Tuori Kom Tu Bomp

Every woman should have the right to regulate the number of children she bears. In some countries, this statement is indubitable, the resolution of a long fought women’s rights movement. Framing discussion about abortion around its perceived immorality is convenient for the pious among us, for Jamaicans are so-called religious people, whose knowledge of scripture will mandate their rejection of laws supporting a woman’s right to abort an embryo. This approach is retarding the women’s rights movement, in a sexist society where the patriarchal oppression of women is commonplace.

We speak superficially of gender equality, but Jamaica is far from the ideal. The high rates of sexual abuse, in the home and workplace, sexual assault and rape perpetuated against women speak volumes to the grave inequalities, which still prevail. Further, the degree to which our women are objectified, commodified, and de-humanized in popular culture, is a good measure of the slight with which many regard women. Concerning abortion, we continue to hear multifarious horror stories about women who regret having one, but few accounts of women who illegally aborted embryos, then went on to lead successful lives with children that have loving and emotionally stable parents.

A recent report published in the Gleaner says that 70 % of Jamaicans believe that women who become pregnant because of rape should not have an abortion. By propagating such impressive statistics, self-serving moralists seek to deny women the right to control their reproductive capacity. Jamaicans like to talk about ideals, so I am not surprised by the poll results, though they are highly suspect; most will speak out against abortion when prompted, and espouse their preference for adoption. In reality, many of these people would abort an embryo if their circumstances necessitated such action, and are unwilling to adopt a child into their family themselves, for adopted children are widely regarded as inferior to biological ones. Also, what percentage of the individuals polled were male? Begetting children is the marker of manhood in Jamaica, so I expect that Jamaican men should overwhelmingly oppose abortions, which detracts from their ersatz masculinity. This despite the reality that many cannot afford to take care of the multitude of children they lend their sperm to create.

Women’s rights must come from the people, but sadly, the momentum is lacking. Jamaican women deserve better, and the right to determine how many children they have is only one of the privileges they must be allowed. The anti-abortion lobbyists are puppets of a patriarchal oppressor, whose antiquated modus operandi should be rejected by the Jamaican government.

Yesterday, I had a very informative discussion with two female friends about abortion. It is very important for me to stand by the things I believe in strongly. It is just not acceptable to hold hypocritical views. I am a pro-choice advocate, who remains adamant that no woman should carry an embryo to full term, if she feels she is not ready.

For too long women did not have a chance to determine when they had children, and how many children they had to care for. They got pregnant, and then they were housewives- slaves of a patriarchal system of oppression. Concurrent with this view, I believe that a woman who desires an abortion should be able to have one.

Now this is the scenario I was given: A woman has 8 abortions. How can you support the rights of a woman like that, who clearly has no regard for the gift of life she persistently throws away.

This scenario is unlikely to occur. Birth control options are innumerable, and many sexually active people, at least in the US, make use of them. Where the condom fails, the famed after-morning pill comes to the rescue. Still these options sometimes fail, and a woman finds herself pregnant with a child she cannot care for. She decides to have an abortion, and I support her decision.
We must be careful to understand where we stand on such controversial matters. Abortion is morally wrong, we say. Adoption should never be an option, we opine...until we find ourselves in the very situation where we need to make a decision to abort or not. My dislike for hypocrisy leads me to defend the right of a woman to have 7 or more abortions, (which, I wouldn't necessarily agree to; for surely there are effective ways to prevent pregnancy if a child is not desired).

My friends spoke of the significance of the decision being made, and I asked them, why they felt the decision had a lot of weight. Women are tortured by their decision they say, as if our viewing abortion as necessarily evil does not have an effect on how women who pursue abortions consider their decisions. Abortion is still largely taboo. Women who do them, do not talk about them, and so they are constantly plagued by their decision. For women who regret their decision, I do not believe the main reasons for their worry is that they "destroyed" a form of "life". Child bearing is still such a big qualifier for female adulthood, and I strongly believe that this needs to change.

I always say this- the fact that women can have children does not in itself preclude that they must. Only heaven knows how my life would fare if I decided to populate the earth with my seed, like I have the capacity to do. This world is not fair, but there are things we can do to make it more so... Women are now able to work amongst men in most professions, but instead of helping them to achieve equality, their employment now serves to maintain their subjugation, as they must still work in the home as well.

The women's movement has come a long way, but it has a lot more to go. So much of the differences we see between men and women are constructed, and very little will change until we begin to break down these social constructions of gender identity.

I just want to say one thing, be responsible. Protect yourself. Prevent unwanted pregnancies. Prevent the transmission of STI's.

Many who hear Jamaica Creole make the mistake of identifying the English root words and then proclaiming, oh I understood that! As a matter of fact, it is not that simple.

Take the following sentence. Context is very important here, so... Two young men are in a fiesty confrontation. One of them shoves the other, and he exclaims:

"Ef yu toch mi agen mi ago tel yu bout yu mada!"
The non speaker/ patwa hater hears this and says, I know what you said. They assemble all the English roots in their heads, and come up with an idea of what must have been meant.

"If you touch me again, I will tell you about your mother."

Maybe this is just me, but I wouldn't translate the original line to English in that manner. Doing so takes away from the potency of the language, and the complexity of the ideas that are expressed with these approportaions.

"If you insist on bothering me further, I will be not restrain myself from giving you a piece of my mind."

Some would say, well I don't think that is what you mean. Tell me, what do I mean then? Clearly, offering to tell someone about their mother, may have no effect whatsoever on an individual not accustomed to the culture.

Similarly, I could say, "Mi wii lik yu dong ino!" Directly translated to be, "I will hit you!" but really, I never intent to hit anyone when I speak these words. Of course, some people do, so I wouldn't suggest using these words against someone you were onthe brink of war with... BUT! The poitn remains, that simplistic approaches to translating Jamaican Creole, using the words of the lexifier language from which many words in Patwa come, is a malicious attempt to perpetuate the perception that Jamaican Creole is but a fegenerate form of English.

Give us some credit please. I wonder if people similarly try to discredit the merits of Spanish and Portuguese as languages, because of their striking similarities and their heavy borrowing from Latin.

Unu lou di ting yaa man! Patwa mi a difen!

A lang taim nou mi no put pen pahn peipa ina patwa. Yeside mi spen taim wid wahn yaadi til bout chrii ina di maanin a siizn op chikin fi biek. Mi se Jumiekan piipl difrent yaa man. Mi get sohn briid a juok de!

Wan a di ting de we wi toch pan, a ou i aad fi wi pudong Daansaal myuuzik, iivn duo wi nuo wi no grii wid i liriks dem. Mi a tel yu, a mosi jos chuu mi baan ahn gruo wid i, bot enitaim mi ier wahn Jumiekan Daansaal biit mi kin kech a faiya! Bot mi disaid fi set tingz striet wid we mi rilii valyu ina laif, so mi tap lisn tu daansaal. Mi diliit di wuola di sang dem outa mi laibri, kaa mi kyaahn a supuot di myuuzic a piipl uu so "crass".

An a beta nuot, i luk laik se dansaal a tek a difrent torn fi di beta. Mi ier wahn sang wa die ya we Taaros Raili ahn Konchens sing. BAD! An mi se di biit mek yu waahn fi rak yu yu no, bot di sang a bout fuos raip gyal pikni uu waahn tek big man. Di singga dem a chrai se man fi ron dem, kaa dem no redi fi big piipl tingz yet. BIG CHUUN mi a tel yu.

Wach i yaso:


Gud duont it? A muo tingz laka di mi waahn fi ier man. Jumiekan piipl ful a talent, ahn mi waahn fi si dem yuuzi fi di betament a yuumaniti. Mi taiyad a di bodi-kaki-pumpum-fling op sang dem nou man. Wi kyaahn du beta dan dat.

Mi se mi kyaahn wiet fi kum bak a Jumieka. We mi kyahn taak patwa aal die ahn nait. Mi mis Jumiekan piipl, ahn mi mis mi faambli. Mi no nuo we mi uda du ef mi neva fain Jumiekan piipl ya.

Wel wish wi pat sohn lok. Mi lef smadi fi biek di chikin bot mi no chos ar. Mek wi prie se shi no pwail i wid tumoch jork saas :D

Lieta!