Lily Wakefield

/ /

President Biden’s World AIDS Day message proves he’s a very different president than Trump

,

oe Biden has promised tackle LGBT+ health inequality in his World AIDS Day message, proving once again that he’s a very different president to Donald Trump.

Ahead of World AIDS Day (1 December), the president issued a proclamationin which he said his administration was “focused on addressing health inequities and inequalities and ensuring that the voices of people with HIVare at the centre of our work to end the HIV epidemic globally”.

Biden “honoured and remembered” the “36 million people, including 700,000 Americans” that have been lost since the start of the AIDS crisis, and noted the impact of COVID-19 on access to HIV-related healthcare.

He said: “The pandemic has… interrupted HIV research and highlighted the work that still remains to achieve equitable access to HIV prevention, care, and treatment in every community — particularly for communities of colour, adolescent girls and young women, and the LGBTQI+ community.”

Biden pointed to his work so far to tackle HIV, including reopening the White House Office of National AIDS Policy that was shut down by Trump, and said that his administration would this week be “releasing an updated National HIV/AIDS Strategy to decrease health inequities in new diagnoses and improve access to comprehensive, evidence-based HIV-prevention tools”.

He added: “Ending the HIV epidemic is within our reach, and we are committed to finishing this work.

“On World AIDS Day, we rededicate ourselves to building on the progress of the last 4 decades; upholding and advancing human rights; supporting research, science, and data-driven solutions; expanding access to housing, education, and economic empowerment; and fighting stigma and discrimination.

“No one living with HIV should suffer the undeserved guilt and prejudice that too many continue to experience.”

In contrast to Joe Biden, Donald Trump never in four years mentioned LGBT+ people on World AIDS Day

Joe Biden’s World AIDS Day proclamation was in stark contrast with Donald Trump’s, with the former president failing to mention LGBT+ people four years in a row.

Trump, who during his time in office dismissed all members of the President’s Advisory Council on HIV/AIDS, mentioned in his final proclamation last year that issued in “this deadly disease disproportionately affects racial and ethnic minorities”, but entirely failed to mention the impact on gay and bisexual men, who make up 69 per cent of all HIV diagnoses in the US.

The LGBT+ community also made up the overwhelming majority of victims of the AIDS crisis.

/ /

The terrible, brutal history of Margaret Thatcher’s homophobic Section 28

, ,

It is 18 years today since the controversial and homophobic legislation known as Section 28, introduced under Margaret Thatcher, was repealed in England and Wales.

The clause – an amendment to the Local Government Act 1988 – banned local authorities and schools from promoting homosexuality and was brought forward by Thatcher’s government.

The legislation has been labelled “toxic and regressive” by deputy leader of the Liberal Democrats Ed Davey, who introduced the clause that led to its repeal, and told PinkNews that Section 28 left young people feeling “alone and vulnerable”.

“I am proud to have moved the clause that abolished Section 28 once and for all. But we still have so far to go,” Davey said, in 2019.

“From trans rights, to tackling the persistent discrimination faced by the LGBT+ community: the fight is far from over.”

Section 28 was introduced by Margaret Thatcher amid renewed anti-gay sentiment

More than three decades have passed since Thatcher’s government introduced the anti-LGBT+ legislation, but its shadow still looms over schools and local authorities in the UK today.

The legislation meant that councils were prohibited from funding of books, plays, leaflets, films, or other materials showing same-sex relationships, while teachers weren’t allowed to teach about gay relationships in schools.

This clause was the Conservative government’s vitriolic and traditionalist response to calls for equality from lesbian and gay rights activists in the late 1980s.

Margaret Thatcher
The homophobic legislation Section 28 was introduced by Margaret Thatcher in 1988. (AFP via Getty/ GERRY PENNY)

Thatcher captured these venomous anti-gay views in her infamous speech at the 1987 Conservative Party conference, which was met with rapturous applause.

“Children who need to be taught to respect traditional moral values are being taught that they have an inalienable right to be gay,” she said. “All of those children are being cheated of a sound start in life. Yes, cheated.”

LGBT+ activists railed against the legislation – but the government didn’t listen

On the day the clause was passed in the House of Lords, a group of lesbians abseiled into the House of Lords in protest, making national news broadcasts.

The legislation – so loathed, so reviled by supporters of LGBT+ equality – caused 20,000 Mancunians to take to their city’s streets to march against it. It also prompted Sir Ian McKellen to come out publicly as gay.

Section 28 was introduced following a difficult period for the LGBT+ community in the UK. There had been some progress, but the outbreak of HIV/AIDS led to the widespread demonisation of gay and bisexual men in the 1980s.

The Conservative Party capitalised on this anti-gay sentiment. In the run-up to the 1987 general election, they issued posters claiming that the Labour Party wanted LGBT+ friendly books like Young, Gay and Proud and The Milkman’s on His Way to be read in schools.

Children who need to be taught to respect traditional moral values are being taught that they have an inalienable right to be gay. All of those children are being cheated of a sound start in life. Yes, cheated.

In 1987, a British Social Attitudes Survey found that three-quarters of the population thought homosexuality was “always or mostly wrong”. Just 11 per cent said it was “never wrong”.

Just before the general election of 1987, the Earl of Halsbury introduced the Local Government Act 1986 (Amendment) Bill, also known as an act to refrain local authorities from promoting homosexuality.

Section 28
Owen Franken/Corbis via Getty

This bill was successfully passed through the House of Lords, and even passed the first stage on the way to becoming law in the commons, but it went no further. Section 28 was not dissimilar to the legislation that the Earl of Halsbury tried to introduce.

The anti-LGBT+ legislation left teachers afraid to broach LGBT+ issues in schools.

Soon after the Tories were re-elected, Tory MP David Wilshire put forward an amendment to the new Local Government Bill – known first as Clause 27, and later as the notorious Clause 28 – based on the Earl of Halsbury’s Bill, which was subsequently passed through Parliament.

Marchers at the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride event, Piccadilly, London, 4th July 1998. One marcher is holding a Socialist Worker placard, calling for the scrapping of Section 28. (Steve Eason/Hulton Archive/Getty Images)

The night before Section 28 became law, a group of lesbians famously stormed the BBC’s Six O’Clock News in protest.

The effects of Section 28 soon became apparent, with some schools and councils shutting down LGBTQ+ youth support groups – and many teachers too afraid to teach about same-sex relationships.

The legislation was ultimately repealed in 2003, and David Cameron issued an apology for the harm it had done in 2009 – but despite this, its implications are still felt far and wide and teaching around LGBT+ issues still remains a taboo topic in many schools.

This year, Thatcher was portrayed by queer icon Gillian Anderson in the most recent series of The Crown. However, proving that Section 28’s horrific history can be all too easily forgotten, the show skipped over the issue entirely. 

/ /

Boys and non-binary student ‘suspended from school for having long hair’ sue school district

,

Six boys and one non-binary student are suing a Texas school district after they were reportedly handed suspensions for having long hair.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Texas filed a lawsuit last week against the Magnolia Independent School District on behalf of the students, aged between seven and 17.

According to the ACLU, the district has been “engaging in explicit gender discrimination” by enforcing sex-specific dress and grooming rules for students, and “harshly punishing” them if they do not comply.

The Magnolia ISD handbook states that hair must “be no longer than the bottom of a dress shirt collar, bottom of the ear, and out of the eyes for male students”, and must “not be pinned up in any fashion nor be worn in a ponytail or bun for male students”. 

No such rules exist for female students. 

The lawsuit claims that multiple students have been placed in “in-school suspension” or a “disciplinary alternative education program” over the length of their hair.

According to the school district handbook, the “disciplinary alternative education program” is used for offences like making a false report of a terrorist threat or bullying another student to the point that they take their own life.

Brian Klosterboer, ACLU of Texas staff attorney, said in a statement: “At a time when students have already been through so much due to the COVID-19 pandemic, it is outrageous that Magnolia ISD administrators are pushing students out of school because of their gender and hair.

“We have warned the district repeatedly that its gender-based hair policy violates the Constitution, but the district continues to derail students’ lives and deny their right to a public education free from discrimination.

“Magnolia ISD is failing to live up to its motto ‘to be the best district in the state of Texas,’ and the district needs to stop hurting its students.”

The 11-year-old non-binary plaintiff was ‘ostracised’ by the school district over their long hair

According to the lawsuit, the 11-year-old non-binary plaintiff, identified as TM, was sent to in-school suspension for nine days over their long hair.

“Sometimes TM expresses their gender identity more like a boy, but other times TM expresses their gender identity more like a girl,” the lawsuit reads. 

“TM has worn long hair for the last couple years as a critical component of expressing their gender identity. 

“If TM is forced to wear short hair based on gender stereotypes associated with their gender assigned at birth, TM will lose a vital part of who they are and sacrifice an essential element of their gender expression.” 

It added that TM had been “ostracised and separated from their friends” by the in-school suspension, and it was only ended after their mother went to the press. 

TM was granted a 60-day “pause” on the sex-based dress code being enforced, which will soon come to an end, putting them at “imminent risk of being sent back to [in-school suspension] and/or [disciplinary alternative education program]”. 

According to Out, Magnolia ISD said in a statement that it “looks forward to the opportunity to respond” to the suit in court.

It continued: “This system of differentiated dress and grooming standards have been affirmed by courts and does not inhibit equal access to educational opportunities under Title IX.

“The rules are included in the student handbook each year and are similar to the codes of approximately half of the public school districts in Texas.”

On Tuesday (26 October), a judge temporarily blocked the school district’s enforcement of the sex-based grooming policy while legal proceedings are ongoing.

/ /

A fearsome, ancient army was made up entirely of gay lovers; endorsed by Plato

In the fourth century BC, a fearsome army named the Sacred Band of Thebes was formed, and it was made up entirely of gay couples.

Lawmakers in countries across the world have been banning LGBT+ people from their militaries for more than a century, from America’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and trans military ban, to the UK’s ban on LGBT+ people in the armed forces, which was only lifted in 2000.

While the US insisted during the era of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” that LGBT+ service members “would create an unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order, discipline and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability”, history tells a very different story.

The Sacred Band of Thebes was formed in Ancient Greece by a general named Gorgidas in 378 BC.

In forming the 300-strong army, Gorgidas took an unusual approach; he personally chose each member based on merit and ability, rather than social status, and only selected gay couples.

What at first seems like a strange decision makes perfect sense when explained by Plato.

In Plato’s Symposium, written just a few years after the formation of the Sacred Band of Thebes, he said: “And if there were only some way of contriving that a state or an army should be made up of lovers and their beloved, they would be the very best governors of their own city, abstaining from all dishonour, and emulating one another in honour; and when fighting at each other’s side, although a mere handful, they would overcome the world.

“For what lover would not choose rather to be seen by all mankind than by his beloved, either when abandoning his post or throwing away his arms? He would be ready to die a thousand deaths rather than endure this.

“Or who would desert his beloved or fail him in the hour of danger?”

And Plato was right.

The Sacred Band of Thebes became a fearsome army, tirelessly training to prepare themselves for battle at any minute, including through wrestling and dance.

They won multiple battles, even taking down the Spartan army, despite being vastly outnumbered.

The couples were each made up of a “lover”, who was older and more experienced, and a “beloved”, who was younger.

The ages of the soldiers were never recorded, but James DeVoto, in his book The Sacred Band, suggests that by comparing them to other armies at the time, it is likely they joined at around 20 to 21 years old, and retired by 30.

The word “sacred” in the name of the army is thought to reference a sacred vow that the couples made to one another.

The Sacred Band of Thebes was so awe-inspiring, even their enemies cried when they were defeated

The Sacred Band of Thebes was finally defeated in 338 BC, 40 years after its formation.

They fought in the Battle of Chaeronea, joining Athens to fight against Philip II of Macedon, but were eventually surrounded.

The ancient gay army was offered the chance to surrender, but as Plato predicted, they refused to give up in front of their lovers.

Every member was killed, but according to Plutarch, Philip II broke down in tears after defeating them.

He is recorded as saying: “Perish any man who suspects that these men either did or suffered anything unseemly.”

/ /

Dildo-inspired insemination kit designed to make queer conception more intimate

,

A dildo-style home insemination kit is designed to make conception a pleasurable and intimate process for queer couples.

Even if queer couples decide to self-inseminate at home, the procedure can feel strange and clinical, but the Way device makes sure that there can still be fun when it comes to baby-making.

At first glance, the insemination device looks exactly like a minimalist, silicone, pink and white dildo. But on closer inspection, a small bubble is visible at the base, which is used to hold semen.

The kit comes with a jar, into which semen is deposited, before the user sucks it into the bubble. When inserted into the vagina during sex, the bubble can be pressed to release its contents.

The tubes through which the semen travels along the dildo can also be removed, and worn as a harness around the hand to inseminate the conceiving partner while fingering.

Way device designer Kamila Rudnicka, from Poland, told Dezeen: “Hands are very important when we are making love, especially in lesbian sex.

“That’s why I decided to use them to connect two people. Just using a device will not give them the same feeling as using their own body during sex.”

While the Way clearly makes for a more pleasurable insemination experience for the conceiving partner, it also allows the non-conceiving partner to feel part of the process. 

During the design process, Rudnicka said she consulted with gynaecologistsand psychologists, and also interviewed potentials customers.

She said: “I wanted to create a device that would help them focus on something other than just getting pregnant.

“In a survey I did of couples, the majority said that even if at-home insemination can be less effective they still want to try it in their own bed.”

Although home insemination is a great option for many couples, it is not always as effective as other methods like intrauterine insemination (IUI) and in vitro insemination (IVF), which can be better choices for those struggling with fertility.

Rudnicka explained: “This is not a device for people who have been trying to get pregnant for years.

“It’s for couples where one side has HIV, for lesbian couples, transgender people and those with disabilities – people who are unable to conceive during their regular sexual activity… The hope is to make it a ‘first step’ people can take before resorting to the sterile medical procedure at the hospital.”

The Way is not yet on the market, and is still in the prototype phase, but the designer hopes it will be available for purchase in the near future.

/ /

Cervical screening pilot for trans patients could save lives

,

A UK cervical screening pilot programme for trans men and non-binary people was so successful it could be used as a model for programmes around the world.

The pilot programme was launched in October 2019 in conjunction with the NHS as part of a study to address cervical cancer in trans and non-binary communities.

It offered weekly cervical screening clinics, only staffed by healthcare professionals with experience in treating trans and non-binary patients.

Of those who attended the clinic and gave feedback, 100 per cent were satisfied with the service, and a majority (60 per cent), said they would not have been screened if it were not for the clinic.

In the UK, screening is recommended every three years for all people with a cervix between the ages of 25 and 49, and every five years for those between age 49 and 64.

But trans and non-binary people with cervixes are often left out of guidance, or avoid attending screenings for fear of discrimination and misgendering.

“Trans men and non-binary people are often reluctant to receive cervical screening, raising their risk of undetected human papillomavirus [HPV], which could lead to cervical cancer,” said Alison May Berner, a specialty trainee and clinical research fellow in medical oncology at Barts Cancer Institute in London, a specialist registrar with the Tavistock and Portman Gender Identity Clinic and the study’s lead author, per News Medical.

The results of the study were presented at the American Association for Cancer Research’s Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved this month, indicating that it could have international implications, and Berner said she wants further research to look at trans-specific cervical screenings in a GP setting.

She said: “People assume that this population’s health care-related needs are solely related to transition. That’s not true.

“Trans and non-binary people are at risk of HPV infection and cervical cancer if they continue to retain a cervix, and they stand to benefit from programs designed specifically for them.

“If you’re a trans or non-binary person living in a place where these specialist services do not exist, I would encourage you to work with a trusted health care professional to build relationships and ensure that you get the appropriate screenings, while continuing to have your identity respected.”

/ /

‘Regressive’ bill threatens to roll back trans rights for Canadians in Quebec

,

A “regressive” bill is could roll back trans rights in Quebec, Canada, threatening trans folks’ “equality, dignity and personal integrity”.

Bill 2 was brought forward by Quebec justice minister Simon Jolin-Barrette on Thursday (21 October), according to CBC.

It aims to change Quebec’s civil code to require trans people to undergo surgery before being able to legally change their gender, and could even bring in separate sex and gender markers on government ID.

Trans Canadians in Quebec have been able to change their legal gender without surgery since 2015, and there are currently no other Canadian provinces that require surgery for legal recognition.

Some trans people do not see surgery as a necessary part of their transition, and others may be unable to access surgery.

Florence Ashley Paré, a doctoral student at the University of Toronto Faculty of Law who specialises in cases relating to trans youth, told Global News: “This would absolutely make Quebec the most regressive in Canada for trans rights.”

“All other bills were about progress,” they added.

“This is an exceptional case where we would go back on rights… [It would also create] situations where people might get surgery they otherwise didn’t want just to meet the prerequisite from the government.”

More from PinkNews

Stars you didn’t know are LGBT+Celebs you didn’t know have an LGBT siblingThe stars who went gay for pay

The possibility of having separate markers for sex and gender on government-issued ID could also put trans folk at risk.

Executive director of the LGBTIQ+ Family Coalition Mona Greenbaum told CBC: “A trans woman who hasn’t had surgery will still have an M for her sex and an F for her gender on her legal documents.

“What that does is it puts that person in danger. You have a document that says you were born an M, but you became an F and you have to show that document to other people.

“It obliges you to make do with coming out, whether you want to or not.”

The bill cannot become law until it has gone through a parliamentary committee and public hearings, in which Quebec citizens will have their say on the changes to the civil code.

/ / / /

Italy blocks hate crime bill after unprecedented opposition from Vatican and far right

,

Italy has voted down a bill to tackle hate crimes against women, LGBT+ people and those with disabilities, all in the name of religious freedom.

The bill – known as the Zan bill after the Democratic Party lawmaker and LGBT+ rights activist Alessandro Zan, who proposed it – was approved my the Italian parliament’s lower house last year.

The Zan bill, which would protect Italians from violence, hate speech and discrimination on the basis of sex, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation and disability, has caused a divide in the country since it was introduced, with critics insisting that it would infringe on religious freedom.

On Wednesday, Italy’s senate voted 154 to 131 to block further debate on the bill for the next six months, according to Reuters. Advocates of the bill fear it will now be impossible to pass it before the legislature expires in 2023.

Zan described the outcome of the vote on Twitter as a “betrayal of a political pact that wanted the country to take a step towards civilisation”.

Gabriele Piazzoni, general secretary of of Italian LGBT+ rights group Arcigay, said that the state had “once again turned the other way” when it comes to homophobia and transphobia.

“We thank those who fought,” he added. “Shame on everyone else.”

The LGBT+ rights bill faced opposition from the Vatican and Italy’s far-right

Earlier this year, Italy saw an “unprecedented” intervention by the Vatican, which insisted that the bill would threaten the religious freedom of the Catholic Church in Italy.

The church feared prosecution for openly opposing same-sex marriage and adoption by LGBT+ families, and also opposed the bill’s requirement that Catholic schools would have to mark a day dedicated to fighting homophobia and transphobia.

The bill also faced fierce opposition from Italy’s far-right League party, with the party’s leader Matteo Salvini describing it as a “gagging law” which would mean that “those who think a mom is a mom and a dad is a dad” would end up in jail.

Andrea Ostellari, a League party senator and president of the Italian senate’s justice committee, managed to repeatedly delay the second vote on the bill.

According to The Guardian, Alessandro Zan said earlier this year that lawmakers who backed the bill were “being held hostage by a president who arbitrarily decides that the vote shouldn’t be scheduled because he belongs to a party that doesn’t want it”.

In a pattern that is becoming worryingly familiar around the world, the bill’s opposition also united anti-trans activists with the far-right.

In April, a group of 17 “feminist” and lesbian groups issued a joint statement against the bill.

Despite the bill aiming to protect Italians on the basis of both sex and gender, the groups declared that the term “gender identity” had been “weaponised against women”.

At the time, Zan rejected the letter, and responded: “To say that trans women are not real women is not acceptable.

“We are talking about people who are particularly discriminated against… Unfortunately, some statements by historic and radical feminists have the same content as the extreme right and religious fundamentalists.”

/ /

Anti-LGBT+ Chick-fil-A promises not to ‘discriminate’… against anti-vaxxers

A sign displayed by a Tennessee franchise of the anti-LGBT+ fast food chain Chick-fil-A has gone viral for condemning discrimination… against anti-maskers and the unvaccinated.

The sign, pasted on the window of the Chick-fil-A in Franklin, Tennessee, reads: “We do not discriminate against unvaccinated, religion, race, sex, vaccinated, maskless, mask. All neighbours are welcome.”

When the message was shared on Twitter by anti-LGBT+ right-wing YouTuber Lauren Chen, social media users were quick to point out that “equating mask/vaccine policy with religion/ race/ sex is so fundamentally stupid”, and that one significant group was missing from the list.

One Twitter user wrote: “They don’t discriminate against sex, just sexual orientation and gender identity.

“Would you like a delta variant combo with your order today?”

The Chick-fil-A sign on discrimination is painfully ironic, considering the chain’s anti-LGBT+ stance

Chick-fil-A has donated millions of dollars to anti-LGBT+ organisations over the years, but in 2019 it announced a decision to end donations to organisations which discriminate against LGBT+ people.

Days later, the company backtracked.

Earlier this year, in a shocking report from Daily Beast, it was revealed through tax filings and “accidental public disclosures” that billionaire Chick-fil-A owner Dan Cathy was still funding anti-LGBT+ causes as part of one of “the most sophisticated dark money operations” ever.

The Chick-fil-A billionaire was found to be donating to the National Christian Charitable Foundation (NCF), the sixth largest charity in the US and the leader in the fight against the Equality Act, which aims to amend the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

The money donated to the NCF, a donor-advised fund, then goes to other groups, some of which are at the forefront of the fight against passing the Equality Act.

In 2018, it gave a massive grant of $6,585,923 (£4,647,620) to the viciously anti-LGBT+ Christian legal group Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF).

/ /

Christian groups to investigate impact of ‘toxic’ anti-LGBT+ church rhetoric

,

A vital new research project will examine the impact of “the increasingly toxic rhetoric around sexuality and gender identity” on LGBT+ Christians.

A survey will be launched on World Mental Health Day (10 October) to measure how safe “increasingly vulnerable” LGBT+ Christians feel.

The vital research, looking at the wellbeing of LGBT+ people in religious spaces which “can cause significant harm and trauma”, is being conducted by a consortium of nine Christian LGBT+ organisations.

It draws on the theme of government’s international LGBT+ conference to be held next year: Safe to be Me.

The survey was instigated by Jayne Ozanne, director of the Ozanne Foundation, who said: “Many LGBT+ Christians feel increasingly vulnerable in their local churches given the increasingly toxic rhetoric around sexuality and gender identity.

“We thought it essential to measure in a safe and anonymous way just how safe people feel able to be about who they are, and what steps should be taken to make them feel safer.”

The survey’s launch on World Mental Health Day will also coincide with the Church of England’s first “Safeguarding Sunday”, an initiative“encouraging local churches to use their regular Sunday service to explore together what safer places look like”.

Dr Sarah Carr, an LGBT+ mental health expert who is overseeing the survey, said: “It is critical that LGBT+ people’s well being is prioritised in spaces which we know have and still can cause significant harm and trauma.

“By asking them directly about how they feel we can build a picture of what is happening in the UK today, and identify steps that they tell us will help improve things.”

Executive director of OneBodyOneFaith Luke Dowding, whose organisation coordinates LGBT-friendly Christian spaces and gatherings and is part of the consortium organising the survey, explained: “We know that many LGBT+ people have a deep faith, but some feel unable to attend church because they fear that they will not be welcomed or understood in their local places of worship.

“We would therefore like to understand if there are LGBT+ Christians who do not currently go to church for fear of their safety, with a desire to learn what if anything local churches might do to help address these concerns.”

The online research survey will run for two weeks, with results to be made public in November, and all LGBT+ adult, self-identified Christian in the UK can take part, whether or not they attend church. Click here to take part.

«‹ 4 5 6 7›»