Orville W. Taylor OUTRAGE!! THIS is both the name of the 'gay rights' group campaigning against dancehall artistes and what I feel as the saga goes on.
Peter Tatchell, its founder, remarked that they have 'dragged' reggae into "a cesspit of homophobia and misogyny."
Alright, 'cesspit,' hmmm what's the point? Maybe the words slipped out of his mouth. Let's break down the big word "misogyny." This is "an exaggerated pathological aversion (dislike) towards women."
Although not quite the same as being unusually attracted to men, a homosexual using the term is amusing. Nonetheless, this 'crap' leading to the impasse has gone on too far.
In recent times one has to be careful in criticising the gay lifestyle for fear of being labelled 'homophobic.' Actually 'homo-antipathic' (averse) is a more accurate term since phobic implies fear. Well maybe in prison, and given the campaign of J-FLAG and Outrage! trepidation in expressing one's opinion is justified.
Perchance it's time to form a group called Anti-gays in Dire Stress (AIDS) because being anti-gay can kill one's career.
Anyway, Tatchell's life was reportedly threatened by Yardies in Britain. As repugnant as I find homosexuality (both male and female), it must be recognised that to advocate or attempt the murder of anyone is wrong.
FUNDAMENTAL ENTITLEMENT
Although it may be inconsequential, the manifest reason for the threats against Tatchell is his attempt to stymie the progress of some Jamaican artistes and not his 'rectumphilia.' He should recognise that promoters and producers of all sexual orientations lose more than artistes when shows are cancelled.
I am not sure what the British statutes say about free speech but I suspect that anti-gay lyrics are permissible under them.
Certainly in Jamaica, the right of freedom of speech or expression is clearly enshrined under Section 13 of the Constitution. Therefore, if one wishes to make a moral personal judgement using any normative code, including the Bible, s/he is free to do so.
I defend to the hilt the fundamental democratic entitlement to say what one wishes as long as it is not unlawful, untrue or likely to be injurious to one's fellows. Therefore, if one is opposed to men having sex with men (MSM) feel free to say so.
Jamaica, with more churches than jobs, is not a pro-gay country even though there is much tolerance for suspected homosexuals, especially in high places. When my 'gaydar' beeps, "only God himself could tell me otherwise."
Speaking of God, the Bible explicitly prohibits liaisons between men and details accounts of persons perishing under his wrath for engaging in such behaviour. Simply put, homosexuality is a sin and its practice effectively closes all access to heaven, including the back door.
In Jamaica, one can be legally gay as long as he does not have sex. Huh? One can have the motives and drives but he may not be a practising MSM. (This sounds too much like a university degree).
If two men have sex then it is the offence of 'buggery'. This presents a dilemma for gay rights activists in Jamaica. How can one seek to claim rights to perform an act, which is by its very nature illegal?
It is equivalent to claiming freedom to smoke 'chalice in the Palace' or a prostitute suing a client for non-payment of fees. One cannot use the law to enforce 'rights' which are not guaranteed.
Interestingly, Jamaican law is silent on female homosexuality and nothing prevents two females from being 'cymbals'.
What's new? Nothing in the Constitution guarantees freedom from discrimination based on sex. Surprised?
Nevertheless, in seeking to understand why Jamaicans revile homosexuality, the 'natural order' arguments about Adam and Eve (not Steve) are unconvincing because many decidedly anti-gay males, including my 'hypocrite bredren,' are not repulsed by two women having sexual relations.
In fact, they are usually fascinated. The explanation lies in our plantation experience when 'Busha', the British slave-owner used to 'bow' male slaves into submission.
NOT TAKEN LITERALLY
Historical research indicates that homosexual acts were part of the process of de-humanisation Black men experienced during slavery, thus fracturing their masculinities.
It is possibly for this reason that Jamaican men, especially those from the grass-roots, abhor homosexuality and consider men who speak 'English' like the British to be gay since it goes back to our collective memories. So "sorry mate!" your ancestors did help to create this Frankenstein.
Inasmuch as homosexuality is repugnant to Jamaicans and even West Indians on the whole, I doubt that DJ lyrics are taken literally.
Probably there might be a few persons who may be inclined to express their aversion violently but this is common for all antipathies. There is no scientific evidence that pro-violence lyrics lead to attacks on gays here. Documented homicides of 'known' gay men have been by their 'friends'.
Personally, I believe that JFLAG is flapping about too much and the action of their British counterpart is Outrageous!
Having sunk Shabba Ranks in the 1990s they are after other big scalps. They may have gone too far and this is likely to 'back-fire' and create the very strong anti-homosexual sentiments that they are fighting.
By the way, "Who or what is MOBO? It is not as if their "hurry come up" award is a BET, Soul Train or Grammy. They certainly weren't there when reggae was unrecognised.
Still, entertainers need to be sensible and not offend those whom they expect economic support from. They can't expect to go to 'Rome' then 'lick out' (oops! bad term) against them. Artistes must realise that if they continue to sing offensive lyrics (as they are free to) there will be a 'back-lash'. Jamaican music has far more creativity than to have all and sundry trying to get 'ahead' by 'riding on the back' of homosexuality. (Sorry!). Enough already!
Dr. Orville Taylor is a lecturer in the Department of Sociology, Psychology and Social Work at the University of the West Indies, Mona.
