Gay Lesbian Bisexual Transgender & Queer Jamaica

Here is one of the reports on the death pf David Kato that has sparked the comments:

The key is in the white matter (Image: Simon Fraser/SPL)

also see:

The Homo-Negativity Surrounding Paedophilia ……. from GLBTQ Jamaica Blog Combo (WordPress Edition)

Pedophiles, Hebephiles and Ephebophiles, Oh My: Erotic Age Orientation

Original Source: h/b implications watch

By Jesse Bering

Michael Jackson probably wasn’t a pedophile—at least, not in the strict, biological sense of the word. It’s a morally loaded term, pedophile, that has become synonymous with the very basest of evils. (In fact it’s hard to even say it aloud without cringing, isn’t it?) But according to sex researchers, it’s also a grossly misused term.

If Jackson did fall outside the norm in his “erotic age orientation”—and we may never know if he did—he was almost certainly what’s called a hebephile, a newly proposed diagnostic classification in which people display a sexual preference for children at the cusp of puberty, between the ages of, roughly, 11 to 14 years of age. Pedophiles, in contrast, show a sexual preference for clearly prepubescent children. There are also ephebophiles (from ephebos, meaning “one arrived at puberty” in Greek), who are mostly attracted to 15- to 16-year-olds; teleiophiles (from teleios, meaning, “full grown” in Greek), who prefer those 17 years of age or older); and even the very rare gerontophile (from gerontos, meaning “old man” in Greek), someone whose sexual preference is for the elderly. So although child sex offenders are often lumped into the single classification of pedophilia, biologically speaking it’s a rather complicated affair. Some have even proposed an additional subcategory of pedophilia, “infantophilia,” to distinguish those individuals most intensely attracted to children below six years of age.

Based on this classification scheme of erotic age orientations, even the world’s best-known fictitious “pedophile,” Humbert Humbert from Nabokov’s masterpiece, Lolita, would more properly be considered a hebephile. (Likewise the protagonist from Thomas Mann’s Death in Venice, a work that I’ve always viewed as something of the “gay Lolita”). Consider Humbert’s telltale description of a “nymphet.” After a brief introduction to those “pale pubescent girls with matted eyelashes,” Humbert explains:
Between the age limits of nine and fourteen there occur maidens who, to certain bewitched travelers, twice or many times older than they, reveal their true nature which is not human, but nymphic (that is, demoniac); and these chosen creatures I propose to designate as “nymphets.”

Although Michael Jackson might have suffered more disgrace from his hebephilic orientation than most, and his name will probably forever be entangled darkly with the sinister phrase “little boys,” he wasn’t the first celebrity or famous figure that could be seen as falling into this hebephilic category. In fact, ironically, Michael Jackson’s first wife, Lisa Marie Presley, is the product of a hebephilic attraction. After all, let’s not forget that Priscilla caught Elvis’s very grownup eye when she was just fourteen, only a year or two older than the boys that Michael Jackson was accused of sexually molesting. Then there’s of course also the scandalous Jerry Lee Lewis incident in which the 23-year-old “Great Balls of Fire” singer married his 13-year-old first cousin.

In the psychiatric community, there’s recently been a hubbub of commotion concerning whether hebephelia should be designated as a medical disorderor, instead, seen simply as a normal variant of sexual orientation and not indicative of brain pathology. There are important policy implications of adding hebephilia to the checklist of mental illnesses, since doing so might allow people who sexually abuse pubescent children to invoke a mental illness defense.

One researcher who is arguing vociferously for the inclusion of hebephilia in the American Psychiatric Association's revised diagnostic manual (the DSM-V) is University of Toronto psychologist Ray Blanchard. In last month’s issue of Archives of Sexual Behavior, Blanchard and his colleagues provide new evidence that many people diagnosed under the traditional label of pedophilia are in fact not as interested in prepubescent children as they are early adolescents.

To tease apart these erotic age orientation differences, Blanchard and his colleagues studied 881 men (straight and gay) in his laboratory usingphallometric testing (also known as penile plethysmography) while showing them visual images of differently aged nude models. Because this technique measures penile blood volume changes, it’s seen as being a fairly objective index of sexual arousal to what’s being shown on the screen—which, for those attracted to children and young adolescents, the participant might verbally deny being attracted to. In other words, the penis isn’t a very good liar. So, for example, in Blanchard’s study, the image of a naked 12-year-old girl (nothing prurient, but rather resembling a subject in a medical textbook) was accompanied by the following audiotaped narrative:
“You are watching a late movie on TV with your neighbors’ 12-year-old daughter. You have your arm around her shoulders, and your fingers brush against her chest. You realize that her breasts have begun to develop…”

Blanchard and his coauthors found that the men in their sample fell into somewhat discrete categories of erotic age orientation—some had the strongest penile response to the prepubescent children (the pedophiles), others to the pubescent children (the hebephiles), and the remainder to the adults shown on screen (the teleiophiles). These categories weren’t mutually exclusive. For example, some teleiophiles showed some arousal to pubescent children, some hebephiles showed some attraction to prepubescent children, and so on. But the authors did find that it’s possible to distinguish empirically between a “true pedophile” and a hebephile using this technique, in terms of the age ranges for which men exhibited their strongest arousal. They also conclude that, based on the findings from this study, hebephilia “is relatively common compared with other forms of erotic interest in children.”

In the second half of their article, Blanchard and his colleagues argue that hebephilia should be added to the newly revised DSM-V as a genuine paraphilic mental disorder—differentiating it from pedophilia. But many of his colleagues working in this area are strongly opposed to doing this.

Men who find themselves primarily attracted to young or middle-aged adolescents are clearly disadvantaged in today’s society, but historically (and evolutionarily) this almost certainly wasn’t the case. In fact, hebephiles—or at least ephebephiles—would have had a leg up over their competition. Evolutionary psychologists have found repeatedly that markers of youth correlate highly with perceptions of beauty and attractiveness. For straight men, this makes sense, since a woman’s reproductive value declines steadily after the age of about twenty. Obviously having sex with a prepubescent child would be fruitless—literally. But, whether we like it or not, this isn’t so for a teenage girl who has just come of age, who is reproductively viable and whose brand-new state of fertility can more or less ensure paternity for the male. These evolved motives were portrayed in the film Pretty Baby, in which a young Brooke Shields plays the role of twelve-old-old Violet Neil, a prostitute’s daughter in 1917’s New Orleans whose coveted virginity goes up for auction to the highest bidder.

Understanding adult gay men’s attraction to young males is more of a puzzle. Evolutionary psychologist Frank Muscarella’s “alliance formation theory” is the only one that I’m aware of that attempts to do this. This theory holds that homoerotic behavior between older, high status men and teenage boys serves as a way for the latter to move up in ranks, a sort of power-for-sex bargaining chip. The most obvious example of this type of homosexual dynamic was found in ancient Greece, but male relationships in a handful of New Guinea tribes display these homoerotic patterns as well. There are also, ahem, plenty of present-day examples of this in Congress. Oscar Wilde probably would have signed on to this theoretical perspective. After all, his famous “love that dare not speak its name” wasn’t homosexuality, per se, but rather a “great affection of an elder for a younger man”:
...as there was between David and Jonathan, such as Plato made the very basis of his philosophy, and such as you find in the sonnets of Michelangelo and Shakespeare. It is that deep, spiritual affection that is as pure as it is perfect. It dictates and pervades great works of art like those of Shakespeare and Michelangelo… It is beautiful, it is fine, it is the noblest form of affection. There is nothing unnatural about it. It is intellectual, and it repeatedly exists between an elder and a younger man, when the elder man has intellect, and the younger man has all the joy, hope and glamour of life before him. That it should be so, the world does not understand. The world mocks at it and sometimes puts one in the pillory for it.

But, generally speaking, Muscarella’s theory doesn’t seem to pull a lot of weight. Not many teenage boys in any culture seem terribly interested in taking this particular route to success. Rather—and I may be wrong about this—but I think most teenage boys would prefer to scrub toilets for the rest of their lives or sell soft bagels at the mall than become the sexual plaything of an “older gentlemen.”

In any event, given the biological (even adaptive) verities of being attracted to adolescents, most experts in this area find it completely illogical for Blanchard to recommend adding hebephilia to the revised DSM-V. (Especially since other more clearly maladaptive paraphilias—such as gerontophilia, in which men are attracted primarily to elderly, post-menopausal women—are not presently included in the diagnostic manual.) The push to pathologize hebephilia, argues forensic psychologist Karen Franklin, appears to be motivated more by “a booming cottage industry” in forensic psychology, not coincidentally linked with a “punitive era of moral panic." Because “civil incapacitation” (basically, the government’s ability to strip a person of his or her civil rights in the interests of public safety) requires that the person be suffering from a diagnosable mental disorder or abnormality, Franklin calls Blanchard’s proposal “a textbook example of subjective values masquerading as science.” Another critic, forensic psychologist Gregory DeClue, suggests that such medical classifications are being based on arbitrary distinctions dictated by cultural standards:
Pedophilia is a mental disorder. Homosexuality is not. Should hebephilia of ephebophilia or gerontophilia be considered mental disorders? How about sexual preference for people with different (or with the same) ethnic characteristics as oneself?

And Marquette University psychologist Thomas Zander, points out that since chronological age doesn’t always perfectly match physical age, including these subtle shades of erotic age preferences would be problematic from a diagnostic perspective:
Imagine how much more impractical it would be to require forensic evaluators to determine the existence of pedophilia based on the stage of adolescence of the examinee’s victim. Such determinations could literally devolve into a splitting of pubic hairs.

One unexplored question, and one inseparable from the case of Michael Jackson, is whether we tend to be more forgiving of a person’s sexual peccadilloes when that individual has some invaluable or culturally irreplaceable abilities. For example, consider the following true story:

There once was a man who fancied young boys. Being that laws were more lax in other nations, this man decided to travel to a foreign country, leaving his wife and young daughter behind, where he met up with another Westerner who shared in his predilections for pederasty, and there the two of them spent their happy vacation scouring the seedy underground of this country searching for pimps and renting out boys for sex.

Now if you’re like most people, you’re probably experiencing a shiver of disgust and a spark of rage. You likely feel these men should have their testicles drawn and quartered by wild mares, be thrown to a burly group of rapists, castrated with garden sheers or, if you’re the pragmatic sort, treated as any other sick animal in the herd would be treated, with a humane bullet to the temple or perhaps a swift and sure current of potassium chloride injected into the arm.

But notice the subtle change in your perceptions when I tell you that these events are from the autobiography of André Gide, who in 1947—long after he’d publicized these very details—won the Nobel prize in literature. Gide is in fact bowdlerizing his time in Algiers with none other than Oscar Wilde.
Wilde took a key out of his pocket and showed me into a tiny apartment of two rooms… The youths followed him, each of them wrapped in a burnous that hid his face. Then the guide left us and Wilde sent me into the further room with little Mohammed and shut himself up in the other with the [other boy]. Every time since then that I have sought after pleasure, it is the memory of that night I have pursued.

It’s not that we think it’s perfectly fine for Gide and Wilde to have sex with minors or even that they shouldn’t have been punished for such behaviors. (In fact Wilde was sentenced in London to two years hard labor for related offenses not long after this Maghreb excursion with Gide and died in penniless ignominy.) But somehow, as with our commingled feelings for Michael Jackson, “the greatest entertainer of all time,” the fact that these men were national treasures somehow dilutes our moralistic anger, as though we’re more willing to suffer their vices given the remarkable literary gifts they bestowed.

Would you really have wanted Oscar Wilde euthanized as though he were a sick animal? Should André Gide, whom the New York Times hailed in their obituary as a man “judged the greatest French writer of this century by the literary cognoscenti,” have been deprived of his pen, torn to pieces by illiterate thugs? It’s complicated. And although in principle we know that all men are equal in the eyes of the law, just as we did for Michael Jackson during his child molestation trials, I have a hunch that many people tend to feel (and uncomfortably so) a little sympathy for the Devil under such circumstances.

written By Empress- Veene

Been around long enough to say
I've had stuff
Been around long enough to admit
That I've had stuff
But none of it was like this

Your stuff
Your stuff is the kind people sing about
It's the prefect line in a song
that beat that speaks to the soul
Those words that stimulates mind and body, nerves and core.

You see this stuff
This is the stuff people write about
It's Epic
Heroically saving my pleasure famished soul from starvation

Its the epiphanic stimuli
It induces climatic climax
It's the kinda drug you don't wish to be rehabilitated from.

This aint no ordinary stuff
No this,
this is some high grade SHIT!

Yeah...
This is the kinda stuff people spend their lives searching for.
This is what happy endings is about.
This stuff will penetrate your mind with erotic memories that is never depleted or erased.
Your stuff is the most sought after stuff of the century.

See after having some a your stuff
I am so,
So drunken with pleasure
So weaken from climaxing
And so fucking high...That I've got to admit
I'm hooked on your SHIT!

SIMONE MORGAN
All Woman Writer

JUST the mere thought of her significant other being with someone else may send a woman over the edge. Sadly though, nowadays it's a truth universally acknowledged that for some men, cheating and relationships go hand in hand, leaving many women on the brink of getting mad over love. But while many women head for breakdown when cheating becomes a feature of their relationships, others take control and will readily accept a third party into their love lives, providing that they get to choose the girl.Meet Jovia Davis, who admits that she's "just keeping it real", by introducing her best friend to her relationship

"My best friend and I vowed that if our spouses became [bored] we would invite a third party into the bedroom," Davis said.

As the new year rolls on the fallout from the coming out process for many who decided to make it a part of their new year's resolution to come out to family and friends in particular is showing up more. Certainly the requests for information on how to go about it have been coming in from Jamaicans here and abroad from the beginning of the holiday season. There have been some what seems positive results on the surface of it for a few persons. One lesbian who related happily her story that her father who she feared who have disowned her has been quite receptive and tolerant but the surprise for her was her mother who she thought would have been the one to be in that position and who is very angry at the revelation further to that the woman decided to approach her father first before coming to her has made her upset as well. Such are some of the unexpected results in the coming out process and of course is not the same per person/case despite the standard guidelines for the process. Another positive case is a Jamaican University student studying overseas who decided not to "hide anymore" in his own words and gathered the family over the holidays to not only come out but introduce his selected life partner on the backdrop on the repealing of the Don't Ask Don't Tell policy in the United States military he explained in an email that he is quite pleased with the results so far and is keeping tabs on the parents and extended family as to his decision. He said he read online guides and thought long and hard about how he was going to handle the situation.No matter what their age, many people are afraid their parents will reject them if they come out. The good news is that you’re probably wrong. However, if you are under age 18 or financially dependent on your parents, consider this very, very carefully.


Some reactions you may want to prepare for:

■ Some parents may react in ways that hurt. They may cry, get angry or feel embarrassed.

■ Some parents will feel honored and appreciate that you have entrusted them with an important piece of truth about yourself.

■ Some parents will need to grieve the dreams they had for you, before they see the new, more genuine life you are building for yourself.

■ They may ask where they “went wrong” or if they did something “to cause this.” Assure them that they did nothing wrong.

■ Some may call being GLBT a sin, or attempt to send their child to a counselor or therapist in the baseless hope that they can “change.”

■ Some parents will already know you’re gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender — or they might have an inkling. They may have been waiting for you to tell them, and find your doing so a relief.

■ It may take time for a parent to absorb or come to terms with the information. Good or bad, their initial reaction may not reflect their feelings over the long term.

Remember that your parents grew up in a time when some of the stereotypes about GLBT people were more prevalent than they are today.

Remember, too, that they’re probably trying to keep you safe from something they do not understand.

Finally, keep in mind this is big news, and there’s no timetable for how long it takes parents to adjust.Most people come out because, sooner or later, they can’t stand hiding who they are anymore. They want their relationships to be stronger, richer, more fulfilling and authentic. Once we do come out, most of us find that it feels far better to be open and honest than to conceal such an integral part of ourselves. We also come to recognize that our personal decision to live openly helps break down barriers and stereotypes that have kept others in the closet. And in doing so, we make it easier for others to follow our example.

The Benefits of Coming Out:

■ Living an open and whole life.

■ Developing closer, more genuine relationships.

■ Building self-esteem from being known and loved for who we really are.

■ Reducing the stress of hiding our identity.

■ Connecting with others who are GLBT.

■ Being part of a strong and vibrant community.

■ Helping to dispel myths and stereotypes about who GLBT people are and what our lives are like.

■ Becoming a role model for others.

■ Making it easier for younger GLBT people who will follow in our footsteps.

Along with these benefits, there are also risks. As constructive as the decision is, the reaction of others can be difficult or impossible to predict.

The Risks of Coming Out:

■ Not everyone will be understanding or accepting.

■ Family, friends or co-workers may be shocked, confused or even hostile.

■ Some relationships may permanently change.

■ We may experience harassment or discrimination.

■ Some young people, especially those under age 18, may be thrown out of their homes or lose financial support from parents.

You’re in Charge:

When you weigh the benefits and risks of being open about who you are, it’s important to remember that the person in charge of your coming out journey is you. You decide who to confide in, when to do it and how. You also decide when coming out just may not be right, necessary or advisable

Keep in Mind That:

There is no one right or wrong way to come out or live openly. Choosing to come out or to be open does not mean you have to be out at all times or in all places — you decide how, where and when based on what’s right for you. Your sexual orientation and gender identity are important pieces of you, but they do not have to define you. Living openly doesn’t change all the many unique things that make you, you.Making a Coming Out PlanHaving the Conversations
Fostering strong, deep relationships with your friends and family begins with honesty. Living openly is important because it allows for closer relationships with the people you care about — and ultimately a happier life for you. For most people coming out or opening up to someone new starts with a conversation.

It’s normal to want or hope for positive reactions from the people you tell, including:
■ Acceptance
■ Support
■ Understanding
■ Comfort
■ Reassurance that your relationship won’t be
negatively affected
■ Confidence that your relationship will be closer
■ Acknowledgment of your feelings
■ Love
All or some of these positive reactions can result from your coming out conversation, but they may not happen immediately. Putting yourself in the other person’s shoes may also be helpful.

A person who has just had someone come out to them often feels:
■ Surprised
■ Honoured
■ Uncomfortable
■ Scared
■ Unsure how to react
■ Supportive
■ Disbelieving
■ Relieved
■ Curious
■ Angry
■ Anxious
■ Unsure what to do next

Give the person you’re telling the time they need. It may also be helpful to remember that the person you’re really doing this for is you. When you’re ready to tell someone, consider starting with the person most likely to be supportive. This might be a friend, relative or teacher. Maybe you will tell this person that you are gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender. Maybe you will simply say that you have questions about your sexual orientation or gender identity. Again, there is no right or wrong way to do this. You are the expert in knowing what’s best for yourself and what you are feeling. When you are ready, here are a couple of things to keep in mind:
■ Find a relaxed, private place to have the conversation, and allow adequate time.
■ People will usually take their cues from you in how to approach this — so be open and honest and say that it’s okay to ask questions.

Appropriate and gentle humour can go a long way to easing anxiety for both you and the person you are speaking with.

Telling Friends


When you’re ready to come out to friends, you may be lucky enough to have some who are already out themselves, or who have a GLBT friend or relative of their own. Oftentimes, however, coming out to a friend can be a leap of faith. Here are some things you may want to consider:

■ Your friends may surprise you. Those you thought would be least judgmental may be the first to turn away; those who seem least likely to be accepting sometimes offer the strongest support.

■ Don’t assume prejudice. Earlier we mentioned that signals can help indicate someone’s level of support, or lack thereof. While that’s true, it is just as possible to read too much into an off-the-cuff remark. Give your friends a chance to be supportive.

The Coming Out Continuum

Coming out and living openly aren’t something you do once, or even for one year. It’s a journey that we make every single day of our lives. There are three broad stages that people move through on the coming out continuum. For each person it is a little different, and you may find that at times you move backward and forward through the phases all at once.

1) Opening Up to Yourself

The period when your journey is beginning — when you’re asking yourself questions, moving toward coming out to yourself and perhaps the decision to tell others.

2) Coming Out

The period when you’re actively talking for the first time about your sexual orientation or gender identity with family, friends, co-workers, classmates and other people in your life.

3) Living Openly

The ongoing phase after you’ve initially talked with the people closest to you about your life as a GLBT person, and are now able to tell new people that come into your life fluidly —where and when it feels appropriate to you.

Peace and tolerance

H