He originally applied for a student visa. If a judge takes this at face value and is approved, every asylum seeker will take a picture with rainbows to get approved. The judge did comment on posturing and I think is just asking “have you ever been in a same sex relationship?”. It could be that there is zero evidence of a relationship.
Being gay isn’t wearing rainbows, it’s being attracted to someone of the same sex.
Asylum cases are a little more challeng and do need more proof than other situations.
“A major part of this involves giving oral testimony to a Home Office official. Inspectors in 2013 found that one in 10 interviewers would ask LGBTQ+ asylum seekers ‘intrusive questions’ such as: ‘Did you put your penis into X’s backside?’ and ‘Did X ejaculate inside you?’“
Bruh imagine getting deported for being a Virgin, you don’t carry enough homosexual proof like wtf, like what are you even saying ? He should be gayer? Like wtf, he should be promiscuous would that “validate” him?
That’s not what I asked. Do you think gay people have to have sex to be discriminated against?
Follow up question, do you think it’s possible for Asexual people to be discriminated against based on sexuality?
Second follow up question: Have you considered the possibility that people who have gay sex in countries where it is illegal are unlikely to keep evidence around that could be used against them, and that outing a partner who’s still in such a country could place that partner in mortal danger? Have you considered the possibility that the discrimination they face is the very reason that someone might avoid being in a relationship?
Home Office never had a good reputation with this sort of stuff. I think they were pretty thorough on visa through marriage as well due to there being man fake marriages they had to fish through.
That, as well as aro/ace being a thing, but also - imagine living someplace where being in the relationship you want to be in is not only illegal but potentially punishable by death, so you don’t risk it, or if you do, definitely don’t document it, and when you finally escape somewhere you think is safe, they tell you you don’t deserve protection because you have no proof of past relationships.
And don’t even start on the fact that much of the rampant homophobia around the world was institutionalised there by the same nations now looking for any way to turn those trying to desperately escape it, away.
Colonise the world, pillage and hoard all of the wealth and resources, then pull up the ladder and kick off anyone trying to escape the pit you put them in and whine about how they’re the ones trying to take over. It’s obscene.
Because gay aro/ace people exist, jfc (not to mention that a. being aro/ace doesn’t mean you never have any sex, but more importantly b. whatever orientation, aro/ace people are still marginalised and violently oppressed all over the world, just like the rest of the LGBTQIA+ community. It’s why it fucking include us)
If that is true, every asylum seeker would volunteer for an LGBTQIA+ charity. If it’s abused it could undermine the cases of gay people genuinely needing refuge as conversation goes from safety, to loophole.
If you come from a country where homosexuals have to fear for their life, taking and publishing pictures like that puts you in mortal danger if your asylum claim is denied.
I’d say after providing these photos, it almost doesn’t matter whether you’re really gay.
That’s what I was thinking. If it’s dangerous to send back someone who is gay, then it is dangerous to send back someone who is very publicly perceived to be gay. In some ways, the publicity from this case has made his case stronger.
I don’t know anything about situation but damn they really found the umm most flamboyants pictures of him.
The question is whether this is all there is.
He originally applied for a student visa. If a judge takes this at face value and is approved, every asylum seeker will take a picture with rainbows to get approved. The judge did comment on posturing and I think is just asking “have you ever been in a same sex relationship?”. It could be that there is zero evidence of a relationship.
Being gay isn’t wearing rainbows, it’s being attracted to someone of the same sex.
Asylum cases are a little more challeng and do need more proof than other situations.
“A major part of this involves giving oral testimony to a Home Office official. Inspectors in 2013 found that one in 10 interviewers would ask LGBTQ+ asylum seekers ‘intrusive questions’ such as: ‘Did you put your penis into X’s backside?’ and ‘Did X ejaculate inside you?’“
Bruh imagine getting deported for being a Virgin, you don’t carry enough homosexual proof like wtf, like what are you even saying ? He should be gayer? Like wtf, he should be promiscuous would that “validate” him?
If you’ve never had sex and never had a partner then why exactly are you claiming asylum for your sexuality.
Do you think gay people have to have sex to be discriminated against?
I think that gay people have to have had a relationship, either sexual or emotional to legitimately claim asylum for their sexuality.
That’s not what I asked. Do you think gay people have to have sex to be discriminated against?
Follow up question, do you think it’s possible for Asexual people to be discriminated against based on sexuality?
Second follow up question: Have you considered the possibility that people who have gay sex in countries where it is illegal are unlikely to keep evidence around that could be used against them, and that outing a partner who’s still in such a country could place that partner in mortal danger? Have you considered the possibility that the discrimination they face is the very reason that someone might avoid being in a relationship?
This person has been in the UK for 15 years.
I’d say a minority of homophobes have witnessed gay sex.
I didn’t call him a homophobe.
Ooof. That is a brutal line of questioning.
Home Office never had a good reputation with this sort of stuff. I think they were pretty thorough on visa through marriage as well due to there being man fake marriages they had to fish through.
"this guy’s got no street cred, fake and straight. "
That, as well as aro/ace being a thing, but also - imagine living someplace where being in the relationship you want to be in is not only illegal but potentially punishable by death, so you don’t risk it, or if you do, definitely don’t document it, and when you finally escape somewhere you think is safe, they tell you you don’t deserve protection because you have no proof of past relationships.
And don’t even start on the fact that much of the rampant homophobia around the world was institutionalised there by the same nations now looking for any way to turn those trying to desperately escape it, away.
Colonise the world, pillage and hoard all of the wealth and resources, then pull up the ladder and kick off anyone trying to escape the pit you put them in and whine about how they’re the ones trying to take over. It’s obscene.
If you’re aro /ace why exactly are you claiming asylum based on sexuality
Because gay aro/ace people exist, jfc (not to mention that a. being aro/ace doesn’t mean you never have any sex, but more importantly b. whatever orientation, aro/ace people are still marginalised and violently oppressed all over the world, just like the rest of the LGBTQIA+ community. It’s why it fucking include us)
He’s worked for an lgbtqia+ charity for asylum seekers. At this point, I don’t care if he is gay, he deserves to be accepted on merit.
If that is true, every asylum seeker would volunteer for an LGBTQIA+ charity. If it’s abused it could undermine the cases of gay people genuinely needing refuge as conversation goes from safety, to loophole.
If you come from a country where homosexuals have to fear for their life, taking and publishing pictures like that puts you in mortal danger if your asylum claim is denied.
I’d say after providing these photos, it almost doesn’t matter whether you’re really gay.
So all it takes to get asylum in the country is to take a picture with a rainbow top on yeah?
As you can plainly see by this article, no.
I’m not saying that’s the case, I’m asking what their opinion on asylum laws should be
That’s what I was thinking. If it’s dangerous to send back someone who is gay, then it is dangerous to send back someone who is very publicly perceived to be gay. In some ways, the publicity from this case has made his case stronger.