Suchergebnisse

This book asks the fundamental question of how new human rights issues emerge in the human rights debate. To answer this, the book focuses on nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and on the case study of LGBTI (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex) rights. The work argues that the way in which NGOs decide their advocacy, conceptualise human rights violations and strategically present legal analysis to advance LGBTI human rights shapes the human rights debate. To demonstrate this, the book analyses three data sets: NGO written statements submitted to the United Nations Human Rights Council, NGO oral statements delivered during the Universal Periodic Review and 36 semi-structured interviews with NGO staff. Data are analysed with a combination of quantitative and qualitative approaches to discover what issues are most important for LGBTI networks (issue emergence) and how these issues are framed (issue framing). Along with NGO efficiency in lobbying for the emergence of new human rights standards, the book inevitably discusses important questions related to NGOs' accountability and democratic legitimacy. The book thus asks whether the right to marry is important for LGBTI advocates working transnationally, because this right is particularly controversial among activists and LGBTI communities, especially in non-Western contexts.

EU Member States may legally designate a country as a Safe Country of Origin when human rights and democratic standards are generally respected. For nationals of these countries, asylum claims are treated in an accelerated way, the underlying objective of the "safe country" designation being to facilitate the rapid return of unsuccessful claimants to their country of origin. The concept of "safe country" was initially blind to gender-based violence. Yet, in the reform of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS), which began in 2016, the European Commission proposed two changes: first, that a common list of "safe countries" should be applied in all Member States, and second, that this concept should be interpreted in a "gender-sensitive" manner. In consequence, the generalization of a policy that has been documented as largely detrimental to asylum seekers has been accompanied by the development of special guarantees for LGBTI+ asylum seekers. In light of this, there is a need to examine the impact of "safe country" practices on LGBTI+ claimants and to investigate the extent to which the securitization of European borders is compatible with LGBTI+ inclusion. Based on a qualitative document analysis of EU "safe country" policies and on interviews with organizations supporting LGBTI+ asylum seekers, this article shows that despite the implementation of gender-sensitive safeguards, LGBTI+ asylum seekers are particularly affected by "safe country" practices. These practices permeate European asylum systems beyond the application of official lists, depriving many LGBTI+ asylum seekers of their right to have their protection claims fairly assessed.

Thousands of LGBTI people have been victims of the forced displacement caused by the social and armed conflict in Colombia. Those people have arrived at new territories and rebuilt their lives, enhancing their freedom and abilities. At the same time, they transform this territory with their feelings and knowledge. This article aims at understanding the transformation of the territory from the alterity of the LGBTI victims of forced displacement in the department of Quindío, Colombia. We carried out an interpretative research with a hermeneutic approach based on the proxemics categories (intimate, personal, and public spaces), as well as a comprehensive review through social mapping of the body-territory relationship of this invisible and revictimized community because of its sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression.

This publication was produced as part of the project Call It Hate: Raising Awareness of Anti-LGBT Hate Crime, co-funded by the Rights, Equality and Citizenship Programme (2014-2020) of the European Commission (grant agreement JUST-REC-DISC-AG-2016-04-764731). The content of this publication does not reflect the official opinion of the European Union. Responsibility for the information and views expressed in the publication lies entirely with the author(s). This publication may be downloaded free of charge from LGBTHateCrime.eu Preface In Europe and around the world, we have been seeing a sharp rise in hate and divisiveness, often targeting marginalised groups such as lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and intersex (LGBTI) people. Anti-LGBTI discourse is increasingly entering the global political stage and influencing societies, propagated by populist leaders stoking fear and breeding intolerance for the sake of political gain. This harmful rhetoric normalises hate and discrimination against LGBTI people, and encourages hate crimes and violence towards LGBTI people in action as well as speech, both online and in the physical world. The effect is dangerous and double-edged: it increases the likelihood of people being attacked for no reason other than their sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression and/or sex characteristics, while at the same time creating an environment that makes reporting hate crimes more difficult, as LGBTI people are no longer able to trust that authorities will treat them respectfully or that their case will be properly investigated – even where there are supportive policies and legislation in place. Against this background, it becomes all the more important to ensure that people – regardless of whether or not they identify as LGBTI – know how to spot anti-LGBTI hate crimes, how to respond to them, and how to support and empower victims. In this way not only can the risk of secondary victimisation be reduced, but a positive narrative is also introduced that sends a clear message to victims of hate crimes as well as to everyone in their wider social groups – the LGBTI community, their supporters, and the rest of society – that LGBTI people are deserving of the same recognition, respect and equality as everybody else. This issue is what the Call It Hate project addresses, working across borders with civil society, public authorities and the general public to discern awareness of anti-LGBT hate crime, recognition of the need to report, and to empower victims to access the support services for hate crime victims to which they are entitled, including under the Victims' Rights Directive of the EU (2012/29/EU). ILGA-Europe is proud to be an Associate Partner of the Call It Hate project, and is glad to support the crucial work it does towards making Europe a safer place for LGBTI people. Evelyne Paradis Executive Director, ILGA-Europe

Drawing from our interdisciplinary qualitative study of LGBTI conservative Christians and their allies, we name an especially toxic form of shame—what we call sacramental shame—that affects the lives of LGBTI and other conservative Christians. Sacramental shame results from conservative Christianity's allegiance to the doctrine of gender complementarity, which elevates heteronormativity to the level of the sacred and renders those who violate it as not persons, but monsters. In dispensing shame as a sacrament, nonaffirming Christians require constant displays of shame as proof that LGBTI church members love God and belong in the community. Part of what makes this shame so harmful is that parents and pastors often dispense it with sincere expressions of care and affection, compounding the sense that one's capacity to give and receive love is damaged. We foreground LGBTI Christian movements to overcome sacramental shame by cultivating nonhubristic pride, and conclude by discussing briefly their new understandings of love and justice that could have far‐reaching benefits.

The correlates of sexual prejudice –negative attitudes toward gay men, lesbians, and bisexuals– are well-known in the literature, but the relevance of the social-political environment in which these correlates insert has received less attention. This study examines trends and correlates of sexual prejudice in El Salvador, a country frequently ranked as one of the most homophobic in the Americas. Using a representative sample from national-level surveys conducted between 2008 and 2016, it was found that the Salvadorian population displayed high levels of sexual prejudice in this period, although these levels varied significantly over time. Analysis with 2016 data showed that socially precarious conditions, religion, and traditionally gendered worldviews, were positively associated with sexual prejudice. Sexual prejudice also correlated with political and social beliefs that encompass authoritarian and misogynistic tendencies. Three clusters of predictors of sexual prejudice were identified: Religious conventionalism, unsophisticated masculinity background, and deficient democratic socialization. This study supports previous findings about correlates of sexual prejudice while highlighting the lesser-studied role of the social-political environment, and oscillations in a democratic culture, in perpetuating sexual prejudice.

"Queer Activism in Africa" published on by Oxford University Press.

A migração motivada por sexualidade se caracteriza como uma busca do indivíduo LGBTI+ por exercer livremente sua identidade sexual reprimida em seu local de origem. Em diversos países, tal repressão ocorre na forma da homofobia estatal, que se manifesta a partir da criminalização da homossexualidade. Desde os anos 1990, pessoas LGBTI+ têm cada vez mais deixado seus países de origem e solicitado refúgio em Estados mais tolerantes. O Brasil está entre os poucos países no mundo que não apenas recebeu solicitações de refúgio com base em sexualidade nas últimas duas décadas, como também reconheceu parte considerável dessas solicitações como legítimas. Através de uma revisão bibliográfica e análises qualitativas e quantitativas, este artigo analisa a dicotomia no caso brasileiro, um país com uma das maiores taxas de violência contra a comunidade LGBTI+ no mundo e que tem se tornado destino de pessoas que estão fugindo de violência homofóbica. Além disso, a partir dos dados do Alto Comissariado das Nações Unidas para os Refugiados (ACNUR) e do Comitê Nacional para os Refugiados (Conare) entre 2010 e 2018, deseja-se compreender de quê maneira o Estado brasileiro se comporta frente a essas solicitações, que se configuram como uma intersecção entre as categorias "refugiado" e "LGBTI+". A pesquisa aponta que, apesar da existência dessa dicotomia, o Brasil se constituiu como país relativamente atrativo para refugiados LGBTI+ entre os anos 2000 e 2016.