The Safe House 2009 Pilot for LGBTQ Youth Explained & more


In response to numerous requests for more information on the defunct Safe House Pilot Project that was to address the growing numbers of displaced and homeless LGBTQ Youth in New Kingston in 2007/8/9, a review of the relevance of the project as a solution, the possible avoidance of present issues with some of its previous residents if it were kept open.
Recorded June 12, 2013; also see from the former Executive Director named in the podcast more background on the project: HERE also see the beginning of the issues from the closure of the project: The Quietus ……… The Safe House Project Closes and The Ultimatum on December 30, 2009

Sunday, August 10, 2014

Why The Obsession with Gays Shirley Richards?

0 comments
You may also want to check out posts from sisters blogs under the tabs:

Lawyers' Christian Fellowship HERE, HERE and HERE
JCHS HERE and HERE 
Buggery Law HERE Charter of Rights HERE Christianity & Homosexuality HERE
Religion as Divisive HERE and Jamaica CAUSE HERE to see some of the damage this woman has done or heavily influenced over these many years with her anti gay activism.


Shirley Richards takes part in a protest in front of the University of the West Indies, Mona, in support of Professor Brendan Bain, who was fired from his post after gay-rights and human-rights advocates pressured the administration. Richards is a strong critic of gay-rights activism. - Norman Grindley/Chief Photographer
Shirley Richards takes part in a protest in front of the University of the West Indies, Mona, in support of Professor Brendan Bain, who was fired from his post after gay-rights and human-rights advocates pressured the administration. Richards is a strong critic of gay-rights activism. - Norman Grindley/Chief Photographer

Patrick White, Guest Columnist

In a major departure from the Dark Ages, superstition no longer has authority in modern jurisprudence, at least in democracies. Fact-based evidence has replaced superstition as the supreme authority. At least that is what I thought until I read attorney Shirley Richards' August 2, 2014 column, 'Can you stop the bolting horse, Mr Boyne?'

The column begins with an ill-advised defence of what nearly everyone would agree to be a nonsensical assertion from an earlier column: "Repeal of the [buggery] law will also effectively remove the philosophy that protects true marriage, making the institution of marriage, although thankfully currently protected, much more susceptible to challenge."

What "philosophy" could Ms Richards be talking about that protects marriage? I know that my marriage, like most, is a personal contract, a long-term expression of love and commitment between my wife and me. There is no philosophy that I know of that protects this commitment. If buggery was decriminalised, as it should be, I see no reason this will change my view of my wife or her view of me. What possible logic could support Ms Richards' reasoning, which seems so bizarre?

Alternatively, perhaps Ms Richards may be fantasising that nations could use the decriminalisation of buggery as the pretext to renege on marriage contracts. If that is the case, let me set her mind at ease. Contract law, as she must know, is at the core of all economic activity. And marriage contracts have a significant economic basis as well, especially in inheritance. Since economics trumps most considerations, it is difficult to see why any democracy would jeopardise marriage contracts, threatening their financial viability.

As to Ms Richards' concern over whether buggery should be taught as normal, what if it is true? After all, normality is the scientific consensus; being gay is not considered an illness. It is merely a variation in sexual behaviour across the continuum, typical of our species. We also know that individuals in many animal species, in addition to us, show durably gay behaviours; it is not 'abnormal' there either.

NO VALID REASON

If being gay is normal, what could be the societal benefit of pretending it is not? Other than upsetting misguided religious sensibilities, my guess is neither Ms Richards nor any of her supporters can cite any valid reason.

At the same time, it is easy to show that when we mischaracterise, mistreat and sequester otherwise normal LGBT individuals, we are effectively relegating a percentage of every generation to living on the fringes. And when we substitute religious mythology for a frank, evidence-based discussion of human sexuality, we may also inflict lifelong psychological damage, especially to gay children as they approach puberty, and for the first time realise they are different from most of their peers.

And who pays for this insanity? We do. We pay for the criminality, which inevitably follows ostracism and sequestration. We also pay for the medical care, particularly the expensive HIV treatment, which often accompanies life in the sex trade, one of the few economic avenues available to LGBT outcasts.

But, more important, this insanity deprives our nation of the contribution LGBT individuals could be making to our economic development. In this regard, I am reminded of Alan Turing, one of the most important mathematicians of the 20th century, and who is also credited with laying the theoretical foundations of computer science. A mug with his likeness, a gift from the Association of Computing Machinery, sits proudly in my cupboard. Dr Turing was a leader in the breaking of the Nazi Enigma encryption that was so central to Allied victory in WWII. He was a gay man.

How many Dr Turings have we damaged psychologically as children, rendering them incapable of contributing to society?

Is there no limit to the economic price that we, as a nation, will pay to indulge the religious fantasies of people like Shirley Richards?

Patrick White holds a doctorate in engineering and led research groups at Bell Laboratories and Bellcore (Telcordia). Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and rasta49@me.com. 


Also see in the Gleaner:
No threat to straight rights 

JFJ Interim Board has Full Authority


Thursday, August 7, 2014

Discredited ‘Ex-Gay’ Therapy Group, NARTH, Undergoes Major Rebranding Effort

0 comments
also see: Former 'ex-gay' leaders publish open letter saying conversion therapy is damaging

Discredited 'Ex-Gay' Therapy Group, NARTH, Undergoes Major Rebranding Effort

Unable to Shake Decades of Failure, NARTH Attempts Extremist Makeover

CHICAGO - Truth Wins Out warned mental health professionals today not to be fooled by



the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality's (NARTH) cynical rebranding effort. The group, infamous for its failed efforts to "cure" LGBT people, has launched a new website,therapeuticchoice.com, and renamed itself the NARTH Institute, which serves as a division of the brand new Alliance for Therapeutic Choice and Scientific Integrity (ATCSI).

"NARTH can put lipstick on this new pig, but it's the same old swine peddling junk science to desperate and vulnerable people," said Truth Wins Out's Executive Director Wayne Besen. "This cynical rebranding effort is an attempt to mask NARTH's past failures, history of consumer fraud, and shredded reputation. We urge mental health professionals not to be fooled by NARTH's new facelift."

Besieged on several fronts, the embattled "ex-gay" organization's new direction is an effort to confront mounting legal and legislative challenges. Jews Offering New Alternatives for Healing, (JONAH) an organization run by former NARTH board member and convicted felon, Arthur Abba Goldberg, is being sued by the Sothern Poverty Law Center for consumer fraud. A therapist affiliated with JONAH, Alan Downing, allegedly made his clients undress and fondle themselves in front of a mirror. This behavior echoes that of another prominent NARTH therapist, Christopher Austin, who was convicted for inappropriate behavior with his clients.

In the legislative arena, two states, California and New Jersey, have passed laws banning ex-gay therapy (aka reparative or conversion therapy) for minors. Several states are looking to pass similar measures. Explaining the purpose of the new branding, NARTH writes, "In recent years NARTH has been increasingly involved in legal and professional efforts to defend the rights of clients to pursue change-oriented psychological care as well as the rights of licensed mental health professionals to provide such care.... Adding to our board new legal and medical experts (i.e., Geoff Heath, JD, and Keith Vennum, MD) and a new clinical member David Pickup, MFT."

A second "ex-gay" organization, Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays (PFOX) also rebranded its website, with a legal focus echoing that of NARTH's. This is no surprise, as prominent PFOX and NARTH member, Christopher Doyle, has been the chief lobbyist against bills prohibiting the barbaric practice of reparative therapy on minors. Doyle gained notoriety for what he admitted online: 


"I tried to have sex with the little girls that my mother watched in her daycare, and eventually, one of the girls told her parents what I was doing. The shame that was placed on me by my parents was more than I could bear. Rather than rescue me, teach me, and put me in counseling, the 'bad boy' was left alone to deal with all of this shame."

The huge changes at NARTH are symbolic of the implosion of the "ex-gay" industry. In the past few years, key "ex-gay" groups have shut their doors, including Love in Action, Exodus International, Evergreen International, and Love Won Out.

Last week, the National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR) released a letter by several former "ex-gay" activists who explained that such therapy is unethical and harmful. Former Family Research Council "ex-gay" spokesperson, Yvette Cantu Schneider, also released a statement with the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) where she expressed regret for her participation in the "ex-gay" industry. Last year, former "ex-gay" poster boy John Paulk apologized for his role in promoting these groups, and the year prior, key "ex-gay" activist, John Smid, renounced his role with Love in Action - the first modern ex-gay ministry founded in 1973.

"The 'ex-gay' industry is an experiment that has failed," said Truth Wins Out's Wayne Besen. "I can understand why they would want to reinvent themselves, because things didn't work out so well the first time. However, these group are simply repackaging the same old snake oil in a fancy new bottle."

NARTH has disingenuously billed itself as a secular therapy group. In reality, this organization served as a front for virulently anti-gay religious groups such as Focus on the Family. The claim that NARTH is a secular organization is betrayed by its own rhetoric.

"We, as citizens, need to articulate God's intent for human sexuality," Dr. Joseph Nicolosi, co-founder of NARTH, said in CNN' 360 Degrees with Anderson Cooper, April 14, 2007. At the Feb. 10, 2007 Love Won Out conference in Phoenix, the "secular" therapist told the audience, "When we live our God-given integrity and our human dignity, there is no space for sex with a guy."

Although NARTH claims to be a group that offers therapy, what it does isn't therapy at all. Instead, it is anti-gay hate speech wrapped in medical language, in an effort to make it more palatable to mainstream Americans. NARTH co-founder, the late Dr. Charles Socarides, told The Washington Post on August 14, 2007, "Homosexuality is a psychological and psychiatric disorder, there is no question about it. It is a purple menace that is threatening the proper design of gender distinctions in society."


NARTH board member Gerard van den Aardweg is a frequent purveyor of anti-LGBT hatespeech. He writes in his book, Homosexuality & Hope: A Psychologist Talks About Treatment and Change:

"The person with a homosexual drive is pulled to a neurotic and conflictions existence. Stubbornly and imperviously, against all advice, despite the sorrow they inflict on their parents, young people with this problem cling to their 'choice' of what their ignorance mistakes for 'happiness.' It may be hard, but it is true: not a few of them degenerate, their youthful freshness and gladness disappear; they become weaklings in many respects - like addicts." (Ch. 2, pg. 24)

NARTH is also infamous for its bizarre theories and techniques. The group encourages male clients to drink Gatorade and call their friends "dude," because this will supposedly make them more masculine. Dr. Joseph Nicolosi espoused the idea that, "Non-homosexual men who experience defeat and failure may also experience homosexual fantasies or dreams."

NARTH board member Gerard van den Aardweg said he believes that there is a link between muscle weakness and homosexuality.

"The possible correlation between homosexuality and 'muscle weakness' could mean, for instance, that boys with deficient muscular growth run a higher risk of becoming sexually deviant because of their feeling inferior on that account...it is precisely youthful inferiority feelings about the physical appearance, body build, and the like that can motivate a development to a homosexual orientation." (Homosexuality & Hope: A Psychologist Talks About Treatment and Change, Ch. 2, p. 29)


On its website NARTH endorsed and sold a book from member therapist, James E. Phelan,"Practical Exercises For Men In Recovery of Same-Sex Attraction (SSA)." It is a veritable, step-by-step guide on how one would attempt to transform from gay-to-straight.

Phelan's peculiar book urges clients to keep a "masturbation inventory" and practice "safe driving."

"Keep your eyes on the road, not on other peoples' cars," the therapist warns. "Focus on driving, not having sex with other drivers." (p. 30)

The author also offers a comprehensive list of 236 activities clients can participate in whenever they feel homosexual urges. This list includes: Bowling, singing to myself, watching the sky, reading maps, caring for houseplants, going to a revival or crusade, seeing famous people, crying, seeing or smelling a flower or plant, going to a drive-thru (Dairy Queen, McDonalds, etc.), walking barefoot, bird watching, smiling at people, playing Frisbee, and going to auctions. (Pgs. 93-97)

Sexism is rampant at NARTH. This is made clear in exercise 57 of Phelan's NARTH endorsed book where advises male clients what to tell their wives:

"It is up to you to help educate her about your needs. Tell her, 'I need to be the man of the house. Let me be the man of the house.' Dominant women only demasculinize men. A man has got to be the lion of the den." (p. 61)

Such retrograde beliefs is reminiscent of NARTH board member Gerald Schoenwolf, who in 2006 seemed to justify slavery on the organization's website:


"With all due respect, there is another way, or other ways, to look at the race issue in America," wrote Schoenwolf. "It could be pointed out, for example, that Africa at the time of slavery was still primarily a jungle, as yet uncivilized or industrialized. Life there was savage, as savage as the jungle for most people, and that it was the Africans themselves who first enslaved their own people.

They sold their own people to other countries, and those brought to Europe, South America, America, and other countries, were in many ways better off than they had been in Africa. But if one even begins to say these things one is quickly shouted down as though one were a complete madman."

More HERE

Wednesday, August 6, 2014

Ensure You are Well-Represented in the 2014 Global Men's Health and Rights Survey!

0 comments

MSMGF

Thank you for your interest in this research survey on the sexual health of gay men and other men who have sex with men (MSM) worldwide!

Your participation in this study is voluntary. You may decide not to participate, or stop your participation at any time.

WHO

In response to feedback on the 2012 GMHR survey, this survey is specifically designed for men who have sex with men, including transgender MSM. For more information you can contact the MSMGF at the email address below.

The Global Forum on MSM & HIV (MSMGF) is a global coalition of advocates, researchers, service providers, and other experts in health, human rights and policy. The mission of the MSMGF is to advocate for equitable access to effective HIV prevention, care, treatment, and support services for gay men and other MSM, while promoting their health and human rights worldwide.

WHAT

This 25 - 30 minute survey will ask you questions about experiences regarding your sexual health, access to services, and your opinions and experiences you may have had regarding other issues related to the wellbeing of MSM where you live.

WHY

Your responses will join the voices of other MSM around the world to inform and support knowledge generation, programming and advocacy for sexual health needs of gay men and other MSM around the world. You may not benefit personally form your participation in this survey. Your decision not to participate or to stop participation will not result in any penalty or loss of benefits to which you are entitled.

CONFIDENTIALITY

Absolute confidentiality cannot be guaranteed. There is a risk of loss of confidentiality.

Your identity will not be linked with your responses. Your responses will be combined with those of other participants, and together the findings will support knowledge generation, programming and advocacy for the sexual health needs of gay men and other MSM around the world.

CONTACTS

Please feel free to contact us with any questions or comments regarding this survey:

Secretariat of the MSMGF: contact@msmgf.org.

Sonya Arreola, PhD, MPH I Principle Investigator: sarreola@msmgf.org

George Ayala, Psy D I Executive Director, MSMGF: gayala@msmgf.org

If you have questions about your rights as a research subject or if you have questions, concerns, input, or complaints about the research, you may contact:

Western Institutional Review Board® (WIRB®)
1019 39th Avenue SE Suite 120
Puyallup, Washington 98374-2115
Telephone: 1-800-562-4789 or 360-252-2500
E-mail: Help@wirb.com

WIRB is a group of people who perform independent review of research.

WIRB will not be able to answer some study-specific questions, such as questions about appointment times. However, you may contact WIRB if the research staff cannot be reached or if you wish to talk to someone other than the research staff.

Thank you again!

The Global Forum on MSM & HIV (MSMGF)

Take the survey HERE

Wednesday, July 2, 2014

Anti Gay Group Jamaica CAUSE told We're Not Into You! Gays No Threat To Straight Folk

0 comments
I am still trying to control my laughter as I typed this post from reading this wonderful article twice that appeared in the Gleaner today, the hysteria, fear-mongering and inciting violence under the guise of a stupid tag line from the anti gay newly formed group Jamaica CAUSE "Straight without the hate" or "love the sinner but hate the sin" had not been bought by many folks including ordinary Jamaicans who are labelling the over reaction by the group as hypocritical owing to the fact that they have not responded so organised to other more serious societal ills.

First here is the article

K. Dwyer, Guest Columnist


So it must have been the rave thing to do on Sunday when 25,000 men and women left their homes to protest in hope of eliminating or possibly exiling the LGBT community?! Give me a break!

I'm just throwing it out there to the 25,000, and please give honest answers! How many of you were fornicating before you took to the streets? How many of you left your homes without ironing clothes for your sons/daughters/husbands/wives for the coming week to jump on the wagon?

How many didn't cook Sunday dinner because the march was going to fill your stomachs with all the necessary nutritional elements to keep your bodies alive?

How many of you left your children at home to join the march instead of giving your families quality time, helping them get ready for graduation, reviewing summer-school notes or just listening and being present?

How many different sins did some of you commit before taking to the streets? How many of you are men and women in the closet living 'down-low' and protested because you didn't want to jeopardise your posts, and so you sold out your own kind?

The Church is very hypocritical. The Bible says, "Judge not and ye shall not be judged," yet you put yourselves on pedestals judging others. NEWS FLASH! You people are not GOD. He did not say the Church will have to condemn or commit malicious acts against you before you could get to him!

How many of the persons marching have children out of wedlock, are stealing, murdering, raping and committing other heinous crimes, yet you guys are protesting about GAYS that don't see you! The Jamaican dollar has slid to 112:1 with the US dollar. Protest about that.

Stay out!

My bedroom is NOT your playground, so I don't see why you want to enter it! The same sexual methods that you use to satisfy yourselves are the same ones we use. The only difference is that we choose to be sexually satisfied by someone of the same sex.

Our bedroom business has a closed-door policy. Hence, STAY OUT! Sure, we can share a few tips and tricks with you, but why should we? We invented some of the ways you use to sexually satisfy your partners.

Portia Simpson Miller, your dear prime minister, gave a commitment to review the buggery law and failed to honour that promise. She is an upstanding political hypocrite with a bang and a hidden agenda to keep her seat in Gordon House.

The heterosexual community is adamant that homosexuals are a threat to them and that is contrary to their beliefs. We do have a type that we are attracted to, and it is NOT heterosexual men and women!

Let me just say to the 25,000 of you out there and the multitudes: gays will always be in existence and more progressive because we are looking into making the world a better place and more uplifting.

So to the pastor man who is lashing out and the politician, what's in the dark must come to light! My bedroom is my play area and what I do there stays there. Your application has been denied!

Feel free to respond to columns@gleanerjm.com and kimswaggerkid@gmail.com.

ENDS

A recent RJR interview a day after the rally showed up the hidden intent as the president of the Lawyers' Christian Fellowship Helen Coley Nicholson referred to their group as the real civil society clearly pitting other groups as irrelevant or their causes not clear. This kind of divisiveness is disturbing indeed coming from so called Christians, they have even gone as far as to malign the more traditional churches who have not supported the CAUSE initiative as supporting homosexuality.

also see for some additional coverage:


Betty Ann Blaine Deliberately Conflates Same Gender Attraction & Child Abuse at Christian Anti Gay Mass Rally & in Public Advocacy

More Overreaction to the Jamaicans for Justice Sex Education Course & Media Senationalism 


Pastors Push Enumeration As Hedge Against Buggery Repeal (Gleaner July 1 2014) obviously the JFLAG change in the call to decriminalization has gone unheard deliberately or unnoticed. So much for pro-activity from our goodly advocates

The False Dichotomy of the religious right on the LGBT advocacy Godlessness

Espeut, West says “Homophobia” was invented to abuse Christians as hate speech

Betty Ann Blaine & foreign religious zealots continue their paranoia & misrepresentations of male homosexuality

Church claims future victimization if buggery is decriminalized in Jamaica

Spilling homosexual blood .... Observer Headline 29.11.09

Lesbians Do Have Morals 2009

More gay marriage paranoia & hijacking of the homosexual debate by fanatics 2014


Professor's Bain's Testimony Threatened Foreign Funding (Gleaner letter)

Lessons to learn from The Professor Bain Matter?




Betty Ann Blaine on Poverty, children and the Buggery Law .... and that awful confusion of homosexuality with paedophilia



Monday, June 30, 2014

Lloyd D'Aguilar on The Church Preaching Itself Out Of Relevance in Jamaica

0 comments

Radio host and rights advocate with his own style of advocacy Lloyd D'Agular's letter became the letter of the day and pleasantly surprisingly so seeing that the Gleaner in recent times had sunk to a low in terms of true journalism from walkouts by award winning staff from press conferences (CVCC) to the tabloid type writing on the JFJ CVCC funded sex education course.

I am not a big fan of his per say but give unto Ceasar what is due unto to Ceasar and he has been interviewing more LGBT spokespersons since his new stint at HOT102FM's Morning Edition.

With yesterday's mass rally by a hastily formed anti gay group Jamaica CAUSE and their threats to vote out any administration that repeals buggery (when that call has since changed by JFLAG though so late to decriminalization) the deceptive conflation of same gender sex with abuse is on twinned with reparative therapy and blocking any attempt to allow coverage under law for sexual discrimination.

video

video clip from "For The Bible Tells Me So" that made it clear that reparative therapy can be dangerous


Lloyd's letter:

LETTER OF THE DAY - Church Preaching Itself Out Of Relevance


THE EDITOR, Sir:

It appears that the last moral lynchpin of the Jamaican Church (the fundamentalist wing at least) is hatred of homosexuals.

The Church has been forced to accept human frailties - adultery, fornication, stealing, murder, covetousness - as things which secular laws either don't regard as crimes or which the State reserves the exclusive right to punish.

The clergy cannot use biblical admonitions to advocate stoning and murder for such transgressions. To do so, they themselves could be prosecuted for criminal conduct.

But now it seems as if the clerics believe that the last moral code on which they cannot concede is homosexuality.

They are gearing up to take their last stand against the 'gay agenda', which seems also to be a referendum on their own relevance. This gay agenda, which the clerics keep fuming against is, in fact, a human-rights agenda.

Morally speaking, the State does not have the right to be involved in the bedroom affairs of consenting adults - gay or straight. Nor can the Church realistically do anything about what people do in the privacy of their bedrooms.

Modern State

The premise of the modern State is that chattel slavery is over and the State, therefore, has no business regulating personal thoughts, beliefs, morality or sexual behaviour. The last bastion of this attempt to regulate personal behaviour seems to be drugs (marijuana and coke), abortion, prostitution, and homosexuality. It is, of course legal to drink, smoke and eat yourself to death.

The United States has moved decisively on the matter of homosexuality, going so far as to recognise gay marriage. Legalising marijuana may not be too far off.

The Jamaican clergy have a mortal fear that removing the buggery law will lead to legalisation of gay marriage à la the USA. The buggery law is unenforceable in any event, unless the participants engage publicly, which is a very rare occurrence, or the police decide to come kicking down your door based on evidence!

No gay agenda

There is no gay agenda in Jamaica other than that criminalisation of gay sex is a violation of the basic tenets of the Constitution. This criminalisation has led to murder, discrimination and social ridicule.

Having lost their thunder against fornication and adultery, which is considered normal human behaviour, buggery is now the Church's new clarion call.

The clerics never challenge the State over its terrorist methods against inner-city youths, such as the 2010 Tivoli Gardens massacre. They have nothing to say about institutional corruption - indeed, they have regular prayer breakfasts with state officials who are known kleptomaniacs.

Now is therefore not the time to flinch in front of clerical irrelevance. God is dead. He seems to have died a long time ago.

The buggery law must be repealed. LGBT Jamaicans must be protected against violence, stigma and bigotry. Clerical hysteria on the matter of gay rights sounds too eerily similar to the echoes of Fascism.

Jamaica either becomes a civilised state or it further descends into barbarism and proto-Fascism.

LLOYD D'AGUILAR

Campaign for Social and Economic Justice
lgdaguilar@gmail.com

ENDS


The Hunt for Blood Continues ..... JFJ/CVCC Children’s Homes Sex-Ed Programme Under Police Investigation part 2

More Overreaction to the Jamaicans for Justice Sex Education Course & Media Senationalism

Why did CVCC & JFJ not Fund a Project/Home for Homeless LGBT Youth in New Kingston instead of the Children’s Home Fiasco that now obtains?

Professor's Bain's Testimony Threatened Foreign Funding (Gleaner letter)

Lessons to learn from The Professor Bain Matter?

Ian Boyne: Bain exercised terribly poor strategic judgement

Anti gay religious voices where are they? .... Pastor charged with sexual assault

'UWI had no choice but to dismiss Prof Bain' says Professor Rosemarie Bell Antoine (OAS Rapporteur)

Pro-Bain Protesters To Meet With UWI Today

Buggery the only thing that makes church butts sore?





Monday, June 16, 2014

Freedom under Attack! Bain, freedoms and a complicated way to dialogue

0 comments



For the first time ever, Belize and Jamaica has almost simultaneous protest regarding professor Bain termination. The debate pitted the issue of religious-base bigotry which has a moral stamp of approval against a collective who is concern about the intersecting issues of rights enforcement and protection as part of an overall health policy concern. Historically, CARICOM member states, have not constructively and responsibly addressed the rights concerns of its L.G.B.T citizens in any substantive way. The Bain case, offers the region an opportunity to teach us all about the limits of free expression and thought and the obligations of individuals in a fiduciary relationships that involves vulnerable groups.

The broader concern for the region, is does religious-base bigotry gets a moral stamp of approval to undermine the rights of L.G.B.T citizens in the region and what happens in the struggle for rights acknowledgment which are already in many states constitutions. The recent debate about Professor Bain termination was argued as an issue of Freedom of Speech in both Belize and Jamaica. Bain, as a result, filed for an injunction on Wednesday to hold on to his job at CHART that he has held since 2001. The article says he is suing on 15 grounds and that Bain is arguing that said disagreement and subsequent termination conflicted with his right to freedom of expression, thought and conscience. He was granted his request for an injunction to prevent his dismissal from Chart on Friday this until his case is heard.

If he is really suing on the basis of "his constitutional rights of freedom of expression and thought," the case has more to do with legal limits on employee behavior than it does on contractual provisions. Interestingly, as I am researching this matter, it does not appear citizens of Commonwealth nations have a protection for "freedom of speech" as contained in the US constitution. Instead, they have laws that protect "freedom of expression and opinion," which may be lawfully restricted to respect the rights and reputation of other persons, national security, public order, public health or public morality. Basically, the distinction limits the actions of people breaching the expression of others to obscenity, defamation and discrimination.

The filing base on "his constitutional rights of freedom of expression and thought," will be interesting as the case moves through the court. In the US, there have been a whole slew of decisions (Garcetti v. Ceballos, Connick v. Myers, Pickering v. Board of Education, Waters v. Churchill, Schumann v. Dianon, Perez-Dickson v. City of Bridgeport, etc.) which uphold that neither employees in the public or private workplace are entitled to First Amendment protection if their speech: is “extraordinarily disruptive” to the workplace or work being done, interfered with the employees job performance, placed strain on his relationships with co-workers, created division within the company, or is insubordinate.

In on case precedent, out of Canada which is extremely interesting and pertinent. "Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission v. Whatcott - The decision rests on a compelling premise: that published statements treating members of vulnerable minority groups as somehow less worthy of dignity or respect – as less human – than the rest of society don’t warrant the same degree of Charter protection as other exercises of expressive freedom." (Please read case link for conclusion)

In another case, Burns v. Dye out of New South Wales is also interesting. Basically a man filed a complaint under the anti-vilification laws (the Australian equivalent to Hate Crimes discrimination laws). The ruling is interesting because it states that just because a homosexual might find the words used offensive, they are not necessarily covered by the law. (I would argue that the absence of such legislation in the Caribbean would equate to the situation where language was not covered by law.) HOWEVER, the court ruled in favor of the complainant because of the public nature of the verbal abuse.

Eweida and Others v. the United Kingdom was a decision that was appealed to the European Court of Human Rights. It ultimately is applicable under 2 provisions. One of the litigants Ms Ladele was employed by the London Borough of Islington, which had a“Dignity for All” equality and diversity policy, from 1992. When in 2004 the Civil Unions law was passed, Ladele, a Christian, refused to conduct civil partnership ceremonies. The court ruled that her view of marriage was not the same as her right to practice her religion and stated that "Islington was not merely entitled, but obliged, to require her to perform civil partnerships" as part of her employment agreement. Another litigant, Mr McFarlane, was a practicing Christian who worked for Relate, a national private, confidential sex therapy and relationship counselling service, as a counsellor from May 2003 until March 2008. He initially had some concerns about providing counselling services to same-sex couples, but following discussions with his supervisor, he accepted that simply counselling a homosexual couple did not involve endorsement of such a relationship and he was therefore prepared to continue. He subsequently provided counselling services to two lesbian couples, which did not consist of sexual therapy, without any problem. However, in 2007 he refused to offer psycho-sexual therapy, on religious grounds, to gay, lesbian and bi-sexual clients. Throughout 2008 employer and employee met many times to resolve the issue. In 2008, McFarlane was dismissed for stating that he would comply with company policy when he had no intention of doing so. McFarlane appealed to the the Employment Tribunal, and the Employment Appeal Tribunal, losing both times as they found he not suffered direct discrimination on the basis of conscience. He had not been dismissed because of his faith, but because it was believed that he would not comply with company policies. With regard to McFarlane's claim of indirect discrimination, the Tribunal found that Relate’s requirement that its counsellors comply with its Equal Opportunities Policy did put McFarlane’s religious beliefs at a disadvantage; however, those were legitimized by the aim to provide of a full range of counselling services to all sections of the community, regardless of sexual orientation. The European Court of Human Rights concurred that the decisions limiting religious freedoms were acceptable for the greater good. This case seem to Mirror the issues around Bain and will be interesting to see how the conservative Jamaica court responds in its final decision.

The case of Bain is going to be interesting in its discourse, as there is an issued about intersection of rights which the Court will be ask to define. What has happened in this bi-national case, is an ensuing discourse about the limits of free speech and its impact on vulnerable groups; the limits of employer/employee relations regarding persons in substantial leadership in carrying out the mission of his employer.


Professor Rose-Marie Belle Antoine wrote on the termination of Professor Bain contextualising the issue best: "At the core, it is about a program leader publicly undermining the very program and principles he was mandated to support. By his words and action, he voluntarily aligned himself with and gave endorsement to, a diametrically opposed, unacceptable message on an issue of grave import for the UWI.

The essence of the harm, therefore, more so than the content of the words that Professor Bain spoke, is the fact that an authoritative leader of the UWI, spoke with one voice with a litigant partywhose purpose and objectives are in direct conflict with the policies of CHART and the UWI. This litigant clearly advocates the retention of a discriminatory regime that excludes persons from enjoying rights of equality on the basis of their sexual orientation. Consequently, the testimony instantly became associated with the UWI in deeply negative and enduring ways, placing deep question marks on the UWI’s integrity and on its public commitment, not only to progressive notions of public health and HIV programming, but more fundamentally, to non-discrimination, equal opportunity, justice and human rights.

It is a fact that the elimination of discrimination on the ground of sexual orientation is a key ingredient of the UWI’s HIV programming which Professor Bain had the honour to lead for many years and about which he testified. Anti-discrimination training is a vital part of CHART’s own program, as conceded in the expert testimony. Significantly, too, the mandate of PEPFAR and the Global Fund for Aids, which funds CHART, is “to develop programs aimed at reducing HIV related stigma.”The mission of UWI’s HIV programming, HARP, as well as CHART, from the very beginning, has co-existed with a human rights agenda, a central plank of which is the need to abolish discriminatory laws on sexual orientation. This is incontestable and no one associated with itcan ever claim to have been unaware of this. I can speak authoritatively to this as one who has been intimately involved with the work of the program from its inception. Further, as an HIV & Law consultant who has been actively engaged for over 20 years in policy development across the region, for governments, international organisations and NGO’s, including on important issues of human rights and justice, I understand why this must be so.

Professor Bain’s longstanding and excellent work on HIV and public health, is without question. Ironically, it is precisely because of his high profile that his remarks and chosen association are so damaging to UWI’s reputation and credibility. The retention of Professor Bain in such circumstances threatened to destroy much of the hard-fought gains and trust that UWI has won in the fight against the scourge of HIV and discrimination in general and seriously undermined its own institutional interests. In this context, such testimony cannot be viewed as a mere personal viewpoint, isolated and insulated from CHART and the UWI’s policy position.Indeed, typically, the very reason authorities like Professor Bain are called upon to speak is because of their professional capacity which is inextricably linked with the institution, the UWI. Thus, Professor Bain cannot separate his personal views from these comments that have come to represent the institution that is the UWI, which is why they are viewed as harmful and irresponsible.

While intellectual freedom is to be protected and encouraged, the UWI has a duty to ensure that on issues where it holds itself up as perpetuating a particular policy for the benefit of the community, the persons who are chosen to take the lead on the matter, are demonstrably in accord with that policy. I cannot think, for example, that UWI could ever appoint an academic known to be a racist, or supporting racist ideology, to head Departments devoted to Race Studies or even History Departments, or a person demonstrating that he or she believes or asserts that women are unequal and their place is in the home, to head the Gender Department! There have been several ‘scientific’ studies that claim that blacks are lazy and intellectually inferior, or women the ‘weaker sex’. Does this mean that in the name of academic freedom, the UWI should compromise its core principles of equality and allow its very integrity to be highjacked? I think not.

Professor Bain, as Head of CHART, was in a fiduciary relationship, where one is placed in a position of great trust, which in turn, induces greater responsibility and duties of care. Professor Bain, and by extension, the UWI, with this testimony, violated these fiduciary duties owed to persons living with HIV, the LGBTI community and to the many who look to it for protection and guiding principle.The bottom line is this: Having given this testimony, it would be impossible for this community, the very constituency that he is supposed to serve, ever to trust Professor Bain again. Thus, the UWI had no choice, after careful review, but to change the leadership of CHART. "

The interesting thing is all this, is what will the Jamaican court decide? We will have to wait, as the drama unfolds. What we do know is that CARICOM member states have failed to uphold the fundamental rights and freedoms of their L.G.B.T citizens in any substantive way. What Bain case may do, is amplify the concerns and needs of L.G..B.T citizens in the region and finally visibilised the fundamentalists movement in the region as well as among CARICOM member state once and for all. Only time will tell.

Source:
Take a Principled Stance http://www.guardian.co.tt/lifestyle/2014-06-04/taking-principle-stand-hiv

Saskatchwan Human Rights Commission v Whatcott: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web...


ENDS

Meanwhile in Jamaica a new anti gay group AGAIN! has been formed with some wanna-be superstars pastors from unimportant churches called Jamaica CAUSE as they are not members of the Jamaica Council of Churches or other groups and claiming to be fighting homosexuality and gay marriage with a rally at Half Way Tree slated for June 29, 2014

Friday, June 13, 2014

Rapsist should be hanged ......... reactions to male rape jogger case continues

0 comments
Atty-at-Law
Barbara Gayle


The report that a male jogger was buggered recently in Queen Hill, St Andrew has led to some Jamaicans calling for all rapists to be hanged.

Many Jamaicans have been shocked by the incident and have expressed sympathy for the victim of that heinous crime and are hoping that the perpetrators will be caught.

Some vendors downtown Kingston were extremely upset about the situation, and in expressing their disgust, called for such criminals to be hanged in public.

"These things are really getting out of hand," one female vendor said as she started a conversation among the group of vendors. "Imagine this man left his house to go and jog and these wicked, no-good criminals held him up with gun and raped the man. I can just imagine how shocked and frightened the poor man must have been. I really feel sorry for him," she said.

In response, one of the vendors pointed out that the ordeal will haunt the victim for the rest of his life. She was quick to point out that no one in Jamaica is safe.

"The children are not safe, old people are not safe, women are not safe and men are not safe either from being raped or murdered," she said.

A man who was among the group said the reality just hit him that one day, he could be attacked by some homosexual men.

"Boy, oh boy, I don't think I could get over it. You know, to me, this is worse than murder because then I would be dead and would not have to live with the thought that a man raped me," he said.

The woman agreed with him that buggery was indeed a horrible crime, but said they were not sure it was worse than murder because the man's life was spared.

"All I am saying is that men who rape men must be hanged because I don't know how I would survive if a man raped my son or my husband," the woman remarked.

"Hang them, yes, they deserve to die for raping men and women. Yes all rapists should be hanged when caught," another women echoed.

Although the vendors felt that men convicted of rape and buggery should be hanged, there is no provision in law for hanging to be the punishment for such offences. The death sentence can only be passed for certain categories of murder.

However, it must not be forgotten that although the judges have been passing death sentences, the last hanging took place in Jamaica in February, 1988. There have been debates and calls for the abolition of the death penalty, but so far, it has not been abolished.

also see:
Is the Observer's Male Jogger Sodomatical Attack Story a Lie? ..... A Jogger/Blogger Poses Questions


Homo Thugs, Observer claims Gun-toting gays creating fear in Kingston ........ endgame here?

Homo-negative & homophobic feedback on the male jogger rape case continues

Wednesday, June 11, 2014

Dr Shelly Ann Weeks on Homophobia - What are we afraid of?

0 comments
Former host of Dr Sexy Live on Nationwide radio and Sexologist tackles in a simplistic but to the point style homophobia and asks the poignant question of the age, What really are we as a nation afraid of?

It seems like homosexuality is on everyone's tongue. From articles in the newspapers to countless news stories and commentaries, it seems like everyone is talking about the gays. Since Jamaica identifies as a Christian nation, the obvious thought about homosexuality is that it is wrong but only male homosexuality seems to influence the more passionate responses. It seems we are more open to accepting lesbianism but gay men are greeted with much disapproval.

Dancehall has certainly been very clear where it stands when it comes to this issue with various songs voicing clear condemnation of this lifestyle. Currently, quite a few artistes are facing continuous protests because of their anti-gay lyrics. Even the law makers are involved in the gayness as there have been several calls for the repeal of the buggery law. Recently Parliament announced plans to review the Sexual Offences Act which, I am sure, will no doubt address homosexuality. Jamaica has been described as a homophobic nation. The question I want to ask is: What are we afraid of? There are usually many reasons why homosexuality is such a pain in the a@. Here are some of the more popular arguments:

The Bible say it's an abomination

The Bible is perhaps the most popular reference when it comes to proving why homosexuality is wrong. The famous verses: Leviticus 18:22 - "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it [is] abomination." and Leviticus 20:13 - "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood [shall be] upon them." The problem with quoting the Bible is that not everyone is a Christian. Also there are other things that are "abominations" in the Bible such as adultery, fornication, lying among others. Are we suggesting that people should be put to death for these transgressions as well?

Gay men prey on young boys

There is a clear difference between paedophilia and homosexuality. Paedophiles are interested in pre-pubescent children who are unable to consent to any sexual activity. Consenting adults getting sexual is very different. Also, there is a lot of concern about boys getting raped, but the attention paid to young girls who are repeatedly molested is not quite the same.

Gay men cause HIV

In the 1980s HIV/AIDS were thought to be caused by homosexuals. That theory has long been dismissed. Heterosexuals have contracted the disease and passed it on to their partners as well. As a matter of fact, anal sex is not only enjoyed by same sex couples, heterosexual couples have been entering through the back door and they face the same risks.

Homosexuals can't procreate

I personally think that this is probably the most hypocritical of all the reasons because most persons who are having sex are not trying to procreate. For many individuals, pregnancy is a consequence, not a decision. So if you are using any form of contraceptive, you are not trying to procreate.

Gay parents will make gay children

This theory is flawed because of one simple fact: Most gay children come from heterosexual households. So clearly sexual orientation is not dependent on that of the parents.

Personally I do not think that what consenting adults engage in sexually should be a matter for legislation. Sexual identity is a personal thing and should be treated as such. As for the buggery (anal sex) law, I think it is antiquated, irrelevant to 21st century life and very difficult to enforce. I mean, are there individuals looking into homes to ensure that the penis is placed in the correct hole? Regardless of how we feel individually about this issue, remember one important fact: every human being is entitled to choose who they love, including homosexuals.

Have fun and stay sexy. 


Send your questions or comments to sexychatwithshelly@gmail.com

see: Buggery could dominate review of sex laws (Observer)

Monday, June 9, 2014

UK to deport Uganda woman for ‘not being in a lesbian relationship for 5 years’

0 comments
Harriet Nakigudde

The UK is planning to deport a Ugandan woman who applied for aslyum saying she was a lesbian saying she cannot possibly be a lesbian as ‘she has not been in a lesbian relationship for 5 years.’

Harriet Nakigudde, a 30 year old Ugandan lady applied for asylum in the UK fearing for her life because of her sexuality as a lesbian according to official documents.

Ms. Nakigudde removal directions have been issued for Tuesday, June 10, 2014, even though she has a pending Judicial review application in the High Court. There is an online petition seeking to halt the deportation.

The spokesperson, Edwin Sesange, for Out & Proud Diamond, a lobby group that advocates for LGBTI African asylum seekers notes:


“This is a miscarriage of justice for the Home Office to predict the outcomes of the courts of law in the UK. It is very clear that no action should have been taken by the Home office to issue any removal direction while a person has applied for her case to review by the courts.”

It is further reported Ms Nakigudde collapsed while boarding a plane on May 17 when the Government tried to remove her.

The UK Home Office reportedly denied her asylum on the basis that she did not get into a relationship whilst in the UK for the period of 5 years she has been here.

Under questioning, Harriet was asked what she used to do sexually with her partner in private, ;even though she explained to them briefly, she feared and was humiliated at the encroachment on her privacy.’ The Home office also used this against her.

The UK Home Office has been accused of asking very private and lurid questions to LGBTI asylum seekers, especially those from African countries.

Sesange noted, even though Harriet did reveal the names of two previous partners to the Home Office, they did not believe her, because those people are hard to track down or expose: “Harriet has kept her private life secret and she is not used to talking about it to strangers, even though it is a requirement for the Home office to encroach on people private, we strongly encourage them to stop it.”

This case highlights the handling by the UK home office of African LGBT asylum seekers after the death of another Uganda lesbian who died after being deported from the UK.

Monday, June 2, 2014

CARIMAC Intern accounts on Millsborough Ave Homeless MSM/Observer Stoning incident

0 comments
Welcome to the real world as the author got a taste of what an angry set of gay youth can be like after being neglected by not only their families but also their more privileged peers as well


photos from Observer at the time of the original report featuring some older members of the displaced populations from the closed Safe House Pilot 2009

Terror, as gays armed with bottles chase photographer



Danger on the streets logo

By KIMBERLEY HIBBERT

MY first real taste of journalism was during internship for the Caribbean Institute of Media and Communication (CARIMAC) when I was placed at the Jamaica Observer. I was excited about roving with the ace crime reporter.

One Wednesday morning we got word that a group of gay men had illegally occupied a house on Millsborough Avenue in Barbican, North East St Andrew, and were being a nuisance to residents there.

Our news team drove to the property to check out the story. On arriving, the driver instructed the photographer to be quick, and take photos from inside the vehicle.

But our photographer insisted on exiting the vehicle to get the pictures. We watched and waited anxiously.

"Weh him deh man, how him a tek so long fi come back? Mi tell yuh bout him enuh, weh him a do up deh so long?" mused the senior reporter.

Within a second of his expression of impatience, we saw the photographer racing towards the vehicle, arms and legs pumping, his camera over his shoulder. Behind him, the men in question were also sprinting with two crocus bags filled with glass bottles which they started hurling.

I was terrified. The driver turned on the engine and started signalling to the photographer to get in the vehicle quickly.

But, out of fright, the photographer started pulling too hard on the door latch and the central lock engaged. He was in for the fright of his life.

Realising what had happened, instead of waiting a few seconds to try the door again, the photographer ran, as the men were within 10 metres of him. For about 10 minutes they stood outside the vehicle playing dandy shandy with the bottles, while the senior reporter, the driver and I sat crouched in the vehicle. At one point the photographer opened the driver's door in a bid to enter, but failed.

When one of the bottles hit the vehicle the driver started going down the road slowly, with the photographer jogging behind. Eventually he ran to the passenger side of the vehicle and by that time more men had joined the bottle throwers. The driver then stretched across to the passenger door and swung it open for the photographer to jump in while the vehicle was still moving. The photographer attempted to get in and ended up having one leg inside the vehicle. Eventually he steadied himself, and we drove towards Barbican Road with a half of the photographer's body outside the vehicle.

The entire vehicle was silent up to the main road when I started snickering, then the other occupants burst out laughing.

The photographer, however, was not amused and insisted that we drive to the police station.

If our hilarity was hard for him to bear, the ordeal at the police station was something else.

We went inside and began telling the sergeant on duty what had happened. The entire station then gathered to listen. One constable sat in a corner trying to suppress his laughter.

But what knocked the ball out of the park was when the sergeant, while smirking, sarcastically asked: "So what you want me to do? Go up there for them?"

The senior reporter, not the least bit amused, gave a dry laugh and said in a very stern tone, "Yes". The sergeant then told us that if the owner did not come forward to remove the men, there was nothing he could do.

It was a hair-raising experience. I phoned my lecturer at CARIMAC and gave him the 411 about the incident. After having a good laugh, he asked in the most concerned tone, "Are you OK?" My response: "Yes sir, and I'm enjoying my internship."

We thought that was the end of it, but when we finally composed ourselves and drove back to Beechwood Avenue, we were in for more teasing.

We entered the Editorial Department and most persons appeared to be minding their business until we sat down. One brave soldier approached us and asked about the experience, some details of which had already been leaked to the newsroom. When I looked up, 12 men had gathered to hear of the showdown. While we did a re-enactment of the incident, the senior reporter and I took turns acting out what had happened to the photographer, to the delight of the editors who laughed heartily. The senior reporter jumped and I, balancing on one leg, showed them how we escaped danger.

Despite the humour of the situation, we all acknowledged the danger we would have been in if a bottle had smashed the windscreen or one of the windows, or had struck the photographer.

Kimberley Hibbert completed her first degree journalism programme at CARIMAC recently.

ENDS



The house was subsequently destroyed (the developer above) and since then the men and transgender collegues have been struggling with all kinds of deception to mask the major causation of the over populations of persons in New Kingston especially at the Shoemaker gully.








A recent documentary on UK Channel 4 (or HERE) of the newer populations deliberately overlooked the Safe House Pilot that was located at 4 Upper Musgrave Avenue under Jamaica AIDS Support for Life, JASL and suggested the property was destroyed due to homophobia by the landlord when that was not the actual reason which also led to the eviction of both JFLAG and JASL with the other tenants.


So much for deception and why we cannot get anywhere with either frontline work or finally beating stigma and discrimination.

See more posts from sister blog Gay Jamaica Watch on the issue including the original closure entry HERE 

Peace and tolerance

H

War of words between pro & anti gay activists on HIV matters .......... what hypocrisy is this?



War of words between pro & anti gay activists on HIV matters .......... what hypocrisy is this?

A war of words has ensued between gay lawyer (AIDSFREEWORLD) Maurice Tomlinson and anti gay activist Dr Wayne West as both accuse each other of lying or being dishonest, when deception has been neatly employed every now and again by all concerned, here is the post from Dr West's blog

This is laughable to me as both gentleman have broken the ethical lines of advocacy respectively repeatedly especially on HIV/AIDS and on legal matters concerning LGBTQ issues

The evidence is overwhelming readers/listeners, you decide.


Other Entries you can check out

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Homeless MSM Challenges and relationships with agencies overview ........



In a shocking move JFLAG decided not to invite or include homeless MSM in their IDAHO activity for 2013 thus leaving many in wonderment as to the reason for their existence or if the symposium was for "experts" only while offering mere tokenism to homeless persons in the reported feeding program. LISTEN TO THE AUDIO ENTRY HERE sad that the activity was also named in honour of one of JFLAG's founders who joined the event via Skype only to realise the issue he held so dear in his time was treated with such disrespect and dishonour. Have LGBT NGOs lost their way and are so mainstream they have forgotten their true calling?

also see a flashback to some of the issues with the populations and the descending relationships between JASL, JFLAG and the displaced/homeless LGBT youth in New Kingston: Rowdy Gays Strike - J-FLAG Abandons Raucous Homosexuals Misbehaving In New Kingston

also see all the posts in chronological order by date from Gay Jamaica Watch HERE and GLBTQ Jamaica HERE

GLBTQJA (Blogger): HERE

see previous entries on LGBT Homelessness from the Wordpress Blog HERE

Newstalk 93FM's Issues On Fire: Polygamy Should Be Legalized In Jamaica 08.04.14



debate by hosts and UWI students on the weekly program Issues on Fire on legalizing polygamy with Jamaica's multiple partner cultural norms this debate is timely.

Also with recent public discourse on polyamorous relationships, threesomes (FAME FM Uncensored) and on social.

Popular Posts

RJR - Surprise Yes vote by Ja on Sexual Orientation Removal from Summary Executions Resolution

Beyond the Headlines host Dionne Jackson Miller has Arlene Harrison Henry and Maurice Tonlinson on Human RIghts Day 2012 on the the removal of language in the form of sexual orientation on the Summary Executions UN Resolution - On November 21, 2012, Jamaica voted[1] against resolution A/C.3/67/L.36 at the United Nations condemning extra-judicial, summary or arbitrary executions which urges States “to investigate promptly and thoroughly all killings, including… all killings committed for any discriminatory reason, including sexual orientation

Homeless MSM evicted from Cargill Avenue (evening edition)



28/08/12 CVM TV again rebroadcast a story of homeless MSM and the deplorable living conditions coupled with the almost sensationalistic narrative of the alleged commercial sex work the men are involved in. Gay Jamaica Watch has been following this issue since 2009 when the older populations of MSMs who were for the most part displaced due to forced evictions and homo negative issues and their re-displacement by agencies who on the face of it refused to put in place any serious social interventions to assist the men to recovery CLICK HERE for the CLIP

Information, Disclaimer and more

Not all views expressed are those of GJW

This blog contains pictures and images that may be disturbing. As we seek to highlight the plight of victims of homophobic violence here in Jamaica, the purpose of the pics is to show physical evidence of claims of said violence over the years and to bring a voice of the same victims to the world.

Many recover over time, at pains, as relocation and hiding are options in that process. Please view with care or use theHappenings section to select other posts of a different nature.


Not all persons depicted in photos are gay or lesbian and it is not intended to portray them as such, save and except for the relevance of the particular post under which they appear.

Please use the snapshot feature to preview by pointing the cursor at the item(s) of interest. Such item(s) have a small white dialogue box icon appearing to their top right hand side.

God Bless


Other Blogs I write to:
http://glbtqjamaica.blogspot.com/
http://glbtqja.wordpress.com
Recent Homophobic Incidents CLICK HERE for related posts/labels from glbtqjamaica's blog & HERE for those I am aware of.

contact:
lgbtevent@gmail.com

Steps to take when confronted by the police & your rights compromised:

a) Ask to see a lawyer or Duty Council

b) Only give name and address and no other information until a lawyer is present to assist

c) Try to be polite even if the scenario is tense

d) Don’t do anything to aggravate the situation

e) Every complaint lodged at a police station should be filed and a receipt produced, this is not a legal requirement but an administrative one for the police to track reports

f) Never sign to a statement other than the one produced by you in the presence of the officer(s)

g) Try to capture a recording of the exchange or incident or call someone so they can hear what occurs, place on speed dial important numbers or text someone as soon as possible

h) File a civil suit if you feel your rights have been violated

i) When making a statement to the police have all or most of the facts and details together for e.g. "a car" vs. "the car" represents two different descriptions


j) Avoid having the police writing the statement on your behalf except incases of injuries, make sure what you want to say is recorded carefully, ask for a copy if it means that you have to return for it
glbtqjamaica@live.com

Notes on Bail & Court Appearance issues

If in doubt speak to your attorney

Bail and its importance -
If one is locked up then the following may apply:

Locked up over a weekend - Arrested pursuant to being charged or detained There must be reasonable suspicion i.e. about to commit a crime, committing a crime or have committed a crime. There are two standards that must be met:
1). Subjective standard: what the officer(s) believed to have happened

2). Objective standard: proper and diligent collection of evidence that implicates the accused To remove or restrain a citizen’s liberty it cannot be done on mere suspicion and must have the above two standards

 Police officers can offer bail with exceptions for murder, treason and alleged gun offences, under the Justice of the Peace Act a JP can also come to the police station and bail a person, this provision as incorporated into the bail act in the late nineties

 Once a citizen is arrested bail must be considered within twelve hours of entering the station – the agents of the state must give consideration as to whether or not the circumstances of the case requires that bail be given

 The accused can ask that a Justice of the Peace be brought to the station any time of the day. By virtue of taking the office excluding health and age they are obliged to assist in securing bail

"Bail is not a matter for daylight"

Locked up and appearing in court:
 Bail is offered at the courts office provided it was extended by the court; it is the court that has the jurisdiction over the police with persons in custody is concerned.

 Bail can still be offered if you were arrested and charged without being taken to court a JP can still intervene and assist with the bail process.

Other Points of Interest:
 The accused has a right to know of the exact allegation

 The detainee could protect himself, he must be careful not to be exposed to any potential witness

 Avoid being viewed as police may deliberately expose detainees

 Bail is not offered to persons allegedly with gun charges

 Persons who allegedly interfere with minors do not get bail

 If over a long period without charge a writ of habeas corpus however be careful of the police doing last minute charges so as to avoid an error

 Every instance that a matter is brought before the court and bail was refused before the accused can apply for bail as it is set out in the bail act as every court appearance is a chance to ask for bail

 Each case is determined by its own merit – questions to be considered for bail:

a) Is the accused a flight risk?
b) Are there any other charges that the police may place against the accused?
c) Is the accused likely to interfere with any witnesses?
d) What is the strength of the crown’s/prosecution’s case?


 Poor performing judges can be dealt with at the Judicial Review Court level or a letter to the Chief Justice can start the process


Human Rights Advocacy for GLBT Community Report 2009

What Human Rights .............

What are Human Rights?

By definition human rights are our inalienable fundamental rights. Inalienable means that which cannot be taken away. So our human rights are bestowed upon us from the moment we are born and, thus we are all entitled to these rights. Because we are entitled to our human rights and they cannot and should not be taken away from us, we as a people must strive to protect them, government should protect them and breaches of our rights should be highlighted and addressed appropriately.

Human rights are the same for everyone irrespective of colour, class or creed, and are applicable at both the national and international level. In Jamaica, our human rights are enshrined in and protected by our Constitution. Internationally, there have been numerous laws and treaties enacted specifically for the protection of human rights.

Milestone document

Most notably of these is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This declaration is seen as a milestone document in the history of human rights. It was proclaimed by the United Nations, in 1948, as a common standard of achievements for all nations, and sets out the fundamental human rights to be universally recognised and protected.

The Declaration sets out the following rights:

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

No one shall be held in slavery or servitude.

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Equality before the law

Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

(1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law.

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

Everyone has the right to freedom of movement

Everyone has the right to a nationality.

(1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.

(2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.

(3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

(1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.

(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.

(2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.

(1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.

(2) Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.

(3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government;

Everyone has the right to education.

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.