Talk:LGBT rights in Jamaica

message: Does anyone have information regarding the dispute that the sodomy laws are not actually illegal, or at least not enforced. 
I see a lot of conflicting information. Does anyone have a link or copy of the official on-the-book laws regarding homosexuality? I don't see any unparaphrased citations of the sodomy law. VisaBlack (talk) 04:00, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Pay attention here: Anal sex is not necessarily homosexual!  Jamaican law prohibits buggery of ANY living creature, boys, girls, men, women, and animals.  Jamaicans are not permitted to bugger their women, either. Nor their pets. The WP article also mentions "Sexual acts between women are legal", and this is where the Bill Clinton legal argument applies: affection between women is not sex for the simple legal reason that it's not possible to insert a penis into an orifice since there are no penises present. Santamoly (talk) 07:20, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Current Law?

message: Actually, Jamaican sodomy law makes no specific reference to male homosexuality. In fact, it does not specifically mention any kind of homosexuality. What Jamaican sodomy law does prohibit is anal sex, regardless of the gender of the people involved. In other words, all anal sex including heterosexual and also lesbians using anal dildos is illegal in Jamaica, while fellatio is as legal for homosexuals as for heterosexuals and penis-to-penis action is also legal.2.69.195.87 (talk) 16:41, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Pay attention here: Anal sex is not necessarily homosexual!  Jamaican law prohibits buggery of ANY living creature, boys, girls, men, women, and animals.  Jamaicans are not permitted to bugger their women, either. Nor their pets. The WP article also mentions "Sexual acts between women are legal", and this is where the Bill Clinton legal argument applies: affection between women is not sex for the simple legal reason that it's not possible to insert a penis into an orifice since there are no penises present. Santamoly (talk) 07:20, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Bans anal sex, not male homosexuality per say

message: Removed this text: "Jamaican churches have been accused of cherrypicking verses from the Bible condemning homosexuality, whilst turning a blind eye to others, such as those that deal with fornication, a practice not unknown on the island." 
'have been accused' is unneccesarily vague, particularly without a citation, and anyway, this is an accusation that applies to any religious criticism of homosexuality, so I don't see why it's particular to the Jamaican case. Anyway, the same point is made with a citation and a reference to j-flag a few sentences later so it's unneccessary.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.157.239.6 (talk) 22:08, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Weasel words

message: The article is not neutral or objective. Many of the references presented are from LBGT websites. I think it needs to be reviewed. One example is a paragraph relating to the April 2006 attack on the "gay student" at the University of the West Indies. I have very close connections to the event and in all fairness to the University in neither the police report or the Local press was there mention of the perpetrator being a University Student.
:Fix the text, don't add editorial comments to the text.  Not that it makes any difference whether he was a student or not - the fact that he was threatened by a mob of university students is telling about the level of bigotry in the society.  Guettarda 17:37, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree. This country has this reputation for a reason. VisaBlack (talk) 04:03, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: If there's a reason, tell us what it is, please.  Otherwise you're just rumor-mongering. Santamoly (talk) 07:26, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: It should be obvious to all neutral readers that this article is heavily pro-homosexuality and pro-sodomy.  Bearing in mind that such viewpoints are far from accepted or factual this makes the entire article strongly biased.
:Bwahahahahaha! Shut up, retard.
As it should be. Christianity is shit, and has ruined millions of innocent lives.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.47.23.211 (talk) 04:02, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Not NPOV

message: The article makes statements that support the argument that discrimination against gay people exists in Jamaica. This is NPOV, just as an article making statements that support the argument that racial discrimination existed under apartheid in South Africa would be NPOV, if the structure of the argument was valid and all the supporting statements were verifiable. There is no 'pro-gay' point of view here, any more than an article describing apartheid could be called 'pro-black'. The mere act of decribing bigotry is not taking a side on an issue. If you want to call this article not NPOV, then provide evidence that the supporting statements are not true. Wandering Star 03:44, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: It's NPOV alright

message: As previously discussed this article is not NPOV.  Further, ntennis, has removed most of the changes which were made to make it more NPOV.  Rights are things you have, not things you do not have.  As such unless you change the title to 'LGBT rights not in Jamaica' all reference to any rights which are absent must be removed.  This is an encylopedia and not somewhere for you to make a political point. 60.48.32.147 09:02, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll leave the tag there and make some changes to the lead section. The statements of human rights groups is relevant. i'll move them to their own section rather than in the lead. ntennis 16:17, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: NOT NPOV (2)

message: Why isn't Gareth Henry mentioned at all in this article? For that matter, why doesn't he have his own article?
Some resources:
http://www.thestar.com/SpecialSections/article/445061  ~
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2008/02/14/gareth-henry.html    ~
http://www.xtra.ca/public/Toronto/Fleeing_for_my_life-4387.aspx  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bob Traver (talk • contribs) 18:20, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Gareth Henry

message: This article is called LGBT rights in Jamaica, but absolutely no reference to the status of transgender individuals in Jamaica is given outside the opening line. This is in serious need of correction. --92.39.193.94 (talk) 05:17, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I await your edits on the subject then, which will be very welcome. Thanks, ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 23:53, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about the T? 

message: NPOV means we need balance so when I add a ref'd piece defending the Rastafari viewpoint I do not expect to see it deleted and the same ref changed to justify yet more Rasta bashing, we need to have a balanced article which this still isnt and just only accepting pro LGBT isnt going to make it so either. I am on the pojnt of tagging this article for NPOV, see WP:NPOV. Thanks, ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 23:49, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV

message: I also deleted a quote which we do not have permission to use so do not revert back to it as it could be construed as a copyvio. Thanks, ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 23:51, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Quote

message: Claiming 2 Rastas support gay rights is blatant original research without a source to verify the veracity of this highly dubious claim. I trust it will not be re-inserted without a cast iron ref to back up the claim. Thanks, ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 17:40, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: AfricaTanz, calling Rastas bigoted while refusing to engage in talk page discussion makes me think you arent a serious editor, I wish you would prove me wrong. Thanks, ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 23:04, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't engage with you because of your abusive history directed towards me, on my talk page and elsewhere. Do you want the diffs? Change your ways and I will change how I handle you. AfricaTanz (talk) 00:03, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

text: You are just trolling here, AfricaTanz, learn to co-operate with other editors and stop talking rubbish, leaving a note on your talk page isnt abusive but your response to it was. If you want to say 2 Rastas you will need to source that, we cant have your unsourced claims in the encyclopedia♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 22:13, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Two Rastas

message: Mass reverting form an editor who refuses to engage in talk page discussion is unhelpful, I am left with the impression AfricaTanz thinks he owns this article, but he doesnt, nobody owns any articles on wikipedia. And taking great chunks out of articles and pasting them here is a copyvio. Thanks, ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 00:46, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Mass reverting

message: We have at least one editor regularly here who thinks Rastas are bigots and keeps reverting the claim that some Rastas support gay rights, inserting the highly POV and unsourced claim that only two do. I cannot believe that AfricaTanz believes in that we need to have balanced article between the beliefs of Rastas and those of LGBT ppl, we arent here to support LGBT but to write a balanced article. I hope AfricaTanz either relents on his POV pushing or contributes to this talk page to resolve this dispute. Thanks, ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 14:08, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality tag

message: We cannot use an 8 yr old ref to claim something is currently happening. I am not sure why AfricaTanz feels that this is the case and that he thus needed to revert my switching this to the past tense but if he wants to sue the present tense he needs to find a more up to date ref. Thanks, ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 14:39, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: 8 yr old ref and the present tense

message: What is the objection to naming the Tolerance album, the first pro gay album. The ref supports this name and I am baffled as to why AfricaTanz removed this info. Perhaps he would care to explain himself here. Thanks, ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 14:41, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: He has to answer my question below first :). Just kidding. Please answer both, this one first of course. --Malerooster (talk) 16:04, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: H*ly crap. Just saw all the stuff above. Guess my question is now 5th? in line, and probably the least "important" or consequencial. --Malerooster (talk) 16:06, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Tolerance album

message: I removed some links that were repeated. I did it again without noticing that they had been readded. If there is a good reason to go against MOS fine, make the case here. Just saying its a long difficult article to follow or such doesn't seem to cut it. Thoughts? --Malerooster (talk) 16:03, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The Manual of Style, which is just a guideline (not policy), allows repeat linking when beneficial to our readers. Refer to my edit summary, which contains a link that will allow you to verify. AfricaTanz (talk) 00:05, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice of you to read selective portions of that policy. Try reading the whole sentence, after what you quoted above. --Malerooster (talk) 02:32, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Is sarcasm something you do regularly on Wikipedia? Should we see what the community thinks about that? The MOS is just a guideline. Here's the full sentence for your reading convenience: "This guideline is a part of the English Wikipedia's Manual of Style. Use common sense in applying it; it will have occasional exceptions." But perhaps you would like to join the long list of editors who have been blocked and/or sanctioned for attempting to impose their own pet interpretation of the MOS, while at the same time insisting it was "policy". AfricaTanz (talk) 11:25, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi AfricaTanz, sarcasm is a wicked tool to quote my former headmaster, but I still enjoy using it. The sentence I was referring to was :Generally, a link should appear only once in an article, but if helpful for readers, links may be repeated in infoboxes, tables, image captions, footnotes, and at the first occurrence after the lead. my bolding for emphasis. I have no desire to edit war over something as trivial and MOSish as this and would hope you wouldn't either because it can be a sign of ownership. I will not be editing that article again. I would encourage you to use the article's talk page for the other issues that have come up since they seem to be more substantive. Cheers, --Malerooster (talk) 13:53, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess I changed my mind, since I did remove some links that are already linked. Oh well, --Malerooster (talk) 02:31, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: You are not the first to become an edit warrior to impose his or her pet interpretation of the Manual of style, which is a mere guideline. Is it worth getting blocked over? Think about it. AfricaTanz (talk) 02:40, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: If you don't agree with the MOS in this case and this one, can you please say why here rather than just revert? Thank you --Malerooster (talk) 03:20, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: AfricaTanz, would you be willing to let, say 3, other editors give their opinion and we go with what they say? --Malerooster (talk) 22:14, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with malerooster ehre, not sure why AfricaTanz thinks those who disagree with him will get blocked, though♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 22:15, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overlinking 

message: I was reading today (8/4/2015) that Jamaica will have their first-ever Pride Parade. I think this merits inclusion in the article somewhere. I'm not exactly sure if it's ongoing or an upcoming event.http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2015/08/lgbt-jamaicans-hold-1st-gay-pride-celebrations-on-island/
Tenor12 (talk) 22:10, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Significant development: First Pride Parade will be held 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on LGBT rights in Jamaica. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110715190948/http://rjrnewsonline.com/news/politics/new-nation-coalition-party-launched to http://rjrnewsonline.com/news/politics/new-nation-coalition-party-launched
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:19, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on LGBT rights in Jamaica. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20131104203308/http://www.hawaii.edu/hivandaids/Sexual_Stigma_and_Sympathy__Attitudes_Toward_Persons_Living_with_HIV_in_Jamaica.pdf to http://www.hawaii.edu/hivandaids/Sexual_Stigma_and_Sympathy__Attitudes_Toward_Persons_Living_with_HIV_in_Jamaica.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:35, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This page is good and comprehensive, but it doesn't contain much toward the transgender community. Furthermore, it caters to a biased point of view.
Hello! Great job with all of your revisions to this article so far! Your article is very comprehensive and talks about many different aspect of LGBT rights in Jamaica.  Your addition of "Health and Wellness" and "Transgender individual" sections were very good. Moving forward, I think your page could benefit from adding a few more pictures and making sure everything is property cited.  Great work!! Courtwang (talk) 00:42, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Edits

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on LGBT rights in Jamaica. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120903222159/http://amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=16161 to http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=16161
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:10, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on LGBT rights in Jamaica. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120205075922/http://jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20080521/lead/lead3.html to http://jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20080521/lead/lead3.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150906085529/http://www.aidsfreeworld.org/Our-Issues/Homophobia/~/media/Files/Homophobia/NATIONAL%20SURVEY%20OF%20ATTITUDES%20AND%20PERCEPTIONS%20OF%20JAMAICANS%20TOWARDS%20SAME%20SEX%20RELATIONSHIPS.pdf to http://www.aidsfreeworld.org/Our-Issues/Homophobia/~/media/Files/Homophobia/NATIONAL%20SURVEY%20OF%20ATTITUDES%20AND%20PERCEPTIONS%20OF%20JAMAICANS%20TOWARDS%20SAME%20SEX%20RELATIONSHIPS.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060621204307/http://www.jflag.org/programmes/parliamentary_sub.htm to http://www.jflag.org/programmes/parliamentary_sub.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:53, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Moneyspender, where are your sources that female SS is illegal? That vigilante attacks are common, and common today, not just that one or two murders (perhaps not even vigilante attacks) occurred 6 years ago, which is all your blog said? You need actual sources to support what you write, especially when there are POV concerns. — kwami (talk) 02:12, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moneyspender's edits 

message: This is a good article and my comments here are hoped to make it a tiny bit better rather than criticise it. I am a bit sceptical about this part: 
"recounts were made of the island's British occupants engaging in sodomy, which may correlate with the fact that the first colonists were mostly men. The slave communities in Jamaica and the rest of the British Caribbean were made up of men and women from West Africa, the men being more sought after by slave owners.[8]"
I have read the source cited in full and it does not seem to me to support the statement. In particular, the reference notes that more or less the whole white slave-owning community (I include support workers here) were male but as this article itself implies, many slaves were female. The idea that male slaves were more likely to be singled out for sex (i.e. rape) than female slaves is unsupported and in any case seems unlikely. I would like to edit this but will wait to see if anyone else has a view first. Charlie Campbell 28 (talk) 08:58, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Slaveowners