Report of the Needs Assessment

The Gay Games workshop was followed up by Empowerment Lifestyle Services by doing a needs assessment for such a global network. Empowerment Lifestyle Services is a non profit company and used its profit of 2003 and 2004 to finance the assessment.

Respondents

In 2003 and 2004, interviews were conducted in Italy, Finland, Sweden, France, the UK and Austria. In late 2004 and early 2005, interviews were conducted in the global South. During this period 14 cities in 9 countries were visited (India, South Africa, Namibia, Australia, Mexico, Colombia, Brazil, Peru and Argentina) and 45 interviews were conducted. In the spring and summer of 2005, some additional interviews were conducted by e-mail, at a conference in Bangkok and in New York. The final needs assessment was based on the results of about 60 interviews.

The respondents were of a diversity of backgrounds. In Europe, most of them were voluntary of professional educators or trainers who worked specifically on LGBT issues. Most of these focussed on schools.
Many respondents in the global South were activists from LGBT organizations. The initial contacts were given by HIVOS, a Dutch development organization which at the time focussed mainly on AIDS prevention. This resulted in an over-representation of AIDS professionals. This was balanced by actively looking for lesbian and transgender activists and researchers, family planning and sex education organizations. On occasion interviews were conducted with government officials and representatives from other sectors, like lawyers and police officers. However, all of them had in common that they had an interest in education about LGBT issues.

Main results

1. It was found out that homosexualities and gender identities vary widely. Imposing one definition as a starting point for the work will deny global realities. A global network needs to be flexible in discussing these issues. Probably, guidelines need to be set for open debate between stakeholders who may have different opinions on the acceptability of educational content and strategies.
2. The degree of discrimination, the different perspectives on sexual orientation and gender identity and the different situations of local organizations all have a definite influence on local priorities. A global network needs to take such priorities into account.
3. Limiting the focus of a global network to the education within formal school systems would not be sensible, since in many countries, the formal education system is not open for education about sexual diversity.
4. Attention to capacity building of LGBT grass roots organizations, influencing the media and external training of professionals like journalists, the police forces and health professionals is necessary.
5. The global trend to neo-liberal policies and conservative sexual politics were perceived as serious threats to education about LGBT issues.

From these findings, a range of detailed recommendations for the creation of a network emerged.