News
30 Colombian LGBT advocates attend USAID-backed training
Program seeks to promote greater involvement in country’s politics
Thirty activists from across Colombia are attending a four-day training in the city of Cartagena designed to encourage LGBT people to become more involved in the country’s political process.
The program, which the Gay and Lesbian Victory Institute and the Colombian LGBT advocacy groups Caribe Afirmativo and Colombia Diversa organized, is the second to take place in the South American country as part of the USAID-backed LGBT Global Development Partnership that will contribute $11 million over the next four years to advocacy groups in Ecuador and other developing countries. Thirty activists attended the initiative’s first Colombia training that took place in Bogotá, the country’s capital, from May 30 – June 2.
Denis Dison of the Gay and Lesbian Victory Institute; Claire Lucas of USAID; National Democratic Institute Director Francisco Herrero and Tatiana Piñeros, a transgender woman who runs Bogotá’s social welfare agency, are among those who took part in a panel on Thursday that Colombia Diversa Executive Director Marcela Sánchez moderated on how out political leaders and officials can advance the Colombian and American LGBT rights movements. Jhosselyn Pájaro, a trans woman who ran for municipal council in the city of Arjona outside of Cartagena; Ramón Rojas, a councilman in the city of Chaparral in central Colombia and María Rachid, an Argentine lawmaker and LGBT rights advocate who led campaigns in support of the country’s same-sex marriage and trans rights laws that took effect in 2010 and 2012, also spoke.
“I will have the opportunity to build my capacity and be able to realize a good and better platform in regards to the next campaign,” Pájaro told the Washington Blade before the Cartagena training began. “To know how to implement a good strategy that will allow me to reach my voters is something that excites me greatly.”
The training is taking place roughly five weeks after two gay men in Bogotá became the country’s first legally recognized same-sex couple.
Colombia’s Constitutional Court in 2011 ruled gays and lesbians could seek legal recognition of their relationships within two years if lawmakers in the South American country failed to extend to them the same benefits heterosexuals receive through marriage.
The Colombian Senate in April overwhelmingly rejected a bill that would have extended marriage rights to gays and lesbians.
The Constitutional Court’s June 20 deadline passed amid lingering confusion as to whether same-sex couples could actually marry in Colombia because the 2011 ruling did not contain the word “marriage.”
Sánchez and other LGBT rights advocates consider Carlos Hernando Rivera Ramírez and Gonzalo Ruiz Giraldo married after a Bogotá civil judge solemnized their relationship on July 24. Many notaries have said they will allow gays and lesbians to enter into a “solemn contract” that is similar to an agreement into which two people enter when they purchase a home together as opposed to a civil marriage.
Anti-LGBT violence in Colombia remains a serious problem in spite of efforts to extend relationship recognition to same-sex couples in the country.
Colombia Diversa estimates 58 of the reported 280 LGBT Colombians who were murdered between 2010-2011 were killed because of their sexual orientation or gender identity and expression. A report from the Latin American and Caribbean Network of Transgender Women (REDLACTRANS) notes 61 trans Colombian women have been reported killed between 2005-2011.
Caribe Afirmativo, which works in Cartagena and other cities along Colombia’s Caribbean coastline, documented 79 LGBT residents in the region suffered “violent deaths” since the murder of the organization’s founder, Rolando Pérez, in February 2007. The group also noted 86 incidents of anti-LGBT police harassment during the same period.
Edgar Plata of Caribe Afirmativo, who uses art as a way to advocate in support of LGBT rights, and Alondra Márquez of the Santamaría Fundación, a group based in the city of Cali that advocates on behalf of trans women, discussed violence against LGBT Colombians during a D.C. panel on Aug. 22 that coincided with an Organization of American States meeting on human rights.

Edgar Plata of Caribe Afirmativo and Alondra Márquez of Santamaría Fundación take part in a panel on anti-LGBT violence at Global Rights in Northwest D.C. on Aug. 22, 2013. (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)
Caribe Afirmativo Director Wilson Castañeda told the Blade on Thursday that Colombian political parties have yet to include gay-specific issues in their platforms. He added LGBT Colombians who seek to enter politics lack support and money for their campaigns and face what he described as the traditional political class that “functions more like electoral businesses than an ideological process.”
Castañeda added he feels working with the media to create visibility for LGBT Colombians is also important.
“It is important to immediately begin to generate synergies with the parties; with the current elected officials to ensure they, without being LGBT, are open to the idea,” Castañeda said.
Gay and Lesbian Victory Institute President Chuck Wolfe, who spoke on a panel during the Bogotá training, applauded the Cartagena gathering and the LGBT Global Development Partnership.
“This groundbreaking training puts into action the U.S. government’s commitment to global LGBT equality,” he told the Blade. “We are excited to work with our partners in-country and at USAID to grow the domestic participation of the LGBT community in Colombia.”
District of Columbia
Advocates honored at Engendered Spirit Awards
Annual ceremony held at conclusion of Trans Pride DC
The 2026 SaVanna Wanzer Engendered Spirit Awards ceremony took place at the Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial Library in D.C. on Saturday. The ceremony was held at the conclusion of the day-long Trans Pride DC: Encore.
Honorees included D.C. Mayor’s Office of Community Affairs Deputy Director Vida Rangel; the LGBT+ Counseling Collaborative, Inc.; and Connor Keuntje, CLP, CLPC.
Trans Pride DC: Encore was held throughout Saturday with several workshop sessions and a virtual conversation with actress and advocate Dominique Jackson.
The annual Engendered Spirit Awards were renamed the “SaVanna Wanzer Engendered Spirit Awards” in honor of SaVanna Wanzer, founder of D.C. Trans Pride. Wanzer died on April 24 of this year.
Speakers at the ceremony included Japer Bowles, director of the D.C. Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs and Bianca Sprague, executive director of D.C. Trans Pride.
“The intent behind this award and honoring members of our communities, organizations, and allies, is to really elevate all of the work that they’re doing to provide resources, tools, learning opportunities and connections: centering trans folks, gender non-conforming, and gender diverse individuals,” Sprague said.
India
Proposed Indian foreign funding law overhaul could further pressure LGBTQ groups
Measure introduced in Parliament earlier this year
India’s proposed overhaul of its foreign funding law could put LGBTQ organizations that depend on overseas donations under new pressure.
Introduced in the Lok Sabha, the lower house of Parliament, on March 25, the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2026, or FCRA, would give a government-designated authority control over foreign funds, and assets when an organization loses or surrenders its registration.
The Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Bill returned to the spotlight this month as the Indian government prepared to seek its passage during Parliament’s Monsoon Session; drawing fierce opposition from political parties, civil society groups and religious organizations.
The government says the bill is intended to address gaps in the management of foreign funds and assets when an organization’s FCRA registration is cancelled, surrendered, or expires. The Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2026, would create a Designated Authority to oversee the vesting, supervision, management, and disposal of foreign contributions and assets when an organization’s FCRA registration is cancelled, surrendered , or ceases. If a vested asset is a place of worship, the authority would be required to preserve its religious character. The FCRA would also reduce the maximum prison term for violating the law from five years to one year.
The changes could also make it difficult for organizations to leave the FCRA regime without surrendering assets created with foreign funds. Under the bill, an organization would have to keep renewing its FCRA certificate to retain those assets. FCRA rules also impose spending requirements on organizations seeking to maintain their certificates.
The bill may also create a distinction between assets created by organizations with FCRA registration and those created through the separate prior-permission route.
More significantly, neither the existing law nor the bill provides an appeal mechanism when the central government refuses to renew an FCRA certificate. They also do not expressly require the organization to be given an opportunity to be heard before renewal is denied. Under the proposed framework, such a denial could trigger the vesting of the organization’s foreign-funded assets in the Designated Authority.
The bill would also widen the circle of people who could face consequences for an organization’s FCRA violations.
Its definition of “key functionary” extends beyond directors and office bearers to trustees, governing-body members, managing-committee members and others responsible for an organization’s affairs. Those functionaries could be held liable for offenses committed by the organization, unless they can show that they were unaware of the violation or had exercised due diligence to prevent it. The FCRA bill would also impose restrictions on dealing with foreign-funded assets during a suspension and leave several important operational details — including timelines and procedures for managing and returning assets — to rules that have yet to be prescribed.
Parliament on Aug 12 moved to refer the FCRA bill to a parliamentary committee for further scrutiny and wider consultations.
Minister of State for Home Nityanand Rai moved the motion in the Lok Sabha, to refer the bill to a committee comprising 21 members of the lower house and 10 members of the Rajya Sabha, Parliament’s upper house.
The Rajya Sabha subsequently approved the nomination of its 10 members to the committee. The panel is expected to submit its report by the last day of the first week of Parliament’s Winter Session.
The proposed changes could have significant implications for LGBTQ organizations that rely on the FCRA framework to receive foreign contributions. (The global LGBTQ and intersex rights movement since the Trump-Vance administration took office in 2025 has lost nearly $50 million in U.S. funding because of foreign aid cuts. One source with whom the Washington Blade spoke described the funding loss as a “catastrophe” for the global movement.)
While the government does not appear to have published an easily accessible, consolidated list of LGBTQ organizations receiving such funding, FCRA registration records and organizations’ financial disclosures indicate that foreign contributions have supported LGBTQ rights, healthcare, and community services in India.
K.C. Venugopal, general secretary of the opposition Indian National Congress, told reporters his party and other opposition parties would strongly protest the legislation if it were introduced in Parliament. He said the bill was aimed at targeting minorities and NGOs and vowed that the opposition would oppose its passage.
Venugopal called the proposed legislation “unconstitutional and anti-people.”
“If the Central Government thinks they can cook up and introduce the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Bill within these two or three days, they should keep that wish to themselves,” he told reporters in Alappuzha, Kerala, on Aug. 9.
“Three provisions worry LGBTQ+ organizations like ours most directly,” said Souvik Saha, founder of People for Change and Jamshedpur Queer Circle. “First, the 2026 bill would let a government-appointed ‘Designated Authority’ take control of an organization’s foreign-funded assets— bank balances, equipments, sometimes even property— the moment its FCRA registration is cancelled, surrendered, or simply not renewed, and this happens through an administrative process, without prior judicial adjudication. For a small community organization, that means losing everything we have built — case files, shelter infrastructure, helpline equipment — almost overnight, with no court hearing first.”
Saha told the Blade the revised FCRA Rules announced in June introduced a minimum spending threshold: organizations must spend at least $10,449 in foreign contributions over two financial years or risk cancellation and non-renewal of their registration.
“This specifically penalizes small and grassroots groups that deliberately keep their foreign funding modest — which describes most LGBTQ organizations in India, including ours,” said Saha. “We are not running core-scale budgets; we are running helplines, safe spaces, and district-level outreach on modest grants.”
Saha told the Blade that the ban on sub-granting, carried over from the 2020 amendment, means larger, well-established rights organizations cannot pass foreign funds to smaller, unregistered LGBTQ collectives that could not obtain FCRA registration themselves. He said rights groups have long described the restriction as a near “death knell” for hundreds of small nongovernmental organizations that work collaboratively with larger organizations, adding that LGBTQ groups outside major metropolitan areas depend heavily on such funding arrangements.
“Domestic funding for LGBTQ work in India is still thin, CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) money avoids us because we are seen as ‘controversial,’ and most Indian foundations would not touch gender-identity programming,” Saha said. “So foreign funding is not a convenience for organizations working with the transgender and LGBTQ community, it is often always funding.”
Politics
Log Cabin Republicans remove transgender rights from mission
Decision made after ‘significant discussion’ with members, board
Log Cabin Republicans, an organization that formerly represented LGBTQ conservatives, has removed advocating for transgender and queer rights from its “renewed” national advocacy focus.
In an opinion piece written by Log Cabin Republicans President Ross Hemminger for the conservative media outlet Town Hall, he announced that trans rights would no longer be part of what the organization advocates for through conservative leadership and candidates.
In his piece, Hemminger wrote that after “significant discussion” with members and Log Cabin Republicans’ board of directors, the organization’s leadership voted to “refine Log Cabin Republicans’ national advocacy focus to concentrate specifically on issues of sexual orientation and conservative values,” a focus that does not include trans people.
“We have fought for the right to legally marry who we love, serve our country and our communities openly and proudly, and to enjoy the same inalienable rights afforded to all law-abiding Americans — and we succeeded,” Hemminger wrote. “However, the new era of gender identity politics is not the movement we supported and fought for. Gay men and women are losing public support across the country, and support for gay marriage and other once-widely accepted rights is eroding. Why? Because many voters today weren’t alive or cognizant of the politics of gay marriage winding its way through the courts and gaining ground in public opinion. Their view of the gay community is based on today’s radical transgender activists with their unnecessary and discomfiting focus on America’s youth.”
Hemminger then went on to argue that trans advocacy has shifted to focusing primarily on minors — a characterization that does not reflect the breadth of issues trans advocates address.
“They push schools to teach radical gender ideology; they want biological men in women’s sports regardless of the consequences; perhaps most offensively, they support gender reassignment treatments for minors, often without the knowledge or consent of the parents, knowing full well these treatments are mostly irreversible,” he wrote.
Hemminger and many right-wing political leaders have continued to assert this false reality as fact.
A Harvard-affiliated study found approximately 2.1 gender-affirming surgeries occur per 100,000 trans and gender-diverse minors diagnosed with gender dysphoria, underscoring how uncommon these procedures are among minors. In addition to the option of surgery for those who think it’s right for them, there is an array of other medically sound options to treat gender dysphoria, which according to KFF, an independent source for health policy research and polling, includes “medical, surgical, mental health, and non-medical services for transgender and nonbinary people.”
Additionally trans advocacy is not as narrow as Hemminger makes it seem in his opinion piece.
There are a slew of issues the trans community faces — and fights for — on a daily basis that have nothing to do with healthcare. Those include obtaining government documents that accurately reflect one’s gender identity, multiple elements of family law that include the right to marry and adopt children as straight couples can, protections from violence, hate crime protections, the right to serve in the military, access to bathrooms corresponding with their gender, and the right to education.
Despite the overwhelming number of issues trans people — regardless of political affiliation — have to struggle with as a result of systemic gaps in protections that are supposed to be afforded to everyone under the law, they remain vulnerable to unequal treatment.
Despite this shift, Log Cabin Republicans has committed to standing with the Republican Party rather than LGBTQ people as a whole. The organization was initially founded as a loosely connected network of local California social clubs made up of LGBTQ conservatives in the late 1970s before eventually emerging as a national political organization in the early 1990s under its founding executive director, Rich Tafel.
As the organization continued to gain momentum, it endorsed a handful of Republicans who voted against the Respect for Marriage Act, the 2022 law that federally recognized marriage equality for same-sex couples.
The Washington Blade reached out to Log Cabin Republicans for comment but did not hear back by the time of publication.
-
Maryland5 days agoAnne Arundel schools updates gender identity regulation following Trump administration threats
-
Illinois4 days agoChicago’s LGBTQ+ youth: Why their zip code still matters
-
Opinions4 days agoI respect AOC, even though I often disagree with her
-
Opinions4 days agoBlack Educated Lesbians: A movement rooted in community

