World
Out in the World: LGBTQ news from Europe and Asia
The South Korean Supreme Court last week upheld health benefits for same-sex couples
SOUTH KOREA
The South Korean Supreme Court delivered a victory for same-sex couples last week, upholding a lower court ruling that found same-sex couples must be given equal access to benefits under the country’s National Health Insurance Service.
The ruling is a landmark as the first legal recognition of same-sex couples in the East Asian nation.
The Supreme Court ruled that the NHIS refusal to provide spousal benefits to same-sex couples was unconstitutional discrimination. The ruling is final.
The case was filed by a gay couple, So Seong-wook and Kim Yong-min, in 2021 after the NHIS revoked So’s registration as a dependent of Kim and imposed a new premium. So and Kim had been a couple since 2017 and had held a marriage ceremony in 2019.
The NHIS allows married or common-law heterosexual couples to register as dependents in employer-backed insurance but had no policy recognizing same-sex couples.
The Seoul Administrative Court ruled for the NHIS in 2022, but the following year that decision was overturned by the Seoul High Court, which ruled for the couple that the denial was discriminatory.
“When I listened to the verdict, I was so moved that I couldn’t hold back my tears,” So told reporters outside the court. “It took four years to earn this dependent status. We need to fight harder to legalize same-sex marriage going forward.”
The advocacy group Marriage for All Korea said in a statement that the decision was just a first step.
“This decision brings hope to other same-sex couples living in Korean society and is a huge milestone toward marriage equality and equal citizenship for LGBTQ people. However, same-sex couples who are not legally recognized in their marriage still experience various forms of discrimination,” the statement says.
“The lengthy and arduous lawsuits that same-sex couples must endure to gain single rights as a spouse, as seen in this case, should no longer be necessary. Fundamentally, we will continue to push for a broader marriage equality movement to eliminate all institutional discrimination that hinders same-sex couples from legally marrying and fully enjoying their rights as spouses, and for LGBTQ people in Korea to enjoy equal citizenship.”
Several bills to recognize same-sex marriage or civil unions and to ban discrimination against LGBTQ people have been introduced by opposition members in South Korea’s parliament over the years, but none has progressed.

LITHUANIA
A final attempt to pass a long-stalled civil union bill before the end of the current session of Parliament came to an anticlimactic end on July 18, as the government withdrew the bill from the agenda before the final day session began.
The civil union bill had long been a bone of contention in the fractious governing coalition whose largest party is the conservative Homeland Union and includes the more progressive Freedom Party, which had made the bill a priority.
The bill passed through two readings in parliament in part with the support of leftist opposition parties, but when the opposition withdrew their support of the bill — in part to deny the government a win on the issue — the coalition no longer had enough votes to get it passed, as a segment of the Homeland Union opposed it.
Over the past month, the Freedom Party had attempted to strong-arm the Homeland Union holdouts into supporting the bill, by threatening to block Lithuania’s appointment of a European commissioner unless the party supported the bill.
In the last few days of parliament’s session before the legislature is dissolved for October elections, it seemed that the parties had come to an agreement, and the civil union bill was going to be put on the agenda for a final vote on the final day of the session.
But the opposition Social Democrats refused to play ball, once again preferring to deny the government a victory on the file, even though the Social Democrats had campaigned on supporting civil unions in the past. Without their votes, the bill would be doomed to fail.
The government withdrew the bill from the agenda rather than allow it to fail. This will allow the bill to be brought back by the new parliament in October, rather than starting the process over again.
Despite the bill’s withdrawal, anti-LGBTQ protesters met outside the parliament and burned rainbow flags. Vilnius police said they are investigating potential charges of incitement to hatred.
The two-round parliamentary election is scheduled for Oct. 13 and Oct. 27, and polling shows the Social Democrats currently hold a wide lead.
Lithuania is one of only five European Union countries that do not recognize same-sex unions. The others are Romania, Bulgaria, Slovakia, and Poland, the latter of which has proposed a civil union bill that its government hopes to pass in the fall.
UNITED KINGDOM
The newly elected Labour government under Prime Minister Keir Starmer included a ban on conversion therapy in the King’s Speech that opened parliament on July 17, indicating that the bill will be a priority item during the session.
The King’s Speech is a tradition in UK politics, where the monarch reads a speech prepared by the government outlining its priorities for the upcoming session of parliament, usually lasting about a year.
During the election campaign, Starmer had pledged to back a transgender-inclusive ban on the abusive practice of conversion therapy, an issue which has become a political lightning rod in the UK over the past decade as a wave of anti-trans hysteria has gripped the media and much of the political class.
The previous Conservative government had pledged to ban conversion therapy six years ago but failed to bring a bill forward after floating the idea that the bill would allow conversion therapy for trans youth.
The UK LGBTQ advocacy group Stonewall praised the commitment to a conversion therapy ban in a statement.
“We welcome the new government’s commitment to banning conversion practices. Each day that these abusive practices remain legal, our communities are put at risk,” the statement says. “The government needs to urgently publish a comprehensive bill to ban these abhorrent practices once and for all.”
But the new government’s approach to trans issues is not entirely praiseworthy.
Two weeks ago, new Labour Secretary of State for Health Wes Streeting announced that his government was defending and extending a ban on puberty blockers for trans youth that was put in place by the Conservatives. That action has been denounced by trans activists and legal experts.
JAPAN
A trans woman is suing for the right to change her legal gender without first divorcing her wife, in a challenge to the nation’s laws surrounding both same-sex marriage and gender recognition.
The woman, who has not been identified, is in her 50s and has been in a long-term marriage to her wife, who is in her 40s, and neither partner wants to divorce. While she has legally changed her name to a woman’s name, her identification still lists her as “male,” which forces her to have uncomfortable conversations outing her trans status whenever she needs to show official documents.
Since 2003, it has been possible for trans people to update their legal gender in Japan, but only if they are unmarried. That essentially forces any married trans person to divorce their partner if they want to update their gender.
In 2010, the Japanese Supreme Court upheld the requirement that trans people be unmarried to update their legal gender, calling the situation “reasonable” and saying it did not violate the constitution.
But the woman’s lawyers believe the legal situation has changed.
Since 2021, several district courts across Japan have found that the ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional. While that has not yet legalized same-sex marriage, these cases will eventually be decided by the Supreme Court. If the court agrees with the lower courts that the ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional, then it should also find the divorce requirement for trans people to be unconstitutional.
Yoko Mizutani, one of the woman’s lawyers, says this case may also contribute to legalizing same-sex marriage.
“Many of those concerned have resigned to the notion that if same-sex marriages are not recognized, the unmarried requirement of the act will not change. If we win this petition, it could also help resolve the issue of same-sex marriage.”
SPAIN
The Constitutional Court has provisionally blocked an anti-LGBTQ law passed by the government of the Madrid Community that stripped a number of legal protections from LGBTQ people; citing constitutional, discriminatory, and jurisdictional issues.
Last year, the local government, which is led by the right-wing People’s Party and supported by the far-right Vox party, passed a bill that stripped legal recognition of trans youth, stopped allowing legal gender change without a medical diagnosis, allowed anti-LGBTQ discrimination and authorized conversion therapy.
Despite these legal protections being stripped at the local level, national laws still afforded LGBTQ people all of these rights and protections.
The national government, which is currently led by the left-wing People’s Socialist Party, filed for the injunction against the law, which it called unconstitutional, which the Constitutional Court has accepted.
Cuba
Trans parent charged with kidnapping, allegedly fled to Cuba with child
Cuban authorities helped locate Rose Inessa-Ethington
Federal authorities have charged a transgender woman with kidnapping after she allegedly fled to Cuba with her 10-year-old child.
An affidavit that Federal Bureau of Investigation Special Agent Jennifer Waterfield filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Utah on April 16 notes the child is a “biological male who identifies as a female” and “splits time living with divorced parents who share custody” in Cache County, Utah.
Waterfield notes the child on March 28 “was supposed to be traveling by car to” Calgary, Alberta, “for a planned camping trip with his transgender mother, Rose Inessa-Ethington, Rose’s partner, Blue Inessa-Ethington, and Blue’s 3-year-old child.”
The affidavit notes the group instead flew from Vancouver, British Columbia, to Mexico City on March 29. Waterfield writes the Inessa-Ethingtons and the two children then flew from Mérida, Mexico, to Havana on April 1.
The 10-year-old child called her biological mother on March 28 after they arrived in Canada. The custody agreement, according to the affidavit, required Rose Inessa-Ethington to return the child to her former spouse on April 3.
“Interviews of MV [Minor Victim] 1’s family members provided significant concerns for MV 1’s well-being, as MV 1 was born a male, however, identifies as a female child, which is largely believed to be due to manipulation by Rose Inessa-Ethington,” reads the affidavit. “Concerns exist that MV 1 was transported to Cuba for gender reassignment surgery prior to puberty.”
The affidavit indicates authorities found a note in the Inessa-Ethingtons’ home with “instruction from a mental health therapist located in Washington, D.C., including instruction to send the therapist the $10,000.00 and instructions on gender-affirming medical care for children.”
The affidavit does not identify the specific “mental health therapist” in D.C.
A Utah judge on April 13 ordered Rose Inessa-Ethington to “immediately” return the child to her former spouse. The former spouse also received sole custody.
“Your affiant believes that due to the extensive planning and preparation exhibited by both Rose Inessa-Ethington and Blue Inessa-Ethington to isolate MV 1 and take MV 1 to Havana, Cuba, without notifying or requesting permission from MV 1’s mother indicates they are likely not planning to return to the United States,” wrote Waterfield.
The affidavit notes Cuban authorities found the Inessa-Ethingtons and the child.
A press release the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Utah issued notes the Inessa-Ethingtons “were deported from Cuba” on Monday “with the assistance of the FBI.”
The couple has been charged with International Parental Kidnapping. The Inessa-Ethingtons were arraigned in Richmond, Va., on Monday. The press release notes a federal court in Salt Lake City will soon handle the case.
The New York Times reported the child is now back with their biological mother.
“We are grateful to law enforcement for working swiftly to return the child to the biological mother,” said First Assistant U.S. Attorney Melissa Holyoak of the District of Utah in the press release.
The case is unfolding against the backdrop of increased tensions between Washington and Havana after U.S. forces on Jan. 3 seized now former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores.
President Donald Trump shortly after he took office in January 2025 issued an executive order that directed the federal government to only recognize two genders: male and female. A second White House directive banned federally-funded gender-affirming care for anyone under 19.
The U.S. Supreme Court last year in the Skrmetti decision upheld a Tennessee law that bans gender-affirming care for minors.
Cuba’s national health care system has offered free sex-reassignment surgeries since 2008.
Activists who are critical of Mariela Castro, the daughter of former President Raúl Castro who spearheads LGBTQ issues as director of Cuba’s National Center for Sexual Education, have previously told the Washington Blade that access to these procedures is limited. The Blade on Wednesday asked a contact in Havana to clarify whether Cuban law currently allows minors to undergo sex-reassignment surgery.
Australia
Australia lifts additional restrictions on LGBTQ blood donors
Gay, bisexual men, trans people in long-term monogamous relationships can now donate
The Australian Red Cross Blood Service (Lifeblood) has lifted additional restrictions on LGBTQ people who want to donate blood.
The Star-Observer, an Australian LGBTQ newspaper, reported new Lifeblood rules that took effect on Monday will allow “gay and bisexual men and transgender people in long-term monogamous relationships to donate blood and platelets for the first time.”
The new policy defines “long-term monogamous relationships” as those that are at least six months.
All potential donors — regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity — will answer the same questions about recent sexual activity.
“Previous donor rules prevented many people from the LGBTQIA+ community from donating blood or platelets if they’d had sex within the past three months,” said Lifeblood CEO Stephen Cornelissen in a press release that announced the new policy. “These latest changes mean many gay and bisexual men and transgender people in long-term, monogamous relationships will become eligible to donate blood or platelets for the first time.”
Lifeblood in 2025 ended its blanket ban on sexually active LGBTQ people from donating blood.
Rodney Croome, an Australian LGBTQ activist who is the spokesperson for Let Us Give, a campaign that has championed the changes, donated blood on Monday.
“After three decades of advocacy, and for the first time in my life, I was able to donate blood today,” said Croome in a Facebook post that showed him donating blood. “From today, gay men, and bisexual men and transgender women who have sex with men, are able to give blood without the traditional three month abstinence period. All donors are now asked the same questions about sex regardless of the gender of our sexual partners.”
Croome in the post said “there are still problems with the new donor regime,” but said Let Us Give will continue to work with Lifeblood.
“Those who may have not been monogamous in the recent past should not be subject to a six month wait time,” he wrote. “Three months is considered more than enough in the UK, US and Canada. It should be here too. People on PrEP and trans people also face continued barriers. Let Us Give will continue to work towards greater equity in donation.”
European Union
Top EU court strikes down Hungary’s anti-LGBTQ propaganda law
Ruling issued days after voters outed Prime Minister Viktor Orbán
The European Union’s top court on Tuesday struck down Hungary’s anti-LGBTQ propaganda law.
Hungarian MPs in 2021 approved Act LXXIX of 2021.
“It shall be forbidden to make accessible to persons who have not attained the age of 18 years advertisement that depicts sexuality in a gratuitous manner or that propagates or portrays divergence from self-identity corresponding to sex at birth, sex change or homosexuality,” it reads.
The European Commission in 2022 challenged the law. Sixteen EU countries — Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, and Sweden — joined the lawsuit. The European Parliament also supported it. Outgoing Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, for his part, said his government would defend the law.
The EU Court of Justice heard the case in 2024.
A press release that announced the ruling on Tuesday said Hungary “acted in breach of EU law.”
“The court finds, for the first time, a separate infringement of Article 2 TEU (Treaty on European Union), which lists the values on which the (European) Union is founded and which are common to all the Member States,” it reads. “The aspects of the amending law targeting content which portrays or promotes deviation from the self-identity corresponding to the sex assigned at birth, gender reassignment, or homosexuality constitute a coordinated series of discriminatory measures which are in breach, in a way that is both manifest and particularly serious, of the rights of non-cisgender persons — including transgender persons — or non-heterosexual persons, as well as the values of respect for human dignity, equality and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities.”
“Consequently, that law is contrary to the very identity of the (European) Union as a common legal order in a society in which pluralism prevails,” notes the press release. “Hungary cannot validly rely on its national identity as justification for adopting a law which is in breach of the values referred to above.”
The Háttér Society, a Hungarian LGBTQ rights group, said the ruling “is a milestone for the protection of human rights in the European Union, and it is also a historic victory for LGBTQI people in Hungary.”
The court issued its ruling nine days after Péter Magyar ousted Orbán in Hungary’s elections.
Orbán took office in 2010.
He and his government faced widespread criticism over its anti-LGBTQ crackdown that included laws that banned Pride events and other public LGBTQ events. (Upwards of 100,000 people last June denied the prohibition and marched in Budapest’s annual Pride parade.)
“Those amendments constitute a particularly serious interference with several fundamental rights protected by the (EU) Charter (of Fundamental Rights), namely the prohibition on discrimination based on sex,” notes the court’s press release.
The EU since Orbán took office has withheld upwards of €35 billion ($41.2 billion) in funds to Hungary in response to concerns over corruption, rule of law, and other issues. Magyar has said he will work with Brussels to unfreeze the money.
ILGA-Europe Deputy Director Katrin Hugendubel urged Maygar’s government to repeal the law.
“With this ruling, the CJEU (The EU Court of Justice) is confirming what we have been saying for six years,” said Hugendubel. “There is now no excuse for the Commission not to require Hungary to quickly withdraw the law. Hungary cannot enter a post-Orbán era without repealing this legislation, including the Pride ban.”
“If Péter Magyar truly aims to be pro-EU, he must place this at the top of his agenda for his first 100 days in office, as an essential part of his EU facing reforms,” added Hugendubel.
