Connect with us

News

Marriage equality in all 50 states?

Some say Obama’s post-DOMA decisions pushing country in that direction

Published

on

Citizens Metal, Barack Obama, gay news, Washington Blade
Citizens Metal, Barack Obama, gay news, Washington Blade

President Obama is implementing the Supreme Court ruling against DOMA in a way that is speeding the pace toward national marriage equality. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key).

New policy decisions from the Obama administration in the wake of the Supreme Court decision striking down the Defense of Marriage Act are providing benefits for gay couples in a way that some observers say is advancing the pace toward national marriage equality.

In the months after the ruling in June, the U.S. government has announced historic decisions in affording the federal benefits of marriage to same-sex couples who are legally wed. Shortly after the decision, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management granted spousal health and pension benefits to gay federal employees, and just last week, the Pentagon announced it was implementing the benefits along the same lines for gay U.S. service members.

But to receive these benefits, gay couples must be in legal marriages as opposed to any other form of legally recognized relationship, such as civil unions or domestic partnerships. OPM announced in a series of memos in July couples in these unions aren’t eligible for federal benefits. And part of its rollout for same-sex spousal benefits, the Pentagon granted up to 10 days leave to allow same-sex couples to travel to a marriage-equality state to wed as opposed to honoring domestic partnerships for the purposes of benefits — retracting a pledge earlier in the year to provide them.

These changes mean gay couples living in the seven states that only offer civil unions or domestic partnerships — Colorado, Illinois, New Jersey, Oregon, Nevada, Hawaii and Wisconsin — will be left out in the cold in terms of federal benefits unless they travel to a marriage-equality state to wed and return. That doesn’t take into account rules for certain benefits — Social Security, taxes and family and medial leave — that for the time being extend only to legally married gay couples only if they currently reside in a state that recognizes their union and not to those who apply for them in non-marriage equality states.

The Obama administration’s insistence that gay couples be married to receive federal benefits is creating the policy that some observers say is leading the way toward national marriage equality by encouraging more states to adopt marriage rights for gay couples.

Lanae Erickson Hatalsky, a lesbian and director of social policy and politics for the centrist group known as Third Way, said this approach is an “organized way” to implement he Supreme Court’s decision against DOMA, but may also strategically advance marriage equality. In particular, she said it’ll demonstrate before the state courts hearing marriage equality litigation that civil unions aren’t marriage under the law.

“I think that’s pretty smart for state litigation purposes and also for ease of administration,” Erickson Hatalsky said. “The more we continue to make kind of a second-class status available at the federal level, the harder it’s going to be to take that step to what we all know is the goal. So, I think this is a pretty strategic way to kick things in that direction, whereas if you offer essentially a federal domestic partnership or civil unions, it undermines some of those arguments for why we do need marriage.”

In addition to battling for marriage equality in state courts in New Jersey, New Mexico and Illinois, LGBT advocates are pushing ahead with the legislative route for marriage equality in numerous states.

In New Jersey, advocates are seeking to overturn Gov. Chris Christie’s veto, and in Illinois, there’s a push underway to pass same-sex marriage legislation in the State House before the extended legislative session ends on Aug. 30. Lawmakers in Hawaii have also recently also met about passing marriage equality in the Aloha State. Each of these states already has civil unions.

Dan Pinello, who’s gay and a political scientist at the City University of New York, said the Obama administration’s decision to grant benefits only to legally married couples provides an incentive for lawmakers in these states to legalize same-sex marriage.

“The practical political effect of limiting federal benefits to legally married same-sex couples will be substantially to increase the pressure on states like Illinois and New Jersey to embrace marriage equality fully,” Pinello said.

But the prevailing notion among observers is that the Obama administration is extending benefits only to married gay couples  because the Windsor decision allotted for that change and any push toward national marriage equality as a result of that implementation is incidental.

Richard Socarides, a gay New York attorney who was an LGBT adviser for former President Clinton, said he thinks the Obama administration is not intending to advance same-sex marriage or to undermine civil unions through its implementation of the DOMA decision.

“Probably neither intentionally,” Socarides said. “Just doing what they think is legally appropriate.”

CUNY’s Pinello similarly said the Obama administration had little room in the way it’s implementing the decision because the majority opinion made no mention of civil unions.

“I don’t think that the Obama administration has much choice in the matter, because Justice Anthony Kennedy’s majority opinion in U.S. v. Windsor explicitly limits the Court’s decision to marriages,” Pinello said. “Civil unions and domestic partnerships aren’t within the holding of the ruling.”

Asked whether the administration had intended to advance marriage equality through its implementation of the DOMA ruling, a White House official, speaking on condition on anonymity, said the administration “is working to implement the Supreme Court’s ruling in compliance with the law.”

“The president has directed the attorney general to work with the Cabinet to review all relevant federal statutes to ensure this decision and its implications for federal benefits and obligations are implemented swiftly and smoothly,” the official added.

Still, the administration’s method of enhancing marriage rights for gay couples is a drastic change from President Obama’s declaration as a candidate in 2008 that civil unions “represent the best way to secure that equal treatment,” a position he held before evolving to embrace marriage equality last year.

And implementing the DOMA decision only for married couples doesn’t explain why the Pentagon withdrew domestic partners benefits after pledging to implement them in February. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said in the memo last week announcing the implementation of the benefits that domestic partnership benefits are “no longer necessary to remedy the inequity that was caused by Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act.”

Christie says couples in civil unions should receive fed’l benefits

Chris Christie, New Jersey, Republican Party, gay news, Washington Blade

Gov. Chris Christie (R-N.J.) (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Meanwhile, at the other end of the spectrum is Chris Christie, whose recent brief in the New Jersey lawsuit seeking marriage equality, known as Garden State Equality v. Dow, contends civil unions within New Jersey should be included among the unions to which the federal government awards benefits. The argument is made in a brief arguing that the court shouldn’t grant summary judgment in favor of marriage equality in New Jersey.

“The examples are endless,” the brief states. “Suffice it to say that a sizable, but indeterminate, number of the over 1,000 benefits and responsibilities that were inapplicable to civil union couples because of DOMA are now available to them because they are spouses, husbands, wives, widows or widowers under New Jersey law.”

Arguably, his attorney’s brief is shifting the debate another way by encouraging the expansion of civil unions in its argument that states with civil unions should be rewarded with the federal benefits of marriage.

Gregory Angelo, executive director of Log Cabin Republicans, refuted the assertion of his organization’s sometime ally Christie, saying says marriage equality is the way to go in New Jersey and would clear up any confusion about awarding federal benefits of marriage in the state.

“Civil unions are not the same as civil marriage,” Angelo said. “In the wake of the DOMA decision we said that the focus was going to be on the states and that’s where we’re focused. The Obama administration’s decision to grant federal marriage benefits to gay couples also shows that there are gray areas emerging since the Court overturned Section 3 of DOMA. The best, cleanest, strongest way to ensure benefits is through legislative action.”

Plans are also set for a legislative fix to ensure that couples in domestic partnerships and civil unions can receive certain federal benefits. Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.) earlier this month introduced the Social Security Equality Act, which in addition to clarifying that married gay couples nationwide should receive Social Security benefits would also ensure they flow to couples in civil unions.

Additionally, Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) is expected to soon reintroduce the Domestic Partnership Benefits & Obligations Act — and the new version, according to a House aide in his office, is slated to provide gay federal employees in civil unions or domestic partnerships, like those in Wisconsin, with the federal benefits of marriage.

As this discussion is underway, the Human Rights Campaign is arguing that the federal benefits of marriage in some circumstances — notably Social Security benefits — should be available to gay couples in civil unions if they’re living in a state that recognizes them as spouses.

Michael Cole-Schwartz, an HRC spokesperson, said his organization is pursuing a dual track advocating for marriage equality in all 50 states as it pushes for federal recognition of civil unions for certain benefits.

“Under most federal laws, benefits are designed to flow to married couples, which is why civil unions and domestic partnerships have always been insufficient,” Cole-Schwartz said. “The issue is that marriage needs to be available to couples in every state so that no couple is denied recognition from the federal government. However there are cases where if a state recognizes a member of a civil union as a spouse under state law, federal benefits can flow to that person. We are advocating that those benefits be available to couples in civil unions and we await further guidance from federal agencies as to their plans for those situations.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Afghanistan

ICC issues arrest warrants for Taliban leaders over persecution of LGBTQ people, women

Groups ‘non-conforming’ with group’s gender policy targeted

Published

on

The International Criminal Court in The Hague, Netherlands. (Photo by STRINGER Image/Bigstock)

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.

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

LGBTQ voters divided in Ward 8 special election

All four candidates on DC Council seat ballot are allies

Published

on

Former Ward 8 D.C. Council member Trayon White (Washington Blade photo by Lou Chibbaro, Jr.)

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.

Continue Reading

El Salvador

#JusticiaParaKarla: una lucha por el derecho a la identidad en El Salvador

Karla Guevara inició su camino legal y personal en 2020

Published

on

Karla Guevara (Foto de Ernesto Valle por el Washington Blade)

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”.

Continue Reading

Popular