Questions on New Zealand's decriminalising buggery & MSM experience (Observer Letter) ......

Dear Editor,

In his letter of August 17, Mr Maurice Tomlinson berated Mrs Betty Ann Blaine for suggesting a link between family life and abstinence education and control of HIV/AIDS.

He then urged emulation of the New Zealand approach of decriminalising buggery for control of HIV, claiming that there were only 19 new cases of HIV in New Zealand, in 2009.

In contrast, data from the AIDS Epidemiology Group, Department of Preventive and Social Medicine, University of Otago Medical School, Dunedin in New Zealand published on the New Zealand Ministry of Health website, indicate that "151 people were diagnosed with HIV through antibody testing in 2009".

This figure is down from an all-time high of 183 in 2008, but the group claims that "it is too soon to determine if there is a definite downward trend in diagnosis".

The data also indicate that men who have sex with men (MSM) are the most affected group, that the number of new cases among MSM was similar to what obtained in 2006, 2007 and that new cases continue to occur among MSM.

New Zealand decriminalised buggery in 1986 and the age of consent for homosexuals is the same as that for heterosexuals - 16 years.

Why are most cases of HIV in New Zealand occurring among MSM?

What explains the peak in the diagnosis of cases of HIV among MSM in New Zealand 23 years after the legalisation of homosexuality?

W West
wayne_west@hotmail.com
ENDS

My two cents:
If the data presented by the letter writer Mr. Wayne West is so then the questions posed have some merit but then again I am a bit tired of seeing the letters by the named Maurice Tomlinson of Jamaica AIDS Support for Life, AIDSFREEWORLD and by extension JFLAG. I frankly think we are beating a dying horse in this matter of using HIV/AIDS infection patterns and sexual practices to request the possible decriminalization of the Buggery Law and similar legislation.

Yes certain cultural practices, homophobia and stigma over the years may have driven some persons underground in accessing treatment (I am no expert but my little experience has taught me much) but Jamaica's position overall towards male homosexuality has certainly evolved although it needs far more growth in terms of tolerance and visibility of gays as stereotypical as that sounds. Many MSMs for example can indeed access services in some public health centres as the staff in some of these facilities have been sensitized to a certain extent but the cultural mores supersede the need to perform professionally thus impeding services to this group.

I do not believe that it is just the social stigma attached to male homosexuality in as far as the health sector that is of major concern but the classism, hypocrisy and clandestine sexual practices of homosexuals themselves coupled with our problems associated with hyper masculine identities from society's definition of manhood, deep eh? but frankly speaking it's an identity crisis as well that eventually causes the infection rates to be where they are in the local context, the last check was in 2007 by the Ministry of Health was 31% despite sustained prevention messages both from the mainstream ad campaigns and targeted interventions in the MSM community from NGOs such as Jamaica AIDS Support for Life. That could be one of the answers to Mr. West's question as to why the infections are so high in the MSM community?

Obviously the opposers to LGBT rights generally are also not buying this line of argument to decriminalise buggery from an HIV standpoint either and have become very cynical to the tone or positions presented by folks like Mr. Tomlinson and other HIV/AIDS - LGBT advocates, these days there isn't a clear demarcation between them adding more cynicism from the christian right movement. We have been lazy as LGBT advocates over the years in properly advocating for said rights with better arguments to include privacy, present social practices and attitudes probably in fear of exposing taboos and other uncomfortable information that may disturb the public's peace. I include myself here because I was apart of it but one is usually blind to certain things when caught up in bureaucracy.

The arguments for example about so called homophobic killings over the years have been dishonest ones as well, not to discount the value of the lifes of those deceased who have been murdered but they were known intimately in most instances to their killers, a fact we have yet to publicly acknowledge as an LGBT community then we wonder why the public doesn't budge on the hard lined positions taken towards male homosexuality and the attendant homophobia this is outside of the ignorance and down low facade that is also played out in our homophobic experiences nationwide.

I believe the public will accept truth no matter how stinging or uncomfortable it may be.

Let us reflect on this letter though and the other points associated with this.

Peace and tolerance.

H