Last week we told you about a mass gay civil union ceremony in Brazil that was held to celebrate the country's Federal Supreme Court decision recognizing the right of gays and lesbians to form same-sex civil unions in May. 

 

Usually, civil unions are a inferior version of marriages that are seen as a stop-gap on the road to full equality. Well, it turns out that the civil unions graduated into full-on same-sex marriages pretty quickly. A judge in Brazil's Sao Paulo state court recently granted a gay couple the right to upgrade their civil union to a full marriage license, citing the Supreme Court's decision and the Brazilian Constitution, which grants that civil unions (known as stable unions and previously available to straight couples as an alternative to religious marriage) may be upgraded to full marriages at any time. 

 

The couple from Jacarei, 85 kilometres northeast of Sao Paulo, are Brazil's first gay married couple. They've said they're prepared to fight any challenge of their legal status all the way to the Supreme Court. However, even Sao Paulo state's attorney-general's office appears to back the unions. A lawyer for the attorney-general's office advised the judge in the case that "The federal constitution establishes as a fundamental objective of the Federal Republic of Brazil to promote the good of everyone without bias of gender or any other form of discrimination."

Brazil is now the most populous country in the world to recognize and perform same sex marriages, and the second country in South America to do so after Argentina legalized gay marriage last year. Other countries to allow gay marriage include Belgium, Iceland, Mexico, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, South Africa, Spain and Sweden. Canada of course became the fourth country to legalize same-sex marriage nationwide in 2005. Gay marriage is also recognized in six US states and foreign same-sex marriages are recognized in Israel. 

In April, Anna Paquin, vampire lover and star of True Blood, rose from the underworld of heterosexuality and announced she is bisexual in a public service announcement (PSA) for the True Colour Fund. 

The organization was founded by Cyndi Lauper to “inspire and engage, especially straight people, to become active participants in the advancement of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender equality.”

The PSA, We Give a Damn, features gays, straights and bisexuals stating for the camera that they all -- yep, you got it -- give a damn about queer rights.

Roll forward a few months and Paquin, who is married to a straight vamp boy, is back on the record about bisexuals.

An article in the Otago Times says that Paquin told VMagazine, "There is a lot of prejudice against us, but the more people talk about it, the less of a deal it will be. Who people choose to sleep with or spend their lives with shouldn't matter. Not that anyone particularly cares who I'm attracted to."

Right on, girl. It really should not be anyone’s concern who we are attracted to.

Although I think it is great that Paquin has the guts to speak out, some part of me wishes she could have spoken out before she married a man.

Still, she did and that’s what counts. Paquin also said that she had no issue stepping forward about her sexuality and would have done it before but “quite frankly, no one had ever asked me before.”

She could bite me any day -- or night, for that matter.

  

A new report by Thomas Hammarberg, the commissioner for human rights for the Council of Europe, examines the legal and social situation for queer people in Europe.

The report, “Discrimination on Grounds of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity” is a whopping 134 pages long. It is the largest study ever done on discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity in the 47 member states of the Council of Europe.

Just let me clarify quickly: the Council of Europe is separate from the European Union (EU). It is an international organization with 47 member countries (the EU has only 27) that was set up to promote democracy and protect human rights and the rule of law in Europe.

The report is not particularly uplifting and, not surprisingly, it raises concerns about the situation of transgender people.

Homophobic and transphobic attitudes were identified in all member states, although attitudes varied significantly among and within the countries.

It also pointed out that “biased, outdated and incorrect information, as well as stereotypical portrayals of LGBT persons in the media and in textbooks contributed to the shaping of negative attitudes.”

Ouch.

The invisibility of queer people is a recurring theme as is the lack of a serious discussion about “their” human rights.

When it comes to discrimination, trans folk are not explicitly protected under the existing laws. Where they are protected the laws are not explicit enough or are only available for a narrowly defined group.

If you are trans it is also extremely difficult to have your preferred gender legally recognized.

“Most member states fail to provide for legal gender recognition of transgender people, be it by completely absent legislation or cumbersome and unclear procedures. A majority of 30 member states require individuals seeking to change documents to undergo gender reassignment surgery, a heavily invasive treatment of often questionable quality and serious health consequences.”

And what if you are married and trans? Well, that’s a whole different problem. Sixteen member states require that trans people be single. So if you are married, you have to get divorced in order to be recognized as trans.

Getting access to gender reassignment treatment also poses a problem — nearly half the states did not have the infrastructure suitable for gender reassignment surgery.

The news is not great, but the report has been done. It is thorough and provides 36 policy recommendations for the members of the Council of Europe.

Richard Köhler, co-chair of Transgender Europe says, “The Commissioner addresses human rights violations transgender people are facing in a very clear language. There is no way for member states to turn a blind eye on research findings or recommendations. It is on them now to demonstrate political will and follow the example of Thomas Hammarberg. Who wants to end discrimination, needs to show face.”

 

Two days after the New York State Senate voted to legalize same-sex marriage, participants in New York’s 42^nd Pride parade on Sunday cheered, danced and celebrated. On July 24, when the law takes effect, no doubt some will shed tears of joy.

Pride is always fun, but this year was special. A number of couples wore wedding suits, faked proposals and carried placards with messages such as “Thirty years engaged. Let's get married.”

At the centre of the celebration was Governor Andrew Cuomo, who made legalization of same-sex marriage part of his election campaign and led the fight for its approval in the Republican-led Senate.

Go Cuomo.

Cuomo marched proudly down the New York streets with several local politicians, including Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

Interesting that the mayor took to the streets to support the rainbow flag. I wonder if Toronto’s Mayor Rob Ford should call Bloomberg and ask for advice on how to support his constituents?

But back to New York — Cuomo was definitely the rock star of the parade.

“I’ve been to the parade many times, and there’s always a lot of energy and it’s always been a ball, but this was special,” he said. “I think you’re going to see this message resonate all across the country now. If New York can do it, it’s okay for every other place to do it.”

So, will other US states follow in New York’s footsteps?

One New York Times article puts it succinctly in its headline: “Beyond New York, gay marriage faces hurdles.”

Twenty-nine states have constitutional bans on same-sex marriage, while 12 others have laws against it.

The push for same-sex marriage in Maryland and Rhode Island died in the legislature earlier this year. In Maine and Oregon, the legislature voted in favour of allowing gays to marry, but voters overturned that decision.

Gay advocates hope, in the long term, to win the legalization of same-sex marriage in Delaware and New Jersey, two states where Democrats control the legislatures, as well as in Pennsylvania.

And in California, the fight for gay marriage continues with the slow strangulation of Prop 8.

But, looking on the bright side, New York is the sixth and largest US state to legalize gay marriage, and on July 24, the number of Americans who live in jurisdictions where same-sex marriage is permitted will be double what it is now.

 

 

 

   

In a historic 33-29 vote, the New York State Senate finally gave its approval to same-sex marriage Friday night, making it the sixth US state to allow it and only the third to approve it by legislation, rather than through the courts. It's also the first Republican-controlled legislature to approve same-sex marriage.

By the way, for those of you keeping score, this happens in the same week that, six years ago, Spain and Canada became the third and fourth countries to permit gay marriage legally (although gay marriages had already been permitted in seven provinces by the time Parliament got around to legalizing it country-wide here).

How did this happen? Well, apparently shifting attitudes in New York, plus a whole whack of lobbying hours, money and phone calls to state senators got 'er done. The analysis from Seattle PI may be informative for future legislative battles.

Gays and lesbians won't be able to get hitched in New York until July 24, to allow time for regulations and statutes to be updated. But it's a great way to cap off New York Pride Week. Unfortunately, the assholes at the Westboro Baptist Church have already announced that they plan to protest today's march.

Meanwhile, gays in other states lament that progress seems to be going backward. Minnesota recently pledged to put a constitutional amendment barring gay marriage on the ballot next year; New Jersey's governor reconfirmed his opposition to gay marriage; and Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachman has proposed a federal constitutional amendment barring same-sex marriage throughout the country if she's elected. 

And so the fight continues.