Be Thy Brother's Keeper

Another letter I have penned with hopes of having my voice heard on this particular issue once more.

The Editor Sir,

The argument posited by certain members of the religious right and the nouveau intelligentsia that it would be illogical to repeal the buggery law in light of the disproportionate rates of HIV infection recorded among Men who have Sex with Men (MSM) in epidemiological data is flawed at its core and demonstrates a lack of understanding of the variables which account for this disproportionate rate.

The argument is that retention of the buggery law in light of the rates of infection is in fact prohibitive towards new infections and is ergo a societal good. I submit that this analysis is fallacious.

The buggery law is but one of many variables which exacerbate the systemic vulnerabilities of MSM to HIV infection. I would never propose that repealing the law would serve as a panacea; in fact I posit that it is merely the first step in the right direction for government in the creation of a supportive social environment that will advance the welfare of every Jamaican  with special attention paid to those with peculiar vulnerabilities.

A fatal (though intentional) flaw of Marc Ramsey's and Shirley Richards' diatribes of exclusion published November 12, 2011  was the failure to recognize how the buggery law legitimizes hostile attitudes toward sexual minorities and how in fact its retention is a symbol of the complicity of government in the abuse suffered at the hand of misguided homophobes that operate with a spirit of entitlement as a result of a law they interpret to mean that MSM are un-apprehended criminals furtively existing outside the scope of justice. How these misguided souls are encouraged by pious hypocrites is another matter for another column but all part of the cycle of abuse at the hands of clerics.

MSM are not infectious disease vectors any more than another societal demographic but the vulnerabilities faced by this population can only be addressed through open dialogue with an aim to reduce vulnerability, foster social inclusion, and curb the spread of disease.

This is the meaning of being your brother’s keeper. It is a pity those among us that purport to have a closer relationship with the author of these words continuously fail to demonstrate his most basic philosophies and instead choose to perpetuate separatist ideals.

I am Sincerely,

Brian-Paul N. Welsh

brianpaul.welsh@gmail.com

St. Andrew, Jamaica

Update: Letter was published but edited to sound less stinging. I'm not a big fan of censorship but at least the message has got out there despite the Gleaner's best efforts to silence dissenting voices and the seeming cass-cass brewing in the editorial department over this recently introduced epidemiological fallacy.

Subscribe in a reader

The campaign continues...

Today's thoughts committed to paper:

The Editor Sir,

The problem with giving uncritical minds new knowledge is that it inspires them to use these tools to validate already questionable deductive capacities and it usually results in the creation of logical fallacies.

Unfortunately such was the case with Elvena Williams whose letter was published Wednesday November 9, 2011 under the title “Meet Gays Halfway But...”.

She prefaces her proficiency as a social scientist by describing a study she conducted untold years prior under the topic “Profile of the Jamaican Homosexual” wherein she interviewed 50 male homosexuals aged 25-45 from white-collar backgrounds. Surely she could not have expected such a limited sample to allow her to extrapolate findings capable of constituting a “profile” of any social group much less one as diverse as male homosexuals and to go further to prove that homosexuality is a matter of choice. But by her own admission not only did she expect it, she also achieved it.

If so then she has achieved something that has eluded the fields of philosophy, psychology and gender studies since their inception. She has apparently outsmarted all the major gender theorists and psychologists such as Kinsey, Hooker and Klein and rubbished their seminal work!

She is hesitant to ascribe any notion of heredity to homosexuality and instead likens it to mental disorders such as schizophrenia and bi-polar disorder. This of course betrays the presumed authority of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) which de-listed homosexuality from the category of mental disorders almost 40 years ago. She has reversed decades of science in one fell swoop! Amazing!

As a result of her findings and in recognition of human rights she prescribes a modified retention of the buggery law which decriminalizes male same-sex activity in a private sphere but outlaws the “flaunting of this lifestyle in public spaces” such as “drag parties”. This would effectively shut down the very lucrative and popular roots theatre industry but that’s alright because it’s done in the interest of public morality!

She means well, but her circular reasoning to get there has certainly taken my head for a spin.

Fact is, no one knows the origins of human sexuality. Whether sexuality is chosen, pre-determined, or an accident of evolution is immaterial when it comes to legislating the activities of consenting adults in their private abodes. That is the essence of the campaign to repeal the buggery law.

Sincerely,

Brian-Paul N. Welsh

Brianpaul.welsh@gmail.com

We'll see if it is published. Doubt it anyway because it's over the 300 word limit.
Subscribe in a reader

AIDS Free World's Press Conference

I am so glad I was there to participate in this initiative.I hope that the dialogue will continue and I am certainly encouraged in light of this editorial.









Subscribe in a reader

Crosses here again!

So Aunty Shirley has risen from her slumber and you know I had to respond with a letter of my own!

Dear Sir,

I offer some sympathy to S. Richards as she struggles to understand the complexities of the troubling situation involving the relationship between Men who have Sex with Men (MSM), HIV and prohibitive laws. In fact it is something I tend to refer to as the Paradox of HIV Infection.

It is indeed a paradox in that in the three decades since HIV and AIDS were discovered with the resulting plethora of social and legal changes and the billions of dollars that have been spent to curb the spread, we as advocates and policy makers have been at pains to rationalize the apparent resistance of seroprevalence rates to fall correspondingly.

In health surveys done all over the world from limping developing nations such as ours to seemingly streamlined developed ones such as in Europe the peculiar vulnerabilities of the MSM population to HIV infection have been recognized and despite our best efforts and success in changing the minds of the general population from viewing AIDS as “the gay cancer”, high rates of infection persist among the MSM population. This has been attributed largely to restrictive social environments which foster a type of disenfranchisement that is conducive to risky sexual behaviours. The response has been to rally for an ease in prohibitive laws and attitudes coupled with targeted interventions in order to give MSM the necessary social capital to illicit behaviour change. There have been tremendous successes in this regard and it is true that despite major challenges the general population and in particular the vulnerable communities are well educated about HIV, AIDS, their own vulnerabilities, and the responsibility of the state to protect them from harm, and yet high rates of infection persist.

In response there has emerged a bit of an impasse between advocates such as myself and Richards about the repeal of the absurdly invasive law which is contained in the Offenses against the Persons Act and known as “the abominable crime of Buggery”. It has become an issue of Epidemiology versus Social Justice.

Persons such as Richards argue, given the worrying facts as I have highlighted above, that to repeal the buggery law would be socially irresponsible, intellectually dishonest, illogical and indicative of a more sinister agenda orchestrated by powerful gays to corrupt public morals. They cite epidemiological evidence as irrefutable proof that MSM are hell-bent on destruction (pun intended); they use examples mockingly equating anal sex and HIV to the cancer-causing effects of smoking cigarettes and asking whether a ban on cigarette smoking should be repealed given these facts if one existed; and they glibly give the impression that AIDS is just recompense for a reckless hedonistic lifestyle. I argue that their thinking is non-critical and that their brains have been infected by the dogma of their bibles and not affected by logic or the rhetoric of equality that the social revolution of the past 50 years has imbued.

As an advocate for social justice I argue that MSM are not infectious disease vectors as implicitly posited by Richards and others of her ilk and that it is evident based on the epidemiological data that we simply have not found that elusive answer or answers that will curb HIV infection generally much less for those among us with intrinsic and systemic vulnerabilities!

Botswana, Lesotho, South Africa, Swaziland, and Zimbabwe all have adult infection rates near or above 15% of the general population and no one would ever suggest that Africans should be outlawed or that coitus should be prohibited. Why then are MSM fair game for discrimination?

We must continue to explore the evidently causal relationship between restrictive legal and social environments and the elevated levels of HIV infection among the vulnerable. We must however do so objectively, carefully examining each variable and its complexities so that we can sufficiently articulate to cynics the specifics of how laws such as the buggery law, the hostility of the populace, and the complicity of the government perpetuate vulnerability and exacerbate infection rates among MSM.

In the mean time I advise Richards to take her nose or imagination out of people’s bedrooms and instead be a champion of social justice and the protection of the vulnerable as the good book prescribes.

I am Sincerely,
Brian-Paul N. Welsh
Brianpaul.welsh@gmail.com

I hope I was able to put her back to bed (and that it will be published of course).

Subscribe in a reader

This won't be a long one

Ordinarily I would ignore such arrant rot as I've come to learn that certain types of stupid really cannot be helped. No amount of rhetoric can cure such a dotish mental capacity and I really haven't the energy to expend on making an attempt.

But something about seeing this while scrolling through the photos of a questionably straight acquaintance (and former lust interest) of mine stopped me in my tracks.

That this imbecile would highlight the verse that is said to condemn all forms of male homosexuality while ignoring the dozens of other ridiculously misogynistic and arguably misanthropic laws that precede and follow it defies the definition of a critical mind.

Idiots such as this cannot be said to have a comprehensive understanding of theology and would rather pick and choose the verses that justify their idiotic beliefs! I am completely exasperated! Aargh!!!!!!

Comedy break:

 

  "Prop 8 - The Musical" starring Jack Black, Allison Janney, John C. Reilly, Marc Shaiman, and many more...  - Americablog

- Watch more Funny Videos at Vodpod.

Selective morality annoys me to world's end.

Lord please grant me the patience to educate instead of decimate the jackasses that bray this nonsense at every opportunity.

Amen.

p.s. I'm cleaning my gun just in case the education won't take.

Subscribe in a reader