News
How goes transition to open military service? Don’t ask
Gay troops face host of new challenges after repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’
Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.) has co-sponsored a bill that would ensure married gay veterans receive benefits. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)
Despite rosy pronouncements from the Obama administration and others about the supposedly smooth transition to open service in the military following the lifting of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” a host of new problems has emerged for gay and lesbian troops.
Stephen Peters, president of the American Military Partners Association, said “there are clearly challenges that remain” for gay service members following the implementation of open service.
“These military families are still facing challenges that need to be addressed sooner rather than later,” Peters said. “All they are asking for is to be treated the same way as their counterparts — simple equality, no more and no less.”
In the past week, attention has focused on state national guard units refusing to process spousal benefit applications for troops in same-sex marriages; an Army base having to make special arrangements for chaplains to accommodate a lesbian couple; gay veterans not receiving benefits in non-marriage equality states; and the condition for gay cadets at the Air Force Academy, where a practitioner of “ex-gay” conversion therapy holds a leadership role.
Nat’l Guards refusing benefits for gay troops
Several state national guards continue to refuse to process spousal benefit applications for troops in same-sex marriages, citing state constitutional amendments banning gay nuptials. This comes after an edict from Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel saying he’s directed the National Guard Bureau to ensure the guards follow Pentagon policy to provide these benefits everywhere in the wake of the Supreme Court decision against the Defense of Marriage Act.
One state that has received significant attention is Oklahoma, where Gov. Mary Fallin on Nov. 6 ordered her national guard facilities to stop processing benefits altogether and directed all couples — gay and straight — to federal installations within her state to apply for benefits.
“Oklahoma law is clear,” Fallin said. “The state of Oklahoma does not recognize same-sex marriages, nor does it confer marriage benefits to same-sex couples. The decision reached today allows the National Guard to obey Oklahoma law without violating federal rules or policies.”
Like other states, Fallin cited a constitutional amendment prohibiting same-sex marriage or conferral of spousal benefits to gay couples. In the case of Oklahoma, voters approved an amendment banning same-sex marriage in 2004 by 75 percent of the popular vote.
According to the National Guard Bureau, a total of five states are not complying with the edict: Texas, Mississippi, Georgia, Louisiana and South Carolina. The list omits Oklahoma, but the Guard wouldn’t respond to a request for comment on why the state isn’t included.
These states maintain only the processing of same-sex benefit applications is being denied, so once these troops are enrolled in the Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System, they’d be able to receive them wherever their assignment. However, LGBT advocates have said participation by same-sex couples in national guard activities, such as “Strong Bonds” retreats for married couples, is threatened by these states’ decisions.
Although the Pentagon has threatened additional action if these states refuse to comply with the Defense Department directive on benefits, a Defense official wouldn’t speculate as to what this action would be.
“These are federal ID cards paid for with federal funding to provide federally mandated benefits,” the official said. “The Secretary has directed General Grass to resolve this issue with the TAGs. We’re not going to speculate on legal options at this time.”
Some ideas that have been speculated include a lawsuit against these states, deprivation of federal funds or federalization of these guards by President Obama.
Gay veterans not receiving spousal benefits
Also gaining attention in recent weeks is the inability of gay veterans to obtain certain spousal benefits if they live in a non-marriage equality state.
Even though the Supreme Court struck down part of DOMA, Section 103(c) of Title 38 looks to the state of residence, not the state of celebration, in determining whether a couple is married. That means that gay veterans who marry their same-sex partner in one state and move to another that doesn’t recognize their marriage can’t apply for benefits while living in that state.
Rep. Tim Walz (D-Minn.), the highest-ranking enlisted soldier ever to serve in Congress, last week introduced a bill that would change Title 38 to enable benefits to flow to gay married veterans no matter where they live.
Joining him as original co-sponsors for the bill, known as the Protecting the Freedoms and Benefits for All Veterans Act, were gay Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.) and Reps. Richard Hanna (R-N.Y.) and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.).
In an interview with the Blade, Takano said the legislation is a “backup” plan should the Obama administration decide it must continue enforcing the marriage state of residency statute even after the Supreme Court ruling against DOMA.
“We are not 100 percent sure whether the administration will or is able at this point to do that,” Takano said. “We’re introducing this legislation as a backup. We’re not finding fault with the administration; it’s just that it came to the attention of committee staff and the Equality Caucus in the Congress that this is a potential issue, and so we wanted to make sure that we drop along with the necessary Republicans and Democratic co-sponsors.”
Calls on the Obama administration to stop enforcing the state of residency statute under Title 38 in the wake of the court ruling against DOMA have previously come from Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.), who has called on the administration to stop enforcing the statute until a legislative fix happens.
Chaplains can’t accommodate gay couple on retreat
The issue of chaplains not being able to accommodate same-sex couples at “Strong Bonds” retreats run by the U.S. Army Chaplain’s Corps for members of the national guard has also emerged as an issue.
Last week, the American Military Partners Association issued a news release saying that a lesbian U.S. soldier, whose named wasn’t disclosed, and her same-sex spouse, Shakera Leigh Halford, were denied access to a retreat at Fort Irwin in California.
After the story generated media attention, the public affairs team at Fort Irwin shot back by insisting the couple wasn’t denied access, and instead the chaplains at the base had sought to find other chaplains to make accommodations.
Pamela Portland, a spokesperson for Fort Irwin, confirmed that account for the Washington Blade, saying chaplains had sought to find an appropriate person to make the accommodation following a Nov. 7 meeting between couples and the commanding general — even before the news story broke.
“We have eight chaplains here at Fort Irwin,” Portland said, “and they were restricted by their religious affiliation, they could not move ahead, but they immediately went out to find someone who could.”
Still, in a statement from the American Military Partners Association that followed, Halford decried the notion that she and her spouse required special arrangements.
“It makes the whole thing very awkward and embarrassing,” Halford said. “Why can’t we just be another couple at the retreat, like everyone else? Why do we have to have special arrangements?”
Air Force Academy hires ‘ex-gay’ advocate
Finally, the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, Colo., has received criticism after AMERICAblog first reported that Mike Rosebush, an advocate of widely discredited “ex-gay” conversion therapy, was hired by the Academy to oversee its character coaching program.
As AMERICAblog’s editor John Aravosis points out on his blog, Rosebush served as a clinical member of the National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality, a fringe group that advocates for “ex-gay” therapy, and as a vice president of the anti-gay Focus on the Family.
“Rosebush’s entire career for the past two decades has been devoted to ‘curing’ gay people of what he clearly deems a problem, and what his former employers consider an illness and a depravity,” Aravosis writes. “How then could Rosebush not include a discussion of sexual orientation in his character and leadership coaching at the US Air Force Academy?”
During a conference call with reporters last week, the Air Force Academy presented three gay cadets at the Academy in an attempt to dispel the notion the Academy fostered an anti-gay atmosphere.
While presenting a general sense of acceptance, the cadets reportedly acknowledged they did face issues at the academy, but they had been addressed. To the consternation of reporters on the call, the Academy wouldn’t go into the nature of the issues, citing privacy concerns.
The presence of Rosebush at the academy inspired a response from the American Military Partners Association and the Human Rights Campaign, which both called for the removal of the “ex-gay” practitioner from the school.
“It’s stunning that Air Force Academy officials think it’s even remotely appropriate to have someone like Mike Rosebush in a leadership position,” HRC’s Fred Sainz said. “While it’s positive that some cadets feel the culture at the Academy is welcoming to openly LGB people, it’s undeniable that Mike Rosebush’s toxic views send a harmful message that there is something fundamentally wrong with being gay.”
In addition to these problems, other issues remain unresolved, such as the inability of transgender service members to serve openly in the military.
AMPA’s Peters said one pathway to accommodate many of the problems faced by gay service members is the codification of an explicit non-discrimination clause in the military’s equal opportunity policy — a request the Pentagon has repeatedly rebuffed.
“A reliable and trustworthy system must be in place to address incidents of inappropriate discrimination against gay and lesbian service members and to foster command climates that are supportive of all military families,” Peters said. “Inclusion of orientation in the non-discrimination policy would send a strong message that all service members, regardless of their sexual orientation or the gender of their spouse, deserve fair and equal treatment.”
Marc Mazzone, a spokesperson for the LGBT military group SPART*A, said new issues are entering the public dialogue following repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and the Supreme Court decision against DOMA.
“The recent news gives a very loud and clear message we are moving into a dialogue on how to battle discrimination in its newest forms throughout the military, and we will be working to find a strong resolution to these problems to ensure all service members and spouses receive fair and equal treatment and benefits they are entitled to,” Mazzone said.
UPDATE: Shin Inouye, a White House spokesperson, responded to the Blade’s request to comment on the issues facing gay service members in the post-“Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” after the posting of this article.
“The President remains proud of the repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ which has strengthened our national security and upholds the ideals that our fighting men and women risk their lives to defend,” Inouye said. “We are confident that the Department, under Secretary Hagel’s leadership, will ensure that all service members are treated with dignity and respect.”
Afghanistan
ICC issues arrest warrants for Taliban leaders over persecution of LGBTQ people, women
Groups ‘non-conforming’ with group’s gender policy targeted
The International Criminal Court on Tuesday issued arrest warrants for two top Taliban officials accused of targeting LGBTQ people, women, and others who defy the group’s strict gender norms.
The warrants are for Hibatullah Akhundzada, the Taliban’s supreme leader, and Afghanistan Chief Justice Abdul Hakim Haqqani.
“Based on evidence presented by the Office (of the Prosecutor), the judges found that there are reasonable grounds to believe that they have committed — by ordering, inducing, or soliciting — the crime against humanity of persecution, under article 7(1)(h) of the Rome Statute, on gender grounds, against girls, women, and other persons non-conforming with the Taliban’s policy on gender, gender identity or expression; and on political grounds against persons perceived as ‘allies of girls and women,’” reads an ICC press release that announced the warrants.
Karim Khan, the ICC’s chief prosecutor, in January announced a request for warrants against Taliban officials over their treatment of women and other groups since they regained control of Afghanistan in 2021. The request marked the first time the court specifically named LGBTQ people as victims in a gender persecution case before it.
“The issuance of the first arrest warrants in the situation in Afghanistan is an important vindication and acknowledgement of the rights of Afghan women and girls,” reads the press release the ICC released on Tuesday. “It also recognizes the rights and lived experiences of persons whom the Taliban perceived as not conforming with their ideological expectations of gender identity or expression, such as members of the LGBTQI+ community, and persons whom the Taliban perceived as allies of girls and women.”
A report that Outright International released in 2023 notes Taliban officials have systematically targeted LGBTQ people — especially gay men and transgender women.
Taliban officials have subjected them to physical and sexual assault as well as arbitrary detention. The Outright International report also notes Taliban authorities have carried out public floggings for alleged same-sex sexual relations, and have collected intelligence on LGBTQ activists and community members.
Artemis Akbary, executive director of the Afghanistan LGBTIQ Organization, praised the ICC.
“Today is a historic moment for LGBTIQ victims and survivors,” he said on social media.
District of Columbia
LGBTQ voters divided in Ward 8 special election
All four candidates on DC Council seat ballot are allies
Political observers, including LGBTQ activists, believe LGBTQ voters in Ward 8, like most if not all voters in the ward, are divided over which of the four candidates to support in the July 15 special election to fill the ward’s vacant D.C. Council seat.
Each of the four candidates, all of whom are Democrats, including ousted Ward 8 council member Trayon White, who is running to recapture his seat, have expressed support for LGBTQ related issues.
The special election was called earlier this year after the D.C. Council voted unanimously to expel White following his indictment and arrest by the FBI on a federal bribery charge in August 2024.
He has pleaded not guilty to the charge and under D.C. law he can legally run for and regain his council seat until the time he is convicted of the charge. His trial is scheduled to begin in January 2026.
The three candidates challenging White — Sheila Bunn, Mike Austin, and Salim Adofo — are longtime Ward 8 community advocates who have been involved in local government affairs for many years and, according to LGBTQ activists who know them, have been supportive of LGBTQ rights.
White also has a record of supporting LGBTQ issues while serving on the council since 2017. Following his indictment, he won re-election by a wide margin in the November 2024 general election against a lesser-known Republican opponent.
Political observers say White’s indictment on a bribery charge is likely to alienate some of his past supporters, but they say he remains popular in the ward, and with three candidates dividing the opposition vote he could win the election with less than 50 percent of the divided vote count.
Two of the candidates, Bunn and Adofo, responded to a request by the Washington Blade sent to each of the four candidates asking for a statement summarizing their positions on LGBTQ related issues. In their respective statements Bunn and Adofo expressed strong support on a wide range of LGBTQ issues.
“In my nearly 30 years of public service, I have consistently supported the rights and worked to improve the quality of life for the LGBTQIA+ community,” Bunn said in her statement. She noted that much of her work on behalf of LGBTQ rights took place when she served as chief of staff for D.C. Congressional Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton and as a senior staff member for former D.C. Mayor Vincent Gray.
In his statement, Adofo said he advocated for a wide range of LGBTQ issues, including housing programs for homeless LGBTQ youth and supportive employment training programs for transgender residents.
“At the heart of our platform is a steadfast commitment to uplifting LGBTQ+ communities, ensuring that policy is shaped not just for them, but with them,” his statement says. Adofo’s positions in support of LGBTQ rights are also posted on his campaign website.
GLAA D.C, formerly known as the Gay and Lesbian Activists of Washington, released its ratings of three of the four candidates on June 22, based on its recent policy of basing its ratings mostly on non-LGBTQ specific issues. The group rates candidates on a scale of -10, the lowest possible rating, to +10, its highest rating.
It assigned a rating of +7.5 for Bunn, +6.5 for Austin, and +4.5 for Adofo. In a statement accompanying its ratings, GLAA said each of the three have a record of support on LGBTQ issues, but they lost rating points for not supporting non-LGBTQ related issues deemed important by GLAA.
GLAA said it did not issue a rating for White based on its policy of not rating candidates who are removed from office or resign due to allegations of ethics violations.
The Capital Stonewall Democrats, D.C.’s largest local LGBTQ political group, chose not to make an endorsement in the Ward 8 special election.
“We thought that this is best because this is a special election and in these unfamiliar times, we decided not to take a stand,” Howard Garrett, the group’s president, told the Blade.
Ward 8 gay Democratic activist Phil Pannell is supporting Adofo, he told the Blade, on grounds of Adofo’s strong support on LGBTQ issues and Adofo’s role as the only candidate in the Ward 8 special election who supported Initiative 83, the ballot measure passed by D.C. voters in November 2024 calling for a ranked choice voting system and open D.C. primaries. A lawsuit challenging the initiative filed by the D.C. Democratic Party has delayed its implementation.
Another longtime Ward 8 gay Democratic activist, David Meadows, is supporting Bunn. Meadows cites Bunn’s support for LGBTQ rights and her positions on other issues he supports as his reason for backing her candidacy.
The D.C. Board of Elections website shows that the board mailed ballots for the special election to all Ward 8 registered voters. The website shows that as of July 7, 2,483 voters sent back their ballots by mail or placed them in drop boxes located throughout the ward.
Early in-person voting at several polling places was scheduled to begin July 11, the website says, prior to the official election date of July 15 at all polling places throughout the ward.
Salim Adofo statement on LGBTQ issues:
Our campaign is rooted in the belief that everyone deserves to live with dignity, security, and opportunity. We are committed to building a safer, healthier, and more equitable District for all — where every voice is heard and every community is empowered. At the heart of our platform is a steadfast commitment to uplifting LGBTQ+ communities, ensuring that policy is shaped not just for them, but with them. We recognize that the fight for equity is interconnected, and we prioritize action in the areas that most deeply impact our residents’ daily lives. As [a] council member, I will advocate for healthcare for all, boost funding for HIV/AIDS, Hepatitis, STD, and TB Administration (HAHSTA) programs to address disparities in health outcomes.
• Expand access to care by exempting digital-only telehealth services from the Certificate of Need (CON) process and increasing funding through the Department of Behavioral Health (DBH).
• Build a culturally competent workforce by removing licensure barriers and expanding the pipeline of LGBTQ+ mental health providers.
• Employment and economic equity: sustain workforce development efforts like Project LEAP, a successful investment in economic empowerment for TGD residents.
• Foster public-private partnerships by requiring D.C. HR to work with labor unions and local employers to host trans-affirming job fairs.
• Fund community-led training by supporting programs developed by TGD organizations, modeled after California’s Transgender Economic Empowerment Initiative.
• Housing with dignity: every LGBTQ+ resident deserves stable, affirming, and permanent housing. End youth homelessness with a community-centered strategic plan focused on expanding permanent housing and wraparound services.
• Support inclusive housing by continuing funding for LGBTQ+ housing vouchers and senior housing initiatives.
• Safety and community support: create safe shelters by investing $2 million in a 20-bed LGBTQIA2S+ shelter for survivors of intimate partner violence and sexual assault.
• Empower community organizations with no-cost capacity-building support and streamlined access to D.C. grants for LGBTQ+-serving CBOs.
Sheila Bunn statement on LGBTQ issues:
In my nearly 30 years of public service, I have consistently supported the rights and worked to improve the quality of life for the LGBTQIA+ community.
As chief of staff to Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton, I helped prevent Congress from overturning the District’s 2009 marriage equality bill and worked on removing congressional riders from the District’s budget that prohibited the expenditure of locally raised funds for our needle-exchange program, which has been pivotal in HIV/AIDS prevention.
As part of Mayor Vincent C. Gray’s senior staff, I assisted in launching the District’s transgender employment initiative under the Project Empowerment Program, increasing training and job opportunities for transgender residents. We also employed a member of the transgender cohort in the Mayor’s Office of Community Affairs after their tenure, demonstrating our commitment to the program. I facilitated efforts to end health insurance discrimination based on gender identity with DISB’s 2013 bulletin, ensuring coverage for services like mastectomies and hormone replacement therapy. Additionally, I helped to coordinate Mayor Gray’s first LGBTQIA+ Youth Town Hall to address the concerns of LGBTQIA+ youth and participated in cultural competency training to better support the District’s significant LGBTQIA+ population.
Currently, I am a member of the Capital Stonewall Democrats, actively engaging in Pride events and supporting LGBTQIA+ causes like the DC LGBTQ+ Community Center, a one-stop shop for services and programs with critical social service partners. Through direct outreach to organizations serving the LGBTQIA+ community, I aim to understand and represent their issues effectively. I look forward to collaborating with GLAA, Capital Stonewall Democrats, and other allied organizations to shape legislation and policies that benefit our LGBTQIA+ residents and all District residents.
El Salvador
#JusticiaParaKarla: una lucha por el derecho a la identidad en El Salvador
Karla Guevara inició su camino legal y personal en 2020
Cinco años han pasado desde que Karla Guevara inició un camino legal y personal para lograr que su nombre y género sean reconocidos en su Documento Único de Identidad (DUI). Cinco años de sentencias, apelaciones, puertas cerradas y vulneraciones que hoy se resumen en una sola palabra: resistencia.
En medio de un país que aún arrastra estructuras jurídicas y sociales poco sensibles a las realidades trans, Guevara se ha convertido en una voz visible. No solo por la denuncia pública de su caso, sino por su capacidad de transformar el dolor en acción: ha iniciado la campaña #JusticiaParaKarla, la cual acompaña con conversatorios llamados “Si tú fueras yo” en diferentes zonas del país.
Su historia se remonta al año 2018, cuando, junto a otras tres defensoras de derechos humanos —Mónica Hernández, Bianca Rodríguez y Verónica López— interpuso una demanda para lograr el cambio de nombre legal. La acción se inspiró en la Opinión Consultiva 24/17 de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos, que obligó a los Estados miembros de la OEA a garantizar los derechos de las personas trans, incluyendo el reconocimiento de su identidad.
A diferencia de sus compañeras, cuyo proceso fue resuelto favorablemente, Guevara fue la única a quien el Estado salvadoreño le negó el derecho, incluso tras contar con una sentencia favorable. El camino ha sido empinado, desgastante y doloroso, y ha implicado múltiples etapas legales con resoluciones contradictorias.
El 8 de enero de 2020, el juzgado declaró su demanda improponible. Guevara apeló el 22 de ese mismo mes, pero la Cámara de Familia desestimó su recurso. Aun así, perseveró. En abril de 2021 presentó una segunda apelación, y en septiembre se revocó la decisión del juzgado, ordenando admitir su demanda. Una pequeña luz parecía abrirse.
En agosto de 2022, después de varios peritajes que, según Guevara, incluyeron momentos donde se sintió expuesta y violentada, recibió una sentencia favorable: se autorizaba su cambio de nombre y género en la partida de nacimiento. Sin embargo, esta victoria fue parcial y breve. Aunque se ordenó marginar su partida, no se ordenó cancelarla como en otros casos similares.
El 4 de octubre de ese mismo año, la sentencia fue enviada al Registro del Estado Familiar. Pero la respuesta institucional fue sorprendente: el 3 de noviembre, la Alcaldía de San Salvador se negó a realizar el cambio. El jefe del registro y el registrador presentaron un amparo ante la Sala de lo Constitucional, paralizando el proceso.
“No solo me lo negaron, sino que ahora me exponen a un juicio aún mayor”, expresa Guevara. La frustración y la indignación fueron creciendo. En febrero de 2023, presentó una denuncia ante la Fiscalía General de la República, aunque lo hizo con poca esperanza. “Temía que no harían nada”, dijo. Y el 16 de abril de 2024, sus temores se confirmaron: la Fiscalía archivó el caso alegando que “no existe delito que perseguir”.
El 19 de noviembre de ese mismo año, Guevara decidió acudir a instancias internacionales y presentó su caso ante la Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. La CIDH ya notificó al Estado salvadoreño y le otorgó un plazo de cuatro meses para responder por qué no ha ejecutado el cambio ordenado por el juzgado.
“Obviamente no van a dar respuesta”, lamenta Guevara. Lo dice con la voz entrecortada, como quien ya ha llorado mucho, pero no ha perdido la voluntad de hablar. Reconoce que el proceso le ha afectado emocionalmente. “Cada vez que hablo de esto se me corta la voz”.
Las heridas no solo vienen de las oficinas estatales, sino también de las calles. Las miradas, los comentarios, el momento de presentar el DUI en cualquier trámite. “Es como si cada vez tuviera que explicar mi existencia. Es un juicio constante sobre quién soy”.
Guevara no está sola. Reconoce que hay otras personas trans en la misma situación. “Lo preocupante es que solo pasa en algunas zonas del país. En otras ha habido casos exitosos”, afirma. La disparidad en el trato revela una preocupante arbitrariedad institucional.
Uno de esos casos exitosos es el de Valeria Mejía, coordinadora de monitoreo y evaluación de ASPIDH. Su DUI ya refleja su nombre identitario, aunque no su género.
“Cuando recibí mi DUI con el nombre que me identifico pensé: aquí empieza una nueva vida”, relata.
Para Mejía, el cambio fue profundamente simbólico. “Uno ve pasar toda su vida frente a los ojos. Toda la discriminación, todos los rechazos. Sentí que algo sanaba”. A pesar de ello, su género asignado al nacer sigue apareciendo en el documento, lo que le genera inseguridad.
“El problema es que tengo que ir a todas las instituciones donde aparezco con mi nombre anterior. En el Seguro Social, por ejemplo, aún estoy registrada con el nombre masculino y no pueden atenderme, aunque el número del DUI sea el mismo”, explica.
Casos como los de Guevara y Mejía visibilizan una problemática estructural: el Estado salvadoreño no garantiza de forma uniforme el derecho a la identidad de las personas trans. Las resoluciones favorables son solo el primer paso. Su implementación efectiva aún tropieza con prejuicios, burocracia y omisiones.
Con la campaña #JusticiaParaKarla, la activista busca más que una solución a su caso personal. Busca generar conciencia, exigir coherencia legal y empujar una transformación cultural. En la marcha del 17 de mayo contra la LGBTIfobia, su presencia se hizo notar con camisetas, banners y mensajes que interpelan directamente al sistema.
Guevara ha hecho de su cuerpo, su voz y su historia una herramienta de resistencia. En cada conversatorio de “Si tú fueras yo”, invita a imaginar, a empatizar, a incomodarse.
“Lo que me pasa a mí le puede pasar a cualquier persona trans. Y si el Estado no nos reconoce, nos niega también la posibilidad de existir plenamente”, expresa.
Hoy, la resolución está en manos de la CIDH y el tiempo corre. La lucha de Guevara ya no es solo por una partida de nacimiento. Es por el derecho a ser, a vivir sin miedo, a que el nombre que la representa no siga siendo un motivo de juicio, burla o rechazo.
Mientras tanto, sigue esperando. Sigue alzando la voz. Sigue sembrando esperanza en quienes vienen detrás. Porque como ella misma dice: “Esto no se trata solo de mí. Se trata de justicia”.
ICC issues arrest warrants for Taliban leaders over persecution of LGBTQ people, women
LGBTQ voters divided in Ward 8 special election
#JusticiaParaKarla: una lucha por el derecho a la identidad en El Salvador
Defying trends, new LGBTQ center opens in rural Winchester, Va.
Female writers arrested in Chinese crackdown on gay erotic fiction
Two new documentaries highlight trans history
Celebrate the power of homeownership this Fourth of July
‘A Wrinkle in Time’ comes to Arena Stage
Lesbian feminist becomes South African MP
