On the heels of Boycott Jamiaca’s Rum Dump protest at the Stonewall Inn comes these responses from Jamaicans:
• “Who are they to be imposing their beliefs on us and boycotting Jamaican products? … How is that going to change how people in Jamaica view homosexuality? Isn’t there homophobic people in the US so why not attack ‘Made in the USA?'” —Jamaican ex-pat and Washington D.C. resident Ann Walters
• “There are conservative Christian groups in the U.S. who are very anti-homosexuality and anti-gay so why aren’t they going up against them? … It’s because those groups have a strong lobbying and can’t be pushed around so they’re coming after the weakness of the Jamaicans, which is we don’t have a strong lobby to push back and raise awareness. … How dare they try to castigate an entire island because of their lifestyle? It’s a shame that they want respect but can’t respect our laws.” —Music writer and TSO Productions chief Sharon Gordon
• “This kind of contemptuous behavior is unacceptable … we have to say enough is enough. They seem to have made it a crusade to destroy our country. I think it’s time for a few of us to come together and organize a Caribbean anti-defamation movement to push back against this in a very strategic and surgical manner.” —Magazine publisher Carlyle McKetty
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
Interestingly, Gordon and McKetty (pictured) have a history of being quoted together.
BrianZ
Let me sum it up as I read it :
“We don’t have any real defense of why Jamaican society is so homophobic. We also have no intention of changing it. However, we are dirt poor and exist off American trade dollars so we can’t just NOT respond, even when it makes us look completely ignorant.”
Contemptuous indeed! LOL The nerve of these queers to stand up for themselves.
Chitown Kev
I would respectfully say to Jamaicans that the level of violent crimes against their LGBT population with the clear sanction of their government is unacceptable. The U.S. government at national, state, and some local levels, in spite of its’ faults, does not sanction violence against gay and lesbian people.
Individuals and even organizations do, but not the government.
Qjersey
Well here in the US when gay people get bashed in the head or chased by mobs in the streets, the police don’t just stand by or join in.
Per capita I bet Jamaica beats the US in anti physcial attacks.
We are NOT imposing our beliefs on you, we simply don’t want people who hate us to profit off of us.
The Coors beer boycott is still “on” depending on who you talk to. The company is “LGBT friendly” but the major stockholders who rake in the $$$ donate to anti-LGBT causes.
Chris
We’re not going there, or buying their beer and rum……..isn’t that what they want?
Jason in WV
I don’t know about everyone else, but I do boycott businesses and stores I know to be homophobic. And screw Jamaica if they can’t or won’t change their society – they can be a bunch of POOR homophobes.
InExile
Give it up guys, they just do not get it! I live in the Caribbean, trust me! You should read all the hoopla in our newspaper when gay cruises come here. Many Caribbean islands are loaded with lots of very religious people and that is where the homophobia comes from! Also there are few gay bars and the gay communities are small, so basically they do not know what gay people are.
TANK
That’s just too bad what they think. It really is. Boycotting is the most effective way of making a political statement. It doesn’t matter what these tools believe or say; they’re entitled; and if they were gay, they wouldn’t be entitled to express themselves freely in jamaica without the fear of being lynched. It doesn’t concern me, nor should it concern anyone who’s seriously interested in activism what people who disagree with certain methods that have been proven to be effective time and again have to say. There will always be dissent; the key to any successful movement is the consensus view, and to further go ahead with an ACTUAL plan on the table. They offer nothing but false dilemmas.
TANK
@TANK:
Rather, the key is to abandon the consensus view.
TANK
And it’s founded upon the most vulgar relativism, too (not even a metaethical view, really, as it’s prescriptive to them). It’s vulgar because it’s self defeating…and even small sensible children wouldn’t embrace it after easily spotting the inconsistency… Unfortunately, it’s common amongst those who belong to the multiCULT. Instead of providing agruments, for example, their tactic is diversion and pranksterism that amounts to petty ad hominem arguments, equivocation and strawmen. They are an obnoxious nuisance, but have no real authority, and never will.
Chitown Kev
I do wonder, though, if Jamaicans would be more apt to listen if John Lewis, Maxine Waters, Hillary Clinton, or even Barack Obama said to them that this level of state-sponsored homophobia and sanctioning of violence against LGBTs is unacceptable. Right message, maybe the wrong messenger?
Andrew W
“There are conservative Christian groups in the U.S. who are very anti-homosexuality and anti-gay so why aren’t they going up against them?”
I find that the most extraordinary thing to say. How utterly oblivious is this woman?
stevenelliot
you know what guyz. Go to Aruba, Bonaire, Curacao, St Barths, St John, St Thomas, and Puerto Rico, MAYBE Mustique, Maybe the Dominican Rep. Fuck the rest. Spend your $ where we are welcome and forget the other islands.
Ive been all over the Caribbean and its totally backass and homophobic except the islands mentioned above.
Why do we want everyplace and everybody to like us? Its like jews boycotting Iran for not being hospitable to jewish tourists.
sal
goodness gracious!!i am sooO shocked by this response!!!NOTTT!!!Hurt em where it hurts the most,in their pocket…the hate us but they sure dont mind taking our money
Chitown Kev
hows it going, sal?
sal
@Chitown Kev: hey there,today was cool,the Caribbean is bustling,Obama is down here(just landed actually)
The Gay Numbers
The key element is that they felt the need to make a statement. Already the boycott idea is yielding a result- dialogue. Before as long as we were willing to spend dollars without regard to how we are treated, there was never any attempt to negotiate. Now, when groups realize there is a repercussion to their actions (whether here or in the case of Utah), there is a need to react to us in ways that require them to respond.
strumpetwindsock
I think one problem is the targets being picked and how they are supposed to influence the government.
A tourism boycott makes sense, not just from the economic impact, but also not putting ourselves in a situation to be harmed.
But why continue to boycott Red Stripe, which has already withdrawn sponsorship of homophobic bands? What is the point or the incentive of a boycott that does not end when you have compliance?
Or are people just looking to whip the only dog they can get their hands on?
How about lobbying your government to tie some of your growing foreign aid to human rights improvements?
Or go after one of Jamaica’s major exports – alumina and bauxite (it is the third-largest bauxite producer in the world). U.S.-based Alcoa controls part of that industry, and probably has a bit more pull with their government than a brewery.
And while it’s not directly related, you might want to be aware of the collapse of talks between Jamaica’s main sugar company and Infinity BioEnergy:
http://www.rechargenews.com/energy/biofuels/article170828.ece
Chitown Kev
@The Gay Numbers:
Yes. Now if we could get a dialogue and some communication going on (in other words, diplomacy)…
Chitown Kev
@Chitown Kev:
damn, I should have said communication and diplomacy, numbers said dialogue…it must be time to go home!
TANK
@strumpetwindsock:
Not only was that authentic frontier gibberish, but it expressed a courage rarely seen in this day and age.
John
My friends from school are Jamaican, there uncle is gay, he ran the most popular gay-ish resort in Jamaica during the 1970’s and 80’s and the town people knew him and he was a part of the community. Then religion took a very deep hold of the people when the got even worse for Jamaicans and the witch-hunts started. In 1992 the town began talking about “those gays” who were visiting the resort and the stories of how gay men would sodomize the children, bring drugs and orgies, etc..started and they went from being innocent gossip to the truth, all led by the church leaders. One night the resort was over-run by an angry mob who burned the place down and beat the staff and the owner. He moved to Queens and hasn’t been back since.
My friends say that Jamaicans have a very uneducated, backwards view on everything that isn’t christian/catholic. Word of mouth is predominant and their word of mouth is that gays are the product of a failed, warped society. There is nothing we can do to change them or their minds, they are a country of Fred Phelps believers. They think we woke up one morning and chose to suck each others dicks and piss off our parents by not having children and grandchildren, and no one is teaching them anything different. They honestly believe we CHOSE to be this way, you can’t argue with ignorance like that. Let them rot.
BobP
First of all, if that’s their best defense then they are even more ignorant than I thought. I don’t care whether these backward bigots like me or not. I just want to make sure that folks don’t go there and enrich them in any way. There are plenty of other places to travel and spend our gay dollars. I love telling people how violent these supposed “religious” idiots are. They have, among their many, many other fine achievements, the highest murder rate in the world. Way to go you morons.
strumpetwindsock
@TANK:
Did you have something constructive to add, or are you just trolling again?
John from England(used to be just John but there are other John's)
No shock here..
sal
@John: hey,lucky your uncle got out
sal
..i mean ya pals uncle
alan brickman
it’s because jamaica is full of black people..and gays are usually the biggest bigots I meet on the scence…seriously….
sal
@alan brickman: sorry to break that thought but im half black and i support the boycott
RainaWeather
@sal: I guess that makes you the final authority then
Tim
I was really undecided on the boycott before reading this. Now, I’m for it 110%. Too many, certainly the vast majority, of Jamaicans are arrogantly hateful louts.
scott ny'er
@John: that was some interesting history. Thanks, John.
More reason to boycott Jamaica. Which I’m all for.
sal
@RainaWeather: no it doesnt but u shouldnt throw “racism”in a forum where u cant SEE da people u accuse
Cee
lol There is enough ignorant Americans to deal with than to be concerned with some ignorant ass Jamaicans. All the batty mon over there. They should find a clue.
strumpetwindsock
I mentioned in the other thread on this issue that there is a big problem when boycotts don’t have strict targets, goals, and conditions for ending.
Things can get out of control and innocent people can wind up suffering a lot.
You want to end the sodomy laws and refusal to curb homophobic hate crime, good.
Don’t turn this into a vendetta against all Jamaicans. If you want to point fingers there’s more than enough evil and injustice in all our countries (especially the rich ones) to go around.
If people down there were getting a fair wage for sugar, minerals, bananas, and the tourist trade perhaps things might be a little different down there. Poverty and misery breed disctimination, and while I don’t think we’re directly responsible we aren’t 100 percent blameless either.
TANK
Are you saying that jamaica’s gnp is inaffected by red stripe sales in the united states? There are strict targets. Tourism and jamaican exports. Considering that gay bars are gay largely businesses that buy jamaican exports, it seems reasonable to expect the boycott to include them. By your failed reasoning, no boycott is legitimate, for clearly every boycott involves collateral damage by your strict parameters.
strumpetwindsock
@TANK:
In the first place I said a tourist boycott is valid for a number of reasons, the main one being not putting ourselves in harms way, and spending our dollars in countries where we are not as likely to be attacked.
But as for the rest of the so-called boycott, Red Stripe has already capitulated. Why is there still a campaign against them? Why should any of the targetted companies change if they know they will continue to be punished?
Like I said, I think this might be a case of whipping the only dog you can get ahold of. This is just blind vengance, not a boycott.
http://streetknowledge.wordpress.com/2008/04/07/red-stripe-pulls-plug-on-reggae-concerts-over-gay-protests/
TANK
In the first place I said a tourist boycott is valid for a number of reasons,
Then STFU. Jeez, there’s no pleasing some people.
TANK
But as for the rest of the so-called boycott, Red Stripe has already capitulated. Why is there still a campaign against them? Why should any of the targetted companies change if they know they will continue to be punished?
Because sustaining their home country’s bigoted antigay beliefs ain’t too good for bidness in the civilized world. Purveyors of alcohol are above the fray for a reason…it doesn’t make good business sense. I’d hardly call that capitulating…from what? There was an international protest about raggae, and they stemmed the tide of red ink by distancing themselves from it. NOnetheless, if they contribute to jamaica’s gnp (Which they do), then they indirectly prop up bigotry.
strumpetwindsock
@TANK:
Plus Red Stripe is now owned by Guinness, I believe, and the decision to pull funding was actually made in Europe.
I am sure the action made a lot of people down there pay attention when concert sponsorship was pulled. I’m sure it made a lot of people mad and hopefully made them think about the reasons for the boycott.
But financially I doubt it would be enough to harm the government – certainly not as much as if we went after their major exports.
TANK
@strumpetwindsock:
Which makes even more sense why it was pulled.
strumpetwindsock
@TANK:
In other words you don’t care if they are no longer supporting homophobic and violent music, you want the company (and presumably the entire economy) shut down.
I’m not interested in going there at all.. and as I said elsewhere if the promoters of these attacks (not boycotts) were so principled why aren’t they taking similar action against homophobia in oil producing states by turning off their cars, air condiitoning, and refusing to buy plastics and fresh produce?
Because Jamaica is an easy and vulnerable target, that’s why.
TANK, I may just have to go out and buy a case of Red Stripe to thank them for their consideration of gay rights and anti-violence.
TANK
Your reasoning applies to all boycotts, though. So you’re apparently against all of them. I disagree, and many other sane people of all political/social creeds do, too.
Yes, it was a good PR move to stop funding bigoted music after an international outcry about it occurred. It wasn’t even “their” decision, apparently, if they’re owned by guiness. The fact of the matter is that it’s manufactured in jamaica, and contributes to jamaica’s gdp. I want the bigotry in jamaica to STOP, not the jamaican economy to fail. If the economy takes a hit because of the bigotry it embraces on an institutional and local level, that will facilitate a change in attitude faster than anything else. Not to suggest that this effort will, but perhaps (tourism is a huge industry in jamaica). It’s practically a law of nature. But I’ll be goddamned if I boycott guiness, though, because they make a fine product. Though, I prefer more authentic irish stouts, to be honest…than guiness…and that, too, has a political component.
strumpetwindsock
@TANK:
I do support boycotts… real boycotts.
Guinness are the ones making the real profit off Red Stripe. What goes to Jamaica is taxes and jobs.
But as I said, I don’t think they should be boycotted if they have capitulated, so you’re off the hook in my books.
TANK
No, you don’t. And you don’t see why because you’re…all of the reasons you’ve provided can be extrapolated and applied to all boycotts. This conversation IS OVER. You don’t have a point.
TANK
The MOST that that can mean is that diageo has an interest in curbing jamaican homophobia.
strumpetwindsock
@TANK:
Man, you should stop pretending to make logical arguments until you actually know how to structure them.
In order for a boycott to work it has to have a clear target, clear goals, and clear terms for ending.
The Guinness company doesn’t make the laws in Jamaica or tell the cops to turn a blind eye. They have done all they can to comply with the boycott – yanking sponsorship from events.
Any further action against Guinness is no longer a boycott; it’s just vengance, and not very effective vengance at that.
Your saying I don’t support boycotts is not going to make me walk into WalMart or buy from other companies I do now support. You can call it whatever you want.
You on the other hand have a dilemma. If you actually support the boycott on Red Stripe then you are breaking that boycott by buying Guinness.
And a lot of other booze as well. Check out who else they own:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diageo
Time to hit those microbreweries.
strumpetwindsock
@strumpetwindsock:
companies I do “Not” support, I mean
Dabq
Yet another serious issue made into a boring back and forth, maybe some of those who are up in arms need to buy a mirror and look at the way they discriminate themselves before telling others not to. I doubt that few posting here really care about what’s happing to the glbt communities in Jamaica, other than lip service.
The Gay Numbers
@Dabq: But you do care by posting here? Weird comment.
strumpetwindsock
@Dabq:
Not sure what you mean.
My main concern is that any campaign achieve it’s goals without hurting innocent people or spinning out of control.
While some of this campaign looks to be effective (the tourism boycott) some other actions are just making noise to feel good, IMHO, and you only have to read this thread to see that some people just want to hurt all Jamaicans indiscriminately (not talking about you, TANK).
Boycotts are serious actions that can have serious consequences.
TANK
And that, strumpet, is founded upon an ignorance of what heterosexual privilege and homophobia are. Just because a man doesn’t abuse his wife, but says nothing about those who do–and, in so doing, sustain the gender inequities that the man who does nothing is a beneficiary of–HE is a part of the problem.
No, it won’t cancel out if red stripe sales go down. And you have a remarkable naivete about the power that businesses have or countries like jamaica.
There are no innocents.
TANK
@TANK:
that was an example meant to illustrate that “innocent” people contribute to the problem. And I agree that the tourism boycott is much more promising.
strumpetwindsock
@TANK:
Here’s an overview of the Jamaican economy from the CIA Factbook:
http://www.theodora.com/wfbcurrent/jamaica/jamaica_economy.html
You will notice that services (primarily tourism) accounts for 60 percent of GDP.
Aluminum (alumina, bauxite) are fairly high up the list of industries. Rum is also there, further down, but beer is not even mentioned.
I said I felt the tourist boycott made sense, but that there were better targets than booze. Sugar is their main agricultural export, then bananas but the sugar industry is already on the ropes as I mentioned above.
And there are NO innocents?
TANK, are you sure you’re not auditioning to be Bill Perdue’s Mini-Me? Because you’re doing a great impression.
TANK
Better targets than booze in the gay “community”? Get the fuck outa town! LOL!
strumpetwindsock
@TANK:
If by better you mean easy and convenient, then you’re right.
Appropriate and effective in changing government policy is another question entirely.
TANK
Nope. Better for what the gay community is, period. It has the potential to be effective. Once you involve businesses whose revenue flows are impacted, they can do amazing things to pressure corrupt third world governments like jamaica to change (booze in conjunction with tourism). Money and force or the threat of it…those are the timeless motivators of social change (usually for the worst) in less evolved parts of the world.
Alec
@TANK: I agree in principle, but this is hilarious:
The US, Europe and Oceania aren’t evolved?
TANK
Well, the threat of force isn’t how business is conducted in a country as sophisticated as the united states. In third world countries, people get what they want by having guns and men willing to die shooting them at other men with the intent of killing them… In the u.s., money is all that is required…in the form of a political campaign contribution instead of a private bank account like in,say, russia (usually, anyway)…
Queerky
Oh yes, American boycotts really work. Cuba is about to roll-back its human rights abuses any day now. I reckon another fifty years of ‘trade embargo’ ought to teach them a lesson. Since Cuba was so successful let’s tackle Jamaica in the same way.
strumpetwindsock
@TANK:
Hey, I think I saw that movie – Team America World Police.
Pound the shit out of them and wreck things indiscriminately until they cave, then pound them some more just because you feel like it.
As Queerky said, that strategy has a really good track record – in British India, Vietnam, Gaza, Ireland – any number of places.
And I’m not sure what you mean by “evolved”, but I know when you start making distinctions like that a lot of Americans (like the 19th Century Brits) assume their country is the most advanced product of that evolution, and assume the moral authority to throw their weight around any way they want.
I know our country has gotten enough attention from you guys for our “anti-free market” health care and economic systems, so although I support putting pressure on the Jamaican government, I get a bit leery when you start humming “The Battle Hymn of the Republic”.
strumpetwindsock
@strumpetwindsock:
Ah, I meant the “Marines’ Hymn”. Must be getting forgetful again.
TANK
Yeah, it’s all the same. We’re no better nor worse than a society that embraces female genital mutilation or rapes underaged virgins because they believe it’s a cure for hiv/aids. It’s all the same…idiot.
strumpetwindsock
@TANK:
In many ways our countries are more advanced, but we also have far more advantages, and we have nothing to be proud of given the barbaric and inhumane behaviour that exists within our own borders. Strip away our power and advantage, and we are not much better, and certainly no more intelligent, IMO.
Most importantly, because we are more advanced and powerful, we have an obligation to use that strength fairly and play within the rules. Unfortunately most powerful states do the opposite, and in fact promote oppression in other countries to our advantage.
That we turn around and look down on them for being “backwards” without seeing our part in that system of oppression just adds insult to injury.
TANK
So, because of, say, our treatment of american indians, we can’t come down hard on antigay violence and bigotry in jamaica or anywhere else? LOL! You, sir, are a joke. Not much better when we strip away our power? I guess that includes state sanctioned murder of oppressed minorities?
Most powerful states do the opposite because they’re just as self interested as less powerful states. Our part in that system of oppression is incidental to the current state of affairs.
TANK
And no more intelligent? oy…pomo cultural relativity at its worst. I do hope you avail yourself of several spiritual and homeopathic treatments when diagnosed with cancer INSTEAD of western medicine. I really do. It’s clearly no more advanced.
TANK
@TANK:
That is, it is not an excuse for evil behavior.
strumpetwindsock
@TANK:
I think I said a couple of times already that I am in favour of parts of the Jamaican boycott.
What I oppose is thoughtless indiscriminate attack with no conditions or strategy. I think part of what is going on here is just that.
And no, I don’t think North Americans are any more intelligent than other people. We have a lot more resources, but we are no smarter.
I would say we are a lot more blind and inexperienced when it comes to recognizing the way thing actually work in this world.
John from England(used to be just John but there are other John's)
@strumpetwindsock:
What about Africa??
“As Queerky said, that strategy has a really good track record – in British India, Vietnam, Gaza, Ireland – any number of places.”
🙁
John from England(used to be just John but there are other John's)
@Queerky:
They are doing it for COMPLETELY diff reasons!! Please read a larger variety of sources!
CUBA was sanctioned cause a wat dude?? Cause they were EVIL socialists that wouldn’t buy into the American controlled free frigging market!
It wasn’t because of something as real, social and to the heart as persecution….or gays, blacks, women etc..
So already you’re not making sense comparing diff reasons for boycotts.
Maybe one day, YOUR country and MINE may actually do boycotts for ethical reasons instead of financial political reasons…
TANK
And I think you’re full of shit concerning
What I oppose is thoughtless indiscriminate attack with no conditions or strategy.
There’s no good argument coming from you.
As to north americans being more intelligent, or europeans, or whatever (I don’t think that’s true, and didn’t say that…), there’s an interesting theory proposed in a book entitled guns germs and steel.
strumpetwindsock
@John from England(used to be just John but there are other John’s):
I know, I know. If we tried to make a complete list there wouldn’t be a place in the world untouched.
strumpetwindsock
@John from England(used to be just John but there are other John’s):
And I assume the first part of your comment is facetious (hard to tell sometimes – not you specifically). We actually catch enough shit from the U.S. for Canada’s support of Cuba.
That embargo had more to do with Russia than Cuba.
John from England(used to be just John but there are other John's)
@John from England(used to be just John but there are other John’s):
Pedanticness is a desease!
I meant….
“It wasn’t because of something as real, social and to the heart as persecution…..of gays, blacks, women etc..”
strumpetwindsock
@John from England(used to be just John but there are other John’s):
Pedantry.
And I actually there were accusations of persecution on both sides of that embargo – including that the U.S. goal was to re-impose the persecution that created the revolution in the first place.
But we’re off on a tangent.
The Gay Numbers
@Queerky: South Africa.
The Gay Numbers
@Chitown Kev: Negoation starts when people have a reason to be at the table. Until now, it was you can kill us and we will still give you our money. Now, it’s you got to give us protection or we aren’t showing up. One is a victim, and the other is someone taking charge of a situation.
John from England(used to be just John but there are other John's)
@strumpetwindsock:
“It wasn’t because of something as real, social and to the heart as persecution….or gays, blacks, women etc..”
I know that and I know you know that. It was all about communisism. The Russians helped out the Cubans to piss of that ‘free market self involved crap the Americans were creating and are still creating’.
And you say…
Pedantry…is not..
“Pedanticness is a desease!”
I say , I know 😉
But I like it.
Robin
Jamaica is being boycotted due to the many deaths of gay activists in the country rampant with violent anti-gay victimization. While many in Jamaica celebrate their right to homophobia and traditionalism, sexual minorities can choose more inclusive destination in order to avoid potential hate and violence. Ignorance is no defence. Be homophobic, you’ll just be poorer doing it.