Serodiscordancy .............. Would you date someone who is HIV positive ?

A question I see popping more and more on social media, blogs and even on the streets with mixed reactions as the issue of HIV/AIDS is still a talking point even in the modern world thirty years later after its initial discovery and its renaming from the stigma infused GRID - Gay-related immune deficiency in the eighties we now however have strangely high rates of infection among men who have sex with men in particular, over 30%. Despite major improvements in social marketing with the requisite paraphernalia, ready access to information, rapid testing & counselling, wonderful antiretroviral and highly active antiretroviral therpy (HAART), improved condoms and an option to use the female condom (formerly FEMIDOM 1 now FEMIDOM II) and talk is that newer technologies are on the way we still ended up with an infection rate of over 30% in Jamaica in 2007 and as we await the official results of another survey done in 2011 all indications point to an increase in that figure.

My answer is yes as it is not about the HIV status of the individual that counts firstly although it will be important as to how we move on in the longterm but the whole person among other things .......... firstly let us look at some other pointers:

Serodiscordancy (couples with mixed HIV status) is a subject not often discussed locally as relationship issues generally in same gender loving couples are not looked at with any seriousness either by advocates or groups representing Jamaican LGBT people or I doubt if there are any studies done to look at the pyscho-social issues surrounding this phenomenon, so the bashing is allowed to continue and stigmatization occurs once it is even suspected an individual may have HIV, serodiscordant means by the way or (sero-discordancy) is a term used to describe a couple in which one partner is HIV positive and the other is HIV negative. Serodiscordant relationships are also referred to as "magnetic". The term seroconcordant is its antonym, used to describe a couple in which both partners are of the same HIV status (i.e. both are HIV positive or both are HIV negative).

A US HIV prevention study in 2009 supports what many researchers, activists and people living with the virus have believed for years--antiretroviral medications reduce HIV transmission in straight serodiscordant couples (where one person is HIV positive and one person is HIV negative) by 96 percent. Most couples of mixed HIV status face similar issues regardless of sexual orientation. Straight or gay, mixed couples usually live with fears about HIV transmission to the negative partner and concerns about maintaining a safe but satisfying sex life. Some encounter a profound lack of support and validation from family and friends, who often question why they're getting into or continuing a relationship full of risks like HIV transmission, illness, dependency and death. Of course, illness, death and dependency can happen in any relationship, but somehow HIV makes them more palpable. Serodiscordant couples face numerous issues not faced by seroconcordant couples, including facing a decision as to what level of sexual activity is comfortable for them, knowing that practising safer sex reduces but does not eliminate the risk of transmission to the HIV negative partner. There are also potential psychological issues arising out of taking care of a sick partner, and survivor guilt. Financial strains may also be more accentuated as one partner becomes ill and potentially less able or unable to work.

Research involving serodiscordant couples has offered insights into how the virus is passed and how individuals who are HIV positive may be able to reduce the risk of passing the virus to their partner. With PrEP being pushed now as prevention for HIV in negative persons how will this change the scheme of things once it is approved and becomes the norm worldwide providing that costs for ARVs and related medicines come to a reasonable price for nearly all to have access. Will this improve dating and hence long term relationships and literally remove some of the concerns serodiscordant couples face navigating love and their union? 

Disclosure

Disclosure however of ones HIV status is still a major taboo issue judging by interactions on the subject when it is mentioned, when some enlightened gay Jamaican in particular decides to use a medium such as Facebook to point out quite openly their status as positive they are met with unbelievable hostility for the most part and are driven out of groups in some cases as has been noted in several MSM membered ones and even to the point of closure with tersely worded comments thrown at the nominee as a germ carrier and they are to just go and die, clearly we have long ways to go on this matter with this younger generation. Is there however some denial in all that backlash towards persons who are open about their HIV status or are persons out there knowing that they are HIV positive but are pretending to be otherwise so as to avoid the very stigma that they themselves end up serving on others who are open about the subject? 
Similarly we are told and to some extent seen proof as well of homophobes who are in fact homosexual but use homo-negativity to cover their tracks or seek some sort of psychological relief from the guilt they feel of having same sex urges. 

Overly Cautious 

In any serodiscordant relationship, there is concern at the prospect of spreading the HIV infection to the negative partner. Sexually, the couple may become overly cautious and at the worst, stop any sexual or intimate contact in fear of spreading the infection. While it’s not the most important part a relationship, sexual intimacy is a key component of any loving relationship. Without intimacy, feelings of frustration, longing, and resentment surface and in turn, the relationship suffers.

Survivor’s Guilt 

Guilt can be a powerful and destructive emotion. Most often, survivor’s guilt is a product of situations such as car accidents in which one person survives while many others die. The survivor feels guilty for having lived. In a serodiscordant relationship, the negative partner can feel guilty for being negative. The guilt increases if the positive partner becomes sick due to their HIV. In extreme cases of guilt, the negative partner wishes they too were infected, feeling their infection would relieve the guilt and other stressors present in the relationship. Stress itself can be a barrier to a successful relationship. But certain circumstances that arise in serodiscordant relationships that are particularly difficult.

Super-infection possibilities

HIV superinfection, which occurs when a previously infected individual acquires a new distinct HIV strain, has been described in a number of populations. SEROCONCORDANT couples (both partners being HIV positive) have this issue, the link here is that serodiscordant status may change in some instances as the negative partner's status may change for whatever reason and they may just continue the relationship as before but with new circumstances surrounding the union. Seroconcordant people can still exchange diseases other than HIV - Unprotected sex between two HIV+ people is not free of risk. Infection with one strain of HIV does not preclude later infection with another. There is a great deal of genetic variability within individual HIV populations and this variability is shuffled and mutated every time the virus reproduces inside a cell in the body. There are millions of viruses in the body of an infected person. Modern drug cocktails keep virus and mutation levels low but eventually drug resistance will develop. Unprotected sex between two HIV+ individuals does risk that one with a less aggressive, drug susceptible strain of the virus who might have kept his infection well under the control of the available drugs, might find him or herself with an aggressively drug resistant strain. Furthermore, dual infection has been associated with more rapid progression to AIDS

On dating a positive person

Even if the individual is physically showing early signs of opportunistic infections due to their impaired immune system I would date them if they are an interesting character, that's how far I would go and have gone in fact but more serious fallout may happen depending on how far impaired their systems have become or viral load counts as well which may make the dating process problematic publicly speaking such as a serious cold, cough or other more pronounced visible issues for example may make the dating process rocky, one has to be real in these matters but I guess it comes with years of engaging positive persons through other NGOs and the Ministry of Health's health promotions programs that has led me to this point. PLWHA - persons living with HIV need companionship too probably more so than negative ones as hinted above the issue of stigmatization is still a concern even from the LGBT community itself being persons who are out or not. It's about the personality of the individual, what they bring to the table, maturity, compromise, of course for me their proof of diligence in handling any  health eventualities or complications from an impaired immune system and the matter of adherence to treatment is also crucial.

Their willingness to listen and to be helped while not feeling a sense of being "sorried for" by their partner is also crucial, I have seen generally persons rejecting assistance from others as they felt they were being pitied by the concerned party. 

Of course if we decide to have a long term romantic union we would have to seek some sort of proffessional assistance in terms of navigating the possible stress issues, possible PrEP as prevention (for the negative partner as an option), treatment adherence for the positive partner, safer sex practices for both of us, maintaining faithfulness, conflict resolution skills and other related matters. 

Certainly it is easy writing about it than living it but let us raise the profile about this issue.

Peace and tolerance

H

Church Opposes Gay Stigma On HIV/AIDS Advocacy

 

Byron Buckley,
REPRESENTATIVES OF UNAIDS are faced with the dilemma of how to enlist the support of local faith-based organisations (FBOs) in the HIV/AIDS prevention campaign without violating the institutions' doctrinal principles. A major stumbling block, which was identified in a recent consultation between church leaders and UNAIDS officials, is the traditional association of the HIV/AIDS messaging with gay-rights issues.

The views of the clerics are summed up in the comments by churchman Major Richard Cooke: "The perception is that the homosexuals have used AIDS to push their agenda. Allow the Church to speak to the church. When we feel that our help is linked to a gay agenda we do not want to be a part of it." The Rev Al Miller echoed similar sentiments: "Perception becomes reality. Changing the face of the historical sellers of the message of HIV prevention is an important and strategic move. We will, therefore, have to identify faces that can have broader appeal in order for us to be successful."

In other words, the clerics are suggesting that the gay-rights agenda has stigmatised the HIV/AIDS prevention programme, and, consequently, has alienated the religious community.

Ironic twist

This is an ironic twist, as it is the removal of stigma and discrimination from the HIV/AIDS prevention programme that is the goal of the local and international health-advocacy agencies. In fact, that was the purpose of the recent consultation between representatives of UNAIDS and FBOs. The discussions were informed by the findings of a Ministry of Health (MOH)-commissioned study of leaders of FBOs about the level of stigma and discrimination towards the most-at-risk populations (MARPs) in their organisations, including gay men, sex workers, prisoners and people living with HIV (PLHIV).

The study, which is based on a survey of 41 FBO leaders in 35 denominations across eight parishes, found that senior clerics considered it their "responsibility to uphold moral values and hold society accountable to those values." The findings continued: "Issues of faith and belief go deep and most FBOs have defined principles to which they adhere and which they consider divine and, therefore, are not open to discussion. A related finding is the faulty association of HIV/AIDS with sexual promiscuity (which is not always the case) by some church leaders and congregations.

Al Miller points to the dilemma: "If we are going to solve the problem, we cannot create another problem in order to solve it. We have to separate the issues of stigma and acceptance of behaviour. You have to be careful that you are not selling that 'this is good, this is normal, this is an acceptable lifestyle'."

It is this combination of doctrinal and moral principles that has presented a challenge to both FBOs and health advocates. Where do the twain meet? According to Garth Minott of the United Theological College, "The faith-based community needs to speak within itself. There are differing starting points and doctrinal issues at play here, but we all agree that we want to get to one solution." Keith Ellis, another churchman attending the recent consultation, argued that attitudinal change will not happen from the pulpit. He suggested that FBOs take the findings of the study and "communicate it in a way that is not offensive and is more palatable, such as with a message of love, respect, and compassion, then we can achieve progress."

Despite, their caution about doctrinal and moral issues, as well as their objection to twinning HIV/AIDS prevention messaging with gay rights activism, FBO leaders have expressed and demonstrated a willingness to support the overarching objective of helping to arrest the spread of the epidemic. This response was expressed during the consultation as well as the MOH study. "We need to change some of the language so that it shows the thin line of wisdom. "Let's push the message of 'test and treat' rather than 'stigma and discrimination'," suggested Rev Miller.

Indeed, the MOH study found that several FBOs were engaged at varying levels, in HIV/AIDS care. The report stated: "The attitude of FBO leaders towards persons of the MARPs were mainly favourable. Although they did not support behaviour contrary to their doctrines, they were supportive of rehabilitation of and practical assistance to vulnerable persons reached by their organisations. A few of the religious organisations actually operate facilities that care and counsel PLHIV.

So there is fertile ground for cooperation between the faith-based community and HIV/AIDS prevention advocates, and as the study has found congregations often become supportive of the programme based on exposure to real cases and education.

Byron Buckley is Associate Editor for The Gleaner. Send comments to columns@gleanerjm.com.

Study recommendations
Develop and implement a comprehensive strategy for engaging the faith-based community in a more direct way into the national HIV/STI response.
Make funding available to the sector over the next two to three years for projects aimed at de-stigmatisation within FBOs and broadening their response to PLHIV and MARPS. Funding could also be used to train the FBO leaders themselves. Train sector over next one-two years focusing on the gaps identified from this research study.

Work through FBO umbrella organisations to develop appropriate training modules for seminary students at tertiary institutions to prepare them to deal with HIV/AIDS issues in their FBOs. Such training should explore the themes of stigma and discrimination, appropriate strategies and approaches for counselling those infected and affected by HIV; advocacy strategies for FBOs; behaviour change communication; national structures and supporting systems in the HIV response, etc.

Encourage/lobby each denomination/FBO to develop its own HIV policy that will be driven and implemented from the national level.

Guyana seeks public opinion on controversial laws ..............

Guyana is launching a national debate on whether to eliminate its death penalty and overhaul laws that discriminate against gays, lesbians and transgender people.

Town-hall-style meetings will be held across the socially conservative South American country as part of a promise that Guyana made to the United Nations Human Rights Council. The government plans to analyze public opinion before deciding whether it will submit any bills to revise current laws.

"Government has no line or position on the gay rights issue," Presidential Adviser Gail Teixeira told The Associated Press on Tuesday. "We will hold the consultations, and if the recommendation is to change the laws, then that will be taken into consideration."

The death penalty is common across the Caribbean, as are laws against cross-dressing and gay sex.

This programme was recorded and aired on Tuesday 28th March, 2012. The Government of Guyana has stated its intentions to conduct consultation on the repeal of the laws which discriminate against lesbian, gay , bisexual and trandgendered persons. 

This programme was convened by Hon Gail Teixeira MP, Advisor on Governance to the President. The programme features the discussion with Ms Texeira; Joel Simpson - Co Chairperson of SASOD; and Andrew Hicks, Head of the Department of Sociology at the University of Guyana. The moderator is Mr Raymon Cummings. This recording was done by NCN Channel 11. 

The encoding and conversions were done by SASOD. Viewers might have to raise the volume on their computer speakers or use a headset if one is available.

The government said officials also plan to meet with leaders from Christian, Hindu and Islamic communities who represent Guyana’s most prominent religions. Many religious leaders in the country oppose legalization of homosexuality.

The independent Society Against Sexual Orientation and Discrimination said it will campaign to remove what it says are extremely discriminatory colonial-era laws.

"It is making criminals out of ordinary people," spokesman Joel Simpson said, noting that under current law, two consenting male adults could face a minimum of two years in prison for having sex in the privacy of their home.

Many Guyanese are opposed to the discussions because they want the current laws to remain untouched.

Rayon Griffith, a food vendor in the capital of Georgetown, said he already worries about gay and lesbian displays of affection on TV.

"I am worried that a whole generation is coming up thinking this is right," he said.

Others are opposed to abolishing the death penalty.

"We have a nation with criminals with warped minds," said Cranon Henry, a 41-year-old security guard. "Hanging will make criminals fear attacking people. Once they kill two or three of them, you will see how quickly the murder rate will go down."

National Security Minister Clement Rohee already has launched the debate on hangings via televised panel discussions that last up to one hour and allow for call ins. People also will be able to attend town halls on the issue later this month. No one has been hanged in Guyana since 1997 even though the law remains on the books. 


Nearly 30 prisoners are on death row.

Teixeira said the government will inform the U.N. in October about the results of the discussions even if they are still in progress.

"We are keeping our promise to consult with an open mind," she said.

(segments Courtesy of repeatislands)

The loss of a long-timer tragically ....................

The cruising community has been hit with a major loss this evening as news spread of the tragic passing of veteran diva affectionately known as "Portland" who was apparently stabbed to death and his partially decomposed body was found on a compound where he was temporarily located and tending to in Upper St. Andrew. He was identified at the morgue late yesterday and again today by other members of the community and influentials. He was said to have had multiple stab wounds all over and his infamous crown he normally sports on his teeth were missing along with other personal effects such as his cellphone which he usually has on his person. 

As tears streamed down his face and intermittent sobs a close friend of mine recounted his last interaction in Kingston this afternoon as I gathered information on this tragic news, he spoke with Portland only last Friday night at a regular hangout in the Half Way Tree area and they shared a joke or two as veterans in the business of cruising the areas and being successful at the art-form as I see it as only really skilled men who have sex with men can navigate Jamaica's caustic homophobic climate, foxy gay for pay hyper-masculine types and those who have sex with men but do not want to be labelled as "gay" as that comes with too much feminine associated pressure that challenges Jamaica's version of maleness and the most valued machismo. 

I came to know Portland from the late eighties to the nineties from his escapades on the streets, his run ins with others for territory or just daily life struggles before he left for London England where he stayed for several years before he returned to Jamaica and settled right at home returning to his regular taunts in Kingston predominantly and Portmore as well. One could easily ask him for a link to the heaviots (hypermasculine types) if one wanted or allow him to show the youngins entering the game the ropes he would often test them in his own terms, it was one of those hypermasculine types company he was last seen with according to my sources and persons who saw this particular man were not comfortable with him as his demeanour was not welcoming. 

It is strongly suspected that Portland was murdered some time Friday night to Saturday morning and the man in whose company he was last seen has not been spotted since news of the gruesome find has been making the rounds on the street. Last evening was quiet on the various strips as if in a kind of mourning the regulars remained low keyed according to the kids on the strip. My sobbing friend who recounted a trip to London on a British Airways flight where Portland created a scene on an air hostess who did not comply with a request he had made about his meal. He jokingly said Portland was real as the came (effeminate) on the flight and in no uncertain terms let the hostess have it in colourful Jamaican parlance. He was loved by those who knew him as his smile was also inviting with that infamous crown and black tam with that pom pom at the end he regularly wore to parties or on the street with shades, even at night. His fingers were often covered with rings as well be they gold or silver as he often interchanged them. He too also when he was able to assisted in offering hosting to to other displaced men who have sex with men in his hayday but he too fell on some ruff patches as his attempts to return to the UK were rocky. 

2011 we saw a myriad of problems with the cruising community of which Portland was a major player and which I tried to keep track of on my sister blog GLBTQJA on Wordpress 

which also saw a murder in the market district in West Kingston of a member of that community and who was left naked, further examination of the body showed he was buggered as well, the body was found near the Coronation market and was covered by the Jamaica Observer newspaper. 

Previous cruising posts and related matters:

Another geographic change blow dealt to the cruising community

Gay cruiser suffers broken arm after tussle

Cruising community challenges continue ............

The Cruising community’s dilemma .....

Outdoor sex and the issues to being caught

Even as news came only late last month of a watchman (deceased photo above)in St Ann who was beheaded and the police surmising he was killed due to an argument with a male lover who he shared the home where he was killed, subsequent news casts have not mentioned the gay related reason even after finding his missing head some three miles away partially decomposed from his home. see the TVJ clip for this item HERE, since then a Howard Lincoln a former house-mate has been arrested and the cops are seeking another man in connection with the murder.

Already we see 2012 starting off on a bad note for LGBT Jamaicans. Was Portland killed by one of the gay for pay types or what here, we hope the investigations can shed some light on this case.

RIP brother Portland. 
Peace and tolerance.

H

US Ambassador Bridgewater on LGBT redress in Jamaica ......

Ambassador Bridgewater

Ambassador Curtis Ward

US Ambassador to Jamaica Miss Pamela Bridgewater appeared on an interview recently online called Conversations with America and which also had as guest Ambassador Curtis Ward, former ambassador of Jamaica to the United Nations and currently President of the Caribbean Research and Policy Center, which took place at the department on March 16. The conversation was moderated by deputy assistance secretary Cheryl Benton which took a brief look at issues that both governments at the diplomatic level were and are working on. 

A member of Gays Without Borders also posed some questions among them were:

How is the U.S. prodding the Kingston government to investigate and prosecute bias motivated crimes and will the upcoming annual human rights report mention an improvement or setback for LGBT concerns in Jamaica?

Are there plans to counter the virulent anti-LGBT preaching of religious leaders? What movement can be taken to repeal the anti buggery statues through legislative or judicial avenues?


However the captioned one was posed in the interview:

To which the goodly Ambassador dodged in essence with a smile as if it were some Sunday afternoon coffee table tete a tete instead of dealing with the matter at hand directly.

Bridgewater's response:

"Well, as the individual stated, our human rights report is being vetted right now, so I will not comment on what it states because it has not been released. But I will say that our embassy has engaged very, very aggressively with Jamaica with Jamaicans on a plethora of human rights issues.

Women's issues, the rights of vulnerable populations, children, trafficking in persons, LGBT. I have worked personally on these issues and will continue to do so. So I can assure the questioner that we are involved very vigorously on these areas."

The GWB member has since expressed disappointment and I am too as even if she could not have addressed the report matter she could have stated whether her good office will put pressure to bear on the government to live up to the promise of the buggery law review and the bringing to book of persons and members of the police who abuse LGBT Jamaicans who often have no recourse when such abuse takes place.

According to the GWB member also Ambassador Ward took the opportunity to address how the new prime minister Portia Simpson-Miller would hire a gay person for her administration:

"If I might add to that Ambassador, you may recall that during the last election campaign in Jamaica, the now current prime minister had made a statement.

Which in effect, was a deliberate shift from what had been the perception at least, if not the practice, that she would not be discriminating against any individuals who were gay. That they could serve in her cabinet, that they could be appointed to high positions. So this is a big step in the right direction for Jamaica.

I think the questioner needs to . . . should understand there are steps being taken for greater tolerance and societies like Jamaica will never shift overnight from one position to another. It has to be a gradual process. I think we are in the right direction."

And Bridgewater replied:

"We certainly commend that and are certainly looking forward to other opportunities to expand human rights in Jamaica."

This conversation is remarkable for the fact that Jamaica's former representative to the United Nations was more direct and specific about gays in his country, than the American ambassador who tip-toed around gay concerns. Is she afraid of a backlash or something why she didn't respond? certainly we would not expect the details of talks and activities but to just side step a simple question as posed is just plain poor in my book. Was she leaving it to Ambassador Ward to handle it? 

See the video in question:

See the full interview HERE on Youtube.

Peace and tolerance

H 

Sizzla Hits Back At Gay Rights Critics ..............

Dancehall/Reggae singjay, Sizzla Kalonji has responded sternly to gay rights activists who’ve long criticized the lyrical content of his songs.

Last week, promoters in Sweden cancelled a stage show that Sizzla was booked to appear on this Wednesday at the Hornstull Strand in Stockholm. The show was axed after several gay, lesbian, bisexual and transsexual activists protested Sizzla's appearance on the bill; condemning his lyrical damnation of homosexuality.

see the Petition that was launched by activists here:  Say No To Hate Music Petition for anti gay artists slated for European shows  

After the latest complaints issued against him by gay rights groups, Sizzla, through his management 

team at Kalonji Musik and Pride Music, issued a detailed statement firing back at such critics who have long opposed his music and stances on such issues as well as clarifying public misperceptions made about him in recent times.

The statement in part reads, "We work closely with many of the artists in the reggae scene and feel that your constant attack against the artists and the musical genre is unfair and one sided. Sizzla has not even begun to tour, yet press releases have been sent giving misinformation to the public about him performing homophobic lyrics at 18 other shows recently. The tour has not even started and Sizzla was not booked to perform in neither Canada nor England. False information is being written to malice and defame his character. It is good to remember that Sizzla has not been arrested, convicted, or charged with any crime and does not have a criminal record what so ever. He abides and will continue to abide by the laws of any State in the World that he chooses to visit or is invited to visit. It is his nature and his character to respect all."

Additionally, Sizzla's management team insists that this latest show cancellation proves how hard the Reggae artiste's critics are trying to censor him.

"Sizzla and all human beings are entitled to freedom of speech, freedom of expression, and artistic freedom as afforded to him by the United Nations Human Rights Council. With these rights he does not seek to incite or provoke violence against anyone, but will continue to speak out against injustices where he sees it. Sizzla and other Jamaicans will continue to support the laws of their country and are free to discuss these issues in a legal framework as a citizen of that country. If anyone has an issue with that, take it up with the respective Government and which ever laws they make, even if he doesn’t agree, he will abide by. In the mean time, every attempt to sabotage or cancel a Sizzla show is a form of censorship against him and the musical genre.”

"Why is it after months of promotions and advertisement, some wait till a few days before a show to try to cancel the performance? This is a form of censorship and is designed to create maximum economic damage to the promoters, the artist, the staff, everyone involved in the construction of the tour, and the reggae industry at large. We don't see you attack Eminem or other musicians who make clear stances against these same issues in the hip-hop, rock, and pop industry. It makes us wonder if there is a bigger picture being painted here? Or is it the fact that they just have better lawyers and bigger companies making money from them?"

Sizzla also believes that part of his mis-perception overseas has to do with a loss in translation, given the strong use of dialect used in songs.

"Patois the language that Sizzla uses to express his music are forms of metaphoric and allegoric expression. The messages in the songs are based on words that have been misconstrued and mistranslated. When he or any artists say burn, fire, or kill, they are not literal terms. In fact the words translate to mean several things depending on the context of its use. So when a DJ in the dancehall takes the mic and says kill Sound boy, it doesn’t mean take a gun a shoot the Sound boy. It means that the DJ is going to win the competition. So interpret at your own risk but understand that in different languages, different words mean different things and Patois is a language very different from English. Historically it was used during slavery to prevent the slave masters from understanding the enslaved Africans as they organized for freedom. Obviously it still is misunderstood and confusing many.

"It is very important for you to understand something. The term batty boy was derived from the rise of pedophiles and rape of young boys in Jamaica. That is why the term batty boy is used, so those that embrace this term, therefore embrace the raping and pedophile of young boys. This is one of the main reasons why there is such an outcry against homosexuality because in many cases in Jamaica it has been done where young boys were raped or coerced by tourist into the lifestyle seeking to gain visa or better opportunities. This has also contributed to a rise in gay male prostitution in Jamaica and is prevalent amongst teenagers and youth of Jamaica."

Sizzla, who recently gave his first live performance in Jamaica since his near fatal bike accident last August, recently stated that the crash helped change his perspective on life. However, his management team believes it's only given critics more reason to bash him despite all the charitable causes he involves himself in and the uplifting messages relayed through his music.

"Sizzla just recovered from a horrific accident where he almost lost his life. Whilst some groups wish he had died, millions of fans around the world sent messages of support, good wishes and prayers for him to make a speedy recovery. This tour partly represent a thanks for their prayers and love that gave him the motivation to get well. Let us be clear, Sizzla has a catalogue of over67 albums and well over 90% of his music is uplifting, positive, speaks of family, empowerment, love, spirituality, and unity. At the same time he is a Rastafarian musician who embraces his faith and plays a pivotal part in the betterment of his society. What would Bob Marley be today if groups protested against him, keeping him in a box, and preventing him from sharing his music? There are two sides to the story, and yes everyone should be entitled to live and express themselves, but we must be respectful of ALL people's values and principles.”

Excerpts from Out a Road

A Note:

Nice try by the management team and his handlers but the fact still remains he has repeatedly performed the murder music in defiance of the very humanist principles of which he is being painted out to espouse here, fancy press statements won't help, he has to say out of his own mouth that he won't go there and live up to the original ideals of Rastafarianism while promoting his cleaner materials of which he has many.

Also the misconception of adult male homosexuality versus same sex paedophilia needs to be addressed and we are to believe therefore that due to these supposed mostly unproven sensationalised stories of boy rape by men without putting them in context that he has the right to utter or regurgitate death messages for individuals? I think not, he is going to have to in no uncertain terms demonstrate his resolve in not uttering such songs he has penned and performed or in fact out-rightly remove the tracks from the public domain as they are still available at several outlets including Youtube. 

Recant Sizzla, that's what you need to do here and promote your better materials such as tracks like "I Need You" "Give Me a Try" and one of your biggest smash hits that is even heralded in the gay community at gay parties "Just One of Those Days"

Peace and tolerance

H

PNP's Damion Crawford says it's highly unlikely buggery review will happen ........ it's not important now

Damion Crawford State Minister in the ministry of tourism in a follow up interview on CVM TV’s Direct with host Garfield Burford on Wednesday March 13^th tried to explain his recent comments at a function that was carried as a news item on the same television station on the proposed Buggery Law Review by his boss Prime Minister Portia Simpson Prime Minister Miller who in the run up to the last general elections suggested a review of the law along with a conscience vote on the matter. Mr. Crawford as extensively reported in a previous post has satirically suggested that no gay member of parliament is going to come forward and he doubted that the issue would be even raised in parliament.

click here to See a previous post with the video of the news item where the comments were made

Damion Crawford PNP Member of Parliament

In what now seems a PR stint on the face of it or some sort of damage control in light of the perception given that the review of the law would automatically mean a repeal he seems to be capitalizing on this. Bearing in mind also the other perception though not in essence true in that of the supposed 100 day ultimatum given by none other than JFLAG in a botched interview which was interpreted as such leaving the group to be putting out fires in sections of the media as the public became somewhat incensed as to the perceived demand. It is just over seventy days since the new PNP administration is in power.

Considering the issue of Mr Crawford’s cynicism and the Don Anderson recent poll commissioned by CVM TV which gagded the views of 1000 Jamaicans on the buggery issue the question was posed “What would be your perception of the government if it were to repeal or review the buggery law?”

Most respondents said they would be less favourably inclined amounting to 61% with 9% not responding to the question while 7% responding favourably while 23% saying it would not make a difference. Why did Mr. Crawford take on this issue at this time? He responded in the opening of the interview that he was not against the review he said what he was trying to prove was that people have power over parliamentarians and that parliamentarians are aware of the people’s views and may not want to move in that direction in fear of losing support. “Why aren't they using that same power to ensure education is treated in a particular way?” he asked hinting in my view that the buggery law is not important at this time if at all and tacitly contradicting himself when he said he was not against a review. “At the end of the day it is unlikely that a politician will seek to vote in favour of removing the buggery law because he feels he will lose favour with the people, however they can do other things that are essential and more influential on our daily lives ..... that we are unwilling to exhibit that same power ....” he tried to say that the people’s power should be more widespread not just to this issue.

He continued in answering Garfield “Why did Mrs Simpson Miller in your view say this in the debate?” “There is nothing wrong with saying that you’ll have a conscience vote Mrs Simpson Miller understands that it is about a group ........... to have all us say what we perceive or are picking up from our constituents nothing is wrong with that, I could not have understood how it automatically became that she was in favour of a repeal, you don’t even know what her conscience vote would say, therefore to say that we will have a vote in parliament I can’t see anything wrong with that.”

“If the majority of parliamentarians based on their conscience feels that it should be reviewed then it would be reviewed so therefore the possibility would exist once you have a vote on it once it is considered, again it doesn’t mean that her inclination is there or not there, what we’re saying is that her substantive point is she was not going use someone’s sexuality to decide if they are capable or incapable that was the essence of the question, would she have a person of homosexual view in the cabinet, she says she wasn’t going to research that person’s sexuality and that is fear, I am not going to research somebody’s sexuality to see if you’re homosexual or not and then to say you are ineligible to be employed, I don’t think that that is right. The fact that you don’t support a type of life style it doesn’t mean that that person should be punished by the society in any way and that’s what she was saying.”

In as far being diametrically opposed to the Golding not in my cabinet pronouncement he said that there are many other things former PM Golding stood for and the PNP in disagreement so that would be nothing new “What we want in our cabinet is to have people with the greatest ability to achieve the goals of the country.” He said he was not Rastafarian by faith but wears his hair in respect to his father as he is but he (Damion) does not subscribe to Haille Selassie being God.

He tried to also represent the point that the same zeal used by the public to oppose the buggery law should also be applied to education, health care and others as the people are not sufficiently interested. “But this one issue is the one that everybody is totally concerned about, I want them to transfer some of that concern and some of that influence to all the other issues.”

Host Garfield Burford then asked a more profound question: “Do you think in your own view as one of the younger members of parliament and a first time member of parliament that there will ever be a point in Jamaica where views change significantly in this area of homosexuality?” (to me a yes or no answer) he responded “I don’t know, sometimes the more one group pushes the more it is resisted, sometimes that is the case, the reality of the situation is that Jamaica has no homosexual laws, buggery is the law that speaks to penile and anal interaction, it means therefore that if a male buggers a female he can equally be arrested ......... a lesbian couple can’t be charged with buggery ............ if anything it is a sexist law more than an anti homosexual law because women can’t be charged with it but men can with it, it’s the same with rape for example doesn’t mean therefore that rape should be taken off the books, so the argument being put forward of the buggery law as a anti homosexual thing isn’t in itself correct.”

Garfield Burford: “How do you think that should be corrected, because you say that it’s sort of sexist law?” Mr Crawford replied “No I don’t see it as sexist I am saying that if there is any claim, it’s the same as men can rape but women can’t rape so therefore it’s not like I am perceiving it as sexist ............ if there is any prejudice it would not be against sexual orientation it would be against gender, the reality of the situation is that the concept that because of the buggery law is proof that we are anti homosexual is falsehood because it doesn’t apply only ....... the reality of the situation is that any parliamentarian in my mind represents the views of the people, I am elected as a representative ............... when they refer to me they say representative from East Rural St Andrew, it is therefore above me therefore having been elected to represent my own views then become superior to the views of the populace, I must represent the views of the majority in my constituency (Garfield Burford interjects: “...presumably Mrs Simpson Miller as Prime Minister she represents by that argument taken to its logical conclusion she must represent the majority of the views of the people of Jamaica?”) she will represent the views firstly of her constituency, now when the amalgamation of all representatives come together she automatically represents the view of the country .”

Garfield Burford: “What about the argument then that because the majority of persons in Jamaica are still opposed to any review or repeal of the buggery law then she should perhaps not try to have members who are gay, homosexual in her cabinet?”

Crawford said: “What I just said to you that buggery and homosexuality are not automatic, so therefore that don’t mean that, the fact of the matter is that is there a process to ascertain with certainty that a person is of a particular sexual persuasion? (he replied no) ....... you cannot look at man or female and automatically know their sexual preferences. We had never had a situation where there is a self confessed politician victorious in the first place and then secondly to be considered there, the question seemed to have arisen out of the pigment of someone’s imagination, more so that one that is of great importance to the development of the nation ........... In the same way that we have consistently have parliament who are afraid and unwilling to touch the buggery law because of the perception that it is automatically homosexual accommodation is in the same way that we shouldn’t have a system that is turning out two children that can’t read very good and one children that can read” (his actual words)

He erred at a point in the interview where he said in response to a question posed on the gay community’s desire to have the law reviewed. He described the so called majority as normal, “There are many things that many people want within a society, the government has a responsibility I believe for the greater good for the greater majority at this point for some reason right which by socialization or otherwise ........... The normal Jamaican is not, sorry, the average Jamaican is not in support of a repeal, it is our responsibility .......... a review in my mind it doesn’t affect the reality, people should be open to the review but then the outcome based on the point I am making of the people’s power will be that very, I predict zero politicians would be willing to risk their political careers based on the people’s influence and that is the central point, the people’s influence is great and this is the evidence of it, they therefore should use that influence to change more important things, what are the most important things facing this country right now? The most important thing facing us is the ability for our children to go through school and come and being equipped to survive in a new society, a knowledge society, why therefore are we not paying equal attention as a people to that? Why are we not paying equal attention to health policies? And so what I was saying in the conversation we were having at the presentation was people power is further than the election, it goes to the governance because the politician can only act in ways that he perceives will find greatest favour with people if he is to be successful as a politician.”

Mr Burford asked Mr Crawford if Mrs Simpson Miller in the last general election was trying to straddle the fence or appeal to both gay voters and otherwise? The question was posed on the perception that there is a powerful homosexual lobby in Jamaica who want a review of the buggery law, was she trying to be politically expedient? Mr Crawford replied “remember you know her point was we , she was not willing to research someone’s sexuality to hire, it was a follow up question that then she said yes, she’d be willing to review and each representative by extension each individual if it is supposed to be in the best case because I’m supposed to represent the views of my people therefore if in such a review I should go and interact with my constituents and so should the other 63 (there are 63 seats in parliament) and come with a consensus from the constituents and so therefore the nation would have had their say on it, we could have a referendum for example which is another form of review, the point that you are willing to review is not pondering to both sides because the outcome will be either or this is an outcome that can be a middle ground outcome, it’s not a grey area, it is either it is repealed or not repealed.”

He confirmed that there has been no moves on the issue since the party has come to power some two months plus, “nothing has been moved in parliament to my knowledge.” As for JFLAG and the perceived 100 day ultimatum which they tried to clear up after a media report presented a radio interview as such Mr Crawford suggested again that other groups are lobbying for their own causes such as the Private Sector Organization of Jamaica, PSOJ, “there are always groups in society that want different things. I want for example for sign language to be taught in schools. They are some persons who want marijuana to be legalized, that fact that a group wants some movement don’t mean automatically that we can all have it in two months”

Then came the other million dollar question by Mr Burford for some despite denials to that effect, “Did the party get any help financially assistance, contributions from the gay community because of Mrs Simpson Miller’s statement in that debate?” Mr Crawford responded “Not to my knowledge, no, I don’t know, I wasn’t the centre of that I was busy on the road walking up and down but I don’t know of any contributions from any particular group because of that statement and if so they would have misread the statement because a review can’t be sufficient, there was a review of hanging what has happened since” He continued “The context is that we have politically for reasons and otherwise seem to come to a conclusion that a review automatically means a repeal and it is in my mind because of the influence of the people that that is highly unlikely.”

The interview steered to tourism issues.

The somewhat cumbersome roundabout answering of direct questions (as the program is themed) is worrisome to me and the shifting goalposts too. On one hand he is calling for the public to be as energized on other national issues but on the other he is dismissing the review of the buggery law as unimportant while expressing the long held fear factor by his predecessors of directly confronting this issue bearing in mind that albeit the promise by his boss Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller (the she was opposition leader) did not stop the PNP from winning but then again there was electorate burn out and disillusionment with the poor performances overall of both political parties. The nation was also weary from the protracted Manatt Dudus commission affair so only core voters came out on election day for the PNP while the incumbent supporters ate all the food and revelled on the campaign trail making the party thinking it had a second term in the bag but they didn’t vote on the day when it mattered.

Strange circumstances here I think, what is the purpose of Mr Crawford standing alone publicly on this matter when none of his other PNP colleagues have responded publicly so far?

Is this a diversion or a delay tactic? 

Mr. Crawford seems to have forgotten his question he asked at that function where he said, "Which Government you think is going to try to legalize homosexuality?" where he answered "none of us are going to try to do it," with the crowd laughing in jest and he encouraged them by saying "Not just of out probability there must be even one homosexual in the parliament but him nah go raise up him hand cause de people nuh inna dat" [he is not going to raise his hands because the people are not into that] yet in the above transcript he tries to paint a picture to say buggery and homosexuality are not synonymous, what gives here, really? Can we conclude that the promise by Mrs Simpson Miller was just that? Another promise?

for some background on the JFLAG 100 day demand misconception go here: 

JFLAG wants PNP to discuss Buggery Law within 100 days of assuming office

also see:   CVM TV @ Sunrise on JFLAG 100 days meeting/PM & the Buggery Law 11.01.12 

and this video clip

As for JFLAG ………… mistakes such as granting a telephone interview (sans any consultations with the community I might add) to the media in a “hot environment” when homosexuality or related matters are in the public domain is a no no, all the J should have done was waited and not mention anything at all to do with any time line in any way, shape or form now for it to be misrepresented as an ultimatum. We have had previous misconceptions before of JFLAG’s position by media and one would have thought that as a former media participant himself the Executive Director of JFLAG Mr. Lewis would have known the ins and outs of local media with regards to hot button issues such as this. The San Francisco boycott some years ago and the suggested EGALE tourism boycott as well are prime examples of learning curves for the group and speaking just a little too much but when it’s time to speak there is silence. How many mistakes are there to be made before it is perfected? one never knows.

Let us also keep in sight the press release from the PNP days following the suggestion by then opposition leader Simpson Miller, the general secretary Peter Phillips had said " .........the Party Leader has proposed a review of the Act, and not a repeal of it.“During the review, every Member of Parliament will be required to bring to bear on the discussions, the views and the opinion of his or her constituents. At the end of the review, if a vote is to be taken, the vote will be a conscience vote, which means each Member of Parliament will vote according to the directive of his/ her constituents........”

Bear this in mind as well, after digging my archives I found the presentation by Mrs Simpson Miller in 2009 (poor audio though) where she sided wholeheartedly with the then Prime Minster Bruce Golding (his speech linked) on the banning of gay marriage, gay marriage rights by the way was never asked for by the LGBT advocacy structure at that time but it was dishonestly pushed on the agenda during the Charter of Rights debate then as a smoke screen to deny us recognition in the Charter. The clause that had discrimination as an infraction then was also removed from the draft prior to this speech after successful lobbying by none other than the Lawyers’ Christian Fellowship with support from none other than reverend Al Miller.

She said on October 20th 2009 - "Mr Speaker when we accepted the final report from the joint select committee that were looking at the bill we were completely satisfied with their recommendation of a provision to restrict marriage and like relationships to one man and one woman within Jamaica and that the provision should be specifically spelt out so that there could be no ambiguity ………. yes one man one woman (laughter in the house) and if you are Jamaican and go overseas the same applies ……….."

Has Prime Minister Simpson Miller changed her mind or is evolving as President Obama did and is moving towards having the review done?

I would much rather be certain of this than having to be getting unpredictable moves by politicians.

Peace and tolerance

H

Say No To Hate Music Petition for anti gay artists slated for European shows

Sizzla one of Jamaica's caustic artists is slated to make appearances alongside other artists in Europe in the coming months and a call has come through a petition captioned above to Say No To Hate Music from LGBT activists in that side of the globe. Let us not forget in late 2011  ..............

 

Sizzla himself broke the RCA, Reggae Compassionate Act by performing an anti gay anthem "Boom Bye Bye" by fellow artist Buju Banton in Montego Bay at a Coca Cola sponsored event. Coca Cola (Coke Zero) at the time upon news of the infraction brought to their attention offered an apology overall and directly messaged me and commented on my sister blog GLBTQJA on Wordpress the following: 

This is Carlos from Coca-Cola. We, too, were deeply disappointed that a program intended to celebrate the heritage of Jamaica included an unacceptable performance that in no way represents the views or values of the Coca-Cola system.

Diversity is one of our key values, and we do not tolerate discrimination of any kind, including discrimination based on sexual orientation.

As a result of this regrettable incident by one artist, we are reassessing and strengthening our efforts to ensure that events we sponsor are not used as platforms for espousing hatred and discrimination. We are continuing to work with the advocacy groups that brought this situation to our attention.

We apologize to all who were offended by this performance, and we we want to ensure that our views on this incident are clear.

Carlos Diaz
Coca-Cola Caribbean

The Petition's call: A number of clubs in Europe (also in Belgium again where a show was cancelled before) will offer a stage in March and April 2012 to an "artist" who calls for the murder of LGBT people, To read more about what I'm trying to do and to sign the petition, click here:

http://www.change.org/petitions/say-no-to-hate-music-don-t-give-a-platform-to-singers-who-call-for-the-murder-of-lgbt-people

Let the event sponsors know what we think about their support for hate and violence. Tell them that we will not tolerate it anymore. Last year another petition was a huge success and together we could prevent most of the concerts of a similar singer.

It'll just take a minute! Together we can make a change!

Why This Is Important

A number of clubs in Europe will offer a stage in March and April to an "artist" who calls for the murder of LGBT people. It is time to speak up again and to call for a boycott of these events and their sponsors. Several clubs invited the singer Sizzla, who uses his songs to encourage the murder of homosexuals:

Here are some of Sizzla's lyrics (translations in parentheses):

In "Pump Up" he sings:
Step up inna front line (Step up to the front line)
fire fi di man dem weh go ride man behind (burn the men who have sex with men from behind)
Shot battybwoy, my big gun boom (Shoot queers, my big gun goes boom)

In "Boom Boom" he sings:
Boom boom! Batty boy them fi dead (Boom boom! Queers must be killed)

In the song "Get To Da Point" he sings:
Sodomite and batty bwai mi seh a death fi dem (Sodomite and queers, I say death to them)
Mi no trust babylon fi a second yah so (I don't trust Babylon for a second)
Mi a go shot batty bwai dem widdi weapon ya (I go and shoot queers with a weapon [as in gunshots])

At a reggae concert in Chicago in April 2002, Sizzla bragged that he kills queers, and also incited the audience to murder gays and lesbians: "mi nuh go tek back mi chat... mi kill sodomite and batty man dem bring aids and disease pon people... shot a kill dem, mi nuh go tek back mi chat" [I wont take back my words... I kill sodomites and queers, they bring AIDS and disease upon people... shoot and kill them, I won't take back my words.]

In 2008 he was arrested and sent back to the United States after he arrived for a concert in Madrid after Spanish human right organizations protested against what they said was his call for violence against homosexuals. In 2007, Sizzla's concerts in Toronto and Montreal had been cancelled after protests. In 2009 and 2010 several concerts in Germany had been cancelled after public protests against the concerts. Two of Sizzla's albums are forbidden to be sold in Germany, and a German politician compares this kind of music with neo-Nazi music. We must build on this growing movement.

These songs are all on YouTube. And these are not all of Sizzla’s homophobic songs. Sizzla signed the Reggae Compassionate Act agreement promising to “respect and uphold the rights of all individuals to live without violence due to their religion, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity or gender”. But he violated his agreement immediately. In an interview in the Canadian entertainment magazine 'Hour', Sizzla said: "...burn sodomite, burn battyman. Burn all things that are wrong. Burn it... We must get rid of Sodom and Gomorrah right now..."

We demand that the 18 Clubs (Live Club in Milano, Atlantico in Rome, Reigen in Vienna, Travastia in Helsinki, Strand in Stockholm, Rockefeller Music Hall in Oslo, Melkweg in Amsterdam, L'Oval in Nancy, Heidegger in Rotterdam, Oosterport in Groningen, Vooruit in Gent, TMN ao VIVO in Lisbon, La Rocher Palmer in Bordeaux, Rockstore in Montpellier, Apolo in Barcelona, Sala Arena in Madrid, Sala Vivero in Malaga, and Rambleta in Valencia) to immediately withdraw their support of people who call for hate, violence, and murder -- towards gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgender people, and anyone at all!

Other clubs slated to book artists include

Club Atlantico in Rome, Italy
Club Reigen in Vienna, Austria
Club Atlantico in Rome, Italy
Ufficio Stampa (Club Atlantico in Rome, Italy)
Travastia in Helsinki, Finland
Travastia in Helsinki, Finland
Rockefeller Music Hall in Oslo, Norway
Rockefeller Music Hall in Oslo, Norway
Rockefeller Music Hall in Oslo, Norway
Melkweg in Amsterdam, Netherlands
L'Oval in Nancy, France
Heidegger in Rotterdam, Netherlands
Heidegger in Rotterdam, Netherlands
Vooruit in Gent, Belgium
TMN ao VIVO in Lisbon, Portugal
La Rocher Palmer in Bordeaux, France
Rockstore in Montpellier, France
La Rocher Palmer in Bordeaux, France
La Rocher Palmer in Bordeaux, France
Rockstore in Montpellier, France
Sala Apolo in Barcelona, Spain
Sala Arena in Madrid, Spain
Sala Vivero in Malaga, Spain
La Rambleta in Valencia, Spain
Promoter (Bunfiresquad)
Eventlocation (Melkweg in Amsterdam, Netherlands)
Live Club in Trezzo sull'Adda (near Milano), Italy
Vooruit in Ghent, Belgium
Vooruit in Ghent, Belgium
Rockefeller Music Hall in Oslo, Norway
Rockefeller Music Hall in Oslo, Norway
De Oosterpoort in Groningen, Netherlands
De Oosterpoort in Groningen, Netherlands
De Oosterpoort in Groningen, Netherlands
De Oosterpoort in Groningen, Netherlands
De Oosterpoort in Groningen, Netherlands
Melkweg in Amsterdam, Netherlands
Strand in Stockholm, Sweden
Strand in Stockholm, Sweden
KB West and Maestro Prod. (Tim Badejo)

Go HERE TO SIGN the Petition & spread the word.

Peace and tolerance

H