Balancing cross-dressing

By Peter Espeut

The killing of cross-dresser Dwayne Jones by a mob at a dance was inexcusable and criminal, no matter what he did. No one has the right - in law or in morality - to take the life of another human being, even if one is convinced of their guilt in a serious matter.

This principle of the right to life is the basis of the crusade against police killings in this country, where agents of the Jamaican State gun down more persons per capita than almost anywhere else in the world. This same principle of the inviolability of human life is the basis of the international crusade against abortion and capital punishment. You cannot oppose killing in one context, and support it in another.

Both the police and the LGBT community want the Church and human-rights lobby groups to publicly condemn the perpetrators every time a policeman is killed, or an openly gay person is beaten by a mob; otherwise, they say, we support the wrongdoers. In fact, if the Church speaks out against one issue - say, the proposed flexiweek - but does not condemn every act of violence against a child, or every time the State oppresses its citizens, the anti-Christians say we have lost our way.

But what about the 'right' to cross-dress? What about the 'right' of a cross-dresser to attend a straight dub session masquerading as a sexy, curvaceous woman, and wining up and rubbing up (dubbing up) with unsuspecting horny heterosexual men? Is there such a right?

As we condemn the unjustified lethal violence perpetrated on Dwayne Jones, should we not also condemn his deceit? Not to do so surely condones it! And defends his 'right' to have done it!

All those - locally and internationally - who have used this despicable incident to condemn Jamaica and Jamaicans for 'homophobia' (whatever that means), when they remain silent about what might have provoked it, they give the green light to cross-dressers to flood Jamaican dub sessions en masse to claim their 'right' to rub up on whoever they want.

No right to practise deceit

Men who wish to dress as women certainly have the right to do so - in the privacy of their homes, and even to go out in public if they so wish. But there is no right to practise deceit, unless the principles of ethics are being rewritten (but then ...).

I know there is something called 'gay pride', and gays do not hide to show gay pride. Should not a cross-dresser have 'cross-dresser's pride', where he publicly flaunts his transvestism for all to see? Then any man (or woman) who wants to rub up with him would know what they are getting - upfront.

Gay people want others to respect their 'rights', but need to convince the rest of us that they respect our right to be heterosexual and be proud of it, and to enjoy our heterosexuality without deceitful interference. Otherwise, their advocacy is for the totalitarian imposition of their ways over all others.

Before my many detractors jump in and accuse me of "blaming the victim", of claiming that Dwayne Jones caused his own death by his deceitful behaviour, let me be abundantly clear: Nothing that Dwayne Jones said or did deserved death. Nothing anyone could say or do deserves death. Nothing that Dwayne Jones said or did deserved a violent response, even though his behaviour did violence to the heterosexual men at the dance.

But the deceitful behaviour of Dwayne Jones at that party was wrong; and the failure of LGBT activists to condemn it indicates their support of cross-dressers flagrantly rubbing our faces in their lifestyle.

And lest I scandalise my Christian brethren, my above comments are not an endorsement for heterosexual dub sessions, an aspect of our culture which has destroyed the innocence of many and has led to innumerable unwanted pregnancies. I guess it is this bacchanalia which has opened the back door for cross-dressers to live out their fantasies.

One's clothes express one's gender identity and one's sexual identity. One can dress like a male without wearing tight pants or opening the shirt to the navel; and one can dress like a woman without exposing one's deep cleavage or wearing various 'riders' and 'printers'. Insecurity leads many down all sorts of roads.

LGBT activists wish to convince us that cross-dressing is 'normal' behaviour, as normal as a formal dinner or the nuclear family; and anyone who disagrees is mentally ill. I suppose there are many different birth control strategies.

Peter Espeut is a sociologist and Roman Catholic deacon. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com.