Talk:LGBT rights by country or territory/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Age of consent for homosexuals in Canada

You wrote that the age of consent in Canada "discrepancy and prohibition of anal intercourse in some cases".

What do you mean by "some cases"?

In which cases does the age of consent in Canada is discrepancy for homosexuals?

P.S. - sorry if my English is not very clear... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.130.107.195 (talk) 23:37, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

The age of consent for most sex acts is 16, but for anal sex it is 18. Of course this affects gay men more than others. It has been found unconstitutional by courts in Ontario, Quebec and Alberta, and I think it's assumed that it would be found unconstitutional in other provinces as well if it came to trial there. - htonl (talk) 03:02, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

So the age of consent for anal sex is 16 for heterosexuals, but 18 for homosexuals? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.130.107.195 (talk) 19:52, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

No, the age of consent for anal sex is 18 for everyone. But a prohibition on anal sex affects gay men disproportionately to others, even if it is nominally neutral. - htonl (talk) 20:29, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

@htonl: Then anal sex under the age of 18 is illegal for everyone in Canada, regardless of their sexual orientation? --83.130.107.195 (talk) 22:45, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Yes, isn't that what I just said? But that doesn't mean it's not especially unfair to gay men. Just like, if a country banned all anal sex, that would obviously be discriminatory towards gay men, even if it also applied to straight couples. - htonl (talk) 23:39, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Why? If a country banned anal sex for everyone, why would it be discriminatory towards homosexuals only? --83.130.107.195 (talk) 18:57, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

This is akin to asking how banning same-sex marriage is discriminatory if both heterosexuals and homosexuals aren't allowed to marry the same-sex (a question that Ann Coulter once asked to my amusement/horror). Anal sex is an activity disproportionally done by gay men, so they are the demographic most affected by such a ban. In that sense, it is discriminatory. ~ Rob^Talk 21:02, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 October 2015

Remove the first References section, the one between the sections on Africa and the Americas, because the article shouldn't have citations split up like this. 94.197.120.57 (talk) 00:50, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

• Done The problem was with the template. I removed the second reference section that was being copied to the page. --Stabila711 (talk) 03:11, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Antarctica

If no part of Antarctica can be owned by any country, why are colours displayed in the maps of Antarctica? It's more or less the same as displaying colours in the sea or the moon, I guess. Chocofrito (talk) 20:13, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Separating "Maps" from "LGBT-related laws by country or territory"

Hello!

I propose that we separate the "Maps" section from the "LGBT-related laws by country or territory" section. I love the maps section, but I think the page would be more efficient if we made the two things separate sections.

Anyone got thoughts?

Thanks! -TenorTwelve (talk) 23:21, 4 January 2016 (UTC) TenorTwelve (talk) 23:21, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Today is 1/15/2015. If no one proceeds to comment on this proposal within ten days, I will take action unilaterally to separate the maps and charts. The deadline shall be 1/25/2015 and if I am available to edit, I will make these changes on 1/26/2015 at the earliest.

Is this permitted under Wikipedia editing guidelines?

Thanks! TenorTwelve (talk) 04:07, 16 January 2016 (UTC) TenorTwelve (talk) 04:07, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Portugal Adoption Laws

We should update the map on the adoption laws around the world to include portugal. This has been done in the table, but has not been reflected in the map.

Same-sex adoption laws around the world

Rtheranikal (talk) 18:53, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Done Eteethan(talk) 01:45, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

The bill awaits presidential signature. See [5]. Ron 1987 (talk) 04:45, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Please change the map: Civil unions are now legal in Italy

I'm saying this because the map doesn't show that. I don't have an account, sorry. 186.158.200.145 (talk) 18:10, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Italy New Law

Italy status should be updated.

That's right. The image is not updated. 186.182.0.207 (talk) 22:16, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

No. Civil unions are not legal yet. The bill awaits approval by the Chamber of Deputies. Ron 1987 (talk) 18:55, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Indeed, not yet fully in force.

--Bouzinac (talk) 19:22, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Decriminalization map inconsistencies

On one hand it considers territories that were "annexed" or dependent as if they had laws of the annexing country in their territory e.g. Poland, Luxembourg. On the other hand, it fails to do so in case of colonies e.g. Mali, which was a sunni country (Tijaniyya Jihad state) and sharia country (Songhai Empire, implementing Sharia Law) before France's annexation. In other words, this map is highly euro-centric. --202.166.79.224 (talk) 16:50, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Recognition of sex change in Jordan

Please note that the highest civil court (Court of Cassation) in Jordan issued a judgment in October 2014 which instructs the state to recognise sex change and there are now a handful of instances in which a person's sex change has been officially recognised by the civil status department, see link in Arabic http://www.alwatanvoice.com/arabic/news/2014/10/12/602917.html - could somebody please update the relevant section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 145.118.237.198 (talk) 11:58, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Swedish Discrimination Act

In the map called "Employment discrimination laws by sexual orientation and/or gender identity by country or territory", Sweden is colored blue which implies that Sweden's anti-discrimination law only covers sexual orientation and not gender identity. This is incorrect. The Discrimination Act (2008:567) bans discrimination based on both sexual orientation and gender identity/expression. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Notsquaregarden (talk • contribs) 21:51, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Including Ireland in List

Hello all - should Ireland now be included in the list under Note F? Referred to here:

"As of April 2016, nineteen countries, most of them located in North America, the Southern Cone and Western Europe,[f] recognize same-sex marriage and grant most of (if not all) the other rights listed above to its LGBT citizens."

with f reading

"Countries with same-sex marriage recognized nationwide are: Argentina, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, Denmark,[a] France, Iceland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands,[b] New Zealand,[c] Norway, Portugal, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom,[d] the United States [e] and Uruguay."

I think the Irish change has come into effect now. - -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.197.1.50 (talk • contribs) 09:00, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Cyprus update

The table should be updated per http://www.hrc.org/blog/entry/cyprus-adds-sexual-orientation-and-gender-identity-to-anti-discriminatory-l. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.88.54.82 (talk) 02:28, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

In Cyprus now there have been gay marriages officially accepted by the state in 2016. Moreover Cyprus does not belong to Eurasia but is a clear member of EUROPE and EU. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.57.216.201 (talk) 12:38, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Chad

Sodomy is illegal in Chad, but this is not represented on the map. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.24.185.202 (talk) 12:59, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

This has still not updated. Chad should be coloured orange on the map. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.38.210.183 (talk) 16:28, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

References

Add HRW link

Kindly add external link to Human Rights Watch on the subject, thank you. https://www.hrw.org/topic/lgbt-rights

 Done We try and avoid too many ELs but that seems a reasonable addition - and I removed a dead EL - Arjayay (talk) 15:36, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Homosexuality de facto illegal in Russia

In Russia, or at least Chechnya they seem to unfortunately carry the death penalty for homosexuality. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_concentration_camps_in_Chechnya The map should update Chechnya to death penalty, or all of Russia. Socialistboyy (talk) 09:30, 23 April 2017 (UTC)socialistboyy

Semi-protected edit request on 12 April 2017

same sex marriage bill has passed royal assent and is now legal in the Falkland islands 2A02:C7D:1214:F800:C4F9:609B:5772:9B97 (talk) 11:31, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:40, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on LGBT rights by country or territory. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111228093601/http://www.iglhrc.org/cgi-bin/iowa/content/takeaction/resourcecenter/index.html to http://www.iglhrc.org/cgi-bin/iowa/content/takeaction/resourcecenter/index.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120118183926/http://www.icj.org/dwn/database/Sexual%20Orientation%2C%20Gender%20Identity%20and%20Justice-%20A%20Comparative%20Law%20Casebook%5B1%5D.pdf to http://www.icj.org/dwn/database/Sexual%20Orientation%2C%20Gender%20Identity%20and%20Justice-%20A%20Comparative%20Law%20Casebook%5B1%5D.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:36, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Corrections Germany Entry

As there will be editing in this section next week either way, please correct the date for the decriminalisation (1994 not 1969)and the status of protection against discrimination (not all discrimination is banned: the churches, small businesses and landlords are exempt). The sources may stay as they are cited now, if only someone would read them.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.238.60.85 (talk) 14:27, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

LGBT rights maps (china and Lithuania)

The map shows incorrect information and colour on the LGBT rights maps both China and Lithuania doesn't have Laws restricting freedom of expression and association.

China : The laws in china Censored any sexual behaviour on web or TVs , chinafilminsider.com/china-tightens-censorship-of-online-dramas/ 2.) according to the national law in China there's no LAW in restricting LGBT freedom of expression in public.

Lithuania : in mid-May, Lithuania’s foreign minister announced that his government had granted visas to two Chechens who “suffered persecution because of their sexual orientation.” And last week, Joël Deumier, president of the French gay rights group SOS Homophobie, said a Chechen refugee had arrived in France. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/09/world/europe/chechnya-gays-refugees.html

There is no way that Lithuania has law restricting LGBT freedom of expression, especially Lithuania is part of the European Union. Please can someone change the colour of both countries, this is Misleading people who read the LGBT rights page. Thank you

So how is this Jadeadam731724 (talk) 09:34, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Same-sex intercourse legal/illegal

This is incorrect wording. Obviously marriage etc is more than just intercourse. On the illegal side, countries in Africa, for example, criminalize non-intercourse things such as kissing and texting. [6] [7].

Please change Same-sex intercourse legal to Same-sex relationships legal and Same-sex intercourse illegal to Same-sex relationships illegal. Thanks!

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 03:13, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Misleading information regarding controversial topic, July 26 2017

The current wording of this article specifies, under the United States; that "Transgenders not allowed to serve since 2017" with this citation. This is factually incorrect as at present time no executive order, house bill, or senate bill, or other military documents have issued such a prohibition. This is not to discredit the article used as citation, but to point out that such a decision has not been made, only discussed. Metalmkll (talk) 01:36, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Amnesty International broken link & same-sex marriage not a human right

The Amnesty International link in the front paragraph no longer takes you to a list of their rights, but now lists 3 cases, one of which is abortion, and it seems to indicate that they no longer consider same-sex marriage to be a human right. It also should be noted that the United Nations does not consider it to be a human right, and the European Court of Human Rights in June 2016 ruled that same-sex unions are not a human right, and that same-sex unions can never be marriage. Perhaps that aspect of the rights should be removed, as it no longer seems to be accurate. 58.179.159.63 (talk) 14:28, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Link here: https://eclj.org/marriage/the-echr-unanimously-confirms-the-non-existence-of-a-right-to-gay-marriage 58.179.159.63 (talk) 14:30, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

It seems to me that the right to marry in itsalf is a human right, according to the UN. [8] --Bouzinac (talk) 06:36, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

As clarified by the European Court of Human Rights, the right to marry does not include the right to same-sex marriage. It is not now and never has been a human right. Mister Sneeze A Lot (talk) 12:06, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

I removed the now broken link to Amnesty International. I did not change the information though, as, other than the same-sex unions part, it does seem that Amnesty International considers the other LGBT rights to be human rights. I could not find an exact source though. It conceivably could be written that LGBT lobbyists consider same-sex marriage a human right, but it is not accurate to claim that Amnesty International or the United Nations or any other world body on human rights considers it a human right. This seems to be a misunderstanding based on the United Nations' 14th article on the right to marry, which, as above, has been clarified to not mean same-sex marriage. Nonetheless, a rewrite could include this in some different way. Please do not restore the inaccurate information that I removed. A rewrite that listed it as LGBT lobbyist right would be reasonable, however. Mister Sneeze A Lot (talk) 14:51, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

What Amnesty Int'l or the EHCR think is irrelevant, as indeed is the whole question of "is same-sex marriage a human right" - a question which is still subject to debate, obviously. Including the item in the list does not assert that SSM is a human right - the list is prefaced by the text "LGBT rights laws include, but are not limited to, the following:". Surely you agree that SSM laws are an example of "LGBT rights laws"? Possibly the paragraph needs to be modified to make that distinction clearer. - htonl (talk) 19:54, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

I have rearranged the article a bit, moving the discussion of human rights/civil rights below the list of types of law, so as to clarify that the article is not asserting that all the laws listed are human rights. I hope this helps. - htonl (talk) 20:01, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Sorry for the triple-posting, but I wanted to add: it's clear that Amnesty does consider same-sex marriage a human right, as can be seen from page 5 of their Pride Toolkit: "Such bills [RFRAs] sanction discrimination, put LGBT people at risk of violence, and mean that LGBT people can be denied their rights to healthcare, education, and marriage. Amnesty International joins many social justice, civil rights, and human rights organizations by recognizing these bills for what they are: discriminatory violations of human rights." - htonl (talk) 20:10, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

That's a 2016 link, which was when Amnesty International changed their front page to recognise same-sex marriage as a human right, in probable reference to the June 2016 European Court of Human Rights decision that declared that same-sex unions are not a human right and that same-sex unions can never be described as marriage. Since the European Court of Human Rights were effectively acting to clarify whether same-sex marriage was a human right, as a clarification of the United Nations, then it flows that from that date Amnesty International were obligated to drop their position of same-sex marriage being regarded as a human right. You'd need a 2017 reference to make it current, and I don't believe there is one. While Amnesty International haven't publicly declared their change in position, the change in all of their links suggests that secretly they very much have. I stand to be corrected if there is a 2017 piece from Amnesty International, but I don't believe there is. Mister Sneeze A Lot (talk) 05:47, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

It's not really a debate anyway, as what is and isn't a human right is determined by the United Nations. The United Nations have *NEVER* declared same-sex marriage to be a human right, and the ECHR clarified the matter there. So there is no debate about it. It is not a human right. Amnesty International were simply incorrectly interpreting the United Nations as if it was a human right, and have since clarified that they were wrong. Wikipedia being wrong on this is important. Wikipedia should not go out on a limb to propose something to be a human right when it is not. The only thing to debate is whether it is an LGBT right, and how important it is. It is not a human right, as clarified by the United Nations, and we cannot consider it to be, especially not since the June 2016 clarification. Mister Sneeze A Lot (talk) 05:50, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Chad & Angola

Chad criminalised homosexuality. The new penal code was signed by the President and took effect on 1 August 2017. Also, does anyone have information regarding decriminalisation in Angola? Xylo kai Gyali (talk) 16:01, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 October 2017

On the first map and its caption, please do the following:

1. Remove the "same-sex unions restricted" heading. This is not a seperate category from "same-sex intercourse legal". Not to mention that not being recognised is not a restriction.

2. Make all of Afghanistan dark red. According to the wikipedia article "LGBT rights in Afghanistan" homosexuality is punishable by death. According to the edit log of the map, Afghanistan was changed on the basis that there isn't evidence of the death penalty being carried out. But there is nothing in the caption suggesting that a country is only labelled "death penalty" if the penalty is enforced, rather than simply in the law.

3. Change "marriage" to "same-sex marriage". It might be clear what is meant, but just saying "marriage" is sloppy and imprecise.

4. Revert the last map edit (the unexplained reversion of the change to China) unless there is evidence backing up having China light yellow, and refuting what was claimed on the talk page (section "LGBT rights map (China and lithuania)) and by the user whose change was reverted. 110.22.123.142 (talk) 15:09, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Not done: this is the talk page for discussing improvements to the page LGBT rights by country or territory. Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. The page that needs to be edited is Template:World laws pertaining to homosexual relationships and expression. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 02:24, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

LGBT rights in Catalonia

This article is missing information about LGBT rights in Catalonia. Is same-sex marriage and joint adoption still legal in Catalonia, now that it's no longer part of Spain? — Preceding unsigned comment added by

Sorry but Catalonia is not a recognized independent country, thus Spain LGBT rights apply down there. --Bouzinac (talk) 21:27, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Netherlands Antilles

What about LGBT rights in the Netherlands Antilles? They do not appear in this article... Guycn2 · ☎ 18:52, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Italy doesn't ban same-sex marriages

There is no statute, as far as I know being italian and gay myself, that bans same-sex marriage in Italy. Marriage is still not recognized by law, except for the ones performed by same-sex couples outside of the country , but neither the italian constitution nor some mysterious "Statute" bans same-sex marriage, It's rather an interpretation used by conservative politicians in Italy to oppose any bill for marriage equality. Thankfully Italy is not as conservative as eastern european countries or Russia. 93.44.105.251 (talk) 11:52, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

References

Why is the History section in this article?

Why do we have the history section in this article? It's quite fragmentary and incomplete, and in any case it would surely make more sense merged into LGBT history or History of homosexuality or somewhere like that. It really seems quite unconnected to the subsequent table which is the body of the article. - htonl (talk) 14:12, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Indeed, it would make more sense to focus on some general modern history to give some context to the tables below, and link to one of those pages. Undoto (talk) 19:53, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Constitutional ban in Russia

>http://rt.com/politics/russian-gay-marriage-constitution-769/ There is no constitutional ban on same-sex marriages. Do not you think that information about this is outdated?

The structure of the Russian constitution does not allow such prohibitions to be introduced. --Vorzhev (talk) 21:40, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Decriminalization map

The colors of the map of decriminalization and the colors in the legend aren't matching at all. 158.174.11.112 (talk) 02:04, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Are you talking about this map? Yes, it's a mess. Could someone sort it out? Ron 1987 (talk) 05:32, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Yes, that is the map.158.174.11.112 (talk) 14:09, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on LGBT rights by country or territory. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131023063544/http://galva108.org/deities.html to http://galva108.org/deities.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150911230918/http://legacy.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/1075assyriancode.asp to https://legacy.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/1075assyriancode.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100516054224/http://www.amnestyusa.org/lgbt-human-rights/country-information/page.do?id=1106576 to http://www.amnestyusa.org/lgbt-human-rights/country-information/page.do?id=1106576

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:00, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Taiwan

Shouldn't Taiwan be coloured blue (as with Austria)? Both cases are Court decisions that will be into force on a specific date, already announced, if their governments do not legislate sooner. Xylo kai Gyali (talk) 15:52, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Lebanon and Iraq

On the map, Lebanon is shown as criminalising homosexuality, when it was legalised in 2014. ISIS no longer holds territory in Iraq, so its territories should be reduced on the map. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.38.237.192 (talk) 16:45, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Stepchild adoption in Italy

Italy doesn't allow the second-parent adoption (or stepchild adoption, the term used in the country). The newspaper articles in the sources say the Italian high court allowed the mother's partner to adopt, but it doesn't mean the practice is automatically extended to other couples. The page in the Italian Wikipedia (https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adozione_del_configlio) is correct: there's a law allowing unregulated kind of adoption (including the second-parent adoption) in particular cases since 1983, and the high-court's sentence in the references refers to this law. But it's not a general rule, applicable to every homosexual couple. a_ (talk) 21:28, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Poland

Poland should of been light blue, like Costa Rica and San Marino, as shown in the 'Same-sex marriage' page map. Xylo kai Gyali (talk) 15:02, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Trinidad and Tobago

Trinidad and Tobago scrapped its sodomy laws, so the number of countries with them should be decreased to 72 in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.38.227.57 (talk) 12:42, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Updates on "Laws concerning gender identity/expression" in European countries

Most boxes for "Laws concerning gender identity/expression" for European countries cite this map from 2016: https://tgeu.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Trans-mapA_Map2016july.pdf However, there is now version of the map from 2017 with some changes to it: https://tgeu.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Map2017-PRINT.pdf Significantly, France, Croatia, Ukraine, and Moldova, all now do not require sterilisation for gender recognition. Only France has been listed properly as no longer requiring sterilisation, with the other three not being updated yet as they should be. This map is not perfect, however, as it provides no information for the regions of Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Artsakh and Transnistria, which, recognised or not, will have completely different laws. 84.93.45.237 (talk) 20:40, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

This page is useless - cryptic title and no male/female distinction

Who googles LGBT rights? I wanted to know about the legal status of homosexuality around the world and found this page only after a long search.

Why is it useless? Apart from the title which is only understandable for people who got in-depth knowledge about the issue and the terminology already, there is no disticition at all between male and female homosexuality on this page. While male homosex. has been forbidden historically in most countries and still is forbidden in many countries of the world, female homosexuality has rarely, if ever, been outlawed or persecuted. For instance, in the British Empire male homosex. was banned and punished, but women were free to do whatever they pleased with each other. There is not even a ban on lesbianism in the Quran, though some islamic scholars may derive it from the story of Sodom and Gomorrha, but this is their opinion only. Hence it should be legal in most islamic countries, too. This information is very important for lesbians, since they want to know in which country they are allowed to make love, kiss, hug etc. It's very easy for male gays to find out where they are forbidden from doing it or even admiting to it, on the other hand. -- Alexey Topol (talk) 11:05, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Does Vatican support allow same-sex sexual activity?

From the wiki page: Vatican City: Yes Legal since 1890 (As part of Italy)[1]. Vatican City is not part of Italy, is an independent State; the source is not very clear in my opinion about it (no date, no reference, no explanation). --Fraph24 (talk) 23:07, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

This page explains it better, a link to it should be added: LGBT_rights_in_Vatican_City --Fraph24 (talk) 23:12, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Removal of non-factual information

As it seems several users are determined to keep incorrect and non-factual information on this page. I will list here all the mistakes these maps possess. 1.Germany has a hate crime law. 2.Sweden has a hate crime law. 3.Australia has a hate crime law. 4.Colombia has a hate crime law. 5.Greenland has a hate crime law. 6.Suriname does not have a hate crime law. 7.Thailand does not have a constitutional ban on discrimination 8.Neither does Finland 9.Neither does Austria 10.Neither does the United Kingdom 11.Neither does Santa Catarina, Brazil 12.Neither does Pakistan 13.Neither does Canada 14.Neither does Slovenia 15.Mexico bans incitment to hatred 16.Australia too 17.The Czech Republic too 18.The Netherlands too and it includes gender identity 19.Germany same as the Netherlands 20.Slovakia too 21.Austria same as Germany and the Netherlands 22.Colombia same 23.Ecuador same 24.Bolivia same 25.Mexico same 26.The Isle of Man same 27.Guernsey same 28.Jersey same 29.Serbia same 30.ISIS borders are not up to date 31.Guernsey missing for immigration map 32.Estonia too 33.The Faroe Islands too 34.Taiwan too 35.Afghanistan does not have a constitutional ban 36.The Cayman Islands has a constitutional ban 37.Every country that hasn't either a statutory or constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. Countless were incorrectly listed as having no ban, which couldn't be further away from the truth 38.Switzerland allows blood donation 39.Taiwan too 40.Portugal has a deferral period 41.Mauritius allows blood donation 42.South Korea too 43.Hong Kobg too 44.The donation blood map for female partners is basically useless, as it's almost a complete copy from male blood donation map 45.China has "morality" censorship 46.As does Malaysia 47.And Indonesia 48.And Pakistan 49.And Turkey 50.Chile has an equal age of consent 51.The US equalized it at the same time as decriminalization 52.Bolivia was in 1832 53.Venezuela in 1997 54.Mongolia in 1993 55.Belize in 2016 56.Trinidad and Tobago is listed as illegal in the age of consent map 57.Honduras was in 1899 58.Guatemala was in 1871 59.El Salvador was in 1822 60.Australian territories are not supposed to be blank 61.All British territories should not be blank either 62.The Dominican Republic has a military ban 62.Kazakhstan has a military ban 63.The military map is completely incorrect, as it lists several countries as not allowing women to serve which is very incorrect 64.Namibia should be ambiguious 65.Same for Botswana 66.Same for Lesotho 67.Same for Swaziland 68.Same for Mozambique 69.Bolivia allows transgender people to serve 70.As does New Zealand 71.As does Ireland Panda2018 0 (talk) 18:29, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Thqnks for opening a discussion. I suggest going to the wikimedia talk pages of the maps and asking for these changes to be implemented. While providing sources, of course.--Aréat (talk) 20:19, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

I agree with Aréat--Baronedimare (talk) 20:50, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Criminalization of homosexuality timeline

I would like to see this table with all the countries and territories. Africa is the only continent with dates of criminalization, like this:

• Mauritius (1838)
• Ghana (1860s)
• Senegal (1861)
• Tanzania (1864)
• Swaziland (1880s)
• Togo (1884)
• Botswana (1885)
• Angola (1886)
• Gambia (1888)
• Malawi (1891)
• Zimbabwe (1891)
• Uganda (1894)
• Kenya (1897)
• South Sudan (1899)
• Sudan (1899)
• Nigeria (1901)
• Zambia (1911)
• Tunisia (1913)
• Namibia (1920)
• Sahrawi Arab Republic (1944)
• Libya (1953)
• Eritrea (1957)
• Morocco (1962)
• Somalia (1962)
• Algeria (1966)
• Senegal (1966)
• Cameroon (1972)
• Liberia (1976)
• Comoros (1982)
• Mauritania (1983)
• Guinea (1988)
• Egypt (2000)
• Burundi (2009)
• Chad (2017) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mauriziok (talk • contribs) 23:02, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 December 2018

Some people are opposed to sexual LGBT rights based on science. DNA creates two human sexes for the procreation of the species. 104.129.18.98 (talk) 12:03, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

References

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Alucard 16_{❯❯❯ chat?} 14:22, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

LGBT Rights timeline

I would rather have the timeline only contain 'countries' and not 'subnational jurisdictions' like US states or UK territories that could find a more appropriate place in the pages 'LGBT rights in the USA/UK'.

I propose so for the sake of 1) clarity: a list with 100 entries is one thing, a list with tens of extra entries is less readable. 2) internal consistency: the page is about countries/territories and not about subnational entities. 3) information efficiency. While it is obviously interesting from a historical point of view to know that the US's decriminalisation of sodomy acts occurred in 2003 after a long series of victories at US state level, the timeline should just give one straight answer to the question 'what was the year when the US decriminalised same-sex activity? 2003'. All other information is not irrelevant, but it is an addition to the main point. 4) international readership. Subnational entities are not as relevant out of the UK/US as in the UK/US.

What do you think about it? Finedelledanze (talk) 15:26, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose The US and UK are countries no different from Canada or Mexico or France or India. This subnational term is not a reason to remove them form the article. MarnetteD|Talk 16:58, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

that's not what I am saying. I'm proposing to list countries only (including US and UK, of course) and exclude any subnational jurisdictions. Finedelledanze (talk) 14:54, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 March 2019

Please change "Anti-discrimination laws concerning sexual orientation-illegal" in India to "legal" because Article 15 in The Constitution Of India 1949 prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth. and in the case of Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, the Supreme Court ruled that the Indian Constitution bans discrimination based on sexual orientation via the category of "sex". Srilohith (talk) 21:19, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

References

 Partly done: As far as I can tell, this only prohibits discrimination within government bodies Saucy^{[talk – contribs]} 08:21, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 March 2019

Please change "LGB people allowed to serve openly in military?" in India to "proposed" because

References

 Done Saucy^{[talk – contribs]} 08:21, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

History section

The history section of LGBT laws is largely irrelevant. So the Celts had same sex activity as reported by the Greeks. Ok. Some Hindu gods are hermaphroditic. Ok. Nothing about laws. Did the Celts have laws allowing what they did or prohibiting it. Our article doesn’t say. Nothing about India’s laws are addressed either. Can someone pare down this section from social observations to addressing LAWS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:387:6:805:0:0:0:AE (talk) 22:47, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Egypt

I made several changes & fixes to the map, including reducing Egypt from orange (prison) to tan (anti-pro etc laws). A user objected to that based on people being imprisoned under morality laws, though homosexuality is not technically illegal. I'd reduced the severity on the map based on a CNN report that opined Egypt was approx. equivalent to Iraq. I'm unsure what's appropriate here. There's a lot of official violence in Egypt, but then so also in Russia and other countries that aren't coded orange. What's the criterion we should use? — kwami (talk) 06:43, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

• Hmmm... 76 Crimes lists Egypt as a criminalizing country. It mentions that the ILGA report had previously reported Egypt as not a criminalizing country but has changed its position to Egypt being a de-facto criminalizing country. I'd say the de-facto criminalizing country is the correct category here. So I'm open to it being orange though I see the argument on it being tan. So I probably support orange. I'm open to further discussion on this, though. -TenorTwelve (talk) 03:36, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

References

AP Kovoso and AP Vojvodina

I saw a huge mistake in the Decriminalization of homosexuality timeline.

Since the AP of Kosovo and the AP of Vojvodina, until the unlawful repeal of the Constitution in 1990., were able to create their own legislation, so did created criminal law too. In this sense, AP Kosovo decriminalizes homosexuality 1970., and AP Vojvodina on the same day as Croatia - 1977.

With the Serbian occupation of these two APs 1990., the serbian government set in Belgrade repeals all their laws, decisions, decrees and other legal acts adopted at the provincial level, and imposes their own. The same is decriminalization of homosexuality.

But as far as legal continuity is concerned, the years 1970 and 1977 are more important dates than 1994, because at those dates APs made the decisions themselves to decriminalize homosexuality without any dictate.

213.149.62.130 (talk) 06:01, 2 August 2019 (UTC) Lucretzia Larapinta

NPOV

I think the article's name should be "LGBT/LGBT-related laws by country and territory" rather than the current names for maintaining NPOV writing style, and the article should also be riwritten according to NPOV. Lazy-restless (talk) 16:21, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

LGBT RIGHTS is a good and usual title. That fits.-Arorae (talk) 17:06, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

As far as I knew that, wikipedia is a place of neutrality, not of being something good or bad. Lazy-restless (talk) 18:04, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

and neutrality is only your own point of view, I may suppose ?—Arorae (talk) 18:43, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

The phrase "laws conserning" is trivial. Every law concerns LGBT people; property law, business law, criminal law, torts, etc. LGBT rights deal with specific laws that broadly or uniquely apply to LGBT people. A hate crime law, for example, might include ethnic minorities but not recognize LGBT (or any of its derivatives) people. If the law does recognize LGBT protection, it becomes an LGBT right. If it does not, the law is an ethnic minority right. Starting an edit war helps no one.Andrew1444 (talk) 19:11, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

thanks to @Andrew1444:. I consider that the editwar is now close and that there is no more the idea of changing title or delete the word Rights.-Arorae (talk) 11:43, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 15 August 2019

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Pretty firm consensus against this one. (closed by non-admin page mover) Steven Crossin ^{Help resolve disputes!} 06:08, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

---

LGBT rights by country or territory → LGBT-related laws by country or territory – The aticle's name should be "LGBT/LGBT-related laws by country and territory" rather than the current names for maintaining NPOV. Lazy-restless (talk) 22:16, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

• and what about moving Human Rights to Human-related laws? And Black rights to Black-related laws? Oppose to the move.-Arorae (talk) 22:44, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose Current title meets WP:NPOV. MarnetteD|Talk 22:56, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

• Weak oppose - I'd say it's fine in meeting WP:NPOV. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Paintspot Infez (talk) 23:09, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose. "LGBT rights" is the well-established term used all over the media and all over Wikipedia. - htonl (talk) 11:30, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose. LGBT rights as a subset of civil rights is similar in function to "women's rights" or "minority rights". A change based on NPOV is not warranted so long as judgement of the granting or the denial of rights is not made. Andrew1444 (talk) 13:08, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose as per Arorae and Andrew1444- Essentially moving this would also mean moving Human Rights to Human-related laws etc etc, Oppose. –Davey2010^Talk 14:55, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Editwar is always useless. And nobody (for the moment) agrees to change the title.-Arorae (talk) 17:24, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

@Lazy-restless:. I think that you have a problem of edit war with the expression Rights. Nobody seems to support your thesis and you are continuing to adapt the title of the article and other related items. Do you plan to change also all the several titles that include « LGBT rights » in all Wikipedia. It is pointless.-Arorae (talk) 18:40, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

NPOV is the fundamental base of wikipedia, if it does not exist, then wikipedia is out of it's own value. We all should be totally intellectual to maintain the best neutrality in Wikipedia regardless our own value or personal point of view. Lazy-restless (talk) 21:10, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

excuse me but you seem not to understand well what is NPOV and you confuse with a controversial usage of words. I will revoke all your changes.

• Oppose and speedy close per Arorae and htonl. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Don't forget to share a Thanks ♥) 22:13, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose: I feel that the propose rename does not improve anything except to make things a lot more complicated than it should. It is important to know that we have dedicated articles that give more information about the LGBT situation for many countries and territories. I know the use of morality laws against the LGBT community is a bit of a grey area in terms of how we interpret it, but the impact of such uses are assessed on a country by country basis. And no, Wikipedia does not have an absolute limit for the number of articles and pages as long as the topics are notable and similar: usual fundraising text, etc. --Minoa (talk) 17:27, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose and close LGBT rights is a descriptive term. Consensus will not develop. -TenorTwelve (talk) 05:14, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

disorganization of the article.

claiming to want to improve this article and its neutrality, @Lazy-restless: modifies according to his own view, this article and many other articles that speak of homosexuality. on all these articles its additions or withdrawals, with no discussion and often edit wars, are strongly contested by the majority. it is time for him to understand that his militant approach is under the eyes of all.--Arorae (talk) 08:46, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

How dare you to use the word "militant" on me? - Lazy-restless (talk) 15:45, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

• If this is about the civil conflict template, I would oppose its use here, because it's irrelevant. This page discusses the current state of legal LGBT rights around the world, not the LGBT social movements.-- Vakrieger♀ 💢❤️🗯️ 09:40, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

• @Arorae and Lazy-restless: Could you two please specify what sort of dispute you are having? Thanks-- Vakrieger♀ 💢❤️🗯️ 09:46, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

I was telling about removing the template which seems irrelevant like an advertisement and adding references to Ancient israel sodom gomorrah part and changing the heading as using the word law instead of right in accurate place, please check recent page history. I also proposed to change the article name as LGBT-related laws by country and territory but most of the commentators above opposed it. Lazy-restless 21:08, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

How should we treat China on the world map?

There is a discussion on Commons, on the talk page of File:World laws pertaining to homosexual relationships and expression.svg, as to whether China should be colored tan like Russia etc. This is primarily re. the latest TV/cinema censorship rules, which (if upheld) single out homosexuality for the first time, mentioned alongside sexual perversion. On the other hand, the govt states that LGBT people need to be respected. There's also periodic purging of LGBT material online, which if quickly reverted in the face of protest is also a recurring problem. Is this egregious enough for us to put China in the same category / color them on the map the same as those other countries? If so, are there additional countries that should be treated this way? — kwami (talk) 20:01, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Death penalty for homosexuality which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 22:17, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Death penalty for homosexuality which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 01:17, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Death penalty for homosexuality which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 01:17, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Death penalty for homosexuality which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 17:47, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Death penalty for homosexuality which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 01:33, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Brazil Supreme Court homophobia criminality

Should this Supreme Court of Brazil ruling on homophobia be added to the article? comrade waddie96 ★ (talk) 15:35, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

This is valid now, right? Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 22:10, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Death penalty

It is misleading to present Iran as the only country that enforces death penalty. We all know that at least Mauritania, Sudan, North Nigeria, Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan enforce the death penalty for homosexuality. We should not present a situation that is less strict than what it is. Taxydromeio (talk) 06:51, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

In Regards to the Map at the Top Right

The map in the top right is a little bit of a mess. It attempts to put the legality of homosexuality, the recognition of same-sex relationships, and propaganda/morality laws all on the same map. Information is missing, and it has to otherwise the map would look like a complete pigsty.

I'm wondering if we should create 3 separate maps for the aforementioned categories. It'd look neater, and you could include more information about each respective category if they all had their own maps. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:56A:F90A:6200:3DE7:59E8:F735:6A36 (talk) 02:53, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

LGBT-related laws by territory (Central Africa) - Gabon

The Gabonese parliament has voted to reverse the 2019 law, and homosexuality has now been decriminalised . Culloty82 (talk) 12:37, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Bias: the missing of prostitution

I plead that the missing of LGBT prostitution as part of LGBT rights is a defect insofar it can be viewed as the expression of a certain kind of postmodern (and premodern!) morality and thus as a bias. Regardless of the personal ethics of a Wikipedia author or Wikipedia reader, the possibility of acting out a certain kind of freedom (in this case LGBT prostitution either way) is a right in the very sense of this article (i.e. the right to non-intervention), whereas the lack of this possibility is a restriction on rights. 91.114.204.244 (talk) 10:13, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

death penalty

Our coverage in this matter is inconsistent. For example, Pakistan and Bangladesh have exactly the same law, but only Pakistan is said to execute gay people. (The law is actually for adultery, but is not enforced except extra-judicially, and then not for gay couples.) Iran is the only country that seems to execute people for being gay (not counting Al-Shabab or ISIS, police-custody murders in Chechnya or unconfirmed claims from Saudi), though Somalia may be a second with the law in Jubaland. But I've never seen any RS that executions are actually carried out in Jubaland, just that the law's on the books (as it is in several other countries). Anyone have a RS for Jubaland? — kwami (talk) 01:01, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Also, dispute over whether the death penalty in the UAE is for rape. Lots of circular refs in the table, but no obvious RS's. Anyone know? — kwami (talk) 04:57, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

trans man Shikhandi

Under Ancient India, where it says "hermaphrodite Shikhandi", it may be more accurate to refer to Shikandi as a trans man. hermaphrodite is an outdated/deprecated term. And Arjuna being a eunuch is not clear either, he is said to have been cursed to lose his virility and present as a person of India's traditional third-gender — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.123.163.52 (talk) 13:31, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Ancient Israel and Sodom

The story of Sodom in the Old Testament does not refer to homosexuality. The sins that city inhabitants engage with have to do with social injustice and in the case of the guests - their rape (not their homosexuality). The transition in the interpretation of the story from an allegory about social justice to one about homosexuality and the beginning in the use of the word "sodomize" in reference to anal intercourse occurs much later, in an early Christian context, around first centuries AD. I'd suggest therefore to request the removal of the reference to that story from the wikipedia article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suscipedepre (talk • contribs) 14:09, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Ancient Israel

I have previously brought this issue up here - according to the Old Testament, the reason for the destruction of Soddom and Gomorrah was NOT the homosexual acts that are described. Also, the homosexual acts that are described are non-consensual, which emphasize on the moral of the story regarding social justice.

Furthermore, even the source that the article provides (https://books.google.com/books?id=qJMA_zTueTMC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Sodom+gomorrah#v=onepage&q=Sodom%20gomorrah&f=false) mentions that the interpretation of the story was originally regarding social justice and that only in early Christianity (so no longer "Ancient Israel") the meaning of the story changed, and Soddom came to refer to homosexuality.

Please take out the reference to homosexuality as the reason for the destruction of Soddom - This is uninformed, and distorts what is written in the text. You can move it to the "Christianity" section if you wish to discuss the use of the word "Sodomize", since the word came to refer to Anal intercourse ONLY AFTER ancient Israel, in early Christian times under the Roman Empire (so first centuries AD). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suscipedepre (talk • contribs) 22:32, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

India

Maybe we should colour India in light blue according to the court ruling that recognised limited cohabitation rights to unmarried same-sex or opposite-sex couples. Taxydromeio (talk) 13:23, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

homosexuality illegal in the CAR?

Hey so the page directly related to LGBT rights in the Central African Republic says that homosexuality remains entirely illegal. Why do the maps not reflect this on this page and on the page about LGBT rights in Africa? I'm confused as to the correct information here... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.93.222.100 (talk) 18:17, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

I think the page is confusing. There’s a report by the US that says the law criminalises “public display of affection” by same sex couples and the penalty is increased when one of the parties is a child. So that doesn’t have to do with consensual homosexuality itself but with public display of affection or sex with a child. So I guess the maps are right, just the article on LGBT rights in CAR is incorrect regarding legality. Taxydromeio (talk) 09:47, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 October 2020

I am requesting to edit. I am doing an edit as an assignment for my college class. Thank you. Haleyriopelle (talk) 18:33, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone will add them for you, or if you have an account, you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:18, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi there, I had to revert your edit unfortunately and have explained why on your talk page. Your assignment is a bit tricky because you should only edit a page because it needs to be changed. Having external pressures on editing may mean students inadvertently make unnecessary edits.

AussieWikiDan ^(talk) 16:40, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 December 2020

Same-sex marriage isn't legal in Israel. 134.191.233.205 (talk) 11:16, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Jack Frost (talk) 11:45, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Same-sex marriage is not recognized in Armenia

The map is outdated and misleading.

According to the Family Code of Armenia, marriages performed in other countries are recognized by the state, however, if the norms of a foreign state contradict the Constitution of Armenia, then the legislation of Armenia is applied. As a result, recognition of foreign same-sex marriages appears to be impossible.[1]

On 3 July 2017, «PanARMENIAN.Net» news agency published an article stating that according to anonymous source in the Ministry of Justice, same-sex marriages performed abroad are valid in Armenia. This news was reported by some media outlets but still has not been confirmed.

On 26 August 2019, the Minister of Justice, Rustam Badasyan clearly stated that Armenia does not recognize same-sex marriage.

As of 2021, no such recognition has yet been documented. It is not known if recognition would give such couples all the rights of marriage under domestic law, also in light of the existing constitutional ban. There had not been a single case in four years! NO SINGLE CASE IN FOUR YEARS. So the map does not reflect the reality.

Let's wait until the first same-sex marriage will be actually recognized and reported by the media.

I would've edited the map myself, but I don't know how to do this. Please update the map. JDQUD1 (talk) 17:44, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Bolivia and Tlaxcala

Can someone edit the map as Bolivia now allows same-sex unions and the Mexican state of Tlaxcala has legalised same-sex marriage? Taxydromeio (talk) 18:10, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Global LGBT rights maps - LGBT service in national militares by country or territories - Brazil, transgenders!

The color of Brazil on the map is incorrect, since there is and has never been any legal impediment for transgender people to serve in the Brazilian Armed Forces, quite the contrary, since 2019 it is a crime "To prevent or impede someone's access to service in any branch of the Forces Armed ", due to their sexual orientation or gender identity, in accordance with a decision of the Supreme Court of Brazil. That is why I am asking you to change the color of Brazil on the map in accordance with the caption "All LGBT people can serve".

Laura Trump (talk) 20:20, 18 January 2021 (UTC) Laura Trump

Global LGBT rights maps - Constitutional discrimination laws by sexual orientation and/or gender identity by country or territory - State of Piauí (Brazil) - sexual orientation covered

In 2013, the Constitution of the State of Piauí, Brazil, was amended in its Article 3, item III, to include the provision that no one should be discriminated against because of their sexual orientation in the State of Piauí. I therefore ask that the color of the state of Piauí on that map be changed in accordance with the caption "Sexual orientation covered".

Laura Trump (talk) 20:31, 18 January 2021 (UTC) Laura Trump

Same-sex marriages performed abroad isn't recognised in Armenia

The map is outdated and misleading.

How many same-sex marriages were recognised in Armenia since July 2017? The answer is - zero. For example, in 2018, more than 400 same-sex couples registered their foreign weddings in Israel.

According to the Family Code of Armenia, marriages performed in other countries are recognized by the state, however, if the norms of a foreign state contradict the Constitution of Armenia, then the legislation of Armenia is applied. As a result, recognition of foreign same-sex marriages appears to be impossible.

On 3 July 2017, «PanARMENIAN.Net» news agency published an article stating that according to unnamed source in the Ministry of Justice, same-sex marriages performed abroad are valid in Armenia. This news was reported by some media outlets but still has not been confirmed.

On 26 August 2019, the Minister of Justice, Rustam Badasyan clearly stated that Armenia does not recognize same-sex marriage.

As of 2021, no such recognition has yet been documented. It is not known if recognition would give such couples all the rights of marriage under domestic law, also in light of the existing constitutional ban. There had not been a single case in four years! NO SINGLE CASE IN FOUR YEARS. So the map does not reflect the reality.

Let's wait until the first same-sex marriage will be actually recognized and reported by the media.

Please update the map. JDQUD1 (talk) 03:08, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Timeline of decriminalisation

Angola should be moved to 2021. The 2019 law never entered into force until it was finally approved in November 2020, entering into force on 9 February 2021 (see LGBT rights in Angola). Similarly, as of today Bhutan's law is not effective yet. At best it should be moved to 2021, at our strictest we should wait to include Bhutan in the list until the bill becomes law. I have no authorization to edit the timeline myself, so can someone please fix it? thanks Finedelledanze (talk) 11:38, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Sufism, Ancient Persia, Ancient India

The article is quite biased and i think the semi-protection status makes this worse. I suggest to do not add information without sources to the article, and to not make generalisations, this is making it to be very imprecise one.

In ancient persia the zoroastrian religion was not pro-gay, in fact there are clear admonitions against homosexuality found in various texts of zoroastrian literature. You can see more about this in the wiki article about homosexuality and zoroastrianism. regarding hinduism, the article shold make clear that there are many variations of hinduism, most are anti-gay, some are pro-gay. The kama-sutra actually speaks negatively of homosexuality.

And finally, regarding sufism, the claim that sufism has a gay doctrine is absurd. There were a small number of sufis who did this practice but the vast majority rejected it as sinful.

EDIT: ^None of these claims are substantiated with evidence, other than a vague citation to another Wikipedia page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jayjay5531 (talk • contribs) 03:55, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Presupposing the existence of essentialistic categories of sexual orientation

For example, the following statement is careless: "Roman law addressed the rape of a male citizen as early as the 2nd century BC, when a ruling was issued in a case that may have involved a man of same-sex orientation." This latter part of this statement is not evidence-based, because (1) it states a speculation without providing evidence not providing a reason for doing so, and (2) it presupposes that "a man of same-sex orientation" in ancient Rome is a definable subject. Since many cultures in many time periods did not define binary categories of sexual orientation (e.g. "same-sex orientation" versus "opposite-sex orientation"), it is incorrect to imply, without justification, that this categorical view can be rightly applied to analyzing subjects of a past culture. If writers want to categorize historical figures in this way, they must first provide evidence that this classification system existed within the context of the culture/time period they're discussing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jayjay5531 (talk • contribs) 04:03, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Extraneous wording removed: [9] Crossroads ^-talk- 04:48, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 April 2021

Change: Ayoni or non-vaginal sex of all types are punishable in the Arthashastra. Homosexual acts are, however, treated as a smaller offence punishable by a fine, while unlawful heterosexual sex carries much harsher punishment. The Dharmsastras, especially the later ones, prescribe against non-vaginal sex like the Vashistha Dharmasutra. The Yājñavalkya Smṛti prescribes fines for such acts including those with other men. Manusmriti prescribes light punishments for such acts.[5][6] Vanita states that the verses about punishment for a sex between female and a maiden is due to its strong emphasis on a maiden's sexual purity.[7]

To: Throughout Hindu and Vedic texts there are many descriptions of saints, demigods, and even the Supreme Lord transcending gender norms and manifesting multiple combinations of sex and gender.[8] There are several instances in ancient Indian epic poetry of same sex depictions and unions by gods and goddesses. There are several stories of depicting love between same sexes especially among kings and queens. Kamasutra, the ancient Indian treatise on love talks about feelings for same sexes. Transsexuals are also venerated e.g. Lord Vishnu as Mohini and Lord Shiva as Ardhanarishwara (which means half woman).[9] References: https://www.galva108.org/deities.html Note: The article is unfairly edited by somebody. I am just requesting to add the previous article which was changed to the current one. The current article only depict the negative aspects in some of the ancient texts which are in no way the representative of the real past. Kamasutra has gay sex positions in it. Ancient India was much more liberal. Somebody has deleted the original text/article present in this section which I have copied and pasted here, since it was available in the history section. Liamparker2020 (talk) 11:00, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

That link is dead and based on the URL, does not seem likely to be a WP:Reliable source anyway. "Ancient India" describes a large area and time period, so there may have been many different views at different times and places. Crossroads ^-talk- 04:16, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Turkey is twice in list

please check this :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.61.105.244 (talk) 00:27, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

There is a typo in reference 6

Reference 15 is "Tritiya-Prakriti: People of the Third Sex" and there is a link but reference 6 is ritiya-Prakriti: People of the Third Sex, p. 40 without 'T' — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dwaynex18 (talk • contribs) 12:33, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Chechnya - Misleading information

To say "homosexuals are abducted and sent to concentration camps based on their perceived sexual orientation" is incredibly misleading. No physical evidence of these camps was found. I'm not saying that these things aren't happening, but aren't we innocent until proven guilty? Even the article about these camps starts by saying "it has been reported". People can report anything, but it doesn't mean that it happened. The fact that the original story came from Novaya Gazeta makes me want to question things more. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brennando1986 (talk • contribs) 06:07, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

The linked article, Gay concentration camps in Chechnya, currently has 104 references. Sources include the BBC, the Guardian, Human Rights Watch, CNN, The Christian Science Monitor, all very well respected sources that definitely meet Wikipedia's standards. So what, exactly, are you objecting to? That so many reliable third-party sources around the planet are saying things you would rather they didn't say? TechBear | Talk | Contributions 06:20, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Does WP need to include a new column for rights?

It has been a year since Trudeau offered an apology to the LGBTQ2S community in the House of Commons and reparations seeming from a class action lawsuit resulting in a 110 million Canadian dollar agreement where announced. Should reparations be added ahead of this emerging topic becoming more common or so we need to wait for a few more countries to step up and admit systematic oppression detrimental to LGBT individuals. In 2015 the UN's Free & Equal campaign cited the World Banks 2014 estimate of 5%GDP lost through LGBT exclusion. The World Court does not have the authority to issue more than an advisory judgement regarding the Human Rights involved here so it is left to each country to address this. What do the tea leaves of the coffee house suggest? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrphilip (talk • contribs) 21:23, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Ireland military service section incorrect.

There is no ban on any LGBT group from serving in the Irish Defence Forces. This page is simply incorrect. Please amend.

https://www.thejournal.ie/transgender-defence-forces-leo-varadkar-3519905-Jul2017/

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/modern-family/defence-forces-to-let-gay-staff-wed-on-military-bases-34735903.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.228.243.196 (talk) 14:15, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

iraq?

according to this table same-sex sexual activity is both legal and illegal in iraq. the table indicated that it was legal until a recent anonymous edit changed it without providing references, citing paragraph 401 of the penal code. the paragraph, cited in LGBT rights in Iraq, states "Any person who commits an immodest act in public is punishable by a period of detention not exceeding 6 months plus a fine not exceeding 50 dinars or by one of those penalties". so it doesn't appear to be illegal, though it is of course possible that people are being persecuted using this paragraph, but no source has been provided. some clarification would be in order.--Exjerusalemite (talk) 21:39, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

doesn't look like there's any opposition so i'll go ahead and change the table to reflect the sources--Exjerusalemite (talk) 22:27, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Note re archiving

A meta point, since there's been a lot of back and forth reverting wrt the archiving of this thread: until recently, the archiving bot was configured to archive threads on this talk page older than 7 days, which is why this was getting archived. IMO that was way too aggressive (as evidenced by this particular discussion getting dumped before the issue raised was actually resolved). I updated the config to archive after 90 days, so we should hopefully not have any more issues. (There might be some other threads that were archived before being resolved and which should be revived, but I haven't checked.) Colin M (talk) 20:56, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Why is the "iraq?" thread still in Talk:LGBT rights by country or territory/Archive 3? It should be there or here, but not both. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:03, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

I guess the IP editor that restored the thread to this talk page didn't remove it from the archive. I just did so. Colin M (talk) 23:52, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Dead link

Link in reference 405 is now dead. SRG372 (talk) 10:33, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

das gf 86.32.38.215 (talk) 13:40, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Turkey is not Europe

Should be moved to Asia

Bullshit. Turkey controls East Thrace. Dimadick (talk) 06:38, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Note 497 dead link

Note 497 from "ilga-europe" is a dead link, please add the archived link from Internet Archive --62.98.118.102 (talk) 10:11, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Bhutan's status

BBC says being gay is illegal in Bhutan. The article was written on 12 May 2021. --Egon20 (talk) 18:42, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 5 November 2021

The map is incorrect. Israel recognizes weddings performed abroad. 217.128.138.154 (talk) 20:09, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:13, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Will return to the Old File

Heyy , We will return it to the Old file for Now Okayy . Because it has all the resources , histories and Linked to the Other Wikipideas in the Other Languages . Bayu Fuller (talk) 14:16, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

No Sources for North Korea

North Korea has no sources associated with it in its corresponding table. This is a big, big problem, and I have removed the claims as such. If anyone has reliable sources on the subject, please furnish them in the template so that they can be verified and feel free to accompany them with relevant changes. Tyrone Madera (talk) 22:58, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Chile same-sex marriage update

Hi,

On December 07 2021, Chile's Congress approved same-sex marriages. The map on this article needs to be updated to reflect that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.28.172.203 (talk) 10:41, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

No recognition of civil Unions in Poland

The map and chart refer to partial recognition of civil unions in Poland. That is incorrect and no sources are cited to back up the position in the article. There is no recognition of same sex civil unions whatsoever in Poland. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.76.8.70 (talk) 18:04, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Trans people can serve on brazilian military

In Brazil, all men, cis or trans, has to enlist and trans women also have to enlist if they don’t make the legal transition before the age of 18. Any trans person can enlist if they want to. (If a trans man do the legal transition after the age of 45, he doesn’t have to enlist). That’s why the Brazil part on “LGBT services in national militaries by country or territory” should be edited. Nora Romari (talk) 10:07, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

North Korea - Illegal; Penalty: Death penalty?

This list claims that in the DPRK homosexuality is illegal and punished with death penalty. No source is provided for the claim, and it is inconsistent with the map attached and the country's LGBT rights article. While the country LGBT rights article is also very poorly sourced, it at least provides some backing for at least a few of it's claims, including legality of same sex relations. Nowhere does it mention a death penalty.

The list should be changed to either show legal same sex relationships (no documented laws against homosexuality) or an unknown status, certainly the unsourced claim of executions for homosexuality should be removed. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence... or any evidence at all at the very least.

I added {{citation needed}} to that entry. Thanks for pointing that out. EvergreenFir (talk) 16:17, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

I will remove the claim, as it is unsubstantiated. Tyrone Madera (talk) 18:32, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

North Koreans don't even know what homosexuality is, so they don't have laws about this topic. Egon20 (talk) 18:54, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

References

Dubious at best. The first claim is supposedly backed by an article that does not exist. The KCNA link leads to nowhere, same as the supposed "mirror". The claim that Koreans are "not aware of homosexuality" is contradicted by the very article linked to support it: Hazel Smith, a North Korea watcher at the Wilson Institute, said that homosexuality as it is conceived of in the West simply does not exist conceptually in the North.

“The way people think isn’t in that way,” she said. “Being gay is simply not recognized.” But surprisingly, gay relationships do exist and are common – close same-sex relationships between young unmarried people in their 20s are normal." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.37.170.91 (talk) 04:54, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 August 2020 and 17 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Haleyriopelle. Peer reviewers: Rockbison.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 01:59, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Update map please

This file needs updating. The correct years for legalisation of homosexuality in Australia (for men and women) are; South Australia (1975), the Australian Capital Territory (1976), Victoria (1980), the Northern Territory (1983), New South Wales (1984), Western Australia (1989), Queensland (1991) and Tasmania (1997).

Most of Australia should be coloured in yellow, not orange, because as it says on the article LGBT rights in Australia, the only states to have legalised homosexuality after 1989 were Queensland (in 1991) and Tasmania (in 1997). Could please someone update the file on Wikimedia Commons? Thanks. 2001:8003:3C42:2300:D159:2EB:1718:DED7 (talk) 10:43, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

The image isn't hosted here, but at Commons - it's c:File:Decriminalization of homosexuality by country or territory (remastered).svg. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:19, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Legal gender change in Russia

In Russia gender can be Legal changed without surgery or hormone therapy Trans people only need a confirmation from the medical commission https://www.transcoalition.net/spravka/ Can someone change that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.89.127.121 (talk) 19:51, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Map Outdated

The map for "Laws concerning gender identity-expression by country or territory" is dated 2015 and is now inaccurate for 2022. Ddvillarreal (talk) 00:43, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 June 2022

Footnote 249 has an outdated URL: http://jus2.uol.com.br/doutrina/texto.asp?id=8206 The correct URL is the following: https://jus.com.br/artigos/8206/a-pratica-da-pederastia-e-crime-militar PaulogustavoPI (talk) 18:32, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

 Done — Coolperson177 (t|c) 21:25, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Ancient Israel

Actually, what was happening was intercourse and rape of young boys, not other men. It also doesn't specifically talk about homosexuality, and if you read the old scripture, rather than the modern interpretation, it can be read that this is speaking of adultery, not homosexuality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.166.58.222 (talk) 14:39, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Templates falling apart

After consulting with Kanguole at Template talk:Reflist#Faulty in some articles?, it turns out that the post-expand include size has exceeded 2,097,152 bytes. As a result, the templates, especially the all-important {{reflist}} section, are no longer working properly.

How are we going to bring the post-expand include size back below 2,097,152 bytes, without sacrificing key information here? --Minoa (talk) 08:19, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Remove redundant references, like four or more of the six references under Ireland in the cell containing "Legal since 2017". – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:39, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

When is "proposed" notable?

A follow-up to the ongoing PEIS issue: I have noticed that a number of countries have "proposed" in some areas, but it appears some of them (especially Turkey) are stale because:

• There are no references
• Progress on the reform is unlikely due to the current policies of the government (Erdoğan isn't really pro-LGBT).

I wish to ask what should the criteria be for a proposed change to be counted in the tables. --Minoa (talk) 18:31, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Hungary

The statements about constitutional ban on child adoption by homosexual couples, on gender reassignment and on same-sex marriage are lies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4C4C:13A2:D700:0:0:0:1001 (talk) 14:53, 15 August 2022 (UTC)