With reports from hundreds of sub-Saharan African locales of male-male sexual relations and from about fifty of female-female sexual relations, it is clear that same-sex sexual relations existed in traditional African societies, though varying in forms and in the degree of public acceptance
The confrontations between police and demonstrators at the Stonewall Inn in New York City the weekend of June 27-29, 1969 mark the beginning of the modern glbtq movement for equal rights.
A social role for individuals who crossed or mixed male and female characteristics was one of the most widely distributed institutions of native North America.
The sexual revolution of post-World War II America changed sexual and gender roles profoundly.
Mixed-orientation marriages--those in which one partner is straight and the other is gay or lesbian--often end in divorce, but such an ending is not inevitable.
"Leather" is a blanket term for a large array of sexual preferences, identities, relationship structures, and social organizations loosely tied together by the thread of what is conventionally understood as sadomasochistic sex.
Since the late nineteenth century, transgendered people have advocated legal and social reforms that would ameliorate the kinds of oppression and discrimination they suffer.
Formed soon after the Stonewall Riots of 1969, the short-lived but influential Gay Liberation Front brought a new militancy to the movement that became known as gay liberation.
In a ruling that was formalized on September 18, 2013, Sonoma County Judge Nancy Case Shaffer ordered the retroactive recognition of a lesbian couple's marriage that occurred a week before marriage equality was restored to California. Stacey Schuett and Lesly Taboada-Hall, who had been partners for 27 years and registered domestic partners since 2001, were married on June 19, one day before Taboada-Hall died of cancer and a week before the United States Supreme Court ruled that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional and allowed California's Proposition 8 to expire because proponents lacked standing to appeal a federal district court ruling that declared it unconstitutional. Judge Shaffer's ruling is an example of a court responding favorably to same-sex couples' pleas for justice in the face of terminal illnesses. But as the example of an Illinois couple attests, time often runs out before justice is done.
As Mary Callahan reports in the Press-Democrat, at stake in the Sonoma County case are benefits for which Schuett and the couple's two children are eligible only if the marriage between Schuett and Taboada-Hall is valid. Judge Shaffer's ruling means that Schuett should soon have full rights as the "surviving spouse" of Lesly Taboada-Hall and as the widowed parent of their two children. She should thus be entitled to pension and Social Security benefits for which she would otherwise not be eligible.
While this lawsuit is similar to recent cases from Ohio and New Mexico where couples in which one partner is terminally ill sued to have their marriages recognized, it is unique in bringing validation to a marriage retroactively on the grounds that it had been prohibited only because of a law that was unconstitutional.
As I blogged about here, on July 22, 2013, federal district judge Timothy S. Black issued a temporary restraining order requiring Ohio to recognize the marriage of John Arthur and Jim Obergefell, long-time partners who were married in Maryland on June 11 in an air ambulance on an airport tarmac because Arthur, who is suffering from ALS, is bed-ridden. The concern that led to the ruling was that Arthur may die without being recognized as the legal spouse of Obergefell.
Among the plaintiffs in the New Mexico same-sex marriage legal battles that resulted in the right to marry in Santa Fe County were Jen Roper and Angelique Neuman. Roper, who is suffering from a life-threatening form of brain cancer, and Neuman were wed in a brief ceremony at Christus St. Vincent Regional Cancer Center, where Roper is hospitalized. Roper's precarious health gave urgency to their quest for legal recognition of their relationship.
However, for some couples waiting to be married, time runs out. As David Mixner points out in a blog, many politicians are content to delay and to hope that the courts make the decision to do the right thing for them. As an example of the consequences of the delaying tactics played by the politicians in Illinois, he cites the example of Steven Rynes and his partner Robert Smith, who wanted to get married in their home state. While waiting for the politicians in Illinois to find their courage, Steven experienced a recurrence of cancer in November 2012. As the legislature delayed and delayed, his health deteriorated. He died on September 10, 2013.
As Mixner observes, "Each day politicians delay marriage equality they literally take away the dream, aspiration and rights of thousands of people around the country."
The video below tells the story of Robert Smith and Steven Rynes. It is a story of love and devotion, but also of the indifference and cruelty of politicians.