Davids is currently fighting to win her fourth term this November — a tough battle, as her district’s demographics have changed to become less Democratic-leaning, andRepublican opponents are lining up to challenge her. But she has also been fighting another very important battle: the fight for increased access to mental health care.
Davids has co-sponsored bipartisan legislation to fund mental health programs in local clinics, schools, and law enforcement centers, as well as a bipartisan bill tohelp people recovering from substance abuse reenter the workforce. She has also supported dozens of bills to bring down the costs of health care and prescription drugs and introducedthe Pride in Mental Health Act — legislation that would improve data collection and resources for at-risk queer youth.
For Davids, mental health strikes an especially personal chord since she’s part of two distinct groups with disproportionately high rates of suicide: Native Americans and young LGBTQ+ people. Native Americans die from suicide at higher rates than any other racial or ethnic group, according to a 2022 reportfrom the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Another recent CDC study found that LGBTQ+ young people are over four times more likely to attempt suicide than their cisgender and heterosexual peers.
Davids believes increasing access to mental health care isn’t merely “putting a Band-Aid on a broken arm.” Rather, she sees such access as an integral part of improving people’s overall emotional well-being.
“I think it’s like an all-of the-above approach, where we do need to be thinking about the most severe and sometimes acute issues happening around mental health or mental illness,” Davids says, “but we also need to be doing that long-term work that helps prevent things like bullying, helps prevent things like young people who are in the foster care system not having anyone around who understands, who has never gotten the training to understand what they’re going through as part of the LGBTQ+ community.”
“If what we’re doing over time is helping people understand how to cope, how to recognize the impacts of trauma, or help people interact with people who are experiencing those things,” she continues, “then I wouldn’t call that a Band-Aid. I would call it the necessary work for keeping people healthy and safe.”
Because many Americans have loved ones who have struggled with mental health, she’ll often watch her conservative colleagues’ committee hearings or press conferences to listen for an opening to reach across the aisle and engage them on this issue.
“There are folks who care about youth mental health and emotional well-being in a way that it probably just doesn’t cross their mind to think about the LGBTQ+ impact,” she says. Some of her conservative colleagues are “often surprised” when they find out about the aforementioned CDC statistics. These discussions can sometimes lead to larger conversations about LGBTQ+ civil rights.
Praising David’s bill to improve data collection on the mental health of queer youth, Melanie Willingham-Jaggers, executive director of the LGBTQ+ student advocacy organization GLSEN, said, “Being excluded, erased, and further stigmatized — by discriminatory policies, peers, and by adults who should protect young people — harms LGBTQI+ youth’s mental health and overall well-being.”
Related:
Davids says, “A lot of times, [my conservative colleagues] might not be aware of how often discriminatory practices [against LGBTQ+ people] are allowed under the law. It’s not right, and it’s not fair, and it doesn’t align with the values that, as Americans, we want to see and that we’re all constantly striving for,” she says.
The mental health disparities facing the LGBTQ+ community are just one part of the institutionalized discrimination experienced by queer people.
Studies suggest that when queer people have the same legal protections as their cisgender and heterosexual peers, their mental health improves, alleviating the anxiety and depression that otherwise accompany worries about discrimination. When Davids points out to colleagues that people can be rejected from a jurybased on their sexual orientation or denied housing based on their gender identity, she notes that she’s not trying to give “special rights” to people based on their unique identities — she’s just trying to make sure that all individuals are afforded the same rights, protections, and responsibilities as other citizens under the law.
Questioning the 2024 election’s long-term impact
The NYC Protect the Results Coalition gathered for a rally and march to demand that every vote be counted before a state can be “called” for a candidate, after Trump’s alleged intention to claim a victory before the results were tabulated. November 4, 2020. Photo by Erik McGregor/LightRocket via Getty Images.
Since arriving in Congress, Davids has noticed Republicans increasingly targeting LGBTQ+ rights amid their attacks on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.
Last year, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) and members of the far-right Freedom Caucus demanded the removal of LGBTQ+-inclusive DEI policies from 12 appropriation bills to effectively fund all U.S. government agencies. She and other Republicans claimed that policies are “woke,” are anti-American, waste taxpayer money, and make the nation less safe.
Similar criticisms have especially accelerated now that it’s an election year.
“There’s a shift, we’ve seen it, and we’re also seeing it in state legislatures that there’s a ‘two steps forward, one step back,’ ” she says. “There’s a ‘one step back’ happening in quite a few places on a number of different types of issues.”
“We have responsibilities to the people who come after us, but also to the people who came before us.”Rep. Sharice Davids
Polls have indicated that voters aren’t enthusiastic about a rematch between President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump. Davids urges voters to not only consider the immediate issues facing their communities but also the long-term impacts of the policies we support, something her Native American identity as a member of the Ho-Chunk Nation has taught her to do.
“I ask questions about the long-term impacts — not for political purposes, but because it’s just kind of how I think about things,” she says. “We have responsibilities to our family, to our community, to our tribe; we have responsibilities to our country; and we have responsibilities to the people who come after us, but also to the people who came before us.”
Editor’s note: This article mentions suicide. If you need to talk to someone now, call the Trans Lifeline at 877-565-8860. It’s staffed by trans people, for trans people. The Trevor Project provides a safe, judgement-free place to talk for LGBTQ youth at 866-488-7386 or text “start” to 678-678. You can also call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 988.
Google has partly disabled its artificial intelligence (AI) image generator Gemini after the software produced racially diverse and historically inaccurate images of Black Vikings, female popes, and people of color as the United States “founding fathers.”
Gemini produced these images without being prompted by users, leading right-wing critics to blast the software as “woke.” However, the incident revealed not only a technical problem but a “philosophical” one about how AI and other tech should address biases against marginalized groups.
Related:
“It’s clear that this feature missed the mark. Some of the images generated are inaccurate or even offensive,” Google Senior Vice President Prabhakar Raghavan wrote in a company blog post addressing the matter.
He explained that Google tried to ensure that Gemini didn’t “fall into some of the traps we’ve seen in the past with image generation technology,” such as creating violent or sexually explicit images, depictions of real people, or images that only show people of just one type of ethnicity, gender, or other characteristics.
“Our tuning to ensure that Gemini showed a range of people failed to account for cases that should clearly not show a range,” Raghavan wrote. “[This] led the model to overcompensate in some cases … leading to images that were embarrassing and wrong.”
He then said that Gemini will be improved “significantly” and receive “extensive testing” before generating more images of people. But he warned that AI is imperfect and may always “generate embarrassing, inaccurate, or offensive results.”
While some right-wing web commenters, like transphobic billionaire Elon Musk, accused Gemini of being “woke,” this sort of problem isn’t unique to Google. Sam Altman, the gay CEO of OpenAI, acknowledged in 2023 that his company’s technology “has shortcomings around bias” after its AI-driven ChatGPT software generated racist and sexist responses. Numerous kinds of AI-driven software have also exhibited bias against Black people and women, resulting in these groups being falsely labeled as criminals, denied medical care, or rejected from jobs.
Such bias in AI tech occurs because the technology makes its decisions based on massive pre-existing data sets. Since such data often skews in favor of or against a certain demographic, the technology will often reflect this bias as a result. For example, some AI-driven image generators, like Stable Diffusion, create racist and sexist images based on Western stereotypes that depict leaders as male, attractive people as thin and white, criminals and social service recipients as Black, and families and spouses as different-sex couples.
“You ask the AI to generate an image of a CEO. Lo and behold, it’s a man,” Voxtech writer Sigal Samuel wrote, explaining the dilemma of AI bias. “On the one hand, you live in a world where the vast majority of CEOs are male, so maybe your tool should accurately reflect that, creating images of man after man after man. On the other hand, that may reinforce gender stereotypes that keep women out of the C-suite. And there’s nothing in the definition of ‘CEO’ that specifies a gender. So should you instead make a tool that shows a balanced mix, even if it’s not a mix that reflects today’s reality?”
Resolving such biases isn’t easy and often requires a multi-pronged approach, Samuel explains. Foremost, AI developers must premeditate which biases might occur and then calibrate software to minimize them in a way that still produces desirable results. Some users of AI image generators, for example, may actually want pictures of a female pope or Black founding fathers — after all, art often creates new visions that challenge social standards.
But AI software also needs to give users a chance to offer feedback when the generated outcomes don’t match their expectations. This gives developers insights into what users want and helps them create interfaces that allow users to request specific characteristics, such as having certain ages, races, genders, sexualities, body types, and other traits reflected in images of people.
Sen. RonWyden (D-OR) has tried to legislate this issue by co-sponsoring the Algorithmic Accountability Act of 2022, a bill that would require companies to conduct impact assessments for bias based on the code they use to generate results. The bill wouldn’t require companies to produce unbiased results, but it would at least provide insights into the ways that technology tends to prefer certain demographics over others.
Meanwhile, though critics blasted Gemini as “woke,” the software at least tried to create racially inclusive images, something many other image generators haven’t bothered to do. Google will now spend the next few weeks retooling Gemini to create more historically accurate images, but similar AI-powered image generators would do well to retool their own software to create more inclusive images. Until then, both will continue to churn out images that reflect our own biases rather than the world’s true diversity.
The CEOs of Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, X, Snap, and Discord testified in the Senate on Wednesday to discuss the online exploitation of children. The discussion brought up the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), a bipartisan bill that seeks to protect minors from online harm. But KOSA has come under fire from some LGBTQ+ activists and groups who fear that the bill will enable Republicans to block queer youth from seeing age-appropriate LGBTQ+ content online.
Laura Marquez-Garrett, an attorney with the Social Media Victims Law Center, says revisions to the bill have helped ensure that its current version will protect all kids and safeguard against potential misuse by anti-LGBTQ+ politicians. But Evan Greer, director of Fight for the Future, a nonprofit that protects people’s human rights in the digital age, says KOSA unconstitutionally violates free speech rights and will result in social media companies broadly censoring LGBTQ+ content rather than risking lawsuits from attorneys general.
It’s undeniable that social media can negatively impact mental health. Last year, the U.S. Surgeon General issued an advisory noting how the frequency and kinds of information shown to young people on social media can cause a “profound risk of harm” to their mental health.
“Children and adolescents on social media are commonly exposed to extreme, inappropriate, and harmful content, and those who spend more than three hours a day on social media face double the risk of poor mental health including experiencing symptoms of depression and anxiety,” the Surgeon General’s report on Social Media and Youth Mental Health said. Social media’s content and design can also make some young people feel addicted to it, increasing body dysmorphia, low self-esteem, and even self-harming behaviors, the report added.
KOSA tries to remedy this by requiring online platforms to take measures to prevent recommending content that promotes mental health disorders (like eating disorders, drug use, self-harm, sexual abuse, and bullying) unless minors specifically search for such content. KOSA also requires platforms to limit features that result in compulsive usage — like autoplay and infinite scroll — or allow adults to contact or track young users’ location. The bill says platforms must provide parents with easy-to-use tools to safeguard their child’s social media settings and notify parents if their kids are exposed to potentially hazardous materials or interactions.
Furthermore, KOSA requires platforms to submit annual reports to the federal government containing details about their non-adult users, the internal steps they’ve taken to protect minors from online harms, the “concern reports” – or reports platforms issue parents when their child encounters any harmful content – they’ve issued to parents, and descriptions of interventions they’ve taken to mitigate harms to minors. These reports will be overseen by an independent third-party auditor who consults with parents, researchers, and youth experts on additional methods and best practices for safeguarding minors’ well-being online.
KOSA has bipartisan support, including that of President Joe Biden as well as 46 senatorial co-sponsors, 21 of whom are Democrats, including lesbian Sen. Tammy Baldwin (WI) and LGBTQ+ allies like Sen. Amy Klobuchar (MN) and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (MA). LGBTQ Nation reached out to Baldwin and Warren’s offices for additional comment but didn’t receive a response by the time of publication. KOSA is also supported by groups like Common Sense Media, Fairplay, Design It For Us, Accountable Tech, Eating Disorders Coalition, American Psychological Association, and the American Academy of Pediatrics.
But while parents of transgender youth and numerous pro-LGBTQ+ organizations agree that social media can negatively impact young people’s mental health, many other groups have nonetheless opposed the bill, including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the Woodhull Freedom Foundation, the LGBT Technology Partnership, as well as LGBTQ+ advocacy organizations in six states.
“KOSA is, at its heart, a censorship bill,” Mandy Salley, Chief Operating Officer of the Woodhull Freedom Foundation, a group that advocates for sexual freedom as a fundamental human right, told LGBTQ Nation. “If passed in its current form, we believe that KOSA will hinder the ability of everyone to access information online and negatively harm many communities that are already censored online, including sex therapists, sex workers, sex educators, and the broader LGBTQ+ community. Our human right to free expression cannot be ignored in favor of supposed ‘safety’ on the Internet.”
Shutterstock
The big sticking point: KOSA’s Duty of Care provision
Specifically, Woodhull and the other aforementioned organizations are worried about the bill’s Duty of Care provision that allows attorneys general to conduct investigations, issue subpoenas, require documentation from, and file civil lawsuits against any platforms that have “threatened or adversely affected” minors’ well-being. LGBTQ+ advocates fear that Republican attorneys general who consider LGBTQ+ identities as harmful forms of mental illness will use KOSA to censor such web content and prosecute platforms that provide access to such content.
In a July 2023 Teen Vogue op-ed, digital rights organizer Sarah Philips wrote that the bill “authorizes state attorneys general to be the ultimate arbiters of what is good or bad for kids. If a state attorney general asserts that information about gender-affirming care or abortion care could cause a child depression or anxiety, they could sue an app or website for not removing that content.”
It didn’t help that KOSA was introduced by anti-LGBTQ+ Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), who has said that one of the bill’s top priorities is to protect children from “the transgender in this culture.”
“[Social media] is where children are being indoctrinated,” Blackburn told the Family Policy Alliance, a conservative Christian organization, in a September 2023 speech. “They’re hearing things at school and then they’re getting onto YouTube to watch a video and all of a sudden this comes to them… They click on something and, the next thing you know, they’re being inundated with it.”
Blackburn’s office told LGBTQ Nation that her comment had been “taken out of context” and wasn’t related to KOSA, stating, “KOSA will not — nor was it designed to — target or censor any individual or community.” But the anti-LGBTQ+ conservative think tank Heritage Foundation has also said it wishes to use the law to “guard” kids against the “harms of… transgender content.”
But Marquez-Garrett told LGBTQ Nation that these concerns are based on an old version of the bill that has since been revised after consultation with concerned LGBTQ+ activists.
“If [the possibility of an attorney general misusing a law is] the standard by which we judge all laws, we’re never going to have new laws because the reality is an unscrupulous attorney general can try,” she said. “But it doesn’t mean they’re going to succeed.”
First, she points out that Philips’s concern about attorney generals suing platforms for not removing pro-LGBTQ+ content doesn’t necessarily apply for two reasons: KOSA doesn’t regulate what LGBTQ+ or allegedly harmful content a site can host — it regulates what content that websites automatically suggest to young users. Users of all ages can still access any material that they deliberately search for.
Moreover, attorneys general have to prove to a judge and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) that, by KOSA’s definitions, LGBTQ+ content harms young users’ mental health. Such arguments won’t pass muster with every judge or FTC commissioner.
Marquez-Garret noted that after Sen. Blackburn made her concerning comments, the bill was revised with input from queer advocates and reintroduced with amendments meant to account for those concerns. For example, while the original bill broadly required web platforms to prevent all “harms” to minors, the revised bill specifically mentions the harms companies must work against (including suicidal behaviors, eating disorders, substance use, sexual exploitation, and ads for tobacco and alcohol).
She also notes that KOSA says an attorney general who begins civil actions under KOSA will be required to issue a report of any action to the FTC. The FTC will then have the right to intervene.
“The FTC is only as good as the people running it,” Marquez-Garrett told LGBTQ Nation. “And we don’t know what’s going to happen in the future.” But, assuming that the FTC is “not nefarious and is reasonable,” she continued, if the FTC begins an investigation into the actions, the attorney general’s home state is forbidden from taking any additional actions.
Marquez-Garrett also points out that the revised version of KOSA contains a carveout that says that if a minor searches for any sort of content, including LGBTQ+ content, then they’re allowed to see it even if an attorney general considers it harmful. Additionally, KOSA also explicitly excludes many websites from its control, including government platforms, libraries, and non-profits. That means if a minor finds pro-LGBTQ+ content on the websites of the ACLU, The Trevor Project, or the Human Rights Campaign, an attorney general can’t prosecute.
Furthermore, under the revised KOSA, websites aren’t required to install age verification or parental consent functionality that might prevent young people from accessing different platforms. Though Greer questioned how social media platforms can comply with the bill without conducting age verification, Marquez-Garrett says Greer’s question ignores KOSA’s plain language and echoes “another Big Tech narrative about Big Tech’s ability or inability to comply with KOSA.”
Regardless, under KOSA, platforms are also expressly forbidden from being required to disclose a minor’s browsing behavior, search history, messages, contact list, or other content or metadata of their communications that could potentially out them to their parents.
“We totally agree that big tech platforms and the surveillance capitalist business model that they employ are doing real harm, and that they’re specifically harming LGBTQ people and communities,” Greer, director of Fight for the Future (FFF), told LGBTQ Nation. “But as long as KOSA attempts to dictate what content platforms can recommend, it will be unconstitutional.”
FFF and the ACLU have said that the government cannot force platforms to suppress entire categories of content or to suppress all content that might lead to a minor becoming depressed or anxious without violating the First Amendment.
Greer said that legislators behind KOSA should have consulted more with civil liberties and human rights advocates, like her organization and the ACLU, to consider a bill’s potential constitutional and human rights pitfalls.
Marquez-Garrett disagrees with Greer’s characterization, telling LGBTQ Nation, “KOSA does not prohibit content of any sort, nor does it prohibit posting of any content by third parties, so does not run afoul of the First Amendment.”
Apart from the constitutionality issue, Greer most worries that if social companies are subjected to liability for content, they will over-remove content to avoid getting sued. “This is exactly what happened with SESTA,” she said, referencing two bipartisan laws passed in 2018 that sought to reduce sex trafficking online.
Because the law held online companies liable for any user content that could be seen as facilitating sex work, many online businesses just opted to shut down any forums for sex or dating. Others banned any potential “adult content” (including discussion boards), deleted content about avoiding sexually transmitted infections, and created rules forbidding sexual comments. The law made sex workers much more vulnerable to traffickers and made actual sex trafficking much more difficult to track, its critics say. Even Sen. Warren, who supported the law, expressed regret for its unintended consequences.
“Do I think that Mark Zuckerberg is going to go to bat in court to protect my kid’s ability to continue engaging in the online communities that she finds supportive and loving and caring? Absolutely not,” Greer said. “He’s gonna roll over and do whatever he thinks he needs to do to avoid his company getting sued,” she added, especially if they’re threatened by “rogue” attorneys general, conservative judges, or an FTC run by the administration of Donald Trump.
“Do people really want to gamble with trans kids’ lives hoping that we’ll never have a bigot in the White House ever again? I sure don’t,” Greer added.
In an informational white paper, FFF said that if a user searches for “Why do I feel different from other boys,” and a platform returns search results about gender identity, an attorney general can argue that that’s not what the user was searching for, and thus the platform is liable for “algorithmically recommending” that content.
Shutterstock
Is there a way to fix KOSA’s potential problems?
If KOSA becomes law, social media companies won’t risk attracting these attorneys’ attention, Greer and other groups worry. Instead, the companies will react by omitting, algorithmically suppressing, or blocking large swaths of LGBTQ+ content — not just “recommended” served by platform algorithms.
This would affect not only content related to LGBTQ+ issues and other controversial but important topics for users they believe could be minors (including content from The Trevor Project or the Human Rights Campaign, Greer says), but also any users’ or resources’ posts sharing information about queer health resources, life experiences, and social events, Greer predicted, since all social media content is regulated by algorithms.
“I truly believe that legislation [like KOSA] that enables this type of government censorship makes kids less safe, and not more safe,” Greer says. “It feels to me like it’s driven by the same bad thinking behind abstinence-only sex education: the idea that we protect kids by cutting them off from information rather than by allowing them to access it.”
Marquez-Garrett disagrees. “KOSA is plain on its face, and efforts to misinterpret KOSA will not succeed. If a conservative attorney general could simply attack a type of content it doesn’t like, then liberal attorneys general could do the same, such as with guns, or political content, or any number of potentially objectionable topics. And KOSA’s own limitations would provide complying platforms with viable defenses.”
But instead of supporting KOSA in its current form, FFF has encouraged legislators to ditch its Duty of Care provision and replace it with a strict privacy regime that bans any use of minors’ personal data to power algorithmic recommendation systems. The FFF also suggested explicitly prohibiting specific manipulative business practices, like autoplay, infinite scroll, intrusive notifications, and surveillance advertising.
Lawmakers should also drop the provision in KOSA allowing enforcement by attorneys general, the FFF suggests. Instead, its provisions could be enforced by the FTC as “unfair or deceptive business practices,” which the FTC already has a mandate to crack down on. This would aid the law’s constitutionality and bring the law into the realm of regulating these businesses the same way that the federal government already regulates many other businesses.
Some social media platforms and influencers are opposed to any government oversight, Marquez-Garrett says, because policies that limit what their algorithms can recommend also reduce their overall content engagement and, thus, their profits.
Currently, social media platforms aren’t protecting LGBTQ+ kids, she adds. A minor who searches for “gay pride” may be served videos telling them that being gay is bad and that gay people are going to hell and should kill themselves. Platforms also regularly remove LGBTQ+ content for allegedly violating platform policies or potentially offending users in other countries.
She believes that KOSA could help open the playing field for platforms that don’t harmfully target kids because any such actions will become a matter of public record and scrutiny. This will allow ethical web designers to create better systems that protect children’s needs. That’s especially important, she said, since numerous studies have shown that access to positive online LGBTQ+ media and communities can improve young queers’ mental health.
Ultimately, she believes that everyone should support protecting children, especially as more studies show how negative online experiences can increase mental distress and suicidality among kids.
“We cannot give big tech a free pass and assume they have our kids’ best interests at heart,” she said.
A federal appeals court has issued an injunction against part of Texas’ book-banning law that requires book vendors to rate books for “sexually explicit” and “sexually relevant” materials. Vendors must submit those ratings every year to the Texas Education Agency (TEA), the agency overseeing public schools. The TEA can then overrule a vendor’s ratings and place vendors on a “noncompliant list,” forbidding schools from buying books from them if the vendors disagree with the TEA’s decisions.
Two Texas bookstores — Austin’s BookPeople and Houston’s Blue Willow Bookshop — filed a lawsuit against the 2023 Restricting Explicit and Adult-Designated Educational Resources (READER) Act, calling the law overbroad and an unconstitutional violation of their free speech rights. The bookstores were joined in their lawsuit by the American Booksellers Association, the Association of American Publishers, the Authors Guild, and the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund.
On Wednesday, a three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled that an injunction against the aforementioned section of the READER Act should remain in place because the booksellers in question are likely to suffer irreparable economic and reputational harm because of the law.
Blue Willow Bookshop said that it had already lost $200,000 in business after the law was passed as the Katy Independent School District had already paused all purchasing from it while awaiting for the business to comply with the new law.
The law requires booksellers to rate all books sold to schools if they’re either “sexually explicit” (“patently offensive” by vague and undefined community standards) or “sexually relevant” (with depictions of any sexual conduct). Blue Willow estimated that rating all of its books will cost between $200 and $1,000 per book and between $4 million and $500 million overall. This would bankrupt the store since it only makes $1 million annually, the bookseller said.
Because the bookseller makes 20% of its annual revenue through school sales, if it fails to comply with the law it would lose a large part of its business.
The Texas government argued that the plaintiffs’ case should be thrown out because vendors aren’t required to participate in the rating system and their economic injuries have not yet occurred. However, in its ruling, the court wrote, “We are not persuaded.”
The state also argued that its law didn’t violate free speech rights because there is an “abundant history” of movie and video game ratings and warning labels on cigarettes. However, the court wrote that movie and video game ratings are entirely voluntary since there are no legal requirements that any entity submit ratings before sale. Also, ratings of sexual content are not “purely factual and uncontroversial,” unlike the health warnings on cigarettes.
“The statute requires vendors to undertake contextual analyses, weighing and balancing many factors to determine a rating for each book,” the court wrote. “Balancing a myriad of factors that depend on community standards is anything but the mere disclosure of factual information. And it has already proven controversial.”
In its lawsuit, the plaintiffs wrote, “The overbroad language of the Book Ban could result in the banning or restricting of access to many classic works of literature, such as Twelfth Night, A Midsummer Night’s Dream, Romeo and Juliet, Of Mice and Men, Ulysses, Jane Eyre, Maus, Anne Frank’s Diary: The Graphic Adaptation, The Canterbury Tales, I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings, and even the Bible.”
While Texas schools will still be allowed to remove sexually explicit and relevant materials from libraries and classrooms, book sellers won’t have to comply with the law for now. The full issue will be decided as the lawsuit proceeds through the judicial system.
In a statement issued after the ruling, the plaintiffs said, “We are grateful for the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals’ decisive action in striking down this unconstitutional law. With this historic decision the court has moved decisively to ensure the constitutionally protected speech of authors, booksellers, publishers, and readers, and prevent the state government from unlawfully compelling speech on the part of private citizens.”
“The court’s decision also shields Texas businesses from the imposition of impossibly onerous conditions, protects the basic constitutional rights of the plaintiffs, and lets Texas parents make decisions for their own children without government interference or control,” the statement contnued. “This is a good day for bookstores, readers, and free expression.”
Right-wingers like Alex Jones and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) have long accused LGBTQ+ people and allies of being “groomers” and pedophiles. But they’re making excuses now that former President Donald Trump may soon be unveiled as one of 200 people connected to child sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein.
A judge has recently unsealed and uncensored previously redacted court documents that name up to 200 associates of Epstein. The documents were unsealed in a lawsuit brought by Epstein victim Virginia Guiffre. Guiffre accused Epstein and his accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell of forcing her to have sex with Epstein’s powerful and wealthy friends, including Britain’s Prince Andrew — something Prince Andrew has denied.
Related:
Trump’s name is expected to appear alongside former President Bill Clinton’s in the un-redacted files since Epstein’s flight logs have already shown that they flew on Epstein’s private Boeing 727 plane. The plane was nicknamed the “Lolita Express,” after Vladimir Nabokov’s 1955 pedophilia novel, due to the frequent delivery of apparently underage women to Epstein’s privately owned island of Little Saint James. Epstein pleaded guilty to sex with a 14-year-old girl in 2008 and was undergoing investigation for other possible sex crimes before his suspicious August 2019 suicide at a New York prison.
There’s no evidence that Clinton or Trump ever visited the island, and neither have been charged with a crime related to Epstein. Nevertheless, Jones and Greene are already pushing a conspiracy theory that any mention of Trump in the un-redacted files will be due to “deep state” federal operatives trying to smear the former president.
Jones, the host of InfoWars whose social media accounts and guests have repeatedly accused LGBTQ+ people and their allies of pedophilia, recently said, “If they put out a client list, and that’s possible that it could be fake, because Epstein’s dead. And that’s something very possible.” Jones said the CIA had previously committed similar actions in connection with the Israeli and British intelligence agencies.
Defending Trump, Jones added, “[Trump] gets devoted to one woman at a time, gets totally obsessed with them, totally nice to them.” Despite Jones’s claim, at least 26 women have accused Trump of sexual misconduct, including extra-marital affairs.
Greene, whose anti-LGBTQ+ tweets about grooming and pedophilia have spread far on social media, has tried to deflect any association between Epstein and Trump by focusing on Clinton instead.
“For some us, it’s no surprise at all that Bill Clinton will be named in the Jeffrey Epstein files,” she wrote in a January 3 X post. “We said it a long time ago but they labeled us conspiracy theorists. There will be lots of names you’ve never heard of and the IC collected info on them. Pedophiles belong in jail not on secret government lists.”
Several X commenters asked if she’ll hold Trump to the same standard if he’s named in the un-redacted documents.
In a 2002 interview with New York Magazine, Trump said “I’ve known Jeff[rey Epstein] for 15 years. Terrific guy. He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it — Jeffrey enjoys his social life.”
However, in 2019, soon after Epstein was taken into custody by New York authorities, Trump said he had a “falling-out” with Epstein about 15 years ago, adding, “I was not a fan of his, that I can tell you.” Trump allegedly banned Epstein from his resort in Mar-a-Lago, Florida in the early 2000s after Epstein expressed interest in a club member’s teenage daughter.
Flames shot through the crowded Up Stairs Lounge as bartender Buddy Rasmussen opened the front door to see who had been ringing the downstairs buzzer. Someone had lit the popular bar’s stairwell carpet on fire, and it burned its way up the wooden stairs into the bar, quickly igniting the lounge’s red wallpaper, curtains, and posters of Burt Reynolds naked on a bearskin rug and Olympic swimmer Mark Spitz wearing his seven gold medals, a star-spangled Speedo, and a smile.
Some patrons saw the blaze and ran for the nearest exits or down the stairwell, emerging with their clothes on fire as neighbors raced to pour pitchers of water onto them. Rasmussen began tapping patrons on the shoulder to follow him toward the fire exit at the back of the bar, but many were too shocked by the exploding blaze to move.
The June 24, 1973, conflagration, likely set by a sex worker ejected from the New Orleans bar earlier that night, killed 32 people and injured at least 15 others.
Yet the reaction to the catastrophe hardly matched the immense suffering the fire caused, and the tragedy was compounded by multiple denials: Public officials refused to issue statements about the fire, and Catholic churches refused to hold funeral services for the victims, whom they saw as unrepentant sinners. The media only reported on the fire briefly or not at all, and some families refused to claim their relatives’ bodies because they didn’t want to acknowledge that they were gay. Three of the victims ended up buried in unmarked graves — two remain unidentified.
To this day, the arson remains unsolved.
Get the Daily Brief
The news you care about, reported on by the people who care about you:
The June 25, 1973, blaze quickly engulfed the Up Stairs Lounge. Photo by Philip Ames, courtesy of the LGBT+ Archives of Louisiana.
Hate crimes reverberate through communities, intimidating an entire class of people. The Up Stairs Lounge had been a safe space in the gay-friendly, tourist-heavy French Quarter. But as bar patrons feared a similar attack on other gathering spots, still others worried that police might start raiding gay bars more often and arresting more men in the name of public safety. Bar owners believed talking too much about the fire could hurt business. And locals just wanted to move on from the horror.
As a result, to this day, even many queer New Orleanians aren’t aware of the most devastating fire in their city’s history, the deadliest massacre of gay men in the U.S. before the June 2016 Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando, Florida.
This year, half a century later, there’s considerable important work being done to ensure that the arson and its aftermath are remembered and the deaths memorialized. For the tragedy’s anniversary, a group of community activists, religious leaders, and queer historians partnered with the LGBT+ Archives Project of Louisiana and the Historic New Orleans Collection to organize a weekend of commemorative events at the end of June.
The weekend, attended by LGBTQ Nation, featured discussions with religious leaders and activists who lent a hand in the fire’s aftermath, artists who have made documentaries and theatrical works based on the event, church leaders concerned with the tragedy’s spiritual legacy, and podcasters and archivists dedicated to preserving its terrible memory. The weekend events also included art exhibitions, film screenings, a memorial service, and a “second line” jazz funeral through the city’s streets to the now defunct bar’s front entrance.
Their work is especially important considering the current backlash against remembering the atrocities America has committed against its most vulnerable communities. Extreme right-wingers are busy denying our guilt over slavery, the genocide of Native Americans, the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II, and the effect these traumas have on minority communities to this day.
But those committed to preserving history aren’t just making artworks and public speeches about the tragedy; they’re also working to ensure that the victims and their families finally get the recognition and empathy they deserve for their loss.
The fire occurred when New Orleans author Johnny Townsend was only 11 years old. Though he saw horrific photos of the aftermath on TV news at the time, as he grew up, he could find little background on what happened. So in 1989 — 16 years after the fire — he began tracking down the bar’s survivors and former patrons with the help of Rasmussen, the lounge’s surviving bartender.
Through interviews and research, Townsend published the first historical account of what happened as well as profiles for each victim in his 2011 book Let the Faggots Burn. The amateur historian struggled to find a publisher, so he eventually published it himself via BookLocker.com. After the 333-page book was released, a son of one of the fire’s victims approached him after Townsend spoke publicly about the book and said that all he had ever known of his father was what his mother had told him: “Your father was a drunk, and he died at a bar.”
Townsend’s book had given his dad back to him. Today, the historical amnesia is finally being addressed. There are three books about the fire — including Clayton Delery-Edwards’ comprehensive 2014 account, The Up Stairs Lounge Arson, and Robert W. Fieseler’s 2018 nonfiction narrative, Tinderbox.
Three documentaries have been made about the arson, with a fourth in production, as well as one play, a stage musical, four unproduced screenplays, a dance piece, various podcasts, and a permanent art installation.
One of the documentaries, a 2013 short by Royd Anderson, helped the estranged family of World War II veteran Ferris LeBlanc realize that he was one of three “unidentified white males” who perished in the blaze. The city buried his corpse in an unmarked plot within Resthaven Memorial Park, a potter’s field located near the city’s northeastern coast.
Anderson is now working on a documentary called Saving Ferris and pressuring government officials to exhume LeBlanc and give him the proper military burial that he deserved.
Max Vernon’s 2017 stage musical, The View UpStairs, depicts a snarky gay fashionista millennial who buys the dilapidated Up Stairs Lounge to launch his flagship store but is then magically transported to 1973, just before the fire. Despite its tragic content, it has been seen by over 100,000 people — Off-Broadway, in multiple U.S. cities, as well as in England and Australia — and has been translated into Japanese and seen by 20,000 theatergoers. Drag legend RuPaul called the musical “fantastic.”
None of these things would’ve been possible without Townsend’s first book. Delery-Edwards and Fieseler agreed on this point as the three book authors spoke at an opening-night panel during the 50th-anniversary commemorative weekend.
Fieseler said that people still contact him regularly with new information about the fire. At speaking engagements, attendees will often approach him, tears in their eyes, to confess their estrangement from their own queer family members.
“It can change minds,” Fieseler said of the history. “It can melt hearts when they learn the inhumanity of how these people were treated.”
Many of the weekend panelists said they wanted to ensure that the history is never forgotten and that it never happens again — but it already is happening again.
“New Orleans is renowned internationally for being a welcoming, open city. And part of us continuing to promote that narrative requires us to acknowledge a time when we were not an open, welcoming city.”City Council Vice President J.P. Morell
none
Eleven states have laws censoring discussions of LGBTQ+ issues in public school classrooms. Thirty-three states have banned LGBTQ+-inclusive books from schools and public libraries, according to the free speech organization PEN America. Meanwhile, recent reports show that the LGBTQ+ community has increasingly been targeted by legislation banning drag shows and gender-affirming care, as well as by hate speech, threats, and violence from white supremacist, neo-fascist, parental rights, and Christian nationalist groups.
“New Orleans is renowned internationally for being a welcoming, open city,” City Council Vice President J.P. Morell told attendees at the opening reception of the 50th anniversary commemoration. “And part of us continuing to promote that narrative requires us to acknowledge a time when we were not an open, welcoming city.”
Morell spearheaded an official apology from the city, delivered in 2022, for its “botched and callous response” to the arson. He said that the city and media had made an “active effort” to bury the massacre and shield the politically powerful from any guilt for neglecting its victims. That same year, Louisiana state Rep. Alonzo Knox (D) passed a resolution apologizing for the state’s response.
A growing community has emerged to preserve the arson’s memory and counter those who wish to keep it buried. To understand what drives them, one must first know a little about the bar, the community it created, and the fire that ravaged both.
“When I try to explain [the arson] to people not in the queer community,” Morell told the reception attendees, “I tell them the Up Stairs Lounge is like the [1921] Tulsa Massacre for those in the African American community … The fact that we didn’t know about it as a country tells you how successful the government and the media can be in erasing history if we don’t fight for it.”
How a refuge turned into a deadly nightmare
Gay life during the early 1970s was nothing like today. The American Psychiatric Association considered homosexuality a mental illness, the best-known depiction across America was the hillbilly rape scene from the film Deliverance, and some closeted men got married and had children just to avoid persecution.
While some of New Orleans’ queer community joined invite-only dinner clubs and Mardi Gras krewes to socialize privately, others frequented public cruising spots and bars. In the late-night hours, police would sometimes raid these establishments, beating up and arresting patrons on vague “obscenities” charges for actions as simple as hugging. Arrestees had their names published in the newspaper, resulting in firings, divorces, and even taking their own lives.
In 1970, gay entrepreneur Philip Esteve opened the Up Stairs Lounge and hired Rasmussen, a friendly man who had been dishonorably discharged from the military for being gay.
The bar didn’t get much business when it first opened, but then Rasmussen had the idea for a Sunday evening Beer Bust from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. when customers could pay $1 for all-you-can-drink beer. He figured, accurately, that Beer Bust customers would become bar regulars.
As the crowds grew, the lounge became a refuge for its patrons, some of whom were out among gay friends but closeted at work. The bar held annual parties for Mardi Gras and Halloween and also community fundraisers for children’s hospitals and other causes. On a small stage, patrons performed plays and lighthearted “Nellydramas” where men played women’s roles, and the audience threw popcorn at cartoonish villains.
The bar also hired a pianist to play singalongs. At the end of every Beer Bust, he’d play the 1970 Brotherhood of Man song “United We Stand,” and patrons would sing together: “There’s nowhere in the world that I would rather be / Than with you my love / And there’s nothing in the world that I would rather see / Than your smile my love / For united we stand / Divided we fall / And if our backs should ever be against the wall / We’ll be together, together, you and I.”
The bar also hosted Sunday morning services for the Metropolitan Community Church (MCC), a gay-affirming church started in Los Angeles in 1968. William “Bill” Larson, New Orleans’ MCC minister, temporarily held Sunday services in the bar’s intimate theater. Even after moving the gatherings into his own home, church members still patronized the bar after services, often staying for the Beer Bust.
According to accounts in the aforementioned books and an ABC News featureabout the arson, during one Beer Bust on June 24, 1973, 26-year-old sex worker Roger Dale Nunez was reportedly sexually harassing patrons. One patron punched him, and the bartender threw him out. But before leaving, Nunez allegedly said, “I’m gonna burn you all out!”
It’s believed that Nunez then went to a nearby Walgreens, purchased a 7-ounce canister of Ronsonol lighter fluid, emptied it onto the bar entrance’s bottom steps, and ignited it. The small fire quickly blazed up the carpeted stairway and swept into the bar, engulfing its wallpaper, window drapes, wood paneling, posters, and decorations.
Rasmussen, who received fire training in the military, helped 22 people safely exit from a fire door behind the stage, but others were too intoxicated or stunned to follow. Some of the 42 people who remained in the bar escaped through another fire door; others ran down the fiery stairwell and emerged downstairs severely burned.
Twelve escaped by miraculously squeezing through the 10-inch gaps in the metal safety bars guarding the lounge’s large floor-to-ceiling windows. One such person was Rusty Quinton, a man who would soon after be photographed while looking at the fiery bar and crying, “My friends are up there!”
Others weren’t so lucky. Larson, the MCC pastor, squeezed his head and arm through the bars before catching flame and burning alive. Some people feared the windows’ 12-foot drop to the sidewalk and blocked others from escaping through them.
Though firefighters extinguished the blaze barely 20 minutes after it began, when they entered the bar, they discovered that nearly 17 corpses had piled atop one another while trying to escape through the windows. Firefighters vomited from the stench and cried at the horrific sights. Larson’s charred corpse remained visible in the window for nearly four hours before being removed.
Fifteen injured survivors went to Charity Hospital, forcing it to prematurely open its new burn unit. Three of those admitted died from their injuries.
One survivor with burned hands asked for help dialing his boyfriend on a pay phone. When his lover answered, he looked at the floor and said, “Hello, David? Listen, I’ve had a sort of accident. Yes … Please come quick. Please come. I hurt.”
Heroes from the ashes
Throughout history, some haven’t considered the fire a hate crime because it was committed by someone from the LGBTQ+ community. But, as one commemoration panelist, Metropolitan Community Church minister Paul Breton, said, the real hate crime happened afterward with the inhuman response of the city, state, and church.
The indignities began almost immediately. As journalists arrived at the scene, Rasmussen found Nunez in the crowd and dragged him to a police officer for arrest. The cop, possibly more concerned with crowd control, told Rasmussen to move along. The officer’s negligence characterized the police’s handling of the case. While investigators often use victims’ clothing, jewelry, birthmarks, and IDs to identify the dead, the fire had rendered them unidentifiable. Police officials told reporters from then newspaper The States-Item that they had trouble identifying people because “some thieves hung out” at the bar, and it was “not uncommon for homosexuals to carry false identification.”
Reggie Adams, Adam Fontenot, Horace “Skip” Hetchell, Ken Harrington, Rev. William “Bill” Larson, Ferris LeBlanc, Robert Lumpkin, Leon Richard Maples, Bud Matyi, Duane George “Mitch” Mitchell, and Perry Lane Waters, Jr. were among the victims on June 27, 1973. Photos courtesy of the LGBT+ Archives Project of Louisiana.
Police concluded their investigation about two months later without ever questioning or arresting Nunez. The fire marshal’s more thorough investigation subjected Nunez to a psychological stress evaluation (PSE) that detected dishonesty in Nunez’s denials. PSEs, however, are subjective and often inadmissible as court evidence.
Nunez drunkenly confessed to three people — his lover, a nun, and a drag queen — that he had started the fire, only to deny it when sober. None of them told the police. The drag queen, Miss Fury, said Nunez confessed to her on Christmas Eve 1973 that “He’d only meant to cause a little fire and smoke. He’d only meant to scare everybody. He didn’t realize the whole place would go up in flames.” The 27-year-old arsonist died by suicide on November 15, 1974, by overdosing on beer and painkillers.
Even though the fire marshal concluded that Nunez was guilty, the Orleans Parish District Attorney refused to sign off on the conclusion. With no fingerprints on the lighter fluid can, witnesses to the fire setting, or confession, there was no proof and no conviction — the case remains officially unsolved to this day.
The local paper, The Times-Picayune, printed the names of the deceased and the survivors, outing some of them. Closeted survivors who avoided the press still couldn’t mention the tragedy at their workplaces. According to Delery-Edwards’ and Townsend’s research, tasteless jokes began circulating among New Orleans locals about “flaming queens,” how the dead homos should be buried in fruit jars, and how the real tragedy was that more f**gots didn’t die.
When a 1972 fire at New Orleans’ Rault Center killed six people, then-Mayor Moon Landrieu, then-Louisiana Gov. Edwin Edwards, and then-Catholic Archbishop Philip Hannan issued sympathetic statements to the victims and their families. However, after the Up Stairs Lounge fire killed 32, the officials said nothing for weeks. Hannan reportedly told local Catholic churches not to hold funerals or burials for any of the fire’s non-Catholic victims.
An appeals court blocked 19 different lawsuits suing city and state agencies for failing to inspect the bar for fire hazards for over two years before the blaze. With no one else to hold accountable, the litigants sued the bar’s owner for $80,000, a paltry sum to split among them all.
But even amid this coldness, heroes rose from the ashes.
Three MCC leaders — MCC founder Troy Perry of Los Angeles, Reverend John Gill of Atlanta, and Minister Paul Breton of Washington D.C. — quickly met in New Orleans to begin organizing memorials and press conferences, shaming the media and government for sweeping victims’ ashes under the rug.
These men helped establish The National New Orleans Memorial Fund, which raised $18,000 (worth about $125,000 today). The fund covered burial costs and aided survivors with medical bills and lost wages. It was the first-ever national fundraiser for a gay cause, and it provided a blueprint for similar fundraisers during the soon-to-come AIDS epidemic.
Breton, who is now 83, recalled the unkindness of churches that refused to host memorials for homosexuals.
“Church is not necessarily found in a community of people who adhere to a creed,” Breton said during a 50th anniversary panel about the fire’s spiritual legacy. “The Beer Bust was a church. You had people of like mind and like interest coming together every Sunday at a specified time, and they did something that people in church should do and often that people in churches don’t do — they were friends with each other.”
The three MCC leaders eventually convinced Father Bill Richardson of St. George’s Episcopal Church to host a June 25 memorial in the church’s small chapel. Only 50 people attended since it wasn’t well publicized and victims were still being identified. But afterward, 100 parishioners complained to the local bishop and demanded Richardson’s resignation.
In response, Richardson wrote a June 28 letter to congregants stating, “St. George’s is not a private club but the House of God … Would Jesus have barred these grief-stricken people from His church, or would He have welcomed them?” If congregants felt that the church should only minister to a select few, he wrote, he’d consider resigning. He never resigned, but the Episcopalian bishop of New Orleans, Iveson Nolan, told Richardson and other local Episcopal churches not to host future memorials.
A second memorial was held at St. Mark’s Methodist Church on Sunday, July 1. Its organizers printed 3,000 flyers to advertise it, and about 300 people attended, including the Methodist Bishop of Louisiana — a big deal considering the church officially sees homosexuality as “incompatible with Christian teaching.” The mourners then sang “United We Stand,” the same song that bar patrons sang at the end of every Beer Bust.
That same day, 46 MCC branches in the U.S. and Europe held memorial services, and several gay bars, nightclubs, and bathhouses in eight major U.S. cities also closed for an hour to commemorate the victims.
“I’m not ashamed of who I am or who my friends are. I came in the front door, and I’m going out that way.”An attendee at a memorial event for the Up Stairs Lounge fire, circa 1973.
none
Though the organizers of the New Orleans memorial had asked the press not to attend, TheTimes-Picayune and the local NBC TV affiliate arrived with cameras, waiting to record departing attendees and potentially out them. Perry notified the mourners and offered a backdoor exit. But an unidentified butch lesbian reportedly shouted, “I’m not ashamed of who I am or who my friends are. I came in the front door, and I’m going out that way.”
Recounts differ on what happened next. Some say the mourners left through the front door. Some say a few exited out the back. Others say the TV cameras had already departed by the time the memorial ended. Perry told one historian it didn’t matter if the cameras were there or not — what mattered was that the gay mourners faced them.
A reckoning 50 years in the making
(from left) A local “watering hole,” The Jimani, has occupied the street level of 141 Chartres Street since 1972. The Up Stairs Lounge on the second floor had only one public entrance, its second-floor windows were either boarded or covered with iron bars. Photos courtesy of the LGBT+ Archives Project of Louisiana.
Contrary to widespread belief, the Up Stairs Lounge fire wasn’t New Orleans’ Stonewall moment. The fire wasn’t a victory against oppression, and it didn’t rouse the local gay community to start fighting for their rights. In fact, the LGBTQ+ community rarely discussed the fire, and some opposed the efforts of the visiting MCC ministers.
The ministers were referred to as “fairy carpetbaggers,” borrowing a post–Civil War term for Northerners who profited off of Southern suffering. Up Stairs Lounge bar owner Esteve and other local gay business owners blamed the out-of-state activists for interfering in local matters, divisively politicizing a tragedy, and attracting unwanted government attention to gay establishments and their patrons.
Though the American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from its diagnostic manual of mental disorders six months after the fire, it wouldn’t be until six years later that the city’s queer community would unite to oppose a force that bears an eerie resemblance to the threat LGBTQ+ people face today.
In 1977, the leaders of seven local gay and lesbian groups organized a 2,000-person protest against hate group leader Anita Bryant — it was the city’s largest-ever gay rights demonstration. That same year, a gay and lesbian newspaper Impact began publication, and the mayor appointed gays and lesbians to his city hall committee. Throughout the 1980s, various gay political and HIV advocacy groups evolved, including the New Orleans Chapter of Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG).
Despite this progress, the Up Stairs Lounge Fire remained mostly forgotten, and it was even excluded from a 1991 Louisiana State Museum exhibit about the city’s historic fires. However, on the arson’s 30th anniversary in 2003, the New Orleans MCC and others placed a bronze memorial plaque with the names of the fire’s 32 victims in front of the bar’s original entrance. By the arson’s 40th anniversary, the city’s then-mayor Mitch Landrieu (son of the mayor who had served during the fire) issued a statement formally recognizing the fire, and then Catholic Archbishop Gregory Aymond apologized for the archdiocese not issuing a statement when the blaze occurred.
Many of the fire’s survivors are dead, and the victims’ families have grown older and largely moved away. But local MCC Rev. Lonnie Cheramie, a queer group called the Crescent City Leathermen, and others have helped organize annual memorials, including a 2023 recreation of the 1973 memorial service that occurred at St. Marks.
“There are growing numbers of people across our country who want to erase our history and our very existence. Your very existence and participation today is, in fact, a political act.”Apostle Shelly Planellas of New Covenant Church, host of the Up Stairs Lounge 50th anniversary commemoration
none
In front of the crowded sanctuary stood 32 small black banners, each with the name of a different victim sewn in gold lettering. After the New Orleans Gay Men’s Chorus sang “United We Stand,” various leathermen, drag nuns with the Big Easy Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, and others carried the banners through the French Quarter for a “second line” jazz funeral procession to the entrance of the former Up Stairs Lounge. (The street-level bar, The Jimani, has occupied the space since 1972, with building records dating back as far back as 1848.)
There, people left flowers and bouquets on the plaque as Regina Adams observed the proceedings. Her husband, Reginald “Reggie” Adams, died in the fire. When she returned to the bar after going home to retrieve her checkbook, she saw the fire and stood in the middle of Iberville Street, screaming. Every day of the following week, she laid out her husband’s work clothes as if awaiting his return. She has rarely ever attended these memorial events, one local filmmaker noted.
“We still have a lot of work left to do,” said the event’s emcee, Apostle Shelly Planellas of New Covenant Church, through a loudspeaker in front of the 32 black banners. “Seven years ago, we lost 49 lives at Pulse in Orlando. Last year, we lost five at Club Q in Colorado Springs. And we have lost countless members of our beloved trans community to bigotry and hatred. And our work does not end here. Our work and our mission do not end ever. Homophobia, transphobia, racism, misogyny, and hatred are still a part of our daily reality. There are growing numbers of people across our country who want to erase our history and our very existence. Many would say that we should never politicize a tragedy like this. Your very existence and participation today is, in fact, a political act.”
Most of the memorial’s attendees skewed older, Tim Reynolds of the Crescent City Leathermen said, because the older generation is more invested in preserving history. His group helps organize the memorials, he said, to keep the memory alive for the next generation.
In a recently released podcast about the arson, The Fire UpStairs, activist, drag performer, and RuPaul’s Drag Race alum BenDeLaCreme said that many younger queer people and allies don’t understand why gay life is so centered around bars.
“These were the spaces that [homophobic society] pushed us into,” BenDeLaCreme told the podcast’s co-creator Joey Gray. But now — with more hookup apps and civil rights — even queer spaces are disappearing, she said.
This disappearance of queer spaces makes it more urgent to convey this history, Gray said, especially at a time when bigots are fighting to actively erase it. The AIDS epidemic silenced an entire generation of queer elders from passing down our community’s legacy. Because of this, more young people have grown up in an unprecedented era of acceptance and find themselves shaken and unprepared to face the current threat to our progress, not aware of similar historical threats and actions.
“In order to fight these battles and to stand up for what’s historically our culture, you have to have some kind of a foundation, a base knowledge,” said Gray about why he started the podcast.
Another guest of Gray’s podcast — Brian Derrick, founder of the progressive political engagement site Oath — noted that the cost of LGBTQ+ progress has been paid with career sacrifices, lives, and emotional labor.
“So now we have this fight in front of us,” Derrick said. “It’s also going to be expensive, and it’s going to cost a lot of time, money, careers, and all of these massive inputs in order to again move equality forward so that the next generation doesn’t have the same fight that we have right now. So we are leaving our kids — both literal and metaphorical — in a better place.”
Additional research by Billy McEntee and Kelly Suzan Waggoner.
The Christian anti-LGBTQ+ legal advocacy group Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) — defined as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center — is hoping the U.S. Supreme Court will overturn state bans on so-called conversion therapy for minors. Though the court hasn’t agreed to take on the case just yet, it provide insight into how ADF plans on challenging more conversion therapy bans in the future.
The ADF is providing legal counsel to licensed marriage and family counselor Brian Tingley in Tingley v. Ferguson, a legal challenge to Washington state’s ban. Tingley says the ban violates his rights to free speech and free exercise of religion, The New Republic reported.
Related:
Tingley’s petition to the court says that his speech as a therapist should be considered as “speech” and not professional “conduct.” He said he “lives in continuous fear of government persecution” because the ban “forbids him from speaking, treating his professional license as a license for government censorship.” Tingley says he should be able to offer conversion therapy — even though it has been widely disavowed as a form of psychological torture by numerous American mental health organizations — because some kids are actively seeking to change their sexual orientation.
Get the Daily Brief
The news you care about, reported on by the people who care about you:
His case may actually be aided by the 2018 Supreme Court decision National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra which said that the government couldn’t “compel” or “regulate” anti-abortion crisis pregnancy centers in California to inform pregnant people about state-funded reproductive health services.
However, Georgia State University law professor Anthony Michael Kreis told the aforementioned publication that the cases are different. Bans on conversion therapy aren’t trying to force Tingley and other therapists to say things they don’t want to say, Kreis argues. Rather, he reasons, state bans are trying to prevent medical conduct from resulting in “tangible harms.”
A 2013 survey showed that 84% of former patients who tried ex-gay therapy said it inflicted lasting shame and emotional harm. Additionally, March 2022 peer-reviewed study from The Trevor Project showed that 13% of LGBTQ+ youth nationwide had reported being subjected to conversion therapy. Of those, 83% were subjected to it before reaching the age of 18. The study showed that young people who underwent conversion therapy were more than twice as likely to attempt suicide afterward. Numerous conversion therapy advocates have later come out as still gay and apologized for the harm that conversion therapy causes.
Furthermore, Kreis notes that the bans provide specific exemptions for “purely religious” speech and also that the government already heavily regulates the professional fields of therapy and healthcare. Thus, the bans are just an extension of that.
Katherine Franke, a law professor at Columbia University, said the ADF will use similar free speech arguments to try and overturn regulations involving professional conduct.
“We have all sorts of regulations for licensed mental health professionals, and the patients rely on this kind of safety that those licensing requirements impose,” she told The New Republic. “Opening the door in this kind of case… opens the door to quite a few other situations where a person may have an objection to what is a public norm or an expert judgment about the safety of other people. It shouldn’t be your private decision that you’re not going to agree with that and therefore [will] not follow that law, when that is a condition of your licensure.”
The methods of so-called conversion therapists include encouraging queer people not to masturbate, redirecting their sexual energy into exercise, “covert aversion” (a fancy name for imagining possible negative consequences of being queer), Bible study, directing same-sex sexual desire onto opposite-sex partners, inflicting pain and humiliation anytime LGBTQ+ feelings arise, and forcing people to act out stereotypical gender roles in behavior and personal appearance.
Twenty-nine U.S. states have either passed full or partial bans on conversion therapy for minors. In three of those states — Alabama, Georgia, and Florida — court injunctions have stopped the bans from going into effect while legal challenges to the bans proceed in court.
If you or someone you know is struggling or in crisis, help is available. Call or text 988 or chat at 988lifeline.org. The Trans Lifeline (1-877-565-8860) is staffed by trans people and will not contact law enforcement. The Trevor Project provides a safe, judgement-free place to talk for youth via chat, text (678-678), or phone (1-866-488-7386). Help is available at all three resources in English and Spanish.
Gay, lesbian, and bisexual young people are more likely to use alcohol, e-cigarettes, cannabis, and tobacco than their heterosexual peers, a new study has found. Researchers say that stress from sexual orientation-based discrimination is to blame.
The study — published this autumn in the American Medical Association’s open-access medical journal, JAMA Network Open — looked at data on the habits of 28,291 middle and high school students taken from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) 2022 National Youth Tobacco Survey.
About 4.5% of student respondents self-identified as gay or lesbian, and 11.8% self-identified as bisexual. These percentages represent about 4,611 of the respondents.
Researchers found that 29.3% of non-heterosexual youths had used alcohol in the last 30 days, compared to 21.6% of heterosexual youth. About 25.6% of non-hetero youth self-reported cannabis use over the last 30 days, compared to 14% of heterosexual youth. Approximately 26.2% of non-hetero youth self-reported e-cigarette use, compared to 16.4% of hetero youth. Lastly, 9.1% of non-hetero youth self-reported cannabis use over the last 30 days, compared to 4.6% of heterosexual youth
Researchers found that bisexual youths were especially more likely to have vaped cannabis oil and e-cigarettes than their gay and heterosexual counterparts.
“It is well-documented that minority stress (eg, stress from sexual orientation-based discrimination) is associated with youth substance use, which may be consistent with vaping cannabis,” the study’s authors wrote. “Preliminary evidence from this study may inform future prevention strategies directed at reducing substance use disparities among sexual minority youth.”
The study’s findings reflect similar findings from past studies. A 2018 surveyfrom the Ohio Department of Health showed that LGBTQ+ teens were more likely to have vaped or smoked in the last 30 days compared to their straight counterparts.
A 2017 CDC study found that LGBTQ+ people were twice as likely to smoke than straight and cisgender people. Another study from the same year found that queer youth were more likely to smoke than straight and cis youth. One studyfound that LGBTQ+ people spend about $7.9 billion on cigarettes each year.
The representatives — Reps. Ken Buck (R-CO), Kay Granger (R-TX), Michael Burgess (R-TX), Debbie Lesko (R-AZ), and Victoria Spartz (R-IN) — all voted against the 2022 Respect for Marriage Act, a law that requires the federal government to recognize legal same-sex marriages.
“The Republican House is failing the American people again,” Spartz said. “[The House is] like a theater full of actors in the circus…. Our children will be ashamed of another worthless Congress.”
“Right now, Washington, D.C. is broken; it is hard to get anything done,” Lesko said in a statement.
“I always have been disappointed with our inability in Congress to deal with major issues, and I’m also disappointed that the Republican Party continues to rely on this lie that the 2020 election was stolen,” Buck said. “Our nation is on a collision course with reality and a steadfast commitment to truth, even uncomfortable truths, is the only way forward.”
Buck predicted that even more House Republicans will leave “in the near future,” The Hill reported.
These announced departures accompany recent unrest among Republicans following a contentious three-week search for a new House speaker after the previous one, Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), was ousted by far-right Republicans for striking a deal with Democrats to pass a stopgap funding bill to avert a federal government shutdown. With another shutdown looming, the new speaker, rabidly anti-LGBTQ+ Rep. Mike Johnson (R-LA), seems poised to do the exact same thing.
Republicans are also reeling from heavy election night losses in which Democrats took control of the Virginia state legislature, passed abortion protections in Ohio, elected a Democratic governor in red-state Kentucky, and defeated the book-banning “parents’ rights” group Moms for Liberty in school board races nationwide. Many pundits said that the election results signal a growing backlash to Republicans’ pro-abortion and anti-LGBTQ+ culture war that could hurt the party’s chances in the 2024 presidential election.
Trump also seems highly likely to clinch the party’s presidential nomination, putting Republicans nationwide in the uncomfortable position of either supporting Trump’s anti-democratic stances or angering his loyal (and large) voting base. While recent national polls show Trump beating President Joe Biden in key swing states, polls also suggest that large swaths will stop supporting Trump if he’s convicted of any of the 91 federal criminal charges facing him.
It’s likely that the departing Republicans — especially those from conservative-leaning districts — will simply be replaced by Republicans who are similarly anti-LGBTQ+. But the departures signal a widening rift between Trump’s small but influential MAGA wing and the party’s more moderate members.
Vermont’s largest school district, the Champlain Valley School District, has passed a set of policies that affirm transgender and nonbinary students’ identities. The policies require schools to let trans students access school facilities, play on sports teams, and use pronouns and names that match their gender identity without informing potentially unsupportive parents.
The policies, which closely follow the trans- and nonbinary-inclusive guidelines issued by the state Agency of Education in 2017, were developed using “feedback from principals, school counselors, and nurses, students, and parents, along with staff from the Vermont Department of Health and Outright Vermont,” the independent state publication Seven Days reported. The school board unanimously voted in favor of the policies, which underwent two rounds of legal review and will affect the district’s over 4,000 students.
Related:
The three-page policy set allows trans students to determine how much information about their identities they want to share with others, including their parents. It also allows students to decide which names and pronouns they want teachers to use — and to retroactively change this information on past student records — without requiring a court order or legal name change.
Get the Daily Brief
The news you care about, reported on by the people who care about you:
While students must be allowed to use bathrooms, locker rooms, and other facilities matching their gender identities, students who request increased privacy “will be provided with reasonable alternative arrangements,” such as a private area, a different changing schedule or a single-stall restroom, the aforementioned publication noted.
The district’s policies are more decisive in their wording than the state education agency’s. For example, while agency policies say trans students “should be” allowed to use bathrooms that match their gender identity, Champlain Valley School District’s says that trans students “must be permitted” to use them.
School board chair Angela Arsenault, who served on the committee that created the policies, said the policy could be challenged in court by transphobic and anti-LGBTQ+ groups like Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF). ADF regularly files lawsuits against any expansion of LGBTQ+ civil rights.
“We really do feel that we’ve covered our bases on the legal front, and are confident that the policy would hold up to any legal challenge,” she said.
Dana Kaplan, executive director of LGBTQ+ youth advocacy organization Outright Vermont, praised the new policies, noting that many school districts across the nation have sought to restrict trans and nonbinary students’ rights.
“[This is] an exciting moment where a district is coming out and saying, in no uncertain terms, ‘We want all of our students to be safe,’” Kaplan said. “Having really clear guidance in this day and age, when rhetoric is flying around and [there’s a] concerted effort to squelch the rights of young people… is incredibly important. I hope other districts will follow suit.”
The Vermont chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics also praised the school district’s policies, noting “[Our state] is not immune to attacks on transgender and gender diverse Vermonters… When students feel safe to express their identities across the gender spectrum, they will be more prepared to learn and thrive in school.”
An estimated 4% of the state’s high school students identify as trans, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s 2021 Youth Risk Behavior Survey.
