Utah Bans Gender-Affirming Care for Transgender Youth

 

 People gather in support of transgender youths at a rally at the Utah State Capitol in Salt Lake City on Jan. 24. Rick Bowmer. AP File.

    On January 28, 2023, Utah Republican Governor Spencer Cox approved Senate Bill 18 into immediate effect which bans all types of gender-affirming medical care in regard to transgender minors under the age of 18. Gender-affirming care includes a wide variety of health care that includes medical, surgical, and mental health services for transgender and nonbinary individuals. The directed legislation against transgender youth makes the passing of this bill the first anti-trans law in 2023 in America. There is an exemption for intersex minors and minors who are ‘medically necessary,’ ones who experience puberty early for example (Yurcaba, 2023). This means that there is no doubt that the bill directly attacks the use of gender-affirming care for strictly transgender and nonbinary individuals. It is noted that minors who are already ‘diagnosed’ with gender dysphoria and have gender-affirming care will continue to receive it if they meet a list of requirements. However, future transgender and nonbinary patients will have restricted or no access at all. The details of this ban include the fact that gender-affirming surgical procedures on minors are prohibited with no exceptions, while hormone therapy and puberty blockers are banned indefinitely until they gain more scientific research. Regardless of the reason for this ban, it has already shown evidence that lack of gender-affirming care causes mental health issues and overall unease for transgender youth living in Utah.

           People gather in support of transgender youth during a rally at the Utah State Capitol in Salt Lake City on Jan. 24, 2023. Rick Bowmer. AP File.

    Gov. Cox claims that his decision was in favor of preventing what he claims to be the ‘permanent life-altering effects’ that this various gender-affirming care provides. He also believes it would be better to put more research into these treatments so that there can be better-understood science and consequences and therefore, in his eyes, bring more love to transgender individuals and their families (The Associated Press, 2023). As aforementioned, there have already been negative consequences that have come from this bill, let alone the overall outcomes of the lack of gender-affirming care in the first place. Marisa Mcpeck-Stringham a mental health therapist currently residing in Utah reported that six of her clients who are all transgender individuals have said that they have been experiencing suicidal ideation as a result of this bill being passed. They have also said that the bill felt like an ‘attack’ regardless of whether or not they were planning to medically transition (Rummler, 2023). There has also been pushback from multiple organizations. The National Center for Lesbian Rights and The American Civil Liberties Union of Utah have vowed to sue the Utah government over the bill, however as these plans are recent there hasn’t been any reported progress or response in regard to this action.

More detail into the intricacies of what gender-affirming care includes and therefore the implication of the severity of the ban:

Mar 2022. Screenshot of the table from Gender-Affirming Care and Young People. HHS Office of Population Affairs. Accessed PDF Feb. 26, 2023. 

    Another example of the negative impacts of this bill showcases a transgender man speaking out about these recent events named Payton Butler, an 18-year-old at South Jordan high school. He says that in his youth, being able to take testosterone made life seem ‘easier’ and was ‘essential to his mental and physical well-being’ (Fernandes, 2023). Hormone therapy and top surgery also contributed to his comfortability being himself. He also claims that high school would have been harder for him if he didn’t receive this care. Now that this ban is implemented, transgender youth won’t be able to receive the same care that Butler had. Butler tried to speak to both Gov. Cox and Senator Mike Kennedy about the situation but felt like the lawmakers couldn’t really hear him out. What frustrated Butler the most was the fact that Sen. Kennedy strictly focused on the possible negative outcomes of gender health care, specifically the point that the individuals who use it will have a shorter life span. Butler responded in regards to Sen. Kennedy’s statement, “...because, yeah, I could not transition and maybe live a couple of years longer because I stayed female. But I’m not really living. I’m just kind of going through life unhappy with who I am” (Fernandes, 2023). Regardless of the fact that it could cause a shorter life span, in Butler’s eyes, he would rather live a shorter life as himself than suffer through a long life pretending to be an identity that he is not (Fernandes, 2023).

    It is even more proof that legislators don’t consider the actual lives that transgender individuals are experiencing, while also not realizing the adverse effects they will inflict on them. This incites more cases of extreme gender dysphoria and mental distress. Furthermore, the Republican lawmakers in Utah specifically are operating on a basis of fear-mongering and using any excuse or report that gender-affirming care, the medium that transgender individuals use to be and feel more like themselves in society, is somehow completely negative and affecting the kids to a harmful degree.

    By comparing this situation to the GBTR (Global Barometer of Transgender Rights) from the F&M Global Barometers, it is unfortunately not surprising that laws like these could still pass in the Americas. With the regional score being 50% gaining a score of F, transgender rights are still under fire and cannot be guaranteed full protection, the F grading trend continuing as of 2019. 

    From Global Barometers. https://www.fandmglobalbarometers.org/countries/united-states/ 2019. 

    It is not only Utah Republican legislation that proceeds with these bills through an extremist and fear-mongering view regarding transgender youth. In the Flordia Department of Health, they advised against any form of gender-affirming care for adolescence in April 2022, including social transition in which a child adopts a new name, gender pronouns, and outer expression including clothes that closely match their gender identity. Also in April 2022, Alabama passed its own law that makes it a felony for doctors to perform gender-affirming care to minors. Additionally, in February of that year, Texas Governor Greg Abbott ordered the Department of Family and Protective Services to start investigating gender-affirming care as a form of child abuse (Riess, 2023). It is important to mention these other states regarding anti-transgender bills because it is not only in Utah, it has been a recent upcoming issue in regard to legislation going through with these anti-trans bills in more Republican-operative countries. 

    Just because Utah’s legislation is under the guise of ‘needing more research’ and ‘protecting the youth and their families,’ doesn't mean it’s going to be saving or helping the individual lives of transgender youth in Utah having to live in this new unfortunate reality. Cathryn Oakley, the state legislative director and senior counsel for the Human Rights Campaign condemned the bill by making this statement, “Utah legislators capitulated to extremism and fear-mongering, and by doing so, shamelessly put the lives and well-being of young Utahans at risk — young transgender folks who are simply trying to navigate life as their authentic selves…” (Yurcaba, 2023). This falls under the belief that by going through with this ban, it is a direct attack on transgender youths' rights now living under Utah's legislators.

     People gather in support of transgender youth during a rally at the Utah State Capitol in Salt Lake City on Jan. 24, 2023. Rick Bowmer. AP File. 

    As long as these bans are still underway, the lives of transgender individuals will continue to be discriminated against and have their freedoms taken away purely based on legislators' biases and fear-mongering for their states’ entire population. Grim as it is, by continuing to speak out and fight against these bills and what they stand for, we can hopefully get to a point where there is more knowledge about the transgender experience and therefore there is more humanity gained towards all transgender individuals living in the United States as a whole. 

References

Fernandes, D., Perkins-Mastromarino, J., Swartz, K., & Hagan, A. (2023, February 7). Utah trans teenager speaks out against state ban on gender-affirming care for minors. Here & Now. Retrieved February 26, 2023, from https://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2023/02/07/gender-affirming-care-ban-utah

HHS Office of Population Affairs. (2022, March). gender-affirming-care-young-people-march-2022.

The Associated Press. (2023, January 29). Utah's governor has signed a bill banning gender-affirming care for transgender youth. NPR. Retrieved February 26, 2023, from https://www.npr.org/2023/01/29/1152388859/utah-ban-gender-affirming-care-transgender-youth

Riess, R., & Sottile, Z. (2023, February 11). Utah governor signs bill banning gender-affirming hormone treatment and surgery for minors. CNN. Retrieved February 26, 2023, from https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/29/us/utah-governor-minors-transgender-care-ban/index.html

Rummler, O. (2023, February 3). How Utah's new ban on gender-affirming care for minors is affecting trans teens in the State. PBS. Retrieved February 26, 2023, from https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/how-utahs-new-ban-on-gender-affirming-care-for-minors-is-affecting-trans-teens-in-the-state

Yurcaba, J. (2023, January 30). Utah is the first state to pass a gender-affirming care ban in 2023. NBCNews.com. Retrieved February 26, 2023, from https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-politics-and-policy/utah-poised-first-state-pass-gender-affirming-care-ban-2023-rcna67941

                        

Transgender Rights Discourse in the UK 

How are JK Rowling, the battle for Trans rights, and Scottish Independence all related?

    Transgender rights are currently at the center of conversation surrounding Scottish independence. Also, Prime Minister Sturgeon’s resignation this past week, transgender inmates in Scottish prisons, and JK Rowling have been dominating the news cycle.  

 

    How is the battle for transgender rights related to these other headlines? For the first time since Scottish devolution and the establishment of the Scottish Parliament in 1999, the UK has blocked Scotland's proposed bill, leading to former Prime Minister Nicola Sturgeon's promise to take the British government to court to challenge the veto. The fierce debate surrounding transgender rights occurs at what former Prime Minister Sturgeon calls a "critical moment" of the Scottish Independence movement. In addition to stirring up debate surrounding the proposed gender identification bill itself, the veto has been viewed as an undermining of the Scottish devolution and stoked those in favor of Scotland severing from the UK entirely and seeking total independence.

 

    So, what did the bill propose? The Scottish self-recognition bill aimed to allow transgender Scottish citizens to legally identify as their chosen gender more easily. It would drop the requirement of a medical diagnosis, lower the age requirement from eighteen to sixteen, and cut the waiting time from two years to six months. This would dramatically lessen the traumatic and intrusive nature of the process for transgender citizens attempting to alter their legal gender. It would also transition away from a medical model of gender identity towards self-determination.

 

    Why was the bill vetoed? Within the parameters of Scotland's devolution, the UK government is able to block a law from Scottish Parliament if it is believed to be incompatible with UK wide legislation. Alister Jack, the Secretary of State for Scotland, claims that the bill would cause complications by creating "two different gender recognition regimes in the UK".  Other opponents of the Gender ID reformation argue that it would interfere with the UK's Equality Act and protections in place for women's safety.

This opposition is widely present in the UK and, though Sturgeon adamantly defended the gender reform bill, Scotland itself seems to be divided. Scottish Parliament engaged in difficult and extensive debate before the bill received approval and faced significant backlash from protesters.

Photos from: https://www.fandmglobalbarometers.org/countries/united-kingdom/

    The UK has been involved in contentious debate surrounding transgender rights for the past several years, especially as prominent figures like author JK Rowling conflate progressive legislature aiding transgender citizens with the erasure of women's safety protections. Rowling took to twitter clad in a t-shirt labeling Sturgeon a “destroyer of women's rights" to express her disagreement with self-identification. 

Twitter / J.K. Rowling 

    In response to such criticism, the former Prime Minster asserted in her resignation speech that, in addition to being a feminist, she would “also stand up for any stigmatized, discriminated against, marginalized and vulnerable group in society.” Criticism of the bill has only continued to grow with the coverage of the recent Isla Bryson case, a Scottish transgender woman who has been sent to a women’s prison after being found guilty of raping two women prior to her transition. Opponents of the gender identification bill have pointed to the Bryson case as an example of transgender rights putting women at risk or allowing male predators access to female only spaces, furthering the controversy surrounding the bill and the transgender community itself.

    Self-identification is a necessary component to the human right of self-determination and expression. Scotland’s proposed bill aimed to protect transgender individuals’ access to that human right. Additionally, transgender lives continue to be in very tangible danger every day. Scotland’s proposed bill would offer some respite in the difficult journey of transitioning and receiving legal confirmation. By vetoing the bill, the UK is demonstrating the undeniable impact of anti-transgender and anti-LGBTQI+ propaganda, discourse, and media on government policies. Though protestors of transgender rights, like JK Rowling, position themselves as empathetic and supportive of the transgender community and simply seeking to protect women’s equality, they are truly opposing human rights.

  

References

Brooks, L. (2023, February 9). Trans prisoners in Scotland to be first sent to jails matching their birth gender. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/feb/09/trans-prisoners-in-scotland-to-be-first-sent-to-jails-matching-their-birth-gender

Brooks, P. C. L. (2023, January 16). Rishi Sunak blocks Scotland’s gender recognition legislation. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jan/16/rishi-sunak-blocks-scotlands-gender-recognition-legislation

Brown, L. (2022, October 6). JK Rowling slams Scottish leader as destroying ‘women’s rights’ with gender bill. New York Post. https://nypost.com/2022/10/06/jk-rowling-on-the-attack-again-over-trans-rights-bill/

Jackson, D. (2023, February 16). Why did Nicola Sturgeon resign as first minister? BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-64661974

Jill Lawless, Associated Press. (2023, January 17). Scotland vows to challenge UK in court over gender recognition law veto. PBS News Hour. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/scotland-vows-to-challenge-uk-in-court-over-gender-recognition-law-veto

Kottasová, I. (2023, January 17). UK government blocks Scotland’s new gender recognition law. CNN. https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/16/europe/scottish-gender-law-uk-constitution-intl-gbr/index.html

Marx, W. (2023, January 18). U.K. blocks Scottish gender ID bill. NPR. https://www.npr.org/2023/01/18/1149855884/u-k-blocks-scottish-gender-id-bill

 

LBGTQ+ Rights in South Korea: The Fight for Visibility

February 21, 2023 

Trigger Warning: This post mentions cases of suicide and harassment.

The Fight for Visibility in People's Every Day Lives

Lesvos, June, and Hee-soo

Lesvos is a non-binary individual living in Seoul, South Korea. They never felt safe even with their own home. Lesvos did not have a supportive mother growing up. Their mother insisted that they were “guilty or had just committed a crime”(Mitsanas, 1). At the early age of 14, Lesvos considered running away from home numerous times. Never finding a place they felt they belonged, they stumbled upon one of the first queer friendly bars in South Korea in 1996. After experiencing a safe space to socialize where they would be accepted, they founded the first lesbian bar in Itaewon. Now, Lesvos works as a chef at a traditional Korean restaurant in downtown Seoul, and at night, they run a successful bar, Lesvos bar, that is a “place for all LGBTQ Koreans, not just lesbians”(Mitsanas, 1). Lesvos proudly states, “"I will do whatever it takes for South Korea's LGBTQ community until I take my last breath”(Mitsanas, 1). Lesvos commitment to advocacy and protecting their queer community inspires many youth today “to survive”(Mitsanas, 1). The article also interviews queer youth who visit Lesvos Bar and asks them to describe their experiences growing up queer. June Green explains how he has to “make a deeper voice whenever [he] leaves [his] house, and even then, people still approach me to ask if [he is] a guy or girl”(Mitsanas, 1). Places such as Lesvos bar persist in being a safe haven.

































Another article tells the story of Sergeant Byun Hee-soo, a transgender woman, who fought valiantly for her country. Once her transgender identity was discovered, she was asked to leave the army under the “disabled” category. In reality, Hee-soo was a soldier like any other who represented her country. In an interview, Hee-soo claims, "I want to show everyone that I can also be one of the great soldiers who protect this country"(Rashid, 1). A year after being asked to leave, she committed suicide. LGBTQ+ activists and civil rights leaders called her case a "social murder' '. The use of “social murders” is justified because Byun was murdered by society's standards and the discrimination they inflicted on her. Her death proves that being transgender in South Korea is being political. And being a transgender person immediately comes with dire consequences.




Progress Battles Politics, the Military, and Religion

The National Law offers no protection from discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender in South Korea. Students who identify as queer still face discrimination and same sex couples cannot legally adopt children. If same-sex relationships are discovered within the military, the punishment is 2 years in prison. The Military Criminal Act “penalizes ‘indecent acts’”(Mitsanas, 1) which ostracizes and isolates queer folks. The word “criminal” immediately reinforces the divide between who is deemed “normal” and accepted, and “others” queer people. In 2007, ex-president Roh Moo-hyn and his administration drafted “South Korea’s first comprehensive nondiscrimination bill, but conservative groups like the Congressional Missionary Coalition immediately objected to its inclusion of ‘sexual orientation.’”(Mitsanas, 1). Many politicians believed that validating the existence of queer individuals in society would unleash chaos. One of the president’s top advisors believed that “homosexuals will try to seduce everyone” if a bill such as the “nondiscrimination bill” was passed. Politicians believe that “homosexuality can be treated” because it is like an addiction. Another leader who remains against the protection bill is Protestant Pastor Yonah Lee, a supporter of ex-president Yoon (Rashid, 1). He is known as the ultimate “ex-gay” spokesperson by often describing queer representation as problematic. In 2005, 30% of the population identified as Christian. In 2023, that number has risen which creates more obstacles for those fighting against the “conservative Christian lobby”(Rashid, 1). Today, 41% of the National Assembly identifies as Christian.




Politicians Seeking Change

Despite religious and political leaders creating barriers for sexual orientation and gender equality, there are those who advocate for the protection of gay and transgender communities. Representative Jang Hye-yeong voted that “a nondiscrimination bill means no citizen of this country is subject to state-condoned discrimination. A nondiscrimination bill means nobody is left behind, and now is the time to pass the nondiscrimination bill”(Mitsanas, 1). Jang is in disbelief at how South Korea can be such “an important member of the U.N.” with “an advanced economy” and “is not protecting its citizens’ human rights.” (Mitsanas, 1). Jang exposes how Korea’s powerful religious groups continue to deny the existence of LGBTQ people and that they have a “right to exist”(Mitsanas, 1). Lawmakers are afraid to make noise and challenge “Christian political stances”(Mitsanas, 1). As one of the only queer representatives herself, Jang continues to argue for her community.





























Even though South Korea remains one of the world’s wealthiest countries with a democracy, they are an outlier for anti-protection of LGBTQ+ rights. On the F&M Global Barometer of Gay Rights, they score an F and a 56% in 2019. On the F&M Global Barometer of Transgender Rights, South Korea scores an F and a 59% in 2019.










Bibliography

Rashid, Raphael. “How Religion Spurs Homophobia in South Korean Politics.” Nikkei Asia. Nikkei Asia, March 26, 2021. https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/How-religion-spurs-homophobia-in-South-Korean-politics.

Mitsanas, Michael. “South Korea's LGBTQ Community Confronts Crushing Headwinds in Fight for Equality.” NBCNews.com. NBCUniversal News Group. Accessed February 18, 2023. https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/south-koreas-lgbtq-community-confronts-crushing-headwinds-fight-equali-rcna57777.

F&M Global Barometers

“Acceptance” of Same-Sex Unions Causes Global Outcry and Cultural Clashing

    Pope Francis has deemed same-sex attraction “not a crime” and laws criminalizing LGBT people as a 'sin' and an injustice. Also, on February 9, 2023, the Church of England voted in favor of blessings for same-sex unions. England had a heated and long debate:  250 votes to 181 to back a proposal by bishops intended to end years of painful divisions and disagreement over sexuality. 

    These moments are the motivation and fuel that LGBTQ+ Anglicans were waiting for in their journey of self-worth and religious devotion. While the Pope and English Church made these statements Anglican Churches around the world, specifically in the Global South --with special attention to The Global South Fellowship of Anglican Churches (GSFA), which represents churches in 24 countries and provinces including Nigeria, Kenya, Uganda, and Rwanda --are in outcry. 

    Pope Francis took a tour to the Democratic Republic of Congo and South Sudan along with Justin Welby, Archbishop of Canterbury and Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland Iain Greenshields. 

    The Pope urged “the people of South Sudan to resist the "venom of hatred" so they could achieve the peace and prosperity that have eluded them through years of bloody ethnic conflicts” (Pullela). It is interesting that these cultural differences are clashing so intensely. While usually, Anglicans across the world would look to the thought process or guidance of these religious figures, those in the Global South are questioning the motives and capabilities of their leaders. This is not a surprising reaction from those countries, specifically South Sudan, as is explained in their country’s global barometer of LGBTQ+ rights. 

    As stated in a The Guardian article: “Samy Fawzy Shehata, the archbishop of Alexandria in Egypt, told the synod that “crossing this line of blessing same-sex unions will alienate 75% of the Anglican Communion” and “lead eventually to impaired and broken communion” (Sherwood). With the majority of the religion against the blessing of same-sex unions, this news is highly critical of the well-being of LGBTQ+ individuals in a plethora of countries. While England may bless the civil marriages of same-sex couples the church’s definition of marriage remains between “a woman and a man”. The synod stated, “the church will apologize for the harm it has caused to LGBTQ+ people”, while the majority of the constituents are against the vote blessing LGBTQ+ individuals there is confusion around how the church will truly aid the community. 

    There is also a discussion of how economic funding, lobbyists, and “outsiders” of the religion will influence further thought processes on LGBTQ+ identity and the Church. 

    While these positive moments seem to be ushering in great change, and a positive future, each action, and statement have its caveat. The definition of marriage is still between a man and a woman, which is not inclusive of all LGBTQ+ individuals. Civil unions or marriages are blessed but not sacramental unions, meaning they hope LGBTQ+ individuals will find aid to their legal or political troubles, but their marriage will still not be “ordained under God”. The Global South Fellowship of Anglican Churches are not backing down and is looking to reinstate leadership that they believe follows the true doctrines of the church. 

References: 

How were human rights violations exposed during World Cup 2022 in Qatar?

  

A man wearing a t-shirt reading "Save Ukraine" runs on the pitch waving a rainbow LGBT flag on the pitch during the Qatar 2022 World Cup Group H football match between Portugal and Uruguay at the Lusail Stadium in Lusail, north of Doha on November 28, 2022 / The Times of Israel. (11/29/2023). Man who invaded World Cup pitch with rainbow flag released from custody. [Photograph].

    Same-sex action is prohibited in 69 countries and persecuted in far more countries. Same-sex actions, including relationship, sexual, and intimate activities, are prohibited under the Penal Code 2004, as it also criminalizes acts of "sodomy" and "sexual intercourse" between people of the same sex. Reaction to human rights issues takes on an international outlook when they are concerns that affect its neighbors, international community, and people of other nationalities --  this happened in World Cup 2022. In that sense, it was almost too late to react and respond to this incident since it has already passed. On December 2, 2010, FIFA announced that Qatar would host the 2022 FIFA World Cup, and later in November 2022, Qatar held the opening ceremony.  What happened before the World Cup announcement, and how did the international community respond to the first calls? How does the public react to this? What discussions about the 2022 FIFA World Cup human rights are still going on? 

    In 2016, FIFA adopted the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, which require it to "avoid infringing on the human rights of others and address adverse human rights impacts." it requires FIFA to take proper measures for the "prevention, mitigation, and remediation" of human rights impacts. Qatar authorities confirmed unwelcomed and unsafe actions for the LGBTQ+ population.

"If you want to change me so that I will say that I believe in LGBTQ, that my family should be LGBTQ, that I accept LGBTQ in my country, that I change my laws and the Islamic laws to satisfy the West – then this is not acceptable," added Minister of State for Energy Affairs Saad Sherida Al-Kaabi.

    In April, Major General Abdulaziz Abdullah Al Ansari, a senior Interior Ministry official overseeing security for the football tournament, said that rainbow flags may be confiscated from prospective visitors "for their protection." Al Ansari added: "Reserve the room together, sleep together — this is something that's not in our concern."

As a result, according to FIFA, Qatar World Cup is responsible for following concrete policies and defending human rights due diligence process with regular reporting. But it was clear that a country with such low standards of protecting the LGBTQ+ population can not host world tournaments. As a result, Qatar uses another external way to suppress the voice of the LGBTQ + population by repeatedly referring to the moralities of the country, rejecting the fact of human rights. Still, despite all the investigations and Qatar's well-known records of persecuting the LGBTQ+ community, FIFA has not taken away the right to host the World Cup. 

   The FIFA World Cup is not just another competition but the most extensive sports tournament on Earth, which increases the revenue of both FIFA and Qatar from ticket sales and licenses to broadcasting rights and marketing. This year's revenue from the World Cup amounted to more than 7,5 billion dollars. Even the FIFA took the majority of profit, this money did not go towards Qatar's economy because all of this was shared with FIFA, the leading football organization on Earth. Why are countries then fighting for the right to host the World Cup? It's all about the fame and prestige of this event, as many famous guests and politicians will watch the match. Everyone will remember this country as festive and cheerful, even if there are human rights violations behind the screen. The country spared no expense for the World Cup, spending ten times more on its bid than England. After all, even FIFA wrote in its reports that this is not the most suitable place for the World Cup due to too small territory, unbearably hot climate, no sports infrastructure, and, most importantly, physical and mental danger to LGBTQ+ and other vulnerable communities.

Qatar scores a measly 15% on the GBGR and 18% on the GBTR. Qatar matches the general trend for the Middle East/Northern Africa.

Photo Courtesy of fandmglobalbarometers.org.

Photo Courtesy of fandmglobalbarometers.org.

    A few years later, Joseph Blatter, the former president of FIFA, recognized the World Cup in Qatar as a mistake that undermined the reputation of the football association. Members of the FIFA executive committee also took the decision. In December 2010, they voted for Qatar in a privileged mode without official evidence that anyone's vote was bought. But out of the entire executive committee, two people were removed before voting, as they were ready to sell their votes. Even 19 remaining executives became defendants in various corruption cases and abuse of power. Even more, Michele Platini, the head of the European Football Association, publicly advocated supporting hosting World Cup in the United States instead of Qatar. Still, suddenly he changed his mind about Qatar after dinner with the President of France and Qatari sheiks. The Qatari government has not proven any accusation of corruption. Still, at the same time, in 2010, two undemocratic countries, Russia and Qatar, received the rights to host the FIFA World Cup. They also both prosecute the LGBTQ+ population, as former by an anti-LGBTQ bill criminalizing mentioning gay rights and homosexuality in media, as well as later prohibiting same-sex sexual activity, which can lead to up to seven years of jail. 

The similar trend we can see in Russia which scores a measly 19% on the GBGR and 24% on the GBTR. Russia is an outlier for Central/Eastern Europe/Eurasia.

Photo Courtesy of fandmglobalbarometers.org.

    Those events marked the beginning of several investigations of Qatari corruption against FIFA. The US General Attorney mentioned, "We are here to announce the unsealing of charges and the arrests of individuals as part of our long-running investigation into bribery and corruption in the world of organized soccer." As a result, allegations of corruption led the international community to open its eyes to the violations of LGBTQ+ rights, as restrictions to holding hands, cuddling, and being together with one's romantic partner. 

     More importantly than corruption, Qatar also used the excuse through the concept of religion and "traditional" and "heterosexual family" values, which is similar to what Russia is currently supporting by referring to the "traditional principles of family morality". Officials believe that looking at the attributes of LGBTQ+ community and encouraging welcoming atmosphere for them can change the sexuality of other people. By understanding that such propaganda works, authoritarian leaders often shift responsibility to more significant concepts, such as the family institution or religion. 

  

    Thanks to corruption and the power of words, Qatar managed to host the World Cup despite public concern. How should the international community prevent the following issues of discrimination against the LGBTQ+ community? Journalists, human rights organizations, and football associations have widely criticized allowing Qatar to host the World Cup. FIFA holds host authorities accountable to an international rights-respecting standard, including LGBTQ+ rights.

  We should prioritize the realities not only for LGBTQ+ residents of Qatar, including by introducing legislation that protects against discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. NGOs and Non-Profits should continue to advocate for decrease in human rights violations in countries that have low score on GBGR and GBTR. On a larger scale, international football community should advocate for continued change through media resources to promote diversity and inclusivity in sports.

Bibliography

Longman, J. (2010) Russia and Qatar win World Cup bids, The New York Times. The New York Times. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/03/sports/soccer/03worldcup.html (Accessed: January 28, 2023).

Sepp Blatter says choosing Qatar to host World Cup was 'a mistake' (2022) The Guardian. Guardian News and Media. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/football/2022/nov/08/sepp-blatter-qatar-hosting-world-cup-mistake (Accessed: January 28, 2023).

Michel Platini: I 'might' have pledged to back US bid before voting for Qatar (2015) The Guardian. Guardian News and Media. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/sep/24/michel-platini-usa-2022-bid-voting-qatar (Accessed: January 28, 2023).

Nine FIFA officials and five corporate executives indicted for racketeering conspiracy and corruption (2015) The United States Department of Justice. Available at: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/nine-fifa-officials-and-five-corporate-executives-indicted-racketeering-conspiracy-and (Accessed: January 28, 2023).

FIFA 2022 World Cup: Qatar's preparation and legislation (no date) International Bar Association. Available at: https://www.ibanet.org/article/9B1C360C-10EC-4400-B380-FB7132F83451 (Accessed: January 28, 2023).

Attorney general Loretta E. Lynch delivers remarks at press conference announcing charges against nine FIFA officials and five corporate executives (2017) The United States Department of Justice. Available at: https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/attorney-general-loretta-e-lynch-delivers-remarks-press-conference-announcing-charges (Accessed: January 28, 2023).

Jeong, A. (2022) Qatar continues to mistreat LGBT people before World Cup, Rights Group says, The Washington Post. WP Company. Available at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/10/25/qatar-world-cup-lgbt-arrest-human-rights/ (Accessed: January 28, 2023).

FIFA publishes landmark Human Rights Policy (no date) FIFA. Available at: https://www.fifa.com/about-fifa/organisation/news/fifa-publishes-landmark-human-rights-policy-2893311 (Accessed: January 28, 2023).

A World Cup of Shame: FIFA fails LGBT rights test in Qatar (2022) Human Rights Watch. Available at: https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/07/07/world-cup-shame-fifa-fails-lgbt-rights-test-qatar?gclid=Cj0KCQiAic6eBhCoARIsANlox85UX_1-QH9wTwE1atIoALhs09PXaQNu97zCKluAHLW8CZaXpZdZqhoaAsAqEALw_wcB (Accessed: January 28, 2023).