When are we going to deal 'up-front' with the contentious issues emerging around intolerance and sexuality in Jamaica? How can we facilitate intelligent, informed discussions around this matter of homophobia? Can we challenge the generalised assumption of 'rampant homophobia' in our culture? Aren't many of the public expressions of gay condemnation mere demonstrations of straight hypocrisy?
How homophobic are some 'fire burners' when there's no posse and crew around to impress? Are we really 'the most homophobic place on earth?' And Mr Gay Activist, where's the empirical evidence that can concretely link violence against homosexuals to dancehall lyrics? Jamaican homosexuals who die violently are mostly killed by people with whom they develop problematic relationships, and not by homophobic strangers. Isn't that a fact? So, why are some elements in the foreign press busily constructing an image of Jamaicans as homogeneously ignorant, barbaric and violently homophobic?
Mainstream media support
I raise these 'whole heap a' questions because when I look at representations in the overseas press, I see where some gay activists with the support of mainstream media, are attempting a 'shock and awe' approach to confronting the idea of Jamaican homophobia. They're trying to shock people into believing that we have gangs of wicked Jamaicans on every street corner, armed, angry and looking for gay people to murder. Then they're threatening to overwhelm our little country with the awesome might of economic sanctions. If their aim is simply to punish Jamaica - or get refugee status in foreign - they may succeed. But if the intention is to effect change - they're wasting time.
We need to examine the impact of overseas initiatives around these issues. Some of the approaches activate memories of white imperial control. And our people are famously rebellious, especially against attempts to impose 'foreign' strategies to fix Jamaican problems. Look nuh, there are complex issues underpinning Jamaican homophobia that ultimatums, sanctions and international condemnations will not address. Banning dancehall artists or boycotting Jamaican tourism won't help people to examine their intolerance and change their prejudices. It will merely prevent more poor people from 'eating a food', alienate allies, and breed bigger bangarang.
Types of gays
I think there are basically three sets of gay people in Jamaica. First, there are the ones that lead deadly double lives: heterosexual pretence on the public side while their true sexuality they thoroughly hide. Another group lives in quiet truce with this 'conveniently homophobic' society. The closet door either 'pop off' or is transparent, and their homosexuality is 'open secret'. But everybody ignores or tolerates their sexuality because they are respected and valued as professionals; plus they keep their love life private. The third set is 'out' and militant.
They're supported by a loud and growing voice of activism. They're intent on asserting their rights and they refuse to quietly abide in secrecy. I admire their courage. But tell me though, do these activists feel that the quiet set are complicit to the homophobia by having this 'truce' and living in the shadows? Does the quiet set feel that the activists are attracting unnecessary attention and compromising their fragile safety? What is going to happen if the truce gets broken?
Yow, violence is reprehensible. And no matter how righteously opposed we may be to their lifestyle, violence against people because of their sexuality is a dangerous kind of backwardness. So there's a problem. But some people are responding to it with strategies that are reactionary and counter-productive. Shouldn't anti-homophobia activists be trying more culturally sensitive methods of facilitating education and critical thinking among Jamaicans at all levels around sexuality and human rights
?
box-mi-back@hotmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment