Jamaica's culture clash with homosexuality

By MARK WIGNALL





"Not in my Cabinet," was the strident answer given by Prime Minister Golding in 2008 when asked by the BBC's Steven Sackur on its programme HARDtalk if he would appoint gays to his Cabinet.

The beautiful luxury of hindsight affords us the opportunity to see that in the interview Sackur was setting up Golding for the simple question and the problematic response, but Golding blew it. Prior to asking the direct question, Golding had touched on Jamaica's culture in relation to homosexuality, and in answering it, he should have reverted to the culture line but with an expansion of his position, the country's position.

Even though we know that Golding was playing to the wider Jamaican anti-homosexual constituency, the full import of his response signalled that the leadership of the country was in the forefront of those who probably wanted to say, "Boom, bye, bye" to those openly flaunting their lifestyles on the down low.

In the previous PNP administration there was at least one powerful Cabinet member who was homosexual. During the PNP's run I had two luncheon meetings with him to discuss policy matters and while seated across the table from him, his lifestyle was the last thing on my mind - in fact it never even featured in my thought processes.

I am not aware that the normal, heterosexual PNP Cabinet members caught his "malady" and neither did I contract anything from proximity to him.

That said, I can empathise with TVJ for not wanting to air the pro-tolerance, pro-love public service announcement in which a former Miss Jamaica World expresses love for her homosexual brother. An indication of the virulent intolerance that Jamaicans have for those practising the lifestyle was seen in a Facebook post where one woman lambasted the former beauty queen for loving her own brother. Utterly amazing!

I have a relative who is lesbian and she has a bubbling, go-getter personality. Did I raise my hands to the heavens when I found out and say, "Oh, Lawd, what is this?" Absolutely not! I simply shrugged it off and made the decision that when next we meet I would give her a special embrace to indicate that I have no less love for her.

As a Jamaican I have to be true to my culture. It is what I am. For example, I could not have in my small circle of male friends one who openly practises the homosexual lifestyle. I wouldn't know how to relate to him or what to say to him. Do I say, "So, how was it with you and Big Moose last night? Did he rock your world?' The fact is, in a country where we are highly intolerant of what is euphemistically called "gay", while we cannot awake the next morning with a "Love gays" label emblazoned in our hearts, the decision to be more tolerant is something that civilised people ought to make, if only for the reason that homosexuals, like the poor, will be with us forever.

That said, I have remained puzzled for many years as to why a male would find another male sexually enticing. No so-called gay gene has been identified and the world accepts that homosexuality is a "lifestyle". In other words it is largely a choice, but, what is it that triggers that decision to go on the down low?

On Monday I telephoned a well-known doctor who has spent many years trying to unravel this phenomenon. "Only a very small percentage, much less that one per cent, of children born at Jubilee Hospital are born with what we refer to as ambiguous genitalia. That is, a vagina and a penis, maybe a vestigial one. It is always a difficult call for the surgeon to make a decision on what to do. It is usually best to wait for a number of years after which one can get an indication as to what particular sexual direction the child is headed, along with a consideration of the physiology on the inside. Then along with the parents' consent we can do the 'repair job' if you want to call it that and apply some hormone therapy."

Then I asked him the question, "Outside of that, what is it that would make a male later on in life want to have sex with another male? Personally, I find it repugnant, but it happens. What causes it?"

His answer shocked me. "To me, it is choice. They could be socialised into it or, as you ought to know, many of our poorer young men are driven to it by poverty."

"But how does that explain, say, San Francisco, or even some of our local homosexual politicians? Poverty was not a factor there. Could it be a mental imbalance which manifests itself into this social deviance? I know that it is no longer classified in medical literature as such, but in the end, what is it that is the main causal factor?"

"Medical science is still struggling with that. The fact is, people for whatever reasons make a choice at some stage of their lives that they want to express their sexuality in a particular way. If they want to do so, it is their right."

Whether it is triggered at birth or later by some hormonal imbalance, or it is strictly choice, the fact is it is here. Our "friends" in the powerful US and EU countries have fully embraced the right of their people to adopt the lifestyle, and thinking of us as savages, they believe that the time is right, considering how parlous our economic state is, to ram home their culture on us.

It cannot be as simple as that. While I would agree that our law on buggery is an ass, the US and the EU must recognise that culture changes do not occur in a flash, by fiat or by money coercion. To me, if two men want to get it on in the privacy of their bedrooms, it is up to them. All I would ask in return is that they keep it where it belongs - in private.

Many Jamaicans are of the view that what these latter-day foreign "invaders" with their money bags are doing is forcing on us a process which may begin with a repeal of the buggery law but may end up with Jamaica endorsing gay marriage. After that, what is likely to follow would be the sick scenario of gays in such a union adopting children!

This is by no means a perfect world and Jamaica has never been anywhere near independent. In the mid-1990s a snotty American teenager named Michael Fay visited Singapore. While there he decided one late evening to spread his US-learned nastiness by using a can of spray paint to despoil dozens of cars. He was held and sentenced to receive six lashes of the bamboo cane.

Even the then US President Bill Clinton intervened. In the end, Singapore did not cave in, but compromised and applied four strokes of the cane to the young man. Singapore was able to do so because it did not have its hands out begging anyone.

We are in no such position so we will always be forced to bend over and accept what is coming.

observemark@gmail.com

August 18, 2011

jamaicaobserver

Bahamas Blog International

What is 'The Help?' A Caribbean perspective

By Rebecca Theodore


It is a fantasy of a post racial America narrated in the voice of a black person by a white woman. It is a story of African American maids in Jackson, Mississippi during the 1950s and 1960s. It is a time and place when black women helped raise white babies, and yet could not use the same bathroom as their white employers.

Set in the Deep South, ‘The Help’ portrays African-American women in subjugated roles and relies on tired stereotypes of black men. ‘The Help’ misrepresents African American speech and culture and omits civil rights activism.

‘The Help’ calls up memories for many affluent whites of being nurtured and cared for by black women, who might have been more like mothers to them than their own white birth mothers.

It is in ‘The Help’ that novelist Kathryn Stockett opens up old racial wounds and presents a deluded picture of hope for black people, who are still considered to be subhuman by mainstream white America.

And I am not amused.

I am not amused because Stockett has maligned the lines between black and white women in America and the Caribbean and it is not impolite of me to write about it. I did not experience slavery or the ravages of the civil rights movement but I am the offspring of slaves who left the same African port but anchored on a different shore, therefore I have the right to speak for I have no fear of being heard.

I do not speak African American vernacular English because I was born on a Caribbean island called Dominica, where vestiges of slavery still decorate the landscape. I was taught the perils of slavery by West Indian historian, Dr Eric Williams in the ‘Making of the West Indies’ and ‘Capitalism and Slavery.’

And I am disturbed.

I am disturbed because Ms Stockett has crossed a terrible line, writing in the voice of a black person. I speak a different accent and I do not understand that voice. The ‘infantilization’ of black women in ‘The Help’ also includes me and my Caribbean sisters everywhere, for we know what it is like to be told in America, “You have a different accent.”

Ms Stockett, Caribbean women may not have raised white babies to be racist like you but there are many Caribbean domestic workers living in the South. The brutal rapes and sexual harassment that they experience behind the iron gates and closed doors of white employers never make the headlines because they are denied the right to organize and bargain collectively.

Domestic workers are excluded from the National Labor Relations Act. They have little recourse to challenge abusive behavior and no union protection. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act bans sexual harassment in the workplace, but domestic workers do not enjoy this privilege because the private space of a home, behind closed doors or iron gates does not constitute a workplace.

Reports from the United Nations entity for gender equality and the empowerment of women concludes that half of all foreign domestic women workers in the South report that they are victims of verbal and physical abuse and rape.

Yes, Ms Stockett, their hushed violence continues in silence while you profit as the hero.

You have used racism as a means to engender white solipsism by allowing white women the power to make it seem that their experiences are wholly representative of all women’s experiences, thus resulting in misinterpreted myths and the advancement of your history by exploitation and greed.

And I am angry.

I am angry because you have made slavery appear as a convenient formula for others to follow. You have used racism as stigmata for entertainment and have belittled the experiences of domestic workers in America and the Caribbean.

But I’ll forever be a confident black woman.

I will be a confident black woman because I know my history and I have powerful black role models as my guide. You have used the dependable voices of Abilene, Minnie and Skeeter to further deify systematic racism in America.

But at the end, you still needed black women to tell your story. At the bitter end, Ms Stockett, you still need black women as your guide.

August 17, 2011

caribbeannewsnow

Bahamas Blog International

Deconstructing the demise of prime ministerial nominees by the Haitian senate

By Jean H. Charles



The Haitian Senate has recently rejected Bernard H. Gousse as the next prime minister of Haiti. It is the second time the Senate as well as the House of Representatives have shot down nominees sent by the new president of Haiti, Michel Joseph Martelly, to form a new government.

The first nominee, Gerard Rouzier, was dismissed on the grounds of allegiance to a foreign country. Gerard Rouzier was the honorary Consul for Jamaica in Haiti.

The true reason was Mr Rouzier was a mulatto. The old political clan that still controls the Senate practices the political exclusion against the mulattoes from occupying high executive position in the government such as president or prime minister. The decibel level of racial insults has been elevated so high that the term “affranchis” has been affixed in the open debate onto a senator by another senator because of the light skin color of his epidermis.

Bernard Gousse did not get the nod on the spurious grounds that he did not receive a discharge from his old function as a former justice minister. He was discharged through a governmental decree used before to approve Jacques Edouard Alexis another prime minister.

Bernard Gousse was a no nonsense justice minister under the Latortue government. He pursued with diligence and with a firm hand, conspirators of the Lavalas regime bent on creating mayhem and violence under the logo Operation Bagdad in the country after the forced departure of their leader Jean Bertrand Aristide in 2004.

Under the guidance of Aristide nemesis, Rene Preval, who ruled Haiti during the last eight years, those conspirators are now Senators of the Republic. They vowed to give Bernard Gousse his marching orders. He was dismissed in spite of the fact that all his documentation was in order. He could not even get to the stage of the normal constitutional process of presenting his political vision that could serve as the true template for decision making.

In his letter of departure, Bernard Gousse told his detractors from the GPR senatorial political platform that GPR -- the platform used by the clan Lavalas Lespwa -- will mean: Gousse Pi Red meaning Gousse will be there for the long haul!

This is the battle raging now in the country. Will the old clan that promised to remain in power for forty years (they have already concluded twenty years: 1991- 2011) continue to rule Haiti?

Using the lowest standard of evaluation, the Lavalas cum Lespwe cum Unity has failed Haiti miserably during the last twenty years. It is engaging today into a macabre dance of survival to continue the culture of corruption, complete disregard of the needs of the Haitian population and the misappropriation of the international cooperation resources under the guise of government.

The Martelly regime, elected in a plebiscite under the motto of change, is inflexible. His prime minister and his government must reflect the change brought about by the Haitian people.

Some twenty years ago, the Haitian president Jean Bertrand Aristide, who is the long hand behind the recalcitrant senators, defied the president of the Haitian Senate Eudrice Raymond to name his prime minister Rene Preval without consulting the president of the Senate as per the terms of the constitution.

On the day of the inauguration, on February 7, 1991, I had to restrain with both hands the president of the Senate, who was ready to fight physically with the newly elected president. I should have let the fight go on. Haiti would have saved the last twenty years of mayhem and misrule!

The fight to bring about a prime minister and a cabinet at the behest of the old regime is at the crux of the matter. The senators willing to facilitate the advent of the new order have forced a philosophical debate on the concept of nation building in Haiti. Should Haiti continue to be a pariah state in the midst of an avalanche of international cooperation?

The debate did not take place; on the strength of their numbers (16 vs. 14) the GPR senators defeated the motion to lay the nomination of Bernard Gousse on the table.

The OAS facilitated the will of the people of Haiti in forcing the withdrawal of Jude Celestin, the candidate of the old regime. This same OAS let in place the senators and the assemblymen selected by and forced upon the electorate through corruption and violence by the Preval regime. Was it by naiveté or by design?

The fact is three months after the inauguration of the new president they have succeeded in blocking the formation of a new government. The Haitian case need not arrive at the Somali situation for an opportune position. Good governance is at the root of all sustainable solutions for Haiti.

Helping Haiti to usher into the path of good governance will solve the drug transshipment business, the illegal immigration and the environmental degradation endemic to the country.

Haiti waited twenty years until the advent of a caring president; contrary to the Miami Herald’s editorial opinion, Martelly should take the time necessary to build a government willing to break away with the culture of corruption, the culture of predatory governance!

The resilient and gallant people of Haiti deserve a government at the scale of its mighty mission of freedom ring, torch bearers in this world!

August 16, 2011

caribbeannewsnow

Bahamas Blog International

London Riots: a cry of despair?

By DIANE ABBOTT






WHEN I saw buildings on fire in neighbouring Tottenham and rioters on the street late last Saturday evening, I knew that it was only a matter of time before the disorder spread to Hackney. Tottenham is less than a mile from my home in Hackney. The two communities have the same ethnic mix, the same poverty lines and the same history of poor relationships between the community and the police. Less than 48 hours later Hackney youths were looting shops in broad daylight.

Jamaica has seen riots in the past. They are also often a feature of politics in Africa and the Caribbean. However, Britain has seen nothing like the riots that occurred in the last week. They were more widespread and involved more communities than any before. In a matter of days they had spread from inner-city communities in Hackney and Tottenham in London to as far afield as Manchester.

Some people have argued that they were very different from the riots in the 1980s in Tottenham, Brixton and Toxteth, but I would argue that the similarities outweigh the differences. Similar to those in the eighties, the background to the riots was a poisoned relationship between the community and the police, and the spark that lit raging riots was the fact that the community believed a black person had died at the hands of the police. Other similarities include: the riots spread from the black community to the wider white community where youths had similar grievances; all types of hooligans and criminal elements got involved; and political elites resolutely refuse to believe that there are any underlying political issues at all.

The rioters are universally condemned as criminals. It is true that most of them were thieves, opportunists and "recreational" looters. However, just because the individuals involved did not have political motives that they could articulate does not mean that political issues do not underlie the disorder.

It is too simplistic to argue that government cuts caused the riots. Cuts do not turn you into a thief. But government policies have been very disillusioning for the youth. Educational allowances, that many of them relied on to stay in school, are being scrapped. University fees have been tripled, effectively putting higher education out of the reach of the youth. These policies have been a slap in the face for aspiring young people in the inner city. The government is planning big cuts in government, but the majority of people who work in communities like Hackney, work for the government. These are communities without hope, and young people are becoming more bitterly alienated than ever. And, as I pointed out in Parliament this week, we are looking at the third generation of black boys who have been failed by the British educational system.

The most pressing need is for the government to regain control of the streets. When the current crisis is over, we all need to try to understand what the dispossessed of the inner city were trying to tell us.


August 14, 2011

jamaicaobserver

Bahamas Blog International

President Obama: Between a "Barack" and a hard place

By RAULSTON NEMBHARD





President Obama inherited an economy that was already in free fall as a result of the worst global economic crisis since the Great Depression. He also inherited a country that was at war on two fronts: Afghanistan and Iraq. The sad thing about these two wars is that they were not paid for by the previous administration. As if this were not enough, the wars were being fought at a time when a massive tax cut was given to the richest people in the country. No sacrifice was demanded of the citizens to foot the bill for these wars; all the government had to do was run an already high deficit, even though the revenue stream from the richest was significantly cauterised. To add to all of this, significant checks and balances that were required to prevent the financial meltdown on Wall Street were not in place when toxic mortgage securities were allowed to "poison" the financial system. To save banks that were too big to fail, billions of dollars had to be spent, again running up an already horrendous deficit. The new president had no choice but to institute a stimulus programme which itself added to the deficit burden of the country.

This brief historical perspective tells the lie to many of the president's detractors that what we are seeing in the aftermath of the debt ceiling debate and the Standard and Poor's downgrade are all the president's fault. What we saw in Washington recently is not only how dysfunctional government can become, but the extent to which politicians are prepared to play reckless games with the country's future in the pursuit of their own narrow-minded ideological positions. This is a dangerous trend which merited an evaluation (not necessarily a downgrade) by those who are professionally designated to offer an opinion on these matters. What was shocking was the willingness of people who swear to defend the health of the country to throw it over the cliff if their agendas were not met.

In order to preserve their agenda and the ideological purity which underlines it, and in order to ensure that the president is a one-term president, as is the avowed wish of many of his detractors, no effort is being spared to ensure that the president's agenda fails. For example, in the recent debt-ceiling fiasco, nothing was said about the need to create jobs or to reinvigorate the economy. These are things that will have to happen if the president is to have any chance at being re-elected. His opponents know this and they are not prepared to lend a helping hand in the president's second-term effort. As part of this effort Republican members of the Senate have used Senate rules to block the passage of important legislation or the appointment of high level government officials. For example, a number of senior positions at the Treasury Department are yet to be filled. The filibuster rule is used routinely to delay and frustrate the passage of key legislations. In 2009 alone, senate Republicans filibustered close to 80 per cent of major legislations.

In recent times, the House of Representatives has become more hardened, dogmatic and more dysfunctional than the deliberative Senate. It has become particularly so since the ascendancy of the Tea Party mavericks in 2010. Under the guise of a commitment to fiscal prudence, small government and no new taxes, they have imposed their ideological positions on the Republican Party to the extent that the mainstream of that party seems impotent to cast them off. Not only are they committed to the president's failure as Michelle Bachman, one of their leading spokespersons has stated repeatedly, but their rhetoric on the ground does not remotely resemble anything that can move the country forward in the short term.

Are these the kind of people with whom the president, and even the country, can do business? Can the principle of compromise to which the president seems solidly committed work with people whose ideology is cast in wrought iron even when it can do serious harm to the country? As a constitutional scholar, the president knows and accepts the importance of the principle of compromise in light of how the federal constitution and the republican form of government work. Unlike the parliamentary system of government where a prime minister is both chief executive and chief legislator, the president of the United States does not have the privilege to pass laws; he can only sign bills into law. He can urge and influence his party to pass legislation in line with his wishes, but this is as far as he can go. He is heavily dependent on the other arms of government to get anything done, hence the need to compromise.

This often places a president between the proverbial rock and a hard place. In an effort to compromise, how much of one's core principles must be given up to gain consensus on a policy? As President Obama grows weary of vitriolic and partisan debate, how much patience can he exhibit when deep down he knows that the country can be hurt by the intransigence from the other side of the political fence? To dig himself out from between that wedge of the rock and the hard place, he has to become more assertive and smart in playing the cards that are being dealt to him. Compromise is good, but there is a limit even to this hallowed principle especially when your core values and those of your constituents are being called into serious question. In the end, the people in a republican democracy are the final arbiters of the way forward. It behoves a president - this president - to trust them more, to be open and more transparent with them. They will reward you if they are convinced that you are at least trying.

stead6655@aol.com
www.drraulston.com

August 13, 2011

jamaicaobserver

Bahamas Blog International

Community policing in The Bahamas and wider Caribbean Region

The importance of community policing

thenassauguardian editorial

Nassau, The Bahamas



An important aspect in any crime fighting strategy is the involvement of the community.

That’s why we were pleased to learn that The Bahamas is this week, hosting a regional community policing conference aimed at strengthening existing programs.

Crime and the fear of crime is a growing concern in our country. Our murder count is at 87, just seven off last year’s record murder count of 94.

By the end of this year it will most certainly be our fourth murder record year in five years.

Residents of communities often know who the troublemakers are, and they often know who is committing the crimes in their communities.

That’s where community policing comes in.

It fosters positive and constructive relationships with communities that can help police solve crimes.

It also helps forge ties where they are most critical — with the youth, which plays an important role in bringing a halt to the vicious cycle of crime and criminality.

And for the Caribbean, according to conference moderator and community security specialist, Bertrand Laurent, it is becoming more and more important for police to improve relationships with young residents.

“There is a rapidly increasing youth population throughout the countries in the Caribbean, and along with that increase has come an increase in different kinds of issues having to do with youth,” he said.

Community policing has been cited as one reason for a decline in crime rates in some cities across the United States.

Research has shown that police departments that have adopted the community policing model have been able to engage communities in comprehensive, collaborative, community-based problem solving aimed at crime, fear of crime and disorder. The pairing of police and community brings together the power of the formal criminal justice system with the informal social control that communities can exert.

Positive results have also been seen when police forge new partnerships with other professional and civic institutions — non-profit groups, the business community, schools and religious organizations, etc.

These can allow for the development of long-term, broad-based interventions that address conditions that allow chronic problems to persist. But community policing is more than having officers do routine community walkabouts in hotspot areas, or having an officer walk a beat as a visible deterrent to crime.

Sustainable solutions must be developed.

These solutions should be dedicated to having a better understanding of community issues, problem solving to meet the real needs of the community, promoting increased levels of involvement by supporting local residents’ issues and having increased visibility in those communities plagued by crime.

Officials expect to leave the conference, which ends today, with examples of best practices in the region and with better insight on what works and doesn’t work for different island populations. Often times conferences end with a communique that collects dust on a shelf in some office.

Let’s waste no time in putting these best practices to work, and develop our own solutions tailored to meet our specific needs and environment.

Aug 11, 2011

thenassauguardian editorial

Bahamas Blog International

London's lesson on urban poverty

By Dennie Quill, Gleaner Columnist:



A peaceful vigil for a black man killed by a police bullet that turned into fiery protests in London has held the attention of the world over the last couple of days. Scenes of looters plundering businesses and homes in broad daylight projected an ugly image not unlike what we have become accustomed to seeing being beamed from impoverished Third World countries.

But this is London, a lavish city which sets the trend in fashion and luxury living. Poverty is the last thing an outsider would likely conjure up when thinking about London.

But this is not the first time this modern city has erupted in violence, and invariably the troubles have involved the police and disgruntled youth caught in poverty and a jobless cycle. Railing against the police and the political status quo is a regular feature of these uprisings. Rioters accuse the police and politicians of ignoring their plight and treating them unfairly. And this time, we have to factor the powerful influence of the Internet in rallying support for the protest.

In reality, London is no different from New York or Santiago or Kingston, where there is a hazy mosaic of wealth and poverty existing side by side.

And as the ranks of the urban poor swell, amid a stubborn global economic crisis, improving these communities must be a political priority for every government.

The question that must be exercising the minds of many policymakers is: how can governments, strangled by debt payments and experiencing declining earnings and no growth, fulfil their social obligations to the citizens of their countries.

Take Jamaica with its estimated one million squatters. These squatter communities have developed along the edge of townships and they spawn various challenges to national security, health and sanitation. A visitor to any of these poor communities will immediately be met with a litany of complaints highlighting their plight - poor housing, unemployment, bad roads and water woes are some of the common grievances. In some cases, too, eviction is hanging over their heads.

Survival instincts

With limited skills and little education, people who find themselves in poor communities will do what they have to do to survive. Invariably, they end up in the informal sector, where they will hustle, and this may mean stealing, extorting, peddling drugs or vending illegally. These activities inevitably bring many of the urban poor into direct conflict with the authorities. The result is evictions and arrests. And the common questions they ask are: "Ah wha wi a go do now?" and "Ah how wi ah go sen wi pickney go a school?"

Our social scientists and our private-sector thinkers should recognise that discontent is simmering all around us, and we ignore this situation to our peril. Initiatives to change the circumstances of the urban poor will benefit the entire country.

What kinds of public-private sector partnerships can we develop to alleviate the stress of these communities? Can Grants Pen become the model for other areas?

Today, it is London that's ablaze, but we don't know where in the world the news cameras will take us tomorrow.

Dennie Quill is a veteran journalist. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and denniequill@hotmail.com.

August 10, 2011

jamaica-gleaner

Bahamas Blog International