but seriously...

You probably should watch this

Sat, 02 Jun 2012 10:36:45 -0400

‘We Were Here’ is the first film to take a deep and reflective look back at the arrival and impact of AIDS in San Francisco, and how the City’s inhabitants dealt with that unprecedented calamity. Though this is a San Francisco based story, the issues it addresses extend not only beyond San Francisco but also beyond AIDS itself. ‘We Were Here’ speaks to our societal relationship to death and illness, our capacity as individuals to rise to the occasion, and the importance of community in addressing unimaginable crises.

__

I started watching this last week (you can watch it here), but at the time it was too hard to finish because, quite frankly, it is unnerving to see unless you know your HIV status - whether you’re gay or straight.

Now that I know I can breathe a sigh of relief, I’ve watched it all and I think you should too.

If all goes according to plan, I’ll be specialising in Public Health soon with a focus on HIV/AIDS and, in particular, its prevalence and risk factors among sexual minorities. From that aspect alone this film was awesome, but whether gay or straight it will force some useful introspection that even the best of HIV/AIDS campaigns would fail to do.

Yeah.

Mon, 13 Feb 2012 23:39:26 -0500

Yeah.

Photo fail of the month

Mon, 23 Jan 2012 19:00:44 -0500

This G4S security guard will rue the day he had to apprehend this streaker who disrupted a cricket match at Kensington Oval in Barbados last weekend.

The streaker, 20-year-old-Barbadian Michael Arthur Francis Marshall, will appear in court to answer charges of indecent exposure and trespassing. The unidentified security guard gets off scot-free for fondling.

CBC TV8 serves up weather news and porn

Wed, 11 Jan 2012 07:46:00 -0500

The state-run Caribbean Broadcasting Corporation in Barbados made a huge mistake last night when someone was either (i) watching porn or (ii) fucking, in its newsroom studio. The audio was simulcast with the weather report of the 7:00pm PrimeTime News.

In a statement on its Facebook page some minutes later, the Corporation issued an apology going something like:

The CBC extends deepest apologies to its viewers for the unfortunate happenings in the presentation of the weather news tonight. Be assured that this matter will be dealt with and we commit to doing all possible to ensure there is not a repeat of this action. Thank you for your understanding in this matter.

How embarrassing. And hilarious.

Jamaica: PNP wins in landslide election victory. Turns out that homophobia does not win in Jamaica.

Thu, 29 Dec 2011 22:18:00 -0500

Political cartoonist and JLP support ‘Clovis’ smears gays, PNP…

The People’s National Party (PNP) has claimed victory over the incumbent Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) in today’s parliamentary elections in Jamaica. The post-result political analyses are best left for others. For me, I find it encouraging that homophobic campaigning against the PNP in reaction to its stated position on equal rights for gays to serve in parliament, and a review to repeal the buggery law, clearly made no impact on the majority of voters today.

If it’s not political suicide in Jamaica, I can’t imagine it being so anywhere else in the Caribbean.

Chef who fucked up Barbados' national dish buckles under the collective hate of an entire nation

Mon, 26 Dec 2011 18:11:00 -0500

I’ve been informed that American “chef”, Christina Curry, has totally wiped the internet of her embarrassing cooking video which fucked up Barbados’ national dish - Cou Cou.

You’ll remember that I told her to jump off a bridge here, but only after droves of Bajans told her to do the same all over the internet.

Just in case you lost count:

BARBADOS - 1 : CLUELESS FOREIGNERS - 0

Jamaica's patois Bible: Who's it for?

Sun, 25 Dec 2011 18:16:00 -0500

I am a faux linguist who believes in the importance of preserving “nation language.” Of all such languages, I find Jamaican patois to be one of the most unique and, when spoken by the right person, one of the sexiest Caribbean nation languages one could listen to.

With that said, it goes to reason that I’d fully support the translation of the Holy Bible into Jamaican patois. Further, I think that similar moves to make mainstream literature more accessible and understandable through the use of nation language should be encouraged, particularly if the intention is to appeal to those whose literacy in English is not up to scratch. The problem is, I’m not sure that this was the intention with the Patois Bible.

In my opinion, the phonetic spellings of some words in the Patois Bible are nothing short of mind-boggling, and require the reader to possess as much (or even more) literary competence than s/he would need to understand a rendering of the Bible in Standard English.

An example from the Book of Luke is pasted below:

“ienjel” (angel)? “nyuuz” (news)? “Mieri” (Mary)? REALLY? (Rilli?!) It’s almost like deciphering a secret code.

When deciphered, it’s amazing how authentically Jamaican even I sound while reading it, but I’m willing to bet that this book presents all of the same challenges to the much-less-literate as the Bible’s modern-English versions.

So, on to my question. Is this Bible meant to be any easier for the less-literate masses to comprehend, or is it just meant to be a symbolic triumph for Patois academics? Or, perhaps, it is meant to be read for the masses by such academics? If either of the latter two scenarios is true, there really is no benefit redounding to the Patois Bible’s purported end-user.

I admit, I am not Jamaican and I’ve only lived there for three years. Perhaps some actual Jamaicans could shed some light.

Photo credit: BBC

Jamaican Prime Ministerial hopeful, Portia Simpson-Miller, says gays can serve in her cabinet

Sat, 24 Dec 2011 20:16:00 -0500

But first, a flashback…

KINGSTON, August 19, 2011:

No politician in this country will ever call for the repeal of the buggery laws because that would be tantamount to political suicide. Jamaican politicians are even willing to face international ridicule just to prove to the local populace that they are staunchly opposed to the gay lifestyle. “Not in my Cabinet!” Prime Minister Bruce Golding declared on the British talk show Hardtalk a few years ago. This was in response to being asked if he would tolerate gays in his Cabinet. He was chastised in the international press but many people here loved him for it.

- Leighton Levy, The Jamaica Star

KINGSTON, December 20, 2011:

At the last leadership debate in the lead-up to the Jamaican general elections, Portia Simpson-Miller, leader of the opposition People’s National Party (PNP), said that she had no objection to appointing gays to her Cabinet. And she went further to say that, perhaps, Jamaica should review its buggery laws which effectively criminalise men who have sex with men. This is HUGE!

Perhaps Simpson-Miller may have gotten ahead of herself and didn’t intend to speak on the repeal of the buggery law, but that is just me wondering why she’d take such a huge political risk before actually being elected as Prime Minister in the virulently homophobic island, where hatred of gays seems, prima facie,to be a societal norm.

This bold, though risky, move by Portia Simpson-Miller should be applauded as a turning point in the national and regional political discourse on gay rights. And, if successful, the PNP/Government of Jamaica would - ironically - set precedent in the Caribbean for ending legislated discrimination against LGBTs.

Who’d have thunk it?

Update: The Jamaica Gleaner’s Christmas Day editorial examines the impact of vulgar anti-gay sentiments now being spewed by the incumbent Jamaica Labour Party in the wake of this debate. Apparently, they’ve been quite effective:

Labourite this AM in Christiana: “Vote labour, bun out sodomite, vote labour on December 29th”
— Gordonswaby (@Gordonswaby) December 25, 2011

As Jamaica heads to the polls later this month, this supporter...

Mon, 12 Dec 2011 17:03:33 -0500

As Jamaica heads to the polls later this month, this supporter of the incumbent Jamaica Labour Party dedicates her vagina to Member of Parliament and Minister of Finance, Audley Shaw. Her backside seems also to sport the slogan “Vote JLP”.

Classy.

American chef Christina Curry is hated by Bajans everywhere

Sun, 11 Dec 2011 22:02:00 -0500

In what appears to be the biggest threat to the sovereignty of post-independent Barbados, American chef Christina Curry recently debuted some fucked up alteration of the island’s national dish Cou Cou, and Bajans all over the world are livid! So livid, in fact, that they’ve taken to every conceivable social network to complain, including Curry’s own YouTube channel.

Some of the comments are so horrible that they’re being deleted as soon as they’re posted, but the general gist is:

IF YOU’RE CALLING IT A VARIATION DONT REFER TO IT AS COU COU, CALL IT FRIED CORN MEAL SQUARES. YOU JUST FUCKED UP MY COUNTRY’S NATIONAL DISH, THANKS ALOT

Further shitting on Barbados, Curry replaced Flying Fish - national fish, requisite complement to Cou Cou, and preeminent national symbol of Barbados which is revered in song, depicted on coins, passports, government logos, license cards and just about everything else Bajan - with beef stew.

BEEF STEW!

Oh, Christina…

America’s justice system is, quite frankly, scary.

Thu, 08 Dec 2011 18:24:00 -0500

knitmeapony:

jhameia:

This white dude is crying because he just received a one-year sentence for a hate crime in which he and maybe a dozen other white dudes beat up a black teenager with fists, feet, knives and beer bottles, even after the teen was unconscious. The highest sentence dealt for this crime was three years. The assistant attorney had recommended eight years.

Read more at Resist Racism

One. Year.

There are PoC (particularly young men of color) who get more than a year for possession of marijuana with no intent to distribute, and that’s after they got seriously fucked up by the police. If this was a group of black men who beat up a white man, you can sure as hell bet they’d be getting the recommended eight years as a minimum.

Tell me again the justice system isn’t racist.

Barbados is a lot of things, but it’s not a place where a gang of racist white men can beat my black ass within an inch of death and just one of them gets three months from a conveniently-lenient (RIP Troy Davis), justice system. For that, I am grateful.

Caribbean electorates: Not for sale

Thu, 08 Dec 2011 12:45:00 -0500

By Sir Ronald Sanders
(International consultant and former Caribbean diplomat)

General elections in St Lucia and Guyana on November 28 have raised serious questions about the financing of campaigns and the unfair use of state resources by governing political parties to gain an advantage over their opponents.

In St Lucia, it is alleged that a significant portion of the United Workers Party (UWP) campaign funds came from Taiwan. The UWP was the ruling party at the time of the elections and the then leader of the Opposition and leader of the St Lucia Labour Party (SLP), Kenny Anthony, had engaged in a public row with the Taiwanese Ambassador over his blatant interference in the electoral politics of the island.

In Guyana, it is claimed that the ruling Peoples Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) outspent its three rivals by a sizeable margin in the elections campaign.

International observers from the Commonwealth and the Organisation of American States (OAS) commented unfavourably on campaign financing in both countries. The OAS Observer Mission in St Lucia pointedly called for legislation, including strengthening the Integrity Commission and auditing and reporting mechanisms, and it noted that “Saint Lucians have no access to information regarding campaign financing by the parties”. In Guyana, a similar observation was made by the Commonwealth Observer Group who said “the requirement for declarations of election expenses by parties after the election is not adhered to and the law in this regard is largely symbolic”.

Local observer also raised concerns that both the UWP in St Lucia and the PPP/C in Guyana abused their positions in government to exploit state resources to bolster their positions during the period leading to the elections.

What is significant is that despite the fact that the ruling parties spent more on their campaigns and manipulated state resources to boost their prospects, the opposition parties did extremely well. In St Lucia, the SLP defeated the UWP overwhelmingly to form the government. In Guyana, the opposition parties, A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) with 40.8 per cent of the votes cast and the Alliance for Change (AFC) with 10.3 per cent enjoyed enough support to deny the PPP/C the overall majority in the National Assembly that it had since 1992. Consequently, having secured 48.7 per cent of the voter turn-out, the PPP/C, although it won the Presidency on a plurality of the vote, has had to form a minority government. Of the 65 member National Assembly, the PPP/C has 32 seats and the combined opposition has 33 with 27 held by APNU and 6 by the AFC.

The Commonwealth Observer Mission in Guyana also criticised the bias displayed by the state-owned media for the ruling party. It said the Media Monitoring Unit analysis indicated “overt bias in state-owned media in favour of the government and ruling party” and added “state-owned media has a higher moral responsibility to serve the interests of all citizens, particularly as in some parts of the country it is the only media available to citizens”. This phenomenon is not unique to Guyana. In other parts of the Caribbean, the state-owned media is increasingly controlled by ruling parties for party political propaganda and to deny opposition parties a voice. But, again, it is noteworthy that despite government control of the state media, the opposition parties in Guyana gave the ruling party a robust fight. It is a warning to all ruling political parties that restricting democracy by muzzling state-owned media will do them more harm than good in the judgement of the electorate.

In St Lucia, the SLP has formed the government and Kenny Anthony is Prime Minister while the UWP and its leader, Stephenson King have been scattered in the wind of change ushered in by a dissatisfied electorate.

In Guyana, the new President, Donald Ramotar – elected on a plurality of the vote (as the Constitution provides) not an overall majority – has formed a minority government made up of PPP/C members only. This has created a great deal of bitterness among the supporters of the main opposition party, the APNU which is a combination primarily of the Peoples National Congress founded by the late President, Forbes Burnham, and the Working Peoples Alliance founded by the late historian Walter Rodney. Whether this new arrangement will work in Guyana is left to be seen. Certainly, the combined opposition parties have an opportunity to bargain with the minority PPP/C government over the areas in which money will be spent and how. They are also in a good position to insist on parliamentary oversight committees that will closely examine the operations of key ministries. And, in the final analysis, they could vote against the Government’s Budget and bring government to a halt, thus forcing a new election.

Despite APNU street protests in the immediate aftermath of the Guyana elections – one of which involved Police shooting pellets at participants - APNU leader, David Granger, said on December 6 that the election results have cleared the way for the politics of ‘inclusionary democracy’. He also stated that the APNU will “pursue our legislative programme to ensure that laws are enacted to provide jobs for our youth; to provide relief from the burden of taxation; to alleviate the suffering of our people; to expose and root out corruption and to eliminate discrimination and marginalisation”.

In looking at the issue of money in elections in its member-states generally, the OAS released a report on December 6 titled, ‘Politics, Money and Power: a Dilemma for Democracy’. The report recommends “the creation of broader national regulations concerning the use of funding, the disclosure of political parties and campaigns donors and the creation of a fair and transparent competition in the campaigns”. But, getting these recommendations implemented requires determination by all political parties as well as concerted lobbying and action by civil society in every country.

Nonetheless, the failure of the two ruling parties in St Lucia and Guyana to win the elections overwhelmingly indicates that high spending - while it may have captured a small number of voters – is no longer a decisive weapon. Big spending on advertising, musical extravaganzas and give-aways, and abuse of state resources by ruling parties will not buy an electorate that is dissatisfied with performance.

Responses and previous commentaries at: www.sirronaldsanders.com

Pat Robertson says that God is livid that the United States thinks it's wrong to murder gays and deny them human dignity

Wed, 07 Dec 2011 20:58:00 -0500

Secretary Hillary Clinton’s speech on defending LGBT rights abroad and the new Obama administration policy to protect people around the world who are jailed, beaten and executed for being LGBT have been met with intense uproar from the Religious Right.

Pat Robertson on The 700 Club today said that the policy was “appalling” shows that America is willing to “violate God’s principles and to make a mockery of His laws.” Robertson even warned that God will not tolerate it and “when the blow comes, it’s going to be horrible”

To address your original question regarding violence against women: I think that if you mean rape, say rape. If you mean partner abuse, say partner abuse. But those are the predominate types of violence that women do experience. Calling it "violence against women" serves as a stronger rallying cry than "fight rape" or "fight abuse" because it brings to the fore that this can happen to any woman. It can be a useful term. It does, however, alienate the men who have experienced this violence.

Wed, 07 Dec 2011 20:32:24 -0500

Thanks for your views.

I asked, "is the term violence against women discriminatory?" Feminists reply en masse: "shut the fuck up!"

Wed, 07 Dec 2011 16:54:00 -0500

Earlier today I asked whether the term ‘violence against women’ was discriminatory, and presented my views. I was delighted to read the mostly-vitriolic responses from feminists, which I’ve reproduced below for your consideration (and entertainment). All emphases are mine.

Consider this reblog part of my campaign to at least spend my energy mocking posts on a wider variety of topics, and mocking posts that are more clearly stupid. Also, my long term commitment to misandrist discourse.

- gaylesofnovember

Standing in misandrist solidarity.

Maybe when women aren’t overwhelmingly the victims and men aren’t overwhelmingly the perpetrators we can talk about changing it.

- coldbitterness

Misandrist = saying “well, maybe you aren’t the most important person in this discussion”

seriously, I have a met a lot of people involved in domestic violence activism, and have yet to encounter a single one who was hostile to or unwilling to help a man who was genuinely a victim of partner violence, not to mention all the boys who grow up in homes where violence occurs. It is very much in the interest of women to remove boys from those situations, because they will become men. The underlying implication of this attempt to ungender DV is that advocates are out to harm men, deliberately or by omission, which is fucking appalling considering that it is women who are overwhelmingly the targets of violence. Any attempt to recenter men and sweep the violence inherent in heterosexual interactions under the table lest it alienate anyone (men) only serves to harm women. You can’t even be beat bloody without some fucker asking you to make room for the men, even when men are not there in sufficient numbers to need that room.

so yeah, misandry 4 life

- desliz

SO MUCH FUCKING WORD. GOD! YES! Male victims’ voices should be heard and seen as REAL victims. BUT FOR THE FUCKING LOVE OF GOD-DO NOT SILENCE WOMEN’S VOICES in order to prove a “BUT WAHT ABOUT THE MEN WAAAH!!!” point. It is sick, it is counter-productive, it ignores women, and it is fucking sexist. And also? Wanna know WHY men aren’t seen as real victims in the first fucking place? Because of misogyny and a patriarchal system…one that participates in shit like this. Because women are incapable of being a fucking threat and men are incapable of being real vicitims. That’s fucking why. Whenever a discussion with Violence against women comes up and some asshole (typically a dude, occasionally a woman) starts with a “but it happens to guys too..” I will tell them to fucking check themselves before they wreck themselves. Because seriously? WHAT FUCKING POINT ARE U TRYING TO MAKE?!! What? Are you trying to defend violence women face? Are you trying to erase women’s experience so you can keep the status quo? Because A) that doesn’t help the men you claim are “ignored by the evil women” and B) it does shit to combat VAW and domestic abuse period. WHY ARE YOU SO DEFENSIVE AGAINST THE THOUGHT OF GIVING 2 SHITS ABOUT WOMEN?!?!!! FUCKING WHY??!?! ARE R U A COWARD TRYING TO EVADE THE FACT THAT MISOGYNY EXISTS?!!

- nowherezone11

RAWR.

If these were guys ranting at a woman putting forward her views, this would be psychological abuse and misogynist raving, wouldn’t it? I am entertained by the double standard and still maintain my original views. Which chapter in the Feminist Playbook does it say that “men must not have views which run counter to women’s on the matter of gender based violence, and if they do, there should be no dialogue with them on this matter apart from a barrage of fuck yous”?

Is the term "violence against women" discriminatory?

Wed, 07 Dec 2011 10:07:00 -0500

CODE RED for Gender Justice and Women Speak take exception to a suggestion from a colleague that the term “violence against women” is discriminatory against men, and should be replaced by the term “relationship violence”.

My thoughts, with all due respect to all parties involved:

Wasn’t this solved when we found the term ‘gender-based violence’? I agree that axing ‘violence against women’ in preference for ‘relationship violence’ will not work because there are a number of fronts on which women (and men) face violence.

But, I do not think that adopting the term “gender-based violence” or similar over “violence against women” would help to ‘socialize [us] to devalue a focus on women, [which] not only [allows] violence against women to continue but [creates] a more permissive environment for it to occur’, as WomenSpeak argues.

Re: CODE RED’s view that “erasing the language feminists have invented to describe the harms women disproportionately face is an attempt at silencing women”, I rather think that gender-inclusive lenses through which we view vulnerability are a good thing. I long to see women and men share a platform on issues like these, rather than to frame them almost-exclusively as women’s issues in what very-often comes to look like misandrist discourse.

I’m open to counter-views.

Edit: Oh, sweet Jesus. Would you have a look at the notes in which this post is being seared by feminists? Some of whom are very angry and dare I say, abusive? I love the ‘discussion’ and the opportunity to get further insight on how they think. Check it out.

State Secretary Hilary Clinton's historic speech on LGBT rights. CARICOM, are you listening?

Wed, 07 Dec 2011 09:22:32 -0500

Bill Browning of the Bilerico Project writes:

Here’s the speech everyone is talking about today. It’s being heralded as a modern day “I Have a Dream” speech.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton addressed the United Nations in Geneva this morning and gave a speech about LGBT human rights in honor of the anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Her speech served as a solid statement following the Obama administration’s announcement this morning that it is instructing federal agencies and diplomats to protect and promote LGBT rights internationally.

This is an amazing speech which, unfortunately, may never be endorsed by any Caribbean leader in our lifetime.

Staying positive as climate change talks hit delays

Mon, 05 Dec 2011 09:34:59 -0500

Just when the reasons to despair stare me imposingly in the face, and the urge to give up swells inside me, I seek the presence of people of conscience, and I feel around me the optimism of youth, with its stubborn refusal to accept a fate forced upon it.

Nauru Ambassador to the United Nations, Marlene Moses, on how she maintains hope in the face of frustrating UNFCCC climate negotiations.

Shurwayne Winchester doesn't condone human trafficking, but...

Sun, 04 Dec 2011 22:35:00 -0500

I challenge you to watch this music video by Trinidadian soca star Shurwayne Winchester and to tell me that he and his creative team aren’t idiots.

Let’s be frank about it.

In the intro to this controversial flick, which I’ve only just seen, a locked container filled with women comes to Trinidad from Cuba, a thug pays off a dealer for the cargo, and the gang of newly-purchased humans go on to pole dance in bars for Winchester’s pleasure. It’s so stupid that you’d laugh, if only the depiction of human trafficking and dehumanised women wasn’t so stark.

Who does that? It also doesn’t help that Trinidad & Tobago was criticised in the latest UN Report on Trafficking in Persons for not fully complying with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking.

Winchester later issued a half-assed statement on the matter saying that he had no direct control of the scripting of the introductory scene, and has since cut it from the official video.

Adding insult to injury, the national flag of Trinidad & Tobago - Winchester’s own country - is upside down for the entire video.

Shame, Shurwayne.

Who Is Sara Baartman?

Sun, 04 Dec 2011 14:02:00 -0500

If you don’t care for the prose and opinion that is most of this video, just read about her on Wikipedia.