EDL LGBT Devision
EDL LGBT Devision EDL LGBT Devision EDL LGBT Devision EDL LGBT Devision EDL LGBT Devision EDL LGBT Devision EDL LGBT Devision EDL EDL EDL EDL EDL EDL EDL EDL EDL EDL EDL …
www.youtube.com/watch?v=f952ckT0GT4&feature=youtube_gdata
All posts by GayFriendschat.com
#Freedom For LGBT: Mumbai Reacts On #Hijras
#Freedom For LGBT: Mumbai Reacts On #Hijras
Inspired by Reshel Shah’s documentary project on the #Hijras – #BlackSheep, Youngisthan captures the reactions from the society about #Hijras For more such interesting stories log on to www.youngi.
Surrogacy
Tavi Gevinson on LGBT Visibility and the Problem With the Word ‘Girls’
Tavi Gevinson on LGBT Visibility and the Problem With the Word ‘Girls’
Tavi Gevinson on LGBT Visibility and the Problem With the Word ‘Girls’
www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwkRDQafgeI&feature=youtube_gdata
DSC_4817 Mike Michaud
Deputado Jair Bolsonaro | Volta do Kit Gay | IX SEMINÁRIO LGBT PARA A INFÂNCIA
Deputado Jair Bolsonaro | Volta do Kit Gay | IX SEMINÁRIO LGBT PARA A INFÂNCIA
Deputado Jair Bolsonaro | Volta do Kit Gay | IX SEMINÁRIO LGBT PARA A INFÂNCIA youtu.be/M5-HNNSs7-4.
Boy George Reveals The Surprising Thing That People Always Ask Of Him
Boy George Reveals The Surprising Thing That People Always Ask Of Him
There’s never a shortage of questions to ask Boy George, but there is one homosexuality-related inquiry that the music icon hears all the time.
During a conversation with HuffPost Live’s Caroline Modarressy-Tehrani on Wednesday, Boy George was asked if people ever use the occasion of meeting him to come out of the closet, as Melissa Etheridge has said is often the case in her life. That specifically doesn’t happen a lot, he said, but he did share what he hears much more often.
“People always say to me, ‘Meet my friend, do you think he’s gay?’ I get that a lot,” he said.
But if you ever get the chance to pose that question to Boy George, don’t get your hopes too high — he added that his gaydar leaves something to be desired, except when somebody is obviously “a mincing fairy.”
Watch the full HuffPost Live conversation about the upcoming Culture Club reunion here.
Sign up here for Live Today, HuffPost Live’s new morning email that will let you know the newsmakers, celebrities and politicians joining us that day and give you the best clips from the day before!
HRC’s ‘Every Vote Counts’ GOTV Tour Lands in Colorado
HRC’s ‘Every Vote Counts’ GOTV Tour Lands in Colorado
Wow! The second night of our Every Vote Counts Get-Out-The-Vote Tour has been just as amazing as the first.
HRC.org
Vindictive Wife In India Has Gay Husband Locked Away For Life, Feels Absolutely No Remorse
Vindictive Wife In India Has Gay Husband Locked Away For Life, Feels Absolutely No Remorse
Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.
“It was the pink lip gloss that first roused my suspicions,” an Indian woman by the name of “Lisa” told the Bangalore Mirror. “He used it every day without fail… His mannerisms and interests were also feminine, and whenever I questioned him, he always gave dodgy responses.”
31-year-old “Lisa” and her 32-year-old husband “John” (not their real names) were wed in November 2013 through an arranged marriage orchestrated by their parents. She was a dentist. He was worked in tech. The couple lived apart for the first six months of their marriage, until John was able to transfer for work and the couple rented a house together in Malleswaram, a suburb outside of Bungalore.
But it didn’t take long for Lisa to notice that something was up in her marriage.
John, she claims, would not touch her. On top of that, he insisted they sleep in separate rooms. He would also work unusually long hours, leaving the house at 8 a.m. and not returning home until as late as 10 or 11 p.m. Except, she claims, on the nights when she was working late. On those evenings, John would return home early.
So Lisa did some sleuthing. She learned from neighbors that her husband would often bring men home with him whenever she wasn’t there. When she confronted him about it, John said he and the guys were discussing business.
But Lisa wasn’t convinced. She began to suspect her husband might be gay.
Her next approach was to suggest John see a doctor.
“I first spoke to John and advised him to get a medical test done, thinking he did not want to get intimate with me because he was impotent,” she said. “He flatly refused.”
Lisa says this left her with “no option” but to approach John’s parents. According to her, they were unsympathetic towards her about her marriage woes and said that if she wasn’t happy she should file for divorce.
But Lisa, feeling throughly dejected by both her husband and her in-laws, decided to take more drastic measures.
Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code makes gay sex is an offense punishable with life imprisonment. The section was declared unconstitutional by the Delhi high court in July 2009, but was reinstated in December 2013, sparking international outcry.
Lisa decided to use this draconian law to her advantage. She would catch her husband in the act and turn him into authorities, and he would spend the rest of his days rotting in a prison cell.
The jilted wife installed hidden cameras all throughout their house. Then she told John she was going to visit her parents. When she returned home a week later, she reviewed the footage. She said she was “aghast” by what she discovered. As suspected, her husband was having an affair with another man.
Armed with her evidence, she marched into her local police station and filed a complaint.
“I have also accused my in-laws of cheating me since I believe they knew their son was gay, but intentionally led me to believe he wasn’t,” Lisa snarled. “They have cheated me and ruined my life by getting me married to him.”
Deputy Commissioner of Police Sandeep Patil confirmed the incident, saying, “We arrested the [husband] soon after his wife tendered a complaint, with proof. The parents have been booked for cheating the victim, but these allegations have to be fully proved before we can arrest them.”
Dr. Vivek Benegal, Professor of Psychiatry at the National Institute of Mental Health and Neuro Sciences, told the BBC that he’s not surprised by this case.
“There are many people who are still being forced to marry because of social pressure. Society really did not give him a choice,” he said. “The man cannot be blamed. Neither can the woman be blamed. We can only blame the social structure. They have been forced to formalize a lie.”
Dr. Benegal added: “It is so tragic that in an era when science has proved that sexual orientation is not a vice, society should be forcing zebras to be horses.”
Related stories:
India, World’s Largest Democracy, Bans Gay Sex
PHOTOS: Men and Women in India Go “Gay For A Day” to Protest Supreme Court’s Ban on Gay Sex
Police Raid Gay Party In India, Arrest 30 Guests For “Indecent Behavior”
Graham Gremore
Lambda Legal Brings Challenge to Puerto Rico's Same-Sex Marriage Ban To First Circuit Court of Appeals
Lambda Legal Brings Challenge to Puerto Rico's Same-Sex Marriage Ban To First Circuit Court of Appeals
As promised, Lambda Legal has filed an appeal of Federal Judge Perez-Gimenez’s ruling that upheld Puerto Rico’s ban on same-sex marriage. The case will now be heard by the First Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston. The Washington Blade reports:
“Puerto Rico has many loving, committed couples who need the dignity and respect of marriage as soon as possible, and we won’t stop fighting on their behalf,” said Omar Gonzalez-Pagan of Lambda Legal. Ada Conde Vidal and Ivonne Álvarez Vélez of San Juan filed the lawsuit in U.S. District Court in March. Four additional gay and lesbian couples along with Lambda Legal and Puerto Rico Para Tod@s, a Puerto Rican LGBT advocacy group, joined the case three months later.
Puerto Rico’s ban on same-sex marriage was enacted in 1999 after lawmakers amended the U.S. commonwealth’s civil code to ban recognition of same-sex marriages. The decision out of Puerto Rico contradicts the larger trend we have been witnessing whereby federal and appellate court judges have been striking down bans on same-sex marriage:
“The district’s court ruling is not only out of step with the rest of the country, it leaves Puerto Rico as the only jurisdiction within the First Circuit to ban marriage for same-sex couples,” said Gonzalez-Pagan. “During the past year reasoned rulings by district courts throughout the nation and the Courts of Appeals for the 4th, 7th, 9th and 10th Circuits, as well as the U.S. Supreme Court’s actions to let stand some of those rulings, clearly demonstrate that marriage bans, such as Puerto Rico’s, are unconstitutional.”
Gov. Alejandro García Padilla, who is among the defendants in the case, publicly supports civil unions for gays and lesbians. He reiterated his opposition to marriage rights for same-sex couples last week after Pérez-Giménez announced his ruling. “The government should not be in the business of discriminating against its people,” said Gonzalez-Pagan. “It is disappointing that Puerto Rico continues to perpetuate the harms it causes to loving, committed Puerto Rican same-sex couples.”
Now that the issue of same-sex marriage in Puerto Rico is headed to the 1st Circuit, SCOTUS Blog considers the impact its decision will have on the larger issue of same-sex marriage in the United States:
Two years ago, the First Circuit said flatly that it was still required to follow the Supreme Court’s summary, one-sentence ruling in 1972, in the case of Baker v. Nelson. That ruling, it said, is “binding precedent” which bars an argument that there is “a constitutional right to same-sex marriage.” And, it noted, the Supreme Court has not overturned that ruling in more recent gay rights decisions. The Baker decision said without elaboration that a plea for a right to marry a same-sex partner did not raise “a substantial federal question.”
The question now is whether the First Circuit will continue to adhere to that view, in the face of a broad wave of federal court decisions indicating that Baker v. Nelson no longer remained an obstacle to striking down state laws against same-sex marriage. If the First Circuit holds fast, it could set up a split on this issue that could lead the Supreme Court to step into the same-sex marriage controversy in a way that it has so far avoided.
In his ruling on October 21 rejecting the couples’ challenge to Puerto Rico’s ban, U.S. District Judge Juan M. Perez-Gimenez said that he had no choice because of the 1972 precedent and because of the First Circuit’s comments about Baker v. Nelson‘s continued validity. The Baker decision, he said, is still controlling, “even when other cases would seem to undermine the Supreme Court’s holdings….The Supreme Court is perfectly capable of stating its intention to overrule a prior case.”
Sean Mandell
