LET'S BOYCOTT JAMAICA! (Or should we?)

"HUMAN RIGHTS ACTIVISTS have given Jamaica the infamous title: 'The Most Homophobic Place on Earth'. If you love your gay friends and family members, you won't visit Jamaica. If you care about the human rights of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people, you won't buy Jamaican products.

Isn't it time we stop rewarding this hate state with our tourism dollars? This nation should be avoided at all costs until the Jamaican government takes action to end the country's virulently homophobic climate and draconian laws that persecute homosexuals."

That's the official statement on the Jamaica boycott. Since learning about it last night, I've flip-flopped several times over condemning it, or supporting it. My initial reaction was one of satisfaction. "Good," I thought. "Serves them right." But today I've been thinking on it, and a few questions came up. Who, exactly, is boycotting Jamaica? Financially comfortable whites, presumably. Is it fair to tar every Jamaican with the same brush? Not really, no. Why just Jamaica? What about, er, nearly every country in Africa? And how about America too, with its rabid packs of bible-bashers and various states who've effectively condoned homophobia (thinking of Proposition 8). And above all else - why a boycott? As if that's going to work. Boycott Jamaica (the official site) have answered all of these questions to my satisfaction, via their Q&A page. On the subject of who, they're described as a "coalition of GLBT activists". I take that to mean our brothers and sisters who care enough to actively fight for all of us.

Are all Jamaicans guilty? Boycott Jamaica say, "We have nothing against the Jamaican people and desire nothing more than calling off this boycott. There is, however, a price to pay for continuing down a homophobic path." And to misquote a well known phrase, ignorance of what's right is no defence. Over the years I have known quite a few Jamaicans, and two of my good friends are from that island. They are amongst the most fundamentally decent people I know, but their acceptance of what is has always troubled me and been the source of many an argument. It always comes down to the same thing - they point out that I don't know what it's really like, so I should keep my mouth shut. That's fine, I accept that. I'm lucky to have been born into a relatively liberal society. But by the same token, if no one ever raises their head above the parapet, nothing ever changes. Nelson Mandela - or Harvey Milk, for that matter - didn't say, "Sod it, it's too hard," and pull the blanket back over their heads.

So, why pick on Jamaica? You have to start somewhere, and Jamaica's one of the biggest bullies in the playground. As Boycott Jamaica points out, Jamaica relies heavily on the tourist dollar - which also negates the argument that outsiders shouldn't meddle with Jamaica's internal affairs. If you want the pink pound - or dollar - you better fix up.

Is a boycott likely to work? It's a moot point. Will heterosexuals support us in sufficient numbers to make Jamaica sit up and take notice? Probably not - but hopefully, even the hint of violence will spoil the postcard perfect picture of Jamaica for the hallowed "families". There's no excuses for what is going on in Jamaica. Go get them. Make them hurt, even if it's just a fraction of what they're doing to our brothers and sisters. And to quote another late, great freedom fighter, "in the end, winning is the only safety."

Hell Is Other People

OVER AT SURREALISTICALLY Speaking, Amerikasmuse is asking "What's the deal with Black men not being cordial to each other?"

That's not a subject I can add very much to, but widen the net a little and boy, just try and shut me up.

His post (which is actually a voice post; an intriguing innovation if you're vocally adept. You can listen to it as you work on other things, like downloading Carioca or Eddie Diaz videos from, say, Gay Porn Clip) is essentially about basic manners, and the rage the lack of them in our fellow man can provoke in us.

Living in London, this a problem one encounters on average every 2.5 seconds when in a public arena. People are ignorant - how hard is it to say please or thank you? How hard is it to let me off the train first, before you attempt to shove your ill-mannered ass on board (no doubt pulling an idiotic case on wheels behind you at the same time for everyone else to trip up on). Londoners seem to have adopted passive aggression as their sport of choice. God forbid you should step out of my way on the pavement. And a trip out with the pushchair just ain't the same unless you send everybody else scurrying in all directions as you lead the charge. And why are you shoving that disgusting, stinking burger into your face as you walk down the street? Can't you wait until you get home? Oh, and if you must step on my foot, would it hurt to say sorry?

Amerikasmuse talks about black men being rude to black men. This made me wonder; is one group ruder than others? Not so long ago I read an article that suggested the more privileged your background, the less inclined you are to make a good impression with good manners; with people of a less privileged background the reverse was true. That's certainly been my experience in dealing with the public: people in suits are generally monosyllabic or completely mute.

To generalise, white women are the worst culprits (although they probably tie with West Africans, particularly Nigerians). A former colleague, a very sexy Bajan dude, once told me that women, particularly white women, expected men to lick their boots, hence their poor attitude. He also had issues with black women, although those concerned their preconception that he was a sex-crazed pussy hound...

Without a doubt, the group with the best developed social skills (which is what basic manners are) are young, black men of Caribbean descent. This conclusion is based upon observation of the many souls I encounter in my day job, and through my own personal experience of Jamaicans, Bajans, St Lucians, Vincentians et cetera over the years. They possess an almost old-fashioned set of manners - instilled by strict parents who didn't tolerate even so much as a little backchat, and who were immune to the Western hippie bullshit of the '60s that's ultimately landed society in the trouble it's in now...

So be nice when you're out and about. As George Costanza once said, "We're living in a society here!"

Elsewhere - What's the deal with Black men not being cordial to each other?

Things You Thought You'd Never See: A Gay Jamaican Cop

Constable Michael Hayden is a brave man. The Jamaican took the momentous step of coming out whilst still serving in the Jamaican police force. His story of abuse suffered at the hands of his colleagues makes for depressing viewing. Try not to get too distracted by the world's sexiest accent - from the world's most homophobic country.

Source: GBMNews

You Don't Wanna Be Gay. Here

Pictured: Gareth Henry, a gay Jamaican man, is surrounded by an angry mob in St. Andrew, Jamaica. The mob was led by police. Story here.

You mostly likely think you have it tough living in the ominous shadow of hostile heterosexuals - fearful of kissing in public or even holding handing - but if you're caught out, you probably won't be whipped to death by the state.

That is, unless you live in certain dark corners of the world; The Independant, the newspaper widely thought of as an antidote to The Daily Mail, tells us the five worst places to live if you happen to like kissing boys (and you're also a boy. Obviously). There's no real surprises, they're all medieval Islamic hell holes (well, they hate us, so I'm going to be a bit childish and throw sticks'n'stones - a bit of stone throwing goes down well in the Arab world too, so I'm told).

Whilst not currently under the rule of Sharia law, Jamaica is the fifth bastion of anti-battyman sentiment, which is a shame, because with all that flamboyance it's a waste - not too mention the fact that lads there carry a lot of weight. And if you don't believe me check out Rudejam.com.

Happily, The Independant also has the ten best places to live if you're gay. I was staggered to learn that London, New York, Paris and (gasp!) San Francisco are considered good places to end up in a man sandwich. So's Berlin, which I wouldn't have necessarily guessed, but then I'm ignorant.

Both articles are worth a read - so click here if you want to be on the receiving end of a Muslim maniac with a whip, or here if feel like blowing an eighteen year old in the street in front of his tolerant mama.

Oraine Barrett

Rod 2.0 reports on Jamaican model Oraine Barrett's latest snaps, in which he's draped in the rags of Phat Farm (why didn't they spell Farm with a Ph too?)

Mr Barrett is different from other manikins because he has a distinctive facial scar. Lots of people like facial scars; it presents them with a fantasy of violence and brutality, without having to take the journey themselves (source: The ka-os School Of $2 Psychology).

Over at Rod 2.0 they're excited that Barrett's scar hasn't been airbrushed out ("it is very refreshing to observe some honesty in the fantasy-driven fashion industry"), but it seems to me that they're missing the point. Since when did serious tissue damage become a selling point for rags? Or could it be that the selling point is that Oraine Barret is being presented as a Big Black Buck, A-Brutal-Street-Thug-Who'll-Throw-You-Down-And-Drill-You-With-His-Big-Black-Dick.

Those crazy kids in the fashion industry, what! Knocking back glasses of champagne and snorting up lines of coke - and in doing so feeding the kind of crime they're fetishising. It's all quite ironic.

Maybe I'm reading too much into it. Maybe Barrett is just a handsome man who happens to have a facial scar, and the world's suddenly such a wonderful, tolerant place and that doesn't matter anymore. Or maybe it really is as f**k-up as I think it is.

On the surface, the pictures are sexy. But what they stand for makes me sick. Sorry, Phat Farm, but I don't buy it.

Soldier Twins

Here's a photo of Jamaican twins, who are also soldiers. Why is this blogworthy? Well, they're twins. They're Jamaican twins. And they're soldiers. I think that just about covers it.

This snippet from Metro (a free commuter paper in the UK) is several months old, as I've only just peeled it off the fridge where it's on permanent display, and scanned it.

Now you too can enjoy the sight of these fine specimens of manhood on your very own computer.

BLACK GAY TEEN FILM FOR CHANNEL 4

CHANNEL 4 IS TO screen a documentary by comedian Stephen K. Amos, provisionally entitled Black Gay Men.

The channel - fresh from the racism row over Celebrity Big Brother - will deliver a week of programs in the morning Education slot about the issues gay teenagers face. From 26th February to 2nd March, we can all learn about coming out, family members who come out, gay relationships, and much much more!

Black Gay Men is described as an observational documentary in which Amos examines why homophobia still exists in his community, from his perspective as a black gay man. From the UK to Jamaica, he looks at the prejudice, violence and intimidation - and what can be done for the next generation of young black gay men.

Kudos to Channel 4 for giving light to this subject, but with the huge number of channels on offer, it's hugely disappointing that there isn't more about the thorny subject of race & sexuality... Cheers, BBC, for spending my license fee on worthy series about celebrities singing, celebrities dancing, celebrities cooking...

Et cetera.