[Gay] Gay News from Around the Gay World That is Gay

[Josquius]

Most of the drag queens I'm familiar with have mammoth tits.  That's pretty sexualized.

Not to a 6 year old kid. They're just funny.

[viper37]

OK, so I thought we had a "trans" thread, but I can't find it so this one will do.

https://www.blogto.com/city/2022/09/ontario-teacher-prosthetic-bust-school-board-defends/

A trans woman teacher at a Toronto-area high school has been showing up to work in short shorts, enormous prosthetic breasts, and sheer tops that clearly show the prosthetic nipples.  It's generated a lot of online attention (because big boobies=clicks), but it raises interesting questions.

I mean first of all her clothing should be the number one issue.  Any student who wore those clothes would be sent home.  But no the school board has simply said they won't discriminate against anyone because of their gender identity and expression.

But what about the prosthetic?  As I understand it plenty of trans women use prosthetics in order to more fully appear as female, and that seems completely appropriate.  And obviously no school board would discriminate against a natal woman because they had extremely large beasts.  But this huge prosthetic is a choice this teacher is making, and one that seems completely inappropriate for a high school.

More news about this person


It seems the huge prostetic breasts are used mainly at school and outside of schools, the person does not wear such prosthetics.

I know the NYPost isn't the most reliable of sources, but still, the pictures don't really lie.

At this point, it's mostly for show.

[The Larch]

Ugandan MPs pass bill imposing death penalty for homosexuality
Human rights campaigners condemn bill introducing capital and life imprisonment sentences

MPs in Uganda have passed a controversial anti-LGBTQ+ bill, which would make homosexual acts punishable by death, attracting strong condemnation from rights campaigners.

All but two of the 389 legislators voted late on Tuesday for the hardline anti-homosexuality bill, which introduces capital and life imprisonment sentences for gay sex and "recruitment, promotion and funding" of same-sex "activities".

"A person who commits the offence of aggravated homosexuality and is liable, on conviction to suffer death," reads the bill presented by Robina Rwakoojo, the chairperson for legal and parliamentary affairs.

Just two MPs from the ruling party, Fox Odoi-Oywelowo and Paul Kwizera Bucyana, opposed the new legislation.

"The bill is ill-conceived, it contains provisions that are unconstitutional, reverses the gains registered in the fight against gender-based violence and criminalises individuals instead of conduct that contravenes all known legal norms," said Odoi-Oywelowo.

"The bill doesn't introduce any value addition to the statute book and available legislative framework," he said.

An earlier version of the bill prompted widespread international criticism and was later nullified by Uganda's constitutional court on procedural grounds. The bill will now go to President Yoweri Museveni, who can veto or sign it into law. In a recent speech he appeared to express support for the bill.

One MP in the chamber, John Musila, wore a gown reading: "Say No To Homosexual, Lesbianism, Gay."

The bill marks the latest in a string of setbacks for LGBTQ+rights in Africa, where homosexuality is illegal in most countries. In Uganda, a largely conservative Christian country, homosexual sex was already punishable by life imprisonment.

Human rights campaigners have condemned the new move to enact the harsh law, describing it as "hate legislation".

"Today marks a tragic day in Uganda's history. @Parliament_Ug has passed legislation that promotes hatred and seeks to strip LGBTIQ individuals of their fundamental rights!" tweeted Sarah Kasande, a Kampala-based lawyer and human rights activist.

"The provisions of the anti-homosexuality bill are barbaric, discriminatory and unconstitutional," she said.

She added: "To the LGBTIQ community, I know this is a difficult day, but please don't lose hope. The battle is not over; this repugnant bill will ultimately be struck down."

Gay activist Eric Ndawula tweeted: "Today's events in parliament are not just immoral, but a complete assault on humanity. It's frightening that our MPs' judgment is clouded by hate & homophobia. Who benefits from this draconian law?"

More than 110 LGBTQ+ people in Uganda reported incidents including arrests, sexual violence, evictions and public undressing to advocacy group Sexual Minorities Uganda (Smug) in February alone. Transgender people were disproportionately affected, said the group.

Kasha Jacqueline Nabagesera, a lesbian activist in Kampala, said efforts to overturn the legislation would continue.

"We shall continue to fight this injustice. This lesbian woman is Ugandan even this piece of paper will [not] stop me from enjoying my country. Struggle just begun," said Nabagesera in a tweet.

Kasande said: "We will fight until all individuals in Uganda can enjoy the rights guaranteed to them by the constitution."

President Museveni last month said Uganda will not embrace homosexuality, claiming that the west was seeking to compel other countries to "normalise" what he called "deviations".

"The western countries should stop wasting the time of humanity by trying to impose their practices on other people," said Museveni in a televised address to parliament on 16 March.

"Homosexuals are deviations from the normal. Why? Is it by nature or by nurture? We need to answer those questions. We need a medical opinion on that," he said.

"It's disappointing that parliament would, once again, pass a bill that is clearly in contravention of several basic human rights," said Oryem Nyeko, a researcher in the Africa division at Human Rights Watch.

"This just opens the door for more regressive laws and for people's rights to be violated across the board. President Museveni shouldn't assent to it," he said.

[Josquius]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jun/05/war-brings-urgency-to-fight-for-lgbt-rights-in-ukraine?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

Ukraine looking to legalise civil partnerships.

I find it quite funny to see the super conservative guy using the logic of the anti woke nuts to support it 

The Ukrainian MP Andrii Kozhemiakin is a wiry, conservative ex-spy who likes to emphasise his Christian faith and large family. He is also an unlikely new recruit in the fight for LGBT rights in Ukraine.

A draft civil union law that would give same-sex partnerships legal status for the first time was introduced this year to Ukraine's parliament, which is still functioning despite the war.

Kozhemiakin's committee was the first to debate it and the team behind the legislation were bracing for defeat; they had even prepared a statement. He started with a script they recognised, talking about his Soviet-era KGB training, his religious beliefs and his "personal opinion about LGBT people

And then he announced his wholehearted support for the legislation, referencing Vladimir Putin's homophobic claim that there are no gay Russians.

"Anything that our enemy hates ... I will support," Kozhemiakin said. "If it will never exist in Russia, it should exist and be supported here, to show them and signal to them that we are different. This law is like a smile towards Europe and a middle finger to Russia. So I support it."

[Solmyr]

So apparently trans women are too masculine to compete in... chess?

https://www.thedailybeast.com/international-chess-federation-bans-trans-women-in-mind-boggling-new-policy

[garbon]

Their rationale was very lame. We have adopted a new discriminatory policy while we decide on what level of inclusion might be possible.

[Sheilbh]

It's mad. Although to be honest I had no idea there was men's and women's chess and I can't really see why they need to do that either.

[garbon]

It's mad. Although to be honest I had no idea there was men's and women's chess and I can't really see why they need to do that either.

As was mentioned in other thread, I can imagine not wanting to be around toxic male nerds.

[viper37]

I'm still not saying she is transphobic.

But she has some... issues.

JK Rowling in arrest me challenge over hate crime law

[Josquius]

The way she has dug in and made such a core part of her persona this weird gender critical adjacent stuff certainly does ring alarm bells.
The science abuse also hurts.

[Sheilbh]

Yeah, no doubt.

Although that law is a little controversial. As mentioned it doesn't include sex as a protected characteristic though "variations in sex characteristics" are. Although I think it's probably good to see age added as a protected characteristic (he says, rapidly deleting all his anti-boomer posts ).

I think the most controversial thing is that it's reduced the bar for stirring up hatred. That's an offence in UK law, the new Scottish law moves the bar for the prosecution from showing that stirring up hatred was "intended" to "likely".

Humza Yousaf has already warned that they're anticipating a flood of "vexatious" complaints and people shouldn't make them. I think that has already happened - early reports are thousands of complaints about various online comments.

The other controversial bit isn't, I think, in the law but in the guidance Police Scotland has issued which is that they will record "non-crime hate incidents".

Edit: Although I am broadly a little more American and generally think we should have fewer "speech" crimes generally. Also not keen on the Online Safety Bill making platforms do things in relation to "harmful but not unlawful content" or police recording "non crimes". I feel like if you want something to be illegal you should kind of just do it and make that argument to the public.

[Admiral Yi]

Terrible 1984 thoughtcrime law.  How the hell is a judge supposed to determine if the defendant intended to stir up hatred?

[Sophie Scholl]

I'm still not saying she is transphobic.

 

[Syt]

Tbf, I don't think she's afraid of trans people (phobia), she just hates them. In my opinion, allegedly etc.

[Sheilbh]

Terrible 1984 thoughtcrime law.  How the hell is a judge supposed to determine if the defendant intended to stir up hatred?

I think it's an indictable offence so for the jury to determine if the prosecution has proven that. And isn't it just the same as any other mens rea?