Gay & Bisexual Intimate Partner Violence, Homophobic Incidents & Crisis Communication

Crisis communications

Crisis communication is not intended to answer all questions or fill all needs it is just a basic outline of options you might consider if and when you are in the midst of a crisis and need help.

Crisis is any situation that threatens the integrity or reputation of your company or NGO, usually brought on by adverse or negative media attention. These situations can be any kind of legal dispute, and misrepresentations that could be attributed to your company. It can also be a situation where in the eyes of the media or general public your company did not react to one of the above situations in the appropriate manner. This definition is not all encompassing but rather is designed to give you an idea for the types of situations where you may need to follow a plan.

For purposes of this post the omission of same gender loving women in large part is not intentional or meant to exclude them but as there are hardly any documented records of such instances but more so on the side of MSM in my archives, men who have sex with men in the broader context. Exploitative same sex relational matters do often result in some injury from an unconfirmed standpoint when the grapevine system gets wind of them but when jealousy is the reason those conflicts tend not to often lead to a murder, it seems that there has been a preoccupation with more powerful or middle class victims whose cases are used to legitimize homophobia as if only such persons suffer same.  A discussion of sorts has carried on in response to a Gleaner letter some days ago where the writer implored LGBT persons to report incidents to predominantly JFLAG while trying to differentiate intimate partner violence from genuine homophobic cases.

There is more than enough evidence to prove beyond the shadow of a doubt homophobia in Jamaica

Here is the letter firstly: Gays Should Report Violent Encounters


One of the more unnoticed effects of living in a heteronormative society is the lack of information on, and services for, victims and perpetrators of violence in gay relationships.

This issue is almost as taboo in the (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) LGBT community as homosexuality is in the wider society. There are already so many negative stigmas attached to gay couples that no one wants to publicly voice that there are instances of violence in many gay relationships.

In the same way that men and women abuse each other in heterosexual relationships, they abuse each other in gay relationships, too. Such violence has come to be known as intimate partner violence (IPV) and is defined as physical, sexual or psychological harm by a current or former partner or spouse.

Due to the nature of gay relationships, especially in Jamaica, many victims and perpetrators of such violence are reluctant to seek help or report incidents of violence in their relationships to the police. IPV can have devastating effects on LGBT people who are already prone to other types of violence at the hands of homophobic people, especially in conservative societies. Many are also reluctant to speak out about it because of the lack of shelters for victims, the general negative sentiment towards gay people, and for some, the fear of being ‘outed’ as gay.


While this fear is understandable, it is important that victims report incidents of violence, and that perpetrators seek help through counselling to reduce and eliminate IPV. I am encouraging all LGBT people to report all incidents of violence, whether as a result of bullying or IPV, to the police as well as to Jamaica Forum of Lesbians, All-Sexuals and Gays (J-FLAG). And I want to use this opportunity to reiterate that J-FLAG does not condone any type of violence against any person regardless of their sexual identity.

The LGBT community and allies need to be a support system for those in need – both victims and perpetrators – and encourage people to speak out against all types of violence, both in and out of relationships.

P. ANDREW,, St James

Sadly it seems as implied in this letter a fall in reporting from persons affected by homophobic violence or is JFLAG now finally trying to get its act together when it comes to proper data collection and archiving with evidence of same. I have been openly critical of the incident reporting mechanism they had when I went there as Admin Finance Officer doubling as Crisis Intervention and the poor record keeping of files and incomplete reports of some serious incidents at times, I had to do some major overhauling of the forms and files at the time, examples include persons with injuries yet no photos, police station reports (even rejected visits or cop service number and times) or supporting pictures or documents such as receipts from clinics or prescriptions for injury treatment or dressing and drugs added to the file to make it substantive, the follow up visits that the form calls for at the end before the file is closed or handed over to the relevant person is often blank for many cases. This poor recording keeping or data collection has had and seems to continue to have a serious dent on the all important crisis communication when it comes to public advocacy.

Crisis communication is such as important piece for Jamaica LGBTQ advocacy and more details of cases (barring names or use of pseudonyms) must be brought forward. Nearly 80% of the clients I interviewed who came into the JFLAG office to file reports the session(s) were recorded on audio, unfortunately those were lost as my successor I gathered did not monitor the files and the systems crashed with the files lost forever, so much for simple good administration.

The cynicism and disbelief from anti gay groups, religious fanatics and even legislators is clear over the years with support from media, public commentators and even the police high command dismissing prominent cases as lovers’ quarrels and these major cases are used to justify dismissing any others that have a homosexual involved while not taking into account every case on its own merit. The deceptive use of non homophobic cases by some LGBT lobbyists over the life of the struggle has not helped any either as it only seeks to reinforce the resolve by anti gay voices as we are viewed as liars when such public agitation takes place. Uncompleted court cases for example that of the John Terry matter from 2009 though the stalling at the preliminary hearing level has already revealed some familiarity with the accused and the deceased despite a note was left suggesting death for homosexuals, alleged used condoms were also said to have been found in the home, whether they have evidence of the persons therein is still unclear. The Dean Moriah matter as well sadly who was murdered earlier this year yet long before the investigations were completed some overseas based advocates rushed to judgement and paraded the matter as a homophobic incident even as the trial creeps in our court system, by the time the police high command responded the blanket dismissal of homophobic killings was the subtext of the response hence implying dishonesty by LGBT advocates and a feeling that Jamaica has been falsely labelled as homophobic.

see: September 18 for Dean Moriah Matter 

The mistrust of local advocates I fear still seems to exist in some 7 reports I have received by phone, social media and through other groups when persons are asked to engage JFLAG for example persons simply refuse and even go as far as to label the group as classist and not interested in assisting certain types of persons or feeling that their matter won’t be dealt with as they think it should. This mistrust challenge has been a concern from long before my time at the entity as while there I had a serious task gaining the trust of persons to release their inhibitions and make their reports, this leads to gross under-reporting. This is where our same gender loving sisters come in where there is a feeling that JFLAG is only for males and hence many women who are the subject of abuse, violence (corrective rape) and increasing forced evictions do not come forward.

Exploitative same sex relations as hinted above are also of significant import as men who do not identify as “gay” in the Jamaican context as “bad man” feel threatened in some way as the description (fear of feminization of any sort) for some and power differentials that obtain in this unions of sorts played out in violence for purposes of control. A constant in most of the cases over the years is the class issues right before us, there is usually a middle to high income or relatively comfortable gay man who ends up being the deceased versus a hyper-masculine type from the lower socio economic classes who often do not take any personal items of the victim after the fact and sometimes ends up using the gay panic defence strategy to suggest some sort of implied sodomatical attack to justify the self defence response to kill the person. These same hyper-masculine types have a real fear of exposure in their own class or community so the relations with other more powerful or resourced men is crucial which is also pegged on the belief gay men are more resourced and will pay for such sexual relations.

There maybe is some truth to that as to maintain stealth/secrecy some exchange may occur but the misogynistic view pegged to masculinity by Jamaican standards men do not want to feel subservient to another or in a weakened position so when something changes in that union riddled with a constant power struggle (the so called monied or resourced gay man controlling the union or sex versus the masculine prowess of the hyper-masculine brother maintaining his ground) leads to some violence as the lower resourced man responds the way he knows how that is violence as we are well taught in Jamaica so to do. Any form of disrespect is often met with a violent reaction and seeing that gay men aren’t seen as real men by general social standards the aggressor feels justified in carrying out the attack even using homophobic slurs in doing so despite the intimate familiarity between the parties. These types of cases have factored in the public domain more so than others especially owing to the fact that the victims are prominent citizens or foreigners such as UK Consul John Terry or local Ambassador Peter King, Julius Nelson (son of oppositions spokesman on National Security Dwight Nelson),

Philanthropist, community legend and party promoter Michael Melbourne victim of a trick by a hyper-masculine type
Philanthropist, community legend and party promoter Michael Melbourne victim of a trick by a hyper-masculine type

Micheal Melbourne (community influential) murdered at his apartment on Worthington Avenue or Brian Williamson whose killer “Wingee” was a part of the MSM population who also died in his own apartment. The Brian Williamson case though the motive turned out not to be a homophobic one directly the response from the public is where the evidence is strong of the homo-negative feelings that run in the Jamaican psyche, persons literally rejoiced the morning outside the building as the undertakers and police cordoned off the area to collect the body and process the crime scene. Most of those cases above have remained in the public domain for so long while not having direct homophobic causations that they inform how members of the public judge new cases as non homophobic matters.

“Steve” Lenford Harvey matter just ended with sentencing shortly but the motive is still a bit unclear as robbery seems as the original causation but upon discovery of photos on a laptop it morphed into something else with an added homophobic feature. Also see: 2 Found Guilty Of The Murder Of AIDS Activist, Steve Harvey, Sentencing September 26

Gully Queen
Transgender murder victim “Gully Queen” whose case was labelled as a homophobic case …. misdirected homophobia towards a gender non-conformist should be the correct sub-text in describing this one I suggest

also see: Female cisgender imperative thwarted: 17 year old pre-op transgender woman murdered

The Dwayne Jones murder mistmatch in its reporting has not helped either as (s)he was a transwoman but mistakenly took for a gay man crossed dressed in  a public space with a deceptive motive to trick straight males at an outdoor entertainment event in a rural district. Some activists said he was gay and used that to justify the public advocacy while others said the correct gender identity which confused some folks so some Jamaicans and public commentators simply dismissed the whole as a another gay deception with a satisfactory outcome believe or not.  The outrage that was to have been displayed was not evident except by sections of the LGBT populations.  A recent television special one year since the murder shows up the carelessness frankly of Gully Queen herself and friends that faithful night but who is going to say it openly? that in a sense she gave her own life away in a sense as they clearly thought they understood how to “pass” in public which clearly they didn’t.  See that documentary HERE …….. Host Dionne Jackson Miller takes a look at the issues of the murder of Dwayne Jones aka Gully Queen one year ago and some other related issues to do with homelessness, displacements and forced evictions of LGBT youths with guests, issues to do with passing in public, honesty & integrity about one’s real gender scream for attention in this presentation which warrants better programs from LGBTQ advocacies & interventions specific to transgender individuals navigating public life in Jamaica as misdirected homophobic violence can lead to more incidents such as the tragic murder of Gully Queen,

Other genuine cases also having persons of lesser ilk have not been put to good use to prove the active homophobia in Jamaica when it occurs in more meaningful ways, the cross dresser beating in Trelawny have been overplayed that it has no impact anymore in a sense, the JFLAG listing of cases it did some years ago only show numbers, no outcomes in terms of which were solved. There are several other cases that can be made to help the public to differentiate genuine crimes with a homophobic motive versus crimes of passion as the others are called by detractors.  Cases such as the Manchester mobbing in January 2008 comes to mind complete with photos I took of the victim when I took the report, the lesbian picketing matter in St Catherine some years ago also has photos, the stabbing incident of a transman in Half Way Tree in full view of persons is also another with strong evidence. He now resides in Canada.

LGBT History - Hated to Death Report 2004, Human Rights Watch
Now deceased man who was chopped in Trelawney in November 2002 and featured in the Human Rights Watch Report “Hated To Death” 2004

There are several points reports can be made:

The Police in some instances do take reports the problem is there are still old feelings of hate and stereotyping in the force that needs removing.

Aphrodite’s P.R.I.D.E Jamaica catering to lesbian, transgender and bisexual persons but does engage MSM via crisis intervention and has aided persons in resolving matters.

GLBTQ Jamaica of which this blog is apart continues to receive, engage persons and make referrals to those who make reports or know of incidents for the past 7 years via yours truly, Tel: 1-876-813-4942

I still recommend JFLAG despite their issues.

Quality Citizenship Jamaica, QCJ which is a lesbian, bisexual women entity more so for advocacy but they do some crisis intervention.

Peace and tolerance

also see more crisis communication related posts from sister blogs:  So Dean Moriah’s murder was NOT a homophobic killing ……. ethical issues in advocacy arise yet again

Gay Lobby May Have Lost Potential Allies (Gleaner Letter) Indeed

NO GAY RAGE – Homosexuals Are Not Targeted For Violent Crime, Say Experts

Gleaner claims new backlash towards the gay lobby due to MSM homelessness in Kingston

Jamaica Observer deliberately aiding the further discrediting of the remaining LGBTQ credibility in public advocacy……

Police crack College of Agriculture, Science and Education lecturer murder

Betty Ann Blaine on the big gay lie ..

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

Questions on murder/buggery case in court

The failure to address or tweak the crisis communication aspect of public advocacy is what has slowed our progress greatly in public advocacy that could have been made.


Shirley Richards: No to reviewing the buggery law …..

Dear Editor,

Mrs Simpson Miller’s recent comments on the matter of homosexuality and sexual orientation have caused many of us to be seriously concerned. One wonders if Mrs Simpson Miller is aware of the following:

* In Europe, Canada and the USA pastors and others are punished for expressing disagreement with the homosexual lifestyle.

* Harry Hammond, the 69-year-old street preacher in England who was beaten by a group of homosexuals, was charged with inciting violence against himself.

* A middle-age Jamaican couple living in England, who had fostered children many times before, were recently denied the opportunity to foster because they could not tell a young child that it’s okay to be a homosexual.

* In Canada, kindergarten children in the public school system are exposed to homosexual teaching as if it were normal behaviour and their parents have no power to do anything about it.

* Catholic adoptions agencies in England have closed because they rightly refused to place children in homosexual households.

* Gary McFarlane, a solicitor of Jamaican descent living in England, who is also a professional counsellor, was sacked from his counselling job for refusing in principle to offer sex therapy to homosexuals.

* Buggery is the most efficient way to spread HIV/AIDS. Over the last two years the Government has spent over $590 million to fight the disease.

Shouldn’t Jamaica be doing everything in its power to discourage the disease? Why then review the buggery law?

Who are Mrs Simpson Miller’s advisors?

Jamaica is accustomed to standing on its own to defend principles. We are little, but we tallawah. Our success cannot be based on economics alone. Whilst we say no to physical violence against all persons, we also say no to reviewing laws and policies which currently block the acceptability of the homosexual lifestyle.

People of Jamaica, be warned!

Shirley Richards

St Andrew

meanwhile: Portia Simpson Miller – SIMPSON MILLER DEFENDS GAY COMMENT 23.12.11

also see previous Observer Letters linked below

Where was the church all along?

Dear Editor,

This is an open letter to all the organised groups of churches in Jamaica.

My name is Jevon Minto. I am currently in my second year at Northern Caribbean University, pursuing a Bachelor of Arts Degree in religion and theology.

Jamaica is one of those countries where the church still influences the decisions of the State. And while this opportunity exists, no other group of people is more unconcerned about social life than the church. Every other group is speaking out, except the church. I think you all deserve a beating from God for rejecting the prophetic ministry that He has called you to, especially where it concerns politics.

If secularism takes over Jamaica you all should be blamed! If Opposition Leader Portia Simpson Miller did not propose to review the buggery law — if she is re-elected — would Jamaica hear anything from you [the church] at this time?

Imagine, three national political debates and not one of the panellists represented the church. Not one question was asked regarding the church. Why speak now and talk ill of the proposition made by the Opposition?

I am definitely not in support of homosexuality, but if the church did not assume such a passive role in the affairs of the nation, then we would not have a leader even thinking about making such a proposal in public.

It leads me to question your integrity. Are you Christian, or are you Christian excused? Did Jesus, our Lord and Saviour, behave in such a passive manner where the issues of the nation were concerned? Was He hypocritical, or was He a self-aggrandiser?

Did He not care for the entire man instead of just the Spiritual man? Until you care more about Jamaica rather than the church, reserve your comments. They only make people laugh at you and make God disappointed in you!

Jevon Minto

Read more:


Jesus hates the sin, not the sinner

Dear Editor,

Mrs Simpson Miller’s statement regarding the buggery law was a brave and commendable act. I openly applaud her for exercising her right as a Jamaican citizen to speak freely about her views on the topical issue of homosexuality.

I believe that every Jamaican has the right to decide for himself or herself what sexual orientation he or she is comfortable with and wishes to pursue. This is why I believe that the uproar from the Council of Churches is just ridiculous. Firstly, she did not say she was about to legalise homosexuality, and secondly, how can the Christian bodies in this country advocate the continued marginalisation of a small fraction of our society?

Correct me if I am wrong. Wasn’t Jesus Christ the one who said that He came to save the lost and isn’t it also the belief and hope of every Christian to be like Jesus? So if they feel so strongly about the homosexual minority being ‘lost’ why not try to ‘save’ them by showing them the same love and compassion Jesus would?

Is it that those who choose to enter into same-sex relationships are less human than Jamaicans who are heterosexual? Homosexuals are people too. This I-am-better-than-you-and-so-have-the-moral-authority-to-bash-you mentality was the driving force for the enslavement of our beautiful black race for over 400 years, and it is definitely not Christian-like.

Jesus urged us to love our neighbours as we love ourselves. As much as the Council of Churches dislikes it, homosexuals are our neighbours. Jesus hates the sin, not the sinner. It is full time for Jamaica to move away from homophobia. That sort of thinking is more crippling to our society than homosexuality is because it engenders abject disgust, hate and intolerance to our fellow Jamaican brothers and sisters who are exercising their freedom of choice.

Claudelle Maitland

 UWI Mona

Read more:–not-the-sinner_10448020#ixzz1hpQH3bBy


Why a conscience vote on sodomy, Mrs Simpson Miller?

Dear Editor,

Baggaley et al of the Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, MRC Centre for Outbreak Analysis and Modelling, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, Paddington, London, UK, reporting in the International Journal of Epidemiology of August 2010 in the article: “HIV transmission risk through anal intercourse: systematic review, meta-analysis and implications for HIV prevention”, stated that among both heterosexuals and homosexuals, “Unprotected anal intercourse is a high-risk practice for HIV transmission”.

Also, local media reported that the Jamaican Government found it necessary to set aside a total of some J$594 million for HIV prevention during the 2009 to 2010 and 2010 to 2011 fiscal years.

In light of this data, why would Mrs Simpson Miller consider bringing the decriminalisation of sodomy to a conscience vote ?

Wayne West

 Kgn 6

Fundamental Questions On Homosexuality (Gleaner Letter 05.10.11) …………

Jamaica Gleaner Company

Fundamental Questions On Homosexuality


I have resisted the desire long enough, and hesitated to speak on the controversial subject of homosexuality. However, with the useful and open-minded information given to us by The Gleaner and other news media, there are certain facts which may be considered simple, but have not been dealt with.

1. No one seems to know in what period of human history the divine plan of procreation was changed from heterosexual to same-sex unions.

2. There is not yet unanimous agreement even among the theologians who are supposed to be God’s spokespersons.

3. What were the reasons or conditions for this unnatural change?

4. Can anyone declare boldly that the spiritual Intelligent Being, whatever He or She is called, made a mistake in creating male and female?

5. Who sets the spiritual and moral standards for us sinful, mortal people?

These are fundamental questions for us to consider in our discussion of this worldwide problem created by the human mind, and being used effectively by evil spirits which have completed their work of deception.

The question to all who say homosexuality is not a transgression is, where in the Bible do we find the command to use that part of the body which ejects garbage from the body for sexual intercourse?


St Andrew


Obviously this writer is just using the guise of entertaining discourse to spew putrid hate simply put but if I may answer with one overall observation I have of the whole thing then delve into some other matters, The books of the Bible when they were being put together certainly never had the concept of homosexuality directly infused in the writings and we are told by scholars that there was not even a word for to describe the person or the practices associated with such, there have been some references however in the old testament to what could amount as same gender loving unions in a sense for example David and Jonathan – There is no real need to bring out a passage showing approval of homosexuality. After all, the Bible condemns only those actions it actually condemns, and homosexuality is not one of those things.

However, even though they are not strictly necessary, there *are* several passages that show approval of gay relationships.
To mention just one, there is the love affair between David and Jonathan.

1 Samuel 18:1,3
“And it came to pass, when he [David] had made an end of speaking unto Saul, that the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul . . . And Jonathan and David made a covenant, because he loved him as his own soul.”
And immediately afterward, Jonathan disrobed before David:
1 Samuel 18:4
“Jonathan divested himself of the mantle he was wearing and gave it to David, along with his military dress, and his sword, his bow and his belt.
Jonathan was not only disrobing, but was turning the symbols of his manhood over to David. This draws a very clear picture of what is happening here.
1 Samuel 20:30
“Then Saul’s anger was kindled against Jonathan, and he said unto him, Thou son of perverse rebellious woman, do not I know that thou hast chosen the son of Jesse [David] to thine own confusion, and unto the confusion of thy mother’s nakedness?”
Reference to the nakedness of one’s parents is one of the methods used in the Bible to refer to a sexual relationship. Jonathan had chosen David as his lover. And in the same conversations Saul says:
1 Samuel 20:31
Why, as long as the son of Jesse lives upon the earth you cannot make good your claim to the kingship!
This clarifies Saul’s problem. One of the most important duties of being a king was producing an heir. Obviously, Jonathan had no intention of producing an heir, and therefore could not provide the final step needed to make good his claim to the kingship. He loved David and *only* David.

Continue HERE

or the The Centurion and His Pais

People who dislike homosexuals, disapprove of homosexuals, or are afraid of homosexuals for one reason or another, enjoy using their Christian Bibles to excuse their attitudes. Why? Apparently because it gives them permission, and helps them feel righteous and good about themselves while they do it.

“I’m loving the Sinner, but hating the Sin,” they say. Which helps them feel close to God, close to Jesus, following nothing more than what their Bibles tell them in Jesus’ own language of English.

Sadly, people who do so have never really read their Bibles, never really thought about the words.

How the words got there. What they meant originally, when the writers wrote them in the original languages (which, believe it or not, were *not English).

What the times, and the people, and the cultures, and the politics, and the level of scientific knowledge, and the history was like when the original writers wrote.

Nowhere is this phenomenon more evident, today, than regarding the question of “What does the Bible say about homosexuals?” Or, most importantly for Evangelical Christians, “What would *Jesus say about homosexuals?”

To support their prejudice against homosexuals, many Christians haul out the Genesis story of Sodom, or the Levitical priestly proscription, or the New Testament writings of St. Paul in Romans:1, or his letter to Timothy, etc. In reply, gay-friendly Christians offer the story of David & Jonathan, or Ruth &

Naomi, or Jesus & The Beloved Disciple.

Unfortunately, all the above passages from the Bible, whether Old Testament or New Testament, whether viewed as anti-gay or pro-gay, are extremely problematical. Pick a scholar — any scholar — and you can get an interpretation, backed by reasonable findings, to support your personal view one way or another about *any of the above passages.

There is only *one place in the entire Bible where we can find a glimpse of how Jesus personally felt, or might have felt, about homosexuals and their relationship to Him…their relationship to God, as we Christians know God. It’s the New Testament story of the Centurion and his Servant.

The story is told in two separate Gospels in our New Testament: Matthew 8:5-13, and Luke 7:1-10, regarding the Centurion who approaches Jesus so that his “servant” (modern English translation) might be cured. In Matthew’s version, the Centurion came directly to Jesus seeking His help. In Luke’s version, the Centurion called upon the Elders of Capernaum’s Jews, sending them in his place to seek help. In Matthew, Jesus went to meet the Centurion and spoke to him. In Luke, Jesus did not actually meet the Centurion but spoke to the city’s Elders about his request, instead. (So much for Biblical inerrancy)


Peace and tolerance


Will J-FLAG, Other Rights Groups Support Paedophiles? (Gleaner Letter 10.09.11)

Readers yet another hint to the supposed confusion between adult same gender loving relationships importantly with consent versus paedophilia which are NOT one in the same. Over these many years we as a community and the advocates namely Jamaica Forum for Lesbians Allsexuals and Gays JFLAG (yet again we have to see the failings) in their proper role as such have poorly rebutted these misconceptions of the two from mainly the tabloids presenting sensational stories of rapes, abuses on children and teens as done so by supposed gay men when we know that most paedophiles including those who carry out same gender paedophilia are heterosexual and the motivator for such crimes is psychological control of the victim(s) more so than sex. Homosexuality has not been linked to paedophilia in any scientific way or any studies that can stand.

But we lack again another element urgently needed which falls under the psychological interventions to be incorporated into LGBT activism, we are eons away from there it seems as the recent homeless MSM civil disobedience and fallout has proven as it is those very glaring missing frontline elements that led to it to have happened a second time.

An article on the issue elsewhere comes to mind from 2010 where the Vatican’s number two linked paedophilia to homosexuality, prompting strong condemnation from gay rights advocates and several governments, including France’s. As a result, the Vatican distanced itself from the remarks. Is this latest spat an illustration of the mindset within the Vatican, or is it evidence of the media’s hounding of the Catholic Church? see the link for the video and

Have a read of the letter from the Gleaner, my two cents continues below that: 


I’m inviting J-FLAG to explain to Jamaica what ‘all-sexuals’ means in its name. Does it mean persons with all kinds of sexual preferences, such as persons who prefer (or rather, as J-FLAG would put it, are orientated) to have sex with animals, children or family members?

I would like to hear J-FLAG’s position on paedophilia because of a recent article in the United States which showed that there is such a group called the National Man-Boy Association and another called B 4 U ACT, which are both organisations for paedophiles. One of their aims is to normalise adult sex with pubescent and pre-pubescent children. They are encouraged by the removal of homosexuality from the list of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) in the 1970s. They acknowledge that it was staunch lobbying and political will that led to this removal, and so also want paedophilia to be removed from the DSM.

Sexual pleasure and confidence

Interestingly, The International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) has as one of its goals: “Young people must be able to have pleasure and confidence in relationships and all aspects of sexuality.” IPPF identifies young people as being from the age of 10-24. Does IPPF mean by “all aspects of sexuality” that young people should welcome or participate in sex with animals, children or family members? Or is IPPF a cover for the legalisation of paedophilia?

Finally, note the trajectory we are on in Jamaica of seeking to legitimise homosexuality and see where it leads. I read recently an article which referenced an essay called ‘The Overhauling of Straight America’ that strategies put forward to normalise and mainstream homosexuality, included talking about gays and gayness as loudly and often as possible; portraying gays as victims, not as aggressive challengers; giving protectors a just cause; making gays look good; making victimisers look bad; and launching media campaigns.

We can see this pattern in the pro-gay movement in Jamaica. So I just want to know what J-FLAG stands for, and if protecting tolerance for ‘all-sexuals’, particularly the all-sexuals who prefer children, will be part of their objectives.

I also invite Families Against State Terrorism, the Independent Jamaica Council for Human Rights and all the other groups which support J-FLAG to let me know if they would support those who maintain that sex with minors and animals should also be a recognised and legalised0 right.



The way the letter writer groups the other human rights groups in the bag with the J has made them tainted and I fear there maybe some withdrawal of support if only for the short term as many of the boards of these groups have  homophobes on them who may not want the organizations that they have oversight for to go down that road. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM 5) which is being debated and put together for May 2013 it seems disingenuous that the writer did not bother to double check before putting pen to paper as the proposed DSM 5 site is up and running and clearly states the present circumstances despite the agitations from the so called pedo groups.


Pedohebephilic Disorder


[1] The Paraphilias Subworkgroup is proposing two broad changes that affect all or several of the paraphilia diagnoses, in addition to various amendments to specific diagnoses. The first broad change follows from our consensus that paraphilias are not ipso facto psychiatric disorders. We are proposing that the DSM-V make a distinction between paraphilias and paraphilic disorders. A paraphilia by itself would not automatically justify or require psychiatric intervention. A paraphilic disorder is a paraphilia that causes distress or impairment to the individual or harm to others. One would ascertain a paraphilia (according to the nature of the urges, fantasies, or behaviors) but diagnose a paraphilic disorder (on the basis of distress and impairment). In this conception, having a paraphilia would be a necessary but not a sufficient condition for having a paraphilic disorder.

This approach leaves intact the distinction between normative and non-normative sexual behavior, which could be important to researchers, but without automatically labeling non-normative sexual behavior as psychopathological. It also eliminates certain logical absurdities in the DSM-IV-TR. In that version, for example, a man cannot be classified as a transvestite—however much he cross-dresses and however sexually exciting that is to him—unless he is unhappy about this activity or impaired by it. This change in viewpoint would be reflected in the diagnostic criteria sets by the addition of the word “Disorder” to all the paraphilias. Thus, Sexual Sadism would become Sexual Sadism Disorder; Sexual Masochism would become Sexual Masochism Disorder, and so on.

In general, the distinction between paraphilias and paraphilic disorders is reflected in the format of the diagnostic criteria for specific paraphilias. Paraphilias are ascertained according to the “A” criteria, and paraphilic disorders are diagnosed according to the “A” and “B” criteria. The distinction between paraphilias and paraphilic disorders is discussed in the context of specific diagnoses by Blanchard (2009b, 2009c). CONTINUE HERE


A. Over a period of at least 6 months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 years or younger).

B. The person has acted on these sexual urges, or the sexual urges or fantasies cause marked distress or interpersonal difficulty.

C. The person is at least age 16 years and at least 5 years older than the child or children in Criterion A.

Note: Do not include an individual in late adolescence involved in an ongoing sexual relationship with a 12- or 13- year-old.

Specify if:

Sexually Attracted to Males

Sexually Attracted to Females

Sexually Attracted to Both

Specify if:

Limited to Incest

Specify type:

Exclusive Type (attracted only to children)

Nonexclusive Type

also see:  Why most “pedophiles” aren’t really pedophiles, technically speaking or Crowds gather at Mandeville Courthouse for Trade show man charged with indecent assault on 13yo boy

Paedophilia, the predominant sexual aberration says Psychiatrist and the church’s response.

The Homo-Negativity Surrounding Paedophilia …….

Ephebophilia vs Paedophilia & Male Homosexuality (REPOST)

On the 13th of September Executive Director Dane Lewis responded in a letter to the Gleaner

J-FLAG Clarifies Controversial All-Sexuals Tag

Peace and tolerance


Homophobic mob bound to fall (Observer Letter) …. writer errs with “Victimless Buggery Law” line

Dear Editor,

The homophobic gang is Jamaica is one that is very mob-like and is similar to many gangs (mobs) that form just about anywhere. I spend a lot of time around them and realise this just from their actions – whom they look up to, their talking points and the slogans they choose to chant. Just read up on mob (crowd) psychology and you realise this

The homophobic gang is Jamaica is one that is very mob-like and is similar to many gangs (mobs) that form just about anywhere. I spend a lot of time around them and realise this just from their actions – whom they look up to, their talking points and the slogans they choose to chant. Just read up on mob (crowd) psychology and you realise this

The first thing that is common among mobs (gangs) is that they always have leaders or a group of leaders that they deeply respect and salute when they do a deed in their favour. Gangs like the “Shower Posse” have respected leaders like “Dudus/Presi” while the homophobic gang (mob) has its leaders in the government, the music industry and the church.

The first thing that is common among mobs (gangs) is that they always have leaders or a group of leaders that they deeply respect and salute when they do a deed in their favour. Gangs like the “Shower Posse” have respected leaders like “Dudus/Presi” while the homophobic gang (mob) has its leaders in the government, the music industry and the church.

From the sayings in government like “Not in my Cabinet”, which seemed to have improved Bruce Golding’s ratings among the church leaders who wield their enormous power to influence the media on whether or not to show the gay PSA and anti-gay dancehall artistes whom they worship and cry about when they mess up, it is quite obvious as to how the saviour or messiah mentality of the homophobic mob (gang) operates when a leader chooses to unleash his demagogy.

The second thing that is common among mobs is their heightened sense of defence; they launch into “attack mode” if they feel their gang is threatened. They defend their mob by taking advantage of the ignorance of their members. By telling their members the lie that all or most gay men are child molesters, wealthy, violence-prone, prostitutes or that they can “catch” homosexuality or be encouraged into the so-called “lifestyle”, they create this “us versus them” mentality that they use to keep their members in bondage on the homophobic plantation away from all sensible debate and reasoning. They readily launched into “attack mode” when the pro-gay public service announcement was to be aired by standing behind the bedroom-intruding buggery law (I don’t see what the PSA had to do with buggery) which their leaders defend.

They use chants and slogans to identify each other when in attack mode such as “Chi-chi man fi dead” similar to the Nazi mob with “Heil Hitler” to identify each other and to show one’s loyalty to the gang. If you dare to fathom, realise or imagine just one thing wrong or hypocritical about the gang, you are banished and labelled as gay or part of the enemy. The third thing about gang culture is their insatiable appetite for power, conquest and domination.

The homophobic mob in Jamaica loves and defends their useless and victimless buggery law because to them it holds the secret to the prevention of an upcoming tsunami of homosexuality, if the law were to be removed from the books. Nothing could be further from the truth. The buggery law isn’t even enforced and neither does it criminalise homosexuality. It criminalises anal sex which can also be done by heterosexuals. Homosexuality and anal sex are not synonymous as any dictionary will define homosexuality as “an attraction to a member of the same sex” and not just some sexual activity. The mob will also use its power and control of the media to make fun of gays and exaggerate and sensationalise things that only a few gay men will do. Their control over the media manifested itself the day the gay PSA was rejected. I’m sure if a PSA were to be made denouncing homosexuality it would be accepted as only the mob is allowed to speak and have a voice. All mobs are dangerous and the homophobic one will fall one day.

David Thomas

 May Pen, Clarendon

Read more:


As more and more seemingly over exuberant youngins join the letter writing campaign which is commendable but this is a good letter overall but there is no such thing as a “victimless buggery law” that is like ignoring those persons (consenting SGL males apart from same sex paedophiles who may not be homosexuals) over these many years who have suffered under that charge, it’s an insult to their pain and suffering they went through, plus the arduous task of recovery (if the case is adjourned sine die) these writers need to be properly couched or do some basic research as we may very well weaken our case, we have to provide some guidance to our letter writers as simple mistakes (may look harmless) can be a problem and give the anti gay opposition free ammunition they weren’t looking for.

Youthful exuberance or a pinch of activist fever is good but we must be careful how we rant on issues, we cannot designate the Buggery Law to be victimless when in days gone by persons who were so called “caught in the act” and hauled before the courts by police or as in one case several year ago in Montego Bay two young men who were suspected of being gay and having sex were paraded naked in the streets to the police precinct with a large jeering crowd following all the way hurling insults at them, they were indeed charged with buggery but the case later fizzled as with many Buggery cases that have no proper evidence which is basically a doctor’s report, the cops basically did it then simply because they could and there were no serious consequences for such infractions of citizens rights during those dark days. Penetration anally is the main proof needed for a buggery charge to stick with spermatozoa cells present in either in the anal cavity or around the excretory orifice and it must match the other party(ies) involved or co-accused in the case.

Sadly many cases languish in our system as the wheels of justice are slow and if the case is adjourned sine die (lack of prosecution follow up but it can be called up in seven years time by them) the rebuilding of ones reputation and by extension life is hard in some instances where displacement and family rejection come in. If we are to present therefore our arguments they must be ethically and factually balanced with remembering the victims no matter how large or small their ordeals under this old tired law that obviously needs to go.

Think on these things

Peace and tolerance


Biased frivolity (Observer Letter)

Biased frivolity

Dear Editor,

My faith in your paper as a whole has been severely compromised by your staff reporter, Donna Hussey-Whyte, on account of the August 21 article, “Rowdy gays banned by J-FLAG, JASL”. Certainly the news item itself was worth telling, as poor conduct by any of our citizens is something to decry. What saddened me was her flagrantly homophobic language when she referred to one source as speaking “with the customary feminine drawl” as she smartly added the gender-bending detail that he was dressed in “women’s tights” before going on to talk about the sexual “preference” of an allegedly murdered 15-year-old gay teenager.

I thought that journalists were supposed to be above the common ebb of public discourse. I thought that journalists were supposed to remain impartial in their presentation of the news. How then can Ms Hussey-Whyte presume to take her role seriously in this charged, contentious social environment if she will stoop to use such irresponsible language in her writing? Of what “customary feminine drawl” was she speaking? I have many gay friends in at least four different countries and few have anything “customary” about their language. And what of the teenager murdered because of his sexual orientation? I suppose his “preference” brought him that outcome? That remark was particularly callous.

What Ms Hussey-Whyte has done is successfully taken the dignity of the Jamaica Observer (a paper I really liked) to a new low by abandoning the ethics that govern the field of journalism. Neutrality is the ultimate defence of any news person or body, and your reporter lost that when she decided to pander stereotypes and judgement when speaking about things of which she visibly knows nothing at all.

For clarification:

(1) All gay men do not have feminine drawls so there can be no such thing as “customary” in reference to millions of men around the world.

(2) All gay men do not wear feminine attire. In fact, men who do wear feminine clothing are considered to be transvestites — regardless of their sexual orientation.

(3) Sexual orientation is just that — an orientation. No one “prefers” being considered a social deviant by his or her community and family, neither does one readily “prefer” a life of ridicule, ostracism and even self-loathing here in Jamaica — listed among the most homophobic and violent countries in the world. I fail to see the “preference”.

Ms Hussey-Whyte’s article focused on marginal elements of the gay community — delinquent male prostitutes and transvestites living on the street and struggling to find their way. Rowdy or not, their stories deserve to be treated with respect and seriousness as their plight affects us all — gays and straights. No one wants to hear that HIV-positive people are roaming about engaging in commercial sex and not receiving treatment. Their clients are our brothers, fathers, bosses and friends and so transactional sex among the homeless, gay or straight, deserves real reporting. Instead, you offered us juvenile humour and bigotry. Shame on you and the Jamaica Observer for publishing such biased frivolity.

Bin Nicht

Read more:


Redefine Buggery Law And Promote Tolerance (Gleaner Letter)


Here’s a suggestion to settle some critical basic issues concerning homosexuals and the practice of homosexuality in Jamaica.

(1) Facilitate publication of a modified version of the public service announcement about loving affected family members that local television stations have refused to publish, so far.

Modification would involve including reference to family members withother conditions, such as HIV/AIDS, mental illnesses, as well as homosexual orientation.

(2) In order to deal with the legal issues concerning the difference between homosexuality or homosexual orientation, and buggery, without further confusing both the religious and non-religious among us, we should also do the following:

Let us NOT change or revoke the law we have on the books against buggery. But let us define (redefine, if necessary) buggery as being or including forced or involuntary involvement of anyone – man, woman or child – in any same-sex act or activity involving penetration or thecommingling of bodies or sexual organs – against their will and/or without their explicit consent, whether privately or in public.

Also, let us recognise, understand and appreciate the value of extending tolerance, unconditional love, understanding, and compassion to all family members, whether they are affected by HIV/AIDS, mental illness, homosexual orientation, or any other ailment or condition that is beyond their control – without necessarily endorsing or approving particular lifestyles or behaviours.

In the circumstances, it would also appear to be prudent for us to state, specifically, that there will be no legal intervention in private sexual issues and/or activities where mutually consenting adults are voluntarily involved.

At the same time, and because of ‘going that far’ and, especially, in order NOT to encourage the illegal, species-endangering practice of gay sex, we would need to strengthen our resolve to confidently counter all subtle or open promotion or encouragement of buggery in schools and everywhere else in Jamaica.


Kingston 10

Don’t Misuse Bible On Gayness (Gleaner Letter)


Regarding your letter of the day dated August 12, ‘Love your gay boys’, the writer, Ricardo Smalling, got the sentiment right but got the meaning of the quoted scripture wrong. Indeed, Matthew 25:40 does tell us,

Whatever you do for one of the least of these brothers of Mine, you do for Me.”

But, who are Jesus’ brothers? Paul tells us in Hebrews 3:1: “… Holy brothers, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest whom we confess – Jesus.” So holy brothers are going to heaven to inherit God’s kingdom.

Conversely, we are told in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10:

“Do you not know that unrighteous persons will not inherit God’s kingdom? Do not be misled. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men, nor thieves, nor greedy persons, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit God’s kingdom.”


Homosexuals will not inherit God’s kingdom unless they put away homosexuality. “And yet that is what some of YOU were.

But YOU have been washed clean, but YOU have been sanctified, but YOU have been declared righteous in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ and with the spirit of our God.” (1 Corinthians 6:11).

The command at Matthew 22:39 – love your neighbour as yourself – certainly applies to gay boys, so we should not hate them.



A fair enough letter seemingly avoiding the castigations and abominations but the writer makes it clear where she stands, if more of the discourse from the Christian community was more civil we would have reached much further towards some better understanding.

Peace and tolerance


Bruce leading us into expensive nightmare (Observer Letter)

bruce-golding-hardtalk-may-2008.jpgHon. Bruce Golding with Stephen Sackur on HARDtalk – May 20th 2008

For your review View The Interview Online

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3

Meanwhile Maurice Tomlinson Wrote

Dear Editor,

Within the past two months leaders of two Caribbean countries have joined the call for the decriminalisation of buggery as an effective way to tackle the region’s HIV epidemic. At a recent UWI Cave Hill conference on HIV and Human Rights, Attorney Freundel Stuart, the new prime minister of Barbados, said that “even if rather than responding to nature’s promptings, (gays) were pursuing this lifestyle as a result of nurture, in which case they may have been exercising some measure of choice, the right to choose in these circumstances was protected by the constitution…”

At the recent Pan Caribbean Partnership Against HIV and AIDS 10th AGM, the Prime Minister of St Kitts and Nevis Dr Denzil Douglas said it was time to revisit these discriminatory laws, despite the political overtones.


It is clear that these two regional leaders have accepted that there will be political implications to proposing the decriminalisation of buggery in their countries, but they are at least willing to lead the crucial discussions to support their national fights against HIV and AIDS.

Such bold leadership contrasts with our own Prime Minister Bruce Golding who is also the current Caricom chairman. Despite the fact that Jamaica is facing the loss of funding from the Global Fund to fight this expensive incurable disease, he appears unwilling to set aside his obvious religious bias and have a frank discussion about decriminalisation of buggery.

In an interview at the United Nations in September, he actually justified the retention of the anti-buggery law in keeping with our “real fears” that the Jamaican family will be destroyed if adult gays are legally allowed to engage in their private consensual acts. Really, PM? Is that the best you can do? Once again your now legendary stubbornness seems set to doom Jamaica to an expensive nightmare.

Maurice Tomlinson

Montego Bay, St James


Love thy gay neighbour (Trinidad’s Newsday letter)

Newsday Logo


I am a young man living in east Trinidad. I am hardworking, loving, and ever-striving to be the best human being I can be. I am an upstanding citizen of Trinidad and Tobago and I am gay.

It is my understanding that an evangelical group is visiting Trinidad and Tobago from October 22 to 29 with the intent of spreading “God’s word,” but in reality is spreading hate against homosexuals…against people like me.

I can’t believe in this day and age people still have such dangerous biases. The world has changed a lot since I was going to school where all kids would beat up the “gay boy,” and I thank God that we’ve evolved to the point where people can be respected, and such pointless violence is at a minimum.

Gay marriage is legal now in a lot of countries and we have come to accept homosexuals and bisexuals as part of society. We still have a long way to go, but now these people are trying to drag us backward into the dark ages.

I believe God intended his ministry to spread a message of love, respect for one’s fellow man, and respect for others, even if they are different. However, I believe that as a result of this group gays will be portrayed in a negative light, and will incite and brainwash those who try to be upstanding Christians into judging and hating people.

Gays will become a target for more radical action, and once again people like myself will be made to feel less than human, to feel wrong, to feel sinful.

Trinidad is plagued with violence and everyone is just looking for another reason to hurt someone.

“Love thy neighbour as thy self.”

Let us live in peace and Love, as Jesus showed us.