How much more ludicrous can we be?

By Jaevion Nelson

It appears many of us, even very learned among us such as administrators and senior faculty at universities, want nothing to do with homosexuality, so much so that if female students role play a heterosexual marriage, it is reason enough to punish them.

Sha-Shana James, a mass communications student at the Northern Caribbean University (NCU), had no idea that dressing as a male in a cheerleading routine on Tuesday, March 4, 2014, for Sports Day would be seen as "deviating" from the university's "ethos and mission". She was reprimanded and given a letter, signed by Dr Beverly Cameron, the vice-president, that disciplinary actions would be taken against her because she "deviated from the accepted" ethos and mission "while participating in [the] cheerleading event on Sports Day".

How much more ludicrous can we be? For a less than 10-second role play?! Really? Perhaps there were also issues with attire in the routine? Or is there something else that neither party is making known? I wonder how many people still think (or pretend?) that ALL expressions of antipathy - both verbal and physical - towards same-sex intimacy are perpetrated solely by the more uneducated and poor among us?

The NCU Student Guide (2011), published by the Office of Student Services, states "The University is governed by the Seventh-day Adventist policy on homosexuality and lesbianism. The church loves and values the homosexual as a person but forbids the homosexual act. Severe sanctions will be applied by the institution if individuals are found indulging in this act or if individuals are reported to be propositioning any member of the school family on or off campus" (pg 47). I'm sure NCU scores a lot of cool points from a great number of Jamaicans for this.

I watched the 15-minute video of the cheerleading routine and read the letter that was sent to Sha-Shana by Dr Cameron. I'd appreciate some clarity on how this was a violation of the school rules. Besides, even if it was in contravention of anything they have set out, does it warrant such draconian measures? I suppose what has happened is all a matter of interpretation, and they did say severe sanctions would be handed down for such indulgence.

Role play, not real life

The challenge I have is that this was a role play. Does NCU not understand this? Perhaps they are as confused about the blatant difference between a role play and "indulgence" in same-sex intimacy as they are about homosexuality and lesbianism. It wouldn't hurt if they utilised Google. But I digress.

The disciplinary actions seem disproportionate. The letter stated "the committee ... noticed the offence and will impose the following sanctions:" (1) a letter of warning, (2) a two-week suspension (which ended on April 3, 2014), (3) a request to submit by April 4, a letter of commitment that she will abide by the school rules and regulations, and (4) placement on citizenship probation for the rest of her time at NCU, which essentially means "ineligibility to hold or run for public office" at the university, and ineligibility to participate in a wide range of activities, such as public performances and intramural events.

I admit to ignoring the bit about her appearance before the committee with a tongue ring and without her identification, given it was never the reason for which she had to appear before the committee. It wouldn't hurt if she removed it and brought her ID.

Perhaps the vice-principal, Dr Cameron, can tell us whether or not it is customary for a student to be imposed with other sanctions while be given a warning which, according to the Student Guide, is "a written or oral notice to the student that continuation or repetition of specific conduct may cause further and more severe disciplinary action".

I would love to hear the answer to these questions that I have raised. Some clarity on the matter would be most welcomed.

We must all understand that while NCU is a private Christian institution, they do not have autonomy to do whatever they want with their students, whether or not it is articulated in the Student Guide. Perhaps we should encourage them to be more prescriptive about the kind/type of student they want to attend, since we believe their rules shouldn't be challenged.

It is disheartening that so many of our educational institutions, both public and private at all levels, are turning out to be values and attitudes religious boot camps than they are places for learning to empower us to achieve our fullest potential (Vision 2030 Jamaica).

What has happened with Sha-Shana betrays our good intentions to rid ourselves of this "most homophobic place on earth" label that haunts us.

Jaevion Nelson is a youth development, HIV and human rights advocate. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and jaevion@gmail.com.