Bus conductress defends herself

Not very often we get real stories of same gender lovers who decide in public that a situation is just basically nonsensical and do something about it with some relative success, such was the case of a coaster bus conductress, a rarity these days on the streets as most coaster informal transportation systems, a carry over from the dark days of the eighties following the closure of the old bus company the Jamaica Omnibus Service, J.O.S now in a sense renamed and reinvented as the Jamaica Urban Transit Corporation JUTC. Women usually seen occasionally on coaster buses are feminine in terms as the culture of transportation from the previous systems had mostly females as bus personnel and males as drivers. That has however changed drastically during the tenure of the Peoples National Party which the roles have switched in a sense so much so that the previous fleet of buses were named "chi chi whites" with chi chi burrowed from the TOK anti gay song "Chi Chi Man" or gay man and many of the JUTC staff have been accused of being homosexuals and lesbians as well.

typical JUTC Volvo buses

Here comes the competition to the formal system with a rare phenomenon of a butch identified or masculine acting same gender loving woman among the world of men who for the most part publicly are homophobic but we all know otherwise in certain respects. Thursday October 13th was a day that will go down in infamy of sorts or history for that matter if not were for the sister herself showing her battle scars after an altercation with a male passenger on route to Spanish Town in rush hour traffic. 

an example of a typical Coaster bus with aisle seats up, these are kept up during peak hour traffic on some routes in Jamaica to accommodate more standing passengers hence more fares collected. Here one can "ride ass or dry hump/rub while being driven

The woman who is dressed in mostly male jeans and tees with her easily identified grey and black uniform worn over the Tee loaded her trip to the St. Catherine capital on a busy Thursday afternoon as persons make their way home however while in traffic on the highway at six miles at the overhead pass she was confronted by a male pass as to her attire apparently in jest however the seriousness of the matter was made clear when she arrived at Spanish Town nearing the terminus as is customary for such buses they do not proceed to the terminus provided but instead force passengers to disembark at the last stop at the intersection of White Church Street and Burke Road then make their way to the western end of Dela Vega city towards the bypass and return to their original points of departure. It was at this juncture the male passenger proceeded to lambaste the conductress as to her sexuality and her refusal to continue the route despite her appeal to disembark the bus that she made to the passengers who for the most part complied. 

He proceeded to "loud her up" or embarrass her in public but she would have none of it and rebutted strongly as to his unreasonableness on the matter but he insisted on her being a lesbian and castigating her and "her kind" in colourful Jamaican language that they were stealing all the beautiful women, a perception echoed in song via dancehall artists and in instances of public homophobia. 

She said that she tried to avoid that section of the argument and pleaded with the man to get off the bus so the driver could make the turn to the bypass but he persisted getting more threatening as the bus approached the corner to make the turn to the point that he while threatening violence on her and her "dutty driver" who supports lesbians he stroke the woman on her arm, she retaliated all this while a few passengers remained on the bus as it made short moves in the slow moving traffic and with each stop more passengers disembarked. She in turn continued her rebuttal and asked the man so what if she was a lesbian? he saw her when he boarded the bus so why did he decided to stay?

This of course did not sit kindly with the man as with Jamaican men they do not like to be cowered by a female in any way shape or form and he again moved to hit her but she stood her ground this time and also moved towards him angrily but as is becoming more refreshingly common this days out of the few remaining passengers there a few who came to her defense literally which included according to her a very tall strapping gentleman and the troublesome thug finally disembarked the bus much to the relief of the driver and his conductress she is not taking any chances and has said she is looking out for him when she makes trips to the old capital. Stories or scenes like this are rarely reported which can bring some real background to LGBT citizenry life on the ground and also a resolve that more same gender loving people are finding and using to their advantage, it ruff out deh enuh.

also see: Brawl on Coaster Bus from Portmore ... man accused of riding another's ass while in transit

Peace and tolerance

H

Civil Society Statement of Action on the Decriminalisation of Adult Same Sex Conduct in the Commonwealth

Out of the 54 states that make up the Commonwealth of Nations, 41 continue to criminalize consensual adult same-sex sexual activity. Laws that criminalise same-sex sexual conductdiscriminate against and oppress lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) persons.The majority of the laws that criminalise same-sex sexual conduct originate in British Colonial lawscriminalising ‘sodomy’.On the 15th of August 2011 at a conference facilitated by the Commonwealth Human Rights InitiativeLondon, LGBTI Rights Activists working across the Commonwealth devised the following statementof action on the decriminalisation of same-sex sexual conduct across the Commonwealth. This is astatement of action that relates both to the Commonwealth Secretariat and to Commonwealthmember states.

1. The incompatibility of the criminalisation of same–sex sexual conduct with Commonwealth values

1.1 Treating individuals in a discriminatory manner as a result of their sexual orientation isincompatible with Commonwealth values. Equality and non-discrimination on any groundshas been repeatedly affirmed as a core Commonwealth value, most recently by theSecretary General in his speech to the 2011 Law Ministers Meeting. The 2009 Port of SpainAffirmation of Commonwealth Values and Principles states in section 5 that a coreCommonwealth value is the “promotion of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rightsfor all without discrimination on any grounds” and that “rights are universal...and cannot beimplemented selectively.” This reaffirms the commitments to formal equality, found in the1979 Lusaka Declaration, and equality before the law, in the 1991 Harare Declaration.

1.2 The universal equal application of human rights to all without discrimination on anygrounds is reinforced in the 2007 Yogyakarta Principles on the application of internationalhuman rights law in relation to sexual orientation and gender identity. In 2008 seventeenCommonwealth States signed up to the European Union backed Statement on HumanRights, Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity at the United Nations General Assembly which affirmed the ‘principle of non-discrimination which requires that human rights applyequally to every human being regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity’.

1.3 At the Port of Spain Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM)reaffirmed the agreement that states had made at the 2007 Kampala CHOGM that allCommonwealth members should ratify core international human rights treaties, includingthe International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). In Toonen v Australia (1994)CCPR/C/50/D/488/1992 the Human Rights Committee held that the criminalisation of same -sex sexual conduct was incompatible with the right to privacy and the right to equality before the law, as guaranteed under the ICCPR. The implementation and ratification of the ICCPR by the vast majority of Commonwealth Countries means that states should take stepsto ensure that laws criminalising same–sex sexual conduct are repealed and amended.Further states that have not yet signed up to international human rights agreements should be mindful of the commitments made at successive CHOGMs and implement international  human rights agreements so that all citizens of Commonwealth states enjoy human rights without discrimination on any grounds. The few states that have not yet ratified the ICCPR are reminded that it accords with the fundamental principles of the Commonwealth andthey are bound to bring their laws into line with these instruments.

1.4 Whilst it is acknowledged that the laws that criminalise same–sex sexual conductcurrently are part of a state’s domestic criminal law and individual sovereign states are generally granted a margin of appreciation in respect to their own domestic criminal jurisdiction, the laws that criminalise same-sex sexual conduct constitute a systemic andongoing human rights abuse and cannot in any meaningful sense be applicable within aframework of individual rights protection. The 1979 Lusaka Declaration commits the Commonwealth to the abolition of discriminatory laws and makes it a condition of membership that states should repeal discriminatory domestic laws. The laws thatcriminalise same-sex sexual conduct are akin to the laws used to segregate racial groups andexclude persons from the full benefit of citizenship in a manner that is directly analogous topractices that underpinned apartheid and white minority rule.1.5 The Commonwealth prides itself on being a values based organisation. These valueshave an enforcement mechanism within the 1995 Millbrook Action programme and there avariety of different enforcement measures available. The Commonwealth, in order toenforce and realise its values, has taken action in the past. This is an issue where theCommonwealth now needs to take a clear lead.

2.The responsibility of individual member states of the commonwealth

2.1 All states must decriminalise private, same-sex sexual activity between consenting adults. Decriminalisation means the removal of any criminal or civil penalties that may beimposed on an adult who engages in private same-sex sexual activity. There should be nolegal powers available to the authorities to arrest or investigate private, consensual same-sex sexual activity between adults. A commitment not to enforce laws that criminalise same-sex sexual conduct is too uncertain and still constitutes a human rights violation as the merefact of ‘black letter’ criminalisation means that LGBTI individuals are marginalised in society.Decriminalisation can be achieved progressively, via either a constitutional reform or testcases that allow the courts to ‘read down’ criminal laws in line with international anddomestic human rights provisions.

2.2 Legislation must be implemented to protect LGBTI individuals from directdiscrimination and discriminatory practices. Decriminalization does not in and of itself prevent private parties acting in a discriminatory manner towards LGBTI individuals andtreating them in a discriminatory manner when it comes to matters of employment,inheritance of property and access to health care. This does not mean giving LGBTI individuals a special status but rather involves the creation of legal mechanisms that can give redress to LGBTI individuals who are the victim of discriminatory treatment of the sort that would be not be afforded to an individual who was not lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or intersex.

2.3 States must enforce existing laws to protect LGBTI individuals against threats,harassment and violence. Laws that criminalize assault and harassment apply to all citizensbut frequently they are not adequately enforced in the case of hate crimes against LGBTI individuals. Moreover, LGBTI individuals often feel unable to come forward and report these crimes, and often an enforcement gap emerges between hate crimes directed against LGBTI individuals and groups, and hate crimes that are directed at other individuals or groups.Again this does not mean giving LGBTI individuals and groups a special status but ratherinvolves enforcing existing laws.

2.4

Consultation and dialogue must be arranged with local LGBTI groups and humanrights organisations on the implementation of all of the above steps. Other groups includingCivil Society Organisations and Non Governmental Organisations should also be consultedand the process should be as wide ranging as possible.

3.Steps the Secretariat and the Secretary General should take to facilitate decriminalisation

3.1 The Secretary General should follow up on his remarks to the 2011 Law Ministersmeeting and issue a formal statement on the incompatibility of the criminalisation of same-sex sexual conduct with Commonwealth values. It should be noted that the criminalisationof same–sex sexual conduct is incompatible not only with the provisions of equality underthe 2009 Port of Spain Declaration but also is incompatible with the respect for humanrights, as guaranteed under the 1991 Harare Declaration, and the principle of equality before the law as protected under the 1979 Lusaka declaration.

3.2 The Secretariat should facilitate the creation of an official independent workinggroup tasked with making official biennial reports into the status of decriminalisation in theCommonwealth. This working group should be formulated in a manner similar to that of election observation groups. The group should be comprised of representatives of NGOs,CSOs and other experts, and have a broad remit to investigate the progress towardsdecriminalisation in Commonwealth countries. The group should be completely independentof the Secretariat and National Governments and should publish a report every two years inline with the CHOGM cycle.3.3

Resources should be made available to the Human Rights Unit (HRU) at theSecretariat to engage in promotional and monitoring activities in this area. Research shouldalso be carried out by the HRU in this area in conjunction with the ongoing projects of CSOsand NGOs. The Secretariat should also make resources available for the promotion of thesocial, political and economic benefits of decriminalisation from the thirteen Commonwealthstates that have decriminalised same-sex sexual conduct.

4.Steps states that have decriminalised same-sex sexual conduct should take to facilitate decriminalisation

4.1 States that have decriminalised same-sex sexual conduct should provide effectiveinternational protection for LGBTI refugees from countries that criminalise same-sex sexualconduct. States that are signatories to the 1951 Refugee Convention have a duty to providerefuge to individuals that have a well-founded fear of persecution. States should ensure thattheir law enforcement and border agencies are equipped to handle asylum claims made byLGBTI individuals.

4.2 States that have decriminalised same–sex sexual conduct should be vocal inadvocating for decriminalisation in Commonwealth and other international forums andshould spearhead initiatives aimed at forging inter-state consensus on decriminalization.

4.3 This also requires states to be active in monitoring the recommendations of international and regional organisations and being willing to scrutinise the human rightsperformance of other Commonwealth states both in Commonwealth forums and at otherinternational forums, such as the UN Human Rights Council. States should also make aneffort to showcase the economic, social and health benefits of decriminalisation from theirown jurisdictions in international forums and this should form part of the case in favour of decriminalisation.The Commonwealth’s future as a values based organisation is dependent upon action on this issueand the different actors mentioned in this statement need, as a matter of urgency to implementthese reforms. Since the declaration of the Commonwealth Principles adopted by Heads of Government in 1971, the organisation has defined itself by its values. The continued criminalisationof a minority for no other reason than their immutable characteristics is a form of discrimination andpersecution that cannot continue amongst a community of nations that has committed itself toprotecting human rights and equality before the law.

Civil Society Statement of Action on the Decriminalisation of Adult Same Sex Conduct in the Commonwealth

LGBT History Month: African Descended Transwoman character on mainstream television

This former favourite sitcom of many Jamaicans in the seventies through to the eighties The Jeffersons with some re-runs on local TV containing its catchy ode "We're Movin On Up" in an episode entitled 'Just A Friend from the fourth season was groundbreaking in many respects. It's the first time that an African descended transwoman character was shown on TV who didn't fit the stereotypes we all know and loathe in the world on record as is expected by some transwomen or sex reassignment patients are to have remaining features of their previous gender to point out and or critique that something was wrong with their look.

African-American transgender characters are not a new phenomenon. They've been on television for a while and you can probably consider Flip Wilson's Geraldine Jones as the first one. On Thursday nights from 1970 to 1974 I would tune in to The Flip Wilson Show si that I could see the latest antics of the sassy wise-cracking Geraldine. I loved to see her utter her famous line 'what you see is what you get' and professing her love for her boyfriend 'Killer'.
Interestingly enough one of the shows that was on opposite Flip was All In The Family, which had the Beverly LaSalle character on for three episodes. That episode was groundbreaking at the time in terms of the accurately depiction of some of the emotions that transpeople deal with when Edie was explaining her transition. It shouldn't have been a surprise to me since it was a Norman Lear produced show and a spinoff from All In the Family. They were aware of the issues thanks to the Beverly LaSalle episodes. It was just the first time it was done with an African-American character.

 This was another enlightened step in American entertainment if one were to look at it as this was before the Cosby takeover where very few shows in Prime Time had all out African descented characters who were upwardly moving and not stupid looking or acting like previous dispensations. Also most transwoman or sex changed subject matter could have been found in the Caucasian mainstream shows.

 It was also broadcast in 1977.

the hosting of the videos are in no way intended to breach any copyright owners of the original work 

Here are some scenes:

Eddie now Edie reveals herself to George (Sherman Hemsley) who reacts in disbelief

George (Sherman Hemsley) asks if its a joke and searches her drawers only to find female attire in them

George (Sherman Hemsley) still in shock avoids an embrace from Edie (formerly Eddie)

George (Sherman Hemsley) pulls Edie's hair still in disbelief and concludes it's a wig but finds out later it is real 

Louise realizes it is George's best friend as Edit reveals the specific way she (Louise) ends her letters to George while they were in the army. Edie was played by Young and the Restless actress Veronica Redd.


 Leading Transgender blogger Monica Roberts from the United States commented on her blog TransGriot that "While I didn't care for the part where he tried to pass off Leroy as Edie, for the most part the episode is on point. You also have to remember at the time 'The Jeffersons' was a Top 10 rated show that many African-American homes watched. So if they weren't aware of the trans issue affecting African descended people, they were after that broadcast."


more trivia

Did you know that Sheryl Lee Ralph has been credited for also portraying a more realistic trans character where she played a post-operative woman named Claire in the short lived Amercian television series Barbershop.

Peace and tolerance

H

Another anti gay Facebook Group ...... Bun Batty Man Movements

As more anti gay groups continue to crop up on popular social networking site Facebook and are reported and taken down others spring up. Only some two days ago on my sister blog I carried a now defunct group named Bun Batty Man, Str8 Pumz Mi seh .... after much vigilance it was removed and now the above mentioned group has been found Bun Batty Man Movements with its description verbatim saying "Leviticus 20:13 - If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of the have commited an abomniation. They shall surely be put to DEATH. Their blood shall be upon them. Leviticus 18:22 - You shall NOT lie with a male as with a woman, it is an abomination. . . Those two verses justifies what this page is doing." 

 

 

This is expected as more and more Jamaicans log on to Facebook and the proliferation of mobile devices and  services the hate will just have another medium to or outlet to release itself however punitive measures can be taken also there is a twist to this a well. literally as a popular group that is a T-shirt company named Twystyd has opened its doors to gays and allows free expression, this has not gone down well with some older members who profess to be heterosexual and there have been heated threads on their group wall. A falling out also in major secret group as well which has many gay Jamaicans on there has also been blamed for this sudden growth on anti gay groups as the previous secret group whose admins have banned rowdy and wayward members have seen hit backs including reporting of the very page and suggestive pics with a view to having Facebook closing the group. The now defunct anti gay group had past members posing as straights in the new group and posting copied threads of exchanges with supposed hookups or hits in the original secret gay group. Here is a snapshot of the now defunct anti gay group

  

Now please report the new group as shown on the very top in the post. 

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Bun-Batty-Man-Movements/143427622383792?sk=wall

Be Vigilant Be Safe

UPDATE October 12, 2011 - The Group has been removed

Peace and tolerance

H

Transitioning Sexual Paradigms (Gleaner 10.10.11)

Transitioning Sexual Paradigms

I am curious about the new state of affairs since the United States repealed the 1993 'don't ask, don't tell' law. Admitted homosexuals could find themselves in a domiciliary conundrum. If, say, a male in the armed forces, living among other male troops in an open dormitory or barrack where there is virtually no privacy, reveals his homosexuality, I believe that the heterosexual troops will feel uncomfortable because they would know that he would naturally see some of his male colleagues in a sexual light.

Before I get stomped on and misclassified as a homophobe, I need to make it very clear that I have absolutely nothing against homosexuals. In fact, I have quite a few male and female friends/acquaintances that happen to be homosexual. And on a broader scale, in spite of Jamaica's international label as a homophobic society, I know for certain that many heterosexual Jamaicans not only tolerate their homosexual friends, acquaintances, associates, workmates and relatives, they are very friendly with them and genuinely like and respect them.

Quite a few of our luminaries were either known to be or strongly suspected of being homosexual, yet no esteem or national honour was denied them because of that widely held opinion.

Reasons for sexual orientations

In spite of contrary assertions from certain quarters, having sat, listened to and conversed with several people with alternative sexual orientations, I believe that some individuals are born with homosexual programming, some are born with bisexual programming, others are born with no particular sexual leaning, and there are those who, through abuse, have been acculturated into homosexuality (which may not be their natural inclination).

Then there is that set of people that become so bored with 'straight' sex that they venture across the border in search of thrills. Those are dangerous people because they masquerade as heterosexuals while living a perfidious and highly risky lifestyle.

Homosexuality is far from new, and it is not an emerging psychosocial phenomenon. Historically, many great nations, societies and cultures accepted it as part of the spectrum of human sexuality. Even now, there exists an unspoilt tribe (I won't say where), wherein males and females live apart and only cohabit during seasons of mating rituals for the sole purpose of producing offspring. The prepubertal males are ceremonially 'abducted' to satisfy the mature male's sexual 'needs' until they go through their own rites of passage.

Misgivings about 'modern' sexuality

Homosexuality has been condemned by the Bible and other religious books. It has been called an abomination. With this in mind, I understand the furore it creates; however, there are many other abominations listed in the Bible. Adulterers, liars, wicked schemers, people who remarry former companions and robbers - just to name a few - don't attract as much ire and attention.

Like many others, I have several misgivings about some other aspects of 'modern' sexuality. The misconception that people can change their sex (gender) with an operation (or by any other means) is outrageous and misleading. Only one's sexual appearance can be changed. There was even a lobby to have birth certificates altered retroactively to reflect the 'sex change' that some people had.

And, I must admit that I am a traditionalist when it comes to marriage. I think that the contract/event/sacrament should be reserved for male-female unions. In a male-male or female-female 'marriage', is there a 'mister' and a 'mistress'?

Nevertheless, I also strongly believe that homosexual couples should have the option to become legally united for socio-economic reasons, but some other term or word should be used to signify the union.Whether or not individuals abhor homosexuality, it has been and will always be within our society. What we need is tolerance, understanding and flexibility on both sides of the sexual divide.

Garth A. Rattray is a medical doctor with a family practice. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and garthrattray@gmail.com.

LGBT History Month - Buggery law backward said Trevor Munroe in 06

I decided to post this as a comment on the turbulent times of the Charter of Rights Bill Debate in the 2006 period with the varying positions mostly anti gay as it related to including sexual orientation as a form of discrimination. 


Senator at the time Trevor Munroe was one of the more sensible voices in the mix who spoke frankly about the stupidity of this old colonial law still on our books. Given also the furore in Antigua and Barbuda on the Buggery Law there on the strength of the challenge in Belize by advocates there.


also see: Anti-Buggery Law Here To Stay

This article however appeared in the Gleaner on July 9, 2006

Buggery law backward - Munroe


Dionne Rose, Parliamentary Reporter


THE JOINT Select Committee of Parliament considering the proposed Charter of Rights Bill failed to conclude its deliberations last week as the committee was unable to find common ground on certain issues.
One such contentious issue was whether the committee should accept the recommendations of the 2001 Joint Select Committee, which had recommended that the Government should consider repealing the buggery law.
Committee member, Professor Trevor Munroe, had insisted that recommendation should be carried forward by the current committee so that the matter could be debated in Parliament.


"... I regard that (the law) as a backward and retrogressive step consistent with when the law was passed in the middle of 19th century," he said.
However, committee members Senator Anthony Johnson, Delroy Chuck and others, had a different view and said that the discussion was not for the consideration of the committee.
"... People in this country don't want to see homosexuality decriminalised. We have agreed on that. We are dealing with serious matters and the committee has decided that we (are) not into that!" said Senator Johnson.


NOT A COMMITTEE MATTER
Meanwhile, Mr. Chuck said that this matter was not for the committee.
"In any event, Mr. Chairman, I don't think we could deal with that here because it is on the statue books ... If anything has to be done about it, is it the statute that will have to deal with it," contended Senator Dorothy Lightbourne.
There was also dissension on whether the Charter of Rights Bill should have a special provision to protect the rights of the disabled person with committee member, Olivia 'Babsy' Grange insisting that this should be included.


But Senator A.J. Nicholson, chairman of the committee, explained that the body had already discussed and agreed that it would be impractical to place these matters in the Constitution.
The committee, however, covered some ground as they signed off on a recommendation brought by the Lawyers' Christian Fellowship, which wanted the right to freedom of religion in Section 13 (b) of the document to be separated.


But Nicholson said the committee would go beyond that.
"We are doing better for them. We are moving religion totally out of that and putting it by itself so that the citizens of the country can know the importance we place on these things, for example religion," he said.
The committee also accepted a submission from the group to prevent same-sex marriages by defining the word 'marriage' in the bill.


The committee will again meet on July 19 when it is expected that it will finalise its deliberations.