Voters in Odessa, Texas, rejected three incumbent City Council members just one month after they voted to implement a harsh anti-trans bathroom ban, replacing one with the city’s first out gay council member.
Craig Stoker, the executive director for Meals on Wheels in Odessa, won his November election for at-large City Council member with 56 percent of the vote — in the same county President-elect Donald Trump won 76 percent of the vote.
Stoker beat Denise Swanner by campaigning on infrastructure — specifically roads and garbage pickup — in contrast to the incumbent, whose campaign sent out mailers comparing the two’s opposite positions by listing their only similarity as the fact that they are both in relationships with men.
“I understood the outcome was too important. If I could pull this off, what I would have the ability to do completely outweighed whatever they were slinging at me,” Stoker told The Texas Tribune. “And the ability to represent people who have probably never had a voice in the City Council chamber became too important to me.”
The Odessa City Council banned transgender individuals from using bathrooms, locker rooms, changing areas, showers, and similar public facilities that align with their gender identity after a contentious open meeting in October. Those who violate the ban could be convicted of a class C misdemeanor and receive a fine of up to $500, also giving legal standing to alleged victims to sue for damages up to $10,000 in civil court.
Mayor Javier Joven strongly supported the ban, stating that it was “important to prioritize the safety and privacy of the majority.” He lost he reelection bid to Cal Hendrick, who campaigned on repairing infrastructure.
The Ector County Republican Party did not endorse any local candidates in this year’s elections, with Chair Donna Kelm reasoning that abortion and LGBTQ+ issues should be left to the state legislature.
“None of it was truly about me. It was their fear of losing a seat, losing an election, losing the title,” Stoker continued. “I came into this campaign with the mindset that I’m going to have to rely on the work I’ve done in the community and the reputation I’ve built preceding me. That’s all I got.”
For half a century, Lesbian Connection has been more than just a magazine — it’s been a lifeline, newsletter, public forum and rallying cry for queer women worldwide. Launched in September 1974 as a humble, grassroots publication, this reader-written magazine has survived the test of time, connecting women-loving women through personal stories, advice columns and community updates long before social media made such communication second nature.
The inspiration for Lesbian Connection magazine, affectionately known as “LC”or “Elsie” by its readers, struck during a cross-country road trip in 1973. Michigan taxi driver Margy Lesher and her then-girlfriend, Goldie, decided to hop in their car and “go around the country looking for the lesbians,” Lesher recalled.
The couple stayed with other lesbians they met along the way and collected names and addresses to stay connected with the greater Sapphic community. Feeling inspired after their weekslong journey, the duo decided to host the first Midwest Lesbian Conference in Lansing, Michigan, in the spring of 1974. However, they found it challenging to advertise the event, so they started the magazine so lesbians around the globe could share with one another and promote events of mutual interest.
Margy Lesher and her puppet monkey, Shyne, at the Michigan Womyn’s Music Festival in 1983.Joan E Biren via Lesbian Connection
“From our travels, we realized there were women all over doing things. They were starting bookstores and starting to publish books and records. Lesbian albums had just started coming out, and I figured it was great to have all these things, but if lesbians didn’t know about them, they were never going to succeed,” Lesher said, adding that the goal of the magazine was “to have a way that all the lesbians who were doing all these great things [could] get the word out about what they were doing.”
ADVERTISING
Lesher formed a cohort of nine lesbians called “The Ambitious Amazons,” and the group, along with several other volunteers, took over a women’s center in Lansing, Michigan, to assemble the first issue. With ink-stained fingers, the women stapled together mimeographed pages to get the copies out to their earliest subscribers.
Since the beginning, Lesbian Connectionhas run almost entirely on subscriber donations. Each cover reads, “Free to lesbians worldwide, but the suggested donation is $7/issue (more if you can, less if you can’t).” The publication — which comes out every two months — is still going strong today, operating out of two small homes in Lansing.
Filing Fortran computer cards and working on a magazine mailing at the Lesbian Center in 1983.Joan E Biren via Lesbian Connection
Longtime reader, contributor and editor Nancy Manahan said she first stumbled upon Lesbian Connection in San Francisco in the mid-1970s, likely at the feminist bookstore Old Wives Tales. The raw, unfiltered nature of the content immediately struck her, she recalled, and she has subscribed ever since.
“It’s not monitored in a way that squelches debate or anger or opinions, and so it’s just so lively and real, and I think that’s kind of unusual and amazing that there’s so much tolerance for diversity and conflict,” she said. “It’s so much fun.”
Manahan added, “A magazine that is created by readers entails a certain kind of buy-in, because all the readers know that nobody is forcing anything on us. Everybody is completely welcome to express their outrage.”
Margy Lesher working at home in 1976.Lesbian Connection
In recent years, readers have debated how transgender and nonbinary lesbians fit into Lesbian Connection, leading to some readers canceling their subscriptions. However, longtime reader Kathy Munzer said she feels these conversations are necessary for the community to learn and grow.
“We’re coming from different places. We need to listen to each other. I just think we could learn from each other,” Munzer said.
Munzer added that Lesbian Connectionis a vital resource for the community. Regardless of how heated the debates may get, she said, the core mission of Lesbian Connection is to foster a sense of togetherness for an oppressed group.
“The stories are inspiring, and no matter where you live, it makes you feel like you’re not alone. You’re part of a loving, kind, smart, and caring community,” she said.
In the magazine, they also included a section called “Contact Dykes” where subscribers could list their contact information for lesbians traveling in their areas. The list is still going strong 50 years later.
Lesbian Connection staffers choosing cover art for an upcoming issue in Margy Lesher’s living room in 1989.Lesbian Connection
Cheryl VanDeKerkhove, now in her 60s, was just 23 when she started working as a full-time staff member at Lesbian Connection in the early ’80s. She said she has always appreciated that the publication never shied away from debate.
“They do allow voices to come through that they know are not going to be well received in the community, because it gives the community a chance to educate itself, and it gives the community a chance to have the discussions that are really difficult,” she said. “That’s a constant that’s been going on since it started in the ’70s.”
AsLesbian Connectionembarks on its second half-century, those behind the magazine say its mission is more important now than ever, especially with a second Trump presidency on the horizon. Manahan said she hopes younger readers subscribe to the magazine to arm themselves with knowledge for the new era of politics our country is about to enter.
“We are heading into a time that may bear a horrifying resemblance to what some of us struggled with half a century ago, and it might be really instructive to see the strategies and the courage and the risks that some of us in the ’60s and ’70s and ’80s and ’90s took all those years ago that younger generations may be faced with again,” she said.
New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy, a Democrat, signed a law Monday prohibiting public schools and libraries from banning books and protecting librarians who obey state law.
Murphy’s signing of the Freedom to Read Act comes amid an ongoing push by conservative lawmakers and activists across the country to challenge books they consider inappropriate for minors, particularly those about LGBTQ issues and race. Lawmakers in at least 13 states this year have introduced legislation to disrupt library services or limit their materials, according to an NBC News tally.
“Across the nation, we have seen attempts to suppress and censor the stories and experiences of others,” Murphy said in a statement. “I’m proud to amplify the voices of our past and present, as there is no better way for our children to prepare for the future than to read freely.”
Murphy during an interview in New York on Nov. 22.Jeenah Moon / Bloomberg via Getty Images
In September, PEN America, a nonprofit dedicated to promoting free speech, reported that the number of books being removed from school shelves during the 2023-24 school year had tripled from the previous year, to more than 10,000.
The PEN America report, along with one from the American Library Association released that same month, outlined how frequently challenged books are often about or written by people of color or those who identify as LGBTQ.
In 2023, the American Library Association’s list of the 10 most challenged books nationwide included Toni Morrison’s “The Bluest Eye,” a novel about a young Black girl who grew up after the Great Depression; Maia Kobabe’s “Gender Queer: A Memoir,” a graphic memoir about the author’s exploration of gender identity from adolescence to young adulthood; and George M. Johnson’s “All Boys Aren’t Blue,” a coming-of-age memoir about a queer Black man.
New Jersey is the third state to sign a law prohibiting the banning of books at public schools and libraries, following Illinois and Minnesota.
The new law is set to take effect in a year from the governor’s signing. However, the state education commissioner and the New Jersey state librarian are permitted to start implementing it immediately “as may be necessary,” the law states.
“Through this legislation, we are protecting the integrity of our libraries that are curated by dedicated professionals and making those resources available to help every student to grow as a critical thinker,” New Jersey acting Education Commissioner Kevin Dehmer said in a statement.
David Hogg, gun control activist, March for Our Lives co-founder and Parkland school shooting survivor, is running for vice chair of the Democratic National Committee, ABC News has learned.
“I think this role is a great way of, for one, bringing newer voices into the Democratic Party,” Hogg told ABC News. “I just want to be one of several of those voices to help represent young people and also, more than anything, make sure that we’re standing up to the consulting class that increasingly the Democratic Party is representing instead of the working class.”
The DNC offers four opportunities to serve in a vice chair capacity — three general vice chairperson roles and one vice chairperson for civic engagement and voter participation. At 24, Hogg is considerably younger than the declared candidates for DNC chair.
Read the full article. In the days after the Parkland massacre, I predicted here that then-17 years old Hogg would one day run for Congress.
The hubs and duds of queer life in modern America have been revealed, thanks to a report from the Williams Institute at the University of California, Los Angeles.
The good news: wherever you are, you’re not alone. Overall, 14.1 million people reported that they “identify as LGBT” between 2020 and 2021, making up a significant portion of the population at 5.6 percent. By state, there wasn’t a single area with an LGBTQ+ population of less than 4 percent.
However, compared to others, some states still have less than half as many queer people proportionally.
While the report did not give any reasoning as to why some states have larger LGBTQ+ demographics than others, the states with the lowest percentages of queer people all but one have pushed anti-LGBTQ+ legislation this year.
Here are the states with the smallest queer communities, and the legislation facing them.
5. South Carolina (Tie)
South Carolina’s 192,800 LGBTQ+ adults account for 4.9 percent of the state’s population. There were 32 anti-LGBTQ+ bills proposed this year, according to the ACLU’s legislation tracker, with one passed into law — an extreme ban against gender-affirming care for youth, as well as requiring school staff forcibly out them to their guardians.
5. North Dakota (Tie)
North Dakota’s LGBTQ+ population also accounts or 4.9 percent of its overall population, but their queer community is fewer in number, with 28,400 members. There were no anti-LGBTQ+ bills proposed this year in the state, which pushed 17 anti-LGBTQ+ bills last year, 10 of which became law.
4. Iowa
Iowa‘s 113,600 LGBTQ+ adults account for 4.7 percent of the population. 37 anti-LGBTQ+ bills have been considered in the state in 2024, four of which passed — including religious exemptions for discrimination.
3. Alabama
Alabama has 173,000 LGBTQ+ people, making up 4.6 percent of the population. Four anti-LGBTQ+ bills have been proposed in the state this year one of which passed that forces universities to implement trans bathroom bans.
2. North Carolina
North Carolina‘s LGBTQ+ population accounts for 4.4 percent of the state’s population, with 353,100 people. There were six anti-LGBTQ+ bills proposed in the state, none of which have yet been defeated or advanced.
1. Mississippi (Tie)
Mississippi’s 93,300 LGBTQ+ adults account for 4.1 percent of the population. There were 23 anti-LGBTQ+ bills been proposed in the state this year, four of which passed. The laws include a ban against trans people using the public facilities that align with their identities, and a legal redefinition of gender that incorrectly conflates it to biological sex.
1. West Virginia (Tie)
West Virginia’s LGBTQ+ community also accounts for 4.1 percent of the population, but their 60,000 queer adults are less in number than Mississippi. West Virginia has considered 33 anti-LGBTQ+ bills this year, one of which passed — enacting barriers to accurate legal identification.
Takeaways
The states with the fewest queer people are also some of the states proposing the most anti-LGBTQ+ laws.
While there is no data (yet) around mass queer exoduses from these states, some could be moving to avoid legislation. Others may not feel comfortable coming out for census data.
And while it may not seem as if the South is a popular place for LGBTQ+ people, by raw population, the region actually has the largest percentage of queer adults. The 5.2 million LGBTQ+ people in southern states account for 36.9 percent of the queer people in the U.S.
While we may not be the majority, LGBTQ+ people across the country have an enormous and undeniable presence wherever they call home.
They join Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg in this year’s class, as voted by the LGBTQ+ Victory Action Board of Directors. Buttigieg, who has also been mayor of South Bend, Ind., and sought the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020, was inducted in August during the Democratic National Convention.
The new honorees will be inducted December 7 during the 2024 International LGBTQ+ Leaders Conference in Washington, D.C.
“The 2024 nominees are not only historic firsts and trailblazers for our community, but they are highly impactful leaders, accomplished public servants, and respected for their work,” Victory Institute President and CEO Annise Parker said in a press release. “Their impact has paved the way for those who have followed them and has greatly furthered our mission of making governments worldwide more equitable for LGBTQ+ people. We are honored to induct them among our global list of LGBTQ+ political changemakers and commemorate their impact on history.”
Arrowood, a gay man, is the first out member of the LGBTQ+ community elected to a statewide office in the South. Gov. Roy Cooper, a Democrat, appointed him to the Court of Appeals to fill a vacancy in 2017, and the following year North Carolina voters elected Arrowood to a full eight-year term. He had served on the Court of Appeals in 2007-2008 as well under appointment by another Democratic governor, Mike Easley.
Arrowood has also been a Superior Court judge and an attorney in private practice, specializing in commercial litigation with the Charlotte-area firm of James, McElroy & Diehl.
Roem is the first out transgender person to serve in a state legislature. A Democrat, she was elected to the Virginia House of Delegates in 2017 from a northern Virginia district and served three terms there, then was elected to the Virginia Senate in 2023. She is the nation’s second out trans state senator — Sarah McBride in Delaware was the first — as well as the first in Virginia or in any southern state.
In the legislature, she has focused on infrastructure improvement and economic development, and in elections, she has consistently bested anti-LGBTQ+ opponents.
López, a lesbian, was the first out LGBTQ+ person elected mayor of any Latin American capital city. She was elected mayor of Bogotá in 2019, the first woman to achieve that distinction, and served from January 2020 until December 2023. She also has been a senator and a vice-presidential candidate. She has been a prominent advocate for social equity, justice, women’s rights, and environmental sustainability.
The LGBTQ+ Victory Institute is a sister organization of the LGBTQ+ Victory Fund. Victory Fund works to elect out candidates, while Victory Institute provides training and leadership development.
In multiple states this election year, voters signaled an overall shift away from “parents’ rights” issues, fear mongering, and partisan politics, including the rejection of anti-trans candidate for North Carolina governor Mark Robinson as well as other state and local educational posts.
North Carolina voters also rejected Moms for Liberty-endorsed Superintendent of Public Instruction candidate Michele Morrow, whose campaign and record was nearly equally as disturbing as Robinson’s
Morrow’s anti-LGBTQ record included a defamatory rant against opponent Mo Green, who received the endorsement of state LGBTQ organization Equality North Carolina. Morrow falsely and dangerously misrepresented the plus symbol in LGBTQ+ in a post on Twitter/X: “NEWSFLASH…the ‘+’ includes PEDOPH*L*A!!” The American Psychological Association notes that the plus is often added “to recognize those not captured within or represented by the acronym LGBTQ,” including asexual, intersex, and nonbinary people.
Michele Morrow launches an anti-LGBTQ rant against opponent Mo Green. (Credit: QnotesCarolinas)
In a recorded clip on her website and YouTube, Morrow addressed a school board, laying bare her values under the guise of “protecting our children.”
“We are talking about trying to figure out how to make our children be as successful as possible, and I am sure that that is your goal. And what we have been called tonight is what they’re claiming we’re saying to children. We’re having an adult conversation,” Morrow said. “There are not children in this room. We aren’t going into the schools and calling them names. They call us Marxist, and hateful, and bigots, and everything else under the sun. Well, let me tell ‘ya: Less than five percent of the entire population of North Carolina identifies as LGBTQ. You guys all claim you want democracy. You know what democracy is? It’s the majority plus one! It’s 50 plus one! You know what? More than 50 percent of the people in this state claim that they believe in God – almighty God, who made us male and female. God who made marriage between a man and a woman. God who said that we must protect our children.”
Morrow had also falsely labeled the public schools she wanted to lead as “indoctrination centers,” while her record included participation in the January 6insurrection, and called for the execution of former President Barack Obama. Political comedy channel The Good Liarsheld Morrow accountable for her actions.
The Good Liars confronts Michele Morrow over threatening Tweets she made against former President Barack Obama. (Credit: The Good Liars on X)
In a viral clip, Jason Selvig approached Morrow with printed copies of her threatening tweets under the guise of requesting an autograph. After stroking her ego, he read the now-deleted social media posts back to her, word for word, before making a hasty escape.
Morrow ultimately lost the race to Mo Green, who captured just over 51 percent of the vote.
Maurice Green received a majority of the vote, 51.1%, in the race for North Carolina Superintendent, narrowly defeating opponent Michele Morrow.
Green served as superintendent to North Carolina’s third-largest school district, Guilford County Schools, and was Executive Director of Z. Smith Reynolds Foundation, which “has invested more than $691 million into North Carolina” to “address the impact of racism ingrained in state institutions — including schools — and support ideas aimed at mitigating hate’s effect on policy and people.”
Green’s platform includes a promise to “celebrate the good in public education” and “ensure safe, secure learning environments,” and opposes The Parental Bill of Rights, which bans discussion about gender identity and sexuality in K-4 classrooms, and requires that schools out students to their parents if they request a change to their name or pronouns.
Green, nominee for North Carolina Superintendent of Public Instruction, holds a news conference. (Credit: NC Newsline)
“Every child deserves to learn, and every staff member deserves to work, in an environment that is safe, welcoming, and inclusive,” Green said.
State’s Most Populous County Wakes up, Rejects Several Anti-Trans Candidates
Also in North Carolina, three of four Moms for Liberty-endorsed candidates were defeated in races for Wake County Board of Education:
District 5: Incumbent Lynn Edmonds “soundly” defeated Ted Hills. During her first term, Edmonds “voted, alongside the board’s six other Democrats, to bring the school system into compliance with new, federally-mandated protections for LGBTQ students.” Hills opposed the Title IX updates.
District 6: Sam Hershey, an anti-book book ban advocate, beat challenger Josh Points “by a 40-point margin.” Hershey voiced support for compliance with federally-mandated Title IX updates.
District 8: Lindsay Mahaffey, who was endorsed by the Equality North Carolina PAC, was elected to her fifth term. Her opponent Elizabeth McDuffie rejected Title IX protections for transgender students and campaigned alongside Michele Morrow.
District 3 incumbent Wing Ng was the only anti-LGBTQ candidate elected, but his victory was narrow. INDY Weekreports that Equality North Carolina PAC-endorsed Jordyn Blaise lost “by a razor-thin margin of just about one point.” Lastly, Toshiba Rice won her bid for reelection to District 4. Rice voted to support compliance with the Biden-Harris Administration’s federal Title IX updates.
Equality Victories in the Sunshine State
While Florida’s 60 percent supermajority requirement led to narrow losses for abortion rights (57.2 percent voted in favor of expanding access to abortion) and legalized recreational marijuana (55.9 were in favor), a GOP-supported proposed constitutional amendment that would have led to partisan school board races also lost. In their rejection of this amendment, the League of Women Voters of Florida and other opponents said, “schools should not be politicized and everyone should be welcome at schools regardless of party affiliation.”
Katie Blaxberg defeated DeSantis and M4L-endorsed Stacy Geier for Pinellas County School Board by over four percentage points (52.06% to 47.94%).
Michelle Bonczek bested Mark Cioffi, who was endorsed by DeSantis, by nearly 10 percent (54.99% to 45.01%).
Meanwhile, Equality Florida (EQFL) saw significant growth in their political representation. With the organization’s leadership on the ground, they doubled the number of LGBTQ legislators in the statehouse, one of their explicit goals for the election. But they didn’t only make gains in the statehouse. All told, more than 85 EQFL-endorsed candidates, including eight members of the LGBTQ community, were elected to office.
“In the fight against extremist takeovers of Florida school boards, voters rejected DeSantis’s culture wars and divisive agenda,” Equality Florida said. “This year, we delivered DeSantis and Moms for Liberty a string of humiliating school board defeats. Nearly two-thirds of DeSantis-backed school board candidates lost their races this year. Meanwhile, over 72% of Equality Florida Action PAC endorsed school board candidates won their elections. This progress is proof of the power of resistance. We are turning the tide, even when it feels like everything is stacked against us.”
Propelling the “Relentless Flow of Acceptance”
Journalist and transgender rights activist Erin Reed has been tracking the resultsof down-ballot races throughout the country.
“Even in affirming states, school boards can make life difficult for LGBTQ+ students,” Reed wrote in her newsletter, “or, in states with anti-trans and anti-queer legislation, they can push back against restrictive policies.”
Erin Reed and fiancée Montana State Rep. Zooey Zephyr celebrate after Reed wins a GLAAD Media Award for her Erin in the Morning blog. (Credit: ErinInTheMorning on X)
Reed’s reports on social media include LGBTQ news with an emphasis on transgender rights. In a post-election message of support to her trans and queer readers, she drew parallels between the 2024 election and the fight for marriage equality in the early 2000s that pushed on despite setbacks.
After former President George W. Bush was reelected in 2004, “he delivered a State of the Union speech where he said, for instance, that he will enshrine a constitutional ban on gay marriage into United States law,” Reed said. “And I could stop there. I could say that there are people that likely did stop there, that saw this and said that there was no future, but you cannot stop the relentless flow of time. You cannot stop the relentless flow of acceptance.”
US President-elect Donald Trump’s inflammatory rhetoric concerning the rights of lesbian, gay, transgender and bisexual (LGBT) people is nothing new. His first term in office from 2017 until 2021 resulted in a wave of discriminatory measures aimed at limiting protections for LGBT people across the United States. Since then, state legislatures around the country have continued to pursue or pass draconian bills to limit the presence of LGBT people in public life, including rolling back freedoms for trans children. Senior Web Producer Paul Aufiero spoke with LGBT rights specialist Ryan Thoreson about what’s at stake under a second Trump presidency.
What does a second Trump term mean for the rights of LGBT people in the US?
Donald Trump’s first term gives us a glimpse of what we can likely expect to see this time around. He previously stacked his administration and the judiciary with people who are overtly hostile to LGBT rights. We saw the consequences of that in a lot of the administration’s policies and executive orders, including one that banned transgender people from serving in the US military.
Trump and other Republican Party candidates also targeted transgender people during the 2024 campaign, running anti-trans attack ads in various states and making absurd claims about schools performing gender surgeries on children. So I think we’re likely to see the federal government turn against trans people in the way that individual US states have in recent years.
How have US states already been curbing LGBT people’s rights?
More than half of US states also prohibit transgender children from obtaining often life-saving, gender-affirming medical care. Major medical associations consider this type of care best practice for many transgender children, as it can alleviate a lot of the mental health stressors of gender dysphoria they can experience as they grow and their bodies change.
Some states have also sought to exclude transgender girls from participating in sports, including some imposing blanket bans. This has the detrimental effect that trans kids who are often bullied or face isolation at school can’t take part in and get the benefits of the teamwork and physical activity that school sports provide.
Seven states also limit or ban discussions of sexual orientation and gender identity in schools, and four more restrict whether and how same-sex activity can be discussed in schools. These laws are passed to prevent children from learning about diverse sexual orientations and gender identities, with little regard for the harmful effects that isolation and invisibility can have on young people who do or will identify as LGBT or have LGBT family members.
How could this kind of discrimination and erasure play out on the national stage under the next Trump administration?
Well, one example is Trump saying that he’ll outright ban gender-affirming care for minors in the US.
He also said he’ll ask Congress to establish that only two genders will be federally recognized. This would stop progress currently being made in the country to recognize non-binary individuals, which we’ve seen in federal and state efforts to allow people to choose a third gender option of “X” on passports, licenses, and other documents.
This is also problematic for trans people generally, as it lays the groundwork for laws and policies that Congress could pass. Some Republicans in Congress have already introduced legislation that would make providing gender-affirming care a crime in the US or that would prohibit transgender girls from playing sports nationwide.
Many of the changes proposed by lawmakers and Trump would exclude transgender students from Title IX protections, a federal law banning sex discrimination in federally funded educational institutions. This would affect school policies on students’ use of pronouns, bathrooms, and locker rooms.
Trump also said during the campaign that he would roll back federal policies prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. During his first term, his administration weakened some of these protections.
What about LGBT people’s rights globally?
Trump’s previous administration made some gestures toward respect for LGBT rights abroad, but they didn’t go far in terms of policy. The Biden administration went much farther, for example by promoting non-discrimination through State Department programming. The next Trump administration could roll some of that back.
Trump’s past unwillingness to discuss human rights issues with foreign leaders could prove very harmful to LGBT people abroad. As Russia, Hungary, and other governments pass anti-LGBT legislation – including laws that have cracked down on LGBT families, discussions of LGBT topics in public, and organizations working to promote LGBT people’s rights – the US voice on LGBT issues around the world could be lost.
How do you see your work changing?
I don’t think the guiding principles of Human Rights Watch’s work will change much. As we discussed, even under the Biden administration, we’ve been vocally critical of lawmakers at the state level passing legislation targeting trans kids and their families. We’ll also need to expand on work we did during the first Trump administration around erosions of non-discrimination protections and access to health care.
That said, I think one of the lessons from the first Trump administration is that there will be things that nobody expected. Banning trans people from the military was one of those. Advocates and LGBT people have to be nimble and responsive to threats as they come up.
What can LGBT people and advocates in the US do to prepare?
Over the next couple months, before the new administration takes office, people who feel they might be at risk should get their paperwork or documentation in order. That could be legal recognition of parentage or other family documentation. Many organizations are recommending that people shore up anything that bolsters legal recognition of their marriages, such as additional estate planning and powers of attorney. Also, if it’s important for someone to get a passport or birth certificate that reflects their gender identity, this is a good time to do that.
I think it’s important to prepare for institutions to be attacked. Lawmakers at the national level have proposed limiting federal funding for organizations that work on sexual and reproductive rights issues, including trans health and rights. Trump has likewise said that federal dollars shouldn’t go to institutions that promote “gender ideology.”
That could mean that comprehensive sexuality education may not be offered to LGBT, or any, kids through schools, so it will fall on community organizations and families to provide that education. And as books about LGBT people and issues may be removed from school and public libraries, donating resources or otherwise helping to fund and support community organizations that help marginalized LGBT communities might be helpful in the coming years.
Anything else we should look out for?
We talked about threats to gender-affirming care, but I think broader attacks on health care for LGBT people are likely to be a constant concern over the next four years.
The administration’s unwillingness to enforce civil rights could leave those alleging LGBT discrimination without much hope, especially if judges become more hostile to LGBT discrimination claims.
And having sex and gender defined federally as just that assigned at birth will likely exacerbate problems LGBT people already have in finding affordable, accessible care.
On a more positive note, watch out for opportunities to be an advocate and show support for LGBT people’s rights in any way you can. Many local organizations have been doing critical work meeting the needs of the most marginalized LGBT communities, and giving them your time, money, and energy goes a long way. Just being a vocal ally matters too. Supportive adults can make an enormous difference in LGBT kids’ mental health and well-being, and showing support is even more critical as policymaking and rhetoric become more hostile.
However you can, find ways to make a difference in your community to pave the way for stronger protections for human rights.
Some same-sex couples are worried about the status of their marriages under a new Donald Trump administration. Legal and financial experts don’t see an immediate threat to marriage equality, but they recommend some safeguards to put in place.
Trump has gone from supporting domestic partnerships for same-sex couples instead of equal marriage rights (in 2000, a common view at the time) to saying marriage should be left to the states to saying marriage equality is settled law.The kind of allies he has in Congress and those he’s appointing to his Cabinet and is likely to appoint to the Supreme Court if he has a chance aren’t exactly supportive, though. And Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas have said they’d like to overturn the court’s 2015 marriage equality ruling, Obergefell v. Hodges.That would take a case getting to the high court.
But how worried should same-sex married couples be? “I would like to think there is no reason to disrupt something that has worked so well for families, their children and society,” Mary Bonauto, senior director of civil rights and legal strategies at GLAD Law, who argued Obergefell at the Supreme Court, recently told The New York Times in response to readers’ anxieties. “It allows people to organize their families and affairs, pool finances, buy property and have kids. In the end, it is popular, and it harms no one.”
“But gay couples’ concerns aren’t entirely unfounded,” the Times notes. “The president-elect already reshaped the Supreme Court during his first term, appointing three conservative justices who are now part of a 6-to-3 majority.” Trump’s appointees, Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh, joined Thomas, appointed by President George H.W. Bush, and Alito and John Roberts, appointed by President George W. Bush. The conservative justices have chipped away at the rights of same-sex couples, with decisions asserting businesses have the right to refuse service to them in Masterpiece Cakeshopand 303 Creative.Legal experts expect to see more “right to discriminate” cases.
The act provides for federal recognition of same-sex and interracial marriages (the latter legalized nationwide in the Supreme Court’s Loving v. Virginia ruling in 1967) and requires all states to recognize those performed in other states. It doesn’t, however, require any state to offer same-sex marriages, so states could cease offering these unions if Obergefell were overturned. Marriage equality opponent Kim Davis, a former county clerk in Kentucky, is trying to set up a caseto overturn it.
Federal recognition comes with many benefits — “health insurance through a spouse’s employer, Social Security spousal and survivor benefits, estate tax advantages, retirement planning opportunities, pension rights and less cumbersome tax planning, among others,” as the Times article explains. In 2009, when marriage equality was limited to a few states, Times reporters Tara Siegel Bernard and Ron Lieber calculated the cost that came with lack of federal recognition, ranging from about $40,000 for a couple in the best-case situation and nearly half a million dollars for those in the worst-case scenario.
With uncertainly about the future, Jennifer Pizer, chief legal officer at Lambda Legal, suggests that same-sex couples make sure they have wills, medical and legal powers of attorney, and perhaps second-parent adoption confirmation for their children.
“It is always a very good idea for people, when they can, to prepare legal documents setting out their wishes for a crisis situation. … Take the steps that are within your power to take,” Pizer told the Times.
President-elect Donald Trump has been nominating controversial people to his second-term cabinet and it hasn’t been pretty. GLSEN, an organization that advocates for safe and inclusive schools for LGBTQ+ youth, has strongly criticized Trump’s nomination of former World Wrestling Entertainment CEO Linda McMahon as secretary of education. The nomination, announced earlier this week, was met with widespread concern from LGBTQ+ advocates and educators who fear it signals a rollback of Title IX protections and other federal policies supporting marginalized students.
In a press release, GLSEN executive director Melanie Willingham-Jaggers condemned the nomination, citing McMahon’s lack of educational experience and loyalty to Trump’s political agenda as deeply troubling.
“Donald Trump’s decision to nominate Linda McMahon, a political ally with no substantial background in education, is yet another deeply concerning move in his ongoing effort to undermine public education,” Willingham-Jaggers said in the release. “McMahon’s lack of expertise in education, paired with Trump’s focus on so-called ‘parents’ rights’ and ‘school choice,’ signals a continued push to strip critical protections for LGBTQ+ students and historically marginalized communities.”
The statement further emphasized the importance of leadership grounded in expertise. “Public education is not a performance—it is the foundation of our democracy and our nation’s future,” it read. “McMahon’s nomination instead prioritizes loyalty to Trump’s agenda over the well-being and futures of millions of students.”
Project 2025 and GLSEN’s concerns
In an interview with The Advocate, Willingham-Jaggers elaborated on the risks posed by McMahon’s nomination, linking it to broader concerns about the implementation of Project 2025, a conservative plan to overhaul federal governance in a second Trump term. The plan calls for the systematic dismantling of the education department and stripping of protections for LGBTQ+ students.
“They are coming in to slash and grab, slash and burn, drain, destroy, and break the confidence and really break the spirit of all the institutions, all the people in it, and everyone who relies on or whose life is touched by these institutions,” Willingham-Jaggers warned.
They expressed concerns that the speed of policy rollbacks could outpace public resistance. “The scariest thing I heard was it’s not the first 100 days. It’s the first 100 hours,” they said, adding that protections like Title IX could be among the first to be dismantled.
We’ve seen this movie before
Reflecting on the lessons of Trump’s first administration, Willingham-Jaggers described its approach as chaotic experimentation. “In the first Trump administration, they were just kind of smashing buttons. Nobody knew what they were doing,” they said. “It was like trying to hit the cheat code on a Nintendo game—just like, ‘Oh, would this give me 18 more lives?’”
They cautioned, however, that this time is different. “They’ve figured out what works and what doesn’t. They’ve purged the ‘immune system’ within the government that held back their worst impulses. And there are laws moving through Congress right now that will allow them to run the board,” Willingham-Jaggers added, emphasizing the urgency of resisting these efforts.
Challenging a backlash against acceptance
Willingham-Jaggers connected the current wave of anti-LGBTQ+ sentiment to the COVID-19 pandemic, noting that as children spent more time at home, some parents became exposed to how accepted their kids were in schools, GSAs, and online communities.
“It’s important for our side to know where we are right now had everything to do with young people going home during the pandemic and their parents seeing how accepted these children—that they did not accept themselves—how accepted and affirmed these kids were in school or their online community,” Willingham-Jaggers said.
This exposure, they argued, fueled backlash from some parents who resented the acceptance their children experienced elsewhere.
“It’s terrible parents of trans kids like Elon Musk and all the others who are now trying to make the world smaller for everyone’s children,” Willingham-Jaggers said. “They’re trying to make the world less accepting for everyone’s children because they saw their kids being accepted, and they said, ’No, you don’t. How dare you teach my child that they are loved, despite what I think.’”
GLSEN, however, remains committed to countering this hostility, they said.
A call to action
GLSEN called on the Senate to reject McMahon’s nomination and urged allies to rally to defend LGBTQ+ students. “GLSEN will not stand idly by while federal protections, including Title IX, are attacked or eroded,” the release stated.
“We call on the Senate to reject this nomination and demand a leader who will center equity, inclusion, and the needs of all students in their vision for education.”
The organization has also launched its Rise Up campaign, encouraging allies to actively support LGBTQ+ youth.
“Our young people are being told that they don’t exist or, if they do, it’s a mistake. That is not only not true; there are millions and millions of adults who love, appreciate, affirm, and understand that we need our young people here,” Willingham-Jaggers said.
Despite the challenges ahead, Willingham-Jaggers offered a message of resilience and determination for those advocating for inclusive education.
“Strap up, put your seat belts on, find your people, put your helmets on, and let’s go,” they said. “There are people like us at GLSEN who are in the fight, who aren’t going anywhere, and who will have your back.”
For more information on GLSEN’s Rise Up campaign, visit glsen.org/riseup.
