Is Democratic America the most pro-LGBT place in the world?

[TheReckoning]

Are majority-Democratic places in the USA (think Pacific Coast, Northeast, Urban centers, etc.) the most pro-LGBT places in the world? If not, what is?

[DrScholl]

Doubtful. Amsterdam is probably far more friendly.

[Crumpets]

Fun fact: after Thailand, the country with the second most gender-reassignment surgeries is Iran (at least as of 2015 or so). And granted, there are a lot of factors at play here (namely whether Iran is forcing non-trans people in same-sex relationships to get surgery to be recognized as legit by the state), but all that is to say this is very much not a one-dimensional measurement.

[Crackerjack McJohnson]

No, there is no place in America that is the best at anything. 

[T'Chenka]

Liberal / NDP Ontario is definitely more pro-LGBTQ, as far as I can tell.

[EastwoodS]

I’d say the Netherlands, most of western and Northern Europe, Australia is progressing way faster than the US is on the LGBT issue.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

I’d say the Netherlands, most of western and Northern Europe, Australia is progressing way faster than the US is on the LGBT issue.

Anecdotally, my mom has an trans friend from Norway(online) who said she got treated better in a rednecky part of the US than in Norway.

[Born to Slay. Forced to Work.]

Netherlands, Belgium, Iceland hell even Malta beats American on some, if not all metrics when it comes to LGBT rights

[EastwoodS]

I’d say the Netherlands, most of western and Northern Europe, Australia is progressing way faster than the US is on the LGBT issue.

Anecdotally, my mom has an trans friend from Norway(online) who said she got treated better in a rednecky part of the US than in Norway.

Rednecks and southerners are well known to be nice to your face but fake behind your back.

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

D.C. is unironically the most LGBT-friendly place in the entire world.

[Alben Barkley]

Fun fact: after Thailand, the country with the second most gender-reassignment surgeries is Iran (at least as of 2015 or so). And granted, there are a lot of factors at play here (namely whether Iran is forcing non-trans people in same-sex relationships to get surgery to be recognized as legit by the state), but all that is to say this is very much not a one-dimensional measurement.

No, there are not "a lot of factors at play here." Iran -- an utterly evil, homophobic, and misogynistic authoritarian regime -- is forcing gay men to get fake vaginas under the threat of death, because they see it as less icky than two guys having butt sex. It is not some pro-trans paradise, and they would laugh at the postmodern ideas of "gender identity" accepted by Western liberals and probably execute someone with a penis who entered a women's bathroom.

[Ferguson97]

America, averaged as a whole? No. Are there specific places in America that could qualify as such? Yes, probably.

[Tintrlvr]

If you're permitting just parts of countries, there are definitely regions of other countries that are even more favorable - places like Amsterdam or parts of Canada are good examples already cited. Countries taken as a whole, maybe not, although possibly the Nordic countries and the Low Countries.

[Crumpets]

Fun fact: after Thailand, the country with the second most gender-reassignment surgeries is Iran (at least as of 2015 or so). And granted, there are a lot of factors at play here (namely whether Iran is forcing non-trans people in same-sex relationships to get surgery to be recognized as legit by the state), but all that is to say this is very much not a one-dimensional measurement.

No, there are not "a lot of factors at play here." Iran -- an utterly evil, homophobic, and misogynistic authoritarian regime -- is forcing gay men to get fake vaginas under the threat of death, because they see it as less icky than two guys having butt sex. It is not some pro-trans paradise, and they would laugh at the postmodern ideas of "gender identity" accepted by Western liberals and probably execute someone with a penis who entered a women's bathroom.

I mean, if you read the backstory of how gender reassignment surgery was initially legalized in Iran, it was NOT in the context of same-sex couples, but exactly the kind of cases that we would look at today in the US as transgender people needing treatment. Quoting from Wikipedia here (not my only source, I did a project on this in undergrad, just looking for something straightforward):

One early campaigner for transgender rights was Maryam Hatoon Molkara, a transgender woman. Before the revolution, she had longed to become physically female but could not afford surgery and wanted religious authorization. In 1975, she began to write letters to Khomeini, who was to become the leader of the revolution and was in exile. After the revolution, she was fired, forcibly injected with male hormones, and institutionalized. She was later released with help from her connections and continued to lobby many other leaders. Later she went to see Khomeini, who had returned to Iran. During this visit, she was subjected to beatings from his guards because she was wearing a binder and they suspected she could be armed. Khomeini, however, did give her a letter to authorize her sex reassignment operation, which she later did in 1997. Due to this fatwa, issued in 1987, transgender women in Iran have been able to live as women until they can afford surgery, have surgical reassignment, have their birth certificates and all official documents issued to them in their new gender, and marry men.

Now, that fatwa has obviously been abused in the years since, but I think trying to write all of Iran's efforts in this regard as being driven purely by homophobia does a lot of disrespect to people like Molkara, who risked her life to try to push for reforms. Anecdotally, if you read the behind-the-scenes of her interactions with Khomeini, it's a really fascinating story. (Summary here) The questions Khomeini asked weren't about homosexuality, but about the differences between hermaphrodites, transsexuals, and "neutrals." I think it's pretty undeniable that the law as originally written applied to, still applies to, and was meant to apply to exactly the kind of people Western liberals would consider to be trans.

Now, obviously, none of that excuses how the law has been applied. Which is exactly why I was saying it was not a one-dimension question. Iran is one of the worst countries in the world for gay rights. Full stop. Iran has a modestly liberal policy towards gender reassignment, albeit one that is used to justify a lot of abuse. Whether Iranian and Western ideas of gender identity are compatible is definitely a debate to be had, but spoiler, part of the reason Molkara was successful in lobbying Khomeini was specifically because the Quran is pretty mum on the issue and people everywhere tend to make up their minds on these issues based on personal experience rather than their holy book's chapter on gender identity.

[Alben Barkley]

Fun fact: after Thailand, the country with the second most gender-reassignment surgeries is Iran (at least as of 2015 or so). And granted, there are a lot of factors at play here (namely whether Iran is forcing non-trans people in same-sex relationships to get surgery to be recognized as legit by the state), but all that is to say this is very much not a one-dimensional measurement.

No, there are not "a lot of factors at play here." Iran -- an utterly evil, homophobic, and misogynistic authoritarian regime -- is forcing gay men to get fake vaginas under the threat of death, because they see it as less icky than two guys having butt sex. It is not some pro-trans paradise, and they would laugh at the postmodern ideas of "gender identity" accepted by Western liberals and probably execute someone with a penis who entered a women's bathroom.

I mean, if you read the backstory of how gender reassignment surgery was initially legalized in Iran, it was NOT in the context of same-sex couples, but exactly the kind of cases that we would look at today in the US as transgender people needing treatment. Quoting from Wikipedia here (not my only source, I did a project on this in undergrad, just looking for something straightforward):

One early campaigner for transgender rights was Maryam Hatoon Molkara, a transgender woman. Before the revolution, she had longed to become physically female but could not afford surgery and wanted religious authorization. In 1975, she began to write letters to Khomeini, who was to become the leader of the revolution and was in exile. After the revolution, she was fired, forcibly injected with male hormones, and institutionalized. She was later released with help from her connections and continued to lobby many other leaders. Later she went to see Khomeini, who had returned to Iran. During this visit, she was subjected to beatings from his guards because she was wearing a binder and they suspected she could be armed. Khomeini, however, did give her a letter to authorize her sex reassignment operation, which she later did in 1997. Due to this fatwa, issued in 1987, transgender women in Iran have been able to live as women until they can afford surgery, have surgical reassignment, have their birth certificates and all official documents issued to them in their new gender, and marry men.

Now, that fatwa has obviously been abused in the years since, but I think trying to write all of Iran's efforts in this regard as being driven purely by homophobia does a lot of disrespect to people like Molkara, who risked her life to try to push for reforms. Anecdotally, if you read the behind-the-scenes of her interactions with Khomeini, it's a really fascinating story. (Summary here) The questions Khomeini asked weren't about homosexuality, but about the differences between hermaphrodites, transsexuals, and "neutrals." I think it's pretty undeniable that the law as originally written applied to, still applies to, and was meant to apply to exactly the kind of people Western liberals would consider to be trans.

Now, obviously, none of that excuses how the law has been applied. Which is exactly why I was saying it was not a one-dimension question. Iran is one of the worst countries in the world for gay rights. Full stop. Iran has a modestly liberal policy towards gender reassignment, albeit one that is used to justify a lot of abuse. Whether Iranian and Western ideas of gender identity are compatible is definitely a debate to be had, but spoiler, part of the reason Molkara was successful in lobbying Khomeini was specifically because the Quran is pretty mum on the issue and people everywhere tend to make up their minds on these issues based on personal experience rather than their holy book's chapter on gender identity.

I am just telling you, there is not a snowball's chance in hell that Khomeini or anyone else in authority in Iran would ever agree with the Western liberal idea of "gender identity" as somehow separate from physical sex. Maybe they were convinced that a "sex change" could be a thing, and no doubt from the earliest days they could see how it could be used as the ultimate form of "conversion therapy" for gay men, as it was from pretty much the start. And no doubt it all boils down to "better to have a 'straight woman' taking it up the 'vagina' than a gay man taking it up the ass, if we must deal with biological males who are into that sort of thing anyway." But in any case, their conception of it is definitely very much rooted in the idea that physical parts define your sex/gender. Again, they very much would NOT be OK with pre-op trans people acting as their identified gender. The surgery is necessary to get a legal sex change in Iran. And there sure as hell is no protection for a "trans lesbian," which these days seems to be more common in the West than the narrow type of trans person "protected" in Iran.

Anyone seeing this as in any way liberal, modern, progressive, or "woke" and is unable to see their OBVIOUS real motives is naive in the extreme, frankly. It kinda reminds me of how the woke sometimes try to portray the "Third Gender" or "Two Spirit" idea in some native cultures as somehow progressive when in fact it was basically making fun of men who were seen as not "manly" enough to be "real men" and do "real man's work" so they were stuck with the women. It's pretty much the opposite of "woke."

[Хahar 🤔]

Fun fact: after Thailand, the country with the second most gender-reassignment surgeries is Iran (at least as of 2015 or so). And granted, there are a lot of factors at play here (namely whether Iran is forcing non-trans people in same-sex relationships to get surgery to be recognized as legit by the state), but all that is to say this is very much not a one-dimensional measurement.

No, there are not "a lot of factors at play here." Iran -- an utterly evil, homophobic, and misogynistic authoritarian regime -- is forcing gay men to get fake vaginas under the threat of death, because they see it as less icky than two guys having butt sex. It is not some pro-trans paradise, and they would laugh at the postmodern ideas of "gender identity" accepted by Western liberals and probably execute someone with a penis who entered a women's bathroom.

I mean, if you read the backstory of how gender reassignment surgery was initially legalized in Iran, it was NOT in the context of same-sex couples, but exactly the kind of cases that we would look at today in the US as transgender people needing treatment. Quoting from Wikipedia here (not my only source, I did a project on this in undergrad, just looking for something straightforward):

One early campaigner for transgender rights was Maryam Hatoon Molkara, a transgender woman. Before the revolution, she had longed to become physically female but could not afford surgery and wanted religious authorization. In 1975, she began to write letters to Khomeini, who was to become the leader of the revolution and was in exile. After the revolution, she was fired, forcibly injected with male hormones, and institutionalized. She was later released with help from her connections and continued to lobby many other leaders. Later she went to see Khomeini, who had returned to Iran. During this visit, she was subjected to beatings from his guards because she was wearing a binder and they suspected she could be armed. Khomeini, however, did give her a letter to authorize her sex reassignment operation, which she later did in 1997. Due to this fatwa, issued in 1987, transgender women in Iran have been able to live as women until they can afford surgery, have surgical reassignment, have their birth certificates and all official documents issued to them in their new gender, and marry men.

Now, that fatwa has obviously been abused in the years since, but I think trying to write all of Iran's efforts in this regard as being driven purely by homophobia does a lot of disrespect to people like Molkara, who risked her life to try to push for reforms. Anecdotally, if you read the behind-the-scenes of her interactions with Khomeini, it's a really fascinating story. (Summary here) The questions Khomeini asked weren't about homosexuality, but about the differences between hermaphrodites, transsexuals, and "neutrals." I think it's pretty undeniable that the law as originally written applied to, still applies to, and was meant to apply to exactly the kind of people Western liberals would consider to be trans.

Now, obviously, none of that excuses how the law has been applied. Which is exactly why I was saying it was not a one-dimension question. Iran is one of the worst countries in the world for gay rights. Full stop. Iran has a modestly liberal policy towards gender reassignment, albeit one that is used to justify a lot of abuse. Whether Iranian and Western ideas of gender identity are compatible is definitely a debate to be had, but spoiler, part of the reason Molkara was successful in lobbying Khomeini was specifically because the Quran is pretty mum on the issue and people everywhere tend to make up their minds on these issues based on personal experience rather than their holy book's chapter on gender identity.

I am just telling you, there is not a snowball's chance in hell that Khomeini or anyone else in authority in Iran would ever agree with the Western liberal idea of "gender identity" as somehow separate from physical sex. Maybe they were convinced that a "sex change" could be a thing, and no doubt from the earliest days they could see how it could be used as the ultimate form of "conversion therapy" for gay men, as it was from pretty much the start. And no doubt it all boils down to "better to have a 'straight woman' taking it up the 'vagina' than a gay man taking it up the ass, if we must deal with biological males who are into that sort of thing anyway." But in any case, their conception of it is definitely very much rooted in the idea that physical parts define your sex/gender. Again, they very much would NOT be OK with pre-op trans people acting as their identified gender. The surgery is necessary to get a legal sex change in Iran. And there sure as hell is no protection for a "trans lesbian," which these days seems to be more common in the West than the narrow type of trans person "protected" in Iran.

Anyone seeing this as in any way liberal, modern, progressive, or "woke" and is unable to see their OBVIOUS real motives is naive in the extreme, frankly. It kinda reminds me of how the woke sometimes try to portray the "Third Gender" or "Two Spirit" idea in some native cultures as somehow progressive when in fact it was basically making fun of men who were seen as not "manly" enough to be "real men" and do "real man's work" so they were stuck with the women. It's pretty much the opposite of "woke."

Why did you even bother replying to his post when you didn't read any of it?

[It’s so Joever]

D.C. is unironically the most LGBT-friendly place in the entire world.

San Francisco?

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

D.C. is unironically the most LGBT-friendly place in the entire world.

San Francisco?

Perhaps. D.C. is unquestionably the most LGBT-friendly first-level subdivision (State/province, etc) though.

[Sol]

D.C. is unironically the most LGBT-friendly place in the entire world.

San Francisco?

Perhaps. D.C. is unquestionably the most LGBT-friendly first-level subdivision (State/province, etc) though.

Hard for a place to be the most pro-LGBT in the world when there's no universal healthcare system to support medical transition or welfare state to support people disowned by their families.

In terms of attitudes maybe but in terms of the experience of LGBT people you probably have to go to the Nordics or Canada.

[7,052,770]

Pro-LGBT is good, so if Democratic Americans are the most pro-LGBT people in the world, I'm proud to be a Democrat.

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

D.C. is unironically the most LGBT-friendly place in the entire world.

San Francisco?

Perhaps. D.C. is unquestionably the most LGBT-friendly first-level subdivision (State/province, etc) though.

Hard for a place to be the most pro-LGBT in the world when there's no universal healthcare system to support medical transition or welfare state to support people disowned by their families.

In terms of attitudes maybe but in terms of the experience of LGBT people you probably have to go to the Nordics or Canada.

That's kinda the point, no? Iran provides free gender transition surgeries and America doesn't, yet one is undoubtedly better for LGBT people.

[ProgressiveModerate]

If people have to go out of their way to see gay and transgender people as something unique and not just part of the natural biological variation, then know.

This is probably a more progressive view of mine, but for instance coming out of the closet is inherently othering for gay and lesbian folks. Somebody should be able to love someone of gender without anyone batting an eye, though we can also acknowledge heterosexual relationships are the most common.

[progressive85]

The United States in 1969 was the world's superpower and it had all the right characteristics to make for a gay liberation movement in the 70s: a culture that was gradually becoming more open-minded, advancements made by women in the society, individualistic thinking, freedom in the marketing and selling of goods, the popularity of the mass entertainment culture, and in several of its major cities, a substantial population of gay people becoming more and more visible.  So the United States has had a big head-start over many of the other countries.

In the 21st century, we have seen the visibility expand throughout the world so that it is now a global change that's occurring.  Especially in an age of the Internet and technological advancements, things are spreading faster than they ever have before.

I feel the United States definitely is leading the way in so many areas, this is the origin of a lot of what happens across the world. 

There's definitely a reason the Stonewall Riots hold such global significance to the growing gay movements in other countries, and it's not a coincidence that it took place in a major American city.

[Bernie Derangement Syndrome Haver]

Progressive liberal arts colleges in various pockets of the country where 90%+ of the students identify as non-binary socialists just may be. Progressive parts of Europe are more chill overall and would be cool with that but Amsterdam, Norway, Iceland, etc. definitely have most people still identifying with their birth sex.

[the artist formerly known as catmusic]

Montreal is the place I've felt the safest as a gay. More than NYC even.