Posts made by leatherbear

Homophobia Associated with Penis Arousal to Male on Male Sex
Published on June 9, 2011 by Nathan A. Heflick in The Big Questions

Even a man who thought that women want to have sex with their fathers, and that women spend much of their lives distraught over their lack of a penis is right sometimes. This person, the legend that is Sigmund Freud, theorized that people often have the most hateful and negative attitudes towards things they secretly crave, but feel that they shouldn't have.

If Freud is right, then perhaps men who are the most opposed to male homosexuality have particularly strong  homosexual urges for other men.

One study asked heterosexal men how comfortable and anxious they are around gay men. Based on these scores, they then divided these men into two groups: men that are homophobic, and men who are not. These men were then shown three, four-minute videos. One video depicted straight sex, one depicted lesbian sex and one depicted gay male sex. While this was happening, a device was attached to each participant's penis. This device has been found to be triggered by sexual arousal, but not other types of arousal (such as nervousness, or fear - arousal often has a very different meaning in psychology than in popular usage).

When viewing lesbian sex and straight sex, both the homophobic and the non-homophobic men showed increased penis circumference. For gay male sex, however, only the homophobic men showed heightened penis arousal.

Heterosexual men with the most anti-gay attitudes, when asked, reported not being sexually aroused by gay male sex videos. But, their penises reported otherwise.

Homophobic men were the most sexually aroused by gay male sex acts.

Legislation allowing gay people to hold civil partnerships in places of worship could be derailed by a group of Tory MPs and peers.

Senior Liberal Democrats have described the threats as showing "reactionary" elements in the Tory party still remain.

Despite the Conservative Party's extensive modernisation project, and David Cameron stating at Tory conference that he supports gay marriage "because I am a Conservative," nine MPs have signed an early day motion calling to repeal changes that allow gay people to get a civil partnership in places of worship.

The move comes as a Conservative peer, Baroness O'Cathain, secured a debate in the Lords calling to scrap the legislation.

Although churches, temples, synagogues and mosques are allowed to refuse to hold same-sex ceremonies, one Tory MP who signed the EDM said it was about making sure churches didn't feel pressured.

Julian Brazier, the MP for Canterbury, maintained it was not about homophobia, saying he knows "lots" of gay people.

And Tory MP Stewart Jackson said the move was to ensure parliament could "have the chance to debate” the changes.

“I support civil partnerships but I think that [there is beginning to be] a predominance of rights of people's over others.

“The government‘s equality office is completely out of step on this issue”.

He added: “It’s not about attacking a particular group, it’s about defending the religious tenets of people in this country.”

But Liberal Democrat Tom Brake warned that the move showed there were "still some reactionary elements" in the Tory party.

He said any move to row-back on allowing gay people to hold civil ceremonies in places of worship would be a "retrograde step" - and emphasised that the views were "not in the mainstream of this coalition government".

Labour sources said the move indicated the Conservative Party had not completed its modernisation project.

"It is typical that some in the Conservative party cannot see the absolute idiocy of opposing a measure that allows those religious faiths and venues who want to to conduct same-sex civil ceremonies on their premises to do so whilst not compelling those that don't."

Edward Leigh, the MP heading up resistance to the measure, told the Catholic Herald the change in law risked causing the same problems which stopped some Catholic agencies from adopting.

“We’ve seen all this before. The Sexual Orientation Regulations went through Parliament without proper scrutiny and they closed down our adoptions agencies as a result. If the Government cares anything about the churches, it will withdraw these regulations and think again.”

But some religious groups support the move. Paul Parker, recording clerk for Quakers in Britain said: “Quakers are keen to hold civil partnerships in our meeting houses and we hope to work with these regulations".

And Rabbi Sandra Kviat, from the organisation Liberal Judaism, added: "We would not want to go back on that at all. Most synagogues and rabbis have no problem with it. It would be a shame if we went backwards in time. It's up to the individual synagogue."

LAGOS, Nigeria – A bill originally designed to outlaw gay marriage in Nigeria likely has consequences far beyond its initial scope – criminalizing gay groups and organizations could jeopardize millions of dollars of Western aid geared toward stopping the spread of HIV and AIDS in Africa's most populous nation.

Though an oil-rich nation, Nigeria likely cannot afford to scorn foreign aid in the fight against HIV/AIDS, experts say. Nigeria has the continent's second highest number of people living with the disease, says the United Nations. More than 3 million people are infected with the disease and many do not know their status, according to U.N. estimates.

"There are about 400,000 people on anti-retrovirals in Nigeria at the moment and 95 percent of those are paid for by donor funds," Nigerian public health physician and health blogger Chikwe Ihekweazu told The Associated Press.

Gay sex has been banned in Nigeria, a nation of more than 160 million people, since colonial rule by the British. Gays and lesbians face open discrimination and abuse in a country divided by Christians and Muslims who almost uniformly oppose homosexuality. In the areas in Nigeria's north where Islamic Shariah law has been enforced for about a decade, gays and lesbians can face death by stoning.

Under the proposed law passed by Senate this week, couples who marry could face up to 14 years each in prison. Witnesses or anyone who helps couples marry could be sentenced to 10 years behind bars. The bill also punishes the "public show of same-sex amorous relationships directly or indirectly" with ten years in prison.

A newly added portion of the bill, leveling 10 years in prison for those found guilty of organizing, operating or supporting gay clubs, organizations and meetings, worries advocates in Nigeria. They fear the law could be used against groups providing aid for HIV and AIDS outreach programs that traditionally consider gay men as an at-risk group.

"We work with them trying to reduce their risk factors, trying to make them more healthy and have safer sex practices," said Meyiwa Ede of the donor-funded public health organization Society for Family Health. "If we can't work with them anymore, then they are vulnerable."

But lawmakers playing to the deeply religious nation's dislike of gays and lesbians have said donor nations who threaten to cut aid over the bill can keep their assistance, putting at risk the lives of people reliant on anti-retroviral drugs.

The U.S. and U.K. governments funnel huge sums of money into Nigeria for AIDS and HIV outreach. The U.S. government, under the United States' President Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, has given an average of $308 million dollars a year to groups working in HIV prevention, treatment, and support, according to the U.S. Consulate in Lagos.

The U.K. government spends an average of $31 million dollars a year on HIV/AIDS programs in Nigeria, the Abuja office of the U.K.'s Department for International Development said.

Through local partners, the funding reaches heterosexuals, as well as gays and lesbians to combat the spread of HIV and AIDS. Heterosexual sex accounts for 80 percent of HIV transmissions in Nigeria, said the country's National Agency for the Control of AIDS in a recent report.

U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron recently threatened to cut aid to African countries who discriminate against gays and lesbians. Advocates fear that could include the HIV and AIDS funding.

Statements from the U.S. and U.K. say both governments are watching the bill closely, but declined to comment further on how it may affect their outreach.

President Goodluck Jonathan promised the United Nations General Assembly in June that his administration was "committing to increase national ownership of HIV and AIDS responses" and to make those responses inclusive. However, six months later, little has changed in a country that makes no attempt to reach gay and lesbian communities.

Nigeria's Health Minister Onyebuchi Chukwu told AP that the bill outlawing gay groups would not affect state-funded HIV and AIDS programs if it were to become law. The health ministry has no programs specifically targeting these communities, said spokeswoman Rekia Zubairu.

Rights groups say the lawmakers' resolve to pass the bill reflects widespread homophobia in Nigeria, but it also shows their disconnect from working-class Nigerians, regardless of their sexual orientation.

"They have the resources to go abroad for treatment, with their big salaries, so they don't give a hoot about ordinary people," gay rights organizer Dorothy Akenova said. "The majority of Nigerians are the ones who will suffer for it."

The bill must still be passed by Nigeria's House of Representatives and signed by President Jonathan before becoming law.

Almost three out of four people in the United States with HIV do not have their condition under control, according to a new report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The news comes just days before World AIDS Day, which is on Dec. 1.

The high figures are likely a result of one in five people not realizing that they have the disease to begin with, the CDC said.

"While we have known that viral suppression can be achieved with proper HIV treatment and care, today's new Vital Signs data highlight the challenges our country faces in keeping HIV-positive Americans in the care they need to control the virus," Dr. Thomas R. Frieden, M.D., M.P.H., the director of the CDC, said in a statement.

There are nearly 1.2 million people who have HIV in the U.S., but just 28 percent of them have what is called a "suppressed viral load," which means that they have less than 200 copies of HIV per milliliter of blood, the report said. Having a suppressed viral load means that the HIV is under control and that there's a lower chance of it being spread to other people, though it's still possible to transmit HIV with a very low viral load, according to the CDC.

But the report also shows that receiving care and treatment for HIV does much to suppress the viral load. Among people receiving treatment, 77 percent of them have a suppressed viral load, according to the report.

While there is no cure for HIV/AIDS, there are a number of medicines that are effective at controlling the virus. Treatment success is determined by how much you are able to lower the amount of virus in your blood, according to the Mayo Clinic.

(CNN) – The Nigerian senate has passed a bill banning same-sex marriages, defying a threat from Britain to withhold aid from nations violating gay rights.

The bill by Africa's most populous nation calls for a 14-year sentence for anyone convicted of homosexuality. Anyone who aids or "abets" same-sex unions faces 10 years in prison, a provision that could target rights groups.

It goes to the nation's House of Representatives for a vote before President Goodluck Jonathan can sign it into law.

"It would place a wide range of people at risk of criminal sanctions, including human rights defenders and anyone else -- including friends, families and colleagues -- who stands up for the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender people in Nigeria," Amnesty International said in a statement.

The bill passed Tuesday comes nearly a month after British prime minister, David Cameron, threatened to withhold aid from nations violating gays rights, sparking outrage in Africa where leaders interpreted it as "colonial" display of power.

Homosexuality is illegal in most African countries based on remnants of sodomy laws introduced during the British colonial era and perpetuated by cultural beliefs.

Punishments across the continent range from fines to years in prison.

"This is something we raise continually and ... we're also saying that British aid should have more strings attached in terms of 'do you persecute people for their faith or their Christianity or do you persecute people for their sexuality?" Cameron said in a statement.

"We don't think that's acceptable. So look, this is an issue where we want movement, we're pushing for movement, we're prepared to put some money behind what we believe."

Soon after his remarks earlier this month, a flurry of African governments released defiant statements accusing him of undermining their sovereignty and culture.

Last week, Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe, known for his anti-gay rhetoric, called the prime minister "satanic" for demanding gay rights.

"Do not get tempted into that (homosexuality) madness. You are young people. If you go that direction, we will punish you severely," state media quoted him as saying. "It is condemned by nature. It is condemned by insects and that is why I have said they are worse than pigs and dogs."

Mugabe's comments were the latest in a series of strident remarks by African leaders.

Ugandan government spokesman Fred Opolot described Cameron's remarks as "patronizing, colonial rhetoric," saying the nation is busy expanding its oil sector to reduce its reliance on aid.

"We are working hard to limit our reliance on foreign governments for this reason," he said. "Statements like the one Cameron is making are false. Our cultural norms and values don't accept homosexuality, but there is no policy against gay people."

In 2009, a Ugandan lawmaker introduced a proposal calling for execution of people convicted of homosexuality. The proposal sparked an international outcry and threats from some European countries to cut aid to the nation, which relies on millions of dollars from foreign nations.

Opolot said the proposal was the opinion of a sole lawmaker and did not reflect the government view. The legislation was eventually shelved, but regularly pops up in parliament and remains a simmering issue.

Ghanaian President John Atta Mills, a major western ally, applauded the benefits of foreign aid, but said the nation will not accept money that will undermine its interest.

"I will never initiate or support any attempt to legalize homosexuality in Ghana," he told journalists this month, according to state media. "As government we will abide by the principles as contained in our Constitution, which is supreme."

Tanzanian officials decried the remarks, saying they "can lead to broken relations" between the two nations.

Cameron's statements also sparked a fiery debate among Africans on social media, where opinions were divided.

"At first, I was upset. I thought, how dare he treats us like this?' said Nigel Mugamu, 33, who lives in Harare, Zimbabwe.

"Then I thought about it," the businessman said. "The U.K. economy is struggling. They spend a lot of money on aid. Given what's happening economically. Maybe it's a nice way of saying -- we can't afford it?"

Mugamu said the threat should be an opportunity to open up a dialogue on an issue considered a taboo in African culture.

"Now is the time to talk about it ... to get our house in order. Lets use this opportunity to say, 'OK, if we didn't have aid, how would we survive?" he said. "Let's talk about gay rights issues. Let's turn this into a national -- African discussion."

Others said while denying aid would be extreme, the continent has a long way to go when it comes to human rights.

"It would be ridiculous if that mentality -- pride from leaders in both sides -- got in the way of millions benefiting from aid," said Aida Mbowa, a Stanford University doctorate student who lives in the Kenyan capital of Nairobi.

However, she said, the threat thrusts the issue to the forefront.

"We need minority rights in the continent. There's a part of me that knows this threat will not have much of impact. But in a way, it's an achievement, however small. Despite the differences in opinion ... it has brought the conversation out in the open."

The Gay and Lesbian Coalition of Kenya said while Cameron's remarks are a positive gesture, they risk turning homosexuals into targets. It urged the prime minister to instead consider directing some aid to community programs aimed at fostering dialogue and tolerance.

"Support national and regional human rights mechanisms to ensure the inclusiveness of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender issues in their protective and promotional mandates," the group said.

As the prejudices rage on, gays and lesbians in the continent lead fidgety lives, including forming underground movements that change locations regularly for safety issues.

Sexual violence against lesbians has become so common in South Africa, the nation has coined a new term "corrective rape" to describe it. South Africa -- one of the more progressive nations in the continent on the issue -- was the first African country to impose a constitutional ban on discrimination based on sexual orientation.

Cameron said he does not expect a sudden change in mindsets, and admits it will take time.

CONCORD, N.H. — Whether they like it or not, Republican presidential candidates are joining New Hampshire's intensifying gay marriage debate.

State lawmakers plan in the coming weeks to take up a measure to repeal the law allowing same-sex couples to wed and a vote is expected at some point in January – the same month as New Hampshire holds the nation's first Republican presidential primary contest.

Already, candidates have been put on the spot over the divisive hot-button social issue when most, if not all, would rather be talking about the economy, voters' No. 1 concern.

The impending focus on gay marriage carries risk for several of White House contenders – including former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, Texas Gov. Rick Perry and former businessman Herman Cain – whose inconsistencies on the topic are well documented. The GOP candidates' increasingly vocal support for "traditional marriage" also threatens to alienate a growing number of younger Republicans and independents here who support legal recognition of same-sex couples. That note of divisiveness could bode poorly for the eventual GOP nominee come the general election.

Even so, the Republican candidates aren't shying away from the topic as they run for the nomination of a GOP dominated by conservatives and pushed further to the right by the tea party over the last few years.

"As conservatives, we believe in the sanctity of life, we believe in the sanctity of traditional marriage, and I applaud those legislators in New Hampshire who are working to defend marriage between one man and one woman realizing that children need to be raised in a loving home by a mother and a father," Perry told a New Hampshire audience recently, becoming the latest contender to address gay marriage directly.

While the issue hasn't yet become a regular talking point on the campaign trail, most Republican candidates declare support for the effort to repeal the law. And groups like the National Organization for Marriage hope to force the presidential contenders to publicly embrace the repeal.

"We will be using all the tools at our disposal to lobby the New Hampshire legislature and the broader population," said Christopher Plante, regional director for the National Organization for Marriage. "One of those tools is the echo chamber of presidential candidates continuing to show their support of marriage as defined by one man and one woman."

Plante concedes that for some candidates, "there has been an evolution on a number of fronts" on this issue.

Romney was the Massachusetts governor when his state legalized gay marriage. The Romney administration, as directed by the courts, granted nearly 200 same-sex marriage requests for gay and lesbian couples in 2005.

Campaign spokesman Ryan Williams said the former governor had little choice but to follow the state Supreme Court ruling at the time. He noted his candidate's consistent opposition to both civil unions and gay marriages, adding that Romney openly supports the New Hampshire repeal effort.

But Romney has reversed himself on whether gay marriage should be addressed at the state or federal level.

This past June, he said during a debate that he favors a federal constitutional amendment banning the practice. That's been his position at least since the beginning of his 2008 presidential bid, when he was the only major Republican candidate to support such an amendment.

But as a Massachusetts Senate candidate back in 1994, Romney told a Boston-area gay newspaper that same-sex marriage is "a state issue as you know – the authorization of marriage on a same-sex basis falls under state jurisdiction." Aides say it's unfair to scrutinize Romney's position in 1994 – when there was virtually no discussion of a federal amendment. And they suggest Romney's rivals have far more blatant inconsistencies in recent months.

Both Perry and Cain have drawn conservative criticism for recent comments related to gay marriage.

Asked in mid-October whether he supports a federal marriage amendment, Cain told the Christian Broadcasting Network that federal legislation is necessary to protect traditional marriage. That seemed to be a direct contradiction from his statement of just six days earlier, when he told "Meet the Press" host David Gregory that states should be allowed to make up their own minds.

"I wouldn't seek a constitutional ban for same sex marriage, but I am pro traditional marriage," Cain told Gregory.

In Perry's case, the Texas governor says he supports the New Hampshire repeal. But in July he said that New York's move to legalize gay marriage was "fine by me." A week later, facing social conservative criticism, he walked back the comments.

"It's fine with me that the state is using their sovereign right to decide an issue. Obviously gay marriage is not fine with me," he said then.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has another problem.

Earlier in the fall, he told an Iowa audience that gay marriage is a "temporary aberration" likely to go away because it defies convention. Gingrich, who has been married three times, has a half-sister in a same-sex marriage.

"The truth is that you're living in a world that no longer exists," Candace Gingrich-Jones wrote the former speaker in a letter posted on the Huffington Post in 2008: "In other words, stop being a hater, big bro."

Despite the presidential candidates' support for the New Hampshire repeal, younger Republicans in this state are skeptical, especially as voters are focused on the economy.

"Why is the NH House wasting time trying to repeal gay marriage? Capital ugh," Robert J. Johnson, chairman of the New Hampshire College Republicans, wrote on Twitter.

Polling suggests it may not be a winning issue.

A recent University of New Hampshire poll found that 62 percent of state residents oppose repealing the same-sex marriage law. And nationally, public opinion has gradually shifted toward supporting same-sex marriages, even among Republicans.

An August Associated Press-National Constitution Center poll found that 53 percent of Americans favor legal recognition of same-sex marriages; 32 percent of Republicans say same-sex couples should get some legal recognition from the government, compared with 71 percent among Democrats and 50 percent of independents.

Democrats hope to use the Republican contenders' positions against them in the general election next fall.

"While these radical stances might win them a few votes in their primary, it will lose them the support of the majority Americans, and ultimately put them on the losing side of history," said Ty Matsdorf, spokesman for American Bridge, an independent group aligned with Democrats.

LOS ANGELES — A Southern California teenager pleaded guilty Monday to second-degree murder for killing a gay student during a computer lab class three years ago in a plea deal that will send him to prison for 21 years and avoid a retrial.

Brandon McInerney, 17, pleaded guilty to the murder charge, as well as one count each of voluntary manslaughter and use of a firearm, said Ventura County Chief Deputy District Attorney Mike Frawley. McInerney is scheduled to be sentenced Dec. 19.

The case drew wide attention because of its shocking premise: McInerney, in a fit of homophobic rage, killed 15-year-old Larry King at E.O. Green Junior High School in Oxnard because he was offended by King's dress and how the victim interacted with him.

Larry King's father, Greg King, told KABC-TV he understands why prosecutors agreed to the plea deal.

"I don't think that 21-year sentence is justice for my son, but I understand the reality that was facing the DA of trying to convict a defendant who was 14 … when he committed the murder," Greg King said.

Comic Ellen DeGeneres, a lesbian, weighed in on her talk show shortly after the shooting and said gays shouldn't be treated as second-class citizens.

McInerney was only 14 at the time of the February 2008 shooting. Several jurors said after the teen's trial earlier this year that he should never have been tried as an adult.

A mistrial was declared in September when jurors couldn't reach a unanimous decision on the degree of guilt. The panel took a series of votes, the last one with seven jurors in favor of voluntary manslaughter and five supporting either first-degree or second-degree murder. The trial had been moved from Ventura County to Los Angeles because of pretrial publicity.

Frawley said prosecutors agreed to the plea deal because of uncertainty about what might result from a second trial.

"We took that into account and looked at what it would take to protect the community," Frawley said. "The total time in custody for 25 years will do that."

The murder conviction will be stayed, and the plea deal calls for McInerney to be given the harshest sentence under California law for voluntary manslaughter – 11 years – and use of a firearm – 10 years, Frawley said. McInerney is ineligible for time served or good behavior because he pleaded guilty to murder.

After serving nearly four years since King's slaying, McInerney will be released just shy of his 39th birthday. Prosecutors had previously offered a plea deal that would have sent McInerney to prison for 25 years to life, but his attorneys passed.

A phone message left with defense attorney Robyn Bramson was not immediately returned.

Eliza Byard, executive director of the Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network, said in a statement the plea agreement ends a tragic chapter.

"Ventura County along with communities and school districts everywhere must come together to promote a culture of respect and nurture the true potential found in every individual regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression," Byard said.

King was shot twice in the back of the head in front of stunned classmates. Authorities maintained the shooting was premeditated and deserving of a murder conviction. During the trial, prosecutors noted at least six people heard McInerney make threats against King in the days before the shooting.

Prosecutors also contended McInerney embraced a white supremacist philosophy that sees homosexuality as an abomination. Police found Nazi-inspired drawings and artifacts at his house, and a white supremacist expert testified at trial the hate-filled ideology was the reason for the killing.

Prosecutors, however, dropped a hate crime count against McInerney in preparing for a second trial.

Defense attorneys acknowledged McInerney was the shooter but explained he had reached an emotional breaking point after King made repeated, unwanted sexual advances. They also argued their client came from a violent upbringing and juvenile court would have been the best venue to try him.

The congregation of a North Carolina-based Baptist church is taking an assertive stand in favor of marriage equality, prohibiting their pastor from legally marrying anyone until she can do the same for same-sex couples.

The 650 official congregants of Raleigh's Pullen Memorial Baptist Church – a progressive, gay-inclusive church -- said in a formal statement that the state's current law discriminates against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) couples "by denying them the rights and privileges enjoyed by heterosexual married couples," according to the News-Observer. "As people of faith, affirming the Christian teaching that before God all people are equal, we will no longer participate in this discrimination," the church's statement continued.

Pastor Nancy Petty, who is openly gay, told congregants earlier this year that signing legal marriage certificates to wed heterosexual couples while not doing the same for homosexual couples had become a burden on her conscience, according to the report. Although Petty will continue to perform wedding ceremonies, she will not sign the marriage certificate required to establish a legal marriage. "Their statement today on marriage equality continues their long-standing tradition of speaking out on behalf of God's love, compassion and justice in the world," Petty was quoted by the News-Observer as saying. "Their counter-witness to those who preach about a God whose love is exclusive and unwelcoming is nothing short of amazing grace."

Pullen Memorial's practice of offering holy unions for gay couples goes back 20 years, according to reports. Though still affiliated with American Baptist Churches in the USA, the Alliance of Baptists, and other groups, the church was kicked out of the Southern Baptist Convention in 1992, and similarly disfellowshipped from the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina and the Raleigh Baptist Association.

"I'm perpetuating what I believe is an unjust law," Petty, pastor at Pullen since 2002, has said previously, according to Star News Online. 'I don't sign birth certificates. I don't sign death certificates. I do baptisms. I do funerals. There's no other ritual of the state that I have to sign a document."

Petty's case mirrors that of a senior Baptist minister in Australia, who is concerned for his job after coming out in support of same-sex marriage. "[The church membership is] happy with my work here, my preaching and my care of people struggling, they're all okay with that, it's just my option that the Government should recognize gay marriage which is the sticking point," Reverend Matt Glover of the Lilydale Baptist Church, who is married with two children, tells the Star Observer. "I've said the church doesn’t have to recgonize gay marriage, the church doesn't have to practice gay marriage, but I think the church needs to stand up for the right of gay people to have their relationships, their marriages, legally recognized by the Government," he said.

sounds yummy

signed the petition.

Today is the 13th International Transgender Day of Remembrance, a day when we remember trans people who have been victims of homicide.

The event was started to honor Rita Hester who was murdered on November 28th, 1998. Hester's death launched the "Remembering Our Dead" web project in 1998 and a San Francisco candlelight vigil in 1999. Transgenderdor.org notes that her murder – like most anti-transgender murder cases -- has yet to be solved.

The Trans Murder Monitoring project reports that since 2008, there have been 755 reports of murdered trans people in 51 countries. It should be noted that this number is probably much lower than the actual figure, as it only represents known cases due to issues of language used in reporting the murders (different countries have different terms for being transgender) and due to the fact that not all trans people who are murdered are identified as trans.

Regardless, it's a heartbreaking and outrageous number and the Transgender Day of Remembrance is a day not only to mourn those we've lost and celebrate the lives they lived, but also bring awareness to the struggle and dangers that trans people face around the world on a daily basis.

In honor of the 13th International Transgender Day of Remembrance, we're featuring 20 trans pioneers in the slideshow below.

Of course there are countless others who deserve recognition and celebration and Huff Post Gay Voices endeavors to feature as many of their stories as we can all year around -- not just today.

Are there other trans people you want to remember and/or celebrate? Tell us about them in the comments section below. For more information on the Transgender Day of Remembrance : hXXp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/20/transgender-day-of-remembrance-2011_n_1101681.html

:hehe: :hehe: :hehe:

SAN FRANCISCO – Army Capt. Stephen Hill says he wasn't trying to score political points when he asked the Republican presidential candidates if they would reinstate the ban on gays serving openly in the U.S. military.

He wasn't worried that his debate question, posed via a YouTube video recorded in Iraq, would generate boos or reveal his sexual orientation to millions of people, including his superiors and fellow troops.

All Hill was thinking about in September was his husband of four-and-a-half months, Joshua Snyder, in Columbus, Ohio.

Now that "don't ask, don't tell" has been lifted, he needed to know if the military would take the next step and recognize his marriage, or if a new president would try to force soldiers like him back into the closet.

"I was looking forward to the future and hoping everybody would realize we are soldiers first, always," said Hill, 41, an Army reservist who returned last week from his yearlong deployment. "I was hoping `don't ask, don't tell' would be a distant memory for everybody."

In an interview with The Associated Press, Hill reflected publicly for the first time on his reasons for submitting the pre-recorded question for the Sept. 22 debate, as well as his reaction to the heckles heard around the world; the answer that former Sen. Rick Santorum gave to thunderous applause; and the outrage expressed on his behalf by, among others, his commander in chief.

With Snyder on the telephone, Hill watched the debate live from Iraq at 4 a.m. And this is what he asked: "In 2010, when I was deployed to Iraq, I had to lie about who I was because I'm a gay soldier and I didn't want to lose my job. My question is, under one of your presidencies, do you intend to circumvent the progress that's been made for gay and lesbian soldiers in the military?"

Santorum replied that he would reinstitute the ban on open service by gay troops because "any type of sexual activity has absolutely no place in the military."

"What we are doing is playing social experimentation with our military right now. That's tragic," he continued. "Leave it alone. Keep it to yourself whether you are heterosexual or homosexual."

Hill says the fact that he just outed himself on national television had barely registered when he absorbed the boos and Santorum's answer followed by applause.

"When the actual booing occurred, my gut dropped out, because my first inclination was, did I just do something wrong?" he said. "The answer, obviously, wasn't very supportive of gay people, and there was a lot of fear of how the Army would take the question."

He did not have to wait long to find out. At breakfast later that morning, the segment was playing on the chow hall television. Hill immediately tracked down his commander, who told him she had no problem with what he'd done but that she would need to run it up the chain of command. She later relayed the response.

"She said, `What the military's most concerned with is that you are OK, because it's a lot of pressure on you and we want to make sure if there is anything we can do to help,'" he recalled.

President Barack Obama, about a week later, chided the Republican contenders for staying silent when several people booed an American soldier. Santorum said he had not heard the booing but condemned the audience members who did it.

What Hill remembers most was that a presidential candidate defined his marriage and military service in terms of sex. He holds that up against the times he hid Snyder's photograph because Army buddies were coming over to play video games, introduced his husband as his roommate or brother, and the legal vows they exchanged at the grave of Air Force Sgt. Leonard Matlovich, who was discharged in 1975 after becoming the first gay service member to challenge the U.S. military's ban on gay troops.

Snyder and Hill last month joined other same-sex military couples in suing the government for the same benefits as straight military couples, which the Pentagon denies them on grounds that federal law defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

"This is not about sex," Hill said. "A special privilege is not hiding pictures in my house or God forbid, taking mortar fire again and not knowing if Josh will be recognized. I'm fighting every day to protect everyone's rights as human beings, and it seems counterintuitive for me to be fighting for those rights and not have them."

It's not every day a famous gay porn star offers a master class at one of New York City's esteemed museums. But that's exactly what will take place on Saturday, November 19, at the Museum of Arts and Design (MAD).

French porn star and actor Francois Sagat will lead a "a rare and intimate master class," which will include insights into "his personal career experiences [and] his approaches and processes in tackling each [of his roles]." The class is part of MAD's retrospective entitled "Francois Sagat: The New Leading Man,"

Sagat, who is famous for his massive muscles (among… ahem... other parts) and a distinctive full-scalp tattoo, gained a loyal following thanks to his immensely popular porn films. But in recent years he's branched out into mainstream film, including a role in director Bruce La Bruce's "LA Zombie."

In addition to acting, Sagat has cozied up to the fashion world and was chosen by designer Bernard Wilhelm to model his first ever collection during Paris Fashion week.

MAD will also feature other Sagat-themed events including a showing of the "Sagat: The Documentary," which makes its U.S. premiere on Friday and on Saturday "Man At Bath," a film directed by Christophe Honore which was originally conceived as a short and was sponsored by the Theatre de Gennevilliers and commissioned by fellow director Olivier Assayas.

In a recent interview with Out magazine, which also featured the actor in a racy photo portfolio shot by Terry Richardson earlier this year, Sagat says that though others in porn have often tried to break ties with the industry to legitimize their other careers, that isn't something he's worried about.

"I don’t think [my involvement in porn films will lessen]," he said. "There's some stuff that I'm not gonna do in the future because of that and I'm aware of that and it's fine. I'm very careful of what I'm doing and the way I'm doing it, and if it's porn I’m always very careful and picky about it."

For a full listing of MAD's Sagat retrospective, including times, dates, and tickets, visit MAD's website.

By Lisa Lef, Associated Press

SAN FRANCISCO – California's highest court says ballot proposition sponsors can step in to defend their initiatives from legal challenges if the state's governor and attorney general refuse to do so.

The California Supreme Court on Thursday responded to a pivotal question from the federal appeals court that is considering the ban's constitutionality.

A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals made the inquiry in January after concluding it needed to determine first if Proposition 8's sponsors have authority to defend the measure.

In its analysis, the state court did not address that specific case, but says the lawmaking power granted to citizens under the state constitution doesn't end once propositions have been approved or rejected by voters.

The appeals court panel now must decide whether to accept the court's guidance and if so, how to apply it to the ongoing legal skirmish involving Proposition 8.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.

The California Supreme Court plans to issue a decision Thursday that could prove pivotal to the future of the state's voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage and have far-reaching consequences for its notoriously vigorous citizens' initiative process. .

The court announced that it would file a written opinion that clarifies if the California Constitution permits the sponsors of ballot initiatives to defend their measures from legal challenges absent the cooperation of the governor or attorney general.

The question, which until now has remained unsettled under California law, is central to the ongoing court battle over the 2008 initiative known as Proposition 8, a constitutional amendment that stripped same-sex couples of the right to wed following the most expensive campaign on a social issue in U.S. history.

A federal judge last year struck down Proposition 8, declaring that it violated the civil rights of gay and lesbian Californians. The coalition of religious and conservative groups that sponsored it appealed, but then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and then-Attorney General Jerry Brown, who both support marriage rights for same-sex couples, refused to do the same on the state's behalf.

Expressing doubts about the ability of initiative proponents to wage an appeal on their own, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals asked the state high court to weigh in before it tackled the broader constitutional issues.

A 9th Circuit panel suggested in January that unless the state court determined that initiative sponsors have independent legal standing, it would have to dismiss the appeal and leave the lower court ruling overturning Proposition 8 in place without further scrutiny.

During oral arguments in September, however, the Supreme Court often leaned in favor of the ban's backers, who argued that the lawmaking power granted to citizens does not end once propositions have been approved or rejected by voters. Several justices noted that their court always had, as a matter of practice if not formal policy, allowed the sponsors of ballot questions to appear before it when their measures were challenged.

Once the Supreme Court voices its interpretation, the appeals court panel will have to decide whether to accept the court's guidance and if so, how to apply it to the ongoing legal skirmish involving Proposition 8. If the Supreme Court agrees the gay marriage ban's supporters should be allowed to represent the majority of voters who supported Proposition 8, it would clear the way for the 9th Circuit to analyze the substance of the appeal.

The state court's word, while expected to carry substantial weight since it involves a state Constitutional matter, is non-binding on the federal court.

Whatever the Supreme Court says would establish a state precedent that could be used in other ballot initiative cases the attorney general or governor decline to defend. Although instances are rare of state officials refusing to appeal rulings that are adverse to voter-approved laws, they have come up in California every couple decades or so.

A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals made the inquiry in January after concluding it needed to determine first if Proposition 8's sponsors have authority to defend the measure.

In its analysis, the state court did not address that specific case, but says the lawmaking power granted to citizens under the state constitution doesn't end once propositions have been approved or rejected by voters.

The appeals court panel now must decide whether to accept the court's guidance and if so, how to apply it to the ongoing legal skirmish involving Proposition 8.

The things we learn from the forums are amazing  :cheers:

:haha: :haha: :haha: :haha:

In what has been deemed a historic moment, U.S. Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan became the first sitting cabinet secretary to publicly support marriage equality, telling Metro Weekly he "absolutely" supports New York's decision to legalize same-sex marriage.

When asked about the June 24 approval of same-sex marriage legislation in New York, Donovan said, ''I was enormously proud to be a New Yorker on the day that it passed. So many friends that I know were able to achieve a dream the day that law passed. And so many neighbors."

After praising both Governor Andrew Cuomo and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Donovan admitted, "We've got more work to do in the Obama administration in a second term…like marriage equality.''

Donovan's remarks came at the National Center For Transgender Equality's awards ceremony, where he delivered a keynote speech. Among those who praised Donovan's support was Fred Sainz, vice president of the Human Rights Campaign. ''Like a growing majority of Americans, Secretary Donovan understands that all Americans should be treated equally, especially when it comes to marriage rights, and our work won't be complete until we're able to achieve those rights at the state and federal level,'' Sainz told Metro Weekly.

Nice cock  :cheers:

:cheers: Good recipe and definitely Soup Season  :cheers: