It should make for lively viewing and reading, if we hear from the likes of equality champions, Ivana Bacik (Lab.) and David Norris (Ind.) – the latter of whom is believed to be planning to vote against the Bill due to the inequalities contained in it – as well as Dan “Tweetin’” Boyle (Greens); we may also hear from Rónán “Catholic” Mullen (NUI), Ivor “The Engine” Callelly (FF), Jim “Anti-Bill Motion” Walsh (FF), Eoghan “Kerrrrazy” Harris (Ind.), Labhras “Ho-mo-sek-sualls” Ó Murchú (FF); among many others.

Here’s hoping they all clock in to join the fun!

Time has been set aside on both Wednesday and Thursday of this week to get through all the remaining stages.

On Wednesday, 7th July 2010, the Seanad’s session begins at 10:30am – starting with the Order of Business and a discussion of a Bill on criminal matters. After that, the debate on the Civil Partnership Bill begins, with the aim of getting through the Bill’s Second Stage and Committee Stage. Further time has been allocated at 7:15pm, for resumption of discussion.

Then, on Thursday, 8th July 2010, the fun continues from 10:30am again with the Seanad launching straight away after Order of Business into further and final debate of the Bill (Committee Stage, Report Stage, and Final Stage).

If the Bill passes the Seanad it will then, having been passed by both houses of parliament, be sent to the President of Ireland, Mary McAleese. She may either sign the Bill into law, or refer it (or part of it) to the Supreme Court for a ruling on its constitutionality.

To tune in:

• The tireless Suzy Byrne has once again set up a Live Blog to follow all the thrills and spills – including, if we’re lucky, news of the anti-Bill protesters at the Dáil gates! Drop by the Live Blog here. Anyone can comment there directly, whether logged in or not. In addition, anyone can comment via their Twitter account by including the hashtag “#cpbill” which will automatically include that Twitter update in the Live Blog.

• The debate will be streamed live on the Oireachtas website here. (Select one of the options in the row for “Seanad Éireann.)

• And, of course, readers can comment right here with your thoughts!

Read back through this blog for other Civil Parntership Bill-themed articles here and here.

Related posts:

1. Civil Partnership Bill 2009 – Report Stage
2. Civil Partnership Bill 2009 – Committee Stage resumed
3. Civil Partnership Bill 2009 – Dáil Debate Resumes

As Suzy Byrne indicates, the Report Stage debate means that all Deputies are given the opportunity to contribute to a debate on the Bill as amended. Dáil Standing Orders restrict amendments at Report Stage to issues arising out of the Committee Stage proceedings. If a minister gives notice that he is to bring later amendments, however, then these can be debated in Report stage.

Read back through this blog for other Civil Parntership Bill-themed articles here and here.

To tune in:

• A Live Blog has been set up on the ScribbleLive website – here. Anyone can comment there directly, whether logged in or not. In addition, anyone can comment via their Twitter account by including the hashtag “#cpbill” which will automatically include your update in the Live Blog.

• The debate will be streamed live on the Oireachtas website here. (Select one of the options in the row for “Dáil Éireann.)

• And, of course, readers can comment right here with your thoughts!

Related posts:

1. Civil Partnership Bill 2009 – Committee Stage resumed
2. Civil Partnership Bill 2009 – Committee Stage
3. Civil Partnership Bill 2009 – Seanad Stages

The Roman Catholic church at every level of its hierarchy has a recent and consistent history of warning the world of some unspecified dangers of homosexuality. It is significant that this coincides with the revelations of endemic child abuse throughout the Roman Catholic church, historically and geographically.

Skipping between his views of “morals,” the Irish constitution, and “democracy,” Twomey’s argument against the Civil Partnership Bill is wide-ranging, but struggles to stand up to scrutiny.

His references to “collusion” and Nazism are at once dangerous, amusing and probably mis-placed coming from a member of the Roman Catholic clergy. It’s certainly an emotional subject, not least because so many homosexuals were persecuted and murdered by Nazis and their collaborators; but also due to the implied assertion that granting same-sex relationships some recognition in the Irish statute-book (far short of equality) is somehow “totalitarian.”

For regular users of the internet, this kind of argument is comically known as “Godwin’s Law” and is regularly employed in an attempt to silence critics.

For a member of the Roman Catholic clergy to employ it, however, is at best ill-judged. Yes, we have heard the disputed claims of Pope Pius XII’s connections with Hitler’s regime. We have also heard of the very much undisputed savagery of the Roman Catholic church in what is now Croatia, and their vociferous, public support of the brutal Ustaše regime. No priest, bishop or archbishop acts alone or against Papal authority in the Roman Catholic hierarchy, yet there they are, photographed for posterity.

I would like to know where is the centrality of conscience here?

In 1986, the current Pope Benedict XVI, then writing as Cardinal Ratzinger, head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (a Vatican institution formerly known as the Inquisition) wrote to all bishops in a letter “on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons”. Beyond its opening line, “Homosexualitatis problema,” the letter states:

But the proper reaction to crimes committed against homosexual persons should not be to claim that the homosexual condition is not disordered. When such a claim is made and when homosexual activity is consequently condoned, or when civil legislation is introduced to protect behaviour to which no one has any conceivable right, neither the Church nor society at large should be surprised when other distorted notions and practices gain ground, and irrational and violent reactions increase.

Can Fr Twomey point to the centrality of conscience here?

Turning to the Constitution, it is unsurprising that the Roman Catholic church in Ireland would seek to preserve our founding document in the permafrost of 1937, with all its influences of John Charles McQuaid and co. We are far from that time and therefore the Constitution should be read as a living document, as it was in McGee v The Attorney General. I understand, however, that the role of interpreting the Constitution remains solely in the hands of the Supreme Court of this country, so neither I nor anyone else should ever presume to usurp that role.

Accordingly, the legislature must ensure that every piece of legislation falls within the bounds of the Constitution, and we have been assured by the Minister for Justice and Law Reform, Dermot Ahern, that the provisions relating to same-sex relationships are not at all like marriage (if you’re a member of the Select Oireachtas Committee on Justice); or that they are just like marriage (if you’re party to a same-sex relationship).

What is fascinating, however, is that the Roman Catholic church makes no comment in relation to the provisions affecting cohabiting heterosexual couples: surely, to remove the need for civil marriage by providing for automatic rights and obligations, this serves to undermine the institution of marriage? The religious sacrament of marriage, of course, remains entirely unaffected by the Bill.

Can the centrality of conscience be found here? Or perhaps double standards? Or worse, simple discrimination?

It is striking that Fr Twomey would seek to equate the Roman Catholic church with a defender of democratic principles. As every good theologian should know, democratic principles are not directly compatible with Roman Catholic hierarchy, and its dogma reflects that. This is not a controversial point, but rather a fundamental starting point, from which Roman Catholic teaching flows. Certainly, Pope Benedict XVI is no friend of liberation theologists, preferring a regression to the pre-Vatcian II church norms. Simply leafing through the pages of the “Proceedings of the Workshop on: Democracy” from December 1996 enhances one’s understanding. Indeed, historically, the establishment of democracy in Europe – through the French Revolution – was extremely bloody for members of the Catholic clergy as well as for so many others.

Can the centrality of conscience be found here? Or is this espousing of democratic values an example of mental reservation?

And so, to morals. Thankfully, this nation is governed by the carefully considered rule of law, rather than arbitrary morals. Thus, while laws may become outdated or otherwise require modification from time to time, there is a legislative procedure to do so. On the other hand, if undefined “morals” are our guidance, this nation would be governed by aribitrary whims, be it the questionable morals of those in the financial and banking sectors; or the morals of those who see fit to take the law into their own hands; or of those who see fit to telephone Joe Duffy about every conceivable outrage; or of the myriad religious faiths, denominations and interpretations; or of those who see fit to perpetrate, protect and conceal child abuse and genocide.

Update:

• A response to Fr Twomey’s article from Angela Kerins of the Equality Authority appears in today’s Irish Times, here.

Related posts:

1. Bishops again get their spake in on Civil Partnership
2. Civil Partnership Bill 2009 – Mary A and the Supremes
3. Gaelick Highlights

As some of our readers may already know, the theme for this year’s Dublin Pride is “We Are Family, Too.” It’s no surprise that this idea forms the theme of the festival, and the basis of MarriagEquality’s latest campaign.

The origin of this focus? The total invisibility in the pending Civil Partnership Bill of children raised by same-sex parents, or any kind of recognition of diverse family forms. Not to mention the absolute refusal from all political quarters to even entertain the notion of marriage equality.

Accordingly, Dublin Pride has a project operating in tandem with the festival’s other highlights, called “We Are Family, Too” or WRF2.

Will Knott of WRF2 was in touch with us to spread the word. As part of the project, there are three extremely important things our readers should be aware of:

• WRF2 wants to hear from you about your idea of how a family is defined;

• WRF2 wants you to enter their fabulous competition, with a prize of a weekend away in a fabulous hotel plus tickets to Pride events; and

• WRF2 wants to hear from any performers and dancers out there!

Read on!

The Project

WRF2 is asking everyone for a short submission for publication on the WRF2 blog – and possible book! – that asks a simple question:

“What does family mean to you?”

Which is really a two part question: What is your definition of family? And what do those people mean to you?

The theme of the 2010 Dublin Pride Festival is “We Are Family Too”, but – and here’s a news flash, Iona “gold standard” Institute – family means different things to different people.

WRF2 would like to post the reply on the WRF2.com blog, so make sure you’re okay with that before sending in your thoughts.

You can submit your comments in any way you want: write back with your opinion using the 140 character limit of a tweet; or something more expansive by email (after all there are entire libraries dedicated to the subject of “family”!). Or draw your opinion on the back of a postcard and send by post it to the address below. Or fill in the form on the WRF2.com site. Alternatively, indeed, WRF2 would welcome a piece of audio, or video, for anyone who wants to get creative in other media. Hey, if you want to give your answer through the means of interpretative dance Will at WRF2 won’t stop you. He’ll post it!

If there are those who would prefer to post your answer to the internet yourself (not on the WRF2 blog) by all means do so. If you include the tag “WRF2″ an alert will find it and WRF2 will link to it.

Notwithstanding the origins of Pride, this is not about sexuality. This is about humanity. We are all some mother’s child. However “what family means to me” is a hard question to answer. The answer is not always simple.

But an answer would be appreciated.

If you have any questions or comments regarding the blog please do not hesitate to ask!

The prize

Details are here. A hotel break for two nights this weekend, plus tickets for Pride events, are up for grabs!

The prize is for confirmed WRF2 submissions received . The winner will be announced tomorrow, 23rd June 2010, so get going!! (Don’t panic if your entry isn’t posted live online, so long as it has been received.)

The plié performance

(See above.) Interpretive dance. If you know any dance troupes, please tell them. As much as a bit of humour the “interpretative dance” bit is, Will would really like to see one.

This is, of course, optional.

wrf2.com
wrf2@dublinpride.ie
WRF2 on Twitter

WRF2 Project
Outhouse,
105 Capel Street,
Dublin 1

Related posts:

1. Uppity gays
2. Civil Partnership Bill 2009 – Report Stage
3. We Are Family

Not content with seeking to influence the workings of government and the legislature, they are now trying to interfere with internal party machinations: in calling for a “free vote” in respect of the Civil Partnership Bill, the bishops are demanding that Ireland’s elected political parties abandon the whip: effectively calling on parties to abandon the party line on this particular policy issue.

(They’re regurgitating the florists’ cop-out, too, this time in respect of registrars, who are civil servants – employed by the State – and who are obliged to carry out their functions.)

The bishops are also claiming to be able to correctly interpret the Constitution of this State when they say that the Civil Partnership Bill is unconstitutional. A Department of Justice and Law Reform spokesman has this morning rejected this claim, and let’s face it no-one with a brain in their heads could possibly regard civil partnerships as unconstitutional. The provisions in the Bill concerning cohabitation, however, might be another matter. Nonetheless, interpreting the Constitution is the exclusive domain of the Supreme Court of Ireland.

Still, it’s not a secret that the Roman Catholic church is opposed to the principle of democracy. This is not a controversial statement. It’s a principle of Roman Catholic dogma so fundamental that it’s taken for granted.

Isn’t there a provision in the Constitution outlawing subversion and sedition? Oh yes. The Catholic hierarchy should be familiar with it – it’s in the provision outlawing blasphemy:

6. 1° The State guarantees liberty for the exercise of the following rights, subject to public order and morality:

i. The right of the citizens to express freely their convictions and opinions.

[…]

The publication or utterance of blasphemous, seditious, or indecent matter is an offence which shall be punishable in accordance with law.

Enactment of Civil Partnership legislation

RTÉ’s Joe Little reported on today’s Morning Ireland on when we can expect the Civil Partnership Bill to become law. Around Pride? August-September? Who’s to say…

Mr Ahern’s spokesman conceded that because of a log-jam of Bills, the Minister anticipated a possible delay until the autumn in the measure becoming law.

However, the Green Party spokesman forecast that it would be enacted within three weeks before the summer recess begins.

• You can read more on Civil Partnerships on this blog here.

• You can follow the discussion of Civil Partnerships on Twitter using the #cpbill hashtag.

Related posts:

1. Civil Partnership Bill 2009 – Mary A and the Supremes
2. The abuse of “conscience” to defend inequality
3. Civil Partnership Bill 2009 – Committee Stage resumed

The countries – including Egypt, Sudan, Qatar, Pakistan, China, Russia, Angola and Burundi – are members of a committee in the UN who decide which non-governmental organisations (NGOs) can be accredited to the UN. Other countries on the committee who supported the NGO include the US, the UK, and Romania. Turkey abstained from the vote.

(It’s not clear how the remaining committee members voted: Colombia, Cuba, Dominica, Guinea, India, Israel and Peru.)

[update]
Sara in the comments tells us of how the remaining committee members voted: Colombia, Israel and Peru voted against the motion of no-action. Guinea & Cuba voted for it. Dominica was absent when the vote was taken. India abstained.
[end update]

The IGLHRC (International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission) was seeking accreditation to the important Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC). The vote has prevented the committee from making a decision on accepting the IGLHRC’s accreditation. Accreditation allows organisations to make representations to the UN on human rights issues within their expertise.

Reuters quoted the head of the IGLHRC:

“IGLHRC is disappointed by the vote of the Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations to block action on our application,” Cary Alan Johnson, head of the New York-based group, said in a statement to Reuters.

[...]

Johnson said it was “a clear case of discrimination against an organization because it defends the human rights of LGBT people around the world and promotes non-discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.”

Radio Netherlands Worldwide has an audio interview with Johnson, here.

[update 2]
The LGBT Intergroup, a committee of the European Parliament, made the following statement to Gaelick via Twitter:

We deplore conservative countries’ attitude; we count on EU countries to further help IGLHRC get the consultative status.

[end update]

The UN was was established as a result of World War II and its atrocities, including the atrocities perpetrated against minorities, the marginalised, and political dissedents, among others; and following the relatively short-lived League of Nations (itself set up following World War I). Eleanor Roosevelt played a crucial role in the formation of the UN, and was instrumental in drafting the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The records of those trying to halt the work of the IGLHRC on gay rights are pretty appalling.

In Egypt, homosexual behaviour is not specifically criminalised. Since the beginning of this century, however, the authorities have used “Public Order & Public Morals” laws dating from the 1990s to persecute homosexuals. Famously, the authorities raided a boat party on the Nile in Cairo, charging 52 men with violating vaguely-worded laws, such as “violating the teachings of religion”, “propagating depraved ideas”, “contempt of religion” and “moral depravity.”

Sudan jailed a woman, Lubna Ahmed al-Hussein, in 2009 after she refused to pay a fine for wearing trousers. Earlier in the same year, several women who were arrested with her were subjected to “lashes” for the same supposed crime. The laws in Sudan are based on Shari’ah. The penalty for homosexual behaviour is death.

The death penalty is also applied in Qatar for same-sex relationships between both males and females.

In Pakistan, homosexuality is outlawed under both colonial laws which remain in force, and under Islamic laws. Islamic law applies particularly in the tribal areas near the border with Afghanistan, which are effectively autonomous.

China appears to have a complicated relationship with homosexuality. There are no laws explicitly criminalising homosexual behaviour. Until now, however, gays and lesbians were barely tolerated. This vote appears to clarify matters on how Chinese officialdom views gay rights.

Homosexual acts were decriminalised in Russia in 1993. There are no protections under law for LGBTs, however. The authorities in Russia – notably in Moscow – have in recent years cracked down, often violently, on attempts to hold Pride marches. This year’s Pride march took place only due to the organisers releasing false details of the event.

Homosexual acts are criminalised in Angola as “an offense against public morality”. The penalty for “repeat offenders” is to be sentenced to a labour camp. Earlier this year, Angola refused to accept the Ambassador for Israel, Isi Yanouka, due to the fact that he is a gay man.

In 2008, Burundi criminalised homosexuality when the president, Pierre Nkurunziza, secretly signed the legislation into law. Those convicted face imprisonment of two to three years and a fine of 50,000 to 100,000 Burundian francs (42 to 84 US dollars).

The Vatican and the Organisation of Islamic Countries hold observer status at the UN.

Related posts:

1. Civil Partnership Bill 2009 – Committee Stage resumed
2. Human Rights for All
3. The abuse of “conscience” to defend inequality

One of the featured articles is by Ann Louise Gilligan and Katherine Zappone and can be read here. from the perspective of lesbian feminists, the article discusses what has and has not changed in Ireland for lesbians, including marriage equality.

When I learned of “Sisters” and Zappigan’s article, I was instantly reminded of a LGBT History Tour of Dublin by Tonie Walsh, which I attended recently as part of the the 25th birthday celebrations by The George.

Fittingly, then, Friday’s Irish Times letters page included the following critique by one Kay Hughes:

Madam, – I was looking forward to reading your supplement “Sisters” (May 26th). It contains some excellent articles on the many achievements in women’s rights over the past 40 years; achievements that I and my contemporaries have benefited from and we owe a huge debt of gratitude to the women who blazed the trail before us. Thank you for providing us with an opportunity to reflect on this.

However, I cannot hide my dismay that the editorial team would choose to insert two additional issues under the guise of women’s rights: namely abortion, and gay rights.

With regard to the former, even that great feminist Germaine Greer maintained that far from being a right to be won for women, abortion is detrimental to women and an insult to our uniqueness as the bearers of human life. With regard to the latter, gay rights have nothing to do with rights for women in so far as they are equally relevant for gay men. The article by Drs Gilligan and Zappone could almost lead one to believe that its inclusion was little more than self-serving journalism on the part of The Irish Times. But surely not! After all, we would expect to see honesty and transparency in its own dealings with the public of the kind The Irish Times so often demands of others. – Yours, etc,

KAY HUGHES,

Blackrock,

Co Dublin.

Glossing over the fact that she should have written “my contemporaries and I,” I noticed that this tied in neatly with what Tonie was telling those of us on the History Tour.  Journalist Declan Cashin wrote a summary of the tour for The Irish Examiner, which can be read on his blog.  Róisín Ingle also wrote about the tour, which can be read in The Irish Times.

In 1982, the Irish Women’s Centre was established at Temple Lane South, Temple Bar.  It hosted the second lesbian conference in Ireland.  In fact, Tonie, tells us, the Irish women’s liberation movement created space for Irish LGBs, notably lesbians.

Ireland’s women’s liberation movement and gay rights movement have been closely linked for decades.  And the support provided by the women’s movement to the gay rights movement was reciprocated.  I took a trip to the Irish Queer Archives, currently housed at the National Library of Ireland, to see what I could find.

Opening the files for the first time and holding those documents was an experience in itself.  It’s our history made real.  One of the documents I read in the short time available to me, was a letter from 1983 from Tonie Walsh, in his capacity then as Secretary General of the National Gay Federation (NGF), concerning a ballot to decide whether the NGF should affiliate with the Women’s Right to Choose Campaign (WRTC).  In notifying members of the vote, Walsh wrote:

To recap briefly, the W.R.T.C. believe that a woman has the right to choose whether she wants to bear children or not; an end to all the social and economic discrimination which exists against mothers, i.e. better childcare facilities, adequate social welfare provisions, adequate housing and a change in the illegitimacy laws and proper contraception facilities.

So far, so radical. Incidentially, the date on the letter was 1st February: St Brigid’s Day.

The WRTC Campaign also sought the assistance of the NGF and the use of the Hirshfeld Centre – the gay community centre of the time – as a venue for meetings.

In a letter from Mary Flanagan on behalf of the WRTC Campaign (with a return address “c/o Molly O’Duffy” of Kimmage Road West) requesting the use of a room in the Hirshfeld Centre for weekly meetings, was written:

I’m sure you can appreciate our difficulty in getting a room and we would be most grateful for your help.

Melissa Murray in an undated letter to Tonie Walsh wrote:

Dear Tony,

This is to confirm that the Women’s Right to Choose Campaign are holding an activist meeting at the [Hirshfeld] Centre on Sunday 12th 10am – 2pm.

Apart from the above examples, let’s look at those who have been involved in the women’s movement in Ireland to date.  If you look at the names of those women – even if you solely take the NWCI (formerly the Council for the Status of Women) – you will find among those names a veritable who’s who of Irish lesbians.  Indeed, you don’t need to look very hard to find us among activists, policy-makers, community workers, lawyers, volunteers and so many more who work to improve society.

But this is not about the importance of Ireland being grateful to its lesbian saviours.  Back to Kay.

So, gay rights have nothing to do with rights for women in so far as they are equally relevant for gay men, you say.  Really?

Quite frankly, if you start from a premise that women’s rights are human rights – and with the radical principle that women are human beings, too – then you begin to understand that you cannot separate the liberation of one group of human beings (let’s say, women) from the liberation of another (let’s say, gays).  That’s not to mention the fact that individuals can experience multiple discrimination.  Kay might find it too much of a conundrum if she ever encountered a dyke of colour with a disability.  (“Oh no!  What narrow category applies?!”) Moreover, if you accept that men – yes, even privileged, middle-class white men – can benefit from liberation movements (including but not limited to the fact that they are fathers, brothers, lovers, friends, children), then you might be on to something.

But, Kay, I believe that if you are of the view that separating and dividing out humanity into distinct sub-groups, which must never over-lap, then you are headed for disaster.

• Since time was against me in the Queer Archives, I’ll just have to be sure to return to find out more about women’s lib and the gays.  Watch this space!

Documenting Irish Feminisms: The Second Wave

Two Irelands: Literary Feminisms North and South (Irish Studies)

Irish Women and Nationalism: Soldiers, New Women and Wicked Hags

Feminist Activism in the 1990s (Gender & Society: Feminist Perspectives on the Past & Present)

Occasions of Sin: Sex and Society in Modern Ireland

Related posts:

1. Women: Everything is ok and nothing needs to change
2. A New Agender: Irish Gov drops Foy Appeal
3. Lesbians are heavier than straight women: so what?

You may remember when the Committee sat in March, that it examined the majority of proposed amendments to the Bill. Time was against them, however, and the Committee had to adjourn with a view to examining the remainder of the proposed amendments at a later date.

So, here we are. In case you missed the initial sitting of the Committee, pretty much all of the proposed amendments were rejected other than those proposed by the Minister for Justice and Law Reform, Dermot Ahern, T.D.

Notably, The Irish Times recently reported that the Cabinet approved amendments to the Bill, including part of the Bill which affects both same-sex and opposite-sex couples who cohabit. It appears that these new amendments will be put forward at the Committee. Distinct from the florists’ amendment, one of the new changes appears to be a farmers’ amendment, given that there was much complaining from the IFA and the ICMSA over the duration of cohabitation required in order to potentially be eligible rights over property and other matters.

To tune in:

• The debate will be streamed live from Committee Room 2 on the Oireachtas website here.

• Readers can comment here with your thoughts.  Anyone can also comment via their Twitter account by including the hashtag “#cpbill“.

• UPDATE: A Live Blog has been set up on the ScribbleLive website – here. Anyone can comment there, whether logged in or not.

Most previous posts on the topic of civil partnership and of marriage equality can be found here and here.

Related posts:

1. Civil Partnership Bill 2009 – Committee Stage
2. Civil Partnership Bill 2009 – Report Stage
3. Civil Partnership Bill 2009 – Seanad Stages

The good

As part of marking IDAHO, a Great Global Kiss-In was organised, and appears to have generated a massive response, with thousands of participants across the world – and still growing!

If you have participated – or would like to – Gays.com are continuing to accept everyone’s photies and videos, by email (to idaho@gays.com) or upload (at gays.com or their YouTube group) – or you can simply tag photos on Flickr with ‘GreatGlobalKissin’.

Oh, and word has reached us thatGays.com are giving away some t-shirts to the best entrants (pics and vids), so let that motivate ya.

And to round off the whole thing for posterity, a fabulous super-video is being compiled, with as many of the kiss-ins from the 40-odd locations around the world.  It makes me think of Travelling Matt, only gayer.

In other good news coinciding with IDAHO . . .

Yay! No sooner has the country’s door hit Il Papa Ratzy on the arse on his way out (see below), but Portugal’s President, Anibal Cavaco Silva, swiftly signed a law allowing for civil marriage of persons of the same sex.  It seems that the country’s Prime Minister, José Sócrates, promised to have the legislation signed into law after the pontiff’s visit – and they didn’t hang around!  If you’re a Lusophile – that is, a speaker of Portuguese – check out some great videos here, here e here.  (And if you can translate them, even better – let us know!)

To celebrate – and since our own government insists on denying us equality here – why not celebrate by participating in International Same-Sex Hand Holding Week this week?  Okay, the name doesn’t exactly trip off the tongue, but it’s the perfect complimentary activity if you’re going for a Kiss-In – or, indeed, it’s something that is feasible if you can’t find your local Kiss-In or if it’s just not safe to be so bold.

The bad

In terrible news, Malawi couple – Steven Monjeza, 26, and Tiwonge Chimbalanga, 20 – have been convicted by a court of “unnatural acts and gross indecency”. The judge in the court stated that the charge had been proven “beyond a reasonable doubt” by the prosecution. Which is disturbing, given that the men were arrested for conducting a commitment ceremony together. The wider implications for the country and the region are causing concern for LGBT and HIV/AIDS activists, who fear that the ruling may push LGBT people “underground” and may make people more reluctant to come forward for advice and treatment for HIV/AIDS. Steven and Tiwonge have been detained since their arrest in December. They have been subjected to beatings during their detention. They will receive their sentence tomorrow.

You can take action via Amnesty International’s UK office.

Closer to home, Bulgaria has been classed by member of its LGBT community as the most homophobic country in the EU.  Data from the EU’s Eurobarometer was cited to provide examples of discriminatory attitudes by employers, and of refusal of applications for refugee status based on sexual orientation.  Lithuania could give Bulgaria a run for its money, with hysterical heteros getting their knickers in a twist over a handful of queers going for a walk.  You can watch the locals and neo-Nazis of Vilnius getting apopleptic here.

In Turkey – a potential candidate for EU memberships – a number of trans people and activists were beaten, and were arrested and detained by police in the capital, Ankara.  ILGA-Europe provides an account in English of the events that took place:

Transgenders who are members of Pink Life Association were arrested after being brutally beaten up in Ankara. On the night of May 17th, in Esat district, Ankara police brutally attacked and dragged 5 transgenders to the Esat Police Station.

Police’s response to those who called the station was “Why do you care about these? Mind your own work.” 5 trangender individuals were kept at the station till morning.

Arrested 5 transgenders were later taken to medical jurisprudence as a result of insisting demand of Pink Life and Kaos GL members and after lawyers showed up at the police station. After medical jurisprudence controls, 5 transgenders were again taken to the police station, where they were released at 06:00.

If the other European countries mentioned above are anything to go by, Turkey’s application for EU membership should be a cake-walk, so.

The fugly

I alluded to him earlier on in this post – yes, it’s everyone’s favourite Pope Nazinger.  Shortly before marriage equality was signed into law in Portugal, Joseph (aka Benedict) launched another verbal attack on the gays.  He thinks that marriage equality and a woman’s control over her own body – or, as he might put it, gay marriage and abortion – were among the “most insidious and dangerous challenges that today confront the common good.”

What’s the matter, Joseph?  Worldwide and systemic child rape and abuse, and cover-up, is not insidious and dangerous enough for you?  Or are you just spinning wildly against the gays in another predictable attempt to distract from just that very issue?

• So, what’s been happening elsewhere during these past few days? Were there any events taking place in your neck of the woods?

Related posts:

1. IDAHO 2010
2. March for Marriage 2010
3. Countries try to ban gay rights NGO from UN

What is this IDAHO? Well, here’s an explanation:

In 2004, Louis-Georges Tin, university professor, intellectual, and homosexual rights activist, took the initiative of launching a International Day against Homophobia and Transphobia, and founded the IDAHO Committee, an international association aiming at developing this initiative.

[...]

The Day has been launched with the idea of creating a worldwide community of activists and committed people, sharing the ideal of a world without homophobia nor transphobia in which everyone can freely choose their own sex life and gender identity.

The date, 17th May, is chosen as this is the date in 1990 that the World Health Organisation (WHO) removed homosexuality from its list of mental disorders.  The day is officially recognised in certain countries, too, which is fairly remarkable. Perhaps Ireland needs to catch up on such a radical notion.

To mark IDAHO, this year sees the Great Global Kiss-In take place. Co-ordinated by Gays.com, the idea is for every country – if not every major city – in the world to see a big ol’ snog-fest take place place at a recognisable landmark. Think flash-mob with smooches.

This year for the International Day Against Homophobia & Transphobia, we want YOUR help in organising kiss-ins like this in major cities around the world between May 14-17 — that’s the weekend before IDAHO2010!

Gay, straight, black, white — whatever you look like and whatever your political stripes are — as long as you believe in love and equality for ALL people everywhere, we want you to join us in a kiss-in near where you are.

Details will be up soon on this very website, but if you think you can help us put together a kiss-in in your city, don’t hesitate and write to us at idaho@gays.com!

If there isn’t an event taking place near you, the organisers are encouraging people to send in photos or videos of themselves and their kissing partner locking lips.

Unfortunately, I haven’t heard word of a Kiss-In taking place in Ireland – but if you know of something happening this weekend or during the week, let us know in the comments or by email!

There are, however, inclusive events taking place in Dublin, Cork and Belfast, organised by Changing Attitude Ireland (CAI). The details are:

Sunday, 16th May 2010

International Day Against Homophobia

Dublin: Christ Church Cathedral, 3.30pm
Belfast: St. George’s Church, 3pm
Cork: St. Fin Barre’s Cathedral, 7pm
A Service on the theme

“OPEN DOORS”

ALL WELCOME
Come with friends and family

www.changingattitudeireland.org

What do you think about IDAHO, about the Kiss-In, and about the CAI events?

Related posts:

1. IDAHO 2010: The good, the bad, the fugly
2. March for Marriage 2010
3. Gaelick Highlights

Since then, however, I’ve been hearing the odd commentator – horror of horrors, including gays – agreeing with Power and some of the things she has to say in the interview.

This will not stand.

Equality

Us LGBTs, our relationships and our families are entitled to equality and respect in law and society. We’re currently denied that. This is an undisputed fact. Brenda Power and her ilk introduce several straw-man arguments to these issues in order to distract from the central issues of equality.

LGBT couples deserve equal treatment in our relationships. We also deserve equal treatment when it comes to being considered as adoptive parents; it’s up to the adoption board to decide who is eligible to adopt.

And, whatever your views on joint adoption, the fact is – NEWSFLASH – that gay couples in Ireland today already have children, any many others are planning their families’ futures. So this is not a discussion in the abstract of what might be – families are in need of protection right now, as you’re reading this.

Misogyny

One of the claims that Power makes, and with which some of her supporters agree, is that the criticism directed towards her has been as a result of misogyny. A connection is also made between drag (see below) and misogyny.

I would reject this first claim completely. Firstly, Power fails to cite any specific examples of the correspondence she has received since her article last year. She’s relying solely on her own unsupported assertion. Such assertions do not deserve attention in any serious discussion.

A second reason I reject her claim is that, for one, there are plenty of lesbians who are highly critical of her stance – this blog is an example – and there certainly is no misogyny motivating that criticism. There are also plenty of others who are highly critical of the view Power espouses – gay and straight, male and female – and again, misogyny is absent, where as rebutting the argument is very evident. Anecdotal as it may be, my friends and family members of varying hues are all examples.

If she can provide evidence of concerted campaign of misogynist abuse directed towards her – there may well be isolated incidences – then, let’s discuss that, as a separate matter to the marriage equality debate. And no, Brenda, the fact that everyone on the internet can read your ill-informed arguments does not a concerted campaign make.

Otherwise, it’s my view that the misogyny buzz-word is being bandied about in order to silence debate of her views.

Drag

Power also feels the need to introduce her views on drag performance into the mix. Presumably this is due to her recent awareness of Panti. She thinks that drag performance is misogynistic.

Reading the interview with GCN, Power clearly demonstrates a total lack of understanding of what drag is and where it’s come from. Even Tallyman, in his latest demonstration of Uncle Tommery, back-tracks on his initial statement – where he states that drag is misogynistic – to a different stance in the comments, where he then claims that some individual drag queens in Ireland can be misogynistic.

I have read and reread the article to try and find some glimmer of good journalism, and unbiased questioning, I have failed to find some. Brenda made some excellent points about drag – it is to a large extent misogynistic with over the top femininity and flamboyant exaggerations – often direct attacks at gay mens perceived weakness of women.

It’s not so much a blanket accusation on the motivations on all drag acts – but there is an element of it, and there certainly an element of it amongst some Irish drag queens – and I certainly don’t think it something that Ms. Panti believes in.

And indeed, I’d agree with the latter. There is an elementary mistake, however, in seeking to generalise from the individual to the general. Drag, however – whether we’re talking kings or queens – is subversion, parody, satire, art.

Specifically in relation to Panti, let’s make some things perfectly clear (again, for the nth time):

Panti did not choose to represent the LGBT community. The LGBT community did not choose Panti to be its representative. As events have played out, however, Panti – and the creator of that persona, Rory O’Neill – have made some impressive, strong and astute statements, rallying the community including perhaps many who previously would not have felt engaged in the marriage equality debate.

Moreover, Rory O’Neill/Panti is by no means the sole voice in the equality debate, and to try to insist this is just facile and misleading.

Diversity & self-expression

Power and her supporters also seem to have formed opinions on the various types of people in the LGBT community. Power bases this on the Dublin Pride march. She claims to have viewed it once, I think.

Number one: Forming an opinion about LGBT people based on looking at the Dublin Pride march is like forming an opinion about Irish people based on looking at the Dublin St. Patrick’s Day parade: the gays are all “colourful” and “outrageous”; the Irish are all puke-covered drunkards.

Number two: Notwithstanding the above, our community is a diverse one. There is no one cookie-cutter type of LGBT person, and why should there be? Now, I’ve never seen “arses hanging out” at Pride, so it may have been that Power was at the Alternate Universe Pride, but I digress: there are all kinds of queer. Why should anyone expect another person to simply conform to someone’s particular type?

Should the gays just sit down and wait to be told how to look, behave, act, think? Certainly, if LGBTs never put their heads above the parapet, sex between consenting male adults would probably still be a criminal offence in this country.

We’re here, Brenda, and we’re not shutting up; we’re not staying quiet; and we’re not going to wait for your fucking approval.

Getting personal

Poor Brenda, though. She thinks that people who contacted her about last year’s article, and people who criticise her views, were getting personal. She says that people commented about her. They commented about her family. They commented about her children. They commented about her life.

Well. Welcome to every day of every one of our lives, Brenda.

Every day, the personal is political, particularly if you’re an LGBT person. So much so, that the Irish State – of which we are residents, taxpayers, citizens, voters – feels it has a right to interfere with our private lives and dictate how they should be lived.

So much so, that any busybody – like Brenda Power, like Kevin Myers, like Mary Kenny, like Pat Kenny, like Ian O’Doherty, like politicians, like Brendan O’Connor, like any wittering opinion-writer with a public voice – thinks that they have a right to make judgments about us.

And “us”, Brenda, means people. People with lives. People with families. People with loved ones. People who are trying to get on with the day-to-day despite constant interference.

Deal with it, Brenda. We do.

Related posts:

1. LGBT Diversity: Take me home, country gays
2. Civil Partnership Bill 2009 – Dáil Debate
3. Civil Partnership Bill 2009 – Report Stage

You know Portugal: extreme western European country (snap!); with the Catholic conservatism (snap!); and the economy that didn’t really feel much of a boom over the past couple of decades before the bottom fell out of, well, everything (hm, that’s where Ireland and Portugal differ slightly).

Well, if you can imagine that society – like family-oriented, Catholic little Oireland, but warmer – and then ramp up the social conservatism just a little bit, that’s probably approaching the mind-set of one of their judges.

Yet, Portugal’s Constitutional Court – the highest court that can rule on issues of constitutionality – has today issued its judgment that expanding the definition of marriage to include same-sex relationships is permissible.

This is in the context of Portugal’s constitution, which obliges the state to uphold and protect marriage and the family.

Sound familiar?
(Well, apart from the clear absence of the DeV effect stamped all over Portugal’s founding document..)

Yet, here in Ireland, the Minister for Justice and Law Reform (he’s no longer Minister for Equality, since the cabinet reshuffle – appropriate, I think), Dermot Ahern, will hide behind “the advice of the Attorney General” – which is never published for all to see – and will insist that marriage equality is unconstitutional in Ireland. Even though in Ireland – just like in Portugal – it is for the highest court to decide on issues of constitutionality (in our case, it’s the Supreme Court), and not a political appointee.

Portugal’s President, Anibal Cavaco Silva – who referred the legislation to the Constitutional Court with his concerns – now must either sign or veto it within the next 20 days. If vetoed, the parliament may nevertheless have a majority to override the President’s veto.

So, should we regard this as something of a gauntlet, thrown down by a fellow staunchly Roman Catholic country?

Read more elsewhere:

• Boxturtle

• Euronews

Related posts:

1. Portugal set to approve same-sex marriage; adoption ruled out
2. Marriage equality and “undermining” straight relationships
3. Civil Partnership Bill 2009 – Mary A and the Supremes

The Committee stage is where amendments are tabled and debated. This will take place over a number of days, return to the Dáil for report stage where amendments notified are debated and voted on and the Bill is then passed as amended and sent to the Seanad.

So, it’s a Dáil Committee which is looking at and debating the proposed amendments. To help prep you for the debate, the proposed amendments are available already on the Oireachtas website here.

The committee for this Bill is the Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women’s Rights (which contains no women, you may notice..). It’s also the Committee which was bombarded by letters and petitions from conservative religious crazies. We’ll see what influence, if any, they’ve wielded.

The Committee is due to get started at 10:00am, Wednesday, 24th March 2010.

To tune in:

• The debate will be streamed live from Committee Room 3 on the Oireachtas website here.

• A Live Blog has once again been set up by the tireless Maman Poulet here. The Live Blog is accessible for anyone to comment directly, or else automatically via Twitter when you include the hashtag “#cpbill“.

In other news: the cabinet reshuffle

Meanwhile, today we learned of the cabinet reshuffle and of who will be taking up new Ministerial posts. Some items to note for the gays, including LGBT young people:

Mary Coughlan is now Minister for Education and Science; Pat Carey has responsibility for Equality (now in the Communities and Gaeltacht Department); Éamon Ó Cuiv is now Minister for Social & Family Affairs.

I’m not too familiar with Carey’s and Ó Cuiv’s records. But we should all know Sweary Mary Coughlan from her time as Minister for Social & Family Affairs when she passed legislation in 2004 to bar same-sex couples from a range of social welfare entitlements (even though unmarried opposite-sex couples were not barred). This was a few months after a couple challenged her Department’s discriminatory guidelines on bus passes. The Department settled. (You see, if the discrimination is in guidelines or some such, it’s illegal; but if it’s in legislation it’s not illegal. Clever, that.) As far as I’m aware, the bar still exists.

I’m sure LGBT pupils will be delighted to hear that a woman like that has ultimate responsibility for their education and well-being in schools.

Update: Coughlan to launch GLEN publication

Oh yes, and as it happens, a couple of hours after the Committee starts its discussions on civil partnerships, that same Mary Coughlan is due to launch a report on diversity in the workplace by GLEN a few doors down Kildare Street. Bizarre. (Although, given that the flyer lists her as Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, we may need to wait and see whether it’s her or the new Minister for the Enterprise Batt O’Keeffe.)

Update 2: Some of the proposed amendments that will be discussed today
(24th March 2010, 9:50am)

Charlie Flanagan, TD (FG) wants the legislation to be called the “Civil Partnership and Cohabitants Act”.  He does, however, want it to come into force 3 months after the passing of the Act, rather than the if-but-maybe piecemeal provisions that currently exist in the Bill.

Brendan Howlin, TD (Lab) proposes an amendment in relation to court declarations of civil partnership status, where a partner has died. Instead of the current provision requiring that the deceased have resided continuously in Ireland for one year immediately before the date of their death, Howlin’s amendment would mean that it is sufficient to have resided continuously for one year at any time.

Charlie Flanagan also seeks certainty in relation to the recognition of foreign relationships which are legally recognised in their jurisdictions (the Civil Partnership Bill transforms such relationships into Civil Partnerships, even for instance where the original legal status of the relationship is marriage).  The Current wording of the Bill provides that the Minister “may” pass an order to recognise such foreign relationships; Flanagan’s amendment would change this to “shall, on the commencement of this Act.”

Howlin also proposes an amendment to allow recognition of foreign relationships which pre-date enactment of the legislation (in other words, for the Act to have retrospective effect).

Oddly, an amendment proposed by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform proposes to delete a paragraph of the Bill which specifies the “particulars to be entered in Register of Civil Partners.” I’m not sure if that means that the same information required on marriage certificates will be used or what.  Anyone able to clarify this?

Flanagan seeks to insert a new section which exempts civil partners from stamp duty or fees where a joint tenancy is created in the family home.

In relation to inheritance, between them Howlin and Flanagan seek to delete sections of the Bill which currently make a surviving civil partner’s automatic inheritance (where the deceased civil partner has died without a will) of two-thirds of the deceased’s estate subject to the children of the deceased applying to a court to have provision made for them out of the estate. (No such proviso or qualification which these TDs are seeking to delete appears to exist in relation to married spouses under the 1965 Succession Act – I’m open to correction on that.)

In a similar vein, both TDs oppose a similar “subject to” qualification in relation to the provision for children in relation to inheritance.  The section to which such provision is “subject to” is opposed by Howlin, and Flanagan proposes to replace it with wording reflecting that applicable to married spouses that appears in the Succession Act.  (Again no such qualification appears to exist for married spouses.)

Oddly, the Minister seeks to delete a section of the Bill which sets out how the Pensions Act 1990 (as amended) applies to civil partners.  He also seeks to delete a paragraph of the Bill in relation to issuing of guidelines on the operation of the Pensions Act after the Civil Partnership legislation comes into force.  (It appears that other amendments to the Pensions Act contained in the Civil Partnership Bill do remain.)

In relation to dissolution of a civil partnership, Flanagan has proposed adding in the line “there is no reasonable prospect of reconciliation between the civil partners.”  It appears a thoughtful addition, considering that the Bill as it currently stands allows a court to dissolve a civil partnership solely on two criteria of living apart for a certain amount of time and provision being made for the partners.

• Most previous posts on the topic of civil partnership and of marriage equality can be found here and here.

Related posts:

1. Civil Partnership Bill 2009 – Committee Stage resumed
2. Civil Partnership Bill 2009 – Report Stage
3. Civil Partnership Bill 2009 – Seanad Stages

LGBT Noise have sent out the following APB on their Facebook page and mailing list. Get writing!
_________

The Civil Partnership Bill is currently making its way through the many stages and committees of the Oireachtas. Noise have been informed that the Justice Committee have been inundated with letters from ultra-conservative letter writers expressing opposition to gay people being granted any form of rights. Many conservatives are describing Civil Partnership as being the same as marriage; this is far from true. It lacks a great deal of the rights, responsibilities and protections of marriage. Crucially, it ignores the rights of children being raised in LGBT families and says that LGBT people do not even have families.

The Civil Partnership Bill forces couples to participate in their own discrimination and officially makes LGBT people second-class citizens.

In a week when a staunchly Catholic nation, Mexico, granted marriage equality and parental rights to its gay citizens Ireland is, incredibly, still debating the withholding of rights to its citizens based on sexual identity.

Noise urges you to write to the clerk of the Justice Committee, Mr Alan Guidon alan.guidon@oireachtas.ie before Thursday the 24th of March, expressing your views on Civil Partnership and why it doesn’t go far enough. Tell them we demand equality.

Love and noise,
The Noise Team

Related posts:

1. Civil Partnership Bill 2009 – Committee Stage resumed
2. Civil Partnership Bill 2009 – Committee Stage
3. Civil Partnership Bill 2009 – Dáil Debate

As far as I’m concerned, at least, IWD is needed as a focus-point, an awareness-raising event to draw attention to the daily, lived experiences of women in this world: whether it’s discrimination in the workplace; whether it’s politicians equating rape with media coverage of their public lives; or whether it’s murder, mutilation, torture, rape and other violations of women’s most fundamental rights.

IWD is needed to highlight the achievements in obtaining equality between women and men. IWD is also needed to highlight the ongoing forms of oppression of half the human population, for reasons solely of their gender. IWD is needed because women’s liberation or emancipation never happened and is still a live issue. The oppression of women in predominantly patriarchal societies continues, and feminist activism is needed more than ever.

Feminism, as far as I see it, is based on the fundamental principles of equality, solidarity and human rights. Feminism in practice, therefore, is required to benefit both males and females in society. Notions that feminism is somehow anti-male is absurd – and, frankly, my view is that anyone (male or female) who uses feminism as a way of attacking men doesn’t know what feminism really is.

This year is the 15th anniversary of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action. In 1995, the UN convened the Fourth World Conference on Women. The outcome of the Beijing Conference was the Platform for Action, an agenda for women’s empowerment.

Perhaps 15 years is too short a time to expect to see real, tangible change in the situation of women in the world. Well, it has been over 100 years since International Women’s Day was first marked in 1909. Its following gained momentum in 1911. The global centenary of IWD is being marked next year, 2011. Moreover, The Beijing Platform, a 132-page document, set out actions to be taken to ensure fundamental changes by the year 2000. The world is still waiting.

Here are a few reasons for continuing to observe IDW and for continuing to actively ensure that feminism is a reality in politics and society:

• On 3rd March, the difficulties affecting women in particular, or disproportionately, in the aftermath of the earthquake in Haïti was highlighted. The problems include trafficking and exploitation of orphaned children, especially girls; increased risk of sexual violence and the lack of institutional structures to address it, as well as the lack of services for women survivors of violence; the fact that over 40% of households in Haiti are headed by single women, and that women play a key role in providing for their families and caring for dependents, means that lack of adequate food, shelter and security affects women disproportionally.

• On 4th March, The Economist reported on “Gendercide: The worldwide war on baby girls.” In China, where the state enforces a one-child policy, the value attached to male children over female children is reflected in the high rates of infanticide of female infants. The rates are so high, and the population so severely affected, that it is estimated that China in 2020 will have 30m-40m more men of age 19 and younger than young women. There are many other nations – such as India, those in south-east Asia, and former Soviet states – with no one-child policy to speak of, where similar trends can be seen.

• In January, Ireland’s Minister for Arts, Sport, Culture and Tourism, Martin Cullen, compared media intrusion into his life as “like waking up every day and being raped.” The Irish Times political correspondent, Déaglán de Bréadún, in his blog stated that Cullen’s remarks were “unfortunate and inappropriate” and commented that objections to Cullen’s use of words were a “disingenuous and opportunistic pursuit of a political agenda against Cullen” in the context of privacy.

• In December, at a sentencing hearing in a court house in Listowel, Co. Kerry, dozens of locals shook hands with a man, Danny Foley (35), of Meen, Listowel, who had been convicted of sexual assault of a woman in the town. At the hearing, a parish priest, Fr Seán Sheehy, provided a spoken statement to the court in support of the convicted man.

• In the UK, the BBC reported on a survey of members of the public in relation to their views of rape survivors: “More than half of those of both sexes questioned said there were some circumstances when a rape victim should accept responsibility for an attack. The study found that women [respondents] were less forgiving of the victim than men.”

• The Guardian newspaper in January wrote about a report on men who pay for sex. A quote from one of the report’s respondents: “Prostitutes are un-rapeable.”

• In February, it was reported that in Turkey, a 16 year-old was murdered by being buried alive by her family members. The reason for her killing (described as a so-called “honour killing”) was that she had been talking to boys. “The girl, who has been identified only by the initials MM, was found in a sitting position with her hands tied, in a two-metre hole dug under a chicken pen outside her home.”

• In Utah, both houses of the legislature passed a bill that effectively criminalises miscarriage. “Perhaps the most troubling part of the bill is a standard that could make women legally responsible for miscarriages caused by so-called “reckless” behavior. Under the “reckless behavior” standard, an attorney only needs to show that the woman behaved in a manner that is thought to cause miscarriage, even if she did not intend to lose the pregnancy [sic].”

An impressive 186 States have ratified the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). The near universal ratification of this key international instrument for women’s rights is a reason for celebration on the occasion of its 30th Anniversary. Violence against women, a critical area in the Beijing Platform for Action, has been increasingly recognised as a key priority in all regions of the world. Many countries have adopted or strengthened legislation on domestic violence, and initiated programmes, policies and awareness raising activities addressing both old and new forms of exploitation and violence against women and girls.

Yet old challenges in the protection of women’s rights remain, such as multiple forms of discrimination. In addition, new challenges have emerged in conjunction with phenomena like the global financial crisis, political violence, displacement and migration, and the acceleration in environmental degradation. The continued use of brutal violence against women, including sexual violence, as a weapon of war in conflict situations also remains a pressing concern. At the domestic level, lack of implementation of laws and other commitments to secure women’s rights, and the lack of gender sensitive budgetary policies, remain chronic problems.

The areas of critical concern for women identified in Beijing such as the economy, the environment, armed conflict, poverty, decision-making and political participation, as well as violence against women, to give only a few examples, appear more pressing than ever in our current economic and political context.

- Rashida Manjoo, UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women, 5th March 2010

(Incidentally, there is an International Men’s Day.)

Related posts:

1. 16 Days: Domestic violence in same-sex relationships
2. Countries try to ban gay rights NGO from UN
3. Can the Irish connection change Uganda’s plans to execute gays?

The collective includes: MarriagEquality, BeLonG To, Irish Council for Civil Liberties, LGBT Noise, NLGF, Gay Community News, GLEN.

LoveAction calls on the Irish government to:

• Deliver equality to same sex couples by opening up civil marriage.

• Ensure that all Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender young people are safe in our schools for once and for all by ending homophobic bullying.

• Hold a referendum to change the Constitution’s restrictive definition of a family so that all loving families are recognised and protected in law.

Tonight, make love at WAR: Join LoveAction at War tonight (Friday, 12th February 2010) at Spy nightclub, South William St, Dublin 2. LoveAction volunteers will be face-painting Valentine’s lovehearts and distributing LoveAction campaign stickers to club-goers.

LOVEACTION

EQUALITY FOR SAME SEX RELATIONSHIPS, DIVERSE FAMILIES AND YOUNG GAY PEOPLE.

CHANGE ATTITUDES. CHANGE THE LAW.

Update

You can also:

Spread the love online…

Adopt the LoveAction love heart as your profile picture on your social networking site, and try to get at least 100 of your online friends to do the same.

LoveAction via snail mail…

Pick up a LoveAction campaign postcard at venues across Dublin, Cork and Galway and send it to your family and loved ones, calling on them to play their part in ending homophobic bullying, opening up civil marriage, and ensuring that all loving families are recognised in the law.

• LoveAction on Facebook

Related posts:

1. Civil Partnership Bill and religious cop-outs
2. Civil Partnership Bill 2009 – Dáil Debate
3. Civil Partnership Bill 2009 – Dáil Debate Resumes

When I was a student in UCD, and was the LGBT Right’s Officer for their students’ union in 06/07 and 08/09, the responsibility fell to me to organise the week. Most colleges have their weeks in the second semester, and ours was in February. Events normally run can range from talks on sexual health to workshops on queer theory, to talks on the history of the student LGBT movement, to guest speakers, to pride marches through campus, to coming out workshops and back again. Many colleges have a mock gay wedding, usually in conjunction with NOISE or MarriagEquality, to highlight the fact that, in this country, gay people cannot get married. Oftentimes the heterosexual students in colleges may not be aware of this fact, what with the civil partnership debate going on, so this is a valuable event to raise awareness of this.

For my second Rainbow Week, I was lucky enough to get Drs Katherine Zappone and Ann Louise Gilligan (above) out to the college to give a talk. DIT this year have Ivana Bacik, UCC had their week launched by Anna Nolan and Trinity had Toni Walsh and Ivana Bacik to participate in a comedy debate, with motion being “Gay People Should Burn in Hell”. It was honestly the funniest hour of my life, with Tonie Walsh and two gay students speaking in favour, and Ivana and a Church of Ireland minister speaking against. David Norris makes an appearance at many of the weeks around the country too.

Coffee mornings and movie nights are also commonplace during these weeks, as this can be a great opportunity to meet other LGBT people in a quiet and safe space, and it is a fantastic chance to make new friends. Nights out also form an integral part of the weeks, as it can be some student’s first times to experience a social scene with other gay people.

For any students reading this, get in touch with your college’s LGBT Society or your Students Union and find out when this week or day is happening in your college. If you do not have one scheduled, email lgbt@usi.ie and the LGBT RO there should be able to help your college run one.

Related posts:

1. USI LGBT Pink Training 2009
2. Civil Partnership Bill 2009 – Seanad Stages
3. Where to Go Out In Dublin This Week

Although there is still a way to go, life hasn’t always been so kind to the gays, a fact which was brought home when I recently watched the 25th anniversary edition DVD of “Before Stonewall: The making of a gay and lesbian community.”

I think that knowing and learning about LGBT history is hugely important: Stonewall was a milestone, but not the beginning. It was an important milestone on a long journey. But what was life like for 20th century gays before 1969? “Before Stonewall” is a wide-ranging documentary which sets out to explore the answer to this question, through first-hand accounts and original footage, from a US perspective.

The film tells us that from the early decades of the century to the 1930s there were always queer clusters – vibrant social scenes, even under prohibition – dependent of course on who you were, where you were. These areas were in the larger cities of the US, such Harlem, New York, in the east and San Francisco in the west. These areas attracted bohemian types, liberals, artists, intellectuals and – of course – the gays. In many ways, this is still the same, even today.

The rise of Hitler in Europe obliterated what we might now call the gay and lesbian communities of cities in Germany, France and elsewhere. WWII, paradoxically, provided an opportunity for women in the US to enter the workplace, gain financial independence, and find each other. As a result, in some cities, gay bars began springing up where lesbian and gay military and Ministry of Defence employees were concentrated.

Eventually, political opposition to lesbians in the home-front ranks of the US army were no match for the sheer numbers of dykes keeping the war effort going. Johnnie Phelps (great name) was a member of the WAC battallion which she estimates was “97% lesbian”. She was one day called into her commanding officer’s office and ordered to “ferret out” the lesbian element in the batallion. To her CO, who was none other than one General Dwight D. Eisenhower, she replied:

I said, “Well, Sir, if the General pleases, I’ll be happy to do this investigation for you, but you have to know that the first name on the list will be mine.” And he was kind of taken aback a bit. And then this woman [Eisenhower’s secretary] standing next to me said, “Sir, if the General pleases, you must be aware that Sgt Phelps’s name may be second on the list, but mine will be first.” And I looked at him and I said, “Sir, you’re right, there are lesbians in the WAC batallion. And if the General is prepared to replace all the file clerks, and all the section commanders, all the drivers, everyone in the WAC batallion” – and I think there were about nine hundred and eighty-something.

He must have done well to remember that, given the footage of the US army-commissioned drag show, starring well-known drag queens who had been enlisted into the military for the war.

After the war ended, supposed “traditional norms” were re-imposed on society. Returning male veterans took the jobs back from the women, women were forced back into the roles of housewives and mothers, and everyone was expected to get married (hetero style) and move to newly-invented suburbia a.s.a.p.

A growing conservatism began to take hold of the US. Yet for a fleeting moment before the 1950s, given the realisation of the horrors of the atrocities of WWII, beatniks and queers began to assert themselves. Names such as Kerouac, Vidal, Burroughs, and Kinsey came to prominence.

But then, at the end of the 1940s/beginning of the 1950s, there was a sudden U-turn when a new administration – and the paranoia of a new Senator called Joseph McCarthy – closed its grip on US society. Commies, queers, dissidents, subversives, deviants were actively pursued, whether or not they existed. A connection between Communism and homosexuality was made and an effective purge of federal employees followed. Obviously Dwight’s enlightenment by Sgt Phelps was short-lived, as he signed the Executive Order for the Stasi-like interrogations and investigations.

Nevertheless, in 1950, a small group of brave men formed the Mattachine Society. This was the first gay organisation ever established. This was the beginnings of any kind of recognisable LGBT movement.

In addition to sponsoring discussion groups and fighting police entrapment, some members began the USA’s first homosexual magazines, Mattachine Review and One.

The Mattachine Review was instrumental in finding for Dr Evelyn Hooker “well-functioning” gay males for psychological review. She found that there were almost no numerical differences between gay and straight males who had superior mental well-being.

Around the same time, a group of lesbians founded The Daughters of Bilitis in San Francisco, whose founders included Del Martin.

At great personal and professional risk to its publishers, the first lesbian publication, The Ladder, came into being. For many women of the time it was their only link to other lesbians. In the days before the internet, this helped to end the isolation of many lesbians in small-town America.

The identities of butch and femme are explored, including pressures from other lesbians to fit into the particular role. At times, in order to go out on a date, it was easier and safer for one partner to really butch it up, and for both to try to pass themselves off as a straight couple. Audre Lorde explains that the lesbian population – the “gay girls” – were simply reflecting the society around them. And lesbians didn’t just reflect the prevailing gender roles. Racism transcended the queer boundaries, too.

Another key development was the publication of lesbian pulp fiction: from trash novels, such as “The Twisted Ones” to classics written by and for women such as “Odd Girl Out” by Ann Bannon. Other writers included Vin Packer (Marijane Meaker) who wrote “Spring Fire” and Marion Zimmer Bradley.

As a background to Stonewall, it’s important to know that in the 1950s and 1960s, it was routine for the police in New York to back a paddy wagon up to the door of a gay bar, and simply round up those inside, regardless of who they were or how they identified. Lists appeared in the newspapers the following day with names and details of each person arrested. Think shooting fish in a barrel – and then criminalising each of them – and you’ve got it.

Accompanying this atmosphere, the 1960s saw the emergence of a strong civil rights movement, Black Power, hippies and women’s liberation. For lesbians, the Women’s Liberation Movement was a place where they could safely assert themselves while (hopefully) avoiding the levels of abuse and invective they may have experienced if they were presenting themselves as lesbians in similar terms. In many cases, the leaders of women’s liberation movements were lesbians, although not always openly.

“Before Stonewall” is a warm, touching and engaging production, featuring relateable interviewees. Each contributor presents familiar stories of coming out, yet from another time and place. The film features a fascinating cast of real-life characters, including some familiar faces, plus the first fag-hag, and in my opinion the gayest man in the world, and the butchest lesbians in the world. They are fabulous!

• Before Stonewall: The making of a gay and lesbian community (Amazon.co.uk)

Related posts:

1. GAZE: Stonewall Uprising
2. Stonewall announce list of 2010 gay-friendly employers
3. GAZE 2010: Dublin Lesbian & Gay Film Festival