Saturday 27 August 2011

Times: NGOs welcome amendment to law on same-sex couples

http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20110825/local/NGOs-welcome-amendment-to-law-on-same-sex-couples.381709
Thursday, August 25, 2011

The Malta Gay Rights Movement and human rights NGO Aditus have welcomed the government's amendment to a law which discriminated against gay couples but say there is still a long way to go.

The European Commission had initiated infringement proceedings against Malta for discriminating against same-sex couples when it did not allow for freedom of movement of recognised same-sex couples, one of who would not be an EU national.

The NGOs said that with this amendment, EU nationals in a relationship with a third country national of the same sex, wishing to move to and reside in Malta, should now have their entry facilitated.

"Being married or in a registered partnership should automatically qualify as a durable relationship duly attested for the purposes of the directive. Where no such formalisation of the relationship exists, other proof might be requested by the local authorities," the organisations said in a statement.

But even though a step forward, this was not enough, they said: It also creates an anomalous situation whereby relationships of Maltese citizens with a third country national of the same sex enjoy less protection than those of other EU nationals in the same situation moving to Malta.

"In other words, a South African national in a relationship with a Belgian citizen, would be allowed to enter, reside and work in Malta whereas the same person in a relationship with a Maltese citizen would not."

MGRM coordinator Gabi Calleja said the amendment in no way did away with the need to introduce comprehensive legislation recognising same-sex couples.

"It is regrettable that a number of same-sex couples are forced to leave Malta in order to sustain their relationship each year."

Aditus chairman and human rights lawyer Neil Falzon said: "This is a clear example of how European Union membership may also imply strengthening the recognition and enforcement of fundamental human rights."

[Click on the hyperlink above to view the comments on the Times' website.]

MaltaToday: Freedom of movement: same-sex relationships recognised, but not for Maltese nationals

23.8.2011

The MGRM and Aditus said they regretted that the change only came about after infringement proceedings by the European Commission.

Freedom of Movement directive fully transposed but leaves Maltese in same-sex relationships with third country nationals enjoying less protection.


The Malta Gay Rights Movement and human rights Aditus have welcomed the full transposition of the Freedom of Movement Directive, but said the updated law now creates an anomalous situation where relationships of Maltese citizens with a third country national of the same sex enjoy less protection than those of other EU nationals in the same situation moving to Malta.


The MGRM and Aditus said they regretted that the change only came about after infringement proceedings by the European Commission.


Since April 2010, Malta and EC officials had been locked in talks on the interpretation of the free movement directive (2004/38/EC).


Specifically, Maltese legislation that was supposed to have transposed EU law only recognised partners “in a durable relationship” with EU citizens if such relationships were not in “conflict with the public policy of Malta”.


This interpretation has meant that same-sex couples moving to Malta would not enjoy the same rights they are entitled to across the EU.


But despite Malta’s absolute policy of non-recognition of same-sex marriages, registered partnerships or any form of same-sex relationship, the Freedom of Movement Directive is obligatory.


A legal notice has now been published, deleting the discriminatory clause.


The MGRM and Aditus said the situation now had created an anomalous situation where, a South African national in a relationship with a Belgian citizen would be allowed to enter, reside and work in Malta; whereas the same person in a relationship with a Maltese citizen would not.


“This amendment is welcome but it in no way replaces the necessity for the introduction of comprehensive legislation recognising same-sex couples. It is regrettable that a number of same-sex couples are forced to leave Malta in order to sustain their relationship each year,” Gabi Calleja, MGRM coordinator said.


Aditus chairperson Dr. Neil Falzon added that this was a clear example of how European Union membership strenghtened the recognition and enforcement of fundamental human rights.


[Click on the hyperlink above to view the comments on MaltaToday's website.]


Monday 22 August 2011

Independent: Bringing your whole self to work

http://www.independent.com.mt/news.asp?newsitemid=130787
Article published on 21 August 2011

Telling your colleagues that you are lesbian or gay can be embarrassing. Exposing a part of your identity to comments beyond your control, and running the risk of being excluded, is apparently not very easy, at least, this is the conclusion reached by Under-reporting of discriminatory incidents in Malta, a study carried out by the Education, Employment and the Family Ministry, in which some lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people wanted to tell their personal story. This was true of John, Rose and Claire.

John is a 32-year-old gay male and where employment is concerned, he does not hesitate to state that “the doors are closed for the gay community”. He sees no chance, no opportunity to be himself in society, with prejudices reigning supreme. When he tries to collect all his negative experiences related to his sexual orientation, he breathes deeply as he remembers being terribly bullied at school. Alone, helpless and with no support, he nevertheless managed to endure the harassment for many years, while trying to pretend that it did not affect him. Neither were things easy when he tried to find a job, since he felt very concerned about the fact that his sexual orientation might affect his working life. So he opted not to come out, shutting himself up in his own prejudices. “There is a fear that is very real”, he says.

On the other hand there is Rose, a 51-year-old transsexual who is unemployed. She explained that, when looking for employment, she felt totally alienated from any work opportunities. She said that when she was taken on as a delivery woman, she warned her employer that she had the strength of a woman, but this was not accepted by her boss, who swore at her and made her leave the company. The employer could not care less that Rose felt and behaved like a woman, even though she was born a male. Due to her gender identity and the limitations that prejudice places on her, she remains in an appalling economic situation. She is unable to find a job to manage on her own: “I ended up homeless because I couldn’t afford to pay rent. They even stopped my electricity”.

The working life of Claire, a lesbian professional, has not been a bed of roses, either. In her words, her position in the company became acceptable only after the intervention of the competent authorities. However she feels that she faces a never-ending struggle, because although society is making progress with regard to LGBT rights, the pace is far too slow for those who want a life now.

Although the current legislation related to non-discrimination in employment protects the LGBT community from being discriminated against in matters of employment, the fact is that many people like John, Rose or Claire still face enough prejudices to make them keep their sexual orientation or gender identity to themselves. In fact, in the words of Malta Gay Rights Movement coordinator Gabi Calleja: “The most commonly cited location of harassment is the workplace, with 15 per cent of all respondents reporting harassment at work”. Twenty-three per cent of those interviewed who were working at that moment reported that they concealed their sexual orientation and/or gender identity from all their colleagues. However, hiding a part of one’s identity can have negative repercussions. This is the opinion held by the British gay rights group Stonewall, which says that the effects of not coming out can also “specifically harm career prospects”. This is why one of Stonewall’s initiatives to overcome initial fears in expressing one’s identity is a leadership course for mid-career gay professionals at Ashridge Business School.

Designed for high-talent professionals in the UK, the aim of this course is to help members of the gay community improve their self-confidence regarding their orientation so that they feel comfortable being themselves in their place of work. “Exploring authenticity can help gay people become more open and honest”, says Albert Zandvoort, a management professor who is a lecturer on the Stonewall course. In short, this programme wants to prove that human resources professionals have to consider this issue in their policies if they want to bring out the best in each employee since, as Zandvoort says: “It’s not impossible to be a good leader if you are gay and haven’t come out, but it’s much harder”, because concealing one’s true self can lead to constant pressure. To avoid this, human resources managers need to understand that employees perform best when they are free to be their real selves and not being able to can influence efficiency and limit their careers.

This opinion is shared by Gabi Calleja, who calls for an investment in workplace policies that enable lesbian and gay employees to “bring their whole self to work” and allow them to participate fully in the workplace. It is an investment that costs nothing apart from the energy and commitment to eradicate ignorance.

Nuria Garcia Reche is a Spanish journalist at the Foundation for Human Resources Development

Times: Group considering legal action against Curia

http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20110819/local/group-considering-legal-action-against-curia.380907
Friday, August 19, 2011, 14:48


The Curia in Floriana.

The group Not in Our Name, founded in June to help people formally renounce their Catholic faith, is considering legal action against the Curia for impeding people wanting to formally terminate their association with the church.

It said in a statement that to formally leave the church, one had to be individually interviewed by the chancellor of the Curia.

Out of the 41 people who contacted the group to leave the church, 23 said they preferred to be in the company of others in the same situation on the date of the interview.

The group asked the chancellor to set up appointments during which it would be possible for him to see three people – one at a time but on the same day.
This had been done on January 10, 2009 when Dr Patrick Attard and another two people had gone through the same procedure.

Such an arrangement was not acceptable to the chancellor "Not In Our Name considers the Curia's behaviour unhelpful, insensitive and obstructive.

"The organisation also believes that it has exhausted all approaches which would enable it to fulfil its commitment towards people who are interested in defection, and at the same time need support in formally renouncing their faith," it said.

[Click on the hyperlink above to view the comments on the Times' website.]

---

Faith ‘defectors’ considering legal action against Curia

A group of young people who wish to renounce their faith and be disassociated from the Catholic Church have accused the Curia of not cooperating with their wishes and are threatening legal action.

Not In Our Name was formed in June to help baptised Catholics who wanted to disassociate themselves from the Church officially. The group said they contacted the Church on July 6 to ask whether it was possible to set a date when all those interested could meet the Curia Chancellor for the baptismal register to be annotated in a way that showed that the people in the group were no longer members of the Church.

The group said the Chancellor refused to receive the people as a group, insisting he would only see them individually. Each person would also have to undergo an interview. The group said that, as a compromise, it suggested that three people be received in one day but on an individual basis because 23 out of 41 people in the group said they felt more comfortable in the company of others. The group said the Chancellor told them he knew of their cause and did not want to help in the propaganda against the Church. Attempts were made to set up meetings with the Chancellor but, according to the group, he proved to be evasive and, ultimately, refused to accept the proposition.

“Not In Our Name considers the Curia’s behaviour unhelpful, insensitive and obstructive. The organisation also believes that it has exhausted all approaches that would enable it to fulfil its commitment towards people who are interested in defection and, at the same time, need support in formally renouncing their faith.”

The group said it had sought legal advice and would be considering legal means to achieve its goal.

“We believe that it is the right of all our members as responsible adults not to be impeded in any way from terminating their association with the Catholic Church, and will henceforth not recognise the need for our members to undergo the Chancellor’s interview,” the group said.


Saturday 20 August 2011

MaltaToday: Same-sex couples: AD welcomes freedom of movement legislation

http://maltatoday.com.mt/news/same-sex-couples-ad-welcomes-freedom-of-movement-legislation
FRIDAY, AUGUST 19, 2011 By MATTHEW VELLA

The Maltese government buckled under pressure from the European Commission and removed a legal clause that discriminated against EU nationals in same-sex relationships.

Alternattiva Demokratika - The Green Party welcomed the changes in legislation on freedom of movement which discriminated against EU nationals in same sex relations.


Alternattive Demokratika has welcomed the removal of a proviso in Maltese law that discriminated against EU nationals in same sex relationships, denying them the same rights to freedom of movement which they enjoyed in other EU countries.


Angele Deguara, social policy spokesperson, said rights obtained by same-sex couples in other EU countries could not be denied in Malta.


Yvonne Arqueros Ebejer, AD spokesperson for civil rights said AD was the only political party in Malta which advocates equal rights to LGBT persons. “AD urges the government to take action so that LGBT persons will have their relationships legally recognised and their rights protected.”


AD chairperson Michael Briguglio said the Maltese government had once again dragged its feet on the rights of LGBT people.


“But the pressure on the European Commission by LGBT rights movements such as ILGA-Europe and the Malta Gay Rights Movement was successful. Within the European Parliament, the European Greens are giving prominence to LGBT rights.


“As a Green Party we look forward to further progress in LGBT rights. AD is against any form of discrimination in social and family policy on the basis of one’s sexuality,” Briguglio said.


The Maltese government buckled under pressure from the European Commission and removed a legal clause that discriminated against EU nationals in same-sex relationships.


Since April 2010, Malta and EC officials had been locked in talks on the interpretation of the free movement directive (2004/38/EC). Specifically, Maltese legislation that was supposed to have transposed EU law recognised partners “in a durable relationship” with EU citizens only if such relationships were not in “conflict with the public policy of Malta”.


This interpretation meant that same-sex couples moving to Malta would not enjoy the same rights they are entitled to across the EU.


But despite Malta’s absolute policy of non-recognition of same-sex marriages, registered partnerships or any form of same-sex relationship, the Freedom of Movement Directive is obligatory.


While opening the door to equal rights for same-sex and opposite-sex partners of any EU citizen, the director of citizenship and expatriate affairs is also being empowered to undertake an “extensive examination of the personal circumstances” of such couples, and will have to justify any denial of entry to residence of unmarried partners or other couples who claim to have a “durable relationship.”


The Freedom of Movement Directive gives certain rights to family members of EU citizens, irrespective of their nationality and sexual orientation, to move freely and reside in any EU member state.


[Click on the hyperlink above to view the comments on MaltaToday's website.]

Friday 19 August 2011

Times: Madrid protesters decry cost of €50 million Pope party

Thursday, August 18, 2011 , by AFP


Policemen standing between Catholic pilgrims (back) and protesters (front) during a demonstration against the public cost of the World Youth Day celebrations at the Puerta del Sol Square in Madrid, yesterday. Photo: Pedro Armestre/AFP

Protesters took to the streets in Madrid yesterday to decry the expense of a rock festival-style, million-strong youth party for Pope Benedict XVI at a time of economic crisis.

On the eve of the 84-year-old Pontiff’s arrival in the Spanish capital to celebrate lavish World Youth Day events, more than 100 groups opposed to the visit marched yesterday evening.

The joint protest unites many causes, including groups seeking a change in the Church’s attitude to gay rights and those fighting for a clearer separation of Church and state.

There is even a separate plan for a gay and lesbian “kiss-in” once the Pope arrives today.

But the outcry that has struck a chord with many – including some priests – is over the official €50.5 million price tag, excluding the cost of police and security, of the Madrid celebrations.

The protest groups, some of which argue the real cost of the event to taxpayers is more than €100 million, were joined under the slogan: “The Pope’s visit, not with my taxes.”

Organisers say most of the cost will be covered by a registration fee from the pilgrims, and the celebration will be a massive tourist boost for Spain.

But for many the celebration is jarring at a time when the economy is faltering, the government is making painful cuts and unemployment is at 20.89 per cent. For those under 25, the jobless rate is over 45 per cent.

“We criticise this scandalous show at a time of such a terribly distressing economic situation, with entire families unemployed,” said Evaristo Villar, of Redes Cristianos (Christian Networks).

“This ostentation is causing a lot of damage and distancing a lot of people” from the Church, he said.

Many of those in Spain’s 15-M “indignant” movement – launched on May 15 against the management of the economic crisis – also took part in the protest.

“Just months after visits to Santiago and Barcelona, Mr Ratzinger – Benedict XVI to the Catholics – persistent in his idea of ‘reconquering’ a country that he sees as veering away from its moral and religious programme, returns to Madrid,” the protesters said in a statement read out at the rally.

It appealed to all citizens, “regardless of their personal convictions”, to stop authorities from granting the Church “privileges that belong to past eras and an undemocratic heritage”.

Spanish gays and lesbians say they will hold a separate protest “kiss-in” after the Pope’s arrival on Thursday.

The kiss-in, being organised on Facebook, is to protest against the Church’s “moral condemnations of sexuality ”, said Jaime del Val, a spokesman for one of the gay groups involved, Asamblea Transmaricabollo de Sol.

When the Pope last visited Spain in November last year, he was confronted by a homosexual kiss-in in Barcelona.

About 200 gay men and women couples locked lips to demand the Church recognise their right to be gay as he paraded through Barcelona’s streets on November 7 in his transparent Popemobile.

For the August 16-21 Catholic celebrations, traffic has been barred in much of central Madrid and a huge white stage has been erected for events in the emblematic Cibeles Square.

Huge speakers blare out pop music through the day as hundreds of thousands of fans in floppy hats swelter in the August heat.

The Church has opened 200 white confessionals in the form of boat sails along the main thoroughfare through Madrid’s Retiro park.

The Pope will hold a “prayer vigil” on Saturday evening at an airbase southwest of the capital, where the pilgrims will spend the night on an esplanade the size of 48 football pitches.

Pope Benedict celebrates Mass there on Sunday morning at a white altar almost 200 metres long in front of a wave-shaped stage and under a giant parasol “tree”, made of interwoven golden rods.


[Click on the hyperlink above to view the comments on the Times' website.]

Thursday 18 August 2011

YouTube: It Gets Better: Remembering Ryan

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFJuYkS6Oa0



Thank you to the hundreds of contributors from dozens of countries around the world. Thank you to Julia Lambie, creator of Flying Wish Paper, for donating product for use in the film. And a special thank you to Ryan's mom, Julie, for believing in this project. Julie, your courage and love is an inspiration for me -- and all of us.

For more about Ryan's story and this project, watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mk2qch2jiG4

And now that we've made our wishes, let's go out and make them happen.

Note: Many factors contribute to suicide risk. Because lesbian, gay and bisexual youth often experience a hostile environment, they are 4x more likely to attempt suicide than their straight peers. Those who have been diagnosed with a terminal illness are at a heightened risk for attempting suicide. You have the power to be the help someone needs by showing you care, by acting on your wish and by being a friend. For more information - or for help - please visit The Trevor Project website: http://www.thetrevorproject.org

Please add me (Davey Wavey) on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/DaveyWaveyOfficial

Music: Kevin MacLeod - Decisions & Arcadia http://incompetech.com

Wednesday 17 August 2011

MaltaToday: Malta removes discriminatory clause in free movement law

http://maltatoday.com.mt/news/malta-removes-discriminatory-clause-in-free-movement-law
MONDAY, AUGUST 15, 2011 By MATTHEW VELLA


EU same-sex couples are no longer discriminated under 'public policy' excuses inserted in Matlese law. (Photo: Ray Attard/Mediatoday)

After 12 months of EU pressure, Malta finally adheres to spirit of foundational EU law on freedom of movement.


The Maltese government has buckled under pressure from the European Commission and removed a legal clause that discriminated against EU nationals in same-sex relationships.


Since April 2010, Malta and EC officials have been locked in talks on the interpretation of the free movement directive (2004/38/EC).


Specifically, Maltese legislation that was supposed to have transposed EU law recognised partners “in a durable relationship” with EU citizens only if such relationships were not in “conflict with the public policy of Malta”.


This interpretation has meant that same-sex couples moving to Malta would not enjoy the same rights they are entitled to across the EU.


But despite Malta’s absolute policy of non-recognition of same-sex marriages, registered partnerships or any form of same-sex relationship, the Freedom of Movement Directive is obligatory.


A legal notice has now been published, deleting the discriminatory clause.


While opening the door to equal rights for same-sex and opposite-sex partners of any EU citizen, the director of citizenship and expatriate affairs is also being empowered to undertake an “extensive examination of the personal circumstances” of such couples, and will have to justify any denial of entry to residence of unmarried partners or other couples who claim to have a “durable relationship.”


The Freedom of Movement Directive gives certain rights to family members of EU citizens, irrespective of their nationality and sexual orientation, to move freely and reside in any EU member state.


The Maltese government previously maintained that the freedom of movement directive had been correctly transposed. But the European Commission had already stated that Malta could not deny any EU citizen in a same-sex relationship the same rights it gave to an EU citizen in a heterosexual relationship.”


Failing to recognise a same-sex union would mean that EU citizens in a civil union would lose their civil status if they relocated to Malta, together with the rights and responsibilities attached to that status. Where one member of the couple was a third-country national, Malta previously denied the right to freedom of movement by refusing to facilitate entry and residence, as required by the directive.


This ultimately resulted in the couple being required to move to another EU member state that does not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation.


The coordinator of the Malta Gay Rights Movement, Gabi Calleja, welcomed the amendment. “I’m glad the Maltese government has adhered to the spirit of the law. One has to see whether public policy will reflect such change,” Calleja told MaltaToday.


Malta does not recognise gay partnerships legally. The removal of the discriminating clause means EU citizens in a relationship with third-country nationals will be recognised in the same way that divorces registered abroad, are recognised in Malta.


The incorrect transposition of the directive had been also discussed in a meeting between MGRM and justice and home affairs minister Carmelo Mifsud Bonnici, who reportedly denied any knowledge of the issue and stated his preference for dealing with such situations on a case-by-case basis.


[Click on the hyperlink above to view the comments on MaltaToday's website.]

Sunday 14 August 2011

Times: Transgender woman allowed to marry...in Cuba

http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20110814/world/transgender-woman-allowed-to-marry-in-cuba.380245
Sunday, August 14, 2011, 12:40 , by AFP

Braving drizzling rain and people's prejudices, a Cuban man and transgender woman tied the knot here in what has been described as the first "gay marriage" on the Communist-ruled island.

Ignacio Estrada and Wendy Iriepa were married in a civil ceremony in Havana's Palace of Weddings on the same day as Cuban revolutionary leader Fidel Castro, who a year ago accepted his responsibility for cracking down against homosexuals, celebrated his 85th birthday.

According to tradition, guests -- among them some well-known Cuban dissidents -- threw rice at the decked-out couple, wishing them prosperity and many years of happy life together.

"This is the happiest day of my life," Wendy, 37, told reporters, sitting on one of the old pre-revolutionary American convertibles so common on the streets of the Cuban capital.

Same-sex marriage is illegal in Cuba, which in the past has showed little tolerance for homosexuality and operated camps for several years to stamp out "counterrevolutionary" values.

But attitudes have changed, in part following efforts by Mariela Castro, a sex therapist and daughter of President Raul Castro.

And technically, Saturday's nuptials were not a gay union, as Wendy, a man named Alexis before his sex change operation, is now officially recognized in the country as a woman.

The operation was performed four years ago by the Center for Sex Education (Cenesex) headed by Mariela Castro.

But Iriepa said Mariela refused to be a witness at the ceremony after she had learned that Estrada was a dissident.

Estrada, 31, said the couple's wedding "marks a new step in Cuba." "This is not a provocation. It's an acknowledgment," he told AFP.

Since 1988, 16 sex change operations have been legally performed in Cuba. Mariela Castro's Cenesex is lobbying for the legalization of same-sex marriage in the island nation.

[Click on the hyperlink above to view the comments on the Times' website.]

Monday 8 August 2011

Independent: It’s not paedophilia: it’s much worse

07 August 2011 by Noel Grima

I wrote the following article and it was published by this paper on 30 January this year. I am reproducing it today because I feel that in the light of what has so far emerged from the sentence against the two priests this week, it is clear that the book from which I am quoting was more than spot on regarding the heinousness of the crime.

Over the past months, I have often considered what a limited view we have of the paedophilia and general child abuse problem in the Church.

Unfortunately, the evidence given in court is invariably banned when priests are involved, so society is spared, if that is the right word, from coming to grips with the incredibly sleazy aspects of this crime and its long-term impacts.

In September 2009, my colleague Chris Sultana published extracts of an interview with Mgr Carmel Scicluna. A few days later he received a thick book (Sacrilege – Sexual Abuse in the Catholic Church, Crossland Press, 2008, 675pp) sent to him from America by its author, Leon J. Podles of the Crossland Foundation. He passed on this copy to me and I read it over the past months.

It is a terrible book. As its blurb says, Sacrilege explores the deep roots of the Catholic Church’s sexual-abuse scandal, revealing its full depth and breadth. As former Federal investigator, Leon Podles says abuse is not limited to a few well-publicised cases in New England; it has occurred in every type of Catholic institution, in every time period, throughout the world. In the United States alone, some of the worst cases of abuse go back to the 1940s, remaining hidden until exposed for the first time in Sacrilege.

In horrifying yet necessary detail, Sacrilege surveys the full extent of the damage, showing how victims were failed by bishops, laity, therapists, police, courts, press and even popes.

Over the past years other books have been published about this subject, such as Thomas Doyle’s Sex, Priests and Secret Codes: the Catholic Church’s 2,000-year Paper Trail of Sexual Abuse, Jason Berry’s Lead Us Not Into Temptation: Catholic Priests and the Sexual Abuse of Children, and of course Geoffrey Robinson’s The Case of the Pope.

Basing himself exclusively on publicly available sources – newspaper and magazine articles, court documents, books – Mr Podles documents only a fraction of what really went on. He concludes: “The bishops made excuses, but the excuses did not excuse. Bishops claimed they were only following the advice of psychologists, but they put abusive priests in parishes even when the psychologists warned against it. Why hadn’t bishops ever gotten angry at abusers? Why were abusers treated so gently, when men who left the priesthood to marry were treated so harshly? Why had the bishops lied to parents? Why hadn’t they disciplined their clergy, when they seemed so eager to micromanage everything else in America, from what married couples did in bed to what the government did about immigration?”

The first seven and a half chapters deal with cases that happened in America, then there is a short account of the situation in Ireland, then in Austria and lastly in Poland.

Then he analyses the findings.

Since 1950, tens of thousands of boys and girls have been molested by priests in the United States. The victims were chosen because they were vulnerable and the vulnerability was often the misplaced faith they or their parents had in the trustworthiness of the Catholic Church. The victims suffered the immediate horror and degradation of sexual abuse; they and their families endured decades of pain, which sometimes ended only in death by suicide for the victims and unending grief for the families.

According to the John Jay Report, most of the victims, 80.9 per cent, were male, mostly post-pubescent males even though male victims report abuse less often than female victims do.

Podles discusses the possible number of victims and abusers and comes to the ‘conservative’ estimate of up to 200,000 victims in the United States alone, and a rough estimate of up to 100,000 abusive priests worldwide since 1950 and anywhere up to two million victims.

He finds that, universally, priest-abusers were narcissists who had no feeling for the pain they were inflicting: they were confidence artists who could exploit the weaknesses of those with whom they were dealing, whether victims, bishops, fellow priests or laity. The adults who enabled the abuse were usually culpably weak.

And the victims had a variety of innocent weaknesses which the abusers exploited: the sexual ignorance of the very young, the emotional turbulence of adolescence; sickness or injury, family problems such as divorce or death or poverty; the absence of a father, or, most dangerous of all, piety.

Many times, the abuse suffered was horrendous. Abusive priests often added the pleasures of sacrilege to the pleasures of abuse. Being, as they invariably put it, ‘close to God’, enabled them to ensure the victims’ silence.

Predators seek out vulnerable children and prey on them.

Because the children, especially the boys, had problems before the abuse began, the abuse exacerbated and multiplied the problems. Podles lists psychological problems, inability to trust, traumatic bonding, fear of homosexuality, loss of faith, and lastly suicide.

The book makes two points about which there will be considerable controversy: Can abusers be treated? And what is the connection between paedophilia and homosexuality?

He says: “Most of the abusers were sexually involved with teenage boys. It is difficult to classify a male’s sexual attraction to sexually mature teenage boys as a mental illness or disorder without also classifying homosexuality as a mental disorder and the American Psychiatric Association voted in 1974, after an intense and disruptive political campaign, to remove homosexuality from the category of mental disorder or illness. It is now simply another sexual orientation. So men who are attracted sexually to teenage boys, ephebophiles, no longer have a recognised psychiatric disorder. They may have other problems which lead them to act on this desire, but the desire itself is not recognised as a psychiatric disorder. Despite this, priests who were sexually involved with teenage boys were sent for treatment as if they were paedophiles.”

Many men feel sexual desire for children; this desire is probably more common than homosexual desire, because men who are heterosexual in adult orientation can be involuntarily attracted to the relative femininity of children’s bodies. But of course, almost all men who feel such desire do not act on it because of religious, ethical or social restraints.

So, I’m summarizing here, when they sent abusive priests to psychiatric clinics for treatment, the bishops were barking up the wrong tree. The problem is more one of seriously handling the cases: most abusers are ‘manipulative confidence artists’. “The role of religious leader is perfect for the abusive confidence artist. The predator is typically charismatic and ingratiating, able to charm and disarm in order to achieve the exact, desired response. The precise skills used by the predator to groom victims also elicit trust and support from the larger community, creating an aura that makes discovery of perpetration unlikely.”

A confidence artist hurts his victims and usually feels no distress at the damage he causes. The abusers, the bishops, and most priests showed incomprehension of the pain of the victims. This lack of empathy is characteristic of sociopaths. They have no sense of the emotional damage abusers inflict on their victims. One would think that the clergy, a ‘helping profession’ would not attract sociopaths. But it does.

Podles also deals with narcissism and self-centredness and with the problem of seeking control. Psychiatrists often claim that abuse is not so much about sex as about control.

Paedophilia is a sexual desire for children, but when it crosses into the realm of act, it becomes a crime and calls for punishment. Punishment and treatment are not mutually exclusive.

He states: “Abusers of both children and teenagers were treated as if they had a mental illness. The treatment was often perfunctory and unprofessional; the aim was to get priests back into ministry – and it too often succeeded. Even if the abusers had received professional treatment of the highest standard, the therapists faced an almost impossible situation.

“Whatever limitations therapists may have had, whatever faults they had, whatever mistakes they made, were almost irrelevant, because the bishops who referred abusers to therapists were not acting in good faith. Church officials withheld information from therapists and even coached abusers on how to avoid a diagnosis of paedophilia.”

When in 2005 the Vatican issued an Instruction which said that people who practise homosexuality should not be admitted to the seminary or to holy orders, the Vatican was widely condemned as homophobic, there was a denial that there was a ‘gay culture’ in the seminaries and a furious denial that homosexual priests had anything to do with the sexual abuse of minors. But, Podles says, a homosexual subculture in American and foreign seminaries seems to have flourished in the 1960s in the general chaos that followed Vatican II, although the roots go back centuries. Besides, the departure of heterosexual priests to marry after Vatican II may have left homosexuals in control of large sections of the Church’s middle management.

In addition to denying that there is any problem created by homosexual seminarians and priests, critics of the Instruction suspect that the Vatican sees a connection between homosexuality and paedophilia. Priest-author Andrew Greeley claimed that “because some few abusers are homosexual, it does not follow that all homosexuals are abusers”.

But then the National Review Board discovered that among the victims of priests, despite the universally recognized tendency of boys to report their abuse less frequently than girls do, more than 80 per cent of the abuse at issue was of a homosexual nature. A recent survey of victims discovered that 93 per cent of victims of priests under 18 years of age are male, as opposed to 20 per cent of the victims of abusers in the general population.

On the other hand, many believe that celibacy places impossible burdens on human nature but it is clear that celibacy does not cause priests to abuse teenage boys, because the vast majority of priests (over 90 per cent) have not been involved in such abuse. Celibate priests violate their vows, as married men do. But unlike married men, priests’ continued employment is contingent upon a pretence of faithfulness to the vow of celibacy, and therefore all who violate their vows, whether with women, men or children, will have an implicit compact not to expose one another.

Besides, the experience among Protestants, who do not have priestly celibacy, shows they have handled scandals worse, if possible than Catholics have. Sexual transgression in churches with married clergy tends to be adultery of male pastors with female laity, although molestation of minor males is not unknown. Ending celibacy would probably not reduce the number of homosexuals in the priesthood. Besides, Protestant churches may ordain more candidates than the Catholic Church does but many times the ordinands do not find suitable jobs to support their family, especially in rural areas.

Fundamentally, bishops and priests tolerated abuse and bear the greatest responsibility after the abusers themselves. Bishops were weak in dealing with abuse, a weakness that had its source in their non-confrontational personalities, personalities which made them attractive to the Vatican as candidates for bishop. Abusers exploited bishops’ desires to avoid confrontation and bad publicity. Priests almost always turned a blind eye to abuse going on in their parishes, because they knew the bishops did not want to know about it and they would be marked as troublemakers for reporting it.

Bishops likewise knew that the Vatican did not want to receive cases for involuntary laicisation on grounds of sexual abuse. In addition, the Catholic Church suffered from a clericalism in both clergy and laity that led them to ignore any evidence of clerical failures. It also had structural weaknesses that abusers could exploit to escape punishment and to continue abusing.

From the 1950s onwards many priests studied psychology. Those were the years dominated by Alfred Kinsey, sexual liberation, which saw no harm in following one’s sexual instincts. Carl Rogers taught that the therapist (hence the priest) was only a facilitator who gave unqualified acceptance to the client. After Vatican II, Catholic moral theologians began competing with one another to see how much of traditional teaching on sexuality they could reject.

The Vatican, chiefly Cardinal Ratzinger, as head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, occasionally tried to discipline priests and for his efforts was denounced as a Nazi and Grand Inquisitor by Catholic liberals. The Vatican received a stream of complaints that bishops were allowing dangerous doctrines to be taught to priests who then acted on those doctrines by having sex with minors, but not once has a bishop been removed for failure to exercise oversight over his seminary and clergy.

There are other issues the book discusses but this is its conclusion as regards the State: “The chief secular reform needed is the abolition of the statute of limitations in all states for both civil and criminal actions stemming from sexual molestation, Many states already have no statute of limitations for felonies and no state has a statute of limitations for murder. Because it often takes victims years or decades to confront the abuse and to speak about it publicly, the statute of limitations creates grave injustices.”

Laws should also be passed that make it a crime to endanger children. The law must clearly establish the criminal liability of churches and other organisations that allow child abuse to go on.

On its part, the Catholic Church must also consider several reforms in its handling of abusers and it must begin, as it is doing under the present Pope, by engaging in a deep process of repentance.

Friday 5 August 2011

Independent: US Embassy and Malta Gay Rights Movement seminar

http://www.independent.com.mt/news.asp?newsitemid=129811
03 August 2011

The US Embassy in Ta’ Qali inaugurated its new state-of-the-art multi-purpose room by hosting a training day intended to discuss strategies and methods to combat homophobia and to promote lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights in Malta.

The training formed part of MGRM’s capacity building efforts and brought to a conclusion a series of events including a Rainbow Weekend held in March and the celebration of Malta’s Pride Week which included a digital video conference with leading US human rights lawyer Jennifer Pizer. Saturday’s training, facilitated by Silvan Agius, policy director for ILGA-Europe, focused on advocacy strategies which Maltese LGBT activists should employ to ameliorate equality and human rights. Trends in continental European LGBT laws and social perceptions were discussed and comparisons were made with trends in Malta. The participants, active members of the Malta Gay Rights Movement, Drachma and Drachma parents’ groups as well as the University group We Are discussed critical issues which must be addressed in order to advance gay rights in Malta and to develop strategies, with attainable milestones, which will achieve equal rights for Malta’s LGBT community.

Public Affairs Officer Elijah Waterman welcomed the participants to the new US Embassy and reiterated the US Embassy’s ongoing support for the Malta Gay Rights Movement and its efforts to promote awareness of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights in Malta. Chargé d’Affaires Richard M. Mills said, “The Obama administration has taken great strides to prevent violence against the LGBT community around the world, and to eliminate discrimination in the United States. I am happy to support MGRM’s efforts in Malta and to encourage your commitment to this struggle for equality.”

Wednesday 3 August 2011

Times: Madness and questionable timing

http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20110802/opinion/Madness-and-questionable-timing.378388
Tuesday, August 2, 2011, by Kenneth Zammit Tabona

It just gets sillier and sillier, doesn’t it? The Arriva crisis seems to be on the wane after the Prime Minister met hunger-striking Emmanuel Cini, the retired gay porn star in Cospicua, and persuaded him to eat two kiwis proving that the rumour that the Prime Minister is homophobic is totally unfounded. He told me himself that he simply could not have the death of Mr Cini on his conscience so, hence, the prime ministerial visit.

Concurrently, the background of party-switching Cyrus Engerer has been revealed as being a trifle seamy by the police. We now know that his father has a drug problem. It is also being alleged that Mr Engerer himself did something rather thoughtless after having split up with his boyfriend and was reported to the police. Marvic Camilleri had not withdrawn the charges. The two unrelated incidents pertaining to both father and son became public domain in a matter of days of Mr Engerer’s controversial split with the Nationalist Party.

The press had a field day. And here is the crux of it all. Should the press have been told? That the Prime Minister’s head of secretariat, Edgar Galea Curmi, happens to be Mr Engerer’s godfather is now also public knowledge and that Mr Engerer resorted to his godfather for help when his father was arrested is no big deal in my book. Were I to be in that situation and Mr Galea Curmi was my godfather I would have done exactly the same and so would you. Were I Mr Galea Curmi I would have also done exactly the same thing. All Mr Galea Curmi wanted to know was whether there was any political pressure on the Police Commissioner, which, in the light of the events that had just happened, seemed pretty logical.

Now there are lots of people playing holier than thou about this rather smelly kettle of fish and while Mr Engerer has to cope with all this and the consequences of the party switch too, the pundits, and the politicos too, are getting very hot under the collar about what is to me just another symptom of midsummer madness peppered by political bigotry. None of them are looking good, let me tell you.

One party is being accused of being heavy handed and the other is probably in a quandary and wondering whether they have landed themselves a poisoned chalice rather than an asset. I will leave it to them to sort out their accusations and counter-accusations and hope that, at the end of it, Mr Engerer will come out smelling of roses and not lampuki left to rot in the sun for a week.

What concerns me is the sudden focus on all things gay, including the question of same-sex marriage, in the wake of the divorce debacle. Is the emancipation of the gay community on the cards? With episodes like this, that do nothing to shift public opinion in favour of gay rights, I doubt it.

Being gay is no picnic and gay people are sick to the teeth of being sidelined at best and pushed around at worst. Most of the time it is done so subtly that it is just a sensitive gay person like myself who can read the overtones and undertones of a conversation. There are not too many people like me in the sense that most people of my ilk and vintage remain either in the closet or keep a very low profile. I am an artist and a columnist and, precisely because I never want to be in a position where I could be muzzled through blackmail or whatever, I have been as frank about myself with readers as the unspoken rules of propriety dictate. That is with me an iron rule and I will not break it for all the kiwis in wherever they grow. The rest is simply not anybody’s business but my own. I am sure readers would have expected no less of me.

When Lawrence Gonzi took on the challenge of leading a government with a one-seat majority in 2008 I am sure he was aware of the problems this could present but I am sure that never in his born days did he envisage this scenario. I had in the past been very critical of Alfred Sant for going to the polls in 1998 for the very same reason, however, I am now not so sure. We are still recovering from the show-stopping effect of a divorce dogfight rivalling the Illustrious Raid. The government has emerged from this in a precarious state loudly proclaiming its liberalism on paper but in deed showing itself up to be highly influenced by the conservative right wingers in the party who, in my opinion, are largely responsible for the unexpected defeat of the PN after it unwisely proclaimed itself to be officially against divorce in a what is purely a civil issue.

What has followed is a concatenation of disasters in which, like a Greek Chorus, events like the civil war in Libya and the massacre in Norway play sinister parts. Ex-friends of the Butcher of Norway, the soi-disant Knight Templar, who wanted to rid Europe of Islamic influences by orchestrating a deadly car bomb and shooting spree, have had connections with Malta. A particular Englishman, who was expelled from his own far-right, UK-based party for being too extreme, not only took refuge in Malta but also aired a documentary, freely available on the net, in which he expounds his chivalric beliefs while sitting comfortably in our Presidential Palace with someone called Mad Dog.

Now, tell me, had I to try to do the same in Buck House or the Quirinale or the Elysee without authorisation wouldn’t I have been arrested forthwith? Was the man who calls himself the Lionheart given authorisation to do this? And if so, who granted it? The Palace officials? The ministry responsible for tourism? The police?

That Anders Breivik has a list with 417 names of Maltese men and women who are to be eliminated as prejudicial to the Right Wing cause is not something to be sneezed at despite the fact that it is a perfect 0.1 per cent of the Maltese population, which does not make it hypothetically negligible. Simply because I find it impossible to believe that Mr Breivik acted alone we may be very unpleasantly surprised if one of these days a number of us receive a packet of anthrax as a present! And then what?

[Click on the hyperlink above to view the comments on the Times' website.]

Tuesday 2 August 2011

Times: Cohabitation Bill in final stages

Monday, August 1, 2011, by Matthew Xuereb, Kurt Sansone

A Bill on cohabitation is expected to be presented to Parliament right after the summer recess, The Times has learnt.

A law regulating cohabitation was something the Nationalist Party has promised since 1998, when it was returned to government after Labour’s 22-month stint.

A spokesman for the Justice Ministry confirmed that the government was finalising the Bill, which would be submitted to Parliament in October, when it reconvenes after the summer recess.

The spokesman would not give details of the proposals but said it would be published in the Government Gazette after its first reading in the House.

In May, in the run-up to the divorce referendum, Nationalist MP Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando had called on his own government to make known its legislative proposals on the matter. His main bone of contention had been that the new law would not cover separated couples who lived with their new partners.

The government had refused to publish the contents of the Bill before the divorce referendum. It insisted it did not want to derail the divorce debate. Before the referendum, Justice Minister Carmelo Mifsud Bonnici had told Parliament that the framework of the government’s proposed legislation on cohabitation had already been laid down.

Dr Mifsud Bonnici had said the government was evaluating the experiences of all EU member states that had tried to regulate cohabitation. Regulating cohabiting couples, he said, was a very complex issue because there were many variants of cohabitation.

[Click on the hyperlink above to view the comments on the Times' website.]