Ryan Thorensen

/ /

Dangerous Setback for Minority Rights in South Korea

,

South Korea’s commitment to equal rights has suffered a dangerous setback with the appointment of Ahn Chang-ho as chairperson of the government’s National Human Rights Commission of Korea.

A former Constitutional Court justice, Ahn has drawn widespread criticism for his opposition to antidiscrimination protections, particularly for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people.

Ahn has taken several deeply troubling positions over the years, including opposing comprehensive sexuality education in public schools, claiming antidiscrimination protections spread HIV/AIDS and anal cancer, and suggesting that homosexuality could lead to a communist revolution.

At his confirmation hearing, Ahn reiterated many of these views, casting minority rights as a threat to the viewpoints of the majority.

President Yoon Suk-yeol appointed Ahn despite strong opposition from civil society groups and his concerning confirmation hearing, bypassing the National Assembly’s approval process. Ahn’s confirmation is part of a worrying trend under Yoon’s administration, which has now appointed 29 officials without the National Assembly’s approval.

This appointment is particularly disappointing given South Korea’s already weak record on minority rights. South Korea and Japan are the only two countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) without a comprehensive nondiscrimination law. In 2023, the United Nations Human Rights Committee urged South Korea to pass such a law and expressed concern about ongoing discrimination against various minority groups.

As Human Rights Watch and civil society partners have documented, antidiscrimination protections are urgently needed in South Korea to address unfair treatment based on race, sex, age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, and other characteristics.

For over two decades, the National Human Rights Commission of Korea has been a crucial defender of minority rights, investigating discrimination, developing research, and advocating for an antidiscrimination law. Yet despite widespread public support for antidiscrimination legislation, the National Assembly has repeatedly failed to enact such a law.

As Ahn assumes his new role, it is critical that the commission resist any erosion of its mission and uphold South Korea’s human rights obligations. Any retreat from its commitment to nondiscrimination would be a devastating setback for the country’s progress on equality.

/ /

Namibian Court Rules It Cannot Require Recognition of Same-Sex Marriages

,

Namibia’s High Court ruled last week that it could not require that the marriages of two same-sex couples conducted outside of the country be granted legal recognition.

The couples, legally married in South Africa and Germany, had been unable to obtain a work permit and residency permit, respectively, for their non-Namibian spouses and so launched a court case against Namibia’s failure to recognize same-sex marriages.

In its decision, the court expressed sympathy with the couples’ position and emphasized that discrimination based on sexual orientation is unacceptable under domestic and international law. Nevertheless, it concluded that the court was bound by a decades-old Supreme Court judgment that said the Immigration Control Act, which provides certain benefits to spouses of Namibian citizens, does not recognize same-sex relationships.

Madam Jholerina Brina Timbo of Wings to Transcend Namibia Trust, a transgender rights organization, expressed disappointment about the decision but said it was a silver lining that the court expressed concern over the unfairness of past rulings.

Linda Baumann of Namibia Diverse Women’s Association, a feminist organization, pointed to other recent court victories in Namibia and told Human Rights Watch it was a step in the right direction that judges were “affirming the existence of LGBTI people as part of our community.”

Globally, 31 countries currently recognize the right to marry for same-sex couples. When those couples travel to other countries however, their marriages may or may not be recognized, potentially making them ineligible for spousal benefits related to taxation, inheritance, insurance, housing, pensions, residency, and even parenting and family law.

The European Union’s top court has required member states to recognize the marriages of same-sex couples performed in other member states to ensure their freedom of movement. Israel also allows same-sex couples to register marriages performed abroad.

The couples are likely to appeal, and so either Namibia’s Supreme Court could overturn its old ruling, or lawmakers could act to change the status quo. As more countries recognize marriage equality, Namibia and other states should also take steps to ensure that same-sex relationships are respected and protected.

/ /

Biden Administration Confronts US Anti-Trans Violence

,

To commemorate the Transgender Day of Remembrance on November 20, the Biden administration issued a report on violence and discrimination against transgender people in the United States. The report outlines positive steps the administration is taking to address the root causes of violence – but progress will be limited unless lawmakers enact laws that support them.

Over the past two years, Human Rights Watch spoke with dozens of transgender survivors of violence, advocates, and service providers in the states of Florida, Ohio, and Texas about the forms anti-transgender violence takes. One of the key findings of that research was that socioeconomic marginalization, such as unemployment, housing insecurity, and a lack of reliable transportation keeps many transgender people in unsafe situations. The most marginalized, particularly Black transgender women, are especially at risk.

The Biden administration’s roadmap, created with input from transgender people and advocates, identifies key concerns and outlines steps the administration has been taking to advance transgender rights. Among these are support for inclusive employment opportunities, health services, housing and homeless shelters, and antiviolence services, which are all badly needed.

Recognizing these factors is laudable, but state and federal lawmakers also need to take concrete steps to address them if meaningful progress is to be achieved.

At a minimum, lawmakers should stop demonizing transgender people and attempting to restrict their rights, and instead enact laws prohibiting discrimination based on gender identity. They should decriminalize sex work, making it easier for transgender sex workers to keep themselves safe and report violence when it occurs. They should explicitly cover gender-affirming care in state Medicaid policies and remove barriers to legal gender recognition to avoid instances in which people are publicly outed as transgender.

To improve support when violence occurs, lawmakers should reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act, enact the Family Violence Prevention and Services Improvement Act, and provide training and support to ensure shelters and anti-violence services are truly inclusive. And they should ban the “trans panic” defense, which allows perpetrators of anti-transgender violence to use their own fear or dislike of transgender people as a legal defense to minimize culpability in criminal proceedings when they have harmed or even killed a transgender person.

The Biden administration has identified some ways it can act to curb anti-transgender violence. To do that effectively, federal and state lawmakers will need to demonstrate the same commitment.

/ /

To Stop Anti-Transgender Violence, Lawmakers Must Address Its Roots

,

As of early November, this year is the deadliest on record for transgender people in the United States, with at least 45 people killed. But their deaths are only the tip of the iceberg. Many other transgender people are subjected to violence and harassment, in public and at home.

Our recent research focused on Florida, Ohio and Texas, three states where dozens of transgender people have been killed between 2016 and 2021. We found that anti-transgender violence is intersectional; risk is shaped by race, gender, class and other factors.

During this period, at least 88 percent of the transgender people killed in Florida, 91 percent in Ohio and 90 percent in Texas were people of color. The majority were Black transgender women, who are most at risk of fatal violence.

Some transgender people who experience violence are targeted or harassed by strangers in public, but others described harassment and abuse at the hands of family members, intimate partners or law enforcement officers — and what they needed most were resources and support.

In part, the high rates of violence that transgender people experience are fueled by public hostility, which some lawmakers have stoked this year. In 2021, a record number of anti-transgender bills were filed in state legislatures — and some passed into law — which demonized transgender people and sought to limit their access to health care, public facilities, and sports and recreation. 

Other lawmakers have decried anti-transgender violence, typically by calling for more policing, stronger hate crimes laws, or harsher punishments. But if lawmakers want to address the problem, they need to address the conditions that give rise to it.

The transgender survivors and advocates I met with in Florida, Ohio and Texas described forms of violence that aren’t well addressed by hate crimes prosecution. Even when these prosecutions result in convictions, the state response lacks a survivor-centered, comprehensive approach and many survivors’ needs go unmet. 

Addressing the violence requires paying attention to the socioeconomic marginalization and discrimination that put many transgender people in circumstances where they are exposed to harm. According to a survey by the National Center for Transgender Equality, 29 percent of transgender people live in poverty, compared with 12 percent of the U.S. population overall. 

Without options, many transgender women engage in sex work and other informal economies, where criminalization puts them at heightened risk of violence by clients and law enforcement and can deter them from seeking assistance when violence occurs. 

When people do face violence, the services designed to shield people from harm often fail transgender survivors. In many parts of the country, transgender people do not have access to homeless shelters, domestic violence services, or law enforcement agencies that will provide them meaningful help. Instead, many transgender people report being re-victimized when seeking out a lifeline, being turned away or mistreated because of their gender identity when they are most in need.

The same survey found that nearly a third of those who responded had experienced homelessness at some point in their lives, and one in 10 had experienced homelessness in the previous year. 

Many transgender people do not know of shelters that will house them consistent with their gender identity, and when they are able to secure a place, they often face harassment from staff or other residents. Without a safe place to stay or the resources to move, many transgender people are unable to escape situations where they experience violence.

Some people we interviewed said they often felt most at risk when others could perceive that they were transgender and openly disparaged or threatened them. When transgender people are unable to access hormones and other gender-affirming health care, or are unable to update their identification to align with their gender expression, it can increase their exposure to hostility in public.

Protecting people from brutal, often fatal violence should not be controversial. Nonetheless, few states have taken meaningful action to address the circumstances that put transgender people at particular risk. Only 21 states expressly prohibit discrimination based on gender identity in employment, housing and public accommodations, leaving people in many parts of the country without such basic protections.

More can be done. At the federal level, Congress could enact the Equality Act, which would prohibit discrimination based on gender identity in a variety of domains. Lawmakers also should enact bills such as the Family Violence Prevention and Services Improvement Act, which would bolster services for survivors of intimate partner violence and family violence, including transgender survivors. 

Condemning violence is not enough. If lawmakers are serious about stopping anti-transgender violence, they must address its roots. 

Unless steps are taken to prevent violence from occurring — at a minimum, prohibiting discrimination, providing people with safe employment and housing options, and ensuring that anti-violence services are accessible and affirming — our interventions after the fact are going to be too little, too late.

/ /

Oklahoma Wants to Make Gender-Affirming Care a Crime

,

Oklahoma lawmakers have introduced a new bill that would make it a felony to provide gender-affirming medical treatment, other than counseling, to anyone under the age of 21. Such treatment can alleviate gender dysphoria and postpone puberty to give children time to explore their gender identity. The bill would punish doctors, parents, and even children themselves with penalties of up to life imprisonment.

Oklahoma’s bill is extreme, taking autonomy away from young adults and imposing draconian punishments, and is part of a worrying larger trend. Across the US, state lawmakers are once again introducing a slew of bills that seek to block transgender children from accessing healthcare, sports, and support in schools.

This seemingly coordinated assault on transgender kids flies in the face of what medical professionals, parents, and transgender kids say they need. Studies show that transgender kids can reap huge benefitsfrom being able to socially transition – that is, to have others treat them in a manner consistent with their gender identity. Bills that shut transgender kids out of sports or bar teachers from respecting their gender identity fly in the face of transgender children’s rights and well-being.

It’s equally misguided to restrict medical interventions for transgender or gender non-conforming kids, which are fairly rare. The most common treatment is puberty blockers, which delay the onset of puberty and can alleviate the anxiety and distress that young transgender people might otherwise experience as their body develops. Professional organizations, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, support this treatment for some children, allowing them to further explore their gender identity while suspending physiological changes that can be difficult or impossible to reverse later in life.

Unfortunately, lawmakers have used sensationalistic arguments about irreversible genital surgeries as an excuse to ban any kind of transition-related care. This ignores that the World Professional Association for Transgender Health does not recommend genital surgeries for minors, and they virtually never occur.

Whether puberty blockers or steps toward medical transition are appropriate for a given child is a deeply personal determination. For kids who need them, foreclosing these options is a violation of their bodily autonomy and their right to health.

Lawmakers in Oklahoma and elsewhere should roundly reject this bill, and others like it, and instead turn their attention to the real crises affecting trans kids, such as discrimination, bullying, and suicide.

/ /

Toxic Homophobia Still Festers in America’s Schools

Over the past year, I’ve traveled around the United States interviewing students, teachers, and administrators about the issues that LGBT people face in schools.

The stories I heard were sobering. Despite some progress in laws and attitudes, many LGBT students still encounter discrimination throughout the school environment, making them feel unsafe, excluded, and unable to learn.

Last week, Human Rights Watch released that research in a new report, “Like Walking Through a Hailstorm”: Discrimination Against LGBT Youth in US Schools. Our research shows that although progress is being made, there’s plenty left to be done, and action is urgently needed.

Between 1999 and 2015, every state in the U.S. enacted legislation aimed at curbing bullying in schools. But in 2016, only 19 states and the District of Columbia specifically target bullying on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. The majority don’t spell out that it’s unacceptable to bully kids for being LGBT, making it difficult for students to know they’re protected and for teachers to know where they should draw the line and intervene. And in Missouri and South Dakota, the hands of school administrators are tied. Perversely, state law actually prohibits them from developing policies that are deliberately tailored to the need to protect particularly vulnerable groups, including LGBT students, from bullying.

Even as millennials generally become more supportive of their LGBT peers, many students I spoke with said they had been targeted for physical bullying, verbal harassment, sexual harassment, or cyberbullying. Worse, they not only have to deal with bullying by other students but also with faculty and staff who ignore bullying and harassment in the classroom, use anti-LGBT slurs, tell anti-LGBT jokes, or teach that being LGBT is wrong.

Nor is bullying the only problem LGBT kids face. In at least eight U.S. states, discriminatory “no promo homo” laws restrict discussions of LGBT topics in schools. The laws prevent LGBT students from learning about their health, history, and rights, and discourage teachers from talking about LGBT subjects, voicing support for LGBT students, or intervening when they see anti-LGBT bullying.

Often students weren’t sure where to turn for information and support. Many students we interviewed didn’t feel they could go to their school counselor about LGBT issues, weren’t aware of LGBT resources in the school library, and found that attempts to learn about LGBT issues on school computers were blocked by internet filters that censored LGBT content.

Students across the U.S. have formed gay-straight alliances for peer support — and under federal law, schools have to allow those groups to form just like any other noncurricular organization. But many students who attempted to form GSAs told us they were stonewalled by administrators, had difficulty finding faculty sponsors, or faced stringent requirements not enforced with other groups. In some instances, GSAs were allowed to organize but faced absurd regulations — like not being allowed to put the word “gay” on posters.

Discrimination also loomed large. Teachers described the pressure to stay closeted, tamping down their support of LGBT kids. Students in same-sex relationships told me that they’d been discouraged or barred from bringing same-sex dates to prom, or were punished more harshly than heterosexual peers for holding hands or hugging in the hallway. Transgender students were misgendered by faculty and staff, denied access to facilities, barred from participating in extracurricular activities, and punished for wearing clothing consistent with their gender identity.

Adults often dismiss these experiences, telling kids to toughen up or dismissing individual incidents. What many adults don’t grasp is that these problems add up day in and day out. As the mother of a gender-nonconforming boy in Utah described it: “It’s like walking through a hailstorm. It’s not like any one piece of hail that gets you, it’s all the hail together.” Addressing discrimination against LGBT youth in schools isn’t a matter of passing any single law or policy — it instead requires holistic approaches to foster environments where all students, including LGBT students, feel safe, included, and able to learn.

Progress is being made, but we can’t take it for granted. The wave of efforts earlier this year to restrict bathroom and locker room access for transgender youth demonstrated how stereotypes and prejudice can threaten the safety and well-being of LGBT young people. And since the election in November, the Southern Poverty Law Center has documented a spike in harassment, much of it in schools, targeting LGBT students, immigrants, and racial and religious minorities.

As lawmakers begin their work in January, they have the power to make things worse or better for LGBT youth. If they are serious about keeping all students safe, there are a number of steps they should take.

The Trump administration’s Justice and Education departments should preserve existing guidance that protects transgender students from discrimination in schools. Legislators at the federal and state levels should pass LGBT-inclusive safe schools legislation, repeal “no promo homo” laws, and enact employment protections for LGBT teachers. Locally, school boards and administrators should revamp antibullying and antidiscrimination policies to make them LGBT-inclusive, incorporate LGBT topics in school curricula, and train teachers and counselors to be resources for LGBT youth.

Ensuring that all youth feel safe at school and get a quality education shouldn’t be a partisan issue. We know what puts LGBT students at risk in schools. In January we will need the political will to address it.

Ryan Thoreson is a fellow with the LGBT rights program at Human Rights Watch.