If airlines want to be LGBT allies, should they stop flying to Jamaica?
Maurice Tomlinson of Jamaica and Canada has been involved in…
In the wake of Virgin Airlines’ announcement that it would allow its employees to wear uniforms that conform to their gender identity, 76crimes contributor and Jamaican LGBTI+ activist Maurice Tomlinson contributes this op-ed, in which he wonders if corporate allyship should extend to boycotting nations that put LGBTI+ people in danger.
UK-based airline Virgin Atlantic markets itself as a corporate champion for the human rights of LGBT+ people. Yet the airline regularly flies happy British tourists to some of the most homophobic places on earth. For example, Virgin boasts up to four weekly flights to Jamaica, where gay sex is criminalized with up to ten years imprisonment at hard labour. And convicted gays must also register as sex offenders and always carry a pass or face a further year in prison plus a JA$1million (about USD$6,500) fine every time police catches them without said pass. Many local and international agencies have found that the archaic British colonially imposed anti-sodomy law has given licence to horrific assaults and murders of LGBT+ people in Jamaica.
So, you can imagine my surprise when I read that Virgin was amending its dress code to allow all staff to dress as they identify, which includes allowing those assigned male at birth to wear skirts. As inspiring as this initiative seems, a recent poll showed that Jamaicans remain overwhelmingly homophobic, and the island has a well-documented history of deadly violence against LGBT+ people. For example, sixteen-year-old trans youth Dwayne Jones was brutally killed when she was outed at a street dance. The bloodthirsty mob stabbed, shot, and ran over Dwayne with a car then threw her body in the bushes before returning to the dance as if nothing had happened. Despite this public butchering, the police have made no arrests.
Considering the conflation of gender expression with sexuality in the minds of many Jamaicans I therefore wondered about the safety of Virgin’s gender non-conforming flight attendants when they arrive on the island. How will these persons walk through the airport? Will extra security be hired to escort them? And will specially trained drivers be employed to transport them to the layover hotels? Further, how will they be treated at the hotels? Or is Virgin counting on foreign privilege to protect its staff from the acts of deadly violence that gender non-conforming Jamaicans experience? If so, what does this say about Virgin’s actions? Is this new policy just performative allyship?
If the airline has a separate dress code for gender fluid crew going to Jamaica, then that would be a betrayal of Virgin’s vaunted commitment to diversity. Or will the airline make the courageous decision not to fly to places where LGBT+ people like some of their own cabin crew can be abused and killed for how they identify?
Homophobic nations in the Caribbean like Jamaica depend heavily on tourism and it is time that multinational corporations like Virgin take effective actions to support global queer liberation. There are certainly many other places in the Caribbean where LGBT+ people and their allies can safely vacation. This month, Jamaica’s neighbour Cuba voted overwhelmingly for marriage equality. The government of Barbados has promised to implement legal recognition for same-sex unions. Meanwhile, courts in Antigua, Belize, St. Kitts and Nevis, and Trinidad and Tobago have also struck down archaic anti-sodomy laws and Guyana banned discrimination on gender identity and expression. The Bahamas has no anti-sodomy law and neither do British, Dutch, French and US territories, which, unlike the Bahamas, also recognize same-sex partnerships. Is it therefore time for Virgin to quit flying to Jamaica, or at least stop pretending to be an airline that truly cares about queers?
Maurice Tomlinson is a Jamaican LGBTI+ activist and a contributor to 76crimes.com.
Please DONATE: We amplify the voices of oppressed LGBTQ people (VIDEO)