Archivo para 29/06/08

Autoridades anacrónicas

Parece que para algunas personas el tiempo no ha pasado, la homofobía de ciertas autoridades ediles de Miraflores como del Cercado de Lima son muy parecidas a las reacciones de las autoridades en 1959, hace 49 años atrás!!! en lo que fue  a llamarse el Escandalo de la Laguna (Visto en Zona de Noticias).

Felizmente la mayoria de los peruanos es hoy más tolerante y el movimiento gay esta mejor organizado para defender sus derechos. No importa las creencias religiosas o ideas personales al respecto, ellos son ciudadanos que merecen todo el respeto de las autoridades y la sociedad en general.

Se propaga así una cultura de la denuncia y de la sospecha, de la befa y de la vergüenza, pasmando cualquier reacción potencial por los derechos legales y humanos de aquellos a los que esa misma prensa luego denominaría “los vulnerables”. El propio organizador del baile parece haber hecho referencia a “fiestas prohibidas” que en Rio de Janeiro se realizaban sin problemas y con cobertura amable de los medios, […] fueron los travestidos quienes mojaron sus preciadas indumentarias, al intentar retirarse de la fiesta sin ser identificados y maltratados por la muchedumbre que el alcalde azuzaba en los exteriores del restaurante).

[…]

Hay en todo esto un elemento de melodrama que pareciera risible.  Las consecuencias, sin embargo, no lo fueron. El propio comisario de Barranco resultó destituido y detenido en un cuartel por su aparente tolerancia y negligencia, cuando no complicidad (el organizador del encuentro era su cuñado). Una decena de quienes se habrían travestido para la fiesta terminaron en prisión y sometidos a “exámenes médicos” para demostrar su condición de “homosexuales pasivos” (al menos dos intentaron suicidarse). También se arrestó a un modisto que no participó de la reunión pero es incluido en la causa por confeccionar vestidos femeninos para algunos de los invitados.

En Micromuseo: Alteridades

Equidad en UK

Si los patrones de discriminación y marginación son tan fuertes no se puede esperar que ellos mismos se arreglen con el paso del tiempo, se tienen que tomar medidas de discriminación positiva, un ejemplo es las acciones que se estan tomando en UK (En la BBC). Cuando se emprenderán medidas similares en el Perú.

Equality minister Harriet Harman has set out plans to allow firms to discriminate in favour of female and ethnic minority job candidates.

(…)”A society which is equal and fair is one which is more at ease with itself,” she added.

(…) Allowing “positive action” would help organisations such as the police better reflect the communities they serve by recruiting more female and ethnic minority officers, said Ms Harman.

But if, for example, a headmistress wanted to discriminate in favour of a male teacher to balance an all female team that would be allowed too.

(…)Asked how she could justify discrimination in the name of equality, she said she wanted tackle “patterns of discrimination” in the workforce and ensure firms were “not just ‘entrenched in the old boy network'”.

(…)It also aims to close the gender pay gap by forcing firms to publish pay rates. Female part-time workers still earned 40% less per hour than their full-time male counterparts, Ms Harman told Today BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

“Do we think she is 40% less intelligent, less committed, less hard-working, less qualified? It’s not the case. It’s entrenched discrimination. It’s allowed to persist because it’s all swept under the carpet.”

Bayli: “blanquito amurallado”

Increible como Sabina le dice sus verdades a Bayli, y como el pobre no sabe como cambiar de tema.

Familia y sociedad

Interesante artículo de Nancy D. Polikoff It’s not a gay thing…or is it? en Utne.

I propose family law reform that would recognize all families’ worth. Marriage as a family form is not more important or more valuable than other forms of family, so the law should not give it more value. Couples should have the choice to marry based on the spiritual, cultural, or religious meaning of marriage in their lives; they should never have to marry to reap specific and unique legal benefits. I support the right to marry for same-sex couples as a matter of civil rights law. But I oppose discrimination against couples who do not marry, and I advocate solutions to the needs all families have for economic well-being, legal recognition, emotional peace of mind, and community respect.

[…] I call this approach valuing all families. The most important element in implementing this approach is identifying the purpose of a law that now grants marriage unique legal consequences. By understanding a law’s purpose, we can identify the relationships that would further that purpose without creating a special status for married couples.

[…]The gay rights movement [in the 60’s & 70’s] was part of broader social movements challenging the political, economic, and social status quo and seeking to transform society into one in which sex, race, class, sexual orientation, and marital status no longer determined one’s place in the nation’s hierarchy. Marriage was losing its ironclad grip on the organization of family life, and lesbians and gay men benefited overwhelmingly from the prospect of a more pluralistic vision of relationships.

[…] A backlash resulted in restrictions on women’s reproductive freedom, gay rights laws were repealed, and welfare mothers were sold out. Conservatives employed the rhetoric of “traditional family values” to fight any proposal advancing recognition and acceptance of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people, and used antigay propaganda to raise money and garner votes for a wide-ranging conservative agenda.

[…] Both these movements focus on marriage. Neither starts by identifying what all families need and then seeking just laws and policies to meet those needs. The marriage movement’s leading spokespeople argue that the intrinsic purpose of marriage is uniting a man and a woman to raise their biological children. They oppose marriage for same-sex couples and want marriage to have a special legal status.

The marriage-equality movement wants the benefits of marriage granted to a larger group: same-sex partners. With few exceptions, advocates for gay and lesbian access to marriage do not say that “special rights” should be reserved for those who marry. But the marriage-equality movement is a movement for gay civil rights, not for valuing all families. As a civil rights movement, it seeks access to marriage as it now exists.

[…] Today more people live alone, more people live with unmarried partners, and more parents have minor children who live neither with them nor with their current spouse. The laws that affect families need to be evaluated in light of contemporary realities. A valuing-all-families approach does this by demanding a good fit between a law’s purpose and the relationships that are subject to its reach.


NO A YANACOCHA!

UN DIA COMO HOY

EL COMERCIO MIENTE

El Comercio2

No a la Impunidad!!

banermajaz

junio 2008
L M X J V S D
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30  
Buzzear (PE)
Global Voices en Español - El mundo te habla … escúchalo

El Frio Mata

logo_por_los_ninos