Thomson Reuters Foundation, BERLIN
For many LGBTQ+ Germans, Sunday’s elections are no longer about winning new rights; the best-case scenario now is just to hang on to any hard-won gains and ensure life does not get worse.
“They’re talking about revoking the trans self-determination law only three months after it entered into force. It’s absurd,” said Jojo Ludwig, a social media creator who last year was legally recognized as non-binary — neither male nor female.
Ludwig, 26, is one of thousands of trans Germans who have changed, or applied to change, gender and name under new self-ID laws, simply by declaring the switch at a local registry.
Previously they might have waited years, paid thousands of euros and faced questions from psychiatrists — about their sexuality and even their preferred underwear — before getting the go-ahead to alter their documents.
“The self-determination law gave me a lot of hope,” Ludwig told the Thomson Reuters Foundation in a phone interview from their home in Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
“I can finally live as the person I really am, and my identity documents say it,” they said.
However, now they fear the federal election on Sunday risks roiling all that, ushering in a new era of repression and prejudice.
Indeed many gay and trans activists interviewed by the Thomson Reuters Foundation fear the country is about to perform a 180-degree turn on LGBTQ+ rights when voters choose a new parliament this month.
Polls place the conservative Christian Democratic Union/Christian Social Union (CDU/CSU) bloc first with 29 to 30 percent of the votes, followed by the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD), which could secure about 20 to 21 percent, becoming — for the first time — the No. 2 party in the Bundestag, the lower house of the German parliament.
CDU leader Friedrich Merz — Germany’s likely next chancellor — has repeatedly ruled out forming a coalition government with the far-right party.
However, he recently shattered a taboo against working with the AfD when he pushed a migration resolution through parliament with the help of the far-right, breaking the so-call “firewall.”
That collaboration has let a dangerous genie out of the bottle, activists say, and they worry the repercussions could spread well beyond the sphere of LGBTQ+ rights.
“Whoever does it once, does it twice and three times,” said Andre Lehmann, board member at Germany’s LGBTQ+ umbrella group LSVD. “It’s not only a threat for LGBTI people in Germany, but for many, many people in this country, and for democracy as a whole.”
Despite the fact its candidate for chancellor is openly lesbian, AfD has become the loudest voice against LGBTQ+ rights in parliament, and even filed a motion to repeal same-sex marriage and adoption in 2017.
The party’s election manifesto calls for minors to be protected from what it calls “the trans cult, early sexualization and gender ideology.”
Among other plans, AfD wants to ban gender-affirming care, such as puberty blockers and hormone therapy, for trans minors.
It also wants to revoke last year’s self-identification law, cut funding for the “indoctrination of children and young people” and end “woke ideology-based development projects” abroad.
While the far-right party alone would likely not have enough seats to push these demands forward, many fear the recent collaboration on migration could see the CDU/CSU joining AfD to pass new LGBTQ+ rights restrictions nationally — just as they have already done at the state level.
Many of AfD’s LGBTQ-related demands overlap with those of the conservatives, be it reversing the trans self-determination law or restricting the use of inclusive language and gender-affirming care for minors.
“German politics is at a crossroads. Some parties are not only trying to freeze the status quo as before, but they also seek to take given rights away,” said Constantin Wurthmann, a political scientist at the University of Mannheim who researches LGBTQ+ politics.
“From my perspective, I don’t see that the queer community and the rest of the population understand what’s really happening right now, and what consequences might arise from this election,” he said.
For many LGBTQ+ Germans, this election is not just a matter of what could be lost, but also about what other reforms might be delayed — again — as national politics shift to the right.
When it took power in 2021, a coalition between the center-left Social Democratic Party (SPD), the Greens and the liberal Free Democratic Party (FDP) promised to fully ban conversion therapy, include anti-discrimination protections in the constitution and give lesbian couples equal parenting rights, among other things.
They passed a trans self-determination law, and revoked a ban on gay and bi men donating blood, but they ran out of time to legislate on other promises, including compensation for what activists call “forced sterilizations.”
“I feel a mixture of rage and resignation,” said Cathrin Ramelow, a 61-year-old trans woman.
Ramelow has spent more than two decades campaigning for the state to compensate trans Germans who were made to choose between the right to legal documents that matched their gender identity or the chance to have children.
She was one of at least 10,000 people forced to become “permanently sterile” in order to change legal gender — a measure that was struck down in 2011, according to the Bundesverband Trans* advocacy group.
Others were forced to divorce their partners until that requirement was also struck down in 2009.
Germany’s outgoing government promised to compensate both groups, but were not able to table a bill pre-election.
Now these promises would likely be buried, activists say.
Even if the CDU/CSU does form a coalition with the SPD or the Greens, the conservatives oppose extending those LGBTQ+ rights measures that have already been promised, according to a questionnaire of Germany’s main parties.
Irrespective of the election results, or what threat politicians might pose, Ludwig and Ramelow said the scale of recent protests against the CDU-AfD cooperation gave hope that many ordinary Germans still had their backs.
“Thousands of people have shown in the streets that they’re against this,” Ramelow said, recalling recent rallies near her home in the coastal town of Wilhelmshaven.
“We are here — and every time there’s more of us,” Ludwig said.
US President Donald Trump has gotten off to a head-spinning start in his foreign policy. He has pressured Denmark to cede Greenland to the United States, threatened to take over the Panama Canal, urged Canada to become the 51st US state, unilaterally renamed the Gulf of Mexico to “the Gulf of America” and announced plans for the United States to annex and administer Gaza. He has imposed and then suspended 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico for their roles in the flow of fentanyl into the United States, while at the same time increasing tariffs on China by 10
As an American living in Taiwan, I have to confess how impressed I have been over the years by the Chinese Communist Party’s wholehearted embrace of high-speed rail and electric vehicles, and this at a time when my own democratic country has chosen a leader openly committed to doing everything in his power to put obstacles in the way of sustainable energy across the board — and democracy to boot. It really does make me wonder: “Are those of us right who hold that democracy is the right way to go?” Has Taiwan made the wrong choice? Many in China obviously
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
Last week, 24 Republican representatives in the US Congress proposed a resolution calling for US President Donald Trump’s administration to abandon the US’ “one China” policy, calling it outdated, counterproductive and not reflective of reality, and to restore official diplomatic relations with Taiwan, enter bilateral free-trade agreement negotiations and support its entry into international organizations. That is an exciting and inspiring development. To help the US government and other nations further understand that Taiwan is not a part of China, that those “one China” policies are contrary to the fact that the two countries across the Taiwan Strait are independent and
RSS