TIME: India's Historic Ruling on Gay Rights

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1908406,00.html
By JYOTI THOTTAM / NEW DELHI Thursday, Jul. 02, 2009

Members of India's gay community in Bangalore celebrate the New Delhi High Court ruling decriminalising gay sex on July 2, 2009

Dibyangshu Sarkar / Getty Images

With one sweeping judgment Thursday, the Indian High Court decriminalized homosexuality, shook off a stubborn piece of colonial baggage and may have added momentum to a broader regional movement for gay rights. "This is a huge step forward," says Anjali Gopalan, director of the Naz Foundation India Trust, an advocacy group based in New Delhi that successfully brought a public interest petition to overturn India's anti-sodomy law, Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code. "We can now take the next step forward for the community in securing our rights."

Related

Photos

Gay Rights: Stonewall to Prop 8

Graphic

Gay Rights Timeline

More Related

• India Detains Tibet Protestors
• What’s Next for Gun Control?
• What the Gitmo Ruling Means

The law was enacted in 1860 by India's British rulers, but the most stubborn opposition to repealing it in India has come from those who argue that homosexuality goes against traditional Indian sensibilities. In July 2001, according to a report last year by Human Rights Watch, four HIV/AIDS outreach workers were arrested under Section 377 for distributing medical literature; a judge denied them bail, accusing them of "polluting the entire society." In 2003, the Indian Home Ministry — then under the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party — argued that it "responded to the values and mores of the time in the Indian society." Maulana Khalid Rashid Firangi Mahli, a member of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, said today's ruling was "against all religions. It is against the culture of Indian society."(See pictures of the gay-rights movement.)

The High Court soundly rejected that argument. "Moral indignation, howsoever strong, is not a valid basis for overriding individuals' fundamental rights of dignity and privacy. In our scheme of things Constitutional morality must outweigh the argument of public morality, even if it be the majoritarian view," the court said in its ruling. Going even further, the court found that Section 377 went against the Indian tradition and guiding political principle of inclusiveness.

That sends a strong signal to Indian gay rights activists, who cheered not just the decision but the principle affirming homosexuals as part of Indian society. "It's the first judgment of its kind," says Siddharth Narrain, an attorney with the Alternative Law Forum in Bangalore. "It looks at the concept of inclusiveness, not just life and liberty."(Read: "The Battle Over Gay Marriage.")

Versions of Section 377 — often identified by the same three digits — exist throughout the former British colonies of Asia and Africa, and there is some hope among activists in the region that today's ruling will help efforts elsewhere. Nepal has already overturned the law, but as the largest country in South Asia, India's repeal effort has been watched especially closely. "We have had a very progressive leadership, and I sincerely hope that the Indian decision will help us in the right direction," says Sahran Abeysundera, a gay rights activist in Colombo, Sri Lanka's capital. As in India, Sri Lanka's law on homosexuality, known there as Section 365, has hindered HIV prevention programs among male sex workers. "We stand to gain more by repealing these laws than keeping them in the law books."

Shakhawat Hossain, moderator of Boys of Bangladesh, an online community that helps and supports gay Bangladeshis, says that India, because of its cultural and historic ties to Bangladesh, can influence the direction of the gay rights movement there. "This ruling certainly would boost up the work that is going on in here," Hossain says. "Most importantly it will pave the way for a discussion in the wider society and media here in Bangladesh."(See a video on gay marriage.)

But the case overturning India's Section 377 took years; activists elsewhere realize they have a long road ahead. "There will not be any immediate change here because of the Indian decision," Rosanna Flamer-Caldera, executive director of Equal Ground, a gay rights group in Sri Lanka. "Things don't work like that, we have to keep working and advocating constantly." The Indian High Court has given them one more rallying cry.
— With reporting by Amantha Perera / Colombo and Delwar Hussain / Dhaka

TIME: When Benedict Meets Barack

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1907931,00.html

By JEFF ISRAELY Sunday, Jul. 05, 2009

President Barack Obama and Pope Benedict XVI

(l. to r.) Jason Reed / REUTERS; Andrew Medichini / AP

When Pope Benedict XVI greets U.S. President Barack Obama at the Vatican on July 10, the symbolism and sheer star power of the encounter will keep the pundits chattering away. The photo op alone is worth a thousand words: The 82-year-old man in white, the world's most recognizable religious leader and head of its largest single denomination comes face-to-face with the charismatic first black President of the world's last superpower. And the scheduling efforts of both the Vatican and the White House suggest a shared appreciation of the symbolic weight the first encounter between Obama and Benedict could carry.

More Related

• Church Politics: Why the Pope Is Sidestepping Notre Dame
• The Vatican Slams Obama Over Abortion
• Will the Pope and Obama Clash Over Abortion?

It was confirmed last week that the two would meet during a highly unusual Friday, 4 p.m. slot immediately after Obama finishes the G8 summit in Rome and prepares to depart for Ghana. Pontiffs almost always meet with visiting dignitaries before lunch, but that's not an option for Obama. And the fact that Benedict leaves Rome two days later for his summer holiday in the Italian Alps has some speculating that the pontiff had delayed his departure in order to be there when the new U.S. President comes to town.

Once they've allowed the photographers their opportunity, Benedict and Obama will speak alone and in private for what will likely be less than one hour. To paint the Obama-meets-Benedict dossier in broad strokes, says one senior Vatican diplomat, "It's basically the reverse of Bush." In other words, the Pope tends to appreciate the new President's less aggressive approach to foreign affairs, while clashing on ethical matters such as abortion rights and stem cell research — where President George W. Bush was seen by the Vatican as one of the few like-minded Western leaders on social issues, but whose invasion of Iraq was strongly opposed by the Vatican.

Some of the more zealous Catholic traditionalists, especially among American prelates, have been warning that an Obama presidency would expand abortion rights and deal other setbacks to traditionalist values. Former St. Louis Archbishop Raymond Burke, now a high-ranking Vatican official, went as far as warning that the Democratic Party risks becoming a "party of death." And U.S. Catholics spent the past month arguing over whether the pro-choice Obama should have been invited to speak at the University of Notre Dame commencement.

The Vatican diplomat, however, said the Pope and his top aides view Obama as different from other Western leaders who challenge the Church on social issues. "He's not Zapatero," said the source referring to the series of landmark bills on gay rights passed by the Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero. "Obama's not motivated with hatred of Christianity or the Catholic Church."

And for each leader, being in the presence of the other can boost their own standing. Obama, whose strong showing with Catholic voters in November were a key to his victory, can pad his popularity on that front by meeting with the Pope, while Benedict's efforts to find his footing in global diplomacy could be helped by having a relatively like-minded partner in the White House.

Vatican sources expect Obama and Benedictd to trade notes on the Middle East peace process, following the Pope's trip to the Holy Land in May and Obama's recent speech to the Muslim world. Expected to coincide with the upcoming publication of the Pope's third encyclical, which covers social and economic matters, we can be sure Benedict will ask Obama about the response to the financial crisis and how to build a more ethical brand of capitalism. After all, while the pontiff is to the right of Obama on social issues and aligned with him on foreign policy, he actually lands quite often to the left of the American president on economic issues.

MEP Elections-ILGA Pledge: Malta has the highest percentage of signatories in the EU

5.7.9 by Patrick Attard

44% of Malta's MEP candidates signed the ILGA pledge (Be Bothered), the highest in the EU.

[Click on image to enlarge.]

Read report here (pg. 4):
http://www.ilga-europe.org/content/download/14894/91846/file/Be%20Bothered%20RESULTS.pdf

See Maltese signatories and text of pledge here:
http://patrickattard.blogspot.com/2009/06/ilga-pledge-for-european-elections.html

Thanks to ILGA, MGRM, Sandro Mangion and others for the success the Maltese gay community achieved.

--------------------
MGRM's letter to the elected MEPs: http://www.maltagayrights.net/MEPletter

MGRM's letter to the elected Maltese MEPs

In the few months prior to the European Parliament Elections, the Malta Gay Rights Movement was very busy lobbying with the prospective MEP candidates and promoting ILGA-Europe's pledge with them. The pledge was being supported by a large number of gay rights organizations all around Europe. You can read more about the pledge here.

Of the 6 elected Maltese MEPs, including the one prospective MEP, 4 have signed the pledge and 2 chose not to sign.

Signed:
Louis Grech
Edward Scicluna
Simon Busuttil
Joseph Cuschieri - prospective MEP


Did not sign:
John Attard-Montalto
David Casa


According to the campaign details published by ILGA-Europe, Malta had the highest percentage of signatories, with 44% of those contesting signing the pledge. You can find more campaign results here.

Getting the MEP candidates' signatures on the pledge is however not enough. As soon as the post-election hype was over, MGRM sent a letter to all of our MEPs, both those who signed and those who didn't. Below you can read the letter sent to the 4 signatories. The letter to the 2 MEPs who did not sign was different only insofar as they were informed that even though they chose not to sign before the election, they can still do so now. A thank you note was also sent to the remaining 11 MEP candidates who signed the pledge but were not elected. The latter 11 candidates were also invited to join in forPride March on Saturday 18th July.


MGRM's letter to Louis Grech, Edward Scicluna, Joseph Cuschieri & Simon Busuttil:

Dear _____,

The Malta Gay Rights Movement would like to congratulate you following your election as a Member of the European Parliament. We would like to thank you for being one of the 871 MEP candidates from 26 European states – 15 of who from Malta – to choose to support the pledge by ILGA-Europe which aims to promote equality and to combat discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression.

In total, 139 of the newly-elected members to the European Parliament have signed the pledge. 58% of signatories were from the PES, 24% from the Green Parties, 12% from ALDE, 4% from GUEN/EGL and 2% from the EPP-ED.

The European Parliament has important legislative and political powers which ultimately have an influence on individual people’s lives. We are confident that following your signature on ILGA-Europe’s pledge, you will keep in mind the fact that every individual European citizen is entitled to the same inalienable rights of fair treatment and non-discrimination.

While wishing you all the best for your work as an MEP, we look forward to keeping in touch and to working together on issues which directly or indirectly affect the lives of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in Malta and around Europe.

Regards
MGRM

Independent UK: Tories accused of hypocrisy as they seek the gay vote

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tories-accused-of-hypocrisy-as-they-seek-the-gay-vote-1732176.html

Party's proposed 'blueprint for the family' signals a return to Back to Basics policies, critics claim

By Jane Merrick, Political Editor

Sunday, 5 July 2009

• SHARE
• PRINT
• EMAIL
• TEXT SIZE
  • NORMAL
  • LARGE
  • EXTRA LARGE

AP

David Cameron says that the Tories will include civil partnerships when giving tax breaks to married couples

• ENLARGE

A row over homophobia in politics escalated last night as the Conservative leader, David Cameron, was accused of pushing "Victorian values" on to the 21st-century concept of the family.

Harriet Harman, Labour's deputy leader, accused the Tories of "hypocritical moralising" for putting forward plans to support traditional family values and make divorce more difficult.

A bitter debate about which political party has the right to claim the "pink vote" overshadowed Gay Pride yesterday, when up to a million people marched through the capital.

Related articles

• Peter Tatchell: Go on, Dave. If you're really sorry about gay rights, prove it
• Leading article: Leaders of the gay revolution

Ed Balls, the Schools Secretary, stoked the row by criticising the "fierce opposition" to gay rights legislation by the Conservatives in Parliament, even though Mr Cameron has backed some of the measures. He became the fifth minister to claim that Labour was winning the battle for Britain's three million gay votes by declaring that the Government had led the way on overturning homophobic legislation such as Section 28.

His remarks came as it emerged that the Conservatives are considering a raft of "family values" policies which critics said had echoes of the ill-fated "Back to Basics" campaign of the John Major government.

A review by the former leader Iain Duncan Smith on behalf of Mr Cameron, hailed as a "Tory blueprint for the family", proposed tax breaks for married couples and laws to make divorce more difficult.

Ms Harman, who is also Equalities Minister, told The Independent on Sunday: "Families won't want to be lectured by anybody, whether in the Cabinet or the shadow Cabinet, about how to lead their lives, especially as politicians haven't proved themselves more likely to stay married than the rest of the population.

"Practical help is what is needed for families, not hypocritical moralising."

On the issue of allegations of homophobia in politics, Ms Harman said: "I would be more than happy for the question of gay rights to be not a political issue at all. No one wants to see prejudice in schools and children being homophobically bullied. But there is still a drag anchor in the Tory party which has not changed."

Mr Duncan Smith's plans did not appear to cover same-sex civil partnerships. However, Mr Cameron has indicated that an existing Tory commitment for tax breaks for married couples will cover gay marriages.

The Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg said last night: " On a weekend where they are trying to be the great friends of the gay community, the Tories are also trying to be the great advocates of the traditional Victorian family values. This is not so much Back to Basics, more them trying to have their cake and eating it."

Denis MacShane, the Labour former minister, said: "David Cameron has a real problem with modern relationships as he panders to those who want to imprison women in loveless marriages by making divorce more difficult while claiming he is pro-gay.

"Cameron is getting into bed with gay-bashing European parties in the European Parliament while saying he is pro-gay in Notting Hill. He wants to appease his traditional right and hope no one notices his forked tongue. It is undignified politics."

The row began last week when Mr Cameron apologised for his party's introduction of Section 28, the law that banned the promotion of homosexuality in schools, sparking criticism from two gay ministers.

Ben Bradshaw, the Culture Secretary, triggered controversy by saying that a "deep strain of homophobia still exists on the Conservative benches", while the Foreign Office minister Chris Bryant said: "If gays vote Tory, they will rue the day very soon."

The Tory leader voted in 2003 for the retention of Section 28, but has voted in favour of other gay rights legislation. Angela Eagle, the Pensions minister, said he was one of only 29 Tories to vote in favour of equality in goods and services.

Alan Duncan, one of two openly gay members of the shadow Cabinet, said yesterday that the comments by Mr Bradshaw and Mr Bryant were "scurrilous".

[Click on the hyperlink above to view the comments on the Independent website.]

YouTube: Gay Rights

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YS-6dlt_H8A



A short slideshow I made out of PostSecret pictures.
Hopefully this will let people see how hard life truly can be on homosexuals.

MaltaToday: Forced cohabitation: the Maltese anomaly

http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/2009/07/01/t10.html

1.7.9

Lawrence Gonzi’s promise to recognise cohabitation without introducing divorce could further undermine the institution of marriage by perpetuating the anomaly where thousands of couples cohabit simply because they cannot remarry. JAMES DEBONO on ‘divorce a la Maltese’

The difference between a legal separation which is available in Malta and a divorce which is available in all countries of the world except two; namely Malta and the Philippines, is that unlike separated persons, divorcees can re-marry.
While some Maltese, like other Europeans, cohabit out of choice, in the absence of divorce legislation others are forced to cohabit and raise children out of wedlock simply because they are denied the opportunity to remarry.
Many cohabit in the hope that their previous union will be dissolved by a civil annulment. But since not everyone can fulfil the criteria required by law to declare a marriage null and void, many end up living in a legal vacuum.
Since cohabitation is not legally recognised people enter in such a relationship at their own peril, denied the legal protection accorded to married couples.
For in the absence of laws regulating cohabitation, people can even be thrown out of their partner’s home despite having lived in it for many years.
Malta is not the only country in Europe where cohabitation is not regulated by law: the same situation exists also in Italy.
But unlike the Maltese, Italians can remarry if their first marriage breaks down. This makes cohabitation a matter of choice for heterosexual couples. In fact the most fervent advocates for cohabitation rights in Italy are gays who are also excluded from the institution of marriage.
Moreover, though in most European countries cohabitation is regulated by law, not all countries give the same rights to these couples.
There are over four million couples cohabiting in England and Wales. Although co-habitants are given legal protection in several areas, they and their families have significantly fewer rights and responsibilities than their counterparts who are married, or same sex couples who have formed a civil partnership.
In the UK unmarried couples have some protection under the provisions of the Rent Act and under the cohabitation rule their income and assets are aggregated for the purpose of claiming social security benefits. A cohabitee can claim maintenance for children, but not for him or herself. On separation, a claim to a share of property can be exercised only by using complicated trust law. By contrast, married couples can go to court to “divide the spoils”.
On the other hand in Sweden and Denmark, where divorce also exists, cohabiting partners have virtually the same legal rights and obligations as married couples, in taxation, welfare benefits, inheritance, and childcare.
Not surprisingly, 50% of all children in these countries are born into families of unmarried couples.
Unlike all other European countries Malta lacks both divorce and cohabitation rights. Statistics show that 25% of all Maltese children are born out of wedlock. Nine per cent claim that the father of the offspring is unknown. There are no official figures for children born to cohabiting couples.
Although many children could be born to single mothers, the figures could also include many cohabiting couples who would be married if divorce were legal in Malta.
Since his re-election, Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi has repeatedly promised that his present administration will honour an electoral commitment made by the PN in 1998 to recognize the rights and obligations of cohabiting couples. But he has categorically declared that he has no intention to introduce divorce.
Significantly the Maltese bishops have acknowledged the need for legislative changes to establish the individual rights and obligations of cohabiting couples, but insist that these legal provisions should be distinct from the laws regulating marriage.
The Maltese church openings on cohabitation might well be a final line of defence against the introduction of divorce, which would diminish the church’s jurisdiction on marriage.
An agreement signed between the Maltese government and the Vatican in 1993 gave civil powers to the Ecclesiastic Tribunal, forbidding people who are refused an annulment in the Church’s court to file a case for annulment in the Civil Courts.
If divorce is introduced, a new remedy will be available to those who were denied an annulment by the Church.
But the bishops have also lashed out against any proposal to grant cohabiting couples the same rights as married couples.
“We would really be destroying the family when all sorts of cohabiting arrangements are called family”, Bishop Mario Grech warned in May.
After excluding divorce from his options, Gonzi has to choose between granting cohabiting couples the same social and economic rights enjoyed by married couples, thus risking criticism from the Church, or to grant them the most basic rights like protection from being evicted from a shared home.
In the absence of divorce, granting very basic rights to cohabiting couples would only give an official blessing to the Maltese anomaly which forces thousands of families and children to live in cohabitation simply because remarriage is not an option for them.
Since it is very unlikely that a Gonzi administration will grant cohabiting couples the same rights as married couples, the inequalities between couples forced to cohabit because of the absence of divorce and legally married couples will become institutionalised.
Ultimately, by excluding thousands of Maltese from the institution of marriage, Gonzi might well be unwittingly undermining the same institution which he so keenly defends.
For divorce might well strengthen the institution of marriage by offering this option to those who are presently forced to cohabit.

YouTube: Gay teens coming out

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-k_qXODgBKk



Music and video by Sigur Ros - Vidrar Vel Til Loftarasa (Iceland 1999)

[Coming out]

BBC News: Gay sex decriminalised in India

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8129836.stm

2.7.9

Rights groups have long campaigned for a repeal of the law A court in the Indian capital, Delhi, has ruled that homosexual intercourse between consenting adults is not a criminal act. The ruling overturns a 148-year-old colonial law which describes a same-sex relationship as an "unnatural offence". Homosexual acts were punishable by a 10-year prison sentence. Many people in India regard same-sex relationships as illegitimate. Rights groups have long argued that the law contravened human rights. Have Your Say I cannot welcome the rule morally or wholeheartedly A R Shams, Pakistan See more of your comments Delhi's High Court ruled that the law outlawing homosexual acts was discriminatory and a "violation of fundamental rights". The court said that a statute in Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, which defines homosexual acts as "carnal intercourse against the order of nature" and made them illegal, was an "antithesis of the right to equality". 'India's Stonewall' The ruling is historic in a country where homosexuals face discrimination and persecution on a daily basis but it is likely to be challenged, says the BBC's Soutik Biswas in Delhi. Activists welcome 'historic' ruling It also promises to change the discourse on sexuality in a largely conservative country, where even talking about sex is largely taboo, our correspondent says. Gay rights activists all over the country welcomed the ruling and said it was "India's Stonewall". New York's Stonewall riot in 1969 is credited with launching the gay rights movement. "It [the ruling] is India's Stonewall. We are elated. I think what now happens is that a lot of our fundamental rights and civic rights which were denied to us can now be reclaimed by us," activist and lawyer Aditya Bandopadhyay told the BBC. "It is a fabulously written judgement, and it restores our faith in the judiciary," he said. Leading gay rights activist and the editor of India's first gay magazine Ashok Row Kavi welcomed the judgement but said the stigma against homosexuals will persist. TEXT OF COURT JUDGEMENT Delhi High Court judgement overturning Section 377 of India's Penal Code Download the reader here "The social stigma will remain. It is [still] a long struggle. But the ruling will help in HIV prevention. Gay men can now visit doctors and talk about their problems. It will help in preventing harassment at police stations," Mr Kavi told the BBC. But the decision was greeted with unease by other groups. Father Dominic Emanuel of India's Catholic Bishop Council said the church did not "approve" of homosexual behaviour. "Our stand has always been very clear. The church has no serious objection to decriminalising homosexuality between consenting adults, the church has never considered homosexuals as criminals," said Father Emanuel. "But the church does not approve of this behaviour. It doesn't consider it natural, ethical, or moral," he said. FROM BBC WORLD SERVICE More from BBC World Service The head cleric of Jama Masjid, India's largest mosque, criticised the ruling. "This is absolutely wrong. We will not accept any such law," Ahmed Bukhari told the AFP news agency. In 2004, the Indian government opposed a legal petition that sought to legalise homosexuality - a petition the high court in Delhi dismissed. But rights groups and the Indian government's HIV/Aids control body have demanded that homosexuality be legalised. The National Aids Control Organisation (Naco) has said that infected people were being driven underground and efforts to curb the virus were being hampered. According to one estimate, more than 8% of homosexual men in India were infected with HIV, compared to fewer than 1% in the general population. [P. Attard's Note: This is a huge step forward since male-to-male relationships were punishable with a 20 year imprisonment in India up to now. It is important to note that whilst the Indian Catholic Bishops do not oppose the decriminalisation, Malta's Archbishop Mgr Michael Gonzi OPPOSED the decriminalisation of homosexuality in 1972. Read article in Maltese here. The Vatican also opposed the UN Resolution to decriminalise homosexuality universally in December 2008. Read article here.]

L-Orizzont: Messaġġ ċar [fil-Malta Gay Pride March]

http://www.l-orizzont.com/news.asp?newsitemid=54716

2.7.9 minn Andre Damato

IL-GWU Youths sejra tipparteċipa fil-LGBT Pride March organizzata mill-Malta Gay Rights Movement.

Il-GWU Youths se tipparteċipa f’din il-manifestazzjoni favur id-drittijiet tal-LGBT (Lesbians, Gays, Bisexuals and Transgenders). Din se ssir fil-Belt Valletta nhar is-Sibt, 18 ta’ Lulju, 2009. Il-post tal-ġabra jkun Bieb il-Belt fl-10.00 a.m.

Il-GWU Youths qiegħda tappoġġja din l-attività għax temmen fl-importanza tad-dritt tal-bniedem li ma jiġix iddiskriminat minħabba l-orjentazzjoni u l-preferenzi sesswali kemm dawk eterosesswali u dawk omosesswali, kemm fuq il-post tax-xogħol u kemm fis-soċjetà li hu jgħix fiha. Għal snin twal nies b’orjentazzjoni omosesswali ġew arrestati, vittimizzati u ddiskriminati. Għalkemm id-dinja nbidlet, illum fl-2009 mhux kulħadd jagħraf id-drittijiet tal-LGBT.

Manifestazzjonijiet bħal tat-18 ta’ Lulju isiru biex tiżdied il-viżibilità u l-għarfien tal- LGBT fis-soċjetà u fl-istess ħin temfasizza l-irwol integrali li għandhom fl-istess soċjetà.

Din is-sena l-movimenti favur id-drittijiet tal-LGBT madwar id-dinja qegħdin ifakkru l-40 anniversarju tal-irvelli ta’ Stonewall. Dawn l-irvelli saru f’Ġunju 1969 barra Stonewall Inn, fi New York, fejn wara li persuni omosesswali kienu msawtin u arrestati mill-Pulizija. Minn din l-esperjenza nibtet l-idea wara l-Pride Marches, fejn dawn komplew jiżviluppaw f’mezz biex titwassal u tissaħ-ħaħ il-vuċi favur l-ugwaljanza tal-LGBT. Parteċipazzjoni f’din l-attività hija messaġġ ċar favur l-impenn u r-rispett tad-diversità u l-ugwaljanza fis-soċjetà Maltija.

Il-GWU Youths tħeġġeġ lill-membri tagħha biex jippar-teċipaw f’din l-attività u iktar minn hekk jagħrfu d-drittijiet tal-persuni LGBT fuq il-post tax-xogħol u fil-ħajja soċjali tagħhom, li fl-aħħar mill-aħħar hu-ma ħutna, uliedna, sħabna u l-kollegi tagħna lkoll.

Għal iktar informazzjoni ċempel lill-MGRM fuq 9925 5559 jew iżur is-sit elettroniku www.maltagayrights.org.

BBC News: 'Stonewall gave me new gay role models'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8123927.stm

29.6.9

A protest in San Francisco, California, against the Catholic Church's policies The Stonewall uprisings 40 years ago brought the gay rights movement to the forefront of American culture. Writer and historian David Carter assesses what progress has been made since that pivotal moment and how far the quest for equal rights has to go. The end of this month marks the 40th anniversary of the Stonewall Uprising, an anniversary that has been duly marked by a number of events, including a White House reception on Monday. VILLAGE RAID The Stonewall Riots began late on 27 June 1969 when New York City police officers raided the popular gay bar, the Stonewall Inn, in Greenwich Village The raid set off a six-day series of protests, demonstrations and confrontations between the city's gay community and the police Police said the raid was staged because unlicensed liquor was being sold on the premises The Gay Liberation Front formed just a month after the riots and soon became an international force Stonewall veteran recalls gay riot But because the history of the gay civil rights movement has generally not been taken seriously by educators nor by the media, people are often uncertain about what exactly Stonewall was: why did the Stonewall Riots occur and what do they mean? There had been a homosexual rights movement in Germany since the 19th century, a movement that regained some momentum after the setback caused by World War I. The movement spread in Europe, including Russia, during the 20th century and suffered further setbacks under Nazi and Communist dictatorships. After World War II homosexual rights movements made progress in Western democracies. The homosexual rights movement began in an organized way in the United States after World War II during the Cold War when the Mattachine Society was founded. While there was progress toward decriminalizing homosexuality in Canada and Europe, progress in the US was much slower. But in Europe, severe prejudice against homosexuality remained even in those societies where homosexual sex acts were not illegal. It was the massive and sustained uprising against the police that erupted at the end of June 1969 when the New York City police raided a popular gay bar named the Stonewall that eventually changed the situation worldwide. Because the riots broke out in the late 1960s after the successes of the US anti-Vietnam War movement and the black civil rights movement, the organizations that emerged immediately after Stonewall were cast in a New Left mould, which also meant a militant consciousness. Suddenly I had a new model: gay men as brave and creative and effective, not as sex perverts who were creeps and mentally ill The most successful of these organizations, the Gay Activists Alliance, modelled its actions on guerrilla theatre and added camp humour to create "zaps", demonstrations that were highly creative, highly subversive, and designed to get media attention. The result was that gay people were seen over and over in the media acting from positions of power: challenging power and unafraid. That changed the consciousness of gay people everywhere, including even someone like myself who was a high-school student who was trying very hard to deny his homosexuality. Suddenly I had a new model: gay men as brave and creative and effective, not as sex perverts who were creeps and mentally ill. And this is why the movement at this historical juncture grew like mushrooms: this was just what gay men and lesbians, who had been so suppressed for so long needed. And because we had witnessed the revolt of all the other oppressed groups, we knew just what to do: all the other militant movements that had changed the consciousness of the masses in the 1960s -even when they had often failed to change particular government policies or pass specific laws - offered a template for ending discrimination and prejudiced thinking. Ellen DeGeneres was one of the first celebrities to come out The Stonewall Riots, in the way that they were immediately commemorated with annual marches, also offered a way to spread the gospel of freedom, equality, and liberation. They were extremely effective because one of the main obstacles against homosexual equality was invisibility. As long as most people thought they knew no homosexuals what basis did they have for doubting the media image of lesbians and gay men as strange, lonely, sad and probably pathological beings? But when real homosexuals had the courage to march in the sunlight, they did not look so different from anyone else: the normalcy was apparent. Members of the public might see their co-worker or fellow student or neighbour in the march, and this made it easier for more and more homosexuals to "come out": to quit hiding. This in turn made it possible for people to approach politicians and demand not only that oppressive laws be overturned, but that laws to protect the civil rights of lesbians and gay men be enacted. Fighting back And so more and more laws outlawing discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation were passed, first on a local basis and then by states. Films and novels began to portray gay men and lesbians more fairly and more accurately. Ground was lost as a terrifying disease with no cure that was connected in the public's mind with homosexuality spread rapidly. Hysteria was caused in part because it was unclear how the disease was spread. Would mosquitoes or a cough spread it from an infected person to an "innocent" (ie, heterosexual) person? Again, the gay community fought back as it had during the gay liberation phase by both organizing and by a new creative media campaign. As medical knowledge progressed and the disease spread more and more, it became clear that Aids was not, after all, a "homosexual disease," and hence not a divine judgment on homosexuality. Equality, promised by the advent of the gay liberation movement in Stonewall's wake, is on the horizon By the time of the Clinton administration, the gay civil rights movement was ready to spring ahead after 12 years of hostile Republican rule. And spring it did. Gay people were energized by the 25th anniversary of the Stonewall Riots and more and more positive and stronger media portrayals from television to Hollywood. Now with the Obama administration in Washington after eight more years of Republican government, there had been much optimism among gay people in America. This was fuelled in part by Barack Obama's proclamation of support for gay equality except in the area of marriage. Now the 40th anniversary of Stonewall has simultaneously heightened the gay public's historical awareness, making gay people impatient for action from this administration. Many are wondering whether President Obama will unveil a new policy initiative today. But whether the Obama administration does so or not, it seems clear that the time of equality is getting close at hand: young Americans don't even understand the idea of discrimination based on sexual orientation any more than young people in the 1990s could understand racial discrimination. Equality, promised by the advent of the gay liberation movement in Stonewall's wake, is on the horizon. When it finally does arrive, it will be thanks to young gay people who found the courage to stand up for themselves on the streets of Greenwich Village 40 years ago. David Carter is the author of Stonewall: the riots that sparked the gay revolution. He is a consultant for the BBC Radio 2 programme Stonewall: The Riots That Triggered The Gay Revolution, which will be broadcast on Tuesday 30 June 2009 at 2230BST. [Click on the hyperlink at the top to view the comments on the BBC-News website.]