The UNIBAM Case Has Its First Day In Court …….. leader confronted

Source: 7 News Belize

UNIBAM’s (United Belize Advocacy Movement) challenge to the constitutionality of section 53 of the criminal code has set off Belize’s first culture war – with the Church on one side and Caleb Orozco and his supporters on the other.

They’re trying to have Belize’s buggery laws taken off the books – while the Churches are fighting to uphold God’s law.

And while there has been passionate public debate and protest, the battle hasn’t even really started. The case went to court today for the very first time – and as might have been expected, the power of prayer was brought to harness.

But while that happened outside, inside the courtroom of Justice Michelle Arana, the attorneys for the Churches, Michel Chebat, Rodwell Williams and Jackie Marshalleck – as interested parties – argued that UNIBAM had no standing to bring the case, because as an organization it has no constitutionally guaranteed rights. Additionally, they argued that their experts had not been properly brought before the courts.

For its part, the UNIBAM attorney Lisa Shoman and Simeon Sampson argued that the Churches – as only an interested party – had taken over the right of the real respondents in the case which is the Government of Belize. A point which was later contradicted by the Attorney General’s Ministry represented by Nigel Hawke.

Arguments took all day to be heard – but the monochrome hearing of all these technical preliminary matters was coloured by the Christian observers who – though few in number – had a strong presence.

Here’s our report:..

Pastor Scott Stirm, Jubilee Ministries, Belmopan
“So Lord we receive your strength today; we receive your legal strength. Lord we pray for Michel Chebat. We pray for Rodwell Williams. We pray for Jackie Marshalleck, Lord God.”

Jules Vasquez reporting
There was powerful prayer this morning in the open air and the shadow of the Supreme Court building.

A circle formed which seemed to marry prayer and protest, or prayerful protest and singing as well as they processed past the courthouse.

From there the prayer circle moved in front of the courtroom where an intense small circle gathered.

And on the other side of the courthouse, patriotism, prayer and protest mingled in a chorus of voices; here they read bibles not lawbooks.

Upstairs near the courtroom they also had a prayerful presence, while the lawyers and activists milled about, eventually leaving for an early adjournment due to blackout.

But arguments resumed in the afternoon, and went on until 4:40 pm – with the judge reserving judgment until a later date. It’s only a preliminary skirmish but both sides would only express only measured optimism.

Jules Vasquez
“You think UINBAM will survive as an applicant withstanding?”

Lisa Shoman, SC Co-counsel, UNIBAM
“It really matters not whether UNIBAM survives as an applicant. This case will go on. I rather suspect that it at this point almost doesn’t matter how the judge rules. There may very well be an appeal in either case. Suffice it to say that the claimants really want to get the case heard, and it is no part on the intention of the claimants to have the matter drag on and on. He’d like to get the matter before the courts. There are several options that we have open, and we will look at them when that arises because – as you can appreciate – there is no way to tell, and I don’t like guessing as to how the judge will rule.”

Jules Vasquez
“However, do you expect that eventually your experts will be accepted?”

Lisa Shoman
“I expect so, one way or another, yes.”

Jules Vasquez
“What is the prospect for an early hearing of this matter?”

Lisa Shoman
“I would hope very good. It really will depend on the court, and they’ve had quite a bit of argument and material placed before them. But I know that the courts are quite aware that this is an issue which needs to hear with some rectitude, so I am not concerned about that. I am sure it will be heard as quickly as possible.”

Jules Vasquez
“Simeon, you’ve been at this court for years. I don’t think you’ve even attended a court hearing where there has been singing and praying in and around the courtroom.”

Simeon Sampson, SC, Co-Counsel Churches
“Well I know that you assume that, but you are only associated with criminal matters. This is an intellectual exercise; it’s a human rights issue. I’ve been involved with human rights issues in Belize for 20 or so years. When I get involved I always try to ensure success. It only just began; we have a long way to go.”

Rodwell Williams, SC Co-counsel, Churches
“Our application was that that organization had no standing and we believe we have made reasonable arguments to support that request that it be struck, and that certain affidavits that are effective were given. And contrary to the rules without the leave of the court, and so on, and that those also should be struck. And I feel reasonably confident about the applications and the prospect of success. Of course, litigation has it risks, but we believe that as interested parties we have standing to bring that application – as you would readily appreciate. Interested parties have appealed decisions of this court all the way up to the Privy Council. There is no good reason to say that interested party because you are so call interested party you can make substantive application.”

Jules Vasquez
“Are you all trying to have this matter thrown out on preliminary technical matters?”

Rodwell Williams
“The application is only against UNIBAM. So if UNIBAM goes the matter is still extant.”

Jules Vasquez
“Do you think it’s a matter from your experience that will be heard expeditiously or will it be sometime before we get to the actual substance of the case?”

Rodwell Williams
“What matter will be heard?”

Jules Vasquez
“The substantive matter of the constitutionality?”

Rodwell Williams
“I suspect that that is some date in the future. How? I don’t know. You’ve heard the judge said that she will return a ruling as soon as she has one and then we go from there.”

As we noted in the story, Justice Michelle Arana has reserved Judgment which will be delivered at a date to be announced.

UPDATE Feb 12, 2011

Caleb Orozco, 38, the leader of the UNIBAM, the movement which has brought a constitutional challenge in the Supreme Court to decriminalize unnatural sex acts under Belizean law, was attacked on Wednesday evening, February 8.

according to the Belize Reporter

Orozco said an unidentified assailant threw a brown beer bottle at his face, while he was on Prince Street between George and West Streets between 4:30-5:50 p.m.

He told The Reporter he had walked from Basra Street towards St Ignatius School and turned onto Euphrates Avenue when he heard someone behind him say: “tell dem bally no walk pahn my street.”

He then turned right into Dean Street when he observed two men stalking him from a distance as he walked toward the Dean Street Police substation at the corner with West Street.

He said he had turned into Prince Street and had turned to see if he was still being followed when the bottle hit him on his right jaw. The bottle did not break on impact but shattered when it hit the ground, so Caleb said he could not say for sure what brand of beer it was.

He was stunned but did not fall to the ground and continued walking away from his assailants who did not pursue him further.

He consulted with his attorney, Lisa Shoman, who is representing UNIBAM in the Supreme Court, but she counselled him that reporting the assault to the police might prove a waste of time.

When Love TV’s Patrick Jones interviewed him, Orozco said he pointed out his assailant to Jones, who convinced him to make a report so the attack could be on record. Caleb said he went to the Dean St. substation and informed the officer on duty that he had been attacked and that his assailant was still just up the street, but the officer refused to leave his post to investigate, but took down his statement

Orozco was treated  for his injury at the Karl Heusner Memorial Hospital by Dr. Gonzalez, who certified his injury on the medico-legal form provided by the police. He said he left the hospital around 9:30 p.m. and went home to recover.

Orozco said the attack was but a small incident in the growing tide of homo-phobic violence which is sweeping the country, and he cited a litany of murders of men who had openly expressed their sexual orientation or who were believed to be homosexuals, and the numbers are indeed alarming

Advertisements

US Pastor Urges Church to Open its Arms to Gays Seeking Asylum

Tim Lucas of the Liquid Church

 Stoyan Zaimov

As the same-sex marriage debate intensifies among states grappling with its legalization, gays from foreign countries are turning to the U.S. for help in escaping from – oftentimes – severe cases of persecution. Such a trend opens the door for the Christian community to help those for whom Christ also died, according to one pastor.

In many places around the world where Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) people are not accepted in society, they face various hardships and threats, such as imprisonment, beatings, forced marriages, and even death. Back in March 2011, President Barack Obama reaffirmed his support of a United Nations declaration signed by the U.S. and 85 other countries calling for an end to violence and persecution against LGBT people worldwide.

“We will continue to promote human rights around the world for all people who are marginalized and discriminated against because of sexual orientation or gender identity,” said State Department Secretary Hillary Clinton. “And we will not rest until every man, woman and child is able to live up to his or her potential free from persecution or discrimination of any kind.”

On Tuesday, the U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services issued new guidelines for how LGBT immigrants coming to the U.S. seeking asylum should be treated. The guidelines address not only the legal issues when it comes to interviewing LGBT people, but also how to approach questions about possible sexual abuse they may have suffered.

“This guidance will give officers the tools they need to gather the necessary evidence for validating an asylum claim, while respecting the often sensitive issues that potential asylees must navigate based on their past persecution,” said Immigration Equality’s legal director Victoria Nelson in astatement. The organization deals with equality issues for LGBT people trying to emigrate to the U.S.

There are about 250 such cases of LGBT people seeking to come to the United State to escape persecution each year, according to Steve Ralls, a spokesman for Immigration Equality. Although LGBT people get persecuted all over the world, especially in the Middle East, many of those that come to America seeking asylum are from Jamaica – as those who live farther away find it more difficult to make the trip and escape to the States.

Homophobia is especially prevalent in Jamaica, a 2011 study on the attitude and perceptions of Jamaicans toward same-sex relationships revealed, in which 85.2 percent of respondents said that they did not think homosexuality among consenting adults should be legal.

Nelson confirmed in an email to The Christian Post that the highest number of LGBT asylum seekers come from English-speaking Caribbean countries and especially Jamaica, where many LGBT people face horrific violence and even death.

In the U.S., LGBT people experience protection from many of the hardships they have fled from in their former countries – and a U.S. pastor says that now is the time for churches in America to show that despite the widespread opposition to gay marriage, they are true to their claims that they still love and want to protect the individual.

Evangelical Christians hold to the biblical view that homosexuality is sin, and that God enables believers to overcome sin.

“This is an opportunity for the Evangelical Church in America to stand up and actually open their arms to offer protection and grace to the LGBT refugees from other countries,” pastor Tim Lucas of Liquid Church in New Jersey told CP.

“In Africa right now there is a homophobia that has turned very violent and is the antithesis of what Jesus Christ came to do, which is to reconcile all men to God.”

“Specifically, the American church in general has had a sad history of judgment toward the gay community and I think this is actually a wonderful opportunity to begin reversing that public perception,” Pastor Lucas urged.

 

The Caribbean Men’s Internet Survey is underway

PRESS RELEASE

The Caribbean Men’s Internet Survey is underway

16 January, 2012 A groundbreaking anonymous online study of the lives of men who have sex with men (MSM) in the English, French, Spanish and Dutch-speaking Caribbean is underway now. CARIMIS, the Caribbean Men’s Internet Survey (available at http://www.carimis.org) aims to learn more about this group while for the first time testing the potential of the internet to conduct research with key populations in the region. The initiative is led by the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) Caribbean Regional Support Team (RST) and involves several individuals, non-governmental organisations and partner agencies throughout the region.

UNAIDS Caribbean RST Director, Dr. Ernest Massiah, explained that the approach presents exciting possibilities for responding more meaningfully to the realities of MSM.

“Almost everybody’s online,” he said. “That’s where people are and that’s where the survey needs to be. It’s the most modern, effective way to connect with communities to find out more about their experiences and their needs. Good data provides the evidence that allows countries to make good decisions about their HIV response.”

Article 29 of the 2011 Political Declaration on HIV/AIDS notes that many national HIV prevention strategies inadequately focus on populations that evidence shows are at higher risk. In June governments committed to identifying the specific populations that are key to their epidemic and response, “based on the epidemiological and national context”. CARIMIS will contribute to this goal by offering new insight into the realities of Caribbean MSM communities at country-level, including respondents’ behavioural risks and their access to HIV prevention, testing, treatment and care.

Participants in pilot tests done in the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago revealed that they responded to questions about their sexual behaviour during the survey that they would not answer in face to face interviews.  Importantly, the approach will reach across boundaries of class, race, socio-economic status and professed sexual identity as anyone with 15 minutes of internet access can participate anonymously.

“Studies among MSM have been conducted in the larger Caribbean countries using traditional sampling methods. While these methods have been useful they have always excluded sub-groups within the MSM community who cannot be reached through public venues or network systems. The internet holds the potential to reach a wider spectrum of MSM and could in the future be used to connect with other hard-to-reach groups,” explained Research Associate, Sylette Henry-Buckmire.

In the Caribbean HIV prevalence among MSM is estimated to range from 0.71 percent in Cuba to 32 percent in Jamaica. The average adult HIV prevalence for the region as a whole is one percent.

The survey is available on www.carimis.org It is targeted toward people who are 18 years or older, were born male and either are attracted to men, have sex with men or think they might do so in the future. Eligible participants must provide informed consent online before completing the survey. No information will be collected that would identify respondents. The website includes links to local referral services for those who require emotional or medical support. CARIMIS has been approved by the Ethics Committee of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM). The website and its supporting technology underwent a rigorous certification and accreditation process to assure security.

Contact

UNAIDS Caribbean| Cedriann Martin | tel. +868 623-7056 ext. 283 | martinc@unaids.org

UNAIDS

UNAIDS, the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS, is an innovative United Nations partnership that leads and inspires the world in achieving universal access to HIV prevention, treatment, care and support. Learn more at unaids.org.

 

 

 

Another geographic change blow dealt to the cruising community

Cruising is nothing new. It’s been going on for hundreds of years, and its history is a part of the history of our cities and public spaces. As cities grew and populations became more anonymous, new opportunities for chance encounters arose, for straight and queer people alike, and the figure of the stranger took on an erotic allure. Parks have always been places where strangers meet for overlapping and divergent reasons. By day, children play, families picnic, tourists take respite, neighbours walk their dogs, joggers jog. By night, teenagers hop fences to snog, hookers and rent boys ply their trade, lovers admire the moon, addicts shoot up, and gay men fuck, jerk and suck

These encounters are embedded in our cultural history. Thanks to Mark Turner for reminding us of that, it’s a worldwide phenomenon.

So valued are these outdoor spaces and the need for pleasure that the slightest adjustment, aesthetically or otherwise shakes up the mind of the experienced cruiser, imagine my surprise when I got a frantic call from a member of that active community expressing shock, some outrage and near rage that his stomping ground has been bulldozed, the cruising community in 2010 had a tumultuous year with spot after spot being literally changed or totally annihilated right before their eyes with some fallout in the process some of which I dare say look rather psychologically troubling as persons seem to just be lost or in some sort of shock knowing they cannot act out their fetishes or desires in these former active open year concealed to the public spaces. The death of one of their members also sent shock waves for months as many of the men refused from visiting the areas namely in West Kingston and onwards. Multiple near misses by inexperienced newcomers were also a cause for concern for some of the more elder statesmen.

see:  Some cruising challenges ………. and The Cruising community’s dilemma ….. also:  Outdoor sex and the issues to being caught and: Cruising community challenges continue …………

Of course as the previous administration, the JLP were the representatives for that area it was not surprising to see infrastructure development taking place after decades of neglect. It is safe to name the spots now seeing they are now defunct, the old railway station and its environs was one spot for decades used by generations of cruisers young and old alike, thugs and effeminates alike, gay and bi-curious alike including gay for pay or trade members as well. These members are not exposed to the rest of the LGBT community and subsequent advocacies that exist and most are not keen to come forward to present their grouses except to persons they feel won’t humiliate them due to their tastes in sexual contact outdoors preferably.

The frantic caller this morning was a long time friend and he insisted I came to Kingston for him to show me the new look of the wooded area now turned a backhoe and dumper truck parking spot as renovations continue in that part of town by the Kingston and St Andrew Corporation, KSAC and with the former active mayor of Kingston Desmond McKenzie crossing over to representational politics and winning the sure JLP seat in the constituency there is bound to be far more adjustments to the area knowing his style. We met in Kingston early this morning along with another younger thug he introduced me to, he again expressed his frustrations of the missing spot as he did on the phone prior to my arrival. We walked to the section leisurely and as was told to me the spot was indeed gone but the reaction of the gentleman is still puzzling to me, it’s a public space, there is bound to be changes in the long run so why this attachment to it along with the need for cruising in that specific area could affect someone so much? There must be an explanation for this. The other spots across town have also been disappearing fast and with no serious LGBT spots available with dark rooms etc for this kind of intense sexual release what are cruisers both active or secretive ones to do?

When the thug friend of the troubled cruiser suggested renting an overnight room for pleasure he expressed the refusal of many of the cheaper priced motels do not allow same sexed guests so easily these days and the more affluent hotels who do not question guest’s gender before booking are too expensive, typical four star Kingston hotel room is at $8000/night average he also made a very important acknowledgement to the whole world of cruising where he said it takes away from the thrill when one rents a room for sex, there is no excitement knowing you may be caught but gets away with it anyway.

There has been an ongoing discussion with some influentials to provide some more sexually charged entertainment to offset some of the wants of some of these brothers whether they will absorb these proposed offerings is another matter seeing that the erotic elements maybe missing and that thrill factor our brother alluded to, plus they may not have the money in all cases to pay the admission fees.

Repeating a section of a previous post – Some sort of intervention is needed I feel but if we can’t even get any honest moves to deal with issues directly infront of our eyes especially with the least amongst us that being the homeless msms then how are we going to deal with a population that is for the most part clandestine even to the rest of the LGBT community’s eyes. My few interactions with these men has also revealed that these aren’t the typically profiled brothers but are men who sometimes are bisexual or have the occasional female partner or that male from the lower economic strata who uses the Kingston proper region to earn a living near the market district but are same gender loving or willing to practice some sort of sexual contact with other men. Stealth is a crucial tool in this game as these brothers are mostly very masculine and it may not be known how they are in their natural state in a few instances.

Keep a cruising carefully brothers.

Peace and tolerance

H

Victimless Crime (Peter Espeut)

by Peter Espeut

In a letter published in The Gleaner of December 29, 2011, Neville Duncan puts forward the moral justification for homosexuality, promiscuity, sadomasochism, drug addiction, suicide, and much more.

He writes: “Each individual has the basic right to do anything with her/his life that s/he chooses, including damaging oneself by using alcohol and drugs, just as s/he has the right to damage oneself with sugar, tobacco, religion, promiscuous sex, mysticism, suicide, etc., so long as s/he does not initiate threats, force or fraud against any other individual.

“… No sexual act between consenting adults can objectively be illegal, even if the acts are physically or psychologically harmful to the consenting individuals (such as injurious homosexuality, masochism, sadism, etc.).”

In philosophy, someone who supports this position is called a libertarian because s/he believes that the inherent freedom of individuals is to be interpreted in a particular way.

Duncan continues: “Let it be clear that the core battle is not merely for women’s rights, minority rights, rights of the elderly, rights of children, rights of ‘gays’ – the battle is and always has been for individual rights. When individual rights are fully protected, then everyone’s rights are protected.”

Decriminalise them

Libertarians believe that all laws criminalising victimless offences should be removed from the books. Duncan asserts: “Let it be clearly understood that only acts of force, fraud or coercion that violate individual rights of non-consenting people can be objectively illegal. … A review of all our laws, including the law on buggery, using this principle of protecting the rights of individuals is imperative.”

Libertinism, which is gaining popularity in Jamaica, is illogical and self-contradictory. There are many angles from which this may be shown, but with limited space let me begin by looking at the basic principle of libertinism: “Each individual has the basic right to do anything with her/his life that s/he chooses, including damaging oneself.”

Under libertinism, there would be no illegal drugs, since people should be free to use ganja, cocaine, methamphetamines, or whatever they feel to use. Duncan says as much: “The State, in misguided Christian sanctimoniousness, in using force to prohibit drugs … is … morally wrong …”.

Would Duncan deny that the use of many psychotropic drugs leads to physical and mental deterioration? These ‘free’ persons would then clog up the hospitals, at great expense to the State and to the taxpayers, who would be compelled to treat them. Does this not restrict the freedom of others? Doesn’t the rest of society suffer when resources which could be used for the common good are diverted to treat drug addicts?

Would Duncan deny that many drug addicts turn to theft and robbery – often inflicting bodily harm in the process – to get money to buy more drugs? This increases societal insecurity and instability, and requires the State to expend more resources in crime fighting, and in the courts.

Libertarians make an artificial dichotomy between the individual and the group: allowing individuals the freedom to damage themselves does damage everyone in the group if the collective has to pick up the pieces. Duncan’s assertion that “when individual rights are fully protected, then everyone’s rights are protected” is platitudinous and false.

Where do we draw line?

Duncan himself supplies a second critique to libertinism. He writes: “Let it be clearly understood that only acts of force, fraud or coercion that violate individual rights of non-consenting people can be objectively illegal. Non-consenting people always include children, for they are unable to give valid or informed sexual consent because (1) they have gained neither knowledge nor experience to assume responsibilities for the physical and psychological consequences of sexual actions … .”

The principle applied here by libertarians is that persons who have “gained neither knowledge nor experience” cannot assume responsibility for the physical and psychological consequences of their actions; such persons must be prevented from taking actions which may have negative consequences upon themselves.

But why apply this only to children? There are people of all ages who have “gained neither knowledge nor experience” about all sorts of things, and hurt themselves and others in the process. Would libertarians make Ponzi schemes legal because people should be allowed to throw away their money if they wish?

In several parts of the world, libertarians fight against seat-belt and motorcycle-helmet laws because people should be free to take their own risks. Libertarians want people to be free to end their own lives (and presumably to seek help to do so) because it’s their life.

Libertines want the full legalisation of homosexuality, abortion, prostitution, gambling, drugs, public nudity, pornography, bestiality, blasphemy. Is this the kind of Jamaica we want?

Peter Espeut is a sociologist and Roman Catholic deacon. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com.

What About The Other Abominations? (Gleaner)

Jamaica Gleaner Company

 

by Garth Rattray

The social network lit up during the excitement generated by the results phase of the recent general election. What caught my interest, however, was that cyberspace was peppered with angry/distraught Jamaicans expressing their wish to run away to some foreign land because the leader of the People’s National Party (PNP) was sober and honest enough to express her willingness to allow parliamentarians – after consultation with their constituents – to engage in a conscience vote on the matter of the law against buggery.

I further understand that an indeterminate number of voters stayed away from the polls because, as preposterous as it is, they harboured unreasonable fears of a society dominated by homosexuals.

Portia Simpson Miller did not brusquely respond, “Not in my Cabinet!” She did not dodge and duck the question, nor did she perform a verbose pirouette. She earned my respect by speaking forthrightly, despite the knowledge that her response was certain to bring her major negative points in the all-important leadership debate. Some people have related to me that they feel certain that the PNP would have picked up more votes were it not for that reply.

Honesty despised?

In my opinion, the voters should be happy that a politician exhibited such bravery and honesty instead of giving a politically correct answer or an answer that would appease the voting public.

Whether we agree with her or not, this is precisely the sort of thing that we need and deserve from our politicians, the truth, no matter what the conse-quences. Yet when some of us see it, instead of encouraging it, we berate it.

The problem, therefore, lies not so much in the fact that Mrs Simpson Miller was upfront; the problem lies in the topic on which she was outspoken. Among many Jamaicans, the topic of sexuality consistently strikes an angry chord harmonised with righteous indignation.

This single biblically labelled ‘abomination’ elicits powerful emotions, while other, far more serious and socio-economically damaging ‘abominations’ only manage to elicit measured and restrained commentary.

Why aren’t we as passionate about ‘people who possess a lying tongue’? What about the ‘hands that shed innocent blood’? How is it that our hundreds of innocently slaughtered citizens every year only get the perfunctory condemnation from politicians, brief, curious/morbid attention and muted whispers throughout society?

Biased righteous indignation

Where is the fierce anger and fiery passion for their lives? Why doesn’t crime and murder elicit rage and holy denunciation from our religious society? Where is the hellfire warning for such acts? Why aren’t we advised to ask our political candidates if they have, or ever had, any direct or indirect interfacing or connections with criminal elements before casting our votes?

Aren’t we, therefore, being very selective in the biblical abominations we rise up against? People remarry former companions all the time and most churches condone it. Many people commit adultery every day, yet there is no moralistic hue and cry from society about that.

Anyone or any group which truly feels that a particular sexual persuasion is abominable certainly has every right to express that displeasure. However, the over-the-top response to that alone is non-productive.

We would do far better to express our chagrin for some of the other abominations (oppression of others, especially the poor and vulnerable; hardness of the heart; violence, and many more too long to list here) that are extremely relevant to our modern-day society and hold people – especially public officials – accountable.

If our citizenry was as outspoken about the other ‘abominations’ that are so pervasive throughout our society, we would receive better governance.

Garth A. Rattray is a medical doctor with a family practice. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and garthrattray@gmail.com.

ENDS

More ……………………

Need I say more?

Peace and tolerance

H

On Tops bottoms and hyper-masculinity ……………..

It’s been a while I have done any posts on lifestyle issues especially to do with hyper masculine types or heaviots as we colloquially call them. Most psychology research that deal with gay men dichotomize the sex roles as Top and Bottom (if they differentiate among gay men at all) – preference for insertive anal intercourse and preference for receptive anal intercourse respectively. I also have found that many gay and bisexual men I talk to feel that there are more Bottoms than Tops. Critics may point out that maybe Bottoms who prefer older partners become Tops who prefer younger partners as they get older, or that Tops in general are older than Bottoms also if we think of Only Tops as preferring feminine traits and Only Bottoms as preferring masculine traits, then we have evidence that the more a gay man prefers the Bottom role, the more he prefers masculine attributes (older, taller, heavier, hairier) in a partner, and the more he prefers the Top role, the more he prefers feminine attributes (younger, shorter, lighter, smoother) in a partner but this incident outlined below may confirm in a sense.

Di role ting deh:

The sticky issue of role play by males in the mainstream seems to be also very pronounced in the  men who have sex with men arena as well but seeing the ever changing tastes in the community one would have thought that the new thinking of versatile postioning in sexual activity and or romantic relations maybe readily welcomed, clearly my thinking was wrong on this end and was proven so by a heated discussion recently on men who play the “top” or strictly dominant roles in same gender affairs. Obviously same gender loving men adopt the relationship role play of the heterosexual community where this is a dominant partner and a passive partner of course stemming from the gender roles so set by society over time.

So strong are these believes that to suggest to some tops that they should perform any sexual or domestic role in their same gender love relationships is a gross insult and an anathema, given the backdrop of our society as well where machismo is so highly valued one dare not even suggest any deviation from those copied gender roles. The discussion came up at a get together recently where several more masculine same gender lovers where present and as it were a clip was shown by someone using a computer of what appeared to be a masculine top and a more smaller in statue “bottom” or passive partner but also masculine none the less. The couple while indulging in foreplay assumed their roles, the passive performing satisfactory gestures to his more dominant mate but when the positions shifted somewhat where the top after performing analingus or rimming on his willing bottom or passive mate also proceeded to lovingly perform oral sex on his well aroused passive partner. This drew some shock and negative responses from the onlookers, the vid was stopped and a discourse ensued with three of the four thug males sharply condemning the oral top while the remaining one who liked the idea said it was a good thing and suggested maybe they were more than just bed buddies. A general perception is also that tops who are very strict about role play may become less demanding with a lover with whom they are romantically involved with and allow or perform acts they would not normally do with just a hookup.

The lone masculine brother’s view was not welcomed at all by his other male counterpart and that’s when the same castigatory lines used in the mainstream to make out men who give in or are too nice to women were thrown in the mix, of course Jamaican men of whatever orientation do not take kindly to when their egos or masculine image are abused or challenged. Words to the effect that the lone supporter “bows” (performs oral sex which is still frowned upon though not so much in the mainstream) or he is a “softy” as one of the other three puts it he is not allowing  no other man to have one over him, as if to suggest the passive partner will also view him as not man enough which is the opposite side to all this as well. The valuing of ones masculine wiehgt is serious business in our world it seems as the men came to near blows before it was quelled by others. It was not ascertained if any of the brothers were bisexual hence putting a link to the strong positions on playing gender roles to the letter in order to remain a credible as a man via societal standards.

Here is a suggested set of sexual roles in the world same gender male lovers I did on my Xrated blog some time ago:

Types of Tops:
1. Total Top—this kind of man is exclusive to PENETRATING during sex (Anally and Orally). He has no sexual desire to be penetrated. Therefore, he does not exchange Oral Sex.
2. Power Top—one who is known for great skill and especially aggressiveness in Topping. He also reciprocates Oral Sex.
3. Service Top—is one who Tops under the direction of an eager Bottom (see “Bottom”)
Dick Frotage (Sword Fighting) is very popular among some Tops
***Note: getting Rimmed/Ate Out (Analingus) is the closest these first 2 Tops will ever come to being penetrated. Tops are also stereotyped as the most masculine of the sexual roles
Types of Bottoms:
1. Total Bottom—the polar-opposite of a Total Top: they have no sexual desire to penetrate Anally or Orally. Think of your average “receiver” in a sexual party.
2. Power Bottom—although they still receive penetration, they maintain an aggressive and especially dominating attitude. Oral Sex is exchanged only at their discretion
3. Dyke-Bottom—these are an acquired taste of Bottoms who are willing to engage in sex with another Bottom. In this case, Oral Sex is primarily exchanged; any penetrating is either done with fingers or Toys. (I.E. in a scene where 2 men are engaging in double-dildo action).
***Note: Orally penetrating/ Fingering/Toying a sexual partner is the closest a true Bottom ever comes to “penetration” in that sense. Bottoms are stereotyped as the least masculine of the sexual roles.
Types of Versatiles:
1. Total Vers—A man who Tops and Bottoms, depending on the sexual situation.
2. Vers Top—Primarily a “Top” who occasionally Bottoms.
3. Vers Bottom—Primarily a “Bottom” who occasionally Tops.
***Note: a true Vers is not concerned with any one specific sexual role.
Clearly as we mature as a community the issues are going continue to come out and the trends may remain constant in some circles unless there is some societal influence to make them go away. Personally many persons know I prefer my boys ruff and thuggy especially when they are willing to explore and experiment in sex and are uninhibited by the gender role mimicking trap and influence.
SEXUAL MOTIVATION

Further older research indicates that power and intimacy motives are significant components of sexual motivation. In addition to the incentives of pleasure and procreation introduced by other theorists (Freud, 1940/1969; Masters & Johnson, 1966; Murray, 1938), recent researchers have found other socially oriented types of motives to be involved in sexual motivation. Hill and Preston (1996) developed the Affective and Motivational Orientation Related to Erotic Arousal Questionnaire (AMORE) to measure eight sexual motives. The eight motives were: (a) feeling valued by one’s partner, (b) showing value for one’s partner, (c) obtaining relief from stress, (d) providing nurturance to one’s partner, (e) enhancing feelings of personal power, (f) experiencing the power of one’s partner, (g) experiencing pleasure, and (h) procreating. They administered the questionnaire to three separate samples of male and female undergraduates. Factor analyses of responses from all three samples supported a multidimensional formulation of sexual motivation. The distributions of composite scores for the eight motive scales indicated that individual differences existed in the value placed on each type of motive represented by the AMORE scales. Hill and Preston (1996) found convergent and discriminant validity for the AMORE scales, and positive correlations between motive scale scores and self-rated likelihood to engage in sexual behaviour consistent with the motive. Thus, this study provided data supporting the position that a variety of motives exist for engaging in sexual behaviour. Participants were interested in sexual behaviour not only to obtain pleasure or to fulfil reproductive needs, but also to experience particular rewards, including the feelings of power and intimacy. Similarly, Davies et al. (1993) reported that gay men found anal sex motivating for various reasons, including the physical pleasure, intensity of orgasm, as well as the feelings of power and intimacy the act provided. Of their sample of 237 gay men. more men reported power (n = 91) and intimacy (n = 92) aspects of anal sex as important than physical pleasure (n = 63) or orgasm (n = 39) aspects, underscoring the significance of these motives.

A US report in 1993 Davies et al reported that 91 men in their sample (n = 237) described anal sex as important because of power, dominance, or control aspects. Of these 91 men, almost all perceived the insertive partner as being dominant and the receptive partner as being submissive. Responses characterizing the connection between anal sex and power included: “Makes you feel dominant … I like the idea of having dominance, and fucking someone gives me a sense of power,” and

“I just like to feel powerless when being fucked, someone having power over me.” These findings suggest two hypotheses.

Hypothesis #1: Men with an insertive preference will be more likely to prefer having power over their partners during sex than men with a receptive preference.

Hypothesis #2: Men with a receptive preference will be more likely to prefer relinquishing power to their partners during sex than men with an insertive preference.

While there is no research that speaks to the following assertion, it is feasible that the desire to have (or to relinquish) sexual power tends be part of a larger dynamic. That is, individuals who want to have (or to relinquish) sexual power may simply want to have (or to relinquish) power in most domains of their lives. The following hypothesis reflects this line of thought:

Hypothesis #3: Men with an insertive preference will be higher in general power motivation than men with a receptive preference.

In conclusion, instead of the Top and Bottom dichotomy, this brief exchange described above shows that there seems to be a fairly continuous spectrum of sex role preferences among gay men that map fairly consistently onto a continuous spectrum of physical preferences. Of course, the bigger question now is what biological or developmental differences map onto sex role preference, and what leads some gay men to prefer insertive anal intercourse rather than receptive anal intercourse.
Peace and tolerance
H

“Tell Me Pastor” says he does not condemn homosexuals ….

In the latest in the Tell Me Pastor series in the Star News we see a supposed letter to Pastor Aaron Dumas saying that Jamaica is getting slack (immoral) with regards to homosexuality or displays of affection in public becoming more visible, of course following on the rising public discourse on the Prime Minister designate and soon to be sworn in (4pm today) Portia Simpson Miller’s suggestion to review the buggery law and then to a parliamentary conscience vote, no mention was made of any changes to the Charter of Rights in case the vote is a positive one in favour of a repeal. Many doubt she will get that support even from her own ranks as this hot button issue of buggery and by extension homosexuality has been declared suicidal for any administration.

Here is the letter in the Star News:

Jamaica is getting really slack

Dear Pastor,

Something is really bothering me. What do you think about a man lying with another man? My Bible is against it and these people are too upfront with these ungodly acts. Jamaica is getting really slack.

A.

Pastor responds

Dear A.,

I read the same Bible you read. My position on homosexuality has not changed. The Bible condemns it. Therefore, I cannot encourage people to engage in it. However, I do not condemn homosexuals, whether they are males or females.

Most homosexuals who have written to me have declared that they hate what they do and they yearn for deliverance. And often when I quote the Bible in responding to them, some people say that I am condemning them. I have never condemned homosexuals. I only say what the Bible says.

I believe that no one is beyond God’s mercy and power.

I used to work with a psychiatrist and I have referred homosexuals to him for professional help and he claimed that the last young man I sent to him, has received deliverance and is now a Christian and has a wonderful wife. So, I say, give God thanks for what he has done for this young man.

And I am sure that He can do the same for others.

Pastor 

ENDS

Clearly the restorative therapy cue is once again being infused and isn’t the strong castigation sometimes from pulpits and from even the goodly pastor himself in previous letters similar to this are kinds of condemnation given how heated the and vitriolic the responses can get at times? I have not yet met anyone even after accepting Christ as saviour and while initially denying or saying they have diminished same sex feelings in their new found faith and life who remain so for long, they tend to usually return to having those feelings even while wanting to please and serve God sometimes even more pronounced than before the conversion. I can attest to that as well, in trying to find purge and relieve as so I thought in younger years of my so called “nastiness” I too sought the altar, found it, thought I was “cured” and only to meet other men struggling in the very church I was attending and believe me we couldn’t take our hands off each other after realizing we were all the same thing. Is the matter therefore of abstinence more than changing ones attitude to same sex feelings or suppressing those feelings by allowing guilt and shame from religious teachings to block who one really is inside? Can one by gay and Christian? Maybe yes I say.

Have they become so consumed by the flesh that they simply sink into gay life once again as since most religious anti gay pundits seem to think homosexuality is all about lust and desire more so than ones makeup/identity, so in essence we are oversexed more than the average heterosexual and are so determined to convert others to our ways? What madness? as far as I am concerned one is either gay, straight, bisexual and the other orientations that exists and that can be properly explained outside of psychological disorders such as paedophilia. Sex and sexuality are issues the church as a whole need to look into.

We have been told by other psychologists that to suppress homosexuality can have disastrous effects as sexual orientation cannot be changed. Bearing in mind that Pastor Aaron Dumas (Tell Me Pastor) is also a psychologist and the guide for all practicing psychologists, the Diagnostic Statistical Manual, DSM clearly does not list homosexuality as a disorder since 1973 so why is he not following the guide while pushing reparative therapy?

In response to the repeated Leviticusal battering here is an excerpt of a previous post on my sister blog Gay Jamaica Watch on the abominations:

When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus

18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination… End of debate.I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God’s Laws and how to follow them.

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighbouring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Haitians, but not Cubans. Can you clarify? Why can’t I own Cubans?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in
Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual unseemliness
– Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offence.
4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odour for the Lord – Lev.1:9.. The problem is my neighbours. They claim the odour is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbour who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2. clearly states
he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the Police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination – Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don’t agree. Can you settle this? Are there’degrees’of abomination?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle- room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/ polyester blend). He also tends to
curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16.
Couldn’t we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

Think on these things, homosexuality is not the only supposed abomination the Bible speaks to yet religious figures prefer selective readings.

Peace and tolerance.

H

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

Again the advocates Jamaica Forum for Lesbians Allsexuals and Gays JFLAG sans consulting the community’s views on the Prime Minister designate to review the Buggery Law and heading to a conscience vote has caused some upset in sections of the community who are saying the J should keep quiet and wait, let Sista P as Mrs Simpson is affectionately called deal with other serious issues first such as the economy and jobs then on the other rights for gays etc. When the group is to speak it is silent, just in December the brutal murders of two lesbians and up until today not an official word or recognition of the lives lost on the backdrop of same gender loving women’s issues and the increasing abuses against them, a trend we have been seeing since 2007 with corrective rapes, attempted abductions, forced evictions and beatings of butch identified women.

please see: 2 SGL Women lost, corrective rape & virtual silence from the male dominated advocacy structure on those circumstances

Reports are already out there of an attempted beating of four men in the Half Way Tree area since the Peoples National Party PNP win as persons out there follow a strong rumour that the party was funded by gays and that gays voted the party back into power based on the buggery law review suggestion by Sista P.

Three of the men allegedly escaped but one was cornered and sustained minor cuts from his assailants which numbered some four, some of whom were sellers of pirated DVDs in the vicinity. Another report has come of a butch identified lesbian who has been asked to take cover from her rented flat in St. Catherine, it is reported that she got the warning from other men in the area who said to her to just be proactive and leave the house to avoid any serious attack on her person or her son who resides with her sometimes of his father who lives elsewhere.

Earlier today the Gleaner had carried a story highlighting the demand of sorts to the incoming government almost ignoring the objections from the religious right and the slow groundswell it seems on the face of it of opposition to the suggestion by Mrs Miller, many persons while agreeing with the voting out of the Jamaica Labour Party, JLP they are stating that they are not comfortable with the homosexual matter, persons misconstrue the call for the review of the Buggery Law as a repeal or freeing up of homosexuality in Jamaica. Others such as some religious leaders think the homosexual agenda is being foisted on the country as previous posts and newspaper articles have brought to bear.

Go Jamaica carried this:

J-FLAG wants PNP to prioritise buggery law review

The Jamaica Forum for Lesbians All-Sexuals and Gays (JFLAG), says it is expecting the new Government to prioritize human rights issues.

In the December 20 leadership debate, PNP President, Portia Simpson Miller said her administration was committed to the protection of human rights.

Simpson Miller also said it was time for a review of the buggery law, saying she believed the issue should be put to a conscience vote in the parliament.

The executive director of J-FLAG, Dane Lewis, said the group expects the new government to stick to its commitments.

Some churches have rejected Simpson Miller’s suggestion for a review of the buggery law describing the proposal as the promotion of a homosexual agenda.

this clip also was apart of that report:

J-FLAG wants PNP to prioritise buggery law review

Dane Lewis Executive Director of the J told CVM TV that he expected the issues to begin to placed on the table within 100 days, “To be realistic we would imagine within the first 100 days the issue could be raised we can look at how to proceed,” Mr Lewis said while JFLAG is not expecting a conscience vote to repeal the buggery law within the first 100 days discussions are important as Jamaica has a 2012 deadline to meet according to the international covenant on human rights, “….one of the leading recommendations made in November last year was that Jamaica should report by 2012 on what concrete steps to removal of discriminatory laws,” Mr Lewis said.

According to Mr. Lewis JFLAG is willing to make small steps in acquiring legal recognition for homosexuals he says although gay marriage is legalized overseas JFLAG is not pursuing that as part of its lobby at this time, ” …gay marriage is certainly not an item on our agenda, we still have a large issue of discrimination …. people are being evicted from their homes, people are being physically abused because of their sexual orientation and we want to begin to address those issues.”

He acknowledges that the discussion of gay rights will be met with strong public opposition however he says as was demonstrated by Mrs Simpson Miller  we should be strident in dealing with issues impeding human rights, a solution to the issues concerning gay rights will help to deal with HIV/AIDS.

also see: Did the talk of buggery turn persons off from the polls?

Certainly this is not the end of the matter now that the goodly J has thrown down the gauntlet here to the incoming government but which I also agree with other persons in the community we need to lay low for a while and let the tempers ease nationally and the post-election euphoria, also let the party bring it on the agenda while talks proceed quietly behind closed doors. There is bound to be fallout of which there maybe not enough net systems to deal with the victims or involuntary martyrs who may have not subscribed to JFLAG’s agenda. The lack of proper consultation with the LGBT body politic before speaking to the media supposedly on our behalf cannot be the modus operandi anymore, there are serious repercussions we need to be cognizant of in these times. This top down approach needs to go!

We have a saying in Jamaica: ” ….. yuh hand inna lion mouth u tek time draw it out,” (your hand is in a lion’s mouth you take your time and pull it out) the J needs to shut up for now and keep in touch with the realities on the ground as suggested by persons who saw the news clip on TV and the Go Jamaica’s report.

Peace and tolerance

H

UPDATE JAN 12, 2012 – THE J RESPONDED 

J-FLAG DID NOT GIVE ULTIMATUM

J-FLAG

Kingston — January 12, 2012

The Jamaica Forum for Lesbians, All-Sexuals and Gays (J-FLAG) wishes to clarify that the organisation has NOTgiven the government an ultimatum.

On January 3, 2012, CVM TV contacted the organisation for a comment on its expectations of the new administration following the Peoples National Party’s (PNP) win in the General Elections. This was in the context of the bold pronouncements the Most Honourable Portia Simpson Miller had made during the leadership debate. NewsWatch reported, J-FLAG’s Executive Director, Dane Lewis as saying “To be realistic, I imagine within the first hundred days at least the issue could be raised, with a look at how to proceed.”

However, many have misinterpreted this statement of expectation as an ultimatum. Mr Lewis also highlighted that Jamaica is required by the end of 2012 to report to the UN Human Rights Committee reviewing Jamaica’s status under the International Covenant on Civil & Political Rights “on what concrete steps it’s [Jamaica] making towards removal of discriminatory laws”. It is within this context that the comment was made.  J-FLAG wishes to reiterate that it has not issued an ultimatum but offered a comment on what could be done by the Government within the first hundred (100) days to demonstrate its recognition of the broad human rights concerns that affect all Jamaicans. This is a common strategy which has been used by many other organisations in civil society and private sector.

Like all Jamaicans, J-FLAG remains committed to the human social and economic development of Jamaica. In so doing, J-FLAG will continue to defend the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Jamaicans from discrimination, harassment and violence.

ENDS

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