He is the creator and star of the long-running BroadwayWorld.com web series Chewing the Scenery with Randy Rainbow and Last Minute with Randy Rainbow.
Randy Rainbow (yes, real name) is a comedian, actor, writer, host and Internet sensation best known for his viral comedy videos. His popular series of political spoofs and song parodies have garnered international acclaim and over a hundred million views. He’s been called “the best thing about the 2016 GOP race” by Dan Savage and his musical tribute to the first presidential debate of 2016 “BRAGGADOCIOUS!” received 28 million views in its first two days. He was subsequently asked by the cast of TV’s Will & Grace to parodize a song, which they performed during a political fundraiser for the 2016 election. Randy has also written for comedian Kathy Griffin and hosted and performed in numerous theatrical events for the Broadway, cabaret and gay communities, as well as for the Tony Awards and some of New York City’s most popular night spots including 54 Below, Birdland Jazz Club, XL Nightclub and Therapy NYC where his own weekly show ran for two years. He’s been seen as a talking head on VH1 and has been heard regularly as both a guest and co-host on Sirius XM Radio. He is the creator and star of the long-running BroadwayWorld.com web series Chewing the Scenery with Randy Rainbow and Last Minute with Randy Rainbow.
Mike Guido is a busy guy and he’s alright with that.
His one-person stage show, “A Real Man – Dad. Daughter. Autism.” has been called many as, “Moving, incredibly uplifting, and truly and inspiration.” A nationally recognized stand up comedian, Mike has made a bunch of national television appearances, has worked along side stars, like Robin Williams, Jay Leno, and Ellen Degeneres, and he can be heard regularly on Sirius XM Satellite Radio, Pandora, and iTunes.
December 15
The Flamingo Resort Hotel
2777 4th Street Santa Rosa, CA 95405
$20 General Admission Advance Online
Limited Door Tickets at $28 HOLIDAY TICKET SALE! Tickets for this show are now on sale for just $14 CLICK HERE TO BUY NOW!
DOORS 6PM
SHOW 7PM
The Flamingo offers a full bar plus a wide-selection of delicious bar bites.
If you’re celebrating a special occasion or if you have a party of six or more, we’re happy to reserve a table in advance. EMAIL US
Before the curtain goes up, enjoy dinner at The Terrace Grill at the Flamingo Resort.
Show proof that you’re attending that evening’s show, and receive a complimentary dessert to share! Dinner Reservation Recommended: (707) 523-4745
Parking
The hotel offers complimentary parking in their lot. There is also open street parking available directly in front of hotel.
You may park in the lot across the street. However, please do not park in the front spaces of CVS or iHop.
All shows are 21+
Valid Photo ID Required.
All Ticket Sales are Final
Ticket refunds are only offered upon cancellation or reschedule by The Laugh Cellar.
No video during the show
After the Show! Enjoy live music and dancing in the Lounge.
Cover charge varies but it’s usually around $10
Present your comedy show ticket and receive 2 for 1 entry!
It’s not news that the Trump Administration’s actions and rhetoric vehemently denounce undocumented immigration into the United States. Yet, a recent proposal by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) suggests that even lawful immigration may be under threat.
On Sept. 22, the DHS unveiled a proposal that will make it harder for immigrants to enter the United States legally, and qualify for and receive green cards and visas. The policy proposal has since been posted to the Federal Register and is currently in its 60-day comment period allowing interest groups and members of the public to weigh in. The Trump Administration will have to absorb the comments, consider them and potentially review their policy before they give a final rule.
The policy reform bypasses Congress and can be put into effect as early as next year. Consequently, members of the local Los Angeles LGBTQ+ community gathered at the Trans Wellness Center last Friday night for what the organization called a “public charge party.”
Armed with laptops and free Wi-Fi, participants were welcomed to submit their commentary and denounce the proposed policy.
Here’s what you need to know:
This proposal centers on the public charge rule, a fundamental immigration policy dating back to the 1880s. It is designed to test whether those immigrating into the United States would be a burden to the federal government and taxpayers. Non-citizens predicted to become a “public charge” can be denied entry and permanent residency.
Previously, the term “public charge” was defined narrowly with cash benefit programs as an indicator of self-sufficiency. The Trump Administration seeks to significantly expand that definition by including those who receive or are anticipated to receive one or more public benefits to cover basic needs. That includes SNAP (food stamps), Medicaid or Section 8 housing vouchers – programs that millions of immigrants benefit from. Additionally, the new criteria include a higher household income threshold at 250 percent of poverty guidelines, a requirement that is predicted to affect over half of all family-based green card applicants.
Refugees and asylum seekers are not affected, and the government says any benefits received before the rule goes into effect will not count against the noncitizen.
Ultimately, identification of a “public charge person” is left to a complicated rubric and a fair amount of case-by-case judgment by USCIS immigration officers. Nonetheless, there remains a feeling of fear, anxiety and worry among the US immigrant community regardless of their status as a refugee, visa holder or green card applicant.
Public Policy and Operations Manager at the Los Angeles LGBT Center Maria Melo told the Pride L.A.that the Center started working with the coalition Protecting Immigrant Families after hearing concerns about how immigration policy affects the LGBTQ+ community.
“In our case, because we are health service providers, our clients began to tell us that they heard about ‘public charge’ in the news, and they were afraid to come to appointments and receive services,” Melo said.
Lawful immigrants are actively dis-enrolling from public assisted programs to avoid being identified as a public charge. This sharp drop in use of public benefits by lawful non-citizens and their dependents is not an isolated case; chilling effects are being reported all across the country.
Photo: Equaldex.
It is still illegal to identify as gay or bisexual in 73 countries around the world.
Why should the LGBTQ+ community care?
“As someone who is gay, I think it’s important to support other communities,” Jax Lust, an attendee of the Center’s event on Friday, said.
Moreover, Isaias Guzman, an organizer with the California LGBTQ Health and Human Services Network, said that it is important to build bridges across communities.
“One of the things I believe is that we need to build an intersectional movement for social justice and health equity,” Guzman said. “When we saw that our immigrant communities are being attacked, I wanted to show up and show that the LGBT community will support in solidarity with the immigrant communities. Immigrant communities are intersectional – there are hundreds, if not thousands, of LGBTQ immigrants living in the U.S. who are going to be affected by this public charge proposal.”
“There are many countries where being LGBT is illegal,” Melo said. “People are wrongly imprisoned and even put to death for simply being who they are. Like every immigrant, LGBT immigrants come here seeking a better life. This administration’s policy is not what the United States is about.”
Individuals have until Dec. 10 to submit a formal comment. Participants can either send their commentary directly on the federal government website regulations.gov or utilize the submission tool and letter template provided on protectingimmigrantfamilies.org.
Gay, lesbian, bi and questioning youth are four times more likely to self-harm with suicidal intent compared to straight youth.
These queer kids are also far more likely to experience symptoms of depression from as young as 10 years old. These symptoms will persist then into their 20s.
Researchers from the University of College London also found LGBQ youth will have worse mental health overall.
‘We’ve known for some time that sexual minority youth have worse mental health outcomes,’ study author Dr Gemma Lewis said.
‘It’s quite concerning that we’ve found this trend starts as early as 10 years old, and worsens throughout adolescence.’
The study is the first of its kind in the UK, questioning 4,828 young people.
Participants responded to questions about depression seven times from age 10 to 21, and at 16 and 21 were asked if they self-harmed in the past year.
While depressive symptoms increased throughout their teenage years for all groups, the increase was far greater for LGBQ teens.
Self-harm was more common for non-straight teens at both 16 and 21.
At 18, LGBQ teens were twice as likely to fulfil the criteria for a clinical diagnosis of depression.
Madeleine Irish, first author, suggests the sense of feeling different may affect mental health in children.
She suggested a range of stressors could be involved. These can include ‘discrimination, stigmatisation, social isolation, shame or fear or rejection, including at home or at school.’
Dr Lewis added: ‘The fact we found mental health disparities at such a young age suggests that early interventions may be useful to prevent and treat such mental health challenges.
‘Despite changes to public perceptions and attitudes in recent years, gay, lesbian and bisexual youth remain at increased risk of long-term mental health problems—addressing this inequality should be a research, policy, clinical and public mental health priority.’
Jay Brome, the former CHP officer | Photo: Video/Sacramento Bee
11 December 2018 0:49 GMT
A gay man is suing the California Highway Patrol (CHP) for decades of abuse, harassment, and discrimination while on the job.
Jay Brome dreamt of working for the CHP, a law enforcement agency in the Golden State with jurisdiction of all of California’s highways.
He spent two years working on getting into the academy. When he finally did, he ended up patrolling the Contra Costa County in 2008, but not without costs to himself, his reputation, and his dignity.
Attorney Gay Grunfeld filed a 55-page brief on 29 November in the 1st District Court of Appeal in San Francisco on behalf of Brome. The brief argues a jury should hear Brome’s case.
Last March, a judge dismissed Brome’s previous lawsuit on the grounds that the statute of limitations had expired. Now he’s trying again, with Grunfeld arguing the dismissal was an error.
‘The harassment began during Officer Brome’s academy training,’ Grunfeld wrote in the brief. When his career officially began in 1996, it continued for over two decades.
The humiliation and abuse he suffered
‘There was bullying or name-calling – “fag”, “gay”,’ Brome recalled to the Sacramento Bee about his time spent in the academy. ‘I had an instructor that told me … to take my skirt off and start acting like a man.’
During one exercise, Brome alleged that a fellow cadet pulled a gun on him. Then the other man reportedly stated: ‘I know you’re gay, tell me you’re gay or I’ll pull the trigger.’
Brome said he had to leave the job, after giving decades of service, due to the effect the harassment had on him.
‘What was happening was I would drive around in my patrol car and for no reason I would just be crying, tears just running down my face,’ he revealed.
‘I was getting these urges to kill myself, and it was this sudden urge while I was driving my patrol car and it just said, “Pull out your gun and shoot yourself.”‘
He added he had no backup or support within the agency.
Not an isolated feeling
Despite no one stepping up for him, Brome wasn’t the only CHP officer to experience such treatment.
Another employee, Ken Stanley, served for 30 years and then sued. He was targeted for being perceived as gay.
‘I’m straight, I’m not gay. But some of the other sergeants I worked with didn’t like me, so they took it upon themselves to portray me as gay by posting pictures in the sergeant’s office,’ he said.
In one instance he said he found a bloody tampon in front of his office door.
‘It’s your typical macho environment (where) to other less-educated individuals in the workforce there can be no greater insult according to them than portraying somebody as gay,’ he added before comparing the CHP to the Catholic Church, in that they ‘deny everything’.
Four fellow officers provided documents supporting Brome’s lawsuit.
One wrote: ‘I observed plenty of homophobic behavior towards and about gay men at the CHP, including myself.’
The response
The CHP did not respond directly to Brome’s case. In a statement by spokesperson Fran Clader, however, they said this:
‘It is the policy of the CHP to provide equal employment opportunities for all persons without regard to race, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, age, sex (includes sexual harassment, and gender identity), physical or mental disability, political affiliation/opinion, marital status, sexual orientation, or medical condition. Equal opportunity in employment practices will be made on the basis of merit, efficiency, and fitness consistent with state civil service and merit system principles.’
This is the latest lawsuit in the US over LGBTI discrimination in the workplace.
Last month, a firefighter sued the city of Norfolk, Virginia.
Members of Lesbians, Gays and Bisexuals of Botswana (LEGABIBO) on Jan. 15, 2016, gather outside the Botswana Court of Appeals, after their organization won legal recognition. The country’s High Court in March will hear a case that seeks to decriminalize same-sex sexual relations. (Photo courtesy of Lesbians, Gays and Bisexuals of Botswana)
GABORONE, Botswana — Botswana, the economic jewel of southern Africa, is set to continue its trailblazing social justice track toward legal equality for LGBTQI+ people. While it has taken longer than expected, the High Court of Botswana has set a new date to hear a case which challenges sections of the penal code which criminalize same-sex sexual relations. While the clauses — inherited from British colonial laws in 1885 — are not exclusively applicable to LGBTQ+ persons, their interpretation has caused grave apprehension to full self expression among members of the population who identify as such.According to human rights organization, LEGABIBO (Lesbians, Gays, Bisexual of Botswana), the hearing of the case challenging the constitutionality of sections 164(a), 164(c) and 167 of the Penal Code will be heard before a full bench of the Botswana High Court, comprising of the Honorable Judge A.B. Tafa, the Honorable Judge M. Leburu and the Honorable Judge J. Dube on March 15. The aforementioned sections criminalize “carnal knowledge of any person against the order of nature” and “indecent practices between persons” (whether in private or public) respectively.
The organization won its registration case against the Botswana government, heard at the Court of Appeal on March 16, 2016, after 11 years of contestation. On this case LEGABIBO is represented by Tshiamo Rantao and supported by the Southern Africa Litigation Center and members and allies of the LGBTQIA+ community.
LEGABIBO Advocacy and Awareness Officer Caine Youngman said the case is “a massive rude awakening to those who are comfortable with the idea that homosexuality is illegal in Botswana.” He added this case “gives a positive image to LGBTQI+ people to know that when they are feeling trampled upon they can approach the court” and “the case is expected to clarify the laws of the land, so the government and ordinary Motswana understand that we are legitimate citizens as much as anyone else.”
There has, historically, been mixed reception of LGBTQI-favorable rulings passed by the courts by the general public as, it would appear, there is little communication and demystification of the necessity and impact of the rulings for people outside of the concerned population. Speaking with internationally-acclaimed, Botswana-based fashion designer Aobakwe Molosiwa of Gilded Sands, he said that for him this case gives an “opportunity to get conversations going because the lack of that attention locally is worrying” adding that it is a chance “to maximize traction; and the consideration we — as the queer community — give this case will drive how the greater community understands who we are. Only through enlightenment can we grow as a nation.” Recently, at the launch of the national observance of 16 days against violence against women and children, the sitting president of Botswana, HE Dr. Mokgweetsi E.K. Masisi, explicitly mentioned people in same-sex relationships also experience violence and must be considered in the commemorations as well as in prevention initiatives. This made him the first occupant of the highest office to speak out on LGBTQIA+ rights while in office.
While Botswana is still lagging on ratifying and domesticating some international human rights related treaties — such as the U.N. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities — and has been flagged for its questionable press freedom, it appears that the highest courts are willing to address contentious matters when presented. The hope is the efforts of perceived societal minorities will lead to broad-ranging advocacy from many other facets of the community at large to build a socially just democracy. Understanding this, Youngman stated that, “we don’t want backlash from the community once decriminalization has been achieved; we are meeting with dikgosi (royalty), parliamentarians, councilors and community members doing awareness raising.”
Looking at future steps in the advent of a victory favoring the plaintiff, Molosiwa said “it would be a step toward discussing familial issues we as a nation have experienced but never addressed” adding that “this brings forward issues of morality and we can use this as an opportunity to confront the politics which religious factions lean on to vilify us.” Youngman said “it means that as a gay man I don’t have to think about what will happen tomorrow when there is no president who can openly call for respect of LGBTQIA+ persons. As a Motswana gay man, I have other things which are afforded to my heterosexual peers such as marriage and adoption and I can start advocating for these. It means my family will get the peace and quiet they need as they never stop worrying about your safety.”
So, while people around the world celebrate Christmas, the arrival of the New Year, Valentine’s day, and anticipate Easter, LGBTQIA+ persons and their allies in Botswana will be anxiously gearing up for what is hoped to be the end of a leg of a long fought battle to recognize contemporary realities of Batswana against inherited colonial laws. Just as March 16, 2016, will forever be inscribed in Botswana’s LGBTQIA+ history, it may transpire that a three-year gap was what was necessary for the courts to catch up and endow LGBTQIA+ persons with their inalienable rights to recognition as people, protection of the law and freedom.
The lower house of parliament (National Assembly) in South Africa has voted for a historic change to civil union laws.
South Africa has recognized civil unions since 2006 but today’s changes will mean that officials will not be able to refuse to marry same-sex couples on the basis of their ‘conscience, religion [or] belief’.
During the debate, Deidre Carter, said LGBTI people suffered greatly during South Africa’s apartheid era. She told the parliament they ‘suffered a
particularly harsh fate and were branded as criminals and rejected by society as outcasts’.
‘I received complaints that couples were being turned away from a number of Home Affairs offices as there were no marriage officers that were
prepared to solemnise same-sex marriages,’ she said.
‘My investigations revealed that this tendency was in fact more widespread than initially thought. At the time, the Minister advised me that nearly half of its designated marriage officers had been exempted from solemnizing same-sex marriages.’
Carter argued that refusing to marry a same-sex couple was a ‘limitation (that) cannot be justified in an open and democratic society’.
Following today’s vote the National Council of Provinces (upper house) will also vote on the amended bill. Should it be successful in the NCOP, President Cyril Ramaphosa will then sign it into law.
A referendum on whether to extend marriage rights to same-sex couples in Taiwan failed on Nov. 24, 2018. (Photo courtesy of Taiwan Tongzhi Hotline Association)
The most LGBT-friendly country in Asia has rejected marriage equality. Amnesty International says the Nov. 24 referendum results are a bitter blow to the Taiwanese LGBT community that wishes their island nation would be the first country in Asia to legalize same-sex marriage. What’s more, for the rest of the dreamers in Asia it’s a painful reminder that realizing genuine marriage equality at home could take another generation.Even though Taiwan is deemed the most progressive country in Asia and a haven for LGBT activism, two initiatives to add same-sex marriage in the Civil Code and gender equality education in schools were both rejected. A pre-election survey that suggested as many as 77 percent of Taiwanese opposed legalizing same-sex marriage is a clear indication that acceptance on LGBT rights is not nationwide, even in Taiwan.
As I grew up in one of the most conservative countries in Asia, I am not surprised to see these results because I know acceptance on LGBT rights in Asian countries is always limited to certain niches. Often, media-distorted views of seemingly widespread acceptance are giving false hopes.
Asian countries present a broad spectrum of LGBT rights conditions, from harsh punishments to discrimination to growing acceptances. As of today, same-sex relationships are illegal in at least 20 Asian countries and are punishable to death penalty in seven of them. For the rest of Asia, LGBT individuals find themselves lucky to struggle with relatively mild miseries, such as family acceptance or workplace discrimination.
As I have traveled as a reporter across Asia, I found a common unspoken consensus among the non-LGBT populace in Asia. Since we are “abnormal” or “deviant” of norms, we shall be allowed to grow only within certain niches. In other words, either as an individual or as a community, if we have grown to the point that the majority feels intimidated, it has the right to say, “too much.” More or less, this reflects the attitudes of the majority in Asian countries. You won’t see them in the media but people act on it when they cast their votes.
On the other hand, the irony is same-sex marriage has become the ultimate symbol of accepting secularism and diversity, so support for LGBT rights has been politicized. From the late-Cambodian King Sihanouk to the Philippine’s President Rodrigo Duterte, it’s not hard to see why these Asian leaders showed support for LGBT rights but never actually acted to risk public support. Support of gay rights is a symbolic gesture to show their Western counterparts how secular and liberal they have become. In Taiwan, the motives to show the world how it is different from the authoritarian mainland in the era of the regime’s rising global power is behind the push for becoming a paragon of freedom and tolerance in Asia. This kind of “acceptance with an agenda” might fool the international media, but the message of acceptance is never passed down to the grassroots level.
When I attended the ILGA Asia conference in 2013, I came to the conclusion shared by many other activists: Marriage equality is too far-fetched for us, at least in our lifetime.
Demands for LGBT rights are not just fighting the repressive laws and homophobic groups. We are fighting the beliefs, traditions and systems backed by patriarchy, collectivism and fundamentalism, which have been institutionalized and cherished by the society. If you are from one of the bottom Asian countries, you have additional fights against corruption, ignorance and misconceptions against the minorities. This is the reality of being an LGBT person in Asia.
Victor Maung is a journalist and LGBT rights activist who was born in Myanmar. He lives and works in D.C.
The Mexican LGBTI community has high expectations for the country’s new president, leftist Andrés Manuel López Obrador.He won the community’s sympathy as the first president to include a message of equality in his victory speech. López Obrador reaffirmed it in his first message to the Mexican people during his inauguration.
López Obrador, a member of the National Regeneration Movement who is known by the acronym AMLO, was elected this year with more than 50 percent of the vote, becoming one of the most popular presidents in recent Mexican history. During his campaign, he promoted zero-tolerance for corruption, lowering levels of poverty in order to allow the country to begin a “fourth transformation,” a change that AMLO himself has made a top priority for the Aztec nation.
López Obrador in his inaugural speech that he gave in the Mexican congress before senators, representatives and invited guests reiterated “he will represent the rich and poor, believers and free thinkers and all Mexicans, regardless of ideologies, sexual orientation, culture, language, place of origin, education level or socioeconomic position.”
For Leonardo Espinosa, an activist from Guadalajara, this affirmation is a positive gesture and brings visibility to the community, “but it is also a call to follow up on these speeches and turn them into action and public policies.”
Alex Orué, executive director of It Gets Better México, an online video channel that promotes LGBTI rights, described AMLO’s speech as historic and “a signal that the agenda of the LGBTTTI+ Mexican coalition’s agenda has a good chance of advancing.”
Orué, at the same time, hopes this new government will lower rates of violence that disproportionately affect members of the community.
“It is vital that they confront hate speech from the state, that institutions like the National Council to Prevent Discrimination (CONAPRED) and the National Human Rights Commission (CNDH) are strengthened and emphasize the development of employment opportunities for diverse talent,” he adds.
Espinosa, for his part, hopes “discourse that speaks about our communities and needs…(that will become part of) all public policies” will take place during López Obrador’s six-year term. Espinosa also said he hopes “the citizenry gets involved and we increasingly see the words sexual orientation, lesbians, gays, transsexuals, transgender, intersex people, queer and diversity in the president’s speeches.”
“The reality of the country has never been favorable to our rights, so we are open to the possibility of improvement,” Espinosa told the Washington Blade.
López Obrador during his campaign avoided LGBTI issues because of his ties with the most conservative elements of Mexican politics, such as the former Social Encounter Party (PES), a party founded by Christian evangelicals that opposed previous efforts to legalize same-sex marriage federally. Given this scenario, a setback in the progress made on LGBTI-specific issues would not have been an unfounded fear.
“We must not forget that the former Social Encounter Party left many candidates in positions of popular election and people who were members of this party were never seen as supporters of human rights and equality,” says Espinosa.
The most concerning thing for Orué, however, is that AMLO has never retracted his statements about putting the human rights for LGBTI people up for a popular vote and “now that these consultations appear to have been legitimized in the political life of this new administration, we must not let our guard down.”
While the movement remains on alert, Orué does not think a reversal of these guarantees that have been won is possible, because “his right-hand person will be lawyer Olga Sánchez Cordero, his Cabinet’s Interior Secretary. It does mean that we have some assurance that not only will that not happen, but, the agenda will even move forward. She herself in her recent statements has reiterated that human rights should not be put up for a consultation.”
Sources with whom the Blade spoke said LGBTI issues, such as an increased focus on how to reduce the inequality gap for trans people, became more visible and were part of the public agenda during former President Enrique Peña Nieto’s government that just ended. Doubts in the country among activists nevertheless continue to persist.
“The only thing that Enrique Peña Nieto’s administration did that could have been seen as a success is he came out in support of human rights for LGBTIQ people in 2016 in a formal ceremony that marked May 17 (the International Day Against Homophobia, Transphobia and Biphobia), where he announced he would send a variety of pro-LGBTIQ initiatives, a marriage equality one among them, to Congress,” maintains Orué.
The activist lamented these promised initiatives died in Congress.
Orué and Espinosa told the Blade that visibility and security for the community, laws that penalize discrimination in all states, violence motivated by homophobia and transphobia, as well as limited employment opportunities, access to health care, justice, gender identity laws and recognition of marriage equality recognition throughout Mexico are among the pressing issues for AMLO’s administration.
“Mexico is a country where LGBTIQ issues were totally erased from the political sphere, where advances in terms of legislation have taken small steps forward,” concluded Espinosa. “It is expected there will be more changes to laws, but they come from social change. Mexico, as a country, is not homogeneous and while there are places where social change already exists and laws have already been changed, discrimination continues to be something normal in other places.”
Mexico in context
Only 15 of Mexico’s 32 states allow marriage equality. Statistics indicate 10,216 of these unions have taken place.
“There is still a long way to go for these unions to be recognized as families with all the rights that this entails,” says the newspaper Publimetro in an article that documents the “slow” implementation of marriage equality since its legalization (in Mexico City) nearly nine years ago.
Same-sex couples can legally adopt children in Mexico City and in Coahuila. There have been, as of now, 17 adoptions of children by gay and lesbian couples. Upwards of 3,230 transgender people have had their gender identity recognized.
The number of reported incidents of discrimination motivated by sexual preference or sexual orientation has decreased by 4.6 percent from 2013-2017, according to the results of a discrimination survey.
Mexico, nevertheless, remains a violent country for sexual minorities. A report that Letra S, an advocacy group, published in May notes 381 murders took place during the last five years under Peña Nieto’s government. The situation in 2018 is not very encouraging because the same organization said at least 24 LGBTI people were killed during the first three months of the year.
LGBTI Mexicans, among others, gathered in Mexico City’s Zocalo square on Dec. 1, 2018, to watch President Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s inauguration. (Photo courtesy of Jesús Chairez)
In spite of this wave of homophobia, Letra S General Director Alejandro Brito told the EFE news agency there are significant advances, such as a more pronounced position abroad in defense of rights and the recognition of marriage among same-sex couples in various entities and the Supreme Court’s 2016 ruling that declared state laws banning same-sex marriage are unconstitutional.
Furthermore, many states’ now include hate crimes in their penal codes. The attorney general last February implemented staff protocol in cases that involve sexual orientation or gender identity.
“The challenge is how to apply it,” he noted.
CONAPRED President Alejandra Haas, for her part, told Publímetro her organization has received 1,185 complaints related to gender identity, sexual preferences and workplace discrimination over the last seven years. These problems, if proven, can affect a person’s mental health.
Long Beach City officials, specifically North Long Beach Councilmember and Vice Mayor Rex Richardson, in collaboration with the Long Beach LGBTQ+ Center, are working conscientiously to make the city a safer, more-inclusive place for transgender and gender nonconforming people.
In an attempt to build all-embracing workplaces for transgender and gender nonconforming Long Beach employees throughout the city, officials a part of the Long Beach City Council passed a motion adopting a preferred name and pronoun policy for all Long Beach employees. In essence, the policy allows for employees to be identified with the name and/or pronoun they prefer to be identified by. The policy was enacted on November 13 and is expected to be in full effect within the next three months, according to Executive Director of the Long Beach LGBTQ Center Porter Gilberg.
“Preferred name and pronoun policies are a tool that employers use to ensure a safe and equitable work environment for employees,” Gilberg said regarding the motions passed by Long Beach city officials. “These policies also create opportunities to recruit the most talented workforce possible and signals to transgender and gender nonconforming job seekers that both their talents and identities will be recognized at work. This is a tremendous step forward for the City of Long Beach and one of the most significant policy achievements at the local level for the LGBTQ community in several years.”
It is not uncommon for the Center to work in collaboration with Long Beach City Council members. The Center normally assists in policy recommendations as well as co-hosting events for the city’s official events. Both institutions aim to make Long Beach a safe haven for LGBTQ+ members — this involves pro-LGBTQ+ policy making and opposition toward discrimination at both a city and, as a result of President Trump’s administration, federal level.
On November 20, Long Beach city officials also passed a motion instructing city staff to directly contact the Trump Administration to formally oppose proposed revisions to Title IX of the Education Amendments, which currently protects people from discrimination based on gender identity.
Title IX was enacted in 1972 by The United States Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights, and “protects people from discrimination based on sex in education programs or activities that receive Federal financial assistance,” according to The U.S. Department of Education’s website. The Trump Administration is considering rolling back acknowledgement and protections of transgender people, under federal civil rights law, by determining someone’s gender based on their genitalia at birth instead of by their individual choice, as reported by The New York Times.
“It’s critical that our community, including our elected leadership, continue to speak out in the face of bigotry being displayed by the Trump administration,” Gilberg said. “We value and celebrate diversity in Long Beach, which means we also provide support to people when they experience hostility and discrimination, especially when it’s being perpetuated by the federal government. By registering official opposition to these policies, the city of Long Beach is taking a stand on the right side of history.”
Both the preferred name and pronoun policy, as well as the proposed letter defending transgender rights under civil rights law for the Trump Administration, aim to create a welcoming environment for all transgender and non gender conforming people at both a city and federal level. Furthermore, the policies, lead by Councilmember Rex Richardson, attempt to defend LGBTQ+ people from the staunch Republican administration currently in power.
A referendum on whether to extend marriage rights to same-sex couples in Taiwan failed on Nov. 24, 2018. (Photo courtesy of Taiwan Tongzhi Hotline Association)
The most LGBT-friendly country in Asia has rejected marriage equality. Amnesty International says the Nov. 24 referendum results are a bitter blow to the Taiwanese LGBT community that wishes their island nation would be the first country in Asia to legalize same-sex marriage. What’s more, for the rest of the dreamers in Asia it’s a painful reminder that realizing genuine marriage equality at home could take another generation.Even though Taiwan is deemed the most progressive country in Asia and a haven for LGBT activism, two initiatives to add same-sex marriage in the Civil Code and gender equality education in schools were both rejected. A pre-election survey that suggested as many as 77 percent of Taiwanese opposed legalizing same-sex marriage is a clear indication that acceptance on LGBT rights is not nationwide, even in Taiwan.
As I grew up in one of the most conservative countries in Asia, I am not surprised to see these results because I know acceptance on LGBT rights in Asian countries is always limited to certain niches. Often, media-distorted views of seemingly widespread acceptance are giving false hopes.
Asian countries present a broad spectrum of LGBT rights conditions, from harsh punishments to discrimination to growing acceptances. As of today, same-sex relationships are illegal in at least 20 Asian countries and are punishable to death penalty in seven of them. For the rest of Asia, LGBT individuals find themselves lucky to struggle with relatively mild miseries, such as family acceptance or workplace discrimination.
As I have traveled as a reporter across Asia, I found a common unspoken consensus among the non-LGBT populace in Asia. Since we are “abnormal” or “deviant” of norms, we shall be allowed to grow only within certain niches. In other words, either as an individual or as a community, if we have grown to the point that the majority feels intimidated, it has the right to say, “too much.” More or less, this reflects the attitudes of the majority in Asian countries. You won’t see them in the media but people act on it when they cast their votes.
On the other hand, the irony is same-sex marriage has become the ultimate symbol of accepting secularism and diversity, so support for LGBT rights has been politicized. From the late-Cambodian King Sihanouk to the Philippine’s President Rodrigo Duterte, it’s not hard to see why these Asian leaders showed support for LGBT rights but never actually acted to risk public support. Support of gay rights is a symbolic gesture to show their Western counterparts how secular and liberal they have become. In Taiwan, the motives to show the world how it is different from the authoritarian mainland in the era of the regime’s rising global power is behind the push for becoming a paragon of freedom and tolerance in Asia. This kind of “acceptance with an agenda” might fool the international media, but the message of acceptance is never passed down to the grassroots level.
When I attended the ILGA Asia conference in 2013, I came to the conclusion shared by many other activists: Marriage equality is too far-fetched for us, at least in our lifetime.
Demands for LGBT rights are not just fighting the repressive laws and homophobic groups. We are fighting the beliefs, traditions and systems backed by patriarchy, collectivism and fundamentalism, which have been institutionalized and cherished by the society. If you are from one of the bottom Asian countries, you have additional fights against corruption, ignorance and misconceptions against the minorities. This is the reality of being an LGBT person in Asia.
Victor Maung is a journalist and LGBT rights activist who was born in Myanmar. He lives and works in D.C.