Religion and the National Gender Policy – Keep the Myths Out

By Corey Gilkes
May 30, 2013

BibleAnyone needing confirmation that our organised religious bodies are by and large irrelevant and stultifying entities should look no further than their views concerning the National Gender Policy (NGP) here in Trinidad along with the LGBTQ and abortion issues. By now it should be common knowledge that Minister Marlene Coudray announced that the issue of same-sex relationships and equality would not be included in the discussion on the NGP. Frankly, it is of no surprise to me that the NGP is being watered down in the way it is; much of the impetus behind this diluting is coming from, predictably, the conservative religious bodies in the country – and no doubt the instinctive bias and prejudices among those in the political elites. This is being done by the time-honoured practice of isolating such issues as the LGBTQ question (which really isn’t what the NGP is about), then eventually other topics, just wait and see.

Like, say, the OSHA of years gone by and its challenges to the business and corporate elites, a really progressive NGP is political and threatens the interests and arrogated authority of elites including religious leaders – of course they don’t say that so they resort to emotive arguments like the NGP will threaten that sanctity of “traditional” marriage and the “traditional” family. This sort of nonsense finds a lot of traction here because, given the way we have been socialised, whenever most of us hear talk about “traditional” marriages and family structures, we formulate assumptions that the nuclear, male-headed model IS traditional and remained unchanged for thousands of years even in the Europe that imposed much of these ideas on us. As such (un?) consciously complicit in this are the many Trinis who read very little and critically analyse even less in this anti-intellectual society of ours. Minister Coudray showed us that quite clearly when she reportedly reminded us, prompted by the Inter-Religious Organisation, that our Constitution was “based” on the supremacy of God, what arrant nonsense and ignorance of the writing of the nation’s Constitution.

I do not wish to go into the gay/lesbian issue per se – there are others who can better deal with that. For me there are wider issues that should always be borne in mind when examining questions of this nature; issues concerning definitions of development and progress; issues concerning definitions of power and who is best suited to possess it; issues dealing with the dangers of accepting as universal and adopting definitions not in keeping with ones own cultural understandings – or what happens when one divorces oneself from ones cultural understanding. Most importantly is the issue of the aversion by religious bodies to human sexuality outside of THEIR prescribed definitions of what is sexually proper and moral (these prescribed mores actually stem from their obsessive need to restrict and control sexuality and nothing to do with any god, respect for family, women or any such romanticised rubbish).

Let’s look, for instance, at the IRO, specifically the so-called leadership of the Catholic Church in Trinidad and Tobago and its apparent mouthpiece, Ms Leela Ramdeen. We’ve already been subjected to the archaic views of a pastor, a pundit and an Imam on marriage and relationships through a recent radio programme on Talk City 91.1FM. Now we see it again from the Catholics with the writings of Ms Ramdeen. In the April 28th 2013 edition of the Catholic News she outlines the principal objections of the Church to the NGP. Of note were their objections to the NGP’s definition of the term “gender.” What was really noteworthy was their very selective use of a certain definition of gender to bolster their agenda. In her article, Ms Ramdeen argues that the NGP’s definition of gender – defined therein as a social construct as opposed to “sex” which is biological – as “intrinsically flawed,” contrary to Church teachings and counter to the Constitution which acknowledged the supremacy of god. She argues that the definition supported gender fluidity, which the Church rejects.

Ms Ramdeen “informs” us that the NGP’s definition of gender goes against the definition of gender in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court which conflates “gender” with “sex.” This is the definition the Holy See (the Vatican) and the local Catholics accept. In fact, to use her words: “The Holy See delegation stressed that in International Law the only binding definition of gender is in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, of which T&T is a signatory, which states that gender “refers to the two sexes, male and female, within the context of society. The term ‘gender’ does not indicate any meaning different from the aforementioned definitions.”

Citing a report by Babette Francis, she indicates her desire, and that of the Holy See, that gender be “defined rigorously because sexual rights activists expand the definition of ‘gender’ in UN documents to define a diversity of “genders”…activists would use this expanded definition in their respective to try to strike down laws governing marriage which they see as discriminating against diverse sexual orientations…”

Well, for now I go leave out the fact that no Catholic (or any other Christian for that matter) should speak about what is intrinsically flawed given the very scandalous history of how Western Christianity came into being in the first place, not to mention the collecting of the books that went into the Bible itself (I’ll leave out all ah dat since most Trinis don’t know the history anyway, thus the romantic attachment by many to religion).

What I will do is point out some of the things she does not say. She does say that the drafters of the Rome Statute’s definition of gender sought the easy way out in light of strong objections by certain countries – prompted by religious bodies – and that the phrase “within the context of society” could be very problematic to her own arguments since in many societies, gender is, well, understood to be a social construct. She does not say that the ICC definition has been vigorously criticised and dismissed by many scholars and researchers. In publications like “The International Criminal Law and The International Criminal Court Statute: Crimes Against Women and Women, War and Words,” scholars and lawyers like Dorean Koenig, Kelly Askan and Brook Sari Moshan showed where the definition was limiting and deliberately ambiguous. In her paper “The Definition of Gender in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: a Step Forward or a Step Back for International Criminal Justice?” Valerie Oosterveld cited these and other studies and words like “stunningly narrow,” “a failure,” “puzzling and bizarre” and “peculiarly narrow” were used.

Furthermore, and this is where I found it very, very interesting, given that much of the NGP has to do with human rights, Ms Ramdeeen and the Catholic Church jumped on and pulled out the ICC’s definition, arguing that T&T is a signatory to that Statute, but ignored the many other UN statutes that have a different definition of gender. One of these is the Commission on Human Rights Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women that has as its definition of gender: “socially constructed roles of women and men ascribed to them on the basis of their sex.” Now even though this can be debated somewhat, it is clear here that the framers of this definition saw gender as a social construct and given that it has to do with human rights, you’d think that y’know, the Church would have adopted this one. But then that can’t happen because that definition acknowledges that gender is a “SOCIAL construct” – how it go look?

Now this may seem a low blow but I have to say it. People in hostage rescue units know of a condition called the Stockholm Syndrome in which the victim of a violent abduction or hostage situation comes to identify with the ideals of the terrorist/hostage-taker, often to the point of hindering rescue attempts. It’s not hard to draw parallels here; the same way many people of African descent, taught openly and subtly for so long that their ancestors contributed next to nothing in the way of human social development, could flippantly dismiss information showing that the pillars of civilisation existed in Africa for thousands of years, the same way the Leela Ramdeens of this world will forever object to and fight tooth and nail epistemologies, models and institutions that seek to replace unbending authoritarian patricentry with more matricentric orderings of society. Oh well, at least she’s honest when she points out that the Church rejects the fluidity of gender definitions. That is a bedrock trait of patricentry/patriarchy. But she should do well to consider that culture, definitions, even language is fluid and have always been, otherwise, for instance, we’d still be speaking the English of the 1600s when King James’ opinion of the Bible was being written. She should also do well to pay attention to the writings and lectures of Jared Diamond when he points out that one of the reasons why many empires collapsed was because the same ideas, customs, rituals and beliefs that made them powerful on the ascendency, caused them to be irrelevant and weak when conditions changed and these things were no longer relevant.

But as far as I am concerned she and her Church are of the least importance, what about us? It is astounding just how much is pushed past the public, how many horrendously bad decisions are allowed to go unchallenged because of a largely uninformed population including people who reside inside the halls of higher learning and political power. We don’t read, unless perhaps for a test to get ah pass, we don’t engage in critical thinking, profound thinkers and activists who spent their whole lives challenging and changing are ignored because they “aesthetically and visually unappealing” (so he must look like Brad Pitt I guess for some people to take them on). It is almost obscene how easily Minister Coudray and the members of the ruling party folded to the objections raised by the Catholics and other religious leaders. Deep in this society run the veins that maintain an uncritical, romantic attachment to religious dictates: “god” approves or disapproves of something and that’s it, no further questioning is to be entertained.

Yes, the Constitution gives us freedom to believe whatever the hell we want to believe religiously….or not. I, for one, have no intention of tampering with that. But this uncritical acceptance of “religious” teachings go put we in real trouble one of these days. It is an ominous thing to consider that these myths are rooted in authoritarian, if not outright totalitarian patriarchal cultural ideas that were embedded in what became European society even before the existence of Europe itself. Ditto for Islam. This is why I support those who argue for the removal of the reference to “god” in the Preamble. Given the authoritative, at times intolerant nature of many religious sects, each arguing that their interpretation of “god” is the only correct one (see the verbal effluence of Pastor Cuffie for instance) this is an active jep nest waiting to get chook and far too many of us refuse to see it including Ms Ramdeen and others who want to cite the authority of the Holy See – not that the Protestants are any better (again, Cuffie, Hinn and far too many imams to count).

When it comes to influencing public policy, de-contextualised, badly mistranslated myths have no business being the determining factor for anything – unless of course the clerics are willing to give up their tax exempt status – and make no mistake about it, the Christian claims of authority are partly based on de-contextualised, badly translated myths. Gerda Lerner in her book “The Creation of Patriarchy” made a very important statement that is the sooner we start seeing these “divine” teachings and articles of faith as historical, the quicker we will be able to understand and accept that they had a specific beginning in human history and so we can easily restructure or deconstruct them.

Before she go about telling people how to live, methinks Ms Ramdeen and those of her ilk should be more focusing their energies on their own Church and force it to deal with the misogynist, anti-sensual, anti-sexual attitudes that it has dressed up so nicely and called it “respect” for women, marriage and family. It’s cheap for her and the clerics to talk about sex using terms like respect for the sanctity of marriage when the Church for 900 years refused to even participate in marriage ceremonies because of its association with sex. And quite frankly if I was a woman and in the Catholic Church and read all what the Church theologians like Augustine, Tertullian, Aquinas, Jerome et al, had to say about women and read why women cyar be no priest, I woulda pelt that faith in the rubbish of history without a backward glance. Say wha, if that’s what floats her boat, cool. Just don’t be telling me I must conform to that too.

11 Responses to “Religion and the National Gender Policy – Keep the Myths Out”


  • IF we are looking to- Augustine, Tertullian, Aquinas, Jerome and all the other who were exalted to sainthood by Rome-AKA ! you are dead wrong, by excluding out the True Writers and Prophets of the Scriptures.
    Especially the Apostles of the New Testament. This False Church, offers a False Hope. If this institution is promoting the concept of CELIBACY higher than the MARRIAGE institution- it cannot speak for marriages. all the Sexual Sins being present in these houses cannot speak about Gender and Gender equality.
    What is A Myth? Fictitious and false Belief. We got to look at who is the Myth here. Christ’s Church on Earth has no HIGH PRIEST. That order of the High Priests have been done away with the Death of Christ.
    I totally Agree with your article here- “They that pretend to be representatives of the true way, check yourself…
    During the Dark Ages this same Church killed Millions just for believing the Bible, Having Bibles in their possessions, or even a Bible Text. Burn at the Stakes, Ripped open by the Inquisition.
    Could we change History by Apologizing for the Woes?? Get real here! This Church Abides by her rules and laws- INFALLIBLE – What fools Mortals be.!!
    The Dictum of the Hierarchy, the seat of the Priests are INFALLIBLE- Why were people hunted down for their Faith, The Waldensian, Albigensian all those who were living in the Alps of upper Italy? The things that were perpetrated by this Institution stands clears for all to see, Why listen to her now as Moral and Spiritual Guides?
    Why this Institution do not want the people to get and understanding of the Scriptures? Because most of her Teachings and Beliefs are not SCRIPTURAL. But Baptize Paganism…
    You do not have a Love for Humanity, Why come as the Savior of humanity. Go sell all your RICHES and come and FOLLOW ME said CHRIST. “My Kingdom is not of this World” John 18:36.
    Teaching for Doctrines the commandments of Men (Mark 7:8-13) Yes all these Pagan Feasts and Holidays are not there in the Scriptures!! Search and you would see. People are being destroyed for a lack of Spiritual knowledge (Hosea 4:6).
    ” Woe be unto the pastors that destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture! saith the Lord. ( Jeremiah 23:1)
    ” I have not sent these prophets, yet they ran: I have not spoken to them, yet they prophesied.” ( Jeremiah 23:21). Who is mocking whom here? The Lord is Holy, these false Shepherds are leading people on in a false hope.
    God created MAN and WOMAN, God did not create these false Genders that is coming out lately, Trans-Genders, Neutral Genders- this is not from above, but is Earthly, sensual and Deprave.
    When the Churches should be standing for the truth, the Churches are being grind ed down through INTIMIDATION. No one can silence the Pulpit. But this is exactly what is happening.
    Yes all these Tax Exempt Status Organizations are influencing Government. This Should never be. Government cannot and should never Dictate MORALS and SPIRITUAL Values on people.
    Marriage is a Moral issue that should have Spiritual values as the Lead in it. No cheap contract by any two individuals base upon Lust should have the rule of the day. Marriage is the backbone of a strong society.
    No one needs more evidence at this as an issue, simply look around and you would see what am talking about.
    Anything that does not pro-mote pro-creation and fruition should be dispelled with. The Problem with Christianity today is: “There is to much HIGH PRIESTS in it.” It also becomes a problem when Government is playing HIGH PRIEST. When the State is acting like the Church, and the Church is acting like the state.
    I agree with the writer here, Go deal with your own ISSUES before you can pose as the Judge with the answer….

  • Is there nobody in Trinidad capable of making a point devoid of such verbosity??

  • Go check on the meaning of verbosity ??

  • Yep these set of Catholics is bent on deceiving the world, but check again there are people who are studying the BIBLE:

  • Catholics are a set of Deceivers

  • And your views are no less illogical and ahistorical

    • Your View are so Correct and Mines are illogical ahistorical… Did you Study History? Do you Study the Bible? Don’t base your facts on Assumptions and Hey Say They Say……..

  • Regarding the study of history

    Clearly YOU haven’t

    Please find some other forum that is more in keeping with that kind of infantile analyses and stop cheapening real discourse and exchange of ideas. If you must stay, just read, don’t write, this is for grown ups only *steups*

    • You guys are living in a make belief world, afraid to look at the real core issues all around, playing journalist and writers.
      As far as I see, you all are a bunch of BIBLE haters and Truth Killers…Any mention about Bible and Bible Truth- you guys are Adamant and upset, Are you an Atheist.?
      Seems like the concept of the Christian God everyone is obsess with, always trying to present a load of crap that does not even fit into History.
      You said the Constitution gives us the freedom to believe in what we want to believe in. You also mentioned the concept of Critical Thinking…Do you know what is Critical Thinking and Freedom of Expression..???

      • Read about ancient world History- The very world empires that went by: Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medes & Persia, Greece and Rome. Western Europe,The Protestant Reformation. The Pilgrims in America-
        History of Harvard University, Yale, and Princeton University…The Logic in all this is The BIBLE were there among all the Ancient world, The Old Testament and the New.
        Egypt-Knew about Moses
        Assyria- The Ten Tribes of Israel
        Babylon- Judah- Daniel
        Medes & Persia- The Second Temple
        Greece- The macabees and Septuagint
        Rome- Times of Christ
        Western Europe- The Protestant Reformation
        Early America Founding- Harvard- Christian Seminary
        Princeton- Christian Seminary
        The Constitution and Declaration of Independence –
        America’S Money- In God We Trust.
        Only these Johnny come lately and revisionist are trying to undo all of this History to fit in an unreal and Make belief world…Should we be their Pawns in the Game.
        1952- The national day of prayer (36 U.S.C.119) is an annual day of observance held on the first Thursday of May, designated by the United States Congress, when people are asked ” to turn to God in prayer and Meditation”. Each year since its inception, the president has signed a proclamation, encouraging all Americans to pray on this day.The modern law formalizing its annual observance was enacted in 1952.
        What is Critical Thinking Here..???1

  • The gay lifestyle is best kept in the closet, that way no one would really bother. Two men or women living in a house does not bother me or others. When they come out and seek to impose their values then that is cause for concern.

Comments are currently closed.