Court by a vote of 52-48, solidifying a 6-3 conservative majority on the bench and President Trump’s lasting impact on the judiciary.
Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), the first out lesbian elected to the Senate, joined other critics in saying Barrett’s confirmation was rushed through and said on the Senate floor “voters across America should be allowed to cast their ballots first,” but Republicans “have no interest in listening to the people.”
“That’s why they are rushing and ramming President Trump’s Supreme Court nomination forward just days before the election,” Baldwin said. “This rigged and illegitimate process is wrong, and it follows a pattern of the majority leader and Senate Republicans abusing their power to break their own standards on Supreme Court nominations.”
No Democrat voted in favor of confirming Barrett, whom President Trump selected to replace the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court. Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) was the only Republican to break with her caucus against confirming Barrett, which critics say was done in a rushed process.
Fears persist Barrett’s confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court would be a threat to LGBTQ rights, including same-sex marriage. Bolstering that apprehension was an unexpected statement earlier this month from U.S. Associate Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito declaring war on the 2015 Obergefell decision granting marriage rights to same-sex couples.
Sarah Kate Ellis, president of the LGBTQ media watchdog GLAAD, said in a statement Monday prior to Barrett’s confirmation the appointment “is alarming for LGBTQ people and for all Americans whose fundamental rights should never be up for debate.”
”Barrett’s time at a school that discriminated against LGBTQ families and hurt LGBTQ youth is disturbing and should disqualify her from the Court. Her stated views against marriage equality, rulings against access to abortion, and her public criticism of the Affordable Care Act are out of step with fair-minded Americans and threaten the progress our country has made to become a stronger and more equitable home for all,” Ellis said. “Her record against LGBTQ families and rights has no place in American life, let alone the highest court in the land.”
Barrett, during her confirmation hearing last week before the Senate Judiciary Committee, said Obergefell “clearly says there is a constitutional right to same-sex marriage,” but wouldn’t budge from no comment on whether she’d vote to overturn the decision, most notably in an exchange with Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.).
“[You’re] implying that I’m poised to say I want to cast a vote to overrule Obergefell, and I assure you, I don’t have any agenda, and I’m not even expressing a view of disagreement with Obergefell,” Barrett said. “You’re pushing me to try to violate the judicial canon of ethics and to offer advisory opinions, and I won’t do that.”
But Barrett has history of deep affiliation with Catholic Church, which has long record of opposing LGBTQ rights (despite Pope Francis I coming out in favor of civil unions just last week), and has articulated personal and religious opposition to same-sex marriage.
In 2015, Barrett signed with other Catholic women a letter to bishops affirming marriage is “founded on the indissoluble commitment of a man and a woman.”
Trinity Schools, the religiously affiliated private school where Barrett served as a trustee for three years, had a hostile climate for LGBTQ teachers and effectively barred students with same-sex parents from admission, as reported by the Associated Press.
Barrett has also admitted to taking speaker fees from a legal fellowship affiliated with Alliance Defense Freedom, a group that fought against same-sex marriage and other LGBTQ rights across the board. Barrett downplayed that connection during her confirmation hearing and during her 2017 confirmation hearing for her on the Seventh Circuit gave a total of three explanations for when she became aware of the legal group’s anti-LGBTQ work.
David Cicilline, the most senior openly gay member of the U.S. House, said in a statement prior to Barrett’s confirmation the Senate should have waited until after Election Day when a new president to sworn-in to fill the open seat on the Supreme Court.
“The American people should have a say in who gets a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court,” Cicilline said. “Instead, just eight days before a presidential election, Republicans will vote today to confirm Judge Amy Coney Barrett, a nominee who threatens the progress our country has made over the years to expand access to health care, protect the LGBTQ+ community from discrimination, address the threat of climate change, and guarantee that women can make their own health care decisions.”
Polls have shown a bare majority of the American public backs her confirmation. A Morning Consult poll made last week found 51 percent of American voters back her confirmation, compared to 28 percent who say the Senate should reject and the 21 percent who have no opinion.
The most imminent opportunity for Barrett to adjudicate a case related to LGBTQ rights is the issue of foster care. Catholic Social Services, in the case of Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, is arguing a First Amendment right to refuse to place children with same-sex couples — even though it had signed a contract with Philadelphia agreeing not to engage in anti-LGBTQ discrimination through its taxpayer-funded activities. The case is set for oral arguments on Nov. 4, the day after Election Day.
Georgette Gomez, president of the San Diego City Council, was born and raised in the city she now serves, just 15 miles from the Mexican border that her parents, Eusebia and Miguel Ángel Gomez, crossed without documents in 1973. Her parents worked multiple jobs to make ends meet and instilled in their daughter a dual sense of industriousness and hope.
“I don’t take that for granted that they left their own country, their own language, their culture, their family, just to create a better path for us, and when they came here it wasn’t easy,” said Gomez, 43, the youngest of three children. “This was not a welcoming country to them and still isn’t to immigrants.”
Immigrant rights is an issue that weighs heavily on Gomez, who is vying this November to become the next representative of California’s 53rd Congressional District.
“It’s something that I’ve been fighting for and will continue to push forward, to defend immigrants, to defend immigrant rights, to move this country to start addressing comprehensive immigration reform,” Gomez told NBC News.
Gomez, a Democrat, was elected to the city council in 2016 and unanimously appointed president two years later. In 2017, she introduced a resolution against President Donald Trump’s proposal to build a border wall with Mexico. The resolution was adopted by the council. San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer, a Republican, didn’t sign the resolution but did not veto it either.
“The fact that I was able to get my Republican mayor to support it was pretty significant,” Gomez said, “and shows that I can push on critical issues that, at times, could be divisive.”
The candidate is passionate about affordable housing and protecting the most vulnerable citizens of San Diego, where soaring rents have made life increasingly difficult for the poor and working class. Gomez introduced an ordinance making it illegal for landlords to discriminate against renters who rely on federal housing assistance, and introduced an eviction moratorium to protect renters during the Covid-19 pandemic — both of which influenced similar laws at the state level, she said.
“I’m very proud of that,” Gomez added. “Our state, our city, our nation should be inclusive of all our community members, and they should be allowed to live wherever they are able to find a home that they can afford.”
Gomez, a former community organizer for an environmental justice group, is also a champion for environmental protections. As city council president, she helped pass a policy that aims to move San Diego to 100 percent renewables by 2035.
The candidate is waging a tough battle against a fellow Democrat, Sara Jacobs, who worked for the State Department in the Obama administration and is a former adviser to Hillary Clinton. (In California, the top two candidates in the primary compete in the general election.)
A recent 10News/San Diego Union-Tribune poll put Jacobs ahead of Gomez, but Gomez has fought tough challenges before. In her 2015 City Council campaign, she narrowly beat Ricardo Flores, then the chief of staff to outgoing council member Marti Emerald,by less than 1,000 votes, “against all odds,” she said.
“We were able to build a strong grassroots campaign, and all of that, really, is in honor of my parents,” Gomez said. “They taught me that if you work hard, you push hard, and you get involved, and continue pushing to create a government that is accountable to all of us, then things change, and definitely that value, those principles, I always carry them with me.”
Gomez, who said she is queer, will be the first openly LGBTQ Latina in Congress if elected. She is part of a rainbow wave of at least 574 LGBTQ candidates who will be on the ballot next month, according to a new report by the LGBTQ Victory Fund, a group that trains, supports and advocates for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer candidates. As women, minorities, and LGBTQ candidates fill the Democratic Party’s ranks, Gomez said there is an “opportunity to have a greater evolution in the party.”
“We need to ensure that we’re electing more progressives that are rooted in community, that understand and have lived through the issues that a majority of our constituents are living through,” she said. “That’s the way that you shape policies. … Our party also needs to understand and reflect those needs.”
A supporter of the Affordable Care Act and “Medicare for All,” Gomez supports making the U.S. health care system more affordable and inclusive. It’s personal for the candidate, who recently discovered that her own health insurance could deny her fertility coverage because she is in a same-sex relationship.
“We still have a health care system that is excluding our LGBTQ community needs, and that has to change,” she said, noting that transgender people can also be denied coverage for transition-related care.
If elected, Gomez said she is “extremely committed” to ensuring “we move forward progressive solutions.”
“I have the leadership to prove that I can move on issues that are normally divisive,” Gomez said. “And that’s the leadership that I’ll be bringing to Congress, and it will be standing against whatever Donald Trump continues to move forward.”
In a highly competitive race for an open congressional seat in Texas, the National Republican Congressional Campaign’s anti-trans attacks on lesbian candidate Gina Ortiz Jones continue, now with a TV ad citing a 2018 quote from her in the Washington Blade in support of gender reassignment surgery for transgender service members.
The new ad that went online Tuesday criticizes Jones — a first-generation Filipino-American who served as an intelligence officer in the Air Force during the Iraq war — for supporting closure of military bases in Texas to save costs, raising the question of where she would rather have that money spent.
“For what?” a male narrator asks in a voiceover. “Jones wants the Defense Department to pay for transgender reassignment surgeries, reassigning the military a new mission, helping Jones use our money to radicalize our country.”
The ad ends with a lock and chain clicking into place superimposed over a black-and-white image of Jones and a scrolling image behind her of blood-red tinted money within an outline of the continental United States.
The sources attributed for Jones’ comments are an August 2017 article in the San Antonio Express as well as an October 2018 interview in the Washington Blade. At the time, Jones criticized her then-opponent, incumbent Rep. Will Hurd, for voting for an amendment that would have barred the use of military funds to pay for transition-related care for transgender people, including gender reassignment surgery.
(The amendment ended up being defeated on the House floor, but President Trump later banned transgender military service altogether with an announcement on Twitter.)
Jones at the time criticized Hurd for voting for the anti-trans amendment, citing it as hypocrisy on the basis he claims to support national security “and then takes votes like that that undermine military readiness.”
“As someone that’s served in the military and under ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ I know that if one person on that team is not 100 percent, that unit is not 100 percent and the mission is at risk, so this is now an issue of military readiness,” Jones said.
It’s not the first time the NRCC has made an anti-LGBTQ attack on Jones. The NRCC has previously run an ad that says Jones “doesn’t care about Texas” and slams her for wanting to “divert military money for transgender re-assignment surgeries.”
The NRCC also put on a website for potential lines of attack against Democrats a picture of Jones and her partner holding champagne glasses, an attempt to paint her as a Washington political insider. Initially, the post included an explicit reference to Jones having a same-sex partner, but that has since been removed.
Major medical groups, including the American Medical Association, have concluded gender reassignment surgery can be medically needed care for transgender people and have backed transgender military service.
The NRCC didn’t respond to the Blade’s request for comment on why the Republican political action committee thought the attack line in the ad was appropriate.
The race between Jones and her Republican opponent, Tony Gonzales, is incredibly tight in the days leading up to Election Day. An Oct. 7 poll from Public Opinion Strategies found Jones has a 1-point lead in the race, which is well within the margin of error.
Rebecca Marques, Texas state director for the Human Rights Campaign, condemned the ad in a statement as “desperate, cheap, and beneath even them,” citing a poll showing 88 percent of Texas likely voters support transgender people having equal access to medical care.
“Their closing argument in Texas appears to be not just attacking LGBTQ people but our nation’s veterans and military,” Marques said. “This isn’t just ineffective, it’s counter to the 88 percent of Texas voters who believe transgender people should have equal access to medical care as any other Texan. If the NRCC were smart, they would realize that even Texas Republicans are turned off by their disgusting strategy.”
The dating life of Rep. Chris Pappas (D-N.H.), one of seven openly gay members of Congress, became the focal point Wednesday night in a debate that got ugly with a personal attack from a Republican challenger who’s facing an ethics investigation.
Matt Mowers, who’s challenging Pappas to represent New Hampshire’s 1st congressional district in Congress, levied the attack in a debate already fiery over the federal government’s response to the coronavirus.
“With all due respect, you’ve been dating a corporate lobbyist who actually was lobbying on behalf of Amazon at a time when you went to cast 10 separate votes on Amazon’s behalf on bills they lobbied you on,” Mowers charged.
Pappas, in response, said the accusation was “not true” and in turn said Mowers has been “paid by pharmaceutical companies and D.C. special interests after you left the Trump administration.”
In fact, Mowers has been a consultant for at least two pharmaceutical companies. After filing an illegible financial disclosure form for his candidacy, Mowers was accused of trying to hide that work from New Hampshire voters, which led to a complaint now before the U.S. House Ethics Committee.
But Mowers wouldn’t let up in his attack, saying Pappas is “doing the bidding for a bunch of corporate special interest groups in D.C.”
“You are dating a corporate lobbyist,” Mowers said. “The fact of that matter is you never disclosed it.”
As the debate participants began talking over each other, Mowers made the false claim Pappas was required to disclose his dating life to the public.
“In fact, there’s actually rules and regulations,” Mowers said. You have to disclose that, especially gifts from lobbyists to the House Ethics Committee, something you’ve never done.”
Pappas, who continued to say the charge was “outrageous” and “not true,” said his opponent is “somebody who worked for the Trump administration.”
“I have read your financial disclosure, Matt,” Pappas said. “You get paid by big drug companies, you get paid by D.C. lobbying firms, you’re representing their interests, not the interests of the people of New Hampshire.”
Pappas hinted the criticism was a veiled attack on his sexual orientation, concluding, “To go after me personally is really disgusting, and there is no place for them on this debate stage.”
Following the debate, Pappas issued a statement calling Mowers’ attack on his dating life “despicable” and said it “crossed a line.”
“Members of the LGBTQ+ community have always been held to a different standard when running for office and Mr. Mowers’s baseless attacks perpetuate those same harmful lines of attack,” Pappas said. “New Hampshire voters saw gutter politics at their worst tonight, but true Granite Staters know that hate has no place in our state.”
An LGBTQ activist in Puerto Rico regained access to his verified and personal Facebook pages on Wednesday after being banned for more than two months.
Pedro Julio Serrano was unable to access his Facebook pages since late August, both platforms comprising of more than 140,000 followers in total. He was alerted he violated community guidelines and “pretending to be a well-known person or public figure.”
Serrano is not aware of violating any guidelines and wasn’t pretending to be a public figure. At the time, he was the sole administrator of his pages but added two users on Wednesday to act as administrators in case another ban occurs.
Serrano since August emailed Facebook weekly, directly messaged the platform’s accounts on Twitter and Instagram and submitted multiple forms of identification to regain access.
“(My) platform is critical for me to continue to lead a movement in Puerto Rico to make sure that LGBTQ people are treated fairly,” he told the Washington Blade.
Facebook is heavily used in Puerto Rico, he said, and Statista reported Facebook accounted for 80 percent of social media site visits on the island thus far in 2020.
In a message sent to Serrano from Facebook, the platform wrote the suspension was a “mistake.”
“We rely on automation that detects violations of Community Standards as well as 15,000 human content reviewers, but occasionally content is flagged or removed in error,” said a Facebook company spokesperson in an emailed statement when asked why Serrano was unable to access to his account for two months.
Kathleen Ruane, senior legislative counsel with the American Civil Liberties Union, said platforms like Serrano’s are integral to marginalized groups that seek to foster community. Ruane said they also assist in spreading messages in ways traditional media outlets cannot in terms of content and reach.
“Social media has been, even in spite of some of the challenges that queer communities and communities of color face, a democratizing force,” she said.
C Rivera, a trans activist from Puerto Rico has also experienced bans on their personal page, with six alone this year so far, all with varying time limits.
Rivera also helps lead “Boicot La Comay,” a Facebook page with more than 100,000 likes and followers that advocates for the cancellation of “La Comay,” a Puerto Rican gossip show that promotes racist, homophobic and misogynist stereotypes.
Vázquez and other members of her party are regular guests on the program that a life-sized puppet hosts. Serrano is among those who called for “La Comay” to be cancelled in June after it mocked Ana Irma Rivera Lassén, a lesbian woman of African descent who is running for the Puerto Rico Senate.
Authorities a few weeks after the segment aired arrested Serrano and charged him with two counts of marital sexual assault against his former partner. A judge last month dismissed the charges on grounds there was no probable cause to prosecute him.
In this deeply thought-provoking documentary Susan Polis Schutz uncovers the origins and complexities of hatred in America. Through a series of sensitive interviews with former white supremacists and other extremists, Susan explores how these people, who were filled with hate, bigotry and rage were able to change. They find love and compassion with a greater appreciation for all humanity, regardless of race, faith, or sexual orientation. This gripping film offers viewers a rare glimpse into the psychology of why people choose to hate, and how they have overcome it. Ultimately, it is a film about hope, the power of redemption, and breaking apart the systems that uphold hate in order to find true peace for a better community.
An LGBT+ Republican group has endorsed 12 politicians who have long track records of opposing LGBT+ rights.
The Log Cabin Republicans, which describes itself as “the nation’s original and largest organisation representing LGBT conservatives and straight allies”, has endorsed 34 candidates from across the United States ahead of the upcoming election.×
Writing on Twitter on October 20, the Log Cabin Republicans shared its list of endorsements, and said the group was throwing its weight behind candidates who would “advocate for limiting the size of government, strengthening personal freedom, and ensuring equality under the law for all Americans”.
The Log Cabin Republicans’ begin by endorsing Donald Trump for the presidency and Mike Pence for the vice-presidency – despite the fact that both have doggedly rolled back LGBT+ rights during their time in office.
And Trump and Pence are not the only anti-LGBT+ politicians on the Log Cabin Republicans’ endorsement list, according to LGBTQ Nation.
The Log Cabin Republicans have endorsed a number of politicians who have significant track-records of supporting anti-LGBT+ measures, including Michelle Steel, Anna Paulina Luna, Fred Upton, Nicole Maliotakis, Nancy Mace, Dan Crenshaw, Clarence Burgess Owens, Madison Cawthorn, Matt Mowers, John Paul Moran and George Devolder-Santos.
State Rep. Brianna Titone, who made history in 2018 when she became the first transgender lawmaker in Colorado, is now running for her second term. But while her platform focuses on the bread-and-butter issues of transportation, education and jobs, her opponents have targeted her gender identity.
The group Take Back Colorado released a Facebook ad this month that misgenders Titone and refers to her by her “deadname,” the name she used before her transition. The ad also claims Titone has “always supported violence” and sexualizes children.
“It’s just a nasty, transphobic ad that’s blatantly full of lies,” Titone told NBC News.
Take Back Colorado is registered to Joe Neville, the brother of Patrick Neville, the Republican state House minority leader. When questioned by The Denver Post, Patrick Neville denied the ad was transphobic, saying it simply showed “the facts.”
Titone said the strategy backfired. She raised $11,000 in the 36 hours after the ad ran —about 20 percent of all online contributions to her campaign this cycle — and said she now had contributions from 43 out of 50 states.
“I’m getting support from places all over the country now,” she said. “People recognized that there was a group of people trying to beat up someone who is doing a really good job.”
Titone is not the only target of anti-LGBTQ political ads. Many LGBTQ candidates this cycle have been subjected to such attacks, prompting advocates to worry that it has become a trend.
“The homophobic and transphobic attacks on LGBTQ candidates are more frequent and more direct than we have seen in at least a decade,” said former Houston Mayor Annise Parker, who now runs the LGBTQ Victory Fund, a national organization that trains and promotes LGBTQ political candidates.
“The dog whistles of the last few cycles are still prominent, but they are secondary to more direct and blatant uses of anti-LGBTQ stereotypes that weaponize our sexualities in an effort to derail campaigns,” Parker added. “LGBTQ candidates are being falsely called ‘pedophiles,’ ‘sexual predators’ and ‘drug users.’ They are being told they are ‘deplorable’ and should ‘go to church.’ They are being misgendered. And their dating histories — including their use of dating apps — have become the targets of opponents.”
Competitive races
Many of the attacks are happening in close races in competitive districts, like Titone’s.
“My race was one of the hardest races to win in 2018, and I’m a top targeted seat in the House right now,” Titone said of the Colorado House of Representatives.
Gabriele Magni, an assistant professor of political science at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles, said homophobic and transphobic attack ads “can be especially powerful and especially hurtful in districts that are not very progressive to start with.”
“They can bring out fear in the electorate,” Magni said. “It’s from an old playbook … trying to create fear about what can happen if transgender people are in office, or if people who are allies with transgender people are in office.”
Magni added that anti-LGBTQ attack ads are actually “validation of the strength and competitiveness of LGBTQ candidates.”
Gina Ortiz Jones, who’s running in Texas’ 23rd Congressional District, has been the subject of attacks funded by the National Republican Campaign Committee. The committee ran an ad last week implying that Jones, a U.S. Air Force veteran, would put military “patriots out of work” so she could “divert military money for transgender reassignment surgeries.”
In August, HuffPost reported that the committee had been encouraging outside groups to remind Texas voters in Jones’ swing district about her sexual orientation.
“The national fundraising arm of the Republican Party has declared war on LGBTQ candidates this election cycle — and homophobia and transphobia are their weapon of choice,” Parker said. “It is despicable that Republicans would attack a military veteran simply because she believes the trans soldiers who risked their lives beside her deserve fair treatment when they return home.”
Jon Hoadley, an openly gay congressional candidate in Michigan, has been the subject of an attack ad from the Congressional Leadership Fund, a PAC dedicated to electing Republicans to Congress, that has been criticized as homophobic. The ad makes reference to Hoadley’s sexual history and calls his judgment “disturbing.” Hoadley is running against an incumbent Republican, Fred Upton, who has not denounced the advertisement.
The ad drew from Hoadley’s personal blog that he kept in his early 20s. On the now-deleted blog, Hoadley wrote about going to a gay bar and mentioned “a four year old wearing a thong” in a post about a friend’s wedding. Hoadley has apologized in a Facebook video for any misunderstanding stemming from the posts.
Chris Pack, a spokesperson for the National Republican Campaign Committee, defended the ads.
Holding Hoadley accountable for “his disgusting comments about toddlers in thongs has nothing to do with his sexual orientation,” Pack told NBC News, “and the same is true regarding Gina Jones wanting to divert money from the military to foot the bill for transgender reassignment procedures.”
Progressive strongholds
Personal attacks on LGBTQ candidates can also occur in progressive strongholds.
Ritchie Torres, who is a shoo-in to win his seat in New York’s 15th Congressional District and become the first Afro-Latinx LGBTQ person in Congress, was called derogatory names on social media that many interpreted to be homophobic.
Torres was called a “first class whore” in a now deleted tweet by Ed Mullins, an officer with the New York Police Department and president of the Sergeants Benevolent Association.
The comments came after Torres criticized the NYPD amid an increase in gun violence. Mullins said his comments “had nothing to do” with Torres’ “race, ethnicity or sexual orientation.”
“My comments had everything to do with his dangerous policies and worldview,” Mullins stated. “The city is burning and Councilman Torres wants to blame the police.”
Magni said attacks like this are not surprising. He said that many of the attacks this cycle are “based on homophobic tropes” that cast gay men as promiscuous or sexual predators.
“American voters are OK with LGBTQ candidates if LGBTQ candidates are sexless,” Magni said.
Despite Torres’ near guaranteed win in November, personal attacks could still have a negative impact.
“The way homophobic attacks work in progressive strongholds … is by hurting candidates in an indirect way,” Magni said. “Some of these attacks isolate LGBTQ candidates and force some allies to distance themselves.”
Like-minded organizations might put endorsements on hold or volunteers and donors may pause contributions, causing LGBTQ candidates to “lose access to resources and allies that are needed at critical moments,” Magni added.
For example, openly gay Illinois state House candidate Ken Mejia-Beal has been subjected to comments from his opponent, Republican Rep. Amy Grant, that target his race and sexuality.
On a recorded fundraising call over the summer, Grant said, “That’s all we need is another person in the Black Caucus.” She went on to say: “I just think that maybe he’s afraid of the reaction that people might give him. Not because he’s Black, but because of the way he talks. He’s all LGBTQ.”
Equality Illinois, a statewide LGBTQ advocacy group, condemnedthe remarks as “racist and homophobic.”
Grant subsequently apologized, saying she “deeply regret[s] the comments” and added that they “do not reflect my heart or my faith.”
Mejia-Beal, however, does not buy Grant’s apology and said she’s out of touch with the people in his district. “She is not a nice person,” he said, adding that Grant’s comments reflect racist and bigoted beliefs.
Grant’s campaign also circulated a mailer insinuating that Mejia-Beal was connected to a cover-up of a sexual assault over a decade ago.
“Right out of the gate, when she started attacking me, I didn’t understand where it was coming from,” Mejia-Beal said. “When I heard the audio, that’s when I had the a-ha moment.”
Mejia-Beal’s opponents may have perceived his candidacy as more vulnerable to attacks because of his multiple marginalized identities.
Magni recently conducted research exploring voters’ reactions to LGBTQ candidates and found that gay men — particularly Black gay men — were the most likely to be penalized by voters.
“In the U.S., Black candidates are penalized more than white candidates for being gay, in addition to the separate, individual penalties that they face for sexual orientation and race,” he said.
He added that this penalty “does not come from Black voters.” When compared to white voters, he added, “Black voters are now more supportive overall of LGBTQ candidates, since LGBTQ candidates tend to be Democrats.”
Personal safety
Personal attacks can also threaten LGBTQ candidates’ personal safety.
Jenna Wadsworth, an openly bisexual candidate for North Carolina’s commissioner of agriculture, received rape and death threats after posting a TikTok video criticizing President Donald Trump, according to the Advocate.
Todd Gloria, a member of the California State Assembly and candidate for mayor in San Diego, also received threats of physical violence that his campaign said were incited by his opponent, fellow Democrat Barbara Bry.
Gloria came under criticism after he voted for SB 145, a bill that addresses anti-LGBTQ discrimination in the application of the sex offender registry.
“We have reported the threats to the San Diego Police Department, and they are currently investigating,” Gloria said in a statement. “While I refuse to let this paralyze our campaign, voters deserve to know that this is what Barbara Bry’s campaign is inspiring. Her campaign is bringing out the worst of who we are. We are so much better than this, and San Diegans should hold her and her campaign accountable this November.”
Bry’s campaign disputed Gloria’s claims and stressed that Bry is a “long-time supporter of LGBTQ rights.”
“While she disagrees with Todd Gloria on the issue of requiring those convicted of sexual assault on children to be placed on the state’s sex offender registry, regardless of sexual orientation, her campaign has never raised this issue in campaign advertising,” Tom Shepard, Bry’s campaign consultant, told NBC News in an email. “This controversy is a result of verbal attacks on Gloria by a rival leader in San Diego’s LGBTQ community, who criticized Gloria’s vote on this issue.”
Non-LGBTQ targets
Targets of homophobic or transphobic ads may not even be LGBTQ. For example, the American Principles Project, a conservative think tank and PAC, released an ad targeting presidential candidate Joe Biden and Sen. Gary Peters, D-Mich., alleging that they support “policies which would allow biological males to compete in women’s sports and push children into dangerous, life-altering sex-change” procedures.
Magni said such ads are designed to “galvanize the most conservative base,” so these voters turn out on Election Day. The idea is to depict Biden and Peters “as out-of-touch liberals who threaten ‘traditions,’” Magni said.
‘Chilling effects’
While a record number of LGBTQ candidates are running for office this year, some advocates fear anti-LGBTQ attacks could derail this progress.
“The last few election cycles we have seen the number of LGBTQ candidates increase dramatically, but this trend is not inevitable,” Parker said. “Already we are hearing from LGBTQ elected officials that they may not seek higher office because they don’t want to expose their loved ones and families to these deeply personal attacks.”
Magni said these attacks could have a long-lasting impact.
“The damage that is done is not only to candidates right now but the potential chilling effects among younger LGBTQ people who are thinking about running,” he said. “It’s not only about scrutiny. Their personal lives are going to be distorted. Their dating lives are going to be weaponized … It makes them think twice.”
For her part, Titone is determined to keep campaigning and support the presence of other transgender women in office.
“When you are only 1 of 4 transgender legislators in the whole county, representation matters,” Titone said. “We cannot take a step back in trans representation at this point.”
Sonoma Film Institute Announces Virtual Screenings for Fall
Sonoma Film InstituteAnnounces Virtual Screenings for Fall 2020 The link for watching the films will be posted on the SFI website by Friday at noon and will be good for 72 hours https://sfi.sonoma.edu
A White, White Day
Friday, Oct. 23, 2020 through Sunday, Oct. 25, 2020 A WHITE, WHITE DAY Trailer | TIFF 2019In a remote Icelandic town, an off-duty police chief (a chilling Ingvar Sigurdsson, who received Cannes’ Critics’ Week award for Best Actor for his performance) begins to suspect a local man of having had an affair with his late wife, who died in a tragic accident two years earlier. Gradually his obsession for finding out the truth takes over his life and inevitably begins to endanger himself and his loved ones. Combining classic thriller tropes with a distinctly Nordic arthouse sensibility, the second feature from Hlynur Palmason “engages in storytelling that’s both powerful and fresh throughout, marking him as a talent to watch.” – The Hollywood Reporter (in Icelandic with English subtitles)Free for SSU Students $12 for 72-hour rental to the General PublicReleased: 2019Run time: 109 min.
Sunless Shadows
Friday, Nov. 6, 2020 through Sunday, Nov. 8, 2020 Sunless Shadows (official trailer) Mehrdad Oskouei’s follow-up to the critically acclaimed Starless Dreams (2016), Sunless Shadows takes another look at the lives of incarcerated teenage girls. As they serve time in a Tehran juvenile correction facility for the murder of their abusive fathers, husbands, and brothers-in-law-some of them abetted by their mothers, now on death row-a group of Iranian teenage girls share intimate, harrowing stories of the past and their adolescent dreams of the future. “It says everything that many of these long-mistreated young women finally find liberty in incarceration,” Guy Lodge writes in Variety . “The great grace of Oskouei’s subtly devastating film is that he doesn’t take it upon himself to say so.” ( in Farsi with English subtitles)Free for SSU Students $12 for 72-hour rental to the General Public Released: 2019Run time: 74 min.
Due to COVID-19, we’re making some changes to our annual Dining Out For Life event. It’s now an online fundraising event — Dining IN For Life!
This year’s event is on Thursday, December 3rd and you can help support struggling local restaurants and Food For Thought by volunteering as a virtual ambassador. Volunteering is easy, simply:
#2 Invite your family, friends and networks to order takeout and make a donation to Food For Thought You’ll be given support by Food For Thought’s staff and the tools to share information about the event on social media or by email.
The best part is you get to volunteer in your pajamas from the comfort of your home!
This year participating restaurants are not being asked to donate a percentage of their sales to Food For Thought. The support of our ambassadors and donors is more important than ever! You can help us raise $100,000 to feed our clients at Dining IN For Life on Thursday, December 3rd!
*Please note this button takes you to a site called Give Lively. You must enter your name, email and create a password to start the registration process.