Skip to main content
  • Sections
  • Search

Center for Strategic & International Studies

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • Sign In

Topics

  • Climate Change
  • Cybersecurity and Technology
    • Cybersecurity
    • Data Governance
    • Intellectual Property
    • Intelligence, Surveillance, and Privacy
    • Military Technology
    • Space
    • Technology and Innovation
  • Defense and Security
    • Counterterrorism and Homeland Security
    • Defense Budget
    • Defense Industry, Acquisition, and Innovation
    • Defense Strategy and Capabilities
    • Geopolitics and International Security
    • Long-Term Futures
    • Missile Defense
    • Space
    • Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation
  • Economics
    • Asian Economics
    • Global Economic Governance
    • Trade and International Business
  • Energy and Sustainability
    • Energy, Climate Change, and Environmental Impacts
    • Energy and Geopolitics
    • Energy Innovation
    • Energy Markets, Trends, and Outlooks
  • Global Health
    • Family Planning, Maternal and Child Health, and Immunizations
    • Multilateral Institutions
    • Health and Security
    • Infectious Disease
  • Human Rights
    • Building Sustainable and Inclusive Democracy
    • Business and Human Rights
    • Responding to Egregious Human Rights Abuses
    • Civil Society
    • Transitional Justice
    • Human Security
  • International Development
    • Food and Agriculture
    • Governance and Rule of Law
    • Humanitarian Assistance
    • Human Mobility
    • Private Sector Development
    • U.S. Development Policy

Regions

  • Africa
    • North Africa
    • Sub-Saharan Africa
  • Americas
    • Caribbean
    • North America
    • South America
  • Arctic
  • Asia
    • Afghanistan
    • Australia, New Zealand & Pacific
    • China
    • India
    • Japan
    • Korea
    • Pakistan
    • Southeast Asia
  • Europe
    • European Union
    • NATO
    • Post-Soviet Europe
    • Turkey
  • Middle East
    • The Gulf
    • Egypt and the Levant
    • North Africa
  • Russia and Eurasia
    • The South Caucasus
    • Central Asia
    • Post-Soviet Europe
    • Russia

Sections menu

  • Programs
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Analysis
    • Blogs
    • Books
    • Commentary
    • Congressional Testimony
    • Critical Questions
    • Interactive Reports
    • Journals
    • Newsletter
    • Reports
    • Transcript
  • Podcasts
  • iDeas Lab
  • Transcripts
  • Web Projects

Main menu

  • About Us
  • Support CSIS
    • Securing Our Future
Photo: Sajjad Hussain/AFP/Getty Images
Blog Post - The International Consortium on Closing Civic Space
Share
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Email
  • Printfriendly.com

Supporting the LGBTI Agenda: Why It Matters for Civil Society

March 20, 2018

By Julie Snyder

After the significant strides forward made by civil society in the 1980s and 1990s, the world faces insidious threats to civic space, and has seen a significant erosion of civil and political freedoms. Governments across the globe have used various tools and strategies to clamp down on civil society and curtail their space of work. These tactics range from restricting the resilience and sustainability of civil society actors to conflating human rights activism with threats to legitimacy. This trend of closing civic space threatens the survival of groups across the spectrum, from international humanitarian organizations that provide life-saving assistance to small, local social change movements. However, particularly vulnerable groups are at an even greater risk. Exacerbated by long and entrenched history of marginalization, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex (LGBTI) groups “ [are] bound to be among the most affected when repressive regimes place constraints on civil society.” Often excluded by mainstream civil society, LGBTI groups are left to fend for themselves, facing stigma, discrimination, and intimidation. LGBTI rights are, therefore, among the first rights to be attacked and the last to be protected.

Over the last decade, LGBTI advocates managed to achieve a recognition of the civil, political, economic, and social rights for LGBTI persons in many countries. Acknowledging the work of civil society organizations on LGBTI rights, the former United Nations special rapporteur on the freedom of association and peaceful assembly pointed out that “more than 20 countries allow same-sex marriages today; in 2000, there were zero. The community’s advocacy has also been wildly successful in changing public opinion. In the United States, for example, only 26 percent of people supported the idea of same-sex marriage in 1996. By 2015, that number rose to 61 percent.” Under the Obama administration, the United States advanced the LGBTI rights agenda at both the domestic and international level, with LGBTI rights forming an integral part of U.S. foreign policy in 2011. This led many conservative countries to follow suit and adopt policies that recognize the rights of LGBTI persons and support their collective action.

However, with the rise of populism and conservatism as well as the increase of restrictive measures on civil society, groups working on LGBTI rights have been subjected to all forms of human rights violations, including being arrested, harassed, tortured, demonized and killed. These practices aim to consolidate power within their conservative constituents, silencing dissenting voices and limiting the space for civic action. Governments and non-state actors engage in smear campaigns against LGBTI individuals or against organizations working on LGBTI rights or led by LGBTI individuals, associating LGBTI with pedophilia, mental illness, or sinful and contagious behavior.

Homosexual relationships are criminalized in 72 countries around the world, making the very act of upholding LGBTI rights illegal and sometimes fatal. In Nigeria, identifying as homosexual can lead to sentences ranging from prolonged imprisonment to death by stoning. Even in Georgia, where homosexuality is legal, LGBTI activists are often attacked by anti-gay groups while the police turn a blind eye. Though its provisions on the criminalization of same-sex sexual conduct are rarely enforced legally, Ghanaian LGBTI persons are often subjected to vigilante violence. Oftentimes, the push for LGBTI rights – and the subsequent clampdown on them – is dismissed as a western phenomenon or an “attack” on traditional values. The Indonesian Defense Minister claimed, for example, that “[i]t’s as we can’t see who our foes are, but out of the blue everyone is brainwashed — now the [LGBT] community is demanding more freedom, it really is a threat.” Since 2013, Algeria, Lithuania, Nigeria and Russia have all passed laws prohibiting “homosexual propaganda,” making it difficult, if not impossible, for LGBTI civil society organizations (CSOs) to operate without interference from the state. Similarly, Ugandan authorities prohibited the organization of capacity building activities for LGBTI human rights defenders in various instances.

The year 2017 alone portrays a disturbing picture, “a global backlash against gay rights.” Evdokiya Romanova, a Russian activist, was found guilty of spreading “propaganda of non-traditional sexual relationships among minors using the Internet” by a Russian court in October 2017. Furthermore, governments have made it difficult and sometimes impossible for organizations working on LGBTI rights to be registered, to receive foreign funding, and to organize their advocacy. In Egypt, the government ramped up arrests for openly LGBTI individuals, and several public figures condemned homosexuality, with one television host even saying that it “ is a crime that’s as terrible as terrorism .” Similarly, Turkey banned all LGBTI events using the justification of protecting public security.

As some segments of society in many countries embrace deep-rooted homo-, bi-, and transphobic beliefs alongside traditional values, civil society organizations – in an attempt not to alienate their constituents – fail to stand in solidarity with LGBTI communities and groups. Given the prejudice and social bias against LGBTI rights, some CSOs opt not to amplify and lend legitimacy to efforts to advance the recognition of the rights of LGBTI people, and turn a blind eye on the violations committed against LGBTI community. The silence of mainstream human rights CSOs stems from the narrowing of civic space; as pressure on civil society increases, mainstream CSOs become absorbed in their own survival and leave more vulnerable organizations by the wayside.

To avoid further scrutiny by host governments and cultural barriers, donors are often hesitant to fund LGBTI groups or initiatives. The quest for sustainable funding plagues LGBTI groups – in 2013, Funders for LGBTQ Issues found that for every $100 given by foundations, only 24 cents goes to LGBTI groups; furthermore, 54 percent came from only three organizations. These groups are seeking to diversify their funding through community donations and implementing cost-saving measures that could expose their staff to greater insecurity.

Civil society experts note the significance of networks between CSOs to protect civic space, particularly for more vulnerable groups. The Fund for Global Human Rights deliberately connects LGBTI CSOs to human rights movements in their own countries to build constituencies for their advocacy. Careful and deliberate coalitions with other civil society groups can be a powerful bulwark against attacks on LGBTI groups and yield gains for all. For example, California adopted a gender neutral access law after joint advocacy by LGBTI groups and women’s groups, and the targeting of LGBTI groups in Uganda through social media led to a broad-based movement to learn how to use and implement virtual private networks (VPNs) by civil society.

Because of their heightened vulnerability and connection with the status of rights across the board, the health of LGBTI organizations within a country can serve as a weathervane for the state of broader civil society. As the Global Philanthropy Project notes, the targeting of LGBTI groups often signals an incoming crackdown on civil society writ large. CSOs at large should not only be standing with LGBTI groups and individuals in solidarity to protect their human rights, but also for the health of civic space – as a diverse and dynamic civil society that is inclusive of all voices is one that is most effective. CSOs must support their LGBTI colleagues to successfully push back against closing space. Civil society should actively seek areas for collaboration to uphold both their own and the LGBTI agenda. LGBTI rights are human rights – and civil society cannot be selective in its call for change.

Julie N. Snyder is a research and advocacy associate with the U.S. program at the Center for Civilians in Conflict.

Media Queries
Contact H. Andrew Schwartz
Chief Communications Officer
Tel: 202.775.3242

Contact Paige Montfort
Media Relations Coordinator, External Relations
Tel: 202.775.3173
Related
Americas, Broadening Domestic Constituencies, Human Rights Initiative, Strengthening Transnational Solidarity, The International Consortium on Closing Civic Space (iCon)

More from this blog

Blog Post
Invest in Citizens: The best way to push back against closing civic space in Europe and Eurasia
In The International Consortium on Closing Civic Space
October 1, 2018
Blog Post
Moving Beyond Words
By Lana Baydas
In The International Consortium on Closing Civic Space
July 27, 2018
Blog Post
Liberty or Security: Do Civil Society Restrictions Limit Terrorism?
In The International Consortium on Closing Civic Space
June 4, 2018
Blog Post
What Can Be Done to Incentivize the Private Sector to Respect and Protect Civic Freedoms?
In The International Consortium on Closing Civic Space
May 21, 2018
Blog Post
Promoting Sustainable Business Practices to Protect Human Rights in Africa
In The International Consortium on Closing Civic Space
May 16, 2018
Blog Post
Opening Up Civic Space through Effective Civil Society and Government Cooperation
In The International Consortium on Closing Civic Space
January 10, 2018
Blog Post
Empowering Citizens to Reclaim Civic Space in Africa
In The International Consortium on Closing Civic Space
August 8, 2017
Blog Post
Germany Sets a Poor Example: The Case of ATTAC in Light of Globally Closing Civic Spaces
In The International Consortium on Closing Civic Space
July 17, 2017

Related Content

Commentary
Conduct Is the Key: Improving Civilian Protection in Nigeria
July 9, 2020
Commentary
Africa Reacts to Secretary Blinken’s Africa Tour
November 30, 2021
Commentary
Fault Lines in Five More Years of Museveni’s Rule
By Maria E. Burnett
May 14, 2021
Newsletter
ISP Brief March 2021
March 31, 2021
Blog Post
Months After Coup, Myanmar Accelerates Toward Surveillance State
In New Perspectives on Asia
August 24, 2021
Commentary
How to Win at the International Telecommunication Union
By Kristen Cordell
May 20, 2021
Newsletter
ISP Brief July 2020
July 31, 2020
Report
Confronting Stabilocracy in the Western Balkans: A New Approach for U.S. Assistance
By Donatienne Ruy
May 26, 2021
Footer menu
  • Topics
  • Regions
  • Programs
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Analysis
  • Web Projects
  • Podcasts
  • iDeas Lab
  • Transcripts
  • About Us
  • Support Us
Contact CSIS
Email CSIS
Tel: 202.887.0200
Fax: 202.775.3199
Visit CSIS Headquarters
1616 Rhode Island Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20036
Media Queries
Contact H. Andrew Schwartz
Chief Communications Officer
Tel: 202.775.3242

Contact Paige Montfort
Media Relations Coordinator, External Relations
Tel: 202.775.3173

Daily Updates

Sign up to receive The Evening, a daily brief on the news, events, and people shaping the world of international affairs.

Subscribe to CSIS Newsletters

Follow CSIS
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube
  • Instagram

All content © 2022. All rights reserved.

Legal menu
  • Credits
  • Privacy Policy
  • Reprint Permissions