the book “A Matter of Principle” and “Revelations on Ras Tafari“