USA: Trump-Appointed Judge Rules Photographer Can Reject Gay Couples Despite Ban on LGBT Discrimination

Read: https://www.towleroad.com/2020/08/trump-appointed-judge-rules-photographer-can-reject-gay-couples-despite-ban-on-lgbt-discrimination/

How you can help persecuted Russian LGBT+ activist, Yulia Tsvetkova

This is Yulia Tsvetkova from Komsomolsk-on-Amur in Russia’s Far East. Yulia is a feminist, an LGBT+ activist, an artist, and a founder of a theatre studio for teenagers.

“I am a scary woman,” she says.

Wondering why? Read on and judge for yourself.

Yulia began 2019 having achieved a lot and with big plans in store. To mark the first day of that year, and to take stock of the past 12 months, she posted this online:

“2018 became a year of a major shift for me. It happens sometimes that important things arrive all at once. This year, I opened my own theatre, a community centre and an online feminist group. Towards the end of the year, I launched a project that I had dreamed about for many years – sex-ed for teenagers. If somebody had told me a year ago that it would have turned out like this, I’d have laughed wholeheartedly…

Many of these things would not have happened without the examples of the amazing people who came into my life and showed me that dreaming about a better world is both possible and necessary, and that we all are able to change what’s around us.”

Fast-forward to the first day of 2020 – and Yulia celebrated New Year under house arrest, with a tracking bracelet on her ankle. 

What happened in-between?

During 2019, Yulia carried on with her freshly-launched activist and theatre initiatives. She hosted events at the LGBT-friendly community centre. She contributed lots of content to her online awareness-raising projects: Vagina Monologues on destigmatising women’s bodies; Komsomolka on feminism; and Dandelion field on sex-ed for teenagers. Together with the young members of her theatre group, Merak, she had a youth theatre festival in the making with four plays to present that coming March.

Then, just two months into 2019, anonymous complaints, threats, and calls from the police began creeping into Yulia’s life. She was forced to cancel the theatre festival, due to pressure from the local authorities. Visits to the police station for questioning quickly became a routine and constant part of her days. 

On one of her visits to the police, she learned that her drawings promoting body positivity were deemed “pornography” by law enforcement agents. Concerns were raised about her “A woman is not a doll” series, in which schematic depictions of women are accompanied by affirmations like: “Living women have body fat, and that’s normal;” “Living women get wrinkles and grey hairs, and that’s normal;” and “Living women have muscles, and that’s normal”. A couple of teenagers from Yulia’s theatre group and some followers of her online communities were called in for questioning too.

The “Vagina Monologues” online community that Yulia led drew the attention of the police as well. It community featured abstract depictions of female sexual organs and educational drawings of women’s bodies.

Invitations from the local police for ‘informal questioning’ stopped later in the fall of 2019.

But Yulia’s story was about to take a darker turn.

Informal questioning soon gave way to formal interrogations. On 20 November 2019, Yulia Tsvetkova was arrested and put under investigation for “distribution of pornography”. 

Yulia was under house arrest for almost four months, from 23 November 2019 until 16 March 2020.

She went through dozens of interrogations and was ordered to undergo a psychiatric examination.

She was fined for “propaganda of non-traditional sexual relations” twice: in December 2019 and in July 2020. In both cases “propaganda” was found in her online content: first in the feminist and LGBT+ communities that she ran, then – in a drawing featuring LGBT+ families and a slogan “Family is where love is. Support LGBT+ families!”

Currently Yulia is appealing these two decisions and a third charge of “propaganda” based on an online post with illustrations in support of LGBT+ families in Russia. 

She continues to regularly receive death threats, and her formal complaints to the police are met with complete indifference and inaction. 

She is still under gag order and cannot leave her town while she awaits her trial in the “pornography” case, which might result in up to six years in prison.

Yet, Yulia will not give up her fight, and here’s how you can help her.

Today, Yulia needs as many eyes as possible on her case and as many messengers as possible for her story. Your attention and your action matter.

• Write, talk, tweet, draw about Yulia’s story, and invite your friends and social media community to join.
• Browse the FreeTsvet website, launched in Yulia’s support by activists in Russia, for complete details and solidarity action ideas.
• Get creative with your own solidarity action.
• Use the hashtags #заЮлю, #ямыЮлияЦветкова, #свободуюлецветковой, #свободуцветковой  on your social media platforms.

Photo and illustrations: Yulia Tsvetkova / FreeTsvet.net

Tags: RussiaLGBTI youthYulia Tsvetkova

How you can help persecuted Russian LGBT+activist, Yulia Tsvetkova

More information here: https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783030437633 A preliminary version can be read for free here: https://serval.unil.ch/en/notice/serval:BIB_8FDB5B3C0490

Happy to have published a book chapter entitled “The European Union as a Protector and Promoter of Equality: Discrimination on Grounds of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity” (ed. #ThomasGiegerich) — Andreas R. Ziegler

Human Rights Watch urged Tunisia to end the use of anal testing, used as “proof” to prosecute same-sex relations

Human Rights Watch on Wednesday called on Tunisia to release two men jailed for sodomy and to end the “cruel, inhuman and degrading” use of anal testing.

The two men, both aged 26, were jailed in June for homosexual intercourse, but their two-year sentence was later halved on appeal. The two men denied all charges, but their refusal to undergo an anal test was used as “proof” to infer guilt.

https://english.alaraby.co.uk/english/news/2020/8/5/tunisia-should-end-gay-proof-anal-tests-hrw

USA: Trans student forced to use wrong school bathroom wins landmark case guaranteeing others won’t share his ‘humiliation’

Read: https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2020/08/10/drew-adams-trans-man-wins-florida-students-right-correct-bathrooms-three-year-legal-battle/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=PNnewsletter

USA: Federal court blocks Idaho ban on changing transgender birth certificate sex

A federal court blocked Idaho’s ban on transgender individuals changing their sex on their birth certificates Friday.

The court reasoned that the ban violated a previous court order that prohibited any policy that prevents transgender individuals from changing their birth certificate sex. The court’s original order pertained to an executive agency rule that prohibited such birth certificate changes. The original order overruled this agency rule:

[Idaho Health and Welfare (IDHW)] Defendants and their officers, employees, and agents must begin
accepting applications made by transgender people to change the sex listed on their birth certificates on or before April 6, 2018; such applications must be reviewed and considered through a constitutionally-sound approval process; upon approval, any reissued birth certificate must not include record of amendment to the listed sex; and where a concurrent application for a name change is submitted by a transgender individual, any reissued birth certificate must not include record of the name change.

After this ruling, on March 30, 2020, Idaho Governor Brad Little signed a bill into law that prohibited individuals from changing the sex listed their birth certificate. The bill provided an exception within one year of birth to change sex on a birth certificate that “…incorrectly represents a material fact at the time of birth” or after a year of birth for a certificate with erroneous sex listed “only on the basis of fraud, duress, or material mistake of fact.”

The court ruled that the previous injunction applied to the new bill:

[T]he Injunction prohibits IDHW from categorically denying applications from transgender people to change the sex listed on their birth certificates and requires IDHW to review and consider such applications through a meaningful and constitutionally-sound approval process irrespective of any policy, rule, or statute. The Injunction is permanent and applies to IDHW’s processing of applications to amend birth certificates both now and in the future.

The state of Idaho has not yet to appeal the order.

The post Federal court blocks Idaho ban on changing transgender birth certificate sex appeared first on JURIST – News – Legal News & Commentary.

The globalisation of gay rights – As more gay people come out, tolerance will spread

Though in some countries to be open is still to risk death

Aug 8th 2020, The Economist: https://www.economist.com/leaders/2020/08/08/as-more-gay-people-come-out-tolerance-will-spread

PHILIP LARKIN was only half-wrong. Sex didn’t begin in 1963, as the poet joked; for a hefty minority of Britons it was four years later—legally, at least—when Parliament nixed the law prohibiting gay sex. In this age of rainbow flags and pride parades, it is easy to forget how few lesbians and gays could be open about their sexuality until relatively recently. One who was, the journalist Peter Wildeblood, was “no more proud of my condition than I would be of having a glass eye or a hare lip”. Two years after decriminalisation in England and Wales, the Stonewall riots in New York popularised a term for this: coming out.

Since then, the closet has burst open. Actors and the characters they play are openly gay. Leo Varadkar, prime minister of Ireland until June, has a male partner; Serbia’s prime minister is a lesbian, as are the mayors of Chicago and Bogotá, the Colombian capital. Yet coming out remains a pivotal moment of self-recognition for gay teenagers. Thanks to the internet, they are finding the means and the confidence to do so in more places than ever before, and at a younger age than in previous generations (see article).

Yet there are plenty of places where being gay remains taboo. Even in liberal countries, gay members of some religious and ethnic minorities have a tough time. Gay sex is still illegal in 68 countries, and punishable by death in a dozen. Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) folk are subject to extra-judicial violence in many places, from beatings in bars to the gang-rape of lesbians by men who imagine that this might, as they see it, “cure” their sinful orientation. It would be reckless to encourage people to come out where to do so is to court injury or death. In all but the most repressive places, though, people are opening up. The International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association, a lobby group, has members in 164 countries. Pride parades march in China, Paraguay and the Faroe Islands.

Urbanisation helps. In big cities, every tribe has its place. You can play bingo with drag queens in Moscow, dance in gay bars in Nairobi (where gay sex is still illegal) and use gay hook-up apps in Beijing (where until 1997 gay people were jailed for “hooliganism”). Even in remote places, smartphones help teenagers discover that they are not alone. And that knowledge gives more of them the courage to come out. In 1985 barely a fifth of Americans had an openly gay relative, friend or colleague. Now 87% say they know someone gay or lesbian.

LGBT people coming out brings the extra advantage of spreading tolerance. Not always, of course. But sceptics and bigots are likeliest to change their minds when they realise that someone they know is gay. Familiarity reveals that homosexuals are just as human—and humdrum—as heterosexuals. It is easy to demonise the imaginary gay people depicted in a brimstone sermon; but much harder to fear the lesbian actuaries next door, or the gay dads cheering their daughter’s softball team. Pride parades, with their loud floats and copious flesh, are lots of fun. But learning that a sober-suited colleague happens to be gay is more likely to win over a conservative. One of the founders of Stonewall, a British gay-rights charity, said the name initially helped secure meetings with government ministers. To gays, it meant a riot; to the uninformed, it sounded like a firm of architects.

In 2002 about half of Americans said they tolerated homosexuality; now nearly three-quarters do. One study found that support for same-sex marriage increased rapidly in 2006-10 among Americans with a gay or lesbian friend, but fell among those with none. Even in countries where a majority remains hostile, change is coming. The proportion of Indians who said that gay people should be accepted rose from 15% in 2013 to 37% last year. Though an attempt to overturn Kenya’s gay-sex ban failed last year, the publicity it generated persuaded more locals to come out. That helps explain why over the same period the share of Kenyans who tolerate homosexuality nearly doubled, to 14%. In most places the young are more gay-friendly than the old, so discrimination will surely dwindle as the prejudiced pass away.

From Iran to Uganda, autocrats often caricature homosexuality as a foreign vice. Some even claim that there are no gay people in their country. In such places the most effective campaigners are, therefore, local gay people. The best thing liberals elsewhere can do is to provide financial and legal support to gay-rights groups and grant asylum to those who flee persecution.

Got to let it show

Mr Wildeblood’s motivation for writing a book in 1955 in which he baldly stated “I am a homosexual” was, he said, “to turn on more lights, revealing, in place of the blurred and shadowy figure of the newspaper photographs, a man differing from other men only in one respect.” The rest of those lights are coming on, one by one. ■

Human Rights Comment (Dunja Mijatović): Comprehensive sexuality education protects children and helps build a safer, inclusive society

English français русский Strasbourg 21/07/2020

Source: https://www.coe.int/en/web/commissioner/-/comprehensive-sexuality-education-protects-children-and-helps-build-a-safer-inclusive-society

Sexuality is an integral part of human life. Children and young people have the right to receive reliable, science-based and comprehensive information about it. Yet, sexuality education in schools is a sensitive issue. Ever since it was first introduced in European school curricula in the 1970’s, parents, religious leaders and politicians have been arguing, often in highly polarised debates, about how much, and what should be taught at what age.

Many Council of Europe member states have made considerable progress over the last decades towards delivering such education and improving its content so that it goes beyond biology and reproduction and truly equips children with knowledge about their bodies and their rights, and informs them about gender equality, sexual orientation, gender identity and healthy relationships (an approach often referred to as comprehensive sexuality education).

A renewed resistance to sexuality education

Despite overwhelming evidence that comprehensive sexuality education benefits children and society as a whole, we currently face renewed opposition to the provision of mandatory sexuality education in schools. Such resistance is often an illustration of a broader opposition to the full realisation of the human rights of specific groups, in particular women, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) persons and, to some extent, children themselves, on grounds that it would threaten traditional and religious values.

In 2019, a draft bill labelled “Stop Paedophilia” was put forward in the Polish Parliament by a group of citizens. It envisages the introduction of harsh penalties – including possible imprisonment – for anyone acting in the educational context or on school premises who “propagates or approves the undertaking by a minor of sexual intercourse or any other sexual act”. I expressed serious concern that the bill may be used to effectively criminalise the provision of sexuality education to school children. Most recently, the President of Poland, running for a second term, made it a campaign pledge to essentially forbid schools from teaching LGBT issues in sexuality education classes. Last year, in Birmingham (UK), religious communities and parents organised protests in front of schools that were providing information about same-sex relationships and transgender issues to their pupils. The recent adoption, in June 2020, by the Romanian Parliament of a bill repealing the mandatory provision of comprehensive sexuality education in school curricula is yet another example of this renewed opposition to the right of children to sexuality education. This move came after the adoption, in early 2020, of legislation introducing such mandatory sexuality education in schools, a development which was labelled by religious organisations as “an attack against the innocence of children.”

In Italy, as noted by the Group of Experts on Action against Violence against Women and Domestic Violence (GREVIO), which monitors the implementation of the Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence (the Istanbul Convention), the government’s initiative in 2015 to prepare “National Guidelines for Education to Affectivity, Sexuality and Reproductive Health in Schools” was stopped due to growing resistance to education on sexuality and the stigmatisation, often channelled through disinformation campaigns on the content of such education, of those partaking in it. In the Spanish autonomous region of Murcia, it is now possible for parents to request that their children opt out from certain classes provided by external educators, should the parents consider that the subject or the providers are not in line with their views on certain issues. This could have a negative impact on these children’s access to sexuality and relationships education, as this subject, as well as other human rights education-related content, is often provided by external actors, within the context of the ordinary curriculum.

Dispelling the myths about comprehensive sexuality education

Campaigns have multiplied across the continent, disseminating distorted or misleading information about existing sexuality education curricula. They have presented sexuality education as sexualising children at an early age, “propaganda in favour of homosexuality”, spreading “gender ideology”, and depriving parents of their right to educate their children in accordance with their values and beliefs. Disinformation about the actual contents of the curriculum is deliberately spread to scare parents.

It is time to set the record straight. UNESCO has spelled out the aims of sexuality education as “teaching and learning about the cognitive, emotional, physical and social aspects of sexuality. It aims to equip children and young people with knowledge, skills, attitudes and values that will empower them to: realize their health, well-being and dignity; develop respectful social and sexual relationships; consider how their choices affect their own well-being and that of others; and understand and ensure the protection of their rights throughout their lives.”

Contrary to what opponents claim, research carried out at national and international level has demonstrated the benefits of comprehensive sexuality education, including: delayed sexual initiation; reduced risk-taking; increased use of contraception; and improved attitudes related to sexual and reproductive health.

Sexuality education in schools is today all the more necessary as children in most cases can – and do — obtain information otherwise, in particular through the Internet and social media. While these can be useful and appropriate sources of information, they can also convey a distorted image of sexuality and lack information on emotional and rights-related aspects of sexuality. Through websites or social media children can also access scientifically inaccurate information, for example as regards contraception.

It is worth emphasising that sexuality education in schools comes as a complement to and not a replacement of what may be shared by parents at home. However, it cannot be left entirely to families. In what other field of science would we relinquish the education of our children to the Internet or families exclusively?

Comprehensive sexuality education is a powerful tool to combat violence, abuse and discrimination and to promote respect for diversity

The benefits of sexuality education, when comprehensive, go far beyond information on reproduction and health risks associated with sexuality.

Sexuality education is essential to prevent and combat sexual abuse against children, sexual violence and sexual exploitation. The Council of Europe Convention on Protection of Children against Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse (“the Lanzarote Convention”) requires from states that they “ensure that children, during primary and secondary education, receive information on the risks of sexual exploitation and sexual abuse, as well as on the means to protect themselves, adapted to their evolving capacity.” The Lanzarote Committee, in charge of monitoring the implementation of the Convention, stressed for example that the school environment was particularly appropriate to inform about the widespread problem of sexual abuse against children within the family framework or in their “circle of trust”.

The importance of sexuality education to prevent children from falling prey to  sexual offenders online was highlighted during the period of confinement due to the COVID-19 pandemic. As stressed by the Lanzarote Committee, during this period, children became increasingly vulnerable to online grooming, sexual extorsion, cyber-bullying or other sexual exploitation facilitated by information and communication technologies. The Committee urged states to step up information on risks and on children’s rights online, as well as counselling and support services. In this context, I note with interest that in some countries, such as Estonia, sexuality education continued to be provided as part of online schooling.

Likewise, sexuality education is crucial to prevent gender-based violence and discrimination against women. It should therefore contribute to conveying, from the early stages of education, strong messages in favour of equality between women and men, promoting non-stereotyped gender roles, educating about mutual respect, consent to sexual relations, non-violent conflict resolution in interpersonal relationships and respect for personal integrity, as requested by the Istanbul Convention.

It is also an ideal context for raising awareness about the sexual and reproductive health and rights of women, including access to modern contraception and safe abortion. Research carried out in the European region under the auspices of the World Health Organisation (WHO) indicates that the teenage birth rate tends to be much higher in countries, such as Bulgaria and Georgia, where no mandatory comprehensive sexuality education programmes are in place. Early pregnancy is not only potentially very damaging for the health of teenage girls, but it also results in serious limitations to their educational opportunities.

Existing sexuality education curricula often tend to completely exclude LGBTI people and issues, or even to stigmatise them. Yet, LGBTI youth frequently face bullying at school and are at higher risk of committing self-harm or suicide because of societal rejection of their sexual orientation. Like all other children, they should be provided with comprehensive sexuality education that meets their needs. Therefore, sexuality education must include information that is relevant to them, scientifically accurate and age appropriate. This means helping children to understand sexual orientation and gender identity and dispelling common myths and stereotypes about LGBTI persons.

By providing factual, non-stigmatising information on sexual orientation and gender identity as one aspect of human development, comprehensive sexuality education can help save lives. It can contribute to combating homophobia and transphobia, at school and beyond, and to creating a safer and more inclusive learning environment for all.

Children and young people have the right to receive comprehensive sexuality education

International human rights bodies have established that children and young people have the right to receive comprehensive, accurate, scientifically sound and culturally sensitive sexuality education, based on existing international standards. These include the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, the UN Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Violence against Women, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and, at European level, the European Social Charter and the above-mentioned Lanzarote and Istanbul Conventions.

The right to receive comprehensive sexuality education derives from a range of protected rights, such as the right to live free from violence and discrimination, the right to the highest attainable standard of mental and physical health, but also the right to receive and impart information and the right to quality and inclusive education, including human rights education. In a 2010 report on sexuality education, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Education stressed that “sexual education should be considered a right in itself and should be clearly linked with other rights in accordance with the principle of the interdependence and indivisibility of human rights.” The need for sexuality education is also acknowledged in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development of the United Nations and is necessary to achieve several of the goals included in the agenda.

Key steps to improve the delivery of comprehensive sexuality education

Comprehensive sexuality education is part of a good quality education. Thus, it should be provided for by law, be mandatory and mainstreamed across the education system as of the early school years. It is of concern that, according to a 2018 survey, sexuality education was mandatory in only 11 out of the 22 Council of Europe member states reviewed.

Opponents to sexuality education often advocate for a right of parents to opt out on behalf of their children from mandatory sexuality education. However, international human rights standards on the right to freedom of religion or belief do not entitle parents to withdraw children from sexuality education classes where relevant information is conveyed in an objective and impartial manner, as also stressed in an Issue Paper on women’s sexual and reproductive health and rights published by my Office in 2017. Therefore, I was pleased to learn that in January 2020, the government of Wales removed the possibility for parents to prevent their children from attending classes as part of the curriculum on inclusive sexuality and relationships.

The curricula and teaching methods should be adapted to the different stages of development of children and take into account their evolving capacity. The 2018 UNESCO International Technical Guidance on Sexuality Education covers a range of age groups, from 5 to 8 years old up to 15-18+ years old. As highlighted in UNESCO’s Technical Guidance, it is essential for children to learn about sexuality and safer sex behaviours before they become sexually active, in order to be adequately prepared for healthy and consensual relationships. UNESCO also recommends using participatory and learner-centred approaches that allow children to develop critical thinking.

Information provided to children as part of sexuality education should be relevant and based on science and human rights standards. Sexuality education should not include value judgments or perpetuate prejudices and stereotypes. The European Committee on Social Rights stressed that “sexual and reproductive health education must be provided to school children without discrimination on any ground” and that it should not be used “as a tool for reinforcing demeaning stereotypes and perpetuating forms of prejudice which contribute to the social exclusion of historically marginalised groups and others that face embedded discrimination and other forms of social disadvantage which has the effect of denying their human dignity.” Curricula on sexuality education should also be regularly evaluated and revised, in order to ensure that they are accurate and meet existing needs.

It is essential to provide families with accurate information about what sexuality education really entails -and what it does not- and to explain the benefits for all, not only children. Clearly, if sexuality education is to be accepted and successfully implemented, it should take into account the communities’ and parents’ cultural and religious backgrounds. Therefore, schools should be supported to engage with them, including as appropriate with religious leaders, and to take their views into account as long as they do not contradict the very aims of sexuality education, the best interests of the child, or human rights standards.

It is important to consult and involve young people themselves, first and foremost, to ensure that the content of education that is provided to them is relevant and adapted to their needs. Peer learning can play an important role. For example, the Ukrainian Ministry of Education decided at the end of 2019 to introduce peer education training programmes on sexuality education and HIV prevention in schools, to be delivered by an international youth organisation.

Comprehensive sexuality education should also be provided to out-of-school children and youth. This is particularly relevant for children and young people with disabilities, many of whom, unfortunately, do not yet have access to mainstream education. Their sexuality tends to be ignored, or even perceived as harmful, and they are therefore often deprived of any access to adequate information on sexuality and relationships, despite their heightened vulnerability to sexual abuse and exploitation. Online sexuality education can be a useful tool for out-of-school children, provided they have access to safe and inclusive digital spaces.

Lastly, it is of crucial importance for teachers to receive adequate specialised training and support for teaching comprehensive sexuality education, irrespective of whether part of the teaching is also carried out by external actors. Integrating training on sexuality education in regular teacher training programmes, as has been done in Estonia and Finland, is an effective way of ensuring that all teachers are adequately prepared. The delivery of sexuality education by schools should also be closely and regularly monitored and evaluated.

With challenges and resistance to sexuality education increasing, what is most needed is strong political leadership to remind society that access to comprehensive sexuality education is a human right and that it is for the benefit of all. Sexuality education is about knowing one’s rights and respecting other people’s rights, about protecting one’s health, and about adopting a positive attitude towards sexuality and relationships. It is also about acquiring valuable life skills, such as self-confidence, critical thinking and the capacity to make informed decisions. There is obviously nothing wrong with this.

Dunja Mijatović

Useful references:

• Commissioner for Human Rights, Issue Paper on women’s sexual and reproductive health and rights in Europe (2017)
• Committee of the Parties to the Council of Europe Convention on the protection of children against sexual exploitation and sexual abuse (Lanzarote Committee), 2^nd implementation report, Protection of children against sexual abuse in the circle of trust, 31 January 2018
• UNESCO, International technical guidance on sexuality education, An evidence-informed approach, revised edition (2018)
• UNESCO, Switched on: Sexuality education in the digital space, Technical Brief, 2020
• World Health Organisation, Regional Office for Europe, Sexuality education in Europe and Central Asia: state of the art and recent developments. An overview of 25 countries (2018)
• World Health Organisation, Regional Office for Europe and German Federal Centre for Health Education (BZgA), Standards in sexuality education, (2010)
• UN Committee on the Rights of the Child: General Comment N. 20 (2016) on the implementation of the rights of the child during adolescence
• Report of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the right to education to the General Assembly, 2010

Subscribe to our mailing list

European Commission publishes report “Legal gender recognition in the EU: the journeys of trans people towards full equality

Read: https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2020/08/06/uk-european-commission-legal-gender-recognition-act-hungary-poland-trans-transgender/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=PNnewsletter

USA: Colorado becomes eleventh US state to ban LGBTQ ‘panic defense’

Colorado Governor Jared Polis signed a bill on Monday July, 13 banning the so-called “panic defense” in court, meaning that defendants can no longer blame victims’ sexual orientation or gender identity for their violent actions.

Colorado will become the eleventh US state to ban the defense, following states such as Rhode Island, New Jersey, California and New York. The bill, signed by the first openly gay elected governor, will add further protections for the LGBTQ community. Previously, the “panic defense” has been used to excuse the violent actions of defendants as temporary insanity as a result of a victim’s sexual orientation or gender identity.

Polis stated that the SB20-221 bill will ensure that in cases of violence or murder trials, there is no discriminatory bias, encouraging a fairer trial. The bill was supported by 22 other elected district attorneys and was signed along with other legislation strengthening protections for the LGBTQ community, including coverage for HIV/AIDS prevention medication.

The post Colorado becomes eleventh US state to ban LGBTQ ‘panic defense’ appeared first on JURIST – News – Legal News & Commentary.