It’s interesting to see where exactly same sex marriage is and is not recognized. A lot of lower South America is far more progressive than I might have imagined in this area. Australia’s mid-way cohabitation laws are also interesting. I would have bet they would be fully invested in SSM at this point and not at this mid point.
I’m also surprised that Australia does not have full fledged SSM.
I’m also surprised that both Texas and Bangladesh have announced their intention to recognize. I could be completely wrong about Bangladesh- I just imagined that they would be a more conservative country.
I’m pretty sure that’s Nepal, not Bangladesh, where they’re working on a new constitution that’s supposed to inlcude same-sex marriage rights.
In the case of Texas (and the other US states with that “intention to recognize” colour) it refers to decisions of federal district courts which have held that bans on SSM are unconstitutional. All those decisions are stayed as they work their way through appeals, and presumably will remain so until one of them reaches the Supreme Court.
“Unregistered cohabitation” has to exist virtually everywhere on the planet, and is supposed to override the color lower on the scale (SSM not allowed). But it doesn’t, which makes me suspect the whole map.
Not really – for a start, it would be illegal in some countries. But I suspect that it means more than just living together without a marriage or civil union: it would mean state recognition of that de facto status for some purposes, even though the couple doesn’t have a piece of paper.
Really? On most of the earth you can’t have a roommate of the same sex?
Cohabitation means more than being roommates: it includes having sex together.
Oops, well, good for Nepal!
Unless there’s a requirement to report sexual behavior among roommates, there is no practical difference.
I believe “unregistered cohabitation” similar to (if not the same as) common-law marriage, so it wouldn’t be recognized is most places for same-sex couples.
“Unregistered cohabitation” refers to countries where there is some legal recognition of same-sex couples even though there is no official registration of the partners.
For example, in South Africa before same-sex marriage was legalised, the courts extended various rights - medical and pension, immigration, adoption, etc. - piecemeal to what they called “same-sex life partners”. There was no legal registration of these “life partnerships”, rather they had to be proved by evidence. Generally this meant something like documentation of living together for some fixed period of time, and a sworn affidavit saying you were partners. This was not an very satisfactory situation, as in each case you might have to provide different documentation - maybe your employer wants evidence of 6 months cohabitation, but the medical insurer wants a year, and an adoption agency wants something else again, and so on.
The changes in Latin America are recent and dramatic. It appears that Latin American countries can defy the Catholic Church on sexual orientation but not reproduction. A number of countries also have quite progressive policies on gender identity, making it much easier for transgender people to change their legal gender status than is the case in the U.S. for example.
I wonder what those three outlined territories in Africa are.
Regions where there is a customary form of same-sex marriage (generally between two women) that is not considered homosexual.