Inclusive approaches to archaeology (including queer, feminist, black, indigenous, etc. perspectives) have increasingly intersected with coding, maker, and hacker cultures to develop a uniquely ‘Do-It-Yourself’ style of disruption and activism. Digital technology provides opportunities to challenge conventional representations of people past and present in creative ways, but at what cost? As a critical appraisal of transhumanism and the era of digital scholarship, this article outlines compelling applications in inclusive digital practice but also the pervasive structures of privilege, inequity, inaccessibility, and abuse that are facilitated by open, web-based heritage projects. In particular, it evaluates possible means of creating a balance between individual-focused translational storytelling and public profiles, and the personal and professional risks that accompany these approaches, with efforts to foster, support, and protect traditionally marginalized archaeologists and communities.

Some scholars, faced with the apparent conflict between the Church of England's teaching on marriage and the idea of equal marriage embraced by the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013, have focused on the implications of that Act for the constitutional relationship between Church, State and nation. More frequently, noting the position of the Church of England under that Act, academics have critiqued the legislation as an exercise in balancing competing human rights. This article by contrast, leaving behind a tendency to treat religion as a monolithic ‘other’, and leaving behind the neat binaries of rights-based analyses, interrogates the internal agonies of the Church of England as it has striven to negotiate an institutional response to the secular legalisation of same-sex marriage. It explores the struggles of the Church to do so in a manner which holds in balance a wide array of doctrinal positions and the demands of mission, pastoral care and the continued apostolic identity of the Church of England.

Nonconsensual pornography, commonly known as “revenge porn,” is the dissemination of another’s sexually explicit images or videos without their consent. This article explores this phenomenon in gay and bisexual male online communities. The first part reviews the current sociological and legal literature on online dating, gay culture on the Internet, and revenge porn. Then, based on a survey of gay and bisexual male dating app users, ethnographic interviews, and an analysis of platform content moderation policies, the next part makes three related points. First, it shows that gay and bisexual men who use geosocial dating apps are more frequently victims of revenge porn than both the general population and the broader lesbian, gay, and bisexual community. Second, it shows that geosocial dating apps create powerful norms of disclosure that make sharing personal information all but required. And third, it describes how gay and bisexual male users engage in privacy navigation techniques with the goal of building trust and enhancing safety. The final substantive section then shows how inadequate protections for online privacy and inadequate legal incentives for safe platform design contribute to the problem of revenge porn. The article concludes with a summary and avenues for future research.

There has been a large increase in the migration of Muslim populations towards the western world and the USA in the past decade. Many have migrated in the hope of finding a safe home away from war, persecution, or a better economic situation, with many coming from Afghanistan and Syria. Gender and sexual minorities (GSM), or individuals who are not heterosexual and do not identify with their sex assigned at birth, are disproportionately over-represented within migrating groups. While most of these individuals will not have received psychotherapy in their home countries, it is likely they would receive or be required to obtain psychological services as part of the asylum process or through psychoeducational services as a requirement to receive assistance. In exploring the specific needs of Muslim GSM individuals, we highlight the diverse impacts of minority stress, shame, and how these might be mitigated through the integration of acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) and compassion-focused therapy (CFT). ACT and CFT may provide a helpful framework for a culturally adapted therapy that targets the needs of those experiencing intersectional Muslim and GSM identities, and can foster the cultivation of a meaningful life that can include all aspects of their identities.

Costa Rica and Colombia, two of the earliest Latin American countries to protect many LGBT rights, attempted to amplify those rights and litigate same-sex marriage (SSM) in mid-2000s; however, these attempts sparked a major anti-LGBT backlash by religious and conservative organizations. Yet a decade later, Colombia legalized SSM while Costa Rica still lacks the right to SSM. Using a most-similar systems comparative case study, this study engages the judicial politics literature to explain this divergent outcome. It details how courts, while staying receptive to many individual LGBT rights claims, deferred SSM legalization to popularly elected branches. In spite of the lack of legislative success in both countries, in Colombia a new litigation strategy harnessed that deference to craft a litigated route to legalized SSM. In Costa Rica, the courts’ lack of conditions or deadlines has left SSM foundering in the congress.

This Article has a twofold aim. First, it focuses on a particular case study, which has attracted the interest of several scholars from an interdisciplinary perspective: the legalization of same-sex marriage. The Article aims to show how changes in one specific socio-cultural landscape may spill into other contexts as a result of a ripple effect. The idea is to demonstrate how the emergence of a social fact—the increasing demands made by homosexual couples for their union to be recognized in one way or another—may make the process of institutionalization natural. A legal system may sometimes be bound to recognize social facts, and transnational law may enhance this phenomenon. The second aim of the Article is to claim is that, when analyzing change, legal deterministic theories should be dismissed, as they are based upon easy assumptions that do not correspond to empirical observations. Instead, as shown by constructivist approaches, the combined effect of structure and agency in some specific circumstances contributes to social and legal change. However, constructivists perhaps underestimate the relevance of unpredictable events and the (positive or negative) influence that transnational frameworks may have in forming discourses of power. In particular, the EU and the ECtHR systems may facilitate the diffusion of ideas and norms deriving directly from the liberal paradigm that inspire them. However, the liberal paradigm is contradictory, as it does not necessarily provide an incentive for change.

This Article analyses, through the lens of comparative law, the Oliari and others v. Italy judgment, which was issued by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in July 2015. The Oliari case is important for being the first judgment in which the ECtHR established the granting of legal “recognition and protection” to same-sex couples as a positive obligation for the Member States of the Council of Europe on the basis of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In order to understand the role of judicial bodies in the progressive protection of homosexual rights, this Article combines an analysis of European case law with the national perspective. As it concerns the supranational facet, the authors illustrate Oliari's reasoning and situate the case in the jurisprudence of the ECtHR. Elements of both continuity and innovation emerge from the analysis, as well as a relevant dimension of judicial dialogue supporting the incremental recognition of gay rights in Europe. As it concerns the national facet, this specific case was initially dealt with at the domestic level and was the object of judgment 138/2010 by the Italian Constitutional Court. The judgment is critically put into perspective through the examination of the jurisprudence of other European Constitutional Courts (France, Portugal and Spain) that were called on to decide similar cases in the same period. Therefore, the Article offers a comparative analysis of the Oliari judgment clarifying its relevance and speculating on the potential value of this case for the future recognition of the right to a “gay” family life in Europe.

This Case Note discusses the recent judgment of the German Constitutional Court (1 BvR 2019/16) requiring either the legal recognition of sex categories beyond male or female, or the aboltion of sex registration requirements. The Note considers the Court's decision within the broader constitutional case law on gender identity, and explores both the progressive potential, and the future—perhaps unforeseen—consequences, of the ruling. The Case Note proceeds in three sections. Section A introduces the facts of the constitutional challenge, and sets out both the submissions of the complainant, as well as the reasoning of the Constitutional Court. In Section B, the Case Note explores the domestic law novelty of the decision, placing particular emphasis on the application of a constitutional equality framework to persons who experience intersex variance. Finally, in Section C, the Case Note contextualizes the judgment, situating the reasoning of the Constitutional Court within wider movements for transgender—otherwise known as trans—and intersex rights.

This Article engages the debate over the free movement of same-sex couples and explores what can, and should, be learned from the case law on the recognition of names. These “name cases” provide valuable lessons for both the proponents and opponents of same-sex marriage recognition. These cases show, first, that Member States are under the presumption to recognize marriages performed in other Member States. This Article also considers the importance of the national and constitutional identities of the Member States and suggests that there remains a possibility that Member States may justify the non-recognition of a marriage or deprive same-sex couples of some of the rights heterosexual married couples benefit from. The Article explores how the EU is confronted with a federal clash of values and offers some suggestions on how to solve this clash.

Why do unthreatening social groups become targets of state repression? Repression of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people is especially puzzling since sexual minorities, unlike many ethnic minorities, pose no credible violent challenge to the state. This article contends that revolutionary governments are disproportionately oppressive toward sexual minorities for strategic and ideological reasons. Since revolutions create domestic instability, revolutionaries face unique strategic incentives to target ‘unreliable’ groups and to demonstrate an ability to selectively punish potential dissidents by identifying and punishing ‘invisible’ groups. Moreover, revolutionary governments are frequently helmed by elites with exclusionary ideologies – such as communism, fascism and Islamism – which represent collectivities rather than individuals. Elites adhering to these views are thus likely to perceive sexual minorities as liberal, individualistic threats to their collectivist projects. Statistical analysis using original data on homophobic repression demonstrates that revolutionary governments are more likely to target LGBT individuals, and that this effect is driven by exclusionary ideologues. Case study evidence from Cuba further indicates that the posited strategic and ideological mechanisms mediate the relationship between revolutionary government and homophobic repression.

Delivering research-supported intervention is increasingly important, given the growing emphasis on evidence-based practice in mental health treatment. When working with clients who hold marginalized identities, however, therapists may have questions about how to best tailor interventions, as treatments may not yet have demonstrated efficacy with under-represented populations. This paper describes potential strategies for using dialectical behaviour therapy (DBT) skills to help LGBTQ+ clients, guided by a theoretical model for understanding sexual stigma. Joining these two paradigms, suggestions are made for applications of skills that can help LGBTQ+ clients who are in DBT effectively interact with invalidating environments characterized by structural stigma. DBT-based strategies aimed at buffering clients from environmental invalidation and enhancing their skills in self-validation can help provide them with pathways towards affirming their own sexual orientation and gender identity. Examples from clinical cases are used to enhance understanding of skills application in practice.

It starts with a dress, or dresses. Among a menagerie of rainbow variations, certain features are standard: lace and ruffle-decked blouses under jumpers, aprons, or high-waisted belled and crinolined knee-length skirts; more skin covered than bare; headwear including bonnets, miniature hats, or massive bows over ringlets and long tresses. So many ruffles; so much lace (Fig. 1). Beginning in the late 1990s, gothic lolitas—overwhelmingly young women in their teens and twenties, and overwhelmingly girly in their outsized bows, platform Mary Jane shoes, and petticoated skirts—stood out as defiantly, bizarrely out of place and time on the Tokyo street scene, all bright white and concrete in Harajuku, a built-up postwar neighborhood of Tokyo known as a youth haven since the 1960s. More than twenty years later, although most Harajuku fashions have died out in keeping with a fad's typically short life cycle, the gothic lolitas have persisted and even multiplied, thanks in large part to the Internet, which has helped muster an army of misfit girl aristocrats not just in Japan but around the globe.

Intersectionality has contributed to the ongoing deconstruction of dichotomous and essentializing categories of identity and oppression. As some scholars have noted, however, intersectionality has debunked a sociobiological, single-node paradigm and unintentionally codified a deterministic form of social cognition. I suggest one mechanism for understanding how to untangle this intersectional dilemma: disclosure practices. Disclosure of stigmatized statuses can illuminate how macro level inequalities manifest in individual thought processes. This study adds to emerging research by showing how social actors rely on intersectional experiences to understand, think about, and frame complex social problems. I examine this topic via 197 interviews with 102 Black participants who identify as LGBT about their views on same-sex marriage as a civil rights issue before and after same-sex marriage was nationally legalized. Specifically, I argue that the Black LGBT participants’ experience with intersectional discrimination and their levels of sexual and gender identity disclosure account for their personal views on same-sex marriage and Black civil rights. Further, the majority of Black participants across disclosure practices viewed marriage equality as primarily benefitting the property interests of White gays and lesbians. Last, I discuss the implications of my findings for LGBT politics and the connections between self-interest and political perspectives.