Even after five years of living together in the Pacific resort city of Acapulco, something as simple as holding hands or sharing a kiss in public is unthinkable for Dayanny Marcelo and Mayela Villalobos.
There is an ever-present fear of being rejected or attacked in Guerrero, a state where same-sex relationships are not widely accepted and one of five in Mexico where same-sex marriage is still not allowed.
But this week they traveled the 235 miles (380 kilometers) to Mexico’s capital, where the city government hosted a mass wedding for same-sex couples as part of celebrations of LGBT Pride Month.
Under a tent set up in the plaza of the capital’s civil registry, along with about 100 other same-sex couples, Villalobos and Marcelo sealed their union Friday with a kiss while the wedding march played in the background.
Their ability to wed is considered one of the LGBT community’s greatest recent achievements in Mexico. It is now possible in 27 of Mexico’s 32 states and has been twice upheld by the Supreme Court.
Just married same-sex couples cut a cake during a mass wedding ceremony in Mexico City on June 24, 2022. Fernando Llano / AP
Mexico, Brazil and Argentina top Latin America in the number of same-sex marriages.
Mariaurora Mota, a leader of the Mexican LGBTTTI+ Coalition, said the movement still is working to guarantee in all of Mexico the right to change one’s identity, have access to health care and social security and to let transsexual minors change their gender on their birth certificates.
Walking around Mexico City a day before their wedding, Marcelo and Villalobos confessed to feeling strange holding hands in the city streets. Displays of affection between same-sex couples in the capital are commonplace, but it was difficult to shed their inhibititions.
“I feel nervous,” said Villalobos, a 30-year-old computer science major, as Marcelo held her hand.
Villalobos grew up in the northern state of Coahuila in a conservative Christian community. She always felt an “internal struggle,” because she knew she had a different sexual orientation, but feared her family would reject her. “I always cried because I wanted to be normal,” she said.
A Japanese court ruled on Monday that a ban on same-sex marriage was not unconstitutional, dealing a setback to LGBTQ rights activists in the only Group of Seven nation that does not allow people of the same gender to marry.
The ruling dashes activists’ hopes of raising pressure on the central government to address the issue after a court in the city of Sapporo in March 2021 decided in favor of a claim that not allowing same-sex marriage was unconstitutional.
Three same-sex couples — two male, one female — had filed the case in a district court in Osaka, only the second to be heard on the issue in Japan.
In addition to rejecting their claim that being unable to marry was unconstitutional, the court threw out their demand for 1 million yen ($7,400) in damages for each couple.
“I actually wonder if the legal system in this country is really working,” said plaintiff Machi Sakata, who married her U.S.-citizen partner in the United States. The two are expecting a baby in August.
“I think there’s the possibility this ruling may really corner us,” Sakata said.
Japan’s constitution defines marriage as being based on “the mutual consent of both sexes.” But the introduction of partnership rights for same-sex couples in Tokyo last week, along with rising support in opinion polls, had raised the hopes of activists and lawyers for the Osaka case.
The Osaka court said that marriage was defined as being only between opposite genders and not enough debate on same-sex marriage had taken place in Japanese society.
“We emphasized in this case that we wanted same-sex couples to have access to the same things as regular couples,” said lawyer Akiyoshi Miwa, adding that they would appeal.
Economic implications
Japanese law is considered relatively liberal in some areas by Asian standards, but across the continent only Taiwan has legalized same-sex marriage.
Under current rules in Japan, members of same-sex couples are not allowed to legally marry, cannot inherit each other’s assets — such as a house they may have shared — and also have no parental rights over each other’s children.
Though partnership certificates issued by some municipalities help same-sex couples rent property together and have hospital visitation rights, they do not give them the full legal rights enjoyed by heterosexual couples.
Last week, the Tokyo prefectural government passed a bill to recognize same-sex partnership agreements, meaning local governments covering more than half of Japan’s population now offer such recognition.
While Prime Minister Fumio Kishida has said the issue needs to be carefully considered, his ruling Liberal Democratic Party has disclosed no plans to review the matter or propose legislation, though some senior party members favor reform.
An upcoming case in Tokyo will keep alive public debate on the issue, particularly in the capital, where an opinion poll by the local government late last year found some 70 percent of people were in favor of same-sex marriage.
Legalizing same-sex marriage would have far-reaching implications both socially and economically, activists say, and would help attract foreign firms to the world’s third-biggest economy.
“International firms are reviewing their Asian strategy and LGBTQ inclusivity is becoming a topic,” said Masa Yanagisawa, head of prime services at Goldman Sachs and a board member of the activist group Marriage for all Japan, speaking before the verdict.
“International businesses don’t want to invest in a location that isn’t LGBTQ-friendly.”
Two transgender journalists are pulling out of the Guardian’s Pride special coverage due to the paper’s alleged “ingrained prejudice against trans women.”
In a letter to the U.K. newspaper’s bosses, freelance journalists Freddy McConnell and Vic Parsons said they were declining all future work with The Guardian. They were commissioned to write pieces about their experiences of being transgender for the paper’s upcoming Pride special.
The pair say they have a “moral duty to stand in absolute solidarity” with transgender women and trans feminine people who are receiving negative attention from the paper, adding they will “no longer write for The Guardian until it changes its trans-hostile and exclusionary stance.”
The letter continues: “For far too long, the UK’s supposedly most progressive mainstream media outlet has routinely monstered trans women, undermined non-binary people, and misrepresented our desire to simply live in peace and safety.”
“It has amplified conspiracy theories about trans healthcare and trans and gender non-conforming children and has contributed to attempts to smear those working to support trans people. On social media, it’s even worse, with prominent writers routinely amplifying and generating misinformation about trans women, trans men, and nonbinary people.”
McConnell and Parsons say they believed a recent opinion piece was “misleading and discriminatory” about cisgender lesbians dating transgender women and said it was “the final straw” for them.
The opinion piece was published in The Guardian’s sister paper The Observer and online on The Guardian’s website. The article has been criticized as anti-trans, with the author of the article repeatedly calling transgender women “biologically male” and labeling transgender campaigners working for transgender equality as pushing “gender ideology.”
McConnell said that he was “disgusted” by the article, “I was like, oh God, here we go again. I’m still shocked that the Guardian is putting out pieces that are so obviously incorrect, inaccurate, and offensive. What is going on?”
In their letter to newspaper bosses, the writers claim the article “contravenes The Guardian’s editorial code on fairness, verification, accuracy, and discrimination,” as well as going against the paper’s “foundational values.”
“This decision was not reached quickly or easily,” they write, adding, “since 2017, trans writers, staffers, and allies have been working politely and tirelessly to help editors understand the harm that misinformed hostility to trans equality is doing, both to trans people and to the paper itself.”
“When I saw that opinion piece I was just like – why? Not again. I was sent it by multiple people and it’s exactly why I’ve had to stop reading the news for the past few months,” Parsons said. “It was impossible for me to go ahead and write something for the Pride edition, knowing that the organization had supported that article.”
The two journalists call on other writers, especially LGBTQ writers, to end their working relationships with The Guardian “until it stops attacking trans women and trans equality,” they say that all of the newspaper’s transgender staff have already left.
“The Guardian can no longer point to trans staffers as evidence of not having a transphobia problem because they’ve all left, either wholly or partly due to said transphobia,” the letter claims.
McConnell and Parsons have several demands within their letter. They want The Guardianto change how it approaches transgender people. They also ask for a change in the editorial stance to reflect that transgender women having rights does not disadvantage cisgender women.
Both writers don’t have any regrets when it comes to leaving The Guardian. When asked if leaving could lead to transgender people being silenced, or more anti-transgender negativity in the newspaper, both McConnell and Parsons said “no.”
“We’re not included in the debate at this point anyway, and certainly not by The Guardian,” Parsons said. “This is a statement against the continued exclusion of our voices from the debate – not us removing ourselves from a debate that we were included in.”
They added: “If you call yourself a trans ally, this is the moment for you to do something. Yes, it might come at a financial cost to not have a working relationship with The Guardian, as it does for me and Freddy, but sometimes you have to do what’s right.”
Czech president Miloš Zeman has said he plans to veto proposed legislation that would give same-sex couples the right to get married in the country.
The measure, which was drafted by lawmakers across the Czech political spectrum, was submitted to the parliament’s lower house on Tuesday (7 June), the Associated Pressreported.
Lawmakers have yet to set a date to debate the proposed same-sex marriage legislation. Yet the country’s president has said he is strongly opposed to the measure and will strike it down should it even land on his desk.
“I’d like to announce that if I really receive such a law to sign I will veto it,” Zeman said.
Miloš Zeman has served as the president of the Czech Republic since 2013. The president is considered a largely ceremonial role as the elected leader has limited executive powers, but he does have a considerable role in political affairs.
Zeman said that the Czech Republic passed a law in 2006 allowing same-sex couples to enter into registered partnerships, but he believed “family is a union between a man and a woman”, “full stop”.
Czech president Miloš Zeman said he believes “family is a union between a man and a woman”, “full stop”. (Getty/Mikhail Svetlov)
The registered partnership gives queer couples in the Czech Republic some rights similar to those of heterosexual married couples, but it stops short of placing same-sex couples on fully equal footing with their heterosexual counterparts.
Same-sex marriage remains illegal in the country because marriage is defined as a union between a man and a woman under the Czech Republic’s civil code.
Parliament started debating similar same-sex marriage legislation back in 2018, but the legislation stalled as lawmakers didn’t take a vote before last year’s general election. The measure had to then be re-submitted for debate.
Lawmakers in the Czech parliament’s lower house can override Zeman’s veto if they can reach a majority vote.
Miloš Zeman has often espoused anti-LGBTQ+ views in the past. Last June, Zeman said he finds trans people “disgusting” while discussing Hungary’s so-called LGBTQ+ ‘propaganda’ law, which bans any depiction or discussion of queer people in schools, the media and advertising.
Zema said he thought people who undergo gender-affirming treatments are “basically committing a crime of self-harm”.
“Every surgery is a risk, and these transgender people to me are disgusting,” he added.
Thailand is set to go down in history as the first Southeast Asian country to legalise same-sex unions after approving a historic bill.
The country’s Cabinet has approved draft legislation which will allow same-sex couples to register their partnership in Thailand, Bloombergreported. The bill avoids the term ‘marriage’, but it will allow same-sex couples rights to jointly own property, adopt children and have inheritance rights between partners.
The bill now goes to the country’s Parliament for approval before it can become law. If passed into law, Thailand would be the first Southeast Asian country to approve such legislation.
Deputy government spokeswoman Rachada Dhnadirek said Tuesday (7 June) that the Cabinet endorsed an earlier version of the bill, which was sponsored by the justice ministry in July 2020. But she said the government needed to study the bill and get public feedback before it was approved.
“The Civil Partnership Bill is a milestone for Thai society in promoting equality among people of all genders,” Dhnadirek said back in July. “This strengthens the families of people with sexual diversity and is appropriate for the present social circumstances.”
Under the proposed legislation, civil partnerships are defined as couples of the same sex, and people in the relationship must be at least 17-years-old to register, Bangkok Postreported. At least one person in the relationship must be a Thai national.
Members of the LGBTQ+ have criticised Thailand’s Civil Partnership Bill for not going far enough to promote queer rights in the country. (Anusak Laowilas/NurPhoto via Getty)
Advocates have argued that the bill is a big step forward for LGBTQ+ rights in Thailand, but they have argued that it doesn’t go far enough.
Tattep Ruangprapaikitseree, LGBTQ+ activist and secretary-general of progressive youth organisation Free Youth, said the bill “isn’t a milestone for gender equality in Thailand”, CNNreported. Instead, Tattep argued it’s an “obstacle to reach marriage for all”.
Tanwarin Sukkhapisit, filmmaker and first trans member of parliament under the Move Forward Party, questioned why the legislation won’t “just call everyone, both traditional and non-traditional couples, as married partners”.
“This is another form of discrimination in disguise,” Tanwarin said. “We don’t want anything special we just want to be treated like others.”
“I felt like I was flying,” says Aloysius Ssali, recalling the day he was granted refugee status in the UK in 2010. He had been living on London’s streets for five years, homeless and undocumented since the UK didn’t formally recognize sexuality as a reason for protection at the time.
Ssali grew up as a gay man in Uganda, where homosexuality can be punished by life imprisonment and where he had been targeted for campaigning for LGBTQ rights. When he returned home in 2005 after studying in the UK, he was captured and tortured – a common occurrence in the country, which ranks 13th on the LGBTQ danger index.
After finally being granted asylum in the UK at age 33, his elated feeling was soon quashed due to further barriers.
“Navigating the system as a gay man was very difficult,” he told LGBTQ Nation.
Wanting to support others in the same position, he founded Say it Loud Club, a community of LGBTQ asylum seekers and refugees helping others to navigate the UK immigration system. Over 10 years later, more claims were being granted based on sexuality and gender identity, and Ssali believed things were slowly progressing.
But in April, when the British Home Office announced plans to relocate asylum seekers to Rwanda, Ssali was “horrified”. Under the $150 million deal, people deemed to have traveled to the UK illegally will be relocated to Rwanda for processing and resettlement, a plan some are comparing to the United States’ Asylum Cooperative Agreement.
While the scheme has elicited concerns for all asylum seekers, human rights organizations are particularly concerned about LGBTQ individuals.
“Everyone we work with is completely terrified,” says Sonia Lenegan, legal and policy director at Rainbow Migration, an organization that supports LGBTQ people through the UK’s asylum system.
While homosexuality was decriminalized in Rwanda in 2010, it “remains frowned upon”, according to the British government’s own foreign office, with LGBTQ people facing societal abuse, including by authorities, and gender transitioning remaining illegal. The Home Office admitted to the persecution of the LGBTQ community in Rwanda in a report, but said ill-treatment is not systemic.
“They are basing it on the idea that people are not actively prosecuted for being part of the LGBTQ community,” says Daniel Sohege, director of Stand For All, a human rights advocacy organization. “But there are multiple cases of people being prosecuted under public decency acts.”
Human Rights Watch reported last year that Rwandan authorities had arbitrarily detained over a dozen gay and transgender people before a conference in Kigali, accusing them of “not representing Rwandan values.”
“People are being stigmatized, abused and discriminated out of existence,” Lenegan told LGBTQ Nation. “You can say that on paper something is lawful, but in reality, it is very difficult for [LGBTQ] people to live openly in Rwanda.”
Neela Ghoshal, senior director of law, policy and research at Outright International, a US-based LGBTQ human rights organization, says there is “no space for dissent or freedom of expression” in Rwanda, and LGBTQ people, particularly refugees, cannot count on protection from the state against discrimination. She warns the UK to learn from the Trump-era Asylum Cooperative Agreement, which saw asylum seekers relocated to Guatemala– a country deemed highly unsafe for LGBTQ people and referred to as “among the most dangerous countries in the world” by the US State Department itself– where at least 20 LGBTQ people were murdered in 2020 alone.
While the scheme was suspended by the Biden administration last year, LGBTQ asylum seekers were highly endangered. Ghoshal says no provisions were made for LGBTQ people and the majority of asylum cases were never heard. She worries the same could apply to Rwanda.
“[The Home Office] seems to see the potential for violence against LGBTIQ+ people […] as an acceptable level of collateral damage, which, from a human rights standpoint, is absolutely unacceptable,” Ghoshal told LGBTQ Nation. “If you’re actually concerned about helping people find a safe place, this kind of offshoring of asylum claims doesn’t work.”
The United Nations has firmly opposed the UK-Rwanda deal, saying offshoring schemes like these evade international obligations under the Refugee Convention and wealthy nations should provide their share of safety for asylum seekers. But the Biden administration’s plans to end Title 42, an order invoked by the Trump administration that utilized the COVID-19 pandemic as a reason to deport asylum seekers from the US, were blocked by a federal judge.
Ghoshal hopes that the UK can do better.
“If the UK government continues with this policy, the conclusion that we […] will have to draw is that the UK doesn’t care about asylum seekers’ safety, including LGBTIQ+ asylum seekers,” she says.
The British Home Office says the scheme is a way to fight human trafficking, but opponents argue that it will just do the opposite once those resettled in Rwanda decide to leave. This was the case in Guatemala, with many leaving in attempts to reach the US again.
“People just disappeared,” Ghoshal says. “Most of the LGBTIQ people who ended up in that program were not willing to sit and wait in Guatemala where they felt unsafe.”
Trans women are in particular danger of abuse when trafficked and on trafficking routes between Central America, Mexico, and the US; Outright International documented multiple rape cases – another warning Ghoshal has against the UK’s policy.
“The Home Office has a track record of ignoring the LGBTQ community and the threats of persecution they’re under,” Sohege says. “They’ve started from a principle of, ‘we want to push this policy through’ […] and have just completely dismissed concerns from experts in the field.”
LGBTQ asylum seekers in the UK are going into hiding to avoid being taken to Rwanda, according to Rainbow Migration, which could put them at risk of exploitation and discrimination in employment, housing, and elsewhere. For LGBTQ asylum seekers who have struggled to come out, Ssali thinks this will reverse years of campaigning.
“We ask people: ‘Please don’t hide, please come out– we are going to give you a safe space’,” he says. “Now, that trust has been broken.”
While some hope provisions are put in place for LGBTQ people, many think the policy should be scrapped altogether.
“I don’t think there’s any way to make it tolerable,” Ghoshal says. “As someone who knows the overall human rights situation in the region, I believe firmly that it is not just LGBTIQ+ people who are going to be at risk. Anybody who is forced to live in Rwanda and who enjoys their freedom of expression is going to face potential risk.”
Legal cases are underway and many hope the policy won’t stand up to international scrutiny since the plans breaching three articles of the European Commission for Human Rights and three of the Refugee Convention.
“The UK’s priorities are upside down,” Ghoshal says. “If Britain wants to create a fake threat that asylum seekers are somehow going to cause harm in the UK, […] and the result is actually doing concrete harm to LGBTQ people, this is in complete violation of international human rights law and the basic sense of humanity.”
A Home Office spokesperson said Rwanda is “a safe and secure country” in which “LGBT+ people [do] not face a real risk of persecution”, and that they will assess each case individually. But campaigners are doing all they can to reverse the plans, and organizations like Say it Loud Club will continue to fight for LGBTQ asylum seekers.
“We have to be at the forefront; the people of color, the ethnic minorities, the LGBTQ people,” Ssali says. “We are the product of the asylum system in this country. The asylum system doesn’t belong to the government, it belongs to people like us.”
Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people and other asylum seekers fleeing persecution in their home countries experience abusive and dangerous conditions in Mexicowhen not allowed to cross the border to seek asylum, Human Rights Watch said today.
Two policies implemented by the administration of former President Donald J. Trump – the Migrant Protection Protocols, commonly known as “Remain in Mexico,” and the Title 42 summary expulsion policy – continue to be used under the Biden administration to block access to the asylum system for most people who try to cross into the US to seek safety. This includes people at a greater risk of harm in Mexico because of their particular conditions or identities, including gender identity or expression, disability, and age who should be entitled to an exception from expulsion. US authorities should stop sending asylum seekers to Mexico or expelling them to their countries of origin and should quickly process people waiting at the border to seek asylum who are at particular risk of abuse.
“The United States should restore access to asylum for all, but so long as Biden is blocked from doing so, he should at the very least immediately use existing exceptions for at-risk asylum seekers, including LGBT people,” said Ari Sawyer, US border researcher at Human Rights Watch. “Continuing to summarily expel LGBT and HIV-positive asylum seekers to Mexico or their country of origin places their lives at serious risk.”
US government protocols include exceptions for asylum seekers at a greater risk, and President Joe Biden has promised US agents will apply them. But border agents have broad discretion to grant or deny exceptions, and there are no clear consequences for agents who fail to do so or checks to ensure that exceptions are being handled properly, Human Rights Watch found.
Despite a recognition by the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that LGBT people may face “increased risk of harm in Mexico due to their sexual orientation or gender identity,” Human Rights Watch documented cases in which border officials returned LGBT asylum seekers, including those with HIV, to Mexico under both abusive anti-asylum policies.
Human Rights Watch conducted 29 interviews with asylum seekers, migrants’ rights groups, and United Nations agency officials in April and May 2022, in person and by phone, in Ciudad Juárez and Mexico City, and in El Paso, Texas. Human Rights Watch undertook research in coordination with Casa de Colores, a US-Mexican organization working to provide shelter and legal services to LGBT asylum seekers.
LGBT asylum seekers told Human Rights Watch they had been expelled even after expressing their fear of returning and telling border agents they identified as LGBT, had HIV, or had experienced abuse related to their gender identity, gender expression, or sexual orientation. They also described serious abuse during their journeys to the border, including by Mexican officials.
One woman interviewed fled to the United States from Honduras, where she previously faced targeted violence for living openly as a lesbian woman, including one incident when someone cut her face, leaving a large scar. Near the US border, people she believed to be members of a Mexican cartel kidnapped her and forcibly took nude photos of her.
She said that when she explained to US border officials that she was a lesbian seeking asylum from Honduras and that she had also experienced abuse in Mexico, agents laughed at her. She said one agent told her, “I don’t care what’s happening to you.” She was expelled to Honduras, and immediately fled again to the US border, this time afraid to seek asylum for fear of being returned to Honduras again.
Previous Human Rights Watch research has highlighted the risk of illegal and arbitrary arrest, torture, extrajudicial execution, sexual assault, and enforced disappearance for LGBT people in Central America.
Although the Biden administration has moved to terminate both Title 42 and Remain in Mexico, several US state officials have filed suits in federal court, resulting in orders to keep the programs in place during the litigation.
A federal district court judge has temporarily blocked the Biden administration from ending the expulsion policy, which was first issued at the start of the Covid-19 pandemic against the recommendation of top public health experts. There is no evidence that people seeking asylum pose a public health threat to the United States, and the expulsion policy cannot be justified on public health grounds.
Though the initial Title 42 was issued without “notice and comment” procedures, allowing a period for the public to comment, the judge found that the Biden administration should have gone through these administrative consultation processes to end Title 42. Some US lawmakers have proposed legislationthat would keep summary expulsions in place until pandemic public health measures are terminated.
Asylum seekers and other migrants sent to Mexico are often unable to support themselves or access basic services such as shelter, food, water, safe transportation, or health care, and have no meaningful recourse for abuses from criminal cartels or Mexican authorities. In the Mexican state of Tamaulipas, Human Rights Watch found that asylum seekers and other migrants are systematically targeted for kidnapping, extortion, rape, and other violence, by both government officials and criminals.
LGBT people constitute one particularly at-risk group of asylum seekers, among others, including people with disabilities and chronic health conditions, Black and Indigenous asylum seekers, asylum seekers who do not speak Spanish as a first language, and families traveling with children.
LGBT asylum seekers and asylum seekers with HIV described additional discrimination and abuse as well as barriers to accessing essential services, including life-saving antiretroviral therapy and gender-affirming health care, services that include medical and mental health services, continuation of hormonal treatment, and other services for transgender and nonbinary people that are crucial to their health and well-being.
Human Rights Watch asked Mexico’s National Migration Institute for more information on allegations made against immigration agents. The agency responded on May 31 and said they were unaware of any reports of such abuses, were not able to investigate them, and that the Mexican constitution prohibits such behavior.
The United States has an obligation to protect refugees from returning to a threat of persecution, ill-treatment, and threats to life and safety, Human Rights Watch said. President Biden should ensure that the United States complies with its domestic and international legal obligations to respect the right to seek asylum.
“LGBTQ+ and HIV-positive asylum seekers face grave risks to their health and safety from the time they flee their countries, often after years of targeted abuse, to when they arrive at the US border,” said Susana Coreas, director of Casa de Colores. “Biden has rightly committed to protecting LGBTQ+ refugees. He should follow through on that promise and ensure all asylum seekers are welcomed with dignity at the border.”
Abuse at the US Border
Human Rights Watch spoke with 20 LGBT asylum seekers in Ciudad Juárez, Mexico, who hoped to cross into the United States and be allowed to seek protection. Nearly all reported they were not approaching the border or trying to ask US officials for asylum because they feared they would be expelled to Mexico or their country of origin. They said they preferred to wait for the Biden administration to restore access to asylum or for legal aid to make a request for exemption from the expulsion policy. Four asylum seekers reported that they had previously been expelled to Mexico or their country of origin without an asylum screening.
When Adolfo H. and Gerardo C., a gay couple fleeing Cuba and El Salvador, respectively, who like others interviewed are not identified by their real names for their protection, tried to seek asylum at the US border in February 2022, they were expelled by US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents to Mexico. They had previously experienced extortion several times by Mexican immigration agents, who stopped them at various points along their journey and demanded payment to continue. At the time, they were not yet married. US officials told the couple that Adolfo could stay and seek asylum in the United States because he is from Cuba but that his partner would be expelled, even though border officials had the authority to allow both men in. Instead, they gave them the option of being separated or of being expelled together. They said that while they were in custody, US officials told them to stop holding hands or touching one another. Faced with the prospect of being separated again, they got married in Mexico, hoping that given another chance, they would be allowed to seek asylum together.
José M., a gay man who fled death threats in Honduras based on his sexual orientation, said he had tried to cross the border in March 2021. He was afraid to stay in Mexico, where he said he has experienced extortion and violence at the hands of Mexican police and discrimination at shelters. On his way to the border, Mexican immigration agents stopped the bus he was on and made everyone get off, he said, forcing each migrant to pay a bribe of about US$25 each or be expelled from the country. He also said that because of his gender expression and sexual orientation, some shelters did not allow him to stay there, leaving him to sleep on the streets. In Ciudad Juarez, the shelter operators told him it was a sin to be gay and said that if he and other LGBT asylum seekers didn’t go to religious service, they would be forced to leave. He said he had told US border officials that he is gay and that he was afraid to be sent to Mexico, but hours later CBP agents sent him to Mexico. Before expelling him, US officials made him throw away everything he had, including the few clothes he had. US border agents typically throw away migrants’ possessions, including items such as medicine, baby blankets, important identity documents, documents needed to prove an asylum claim, and memorabilia that hold sentimental value, claiming the practice is for health and safety reasons.
The Biden administration has also recently placed some LGBT people in the Remain in Mexico program, officials with the International Organization of Migration (IOM) told Human Rights Watch, sending them to Ciudad Juárez despite the exemption for LGBT people and others at particular risk of abuse. IOM operates a shelter for newly expelled or returned asylum seekers to test them for Covid-19 and provide quarantine before they move on to other shelters. IOM officials said LGBT asylum seekers had been sent to Mexico even after they explicitly told US border agents about their gender identity or sexual orientation.
Abuses in Country of Origin
LGBT asylum seekers interviewed reported serious abuses in their countries of origin, including rape, assault, death threats, extortion, and forced disappearances or killings of romantic partners and friends.
Juan C., a transgender man, fled Honduras after he received death threats related to his gender identity and activism in an LGBT rights organization. He said that several LGBT people he has known have been killed or disappeared there. He said that the police detained him without charges on several occasions. In 2021, two men raped him and his girlfriend after saying, “Who is the man and who is the woman in the relationship?” and saying that the couple were transgender and lesbian only because they had not had sex with a man. “They said, ‘We are going to make you women,’” Juan said.
Eduardo O., a gay man from Honduras, said he fled the country shortly after gang members beat his romantic partner to death. Gang members had previously threatened to kill Eduardo. Then in June 2021, the same gang members attacked him and his partner while they were together. While Eduardo was able to escape, he said, his partner could not. He said he reported his partner’s murder to the police, who did not investigate.
Kayla R., a transgender woman from Guatemala, said she had to flee and seek asylum after the gangs who were extorting the business where she worked beat her when she and the store owner couldn’t pay, leaving prominent scars on her face. On another occasion, gang members beat her in the street while using anti-LGBT slurs. They left a large gash and scar on her head.
Discrimination and Abuse in Mexico
Human Rights Watch also documented serious abuse and discrimination against LGBT asylum seekers in Mexico. Several LGBT asylum seekers said that Mexican immigration agents, police, and National Guard soldiers targeted them for extortion. Other asylum seekers experienced kidnapping, sexual assault, robbery, and other physical violence by both Mexican government officials and criminals.
Brenda F., a transgender woman, fled El Salvador in 2017 after gang members who wanted her to sell drugs beat and threatened to kill her. After applying for protection and living for a few years in Mexico, she said she was riding a bus from Monterrey to Matamoros in the Mexican state of Tamaulipas in May 2020 when, at a checkpoint, immigration agents pulled her off the bus and took her into an office about 25 meters away. While another immigration agent stood watch outside the office, the agent questioned her about her destination and reason for traveling, she showed him an order from a doctor for laboratory tests. He accused her of lying and of wanting to cross into the United States and grabbed his genitalia, saying if she wouldn’t “give me what I want,” he could have two police officers expel her to Guatemala. Afterward, he told her that if she reported him, he had already taken a photo of her identification and would come after her. She said she knows other trans women who have experienced sexual assault at the hands of Mexican immigration agents.
Mariana L., a lesbian woman who fled Honduras in 2021, said she was kidnapped for ransom in January 2021 and held for over a week near the US-Mexico border by people she believed to be cartel members. They took her to a house in Reynosa, Tamaulipas, where she saw several other kidnapped migrants. She said they stole her passport and forcibly photographed her naked until her sister managed to pay a ransom of US$3,000. Her kidnappers would hit her to make her cry when they called her sister for the ransom money.
When Erika L., a lesbian woman, and Samuel B. and Martin G., gay brothers from El Salvador, arrived at the Mexico-Guatemala border in January 2022, a group of men kidnapped them. On the Mexican side of the border, the men raped Erika while beating her friends and forcing them to watch. They went to the Mexican Commission for Refugee Assistance (COMAR), Mexico’s refugee authority, in Tapachula, Chiapas, where they applied for asylum in Mexico. COMAR gave them a document confirming that they were in the process of seeking asylum in Mexico, giving them legal status in Mexico. An immigration agent apprehended them outside the COMAR office as they left. When he saw their application documents, he tore them up, saying they were meaningless and sent them to a detention center. They were released and then took a bus to the US-Mexico border. They said Mexican immigration agents periodically stopped the bus and boarded it to extort them and other migrants, saying they had to pay if they wanted to continue their journey to the US border.
Kayla R., the transgender woman who fled Guatemala, said that in July 2021 Mexican state police in Piedras Negras robbed her and beat her with batons so badly that she was ultimately hospitalized and vomited blood. The police detained her and another transgender woman she was traveling with for two days without food and water and then turned them over to immigration agents, who sent them to an immigration detention facility. There, she said, a Mexican immigration agent told her she should report the crime, which would make her eligible for a one-year humanitarian visa, giving her legal status in Mexico. She said she would like to do so, and that the agent took down her information but never gave her any paperwork or began any immigration process. Instead, after she reported the crime, Mexican immigration agents returned her to Guatemala, where she had experienced brutal violence. She immediately fled again. While she was making her way back to the US border in March 2022, criminals threatened her with a machete and robbed her.
Six asylum seekers and migrant rights workers reported that some of the shelters in Ciudad Juárez that accepted LGBT asylum seekers subjected them to discriminatory treatment, including the shelter where LGBT asylum seekers were forced to go to Christian religious services. Shelters in Ciudad Juárez are at capacity, meaning they would be homeless if they did not agree to go to the service. Some migrant shelters in Ciudad Juárez would not accept LGBT asylum seekers at all, migrant rights workers there said.
Accessing lifesaving health care for asylum seekers with HIV or other chronic illnesses was also difficult, asylum seekers said. All five HIV-positive asylum seekers interviewed, and one asylum seeker with diabetes and hypertension, said they had gone periods ranging from a few weeks to four months, without their necessary medication because they did not have any money or support.
Mari R., a transgender woman who is HIV positive and who fled Honduras after she refused to sell drugs for a gang whose members had raped and threatened to kill her, went without her antiretroviral medication in Mexico for four months. In April, with the support of Derechos Humanos Integrales en Acción (DHIA), a local migrant rights organization, she was finally able to see a doctor, who told her that her condition had significantly worsened. The day after Human Rights Watch spoke to her, she was hospitalized.
Four transgender asylum seekers, as well as IOM officials and a local trans rights organization called Red Solidaria Trans, said that transgender asylum seekers have not had access to gender-affirming health care in Ciudad Juárez.
Brenda F., a transgender woman who fled after facing an attempted gang recruitment and death threats in El Salvador, said she had previously been taking hormones but that in Ciudad Juárez, she has not been able to access to gender-affirming hormone care, though she has repeatedly tried. “They always say they don’t offer that care, they can’t, or they don’t know how,” she said. Transgender people who take hormones to develop secondary sex characteristics consistent with their gender identity and expression experience a reversal of these physical traits when hormone therapy is stopped, which can cause distress among other symptoms. Brenda said she hasn’t had access to hormone care since October 2021 and that she is suffering from depression as a result. “I have asked for help getting my hormones and they have said they don’t offer that kind of support here [in Ciudad Juárez],” she said. “We are suffering marginalization in that way – hormone treatment is necessary, and they are denying us.”
Recommendations
To the Biden Administration
Continue and redouble efforts to end the Remain in Mexico program and Title 42 summary expulsions, including by initiating a “notice and comment” rulemaking process to end Title 42.
While these abusive policies remain in place, ensure that border agents do not to return at-risk asylum seekers under the Remain in Mexico program or expel them under the Title 42 summary expulsion policy. People at particular risk of harm include LGBT asylum seekers; those with HIV, disabilities, and chronic health conditions; Black and Indigenous asylum seekers; those who do not speak Spanish as a first language; and families traveling with children.
Take immediate steps to parole into the United States all LGBT asylum seekers and other asylum seekers at particular risk of harm who have previously been subjected to the Remain in Mexico program or the Title 42 summary expulsion policy.
Review regulations, Board of Immigration Appeals and Attorney General decisions, and policies and other guidance, rescinding or amending as appropriate to ensure consistency with the right to seek asylum and the right to protection from return to harm or threat of harm as defined in the Refugee Convention, the Convention against Torture, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Continue to increase the number of appropriately trained personnel – asylum officers, doctors, child-care specialists, mental health services professionals and other first responders – at the border using funds currently allocated toward immigration enforcement and detention.
Beyond initial screening of migrants, transfer humanitarian reception, including migrant processing and asylum functions, from CBP to a separate government agency, such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), or groups with trauma-informed training and whose mission is to perform humanitarian services.
Take steps to ensure that LGBT asylum seekers and asylum seekers with HIV feel safe enough to self-identify while in the custody of CBP, including by ensuring that US officials affirmatively explain a policy of nondiscrimination and ask each migrant if they would like to share their gender identity and sexual orientation.
Investigate and discipline US border agents who wrongfully send LGBT asylum seekers and other particularly at-risk asylum seekers to Mexico or their countries of origin.
Work with Mexico and other governments to implement a holistic regional plan for access to protection and safe and dignified migration.
To the US Congress
Reject proposed legislation introduced by Sens. James Lankford (R-Oklahoma) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Arizona) to keep Title 42 in place until after the government’s Covid-19 emergency declaration is terminated.
Enact legislation to end the Title 42 summary expulsion and Remain in Mexico policies.
To the Mexican Government
End the practice of accepting non-Mexican nationals sent to Mexico by US authorities under the Remain in Mexico and Title 42 summary expulsion policies.
Investigate abuses by Mexican immigration agents, including reports of extortion at immigration checkpoints, and take disciplinary action against any found to have been involved in such conduct.
Ensure that Mexican immigration agents do not expel people who may need international protection without due process and screening for fear of return to potential harm.
Surrounded by thousands of people wearing rainbow flags, glitter and sparkly outfits, Eddie Balčiūnaitė prepared to take part in one of the biggest marches the Baltic countries have ever seen.
The 21-year-old nonbinary Lithuanian grew up in a country that since 2009 has banned sharing information that “expresses contempt for family values (or) encourages … entry into a marriage and creation of a family other than stipulated in the Constitution.” Dubbed the “gay propaganda” law by its critics, the ban even preceded Russia’s 2013 infamous legislation.
“The first time I heard about queer people was in the church, so it wasn’t a very positive portrayal, as you can imagine,” Balčiūnaitė, who uses he/she/they pronouns, told NBC News. “You Google stuff, you talk to your friends, and hopefully you learn something about yourself — but not with the help of the school or your teacher.”
Eddie Balčiūnaitė.Enrique Anarte Lazo
Around 10,000 people, mostly young adults, flocked to the capital, Vilnius, from across Lithuania — a country of 2.8 million and the biggest Baltic country — and its neighbors Latvia and Estonia to join the annual Baltic Pride march Saturday.
“This is incredible,” said Juan Miguel, a Spaniard who studied abroad in Lithuania and arranged a reunion with his friends who are now spread across the continent. “Nine years ago, there were neo-Nazis at both sides and more police than participants.”
Since 2009, the annual event has rotated among the capitals of the three countries, gathering local activists and international allies. Vilnius hosted Baltic Pride for the first time in 2010. Back then, only 400 people marched.
“It wasn’t easy. People looked at us like they were in a zoo,” said Vladimir Simonko, executive director of LGL, Lithuania’s biggest LGBTQ group. “Our community is very brave to show up, and we have lots of allies that march with us.”
Big companies such as Google, Moody’s and the Nordic-Baltic bank Swedbank were among the participants and sponsors of this year’s march, as well as the embassies of countries such as the United States, Canada and Norway. The parents of Matthew Shepard, the American student brutally killed in Wyoming in 1998, also attended.
Under Soviet occupation from 1944 until 1991, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia all joined the European Union in 2004, together with other countries of the Eastern bloc, including Poland and Hungary. But unlike their Nordic neighbors — only a short plane trip away — their human rights records lag behind, particularly when it comes to sexual minorities.
In the E.U., only Poland, Romania and Bulgaria rank worse than Lithuania and Latvia for LGBTQ rights, according to the LGBTQ advocacy group ILGA-Europe. And Estonia, an economic success story in the region for its impressive digital transition, remains in the lower half of the ranking in legal protections for queer people. Estonia is, for example, the only Baltic country that has so far introduced civil unions for same-sex couples.
Yet, things are slowly changing. Both the Lithuanian and the Latvian parliaments are currently debating similar bills that would introduce civil partnerships for same-sex couples, granting them some — but not all — the rights of marriage.
“We didn’t pay enough attention to human rights in Lithuania before,” said Jurgita Sejonienė, a conservative member of parliament and sponsor of the bill. “We arrive too late with this legislation. They’re people; they deserve the same rights as everyone else”.
After several failed attempts and the bill being watered down — avoiding the term “family” in its wording, for example — she hopes to secure a parliamentary majority in favor of the measure in the next weeks or months. But same-sex marriage is still years away, she said: “When people realize that civil unions don’t affect them in any way, we will change the public opinion step by step. This could be the way of success in Lithuania.”
Mayor Colin Ratushniak of La Ronge, Saskatchewan, left, Vladimir Simonko and Tomas Raskevičius at the Baltic Pride march Sunday in Vilnius, Lithuania.Enrique Anarte Lazo
Tomas Raskevičius, Lithuania’s only openly gay member of parliament, said reluctance to grant LGBTQ people further legal recognition comes mostly from the deep influence of the Catholic Church, as well as the legacy of Soviet occupation. The USSR made same-sex relations a crime in 1933, and it wasn’t until 1993 that Lithuania, already an independent country, decriminalized homosexuality. Latvia and Estonia had done so a year earlier.
Raskevičius was a lawyer and LGBTQ activist who went into politics to create “systemic change,” he said as he prepared to meet a group of young Lithuanians at the parliament and listen to their concerns. He said he will vote for the civil union bill in the hope that it will help ignite more substantive change in the long term.
“I’m not happy with the bill, because it’s full of compromises,” he noted. “The reality of politics is tough. This is just the first step on the road toward equality.”
Latvia could take a similar step in the next days or weeks, with its civil union bill only a vote away from being approved, providing the president doesn’t veto it.
“Until now, politicians didn’t care about this, but things have been changing in the past couple of years,” said Kaspars Zālītis, board member at the Latvian LGBTQ group Mozaika. “We went over a long way for the recognition of families outside the concept of marriage.”
The Baltic Pride march Sunday in Vilnius, Lithuania. Enrique Anarte Lazo
Latvia is, however, the only country that still requires transgender people seeking to legally change their gender to undergo mandatory sterilization, according to the advocacy group Transgender Europe. In 2017, the European Court of Human Rights determined that a sterilization requirement breaches trans people’s right to bodily integrity.
“The wording of the law isn’t very clear, because it speaks about a permanent or semipermanent sex change, so some trans people can find their way around it,” Latvian activist Ana Metra said as she marched along the rainbow parade across Vilnius. “Trans issues are not even part of the public discussion, unlike same-sex civil unions. It feels like trans people have to wait in line until their turn comes.”
That trans rights aren’t even on the table is a view shared by activists across the region. Since 2002, Estonia has allowed trans people to change their legal gender without undergoing sex-reassignment surgery, sterilization or divorcing their partners.
“But if you want to change your legal gender marker, you have to start taking hormones and prove your gender identity to a medical committee,” said Anette Mäletjärv, an activist at the Estonian LGBT Association. Even though the Estonian language’s gender neutrality keeps people from having to come out in many situations — a bigger concern, for example, for many nonbinary Lithuanians, whose language is highly gendered — Mäletjärv said “people still don’t understand.”
In Europe, only a handful of countries, such as Iceland, Malta and Germany, have introduced some sort of nonbinary gender recognition.
“Many of the laws taken in the early years were influenced by the wish to enter the European Union in 2004,” Mäletjärv said. “But now we’re in a sort of pause; there doesn’t seem to be much movement.”
Yet, judging by the growing number of participants taking part in Pride events across the Baltics, civil society, particularly those in younger generations, seems to be slowly embracing LGBTQ rights.
“We are the first generation that did not grow up under Soviet occupation. We grew up in the European Union. We are free to do as we wish. It’s going to get better,” Balčiūnaitė said Saturday as the Pride march speakers on the floats played global queer anthems from Katy Perry’s “I Kissed a Girl” to Gloria Gaynor’s legendary “I Will Survive.”
Russia-Ukraine war looms large
At this year’s Baltic Pride march, there was an additional flag next to the sea of colorful Pride symbols that flooded Vilnius. Protesters from all over the region brought Ukrainian flags and banners calling for an end to Russia’s invasion of its neighbor.
“We’re not surprised about what’s going on in Ukraine. Everybody understood that it was a question of time,” Lithuanian activist Simonko said.
Get the Morning Rundown
Get a head start on the morning’s top stories.SIGN UPTHIS SITE IS PROTECTED BY RECAPTCHA PRIVACY POLICY | TERMS OF SERVICE
The Ukrainian bloc of protesters at the Baltic Pride march Sunday in Vilnius, Lithuania.Enrique Anarte Lazo
Mäletjärv agreed, adding, “Ukrainians are not only fighting for their freedom, but they’re also fighting for human rights and liberal values across Europe.”
Thousands of Ukrainians have fled to the Baltics, among them some LGBTQ people. Anna Dovgopol, a lesbian from Kyiv, said she is moved by the support: “This is very comforting, to feel part of the community.” Before the war, she had been a queer rights activist in her home country, but two months ago, she had to leave everything behind.
“This is an inspiration for me. I hope it gets as good as this in Ukraine once the war ends,” she said. A bloc of Ukrainian LGBTQ refugees and allies, as well as other migrants who have been living in Lithuania for longer, held banners calling for LGBTQ equality and peace in their mother tongue. An openly bisexual woman wore a traditional Ukrainian dress while she danced with a rainbow flag.
Anna Dovgopol.Enrique Anarte Lazo
Dovgopol, who plans to go back to Kyiv in the next few days if the situation doesn’t get worse, said she remains optimistic about the future of sexual minorities in her country after the war ends.
“It’s going to be a hard time, but I hope Ukraine takes a more ambitious stance on human rights,” she said.
In the meantime, though, LGBTQ people from the region fear they could be next.
“We know Russia better than many other countries. I was born in the Soviet Union, and lived there until I was 8,” the Latvian activist Zālītis said. All three Baltic countries share borders with Russia. Lithuania and Latvia also border Belarus, a supporter of Russia’s invasion.
“We understand word by word what Putin is saying. He’s out of his mind. No one can anymore predict what he’s going to do,” Zālītis said of Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Tomas Raskevičius.Enrique Anarte Lazo
But the shadow of Russia in the Baltics goes far beyond the invasion of Ukraine.
“They have been using their soft power for a very long time”, Lithuanian MP Raskevičius said. “Russian-speaking Lithuanians consume the ‘dirt’ Russia is putting on us, and they have been exporting homophobia very actively in the region.”
All three countries have Russian-speaking minorities who consume news and information from Russian-based outlets.
“It happened the same with Covid-19, when they were spreading misinformation about the virus and the vaccines in the region,” MP Sejonienė said.
Since the war in Ukraine started, tens of Russian TV channels have been banned from broadcasting in the different Baltic countries.
“Some of the right-wing anti-LGBTQ+ abuse has the same wording as it does in Russia and Hungary, and sometimes in Poland, so you can do the math,” said Zālītis, who also blames U.S.-based evangelical groups for promoting homophobia and transphobia across the region.
Queer people in the Baltics worry the spread of anti-LGBTQ narratives could compromise what has been achieved so far, or even halt further progress.
‘We are the future’
Growing up under Lithuania’s “gay propaganda” law, Rimas Prokopovičius, 21, said he never heard a word about people like him.
“No one talked about it in schools. The only thing we heard was the f-word, that’s how I learned about LGBTQ+ people,” he said. “We did talk about LGBTQ+ people with our religion teachers though. Somehow that was OK, because they could just call it a sin.”
Rimas Prokopovičius.Enrique Anarte Lazo
In Vilnius, he can now be openly gay, but he’s reluctant to come out to his parents, who live in a smaller city, until he’s financially independent, he said. Lithuania has the highest rate of LGBTQ people in the E.U. who are “never open” about their sexuality (60 percent), according to a 2020 survey by the E.U.’s Fundamental Rights Agency.
Lithuania’s 2009 “gay propaganda” law hasn’t been implemented since 2014, but it remains on the books.
“If you don’t use it, you need to revoke it,” activist Simonko said. But unlike same-sex civil unions, this is an even tougher conversation, because it involves the kind of LGBTQ representation minors are exposed to, advocates say.
Yet, the “gay propaganda” law is being challenged at the European Court of Human Rights after a fairy-tale book featuring same-sex couples was sold with stickers saying it was not suitable for those younger than 14.
“Of course, the public discussion is going to be very sensitive, because it’s about minors, children,” Raskevičius said. “People still think that having LGBT people around their children will turn them gay.”
After the march, young people from the different Baltic nations gathered at what appeared to be a semi-abandoned industrial building outside Vilnius’ city center. The event branded itself as “queer-feminist,” and the words “WE ARE PROPAGANDA” were projected in rainbow colors onto a wall.
During the event, Sandra, a 21-year-old local, stopped dancing to answer a question about the future of LGBTQ rights in the Baltics.
“We are the future of this country, despite Russia, despite the church, despite all those who try to stop it,” she said.
The UK public is most likely to have feelings of respect and admiration towards LGBTQ+ community, according to new research from Stonewall.
The research – published by the charity on the first day of Pride Month 2022, which also marks 50 years since the first Pride march in the UK – surveyed 2,000 adults across the UK to measure public sentiment towards LGBTQ+ people.
Given a choice of words to describe their feelings toward different sections of the community, the most commonly chosen word was “respect”, followed by “admiration”.
The proportion of respondents who chose the word “respect” was around a third across the board, although people were more likely to say they felt respect for lesbian and gay people (38 per cent and 37 per cent) than bi or trans people (32 per cent and 31 per cent).
Trans people garnered the most admiration from the public (21 per cent), while 19 per cent said they admired gay and lesbian people, and 16 per cent said they admired bisexuals, “which may be related to biphobic stereotypes”, Stonewall noted.
Despite relentless fear-mongering in both the media and the UK governmentabout trans people and trans rights, just four per cent of respondents said they felt “fear” towards trans folk, the same proportion that felt fear towards the rest of the LGBTQ+ community.
Less than 10 per cent of the public chose the word “disgust” when thinking about queer people – nine per cent for gay people, eight per cent for trans and bi people, and just 7 per cent for lesbians – showing that homophobia, biphobia and transphobia are limited to a tiny minority of the UK population.
Veteran LGBTQ+ rights activist Peter Tatchell told PinkNews: “This is terrific news that debunks the bigoted agenda of government ministers, right-wing culture warriors and transphobes like the LGB Alliance.
“They are out of touch with public opinion. There is almost no support for the Conservatives’ regressive policies on LGBTQ+ issues.
“Boris Johnson is deluded. He thinks he can shore up his administration with the support of bigoted voters. But this poll shows his cynical strategy won’t work and may turn many voters against the Tories. It proves that our sustained efforts to educate against prejudice are paying off.
“These statistics confirm the long term trend that anti-LGBTQ+ attitudes are waning fast: down massively from two-thirds of the public in the late 1980s believing that homosexuality is ‘mostly’ or ‘always’ wrong.”
Stonewall CEO Nancy Kelley said in a statement: “Over the last 50 years, every battle for the rights of LGBTQ+ communities has been fought in the court of public opinion as well as in the corridors of power.
“This data reminds us to celebrate how far we’ve come, as well as focus on how far there is to go. Nobody should have to grow up and go through life worrying that the people around them feel disgusted by who they are.
“From the fight to decriminalise men who have sex with men, to the fight for trans people’s rights to be protected and respected, we’ve always relied on allies to stand alongside us.
“That’s why, as we enter Pride Month, we need people to do more than wear a rainbow pin – we need everyone to show they take pride in our community, by stepping up and fighting for a more equal world.”
Europe’s first LGBTQ+ youth support centre has reopened in Manchester after a massive redevelopment effort.
LGBTQ+ charity The Proud Trust unveiled its newly redeveloped centre, The Proud Place, on 27 May. It’s a place where LGBTQ+ people can access community groups, support workers, and a range of events to meet local peers.
The £2.4 million centre opened its doors after four years of development to the rapturous applause of Manchester patrons; its previous home of 20 years closed in 2020.
Among the crowd were It’s A Sin star Nathaniel Hall and Schuh managing director Colin Temple, who presided over its opening along with other Manchester dignitaries. Hall spoke about the “beautiful” new building during its opening, saying that “it feels like a place you can kick off your shoes and just relax”.
“The Proud Place is amazing – it’s so beautiful,” he said. “It’s the place that I definitely needed when I was 14, 15, 16 growing up and understanding my sexuality and navigating a homophobic world.
“To spend time with other people my age, like me, and grow and learn and connect would have been invaluable. Everyone needs to come down and experience it.”
Nathaniel Hall and a friend. (Proud Trust)
The building spans three floors and will play host to activities, amenities and events that are free to apply or participate in for queer youth looking for a place to meet new people. With its new golden exterior, it’s hard to miss.
The Proud Trust CEO Lisa Harvey-Nebil said: “It’s an honour for The Proud Trust to take care of such an important building on behalf of Manchester’s LGBTQ+ community and we’re excited for this next chapter in our history.
“Our beautiful new home is such a far cry from the original building, which was built for privacy in the days when many people in our community were fearful of accessing service.”
Organisations such as Schuh, Amazon, Post Office, and Siemens funded The Proud Place’s renovations, buying corporate bricks and/or contributing other considerable expertise and financial support.
“Working with the Proud Trust helps us further understand the key issues for young LGBTQ+ people,” Schuh managing director Colin Temple said. “We want to continually educate ourselves and our teams, customers, and the wider community.”
Lord-lieutenant Sir Warren. (Proud Trust)
The original building was constructed in the same Sidney Street location in 1988 and has been a pillar for Manchester LGBTQ+ youth for decades. Now, after waiting for its eventual refurbishment, service users such as Simone, 24, are ecstatic to see its return.
“It means so much to be here today,” Simone said during the opening. “To see it all finally complete, it very much feels like now everything can start.
“I first came to The Proud Trust as a young person to help me with getting employment, they supported me on my options, as I hadn’t been out long as a trans woman,” she continues. “Ever since then I have never looked back.”
Lord-lieutenant of Greater Manchester, Sir Warren Smith, attended the launch and spoke to the attending guests, saying: “This centre was the first of its kind in the whole of Europe when it first opened. It makes a real statement and should be something that Manchester is really proud of.
“I was the first openly gay lord-lieutenant in 500 years of history, I must admit it was a challenging route. I went through 40 years of being mocked. This organisation will eventually change that, and I am so proud to be a part of it.”
