Showing posts with label Gay Sex. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gay Sex. Show all posts

May 29, 2020

Two Years in Prison For Two Men Accused of Having Sex with Each Other in Turkmenistan

A screen showing a portrait of Turkmen President Kurbanguly Berdymukhamedov inside the terminal of the newly built airport in Ashgabat
Click to expand Image
A screen showing a portrait of Turkmen President Kurbanguly Berdymukhamedov inside the terminal of the newly built airport in Ashgabat, Turkmenistan, September 17, 2016.  © 2016 Reuters
In Turkmenistan, men who have sex with men continue to be arrested and imprisoned on sodomy charges.
In mid-March independent media in the region reported the arrest of a popular entertainer as well as those of numerous other men who move in Turkmenistan’s show-business world. Some were able to secure their release. On May 7, a Turkmen court sentenced the entertainer, and several others to two years’ imprisonment on sodomy charges.
Turkmenistan is one of sixty-nine countries in the world that outlaw consensual sexual intercourse between men. Article 135 of the criminal code stipulates penalties of up to two years’ imprisonment for sodomy and 5 to 10 years if repeated. This blatantly discriminatory law, that violates Turkmenistan’s international human rights obligations, enables police to subject gay and bisexual men to harassment, including with the purpose of extortion, humiliation, and abuse.
Human Rights Watch documented a 2013 case in Turkmenistan, where medical staff collaborated with law enforcement officials to conduct an anal exam on an 18-year-old man accused of homosexual conduct. While not evidence of a pattern, the case raises the possibility that forced anal examinations have been or are being used against others charged with sodomy in Turkmenistan.
Such examinations have no medical justification, are cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment and may amount to torture. They violate the Convention against Torture and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, both ratified by Turkmenistan.
Last year, in an extremely rare headline-grabbing instance, a gay man came out publicly despite hostile social attitudes and bullying by his family. He went missing after he came out, and then briefly resurfaced in the media before going silent again.
In 2017, the United Nations Human Rights Committee flagged criminalization of consensual same-sex conduct as “unjustifiable” and urged the Turkmen government to repeal it. Turkmenistan prides itself on its good standing in the United Nations. The government should immediately dismiss all charges against the men convicted under these laws and release them.
Turkmenistan should also repeal article 135 of the criminal code and protect people from violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation.

December 19, 2019

Gabon, Africa Criminalizes Sex Between Same Sex Adults

                 Map of Gabon   

Gabon has passed a law against gay sex, becoming the 70th country to ban the practice, an official confirmed, as the global pace of reform falters.
The central African country banned “sexual relations between people of the same sex” in a new penal code earlier this year, according to copies of the law online.
A government official who declined to be named confirmed the change, which happened in July but was not widely reported. The minister of justice declined to comment.
Davis Mac-Iyalla, an activist who monitors LGBT rights in West Africa, said he had spoken to two Gabonese men arrested under the new law who had to bribe the police to be released.
“It has further sent the LGBT community underground and has created harassment,” said Mac-Iyalla of the Ghana-based Interfaith Diversity Network of West Africa.
“The corrupt police now use that, arrest people and then people have to bribe their way out.”
These reports could not be independently confirmed.
Confirmation of the change, which introduced a penalty of up to six months in prison and a fine of 5 million CFA francs ($8,521), came at the end of a mixed year for LGBT rights.
Hopes for more reforms were raised last year when India’s Supreme Court decriminalized gay sex, overturning a colonial-era law and spurring campaigners to press for similar reforms in other former British colonies.
When Botswana decriminalized gay sex in June, the number of countries outlawing same-sex relations fell to 69, according to LGBT advocacy group ILGA World – the lowest figure since it started monitoring such laws in 2006.
But large populations of religious conservatives, including growing numbers of Evangelical Christians, are opposed to LGBT rights in African countries including Uganda, Kenya, and Nigeria.
In May, a Kenyan court upheld a law criminalizing gay sex dating back to British rule. Advocates are challenging that ruling.
There are legal cases challenging bans on same-sex relations underway or planned in countries including Singapore, Mauritius and six nations in the Caribbean, according to ILGA World.
“Globally… we’re seeing polarising tensions,” said Lucas Ramon Mendos, a researcher at ILGA World.
“Where things are getting better, there is a momentum for even more improvement, and where things are bad now we’re seeing things are worsening.”
At least 35 countries have prosecuted LGBT people for same-sex intimacy in the last two years, according to ILGA World research – 28 in 2018 and 17 so far in 2019.
“The decrease in countries from 2018 to 2019 can hardly be read as a positive sign,” Ramon Mendos said. “We think there is a huge number of cases flying under our radars.”
In Africa, 33 out of 54 countries criminalize consensual same-sex relations. Six African countries have scrapped their bans since 2012, marking a positive trend overall, said Neela Ghoshal, a researcher with Human Rights Watch.
“It’s unfortunate that a lot of African countries have claimed and owned those homophobic, colonial values, but others haven’t,” she said.
“In general, across the continent, things are moving more in the right direction than in the wrong direction… I’m guessing you’ll see a lot of change in the next 10 years or so.”
Reporting by Rachel Savage @rachelmsavage; Editing by Claire
Cozens. Please credit the Thomson Reuters Foundation, the
charitable arm of Thomson Reuters, that covers humanitarian
news, women’s and LGBT rights, human trafficking, property
rights, and climate change. Visit

November 22, 2019

Slate had the following Headline: "Can I get Oral Sex From Another Guy and Still Not Be Gay?"

I like the answer by Rich Juzwiak on Slate. I've been asked that personally and through Facebook. My answer is similar to Rich and I wonder what yours is, as you read this. No need for a Ph.D. or any Doctorate or tittle before your name except Mr., Ms or Mrs. Mine is my out experience of being in the closet until the age of 24 (multiply by 2 and and add more years to get to my age but only important thing to know how long I have been out and its been a long! time).

All you need is common sense and the experience of giving or receiving during oral. My answer is similar to Rich at Slate: Whether you give or receive a straight or gay man is the same experience as far as oral sex is a concern, so all you need to do is enjoy it and don't qualify it just like when you have dinner. If you start thinking of where the steak came from, how old the chicken was whether they enjoy the free-range or not. The potato you don't think about how little the Mexican or other got paid and how much you had to for it. If you did you might as well not eat. Those questions are supposed to be asked before you eat. If you need to eat, you need to eat and the morality of it comes before and having oral sex with a guy is just that and it won't change your life unless you feel you need to change.

However, if you keep being aroused by some men you are either bisexual or gay. Some people say they don't like labels but labels assure us we get the right solution to our problems.  We give names to everything that touches our lives so we can learn how to deal with it. People that don't like labels are because they don't like what certain labels say about them, for instance like they are LGBTQ.

Whatever we do now in sex is not new and it's been done through the centuries since man realized what to do when the urge for the companionship of the same sex came knocking on the door, whichever door it knocked. 

The immorality of these comes from forcing someone or taking advantage of someone's age or even disability.


June 12, 2019

Botswana Decriminalizes Being Gay

Botswana's High Court has ruled in favour of decriminalising homosexuality in a landmark decision for campaigners. 
BBC  Reports

The court rejected laws that impose up to seven years in prison for same-sex relationships, stating they were unconstitutional. 
The move contrasts with Kenya's recent ruling against campaigners seeking to overturn laws on gay sex. 
"Human dignity is harmed when minority groups are marginalized," Judge Michael Elburu said. 
Three judges came to the decision unanimously. 
Judge Elburu labelled laws banning gay sex as "discriminatory" and added: "Sexual orientation is not a fashion statement. It is an important attribute of one's personality." 
The law has been in place since 1965 when it was brought in by the colonial British government. 
The case was brought to court by a student who argued society had changed and homosexuality was more widely accepted. 
Activists welcomed the decision and described it as a significant step for gay rights on the African continent.
Laws outlawing same sex relations exist in 31 out of 54 African countries, according to the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association (ILGA).
A map showing where homosexuality is illegal and where it is punishable by death
Gay sex can be punishable by death in northern Nigeria, Sudan, Somalia and Mauritania. Tanzanian laws mean homosexuality can result in a life sentence. 
Angola, Mozambique and the Seychelles have all scrapped anti-homosexuality laws in recent years. 
On 24 May, Kenya's High Court ruled against overturning a law banning gay sex.

May 8, 2019

Sex Offender’s Law Has Many Inequalities For Gay Men { 17 Yr Old With19 yr Old BF=Punished for Life}

Legislation May Keep LGBT Romeos Off Sex Registry
California law brands LGBTQ young adults for sex with teen lovers but treats straight relationships differently.
(Advocate picture credit)

If a 19-year-old man is convicted of having sex with his 17-year-old boyfriend in California, he must register as a sex offender. But that may not be the case for a 24-year-old man who gets a 15-year-old girl pregnant — he can avoid that penalty if a judge decides it’s unnecessary.
That disparate treatment lingers from a historic criminalization of gay sex that California struck from law decades ago. Critics warn that it leaves LGBT young people vulnerable to unfair punishment in more conservative parts of the state where local prosecutors might be more inclined to pursue such cases.
State Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, hopes to eliminate the discrepancy with a bill giving judges discretion over sex-offender registration in all cases involving voluntary intercourse between teenagers and young adults. 
When California created its sex-offender registry system in 1947, anal and oral sex was illegal, as was vaginal penetration with anything other than a penis. Even after the Legislature decriminalized those acts between consenting adults in 1975, adults who engaged in them with minors continued to be treated more harshly than those who had vaginal intercourse with a minor.
The California Supreme Court upheld the legal difference in 2015. Among its arguments was that vaginal intercourse can lead to pregnancy, and forcing a father to register as a sex offender would subject him to social stigmatization that could make it difficult to find a job and support his child.
Wiener said that decision is to the “eternal shame” of the court. His bill, SB145, would instead treat sex acts the same: Although minors cannot legally consent, if a teenager ages 14 to 17 voluntarily had sex with an adult who is less than 10 years older, the judge would decide whether the adult should register as a sex offender based on the facts of the case. 
The measure has support from Equality California, the LGBT advocacy organization, as well as the American Civil Liberties Union of California and groups representing district attorneys, police chiefs and public defenders.
It is sponsored by the Los Angeles district attorney’s office. Deputy District Attorney Bradley McCartt told lawmakers at a Senate committee hearing in April that the bill is about public safety as much as fairness.
It takes the same amount of time to register and track these young adults who are at little risk of re-offending as it does serial rapists and child molesters, McCartt said.
“It’s important to look at the actual purpose of the registry,” McCartt said at the hearing. “Remember, it’s not the punishment for the crime. It’s a public safety issue that has to do with crime-solving and keeping track of predators.”
He told the story of a 17-year-old girl whose mother was upset to find out she was a lesbian. The mother pressed charges against her daughter’s 18-year-old girlfriend. Although McCartt was able to stop the prosecution, he said, the girlfriend still lost a scholarship to a University of California campus as a result.
“It seems like we went in a time machine and pulled out something that I can’t even believe still exists on the books of our penal codes,” McCartt said.
Two years ago, Wiener carried another bill to end automatic lifetime registration for California’s sex offender registry and allow offenders convicted of less-serious crimes to remove their names after 10 or 20 years. Law enforcement officers said that with about 100,000 registered offenders, the database had become too large to be useful.
According to data provided by Wiener’s office, at least 2,400 people on the sex-offender registry, and potentially hundreds more, have been convicted of non-vaginal sex with a minor age 14 or older.
There is no formal opposition to SB145, though some conservative news sites wrote stories after the bill was introduced accusing Wiener of trying to “protect pedophiles who rape children.”
The measure does not apply to forcible sex acts. Wiener noted that it does not change any crimes, merely whether they result in automatic sex offender registration.
“We need to stop criminalizing teenage sex,” he said. “At a minimum, we should not be forcing these kids onto the sex-offender registry and ruining their lives.”

Alexei Koseff is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: Twitter: @akoseff

September 6, 2018

A Landmark Court Decision in India "By Decriminalizing Gay Sex"

New Delhi (CNN)
India's Supreme Court has struck down a colonial-era law criminalizing consensual gay sex, overturning more than 150 years of anti-LGBT legislation.
The court announced the landmark verdict in Delhi on Thursday, as jubilant crowds cheered and rights activists hugged one another, overcome with emotion. 
Section 377, an archaic law imposed during British rule that penalized intercourse "against the order of nature," had carried a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. 
The decision to repeal the law is a major victory for India's LGBT activists and supporters after years of determined struggle.
    Crowds in Mumbai cheer the Supreme Court announcement.
    "I can't even explain how I am feeling right now. The long battle has been won. Finally we have been recognized by this country," said Bismaya Kumar Raula, wiping away tears outside the court. 
    Others gathered said that, while they had anticipated a positive outcome, the result still came as a shock.  
    "It's an emotional day for me. It's a mix of feelings, it's been a long fight," said rights campaigner Rituparna Borah. "There was not enough media or society support earlier but we have it now. People will not be seen as criminals anymore." 
    Though the law was rarely enforced in full, lawyers argued that it helped perpetuate a culture of fear and repression within the LGBT community. 
    A change in legislation will "create a space of freedom where you can start expecting justice," Danish Sheikh, a law professor at Jindal Global Law School and LGBT advocate, told CNN. 

    Long battle

    Thursday's historic ruling is the culmination of a lengthy and often fraught legal battle for equality in a country where homosexuality remains taboo.
    In 2009, the Delhi High Court ruled that the ban on consensual gay sex violated fundamental rights. The decision, which only applied to the Delhi region, was quickly overruled by the Supreme Court in 2013, following a petition launched by a loose coalition of Christian, Hindu and Muslim groups.
    In its 2013 ruling, the Supreme Court said that only a "minuscule fraction of the country's population constitute lesbians, gays, bisexuals or transgenders" and it was therefore "legally unsustainable" to repeal the act. 
    During the latest hearings, lawyers representing more than a dozen gay and lesbian Indians questioned the constitutional basis of that earlier ruling. 
    LGBT Indians gear up for possible U-turn on anti-gay laws
    LGBT Indians gear up for possible U-turn on anti-gay laws
    "It was a wrong judgment. It was not legal and it was based wrongly on the tenets of the constitution," said Colin Gonsalves, one of the lawyers representing the current group of petitioners.
    That case was strengthened last year, when the Supreme Court moved to uphold the constitutional right to privacy
    The ruling, which declared sexual orientation to be an "essential attribute of privacy," helped galvanize campaigners. 
    "Last year's ruling eviscerated the 2013 judgment," said Gonsalves. "There is no issue now. There is not much left to argue," he added. Opposition to moves to overturn Section 377 had rested predominately on religious and moral objections. In an interview earlier this year, lawmaker Subramanian Swamy, a prominent member of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), described the legalization of gay sex as a "danger to national security" and "against Hindutva."
    Hinduism has traditionally maintained a flexible, non-prescriptive view of sexuality. However, in recent years hardline Hindu groups have taken a more conservative approach.
    In the run up to the judgment, the BJP refrained from taking a public stand, deferring instead to the court.

    Dehumanizing colonial law

    Out of the estimated 48 former British colonies that criminalize homosexuality, 30 still have laws based on the original colonial anti-LGBT legislation, according to Lucas Mendos, co-author of the 2017 International LGBTI Association "State-Sponsored Homophobia" report.
    In the case of India, the original British law had remained in place more or less unchanged since it was introduced by British colonizers in the 1860s. 
    According to India's National Record Bureau, more than 2,100 cases were registered under the law in 2016. India did not maintain a separate database of prosecution under section 377 until 2014.
    Arif Jafar, one of the current group of petitioners whose case the Supreme Court ruled on, was arrested in 2001 under Section 377 and spent 49 days in jail. 
    Supporters in Mumbai react to the Supreme Court ruling that gay sex is no longer a criminal offense.
    Jafar now runs an informal support group in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh. The group, named "Trust," provides counseling, support and sexual health services to gay and transgender persons.
    In his petition, Jafar described the experience as dehumanizing and a violation of his fundamental rights. He also alleged that he was beaten and humiliated every day because of his sexuality. 
    Campaigners in India pointed out that the law didn't only trap members of the LGBT community in the closet, it also invited other forms of discrimination, providing a cover for blackmail and harassment. 
    Members of India's LGBT community dance in celebration after the ruling was announced in Bangalore on Thursday.
    "The constant fear of 377 we have felt will not be there for the coming generation," said Yashwinder Singh, of Mumbai-based LGBT rights group The Humsafar Trust. 
    "Laws getting passed is one thing but changing the society is a big challenge," said Singh of the court's decision, Thursday. 
    "Our work has started multifold now. We have to go and talk to people and change their mindset so that they accept every human as one." 
    Following the announcement Thursday, the Congress Party, the country's main opposition, posted a message of congratulations on social media, welcoming the "progressive and decisive verdict" from the Supreme Court.
    As supporters celebrate the decision, activists will now be shifting focus to the broader issue of equality. 
    People celebrate the decision in Bangalore on September 6.
    "The next step is to start looking at issues of rights. Right now, it is just decriminalizing," Anjali Gopalan, founder of the Naz Foundation, which has spearheaded the fight against Section 377, told CNN.
    "The right that every citizen of the country should have access to and should not be taken for granted. Like the right to marry, the right to adopt, the right to inherit. Things that no one questions and that are clearly denied to a certain section of citizens."

    August 6, 2018

    Instead of keeping it Like A Secret Let's Celebrate Gay Men Can Have Sex Without Fear

    Have you heard of the anti-AIDS drug PrEP? Most straight people are unaware of it. In 2015, the World Health Organization said “the efficacy of oral PrEP has been shown in four randomized control trials and is high when the drug is used as directed.” 
    PrEP (Pre-exposure Prophylaxis) is a drug that allows you to have as much sex as you want, without a condom, and remain HIV-negative. If you use it, you probably won’t catch HIV. POZ magazine says that it has “100 per cent efficacy for those who stick to the treatment.”
    Doctors recommend everyone use condoms, because although PrEP is very effective as a protection against HIV, it does not guard against the transmission of other sexually transmitted diseases.
    Recently, Patrick William Kelly — a gay academic from Northwestern University who is writing a “global history of AIDS” — sounded the alarm about PrEP. For many straight people, Kelly’s discussion of PrEP may be the first they have heard of this revolutionary drug. 
    Kelly’s concern is that the popularity of PrEP will cause gay men to stop using condoms. He worries:
    “An entire generation of gay men has no memory or interest in the devastation [AIDS] wrought. AIDS catalyzed a culture of sexual health that has begun to disintegrate before our eyes. What is there to be done to bring it back?…The nonchalant dismissal of the condom today flies in the face of the very culture of sexual health that gay men and lesbians constructed in the 1980s.”

    Doctors still recommend that everyone use condoms because although PrEP is effective as protection against HIV, it does not guard against the transmission of other sexually transmitted diseases. (Shutterstock)

    There is one sentiment that is missing from Kelly’s article. Why doesn’t he celebrate the fact that gay men — and everyone else — can now have sex without fear of death? PrEP makes sex safer for everyone. It is just one new tool in the “safe sex arsenal.” Why not be happy about the fact that PrEP will undoubtedly save many lives?

    Not a lethal illness anymore

    Some might ask — isn’t AIDS still a lethal illness? Not so much. 
    The gold standard in HIV treatment” (highly active antiretroviral therapy or HAART) was first introduced at the 1996 Vancouver International AIDS Society (IAS) Conference. According to Dr. Julio Montaner, director of the British Columbia Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS, “this was a pivotal moment, when HIV infection became a chronic manageable condition.” 
    In 2014, The Globe and Mail reported that worldwide deaths from AIDS were massively decreasing
    “In 2013, 1.5 million people died from AIDS-related causes worldwide, compared with 2.4 million in 2005, a 35 per cent decrease.” 
    This state of affairs seems particularly significant when one considers hysterical early predictions concerning the effects of the disease. In 1987, Oprah Winfrey stated confidently that “research studies now project that one in five — listen to me, hard to believe — one in five heterosexuals could be dead from AIDS at the end of the next three years.” 
    This never happened.

    In this 1989 photo, protesters lie on the street in front of the New York Stock Exchange in a demonstration against the high cost of the AIDS treatment drug AZT. The protest was organized by ACT UP, a gay rights activist group. (AP Photo/Tim Clary)

    It’s absolutely true that AIDS affects different demographics, ethnicities and geographies differently, and that gay men are not the only population to be affected by it worldwide. But the improvement in the lives of HIV-positive people everywhere is only in part due to the tireless efforts of doctors, researchers and health-care workers. 
    It is also due to the tireless efforts of gay men everywhere — many of whom became safe-sex activists during the last 35 years, distributing pamphlets, marching and just generally spreading the news. 
    So why would a gay professor characterize PrEP as a bad thing? Why is he worried that gay men — en masse — will suddenly start practising unsafe sex?
    Kelly is the victim of another kind of infection — the notion that gay men are criminals whose desires must be controlled. 
    This criminalization of homosexuals goes back as far as the notion of sodomy. 

    Viewing homosexuality as criminal

    In the England of Henry VIII, the punishment for sodomy was deathIndia today is still struggling to legalize same-sex encounters. 
    In 1972, gay liberation theorist Guy Hocquenghem flatly stated in his book Homosexual Desire: “Homosexuality is first of all a criminal category.” 
    Hocquenghem went on to suggest that even though the late 19th century brought a tendency to view homosexuality through the more “tolerant” lens of illness, the human need to view homosexuality as criminal is persistent.
    “Certainly as we shall see later, psychiatry tends to replace legal repression with the internalization of guilt. But the passage of sexual repression from the penal to the psychiatric stage has never actually brought about the disappearance of the penal aspect.” 
    Both the sexuality of gay men and the sexuality of women are a threat to the primacy of patriarchal male heterosexual desire. Heterosexist culture believes this threat must be controlled. The LaBouchere Amendment in England (1885) was used to incarcerate Oscar Wilde for his homosexuality as a crime of “gross indecency.”
    But Labouchere was an amendment to legislation designed to control female prostitution  — a law that angered many 19th-century trailblazing feminists. 
    When AIDS appeared in the early 1980s, some heterosexuals saw it as primarily a gay disease (AIDS was first called GRID — gay-related immune deficiency). They worried that gay men might infect straight people, especially children. 
    In his influential book of essays, Is The Rectum A Grave?, Leo Bersani suggests that when small-town Americans wanted to ban HIV-positive hemophiliac children in schools, what they actually feared was the spectre of “killer gay men” acting too much like women:
    Women and gay men spread their legs with an unquenchable appetite for destruction. This is an image with extraordinary power; and if the good citizens of Arcadia, Florida could chase from their midst a very law-abiding family it is, I would suggest, because in looking at three hemophiliac children they may have seen — that is unconsciously represented — the infinitely more seductive and intolerable image of a grown man, legs high in the air, unable to refuse the suicidal ecstasy of being a woman. 

    A doctor holds Truvada pills, shown to help prevent HIV infection. (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu)

    AIDS was not the first thing to make straight people think gay men had to be controlled. It simply fit like a glove on a fear of homosexuality that was already culturally endemic. 
    Our society seems addicted to the notion that homosexuality is something uncontrollable and potentially lethal. So when AIDS came along, as the long-time AIDS worker Simon Watney wrote, it was “effectively being used as a pretext throughout the West to justify calls for increased legislation and regulation of those who are considered to be socially unacceptable.”
    The concern over gay male imagined libidinal insanity is a throwback to an old trope. Gay men don’t need to be controlled; at least not any more than anyone else. And if you think otherwise? Well, it’s based on prejudice. Not fact.
    This page was published on Aug 1, 2018 on The Conversation by,

    Featured Posts

    Thai Cabinet Backs Allowing Same Sex Unions

                    Patpicha Tanakasempipat BANGKOK (Reuters) - Thailand’s cabinet approved a civil partnership bill ...