News
Editorial: ‘El Orgullo LGBTI+ y la lucha por el matrimonio igualitario en Cuba’
Activistas han llegado a este mes del Orgullo más organizados que nunca
Los colectivos LGBTI+ de Cuba han llegado a este 28 de junio más organizados que nunca antes.
La Plataforma 11M, que es el grupo más activo, hizo gala de fuerza este mes con una besada virtual y un tuitazo a favor del matrimonio igualitario que se reeditará el 11 de cada mes, en referencia al 11 de mayo de 2019, cuando cientos de activistas y sus aliados marcharon en La Habana sin autorización.
El Orgullo que los movimientos LGBTI+ del mundo entero celebraron este domingo es una celebración de la rebeldía, a diferencia de otras conmemoraciones, como la del Día Internacional contra la Homofobia, la Transfobia y la Bifobia ―el 17 de mayo―, que se originó en un gesto institucional de la Organización Mundial de la Salud.
Mientras el 17 de mayo es una fecha que recuerda el triunfo del sentido común sobre los prejuicios culturales del discurso médico, el 28 de junio significa la rebeldía LGBTI+ sin concesiones. El acto de desobedecer.
Ninguna institución, ni siquiera los Estados, tiene derecho a enfermarnos o sanarnos, a igualarnos a todos o rebajarnos a una ciudadanía de segunda clase, según determine la voluntad política.
Las instituciones cubanas, que siguen patologizando los cuerpos trans y discriminando el acceso a la fertilización, por hablar solo de dos gestos reguladores, llevan años retardando la implementación en las leyes de matrimonios LGBTI+ que, no obstante, existen.
En la tradición patriarcal, existir más allá del Estado es un gran atrevimiento. En el mundo heterosexual, es el Estado quien decide qué eres. Se ocupa de reglamentarlo y registrarlo minuciosamente, siempre con el afán controlador y empobrecedor que es consustancial al origen y la práctica de los Estados.
Los maricones y tortilleras y travestis y trans nacimos en esa tradición. Vivimos en la paradoja de negar ese orden y a la vez, como forzosamente, sin más opción, querer asimilarnos a él.
Nosotras no tenemos patria.
Las patrias no son esencias, sino discursos. Y siempre, hasta ahora, ha sido el discurso de un grupo, de una clase o de una ideología que pretende prevalecer.
Ningún ideal de ciudadanía concebido desde los presupuestos nacionalistas tradicionales ha aportado siquiera un trato respetuoso para las comunidades LGBTI+ en Cuba ni en ninguna parte.
No obstante, como fuimos asimiladas a esos Estados sin que nos consultaran y recibimos de ellos, como una asignación incuestionable, un género y una orientación sexual, tenemos derecho a exigirles a estas alturas, al menos, un trato igualitario.
El matrimonio civil es un derecho alcanzado en la mayor parte del mundo desde el siglo XIX por las personas heterosexuales y afiliadas en general a las normas patriarcales.
Es, también, una institución reguladora que establece solamente una relación de esas parejas con el poder efectivo e implica una sumisión. Otras opciones de relacionarse o de constituir familias, por suerte, siguen funcionando al margen del sistema.
Pelear por el matrimonio igualitario, como ha hecho en Cuba la comunidad LGBTI+ con más empeño desde 2018, ha sido, sin embargo, la oportunidad más viable para desmantelar la vieja patria donde hemos vivido como inquilinos hasta ahora.
Los intentos de activismo sustentados por una sensibilidad “oficial”, como el emprendido por Mariela Castro y el Centro Nacional de Educación Sexual durante la última década, fracasaron precisamente por haber nacido sujetos al deseo de asimilarnos a un orden que nos excluye, sin comprender la naturaleza histórica de esa relación opresiva.
Sin revisar y cuestionar abiertamente la homofobia y transfobia de Estado, no solo cultural sino política, ejercida en Cuba hasta el presente, las comunidades LGBTI+ no tienen ninguna oportunidad de conseguir ni siquiera la igualdad sometida que pudiéramos obligar al poder a otorgarnos.
El Orgullo LGBTI+ debería ser la fiesta de quienes ya superaron la tentación de asimilarse y, si van a pelear en el terreno del Estado, fingirán que aspiran a incluirse en las reglas para ganar pequeñas victorias.
El matrimonio igualitario es la meta de ahora. Y hay que lograrlo sin referendo, a pesar de la norma establecida por el parlamento cubano con el propósito de buscar un consenso injusto, por razones no solo prácticas.
El matrimonio igualitario no nos dará una patria, pero hará más habitable la patria que nos impusieron. Con esa certeza hay que ir por él.
Rehoboth Beach
BLUF leather social set for April 10 in Rehoboth
Attendees encouraged to wear appropriate gear
Diego’s in Rehoboth Beach hosts a monthly leather happy hour. April’s edition is scheduled for Friday, April 10, 5-7 p.m. Attendees are encouraged to wear appropriate gear. The event is billed as an official event of BLUF, the free community group for men interested in leather. After happy hour, the attendees are encouraged to reconvene at Local Bootlegging Company for dinner, which allows cigar smoking. There’s no cover charge for either event.
District of Columbia
Celebrations of life planned for Sean Bartel
Two memorial events scheduled in D.C.
Two celebrations of life are planned for Sean Christopher Bartel, 48, who was found deceased on a hiking trail in Argentina on or around March 15. Bartel began his career as a television news reporter and news anchor at stations in Louisville, Ky., and Evansville, Ind., before serving as Senior Video Producer for the D.C.-based International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers union from 2013 to 2024.
A memorial gathering is planned for Friday, April 10, 11:30 a.m.-1:30 p.m. at the IBEW International Office (900 7th St., N.W.), according to a statement by the DC Gay Flag Football League, where Bartel was a longtime member. A celebration of life is planned that same evening, 6-8 p.m. at Trade (1410 14th St., N.W.).
Puerto Rico
The ‘X’ returns to court
1st Circuit hears case over legal recognition of nonbinary Puerto Ricans
Eight months ago, I wrote about this issue at a time when it had not yet reached the judicial level it faces today. Back then, the conversation moved through administrative decisions, public debate, and political resistance. It was unresolved, but it had not yet reached this point.
That has now changed.
Lambda Legal appeared before the 1st U.S. Court of Appeals in Boston, urging the court to uphold a lower court ruling that requires the government of Puerto Rico to issue birth certificates that accurately reflect the identities of nonbinary individuals. The appeal follows a district court decision that found the denial of such recognition to be a violation of the U.S. Constitution.
This marks a turning point. The issue is no longer theoretical. A court has already determined that unequal treatment exists.
The argument presented by the plaintiffs is grounded in Puerto Rico’s own legal framework. Identity birth certificates are not static historical records. They are functional documents used in everyday life. They are required to access employment, education, and essential services. Their purpose is practical, not symbolic.
Within that framework, the exclusion of nonbinary individuals does not stem from a legal limitation. Puerto Rico already allows gender marker corrections on birth certificates for transgender individuals under the precedent established in Arroyo Gonzalez v. Rosselló Nevares. In addition, the current Civil Code recognizes the existence of identity documents that reflect a person’s lived identity beyond the original birth record.
The issue lies in how the law is applied.
Recognition is granted within specific categories, while those who do not identify within that binary structure remain excluded. That exclusion is now at the center of this case.
Lambda Legal’s position is straightforward. Requiring individuals to carry documents that do not reflect who they are forces them into misrepresentation in essential aspects of daily life. This creates practical barriers, exposes them to scrutiny, and places them in a constant state of vulnerability.
The plaintiffs, who were born in Puerto Rico, have made clear that access to accurate identification is not symbolic. It is a basic condition for moving through the world without contradiction imposed by the state.
The fact that this case is now being addressed in the federal court system adds another layer of significance. This is not a pending policy discussion or a legislative proposal. It is a constitutional question. The analysis is not about political preference, but about rights and equal protection under the law.
This case does not exist in isolation.
It unfolds within a broader context in which debates over identity and rights have increasingly been shaped by the growing influence of conservative perspectives in public policy, both in the United States and in Puerto Rico. At the local level, this influence has been reflected in legislative discussions where religious arguments have begun to intersect with decisions that should be grounded in constitutional principles. That intersection creates tension around the separation of church and state and has direct consequences for access to rights.
Recognizing this context is not an attack on faith or religious practice. It is an acknowledgment that when certain perspectives move into the realm of public authority, they can shape outcomes that affect specific communities.
From within Puerto Rico, this is not a distant debate. It is a lived reality. It is present in the difficulty of presenting identification that does not match one’s identity, and in the consequences that follow in workplaces, schools, and government spaces.
The progression of this case introduces the possibility of change within the applicable legal framework. Not because it resolves every tension surrounding the issue, but because it establishes a legal examination of a practice that has long operated under exclusion.
Eight months ago, the conversation centered on ongoing developments. Today, there is already a judicial finding that identifies a violation of rights. What remains is whether that finding will be upheld on appeal.
That process does not guarantee an immediate outcome, but it shifts the ground.
The debate is no longer theoretical.
It is now before the courts.
Calendar: April 10-16
BLUF leather social set for April 10 in Rehoboth
Celebrations of life planned for Sean Bartel
The ‘X’ returns to court
LGBTQ community explores arming up during heated political times
Risking it all for love during World War II
D.C. is the place for the Democratic Socialists of America
PHOTOS: The Bonnet Ball
Key lifestyle changes can help patients cope with diabetes
