As a prominent activist and cultural advocate, Lysanne Charles participated in the 2024 LGBTQI+ and Allies Conference held in Curaçao, bringing her unique perspective on fostering inclusivity and celebrating diversity in the Caribbean. The conference, hosted by the Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations, aimed to strengthen alliances between LGBTQI+ individuals and their supporters, addressing critical issues and envisioning a more inclusive future. In this interview, Charles discusses actionable allyship, the unique challenges faced by LGBTQI+ individuals in the region, and the path forward for systemic and sustainable change.
How can allies go beyond symbolic gestures to create tangible support for the LGBTQI+ community?
I’m aware that the concept of ally is under some pressure, because of the more talk, less action attitude of some allies in the past. Still I think allies can be very impactful for our community when they really walk the walk, in addition to talking the talk. I think allies who can come out and be vocal about their ally-ship must come out and be more visible and vocal. Allies can use their positions to actively advocate for legal reforms and social change and those in and around education can push for schools to be safer spaces for youth who identify or are identified as LGBTQI+. Allies in LGBTI+ affirming churches can call on their leaders to engage more with other leaders who are less supportive. Allies who own businesses can also support LGBTI+ organizations by funding them or particular activities and allies who are in government, especially in top positions, such as Department heads, Secretary Generals, Ministers and Members of Parliament should push for the laws to protect LGBTQI+ citizens fully.
There is a lot of work to be done and it will take all hands being on deck to create meaningful, lasting change on this matter. Most importantly again, allies need to come out too. I always say that every year on October 11 we celebrate National Coming Out Day for LGBTQI+ persons and if and when it is safe for LGBTQI+ persons to come out then they should start their coming journey at a pace that works for them and their safety. But in light of that, the very next day, October 12 should be National Allies Coming Out Day for LGBTQI+ allies. Because allies coming out and showing up, when and where it is safe for them to do so is also important. LGBTQI+ people need safe spaces to be accepted in and these can be physical spaces, but also emotional, spiritual and psychological spaces created through connection with people they know support them.
What unique challenges do LGBTQI+ individuals face in the Caribbean that might not be as prominent elsewhere in the Kingdom?
I would go straight to the laws, primarily, because yes there is the societal stigmatizations here as well, but those can be encountered in different degrees anywhere, especially with the increasing global pushback against human rights advances. What is prominent is that there are a number of issues, beyond marriage equality, like inheritance, adoption, etc., that need to be addressed.
And yes, the cultural aspects also have to be tackled, because since 2012 we have supposedly been mandated to ensure that anti-discrimination laws are extended to most aspects of social life, but we still hear complaints of people experiencing workplace discrimination, housing discrimination, issues with doctors who aren’t affirming, issues at schools and at home and I could go on. I would be remiss if I didn’t also point out the role that religion plays on the island(s) and the way that some religious leaders have rallied around anti-LGBTQI+ rhetoric and made it a major talking point (on radio, social media and pulpits) when actually there are so many pressing issues they ought to be addressing.
This then impacts the way LGBTQI+ people are accepted or not accepted at home and in their communities and often, in many ways negatively impacts their lives.
What role does storytelling or lived experiences play in fostering understanding and connection between allies and the LGBTQI+ community?
As a poet and songwriter, amongst other artistic practices, I’m a strong believer in the power of storytelling and other arts to transmit and spread truth about the lived experiences of LGBTQI+ people to others in our own communities and in our wider communities as well. This especially in the face of blatant lies tossed about who we are.
Too often people outside of the LGBTQI+ communities try to reduce our lives to just sex and body parts, but in truth our experiences are so much broader than that. LGBTQI+ people come in all types and storytelling can play an important role in bringing understanding to our realities. When allies hear about the real struggles, joys, and journeys of LGBTQI+ people, they can better empathize with their experiences and recognize the importance of supporting their rights.
One of the most moving theater productions I have ever been a part of was a collaboration with Clara Reyes and SAFE SxM and was called ‘Don’t be Afraid of Rainbows’. I saw everyone in that room from politician to government official to community leader to family member moved by what they had experienced and walking away with a richer understanding of the trials and triumphs of LGBTI+ people and that was all because of sharing our sometimes painful, sometimes beautiful stories.
So many people came up to the cast and said things like “I didn’t know things like that happened on St. Martin”, “You moved me to tears,” and “You all are incredibly brave”. That production helped up to break down stereotypes that people had been walking around with about us. Also, several government officials walked away vowing to help us do more to change things and some tried certainly, but we are still waiting for others to take this up also and make sure that full rights are extended to LGBTQI+ persons.
How would you like to see the LGBTQI+ Allies Conference evolving in future editions?
So first of all, this conference, as a first allies conference was a good start, it provided opportunity for much needed networking between LGBTQI+ organizations, allies and also officials. However, it does come on the heels of many LGBTQI+ conferences held in the Dutch Caribbean over the last decade and a half and as such I do think they have to make some pivots when they are doing future ones. I think the spaces definitely have to be created across all the islands and those spaces then brought together via technology.
Also, beyond that LGBTQI+ government officials and government officials who are allies need to be extended invitations to be present. This also goes for allies who are religious leaders, school board members and counselors. Allies from the business community also need to be more present. I also think there needs to be more focus on walking about with actionable plans, otherwise a lot of what is discussed stays in the realm of the conference, when it’s the lives on the ground that can really benefit from our efforts. I always say that I am very aware of the privilege I have to be in the room and also the awareness I have of who is in the room with me and who is not. We have to continue to push for the creation of spaces that include more and more diverse voices.
Finally, I would like to see any future allies conference make connections to other pressing issues in our communities, especially those that directly and indirectly impact LGBTQI+ lives, like economic exploitation, xenophobia, issues in healthcare, stresses on family life, etc. Finally, I think that it’s important to ensure that LGBTQI+ organization have the proper resources to continue to do the work on their respective islands, so that they can empower their communities to show up at these conferences even more empowered and supported. It’s only by doing this that we can really build a stronger, more united movement for change.
What strategies can be used to ensure that inclusion efforts reach marginalized subgroups within the LGBTQI+ community?
I think stock needs to be taken of whose voices were absent from this conference and work hard to ensure that they are present at the next. We can’t take it for granted that they will come to us, so we really have to go to them, reach out to them and actively listen, not only to their lived experiences, challenges and needs, but also to ideas they may have around how to solve them. Also, again, making sure that the conference has some type of event or space on all of the islands that can be linked via technology allows for more people to have access to the space and opportunity to share their knowledge and skills. Emphasizing that participation from underrepresented groups is welcomed and encouraged can also go a long way towards making people in those groupings feel valued. Finally, we have to think of timing, a lot of folks have jobs that won’t give them off to attend such a conference or go to schools that would not support their presence at such. So, we have to be critical and think around those obstacles as well.
What are some ways allies can address resistance or pushback from within their communities while advocating for inclusion?
I think, allies, like LGBTQI+ people and organization will receive resistance and pushback from some segments of the wider community, and like us they will have to exercise patience and open-mindedness and attempt to reach people where they are. This can be frustrating, disheartening and draining, believe me I know. However, ultimately dialog anchored in empathy is the only thing that will get people moving on this issue.
That dialog, of course has to be respectful both ways and I think it is important for allies to also assert their right to be heard, even as they are actively listening, it should not be a one-way street or a monolog. I think allies can also use storytelling and other arts-based practices to share their reasons for being allies. Allies should also continue to educate themselves on issues related to the community and speak with LGBTQI+ people and organizations about things they may not understand or be comfortable with. Finally allies can model the behavior they want to see from others by creating safe spaces for LGBTQI+ members in their homes, in their classrooms, at their churches, at their events and so on. Change does not come in a day, so they have to stay persistent and continue to support us for the long term.
In your opinion, what has been the most overlooked aspect of allyship discussed at the conference?
One of the most overlooked aspects of allyship in the discussions at the conference was the critical issue of funding for local LGBTQI+ organizations. Without adequate funding our organizations cannot continue to provide support for our communities, advocate for social change and push for legal reforms. We rely on small, inconsistent or no resources and are constantly being told to be creative. But activism also costs; financially, emotionally, and mentally. Lack of real financial support limits our ability to develop long-term programs and activities, engage in sustainable community outreach and advocate for policy and legislative changes.
Allies from the conference and beyond can help us by supporting in terms of finances, but also skills and services. LGBTQI+ persons from across the islands have been lobbying for this for several decades already and this remains important. Another area was the role that the governments of the four countries in this political constellation must play in regards to each other on this matter. It is strange that the Netherlands exercises oversight on any number of issues concerning the other three countries, but on this matter of human rights stays relatively silent and says it is an internal issue. The Netherlands is known as one of the staunchest supporters of LGBTQI+ rights across the planet, but within this kingdom it takes on another role, even while local organizational leaders ask for more support. Allyship also means listening actively to those on the ground and supporting their asks.
What actions should governments prioritize to create long-term systemic support for the LGBTQI+ community?
First, I think that governments have to stop being silent on this issue. They have relegated it to a party or individual matter, making it political, when in fact it is a government matter and a matter of ensuring full rights of and protection to all of their citizens. To a certain degree government sets the tone and so our government should remain mindful of that. I’ve said several times, that on St. Maarten, by not saying anything in an official capacity, while much anti-gay sentiments are being said from various quarters, government is de facto being supportive of what is being said. Silence is consent or at least that is the way our community continues to read that.
So, government needs to prioritize setting a new, different, more inclusive tone concerning LGBTQI+ rights. Marriage equality can be a start, but it’s only a start, that while it will go a long way at sending a message about the inclusive society we want to be, must be followed up by other measures. This includes ensuring that LGBTQI+ youth are protected at school and at home, addressing inheritance provisions, birth and adoption regulations that recognize diverse family structures, mental health support, etc. Government should also prioritize allyship campaigns that encourage acceptance and discourage intolerance, this can even be started within their very own civil service corps and law enforcement branches where reducing stigma can lead to better service being provided and more feelings of safety for our LGBTQI+ communities.
And finally, yes, government can also prioritize funding for LGBTQI+ organizations or activities.
The Charter
and the Chatter
The Charter for the Kingdom of the Netherlands is 70 years old. This occasion has been marked by some chatter, especially in the dependent territories of the Kingdom in the Caribbean. For the populace, the occasion, just like the date of December 15, recognized officially in the past as “Kingdom Day” was a non-event. There were no special popular activities, no parades, no official events or parties to mark what would ordinarily have been a big milestone. At least, not here on St. Martin. That, in itself, is a barometer of how the people feel about the Kingdom Charter.
Signed on December 15, 1954 by Queen Wilhelmina, who was exiled in London during World War II, the Charter emerged from the Dutch trying to cut their losses, after Indonesia won its four-year war of independence against them in 1949. The Queen, whom Winston Churchill had called “the only man in the Dutch government” was trying to hold on to what remained of the Dutch colonies – Suriname, and the Netherlands Antilles of six (Aruba, Curacao, Bonaire, St. Maarten, Saba and St. Eustatius).
Even during the War, the Dutch government-in-exile was still in control of its resource-rich Dutch East Indies (Indonesia) and was at the time, the third-largest oil producer in the world. Also, Aruba and Curacao played a pivotal role in the War as their world-class refineries provided refined oil products to the Allies. So important were they that Aruba, for example, became a British protectorate from 1940 to 1942 and a US protectorate from 1942 to 1945, all the time while The Netherlands was under Nazi occupation.
Meanwhile, as of 23 November 1941, under an agreement with the Dutch government-in-exile, the United States occupied Dutch Guiana” (Suriname) to protect the bauxite mines there. The oil boycott on Japan that ensued was one of the factors that led to the Pearl Harbor attack.
Against this turbulent geopolitical background, the Dutch had to come up with a clever way to maintain their territories in this part of the world. Thus was born the Charter of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, promising Suriname and the Netherlands Antilles, “equal partnership” in a kingdom that is obviously not theirs.
The Charter became the foundational document for the continued colonization of Suriname – which the Dutch had swapped with the English for Nieuw Amsterdam (New York) as per the Treaty of Breda in 1667 – and the six islands of the Netherlands Antilles. Deliberately designed to calm down the increasing clamor for autonomous rule in those territories, especially Suriname following World War II, the Kingdom Charter also served to shift international attention away from The Netherlands at the United Nations where it had presented the document as evidence that it no longer held colonies. It got away with this for so long mainly because of its alliance with the US and the Republic of France, both of which de facto also continue to maintain colonies in the region.
It needs to be stressed that the Kingdom Charter was NOT a decolonizing document, even though it has, up till now, been paraded as such. Therefore, talk of “post-colonial” when referring to the islands is disingenuous at best. Articles 2, 50 and 51 of the Charter and subsequent regulations actually entrenched colonialism rather than decolonize the islands. To put it bluntly, we have been and continue to be colonies of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. Unless we accept this basic fact, we will continue to delude ourselves and make mockery of our inalienable right to self-determination. The independence of Suriname in 1975 and the suspended independence of Aruba, which was constitutionally due in 1996, are clear indications that the Charter did not decolonize these territories.
Part of what – with all humility – I have chosen to call the “chatter” about the Charter is what politicians on all three territories (Aruba, Curacao and St. Martin (South) popularly refer to as the “democratic deficit”. This simply means that they are completely powerless when it comes to decision making about and within the Kingdom. In effect, and for all intents and purposes, the Kingdom of the Netherlands is the Netherlands. The so-called “Kingdom government” is effectively the government of The Netherlands. The gripe that our politicians have with the current constitutional set up is that it is, at its very core, undemocratic. They are right. But that is the nature of colonial rule. It’s Colonialism 101.1
One glaring example of that undemocratic nature of the Kingdom of the Netherlands is that it voted in December 2020 against the UN Resolution calling for concrete global action against racism and discrimination.
This, in actuality, means that St. Martin (South), as part of that Kingdom, is also AGAINST ending racism and discrimination all over the world. It is idem ditto for Aruba and Curacao. Were we consulted before such vote was cast? Would our opinion have mattered even if we had been asked? How come none of our Prime Ministers or elected representatives have made any fuss about this? There are several other examples.
Eliminating the so-called “democratic deficit” or even the articles in the Charter that are considered in violation of our right to self-determination will not result in true decolonization.
The only way to achieve this is by becoming independent. Betico Croes in Aruba understood this. That is why he asked his people to say Yes or No to independence in a referendum. The resounding Yes vote for independence in Aruba led to the so-called “Status Aparte” in 1986, which was meant to be a transition period to full independence in 1996. However, the death of Betico Croes in suspicious circumstances, on the eve of Aruba’s “status aparte” put a screeching halt to that process. It is beyond the scope of this article to delve into what may have happened.
What is also clear is that removing the so-called “democratic deficit” will neither solve the debt trap which the islands have been plunged into 14 years into becoming so-called “autonomous countries within the Kingdom of The Netherlands.”
It will be recalled that the ballooning debt of the now defunct Netherlands Antilles was one of the main reasons that led to its dissolution. The Netherlands Antilles was considered then a ship sinking in debt. St. Martin (South) is now in a similar situation, although the political class seems to be ignoring this. At the recently concluded Central Committee meeting of the island’s Parliament to debate the 2025 budget, the Minister of Finance, Marinka Gumbs, revealed that the total debt of the government is at one billion guilders!! This is what is owed to the Dutch government since it is prohibited to contract loans from other outside sources.
But in all fairness to the Dutch, they have always recognized, at least, in theory and at several Round Table Conferences held to determine the constitutional future of the islands, our inalienable right to self-determination. In practice, however, it would seem that everything is being done to tie the same islands to the apron strings of the Kingdom. One such strategy is the debt trap and The Hague has not shied away from wielding that stick to impose its will as it did when the government of St. Martin (South) floated a bond to finance certain projects.
The chatter about the Kingdom Charter conveniently ignores this very important development. It also does not ask a pivotal question: how did we become part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands in the first place?
For historical context, we need to remember that until 1795, the Netherlands was a republic made up of a federation of seven autonomous provinces. According to Wikipedia, “During the French occupation, the Dutch Republic was transformed into a modern unitary state, the Batavian Republic (1795-1806). It then became a Kingdom, when the Emperor Napoleon installed his brother Louis as King of Holland (1806-1810). The Netherlands regained its independence in 1813, and the first Constitution for the Kingdom of the Netherlands dates from 1814.”
Throughout the period referenced in the above quote, the Dutch West Indies Company hoisted the Dutch flag over plantations all across the so-called New World. Our enslaved ancestors toiled for centuries without compensation on those plantations. Slavery was the most cruel and dehumanizing form of colonization. It was also a most profitable enterprise for the colonizer. That is how we became “part of the Kingdom.” As a matter of fact, the Dutch were among the last slaving nations to abolish Slavery on its colonies in 1863, almost half a century after it got its first Constitution.
We had no hand in fashioning that constitution. We had no involvement in deciding their constitutional structure nor any say in whether or not they should become a constitutional monarchy. Our ancestors were in chains and shackles and were not considered human beings during that period. And even when they eventually won their freedom, they were still forced to work for free for a whole decade later. That is how we were forcibly made “part of the Kingdom.”
Granted we voted twice in referenda (1994, and 2000) to remain a part of the Kingdom, but it is clear that we still do not feel comfortable within this construct. That is why it is imperative to return to the people in a new referendum to find out if they really and truly want to continue to be lorded over by the Dutch, who despite all their years of colonial rule, have not succeeded in supplanting the languages of the people of the islands, nor in completely erasing their cultural identity. They have neither succeeded in entrenching a good governance regime despite the Higher Supervision they exercised over St. Martin (South) for example. In fact, the transformation of the island from a postal order economy to a thriving, vibrant tourist economy cannot be attributed to the Dutch.
And while we are at it, though the Dutch Crown and government have “apologized” for their role in the evil system of Slavery, their refusal to even entertain any discussion about Reparatory Justice makes their apology hollow. An apology without reparatory justice is no apology at all. Again, in all the chatter about the Charter, the issue of Reparatory Justice has been banished from the political discourse. But it will not be swept under the carpet for much longer.
Source: The Peoples Tribune https://www.thepeoplestribunesxm.com
View comments
Hide comments