Intersex Awareness Day 2016

Intersex Awareness Day takes place on October 26 each year. This year, 2016, marks the 12th anniversary of the first one, or the 12th if you count the very first time it was talked about, in 2003. When it was first started, it was suggested the entire month of October be devoted to talking about intersex; today many recognize it as the period between October 26 and November 8, which is noted as Intersex Solidarity Day.

Twelve years ago, the nascent intersex movement was still trying to find its way in a world where few people knew what intersex was, and fewer people were openly talking about their own intersex status. The Intersex Society of North America (ISNA) was still going strong, and a few diagnosis-specific organizations were starting to turn up on the internet to provide support and information about specific types of intersex to those affected and their families. Two years earlier in 2002, Bodies Like Ours came on line in an effort to reach out to intersex people by providing an online forum and information about intersex that was not focused on specific traits but, rather, the experience and state of intersex – what it means to be born with a body that that doesn’t fit the standard definitions of what it means to be male or female.

For the first time, intersex people and those affected by intersex variations were talking about it, publicly and as a group. Sure, the forums encouraged the use of aliases but real people with real variations of intersex were talking about it, together, in real time. The forums were not hidden behind a wall – anyone with internet access could read the conversations. And read they did – and talk about it they did. Intersex was gradually coming out into the world.

Sometime in mid-2003, Emi Koyoma, who had worked at ISNA and was by then running a website of her own called The Portland Intersex Initiative, or IPDX, and I, Betsy Driver, co-founder of Bodies Like Ours, started to kick around some ideas on how to get more media attention about intersex, and how to get campus organizations to host a speaker or perhaps some other type of informational session about intersex. We decided that we needed to come up with a day to recognize intersex and some of those behind the movement.

It didn’t take us long to come up with October 26. I think it was Emi who came up with the date. It was the anniversary of a 1996 ISNA protest, under the banner of Hermaphrodites with Attitude, and in conjunction with allies from Transexual Menace, in Boston where the American Academy of Pediatrics was holding their annual meeting. We quickly agreed the demonstration would be the day we recognized and set forth to building a website and sending out some press releases.

We framed Intersex Awareness Day as a grassroots effort to raise awareness around intersex. We encouraged other organizations to join in with it. In short, we put it out there in the hopes that different groups and different people would somehow take up the banner and make it into something. That first year, 2003, nothing much came of it. We didn’t even launch the website until less than a month before October 26th.

We did, however, make it into the syndicated News Of The Weird that first year. While that may seem at first to have been an affront, they actually did us a huge favor by printing that little blurb trying to make light of our idea; it gave us incredible exposure since Weird News was a syndicated service and went out to thousands of print outlets. We couldn’t have asked for a better way to get publicity.

Once 2004 came along, word had spread about Intersex Awareness Day. Events were planned throughout the world by different advocates and were taking place in community forums, on campuses, and in community centers.

Asexual Awareness Week 2016 ......

Asexual Awareness Week occurs in the later half of October, October 23rd to 29th to be precise and is created to both celebrate asexual, aromantic, demisexual, and grey-asexual pride and promote awareness.

Goals:

The goals of Asexual Awareness Week include the following:
Promote the realisation that sexual and romantic attractions such as asexual, aromantic and similar exist,
Help people who fall under these categories understand that they are not broken or alone,

Help other people understand what these sexual and romantic attractions are to help dissolve misunderstandings,
Promote the understanding that love and sex are not intrinsically linked and that the lack of one does not make the other any less meaningful,

Promote the understanding that aromantics can still experience non-romantic love,

Spread the understanding of the discrimination and violence that people who fall under these attraction categories face,
Help decrease the violence they face such as corrective rape,

Help people understand how they can be supportive
Advertise support groups for those who might need it

Observances

Asexual Awareness Week is an international week organized by the Asexual Awareness Week (AWW) organisation to help increase people's understanding of the sexualities and romantic spectrum that fall under the 'Ace Umbrella'. 

These can include asexual, aromantic, demisexual, and grey-asexual among them. It is designed to help promote understanding of what these sexualities are and the current issues people face. This is conducted by using the dedicated week to promote relevant material online, through LGBT groups, and media outlets. This media includes pamphlets, articles, interviews, documentaries and videos.

A number of university unions also promote the week.

Asexual Awareness Week and Transgender Day of Visibility are different from the better-known Transgender Day of Remembrance (TDOR); TDOR specifically remembers the deceased.

Peace & tolerance

H

Call to Action: International Day of Action for Trans Depathologization 2016

This year's International Day of Action for Trans Depathologization is approaching, taking place on Saturday, October 22, 2016.

As in previous years, on this day and in the course of October activist groups throughout the world will organize demonstrations and other actions demanding trans depathologization.

The slogan of the 2016 Call to Action is:

Stop Pathologizing Gender and Bodily Diversity

If you would like to participate in the International Day of Action for Trans Depathologization 2016 and organize an action in your city, please send us a message.

In order to view STP's Call to Action published on August 9, 2016:
http://www.stp2012.info/old/en/news#call_to_action2016

The main objectives of STP are the removal of the classification of gender transition processes as a mental disorder from the diagnostic manuals (DSM of the American Psychiatric Association and ICD of the World Health Organization), access to state-funded trans health care, a change of the trans health care model, from an assessment towards an informed consent approach, legal gender recognition without medical requirements, depathologization of gender diversity in childhood, as well as protection from transphobic violence.

This website aims to visibilize the objectives, manifestos and actions of this Campaign, as well as the list of collective and individual supporters.

Since 2009, STP launches each year the Call to Action for the International Day of Action for Trans Depathologization, with activities being organized in cities all over the world throughout the month of October.

In October 2016, more than 120 actions took place in 47 cities worldwide within the International Day of Action for Trans Depathologization 2016.

Furthermore, at the moment (October 2016), STP counts on the support of 410 activism groups and networks, public institutions and political organizations from Africa, Asia, Europe, Latin America, North America and Oceania.

Apart from the annual call for action in October, during the year STP carries out information, networking and lobbying activities for trans depathologization.

Currently, trans depathologization activism continues to focus on the revision process of the

International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems

(ICD), which is published by the World Health Organization (WHO). The expected approval

date of ICD-11 by the World Health Assembly is 20184

.

As noted in previous press releases5,6,7

, we believe that the removal of trans-specific categories

from the ‘Mental and behavioural disorders’ Chapter and the inclusion of a trans-specific

 1 STP, International Campaign Stop Trans Pathologization. STP launches the Call to Action for the

International Day of Action for Trans Depathologization 2016, August 9, 2016. Available at:

http://www.stp2012.info/old/en/news#call_to_action2016 2 STP, International Campaign Stop Trans Pathologization. Acciones Octubre 2016 / October 2016 Actions.

Available at: http://stp2012.info/old/en/press#october2016_actions

3 STP, International Campaign Stop Trans Pathologization. Support. Available at:

http://stp2012.info/old/en/supports 4 WHO, World Health Organization. The International Classification of Diseases 11th Revision is due by

2018. Available at: http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/revision/en/ 5 GATE, Global Action for Trans* Equality, STP, International Campaign Stop Trans Pathologization. GATE

and STP Press Release: New Developments in the ICD Revision Process, August 19, 2014. Available at:

http://www.stp2012.info/old/en/news#information_ICD_revision_process

6 STP, International Campaign Stop Trans Pathologization. STP Press Release: International Day of Action

for Trans Depathologization 2014. 

Available at:

http://www.stp2012.info/STP_Press_Release_October_2014.pdf

7 STP, International Campaign Stop Trans Pathologization. 

STP Press Release: International Day of Action

for Trans Depathologization 2015. Available at:

http://www.stp2012.info/STP_Press_Release_October2015.pdf

International Study Finds High Levels of Adherence to Use of Rectal Microbicide Gel

Participants as adherent to using gel with sex as taking a daily pill for HIV prevention

CHICAGO, October 20, 2016 – Participants enrolled in a rectal microbicide study were just as likely to follow through using an anti-HIV gel with anal sex as they were to using daily oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), according to adherence results presented today at the HIV Research for Prevention conference (HIVR4P). The study, led by the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded Microbicide Trials Network (MTN), was the first extended safety study of a rectal microbicide for prevention of HIV infection from anal sex, which initially reported that the gel was safe in February 2016.

The Phase II study, MTN-017, began in September 2013 and enrolled 195 men who have sex with men (MSM) and transgender women at sites in Peru, Thailand, South Africa and the United States, including Puerto Rico. MTN-017 participants –12 percent of whom were transgender women – cycled through three study regimens which each lasted eight weeks: reduced glycerin tenofovir gel used daily, reduced glycerin tenofovir gel used before and after anal sex, and daily use of the antiretroviral tablet Truvada® (emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate) as PrEP, developed by Gilead Sciences, Inc.

Researchers found that most participants were highly adherent during the course of MTN-017, using study products 80 percent of the time or more. Participants were similarly adherent to using gel before and after sex (93 percent) as they were to taking daily oral Truvada (94 percent). They were less adherent when using the gel on a daily basis (83 percent).

“Overall adherence to the three regimens in MTN-017 was high,” said Alex Carballo-Diéguez, Ph.D., HIVR4P abstract co-author and professor of medical psychology, Columbia University. “What we found most remarkable was that even though efficacy of the gel has not been established, its adherence was similar to oral Truvada, which we know is effective. This tells us that rectal microbicide gels, provided they are proven effective, could be a potential alternative for people who don’t want to use daily oral PrEP.”

Adherence in MTN-017 was measured by a combination of responses to daily questions sent by text message, number of returned gel applicators, and blood tests to confirm the presence or absence of drug. Throughout the study, researchers employed real-time pharmacokinetics (PK), in which they regularly tested participants’ blood to assess the presence of drug – a determinant of whether they were using their assigned study products – and shared the results with participants as part of their adherence counseling sessions. These sessions also included convergence interviews, collaborative conversations to engage participants and clarify discrepancies among adherence measures.

In a related HIVR4P poster session (P24.11), Iván C. Balán, Ph.D., assistant professor of clinical psychology, Columbia University, found that convergence interviews conducted in MTN-017, which were aimed at improving the accuracy of adherence data, were feasible and acceptable to both adherence counselors and study participants. They also provided important context to understanding discrepancies in product use assessments and PK results. Engaging study participants as allies in the process was critical to avoid making them feel confronted and thus becoming defensive, noted Dr. Balán.

In addition to Dr. Carballo-Diéguez, abstract co-authors include Dr. Balán, Rebecca Giguere, M.P.H., Curtis Dolezal, Ph.D., Cheng-Shiun Leu, Ph.D., William Brown III, Ph.D., Titcha Ho, Ph.D., Camagu Tuswa-Haynes, M.S., all with the New York State Psychiatric Institute and Columbia University; Javier Lama, M.D., IMPACTA PERU Clinical Trials Unit; Jeanna Piper, M.D., Division of AIDS, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) at the NIH; Barbra Richardson, Ph.D., University of Washington and Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; Ian McGowan, M.D., Ph.D., University of Pittsburgh; and Ross Cranston, M.D., Microbicide Trials Network.

Dr. Cranston is protocol chair of MTN-017 and Dr. Lama is protocol co-chair.

MTN-017 was funded by NIAID and the National Institute of Mental Health, both components of the NIH. Tenofovir gel was developed by Gilead Sciences, Inc., of Foster City, Calif., which assigned the rights for tenofovir gel to CONRAD, of Arlington, Va., and the International Partnership for Microbicides of Silver Spring, Md., in December 2006. Clinical input and study supplies of reduced glycerin tenofovir gel were provided by CONRAD, with funding from USAID.

# # #

Dr. Carballo-Diéguez’s abstract (QA20.01) is part of the HIV R4P oral presentation session Trust But Verify: Understanding Adherence taking place from 10:30-noon CDT, Wed., October 20. It is one of 22 MTN abstracts being presented at the HIVR4P 2016 conference. Webcasts of all HIVR4P 2016 sessions, along with the conference program and more information on the meeting is available at hivr4p.org.

More information and materials about MTN-017 and rectal microbicides are available athttp://www.mtnstopshiv.org/news/studies/mtn017.



About the Microbicide Trials Network

The Microbicide Trials Network (MTN) is an HIV/AIDS clinical trials network established in 2006 by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases with co-funding from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and the National Institute of Mental Health, all components of the U.S. National Institutes of Health. Based at Magee-Womens Research Institute and the University of Pittsburgh, the MTN brings together international investigators and community and industry partners whose work is focused on the development and rigorous evaluation of promising microbicides – products applied inside the vagina or rectum that are intended to prevent the sexual transmission of HIV – from the earliest phases of clinical study to large-scale trials that support potential licensure of these products for widespread use. More information about the MTN is available at www.mtnstopshiv.org.

MTN is funded by the U.S. National Institutes of Health grants UM1AI068633, UM1AI068615 and UM1AI106707.

Click here for PDF version of this document.

African Women Using Anti-HIV Vaginal Ring Say Sex Felt the Same

African women in a study of a vaginal ring used as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for the most part said wearing the ring did not affect the physical act of sex. However, for some the worry that their partner would discover they were using the ring reduced the enjoyment of sex. Also, the few women who were burdened by intimate partner violence were much less likely to use the ring.

At the HIV Research for Prevention (HIVR4P) meeting in Chicago, researchers presented new findings from the MTN-020 study, also known as ASPIRE, of a dapivirine-containing vaginal ring studied as PrEP among 2,629 women 18 to 45 years old in Malawi, South Africa, Uganda and Zimbabwe.

Study results presented at the 21st International AIDS Conference in Durban, South Africa (AIDS 2016), in July showed that on the whole, giving the ring to women reduced their risk of HIV by 27 percent. Women who used the ring with greater frequency had a 56 percent reduced risk, and those who used it consistently had a 75 percent reduced risk of HIV.

To reach the new findings, the researchers interviewed 214 participants who used the ring about their qualitative experiences with it. Most said the ring did not affect the physical act of sex negatively.

However, some women said they fixated on how their male partners would react if they found out about the ring. Consequently, some of them removed the ring before sex, which is not recommended. Others curtailed certain sexual practices they thought would raise the risk of the man finding the ring, including particular sexual positions and receptive oral or digital sex.

Some women reported having greater sexual satisfaction because they believed the ring was protecting them against HIV. But others had the opposite experience because of their worries over their male partners discovering the ring.

Less than 5 percent of the women said they experienced intimate partner-related violence or other related social harms. Those who did were nearly two and a half times more likely to adhere poorly to the ring’s protocol for use (the women received instructions to leave each ring in for a month).

Sixty-four percent of the women told their male partners they were using the ring at the beginning of the study. Thirteen percent never disclosed their use of the ring to their partners.

To read a press release about the study, click here or HERE: Women Report Vaginal Ring for Preventing HIV Had Little Effect on Sexual Intercourse

ASPIRE evaluated whether the ring, which continuously releases the anti-HIV drug dapivirine, could safely reduce HIV infection among 2,629 women aged 18-45 years living in Malawi, South Africa, Uganda and Zimbabwe. Among participants randomized to receive the dapivirine ring, risk of HIV infection fell by 27 percent. A further analysis found that the ring reduced the risk of HIV infection by at least 56 percent among women who used it with greater frequency, and up to 75 percent or higher among those who used it consistently. Further exploration of the ring’s clinical potential began in July 2016 through the large-scale HOPE (HIV Open-Label Prevention Extension) study, also known as MTN-025 (link is external). ASPIRE, HOPE and their ancillary studies were primarily funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The nonprofit International Partnership for Microbicides developed the dapivirine ring and supplied it for the studies.

“Women need an HIV prevention modality that offers safe, effective protection and is practical for use in their daily lives,” said NIAID Director Anthony S. Fauci, M.D. “Women enrolled in the MTN-020/ASPIRE study reported that the experimental vaginal ring generally did not interfere with sexual intercourse, which is an encouraging sign that this product could appeal to a larger group of women at risk for HIV infection.”

The ASPIRE study staff interviewed 214 participants who used the ring to obtain qualitative data about their sexual experiences during the trial. A team led by Nicole Laborde, Ph.D., M.P.H., of RTI International in Research Triangle Park in North Carolina, analyzed the participant responses. While most of these women found that the ring did not negatively affect the physical act of sex, some women said they were continually preoccupied with how their partners would react if they felt or discovered the ring. To address this issue, some women removed the ring before sex, a practice not recommended by study investigators. Other women limited sexual activities that they believed might heighten their partners’ awareness of the ring, such as certain sexual positions and receptive oral or digital sex.

Some women reported greater sexual satisfaction partially due to perceived protection provided by the ring. Other women reported diminished sexual pleasure associated with the worry that their male partners would notice the ring during sex.

Additional analyses of the ASPIRE data revealed other patterns of experience among study participants. Because women who face intimate partner violence and other social harms more often find it difficult to adhere to the clinically proven once-daily antiretroviral drug Truvada as pre-exposure prophylaxis, or PrEP, researchers investigated the connection between consistent use of the ring and these issues. While fewer than 5 percent of all ASPIRE study participants reported incidents of intimate partner-related violence or other social harms, women who did report violence or social harm within a month of the interview were nearly 2.5 times more likely to have low adherence to the ring. Younger age at enrollment, having a new primary partner and not disclosing study participation or ring use to the primary partner were significantly associated with reporting social harms. These findings, reported by a team led by Thesla Palanee-Phillips, M.Med.Sci, Ph.D., M.Sc., at the Wits Reproductive Health and HIV Institute in Johannesburg, South Africa, indicate that more research is needed to determine strategies to mitigate low adherence in the context of intimate partner violence and other social harms in future studies of female-controlled prevention methods.

Grenada says no loophole for gay marriage in Rights and Freedom Bill

ST GEORGE’S, Grenada (CMC) – Grenada’s Attorney General Cajeton Hood said yesterday that the proposed amendments contained in the Rights and Freedom Bill will not be creating a loophole that could result in Grenada legalising same- sex unions.

“The amendment does not affect the status quo at all in any way, the amendment does not seek too, nor does it at all give additional right to anybody who wanted to get married before the amendment.

“I want to be very clear on that, the amendment does not seek to nor give any loophole or any extra power or any extra right that was not there before,” said Hood.

The bill is one of seven that will be voted upon during the October 27 referendum for a new constitution. Gender equality, according to the legislation, provides for both men and women to be entitled to equal rights and status in all spheres of life, especially in economic, educational, political, civic and social activities.

“This therefore goes to the heart of the matter of the intention of the Bill, the Intent is equal rights for both men and women and not one having more rights than the other,” Hood said, while stressing that government will not in any way go down that route even as he acknowledged that any lawyer can build any case using any law.

Urging the general public to inform themselves with the facts of the issues, he said they should not listen to rum shop talk.

In recent days, several religious bodies have begun campaigning against the Bill, saying that despite it good intention it creates a loophole for gay marriage.

Hood further explained that Grenada’s Marriage Act has not changed and there is no proposal to change it. “The amendment doesn’t speak to marriage,” he said.

Junior Education Minister Simon Stielle said that the present Administration does not support same-sex marriage and it is not the intention of the Keith Mitchell Government to weaken any legislation that will create any loophole within the law.

“There is no intent to weaken any provision that will provide for same- sex marriage…the Bill speaks to equal opportunity, it does not speak to same-sex marriage,” said Stielle, who reminded journalists that Prime Minister Mitchell has openly said he is not in support of same-sex unions.

Hood said that as a country, he trusts that the voting population will see the opportunity that is presented to play an important role in the having a say in the supreme law of the land.

‘It’s the first time the people are having a say and no politician can do it, it is now up to people,” he said.

The Bill needs to be passed by a two-thirds majority of those voting in the referendum to become law.

Coming Out Day 2016 ........ some tips

Today is coming out day mostly in the US but the recognition of the day has spread worldwide and certainly this blog has been carrying this for some years now. In light of recent accidents on social media as reported of persons being outed on social media I decided to take a different stance this year. As social media is being embraced more and more complete with online campaigns some persons may inadvertently out themselves with some unintended consequences.

Coming Out to a Close Friend

Make sure you’re comfortable with your sexuality first. Before you come out to anyone, you should feel comfortable with who you are and with your sexuality so that you don’t let anyone else tell you who you are. If you’re still not sure about how you really feel and don’t feel comfortable telling anyone, then you should wait until you’ve had time to come to terms with your sexual orientation so you can come out without letting it shake your confidence. 

If needed, you can find a therapist to talk to to help get an understanding. In the end, you want to make sure you're pansexual rather than bisexual, because nobody wants to have to sit down with their friends/parents again and explain they were not sure about themselves the first time, although it's not the end of the world if this is the case.

It’s likely that you’ve known that you’re gay, lesbian, or bi for quite some time, but being aware of it isn’t the same as accepting it. Give yourself the time you need to process that and don’t rush yourself or give yourself a timeline to stick to.

You may have friends who have come out years before, but that doesn’t mean you should have to follow their timelines. What’s right for them isn’t necessarily what’s right for you.


Something else you should accept is that while being gay, bi, or queer is an important part of your identity, you can’t let it define you. Just because you’re gay, bi, or queer doesn’t mean that’s all you are, just as a straight person isn’t purely defined by their sexual orientation. When you come out to people, you’ll be telling them that being gay is one important aspect of your identity; however, that won’t stop you from also being an amazing soccer player, artist, brother and so on.

Consider telling a friend you trust before talking to your family. When you’re first thinking of coming out to a friend, you should ask yourself, “Who is the most open-minded and accepting person I know?” That person may not be your very best friend in the world, but another close friend of yours. This is a crucial moment in your life and you should try to set yourself up to get the most positive reaction possible. You are likely to benefit from the support of an open-minded and understanding friend to help you feel loved and gain the courage to move forward.

You’ll never forget the first time you came out to someone. You should put a lot of thought into who the person you tell is.

You should think about what the person might have said about the LGBTQ+ community before. If they have clearly demonstrated support for LGBTQ+ rights, have other queer friends, or has made comments against close-minded people, then you’ll be in good hands. If you’re not really sure, then you can test the waters by casually mentioning a queer person and seeing how your friend reacts.

Many people tend to come out to friends first because they find this more comfortable than coming out to their families. However, if you’d feel more comfortable telling your family first, then you can follow that path.

Find the right place and time to say it. Though everything doesn’t have to be perfect when you come out to your friend, you should try to pick a place where you can have some privacy and a time when your friend isn’t stressed out, distracted, or busy. You want to give your friend some time to process what you have to say, so you don’t want to deliver the news when your friend has a basketball game in ten minutes. Think it over carefully and then plan the place and time to talk to your friend.


Just ask your friend to hang out and say that there’s something you want to tell him or her. You don’t have to make a big deal about it or your friend may get nervous.

Write a letter if that seems less intimidating. Though a lot of people come out in person, or if on social media send them a message of some kind, carefully thinking it through before launching this, once done it is hard to take it back, if you feel too intimidated at the thought of coming out to your friend face to face, you can consider writing him or her a letter instead. It doesn’t have to be very long; it should just say that you’re coming out and that you wanted the friend to know first because you really trust them. Just make sure that the letter gets to your friend directly; in fact, you can even hand the letter to your friend and watch their reaction right in front of you, if that feels less scary than saying it in person.


If you’re feeling too shy to say it in person, but really want your friend to know, then this may be your best bet. Just be wary of giving your friend the letter in school or another place where a lot of other people are likely to be around because you don’t want it to get into the wrong hands.

Wait for a reaction. Your friend will likely hug you and there will be some tears. However, your friend may need some time to process what you’ve said, so be patient. Give your friend a few minutes to react, to ask you questions, and to give you the love and support you deserve. Once you tell your friend you can take a deep breath and see that it wasn’t as bad as you thought.

Of course, your friend may very well speak right away and may even surprise you by saying that they knew right away, and that will make things even more comfortable.

Don't worry if the conversation is a little awkward. That doesn't mean your friend doesn't approve — they just may not know what to say. It may be a little uncomfortable at first, but it'll get better. Don't let awkwardness discourage you from coming out to others, either.

Gain confidence and support from your friend. If things go as planned and your friend is completely encouraging and supportive, then coming out for the first time should make you feel good about yourself, and proud for taking such a big step. Your friend will make you see that you’re still you, and that being gay is just one aspect of who you are. This will give you the courage to move forward and to feel even more comfortable with your sexuality.


Unfortunately, there may be a chance that your friend doesn’t give you the support you expected. If your friend needs more time to process what you’ve said or is even negative about your news, don’t let this make you think that it means that all of your friends will react this way. You’ve just gotten unlucky and have come face-to-face with ignorance. This will be a hurdle, but you’ll be able to find someone who is supportive very soon.

also see:
Thoughts on coming out transgender to family

Coming Out: Living Openly with Your Terms .....

Coming Out Day - Making a coming out plan

Coming Out (or outed) 2012

Peace & tolerance

H

LGBTI Intergroup welcomes appointment first ever UN independent expert LGBT discrimination

Daniele Viotti MEP, Co-President of the LGBTI Intergroup

Friday, the UN Human Rights Council appointed Vitit Muntarbhorn (immediately above) its first independent expert on sexual orientation and gender identity.

In July, the Human Rights Council agreed to the creation of the post in a 23 – 18 vote.

Munthaborn, a Thai national, is Professor in International Law at Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok. He was co-chair of the 2006 Yogyakarta Principles on the application of international human rights law based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

Munthaborn is appointed for an initial period of three years. His role will be to assess the implementation of existing international human rights instruments regarding LGBT people. Furthermore, he will raise awareness of violence and discrimination suffered by LGBT persons and engage in dialogue with states to implement measures.

Ulrike Lunacek MEP, Co-President of the LGBTI Intergroup, reacted: “All around the world LGBTI people continue to face discrimination and violence, sometimes explicitly legislated or encouraged by the state. These are severe breaches of human rights.”

“I am glad the Human Rights Council has reinforced its commitment to end these breaches by creating this position, and look forward to working with Mr Munthaborn in his new position.”

Daniele Viotti MEP, Co-President of the LGBTI Intergroup, added: “Earlier reports by the United Nations Human Rights Council have shown it clearly: homophobia and transphobia literally kill. We urgently need to up the pressure to end the unnecessary and extreme violence that our community faces across the globe.”

“I call on all states to cooperate with the independent expert so it can fulfil its full potential in fighting for the human rights of LGBTI people.”

Does having a Y chromosome make someone a man?

A lot of unintended harm happens when people assume a Y chromosome makes a person a boy or a man and the lack of a Y chromosome makes a person a girl or a woman. For example, one physician educator on our Medical Advisory Board had the challenging experience of trying to calm a 23-year-old patient who had just been told by a resident that she was “really a man” because the resident had diagnosed the patient as having a Y chromosome and complete androgen insensitivity syndrome (CAIS).

It is true that in typical male development, the SRY gene on the tip of the Y chromosome helps to send the embryo down the masculine pathway. But more than the SRY is needed for sex determination and differentiation; for example, women with CAIS have the SRY gene but lack androgen receptors. In terms of hormone effects on their bodies (including their brains), women with CAIS have had much less “masculinization” than the average 46,XX woman because their cells do not respond to androgens.

Moreover, the SRY gene can be translocated onto an X chromosome (so that a 46,XX person may develop along a typical masculine pathway), and there are dozens of genes on chromosomes other than the X and the Y that contribute to sexual differentiation. And beyond the genes, a person’s sex development can be significantly influenced by environmental factors (including the maternal uterine environment in which the fetus developed).

So it is simply incorrect to think that you can tell a person’s sex just looking at whether he or she has a Y chromosome.

Want to know more? The following comes from ISNA’s Medical Advisory Board member Dr. Charmian Quigley:

SRY, discovered in 1989, is a small gene located at the tip of the short arm of the Y chromosome. So what does it do? Actually, like all genes, it does nothing except to act as a blueprint for a protein. In this case, the protein of the same name does funky things to DNA, like bending it and unwinding the 2 strands, so that other proteins can get in and attach themselves to other genes that are then turned on. So how did this gene get its reputation (and its name) as the “sex determining” gene?

As is pretty common in the world of genetics, this was because of some errant mice. Researchers in England took a laboratory-made copy of this gene and inserted it artificially into a female (XX) mouse embryo at a very early stage of development. The mouse was “converted” from female to male, so the gene must have been responsible – right? Well, maybe not. A few years later, a similar gene was found on human chromosome 17. When the important part of this gene was inserted into a female mouse embryo, the same thing happened. Voila! A male.

So now we have 2 genes that can turn a female into a male, and one of them is not located on the Y chromosome! How can that be? It turns out that SRY is probably just a facilitator that allows a more critical gene (or genes) to function, by blocking the action of another opposing factor. Can the magic of genetics do the opposite – turn a male into a female? Indeed it can. A gene on the X chromosome (the chromosome one typically associates with “femaleness”) called DAX1 when present in double copy in a male (XY) mouse, turns it into a female.

So now we have genes on the Y that can turn females with XX chromosomes into males and genes on the X that can turn males with XY chromosomes into females… wow! Maleness and femaleness are NOT determined by having an X or a Y, since switching a couple of genes around can turn things upside down.

In fact, there’s a whole lot more to maleness and femaleness than X or Y chromosomes. About 1 in 20,000 men has no Y chromosome, instead having 2 Xs. This means that in the United States there are about 7,500 men without a Y chromosome. The equivalent situation - females who have XY instead of XX chromosomes - can occur for a variety of reasons and overall is similar in frequency.

For these 15,000 or more individuals in the US (and who knows how many worldwide), their chromosomes are irrelevant. It is the total complement of their genes along with their life experiences (physical, mental, social) that makes them who they are (or any of us, for that matter). The last time I counted, there were at least 30 genes that have been found to have important roles in the development of sex in either humans or mice. Of these 30 or so genes 3 are located on the X chromosome, 1 on the Y chromosome and the rest are on other chromosomes, called autosomes (on chromosomes 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 17, 19).

In light of this, sex should be considered not a product of our chromosomes, but rather, a product of our total genetic makeup, and of the functions of these genes during development.

Implicit Transphobia or sheer ignorance .......

both perhaps

So Dr Glenville Ashby had a piece he penned published in the Sunday Gleaner dated September 25, 2016 entitled “Transgender: denying reality” where he insidiously went off on Transgenderism and so near effortless displayed sheer ignorance on the subject(s). He was quite prepared to conflate transgender with intersex and committed the ultimate infraction when it comes to the latter that of using a now well accepted stigmatizing term as ‘hermaphrodite’ and the faux pas of transgender(ed) as if to suggest someone can be a past participle of who one is, the ‘ed’ at the end is still a problematic issue in terms of designation prior to or after re-assignment surgery or feels.

‘Hermaphrodite’ has been removed from the LGBTQI toolkit in as far discourse surrounding such physiological issues attends since 2005. The word is seen as a stigmatizing terms as it conjures up mental images of someone with merely two sex organs when the issues attendant to such matters are not ones of sexual orientation and or gender identity in as far as psychological considerations are concerned. While Dr Ashby has used the correct term ‘Intersex’ he has misdirected it to mean something else and ends up concluding some sort of abnormality or as the article is subtitled ‘denying reality’

For example he wrote:

“Transgender should not be confused with transvestite

Then he both Transgenerism and intersex as one, he wrote:

“Transgender is invariably referred to as intersex (a person that has non standard genitalia), or transsexual (a person who expresses a gender identity that is different to his or her gender at birth).”

He could have simply done some basic research on this just as how he was able to site opinions of the likes of neuroscientist Tad Pacholcyzk or Dr Paul McHugh. We have been subjected to a series of very deceptive writings and outward transphobic pronouncements by some persons pointing to Transgenderism as madness of some kind; the leader in the wave of the intellectually driven hatred is Dr Wayne West of Jamaica Coalition for a Healthy Society, JCHS fame. He has been given support by sociologist and radio show host of Everywoman on the sometimes progressive Nationwide News Network, NNN Radio one Miss Georgette Crawford.

Here is the Gleaner article in question:

The highly publicised sexual transformation of United States Olympian Bruce Jenner (now Caitlyn Jenner) has ignited a bruising political and cultural debate on gender dysphoria and 'transgenderism'.

Academicians, scientists, theologians and laypersons have weighed in on a phenomenon that is as old as civilisation.

With a shift in the cultural paradigm, transgender rights are slowly being accommodated. Federal laws prohibit discrimination against transgender individuals, and bathrooms at most public places in the United States are required to accommodate new 'gender realities'.

Not surprisingly, political, academic, and judicial activism has advanced a new confrontational liberal zeitgeist that has made it difficult to have a dissenting opinion for fear of being maliciously labelled. The same held true when conservatism was universally dominant.

There are key questions surrounding this debate. For example, is surgery appropriate in dealing with somatic dysphoria? Also, is being transgender a psychopathology? What is needed is a sober discussion based on measurable arguments and not malleable evidence fashioned by individual and social leanings.

Transgender should not be confused with transvestite (a man having pleasure in dressing like a woman), homosexuality (having sexual feelings for the same sex), bisexuality (having sexual feelings for both sexes), or hermaphrodites (a person having male and female genitalia).

Transgender is invariably referred to as intersex (a person that has non-standard genitalia), or transsexual (a person who expresses a gender identity that is different to his or her gender at birth).

In many of these cases, gender transition is made possible through surgery.

Orthodox religions have long expressed paradoxical views regarding abnormal sexual identity, not unlike its position on homosexuality. The actions of the so-called sinner are vehemently condemned, although love is professed for the perpetrator.

Russell D. Moore, president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the southern Baptist Convention, said: "The transgender question means that conservative Christian congregation must teach what's being handed down to us, that our maleness and femaleness points us to an even deeper reality, to the unity ... of Christ and the Church.

"A rejection of the goodness of those creational realities, then, is a revolt against God's lordship, and against the picture of the gospel that God is embedded in His creation."

In marginal cases, pastors have been accused of fomenting a climate of hatred and violence towards transgender people who are deemed morally bankrupt and evil.

James Dobson, president of Focus on the Family, declared: "If you are a dad, I pray that you will protect your little girls from men who walk in unannounced, unzip their pants and urinate in front of them ... . If this happened 100 years ago, someone might have been shot."

WORSHIPPING IN CHURCHES

 

Sensing and experiencing slight from mainstream Christianity, many in the LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) community have begun worshipping in churches and temples where sexual orientation is inconsequential.

Secular society, though, has pushed back forcibly against what they call intolerance and bigotry. Prominent businesses are boycotting states, such as Georgia, Indiana, and North Carolina that uphold the Religious Freedom Restoration Act that is arguably discriminatory and unconstitutional.

While battlelines are drawn, some are critically measured, preferring to understand the sexual dynamics and overall psychological profile of the transgender community.

Among those is priest and neuroscientist Tad Pacholczyk, a Yale and Harvard graduate and education director at the National Catholic Bioethics Center in Philadelphia. His scientific and theological background offered a unique insight into this highly charged subject.

In the article, 'Seeing through the intersex confusion,' he acknowledged that confounding physiological (hormonal) triggers and cultural forces lead to psychological discordance.

Comparing somatic disorders to other developmental disorders that should never "be subjected to bias or mistreatment", he argued that "while a newborn's 'intrinsic maleness' or 'intrinsic femaleness' may be difficult to access in certain more complicated intersex cases, the point remains that there is an 'underlying' sexual constitution that we must do our best to recognise and respect and act in accord with".

Equally important is his far-reaching assertion that "wilfully (denying this reality) is a prescription for disillusionment and dishonesty".

Pacholczyk has oftentimes referred to the work of the eminent Dr Paul McHugh, the former psychiatrist-in-chief at Johns Hopkins Hospital, who has been in the cross hairs of liberal professionals.

His detailed study of transgenderism and sex-reassignment surgery has produced some explosive assertions.

McHugh observed that after transitioning, individuals are still plagued by psycho-emotional and identity problems; that there is an absence of maternal characteristics and desires in transgendered individuals; and that despite haute couture over compensation there remains definitive, irreversible indicators of their maleness or femaleness.

Writing for the Wall Street Journal, McHugh likened the transgendered to "anorexia nervosa patients who believe that a drastic physical change will banish their psychosocial problems".

"At the heart of the problem," he argued, "is confusion over the nature of the transgendered."

McHugh continued: "Sex change is biologically impossible (and) people who undergo sex-reassignment surgery do not change from men to women or vice versa. Rather, they become feminised men or masculinised women."

He concluded that the transgender issue "is not a civil rights matter and encouraging surgical intervention is in reality to collaborate with and promote a mental disorder".

VERY REAL PROBLEM

 

McHugh has always emphasised that a diagnosis of mental illness should be met with the most appropriate means to address a very real problem.

Lending support to McHugh is the conservative American Association of Paediatricians.

Featured on its website is the article, 'Gender Ideology Harms Children', in which we read that "gender (an awareness and sense of oneself as male or female) is a sociological and psychological concept (and) not an objective biological one".

It also highlighted the disproportionately high rates of suicides among those who use cross-sex hormones and undergo sex realignment surgery, "even in Sweden which is among the most LGBT- affirming countries".

As both sides of the debate harden their position, the words of Pacholczyk invite reflection: " ... allowing people to 'define their identity' ignores the crucially important truth that numerous aspects of our identity, especially those related to our bodily and sexual identity, are predetermined, objective goods that we are called upon to recognise and respect in the choices we make".

I am sure as we wade through the sea of ignorance and the bliss that accompanies it we are going to see more nonsense such as this article so worded to give support but the true reasons becomes clear.

Peace & tolerance

H

also see:

Jamaican human rights advocate uses the "H" word in submissions on intersex/lgbt issues a ..... 2014

Five Myths that Hurt Intersex People 2010

Intersexuality, Ambiguous Genetalia & Psycho-social issues Discussion on Nationwide Radio 2009

Bisexuality Day is September 23 ...................

Celebrate Bisexuality Day is observed on September 23 maybe 24th as it falls on a Sunday by members of the bisexual community and their supporters originally in the United States but has been extended worldwide.

This day is a call for bisexual, pansexual, friends and supporters to recognize and celebrate bisexuality, bisexual history, bisexual community and culture, and the bi/pansexual people in their lives.

First observed in 1999, Celebrate Bisexuality Day is the brainchild of three United Statesbisexual rights activists: Wendy Curry of Maine, Michael Page of Florida, and Gigi Raven Wilburof Texas.

Wilbur said,


“Ever since the Stonewall rebellion, the gay and lesbian community has grown in strength and visibility. The bisexual community also has grown in strength but in many ways we are still invisible. I too have been conditioned by society to automatically label a couple walking hand in hand as either straight or gay, depending upon the perceived gender of each person.”

This celebration of bisexuality in particular, as opposed to general LGBT events, was conceived as a response to the prejudice and marginalization of the bisexual persons by some in both thestraight and greater LGBT communities.

In its first year, an observance was held during the International Lesbian and Gay Association, which occurred during the week of the 23rd. While at first it only took hold in areas with an extremely strong bisexual presence, it is now celebrated worldwide.

It features event such as discussions, dinner parties and dances in Toronto and a large masquerade ball in Queensland, Australia. At Texas A&M University, the week featured discussion panels and question-and-answer sessions. Princeton University celebrates this day each year by throwing a party at its LGBT Center.

It has also been celebrated in Germany, Japan, New Zealand, Sweden and the United Kingdom.


Unfortunately in Jamaica either our advocates haven't matured to the recognition of bisexuals as a part of our struggle or we can't be bothered as "batty business" and the associated dramas are more important when some of the very issues of homophobia as we call it are not really so but bi-phobia if one were to closely examine the details at times.

JFLAG, Jamaica Forum for Lesbians Allsexuals and Gays has "Allsexuals" included in their acronym I suppose to cover all other orientations and variants outside of the original LGBT population (excluding those associated with disorders) but I never heard of any direct meetings, interventions or strategies to engage this section of the population or any inclusion in the umpteen public statements or press releases.

Bi-phobia or bi-erasure by default?

I would hate to think that our advocacy representatives are themselves guilty of bi-phobia in the form of bisexual erasure (the tendency to ignore, omit, remove, falsify, or reexplain evidence of bisexuality in history, advocacy, academia, the news media, and other primary sources.)

In its most extreme form, bisexual erasure can include denying that bisexuality exists. Inclusiveness is the name of the game now if we are to get anywhere but with the elitist position taken by the group one wonders when will we begin to move on anything? with recent ugly events further darkening our LGBT history that of aloofness towards the homeless msm population more and more persons in and outside the LGBT community are asking what are the reasons for these organizations.

It is refreshing to see other individual voices saying their piece and going out on their own, I would love to see an all out Jamaican bisexual website or at the very least a couple of blogs related to bisexual issues exclusively. There has been some discourse regarding bisexuality but the backlash from the MSM and SGL female communities suggests we have a far way to go towards inclusiveness and tolerance, ways that are to be facilitated by a JFLAG or similar groups.

Let us hope in the near future something can be done about that either by them despite the insulation or some other group, organization or individuals. Here is an ironical take on the issue from a UK perspective, the images included here were burrowed from this clip.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-4w6NqfLAc

my audio commentary on the issue from a year ago:

 Bi-phobia by default from supposed LGBT advocate structures? 

Also see:

Biphobia in the L & G communities maybe higher than thought 2011

Peace and tolerance

H