Sign Up to Receive Email Action Alerts From Issa Exposed

2/12 news round-up: 9th Circuit win on trans rights

Transgender Rights

– The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed a district court ruling that policies allowing students who are transgender to use the correct restrooms don’t violate federal law.

We’ll post any breaking news.

Thanks to Equality Case Files for these filings


  • 1. VIRick  |  February 14, 2020 at 3:40 pm

    Connecticut: Hate Group Files Federal Suit Attacking Transgender Student Athletes

    Per Equality Case Files:

    On 12 February 2020, Alliance Defending Freedom filed a federal lawsuit, "Soule v. Connecticut Assn. of Schools," targeting transgender student athletes. Specifically, the complaint alleges that the trans-inclusive policy adopted by the Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference violates Title IX, and asks for an injunction to block transgender girls from participating in girls' sports and "to correct any and all records, public or non-public, to remove [transgender athletes] from any record or recognition purporting to record times, victories, or qualifications for elite competitions designated for girls or women…" The case has been assigned to Judge Robert N. Chatigny.

    The 52-page Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief and Damages is here:

    The ACLU issued a statement in response to said lawsuit here:

    Among other points, "The lawsuit has been filed against the Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference and multiple school boards, and specifically names Andraya Yearwood and Terry Miller, two transgender student athletes. The language of the complaint, which deliberately mis-genders transgender youth and demands that high school athletics be organized by chromosomes, is an assault on the basic dignity and humanity of transgender people and a threat to the privacy and equality of all students. The ACLU will be seeking to join this lawsuit and defend the interest of trans student athletes."

  • 2. VIRick  |  February 14, 2020 at 4:12 pm

    Bhutan: Penal Code Amendment Bill 2019 Passes

    Per LGBT Marriage News:

    In Bhutan, on 10 February 2020, the National Council (upper house) unanimously passed the Penal Code Amendment Bill 2019 which decriminalizes consensual gay sex between adults in private. The measure now goes back to the National Assembly (lower house) for concurrence.… …

    Note: This site is actually from Bhutan, and the English utilized in it, including multiple antiquated Britishisms, but an obvious translation from a very different language, is somewhat difficult for me to understand. The strangely-phrased wording in the direct quotes in the next several paragraphs are typical.

    In any case, it would appear that the National Assembly wants to expunge the anti-sodomy provisions from the criminal code in their entirety. However, the National Council only wishes to expunge that portion relative to sex in private. Thus: "Any consensual sexual conduct that is against the order of nature committed in private between any adult human beings shall not be considered unnatural sex.”

    Since many of the word-choices utilized are rather unusual, does that quoted sentence actually make sense, given that "against the order of nature" is never defined, nor is "unnatural sex," but rather, are merely presumed to be mutually understood? Personally, I do not fully understand the definition of those antiquated British euphemisms, nor does it appear that the folks in Bhutan have much of a clue as to their meaning, either,– nor how to express the several concepts in any other form of up-dated English.

    However, it appears as if the National Council wishes to retain the criminality of the act if done in public, and/or if performed between minors. And for clarity, how does one know the difference between a location considered private v. one that is public? "For the purposes of this section: a) unnatural sexual conduct is considered not to have been committed in private, if it is committed in public place." OK, then.

  • 3. JayJonson  |  February 15, 2020 at 6:21 am

    I wonder if those phrases such as "against the order of nature" might refer to the actual language of the British laws that were adopted, or are at least attempted to parallel analagous British laws that existed at the time the Bhutan laws were originally adopted. Although "against the order of nature" is a preposterous euphemism, it is one that was used all over the English-speaking world including many U.S. states. Those euphemisms sparked a lot of litigation. Did it mean oral as well as anal sex? Some courts said yes, others no. Did the offense have to include penetration? Some courts said yes, others no. Did it mean male-female anal or oral sex or only male-male oral or anal sex or did it also include female-female sex? Some courts said yes, others said no. At the time many of the statutes were adopted, homosexuality (or, more specifically, sodomy) was quite literally considered "the sin not to be named," and therefore the legislators did not want to be very specific about their meaning lest they would put sinful thoughts into the citizens.

  • 4. VIRick  |  February 15, 2020 at 11:04 am

    Jay, that is an excellent analysis, and I am certain you are absolutely correct in that they are copying the exact antiquated language found in the British-imposed criminal code which they now wish to see expunged. Plus, as you have noted, we are going to find those same euphemisms repeated over and over again in multiple ex-British jurisdictions worldwide.

    At the time of the British Raj, when the anti-sodomy laws were first introduced (from 1862, onward), modern-day India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Burma (now Myanmar) were under the direct rule of the Raj. Bhutan had "British Protectorate" status (from 1910), similar to various Indian princely states like Hyderabad and Kashmir, as well as neighboring Sikkim (from 1890) and Nepal (from 1816). When India became independent in 1947, it shattered into several warring factions, the worst being the division between Pakistan and India, which also divided Kashmir, Punjab, and Bengal. And except for Kashmir, most other Indian princely states then disappeared as separate jurisdictions, each adhering to Indian law. Later, Sikkim also chose to join India as a separate state (1975), and now adheres to Indian law. The former French holdings of Puducherry (1962) and the former Portuguese holdings of Goa (1987) (and Daman/Diu, 2020) also "chose" to join India as additional separate states/territories, but have retained their own separate laws. The former French holding of Chandernagore chose to become part of West Bengal (1954), and now follows Indian law.

    On the other hand, both Bhutan (as a Buddhist theocracy) and Nepal (as a Hindu monarchy) became independent. Neither have ever shown any interest in joining India, as both have a very different ethnic composition, and an extremely "other worldly" religious/cultural tradition, akin to Tibet. Although both overthrew their monarchies in 2008, Nepal (as a republic) is also quite a bit further ahead of Bhutan (as a constitutional kingdom) in undoing its imposed Britishness.

  • 5. VIRick  |  February 15, 2020 at 7:14 pm

    While doing some research for the above post, I also encountered a Nepali Supreme Court ruling from 2017 which I do not recall as having been previously reported here at EoT (and for which I had no record in my archives):

    Nepali Supreme Court Recognizes Same-Sex Marriages Performed Abroad

    "Same-sex marriage with foreign nationals occurring in a jurisdiction that recognizes same-sex marriage is now recognized in Nepal, for eligibility to obtain a "non-tourist visa" as a dependent of a Nepali citizen, by verdict of the Supreme Court in 2017, as the laws don't make sex-specific distinction in provisions relating to the rights of foreign nationals married to Nepali citizens."

    Unfortunately, in the Wikipedia article containing the above-mentioned ruling, when one clicks on footnote 130 to obtain further details concerning the citation, one obtains this, the official ruling of the Supreme Court of Nepal in the Devanagari script, thus explaining why we missed it when originally issued in 2017:�%

    One should also note that there are no restrictions of movement between India and Nepal. Indian citizens can freely live and work in Nepal, and vice-versa, without the need of obtaining visas, work permits, or other official permissions.

    However, at about the same date in 2017, we did record this:

    Nepali Couple Registers First Transgender Marriage

    On Saturday, 5 August 2017, Monika Shahi Nath – who legally identifies as third gender – registered her marriage with her husband, Ramesh Nath Yogi, in her home district in Nepal, making this the first official transgender marriage in Nepal.

    I will let others attempt to decide whether this marriage also qualifies as the first legally-recognized same-sex marriage, not only in Nepal, but in all of Asia. It is, — except that Monika had changed her gender to that of the third-gender category as soon as it had become legal to do so in Nepal, a category still not available in most other countries.

  • 6. VIRick  |  February 14, 2020 at 6:11 pm

    Quintana Roo: Only 6 Same-Sex Couples Marry in 2019

    Per Radio Turquesa:

    A la baja, tasa de matrimonio igualitario en Quintana Roo en 2019, solo seis parejas del mismo sexo contrajeron matrimonio el año pasado, confirmó Patricia Tórres Carrillo, Directora del Registro Civil.

    Sin embargo, aclaró que lo único que aún no pueden hacer matrimonios conformados por personas del mismo sexo (en Quintana Roo), es adoptar a niños.

    The equal marriage rate in Quintana Roo in 2019 is on the decline, as only six same-sex couples contracted marriage last year, confirmed Patricia Tórres Carrillo, Director of the Civil Registry.

    However, she clarified that the only thing that married same-sex couples (in Quintana Roo) still cannot do is adopt children.

  • 7. VIRick  |  February 15, 2020 at 9:32 pm

    Quintana Roo: First Same-Sex Marriage for 2020

    Per Raymundo Moreno:

    La presidente municipal (alcaldesa) de Solidaridad, Laura Beristáin, pidió matrimonio esta tarde, el 15 de febrero 2020, a su pareja Karla Robles, titular del DIF.

    This afternoon, 15 February 2020, the municipal president (mayor) of Solidaridad, Laura Beristáin, asked her partner Karla Robles, the head of DIF, to marry.

    Solidaridad is the official name of the municipality for which the town of Playa del Carmen is the municipal seat.

    DIF is the Mexican state adoption agency, technically, el Sistema Nacional para el Desarrollo Integral de la Familia.

    Putting these two articles back-to-back naturally leads one to ask the obvious question: If a lesbian is in charge of the DIF in Quintana Roo, why have the rules disallowing married same-sex couples from adopting not already been changed? The DIF is a separate agency, not part of the Civil Registry, and can set its own statewide agenda.

  • 8. VIRick  |  February 14, 2020 at 7:46 pm

    Zacatecas: 11 Same-Sex Couples Marry in Collective Marriage Ceremony

    Per Raymundo Moreno:

    Once matrimonios igualitarios se celebrarán este viernes, el 14 de febrero 2020, en (Ciudad) Zacatecas.

    Eleven equal marriages will be celebrated this Friday, 14 February 2020, in (Ciudad) Zacatecas.

  • 9. VIRick  |  February 16, 2020 at 7:08 pm

    Zacatecas: Anti-LGBT Judge Participates in Collective Marriage Ceremony

    Per Orgullo Zacatecas:

    Efectivamente, el Juez Pedroza estaba en contra del matrimonio igualitario, pero finalmente accedió y participó en la ceremonia del pasado viernes, el 14 de febrero 2020. Saludos.

    Indeed, Judge Pedroza was against marriage equality, but he finally agreed and participated in the ceremony last Friday, 14 February 2020. Cheers.

    Per Raymundo Moreno:

    As per the final count, of the 56 couples who married in the collective marriage ceremony in Ciudad Zacatecas on 14 February, 15 were same-sex couples, an extraordinarily high proportion (26.8% of the total). However, this was also the first time that same-sex couples had been invited to participate in the annual event in that locale. Still, to date, this was the highest proportion of same-sex couples ever recorded anywhere in Mexico as participating in such a collective ceremony.

  • 10. ianbirmingham  |  February 16, 2020 at 12:54 am

    Thailand 'no paradise for transsexuals': A transgender couple's fight for their rights

  • 11. ianbirmingham  |  February 16, 2020 at 12:56 am

    [Thailand] Same-sex couples fight for civil union rights

  • 12. VIRick  |  February 16, 2020 at 12:28 pm

    Kansas: Bill Introduced to Remove Same-Sex Marriage Ban from State Constitution

    Per LGBT Marriage News:

    On 14 February 2020, two Democratic lawmakers introduced legislation to remove the unenforceable language banning same-sex marriage from the Kansas State Constitution. The measure would need to pass both the Kansas House and Kansas Senate before being placed on the ballot to then be voted upon by voters.

  • 13. VIRick  |  February 16, 2020 at 4:25 pm

    Coahuila: In Second Place in Same-Sex Marriages

    Per "El Siglo de Torreón:"

    Coahuila: En Segundo Lugar de Uniones Homosexuales

    Uno de cada 10 matrimonios entre personas del mismo sexo que se registra en el país, ocurre en Coahuila. A 10 años de su aprobación, este tipo de uniones se han quintuplicado, y el estado ocupa el segundo lugar nacional con más registros. En Durango, no ha sido aprobada esta figura.

    En el marco del Día de San Valentín, el Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía (INEGI) presentó los indicadores de los matrimonios y divorcios celebrados entre personas del mismo sexo en México. En 2018, hubo 3 mil 359 matrimonios y 273 divorcios en este segmento de la población.

    Por entidad federativa, las mayores tasas de nupcialidad entre personas del mismo sexo se ubican en la Ciudad de México (CDMX) (209.97 matrimonios por cada millón de habitantes de 18 años o más), Coahuila (146.04) y Quintana Roo (145.61). En Durango, Guerrero, Hidalgo, Nuevo León, Oaxaca, y Veracruz, no hay registros de estos eventos, mientras que Tabasco, San Luis Potosí, Sinaloa, y México (Edomex) reportan las tasas más bajas.

    One in 10 same-sex marriages registered in the country occurs in Coahuila. Ten years after its approval, these types of unions have quintupled, and the state ranks second-highest in the country. In Durango, this type of union has not been approved.

    Marking Valentine's Day, the National Institute of Statistics and Geography (INEGI) presented the statistics on marriages and divorces between same-sex couples in Mexico. In 2018, there were 3,359 marriages and 273 divorces within this segment of the population.

    By federal jurisdiction, the highest rates of same-sex marriages occurred in Mexico City (CDMX) (209.97 marriages per million inhabitants 18 years of age or older), Coahuila (146.04) and Quintana Roo (145.61). In Durango, Guerrero, Hidalgo, Nuevo León, Oaxaca, and Veracruz, no records of these events were kept, while Tabasco, San Luis Potosí, Sinaloa, and México (Edomex) reported the lowest rates.

    Note: Torreón, the largest city in Coahuila, is situated way on the southwestern edge of the state, facing Gómez Palacio, Durango, across the Río Nazas, thus explaining the Coahuila/Durango comparisons.

    Torreón has seen extraordinary growth. In 1892, it was a sleepy pueblo of 200 people, merely a water-stop in the Chihuahua desert for steam locomotives on the long railway line running north to El Paso. Today, it is a modern, progressive agro/industrial center for a sprawling, 2-state metro area of 1.5 million inhabitants, Mexico's answer to Phoenix, but in a state where marriage equality was never an issue.

  • 14. allan120102  |  February 16, 2020 at 11:10 pm

    Yucatán lgbt activist are no longer playing . They are asking the supreme Court in two different amparos to force the state Congress to vote in an open way the ssm bill. I am not sure if the Amparo is asking the judges to force the deputies to vote in a positive way but it looks like it does.

  • 15. VIRick  |  February 17, 2020 at 1:53 pm

    Cyprus: Gay Married Couple Battles for Legal Recognition

    Per LGBT Marriage News:

    A gay couple is battling for their right to have their marriage already performed in another EU country recognized and ratified as legal in Cyprus. Erkin Fellah, a Cypriot citizen of Turkish Cypriot origin, and a Turkish citizen who prefers to be known by his initials, AA, met four years ago, and in January 2019, decided to marry in Denmark, as the Scandinavian state is one of the very few in the European Union that allows same-sex marriages without at least one person of the party being a permanent resident of the country in question.

    Two months after getting married, the two men came to Cyprus, where Erkin was born in Episkopi, near Paphos, in 1965, with the idea of settling here permanently. They submitted an application for their marriage to be officially recognized as a civil union, which would then allow them to live together as an official couple in Erkin’s house in Strovolos, Nicosia.

    The couple claim that six months after they submitted the application, the migration department sent them a letter refusing to recognize their civil union on the grounds that gay marriages are not accepted in Cyprus. Still, even though gay marriages are not yet officially recognized, same-sex civil unions in Cyprus have been legal since December 2015. In addition, ahead of its EU membership in 2004, it had to change its human rights legislation, including its laws regarding sexual orientation and gender identity.

    According to the latest official data released by the government in January 2019, there have been 567 civil partnerships in Cyprus since the law was introduced in 2015, of which 100 involved same sex couples.

    “Because of the migration department’s decision, I had to do a sworn affidavit in court to state that I’m single and carry out a second civil union application in Cyprus, which meant spending more time and money for something that is absolutely unnecessary. On top of that, I had to lie and say I’m single, when in fact, I’m actually legally married,” he said. “I don’t expect my marriage to be officially recognized, as gay marriages by law do not exist in Cyprus, but the migration department had no grounds to refuse our civil union application.”

    Cyprus-based action group, Accept LGBT, described the migration office’s decision as inexplicable. “We are a European Union country and we cannot understand the reasons behind the denial of the couple’s civil union application, it makes no sense whatsoever,” a member of the Accept LGBT group told the "Sunday Mail," promising that the organization would do all it could to help the couple. “Our laws clearly state that, if a couple is married or has been officially recognized as a civil union partnership in any other EU country, they must be recognized as such here, as well. Unfortunately, it’s no secret why they are going through such an ordeal. The fact that AA is a Turkish citizen could well be the reason behind the problems they are facing,” he said.

  • 16. ianbirmingham  |  February 18, 2020 at 1:29 pm

    This last sentence is important. Turkey has militarily occupied Northern Cyprus for the past several decades now. Turkey is trying to grab oil & gas from the waters belonging to Cyprus. Turkey has long been a boorish bully here, and it has fully earned the deep anger of Cyprus. This could well be a case in which people who happen to be gay are being harassed, but not for being gay.

  • 17. VIRick  |  February 17, 2020 at 4:05 pm

    Maryland: Assembly Committees Hold Hearings on Bills to Ban "Gay Panic" Defense

    Last week, two Maryland General Assembly committees held hearings on bills that would ban the so-called "gay panic" defense in criminal cases. On 11 February 2020, the House Judiciary Committee heard testimony on House Bill 488, sponsored by state Del. Julie Palakovich Carr (D-Montgomery County). On the same date, the Senate Judiciary Committee heard testimony on Senate Bill 554, sponsored by state Sen. Clarence Lam (D-Baltimore and Howard Counties).

    Both bills would ban the use of a crime victim’s actual or perceived LGBTQ identity as a mitigating factor in court. Palakovich Carr added that this legal strategy is not based on science, but rooted in “hatred and bigotry,” and stated that it has been used in a number of murder cases across the country, including Maryland. “And there have been people who have been acquitted of murder or other charges because of this defense strategy,” she said.

  • 18. Randolph_Finder  |  February 18, 2020 at 3:22 am

    Maryland has a Republican Governor, but in general, he hasn't made vetoes that he knows will likely be overrident on social issues. Maryland has a 60% majority needed in both houses for override, but the Democrats have more than that. So if you get all of the Democrats voting for it, it will pass.

  • 19. VIRick  |  February 17, 2020 at 6:09 pm

    Miraflores, Perú: Symbolic Outdoor Same-Sex Marriage Event on Valentine's Day

    Per Radio Nacional:

    El 14 de febrero 2020, en Miraflores, la Red Peruana TLGB viene realizando el Matrimonio Simbólico de 11 parejas de la comunidad LGTBI. Este evento contará con la presencia del virtual congresista-electo, Alberto de Belaunde.

    On 14 February 2020, in Miraflores, the Peruvian TLGB Network carried out the Symbolic Marriage of 11 couples from the LGTBI community. This event counted upon the presence of the newly re-elected congressman-elect, Alberto de Belaunde.

    Note: Miraflores is an up-scale, seaside district in Lima Province, south of downtown Lima.

  • 20. VIRick  |  February 17, 2020 at 7:11 pm

    Jalisco: Same-Sex Marriages Increase 40 Percent

    Per Osos Musculosos de Jalisco (Muscular Bears of Jalisco):

    Jalisco: Matrimonios Homosexuales Aumentan 40 Por Ciento

    Según indicaron datos del Registro Civil de Jalisco, los matrimonios homosexuales tuvieron un aumento del 40 por ciento durante 2019. Detallan que en solo Guadalajara y Zapopan, 217 parejas gay contrajeron matrimonio. Cabe mencionar que este porcentaje es en comparación de 2018, pues durante ese año hubo un total de 155 enlaces del mismo sexo. En 2017, solo 95 parejas acudieron al Registro Civil.

    En 2016, 145 parejas homosexuales se casaron en Jalisco, y anteriormente, al menos 19 ya habían sido celebradas gracias los juicios de amparo. En lo que va de este 2020, 11 parejas han acudido al Registro Civil a hacer legal su relación.

    According to data from the Jalisco Civil Registry, same-sex marriages had a 40 percent increase during 2019. They detail that in Guadalajara and Zapopan alone, 217 gay couples contracted marriage. It is worth mentioning that this percentage is in comparison to 2018, as during that year, there were a total of 155 same-sex marriages. In 2017, only 95 couples went to the Civil Registry.

    In 2016, 145 gay couples were married in Jalisco, and previously, at least 19 had already been celebrated thanks to amparo judgments. So far for 2020, 11 couples have gone to the Civil Registry to make their relationship legal.

  • 21. VIRick  |  February 17, 2020 at 8:04 pm

    Nicaragua: A Ray of Hope for Marriage Equality (Brought Home from Abroad)

    Per la Constitución Política de Nicaragua‏:

    A propósito del matrimonio igualitario en Costa Rica: un vacío legal en el Código Civil de la República (de Nicaragua):

    Codigo Civil de Nicaragua

    Artículo 103. El matrimonio celebrado en el extranjero entre nicaragüenses, o entre nicaragüense y extranjera, o entre extranjero y nicaragüense, también producirá efectos civiles en territorio nicaragüense, si se hace constar que se realiza con las formas y requisitos que en el lugar de su celebración establecen las leyes, y que el nicaragüense no ha contravenido a las disposiciones de este Código relativas a la aptitud para contraer matrimonio y a los impedimentos absolutos.

    Per the Political Constitution of Nicaragua:

    In light of marriage equality in Costa Rica: a legal vacuum in the Civil Code of the Republic (of Nicaragua):

    Nicaragua Civil Code

    Article 103. Marriage celebrated abroad between Nicaraguans, or between a Nicaraguan and a foreigner (female), or between a foreigner (male) and a Nicaraguan, will also produce civil effects in Nicaraguan territory, if it has been stated that it was performed with the forms and requirements in the place of its celebration as established by law, and that the Nicaraguan has not contravened the provisions of this Code relative to the ability to marry and to the absolute impediments.

    Note: Although the word "extranjero/a" is gender-specific, the word "nicaragüense" is gender-neutral. So, yes, per the specific Spanish text, any two Nicaraguans can marry abroad, any (gender-neutral) Nicaraguan can marry a foreign female, and a foreign male can marry any (gender-neutral) Nicaraguan.

    Also note: This Twitter account, with the Username of "Constitución Política de Nicaragua," was only begun on 13 February 2020. Although unlikely, one can not fully determine whether this is an actual government-sanctioned account. Instead, though, it would appear far more likely to be the recent inspiration of a private individual in Nicaragua.

  • 22. VIRick  |  February 17, 2020 at 8:42 pm

    More on the Constitución Política de Nicaragua‏:

    Las disposiciones del código civil a la aptitud de contraer el matrimonio son: varón mayor de 21 años o declarado mayor; mujer mayor de 18 años o declarada mayor (sin ningún impedimento); habiles: varón a partir de los 15 años, mujer a partir de los 14 años.

    Impedimentos absolutos:

    1. El de la persona que esta ligada por un matrimonio anterior.
    2. El de parentesco entre ascendientes y descendientes por consanguinidad o afinidad legítima o ilegítima.
    3. El de parentesco entre hermanos.
    4. El de homicidio entre el autor o cómplice de la muerte de uno de los cónyuge y el cónyuge sobreviviente; y
    5. El del condenado por adulterio y su cómplice.

    The provisions of the civil code for the ability to contract marriage are: adult male of 21 years or declared adult; adult woman of 18 years or declared adult (without any other impediment); valid for: male from 15 years old, female from 14 years old.

    Absolute impediments:

    1. That of the person who is bound by a previous marriage.
    2. That of the relationship between ascendants and descendants by consanguinity or legitimate or illegitimate affinity.
    3. That of the relationship between brothers.
    4. That of homicide between the perpetrator or accomplice in the death of one of the spouses and the surviving spouse; y
    5. One convicted of adultery and their accomplice.

  • 23. ianbirmingham  |  February 18, 2020 at 1:35 pm

    #3 only applies to brothers (and not to sisters)?

  • 24. VIRick  |  February 18, 2020 at 5:56 pm

    Ian, in gendered Spanish, "hermanos" means brothers, while "hermanas" means sisters. However, in the old-fashioned way of stating it in a situation that includes both genders, the default is to utilize the masculine, thus "hermanos," as was done in this provision, which, like the entire quoted text, has not been up-dated or modernized in years and years. Still, the fault lies with the translator. In order to carry the correct sense in English, I should have said:

    3. That of the relationship between siblings.

    However, the entire possibility of same-sex marriages from Costa Rica (or anywhere else abroad) being recognized as valid in Nicaragua hinges on the fact that the word "nicaragüense," utilized multiple times throughout to describe multiple possible marriage scenarios, is gender-neutral.

    I have seen two other ethnicities expressed in that same gender-neutral format: "costarricense" and "puertorriquense" (also "boricua"), although the gender specific, "costarriqueño/a" or "tico/a" for the first and "puertorriqueño/a" for the second, are more common. "Boricua" derives from the fact that the island's original name in the indigenous Taino language is "Borinquen." I have no idea as to the origins of "Tico."

  • 25. ianbirmingham  |  February 18, 2020 at 7:35 pm

    I ask because consanguinity is also a realm in which the freedom to marry is contested. If sisters were free to marry in Nicaragua, to my knowledge that would represent a significant advance. In Sweden, it is legal to marry a half-sibling:

    And in Brazil, half-siblings can also legally marry:

    However, at present I am unaware of any jurisdiction in which full siblings can legally marry.

    There are several countries (e.g., France) and a few US states (e.g., New Jersey) in which consenting adults may legally have sex regardless of consanguinity. In other places, even consensual sex remains illegal.

    This BBC article describes an unsuccessful challenge to the German law against sibling marriage and provides a general overview of the legal landscape (as of 2007, but not much has changed since then):

  • 26. VIRick  |  February 19, 2020 at 11:42 am

    I almost forgot,– there's also the gender-neutral "estadunidense" and "canadiense" for those from "El Norte," while "mexiquense" refers to someone from Edomex and "sonorense" to someone from Sonora.

Having technical problems? Visit our support page to report an issue!