Wanna team up and help Gay Rights to go global?

[Dorothy]

If this is a realy useless/stupid idea feel free to viritualy kick my ass, but I was thinking... Maybe we should just team up big time and find a way to take over sunnydale, ehm, the world I mean.

It's common knowledge (well, on here at least) that Gay Rights are human rights and all... Yet some parts of the world fail to understand, even so-called advanced-civilised parts. Luckily I live in a place where anyone can be as gay as they like, discrimination is even a criminal offence. I think it should be like that everywhere.

So what's the plan? Well, teaming up, lobbying, showing the world how pretty love is obviously. But also Research Mode, there MUST be something somewhere in whatever international law, declaration or human rights bill that makes it impossible to prohibit love. Let's get nasty and brainstorm untill we find a way to make them understand Love is beautifull and should be supported in every way.

So, anyone wanna join in here? Any idea to help Gay Rights gain even the smallest extra amount of support is welcome and I think no idea is too wild or stupid to be mentioned.

(Or am am I getting carried away by my soapbox again)

[Millerchip77]

I'm in Dorothy - I think that's a super idea and there are some really political kittens around. I am involved with a feminist academic association and my partner is a big union activist - though she's not as much of a geek as me so doesn't use this site

International gay rights is a huge issue I think - I saw a terrible after dinner speaker at an LGBT teachers' conference the other week who claimed that we 'shouldn't impose our views on the rest of the world'. I agree to some extent - we've had eight years of an American president who thought that it was his job to impose his view of 'freedom' on to the Middle East. However in matters such as this I think it's our responsibility as LGBT people to stand shoulder to shoulder (sorry for quoting Tony Blair) with our brothers, sisters and those in-between in places where they are persecuted, murdered and prevented from living their lives as they choose. I also saw a great speaker - Tony Benn - the best PM we never had who quoted Thomas Paine's 'Rights of Man' - 'My country is the world and my religion is to do good' - this is where I stand on this. So yeah - I'm in; let's take over Sunnydale - I mean the world

[Dorothy]

a quick scribble from 314 where I'm drawing some evil plans (or is it just a 1/4 size pattern for a t-shirt LoLz)

We should indeed not force an opinion on others, I like it when others don't share my opinion as it leads to fun discussions and a broader view of the world. It should stay respectfull though. Others shouldn't force us to live by their rules either, they don't have to mary a lesbian if they don't want to, but they shouldn't keep someone else from doing it if they want to.

Respect and equal rights, plus protection from dicrimination and harrasment of any kind, just like discriminating and harresment on acount of someones handicap, gender or race is illegal. That's what I'm aiming for.
And it's sad we actually have to fight for that.

[Paint the Sky]

Get involved with amnesty international - it could be what you are looking for.

http://www.amnesty.org/en/sexual-orient ... r-identity

[Dorothy]

Have been in contact with amnesty before, didn't work out, they don't wanna mess with "important" countries and all unless they are realy violent.

I was thinking more of a LGBT powered initiative for acceptance and the right to get married and all.

[Guest]

Hey Dorothy,

Thank you for having created this thread and exposed your ideas.

I was especially interested in what you had to say about an international law or human right working towards equality in "love". Human Rights jurisdictions worldwide are in effect very brief in their disseminations and focus mostly on a non-discriminative perspective. Where the flaw lies is that the guarantee of non-discrimination does not prevent a country's parliament from enacting laws that are reasonably necessary in matters relating to human relationships (marriage, adoption, divorce, inheritance etc.). If we were to brainstorm and find appropriate advocacy and lobbying tools at our level, the multicultural context would have to be taken into consideration and as this may be averred difficult initially, it is best to start at grassroots level.

Secondly, there is an article in the UNESCO universal declaration on cultural diversity that has always been used as a powerful tool for shaping communities. It's the article on cultural heritage as being the wellspring of creativity. It states that creation draws on the roots of cultural tradition, but flourishes in contact with other cultures. It is for this reason that heritage, specifically a heterosexual framework on heritage, is preserved. This is meant to be handed over to future generations as a record of mankind's aspirations. This could be a vital point that may be used for placing homosexual culture in the limelight as a culture that efficaciously fosters visions of tolerance.

With the advent of globalisation, young people specifically are being provided with the opportunity to become politically active, starting from one's local community to the global stage. With this perspective in mind, the intersection of youth activism and human rights becomes something that must definitely be encouraged. I'm thinking of participation in youth parliaments or other such youth networks for the Human Rights Area. LGBT rights are offered an extensive platform for expression at global level in this way.

If Amnesty International has been reluctant to offer supportive help, you may join any such global youth networks. All is needed is a vision and a creative pool of ideas for sustainable change in the LGBT rights framework. I was a volunteer for OXFAM before but the organisation only takes in young people in the age range of 18 – 25. You could try and have a look at the Taking IT Global network. It makes use of the net principally as its tool for communication, has no specific age limits and addresses all issues.

Taking IT Global - Human Rights and Equity: LGBT Rights

Vi'

[Dorothy]

Cool, thanks any idea posted here is worth it's weight in gold... But yours just weights much

It seems like not many people are actually interested in actively supporting gay rights. A member of the group I used to be involved with complained about that once, she seems to be kinda right.

(I got out of that group because they were becoming too agressive and were taking everything personally, therefor losing the bigger picture and the ability for debate. Fighting and yelling doesn't gain you anything, plus the police was getting anoyed with them and I didn't wannabe part of that.)

[Dorothy]

Article 1
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 2
Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

these are the first two articles on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Which would mean that banning gay marriage is against human rights, since you are discriminating on gender, which is specificaly (is that a good word?) ruled out here.
If one of the partners would have been the other sex, there would be no restrictions on marriage or whatsoever. This makes it discrimination and therefor illegal.

[Millerchip77]

The sad thing is though is that this has not been incorporated into the laws of many countries.

Also in some countries where there is gay marriage like South Africa, couple still find it difficult to find ministers who are prepared to marry them because their 'religious rights' override the human rights of the individuals.

[Dorothy]

does that go for people in non-religious functions too?

I know we (the Netherands) don't take on any more government marriage officials that refuse to perform gay marriage ceremonies. Churches and the likes of them are allowed to make their own decision, which I think is fair, because the religious marriage ceremony isn't a legal thing, just additional for the ones who want to seal their marriage with their religious beliefs too. If the said religion doesn't approve of gay marriage it's useless to seal it in that community anyway

[Guest]

There is a dichotomous aspect to the issue of banning same-sex marriage since a restriction to religious freedom also becomes a violation of a human right. The international community protects human rights globally but at the domestic level, a government has the right to balance the rights proscribed in its constitution with the cultural beliefs and practices of its citizens. To this end, depending on the religion in question, it is paradoxically not discriminative when we think about it from the religious officer's perspective since her/his refusal to perform a same-sex marriage is in force with the freedom of practising religion.

The contradiction in the international legislation is what might be causing rifts in communities since there is no guidance whatsoever as to what ought to be given preference over the other: human right or religious freedom?

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is simply a document that makes a descriptive mention of enforcement mechanisms for the protection of basic human rights. Some of the covenants responsible for implementing these enforcement mechanisms though have failed to do so up to date.

From a non-religious point of view, I'm not well acquainted with what could be in force for gay marriages but in the realm of the protection of lesbian rights, the Women's Convention requires that signatory country members take steps for modifying any forms of cultural patterns that impair the rights of women. Erroneously, even implementing remedial measures against violators would not be enough for prohibiting prejudice and discrimination since it would be impossible to enforce it in countries with a traditional rural background, such as some African countries. That is where I agree with Millerchip77’s post.

Because we cannot decide for people on how they must take individual decisions on what marriage means to them personally, we can target them as agents of change if they wish to bring about a collective behavioural change on the notion of same-sex marriage. I think addressing contextual factors country-wise is a good start since we'll be integrating communities in assessing this particular issue of concern at local level.

Vi'

[Dorothy]

I'd like to see someone sue the government for discrimintion
but I can't do it, since I don't have a girl, but do have the right to marry one whenever I like, as long as I'm over 18 years old.

[JujuDeRoussie]

Hey, yesterday I went to buy the last grammar book I needed, and came across a lonely tiny book called "Homosexuals, what rights?".
I have read only the huh... how do you call this? anyway I have read only the beginning which was written by an ancient minister of education and at some poitn of culture, or the way around. It was really interesting how he did it. And he finishes by saying that he wishes, as a European Deputy, to ask the United Nations to change the Human Rights so Homosexuals would not be different.
It is not that simple, and I have not read it all yet, I'll say more when I'll have more time.

But I thought about your thread Dorothy.

[Dorothy]

*angryface*
http://www.amnesty.org/en/appeals-for-a ... ssociation

click on the "take action" button if you can spare some time and efford

[Dorothy]

look at my new toy http://glgbtrtu.yuku.com/ [/spam the kittenboard mode]



http://jointheimpact.wetpaint.com/page/ ... r+Equality

Anyone in/around London up for this? I'll be in London that week anyway and I bet they have an American embassy over there.

[HC]

Judge overturns Florida ban on adoption by gays:

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/US/11/25/fl ... index.html

[maudmac]

Oh, wow, that is fantastic!

Our journey toward equal rights is so two steps forward, one step back, but we are getting there. Slooooowly, yes, but we're getting there.

You know, this argument from the state...

The state argued that gays and lesbians have higher odds of suffering from depression, affective and anxiety disorders and substance abuse, and that their households are more unstable.

...rubs me the wrong way sooooo hard. Never mind that the reason we have such issues in our community is most likely because we face such (socially acceptable) hostility. And never mind that an abundance of research indicates that children raised by same-sex couples are absolutely fine.

This "the queers are more fucked up" argument has been being used for years and years to deny us all sorts of things. Why is socially acceptable to use that against us, but no one would even dream of using an argument like that to prohibit any other distinct group from adopting? And there are many other distinct groups (based on age, class, geographic region, ethnicity, etc.) that suffer higher prevalence of various sorts of mental health and substance abuse issues.

This is just basic logic - if the criterion for excluding a group from the right to adopt is rates of mental health and substance abuse problems, that must be applied to all groups who have higher rates of such issues. Let's see who has the guts to try to push that legislation through.



Anyway, good for Judge Lederman! This really is great news.

[Dorothy]

nice, that's one icky government rule undone, loads to go

I was thinking about the "gay is a choice" argument some bigots have... Well, even if they believe so.... Bigotry and religion are choices too aren't they?
Let's see, of two choices you can have, the choice of loving or the choice of prohibiting people to love, which one's better from an objective point of view... owww hard one, I'd need at least 2 brain cells to solve this.

[Dorothy]

A little something I posted on another board about very bigoted activist...
I think it's worth sharing my digi-babble thingy with you all too:


The worst thing about those people is that they are now so scared that there is no room for conversation. They have been tought to block out all other points of view because they are devil sent.

These people are (sadly) not the ones we can fght to gain equality. Our chance lies in the ones they manipulate, the ones scared by the lies and excegerations of their adds and preachings. Some people can't be convinced, but the goal is to not make them convince others who are still open to other points of view.

That's also where visibility and openness comes in. I guess more than half of the people who voted yes were people who don't know a friendly homosexual person and/or never even had a conversation about that topic with them.

This is also where the difference with equality between the races comes in, or even equality between men and women. Homosexuality is more misunderstood because it's not visible (well, sometimes, but rarely ever from childhood on) I think our chance lies not (solely) in big campains and protests. Fear is always stronger than a nice aproach so sadly the discriminatory ads will win more votes.

Our chance might lie in conversation. There are more homosexuals than haters, there are even more openly out homosexuals the than openly protesting haters, just look at the protest numbers in November. So if we talk with friends, with collegues, with family or with whoever we can if theres an ocasion to bring out the subject, we can defeat the predjudgements and fearcampaigns thrown upon us.

We might hit rock bottom sometimes and that might hurt, but the wins are worth a thousandfold more than the ones you can't win. If you tried it is not even a loss, there will be painfull comments sometimes but if you react right to them they might even cause you to win the "debate".

Some of the straight people I talked to, not even all of them are family or friends, now openly defend homosexuality when it's brought up in a bad way. Offcourse they probably don't do that when they don't feel safe, but every win is a win and I think we have to win this one from within. Gaining the sympathy we deserve (we're nice people, aren't we? ) and thereby gaining allies who gain more sympathy.

---

A nice example to paint this pretty picture is my mother. She came from a religious family is overall unsupportive and whatever I do is wrong. But because she had a lesbian friend at highschool, who explained to her what homosexuality is and how bad it feels not to be accepted, she has always been ok with me being a lesbian... Hell, she even knew before I did and told me it was ok before I was even out

I think that illustrates the impact one person can have, because she and her church members even aranged a gay wedding though the local religious authorities don't allow that, she openly defends homosexuals any time and her approach made me a proud lesbian who wants to fight for the rights of homosexuals in a positive, constructive way.
Who can do the maths on how much impact that one girl will have had in ten years from now, how many people her courage will have effected?

[Guest]

Dominant understandings of "masculinity" and "feminity" in universal culture shape the way people behave and interact sexually. Unless patriarchy is dissolved and principles of non-sexism are incorporated into everyday life, the norms that dictate "masculine" behaviour may make it difficult for well meaning heterosexual males to support the LGBT community.

My emphasis is on the male community because though societies have different meanings and attributions for males and females that are all socially constructed, in most cultures, male identities are still privileged over feminine ones. And interestingly, tactics by the LGBT community are focused on accessing power structures (which are primarily male oriented) rather than seeking profound reform.

Moreover, small steps lead to the bigger whole and I have no difficulty in agreeing with what you said in the last part of your post Dorothy, that the more we do for fighting for our rights, the more we move a step forward.

Vi'

[Dorothy]

I have many straight males supporting me fully maybe because the Netherlands have been pretty ok with gayness as long as I've been alive, but thoudh some of them would run off screaming if a gay man would hit on them, they are all fine with it (some not from starters on, especialy the adolecent ones, but they all came around at some point)

One of my friends keeps proclaiming he's a full on lesbian because he really doesn't wanna find a man in his bed LoL

[Dorothy]

Cool, now Wanda Sykes says what I've been saying for ages cool to have another person agree with me: http://www.supportido.com/?tr=y&auid=4544006


edit; anyone have any info on these things;
[blockquote]March 13: Movie Date for Equality
See the new feature Saving Marriage.

March 14: Dancing for Equality
Local clubs and bars will host parties and donate 5% or more of the proceeds to the fight for marriage equality.

March 15: Eating Out for Equality
Participating restaurants will donate 5% or more of their proceeds to marriage-equality efforts.
The Gays United Network will also lead a statewide canvassing campaign. [/blockquote]

I'll be in LA then and I'd like to find places that participates in these things (if my travelbuddy feels like it too) but google isn't being very helpfull