Relive the second most historical event to ever take place at the Stonewall Inn: Boycott Jamiaca’s Rump Dump. [WOW]
Get Queerty Daily
Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #boycottjamaica #jamaica #newyorkcity(nyc) stories and more36 Comments
Comments are closed.
Jamie
This is why it’s important to do your homework before you protest. Red Stripe beer does not support homophobia – in fact, it has pulled sponsorship of reggae acts with homophobic lyrics. But hey, let’s just lump everyone and everything Jamaican in together and tar it with the same sweepingly generalized brush.
This is so embarrassing. Boycotting everything Jamaican, regardless of the stance of the individual people or companies, is just so racist and nationalistic, and it needs to be called out as such. Protesting discrimination with more discrimination… can you not see the irony and hypocrisy???
I’m boycotting the boycott. The rest of you can continue making yourselves, and the gay righs movement, look ignorant and racist.
Thanks a lot. Way to change the world, guys.
Alec
@Jamie: Boycotting everything Jamaican, regardless of the stance of the individual people or companies, is just so racist and nationalistic, and it needs to be called out as such. Protesting discrimination with more discrimination… can you not see the irony and hypocrisy???
Get a hold of yourself there. Even innocent actors get swept up in boycotts; the residents of Colorado might not have all voted for Amendment 2, but the purpose of a boycott is to pressure everyone to change. Cf. South Africa (does anyone doubt the presence of white liberals opposed to apartheid?). Whatever you think of the merits, reactionary political correctness (baseless allegations of racism) are counterproductive. What’s next, boycotting businesses affiliated with the LDS is religious bigotry?
Wayne
@Jamie. Actually maybe it’s you who should do a bit more homework on the subject:
(from the Petrelis blog)
The Red Stripe Company has maintained a long and mutually beneficial relationship with the music industry and together we have worked very hard with promoters and artistes to uphold globally acceptable standards.
Over the years, however, a very negative trend of glorifying violence has crept into some of the music, causing much consternation among well thinking Jamaicans and others at home and abroad. This has far-reaching and damaging implications for the industry and for the country as a whole.
Yes, the impact of this trend has directly contributed to the launch of the boycott Jamaican campaign. This would have been the perfect paragraph for Red Stripe to clearly state it’s opposition to homophobic lyrics calling for assaults and murders against gays.
If the Red Stripe executives can’t be out and upfront about how their support for tolerance and support for gay Jamaicans, don’t expect me to count the corporation as a friend.
http://mpetrelis.blogspot.com/2009/04/gay-omission-red-stripe-beer-pulled.html
Wayne
@Jamie. (Typ Corrected) Actually maybe it’s you who should do a bit more homework on the subject:
(from the Petrelis blog)
(Red Strip Statement)
The Red Stripe Company has maintained a long and mutually beneficial relationship with the music industry and together we have worked very hard with promoters and artistes to uphold globally acceptable standards.
Over the years, however, a very negative trend of glorifying violence has crept into some of the music, causing much consternation among well thinking Jamaicans and others at home and abroad. This has far-reaching and damaging implications for the industry and for the country as a whole.
Yes, the impact of this trend has directly contributed to the launch of the boycott Jamaican campaign. This would have been the perfect paragraph for Red Stripe to clearly state it’s opposition to homophobic lyrics calling for assaults and murders against gays.
—–
(petrelis)
If the Red Stripe executives can’t be out and upfront about how their support for tolerance and support for gay Jamaicans, don’t expect me to count the corporation as a friend.
http://mpetrelis.blogspot.com/…..ulled.html
Jamie
@Alec: “What’s next, boycotting businesses affiliated with the LDS is religious bigotry?”
It would be bigotry to boycott companies just because they’re owned by Mormons; it would be perfectly legitimate to boycott based on actual public support/donations for anti-gay legislation.
There’s a distinction – and the fact that the gay rights movement seems increasingly unable to make that distinction is troubling.
If you want to boycott Jamaicans for being Jamaican, or Mormons for being Mormon, it’s a free country, and that is your right. I happen to think you should boycott based on a person/organization’s actual words and actions, rather than simply boycotting based on ethnic/religious affiliation. Newsflash – not all Mormons are homophobes, neither are all Jamaicans.
Wayne
@ Jamie. Sorry I was trying to make that Red Stripe Statment and Petrelis’ rejoinder a bit more clear but may have only succeeded in muddling it further. The jist of it is that Red Stripe can’t even say that they are pulling their support because of anti-gay violence. They won’t even say the word gay, so as not to offend Jamaicans (where anti-gay attitudes are wide spread). I met a filmmaker, a Jamaican woman at the protest last night who making a film about the violence in her homeland. Was she “ignorant and racist” as you accuse us of being?
Alec
@Jamie:
Mormons tithe; moreover, you need to agree to tithe to join the church. The LDS church even accepted proposition 8 donations as part of tithing.
It is most certainly not bigotry.
DM
Is ganja part of the boycott?
Chitown Kev
@Jamie:
@Alec:
Again, I will split the difference on this, since there have been calls for Jamaican boycotts going back 2 years.
But, again, here is a case of an all-too-typical knee-jerk reaction and last-minute planning on the part of an American GLBT group.
Christopher
South African boycotts had the direct support of communities within South Africa, many of who risked everything to support them.
The gay community in Jamaica has for the most part said “thanks, but no thanks” to these boycotts, and the only response that the Boycott Jamaica camp has to that lack of support is “oh, but those poor dears, they just can’t support such a thing for fear of their lives”. It’s really sad how patronizing and pathetic this campaign is, and how little credit it gives to the actual queer Jamaicans who are struggling every day.
Alec
@Christopher:
Actually, I don’t really care what gay people in oppressive countries think about such boycotts, because I’m not going to knowingly provide support to states, directly or indirectly, that tolerate such things. I’ve heard that Dubai is lovely and a Middle Eastern mecca for gays; you’d never get me to visit (and that isn’t solely because homosexuality is illegal there).
Don’t look at this as targeting Jamaica, look at it as, say, rewarding the Virgin Islands.
@Chitown Kev: I don’t really think it even needs to be well planned to bring about pressure, given the economic crisis and the expected downturn in tourism revenue this year. I don’t really expect them to change any time soon, but if it helps raise awareness and puts pressure on them in the long run, good.
Chitown Kev
@Alec:
I hear you, Alec.
Still, I would have loved for this to have been a joint statement by the Canadian and British LGBT groups that have actually been working with J-FLAG for years and have done limited boycotts. This does a bit like a “Castro Monroe Doctrine” even if that is not the intent. Again, as with the No On 8 and even the gay teabag protests yesterday, it just seems like kneejerk, reactionary planning. Reactionary, in this case, tho the “I don’t give a damn” attitude from the Jamaican government.
Wayne
I definately don’t have all the answers. But I’ve been to Jamaica and witnessed the homophobia for myself, I think any effort to call attention to the brutal treatment of gay men in Jamaica is well worth the effort. As I said earlier, I met a Jamaican woman, a filmmaker at the protest last night. She was well aware of the violence and homophobia in her homeland. She was doing her best to call attention to it. She did not view our attempts to highlight the matter as racist and she seemed quite enthusiatic about bringing any type of attention or pressure against the violence in her homeland of Jamaica.
Chitown Kev
[REWIND}
I hear you, Alec.
Still, I would have loved for this to have been a joint statement by the Canadian and British LGBT groups that have actually been working with J-FLAG for years and have done limited boycotts. This does a bit like a “Castro Monroe Doctrine” even if that is not the intent. Again, as with the No On 8 and even the gay teabag protests yesterday, it just seems like kneejerk, reactionary planning. Reactionary, in this case, to the “I don’t give a damn” attitude from the Jamaican government.
Chitown Kev
@Wayne:
OK, where is she? Let’s interview her.
MadProfessah
Here’s a statement from a prominent Jamaican LGBT activist (who used to be the spokesperson for J-FLAG) Gareth Henry who because of death threats had to flee the country and now lives in Canada:
Wayne
@Chitown Kev.
Her name was Selena Blake (she interviewed me for her film project and gave me her card – but I’m en route to Fire Island as we speak and don’t have it with me). But I believe she said her website was http://www.TabooYardies.com
Chitown Kev
@Wayne:
Thanks. I’ll look that link up when I get home.
John from England(used to be just John but there are other John's)
@DM:
Yes!
ALL Jamaican products!
Alec
@MadProfessah: If the community that you claim that this boycott will benefit is not in support, what is your purpose of continuing?
What if I just want to reward countries that are tolerant and encourage people to redirect their purchasing and tourism dollar there? The Jamaican government has no right to tourism revenue, after all.
Elijah
Gareth Henry’s own suffering doesnt’ make him right: BOYCOTT JAMAICA!
Jamie’s idiocy just makes him an idiot. “Innocent” poor, poor shat upon Mormons my ass!
The second great boycott in the US after the Boston Tea Party was the 1955 boycott of the segregationist city bus system in Montgomery, Alabama, that went on FOR A YEAR, and I’m sure there were some white bus drivers who weren’t racist.
But the ones hurt the most were black riders who had organized it THEMSELVES! Normally, I’m loathe to quote Wikipedia because its based on arrogance, but:
“When the city pressured local insurance companies to stop insuring cars used in the carpools, the boycott leaders arranged policies with Lloyd’s of London. Black taxi drivers charged ten cents per ride, a fare equal to the cost to ride the bus, in support of the boycott. When word of this reached city officials on December 8, 1955, the order went out to fine any cab driver who charged a rider less than 45 cents. In addition to using private motor vehicles, some people used non-motorized means to get around, such as cycling, walking, or even riding mules or driving horse-drawn buggies. Some people also hitchhiked. During rush hours, sidewalks were often crowded. As the buses received extremely few, if any, passengers, their officials asked the City Commission to allow stopping service to black communities. Across the nation, black churches raised money to support the boycott and collected new and slightly used shoes to replace the tattered footwear of Montgomery’s black citizens, many of whom walked everywhere rather than ride the buses and submit to Jim Crow laws.
In response, opposing whites swelled the ranks of the White Citizens’ Council, the membership of which doubled during the course of the boycott. The councils sometimes resorted to violence: Martin Luther King’s and Ralph Abernathy’s houses were firebombed, as were four black Baptist churches. Boycotters were often physically attacked.
Under a 1921 ordinance, 156 protesters were arrested for “hindering” a bus, including King. He was ordered to pay a $500 fine or serve 386 days in jail. He ended up spending 2 weeks in prison. The move backfired by bringing national attention to the protest. King commented on the arrest by saying: ‘I was proud of my crime. It was the crime of joining my people in a nonviolent protest against injustice’.
[In addition to resulting in an unprededented US Supreme Court decision} the Montgomery Bus Boycott sent vibrations throughout the United States, which stimulated a national struggle for freedom and justice, the Civil Rights Movement.
The boycott resulted in the U.S. civil rights movement receiving one of its first victories and gave Martin Luther King, Jr. the national attention that made him one of the prime leaders of the cause.”
STAND UP FOR EQUALITY AND JUSTICE! BOYCOTT JAMAICA! BOYCOTT ANYTHING MORMON-CONNECTED!
Chitown Kev
I don’t think this is racist at all.
I think it is an attempt to do something, esp. after what must be the powerless feeling of the California GLBT community after Prop 8. Nothing wrong with that, but poor, poor planning and execution, yet again (though to give Petrilis credit, he has been in contact with J-FLAG.
Chitown Kev
@Chitown Kev:
This is only my opinion.
Orinda Cookie
I just read through this forum, and found the back and forth about the boycott interesting, but what struck me the most, was the http://www.travelzoo.com ad at the bottom for a $399 Jamaica All-Incl. Getaway
Alec
@Orinda Cookie: Heh:
http://services.google.com/feedback/abg?url=http://www.queerty.com/boycott-jamaicas-rum-dump-20090416/&hl=en&client=ca-pub-3630375455030848&adU=www.travelzoo.com&adT=ImageAd&done=1
mick
These people in San Francisco don’t care about Jamaican GLBT people, they just want to make a scene.
Wayne
I don’t know if anyone has seen Boycott Jamaica’s responce to the JFLAG critique:
http://www.boycottjamaica.org/blog/jflag-is-wrong/
strumpetwindsock
I do support some boycotts, but I am leery about campaigns which do not have a specific goal and a specific target.
Without clear terms you risk hurting people that have nothing to do with righting the wrong, and those at fault may be unaffected (there are plenty of claims in this thread that that is happening here).
Also, while a campaign like this helped against a larger country (South Africa), I think it’s dangerous and not necessarily productive to go wildcat against a tiny, poor nation.
After all, if it is such a matter of principle why don’t you turn off your cars and electricity, stop buying imported and fertilized food as a protest against abuses in oil-producing states?
This is an easy means of protest, and possibly a means of ignoring ills here at home.
Also (and I expect I may get some flak here) I think the protest and the damage done has to be appropriate to the wrong.
On the one hand I wouldn’t step inside a WalMart for any reason. On the other hand I may not want to support a business owned by someone who supported something like Prop8, but do I think someone should be put out of business for their political decisions? Personally, I don’t think so.
Also, it goes both ways. If a homophobic owner tried to bar us from his business we would scream bloody murder. It would even be more of an issue if we were talking about a small community and an essential service.
Actually I have personal experience with this. I am a retailer providing the only local service.I have a customer who has in the past been very public about his racist views. He knows how I feel about him, but I do business with him. I don’t think it would be fair or legal to turn him away any more than the only grocery store in a town could bar a customer. Also, as someone with a rainbow triangle on the door of our business I wouldn’t want arbitrary measures like that turned against me.
Again, I support boycotts against a specific target for a specific goal, and I support like-minded businesses rather than those with different views, but if we all started boycotting each others’ businesses because we disagree it wouldn’t be too long before things break down.
Chitown Kev
@strumpetwindsock:
Well said, as always.
And whatever happened to the “Buycott” idea?
strumpetwindsock
@Chitown Kev:
Good question.
I also meant to say that in most cases if a boycott doesn’t have clear conditions for ending, there’s a problem (and also no incentive for change).
Alec
@strumpetwindsock:
Putting them out of my business transactions is all that I’m really interested in. Also, I don’t think it is equivalent to sexual orientation discrimination, unless your argument is that purchasing from someone should be mandatory. That’s just not the way it works. Moreover, the relationship between a supplier and a customer is very different; anti-discrimination statutes assume this implicitly. There’s no requirement that a fundamentalist Christian purchase from a gay owned business, either. That’s the proper analogy.
From the site, it is clear that they have a specific goal. I think the better response is discouraging people from tourist-related travel to Jamaica in favor of a more tolerant Caribbean nation. Surely not difficult to do within the gay community, as I imagine it is done by couples and individuals traveling in any event.
Chitown Kev
@strumpetwindsock:
As far as I am aware, one of the 2 conditions was striking the “buggery” laws from the books. There were specific goals in mind. (I cvan’t remember the other).
There doesn’t seem to be a specific target though, it seems like a lot of hair-tossing and justifiable outrage at the utter bellicosity of the Jamacian government.
But the rage needs to be focused, this is just blind rage.
strumpetwindsock
@Chitown Kev:
I’m mostly concerned if the people most hurt are poor people losing their jobs and winding up on the street or worse. Big businesses (whether responsible for the law or not) can weather attacks like this a lot easier.
@Alec: We clearly disagree on the need to grind someone into the ground; I think it threatens democracy, and I think it’s not always justified.
Sure I like to see institutions tempered (and in some cases destroyed), but as for voters, I am happy to see them understand what they have done wrong, or perhaps feel some pain. I don’t think it is fair to drive someone out of business because of a moral or political decision any more than it would be fair to drive them out of a community.
Again, if you take that tactic too far things will start to break down. And worse, there is no incentive for anyone to learn and change.
But on the general issue, I think perhaps our difference is semantic. I firmly believe that our dollars have more power to change than our ballots. I’m going to buy local and small rather than big and multinational because I support their aims – not because of formal boycotts. Likewise I prefer to buy from queer-friendly businesses.
But I recall last year being told in an email campaign not to buy from a certain ice cream store because the owner allegedly didn’t let a stroller into the store. I did not participate, nor did I spread the virus any further.
Boycotts and similar actions can do a lot of unfair damage if the are let out of control.
Wayne
I thought you guys might want to see this. It’s video from the Rum Dump at Stonewall and it has an interview with a gay Jamaican man and his views on the boycott movement:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TijsYfO_BOw&feature=player_embedded
rogue dandelion
my question is, do will a jamaica boycott be effective? Who can afford to go to jamaica or anywhere else these days, except AIG supervillains?
libhomo
@Jamie:
There is nothing “bigoted” about boycotting Mormon businesses. The Mormon Church is a racist, sexist, and homophobic hate group. It’s the same thing as boycotting businesses owned by members of the KKK.