Something You Should Know Before You Go

Comments

1
This is a legacy of British rule. And Britain can also play a role in stopping anti-gay hate crimes in Jamaica. Between the U.S. and Great Britain, they can feel the pinch. And one thing they advertise on Facebook is Hedonism Resorts.
2
I have a gay friend who is originally from Jamaica. He told me that most of his gay friends from back home have been beaten to death.
3
While Russia is currently the most prominent homophobic place on earth, let's not get carried away. They don't superglue gay people's assholes shut to death, or publicly execute them. They're not even as bad as their more prejudiced former buddies to the west, Belarus and Ukraine.
4
Pretty much it's just the western world where you're okay. There's outright hostility and/or major stigma everywhere else. I find it funny when liberal whites living in their gay bubbles in the West actually travel outside of them and find themselves 'shocked' by the views of most of the planet.
5
Jamaica is pretty horrible socially all around, which is what happens when you have a nation with no economy except what the white tourists bring in every year. They treat women like shit there too, and their prisoners must purchase their own food and goods with money sent to them from the outside. No one to send you money? You die in your own filth.

This is complex because without those tourist dollars, we are talking about starvation, child prostitution and everything else that happens to a society when no one has any money. People do not think of Jamaica as being a dirt poor and violent country with no economy or jobs, since all they see is the lovely Sandals resort with the very friendly black folks in their pressed white uniforms.

The corrupt government may get the hint eventually, but it will be over a pile of starved and shot Jamaican corpses.

But what else can one do?
6
like american states and abortion, the world will soon be divided into places it's pretty safe to be out, and places where homophobia has the force of law.
7
Or if you're a woman? Also, you seriously would say that they are more homophobic than some middle-eastern countries? Hmmm.
8
Jaimaca is a dump - don't go there regardless of your politics or orientation.

And I'm sorry: this 'culture' is not the result of colonialism - it has much more in common with Africa where homophobia most certainly carries the full force of law in a number of countries - we've had to intervene repeatedly in Uganda on this score recently.
9
Whoever winds up on top, clearly we can all agree on the importance of ranking the relative homophobia of various places.
11
Dan Savage came within shouting distance of being right about something?!

Violence on account of perceived differences is wrong and should be met with lawful punishment

Making consensual sex between adults that harms neither physically illegal is wrong.

About the only legitimate way I have to show dislike of the policies of a foreign government is boycott.

But the problem is the usual Savage one. Your sources don't support your conclusions. Here's a few helpful hints. There is no such condition as homophobia. Any source which uses the term is showing ideological bias and should be ignored.

Further, any source which relies on anecdotes ('I was at a party and got beat up, and a bunch of my friends have too') to support their conclusions isn't reputable and should be ignored.

But hey, keep trying Savage. You've been at this for two decades, so maybe with another three you'll get it!
12
I'd be careful dismissing the disease of unrecognized hatred in males, or better yet the disease falsely justifying hatred -- done by males -- and placing the blame on a culture or government.

This is a Global -- Male -- Disease. And the disease is hatred that is allowed or goes unrecognized in men. Just to be clear, so some stupid fucking idiot male doesn't read my words wrong, the problem is NOT homosexuals.

And yes , government sponsored bigotry is a problem, so lets not forget all of the heroes, who for the last fifty years had the courage to be themselves, had to live their entire lives ignoring those stupid fucking idiot males who intimidate others for no reason because they are too stupid to see that hating a person for who they love is wrong.

So please don't be just another stupid fucking idiot male and make this about a Culture or a government or a religion, because we can't exactly go around patting ourselves on the back. We still have govt. sponsored bigotry, which is a disease of hatred.

So I hope no stupid fucking idiot males inadvertently associate this with any Middle Eastern religion, or African govt.

Not recognizing this male disease for what it is, means you are part of the problem. If testosterone makes you so fucking stupid and idiotic that you are honestly too blind to see that this violence is NOT carried out be women, then YOU are part of the problem.

Fathers need to teach their son's how to be man, how to handle their testosterone so that it doesn't cloud their mind from the truth, because that is exactly what it does.

Don't forget, that the only reason we are not a hundred times worse than Jamaica is not because we are so enlightening and evolved [sic]

It is because for the last fifty or sixty years there were people brave enough to so fuck you, I will not bow down to evil -- fuck you -- I will not bow down to hatred -- fuck you -- I am not doing anything wrong, and they paid the ultimate price as the sort of evil they stood up to wasn't the type that bluffs.

And it was NOT any straight males that stood up for homosexuals that brought about change, we were too much of a spineless little cowards to stand up against the stupid fucking idiotic blind male mind of evil that had strength in ignorant numbers.

So there isn't exactly any high horse we have the privilege of riding on, if anybody wants to claim we are an enlightened nation, then wake the fuck up and see the world as it is and most importantly know the source of the problems for what is wrong.

It does no good working to address problems if we don't address THE problem

Which is too many men are blind to the fact that we are the problem

13
thank god the DJ had the courage to speak out, hopefully it won't cost him his job, that would really suck if by simply reporting the truth he was blacklisted from the broadcast industry and had to start selling used sailboats, or whatever they use as the most common type of transportation in Jamaica
14
@4 Your point being? How is it related to Dan's post? Most everywhere in the world it's also not safe for women to walk the streets alone.
15
SB, if you actually did some research yourself, you'd find that Savage is spot-on about Jamaica.
16
Every one of my (native) Jamaican friends say the say the same thing: "Don't go to Jamaica." And calling it homophobia is a gross understatement; there is absolutely zero tolerance for anything that is homo, from my experience. And by zero tolerance I mean angry, violent, and dangerous.
17
@11 - (yes, troll feeding, just this once) - Look SB. You obviously have a problem with the term "homophobia", but why? It "exists" in the way any social phobia exists - in the minds of people and is observable through their words and behaviors. You could use another word to describe irrational hostility to homosexuals, but why? "homophobia" seems as good a term as any.

As for the lack of statistics regarding violence toward gays in Jamaica, welcome to the third world. Well-funded statistics-gathering agencies and foundations are not exactly legion on that island or any country like it. Anecdotal evidence may be all we have, but it's starting to sound pretty compelling.

Oh, and please stop being hostile and condescending to everyone. It doesn't make you sound smart or convincing. Try cheerful, polite argument. Really! You might like it.
18
@11: Plenty of words with "-phobia" in them aren't actual medical conditions. You're saying that people DON'T commonly have an irrational fear of The Gay?
http://cdn.ebaumsworld.com/mediaFiles/pi…
19
Or is the problem that homophobes aren't necessarily _afraid_ of gay people? Fine. I agree it's kind of a silly word. But that's the word we (most of us) have settled on. And admit it: you always knew exactly what everyone meant when they said "homophobia."
20
I find it funny that SB claims that homophobia is not real, when his only reason to be here is to try to make other people as scared as he is that homosexuals are getting equal rights.

People say that it is not fear, but merely hate or dickishness, but it truly is irrational fear: the fear of change, the fear that the Norman Rockwell America that only exists in advertisements is being demolished by gyrating leather daddies.

There would be no reason for SB to troll here all the time if he were not afraid of his tiny, imaginary world crumbling beneath him, a world predicated on his imagined superiority to all other lifestlyes.

He fears that one day he may not be allowed to evict lesbians because he is butthurt. He fears that one day he can not be as prejudiced and bigoted as he wants without any kind of social censure. He fears living in a world where his sexual orientation does not grant him special privileges.

It is fear, make no mistake.
21
My friend and her girlfriend went on their dream vacation to Jamaica about 10 years ago, and were in fear the entire time...
22
Any term that accurately describes SB's bigoted bullshit as a pathology does not exist to him. Must be convenient.
23
@12: check your medication levels, dude.
24
Now if only Jamaica had some export product that righteous American gays and their friends could boycott, and/or pressure bars into dropping...
25
It is not always America's place to correct injustices in other countries, but our tourists don't have to support them with money. Spreading the word is good.
26
@ LTO #17 & #23 you know what to do, it sounds an awful lot like plucking yourself

as in

go

fuck

yourself
27
We need an "underground railroad" for LGBTQ people who are subject to violent attacks and death.

And, we must address the members of the religious reich in our own country that underwrite this intolerance and violence around the world.

Volunteer, join those who are already fighting the good fight for justice, freedom, and equality. Do whatever you can, even a conversation with your friends and others creates awareness. Start today.

To do nothing is to consent to the status quo.

The great rivers that feed the vast oceans all began with one drop of water joining another.

Go become a part of something bigger than yourself.
28
@29

Those who've chosen to act on unhealthy sexual urges with the same sex have equal rights. Have had for years since anti sodomy laws were declared unconstitutional.

My beef isn't with equal rights. What another adult does in their bedroom is not my business or that of the law. No, my complaint is with a tiny minority deciding that their choices should be protected from social and legal consequences under the law.

And any rational person who loves this country should be frightened. We used to be a nation of self reliant adults. It's what our greatness was built on. But after nine decades of liberals pushing the theory that nobody is responsible for their own choices under any circumstances ever we're in danger of losing all that made us who we are. The homosexual lobby constantly whining about how 'it isn't FAIIIIR!!!' is only the latest symptom of the destructive effects of liberal "thought" generally.

Sorry kiddo, but knowing as I do that reality is a tough one for you I'll give you some time to kill that over.
29
@26 - What??! Dude (or dudette), I wasn't even directing my comments at you. At all. Reread them if you don't believe me.

But now? I agree. Check your meds and start trying to make sense.
30
Problem with smart phones is they aren't.

Last sentence should have read 'mull that over' if autocorrect hadn't butchered it.
31
@Homophobia

Think of it like using the word prolife or pro choice. Simply using either word tells the reader or listeners two things- which side of the abortion issue the speaker or writer stands on and that their mind is closed on that issue.

Like those words homophobia is a propaganda tool, no more. Acting as though anyone who uses it has any more validity than the hateful and unchristian words of Westboro Baptists on the other side is an exercise in self delusion I'm not engaging in.
32
And there will be another right behind me after I am dead or incarcerated

if you are seriously that ignorant ,

if you seriously think the homosexuals have "equal" rights than it proves that the old saying "as dumb as you look" is complete and utter BS

Nobody could ever look that dumb

name one thing, just one reason how allowing the every citizen, EVEN THOUGH THE RIGHTS ARE ABOUT 250 YEARS LATE, how exactly does ensuring that everyone gets there freedom, liberty and day of justice a threat to America?

You call yourself an American?

I don't care if you were there when they penned it or if one of your relatives wrote it or signed it, just because they were inspired words written for today -- to protect citizens from exactly the type of bigotry from govt. that there is today -- doesn't mean that people won't still have to face hostility from people who go out of there way to make sure they never feel comfortable, never feel safe, nobody is saying it's illegal to be a bigot

you can still inflict all sorts psychological anxiety in great enough amounts to affect their lives, so what the fuck are you complaining about?

If you don't understand why the men that wrote that Our Constitution wrote it, and why it was worth it to declare independence, even though they knew it was pretty much suicide, then you don't know shit, and will never understand why a straight male wouldn't hesitate to stand firm, die if we have to, because if we bow down to what is wrong, and aren't willing to die for what is right, not only will there never be freedom, liberty and justice for anyone, if by some miracle of act of God there ever was, we wouldn't be worthy of it because we would have been the ones who surrendered it up, in exchange to keep this one life a little longer.

I don't want to live in a world that isn't right, and I don't want to be the one that doesn't deserve life during the days the world becomes right

33
@ 31, you're the guy who keeps calling homosexuality a mental illness, in complete and utter disagreement with the entire fields of psychiatry and psychology.

Homophobia is a learned response, and can be unlearned. I was once all "gay is gross!" but was able to change when I overcame my ignorance, which was foisted upon me by our culture when I was a child.
34
#4 - not so fast - Thailand is fairly gay-friendly
35
@28 - The social and legal consequences in question, like all social and legal consequences, are wholly fabricated. One is not asking for special protections in suggesting that ill-justified (except by axiom, which, less face it, is all even the best of you arguments has managed to be) consequences ought not be imposed by society.

Unless, of course, you refer only to state recognized marital contracts and adoption rights, which are admittedly social perks. That said, those perks exist because the former is seen as benefitting society at large, and the latter as benefitting children who would otherwise lack any facsimile of a family. You cannot make--or, so I don't limit you unduly, have not yet made, no matter how many times I and others have challenged you on it--an argument against either contractual option being extended to same-sex couples that does not, in its text, either call into question the wisdom or efficacy of the state offering these options (or funding, directly or indirectly, those who do) to anyone (a libertarian position that is at least intellectually consistent) or rely upon value statements that, even in the rare instance when you make them civilly and compassionately, members of a pluralistic society with guaranteed freedom of (ir)religion are in no way obligated to recognize as valid, and have no recourse empiricism.

If you had any interest in being something other than a vile and inflammatory troll, you would either address these points (there's a first time for everything) or admit you cannot (likewise).
36
@4 - As someone else pointed out, you paint with too broad a brush. The East actually has several pockets of sexual liberalism, many of which have maintained such "tolerance" (for lack of a less politicized term) since pre-industrial times.

I think the West has a unique balance between rigid notions of hierarchy and a strange, somewhat incongruent egalitarianism that uniquely suits it to weave notions of sexuality and sexual liberty with notions like rights and democracy; I also think our pointed obsession with taxonomy puts us in a better position than the East to posit "homosexuality" as an identity (which is not always a positive thing). But I don't think it follows that tolerance itself is a uniquely Western value.
37
@28: Thank you for proving you have an irrational fear of homosexuals. You did better than I ever could. You sound like a tinfoil hat wearing lunatic.
38
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/201…

Pretty clearly Western whites who accept homosexuality, from the most recent Pew study. And notice how 61% of South Africa is anti-same-sex marriage. It's the whites originating from Holland/Britain who support it there, which is how it's legal.

Of course you are a going to find pockets of gay communities in every society (gay underground in Bangkok), but broad societal acceptance of said communities? Sorry, that's just in the West. You really don't have any research to back up what you are saying.
39
@28: Again with the whole "tiny minority" bit! NEWS FLASH, there are way more straights than gays in favor of gay marriage. Regarding your claim that gays have equal marriage rights at present, I'd like you to make an argument against gay marriage that wasn't also used against interracial marriage.

@38: WELL OF COURSE a city whose name sounds like Bang Cock will have a gay subculture! yuk yuk yuk
40
@39: There's this Ludacris lyric- "I bang cocks in Bangkok"- that always struck me as pretty decisively gay, but my cousin told me it was wishful thinking on my part. But since I don't have a thing for Ludacris personally, I've always been pretty sure it was just gay. And seeing it this context, I know I'm right. Where am I?
42
"You really don't have any research" is exceptionally pedantic for someone who accuses other posters of being ivory tower academics in posts that can't be linked here because you've hidden your activity, Confluence, particularly given that no one questioning your assertions is claiming to make a scientific argument. Indeed, only the softest of sciences (sociology, psychology, demographics) even apply here ... and aren't really what concern me.

One can acknowledge (as I did) that POLITICAL support for gay rights appears to be largely (not solely--or did you not notice Japan on your map?) a "Western" phenomenon while still concluding that, well, that might not mean what you think it means.

Japan is an interesting example, since its history of tacitly indulging homosexual acts dates back at least to the height of the Shogunate. Thailand is a more interesting example--and a more complex one--than either you or the person who brought it up has credited it with being.

My theory (in the vernacular sense, rather than the scientific) is that societies that have advanced to the point where the proliferation of cultural memes has become of paramount importance--more so than breeding or pleasing (the) (G/g)od(s)--are more likely to accept the notion of pleasure and emotional and/or social bonding as the primary purposes of sex. Furthermore, societies where rights and liberties have surpassed (overall) material need as a primary concern are more likely to develop political will around pleasure and emotional/social bonding being valid rights/liberties to defend.

Now, why such societies have occurred largely (though, again, not solely) in the West is an interesting puzzle, as is what makes Japan more like Europe or the U.S. and China and Russia more like Uganda, or what places Thailand somewhere between those poles. I have ideas on all of that (extreme climates creating breeding anxiety; orthodox vs. progressive religion, pantheism vs. anthropomorphic monotheism; culturally entrenched notions about proper interaction of the different spheres of human endeavor) that would, I think, be relevant to the broader discussion. But I don't see much utility in chasing that discussion down with someone whose primary purpose is to haughtily declare that we're all trapped in our elitist bubble, then dictate the terms in which we are allowed to challenge that assertion.
43
I think it's difficult to quantify which place is the most homophobic. What is clear is that there a number of countries that share the distinction of being among the most virulently anti-gay on the planet, currently including Russia, Jamaica, Uganda and handful of other mostly non-Western, religiose, backward shitholes.
44
@31 - By that logic, one could say the same thing about words like "Christian"--it tells you what the speaker's position is on deity and the origin and nature of morality, and that their mind is "closed" on the issue. Right? If I'm wrong, please explain why.

If it makes you feel better, by this line of reasoning, my mind is just as closed by virtue of my calling myself a Buddhist. Maybe all our labels for ourselves (liberal; conservative; American; left-handed) are mere propaganda.

I'm also not sure where anyone using the word "homophobia" was claiming any special authority. I don't like to use the word because it doesn't quite say what I'd want it to say (and, in a case like yours, your obvious distaste/revulsion at the notion of social parity for those you consider morally reprehensible for your own subjective--and therefore legally irrelevant--reasons goes beyond your specific feelings towards homosexuals; if there were no homosexuals, my guess is you'd find another group collectively deviating from your own arbitrary norms on which to focus your ire, so volcanic is your unrest). But that doesn't mean that the word in question doesn't carry a clear connotation that we can all agree on. Not all tissue is Kleenex, but if I ask for a Kleenex, you know I'm not looking for a brand.
45
One night in bangkok makes a hard man humble; not much between despair and ecstasy.

@39 - Luda always struck me as heteroflexible, so it makes sense to me. When the weed smoke is thick in the air, anything can happen.

46
@45: Ain't that the truth. In my humble experience, nothing gets straight friends more experimental than a late night and good kush.
47
@46 - Exactly, and it was so much better than the drunken awkwardness (at least for me it was).
48
@47: Not that I've spent a lot of time straight-chasing (pointless exercise). I'm really talking about the friendly, non-fraught happy incidents with friends and bourbon and vaporizers.
49
@48 - The best way to get straight guys is to not go after straight guys. Being friends is what makes it work, sometimes shit happens and it's win/win all around.
50
@42

Your post beautifully exemplifies the term "pedantic" - oh, the irony. Do you even know what the word "pedantic" means?

Classic academic: lots of words, very little substance, propping up a puny ego. And you wonder why people don't take you seriously.
51
@50 - "And you wonder why people don't take you seriously."

Stop projecting.
52
@49: Exactly.
53
@45 & 46 - I like to identify as "disastrously open to suggestion."

@50 - I'm aware what the word means. How clear are you on "irony"?

I happily admit I'm not immune to pedantry's temptations. I'm not the one, however, suggesting that "research" is required to offer observation and speculation to subjects not strictly covered under the hard sciences. If my posits strike you as inconsistent or implausible, make an argument.

I'm a personal trainer, playwright, actor, and physical comic. Here's hoping no one takes me too seriously; it wouldn't be great for my career. That said, I say what I mean, in precisely as many words as it takes, and until or unless you can demonstrate a falsehood or an error in reasoning, I stand by it, your puffery and pointless hostility notwithstanding.
54
@8: Most of Africa was also subject to colonial rule...