First non-binary person granted UK refugee status.

[Defaultname]

"The judgment, in the upper tribunal, was decided in the case of Arthur Britney Joestar from El Salvador after concluding that they would face persecution for their identity if they returned to their home country.

In El Salvador, transgender women have a life expectancy of 35 years due to violence. Across the Latin America and Caribbean region, the figure ranges from 30 to 35 years, compared to average life expectancies ranging from 65 to 81."

"At the appeal hearing, Judge Bruce criticised the previous decision that the Salvadorian police attack was not persecution.

“It was a physical assault, by the police, motivated by nothing other than homophobia,” she said. “Five minutes is a long time to be beaten. I do not doubt that it was for the appellant a terrifying experience." www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/30/i-felt-like-i-was-born-again-first-non-binary-person-granted-uk-refugee-status

Do stonewall etc do anything about gay rights overseas? Loads of countries have awful laws/ very non accepting societies. Do they do anything around that? I would expect them to.

Isn't Stonewall a UK group?
If so not sure what they'd be able to do or achieve in different countries when it comes to their laws.

Please don’t encourage Stonewall to go international. There are great and actually brave LGBT organisations in other countries, and they are not going to be helped by Stonewall going in, grabbing all the money, and doing divisive campaigning that makes life worse for many people they are supposed to help (as they have done here).

@vivariumvivariumsvivaria

Arabella that trans woman was granted residency in NZ - they had family ties, they had established social links, they had desired work skills and a job, and they paid tax.

So, it was really just a standard residency application - their gender status wasn't one of the important points the government require.

Yes, it wasn’t an asylum application as has been claimed. No country is going to grant asylum FROM the UK on the basis of transphobia. The suggestion that trans people are at risk here just because some women object to how the law is framed is preposterous and would never be entertained. People who spout this crap are incredibly privileged and have no idea of the real persecution some minorities face in some countries. Being offended by a newspaper article by Julie Bindel is not persecution.

Lysistrata thanks. Food for thought.

The story about the transwoman fleeing the UK as an asylum seeker was out and out lies, in that case. I think it was the Independent reported it, I should have known better.

Good.

This person is in danger of true transphobia, not the thought crimes that are peddled in the West.

@Sheleg

Good.

This person is in danger of true transphobia, not the thought crimes that are peddled in the West.

But, while it seems very confused, wasn't it granted because the person said they weren't part of the binary that the majority belong to? The criteria for allowing refuge in the UK seems to be very broad if it were to include men who prioritised personal grooming (as a feminine characteristic).Almost self-identifying.

@Sheleg

Good.

This person is in danger of true transphobia, not the thought crimes that are peddled in the West.

But they were persecuted for being a feminine presenting gay man. This is homophobia. Their request for asylum was refused.

Their lawyer suggested that their newly declared non binary 'gender identity' constituted new evidence and appealed on those grounds.

The abuse was real, but what I'm reading from this is that homophobic abuse isn't enough to get asylum, but transphobic abuse for being non binary is.

While it's clear that this person suffered serious abuse in their home country, they appear to have internalised a lot of the repressive and regressive attitudes that they were surrounded by there. Long hair and painted nails as 'proof' that they aren't actually a man but are 'non binary' is sexism on steroids. It's also pretty homophobic to suggest that a man who likes such things and is also gay isn't actually a man at all.

A few years back, I saw a photo of a state-run prison cell in South America. It was a large cage, housing dozens of men. The caption noted
that the little plastic bags tied to the bars contained feces, which the prisoners were allowed to dispose of whenever they were allowed out for exercise.
Life must be grim for those people. I want Amnesty or whoever, to help them, even those who are murderers (this isn't to suggest that the person in the article is a criminal; there's no suggestion of that).

Despite that, I don't want 'woman', or 'man' to be defined by dress codes.

ArabellaScott as per Reality's post.

It was all immigration law translated into bat shit by people with an agenda for social media.

Can you imagine the political fall out of a UK citizen fleeing from their home because of persecution of that nature? Never mind that they chose to flee, erm, to a Commonwealth country...it's a total nonsense.

He got kicked in by the police because they thought he wasn't 'man' enough.

Whether that's because they saw him as gay, trans, or just different, it's not trivial.

I really want orgs who talk the talk to be picking this stuff up. Everyone keeps saying gay marriage is done here and the laws so these orgs eg stonewall are looking where the money comes from next. They seem to be currently focusing on trans and then inroading into stuff that has nothing to do with them eg race, disability.

No. They should be working with orgs overseas on this stuff. Lobbying our govt to make noise. Fundraising here where they have lots of support and channeling the cash to grass roots orgs overseas.

Their own blurb says they have a remit including overseas.

So why the fuck aren't they doing it? It's engaging. Too tricky? Not fashionable enough? I mean FFS. Gay rights was always about fighting, about protest. So come on stonewall what's your excuse.

As someone else pointed out in another thread, looks like the guardian has removed the asspulled unverified 35 year life expectancy statistic (see last paragraph). Good on them.

Terrible to hear what a horrific time this person has had. I'm so delighted they have found asylum here, and wish them all the very best.

@FWRLurker

As someone else pointed out in another thread, looks like the guardian has removed the asspulled unverified 35 year life expectancy statistic (see last paragraph). Good on them.

The phrase they use is "This article was amended on 31 December 2020 to remove an insufficiently confirmed statistic relating to life expectancy of transgender women in Latin America and the Caribbean.". "Insufficiently confirmed" is something I don't recall them using anywhere else in the paper when they've fact-corrected articles. Anyone know how it differs from 'unconfirmed'?.

Does the judge's ruling establish for the first time in English law that it's possible to be 'non-binary' and to establish that it can be the basis, along with the rejected claim of homophobic abuse, as cause for the granting of refugee status?