Coming Out Day - Coming out transgender ......

Parts of this post with suggestions are taken from leading trans ally and African American activist/blogger Monica Roberts' blog and from my other blog on Wordpress from previous years but still worth revisiting

here is my short two cents on coming out:

also see from Gay Jamaica Watch: Coming out (or outed)  and Coming out tips and suggestions posted this year: HERE

With today being Coming Out Day, you'll see ceremonies and events all over the country that will be primarily focused on the LGB end of the community rainbow.  For the trans end of the spectrum, coming out has a different twist to it.  

When people come out as lesbian, bi or gay, they are still the son or daughter that their parents brought home from the hospital that day.   But when you come out as trans, it means that's akin to a death in the family.

The child they once knew will eventually be morphing into an outward gender presentation different from the one they brought home from the hospital.  Those parents will have to get used to that morphed body over time just as it took the trans person involved a certain amount of years to come to grips with the reality they are trans.

.

From the moment of that declaration that we are trans, we are going from zero to femininity or masculinity and begin the process of having to navigate all the societal baggage that particular desired gender role comes with while unlearning it from the birth gender role.  

We trans people are the only part of the rainbow community that have to pay for the privilege of being ourselves. In addition to having to go through medical and surgical intervention, there's also wading through the paper trail we have piled up and changing those identity documents to reflect who we are now.

I don't want to underestimate how liberating it is for a trans person to come out to family, friends and allies.  It does wonders to lift the burden of carrying that tremendous secret off our psyches so we can begin to openly and honestly live our lives.  

But a dose of reality as you make this life changing decision, especially if you're planning to do so under the euphoric environment of National Coming Out Day.    

If you're a trans person of color, it's even tougher to come out and I understand that reticence to do so.  When we average two transwomen of color killed every month, 70% of the names we read during every  Transgender Day of Remembrance are Black and Latina, and we have the unwoman meme and disrespect hurled at us on a regular basis, it's enough to make you pause.

   

Unlike our white counterparts, we transpeople of color don't have the long established support groups or organizations that are fluent in our culture, backgrounds and needs.

We've only started getting the attention we deserved in the tail end of the last decade.  The Trans Persons of Color Coalition was founded in 2010, and we still have to fight tooth and nail just to get any kind of positive visibility or media attention for our role models and our issues.

Coming out for trans people of all ethnicities is tempered with the knowledge that we still have a long way to go to achieve trans human rights in this country   We still have a lot of education we have to do even with recalcitrant hardheads in our rainbow family and within trans circles about what being trans is. 

But as I've discovered ever since I began my own transition in 1993, my life not only began when I did so and got comfortable in my own skin, my family expanded.  We have a proud history that is still unfolding every day.  I have out and proud trans brothers and sisters all over the world now.  I have trans elders who are eager to pass down their hard won knowledge to me so I can do the same for you.   I love the fascinating journey of discovery I've been on.

And I'm proud to be an African descended #girllikeus. That outweighs whatever negatives connected with our coming out decision.

But to get to the point where I, Janet Mock, Isis King, Kylar Broadus and countless other trans brothers and transsisters are, the first step is coming out and living your life openly and honestly.   You need to not only do so for yourself when you feel comfortable and confident in yourself to do so, frankly the trans community needs you to do so as well.

The rest of being trans we can deal with one day at a time..

ENDS 

Before you come out:

I think it’s important to start with thinking about the purpose of your communication, and that is just to come out to them, to come out of hiding and let them know who you are and what you’ve been struggling with. I’m making the assumption that you also wish to remain as close as possible to your family, and be accepted and hopefully supported by them in the future.

There’s also the question of if you should come out at all. If you are dependent on your parents/family (under 18, or if they are paying for college, etc…) then you need to think of the very real possibility of their cutting you out or off. The last thing you want to be is a homeless transgendered youth. If this is the case, then it may be wiser to spend some time finding and getting support before proceeding.

If you decide that the time is right and it’s safe to come out to them then…

The Vehicle:

My experience has been with Transgendered clients, that a letter works best. The letter has several advantages over face to face communications.

You get to take your time and think about what to say and word it perfectly.

You can have a friend, therapist or supportive person read it over first and give you feedback.

You can’t be interrupted.

The recipient can go back and read it again and take their time with it.

Why a letter and not an email? Well, it’s more personal, email can be a little cold.

What to say:

I’m of the school of thought that you should just say it in your own words as clearly and plainly as possible. I think it can be good to also include the following:

Reassurance that you love them and want to remain connected and hope that they will be supportive.

Reassurance that this is not their “fault”.

A little bit about your struggle with gender over the years, your experience, coping, isolation, etc… (be specific! It will help them empathize with you)

A few recommendations of books, articles or support groups in their area and I recommend to ask them specifically not to respond right away, but to take some time (a week) before they respond. Let them sit with it. This will weed out any immediate bad response and let them cool down.

Just as you would tailor a cover letter for a job you may need to tailor your coming out letter for different family members. Your parents are two (or maybe more than two) separate people, invite them to respond individually.

What not to say:

No need to talk about specific long term plans/timetables or surgeries in your coming-out letter. Remember, the purpose of the letter is to let your family know that you are transgendered. Period. Future plans are better left for future communications. Why? Because just digesting the fact that one has a trans son/daughter/brother/sister is enough to begin with. Remember, you’ve had a lot of time to think about this and are ready to move ahead. They are just learning of this for the first time and need to absorb it. I think its ok to gently allude to the fact that changes might be coming in the future, but I wouldn’t go father than that in your first communication on this topic.

There is no need to go into the etiology of transsexualism here. There are too many conflicting theories biological and otherwise, and even if you knew the origin of your being transgender, it wouldn’t change it.

Afterwards:

If you get a positive response that’s great! Otherwise stay calm, even if you get a negative first response. Give them time.

Don’t be reactive to a negative response. Be the adult (or if you don’t feel it, just pretend). Remember the long term goal is to have them be connected to you and supportive. Keep the long term goal in mind in all your communications with them.

It does happen sometimes that parents have a very negative response and even reject you outright. This can be very hurtful and disappointing. When this happens, again, don’t be reactive no matter how you feel. Keep the long term goal in mind. It’s easy to “write them off”, but ultimately unsatisfying if you want to have your family.

A few things to do with a negative reaction:

Communicate that you are open and ready to talk when they are,

Be empathic with their difficulty in accepting/understanding/assimilating this information. Understand that they need time and may have a religious/cultural basis of understanding that can’t be overcome quickly.

Express your wish and hope that it will change over time.

Ask what you can do to help them accept this?

Other Approaches:

You know your family best, so keep that in mind when crafting your coming out communication.

Here are some other perspectives on how to come out to your family:
coming out, hormone, surgery, and other letters
http://www.videojug.com/interview/how-to-come-out-to-your-family-and-friends-as-transgender video ‘How To Come Out To Your Family And Friends As Transgender’
http://www.hrc.org/issues/3455.htm
Article ‘Coming Out to Family as Transgender’ from The Human Rights Campaign
http://www.tsroadmap.com/family/index.html
Transsexual Road Map – Family issues

How To Come Out To Your Family And Friends As Transgender

Check out the "Coming Out" tab immediately below this post for previous entries on the subject.

Peace and tolerance and a safe and cathartic coming out!!!!!!!!!!

H

Long-acting antiretrovirals may improve survival for people with poor adherence

Produced in collaboration with hivandhepatitis.com

Long-acting antiretroviral formulations taken once-monthly or less have the potential to improve survival and quality of life for people with HIV, especially those who have difficulty achieving good adherence, but cost may be a barrier, according to a presentation at the Second IDWeek conference taking place this week in San Francisco.

Long-acting antiretroviral therapy (ART) administered as monthly or quarterly injections may be a more convenient way for some people to receive treatment, which could lead to improved adherence and in turn better viral suppression. Two such formulations, a long-acting version of rilpivirine known as TMC278-LA and the experimental HIV integrase inhibitor GSK1265744, have shown promising pharmacokinetics, safety and antiviral activity in early studies.

Eric Ross from Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston and colleagues used mathematical modelling to predict the impact of long-acting ART on survival and cost-effectiveness for people who have not taken ART before (treatment naive) in four scenarios:
Current standard of care using daily oral antiretrovirals, starting with a regimen based on an NNRTI (non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor), moving on to protease inhibitors and finally to integrase inhibitors and salvage regimens.

Late long-acting ART starting after multiple treatment failures.
Second-line long-acting ART starting after first-line NNRTI failure.
First-line long-acting ART used as an initial regimen.

The model assumed a hypothetical cohort of previously untreated people with HIV based on demographic, CD4 cell count and adherence data from published studies. Most (84%) were men, the mean age was 43 years, the baseline CD4 count was 320 cells/mm3 and they maintained 89% adherence on average. The analysis assumed that viral suppression rose linearly with increasing adherence when using daily ART, but that both adherence and suppression remained consistently high when using long-acting injections.

The researchers projected changes in CD4 count, viral load and retention in care over a lifetime. They looked at life expectancy, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and cost estimates based on 2012 US price data:

Average first-line regimen: USD$24,000/year.
Boosted protease inhibitor regimen: USD$28,000/year.
Integrase inhibitor regimen: USD$39,000/year.
Integrase inhibitor salvage regimen: USD$40,000/year.
Long-acting ART regimen: USD$53,000/year.

Importantly, they estimated that long-acting ART would cost 85% more than boosted protease inhibitor regimens, based on historical information about relative costs of novel long-acting formulations of drugs for other diseases.

Cost-effectiveness was determined by calculating whether the incremental cost per QALY gained was above or below USD$100,000, a commonly used threshold in the US.

Compared with a life expectancy of 23.0 years after ART initiation for people taking daily therapy, the model predicted that those using long-acting formulations would increase their survival by several months: 23.5 years with late long-acting ART, 23.6 with second-line long-acting ART and 23.7 with first-line long-acting ART.

Lifetime costs for long-acting ART under the late, second-line, and first-line scenarios were USD$420,000, USD$490,000 and USD$670,000, respectively, compared with USD$400,000 for current daily regimens.

Late long-acting ART after multiple treatment failures was found to be cost-effective, coming in under the threshold at USD$90,000 per QALY. Second-line long-acting ART was ten-fold more expensive at USD$980,000 per QALY. The cost of starting long-acting ART as first-line therapy was an exorbitant USD$6,190,000 per QALY.

But the cost picture improved when the model took into account adherence. Amongst individuals with very high adherence to daily regimens (as seen in some clinical trial populations), long-acting ART did not significantly improve survival, so it was not cost-effective under any scenario. People with poor adherence to daily therapy, however, could see enough improvement in life expectancy that long-acting ART became feasible.

The researchers calculated that the cost of long-acting ART would have to drop into the $27,000 to $34,000 per year range to become cost-effective for second-line therapy – close to the current price of boosted protease inhibitor regimens.

"Long-acting ART has the potential to improve survival of HIV patients, especially those with barriers to adherence," the investigators concluded. "With a high cost, long-acting ART will be good value when used selectively in poorly adherent patients with multiple failures. With a cost near that of currently available regimens, long-acting ART could be cost-effective as second-line therapy."

The researchers stressed that because survival benefits of long-acting ART could be negligible for highly adherent patient groups, future studies of this strategy "may underestimate its value" if they do not include individuals with barriers to adherence.

They also noted that this model did not incorporate the potential impact of long-acting ART on reducing the risk of HIV transmission, which would likely improve its value.

The historical 85% cost increase for novel long-acting drug formulations is perhaps the most flexible factor in this model. If advocates succeed in demanding lower prices, or if national health programs refuse to pay such a high premium, long-acting ART could become cost-effective for more people.

MORE HERE

Background:

Long-acting antiretroviral formulations (LA-ART), currently in development, aim to achieve monthly or quarterly ART dosing; this could improve health benefits of ART for HIV-infected individuals who have difficulty maintaining daily adherence. We sought to identify the clinical and economic circumstances under which differing clinical roles of LA-ART might be cost-effective in the US.

Methods:

We used a microsimulation model of HIV disease progression (CEPAC-US) to project the impact of 3 potential roles of LA-ART (compared to daily ART only): 1) initial therapy for all ART-naïve patients, 2) 2nd-line therapy for those failing 1st-line, and 3) use for patients with multiple prior failures on NNRTI- and PI-based regimens. Model outcomes include quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), lifetime cost, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER); strategies with ICER < $100,000/QALY are designated “cost-effective”. We simulate a cohort with mean adherence (medication possession ratio) of 89% (SD = 22%). Depending on adherence, HIV RNA < 400c/mL at 48 weeks on daily ART ranges from 0 to 91%, and loss to follow-up ranges from 41 to 4/100PY. We assume LA-ART's efficacy is 91% regardless of adherence to daily ART, and that LA-ART costs $60,000/patient-year (vs. $28,000 for daily PI-based regimens). In sensitivity analysis, we vary LA-ART's cost, efficacy, and quality of life (QOL) impact (due to benefits of reduced pill burden or detrimental side effects).

Results:

In the base case, LA-ART increases overall life expectancy (LE) compared to daily ART by 0.5-0.6 years, and LE of patients with the lowest adherence by 2.3-3.0 years, depending on clinical role; only LA-ART for patients with multiple failures is cost-effective ($86,000/QALY, Table). With a cost of $30,000/year and a favorable QOL impact, 2nd-line LA-ART is cost-effective ($94,000/QALY); varying efficacy of LA-ART has minimal impact on cost-effectiveness results.

Conclusion:

LA-ART could improve survival of US HIV patients, especially those with barriers to adherence and poor outcomes on daily ART. With a high cost, it will be a good value for use in patients with multiple prior failures; a cost close to current regimens combined with demonstrable QOL benefit would support broader use.

Tense stand-off between homeless MSM and Security team in New Kingston

Here we go, here we go again as the least amongst us make the news again this time for all the wrong reasons. Rumour has it some new entity (yet again) is being formed to address this particular group of homeless and displaced teens and men but where or when this will become a reality we may never know. And while we wait for any real meaningful residential type interventions for this most at risk group out of all of us we see videos being to highlight their supposed plight that being HIV statuses and statistics yet no serious interest in their welfare.

Trafalgar Park photo above was where the tense standoff took place on Friday September 20 and again last evening both around the ten o'clock hour as I made my way home from a meeting. I decided to stop by and check in with the fellas. I noticed several cross dressed divas too strutting their stuff or pounding the pavement for that man for the night honey, those of us who understand the culture know the tricks of the trade here but what came next as I made my way around the corner from the ScotiaBank ATM on Knutsford Boulevard was frightening to say the least as one of the men had a large enough machete verbally bashing the security guards with dogs. It became apparent that the men were warned to stay away from the newly refurbished and completed building that was formally the Super Plus food stores (photo below) turned a financial institution. The men used to use the area as a hangout spot back in the day when the original mass displacement became apparent and the men had nowhere to go seeing it was unoccupied.

Other security personnel stood by the other office building adjacent to the canine guards as well watching and instructing the man and subsequently his friends not to cause any problems. The some twenty other younsgters who could not be more than under or near their twenties congregated across the street from all this on the benches by the bus stop in front the photographed park and as they egged on the machete carrying man others could be seen darting across the dual carriage way that is Trafalgar Road in a seemingly happy mood. I am worried again by all this, other incidents have been recorded elsewhere including a beating near the Jamaica Information Service building on Half Way Tree Road that has been confirmed. 

Who is provoking whom here? a chicken and egg situation as this issue has been with us for ever so long yet no end seems in sight while the numbers climb, as I stood and tried to calm the tensions by calling to the machete carrier as I knew him by name a white car arrived where four other persons alighted, they hailed me "DJ Howie" and then also proceeded to join their counterparts by the benches darting as the ones before between oncoming cars. The car soon left and I was told it was a popular community queen who left to pick up "more friends" I do not like what I am seeing here as the signs are evident that something is going to come with this particular group. 

Meanwhile the now usual spot along Grenada Crescent across from the FLOW office and the lawns of the Victoria Mutual Building Society was also occupied with some twelve persons I counted all of whom were not homeless but friends of their had visited, 

is this how the men are to continue here?

are young homeless MSM just targets to be met and material for study and statistics?

what about their welfare, not that anyone can save them so to speak but is it expected that they should recover solely by their own recognizance?

is there really any interest in having a truly cohesive community that includes ALL?

is it convenient to have them homeless so headlines can be made of their issues when matters occurs?

Last evening was a similar sight though fewer in numbers when I passed, of course the money requests came which I could not fulfil and other complaints.

It seems yet still the least amongst us are just that, the least amongst us while they aimlessly wonder and or live vicariously. Some previous incidents should jolt our consciences:

This shooting incident in the Upper Montrose area also caused the men to be circumspect about the very park they are now accused or luring schoolers, please see: Shots fired at homeless gays in Kingston, homeless situation spiraling out of control

This beating incident also makes them retreat in a sense over time: Men rushed and beaten in New Kingston

This attempted mobbing of two cross dressers in the same area in 2010 just after the Independence celebrations which I covered via an on the street investigation: Homeless MSM/CSWs in New Kingston rescued by taxi driver

The residents have complained before: Complaint of "Freaky Gays" Harassing New Kingston Residents ........Influentials can only do so much and no more it is long overdue for an in depth response to this and not some non residential crap that I fear is coming as a solution, so many previous generations have simply fallen through the cracks under the when convenient watchful eye of agencies supposed working for vulnerable populations but only for HIV prevention and nothing else. 

also see: Star News sensationalizes male commercial sex worker issues .............

Peace and tolerance

H

A Statement of Trans-Inclusive Feminism and Womanism

Some international Trans-Inclusive Feminists have acted as stated below to tackle transphobia, sigh if you feel so moved.

If you are a blogger/writer/academic/educator/artist/activist/otherwise in a position to affect feminist or womanist discourse or action and you would like to sign on to this statement, let us know! You can use the form on the contact page or you can email us at feministsfightingtransphobia1@gmail.com. We’d love to hear from you. [NEW: You can also just sign right on in the comments, particularly if you're wanting to sign in a personal, rather than professional capacity--this will be much quicker and also easier on our moderators!]

Note: this blog in general and this post in particular are places where trans* people can come and find welcome and support from feminists. For this reason, all comments are moderated for now, and hateful or abusive or bigoted discourse directed against marginalized groups or their members will not be approved. It will either be deleted or it will be replaced with mockery of that discourse, depending on what the moderators feel like doing. To be clear, transphobia, misgendering, racism, misogyny, slut-shaming, etc. are unwelcome.

We particularly welcome comments regarding ways in which feminists and womanists, both cis and trans*, can organize to demonstrate solidarity with and support and acceptance of trans people. Reading the names of prominent feminists on statements of transphobia is heartbreaking to many of us, but as Joe Hill said, “Don’t mourn; organize!”

– Moderators

A Statement of Trans-Inclusive Feminism and Womanism

We, the undersigned trans* and cis scholars, writers, artists, and educators, want to publicly and openly affirm our commitment to a trans*-inclusive feminism and womanism.

There has been a noticeable increase in transphobic feminist activity this summer: the forthcoming book by Sheila Jeffreys from Routledge; the hostile and threatening anonymous letter sent to Dallas Denny after she and Dr. Jamison Green wrote to Routledge regarding their concerns about that book; and the recent widely circulated statement entitled “Forbidden Discourse: The Silencing of Feminist Critique of ‘Gender,’”signed by a number of prominent, and we regret to say, misguided, feminists have been particularly noticeable. And all this is taking place in the climate of virulent mainstream transphobia that has emerged following the coverage of Chelsea Manning’s trial and subsequent statement regarding her gender identity, and the recent murders of young trans women of color, including Islan Nettles and Domonique Newburn, the latest targets in a long history of violence against trans women of color. Given these events, it is important that we speak out in support of feminism and womanism that support trans* people.

We are committed to recognizing and respecting the complex construction of sexual/gender identity; to recognizing trans* women as women and including them in all women’s spaces; to recognizing trans* men as men and rejecting accounts of manhood that exclude them; to recognizing the existence of genderqueer, non-binary identifying people and accepting their humanity; to rigorous, thoughtful, nuanced research and analysis of gender, sex, and sexuality that accept trans* people as authorities on their own experiences and understands that the legitimacy of their lives is not up for debate; and to fighting the twin ideologies of transphobia and patriarchy in all their guises.

Transphobic feminism ignores the identification of many trans* and genderqueer people as feminists or womanists and many cis feminists/womanists with their trans* sisters, brothers, friends, and lovers; it is feminism that has too often rejected them, and not the reverse. It ignores the historical pressures placed by the medical profession on trans* people to conform to rigid gender stereotypes in order to be “gifted” the medical aid to which they as human beings are entitled. By positing “woman” as a coherent, stable identity whose boundaries they are authorized to police, transphobic feminists reject the insights of intersectional analysis, subordinating all other identities to womanhood and all other oppressions to patriarchy. They are refusing to acknowledge their own power and privilege.

We recognize that transphobic feminists have used violence and threats of violence against trans* people and their partners and we condemn such behavior. We recognize that transphobic rhetoric has deeply harmful effects on trans* people’s real lives; witness CeCe MacDonald’s imprisonment in a facility for men. We further recognize the particular harm transphobia causes to trans* people of color when it combines with racism, and the violence it encourages.

When feminists exclude trans* women from women’s shelters, trans* women are left vulnerable to the worst kinds of violent, abusive misogyny, whether in men’s shelters, on the streets, or in abusive homes. When feminists demand that trans* women be excluded from women’s bathrooms and that genderqueer people choose a binary-marked bathroom, they make participation in the public sphere near-impossible, collaborate with a rigidity of gender identities that feminism has historically fought against, and erect yet another barrier to employment. When feminists teach transphobia, they drive trans* students away from education and the opportunities it provides.

We also reject the notion that trans* activists’ critiques of transphobic bigotry “silence” anybody. Criticism is not the same as silencing. We recognize that the recent emphasis on the so-called violent rhetoric and threats that transphobic feminists claim are coming from trans* women online ignores the 40+ – year history of violent and eliminationist rhetoric directed by prominent feminists against trans* women, trans* men, and genderqueer people. It ignores the deliberate strategy of certain well-known anti-trans* feminists of engaging in gleeful and persistent harassment, baiting, and provocation of trans* people, particularly trans* women, in the hope of inciting angry responses, which are then utilized to paint a false portrayal of trans* women as oppressors and cis feminist women as victims. It ignores the public outing of trans* women that certain transphobic feminists have engaged in regardless of the damage it does to women’s lives and the danger in which it puts them. And it relies upon the pernicious rhetoric of collective guilt,using any example of such violent rhetoric, no matter the source — and, just as much, the justified anger of any one trans* woman — to condemn all trans* women, and to justify their continued exclusion and the continued denial of their civil rights.

Whether we are cis, trans*, binary-identified, or genderqueer, we will not let feminist or womanist discourse regress or stagnate; we will push forward in our understandings of gender, sex, and sexuality across disciplines. While we respect the great achievements and hard battles fought by activists in the 1960s and 1970s, we know that those activists are not infallible and that progress cannot stop with them if we hope to remain intellectually honest, moral, and politically effective. Most importantly, we recognize that theories are not more important than real people’s real lives; we reject any theory of gender, sex, or sexuality that calls on us to sacrifice the needs of any subjugated or marginalized group. People are more important than theory.

We are committed to making our classrooms, our writing, and our research inclusive of trans* people’s lives.

Signed by:

Individuals

Hailey K. Alves (blogger and transfeminist activist, Brazil)

Luma Andrade (Federal University of Ceará, Brazil)

Leiliane Assunção (Federal University of the Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil)

Talia Bettcher (California State University, Los Angeles)

Lauren Beukes (novelist)

Lindsay Beyerstein (journalist)

Jamie “Skye” Bianco (New York University)

Hanne Blank (writer and historian)

Kate Bornstein (writer and activist)

danah boyd (Microsoft research and New York University)

Helen Boyd (author and activist)

Sarah Brown (LGBT+ Liberal Democrats)

Christine Burns (equalities consultant, blogger and campaigner)

Liliane Anderson Reis Caldeira (Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil)

Gloria Careaga (UNAM/National Autonomous University of Mexico)

Avedon Carol (activist and writer; Feminists Against Censorship)

Wendy Chapkis (University of Southern Maine) – “I don’t love the punch line ‘people are more important than theory.’ More to the point, it seems to me, is that feminist theories that fail to recognize the lived experiences and revolutionary potential of gender diversity are willfully inadequate.”

Jan Clausen (writer, MFAW faculty, Goddard College)

Darrah Cloud (playwright and screenwriter; Goddard College)

Alyson Cole (Queens College – CUNY)

Arrianna Marie Coleman (writer and activist)

Suzan Cooke (writer and photographer)

Sonia Onufer Correa (feminist research associate at ABIA, co-chair of Sexuality Policy Watch)

Molly Crabapple (artist and writer)
Petra Davis (writer and activist)


Elizabeth Dearnley (University College London)

Jaqueline Gomes de Jesus (University of Brasilia, Brazil)

Sady Doyle (writer and blogger)

L. Timmel Duchamp (publisher, Aqueduct Press)

Flavia Dzodan (writer and media maker)

Reni Eddo-Lodge (writer and activist)

Finn Enke (University of Wisconsin, Madison)

Hugh English (Queens College – CUNY)

Jane Fae (writer and activist)

Roderick Ferguson (University of Minnesota)

Jill Filipovic (writer and blogger)

Rose Fox (editor and activist)

Jaclyn Friedman (author, activist, and executive director of Women, Action, & the Media)

Sasha Garwood (University College, London)

Jen Jack Gieseking (Bowdoin College)

Dominique Grisard (CUNY Graduate Center/Columbia University/University of Basel)

Deborah Gussman (Richard Stockton College of New Jersey)

Dr Sally Hines (University of Leeds)

Claire House (International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia, Brazil)

Astrid Idlewild (editor, urban historian)

Sarah Hoem Iversen (Bergen University College, Norway)

Sarah Jaffe (columnist)

Roz Kaveney (author and critic)

Zahira Kelly (artist and writer)

Mikki Kendall (writer and occasional feminist)

Natacha Kennedy (Goldsmiths College, University of London)

Alison Kilkenny (journalist and activist)

Matthew Knip (Hunter College – CUNY)

Letícia Lanz (writer and psychoanalyst, Brazil)

April Lidinsky (Indiana University South Bend)

Erika Lin (George Mason University)

Marilee Lindemann (University of Maryland)

Heather Love (University of Pennsylvania)

Jessica W. Luther (writer and activist)

Jen Manion (Connecticut College)

Ruth McClelland-Nugent (Georgia Regents University Augusta)

Melissa McEwan (Editor-in-Chief, Shakesville)

Farah Mendlesohn (Anglia Ruskin University)

Mireille Miller-Young (University of California, Santa Barbara)

Lyndsey Moon (University of Roehampton and University of Warwick)

Surya Monro (University of Huddersfield)

Cheryl Morgan (publisher and blogger)

Kenne Mwikya (writer and activist, Nairobi)

Zenita Nicholson (Secretary on the Board of Trustees, Society Against Sexual Orientation Discrimination, Guyana)

Anne Ogborn (frightening sex change)

Sally Outen (performer and activist)

Ruth Pearce (University of Warwick)

Laurie Penny (journalist and activist)

Rosalind Petchesky (Hunter College and the Graduate Center, CUNY, and Sexuality Policy Watch)

Rachel Pollack (writer, Goddard College)

Claire Bond Potter (The New School for Public Engagement)

Nina Power (University of Roehampton)

Marina Riedel (Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil)

Mark Rifkin (University of North Carolina – Greensboro)

Monica Roberts (Transgriot)

Dr. Judy Rohrer (Western Kentucky University)

Diana Salles (independent scholar)

Veronica Schanoes (Queens College – CUNY)

Sarah Schulman, in principle (College of Staten Island – CUNY)

Donald M. Scott (Queens College – CUNY)

Lynne Segal (Birkbeck, University of London)

Julia Serano (author and activist)

Carrie D. Shanafelt (Grinnell College)

Rebekah Sheldon (Indiana University-Purdue University-Indianapolis)

Barbara Simerka (Queens College – CUNY)

Gwendolyn Ann Smith (columnist and Transgender Day of Remembrance founder)

Kari Sperring (K L Maund) (writer and historian)

Zoe Stavri (writer and activist)

Tristan Taormino (Sex Out Loud Radio, New York, NY)

Jemma Tosh (University of Chester)

Viviane V. (Federal University of Bahia, Brazil)

Catherynne M. Valente (author)

Jessica Valenti (author and columnist)

Genevieve Valentine (writer)

Barbra Wangare (S.H.E and Transitioning Africa, Kenya)

Thijs Witty (University of Amsterdam, Netherlands)

Groups:

Bishkek Feminist Collective SQ (Kyrgyzstan, Central Asia)

House of Najafgarh (Najafgarh, India)

House of Kola Bhagan (Kolkatta, India)

Transgender Nation San Francisco

[See http://feministsfightingtransphobia.wordpress.com/2013/09/17/welcome-to-our-most-recent-signatories/ for our newest signatories, as of the end of the day on September 16, 2013]

[See http://feministsfightingtransphobia.wordpress.com/2013/09/18/six-hours-later-we-have-a-new-signatory-list/ for our newest signatories, as of the end of the day on September 17, 2013]

Shots from Quality Citizenship Jamaica's peaceful stand in Kingston

September 10, 2013 Quality Citizenship Jamaica had an outdoor silent protest nearing Devon House in the midst of a near downpour as a tropical wave passed over the island, below are some scenes I selected from the stand with the founders Angeline Jackson and Jalna Broderick up front and centre. Thankfully lesbian invisibility/omission in the struggle  is now a thing of the past. Women for Women for Women also need to "tun up di ting"

Apologies to Queen Ifrica from Blakka Ellis on the Independence Day Issue

Guess what! After my comments about Queen Ifrica's now controversial utterances at the National Independence Grand Gala on Independence Day, I got a personal call from celebrity entertainer and original roots singjay, the honourable Mr Tony Rebel himself.

Yeah, the big man from Flames Productions and visionary behind the wholesome, conscious and successful 'Rebel Salute' series called me, personally, so you know say me important!

Of course, I never got to big him up and tell him that he's one of my all-time favourite artistes, and all of those nice things, because it wasn't that kind of call. Rebel actually called to challenge me on the position I took in the article and we had a long reasoning about it.

I love talking to intelligent people. Yeah, man, because although neither of us budged from our basic positions, we were able to articulate and clarify our respective points of view, respectfully challenge each other and politely agree to disagree.

Differing opinions aside though, a key point of contention for Queen Ifrica and Tony Rebel was a statement I had made in the article about what I actually heard on the night. I quoted Queen Ifrica saying four specific words, because those were the words I thought I heard. Rebel insists, however, that my assertion is factually erroneous and she did not utter those words. Naturally, he also wanted a retraction.

Now, based on my respect for the man, and considering the passionate nature of his insistence, I began to seriously wonder, there and then, if perhaps I did hear wrong.

But mi nah lie, I'm kinda stubborn, and mi couldn't just capitulate and run go apologise without verifying the thing. So I told Rebel that I'd try to get a copy of video footage from the event and watch it again.

I promised that if I found that he's correct, I would make the appropriate correction the following week.

Well people, I really tried and tried, but got nowhere with obtaining the precious footage. Red tape choke mi till mi get blacker and blue!

I called around and asked about nine people who were either at the Grand Gala or watched it on TV, and nobody could unequivocally substantiate my recollection of what I thought I heard.

The week came and went. Braps, Roger Clarke 'daggered' his way into the spotlight and became the topic of my comments last week.

So, the relentless Rebel reached me again with the following text: "Greetings, Mr Ellis, I notice you did not correct your error that you made in last week's column about Queen Ifrica. We can overstand that the 'Rogernization' of the social media captured your mind, but we anticipate the correction from you. An error that is not corrected will end up as a fact and we don't want that. Bless. Rebel."

Mr Rebel is right, don't it? Yeah man, I'm now duty bound to do the right thing. So, folks, while I stand by my substantive argument against the public 'othering' of fellow Jamaicans based on sexuality, and while I insist that the Grand Gala stage was an inappropriate forum to introduce or ventilate an issue around which our people are passionately and violently divided, I must now concede that I also erred.

My assertion in the fifth paragraph of my column of August 28 that, "I'm sure I heard her say 'no gays 'round here' on the big stage at the National Stadium", was an error. I can find no evidence that Queen Ifrica actually spoke those words and I hereby, categorically, withdraw and retract my comments to that effect.

I also apologize sincerely to Queen Ifrica for inadvertently publicising an error.

box-mi-back@hotmail.com

ENDS

In the meantime here is my podcast on my thoughts on the handling of the matter by the advocates:

European Parliament says all international couples should enjoy the same property rights

Today the European Parliament adopted two resolutions to simplify legal procedures for international couples in the event of divorce or death. The texts include provisions for equal treatment between spouses and registered partners.

 

Last year the European Commission proposed two new EU regulations to simplify sharing and dividing couples’ property, including real estate and financial assets, when they move between EU Member States.

Under the Commission’s proposals, spouses would have been allowed to choose which national law applies when dividing their property, whilst registered partners would have been forced to use the law under which they registered.

The Fundamental Rights Agency had said in an opinion the discrepancy was discriminatory and unfounded.

In two resolutions adopted today with an overwhelming majority, the European Parliament suggested changes to make sure the same choices were available in both situations.

Under these changes, registered partners would be allowed to choose their applicable law, as long as registered partnerships existed under that law. The texts also reassure Member States that national marriage and family laws won’t be affected.

Alexandra Thein MEP, Rapporteur for the two resolutions and member of the LGBT Intergroup, commented: “This sends a very important signal: married couples and registered partners, regardless of their gender, must be able to enjoy the same freedom of movement across the European Union.”

“I’m glad the European Commission finally agreed with Parliament and with the Fundamental Rights Agency that registered partners too could choose their applicable law.”

Michael Cashman and Evelyne Gebhardt MEPs, Rapporteurs for the opinions in the Civil Liberties committee, added: “The Civil Liberties Committee had made a point that all couples should enjoy the same rights. We now hope the Council will listen to Parliament’s requests.”

Under the consultation procedure, today’s resolutions are the Parliament’s opinion. Member States are now responsible for adopting the binding legislation in the Council of the European Union.

Local Gays Getting Comfortable ... But Church Stands Resolute Against Homosexuality (Gleaner)

The lateness of the Gleaner these days is disturbing but be that as it may this came in the paper today:

Karrie Williams, Gleaner Writer

Despite the reputation Jamaica has developed among gay-rights advocates as a country that is intolerant to homosexuality, the Jamaica Forum for Lesbians, All-Sexuals and Gays (JFLAG) is of the view that more gays are coming out of the proverbial closet.

"More people are feeling much more comfortable to come out and claim their true identity, particularly young people," Dane Lewis, executive director of JFLAG, told The Gleaner earlier this week.

While Lewis wants to make it clear that JFLAG is not a membership organisation, he said based on the accepted international measurement, which has gays ranging between five and 12 per cent of the population, he is estimating that five per cent (135,000) of Jamaica's population - which was listed by the Statistical Institute of Jamaica (STATIN) in 2012 as 2,711,476 persons - is gay.

"There is no system of measurement of one's sexual orientation," said Lewis. "The international standard of measurement used is between three to 12 per cent of the population, but we would estimate that in Jamaica it is a moderate five per cent."

The Church, which is opposed to homosexuality on moral and ethical grounds, remains unhappy with the traction the movement appears to be getting in Jamaica.

The Reverend Dr Sonia Seiv-wright, of Bounty Hall New Testament Church of God, said the rapid increase in the local homosexual population could be linked to greed, especially in the case of the young men who have been gravitating towards the movement.

"I think they are increasing and I am concerned for our young men. I believe that our young men feel that if they get involved in certain things they will be more successful financially," said Seivwright. "Maybe they are putting themselves with people who are financially stable, and so they are drawn into this lifestyle because they are told they can be helped or they can be taken out of the economic state they are in."

Like the vast majority of Jamaican church leaders, Seivwright is staunchly opposed to homosexuality on moral and ethical grounds, and thinks the nation stands to lose if the practice continues to grow.

Biblical stance

"The Bible clearly speaks against it (homosexuality) and God also destroyed a nation for practising homosexuality; therefore, if it is not biblical, then it is not right," said Seivwright. "I think they all should come out of the closet, as we need to know who they are. I have a son and I don't want my boy to become mixed up with them."

Because of her anti-gay stance, Seivwright is taking issue with the call by some gay advocates that they should be given more rights in Jamaica.

"I don't see where homosexuals should have any rights," Seivwright toldThe Gleaner.

However, anxious to generate legitimacy for his group, Lewis is calling for more tolerance for members of the gay community.

"We do see an increased level of tolerance being displayed but we are also seeing that the violations continue; so one can't necessarily sit back and say that we are enjoying a better life as a community, despite there not being any legal recognition," said Lewis. "There are still members of the community that are still being violated, harassed, threatened, as we see happen the other day in the case of Dwayne Jones."

Jones was the cross-dresser who was murdered by patrons at a dance in Montego Bay, St James, after they realised he was not a woman.

Under the Jamaican Constitution, men who have sex with men can be brought before the court for prosecution but there are no penalties for lesbians. Section 76 of the Offences Against the Person Act states:

"Whosoever shall be convicted of the abominable crime of buggery, committed either with mankind or with any animal, shall be liable to be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for a term not exceeding 10 years."

The election campaign promise made by Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller that, if elected, her Government would review the buggery law, is also being frowned upon by some members of the society.

"They have been empowered by the prime minister's pronouncement to review the buggery law, so as a result, they have become braver in their attempt to enter mainstream society, and now it's the heterosexuals who are running scared," said Pauline Clarke. "In addition, we are being constantly pressured by gay-rights activists both here at home and abroad, but we just want them to know that there is no room for that sort of nefarious lifestyle in Jamaica."

The health authorities are also expressing concern about the gay lifestyle as it relates to the spread of HIV/AIDS.

According to the 2010 report of the National HIV Programme, one out of every three men who have sex with men are HIV-positive.

"The prevalence values recorded in vulnerable populations were higher with men who have sex with men, having a 31.8 per cent rate," the report stated

Earlier this year, Lenworth Anglin, the executive director of the Church of God in Jamaica, created a firestorm when he declared that the Church would never bow in its opposition to homosexuality.

"Let those who want to get offended get offended. Let those who want to oppose oppose," said Anglin. "I stand to declare, based on evidence, evidence in scripture, evidence backed by history. No negotiation. If you standing up for God, stand up for God."

karrie.williams@gleanerjm.com

Calling for a Tourism Boycott on Jamaica is a dumb idea at this time

Some young advocates as it were with full support from some older ones who seem more interested in attention seeking than seriously thinking what can happen when such poorly thought out agitations are launched. Lest we forget the LGBT population is still reeling from the black eye from the Queen Ifrica fiasco and the fumbling by all parties involved namely JFLAG and JAGLA (Jamaica Association of Gays and Lesbians Abroad) like wherein the hardened positions by the anti gay voices and persons has gotten more so. Now we see the Lovemarch folks planning another march from Hope Gardens to Half Way Tree on September 14th in opposition to the upcoming court cases challenging the buggery law etc.

Lest we also forget for those who were around before in 2008 and for newcomers we have gone down this road before with calls for boycotts by over exuberant foreign activists out of touch with our realities and who in a supposed bid to assist us in the struggle instead we ended up with a near diplomatic nightmare and a major spike in homophobic incident reports that these same voices were not prepared to assist us (I was a JFLAG at the time) to mitigate or engage. The choppings, profilings, beatings and so on were numerous and the narrative that rang out in some of those documented cases was that they were done in retaliation for making our country suffer in the eyes of the attackers.

EGALE - EQUALITY FOR GAYS AND LESBIANS EVERYWHERE Canada for example comes to mind in 2008 where they fervently called for a tourism boycott and the nation turned red with the call those days we did not have a more supportive media as now and it was a public relations nightmare the call ended up causing more problems than they solved, SMMS Stop Murder Music Canada also joined the call but called it off after some persuasion from local advocates on the ground and a response from the then government of Jamaica, also involved was the Metropolitan Community Church of Toronto who had demanded that the Jamaican government immediately denounce homophobic violence in the country and begin work on repealing laws criminalizing homosexuality, including sexual orientation in the Charter of Rights and developing education campaigns for the country and for the police. A similar call has been hinted to by JAGLA, individual advocates and supported by Maurice Tomlinson. The supposed call is stop the rising numbers of violence meted out to members of the LGBT populations in recent times, my fear based on experience is that such calls only seek to increase the very abuses that the calls are intended to decrease, boycotts are counter productive, besides travel agents said that a tourist boycott was not likely to have a major impact anyway then and I doubt it would have now, also we must bear in mind that Air Canada recently commenced flights to Kingston again with renewed interest in the destination and given our economic situation, austerity and the mood of the nation on many fronts this is not the time for a boycott. Jobs are scarce, persons are tense we do not need a spark to set the place on fire.

Then came the Red Stripe boycott as well which had us in a frenzy for some time although Red Stripe bounced back easily and capitalized on the unexpected exposure that they could not pay for, their forward thinking however averted trouble when they vowed not to support shows with artists professing violent lyrics overall. Back then I had posted in a response to our friends in San Francisco; "While I appreciate the support in the cause for justice and tolerance towards everyone here despite their sexual orientation, groups planning or who have planned these events must be mindful of the repercussions such actions may have on an already marginalized grouping as we are here.

Members of the public and by extension select public opinion shapers will consider this as interference by foreigners and hence push for more hatred and opposition towards gays. Not to mention the increase in violence that occurs when a situation like this becomes public knowledge. As we have seen before during the planned Canadian group EGALE’s boycott early last year many persons including lesbians suffered attacks, we saw a spike in the numbers that was never so for lesbians especially before. The stories told to us by many victims included hints that we (gays) were getting foreigners to force their nasty lifestyle on Jamaica and other derogatory remarks so the attackers felt justified in their actions.

I ask you our friends to be mindful, JFLAG is slowly working on the ground to reach several objectives which include on going dialogue and other strategies which I am not at liberty to reveal now that I am aware of. Also to consider are the limited resources available for any action that may need to be taken in crisis intervention cases.

Let us remember too that it was Red Stripe, one of the targets of this ban campaign that withdrew financial backing for events and artists who promote violence of any sort against Jamaicans some time ago, we wouldn’t want to erode that small gain now, small as it was it was a step in the right direction.

Thanks to the organizers and participants however for showing concern and for taking the steps to bring the matter(s) to public light but let us communicate before any other drastic actions are taken, I know that there are passionate persons out there to our cause and I am grateful personally and by extension I know the JFLAG team and gays here are thankful too.

One Love

H"

Cordially relations are enjoyed since and in fact it was the members of the same team in essence that met with Buju Banton, Michael Petrelis seated to Buju's left was involved in the Red Stripe boycott call. Boycott calls tend to make the hotel market jittery and with the public still angry at the feeling that the lobby has moved from being the oppressed to the oppressor. 

alarmist LGBT crisis reporting?

One wonders if the calls are genuine when the same persons making such calls do not reside here and seem oblivious to the real conditions on the ground such as the long standing issue of homelessness which none of these fly by night groups have once spoken to fully yet but are loud on limelight placing demonstrations and homophobic or transphobic violence reactions, case in point the Dwayne Jones murder in July, Jones was indeed homeless and resided illegally in a captured house in western Jamaica while alive he got very little assistance but in death became wonderful public relations material for some persons to project themselves yet they do not directly get involved in frontline work, one wonders. 

The fundamental concern for me is when the boycott is launched as persons seem head strong to do impervious of the opinions of influentials and previous Programs Managers of JFLAG will these groups and individuals provide assistance in whatever forms (outside of asylum seeking avenues) for local folks who may fall as involuntary martyrs for a cause they may not necessarily subscribe to? Such persons are in the comfort of other lands and can say anything what about the least amongst us especially who are far more exposed to the likelihood of being attacked or killed?

Knee jerk reactions to an obvious spike in homo-negative incidents is not the way to go about it, careful thought has to be done and strategizing but with recent outcomes in the lobby as well as outside of it leaves me wondering and indeed concerned on many fronts.

also see: Murder Music Campaign needs local leadership and Gov’t Hush Hush On Gay Pressure …As Promoters Forced To Pull Queen Ifrica From Canada Show 

Rev Al Miller’s late response to Dwayne Jones’ Murder & Respect heterosexuals demand

Sizzla bats for Queen Ifrica as expected 

Queen Ifrica's "Freedom of Speech" & advocacy found wanting  

'I SPOKE FOR WHAT I BELIEVED IN' - Queen Ifrica defends Grand Gala performance after JFLAG backlash

We muss tek sleep and mark death and learn from previous mistakes instead of going headstrong inna more mess creating more unneeded obstacles.

Peace and tolerance

H

  

London protest against LGBT murders in Jamaica

Outrage over brutal killing of Dwayne Jones & Dean Moriah

Rally outside Jamaican High Commission in London

Jamaican authorities urged to protect LGBTs against hate crime

London, UK – 29 August 2013

Thirty protesters picketed the Jamaican High Commission in London yesterday (28 August) in protest at the brutal murders of 16 year old cross-dresser Dwayne Jones and a 41-year old gay man, Dean Moriah.

They demanded justice for both men, and urged tougher Jamaican government action against homophobic and transphobic hate crime.

The protest was organised by Out & Proud African LGBTI and Justice for Dwayne Jones, with the support of the Peter Tatchell Foundation.

PHOTOS of the protest: http://bit.ly/15m5Qeo

“We demand justice for Dwayne and Dean. Jamaican authorities need to send an unequivocal message that there will be zero tolerance of violence against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people. Additionally, the police should prosecute the killers and witnesses should be offered anonymity and police protection,” said Edwin Sesange, Co-founder and Director, Out & Proud African LGBTI.

“Like Senator Golding, Prime Minister Portia Simpson-Miller and other government officials and religious leaders must publicly condemn the killings. We call on them to end the criminalisation of homosexuality and to protect the human rights of all Jamaicans.

“We urge the Commonwealth to condemn homophobia in Jamaica and ask the Jamaican government to take action to prevent the persecution LGBT people,” said Sesange.

“The Jamaican Prime Minister, Justice Minister, Education Minister and police chief must work together to educate the public about LGBT issues, promote tolerance, prosecute homophobic hate crime and ensure that LGBT Jamaicans are able to live in peace, without fear,” said Peter Tatchell, Director of the human rights advocacy organisation the Peter Tatchell Foundation. He attended and spoke at the Wednesday protest.

“Jamaica’s anti-sodomy law is a violation of the country’s commitment to equal rights and non-discrimination. It menaces law-abiding LGBT citizens with arrest and imprisonment, as well as giving homophobic attitudes the underpinning of law and official legitimacy. It also discourages LGBT people from coming forward for HIV education and testing, which is contributing to the spread of HIV and placing a burden on the Jamaican health service. Repealing the ban on gay relationships is in the wider public interest,” said Mr Tatchell.

Dwayne Jones was brutally murdered in Jamaica on 22 July 2013. He was dressed as a woman. His sexuality and gender identity are unconfirmed.

Relentlessly teased at school, at 14 Dwayne was kicked out of home by a father who joined in with neighbours homophobic jeers as Dwayne left. A few weeks ago, aged 16, Dwayne was beaten, stabbed, shot and deliberately run over by a car as he tried escape after being attacked at a party where he had dressed in women’s clothing. According to reports, someone at the party identified Dwayne as 'male' and then a mob chased and murdered him. Police have yet to make a single arrest.

READ MORE about Dwayne Jone’s killing: http://bit.ly/19BHB0L

READ about the murder of Dean Moriah: http://bit.ly/19XjoWe

Further information:

Edwin Sesange
Out & Proud African LGBTI
0744 806 3053

Peter Tatchell
Director, Peter Tatchell Foundation
Email: Peter@PeterTatchellFoundation.org
Web: www.PeterTatchellFoundation.org

Anti Gay Distortions (Gleaner Letter)

QCJ co founder penned this letter as published in today's Gleaner:

THE EDITOR, Sir:

In a letter to the editor on August 24, 2013, S. Richards insinuated that the LGBT agenda was anti-free speech and thus called on Jamaicans to rise up.

Richards cited several occurrences in which the victim's freedom of speech was purportedly violated in an attempt to bring the message home. However, Richards' representation of each of the selected events shows either a lack of knowledge of the instances themselves or a deliberate attempt to misrepresent the truth to advance an agenda.

Below, I have shared more details of each instance to which the writer referred.

Crystal Dixon - Ms Dixon was the hiring chief at the University of Toledo whose policies specifically reference inclusion of, and protection for, all sexual orientations. These are reflected in their strategic and diversity plans, as well as their equal hiring and anti-harassment policies.

A three-judge panel of the Cincinnati-based 6th US District Court of Appeals expressed that it was, in their opinion, deciding a very narrow question of whether public speech and writings are constitutionally protected when they oppose "the very policies that her government employer charges her with creating, promoting and enforcing". - Carrie Ghose, Business First.

The judges stated, "In writing her op-ed column, Dixon not only spoke on policy issues, but also spoke on policy issues related directly to her position at the university."

PROMOTING HARMONY

Donnie McClurkin: He was indeed pulled from performing at the concert Reflections on Peace: From Gandhi to King. However, the following reason was given by the organisers: "The Arts and Humanities Commission and Donnie McClurkin's management decided that it would be best for him to withdraw because the purpose of the event is to bring people together ... . Mayor Gray said the purpose of the event is to promote peace and harmony. That is what King was all about," said Doxie McCoy, spokeswoman for Mayor Vincent C. Gray.

Adrian Smith: His employers, Trafford Housing Trust, argued that he broke their code of conduct by expressing religious or political views which might upset co-workers. Shortly after Mr Smith's demotion, Peter Tatchell, a prominent LGBT rights activist, described the action of the employees as excessive. Mr Smith subsequently won a breach-of-contract action against his employers.

There is a balancing act that must be played in this grand circle of life where so many different ideas, beliefs and people must coexist. There are indeed times when, in an attempt to protect one vulnerable group, laws and institutional policies overextend their authority. However, those instances, though never many to begin with, will gradually decrease as we learn to respect each other and live harmoniously.

ANGELINE JACKSON

ajackson@qcjm.org

Kingston

also see: Government Hush on Queen Ifrica matter since work permit cancellation

Anti gay Facebook group pops up after the Queen Ifrica fiasco

A new group one of many has popped up on Facebook since the Queen Ifrica public debate on freedom of speech and so on and now the moralists have been coming forth. The overall feeling since the euphoria post the cancellation of the work permit of the female singjay is that the gay lobby has over reached and is becoming oppressive instead of showing the tolerance it is agitating for. 

The airwaves have been on fire since this week and persons vowing all kinds of action including a planned march word has it on the street in opposition to the supposed choking of the performance by Queen Ifrica.

The group named Jamaicans' Fight Against Slackness Immorality Nastiness & Homosexuality

Closed Group 
Jamaicans' Fight Against Slackness Immorality Nastiness Corruption & Homosexuality (JFASINCH) is a group on a mission to boldly and fearlessly stand up against ALL forms of persons, entities, groups, and governments that continue to use their wealth and power to brutally force our Jamaican people into accepting, encouraging, and subjecting themselves to their sordid ways of life.

I, Sub-Zero, WILL NOT be accommodating any individual in this group who is not 100% in support of my cause to stand up at ALL cost against the powers of darkness, greed, and immorality. I will not be under the modus operandi of persuading persons to believe in my cause; but will be seeking to find persons who are already of the same faith and conviction to do whatever is necessary to bring Jamaica back to some semblance of morality.

Finally, it is my sincere intention of physically launching this group as a Non-Profit Organization in Jamaica as soon as the Facebook membership reaches a satisfactory total. It is now full time for the Moral side of Jamaica to start making their voices be heard in LARGE numbers; because if we don't, our little island called Jamaica will be a figment of our imagination--a place that would be completely demoralized, demonized, and perfect for Satan to establish his New One World Order domain, similar to that in places like America now.

THE NEW WORLD ORDER IS SURE IF WE DON'T FIGHT!!

the Admin:

The group though young has only managed to get only 16 members as at the preparation of this post but other LGBTians have been insisting on reporting the group, are we taking an intolerant view of intolerance here in some respects? After examining the group there was no indication the more egregious death wish for us seems not present at this time so should we rush to judgement. Of note Delano Sevright of the opposition party the JLP, Jamaica Labour Party is a member which suggests the general view of that party on homosexuality for all intents and purposes. He views may not be those of the group as he has been some what fair on some issues before so I do not want to pre-judge his intentions.

Question is should we watch first before action or report them for closure?

I say wait a little then if any infraction of refusal to admit LGBT persons then we can act.

Peace and tolerance

H