World
Out in the World: LGBTQ+ news from Europe & Asia
LGBTQ+ stories from around the globe including Nepal, Malaysia, The Vatican, the United Kingdom, Ireland & Russia
NEPAL
KATHMANDU, Nepal – The marriage between Maya Ram Bahadur Gurung and Surendra Pandey this past week in the Nepalese capital city is being hailed by the country’s LGBTQ+ rights activists. Gurung, a transwoman and Pandey, who is gay was registered by the local municipality ward office four months after the Himalayan nation’s highest court legalized same-sex marriages in an interim order.
The former Executive Director/CEO and founder of the Blue Diamond society, first LGBTQ+ rights organization in Nepal, Sunil Babu Pant, who has also served in the country’s parliament was present for the civil ceremony telling the Associated Press: “After 23 years of struggle, we got this historic achievement, and finally, Maya and Surendra got their marriage registered at the local administration office,” Pant said.
In a later interview with Naya Prakashan news Pant noted. “A wedding in Nepal today can become the signpost in South Asia for a more equal tomorrow.”
Human Rights Watch (HRW) reported that Gurung, a transgender woman who is legally recognized as male, and Pandey, a cisgender gay man, held a Hindu wedding ceremony in 2017. They first attempted to legally register their marriage in June this year at the Kathmandu District Court, following an interim order by Nepal’s Supreme Court instructing authorities to register same-sex marriages while considering a case that argues for marriage equality across the country.
When that court rejected their registration, saying it did not need to recognize a couple that was not one legal male and one legal female, they appealed to the Patan High Court in September.
But the high court judges rejected the appeal, saying that it was the responsibility of the federal government to change the law before the lower authorities could register such marriages, HRW reported.
Nepal’s civil code currently only recognizes marriages between one man and one woman. The Supreme Court attempted to rectify that by ordering the creation of an interim registry for nontraditional marriages until parliament changes the law. The two lower courts then reversed the logic by claiming that the national law must be changed first.
MALAYSIA
JOHOR, Malaysia – Malaysian LGBTQ+ rights activists are decrying efforts by the Johor state government to establish a “rehab” centre for “people in same-sex relations,” which would use the globally debunked conversion therapy to change sexual orientation.
Malaysian society is predominately Muslim and conservative. Human Rights Watch has noted that the government authorities in the Malay Archipelago are willing to enforce the rigid gender roles by which they compel all Malaysians to abide with few exceptions.
Speaking at the Johor state assembly on Wednesday, the state’s Islamic Religious Affairs Committee chairman Mohd Fared Mohd Khalid said 400,000 ringgit ($86,000 USD) has been allocated for the rehabilitation center, which was expected to open in July next year the South China Morning Post reported.
“This rehabilitation center is established … for them to get back on the right path,” Fared told the assembly.
Aside from same-sex individuals, Fared proclaimed that the center would also house “those who are deemed deviant” from the state-prescribed religious Islamic orthodoxy, which includes the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community and Baha’i among some 42 groups, the state’s religious affairs body has identified as “deviant.”
The Malaysian government relies on the force of law to prohibit expression and conduct that fall outside of a heterosexual, cisgender norm. It is one of only a handful of countries that explicitly makes gender nonconformity a criminal offense.
Reacting to the rehab news, transgender rights group Justice for Sisters told the South China Morning Post that detaining people was a violation of the Malaysian constitution, which safeguards personal liberty, privacy, dignity, equality and prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender.
“Detaining people on the grounds of changing their SOGIE – sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression – amounts to torture without a doubt,” said the group’s spokesperson Thilaga Sulathireh.
Malaysia also criminalizes consensual same-sex conduct at both the federal and state levels. Its officials frequently insist that the laws criminalizing lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people are intended not primarily to punish, but rather to return them to “the right path,” statements echoed this past week by Johor’s Islamic Religious Affairs Committee chairman.
Human Rights Watch notes that officials under successive Malaysian governments have typically coded their approach to sexual and gender diversity in a logic of “prevention” and “rehabilitation,” backed by the threat of punishment. Former Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin, who was in office between March 2020 and August 2021, described LGBT people as a threat to Islam, backed by “foreign influences,” and a “disorder” that requires counseling.
THE VATICAN
VATICAN CITY – Pope Francis this past week further disciplined another American prelate, retired Cardinal Raymond Burke, who has publicly critiqued Francis over the Pope’s ongoing efforts for reforming the Catholic Church, especially over issues centered on LGBTQ+ Catholics and the LGBTQ+ community.
The Associated Press reported that Pope Francis revoked Burke’s subsidized Vatican apartment and retirement salary, according to sources because he was a source of “disunity” in the church.
The move is “unprecedented in the Francis era”, Christopher White, a Vatican observer who writes for the National Catholic Reporter, told the BBC.
“Typically, retired cardinals continue to reside in Rome after stepping down from their positions, often remaining active in papal liturgies and ceremonial duties,” he said. “Evicting someone from their Vatican apartment sets a new precedent.”
Burke, who spends much of his time in the U.S. at the Our Lady of Guadalupe shrine he founded in his native Wisconsin, has not yet been notified of the Pope’s actions according to the AP.
At the end of October, the Pope convened a month long conference, known as a Synod of Bishops, followed an unprecedented two-year canvassing of rank-and-file Catholics. During the conference Jesuit Fr. James Martin, a popular spiritual author and editor of the LGBTQ Catholic publication Outreach, noted that on LGBTQ+ issues, “There were widely diverging views on the topic,” he said.
In early November, Bishop Joseph Strickland of Eastern Texas was “relieved” of his position as head of the Diocese of Tyler, Texas by Pope Francis after Strickland’s refusal to resign in a dispute over the Church’s LGBTQ+ inclusion in Catholic practices. Strickland often had echoed Cardinal Burke’s positions.
Although retired in 2014, Burke had an incredibly anti-LGBTQ public record since, especially in vocalizing his opposition to plans to be inclusive of the LGBTQ+ community. Burke was once a high-ranking U.S. archbishop and head of the Apostolic Signatura, the Vatican court, but was repeatedly demoted under Pope Francis and then forced to retire.
In March of 2020, Burke laid blame on the coronavirus pandemic on the LGBTQ+ community. As churches were forced to close during the lock-downs ordered by health officials, Burke wrote:
“Worship is particularly needed now because of ‘how distant our popular culture is from God,’ he wrote, noting abortion and euthanasia, then attacking the LGBTQ equality movement, particularly activism for recognition of transgender identity.
“‘We need only to think of the pervasive attack upon the integrity of human sexuality, of our identity as man or woman, with the pretense of defining for ourselves, often employing violent means, a sexual identity other than that given to us by God,’ he said. ‘With ever greater concern, we witness the devastating effect on individuals and families of the so-called “gender theory.”‘ Burke went on to say, ‘There is no question that great evils like pestilence are an effect of original sin and of our actual sins.’”
Burke once compared lesbian, gay, and bisexual people to murderers.
UNITED KINGDOM
LONDON, UK – Former British Prime Minister Liz Truss is said to be backing a private bill to be introduced into the House of Commons that will ban minor children under the age of 18 from accessing hormone therapy and block the National Health Service and the UK government from recognizing their social transition.
After Truss was one of 20 backbencher MPs to be selected to bring forward a bill, a source reportedly said she chose the legislation because she believes under-18s need to be protected from “making irreversible decisions about their bodies.”
PinkNewsUK pointed out that argument fails to consider the fact that trans under-18s are typically prescribed physically reversible puberty blockers and are only permitted to do so after lengthy medical checks.
Physically reversible puberty blockers are also typically only given to teenagers over the age of 16. It is exceptionally rare for under-16s to be prescribed puberty blockers.
Despite this, Truss is expected to formally present the bill on Wednesday (6 December) during a House of Commons hearing where its MP backers will also attend, PinkNewsUK also reported.
A spokesperson for the UK government said in a statement: “This government is clear on the fundamental importance of biological sex.
LIVERPOOL – A magistrate’s court found a fifty-one-year-old man guilty of a hate crime in an assault on Drag Race UK star The Vivienne this past June at a local McDonald’s. Alan Whitfield told the court that he had struck James Lee Williams, aka The Vivienne, in the face claiming that his actions were not motivated by homophobia but by what he described as “banter.”
During his testimony, 31-year-old Williams said he was subjected to a “barrage of abuse” from Whitfield after entering the fast food restaurant PinkNewsUK reported.
“He [Whitfield] carried on, then after the fourth ‘look at the state of you’ I said ‘look at the state of you’, I said ‘look at the state of your face’, to which he said ‘I’ve got skin cancer’ and then punched me straight in the face.”
PinkNewsUK reported that the RuPaul’s Drag Race UK star, who took home the crown in the first series in 2018, argued that the attack was motivated by homophobia because there were “countless other people” in the McDonald’s at the time.
Whitfield maintained throughout the proceedings that the assault “was nothing to do with him [Williams] being gay”, reiterating that he has LGBTQ+ members of his family.
After court deliberation, Justice Anthony Canning said that Whitfield’s evidence was “not credible”.
“Having considered this incident from beginning to end, we believe beyond reasonable doubt that the hostility shown by yourself from that outset was motivated and down to the perceived sexuality of the complainant and this was homophobic in nature.”
Whitfield will be sentenced in January 2024.
IRELAND
CORK CITY, Ireland – A 25-year-old 2nd year Law student at the University College Cork is set to make history as the first openly transgender person in history to run for local election in the Republic of Ireland.
Saoirse Mackin, who co-founded Trans+ Pride Cork in 2022, was nominated by the Social Democrats to run in Cork City North West’s 2024 election. Mackin, who transitioned in 2017, told LGBTQ+ media outlet GCN – Ireland, that if elected, one of her top priorities will be eliminating the excessive healthcare barriers that are in place for transgender women in Ireland.
Mackin also advocates for better cycling infrastructures, as well as affordable housing and improved public services GCN noted.
She said, “If elected, my priority areas will include the provision of more affordable housing, improved public services, universal access to healthcare and the development of quality cycle infrastructure in Cork. I will also campaign for better local amenities, such as upgraded parks, green spaces, playgrounds and sports facilities.”
In addition to being a transgender activist, Mackin is also a law student and community organizer who has bravely spoken up against the growing far-right movement in Ireland. She was also named in the Irish Examiner‘s 100 Women of 2022 list.
RUSSIA
MOSCOW – Russia’s Supreme Court this past week on Thursday ruled that “the international LGBTQ movement” is “extremist” which, legal experts and human rights advocates say will lead to all LGBTQ groups and organizations in Russia being banned.
The Russian Ministry of Justice had lodged an administrative legal claim with the High Court to recognize the International LGBTQ public movement as extremist and ban its activity in Russia. Russian Justice Minister Konstantin Chuychenko did not specify whether it was seeking the closure of any specific groups or organizations, or if the designation would apply more broadly to the LGBTQ community, causes and individuals.
Speaking with Agence France-Presse, the head of the Sphere human rights group, which advocates for the Russian LGBTQ community, had criticized Minister Konstantin Chuychenko actions.
“Russian authorities are once again forgetting that the LGBTQ+ community are human beings,” said Sphere head Dilya Gafurova, who has left Russia.
Authorities “don’t just want to erase us from the public field: They want to ban us as a social group,” Gafurova told AFP. “It’s a pretty typical move for repressive non-democratic regimes — the persecution of the most vulnerable. We will continue our fight,” he added.
UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk in a statement issued from Geneva, Switzerland after the ruling said:
“This decision exposes human rights defenders and anyone standing up for the human rights of LGBT people to being labeled as ‘extremist’ – a term that has serious social and criminal ramifications in Russia,” said the High Commissioner.
“No one should be jailed for doing human rights work or denied their human rights based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.”
“I call on the Russian authorities to repeal, immediately, laws that place improper restrictions on the work of human rights defenders or that discriminate against LGBT people. The law must uphold and defend the principles of equality and non-discrimination. The law must never be used to perpetuate inequality and discrimination,” Türk added.
Laws that must be reformed include those prohibiting gender-affirming medical and administrative procedures, and banning so-called “LGBT propaganda”,which made it illegal to discuss LGBT issues in Russia on penalty of substantial fines, Türk said.
The High Commissioner also pointed out the wide use of the “extremist” label is more generally used to prosecute all those perceived as opponents, including politicians, journalists, human rights defenders and others.
“LGBTIQ people exist in every country, and a legal ban on the undefined ‘international LGBT movement’ will result in more violence, discrimination, and isolation of LGBTIQ people in Russia, who are already targeted for being who they are,” said Maria Sjödin, Executive Director at Outright International.
“Russia, which has already restricted access to information about LGBTIQ issues, is yet again violating the human rights of LGBTIQ people by restricting freedoms of association and expression. This is a great concern not just for human rights defenders focused on protecting the rights of LGBTIQ people but for everyone who believes in human rights for all,” Sjödin added.
Within 48 hours of the High Court’s ruling, multiple Russian law enforcement agencies executed a series of raids at multiple queer venues in the Russian capital. At one club located on Ulitsa Malaya Yakimanka street in the center of the city, there were approximately 300 people gathered when Russian security forces burst in under the pretext of searching for drugs in the establishment. Several persons were detained.
“In the middle of the party, they stopped the music and began to enter the halls [the police]. There were also citizens of other countries at the party. At the exit, they photographed passports without permission to do so,” an LGBTQ rights activist who had previously spoken to other media outlets told the Blade in a phone call Sunday.
The raids took place in at least four venues, and were reportedly expected by the clubs management and owners.
Security forces arrived at an establishment near the Avtozavodskaya metro station and a themed strip club for guys near the Polyanka metro station in central Moscow. The administration of the clubs warned visitors about the events in advance, the Moscow Times reported.
According to an eyewitness to the police raid on Mono, a bar also located in the city’s central district on Pokrovsky Boulevard, “there was the usual party, then the owner came out and said that within an hour law enforcement would arrive in connection with the recent ruling by the Supreme Court. Within 20 minutes the dance floor started to empty,” Ostorozhno Novosti, an independent Russian news outlet reported.
The Moscow Times could not independently verify Ostorozhno Novosti’s reporting, and employees from at least two of the clubs believed to have been targeted on Friday denied the reports, which they called “fakes.”
“I wake up… and I’m reading the news, and, of course, it’s hilarious. Where was [this raid] when we had nothing going on?” the manager of the club Mono said in a video posted on social media Saturday.
The Blade has also been unable to verify Ostorozhno Novosti’s reporting on the Mono bar raid but in a series of phone calls and Telegram chats was able to determine that multiple raids had in fact taken place across central Moscow and that gay clubs and LGBTQ+ safe spaces were targeted.
In the Baltic city of St. Petersburg, the largest gay club, Central Station, according to independent news outlet Sota, reported the club’s management said that they were denied further rental of the site due to the “new law.”
Additional reporting from Pahichan Media, the South China Morning Post, Human Rights Watch, The BBC, PinkNewsUK, Agence France-Presse, The Moscow Times, GCN Ireland, The Vatican News and The Associated Press.
European Union
Poland’s top court rejects recognition of same-sex marriages from other EU countries
Ruling sets up potential clash with bloc
Poland’s top court this week rejected the recognition of same-sex marriages legally performed in other EU countries.
The EU Court of Justice in Luxembourg last November ruled in favor of a same-sex couple who challenged Poland’s refusal to recognize their German marriage. Poland’s Supreme Administrative Court in March reaffirmed the decision.
The couple, who lives in Poland, brought their case to Polish courts in 2019. The Supreme Administrative Court referred it to the EU Court of Justice.
The Polish government in May announced it will recognize same-sex marriages legally performed in other EU countries. Polish President Karol Nawrocki on July 17 vetoed bills that would have extended rights to same-sex couples.
The Constitutional Tribunal ruling, which it issued on July 28, was unanimous and final. It also sets up a potential clash between it and the EU Court of Justice.
Taiwan
Taiwan’s government has failed to update process to change gender markers on ID documents
Interior Ministry’s 2008 directive remains in place
More than four years after Taiwan began formally studying legislation to overhaul its legal gender recognition system, and despite repeated recommendations from international human rights experts, the government has yet to introduce a bill that would replace decades-old administrative rules governing how transgender people can change the gender marker on official documents.
On May 15, an independent international review committee examining Taiwan’s implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights urged the government to enact legislation governing legal gender recognition. The committee said Taiwan’s continued reliance on an administrative order, despite a 2023 Supreme Administrative Court ruling that mandatory gender-affirming surgery violates constitutional rights, has created legal uncertainty for transgender people, administrative authorities and judges.
In Taiwan, legal gender recognition has long been governed by a 2008 Interior Ministry administrative directive rather than legislation.
Under the directive, applicants seeking to change the gender marker on their national identification documents are generally required to provide diagnoses of gender dysphoria from two psychiatrists and proof that they have undergone gender-affirming surgery. For trans men, this typically involves the removal of the breasts, uterus, and ovaries, while trans women generally must undergo the removal of the penis and testicles. Because these requirements are established through an administrative directive rather than a law enacted by the legislature, trans rights activists and human rights organizations have argued they violate human rights.
Although Taiwanese courts have increasingly allowed trans people to change the gender marker on their official documents without undergoing gender-affirming surgery, the Interior Ministry’s 2008 directive requiring surgery remains in force. As a result, Taiwan’s administrative rules and judicial decisions are no longer fully aligned.
In a landmark ruling in May 2024, the Taipei High Administrative Court ordered a household registration office to approve a trans man’s application to change the gender marker on his household registration without requiring gender-affirming surgery. The court held that the Interior Ministry’s 2008 administrative directive, which requires applicants to submit proof of surgery, cannot be treated as an absolute prerequisite for legal gender recognition. Instead, it found that the applicant had provided sufficient medical evidence of a stable and long-standing gender identity and that denying the application solely because he had not undergone surgery was unlawful.
The Executive Yuan began work on legislation in April 2020, when it decided to commission an academic study examining international legal gender recognition systems rather than immediately drafting a law.
The government subsequently commissioned Shih Hsin University to prepare a report reviewing foreign legal models and developing legislative recommendations, including a bill. Since 2022, the Executive Yuan has held a series of inter-agency meetings involving multiple ministries to consider the study’s recommendations and legislation governing legal gender recognition, though no bill has yet been enacted.
In September 2023, Taiwan’s Supreme Administrative Court set aside a lower court ruling that had upheld the Interior Ministry’s refusal to change a trans person’s legal gender without proof of surgery and ordered the case to be reheard.
The court held that the ministry’s 2008 administrative directive requiring surgery could not be treated as the controlling legal standard because it lacked a clear statutory basis and implicated constitutional protections, including bodily autonomy and personality rights. Rather than treating surgery as an automatic prerequisite, the court instructed the lower court to determine whether the applicant had established a stable gender identity based on the evidence presented.
“From our perspective, the primary goal should be lowering the barriers to legal gender recognition, particularly by abolishing the mandatory surgery requirement,” the Taiwan Tongzhi (LGBTQ+) Hotline Association, a nonprofit LGBTQ+ advocacy and support organization founded in 1998, said in an email to the Los Angeles Blade.
The Taiwan Tongzhi (LGBTQ+) Hotline Association said several factors have stalled progress toward comprehensive legislation.
The organization told the Blade the complexity of the issue and the lack of constructive dialogue are among the primary obstacles. It said legal gender recognition requires extensive discussion, with views differing even within the trans community itself. The Taiwan Tongzhi (LGBTQ+) Hotline Association added that opinions also vary widely within the legislature and across Taiwanese society, while effective channels for dialogue remain lacking.
The Taiwan Tongzhi (LGBTQ+) Hotline Association also attributed the lack of progress to what it described as a lack of political will and an over reliance on “social consensus.”
According to the organization, the executive branch lacks the political momentum to advance legal gender recognition reforms. The Taiwan Tongzhi (LGBTQ+) Hotline Association said the Interior Ministry and other relevant agencies have often adopted a passive approach in the face of opposition from conservative groups, delaying progress by arguing that there is no social consensus or that further discussion is needed.
The Taiwan Tongzhi (LGBTQ+) Hotline Association also said progress has been hindered by what it described as a backlash following the legalization of same-sex marriage. According to the organization, groups opposed to gender equality and trans rights, including some conservative religious and anti-trans organizations, shifted their focus to trans issues after marriage equality became law. The Taiwan Tongzhi (LGBTQ+) Hotline Association said these groups have promoted fear-based narratives, including concerns about safety in public restrooms, leading many politicians to view trans rights as a politically risky issue and reducing momentum for legislative action.
“The existing system makes changing one’s legal gender marker extremely difficult. Forced surgical removal of reproductive organs imposes a heavy financial burden since it must be paid out-of-pocket, and not every trans person can afford, desires, or is medically advised to undergo organ removal,” the Taiwan Tongzhi (LGBTQ+) Hotline Association said. “Additionally, requiring psychiatric evaluations is problematic because specialized medical resources are scarce and concentrated in major cities. These obstacles severely impact transgender individuals in their daily lives.”
The Taiwan Tongzhi (LGBTQ+) Hotline Association said the continued reliance on an administrative directive rather than legislation has created systemic uncertainty for trans people. The organization said the absence of a statutory framework allows executive agencies to alter requirements without legislative oversight, leaving trans people uncertain whether future policies will become more restrictive or more permissive. The Taiwan Tongzhi (LGBTQ+) Hotline Association added that while several trans people have secured favorable court rulings since 2023, those decisions apply only to the individual cases before the courts and do not guarantee similar outcomes for others. The group also said pursuing litigation requires significant time, financial resources, and emotional investment, making it an inaccessible path for many trans people seeking legal recognition.
The Executive Yuan and the Interior Ministry did not respond to the Blade’s requests for comment.
Celebrity News
Madonna to perform at World Pride in Amsterdam
‘Confessions II’ album released earlier this month to rave reviews
Editor’s note: International News Editor Michael K. Lavers and Photo Editor Michael Key will be on assignment in the Netherlands through Aug. 10. They will be covering World Pride in Amsterdam.
AMSTERDAM — Madonna on Saturday will perform at World Pride in Amsterdam.
She is scheduled to appear alongside Stuart Price, Honey Dijon, and other “special guests” at the World Pride Music Festival at AFAS Live concert hall. The Amsterdam Pride Canal Parade will take place earlier on Saturday.
MISTR, a telehealth platform that offers free access to PrEP, Doxy PEP, STI testing, and long-term HIV care, is organizing Madonna’s performance.
Madonna on July 2 released her new album, “Confessions II,” to rave reviews.
She appeared at The Abbey in West Hollywood in April. Madonna in June celebrated Pride month with a pop-up performance in New York’s Times Square.
“Everyone here is a work of art,” says the World Pride Music Festival performance poster, referring to a line from “Danceteria” on “Confessions II.”
Brazil
US official protested at 2026 International AIDS Conference
White House funding cuts have adversely impacted global HIV/AIDS fight
HIV/AIDS activists on Sunday protested a Trump-Vance administration official at the 2026 International AIDS Conference in Rio de Janeiro.
Health GAP Executive Director Asia Russell and others disrupted U.S. Global AIDS Coordinator Jeff Graham, who is leading the Trump-Vance administration’s AIDS 2026 delegation, as he spoke. They were protesting the Trump-Vance administration’s cuts to U.S. foreign aid that they maintain have had a devasting impact on the global HIV/AIDS fight.
“The U.S. government has stolen HIV treatment from 77,163 HIV positive children, slashed PrEP enrollment by 42 percent, closed 1,700 PEPFAR HIV treatment sites, decimated programs led by and for key populations, implementers report slashing condom programming by 93 percent, and so much more,” said Russell in a Bluesky post that contained pictures of her and other activists on stage at AIDS 2026.
The US government has stolen HIV treatment from 77,163 HIV positive children, slashed PrEP enrolment by 42%, closed 1700 PEPFAR HIV treatment sites, decimated programs led by and for key populations, implementers report slashing condom programming by 93% and so much more
— Asia Russell (@asia-ilse.bsky.social) July 26, 2026 at 2:26 PM
Secretary of State Marco Rubio shortly after the Trump-Vance administration took office issued a waiver that allowed PEPFAR and other “life-saving humanitarian assistance” programs to continue to operate during a freeze on nearly all U.S. foreign aid spending. HIV/AIDS service providers around the world with whom the Washington Blade has spoken say PEPFAR cuts and the loss of funding from the U.S. Agency for International Development, which officially closed on July 1, 2025, has severely impacted their work.
The International AIDS Society in a press release it issued last week noted PEPFAR “has saved more than 26 million lives” since President George W. Bush implemented it in 2003, “and changed the trajectory of the HIV pandemic.” The group also said PEPFAR “was a a success under the first Trump administration, with major progress toward the 95-95-95 goals.”
The UNAIDS’s 95-95-95 goals are 95 percent of people with HIV knowing their status, 95 percent of people with HIV having access to antiretroviral therapy, and 95 percent of those receiving ART having suppressed viral loads by 2030.
“Since the start of the second Trump administration, however, it has undergone major disruptions,” added the International AIDS Society.
“No one has to accept being lied to by this administration, particularly not the scientists and communities and activists who know the best what is at stake and what is actually happening,” said Russell on Bluesky.
many many people stood up and applauded during our protest, and thanked us afterward.
No one has to accept being lied to by this administration, particularly not the scientists and communities and activists who know the best what is at stake and what is actually happening
— Asia Russell (@asia-ilse.bsky.social) July 26, 2026 at 2:45 PM
AIDS 2026 will end on Friday.
Germany
We must not scapegoat refugees after Berlin Pride terrorist attack
‘LGBTI people must not be instrumentalized to spread hatred against others.’
On Saturday, during Berlin’s Christopher Street Day, one of Europe’s biggest LGBTQ+ Pride events, a 21-year-old religious extremist drove a van into the crowd and then used a knife to stab multiple people. One person died and 29 others were injured.
When I saw this news on social media, I sincerely felt scared, and not because one more bigot used his religion to justify violence against people like me. It has, unfortunately, happened too often. Despite being happy to see the overwhelming support for the queer community and the condemnation of terrorism, I was terrified by the wave of Islamophobic and anti-immigrant statements that came even from “left” and “progressive” people who should know better, who generally support refugees, who know that all people are equal, and that you shouldn’t treat others as less human because of their religion.
In 2020, a Russian MP threatened to start a criminal case against me after I interviewed Muslim women about why they called themselves feminists and wrote about my own relationship with feminism and Islam, mentioning that I was following events in Syria and had read some academic books on the Islamic State. Surprisingly, the MP claimed that I was recruiting women to ISIS by using feminist ideas, which, of course, was absolutely ridiculous for many reasons, including the fact that I was an openly nonbinary transgender person. But some media outlets and queer people online, including those who called themselves progressive, refused to support me or believed the lie. This is what an anti-extremist witchhunt looks like. If I had been in Russia, and not in the UK, I probably would have been in prison.
It is extremely important to oppose extremism by knowing the actual facts about terrorist groups and not starting a moral panic.
Here are four examples of what media coverage and queer people online often misunderstand about the events in Berlin, and why it’s important.
1. Islam is not the problem
Despite a common misunderstanding, this terrorist act wasn’t even about Islam.
Islam, just like Christianity and Judaism, has a variety of views on LGBTQ+ rights, from affirmative to condemning. I think everyone in the American Bible Belt has met Christian fundamentalists who praised violence against LGBTQ+ people or used violence against their own queer children, so it is a universal problem. But the thing is Abdul Ballout was not an ordinary conservative Muslim. He was known for wanting to join ISIS. It is an apocalyptic cult that teaches that we are living in the last era, so they are trying to re-create the caliphate that they believe should be restored before Doomsday.
Most of the Muslim people I know, including conservative Salafi Muslims, see the group as dangerous criminals, or don’t see the group as a Muslim group at all. The vast majority of ISIS victims are not Western people or queer people, but cisgender heterosexual Muslims in the Middle East and Africa who the group considers to be infidels. ISIS is widely condemned by Muslim communities and scholars, and blaming Islam for the actions of cult members is like blaming Christianity and all Christians — or even all Christian fundamentalists — for the actions of Branch Davidians members or for the mass murder-suicide committed by members of the People’s Temple.
2. Refugees are not the problem — and Germany is not a safe haven for refugees
First, the attacker was a German citizen. But the media continue to blame migration. Germany is seen as a safe haven for refugees and asylum seekers in the U.S., the UK and beyond. But the time when Germany was safe is long gone. For refugees from Russia between 2022 and 2025 alone, around 90 percent of refugee claims have been refused by Germany, including the claims of political prisoners. The situation for non-White Muslim refugees is even worse, especially in regions such as Bavaria.
I have personal experience working with some refugees in Germany who are also Muslim. The way the migration service mistreated them is beyond anything I saw while working with refugees and being a refugee in the UK. I saw cases in Germany where an asylum seeker’s family was threatened back home because of social media posts the asylum seeker had made, or where a person was detained and sent back to their homeland despite having a history of persecution and torture by the government. Very often, when a person is taken by the immigration service, their loved ones don’t know where they are. Queer refugees also report homophobic and transphobic attitudes in the system.
The narrative that Germany is too generous to refugees was created by the far right and has little to do with reality, and it harms actual refugees, including queer refugees, by silencing their voices.
3. There is no collective responsibility
It is an extremely old and dangerous idea.
Just as all gay men shouldn’t be blamed for what the American serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer did just because he was gay; we shouldn’t blame all Muslims, all people of Middle Eastern origin, or any other large demographic group for the crime of one terrorist. Even if the terrorist had been a refugee and a Muslim, it shouldn’t actually matter, because under the law in any modern non-authoritarian country, an individual shouldn’t be held responsible for the actions of their social group.
After all, when a white, Christian, cisgender, heterosexual, neurotypical person commits a crime, it is almost always seen as an individual’s fault. Why is it different for marginalized groups? The idea of collective responsibility harmed the gay community for decades and is harming the trans community right now, for example after Charlie Kirk’s murder. The best thing we can do is stop this narrative, because it will be used against us.
The only reason I explained about ISIS and the refugee experience in Germany is to show how far from reality the popular accusations are.
4. Witch-hunts and scapegoating serve the far-right agenda and are extremely anti-queer
From my own experience, as an openly trans person speaking against Islamophobia, sexism and queerphobia who was accused of supporting the cult that kills queer people, promotes the sexual exploitation of women and sees the majority of Muslims as legitimate targets, I can say for sure that moral panic can go wild.
People who remember the Satanic Panic of the 1980s, or even the attacks on Muslim communities after Sept. 11, should know this.
Now even queer people are attacking refugees and Muslim communities online while the German government is introducing more draconian measures against those groups.
ILGA-Europe, the biggest LGBTQ+ organization in Europe, made a statement warning against any attempt to weaponize the attack.
“This tragedy must not be used to fuel hatred against migrants, foreigners or Muslim communities. We reject any attempt by anti-democratic actors to exploit what happened to divide communities, scapegoat minorities or turn one group against another,” Chaber, the group’s executive director, said. “LGBTI people must not be instrumentalized to spread hatred against others, nor should the existence of racism, Islamophobia or anti-migrant hatred be used to minimize the threats faced by LGBTI people. The rights, safety, and dignity of all people must be defended.”
People who live at the intersection of multiple marginalized identities — LGBTQ+ Muslims, LGBTQ+ people of color and LGBTQ+ refugees — will probably suffer the most from this moral panic. Moreover, these are the same political groups that target refugees, Muslim communities and queer people. If this hatred isn’t stopped now, everyone is potentially at risk.
Condemning terrorism is important, but it is no less important to stop creating more victims.
Netherlands
Dutch queen opens World Pride in Amsterdam
Ceremony took place hours before Berlin Pride terrorist attack
Editor’s note: International News Editor Michael K. Lavers and Photo Editor Michael Key will be on assignment in Amsterdam from Aug. 5-10.
Queen Máxima on July 25 participated in this year’s World Pride opening ceremony in Amsterdam.
The Dutch monarch joined Amsterdam Mayor Femke Halsema at the ceremony that took place in Amsterdam’s Vondelpark. Several drag queens also participated in the event.
🌈 Koningin Máxima opent WoldPride 2026 in het Vondelpark in Amsterdam. Het evenement vraagt wereldwijdaandacht voor de zichtbaarheid, emancipatie en mensenrechten van de LGBTQIA+-gemeenschap. Koningin Máxima bezoekt de Sport Pride en de Youth Pride.⁰https://t.co/eXdHJYQX2R pic.twitter.com/wNkjvaTkHY
— Koninklijk Huis (@koninklijkhuis) July 25, 2026
World Pride will take place in Amsterdam through Aug. 10.
Dutch Prime Minister Rob Jetten, who is openly gay, is scheduled to open the World Pride Human Rights Conference on Aug. 5.
Halsema on Sunday told reporters that authorities will bolster security measures “where necessary” in response to the terrorist attack at Berlin’s annual Pride march the day before that left one person dead and 29 others injured.
Germany
1 dead, 29 injured in Berlin Pride attack
Authorities investigating incident as ‘Islamist terrorist attack’
At least one person died on Saturday when a van drove into a crowd at Berlin’s annual Pride march.
The incident took place shortly before 10 p.m. local time (1 p.m. PT) in Tiergarten park.
Authorities say a 21-year-old German man of Lebanese descent who tried to join the Islamic State drove the van into the crowd. German Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt on Sunday told reporters during a press conference the suspect also attacked people with a machete.
Dobrint said the suspect injured 29 people — with some of them in critical condition.
He and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz confirmed authorities are investigating the attack as “an Islamist terrorist attack.” Officers killed the suspect in the Berlin suburb of Spandau on Sunday after he reportedly charged at them with a knife.
A memorial service and rally took place in Berlin on Sunday.
Hundreds of thousands of people participate in the annual Christopher Street Day parade — which is one of Europe’s largest Pride events — that winds its way through Berlin.
Tiergarten is near June 17 Street and the Brandenberg Gate where post-parade parties and concerts take place. Authorities cancelled the remaining Pride events after Saturday’s attack.
“We strongly condemn the fatal attack at the Christopher Street Day celebration in Berlin,” said the U.S. Embassy in Germany on Sunday. “This attack undermines the fundamental values of freedom and respect which underpin open and democratic societies. Our thoughts are with the victims, their families, and the first responders.”
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni are among those who condemned the attack.
“It is difficult for us to put into words the shock and grief of the queer community,” said Alva Träbert of Federation Queer Diversity, a German LGBTQ+ and intersex rights group known by the acronym LSVD, on Sunday in a statement. “Our solidarity goes out to all the victims and their families. The community’s grief now needs space to be expressed. This act, which according to the current state of the investigation was motivated by Islamist extremism, is to be condemned in the strongest possible terms. We owe our thanks and deep respect to the entire Berlin Pride team for their organization and to the emergency services for their swift assistance.”
Träbert added the attack “was not directed at a party, but at a political demonstration for the human rights of LGBTQIA+ people” and was “also an attack on democratic values themselves.” Träbert also urged the German government in the wake of the attack to do more to protect LGBTQ+ and intersex Germans.
Dutch authorities to ‘take extra measures’ during World Pride in Amsterdam
The attack took place on the same day that World Pride began in Amsterdam.
Amsterdam Mayor Femke Halsema on Sunday said authorities will “take extra measures … where necessary” during the event and the city’s annual Pride, which will take place on Aug. 1. Dutch Prime Minister Rob Jetten, who is gay, on social media said he expressed his condolences to Merz.
“The horrific act of aggression last night at the Pride in Berlin is a direct attack on our free and tolerant society,” said Jetten on X.
“My thoughts are with the victims and their loved ones,” he added. “In these difficult times, we stand shoulder to shoulder with our German neighbors.”
Brazil
2026 International AIDS Conference to take place in Rio
US funding cuts have significantly impacted global HIV/AIDS fight
The 2026 International AIDS Conference will take place next week in Rio de Janeiro.
Francisco Ruiz, the former director of the White House Office of National AIDS Policy, and UNAIDS Executive Director Winnie Byanyima are among those scheduled to speak at the conference that will take place in the Brazilian city from July 26-31. Other scheduled speakers include Spanish Health Secretary Javier Padilla, World Health Organization Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, South African Deputy Health Minister Mathume Joseph “Joe” Phaahla, and Alexus D’Marco of the United Caribbean Trans Network.
The International AIDS Society-organized AIDS 2026’s theme is “Rethink. Rebuild. Rise.”
AIDS 2026 will take place against the backdrop of U.S. funding cuts that have significantly impacted the global HIV/AIDS fight.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio shortly after the Trump-Vance administration took office issued a waiver that allowed PEPFAR and other “life-saving humanitarian assistance” programs to continue to operate during a freeze on nearly all U.S. foreign aid spending. HIV/AIDS service providers around the world with whom the Los Angeles Blade has spoken say PEPFAR cuts and the loss of funding from the U.S. Agency for International Development, which officially closed on July 1, 2025, has severely impacted their work.
The International AIDS Society in a press release it issued on Tuesday noted PEPFAR “has saved more than 26 million lives” since President George W. Bush implemented it in 2003, “and changed the trajectory of the HIV pandemic.”
“PEPFAR was a success under the first Trump administration, with major progress toward the 95-95-95 goals,” it said.
The UNAIDS’s 95-95-95 goals are 95 percent of people with HIV knowing their status, 95 percent of people with HIV having access to antiretroviral therapy, and 95 percent of those receiving ART having suppressed viral loads by 2030.
“Since the start of the second Trump administration, however, it has undergone major disruptions,” added the International AIDS Society.
Eswatini is among the African countries that have received doses of lenacapavir, a groundbreaking HIV prevention drug that users inject twice a year, through PEPFAR since the Trump-Vance administration took office.
The White House last month announced it will end PEPFAR funding for South Africa.
President Ronald Reagan in 1985 implemented the global gag rule, also known as the “Mexico City” policy, that banned U.S. foreign aid for groups that support abortion and/or offer abortion-related services. The Trump-Vance administration earlier this year expanded the prohibition to include groups that promote “gender ideology” and support gender-affirming care and diversity, equity, and inclusion programs.
The International AIDS Society in its press release notes 52 percent of “all implementing partners had at least once terminated award,” while 77 percent of them “had been asked to restrict their work to comply with an additional U.S. policy.” The International AIDS Society notes 1,010 public health facilities, 325 “access points” and 126 “drop-in centers” around the world have closed because of U.S. funding cuts.
“Science is moving fast, giving us more powerful HIV prevention and treatment tools. But these advances cannot save lives if they never reach the people who need them,” said International AIDS Society President Beatriz Grinsztejn, who co-chairs AIDS 2026 and is the director of Rio de Janeiro’s Evandro Chagas National Institute of Infection Diseases’ HIV/AIDS Clinical Research Unit. “That requires robust, stable financing and steadfast political commitment.”
Poland
Polish president vetoes same-sex relationship recognition bills
Karol Nawrocki: measures would ‘lead to the loss of the special status of marriage’
Polish President Karol Nawrocki on July 17 vetoed bills that would have extended rights to same-sex couples.
Reuters reported Nawrocki rejected two measures that would have allowed same-sex couples who live together to enter into “cohabitation contracts.” Reuters noted the bills would have allowed same-sex couples to make decisions on issues that include access to medical information, property rights, and burial.
The country’s coalition government backed the bills that MPs approved. Nawrocki, a socially conservative Catholic, in a statement said they “create a new, formalized institution of family law, equipped with a broad catalogue of rights similar to those of marriage.”
“As the guardian of the Constitution, I cannot accept a solution that would lead to the loss of the special status of marriage, defined in Article 18 of the Constitution as a union of a man and a woman under the protection and care of the Republic of Poland,” said Nawrocki, as Reuters noted.
Prime Minister Donald Tusk sharply criticized Nawrocki.
Miko Czerwiński of the Campaign Against Homophobia, a Polish LGBTQ+ advocacy group, in a statement noted nearly 80 percent of Poles “believe that the status of same-sex couples should be protected.”
“Once again, the voice of society has proven irrelevant to those in power,” said Czerwiński. “We are not willing to accept this. We will continue working towards full marriage equality.”
The EU Court of Justice in Luxembourg last November ruled in favor of a same-sex couple who challenged Poland’s refusal to recognize their German marriage. Poland’s Supreme Administrative Court in March reaffirmed the decision.
The couple, who lives in Poland, brought their case to Polish courts in 2019. The Supreme Administrative Court referred it to the EU Court of Justice.
The Polish government in May announced it will recognize same-sex marriages legally performed in other EU countries. Tusk, for his part, apologized to same-sex couples for the “years of rejection and humiliation” they suffered because Poland did not recognize their relationships.
“We will continue working towards full marriage equality,” said Czerwiński in response to Nawrocki’s vetoes. “We will not allow years of work by non-governmental organizations, activists, and our entire community to be wasted.”
India
Expected India Supreme Court ruling could shape future LGBTQ+ rights cases
Decision to determine whether courts can use constitutional morality doctrine
India’s Supreme Court is expected to issue a closely watched constitutional ruling that could shape the future of LGBTQ+ rights litigation.
The decision will determine whether courts can continue to rely on the doctrine of constitutional morality, a principle that has underpinned several landmark rights decisions. During hearings in April, the Indian government urged the Supreme Court to reject the doctrine, arguing that it has no basis in the Constitution and should not guide judicial decision-making.
For years, the Supreme Court has relied on the constitutional morality doctrine to treat the Constitution as a living document: one whose enduring promises of justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity must be applied to the realities of a changing society rather than remain frozen in the era in which it was written.
The Indian government in April asked the Supreme Court to revisit the constitutional reasoning behind two landmark judgments: one that struck down the country’s adultery law and another that decriminalized consensual same-sex relations, arguing that both relied on a subjective invocation of constitutional morality and should no longer be treated as good law.
Arguing before a 9-judge bench considering constitutional questions referred from the Supreme Court’s 2018 Sabarimala temple case, which allowed women of menstruating age to enter one of Hinduism’s holiest shrines after a centuries-old ban, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, India’s second-highest law officer, argued that “constitutional morality” has no textual basis in the Constitution and is instead a judicially evolved concept that is vague and indeterminate.
Mehta said the government did not oppose the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down Section 497 of the Indian penal code, which criminalized adultery, if it was based on Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of the laws. Instead, he argued that the court should not have relied on what he described as the “vague and subjective” doctrine of constitutional morality to reach its conclusion.
Mehta told the Supreme Court that its 2018 Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India ruling that decriminalized consensual same-sex relations wrongly equated “morality” with majoritarian or mob morality while relying on constitutional morality as the basis for its reasoning.
To support his argument against relying on constitutional morality, Mehta quoted extensively from then-Justice Antonin Scalia’s dissent in the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2003 decision in Lawrence v. Texas.
Scalia argued that courts should not import foreign legal trends or allow evolving social values to drive constitutional interpretation, contending that judges must remain neutral arbiters rather than participants in broader cultural debates.
Referring to the Supreme Court’s landmark decisions in Navtej Singh Johar and Joseph Shine, Mehta questioned whether the judgments reflected the constitutional vision of India’s founding generation.
“If these judgments, Navtej Johar, Joseph Shine, etc., were to be read by Dr. Ambedkar or Kanhaiyalal Munshi or Alladi Krishnaswamy Iyer, I do not know whether they would be surprised, shocked or they would say that this is what we wanted. I believe, they did not want this to happen,” he told the bench.
“A new trend starts, which is Naz Foundation v. Government of NCT of Delhi,” Mehta said. “This is the judgment of Delhi High Court which was ultimately affirmed in Navtej Johar, sodomy … ‘In our scheme of things, constitutional morality must outweigh the argument of public morality, even if it be the majoritarian view.’ In case of a country governed by democratic principles, the view which is always majoritarian will prevail. When it is question of testing a law, it is always the majority which passes the law. How can you define morality based on this?”
The Naz Foundation case marked the beginning of a landmark constitutional challenge to Section 377 of the Indian penal code, a colonial-era provision that criminalized consensual same-sex relations between adults as “against the order of nature.” The public interest litigation, filed in 2001 by the Naz Foundation, an NGO working on HIV/AIDS and sexual health, argued that the law violated fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution.
In 2009, the Delhi High Court ruled in the organization’s favor, holding that Section 377 violated the rights to equality under Article 14, protection against discrimination under Article 15, and life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The Delhi High Court’s ruling was short-lived.
In 2013, the Supreme Court, in Suresh Kumar Koushal v. Naz Foundation overturned the decision, recriminalizing homosexuality under Section 377.
The court held that the law affected only a “minuscule fraction” of the population and said it was for Parliament — not the judiciary — to decide whether the provision should remain on the statute books. Five years later, the Supreme Court’s Constitutional Bench in Navtej Singh Johar, unanimously overruled its 2013 judgment, holding that Section 377 was unconstitutional. The decision marked the culmination of the Naz Foundation’s long legal challenge to the colonial-era provision.
Anish Gawande, the first openly gay person to serve as a national spokesperson for a major political party in India, the Nationalist Congress Party (Sharadchandra Pawar), told the Los Angeles Blade that the doctrine of constitutional morality, which he said underpinned not only Navtej Singh Johar but also forms one of the foundational principles of India’s constitutional jurisprudence, is “an incredibly important concept.”
“It provides a moral backbone to the document in a way that prevents any amendments to the Constitution from being out into place that would violate the very ethos upon which the Constitution was framed,” Gawande said. “Constitutional morality is an incredibly important antidote to societal morality. It’s been what has allowed us to clamp down on things like dowry. It’s been something that has allowed us to bar even regressive religious practices that might go against human dignity. It’s also been an incredibly important framework that has allowed for the advancement of LGBTQ rights in opposition to arguments made by practitioners and leaders of various religious denominations about the societal immorality of queerness.”
“The most critical part of constitutional morality, which is a doctrine that has been put in place by the courts, is that it is a very effective bulwark against majoritarianism and the unilateral diktat of the executive over the judiciary and, in some ways, also the legislature,” he added.
Gawande said those factors make constitutional morality “an incredibly important concept” in Indian constitutional jurisprudence.
If the Supreme Court were ultimately to narrow or reject the doctrine, he said, judgments that have relied on constitutional morality, including the landmark Navtej Singh Johar ruling could come under renewed scrutiny. He added, however, that he did not believe the Supreme Court would take that step because it would run contrary to its own institutional interests.
Gawande said the government has advanced several reasons for challenging the doctrine of constitutional morality. One of them, he said, is that the solicitor general has opposed the doctrine in cases involving religious issues, arguing that courts should not rely on it in constitutional adjudication.
“The downward repercussions of this, however, could extend to LGBTQ rights and to the rights of all sorts of persecuted minorities in the future,” he said.
“The second thing is that, in principle, the section 377 judgment, of course, rests upon constitutional morality, but it is also resting upon so many other fundamental rights, including the right to privacy that Puttuswamy upheld before the Navtej Singh Johar verdict,” Gawande added. “In Navtej, the right to privacy was also cited as an incredibly important condition upon which the decriminalization of ‘carnal intercourse against the order of nature’ could be permitted. In many ways, the fact that Section 377 does not exist on the statute books at all in the present updated penal codes, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, provides some respite. The entry of Section 377, at least immediately after a reading down of constitutional morality, is not imminent yet. However, it opens the door for a new Section 377 to be introduced and the judicial mechanism available to counter that new section 377, if it were to be introduced, to be reduced significantly.”
Ankit Bhupatani, an LGBTQ+ activist, said he does not believe the Supreme Court’s reconsideration of constitutional morality would lead to the recriminalization of consensual same-sex sexual relations.
He argued the 2018 Navtej Singh Johar decision rests on multiple constitutional principles beyond constitutional morality, but warned that weakening the doctrine could make it more difficult to secure future LGBTQ+ rights through the courts.
“If we have to take an informed guess on why the government does not like the concept of constitutional morality, it is because it wants a narrower field of judicial review and an elected legislature restored as the primary author of social policy,” Bhupatani said. “But we have already seen parliament’s ability to make laws related to LGBT rights, and it does not give optimism.”
“The only practical way forward for LGBT rights in India is the judiciary,” he added. “But if the government’s argument is accepted by the Supreme Court, it means the next gay Indian who walks into a court for marriage, for adoption, for inheritance, or for a job they were fired from, finds it more difficult to secure these rights from the only institution from which we could hope for a positive outcome.”
Bhupatani said the decriminalization of consensual same-sex sexual relations would probably survive because the Navtej Singh Johar judgment also rests on the constitutional principles of privacy and equality. However, he warned that weakening the doctrine of constitutional morality could stall broader progress for LGBTQ+ rights.
“The community keeps the floor and loses the staircase,” he said. “Nobody is criminalized, but nobody moves up.”
“The clever thing about this is that it lets the government have it both ways. To its so-called base, who think that making the law, especially on social issues, is the work of elected parliamentarians and not judges,” said Bhupatani. “It signals that the 2018 verdict was a judicial overreach that ought never to have happened. To everyone else, truthfully, that it never asked to recriminalize anyone. Both messages, one filing.”
Bhupatani said the implications of the government’s position extend beyond LGBTQ+ rights, arguing that asking the Supreme Court to treat the reasoning in Navtej Singh Johar as “not good law” raises broader questions about India’s commitment to constitutional rights. He said such a move could also affect how India’s constitutional democracy is perceived internationally.
Poland’s top court rejects recognition of same-sex marriages from other EU countries
Veteran journalist Karen Ocamb continues the good fight with the launch of her podcast
Here’s Your Palm Springs Weekend: Jul 31-Aug 2, 2026 by LA Blade x Gay Desert Guide
Taiwan’s government has failed to update process to change gender markers on ID documents
Against all odds, and then some: Stephen Muhwezi on courage, community, and starting over
Ellen Greene returns to ‘Little Shop of Horrors’ for the film’s 40th anniversary
Things are heating up: Summer gym etiquette
How ‘Staples Baddie’ Kaeden Rowland is fighting for a queerer workplace
Tello Films opens the door to Christmas in July
Weho’s GYM bar owner Jonathan Cottrell is running for city council
-
a&e features4 days agoEllen Greene returns to ‘Little Shop of Horrors’ for the film’s 40th anniversary
-
Fitness5 days agoThings are heating up: Summer gym etiquette
-
Social Media Platforms4 days agoHow ‘Staples Baddie’ Kaeden Rowland is fighting for a queerer workplace
-
a&e features4 days agoTello Films opens the door to Christmas in July
-
Politics4 days agoWeho’s GYM bar owner Jonathan Cottrell is running for city council
-
National4 days agoTrump ends direct HIV prevention funding to community groups
-
National3 days agoWhite House orders warning signs at Smithsonian over gender identity exhibits
-
Politics3 days agoFrom the desk of Equality California: the top political news for California’s LGBTQ
-
Netherlands5 days agoDutch queen opens World Pride in Amsterdam
-
Miscellaneous2 days agoAgainst all odds, and then some: Stephen Muhwezi on courage, community, and starting over