All posts tagged "lgbtq"

This killing is appalling — but it's wrong to lionize a man who preached hate and division

There are so many words and clichés condemning the killing of Charles James Kirk and none of the refrains are unique.

“We need to dial back our discourse.”

“We need to be tolerant of different opinions.”

“There is no room in American politics for political violence.”

Are people blind to the realities that have been swirling all around us? The language has been violent. The discord has been great. There has been a consistent invitation to dine at the table of heated racist discussion posing as legitimate political speech.

The killing of Charlie Kirk fits within this arena of speech that is racist and hate-filled but is designed to pose as rational and logical political speech.

In his rhetoric and so-called debate style, this 31-year-old evangelical firebrand of the right stated that Black pilots were incompetent; was opposed to gun control, abortion and LGBTQ+ rights; criticized the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Martin Luther King Jr.; promoted Christian nationalism; advanced Covid-19 misinformation; made false claims of electoral fraud in 2020; and was a proponent of the Great Replacement conspiracy theory.

This Chicago-born suburbanite brought all of the racial innuendo to political speech and rhetorically violated the safety and security of Black people, people of-color, and the LGBTQ+ community. He perverted the history of race and racism in America, attempted to legitimize the nation as a white bastion of civilization and Christianity, and in general perfected the use of racial and hateful language and molded it into a form of acceptable and legitimate political debate and viewpoint.

But the legitimate debate aspect was far from legitimate historical benign speech, nor was it nonviolent in character. In fact, it touched all of the refrains of the vile language of the past that resulted far too many times in lynchings and other forms of racial violence and upheaval.

Don’t get me wrong, I am sorry for the death and killing of Charlie Kirk.

I have stood over many coffins of people I did not agree with and said words of comfort to the families during my 40-plus years of ministry. In doing so I have looked at a person’s life to find something to say about their character, worthiness, and contributions they have made in their lifetime. Sometimes the task is easier than at other times.

As I look at the life of Kirk, he was a husband, a father, and what else I do not know. He had friends, I am sure. He played a significant role in his connection with community that was personal and also collective.

But the problem I would have in affirming this life at an end-of-life ceremony is that he evidently did not care in his living about the security and comfort of others. He did not show empathy. Whether he believed what he espoused, or it was simply a marketing ploy for influence and money, I don’t know, and no one will ever know for sure. But Charlie Kirk expanded hatred, marketed the vile speech of old racisms in new wineskins, and further jeopardized the lives and security of others.

The right wing is working hard to make a political martyr of him. President Donald Trump ordered flags to be flown at half-mast. Trump talked about lowering the temperature of the political language that is used, but in the next breath criticized “the radical left” for castigating the hate language of Kirk.

If we are going to be truthful in this moment, the hate that Kirk put out came back on him, and the violent political language that continues to fly in this country will continue to manifest itself in ways where we will continually be praying for victims and their families.

  • Rev. Graylan Scott Hagler is an advisor with FOR-USA and the founder and president of Faith Strategies USA. Until retiring from his position in 2022 Hagler was Senior Minister at Plymouth Congregational United Church of Christ in Washington, D.C.

This Republican ghoul should look both ways before crossing angry Floridians further

No doubt Gov. Ron DeSantis expects Floridians to be grateful for saving us from yet another woke attack on decency, probity, and speeding motorists.

I refer, of course, to colorful crosswalks.

Just as he has fought to expel books by Black and gay authors from our schools, the governor has ordered the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) to paint over the flowers, the sunbursts, the fish, the musical notes, and the rainbows — especially the rainbows.

We want guns in our streets, not rainbows.

Speaking of guns, one of the first crosswalks to be destroyed was the one outside the Pulse Memorial.

You may recall that in 2016 a gunman murdered 49 people at an LGBTQ+ nightclub in Orlando.

The rainbow crosswalk was intended to honor them.

DeSantis, however, views it as some sort of personal insult.

His political future looks distinctly unpromising AND his wife’s gubernatorial campaign lies in ruins after the Hope Florida scandal. Environmental activists won a temporary shutdown of his Everglades gulag, though an appeals court is allowing it to stay open for now.

I mean, nobody likes the guy, but, by God, he can still teach crosswalks a sharp lesson.

“We will not allow our state roads to be commandeered for political purposes,” he said.

Except the crosswalks were not “commandeered.” Like most painted crosswalks in Florida, the Pulse rainbow was supported by the city government and the citizens.

FDOT itself had approved it.

But in late August, FDOT turned up in the dead of night and ground it off the road.

But this kind of pointless vandalism is happening across the state.

At least a dozen schools in Tampa will see their “Crosswalks to Classrooms” school crossings destroyed, including one painted to look like a shelf of books.

Florida’s government is particularly scared of books.

‘Political ideologies’

Hearts commemorating a young girl who died of a heart condition in Port St. Lucie; checkerboards in Daytona near the raceway; “Back the Blue” in Hillsborough County; bike lanes in Orange County, painted by kids who won an FDOT art contest to design them — all either already gone or about to be.

Florida Transportation Secretary Jared Perdue vows to “keep our transportation facilities free and clear of political ideologies.”

As if violating free expression in cities and towns across the state is not the product of a “political ideology.”

DeSantis says painted crosswalks promote “social, political, or ideological messages” and must be obliterated.

That’s one of his excuses. He’s got more.

The governor claims he has no choice but to enforce a new law — a law he signed — allowing FDOT to withhold funds for road projects and “traffic control” if cities and counties don’t follow orders.

Thing is, FDOT always had the power to forbid street art. That’s why communities wanting to paint a crosswalk sought and received permission — from FDOT.

Now, you could argue that the wrong kind of paint could create a slippery surface.

Crosswalk painters know this and generally use acrylic or other paints that bond to the asphalt.

You could argue brightly colored crosswalks give people trying to cross the street a false sense of security, leading them to just hop out into the road without looking to see what maniac in an F-150 is barreling toward them.

Except the data do not support that contention.

You could argue drivers encountering images of sunflowers or fish or “Black Lives Matter” on the road will be so discombobulated trying to read and interpret the art, they’ll become reckless.

Remember, FDOT said yes to those cheery, often clever, crosswalks.

Distracted drivers?

The crosswalks only got dangerous this spring.

Now, as the law says, “Non-standard surface markings, signage and signals that do not contribute directly to traffic safety or control can lead to distraction or misunderstandings, jeopardizing both driver and pedestrian safety.”

The state’s assumption that drivers aren’t already distracted is demonstrably false, as every human who has ever operated a car in this state knows.

Whether they’re behind the wheel of a beat-up Kia or 4,000-pound Mercedes SUV, people frequently struggle to heed FDOT’s “standard surface markings and signage,” including the scarlet octagon that says “STOP.”

Nevertheless, research indicates they are unlikely to lose control of the vehicle contemplating a pink, blue, and green-stiped crosswalk.

What they might do is slow the hell down. A national study shows street art has contributed to a 50% reduction in crashes involving vehicles and pedestrians.

In Leon County, the Knight Creative Communities Institute worked with Florida State University and local government to determine whether brightly painted crosswalks might get people to drive the speed limit near schools.

Sure enough, brightly painted crosswalks did indeed cause Tallahassee drivers — not noted for their adherence to posted speed limits — to ease up on the accelerator.

Unless you just moved to Florida from Inner Mongolia, you know what’s actually going on here.

Bike lanes and walkways designed and painted by school kids, and crosswalks celebrating a city’s history or its natural beauty or demonstrating its commitment to inclusivity, somehow threaten DeSantis’ commitment to Beijing-style state control.

Children must not grow up in the Free State Florida feeling free to create or express themselves or engage in their community.

‘Conform’

Asked during a press conference what he’d tell Florida children now watching grown people destroying their art, DeSantis said, “We have a representative system of government. People elect their representatives. They’re able to enact the legislation with the governor’s signature and then when that happens, obviously, people will conform their conduct accordingly.”

Hear that, kids? “Conform” your conduct and chant the mandated Pledge of Allegiance every morning.

DeSantis means to bully the people of this state from Perdido Bay to the Dry Tortugas: Expressions of dissent, assertions, of common humanity, civic pride, beauty, and joy will not be tolerated.

The people of Pensacola have been told the large “Black Lives Matter” painting on A Street, the words spelled out with flags of nations that have contributed to Florida culture, is verboten.

God forbid Black people think their lives matter.

This is not a popular decision: The mayor says Pensacola will comply, but city resources are stretched pretty thin, so if the state really wants to rid the place of a “Black Lives Matter” painting, FDOT might have to handle it themselves.

As for LGBTQ+ folks and their aggressive use of the color wheel, state policy is to erase both the pigmentation and the people.

Remove “gay” books from the library, pull courses out of college catalogs, and scrub rainbows off the streets.

Remember the great essay “The Cruelty is the Point” by Adam Serwer?

The Atlantic published it in the early days of Donald Trump’s first term, but it’s just as relevant now: insulting, attacking, undermining, performative hatred — this how the regimes in both Washington and Tallahassee rule us.

Resistance

Authoritarians want to control every aspect of our culture, no matter how seemingly inconsequential.

No shot is too cheap, no attack too petty: FDOT has just ripped out road signs on Longboat Key.

The road signs identified Longboat Key’s main drag as “Gulf of Mexico Drive,” its name since 1957.

The regime wants it changed.

The entire world calls the body of water along Florida’s west coast the Gulf of Mexico.

However, I’m happy to report, not all Floridians acquiesce in this name-changing nonsense.

Some elderly residents of Tallahassee’s Westminster Oaks faced down a county road crew as it was scraping the paint off the yellow and green crosswalk by their retirement community.

Children at the nearby W.T. Moore Elementary School had painted it.

Around 30 seniors arrived on golf carts and walkers. An 85-year old lady lay down on the crosswalk and the road crew retreated.

But only temporarily.

Delray Beach and Key West are vigorously resisting DeSantis’ attempt to destroy their rainbow crosswalks, as is Fort Lauderdale, which is demanding an FDOT hearing.

Fort Lauderdale’s mayor declared, “We must stand our ground. We cannot allow us to be bullied into submission and to allow others to dictate what we should do in our own communities.”

In Orlando, the resistance grows louder and more determined.

After the state wrecked the Pulse rainbow crosswalk, hundreds of protesters re-colored the rainbow.

FDOT painted the new rainbow black.

Protesters colored it in again.

FDOT put up signs saying, “No Impeding Traffic,” and, “Defacing Roadway Prohibited,” and called in city cops and the Highway Patrol.

You’d think they’d be lurking in a Home Depot parking lot rounding up Brown people. At least four people have been arrested.

They were armed — with water-soluble chalk.

Babysitters

I’d be willing to bet these law enforcement officers signed up to fight crime, bust bad guys, and keep communities safe, not protect a 10-foot wide hunk of road.

One man, a survivor of the Pulse nightclub massacre, observed on social media: “More officers babysitting the crosswalk than there were security guards watching the front door of Pulse the night 49 people were murdered. By a lot.”

Our tax dollars at work.

I have news for Ron DeSantis and the dead-eyed myrmidons who carry out his narrow-minded whims: You can’t pray the gay away, nor can you paint over it.

You can’t quash children’s creativity.

You can’t surgically remove people of color from our history.

You can’t outlaw rainbows.

Just as FSU’s football team was putting the finishing flourishes on its win over the Alabama Crimson Tide, the sun came out. To the west, a glorious rainbow arced across the Tallahassee sky.

I’m waiting for DeSantis to declare the heavens “woke.”

'Dangerous': Hate-fueled activist raises alarm as Meta sets him loose on AI

Meta’s announcement earlier this month that anti-trans activist Robby Starbuck “will work collaboratively” with the company to address bias in its AI products marks another step in the social media giant’s rapid shift to the right.

Starbuck is a former music video editor who repositioned himself as a conservative influencer, best known for leveraging social media to pressure companies such as Tractor Supply Co. to abandon commitments to diversity, equity and inclusion.

Starbuck has also spread anti-LGBTQ messaging, equating trans people with pedophiles through repeated use of the term “groomer.”

“Robby Starbuck pushes a dangerous anti-LGBTQ+ agenda, spreading disinformation and denying the very existence of transgender people,” Eric Bloem, Human Rights Campaign’s vice president for workplace equality, told Raw Story.

“There’s nothing unbiased about that. Coupled with its January rollback of protections against hate speech across its platforms, this decision calls into question Meta’s commitment to keeping LGBTQ+ people and others safe online.”

Starbuck gained a seat at Meta’s table by suing the company, which owns Facebook, Instagram, Threads and WhatsApp, over false claims by its AI chatbot that he was involved in the Jan. 6 2021 riot at the U.S. Capitol.

Starbuck said in an Aug. 8 post on X that after he filed a defamation suit, “Meta reached out to me immediately, which led to many very long calls with concerned executives and engineers.”

Starbuck and Meta said in a joint statement the same day that “since engaging on these important issues with Robby, Meta has made tremendous strides to improve the accuracy of Meta AI and mitigate ideological and political bias.”

The statement also said “Meta and Robby Starbuck will work collaboratively in the coming months to find ways to address issues of ideological and political bias.”

Starbuck described the settlement “as a win for everyone,” adding that it “produces a better product for Meta” and also “allows me to deliver on multiple fronts as a voice for conservatives.”

But in a statement to Raw Story, he insisted that while he’s made no secret of his political views, he’s not out to impose his beliefs on Meta’s users.

“That would be antithetical to my beliefs about AI, which are that it’s here to stay and needs to show no bias, not my bias, not your bias, not anyone’s bias,” he said. “It needs to be a neutral, fact-driven system.”

‘I hope this is a joke’

Over the past four years, Starbuck has made a string of posts on X labeling LGBTQ people, particularly trans people and people involved in drag performances as “groomers.”

One 2023 post attacked KitchenAid’s sponsorship of trans TikTok influencer Dylan Mulvaney, saying: “KitchenAid will forever be GroomerAid in my house from this day forward.”

In another post, Starbuck called Lil Nas X, whose real name is Montero Lamar Hill, “a groomer and a predator” in response to the rapper’s 2021 video simulating a lap dance with Satan.

“I don’t hate gay people,” Starbuck posted in May 2024. “I hate behaviors that hurt kids. I want people to stop pushing LGBTQ propaganda on kids and stop transitioning kids.”

Starbuck has also openly embraced the Great Replacement theory, a set of racist talking points on immigration closely associated with white supremacist agitation and mass shootings.

Brenton Tarrant, who livestreamed a slaughter of 51 Muslims at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand in 2019, named his manifesto “The Great Replacement.”

In February 2024, Starbuck wrote on X: “You can’t call replacement theory racist when it’s literally out in the open now.

“I’m Latino and I’m telling you that the west is trying to replace existing citizens (mostly white) with migrants from 3rd world countries. It must end or the west will become third world!”

Asked about that post in the context of his new role helping Meta guard against bias in AI products, Starbuck told Raw Story: “I hope this is a joke because I’m Latino.

“Trying to associate me to white supremacy or mass shooters is as sick as it is devoid of intelligence.”

A Meta spokesperson declined to comment, other than to reference the joint statement previously issued with Starbuck.

Alejandra Carballo, a clinical instructor at Harvard Law School’s Cyberlaw Clinic, told Raw Story that Meta engaging Starbuck in “any advisory capacity” was “pretty egregious.”

“It’s so incredibly far from where Meta was a few years ago, where Meta was holding stakeholder meetings with LGBTQ groups,” Carballo said.

“It fits in with their tack to the right since the election. They view anti-LGBTQ content as something they’re not only able to tolerate, but something they’re actively greenlighting.”

In January, less than two weeks before Donald Trump’s inauguration, Meta rolled out changes to eliminate third-party fact-checking and weaken policies against hate speech.

Meta’s new policy on Hateful Conduct carved out an exception for LGBTQ people, allowing allegations of mental illness, in contrast to other groups with protected characteristics.

The policy also lifted a prohibition against the anti-trans slur “t----y.”

‘Anti-trans sources’

Among 7,000 Meta users in 86 countries surveyed by the LGBTQ advocacy group GLAAD, along with Ultra Violet and All Out, 72 percent reported that harmful content targeting protected groups has increased since Meta relaxed regulation of hate speech.

Ninety two percent said they felt less protected from being exposed to, or targeted by, harmful content, and 77 percent said they felt less safe expressing themselves freely.

Caraballo said Meta’s Llama chatbot stands out among its competitors “for incorporating far more anti-trans sources.”

Noting that Facebook, Meta’s predecessor, was accused of amplifying hate against the Rohingya people in Myanmar, culminating in a 2017 massacre, Caraballo said she worries that WhatsApp, a platform owned by Meta and popular in the global South, could magnify hate and instigate violence against trans people.

“I can imagine someone like Starbuck being brought in and saying trans people don’t even qualify as a group or people or they’re mentally ill,” Caraballo said.

“The implicit bias in the Llama model could be made even worse.”

At the same time, Caraballo said she saw Meta’s arrangement with Starbuck as more a function of gauging the political winds than pursuing a political agenda.

“Maximizing engagement and minimizing political liability” is the social media giant’s ultimate aim, Caraballo said.

That fits with the decision by Meta in April 2024 to hire Dustin Carmack, chief of staff to the director of national intelligence in the first Trump administration, as director of public policy for the Southern and Southeastern U.S.

Carmack, who was also a senior advisor for the presidential campaign of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, authored a chapter of Project 2025, a policy blueprint for the second Trump administration.

In his contribution to the 900-page document, Carmack accused some CIA employees of “promoting divisive ideological or cultural agendas,” and said the new CIA director — who turned out to be John Ratcliffe, his old boss as Director of National Intelligence — “should direct resources from any activities that promote unnecessary and distracting social engineering.”

In July, Meta promoted Carmack to a new job in Washington: director of public policy for the executive branch.

Evangelical church urges Trump admin to 'execute' LGBTQ Americans

An Indiana church is urging the Trump administration to "execute" members of the LGBTQ community because "the Bible teaches that those people are worthy of death," according to WISH-TV 8 in Indianapolis.

In a sermon titled, "Pray the Gay Away," Stephen Falco, an evangelical preacher with the Sure Foundation Baptist Church, yelled from the pulpit, "They're all a bunch of f-----, that want to walk around, come on our streets, and demand our children. And we should look them in the eye and say, 'No, you're not going to have our children!'"

The event called "Men's Preaching Night" was live-streamed on the church's Facebook account, according to the report.

When asked to respond to Falco's inflammatory remarks, the church said in a statement that the preacher was "only calling for the death penalty and suicide for the actual sodomites (homosexuals). The Bible teaches that those people are worthy of death. They are supposed to be executed by the government. We are not to take the law into our own hands."

One member of the LGBTQ community told WISH-TV, "Children are targeted silently and violently. These children don't know social constructs until we teach them that. And, so, when we're teaching them through hate and disguising it as scripture, what we're doing is abusing them."

Reporter Kyla Russell said the Concerned Clergy of Indianapolis called the message "theologically irresponsible and pastorally dangerous," adding that they "stand for dignity, inclusion, and justice for all people, including their LGBTQ+ brothers and sisters."

Watch the clip below via WISH-TV, Indianapolis.

'All kinds of dumb outcomes': Trump slammed for firing workers over training he ordered

President Donald Trump required Department of Education employees to attend "diversity training" during his first term. Now, he's suspending them as he seeks to root out Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) from the federal government.

A new piece in Monday's Washington Post reports that Trump's Education Secretary Betsy DeVos was fully onboard with the training in 2017 when she wrote, "In building strong teams, embracing diversity and inclusion are key elements for success.”

"Now, in the opening days of Trump’s second term, dozens of employees who attended that diversity program — many during Trump’s first term — have been placed on leave because of it, according to union officials, affected employees and a person with knowledge of how the decisions were made," wrote WaPo reporters Laura Meckler and Hannah Natanson.

ALSO READ: 'Hero': Latest school shooter celebrated as followers float copycat plans

Education officials have been "scrubbing" the agency’s website for words like "diversity, transgender, LGBTQIA and equity," WaPo reported. "On Friday, a directive sent to department employees said the agency would terminate programs, contracts, policies or media that mention transgender or 'fail to affirm the reality of biological sex.'”

Michael Petrilli, with conservative think tank Thomas B. Fordham Institute, called Trump's move, "Kafkaesque" and "Orwellian.”

“It is ridiculous to threaten professionals’ livelihoods because they attended a training. Most of America attended a DEI training in 2020. This policy by keyword search will lead to all kinds of dumb outcomes and, I hope, a real backlash," Petrilli said.

A spokeswoman for the Education Department "defended the decisions to place the employees on leave" as a part of the Trump administration’s review of federal agencies, adding that the administration has "the commitment to prioritize meaningful learning ahead of divisive ideology in schools."

Trump's war on DEI is expected to receive extensive legal pushback, especially after a memo from the Justice Department "indicated that the department would be involved in enforcing" Trump's executive order declaring DEI "illegal."

Read The Washington Post article here.

Colleges brace for sweeping changes tied to Trump's higher education pledge

Now that Donald Trump is days away from retaking the White House, U.S. colleges and universities are said to be bracing for the impact of Trump's vow to end "wokeness" in higher education.

Colleges in red states, in particular, are ditching their diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) plans in a move that "both conservative and liberal politicians say" could be a "road map for the rest of the country," according to an ABC News report.

The report continued, "Dozens of diversity, equity and inclusion programs have already closed in states including Alabama, Florida, Kentucky, North Carolina, Iowa, Nebraska and Texas. In some cases, lessons about racial and gender identity have been phased out. Supports and resources for underrepresented students have disappeared. Some students say changes in campus climate have led them to consider dropping out."

ALSO READ: Trump intel advisor Devin Nunes still dismisses Russian election meddling as a 'hoax'

The anti-DEI reaction is the direct result of Trump's campaign vow to end "wokeness" and "leftist indoctrination" in education. "He pledged to dismantle diversity programs that he says amount to discrimination, and to impose fines on colleges 'up to the entire amount of their endowment," according to the report.

The resulting backlash has led some universities to close campus safe areas for LGBTQ+ and Black students, and to cancel minority-focused events like parades and even barbecues.

Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey (R) even signed into law a bill barring state funding for public colleges that promote “divisive concepts” over race and gender. In addition, the law requires people to use school and college bathrooms that align with their birth gender.

Critics fear the conservative backlash will harm "students that are most marginalized," and that safeguards once put in place to help these students could be weaponized against them.

"The Education Department's Office for Civil Rights typically investigates discrimination against people of color, but under Trump, that office could start investigating diversity programs that conservatives argue are discriminatory," ABC News reported.

Read the full ABC News report here.

‘People are energized’: LGBTQ+ rights groups and voters are lining up behind Harris

This article was originally published by The 19th. Sign up for The 19th's daily newsletter.

The moment that President Joe Biden offered his endorsement to Vice President Kamala Harris’ historic run for the White House, LGBTQ+ organizations and voters hit the ground on her behalf.

Kim Hunt, a veteran LGBTQ+ rights advocate from Chicago, was at brunch when the news broke that Biden was ending his reelection campaign and throwing his support behind Harris. Hours later, Hunt was on a Zoom call with 40,000 other Black women mobilizing support for Harris.

“The mood is completely different in LGBTQ communities, in people of color communities, for women's rights organizations,” Hunt said. “It's different now. People are energized.”

Harris’ candidacy has electrified many Black LGBTQ+ voters — and queer voters in general — who see fresh hope as the community faces unprecedented legislative attacks, particularly against transgender Americans. Others are grappling with Harris' complicated history on transgender issues, both as a member of the Biden administration and previously as a California prosecutor. But, they say, she’s shown growth over time.

Like Hunt, David Johns, executive director of the Black queer advocacy organization National Black Justice Coalition, also sprang into action. Within hours, he was on a call with more than 53,000 other Black men. They raised more than $1 million for Harris in four hours.

“There are clear indications of a new kind of interest and energy,” Johns said of the Harris campaign.

The Human Rights Campaign (HRC), the nation’s largest LGBTQ+ rights organization, pivoted its endorsement from Biden to Harris.

“Vice President Kamala Harris is a trailblazer and has been a champion for LGBTQ+ equality for decades: from leading the fight in San Francisco against hate crimes and her work in California to end the so-called gay and transgender ‘panic defense’ to her early support for marriage equality and her leadership serving as our Vice President,” said HRC President Kelley Robinson in a statement.

“Her leadership promises to fortify and enhance the efforts to address and meet the needs of transgender people, ensuring continued progress in our nation's history of civil rights,” said the nation’s largest trans organization, Advocates for Transgender Equality, in a statement.

Harris boasts some of the earliest support for LGBTQ+ rights of any of her Washington peers. On Valentine’s Day 2004, she became one of the first elected officials to publicly back marriage equality when she officiated same-sex weddings in California.

As San Francisco’s district attorney in 2008, she refused to defend Proposition 8, which barred marriage equality.

Equality California Executive Director Tony Hoang and Nevada’s Silver State Equality State Director André Wade said in a statement that Harris had exemplified what it means to be an ally throughout her career.

“We have seen her commitment to LGBTQ+ equality firsthand,” including her work in the U.S. Senate to enact a federal lynching ban and expand access to HIV prevention medications PrEP and PEP, they said.

Harris, however, has also faced difficult questions in the past from LGBTQ+ leaders. As attorney general in California in 2015, she opposed gender-affirming care for an incarcerated transgender woman. Harris has since apologized, gaining praise from some organizations like HRC who say she is a candidate able to learn and grow.

Others have expressed hesitancy about her history as a prosecutor in a system that disproportionately incarcerates people of color and queer people.

Jennifer Love Williams is the vice chair of the national LGBTQ+ prison advocacy organization Black and Pink. She is also a formerly incarcerated Black trans woman. She acknowledges that Harris’ history may be tough for some.

“I know that she did a job, and what I have to give her is the grace to show me what she would do for us as a country,” Williams said. “What other choice do we have? If we go for [former President Donald] Trump, I know all my rights will be going.”

Life for queer Americans over the last four years has grown increasingly fraught as anti-LGBTQ+ legislation floods state houses and hate crimes on queer Americans have climbed year over year. In the last two years, states have considered 1,197 anti-transgender bills. Of those, 129 have been passed into law.

Before Biden exited the race, some advocates questioned if he was willing to use the bully pulpit of the presidency to truly go to bat for transgender youth, who have faced limits on their access to gender-affirming care and participation in sports, among other attacks.

Biden repeatedly told transgender Americans he has their backs, and his administration has made significant moves in advancing LGBTQ+ equality, including reinstating health care protections for transgender Americans and reversing Trump’s ban on transgender military service. The administration was also the first to issue gender-neutral passports. Biden’s Department of Justice stepped in to support a transgender woman incarcerated with men.

In contrast, LGBTQ+ organizations have condemned Trump as among the most anti-LGBTQ+ presidents in history. Media advocacy organization GLAAD totaled 210 attacks Trump’s administration made against queer Americans during his time in office.

Anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric has grown so extreme in recent years that some in the community have expressed fear that a second Trump presidency would usher in the end of marriage equality. Ostensibly to ease those fears, the RNC’s new Trump-backed platform scraps language limiting marriage to “a man and a woman.

However, a number of RNC speakers used their time at the convention in Milwaukee to verbally attack transgender Americans.

The Biden-Harris administration also found itself ensnared in controversy in early July when the White House stated it opposed gender-affirming surgery for transgender youth. The White House later hedged that stance in comments to the Advocate, acknowledging that surgeries on young people are only offered in extreme cases, a practice the administration said it supports.

The Harris campaign did not respond to a request to comment for this article.

Raquel Willis, a nationally-renowned transgender writer and advocate, still has reservations about Harris.

“I think that we are living in a time where Democratic leaders, including the Biden-Harris administration, have been coasting on toothless platitudes around their beliefs on trans rights,” Willis said. “I will always carry the knowledge that [Harris] wasn't as fierce of an advocate for particularly trans people in and around access to gender-affirming care.”

Willis said this mixed track record sits oddly with transgender Americans. She believes Harris will inherit some of the disappointment and anxiety queer Americans felt about Biden’s response to anti-transgender legislation as well as his handling of the ongoing crisis in Gaza which has alienated many LGBTQ+ voters.

“This is a prime time for accountability, for Harris to be a better candidate that we all desire,” Willis said.

Other leaders agree. So much about Harris, particularly on LGBTQ+ rights, remains unknown. Leaders are curious and eager to hear from her.

“Harris has been a mystery in some ways, but there is lots online showing her support for LGBTQ folks,” said Hunt. “So I feel good about that, certainly feel way better than the alternative.”

The 19th is an independent, nonprofit newsroom reporting on gender, politics and policy.

Corporate sponsors of Pride events contribute to politicians with anti-LGBTQ leanings

This article originally appeared in OpenSecrets. Sign up for their weekly newsletter to receive stories like this one in your inbox.

Throughout Pride Month, it has become increasingly common for corporations to adorn their websites in rainbow flags, espouse their support for LGBTQ+ rights and try to win over a community that has historically been stereotyped as having a disposable income. But some of those companies still steer big money to groups and politicians who oppose LGBTQ+ rights.

Chief Economist at the Koppa LGBTI+ Economic Power Lab, Lee Badgett, said that the idea that LGBTQ communities have more money to spend is a misrepresentation of the community as a whole.

“There’s long been an incorrect stereotype about LGBTQ people that they are well off, lots of income, no real financial problems,” Badgett said. “We know that gay and bisexual men and bisexual women in particular tend to have lower earnings than their heterosexual counterparts. Same for transgender and cisgender people, transgender people are earning less.”

Lack of clarity on how politicians and corporations are spending can create a false narrative that a specific corporation or political figure solely aligns with LGBTQ rights, when they may also give to anti-LGBTQ groups. OpenSecrets has found that even corporations that publicly condemn anti-LGBTQ legislation regularly steer tens of thousands of dollars in political contributions to legislators who advanced those bills.

Melissa Michelson, professor of Political Science at Menlo College, calls this behavior during Pride month a type of “rainbow washing.”

“Politicians engage in rainbow washing for the same reason that corporations do because they want consumers, slash voters, slash potential donors to think well of them. And maybe that means you will donate money to them, or maybe you will consider voting for that,” Michelson told OpenSecrets. “Either way that’s the currency of politics, whether it’s a financial donation or a vote, that’s what every candidate needs.”

Fairweather support

Large donors to Pride events in June have done everything from changing their logos to making posts on social media, but some of their political giving tells a different story.

Delta Air Lines sponsored multiple Pride events in California, New York and Washington D.C.

The airline’s PAC donated more than $300,000 to Republican candidates, including $8,500 to Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) and $5,000 to Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.) – both of whom have supported anti-LGBTQ legislation according to GLAAD.

Blackburn has been a vocal opponent of gender-affirming care for transgender youth, and Scalise who has a long history of introducing and supporting anti-LGBTQ bills.

All Republican Senators who received funds from the PAC received less than 20 from the Human Rights Campaign Congressional scorecard. Many did not reach the double digits.

The airline donated another $45,000 to GOPAC and $10,000 to the dark money group Alliance for American Exceptionalism, both of which work to elect conservatives with records of voting against LGBTQ+ rights at the state and federal level. Mark Green who compared LGBTQ Americans to ISIS, received $5,000 from GOPAC, filings show. GOPAC also gave $5,000 to Michigan State Sen. Tom Barrett whose campaign sent out anti-trans text messages.


Another big sponsor for Pride events across the country is MasterCard, whose PAC also steered more than $100,000 to Republican candidates in 2024, including $10,000 to Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.) and $4,000 to Jim Jordan (R-Ohio). Both politicians have openly opposed bills that would protect the rights of LGBTQ individuals, including a vote in 2022 against the Respect for Marriage Act. Republicans who received funds from Mastercard did not pass 60 on the HRC scorecard while Democrats did not score below 90.

Defense contractor Booz Allen Hamilton’s corporate PAC contributed almost equally to Republicans and Democrats in 2024, giving more than $100,000 to Republican Candidates and $87,000 to Democrats. Some recipients from the defense contractor’s PAC include $4,000 each to Reps. Ken Calvert (R-Calif.) and $5,000 to Mike Gallagher (R-Wis.). Calvert has a long history of opposing LGBTQ rights but his views shifted to ostensibly support marriage equality after his district was redrawn to include Palm Springs, a city that has the largest LGBTQ population per capita in the U.S. But in 2023, Calvert voted for the Parents Bill of Rights Act, legislation that would force schools to out transgender students.

Gallagher backed two amendments that would remove protections for transgender people experiencing homelessness in 2019. He also voted against the Equality Act in 2021 which would have explicitly protected LGBTQ people through federal civil rights law. “The Booz Allen PAC makes contributions on a bipartisan basis to U.S. federal congressional candidates,” a spokesperson from Booz Allen said in a statement to OpenSecrets. “The PAC continues to evaluate and execute a giving strategy aligned with our diverse global business, our corporate values, and our interests as a large employer.”

Delta and MasterCard did not respond to requests for comment.

While some companies sponsoring Pride events have made contributions to groups and politicians with records of opposing LGBTQ rights, it is noteworthy that the organizations publicly support Pride because that is not something that historically happened, Michelson told OpenSecrets.

“I don't remember 10 years ago that you'd walk into Target and there were rainbows everywhere,” Michelson said. “In the same way that corporations are responding to this new kind of national focus on LGBTQ rights I would imagine that that's paralleled in the political arena.”

That support, however, isn’t without its own issues. Earlier this year the national brand Target announced that it would be limiting its pride section after conservative pushback on pride-themed items and bathing suits for transgender people.

Despite the pullback on pride merchandise, Target has still been a corporate sponsor for a number of pride events around the country. How much they’ve donated in those sponsorships is unclear.

It has become common for various groups like airlines, big banks, and defense contractors to sponsor stages or portions of Pride events, which have historically worked to offset the cost of hosting the events.

“Every June, every corporation, every politician, everybody wants to say, ‘I'm supportive of LGBTQ rights, I'm an ally of the community,’” Michelson said. “Maybe you never hear anything from them about issues facing the community the rest of the year, but suddenly in June, they're very concerned and very supportive.”

A second Trump term would double down on erasing trans rights. How advocates are preparing

This article was originally published by The 19th.

LGBTQ+ advocates are gearing up for a possible second Trump administration by planning future litigation, deepening relationships in Congress and mobilizing voters.

If former president Donald Trump is re-elected, advocacy groups expect him to enact anti-LGBTQ+ policies that are more far-reaching and extreme than those he put in place during his first term — based on his campaign promises and policies suggested by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank that has shaped the GOP’s agenda for decades.

Trump is focused specifically on rolling back transgender rights, as he detailed in a campaign video last year. His proposals would terminate Medicare and Medicaid funding for hospitals that provide gender-affirming care to trans youth, attempt to charge teachers with sex discrimination for affirming students’ gender identities and order federal agencies to “cease all programs that promote the concept of sex and gender transition at any age.” Trump also pledged to ask Congress to halt the use of federal funds to promote or pay for gender-affirming care, without distinguishing between care for adults or minors.

Some of these policies mimic state anti-LGBTQ+ laws, which frequently run into enforcement issues as state agencies tasked with monitoring school bathrooms and classrooms are unable to find consistent ways to carry out restrictive laws. Several of Trump’s proposed anti-trans policies would also require congressional approval. However, as a new report from the American Civil Liberties Union details, even if Trump gains the presidency without Republicans taking power in Congress, he would be able to take action against LGBTQ+ rights on his own — and has said that he plans to.

“We’ve seen over the last several years a militant effort in red states by the government to discriminate against trans folks, in particular, and the broader LGBTQ community, and even to go so far as to try to deny trans people's existence,” said Mike Zamore, national director of policy and governmental affairs at the ACLU. “The danger in the Trump administration is seeing the federal government using its massive reach and resources to do something similar on a national scale.”

The federal government could use its civil rights enforcement capabilities to argue that institutions trying to protect LGBTQ+ rights are violating the rights of people with certain religious beliefs, Zamore said, or it could threaten to withhold funding from universities that receive federal money if they do not discriminate against transgender students.

In the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, a purported roadmap of executive actions that a future Republican president could take on various issues — including abortion access — several of the policy suggestions align with Trump’s promises to roll back LGBTQ+ rights. Project 2025 advocates for the deletion of the terms “sexual orientation and gender identity” from all federal rules and for prohibiting teachers from affirming trans students.

One of the more extreme proposals in Project 2025 equates the act of being transgender, or “transgender ideology,” to pornography, and declares that it should be outlawed. The conservative think tank recommends that educators and public librarians who spread the concept of being transgender should be registered as sex offenders, and that telecommunications and technology firms that facilitate the spread of ideas about transgender people should be shuttered.

The ACLU says that a second Trump administration would not be able to implement such a policy without Congress — and that if such a policy did go into effect, using criminal laws to outlaw the concept of being transgender would violate the First Amendment.

Overall, the ACLU expects the federal government under a second Trump presidency to rescind federal regulations that prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, and to weaponize federal law against transgender people in ways that would also harm cisgender and gender-nonconforming people, by attempting to enforce strict definitions of gender expression.

“This election has huge ramifications for the future of trans rights across the country,” said Josie Caballero, director of voting and elections at Advocates for Trans Equality. “The future is going to be incredibly difficult if we allow for a second Trump presidency. That will have ramifications that will affect the trans community for decades,” she said.

Caballero, a Texas-born granddaughter of Mexican immigrants who is also a military veteran and a queer trans woman, joined other advocates in Congress this week to lobby lawmakers in support of trans rights. If Trump is elected to another term, she believes that deepening relationships in Congress will help. But her focus ahead of the 2024 presidential election is getting as many trans people registered to vote, and ready to vote, as possible.

Building a substantial trans voting bloc is crucial to demonstrate to lawmakers that trans people are a formidable political force, she said; and it provides a concrete way to show how many trans people are getting involved in the political process.

“If you vote against trans issues, well you’re going to lose a massive amount of votes and have those votes go against you,” she said.

Caius Willingham, senior policy advocate at Advocates for Trans Equality, led the organizing for the group’s lobbying on Capitol Hill. Building strong relationships with lawmakers in Congress is key to a unified strategy to fight back against anti-trans attacks expected during a potential Trump 2025 administration, he said. When Congress is functioning properly, it is meant to check presidential overreach — and much of Project 2025 focuses on consolidating presidential power, he said. Project 2025 includes authors from Trump’s former administration and campaign.

“Their aim is to consolidate as much power in the White House as possible, and so it's very key to make sure that Congress remains a vital check. So that's why this is a huge priority for Advocates for Trans Equality,” he said. There are strong allies for trans rights in Congress, he said — like Rep. Pramila Jayapal of Washington, author of a congressional bill that aims to recognize federal protections for transgender Americans.

Caballero met on Wednesday with staff from Massachusetts Democrats in Congress, including Reps. Ayanna Pressley and Katherine Clark and Sens. Ed Markey and Elizabeth Warren. Other staff at Advocates for Trans Equality, as well as the constituents that they brought to meet lawmakers, also met with Republicans in Congress.

“We actually ended up with more than 90 meetings scheduled, and these meetings really ranged the political spectrum. We did not turn down a meeting with a single office,” Willingham said. “We met with Ted Cruz's office. We scheduled something with Mitch McConnell’s office, that one fell through. But we were here and we were happy to meet with anybody who would make the time to listen to us.”

Whether congressional Republicans have been responsive to those meetings remains to be seen. Within the past few years, anti-trans rhetoric and attempted policymaking have only continued to grow on Capitol Hill. But the rising number of federal anti-trans bills introduced by Republicans in Congress have been unable to pass, due to a Democratic-controlled Senate. In November, that could change.

If “a pro-equality opposition” controls either or both chambers of Congress in a second Trump administration, pro-LGBTQ+ members of Congress could still use the appropriations process to hinder Trump’s ability to enact anti-trans laws, the ACLU writes in its report. The appropriations process refers to how the House and Senate fund the federal government, which is often derailed by “riders” — provisions that dictate policy not directly related to the federal budget.

Since many of the anti-LGBTQ+ policies proposed by Trump’s campaign or Project 2025 would violate the Constitution and federal law, the ACLU says that litigation would be a significant part of its response to a second Trump term. As the last few years have seen a dramatic increase of anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric and laws, the civil rights group has mounted dozens of consequential lawsuits against those policies — and at least a dozen on health care bans within the last year. During Trump’s first term, the ACLU took on the former president’s order to ban trans people from the military amid hundreds of other lawsuits against the former administration.

Although the ACLU is confident in its ability to fight anti-LGBTQ+ policies in court, and several judges appointed by Trump have actually granted wins for LGBTQ+ advocates, the organization says that the political atmosphere has still changed since Trump’s first term.

“Getting courts to understand the experience of transgender people and the impact of discriminatory policies on their lives was difficult even before Trump reshaped the judiciary. It is that much harder now,” the report reads. It was co-authored by Ian Thompson, senior legislative advocate at the ACLU, as well as James Esseks, attorney and project director for the ACLU’s LGBTQ+ HIV Project, and Leslie Cooper, deputy director of the ACLU LGBT & HIV Project.

“What we know is that the courts are not as friendly as they once were,” said Zamore, who contributed to the report. “I don't think any of us can assume that a position that was successful in the first Trump administration would necessarily prevail this go around, but we will obviously be doing everything we can.”

The ACLU is also urging states to act now to prepare for a possible second Trump presidential term. Local elected officials should start planning how to protect their transgender constituents, and states should create funding streams for gender-affirming care to protect access for those who would lose health care without federally funded programs. The organization cites policies created to protect abortion access as examples, like California’s reproductive health equity program and Maryland’s abortion clinical training program.

The ACLU is working with its state affiliates to organize ideas and potentially necessary resources, Zamore said. Under a hostile administration, states with LGBTQ-friendly governments will need to fill in the gaps for access to gender-affirming care while also standing up for their residents, he said.

Trans Americans and parents of trans youth can also prepare by updating their identity documents, said Gillian Branstetter, communications strategist at the ACLU’s women’s rights project and LGBTQ & HIV Project, who also contributed to the report. Approving name changes, updating birth certificates, and filing for a new passport are all steps that should be taken now, she said.

The ACLU’s report aims to communicate a way out if some of these policies are implemented, she said, and to organize LGBTQ+ groups around a common focus.

“We’re not out of options. We are not without power here,” she said.

The 19th is an independent, nonprofit newsroom reporting on gender, politics and policy.

'Cannot support this': Christian Republicans rebel against Trumps over pro-LGBT event

Christian Republicans are expressing frustration at Donald and Melania Trump after it was announced Melania would attend a fundraiser for the pro-LGBT group the Log Cabin Republicans at Mar-a-Lago later this month.

Raw Story recently reported on the event, noting that the former first lady, known for supporting LGBT rights, will help raise money for the group that was banned from the Texas Republican Party.

But not everyone is happy about that.

ALSO READ: A criminologist explains why keeping Trump from the White House is all that matters

Jenna Ellis, the Donald Trump attorney who tearfully pleaded guilty to 2020 election interference crimes, protested over the Trumps' involvement in the pro-LGBT cause.

Citing a Fox News article, Ellis said, "Melania’s first campaign fundraiser is a pro-LGBTQ Republican event."

"This is an example of something Trump is doing that zero Christians can support," Ellis added. "Even if you vote for him, which of course you should over Biden, Christ followers cannot support this... Where and when in conflict, I follow Christ over Trump."

In a separate post, Ellis said, "No person who truly loves or follows Christ is pro-LGBTQ," citing John 14:15.

Although some conservatives disagreed with Ellis, even arguing that "Homosexuality is no more of a sin than two unmarried people living together," others appeared to provide some back-up.

"All sin is NOT 'equal in the eyes of God', even as all crime is not equal in the eyes of man. That's a fallacy. Pride is a sin, but it’s not equal to murder in the eyes of God," wrote Pastor Darrell Scott, a former advisor to Trump himself.

One user, @Lamar1106, added, "This is why I will NOT be voting for him. Lockdown, vaccine, trans-Trump is not getting my vote. I'm focusing on local elections only."

Another user, @pehzdispy, wrote, "Once again, Christless conservatism is the problem."