Historic: Cuba protects workers from discrimination based on sexual orientation (Report)

Cuban parliament as they debated adding adding anti-LGBT discrimination language to the island's labor laws (via CubaDebate)

In what Cuban LGBT advocates are calling a historic victory the Cuban parliament has reportedly adopted changes to the island's labor codes to include language that explicitly bans employment discrimination based on sexual orientation.

Blogger Francisco Rodriguez who is better known by his nom de plume Paquito El De Cuba broke the news on Friday evening with a series of tweets in Spanish that read as follows:

"Experienced a countless number of emotions today at the Parliament. We now have the 1st law that protects gays, in this case at the workplace. The intense parliamentary debate left it almost for certain that the labor law will also ban discrimination based on gender identity. [President Raul Castro's daughter] Mariela Castro proposed banning discrimination based on gender identity and obtained the support of Christian and intellectual parliamentary leaders."

The parliament is currently taking a look at suggested changes to the labor code and approving them section by section during a series of parliamentary debates which began on Friday.

In a follow-up blog post in which he expanded his thoughts Francisco stated that a majority of the parliament voted in favor of banning discrimination based on sexual orientation at work ("We succeeded! The first Cuban law to protect LGBT people's rights").

He also said that while other protections had yet to be approved Mariela Castro, daughter of Cuban president Raul Castro and newly elected member of the parliament, stood up and called for additional language banning employment discrimination on the basis of gender identity, HIV status and disability.  Francisco says that while some deputies spoke against the measures they received immediate support from Miriam Ofelia Ortega Suárez who is also the first woman to be ordained as pastor of the Presbyterian Church in Cuba as well as deputy Pablo Odén Marichal who is an Episcopalian pastor as well.

Cuban vice president Miguel Díaz-Canel, who also has a seat in the parliament, said he recognized the political value of Mariela Castro's proposals and suggested the creation of a parliamentary commission to study and implement the suggestions.  President Raul Castro who led the Friday parliamentary sessions backed the proposal and a majority voted in favor of sending the additional proposals to a committee.

The specific language banning employment discrimination specifically based on sexual orientation was approved by the same majority vote and is, in effect, a done deal according to Francisco.

Writing before the vote took place blogger Camilo Garcia - better known as k1000g - wrote that, if passed, it would "be the first time in the history of Cuba when there is a bill explicitly protecting the rights –specifically at their working environment– of the people who have decided to live openly in contrast with heterosexual norms" ("On the eve of a significant step").

Camilo ends by writing the following:

It also constitutes a valuable step, because it was the citizenship participation that brought this issue to the legislation. It happened without any public action, because –as expected-- the national media did not say a word about it during the numerous press reports they have published in the last few months during this process... Something like this makes us think in two things: It may be a demonstration that the perception of the Cuban people about sexual orientation is changing, slightly for good, and that people have lost their fear to talk about it and to defend openly their rights openly. Then we are also talking about an important step against patriarchal power in Cuba... It will also be an action of historic fairness ¿How many people we know that haven’t had access to a job, or have left their profession, due to homophobic actions? ¿How many we know who has suffered in silence all their lives, or have taken more radical decisions –emigration or even suicide– as a result of homophobia? It is clear that this step brings more challenges. Among them, the necessary changes in regulations not to leave the new Working Code to fall on deaf ears. The subject of “gender identity” is still pending because –although people don’t understand it– trans people may not be homosexuals… and they still remain excluded from this piece of legislation. Besides, there’s still an urgent need of a wide and effective education campaign among the general population that addresses respect to sexual rights. In May 2013 the ILGA map recognized that 66 countries have adopted explicit protection rules over these peoples. Cuba might be number 67 and keep taking new significant steps… because it is important to work out on policies that protect the rights of all people – and including sexual orientation as it was done at the 2012 Party Conference – but it is more important to make those commitments real by making them the law.

During the Friday session President Raul Castro also honored the late former South African president and human rights giant Nelson Mandela.

UPDATE #1: In a previous post before the law was approved Francisco took a look at the pluses and minuses of the measure and highlighted removal of language that would have protected Cubans from employment discrimination based on "political opinion" which had been included in a first draft.  Francisco called it a major step back.

UPDATE #2: Michael Lavers at the Washington Blade touched base with some of the leading critics of the Cuban government in the U.S. regarding this post. None of them were aware of the developments but they try to walk back some of the statements in this post.

Cuban-born Republican U.S. Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen was particularly dismissive of any claims that the Cuban government might be advancing on LGBT rights telling the Blade as follows:

The tyrannical regime in Cuba likes to fool those who are easily fooled but, unless there are human rights for all, there can be no true rights just for gays. One would have to be quite gullible to give any credence to reports that the non-freely elected sham of a parliament has passed an non-discrimination law regarding individuals who are LGBT. The Castro regime allows no freedom but it knows how to sugar coat its horrid human rights record by promoting a law that will never mean a thing. The Cuban people deserve freedom, whether they are gay or straight. Liberty knows no gender identity.

You can read more here.

UPDATE #3: Rep. Ros-Lehitenen tweets:

Don't fall 4 this sham. There's no freedom in #Cuba. @marielacastro is part of despotic regime. Don't be duped! http://t.co/PWrwAzzJhJ
— Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (@RosLehtinen) December 22, 2013

UPDATE #4: Well known Cuban government dissident Orlando Luis Pardo, taking notice that language prohibiting discrimination based on political opinion was eliminated from the bill, took to Twitter to express his displeasure.

"CUBAN POLITICAL APARTHEID," he writes adding a link to Francisco's blog post, "You can be LGBT or black in Cuba but not a Democrat of anti-Castro".

APARTHEID POLÍTICO EN CUBA http://t.co/Ug5LFDDisx Se puede ser LGBT o negro pero no demócrata ni antiCastro @paquitoeldecuba @CastroEspinM
— Orlando Luis Pardo (@OLPL) December 22, 2013

To be updated as more information becomes available.

RELATED:

• Cuban Labor Code to Protect LGBT Rights (Havana Times) 
• Cuba tiene un nuevo Código de Trabajo más inclusivo (IPS)

Puerto Rican men give up Eagle Scout badges over Boy Scouts' discriminatory policies

Joining thousands of Boy Scouts in the United States who have turned in their merit badges and renounced their affiliation with the agency in protest of their discriminatory policies, three Puerto Rican men have followed suit and publicly renounced their Eagle Scout honors and badges.

In a statement addressed to the Puerto Rican chapter of the Boy Scouts of America and published today in El Vocero, the three former Boy Scouts - José Aníbal Herrero Acevedo, Juan Gabriel Marrero Delgado and Luis Salvador Herrero - urged the agency to change their ban on LGBT members.

My translation of their statement:

We have made the decision to renounce the Boy Scouts' highest honor to raise the alarm against an organization that refuses to accept members of the LGBT community as part of their membership. In Puerto Rico of the 21st century there is no room for intolerance, discrimination or homophobia and, as a result, we can no longer be part of an organization that promotes any of it.

Being a part of the Boy Scouts of America was a unique part of our lives and that's the reason we cannot simply stand with our arms crossed before an organization that has shut its doors to a significant part of the community.  We cannot continue wearing our Eagle Scout badges with pride unless the Boy Scouts eliminate their unjust policies and allow gays to openly participate in the organization.

The great experiences and memories of the time we spent in the troop last a lifetime and they must be available to everyone and not just a few. We call on other young Eagle Scouts from our troop and throughout Puerto Rico to join our efforts and to renounce their Eagle Scout rank until the Puerto Rican chapter of the Boy Scouts changes its discriminatory policy against the gay community.

The three men, currently in their 20's, were members of the same Guaynabo-based troop more than twenty years ago and have remained friends since then. Earlier today, Herrero took to Twitter to publicly announce their stand (in Spanish)...

Hoy @jmarrero86 @lherrero y yo renunciamos a la insignia de Águila de los Niños Escuchas por su políticas intolerantes vocero.com/ninos-escucha-…
— José Herrero Acevedo (@joseanibal) February 10, 2013

Herrero also announced the launch of a Facebook page titled "No Discrimination in the Boy Scouts of Puerto Rico".

A certain someone preparing to fill a judge's seat in the Australian version of "The Voice" took notice. Ricky Martin thanked the three men in a tweet sent to his 8,000,000+ followers.

@joseanibal @lherrero @jmarrero86 Gracias!
— Ricky Martin (@ricky_martin) 10 de febrero de 2013

In October of 2012, the Georgia-based office of the national Boy Scouts of America released a public statement apologizing for 5,000 instances of sexual abuse committed against members of the Boy Scouts in Puerto Rico between the years of 1959 and 1988. The apology followed an Oregon court ruling that made the records public.

In July we took a look at the Boy Scouts in Latin America and their policy on LGBT members.  Surprisingly we only found out one Latin American country that banned gays from the Boy Scouts - Panama - and even they seemed to backtrack once the policy became public.

Related:

• Pedro Julio Serrano thanks young people who renounced the Boy Scouts in solidarity with the LGBT community (Spanish)

Panama's Boy Scouts Association vows to cure gay scouts or else ban them from the organization (UPDATED)

Not two days after the Boy Scouts of America reaffirmed their discriminatory ban on gays, the National Association of Boy Scouts in Panama has announced that it will remove any child, young man or adult who is a current member of the Association and is found to be openly gay.

"We cannot allow the participation of people who have tendencies which are opposed to the formation of our values", said the Association's Executive Director Victor Winter to La Prensa.

Winter argued that the removal process would be "subtle" but that the step was needed because "it goes against our principles and ethic and moral values."

The new policy was actually adopted at a meeting that took place on March 21st but was only announced yesterday.

The Association's norms now include a paragraph that says "Discrimination based on gender will not be allowed, with the understanding that no members with obvious homosexual behaviors or who admit being homosexual will be admitted. Sexual harassment will also not be permitted.  Said infractions, if proven, will lead to the expulsion of the person committing them."

Most worrisome, Winters said that the Association already had put into place programs to help homosexual children "revert" their sexual orientation back to straight.  "We have programs," he told La Prensa, "We do put in our grain of sand in straightening their path."

They also said that before kicking out a Boy Scout who was gay they would first reach out to their parents which I assume means that they would offer the "reversion" program to the parents for their gay kids as an alternative to being kicked out.

Ricardo Beteta, Director of The Association of New Men and Women of Panama (AHMNP), the nation's leading LGBT rights organization, told La Prensa that he was a former Boy Scout and Troop Leader from 1965 to 1973 and condemned the announcement.

"Banning sexual contact within the Troop is not the same thing as defining homosexuality is a deviant behavior and offering a cure," he said, "that is nefarious and discriminatory".

Beteta said that he had first hand knowledge because he had been a victim of so-called reconversion therapy programs forty years ago and survived them to become the director of Panama's leading LGBT rights organization.

Augustín Clément, another leading LGBT rights leader, asked all Panamanians who believed in equality to stop supporting the Boy Scouts Association economically.  He said that each non governmental organization had the right to establish their own rules and regulations but he also urged the government to investigate whether the Association was violating the human dignity of those Boy Scouts who are gay or thought to be gay [Image: Agustín Clement in red and Ricardo Beteta celebrate the Panamanian LGBT pride march that took place on May 25th].

COSTA RICA: Meanwhile in Costa Rica and also in the wake of the announcement by the Boy Scouts of America, Peggi Chávez, Executive Director of the nation's Guides and Scouts Association, told La Nación that their non-discriminatory policy towards gays and lesbians would remain intact. Chávez said that the issue was not under discussion since "each person has the right to determine what is best for their lives."

HONDURAS, EL SALVADOR & NICARAGUA: As EFE reports today, Raúl del Cid, Director of the Honduran Scouts Association said that they would also not determine membership based on a person's sexual orientation while Aníbal Abendaño, Director of the Support Unit for Scouts of El Salvador, also said that everyone age seven to twenty-one were welcome to serve as scouts regardless of gender or sexual orientation.  An unnamed source within the Nicaraguan Scouts Association also said that they would not discriminate against gay and lesbian scouts.

COLOMBIA: In 2003, the Colombian Constitutional Court took up a case filed by Edgar Eduardo Robles Fonnegra who argued that the Colombian Scouts Association had kicked him out for being gay.

The Court ruled in Robles' favor and said that it was unconstitutional for the Association to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation.

--- UPDATES ---

[July 21st, 2012] Panama's TVN Noticias reports tonight that Victor Winter seems to be looking for a way to take back his words in the face of mounting criticism and increased international media inquiries. There are no direct quotes but the television news web portal says that Winter now claims that La Prensa misinterpreted his words and all he meant to say was that gays involved with the Boy Scouts in Panama were expected to "behave correctly" and follow the values of the organization with respect to their contact with minors.  He denies that this means that gays would be immediately banned from the organization although his latest statements directly contradict the Association's norms and regulations as obtained and shown on La Prensa's website.

[July 22nd, 2012] Victor Winter now says that he will no longer be speaking to media and will refer all inquiries to the president of the Panamanian Boy Scouts organization Carlos Torres.

La Prensa has tried to reach Torres without success. They should demand information about the "reversion" programs the institution seems to be currently running according to Mr. Winters.

Interestingly in 2010 the World Organization of the Scout Movement designated Panama as the new headquarters of the Inter-American Scout Office. Mr. Torres, in addition to being the President of the Panamanian Boy Scouts organization, was also named the legal representative of the World Scout Bureau, Interamerican Region.

Related:

• Gays face purging from Panama Scouts Association (Newsroom Panama)

Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez on marriage equality and anti-gay persecution

As rare as it is to have Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez on the record on LGBT rights, I wanted to share this little nugget from an interview given on the spot during his visit to Europe last month. In it, an Italian gossip show host lobbies a series of questions on controversial issues and elicits as clear an answer from Chavez on his views on marriage equality and anti-gay discrimination. From my translation:

REPORTER: Can you tell me your position on gay marriage? [EDIT] ...in a world in which gay marriage is possible.
HUGO CHAVEZ: I believe that... look, each country has its customs, no? At least, in Venezuela, it is not well-regarded, no? But there are societies, there are societies, there are ideas which continue to mature [EDIT] ...what I am indeed against is any persecution against anyone based on sexual orientations...
REPORTER: What do you think... [CLIP]
HUGO CHAVEZ: ...we are all equal, the particularities of the individual, of a human being, have to be respected.
REPORTER: ..brings us, justly, to gay marriage... [CLIP]
HUGO CHAVEZ: In Venezuela, it is not well-regarded...
REPORTER: What do you think...
HUGO CHAVEZ: Now, if... Me? The same as Venezuelans, as the majority of Venezuelans, those of us who don't see it as being good.
REPORTER: No...
HUGO CHAVEZ: No, but it's a state of opinion, it's a state of opinion. Which doesn't mean we are in opposition, that I am in opposition of what you might think.

Translation caveat number one: Italian is not my first language, so I might have erred in translating some of the reporter's questions. Translation caveat number two: As you would expect for an Italian paparazzi show, the video has several edits which means that Chavez' response has been severely truncated. Translation caveat number three: "No es bien visto" can be translated as "it's not well-regarded" but doesn't have the full impact of "it's not considered to be a good thing" which is probably what Chavez means.

All in all, Chavez admits a couple of things: 1) He thinks that marriage equality is a symbol of a 'mature' society and yet he sides with the Venezuelan population that believes marriage equality is wrong, and; 2) He says that he is against persecution against anyone based on sexual orientation.

Last week, the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission sent out an urgent alert on the arbitrary detention of LGBT leaders in Caracas. So far, no word from the Venezuelan government or Chavez. I guess it's one thing to say that he is against discrimination against the LGBT community when interviewed in a foreign country but quite another when it comes to governing his own country.

Update (or, some additional thoughts as of 11/21/09): Over at Towleroad as well as below, some readers have taken some issue with what I wrote on this post. I wanted to address a couple of those issues.

On taking Chavez to task for violence and detentions against the LGBT community in Caracas instead of the local authorities and the city's mayor: Caracas Mayor Antonio Ledezma might be among those who oppose Chavez and the IGLHRC 'action alert' might be directed at local Caracas officials, but ultimately Chavez is the country's president and it would make a world of difference if he stepped in and publicly declared the detentions a violation of people's human rights. What's particularly galling to me is that there he is in Venice boasting that he is against persecution based on sexual orientation and yet, when he goes back home, he continues his long-term silence on LGBT issues.

On taking Chavez to task for his position on marriage equality when even US President Barack Obama does not support marriage rights for same-sex couples: I doubt that marriage equality advocates in Venezuela give a second thought to Obama or his position on the issue when advocating for the right of same-sex couples to marry in their country. The video was actually sent to me by an LGBT rights organization called Venezuela Diversa and, in a statement that accompanied the video, they deplored Chavez's stand on the issue. Interestingly, they argue that, on LGBT issues, Venezuela is being left behind other countries in Latin America (no mention of Obama) and argued that left-wing movements throughout the world had embraced the issue and now support it (an arguable point).

Argentina is about to see the first marriage between a same-sex couple in all of Latin America in a couple of weeks and courts and legislatures have paved the way for a series of advances in countries like Uruguay, Colombia, Brazil, Mexico, Chile and others. They are advances that have been obtained through the hard work of local organizations and activists with little economic or strategic input from organizations in the United States.

Obama should be taken to task for not being the "fierce advocate" he promised to be on LGBT rights but his reticence does not mean that every other heads of nation should get a free pass on LGBT issues, including marriage equality.

On these being 'fringe' issues in a region that is facing larger problems: Arguments that the Latin American region is largely homophobic and not amenable to be progressive on LGBT issues, or that these are fringe issues raised by a small minority in countries facing greater social problems, are defeatist and ignorant of the tremendous advances that have been made in the last few years when it comes to same-sex partnership rights in Latin America.

Related:

• Towleroad: Hugo Chavez on LGBT persecution and marriage equality (Nov. 19, 2009) - Read comments below post for commentary.
• The Huffington Post / IPS News: Venezuela: Gays Attacked, Harassed By Police (Nov. 4, 2009)

Previously:

• President Chavez is too macho to be gay (Sept. 16, 2007)

Peru: Police cadets fight dismissal due to gay rumors

I've certainly been burning that 'annotations' function over at YouTube as of late and here's another video which I've used the function to translate what's being said on-screen to English.

In this case, the news report is about a couple of police academy cadets who were dismissed from school in 2003 based on rumors that they were gay. As Diario de Lima reports, Peru's constitution bans discrimination based on sexual orientation, but what if they neither man identifies themselves as gay?

Well, one of the dismissed cadets brought his case before Peru's Constitutional Court and argued that it had been unconstitutional to have been dismissed based on the perception that he might be gay - and he won. He was recently reinstated as a police officer.

Based on the verdict, the second man says - in the video - that he is also considering going to court and one of the Constitutional Court judges has said that the court should also vote in his favor. Judge Carlos Mesia says that the country's military regulations still ban homosexual conduct among police officers and soldiers but that they precede changes to the Peruvian constitution which now make the ban unconstitutional.

Updates:

• Interior Minister bans gays from police service possibly setting up constitutional clash (May 14, 2009)
• A call for an "immediate repeal" of homophobic police regulation (May 23, 2009)

Bolivia: New constitution bans discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity

An unpublished comment from an anonymous reader dated February 4th asks "Why no story on Bolivian voters voting last week for a constitution that outlaws discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation?"

Short answer: Because I wanted to include one specific piece of information and kept looking for it with no luck... until today!

Here are the basics: Following similar efforts by Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and Ecuadorean President Rafael Correa, Bolivian President Evo Morales won a huge political victory on January 25th when 61 percent of Bolivian voters voted in favor of adopting a new constitution.

The constitution, which goes into effect today, "promises more power for the poor, Indian majority; recognizes communal justice; grants some regional autonomy; and declares coca a part of the nation's heritage", according to an article posted today by the Associated Press.

It also allows Morales, the first Bolivian president of indigenous background, to run for a second term and to further establish a socialist vision for the country, even as it also leaves deeper divisions between those who backed the changes and does who did not.

LGBT community protected from discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity: So, as the reader noted, there was more to the new constitution than the AP reports. Here is what it says under Article 14.II:

In the title 'Fundamental Rights and Guarantees': The State prohibits and punishes all form of discrimination founded on the basis of sex, skin color, gender, age, sexual orientation and gender identity, origin, culture, nationality, citizenship, language, religious beliefs, ideology, political or philosophical affiliation,

That, according to an article in El Deber comparing misleading arguments being made by the opposition to the actual constitutional text (the full document can be downloaded here).

Constitution defines marriage as that between a man and a woman: According to some reports, earlier versions of the constitution paved a way for the recognition of civil unions between same-sex partners. Instead, that language was dropped and replaced with Article 63 (an attempt to appease religious leaders who had complained):

I. Marriage between a woman and a man is constituted by legal ties and is based on equal rights and responsibilities between spouses; II. Free or common-law unions that meet conditions of stability and singularity, and be maintained between a woman and a man without legal impediment, will produce the same rights as a civil union, not only in the personal and patrimonial relationships between co-inhabitants, but also with respect to sons and daughters who are adopted or born from those partnerships.

To put it mildly, this did not appease religious leaders and, particularly, those on the right. Days before the vote, right wing religious leaders launched a predictable but nevertheless incredibly ugly attack on the proposed constitution.


The attack ad: I had read that the religious right had launched an incredibly offensive television ad as a last-ditch attempt to defeat the constitutional changes. It told believers that the new constitution would "throw God out of Bolivia" and that a vote against it would be a vote in favor of God. I searched for it on YouTube and elsewhere in vain but no luck... Until today! I've uploaded it on YouTube and posted it above.

I am struck by the imagery: A still from Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ" (which I have also seen widely used by local NYC Latino Evangelical leaders to whip-up resentment against gays and lesbians); Evo Morales shown in a traditional Indian costume which probably serves to inflame racist sentiments against indigenous cultures; what appears to be an image of a US-based couple kissing, which of course perpetuates the idea that homosexuality is being imported from elsewhere; an image of an aborted fetus which is a staple of those used by the religious-right in the United States; and, of course, an image of children holding the Cuban flag to tie it all up to Communism.

The AFP says that the ad was so offensive that it was banned by the country's independent electorate tribunal but that television stations who opposed approval of the constitution continued to run it until election date.

If you have read this blog in the past, you might be surprised that I am backing the constitutional changes in Bolivia. Then again, neither Morales not Ecuador's Correa are the egotistical maniacal figure represented by Venezuela's truly despicable Chavez (even as they follow his every step).

This is why socialism is capturing the hearts and minds of folk in Latin America (and why Chavez is so successfully in his quest to remain in power indefinitely): The political alternative is even worse! They champion discrimination against minorities, the worst sort of right-wing ideals, policies that discriminate against indigenous communities and, of course, anti-choice and anti-gay sentiments left and right. Heck! They are decrying that the additional anti-discrimination protections covering indigenous communities are an infringement on their freedoms! Their true fear? The new constitution establishes a separation of church and state for the first time ever in Bolivia which means that they have lost a certain grasp on the legislature.

I mean, considering what they are willing to do in the ad above and if you had a similar choice, wouldn't you back Evo as well?

Related:

• Bolivians appear to back charter (The Washington Post, Jan. 26, 2009)
• Touching a nerve: Freedom of religion in the Bolivian constitutional debate (Andean Information Network, Jan. 16, 2009)
• Bolivian constitutional referendum analysis: An Overview (Andean Information Network, Jan. 14, 2009)

Chile to stop identifying gays as a "risk group" for sexually transmitted diseases

EFE reports today that Alvaro Erazo, the country's Health Minister (right), has announced that the government will "eliminate instructions in medical exams in which gays were identified as a risk group for sexually transmitted diseases and by which they were submitted to specific blood tests."

The announcement came after a meeting held with Rolando Jiménez, President of the Homosexual Movement for Integration and Liberation (Movilh).

According to the article, the LGBT rights organization had already gotten the government to eliminate a ban on blood donations by transgender individuals and gay and bisexual men back in 2003. But instructions that remained in official preventive medicine manuals still instructed health practitioners to ask a person if their partner had been exposed to a sexually transmitted disease and to tell the person that STD's were more frequent among people who had sexual relations with same-sex partners. If the person indicated having a same-sex partner, health practitioners were instructed to urge them to take blood tests.

Under the directive announced today, health practitioners will not be instructed to ask those questions and gays will not be instantly urged to undergo blood tests if they disclose their sexual orientation.

Update: Puebla Archdiocese drops plan to test priesthood hopefuls for HIV

Archbishop Rosendo Huesca y Pacheco, leader of the Puebla Archdiocese in Mexico, has said that seminary candidates will not be tested for HIV - as originally announced on January 26th - as part of enforcing a church ban on gay men and HIV positive individuals ("Puebla Archdiocese cancels conducting HIV tests on priesthood hopefuls", NotieSe).

The plan had drawn an outcry from Mexican human rights advocates who warned that the church was in violation of anti-discrimination and right-to-privacy federal policies.

In a press conference held on Tuesday, Huesca said that the HIV ban was still very much in effect but claimed that the church would drop plans to test every potential seminarians due to lack of funds to implement the plan. Instead, according to NotieSe, Huesca "invited" those interested in joining the priesthood to get a general medical check-up before joining the church.

Huesca said that the Puebla Archdiocese "values, respects, promotes and defends the human rights of everyone without distinction, for which it will never approve any form of discrimination" and said that banning HIV positive men from priesthood was akin to telling a potential mountain climber to refrain from the sport if a medical test detected heart disease.

He said that the church banned all men with HIV because such an individual "dies half way through, will only lose his years, his strength" and because the church "does not have the means to cure him."

Previously:

• Mexico: Puebla Archbishop bans HIV positive men from priesthood (Jan. 31, 2009)

Chile: Religion teacher who was fired for being a lesbian files suit against the Chilean State in international court

I have been seeing this case build up and had planned to write something about it but the great folk at the UK's Pink News beat me to it. From their article:

[Religion teacher Sandra Cecilia] Pavez had taught at a public school in San Bernardo for 23 years.

She lost her position in 2007 after admitting to church authorities she was a lesbian, resulting in her teaching certificate being taken away.

Bishop Juan Ignacio Gonzalez Errazuriz, head of San Bernardo Diocese, also urged Ms Pavez to seek psychological help.

She has twice previously attempted to file lawsuits, one before a local court and another before Chile's Supreme Court but both attempts were unsuccessful.

Ms. Pavez said:

"If there is no guarantee of my rights as a citizen in this country then what kind of citizen am I? A third or second class citizen? Maybe I don't even have a category in my country."

Ms. Pavez has now turned to the Inter-American Human Rights Court where she filed a discrimination suit against the Chilean State. Above, she stands with Rolando Jimenez, President of the Movement for Homosexual Integration and Liberation (MOVILH) who has backed her in the courts (photo courtesy of the Chilean web portal OpusGay).

Mexico: Plucking eyebrows indicates homosexual tendencies, says high school principal; 15 students suspended

The Tamaulipan Youth Institute (Itjuve) is demanding action against a high school principal in Matamoros, Mexico, who suspended fifteen male students for plucking their eyebrows arguing that the practice was "unique to women or youth with a homosexual tendency."

Efraín Hernández, director of Itjuve, told La Jornada in an article published today that the sanctions taken against the students on December 15th by principal Rubén Reyes Urbina were discriminatory ("Matamoros: High school principal suspends fifteen students who had plucked eyebrows").

“No one can be denied the right to enter an institution simply because they look different to the rest of the alumni or because they decided to make a change in their person," Hérnandez said, "we clearly see a discrimination that is worrisome since it is a center that shapes individuals which is not in the best of hands."

The students, who were suspended during finals week and three days before the holiday vacations, ranged from thirteen to fifteen years of age.

Members of the State Association of Family Parents has also expressed their dismay and said that the agency will also submit complaints with the State Commission of Human Rights.

Previously:

• Domincan Republic: Prosecutor links earrings to homosexuality, strips them from young men in the Hato Rey province (Oct. 12, 2008)
• México: School teacher protests children's use of the word 'gay' as an insult (Sept. 27, 2008)
• Perú: Gay students pulled out of school after being caught in compromising situation (Aug. 26, 2008)
• Perú: Two gay high-school seniors caught having sex in classroom, LGBT rights organizations oppose expulsion (July 24, 2008)
• Colombia: Student who was kicked out of high school for being a lesbian speaks up against discrimination (June 24, 2008)
• Colombia: 1st day back in class for high school lesbians who were booted out (April 29, 2008)
• Colombia: Allowed back in school by court order, lesbian students are heckled by student body, high school principal (April 26, 2008)

The gays MADE Eduardo Verastegui, in return he stabs them in the back

With the presidential election just days away, the other nerve-wracking waiting game for the gays is seeing if attempts to ban same-sex marriages rights in California (Proposition 8), Florida (Proposition 2) and Arizona (Proposition 102) pass muster on Tuesday - with a very real chance of defeating all three (please click on each link and find out more and, if possible, donate).

Although the campaigns to defeat the discriminatory initiatives in AZ and FL must feel relegated to the sidelines as they look at the mammoth battle taking place in CA, it must be said that a California loss will be devastating to efforts to build a future where same-sex couples are not discriminated in the United States based on who they love. If passed, California would also become the first state to strip away marriage rights already granted to its state residents (couples who have gotten married would not lose their marriage status but unmarried partners and future partners would not be able to have access to them).

The extreme right-wing certainly understands that it's the battle to end all battles when it comes to the issue and have been acting accordingly treating it as if it were Armageddon itself or the final End of Days battle (a poll released yesterday shows a 49% to 44% lead for "No on 8" which is good but that lead might evaporate come election day).

Tonight, the Associated Press has the latest ("Anxious eyes on California gay marriage vote").

The Latino vote: Despite the slight lead, it's a slight lead that might easily evaporate.

Unfortunately this has led to some generalizations on both sides of the equation that the minority vote might end up deciding the future of same-sex marriages in California with the common assumption that most blacks and Latinos will vote do deny rights to the gays.

First came fears that a strong minority showing for Barack Obama in the California voting booths might mean additional support for the marriage ban ("Obama surge confounds gay marriage"), then came indications that both sides were targeting Latino voters believing that they might be the ones to push the ban over the treshhold or keep it from passing ("Leaning on Latinos" and "Prop. 4, 8 campaigns battle fiercely for crucial Latino vote").

Let me say this: I don't have much money but I have donated to the "No on 8" campaign to support their efforts (as well as "No on 2" in FL and "No on 102" in AZ); I also know that they have attempted to make inroads among Latino communities; but I was less than thrilled by their discourse in media during these last few days on the issue of Latino voters and not too impressed by their ads targeting Latino media.

Sure, they got the stars of "Ugly Betty" to do an ad in English and and ad in Spanish. Not sure how it plays out to California Latinos and particularly those undecided or supporting Prop. 8 but to me it certainly plays up the stereotype that familia trumps everything in our lives (it may or it may not but not in that La Cosa Nostra creepy way that ends up implying all Latinos are conservative because we love La Familia - which plays right into the right wing's hands). And, secondly, I also have a feeling that Latinos who watch "Ugly Betty" on ABC are not necessarily the Latino population that needs their mind changed on Prop. 8. I mean, they probably get Justin already .

Having Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa be a lead spokesperson and supporter is much better but I have yet to see efforts to engage truly popular Spanish-language television stars or singers that might reach out to a wider Latino community. This, despite the fact that Paulina Rubio and Gloria Trevi - who are hugely popular among the Mexican and Mexican-American communities in California - came out strongly against Prop. 8 this week. They should be in ads today!

[BTW: No poll is perfect but a poll released yesterday and forwarded to me by my friend Evan Wolfson actually shows Latinos in California OPPOSING the ban 51% to 46%].

Now, I've been peppering this post with a few images that seem to have no relation to the topic at hand. Heck, if you go for that metrosexual, pouty-lip, hairless chest bimbo look, you might even still be reading this post because of him. Me? Eek! Not my type at all.

Now, watch this video of the '90's Mexican boy-band (er, man-band?) Kiero and pay attention to the guy with a wife-beater shirt and no leather jacket or - alternatively - no shirt and lotsa sweat plus all his queerrific dance moves:

 

Why it's Eduardo Verestegui! And ever since he was introduced as the Latino face of the "Yes on 8" campaign I have heard nothing but shock and disgust from most of my Spanish-speaking Latino friends throughout the country.



Part of the shock for some friends is that they assumed Verastegui was gay (a lot of them grew up watching him perform with Kiero and playing leads in popular Mexican soap operas). I mean, just by the photos and video above there's no doubt in my mind he knew exactly who his fanbase was and that it was tres-gay. So forgive some from feeling ultra-betrayed.

But those are the gays. He also has a huge female fan base (for some reason they love the bimbo pouty-lipped look too) and he certainly used it to play up his Hollywood debut in the failed attempt at cross-over success otherwise known as "Chasing Papi".

Enter his 2006 anti-abortion message movie "Bella" and his embrace of the whole US right wing enchilada (immigration issues be damned!) and lo-and-behold - he becomes a poster child for the worst right-wing policies being channeled by the McCain camp as of late (Hey! What do ya know! He endorsed McCain this week as well!).

As a matter of fact, bimbo-boy's fabulous right-wing adventure was what elicited reactions from Mexican mega-star Paulina Rubio (who called him "ignorant") and Gloria Trevi (who taped her own message urging voters to vote against the California and Florida propositions).

Let truth win on Tuesday! Vote "No on 8" if you live in California.

Related:

• Pérez Hilton lashes out at Verastegui over Proposition 8 (New York Daily News, Oct. 31, 2008)
• Mexican Soap Star shills for 'Yes on 8' (Joe.My.God, Oct. 28, 2008)
• Tell Eduardo your dreams! (Latin Gossip, Oct. 27, 2008)
• Manic Eduardo Verastegui hearts Prop. 8, McCain (Intersections)
• Perpetually nude dude has no problem with deciding other's morals (Riptide 2.0, Oct. 27, 2008)
• Eduardo Verastegui is against abortion, gays and gaybortions (Guanabee, Oct. 21, 2008)
• Spanish-language gossip show criticizes Paulina Rubio for standing up to Verastegui, Verastegui responds to Rubio's comments (Escandalo)

Mexico: School teacher protests children's use of the word 'gay' as an insult

A high-school English language professor from the city of Tampico, Mexico, decided to stage a one-man protest yesterday against anti-gay discrimination.

According to Hoy Tamaulipas, professor Rogelio Pérez Barragán said that he was tired of the way that children and adolescents used the word "gay" when insulting each other and said he wanted to raise awareness about the discrimination faced by individuals with different sexual orientations ("Gay professor from Tampico goes out to the street to protest") [Side note: The paper is clear that the word in question is 'gay' and not 'homosexual' which I believe is more commonly used in Spanish-speaking countries, which makes me wonder if it's usage is in any way related to a similar phenomenon among younger individuals in the United States in which the word 'gay' is used to describe something that is lame or tired - without, some would argue, having a specifically derogatory nature].

"Simply," he said," I believe that there is a lot of work to do and that we have to start with the children."

Mr. Barragán, wearing jeans and a white long-sleeved shirt, taped a piece of paper to his back which read "One part of me is being gay" and "I see life and love." He also attached a piece of lavender-colored cloth to the note.

He then walked down Tampico's Guadalajara Street as reporters followed.

The professor, whose face is not shown on the photos posted online, disclosed he'd previously been called names and ridiculed due to his sexual identity at his place of employment but did not give the name of the school.

In Dallas, a lesbian sheriff under siege

[NOTE: To help Sheriff Valdez stem back these attacks, please donate to her campaign here]

Lupe Valdez (right) was sworn as Dallas County Sheriff on January 1st, 2005. Valdez, a Democrat, was long seen as an underdog in the race not only because it had been held by Republicans for decades but also because she became the first Latino person to hold the job as well as the first openly gay person as well (and the only female sheriff in the state).

Today, as she runs for re-election, some say that an increasing Democratic base in Dallas and the fact that the vote takes place on November 4th - the same date that voters elect the next president of the United States with Barack Obama on the ballot - will make it difficult for Republicans to regain the Dallas sheriff's office.

But, despite a 100% rating from the Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund, her performance has not drawn widespread support from certain circles in Dallas.

The Dallas Morning News reported in late August that as many as fourteen police associations - including one representing her own deputies and another representing local Latino policemen - had endorsed her opponent. None had endorsed Valdez.

Most of the opposition stems from allegations that Valdez has been unusually reluctant to meet up with police unions and address some issues (the Valdez camp says that it has been aggressive in fighting the corruption and cronyism that overran past sheriff administrations and that they are not surprised by the fact that the good ol' boy's network has been siding with her opponent).

It also stems from her offices failure, during her first term, to significantly improve living situations at the Dallas County Jail which had failed state and federal inspections before and after her election (the Valdez office claims that they inherited the problem and have made strides even if there are still failing grades).

As of late, though, attacks on Valdez have turned nasty and, yes, homophobic and sexist. An anonymous blog (ah! Is there any other hatchet job kind of blog than an anonymous one?) called Off with Her Badge has a cute 'Stoopid Loopy' icon on their homepage and, under a link titled 'Lupe's House of Horrors' which criticizes her record on jails, there is also an image that recalls the horrors of Abu Ghraib (these seem to be criticisms from the left but I bet ya they're just masking a right-wing anonymous attack on Valdez).

Most recently a 'controversy' has erupted over a questionnaire on gay issues that was distributed to department officers.

When I first heard about the questionnaire from the The Dallas Morning News (and when I took a look at it) it seemed pretty clear to me that these were standard questions on forms given out during tolerance trainings on LGBT issues requested not only by police departments around the United States but also other institutions.

Online critics called it a litmus test for employment but a WFAA report and video clearly indicates that it's part of a diversity training at the police department and that officers are not required to participate in the training or to sign their names if they do respond to the questionaire.

In a written statement released to press, Sheriff Valdez said: "It is a shame that a diversity program that is geared toward ensuring equality for all employees in an agency as large as the Sheriff's Department is being used to stir up controversy; Our goal is to make sure that employees of every race, color, and sex are treated fairly and have the same rights as others."

As for what some call a 'left-leaning' Latino Peace Officers Association (who failed to endorse Valdez when she first ran for the sheriff's office in 2004 and are doing so again), the 'controversy' certainly seems to have exposed the true reason they haven't backed Valdez: Homophobia.

According to the Dallas Morning News, Deputy Mike Ramirez, the Association's vice president, never took the test but 'took offense after reading it' and claimed that - even if it wasn't mandatory - some officers had complained that they felt pressure to attend the training and complete the questionnaire.

"They felt the department was trying to promote the gay lifestyle," he said.

Ah, yes, the good ol' lifestyle.

I haven't followed Valdez' performance as sheriff so I can't voucher for her performance during her first term but this all certainly smells of crapola. Elect a sheriff on his or her merits, not on your bias and outright discrimination.

UPDATE: As I thought, the questionnaire is not a litmus test given to officers in the sheriff's department but rather from a standard questionnaire distributed to officers who participate at diversity trainings. Here is an explanation posted at a Dallas Voice blog:

"The questionnaire is the same one that Resource Center of Dallas has used for its public safety training classes, including the Dallas Police Department, since the 1990s. It was administered anonymously and participants were explicitly told they were not to write their names on it. Furthermore, the questions were mixed up so that respondents could not be tied to specific questionnaires. Similar questionnaires have also been used in our monthly diversity training classes here at the Resource Center of Dallas and in educational, public safety and corporate settings. The questionnaire is used by Resource Center of Dallas to determine attitudes toward the GLBTA community and generate discussion in the classes. The completed questionnaires are not shared with anybody outside RCD and are destroyed after each class. The questionnaires are the sole property of Resource Center Of Dallas and were not developed by the Dallas County Sheriff’s Department. We are disappointed that our efforts at diversity and inclusiveness are being used in a political manner in advance of the Dallas Pride weekend, when the North Texas GLBTA community comes together to celebrate and share. It shows that our work is needed" - Cece Cox, associate executive director of Resource Center of Dallas

- Previously:Latina lesbian sheriff criticized (September 15, 2006)

Peru: Gay students pulled out of school after being caught in compromising situation

Another update: In April I wrote about a decision by a local court in Colombia ordering a large all-girls' school to welcome back two students who were kicked out because they were a lesbian couple (the school's principal argued that they were kicked out due to behavior problems but the court ruled that they had been rejected for showing affection towards each other).

The ruling drew national attention when reporters captured images of the angry mobs that greeted the two students when they went to register for the new semester. Their first day of class did not bring as much hostility but few schoolmates expressed any support. In a brave interview given to a national television news show one of the girls said that few of their former friends would even approach them now but, with support of their parents, both had decided to stick it through and finish their high-school degree at the institution.

In July I wrote about a similar case in Peru at an all-boys' school where an internal investigation had been launched into reports that two high-school seniors had been caught in a compromising situation. The sketchy details about the case came from a Destapa newspaper article which referred to an unspecified "homosexual act" between the students which took place inside what was supposed to be an empty classroom. I was personally struck by the fact one of the students seemed to question the reasoning behind the investigation. He was qoted as asking "What's with the uproar if in the class there are 5 more students who are homosexual and everyone knows them?"

On August 14th, in a small follow-up article, Destapa revisited the case and said that the parents of both students had decided to pull the boys out of the San José de Chiclayo National School "out of their own volition" although it's not clear whether this information comes from the school itself or the boy's parents.

The article, which reveals that the "homosexual act" in question was oral sex, says that it was a substitute art teacher who first reported the students to the school rectory based on what he said were complaints by other students (the original article said that the students had taken advantage of a class cancellation to get together at what they thought would be an empty classroom but that more than twenty students had caught them in the act).

Organizations such as the Homosexual Movement of Lima (MOhL) had offered legal support and opposed any move to throw the students out of the institution.

Peru: Two gay high-school seniors caught having sex in classroom, LGBT rights organizations oppose expulsion

Above:Students at the San Jose de Chiclayo National School in Chiclayo, Peru, Class of 2007.

Earlier this year I wrote about a young lesbian couple in Manizales, Colombia, who were thrown out of their high school and then sent back by a court order that said that the school administrators had discriminated against them for being gay (see 'Related' posts below).

Last week a newspaper from the northern coastal plain city of Chiclayo, Peru, reported that two male high-school students were on the verge of being kicked out school after being caught having sex in an empty classroom ("2 students are discovered practicing a homosexual act," Destapa, July 16, 2008).

The article itself has a sensationalistic tone and it's one thing for two girls to be thrown out of school for holding hands or kissing and quite another for two students to have sex in a classroom without disciplinary action but what caught my attention was that the students seem to be challenging the school.

The two 5th grade secondary-school students (12th grade in the US) at the San José de Chiclayo National School allegedly took advantage that the school's art teacher was absent and used the empty classroom during the art class period to engage in sex. The paper says that they were discovered by other schoolmates and that twenty classmates were witnesses to the "homosexual act."

School principal Gonzalo Supo Capuñay told Destape "Let you be certain that the students will take a definite leave from the school, because the conduct of one or two students will not dim the prestige of the San José de Chiclayo National School."

As of last week, though, disciplinary action was pending an investigation of the allegations.

The students, who were identified only as Erick P.Q. y Kevin M.L. in the paper for being minors, aparently also spoke to Destape. "What's with the uproar," one is quoted as saying, "if in the class there are 5 more students who are homosexual and everyone knows them."

It's unclear which of the students said it since Destape only says it was "the one that took the passive role."

Journalistic integrity for you!

Homosexual Movement of Lima (MOhL), Peru's oldest gay rights organization has released a statement opposing the expulsion of the students and offered legal assistance arguing that it's discriminatory to prevent the free expression of one's sexuality.

The Boletin Diversidad blog ads that the school is an all-boy's school. They also oppose the expulsion in what they call one of the most conservative regions in the country.

Update:

• Peru: Gay students pulled out of school after being caught in compromising situation (August 26, 2008)

Related

• Colombia: Student who was kicked out of high-school for being a lesbian speaks up against discrimination (June 4, 2008)
• Colombia: 1st day back in class for high school lesbians who were booted out (April 29, 2008)
• Colombia: Allowed back in school by court order, lesbian students are heckled by student body (April 26, 2008)
  

Colombia: Student who was kicked out of high school for being a lesbian speaks up against discrimination

• UPDATE: Just today the Fifth Circuit Civil Court in Manizales, where the ruling was being appealed, not only agreed that principal Magola Franco had erred in dismissing the students but ordered the Department of Education of Manizales to institute obligatory curriculum language that educates students on human rights on gender issues with a focus on sexual diversity ("The Courts of Manizales ratifies court ruling in favor of lesbian minors," Caracol Radio, June 4, 2008).
  

[NOTE: The heartbreaking part about this interview is that the high-school student and her girlfriend are still being shunned by their school-mates even as they both seem determined to finish their high school education at the school. If you would like to send them a supportive message please send me your message to blabbeando @ gmail.com and I will try to get it to them]

In late April, I shared a shocking video of what happened in Manizales, Colombia, when a court determined that two students had been unfairly kicked-out of an all-girls high school because they were lesbians ("Allowed back in school by court order, lesbian students are heckled by student body, school principal").

News cameras caught the students as they walked into the Leonardo da Vinci High School to register for classes and were faced by most of the student body shouting "We don't want you!" at them while expressing support for the school principal.

In that video, the faces of the two students were blurred digitally to protect their identity but now one of them has decided to speak-up and show her face. The interview was broadcast on an investigative late night news show called El Radar on Colombia's Caracol Television. Unfortunately there are no subtitles but here is a translation (the interview proper begins at the :44 second mark).

Maria Elvira Samper: Jenny, first of all, welcome to "The Radar."
Jenny Viviana Rendon: Thanks
MES: I want to reiterate a [deep sense] of admiration for the courage and valor in showing your face [despite] a society as full of prejudice as ours is. I want to tell you that you should feel at ease, that if there is a question that bothers you it is not my intention to bother you and that if you don't want to answer it, don't answer it...
When did you decide to tell your parents that it wasn't as they wanted you to be - or how society or your classmates or your friends or your family - wanted you to be.
JVR: When my mom said to me, my mom said to me: 'You have to tell him.'
MES: Did you tell your mom first?
JVR: She figured it out... and then - once she knew - she told me "Tell your dad or I will tell him." And so I - It's me with the problem - so I will tell him.
MES: That is not your 'problem'...
JVR: Ah! Good...
MES: That is not your problem. A whole other thing is for society to see it as a problem; Have you felt... was it difficult, let's say, was it very difficult...?
JVR: [nodding 'yes'] Too difficult...
MES: Is it a united family? Is it a warm family? Has it made it easier... Have they made it easier for you all this process of integration - a little bit- or to confront a situation that I imagine became very difficult at the school when you decided - or when they told you that you were not accepted [a clip is shown of the girls walking into the school as their school mates shout against them].
JVR: Well, yes. They not only have provided me with huge [support]. I think that if it wasn't for family, one would not have the valor to show up like this.
MES: In this process have you counted with psychological assistance, with a counselor, with a schoolmate, other than your family?
JVR: We have gotten unconditional support from the Public Advocate's Office.
MES: How are your school mates with you, how have they welcomed... Did they know, let's say?
JVR: Yes. All of them...
MES: And did you feel rejected?
JVR: Very much so.
MES: Your teachers?
JVR: Well. Very well.
MES: Have you found more understanding coming from your teachers than from your school-mates?
JVR: Yes..
MES: Do you have friends to whom you feel at ease talking, with whom you feel comfortable, or do you always feel looked at differently, as if you are being questioned, or..
JVR: No.
MES: Do you feel as comfortable at school as in your home?
JVR: [Opens up eyes and reacts emotionally] Uh, no...
MES: No.
JVR: I do feel more pressure at school but I do have a friend. A friend that helps me a lot and with her... If we sit down to talk about this, it's very normal for the both of us.
MES: And the family of that friend greets you normally?
JVR: Yes, the day of the court ruling they cried with us and everything.
MES: Have they mistreated you - eh - psychologically in any way at school, for example?
JVR: Well, I think that a mistreatment was the day of the protest. That day we felt very, very awful.
MES: And who do you attribute for that [more clips are shown from the video shot on that day]. Do you feel that considering teachers that were understanding with you, the principal was not?
JVR: It's that the protest was done in the morning, we study in the afternoon. And so, the morning teachers had nothing to do with us.
MES: Do you think that the protest was orchestrated, was spontaneous...
JVR: I can't say that 'Yes! it was for.. It was organized' but... I believe it was [the high school principal has denied that she had any role in orchestrating a protest despite the banners, the students' vocal defense of her decision to remove the students and the fact that students had access to the school's intercom system].
MES: OK, after you were accepted back in school, has there been any changes or do you continue to feel that you are a bit isolated.
JVR: No, well, we both are isolated because it's only the two of us. The two of us in the classroom. The two of us during the school-breaks. The two of us for everything. Because we don't talk to anyone.
MES: But is it because the rest do not want to talk to you or because you feel a bit inhibited because you feel that there is a kind of fence.
JVR: No. We have always been very social. We have been group leaders. We have been very dynamic all these years and this year we feel more distant...
MES: What grade are you in?
JVR: 10th [equivalent to being a junior at a US high-school].
MES: You almost... on the verge of graduating. Outside of school do you find more tolerance?
JVR: [Shrugs] It's that it's so weird because one find people that say 'No, that's normal, it's silly' but then one encounters reality, it's not like that.
MES: Do you think that - from now on - things will be easier or more difficult?
JVR: [Cringes] Uh, I don't know.
MES: Are you scared? Are you fearful...
JVR: Yes, a lot
MES: What is it that you fear.
JVR: I have fear because if I was rejected for something they already knew... and with someone who was... well, that we were together... that they studied with me all the time... and I was rejected... and so I don't know if I will be rejected in the future... I don't know what kind of people I will meet in the future...
MES: Have you cried a great deal during this process?
JVR: No.
MES: Very macha!
JVR: I cried on the first day but late at night when I was already in bed but I didn't cry nor in front of them nor have I cried as if I am just about to die or that I let depression take over me, no.
MES: What would you say to parents of children like you that don't... that have left their children abandoned.
JVR: That they should get involved a little bit. That they get a little bit involved on the issue. Because if they get involved, or better said, if they try to feel like one feels sometimes, perhaps they will understand. I believe that my dad... my dad is a person with a very open mind.
MES: Who is your father.
JVR: He is an administrative assistant. But he has worked with many things and that probably helps him.
MES: Did you find more understanding from your dad, from your mom, or from both equally?
JVR: From both.
MES: And your siblings? There wasn't any shock, nothing?
JVR: No, well... let me tell you... eh, my mom at first was very stern.
MES: Why.
JVR: Well, it was harder for her because I am her little girl and everything.
MES: How were you able to get your mom - because you understand her a little bit and her reaction - how were you able to get her to lower her guard a little bit - to say it that way - and to get to the point, the point in which you are right now. Did you do something or was it an internal process when it came to your mother?
JVR: Well, I think she put a lot of herself in it, but I would speak to her normally. I would tell her 'No, but my girl friend...' or something like that. I would mention the girl's name and would speak to her normally. Something that one day she would have to understand.
MES: At school did someone find out before this was known publicly?
JVR: Yes. All my friends. 'Quote Unquote.'
MES: Well, I agree with you. Between quotation marks. And did they do... did they say something, did they have discriminatory attitudes...
JVR: No. That is what is bizarre. That when I was with them all of them said "Go ahead. Go forward. We love you both.' Well, we were always together. I think that they all acted in mass.
MES: Do you think that there are more people like this?
JVR: Yes I do.
MES: And you know them.
JVR: [Smiles] Yes.
MES: After all these things have you have an opportunity to talk intimately or personally, privately, with the [school] principal who, by all appearances, seemed to be the harshest person in all this process?
JVR: No.
MES: You don't even want to see her in a painting? [a common Colombian expression determining disdain]
JVR: No! It's not like that. To me it's all the same.
MES: Don't you want to communicate with her? Don't you want to tell her anything?
JVR: No! Well - She thinks in a different way than we and many other people do.
MES: Wouldn't you ask her - in that sense - 'I respect what your thoughts are, please respect who I am'?
JVR: We said that to her on many occasions. No, she doesn't...
MES: And what does it mean to return to a school that did to you what it did to you.
JVR: No, it doesn't matter. Because the school and I - not for the principal - but I love my school. I was born there. I have been there since 6th grade. So I have a strong feeling of belonging with the school and I don't care.
MES: And are you ready to continue fighting in this year that is left...
JVR: And in the next one as well..
MES: And in the next one that is left to seek more acceptance, more tolerance, more respect for you or people who are like you?
JVR: Yes, I think that after a little bit of time, things will calm down and we will get back... yes! to carry on normally, and to continue being the same ones as before, if God allows.
MES: He, if... Well, Jenny. You don't know how us at El Radar thank you for being with us. We hope that this show and what you have said will serve so many people and help so many people that perhaps - as people say - are inside the closet going through very difficult moments and we hope that there are many parents such as yours that can make of people such as you happy beings.
JVR: Many thanks to you.

After the interview the show's anchorman explains that while Jenny decided to go on camera with her parents consent, the parents of her girlfriend felt it was better for their daughter not to speak on camera. She still was in the studio, sitting near Jenny, as she was interviewed for the show.