Last Wednesday, Sept. 29, by an overwhelming vote of 18-1, the Chamber of Deputies of the Mexican state of Baja California decided to send a message to the country's Supreme Court by voting for a statewide constitutional amendment banning the recognition of marriages between same-sex couples.
From my friend Rex Wockner's reporting (read his entire report here):
Same-sex marriage is legal in Mexico City, and the nation's Supreme Court ruled this year that all 31 Mexican states must recognize gay marriages from the capital city.
As a result, the state legislature's move could set it on a collision course with the federal Supreme Court, although some amendment backers claimed they only want to prevent gay marriages from taking place in Baja.
It's not a done deal. Again, from Rex:
To be valid, the amendment has to be ratified by the city councils of three of Baja California's five municipalities -- Ensenada, Mexicali, Rosarito Beach, Tecate and Tijuana. Any municipality that fails to report the result of its vote within a month of receiving the amendment will be counted as having approved it. (All towns and areas of Baja California are within one of the five municipalities, which are somewhat similar to U.S. counties.)
In the meantime, my friend and Mexican human rights advocate Gabriel Gutierrez sent me a link to an 11 minute video of the day when the actual vote took place. In it, you can see that it was a standing room only event packed with LGBT rights advocates and marriage equality rights opponents vying for space.
I won't be translating this one but you have to have heart to the LGBT advocates standing in the room as only one of seventeen of their representatives stood up for them.
At the 8:03 mark in the video, after the vote has been taken, an unidentified man in white reacts in anger to the overwhelming opposition to his rights:
Rapists! We are also citizens and we pay taxes... ridiculous moralists!... None of you want to adopt anyone, children are dying of hunger and we want to help them. And you come here with your pedophile priests leading you. Trash is what you are! Double morality! Your husbands are with the prostitutes and you are just being ridicule here! Where are your marriages? Where? You have children dying of hunger and you just vouch for your priests! But you come here and say that marriages are between a man and a woman. We are also worthy!... We are human beings just like you!
What a day! First Fidel Castro owns up to the persecution of gays in Cuba while the island was under his command, and then this monumental story...
OK, I am kidding but this is sorta newsworthy.
While watching Miss Universe a few days ago (yup, I watched the actual pageant when it was broadcast back on August 22nd), it quickly became obvious that Miss Mexico - Jimena Navarrete - would take the crown this year.
And yet, when she answered her Top 5 finalist question on the effect of unsupervised internet use by minors and she said that it was important to teach kids "values" as taught "in the family" I cringed a little bit. Not that it's bad to teach kids family values, but I wondered if she was simply parroting the "family value" rhetoric of the religious right in Mexico and elsewhere.
That, apparently, is not the case.
Interviewed yesterday on Mexican radio, here is what she said:
Salvador Camarena (W Radio): I want to ask you about a topic that has been very controversial and it's the topic of marriage between people of the same gender. Do you agree with this type of relationships...
Jimena Navarrete: Look, I believe that every person in this world has the right to profess the beliefs they have and I am in agreement. We have to respect what each human being decides to do with their lives, you know? Clearly, there are limitations, of course, also, as there are with heterosexual couples, right? Better said, there are limitations for any of the two - if they are heterosexual or homosexual - but I believe we have to learn to be respectful because they are people who are the same as us. There is no difference. And I don't believe it's just to discriminate somebody based on the gender they prefer, right? Based on the partner they choose to select, if it's a man or a woman. The truth is that I am absolutely against discrimination and, well, what can I say. I have many friends who are homosexual and I adore them. And they are equal folk: There is no reason we should want to set them aside, there is no reason why we shouldn't let them enjoy what they want to enjoy with their partner.
I've posted a link to the audio clip, in Spanish, below. The remarks on marriage start at the 4:50 minute mark...
Still on a high from yesterday's historic federal court ruling knocking down Proposition 8 in California? Well, get a load of this:
The Mexican Supreme Court of Justice has been holding hearings this week on the constitutionality of Mexico City's groundbreaking marriage equality law which was adopted by the city on December 21st, 2009.
The law, the first of its kind in all of Latin America, not only granted gay couples in Mexico City the right to marry but also explicitly said that gay couples could adopt children (previously gay individuals were allowed to adopt but, if they had a partner, that partner could not file for parenthood rights).
Upon passage of the law, Mexican president Felipe Calderón stated that the constitution only allowed marriages "between a man and a woman" and had his attorney general file an appeal before the Supreme Court.
Guess what! Earlier today the Mexican Supreme Court ruled by a vote of 8-2 that Mexico City's marriage equality law is indeed constitutional ("Mexican court upholds capital's gay marriage law", AP). Suck it, Calderón!
Echoing California federal court judge Vaugh R. Walker in ruling that Proposition 8 was unconstitutional, Milenio reports that, in backing the law, Justice Fernando Franco stated the following:
Procreation is not an essential element of marriage nor does it threaten the protection the Constitution grants to the family and procreation, since those who want to conceive, have the full capacity of doing it.
The court had previously said that they would also take up the part of the law that grants adoption rights for gay couples as a separate debate. To that effect, the court will convene once again this Monday to discuss whether that part of the law is constitutional. They will also be debating whether the court's ruling has any reach beyond Mexico City.
Not all LGBT-rights advocates were happy with the marriage equality law approved in December by the legislature. Federal Deputy Enoé Uranga, an openly lesbian legislator who spearheaded a civil union bill in 2001 which was passed in 2006, warned that the law had been rushed through the legislature with not enough time for public debate. She argued that the law reflected political interests rather than serve the needs of LGBT families and warned that making adoption rights explicit within the law might have unintended consequences should the Supreme Court decide to ban them. As of late, though, and now that the Supreme Court is holding hearings and deciding on the constitutionality of the law, Uranga has been busy trying to draw expert witnesses and testimony for the court to consider backing adoption rights for gays.
Some observers are just as concerned the court won't be nearly as progressive on adoption as it was today on marriage equality but Mexico City Councilmember David Razú (pictured above), the author and lead sponsor of the bill which became law, is absolutely certain the Court will back adoption rights as well, according to my conversations with him on Twitter.
In the meantime, the United Nation's Deputy High Commissioner Kyung-wha Kang, visiting Mexico for an international conference on women's rights, told CNN Mexico that marriage was a right everyone should have access to, including same-sex partners. CNN doesn't quote her directly but says that the UN Commissioner also backed adoption rights for same-sex couples "although the decision should be taken carefully in each particular case" and said that the United Nations had always been in favor of citizens having full access to human rights regardless of their sexual orientation.
As for marriages between same-sex couples that have taken place since the law was passed six months ago? NotieSe reports that 320 same-sex marriage couples have gotten married, 173 between men and 147 between women. 27 foreigners have married Mexican citizens including people who were born in Rumania, Austria, Germany, Spain, Italy, France, England, the United States, Canada, Panama, Guatemala, Venezuela and Colombia.
Today's El Universal, which reports on the official numbers today, says that, of the 88 marriages, 50 have been between male couples and 38 have been between women. Age-wise, of the 176 individuals who have gotten married, seventy-two have ranged between the ages 31 and 40 and forty-five have been between 21 and 30. Only twelve individuals fell in the 18 to 20 range [that doesn't quite ad up to 176 so I guess the rest - forty-seven individuals - might fall into the 41 and older range]. In five cases, one of the partners was born in a different country (including two Italians, two French and one British person).
There are 37 marriages between same-sex couples pending for the months of April, May and June.
The official statement from the government office of Mexico City can be found here (Warning: Loud audio clip plays upon opening page).
The Mexican newspaper Milenio has produced a 4 minute video capturing the sights and sounds last Thursday as five same-sex couples became the first ones to marry in Mexico City. I won't be translating this one but I wanted to share.
On December 21st Mexico City's legislative Assembly made history when it passed a law allowing same-sex couples to marry and adopt children. The law, which goes into effect on March 4th, became the first such measure to be adopted in all of Latin America.
Surprisingly, in the days that followed the vote, there was actually little visible reaction from any of the regular anti-gay forces in the country. Instead, as the new year began, a Twitter-led media frenzy erupted over homophobic comments made by a Mexican television morning show host named Esteban Arce.
Now, a week before the law goes into effect, the opposition has certainly raised its ugly head and come out in full force.
On January 27th, Mexico's Attorney General filed an appeal before the country's Supreme Court challenging the constitutionality of the law. Last week six governors from the conservative PAN party also raised constitutional appeals claiming that the law might spread to other regions in the country. And - somewhat surprisingly - Mexico's president Felipe Calderón - also from the PAN party - stepped in and honed his conservative re-election bonafides by siding with anti-gay forces and stating his opposition to the law.
Patrick Corcoran, a freelance writer based in Mexico who blogs at Gancho, has a great breakdown of the partisan politics at play in an essay he wrote for Mexidata, and I quote:
Despite a lengthy to-do list that represents Mexican President Felipe Calderón's last gasp for an enduring legislative legacy, the president and his party have diverted their recent efforts toward a push to ban same-sex marriage.
The change of focus stems from a December law passed by the left-leaning Mexico City government legalizing same-sex marriage and providing gay couples with an avenue to adoption. Gay rights in general and same-sex marriage in particular had not been particularly divisive issues in Mexico, but the new law, which was the first of its kind in Latin America (the northern state of Coahuila did, however, legalize same-sex unions in 2007, though without the adoption provision) provoked a storm of controversy.
Even before the new law was official, the Mexico City PAN (National Action Party) was promising a legal challenge. Church officials, predictably, were apoplectic (although interestingly the Vatican conspicuously kept its distance). Opponents of same-sex marriage found a sympathetic ear in Los Pinos; Calderón is said to be personally close to Mariana Gómez, the PAN's most visible opponent of same-sex marriage, and in late January, his attorney general Arturo Chávez Chávez filed a challenge of the law before the Supreme Court. Five more states, all run by PAN governors, joined the fray last week, challenging the law on the grounds that it unfairly obliges them to recognize the capital's marriages.
Since Mexico City is light years to the left of much of the rest of the country, the backlash could undermine gay rights more than the Mexico City law advanced them. The Supreme Court could strike down the Mexico City law, rendering same-sex marriage illegal across the nation. Even if the Court refrains from doing so (which seems likely, given the court’s recent leftward tilt, its endorsement of Mexico City’s abortion legalization, and the flimsiness of the legal arguments), a series of statewide bans of same-sex marriage seem quite likely. This pattern, a progressive law in Mexico City sparking a harsh conservative reaction virtually everywhere else, was established over the past couple of years in the realm of abortion.
But even if the PAN’s strategy does bear fruit, this is a bad policy and ultimately a bad political move for the PAN... [read the rest of the essay here]
The good news this week: The Mexican Supreme Court has dismissed all six appeals from the governors of Sonora, Tlaxcala, Guanajuato, Morelos, Jalisco and Baja California.
Additionally, President Felipe Calderón, when asked yesterday to share his thoughts on the law once again, refused to reaffirm his opposition, simply referring to the one appeal against the measure that is still standing before the court: That of the Attorney General's Office.
"I will abstain from giving an opinion which might be interpreted as as if the President might be trying to introduce a belief, an opinion, a value that is different than the law", Calderón said.
He added that it was a delicate debate and argued that he respected every single person. "I absolutely do not have any bad taste nor reproach towards those who have a partnership with another of the same gender," he said, "I respect - I absolutely insist - such preferences".
David Razú Aznar, the President of the Human Rights Commission of Mexico City's Legislative Assembly, Tweeted this morning that this could be a signal that Calderón knows he is on the losing end of the debate. Aznar was among a team of lawyers and government officials who handed a report to the Supreme Court yesterday in which the City vouched for the constitutionality of the marriage equality law (you can download the complete report, written in Spanish, here).
Jalisco queers act-up: As good as it looks for marriage equality supporters in Mexico right now, what has been the most inspiring to see is how the LGBT community has reacted to efforts to sink the law. Mexico doesn't really have a national LGBT-rights organization that can act as a centralized force against these homophobic efforts. Instead, there is a large patchwork network of small local LGBT rights advocates and organizations that mostly work independently from each other. And, despite the fact that the law in question will only cover couples within the Mexico City district, it seems that LGBT folk throughout the country are rising up against efforts to derail it, particularly in Guadalajara, the state capital of Jalisco.
I already wrote about a march that took place in Guadalajara on Valentine's Day which drew more than 350 people and ended in a town square with kiss-ins and symbolic marriage ceremonies (Milenio has a full description here).
A week later, riding approximately 12 vehicles, 40 advocates made their way through the Guadalajara streets once again and stopped in front of the State's Human Rights Commission. According to El Occidental, advocates declared their opposition to their governor's Supreme Court appeal, as well as the interference of the other PAN-affiliated governors into the affairs of Mexico City. They also announced a campaign they called "Thousand for Our Rights" and said that they would be collecting 1,000 signatures from Guadalajara residents asking the Human Rights Commission to protect the rights of the city's LGBT community.
Milenio reported that leaders of three local LGBT rights organizations symbolically shut down the Commission's office by placing rainbow-colored chains and red-tape on its front doors and declaring a "quarantine" [see top photo]. Members of the Lesbian and Gay Committee (COLEGA AC), the Sexual Diversity Commission (Codise) and the Sexual Diversity University Network said that they were shutting down the office to protest the inaction of the president of the Commission, Jesús Álvarez Cibrián, who refused to take any action against the Supreme Court appeal filed by Jalisco's governor.
A representative of the Human Rights Commission refused to talk to demonstrators but said that the agency stood by its claims that the governor's actions were beyond their scope of work.
In Jalisco we want to do the same: First we will look for them and see how they can support the cause, if there is no free will by gay public figures, or if they don't take a position that is of beneficial on these issues - because we have seen these officials speaking badly about the initiatives that have been presented - if this continues to happen, in the middle of the year we will release some pictures, videos, which include interviews with partners and ex-partners of the officials, so that they can provide names and be witnesses to all of this.
Finally, in an interview posted today on NotiSistema, Rosa Maria Trejo Villalobos, Coordinator of Codise stated that there were 14 couples from Jalisco who were planning to travel to Mexico City to get married on March 14th. She said that they would join approximately 300 other same-sex couples who had petitioned for the right to get married once the law goes into effect on March 4th.
Amazing all that's been happening in Jalisco, no?
As for the homophobic opposition to Mexico City's marriage equality law, it doesn't only come from within the nation. The United States religious right is also freaking out. Earlier today, the World Congress of Families, led by several right-wing religious groups in the United States, announced a "World Congress of Families Leadership Petition To Save Marriage In Mexico City".
US-based signers include Gary Bauer, Tom DeLay, Tony Perkins, Maggie Gallagher and Yuri Mantilla. Oh joy! Funny how they would blow a fuse if another nation meddled into United States policies but are all too glad to tell Mexico what to do.
No worries in the short-term as their actions will probably have null effect on the current Supreme Court's deliberation of the constitutionality of the law. The clear intent is to push Mexico to adopt a constitutional ban on same-sex marriages because, if they haven't achieved a constitutional ban in the United States, why not try Mexico? Ugh.
Related: If you want to follow the latest on Mexico City's marriage equality law and you are on Twitter, you can follow the #MatrimonioDF hashtag or my @NoticiasLGBT Twitter account. A warning: Both feeds provide information that is overwhelmingly in Spanish.
As commercialized as Valentine's Day has become over the years, it also has become a prime opportunity for the LGBT community to make our lack of partnership rights visible whether it's in the United States or any other country that 'observes' the unofficial ode to lovers.
Definitely less massive but just as important were several demonstrations that took place yesterday throughout Latin America.
Peru: Meet Jonathan and Oscar (right), college students and members of the LGBTI Student Bloc of Lima. In what Blog de Lima calls the 2nd annual "Kisses against homophobia" street action, they joined other several gay and lesbian couples and tried to take over the main public space inside a popular Lima shopping mall.
The couples held hands and kissed as they made their way through the mall but ran into heavy security as they tried to congregate inside the mall's main gathering spot. Several couples embraced each other and kissed for the cameras once they left the building (thanks to leading Peruvian LGBT rights advocate Jorge Alberto Chávez Reyes for providing images and video).
Meanwhile, across town, members of the Peruvian TTLGB Network congregated at the "Love Park" in Lima's Miraflores district for a symbolic marriage ceremony between same-sex couples. The Network, which had participated in previous kiss-in actions, said that they wanted to highlight the lack of same-sex partnership rights in the country.
"Just as the laws have to change in Mexico and Argentina, making civil rights be available for everyone, that's what our community demands", said well-known lesbian attorney Susel Paredes, who participated in the ceremony and symbolically married her partner, as quoted by the EFE news service.
There are conflicting reports of how many couples participated in the symbolic marriage. EFE says there were five but Peruvian media says that there were four as well as a heterosexual couple who was there in support for same-sex partnership recognition but did not participate in the ceremony.
Argentina: I haven't seen any coverage yet, but on the eve of Valentine's Day, the leading network of organizations advocating for marriage equality in Argentina called for members of the LGBT community and allies to participate in the 2nd annual "Picnics for the Same Love". The Argentinian LGBT Federation, in collaboration with ElMismoAmor.org [off-line at this moment] were the leading organizers (source: AG Magazine).
Two Argentinean men became the first same-sex couple to marry in all of Latin America back in December after a court declared that it was discriminatory to deny them the right to marry but other gay couples wishing to marry are awaiting an expected Supreme Court ruling on the constitutionality of allowing gay couples to do so.
I do know that, as part of the Valentine's Day events, Argentinean advocates launched their YouTube video version of Lily Allen's "Fuck You":
Chile: Chile is further back on the path of recognizing marriage equality but that didn't keep members from the United Movement of Sexual Minorities (MUMS) to take to the capital's Army Plaza and demand the right to marry.
"Chile is a country in which not everyone is equal," said MUMS director Fernando Muñoz, "it's a country where the laws keep you out and put you on the margin specifically in the sense that there is no recognition of same-sex partners or of common-law partners in the law that recognizes partnerships, nor of those who might want to conform one."
Muñoz also said that if the current law specifically establishes that marriage is only allowed for procreation and implied that it was hypocritical to keep gays from marriage but allow straight couples who cannot procreate to marry even if the law said they don't qualify (source: Radio Cooperativa).
Mexico: As in Argentina, marriage equality is a red-hot topic in Mexico ever since the Mexico City legislature passed a bill allowing same-sex couples to marry in Mexico's capital city (the law goes into effect in March). The measure, which also explicitly would allow same-sex couples to adopt, has run into vehement opposition from right wing politicians and religious leaders - and will also be heading to the country's Supreme Court for review later in the year.
Yesterday's La Jornada reported that different LGBT rights organizations from Jalisco, Colima and Guanajuato marched down the streets of Guadalajara to demand equal partnership rights. The group, mostly made up of lesbian and gay members from different regional university student groups, carried signs and expressed a desire for having similar rights granted to gays and lesbians in Mexico City. The group gathered outside the University of Guadalajara and made their way to the city's main plaza where they staged a kiss-in as the shadow of the city's Metropolitan Cathedral fell on them.
Milenio describes the scene outside the Cathedral and gives a better sense of how massive the march was. They estimate the crowd at 350 and say that, in addition to the kiss-in, eleven gay and lesbian couples also participated in a symbolic wedding ceremony. They also report homophobic insults and obscenities being hurled at marchers even as organizers expressed relief that there were no outbursts of violence.
"We received many threats form many people who said they were not going to allow us to march, including many who said they would be waiting here at the Cathedral to prevent us carrying on with the event, but at the end, none of that came to be," said Karina Velasco Michel.
These weren't the only LGBT-rights demonstrations that took place yesterday in Mexico, nor in other cities throughout Latin America, but I wanted to give you a flavor of what went on.
On December 29th Alex Freyre and José Maria Di Bello shocked the world by becoming the first gay couple to be allowed to marry in all of Latin America. Their marriage victory in Argentina came after a protracted court battle which ended when a Buenos Aires judge ruled that it was discriminatory to deny them the right to marry. A Buenos Aires court placed a stay on that ruling but the couple circumvented that last obstacle by traveling to Tierra del Fuego, where that municipality's Governor's Office allowed the marriage to proceed, making Latin American history at the end of 2009.
By some accounts, more than a hundred same sex couples in Argentina have filed marriage claims following Freyre and Di Bello's historic wedding but, as of now, there are still no laws allowing same-sex couples to marry anywhere in Argentina and no marriage bureaus willing to grant marriage rights to other couples.
is no law allowing those marriages to take place or a marriage bureau willing to start processing additional marriages. The matter is to be decided later this year when the Supreme Court is expected to take up the matter and determine whether the Argentinian constitution is indeed discriminatory in not allowing same-sex couples to wed.
As you would expect, the measure, which also allows same-sex couples to have the same adoption rights as heterosexual partners, has drawn the ire of right-wing political parties and conservative religious groups. Mexico's attorney general has filed a suit to block the law before the Mexican supreme court. The court recently announced that it will accept the suit and determine whether the law is constitutional. But the suit won't reach the court until possibly the end of the year and, by then, hundreds of couples might have already married.
Today's New York Times takes a look at the law and its repercussions. I believe it gives too much credence to the conservative parties that are trying to derail the law but it is a worthy read ["Gay marriage puts Mexico City at center of debate"]. It is also the only English-language coverage that I have seen covering the right-wing challenges that await the landmark law in months to come.
So, come March 4th, please join me in celebrating the same-sex marriages that will take place in Mexico City and rejoice in their historic nature. But also know that the law faces incredible challenges in the future and that the marriage equality fight in Mexico, as in the United States, is far from won.
NOTE: This post replaces and expands on an item I wrote at the end of 2009. I'm replacing the post because it was a bit rushed and because, much to my surprise, it's suddenly become the most discussed topic in Mexico during the past few days.
The video: It all started with a televised segment from a Mexican morning show called "Matutino Express" which aired on December 18th.
In it, lead host Esteban Arce welcomes sex columnist Elsy Reyes to the show for what he says will be a discussion on the difference between 'sexual orientation' and 'sexual preference'.
At first, things seem to run smoothly as Reyes begins to define both terms. But, just as she begins to talk about the fact that homosexuality is not considered to be an illness, he stops her at the 1:23 minute mark of the video and asks "So, is it normal to be a homosexual?" Watch:
Reyes initially sidesteps the question and tries to be gracious about her host's grilling. But Arce wants a direct response from her. "There are things that are normal: Being a man or being a woman" he says,"To be a homosexual is normal?"
When Reyes finally says that many studies show that being gay is an orientation and, as such, it is normal, Arce cuts her off again by saying "no, no, no". He states that Reyes and others might consider homosexuality to be an orientation but asks, for a fourth time, "is it normal?".
Reyes attempts to answer once again but it's clear that Arce is not getting what he wants to hear from her. So he simply interrupts her once again and indicates where his thoughts are going. He says that "what is natural" is for a man and a woman to come together and procreate. He then asks if anything that deviates from sexual relations between a man and a woman is "natural" or "normal".
In vain, Reyes says that sexual relations are not only limited to procreation. Arce's response? "It's not what you believe - it's what it is."
When Reyes says that she is sharing knowledge from the many studies she has read and not relying on her beliefs, Arce responds "What studies! You don't need to be a genius to know that there's a female and there's a male!"
And the hits keep coming!
Arce jokes that "eating cheetos and masturbating in the afternoon" is a sexual preference but isn't necessarily "normal".
When Reyes brings up studies that show that homosexual behavior have been observed among other animal species, he says that male dogs who engage in sex with other male dogs have been deprived of sex for a long time and are "letting themselves go" and that their behavior is considered to be "animal dementia".
He also says that younger people are susceptible to "letting themselves go" and turning gay even "if they look to you like men". "There is a lot of degeneration and a lot of drugs", he explains, as if homosexuality could also be the result of using illegal drugs.
By the end of the segment, Arce doesn't seem to care that he is speaking over the expert they invited to the show and, as she urges tolerance, he keeps repeating that she shouldn't be giving the wrong information to people.
Finally, he states that sexual relations not meant for procreation and not between a man and a woman are not a normal or part of nature. He dismisses Reyes as she is still trying to make a point with an "OK, thank you, let's leave", and that is the end of things.
Initial reaction: The original YouTube video was posted on December 19th, a day after it was broadcast, by someone with the handle of MikeParkRevolutions. I first saw it through a Google Alert but I didn't initially post it because it was hard to identify the actual broadcast date and location. I recognized Arce from a Telemundo gossip show called "Cotorreando" so I erroneously assumed that it was from the United States and I was so incensed by it that I actually forwarded it to GLAAD on December 24th.
In the meantime, I uploaded it to my YouTube page and began to translate it for posting on this blog. With additional research, I found out that Esteban Arce had left Telemundo in 2007 and now worked for Televisa in Mexico. I finally posted the video and a brief note on my blog on December 29th. The women at Macha Mexicopicked up on it on the 30th. Mexican newspaper Milenio had also picked up on it back on December 21st but the newsbrief drew little notice at the time. And I think that was it... until the new year.
On Monday, January 4th, my contacts at GLAAD, alerted me that they had sent the link I gave them to NotieSe and other LGBT media in Mexico. They also alerted me that Mexican LGBT news web-portal Anodis had just published an article about it ("People point out television host's homophobia"). Later that day, El Financiero picked up on a press release sent out by folks involved with Anodis demanding an apology from Esteban Arce ("Esteban Arce's homophobic comments are questioned").
And then, Twitter: That afternoon I started noticing that my Tweeter feed had begun to show links information related to the incident. That was the first time that I noticed the Twitter hashtag #EstebanArceFueraDelAire (#EstebanArceLeaveTheAir) being used to ask Televisa to fire Arce. I found out that the President of Televisa's Board of Directors, Emilio Azcarranga, was also on Twitter (@eazcarraga) and I started urging interested Tweeters to send complaints directly to him.
On Tuesday, January 5th, Mexican mainstream media picked up the Twitter revolt. El Gráfico, a subsidiary of one of the largest Mexican newspapers, El Universo, carried the headline "Twitter lashes out against Esteban Arce" on its print edition (they also posted the video I uploaded on YouTube on its online edition).
Sex columnist Elsy Reyes, who also has a Twitter account (@elsyreyes) posted a link to her version of what happened during the taping of the show on her blog ("Clearing up what happened on Matutino Express and sending thanks"). She said that she had been astounded by the amount of attention that her seven minutes on the show had drawn and apologized to the LGBT community for not having been able to defend herself better and for not having been able to express her views completely. She also noted the "pejorative" and "homophobic" comments made by Esteban Arce but stopped short of calling him a homophobe. She said that she was still unsure whether he had meant his comments to be homophobic.
He was wrong on one account: Someone had taken advantage of the moment to open a Twitter account under Esteban Arce's name and was responding as if he were the real deal. One prominent reporter actually fell for it and interviewed the fake Arce for a national newspaper. Azcarranga wanted to tell people that the account was a fake but, unbeknownst to him, Arce did and still does have a Twitter account (@estarc62).
By Wednesday, January 6th it seemed as if every other press media in Mexico had picked up on the story. The YouTube video I posted had gone to the #1 position on YouTube's "Most Watched" list and thousands of people were logging in to watch each day. On Wednesday, the government also stepped in: The National Council to Prevent Discrimination (CONAPRED) announced that it was considering whether to act upon several complaints received about the broadcast and said that they would soon determine if there were merits to those who said Arce's comments had been discriminatory ("CONAPRED opens complaint against Esteban Arce based on homophobia"). As for Esteban Arce, aside from a couple of Tweets on the issue, he remained silent.
His apology came on the morning of Thursday, January 7th, when the first live edition of "Matutino Express" of 2010 aired live. Watch:
That's right. The only apology Esteban Arce made when he went back on air was to Elsy Reyes for having interrupted her. Using carefully edited clips from the previous show, Arce denies he is a homophobe and paints himself as the victim of intolerance. No mention of him having argued that sex between a man and a woman for the purpose of procreation as the sole "natural" and "nornal" human behavior in this world, no mention of masturbating while eating cheetos, no mention of teens "letting themselves go" into homosexuality, no mention of his repeated attempts to silence Reyes when she brings up academic research on the topic of homosexuality, and, most laughably, an argument that he in no way had meant that gays suffered "animal dementia" when he claimed that dogs who had homosexual behaviors usually were diagnosed which such an illness (he might not have said that gays suffered "animal dementia" but he certainly was making a direct comparison).
Arce also riles against "social networks", including Twitter, and says that the attention given to his statements are the result of people with "bad faith" uploading the segment online. To be expected, and as they did during the controversial segment, the other co-anchors back him up on everything and only speak up to say he is being victimized.
Note the absence of Reyes or anyone who might speak for the LGBT community to give their point of view (Reyes has said that, even though she was a weekly guest on the show, she has yet to receive an invite to come back).
On Friday, January 8th, CONAPRED served official notice to Arce that there were 18 complaints against him before the agency. If found guilty of promoting discrimination, Arce could face a year to three in prison unless he publicly apologizes for his statements on his show ("CONAPRED notifies Esteban Arce about complaints").
Comments on YouTube: Since MikeParkRevolutions posted the original YouTube video on December 19, it has amassed nearly 147,000 views and 5,106 comments. My translated version of the video has gathered another 62,000 and 790 comments since December 27th. My translated video of Esteban Arce's "apology" has drawn 56,000 views and 272 comments since January 7th and also reached #1 on YouTube's "Most Viewed" list in Mexico and #2 on the US "News & Politics" list (see top image).
Comments left on the videos I have uploaded range from those who are furious at Arce to those who back him unconditionally. What's striking is that a lot of those who back Arce and ask that gays "tolerate" his comments actually make the case for those of us who were troubled by his comments. One extreme example of this is the following comment:
I am in agreement that people should not be homophobic, but don't let gays mix with society. Send them to an island and burn them or something like that. I don't want my daughter to grow up with the idea that it's normal since they are even condemned in the Bible...
Or, more insidiously...
Well, he's right! It's not normal!I don't have anything against homosexuals. What's more, I have a lot of friends like that... and the majority are the best! But let's be realist. You need an ovum and sperm to create life. Period. He's not insulting anyone. Just saying what is the truth.
Arce is a wolf in sheep's clothing. By vilifying gays using the same language that fundamentalist religions use against that without actually saying that we are evil sinners, he can claim that he's just spreading simple facts and not being homophobic, giving an example to others of how they can actually justify their own homophobia in the language of freedom of speech and tolerance.
Overreaction? As media coverage of the clip in question grew during the week and coverage began to appear everywhere, complaints about media overkill also began to surface.
Some say that the outsize attention being given to Esteban Arce is actually promoting a show that had poor ratings and turninng him into a larger personality trhan he ever was. Others say that media have latched to the issue as a way to keep people entertained instead of focusing attention on issues such as increasing poverty and violence. Others say that to go after Arce and not go after religious and political figures who are just as homophobic but have more power is counter-productive.
Indeed, when Mexico City granted marriage rights to same sex couples two or three days after the "Matutino Express" segment aired on Televisa, Cardinal Norberto Rivera said the law was "perverse" and "immoral" and warned about the declining civilization. CONAPRED and other public interest groups have responded and asked them to measure their reactions and be more respectful of the LGBT community, but the reaction to their homophobic statements certainly hasn't reached the level it reached with Arce.
This might be in part because people expect such comments to come from the likes of Cardinal Rivera. He has made similar comments in the past and will make similar comments in the future. In other words, his words probably didn't surprise anyone, and even people who rejected his statements might have seen them as par for the course.
But, with Arce, that was not the case. Arce is supposed to be a somewhat neutral television show host and watching him become visibly upset that his fundamentalist religious views are being challenged by a guest and try to stop her by interrupting her at every chance is akin to watching a kid cover his ears and say "Nanananananana" when he doesn't want to hear something. And, as he found out, more than a few people thought his behavior more than reprehensible and decided to pass it along to others.
It's also true that he has gained notoriety, but for all the wrong reasons. It's his one television appearance that will probably forever define his career.
But what many are missing here is that Televisa and Arce might not have ever felt the need to respond or explain themselves if it wasn't for Tweeter and the same social networks that Arce described as lacking any "seriousness". It also puts other people on Mexican television on notice that similar homophobic shenanigans won't be taken down without a response.
As for those comments, perhaps my favorite thing has been this parody of a "Peanuts"cartoon strip, which uses Arce's comments to great effect...
[Source: Blog del Mono Hernández] Panel 1 -Voice coming from TV Set: "Eating cheetos and masturbating in the afternoon is a preference but it's not normal"; Panel 2 - Voice coming from TV Set: "When you put a dog in, they let themselves go, and that's considered to be 'animal dementia'"; Panel 3 - Snoopy: "The more I hear demented animals on TV, the more I care for you..."
In Latin America, April Fools' Day doesn't come in April - nor is it called "April Fools' Day"... discuss.
Actually, it's called "Innocents' Day" and it comes around every December 28th.
Anyhow, considering all the hoopla surrounding the decision last week by Mexico City's Legislative Assembly to grant gays the right to marry and adopt, a Guatemalan newspaper thought that it would be hilarious to prank Guatemalan gay couples yesterday and make them believe that their government had also granted them the right to marry.
In an article titled "The gays will be able to create a family in Guatemala", El Periódico reported that Guatemalan president Álvaro Colom had broken away from his past and promised to promote a law making it easier for gays to marry. President Colom, according to the article, had hosted a surprise Christmas dinner with the country's LGBT leadership on Saturday and had been able to work out every difference that the LGBT rights movement might have held with his government. The article also said that most of the government's ministers had been present at the dinner, including the ministers of Defense, Education and Athletics, and that Colom had taken the opportunity to personally apologize for making comments against the LGBT community in the past.
In addition, the paper said that the Guatemalan president vowed to institute a series of measures to prevent discrimination against the LGBT community in the country, and that he would require any private institution doing business with the country to prove that at least 10% of its workforce was LGBT.
But, wait! It was all a prank!
In the last sentence in the article, the paper said "Lastly, the leader asked all communication media representatives to distribute the news until today, December 28th, Innocents' Day", the only sign that readers had been had.
A few readers caught up with the prank leaving messages behind calling it in poor taste. Others thought it was the real deal, including Guatemalan homophobes who called the news a travesty. And yet, so far, there has been no apology forthcoming from the paper's editors.
From Rex Wockner's weekly syndicated international LGBT news column via Bay Windows:
Mexico City’s Legislative Assembly voted 39-20 to legalize same-sex marriage Dec. 21... Federal benefits, such as pension, inheritance and social-security rights, will remain off-limits to married gay couples without changes in federal law to recognize the Mexico City marriages.
The bill, which also grants gay couples the right to adopt, is expected to be signed into law by Mayor Marcelo Ebrard in January. The law would go into effect in March.
"ATTENTION: In our community, there are more murders each day. Today's hook-up could be your murderer. Be careful of who you invite to your home"
So says a number of stark black and white posters and post-cards that began appearing at a number of gay bars in Mexico City with skulls placed in the middle of two interlocked masculinity symbols.
On Monday, Milenio said that the campaign, meant to raise awareness about a raise in homophobic crimes in the city, was actually the idea of a group of friends who got together and decided to do something. They tell the paper that they knew of at least ten men who had been recently found dead after picking up someone at a gay bar the night before.
The founder of the group, 40-year old Alberto Shueke, said he knew at least three of those men and decided to take action following the gruesome murder of a friend's roommate back in August.
That man, 24-year old Victor Galán, was found stabbed 24 times. Neighbors saw him bring someone home the night before while his roommate was away on vacation.
Shueke said that the campaign was not meant to tell gay men how to behave or to curtail ways in which gay men socialize but that it was just a way to raise awareness about these crimes.
At the bottom, below the warning, the poster also suggests steps that should be taken in case a hook-up does occur. It includes making friends aware of where you will be and with whom, asking friends to take a photo of you and the hook-up, not leaving the bar with more than one person, and avoiding taking the hook-up to your place on the first day of meeting him.
In August, in response to the increasing rate of murders of gay men, Mexico City approved a hate crimes that protects specific social groups, including on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity (SEE: "Mexico City adopts inclusive hate crimes measure", Blabbeando, August 26, 2009).
I might be wrong here, but Mexico City seems to have become the first municipality in Latin America to adopt a hate crimes measure that specifically includes crimes committed on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.
The measure, which was approved on Thursday by an unanimous vote of 39-0 in the Federal District Legislative Assembly, adds a section to Article 138 of the city's Penal Code which establishes that homicides and lesions will be considered as "hate crimes" when they are committed due to hate, and when "the agent commits it based on social or economic status: By association, affiliation or relationship with a defined social group."
A hate crime, the measure says, can be motivated by "ethnic or social origin, nationality or place of origin, color or any other genetic characteristic, sex, language, gender, religion, age, opinions, disability, health status, physical appearance, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, occupation or activity of the victim."
Milenio, which reported on passage of the measure on it's August 20th edition, says that LGBT advocates have already claimed that homophobia might be at play in the murders of six gay men during the last year, even if authorities have said otherwise. The latest, they say, occurred on August 15th, when 24 year old Victor Galán, who had moved to live in Mexico City a month earlier, was stabbed 12 times and found dead in his apartment. Advocates say that robbery was not a motive in the crime and that they suspect he was killed based on the fact that he was gay. Authorities, on the other hand, say that they have not ruled out a "crime of passion."
After the Assembly vote, Assemblymember Ricardo García Hernández applauded the measure and said that such crimes are often left unresolved. “In the majority of the cases, the investigation and the persecution of these crimes do not advance since authorities tend to classify them as 'crimes of passion,'" he said.
"Hate" will now be considered as an aggravating circumstance when it comes to determining punishment although the Milenio article does not specify the extent of any additional punitive measures when an attack is determined to be a hate crime.
According to WikiPedia, the only other country in Latin America with a hate crimes law is Brazil, but it does not specifically include sexual orientation or gender identity under the protected status.
As expected, international LGBT-rights organizations and leaders are not too happy about the latest homophobic rantings by Pope Benedict XVI. If you haven't heard, on the eve of the Christmas holidays, his Holiness implied that saving the world from homosexuality was akin to saving the world from environmental destruction ("Gay Groups Angry at Pope's Remarks," BBC, Dec. 23, 2008).
Neither the Pope's comments nor the angry reaction should surprise anyone but they certainly come right on time for the Vatican-sponsored 6th World Annual Meeting of Families taking place in Mexico City from January 13th to January 18 of 2009. It's not clear if the Pope will attend but the event, the 6th organized by the Catholic Church since 1994 and the first to take place in North America, is expected to draw an estimated 30 Cardinals and 200 priests from around the world in addition to laymen interested in taking part.
Of course, by "families" the confab doesn't really mean all families. Just the heterosexual ones. And by "families" they also mean specially NOT the gay ones. Which is why a few Mexican LGBT-rights advocates are planning some actions.
Diego Cevallos, writing for Inter Press Service in a Spanish-language article published online today, says that some "social activists" as well as same-sex couples are planning to let their voices heard at the event ("Gays raise arms against hostile meeting of families").
From the article:
"They say we are not family, but we are and, additionally, Catholics and proud of it," said to IPS Esteban Castillo, a professional in electronics that lives in a common law partnership with another man.
Carrillo and a group of friends plan to be present at the site of the encounter in Mexico, which will be at the convention center that belongs to Banamex, and loudly, with posters and a "surprise", will claim "our right to be who we are, to be respected and recognized as Catholic believers", he said.
For his part, Víctor Espíndola, Director of the widely read online Mexican LGBT news portal Anodis.com, said that several important protests were planned but would not divulge details. He told IPS that the diversity of those who were planning demonstrations meant that there was also the possibility that certain actions might arise from one day to the other without much planning and that he expected some of them to be just as big.
Mexico City, as IPS notes, has in the last few years adopted resolution granting partnership rights to same-sex couples, allowed transgender individuals to change their identity and name in public documents, allowed terminal patients to decide if they should end their lives and allowed women to have access to an abortion within the first twelve weeks of pregnancy - all of which clashes with the Catholic hierarchy of a deeply Catholic country.
By the way, somewhat related, in terms of the Pope's latest statements is the following blog post by Arthur Leonard which I recommend:
Today's Time Magazine has an article on Mexico City and the astounding recent cultural and political developments that have led to the recognition of some same-sex partnership rights, transgender rights and abortion rights in what many consider to be an overwhelmingly conservative and Catholic country.
It also depicts the outrage felt by certain conservative bastions (including the Catholic Church) at what they see as a loss of values and licentious decadence run amok.
From the article:
The conservatives run scared from these issues because they are afraid voters will see their true intolerance, Mexico is changing little by little and the capital is at the forefront of that change. People visit from the provinces and see it is better to live with rights and tolerance. And they want to take those rights home with them - PRD leglislator David Sanchez Camacho, the only openly gay lawmaker in the Mexican Congress
Even if you live in Mexico City you might have blinked and missed the latest gathering by those who allege that homosexuality can be treated or cured through therapy which involved some prominent United States adherents to the so-called "ex-gay" movement.
Originally Mexican LGBT rights activists had planned protests outside the event, which reportedly drew 300 people and took place at the ritzy Sheraton Hotel in the historic district of Mexico City, but they decided against it in order not to draw additional attention to the event ("Protest Against Anti-gay Conference Cancelled," Anodis.com, May 1, 2008).
Web portal Anodis.com, who ran excellent multi-day coverage of the event, revealed on April 16th that students from the Autonomous National University of Mexico (UNAM) were the first to notice fliers for the event when they saw them posted on college bulletin boards.
They also noticed that panelists included a virtual who's who of those involved in the US ex-gay movement including Joseph Nicolosi, co-founder and president of the much-debunked National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality; Dean Byrd (pictured above), president of the Thrasher Research Fund, a private foundation that allegedly provides grants for project that find "solutions to children's health problems" (he also is the incoming president of NARTH and is among the leading advocates for the theory that people are not born gay); Arthur Goldberg, co-director of Jews Offering New Alternatives to Homosexuality (JONAH) and Charlene Cothran, publisher of Venus Magazine who made news back in 2007 when she announced she was renouncing to her lesbianism and changing the content of Venus to reflect her new found anti-gay news.
On May 2nd, Anodis.com described Mr. Byrd's opening session presentation in which he promoted "sexual reorientation" therapies for gays who might want to leave their "lifestyle" claiming that he wasn't there to change all gays. The article says that it was the first time that Mexico City had seen a public presentation of the ideas put forth by NARTH.
Anodis.com also says that there were both public presentations open to anyone and private ones for "specialists."
Organized by Renacer (Rebirth), an alleged "non-profit coalition," local panelists included members of Exodus Latin America - also based on a United States anti-gay organization - and the Mexican Association of Education on General Sexuality (AMESI).
There is a conference website that offers additional information on panelists and the program and ways to order DVD's of the presentations given. Surprisingly for a nonprofit, there is little information about just who makes up the Renacer board, where they get their funding or the deep involvement by US-based ex-gay promoters.
Makes me want to shout: Keep your hands off Latin America, NARTH! And to think that some say that homosexuality is exported to Latin America when, in fact, it's the United States anti-gay industry that is seeking to make inroads.
My friend Francisco Madrigal, a long-time LGBT rights advocate from Costa Rica, sent me wonderful news earlier this week.
On Wednesday, the Costa Rican government released Executive Decree 34399-S with signatures from President Oscar Arias Sanchez and Health Minister Dr. Maria Luisa Avila designating May 17th as the nation's official "National Day Against Homophobia."
"Public institutions must amply disseminate the objectives of this commemoration. They also must facilitate, promote and support activities directed at the eradication of homophobia."
The May 17th date was chosen by advocates as commemoration of the date that the World Health Organization officially removed "homosexuality" as a mental illness in 1990.
There have been sporadic events and demonstrations throughout Latin America in past years on May 17th but this is the first time that I know of a Latin American president signing an official declaration recognizing the event.
In Mexico, LGBT rights advocates were successful in getting Mexico City to officially recognize May 17th as a "Day Against Homophobia" but efforts to have the federal government recognize a national commemoration have faltered.
The Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) invites you to a “meet & greet” with Antonio Medina, well-known journalist and editor of Letra S, La Jornada’s monthly lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) and sexology supplement. La Jornada is one of Mexico’s most important newspapers. Medinawill share his own experiences in trying to eradicate sensationalistic LGBT images in mainstream media.
Hear – from someone who’s always been at the forefront – how the LGBT community enacted Mexico City’s civil unions. Medina and his partner, Jorge Cerpa (pictured above in a photo from La Jornada) became the first gay couple who signed a civil union in that city.
Come & create ways to share vital information between your organization and Mexico’s LGBT community.
Date:Friday, April 27, 2007 Location: GLAAD 248 W 35th St, 8th Floor New York, NY10001 Time:7pm-9pm
Snacks will be served.
YOU MUST RSVP: E-mail Mónica Taher at taher@glaad.org or call Hunter Aldrich at 646-871-8007.
Mexico City and the northern Mexican state of Coahuila might have taken Mexico by surprise when they passed separate same-sex civil union bills last year (Mexico City's law goes into effect on March 16th while Coahuila, which adopted a more extensive law, has already seen several couples enter into a civil union), but the fact is that most gay rights advocates and organizations in the country were probably equally as surprised by these developments.
Not that similar bills had not been introduced and supported by pro-gay legislators with the backing of segments of the gay community, but - in the past - these were mostly symbolic efforts by candidates who wanted to attract the gay vote even if the bill they were sponsoring had no chance in hell of being passed.
In other words, these gains were not necessarily a result of a mass mobilization by Mexican gay rights leaders that demanded the right to civil unions but, rather, by developments in local politics that made the legislative bodies of Mexico City and Coahuila more open to voting in favor of gay rights.
Still, do these developments also reflect that Mexico as a whole is becoming more gay-friendly? Maybe... but a majority still rejects gays.
In a door-to-door survey conducted in February by Roy Campos Research/Consulta Mitofsky, pollsters interviewed 1,000 voters of 18 years of age or older throughout Mexico regarding the "Myths and Preconceptions about Homosexuality" (results of the survey in PDF form here).
With a margin of error of plus/minus 4%, here are a few of their findings:
When asked if a person with a specific characteristic who was not a relative would be allowed to live at their home: 54% said they would not allow a gay man to live with them (40% would), 52% would not allow a lesbian (39% would) and 49% said they would not allow someone with AIDS (41% would).
Breaking it down, the researchers noted that the older the person was, the more intolerant they were of gays (with 66% of those older than 50 saying they would not allow a gay man or a lesbian man in their home) and that people surveyed in rural areas also showed less tolerance than those in urban areas.
When asked what their reaction would be if one of their sons or daughters wanted to introduce a same-sex partner, 16% said that they would not want to meet the person with an additional 46% declaring that while they would accept a same-sex partner, they would also not want to meet them (only 38% said they would like to meet the partner).
43% thought that people were born gay (compared to 46% that said you could become gay) although more than 10% of those surveyed did not respond to this question. 59% said that being gay is a risk factor for AIDS.
Finally, the survey asked participants whether they agreed or disagreed with the following statements (breakdown for each follows:
"A homosexual couple should have the same rights as a woman-man couple" (46% agreed, 47% disagreed, 7% did not respond).
"Partners who are lesbian women should be allowed to adopt" (34% agreed, 58% disagreed, 8% did not respond)
"Homosexual partners should be allowed to enter into matrimony" (33% agreed, 58% disagreed, 9% did not respond)
"Partners who are homosexual men should be allowed to adopt" (23% agreed, 68% disagreed, 9% did not respond)
So, there is still a long road ahead for acceptance though I also wonder how these figures would compare to polls in the United States. At least in California, age difference also plays a big part.
Side note: The poll also asked if Mexican people would feel comfortable living with someone of indigenous background. Considering that most Mexicans have an indigenous background, it is a bit shocking to 21% would say that they would not allow such a person to live in their homes. 27% said that they would not live with someone of a different race.
Racism and the right.
-
[image: Image result for right wing images]The following is an article
written for the New York Times opinion page by *Ross Douthat.*
*I disagree with some...
The 'Dangers' of Homosexuality in 1966
-
Call me sadomasochistic for it, but there are times in which I like to look
read past articles or look at past videos which show the world when things
were...
Ultimate Guide to Finding a Fuckbuddy Abroad
-
Going abroad has so many benefits. You get to experience a new culture,
new foods, and meet tons of new people, whether they’re with you on the
trip or t...
Schön Küche Renovieren Aus Alt Mach Neu
-
cool gros einbaukuche weiss hochglanz einbauk c3 bcche from küche
renovieren aus alt mach neu Dieses ist erstaunlich, wie man Farbe aus einer
alten Tür e...
White Feminism Did Not Save Us
-
It is the morning after and my feed is full of angry posts about who is
responsible for this. I have a suggestion:
Back off from third party voters or eli...
Shakira (feat. Maluma) - "Chantaje"
-
Andrew Casillas said it best when he rejected the notion of Shakira as
Latin America's Prince and relegated her to the category of Latin America’s
Jay-Z ...
Diversidad Capital: discriminación por edad
-
Esta semana en Diversidad Capital por Capital 21 hablamos sobre
discriminación por edad con: Ana Francis Mor. Humberto Álvarez. Victoria
Beltrán del Consej...
Click On Over To The New JMG!
-
The new JMG is live right now so you can click right over and create a
bookmark for JoeMyGod.com. But keep the old bookmark for a bit as we're
going to ke...
It Is Accomplished
-
As Gandhi never quite said, First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you.
Then they attack you. Then you win. I remember one of the first TV debates
I had...
MIT Fellowship and Relocation
-
Very excited and grateful to begin a new chapter in my life. The
Massachusetts Institute of Technology has awarded me one of ten Knight
Science Journalism ...
Joining the Trans Advocacy Network
-
Post by Christopher Argyros, Pride Agenda Transgender Rights Organizer I’m
excited to announce that the Pride Agenda has joined the nationwide Trans
Advoca...
Chess, anyone?
-
Art by MUROB
From Wikipedia...
Chess Records was an American record label based in Chicago, Illinois. It
specialized in blues, R&B, gospel music, early ro...
Blabbeando does not claim credit for any images featured unless otherwise noted. Usually we try to give credit when we can. All visual content is copyright to its respectful owners.
If you own rights to any of the images, or are depicted thereof, and do not wish to appear here, please contact us for prompt removal.
The views expressed on this site are my own. They do not reflect the views of my employer, or any professional, or legal organization of which I am affiliated.
Posts
