Colombia’s Special Jurisdiction for Peace (Juridicción Especial para la Paz, JEP) has charged six former leaders of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia,FARC) guerrillas with war crimes for the forced recruitment and use of 18,677 children from 1971 to 2016. In addition to forced recruitment, the charges encompass torture, killings, reproductive and sexual violence, and targeted violence against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) children.
The JEP, a transitional justice mechanism created by the 2016 Peace Accordsbetween the Colombian government and the FARC, is tasked with trying crimes, including crimes under international law and grave human rights violations, committed during Colombia’s armed conflict.
“Macro-case” 07 before the JEP is focused on child recruitment and involves 9,854 victims, including 8,903 who belong to five indigenous communities and 951 others, including survivors and families who continue the search for missing recruited children.
The JEP’s Chamber of Recognition of Truth charged the former FARC leaders with heinous crimes, including the mistreatment, torture, and homicide of recruited children; reproductive violence affecting recruited girls; and sexual violence against recruited boys and girls, including torture, rape, and sexual slavery.
In a historic first under a transitional justice mechanism, the chamber also charged the former leaders with violence against recruited boys and girls based on prejudice related to the children’s sexual orientation or gender identity or expression. The chamber found that several LGBT girls and boys “suffered sexual violence and abuse as a way of ‘correcting’ or ‘punishing’ them.” This unprecedented recognition of violence targeted against LGBT children sets a new standard for addressing discrimination as an element of human rights abuses in conflict.
These indictments go a long way in addressing the impunity that has long characterized Colombia’s armed conflict. The JEP should now make sure that defendants are fairly prosecuted and, if found guilty, appropriately punished for their crimes.
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.”
During a live newscast on Washington, D.C.’s NBC affiliate WRC Thursday evening, anchor Jim Handly referred to DelawareCongresswoman-elect Sarah McBride as “congressman.” The moment, during the station’s News 4 at 6 newscast, happened as Handly reported on a new policy from Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson barring transgender people from using restrooms that align with their gender identity in the House-controlled sections of the U.S. Capitol complex.
Handly, a veteran broadcaster who is gay, quickly corrected himself, using McBride’s proper title and pronouns in subsequent references during the same segment.
A spokesperson for WRC addressed the incident in response to The Advocate’srequest for comment.
“An anchor momentarily lost in the script during a live news segment misread the word ‘Congresswoman.’ The anchor used the proper title and pronouns in several subsequent references to the Congresswoman-elect during the same news segment,” the spokesperson said. They did not indicate whether an on-air correction would be made.
McBride, who will be sworn in this January as the first out transgender member of Congress, represents a historic milestone in LGBTQ+ representation. Yet, even as the station downplayed the error, advocacy organizations such as GLAAD and the Trans Journalists Association urged media organizations to view this as a moment for correction, reflection, and growth.
A teachable moment
GLAAD, which works with newsrooms to improve their coverage of LGBTQ+ issues, emphasized that mistakes like this, even when unintentional, carry weight. Misgendering — whether accidental or deliberate — perpetuates societal biases and reinforces the marginalization of transgender people.
Misgendering (verb, noun): The act of using gendered words that are inappropriate or the wrong pronouns for someone, intentionally or unintentionally. – Trans Journalist Association
A GLAAD spokesperson told The Advocate that the organization would connect with WRC to learn more about the incident and offer the station guidance.
“Mistakes happen on the air and in everyday conversation, and the best course is to apologize, correct, and move on, then work to not repeat it,” GLAAD president and CEO Sarah Kate Ellis told The Advocate in a statement.
She described McBride’s election as an opportunity for newsrooms to review their protocols and language conventions to ensure respectful and accurate reporting.
“GLAAD’s general guidance for reporters is to ask for and use the names, pronouns, and titles of people they are covering,” Ellis said. “This is accurate and respectful journalism that builds trust with those sources as well as viewers and readers from marginalized communities.”
The Trans Journalists Association offered additional guidance, advising that corrections should address errors as with any incorrect information and that the wrong information shouldn’t be repeated.
“In the correction, it may be appropriate to briefly mention that the person’s name, pronouns, or gender have been incorrectly identified in past articles, but do not restate the incorrect information. Take care to correctly identify the person’s gender going forward,” the TJA advises.
Misgendering in context
McBride’s misgendering reflects a more extensive, systemic issue within the media and society. Women, including transgender women, who step into leadership roles traditionally dominated by men often encounter linguistic habits that struggle to catch up with the times. GLAAD points to the persistence of terms like “chairman” or “congressman,” even when describing women, as a vestige of a deeply male-centric view of authority.
For transgender women, the stakes are even higher. According to GLAAD, misgendering doesn’t just misrepresent — it questions the validity of a person’s identity. McBride’s case highlights the challenges she will face in an institution that has historically excluded people like her.
Moving forward
Advocates argue that media organizations are responsible for learning from incidents like the one at WRC and improving their coverage of marginalized communities.
GLAAD recommends that newsrooms take active steps to improve how they report on McBride and other transgender people. This starts with training staff to ask for and use accurate names, pronouns, and titles in every story. Hiring transgender journalists and involving members of the transgender community in discussions about newsroom practices can help build understanding and foster more thoughtful coverage, the group says. GLAAD notes that it’s also important to include transgender voices in stories beyond topics specifically tied to their identities.
The group urges media outlets to keep covering these issues. The group notes that some newsroom managers express fear about “getting it wrong,” but GLAAD stresses that avoiding coverage entirely is the real mistake. Newsrooms should lean into their curiosity, consult experts, and learn from those with lived experience. The goal is to report with care, accuracy, and confidence, not to shy away from important stories.
While the economic challenges of the last few years have tested organizations of all stripes, Black-owned businesses closed their doors at twice the rate of other businesses during the pandemic. Studies show that less access to the financial system and lack of family wealth to draw from – both key avenues of financial security during economic slowdowns – are partly to blame.Consumer spending habits are another major challenge for Black-owned businesses, which can struggle to scale up because of a misperception that their target market is a narrow demographic. Minority-owned businesses, however, are often marketing to broader audiences who never consider them.I have personally experienced how convenient it is to visit the website of a prominent retailer and locate a significant portion of my shopping list in a single location. However, in order to contribute to the advancement of Black-owned enterprises in the United States, UK, Ireland, and the Netherlands, I have assembled an extensive roster of more than 450 Black-owned businesses spanning various sectors. Please take a moment to explore the list provided below!
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.
Romania has been described as being “in shock” today (25 November) after far-right candidate Calin Georgescu won the first round of the country’s presidential elections.
Calin Georgescu, an independent candidate who is a NATO critic, won with a 22.95% share, beating incumbent prime minister Marcel Ciolacu of the Social Democratic Party (PSD), who had been the favourite to win the first round.
62-year old Calin Georgescu will now go on to face Elena Lasconi of the centre-right Save Romania Union party on 8 December. It’s the first time in 35 years that the left-wing PSD won’t have a second round candidate.
What is life currently like for LGBTQ+ people in Romania?
Things haven’t exactly been rosy for the LGBTQ+ community under left-wing rule, so it’s concerning to see this far-right surge in the country, which was formerly run by tyrannical communist dictator Nicolae Ceausescu. Could things get worse, and could queer peoples’ hard-won rights be rolled back?
More than 25,000 people joined this year’s Bucharest Pride in July 2024, marking the largest march to date. The Pride Festival featured 20 events and spanned over nine days.
You may like to watch
However, on the same day a counter-demonstration called March for Normality was held in the capital.
Also in July 2024, an MP named George Simion shared a social media post to say that LGBTQ+ people are to blame for the weather conditions, which are divine punishment. In the same month, the head of the Romanian Orthodox Church also said that “homosexuality was, is and will remain unnatural”.
Romania’s Prime Minister Marcel Ciolacu during a meeting with Britain’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer at 10 Downing Street on November 13, 2024 in London (Getty)
Marcel Ciolacu: country ‘not ready’ to uphold LGBTQ+ rights
A year ago, in November 2023, Romania’s Prime Minister said that the country isn’t ready to uphold LGBTQ+ rights in line with the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).
It came after the ECHR ruled in May 2023 that Romania had breached of article eight of the European Convention on Human Rights – the right to respect for private and family life – by refusing to legally recognise same-sex relationships.
In an interview with Europa FM, left-wing Prime Minister Marcel Ciolacu was asked about his thoughts on the ECHR ruling and whether Romania would now consider expanding protections for the LGBTQ+ community.
Ciolacu said: “Romanian society is not ready for a decision at the moment. It is not one of my priorities and… I don’t think Romania is ready.”
Two women kiss as they take part in Bucharest Pride 2018. (DANIEL MIHAILESCU/AFP via Getty)
He continued: “I am not a closed-minded person, I… have friends in relationships with a man, I don’t have a problem with that, I am talking now from the point of view of a prime minister.”
Ciolacu added that he didn’t believe it would be the last time that Romania failed to enforce the ECHR’s rulings.
Although Romania decriminalised homosexuality in 2001, it has yet to legalise marriage or civil partnerships for same-sex couples.
In the ECHR’s investigation into Romania’s failure to recognise same-sex couples, it was determined that the societal opposition to same-sex marriage in Romania should not override same-sex couples’ right to have their relationships legally recognised.
Prime Minister Marcel Ciolacu said ‘Romanian society is not ready” to introduce same-sex rights. (Getty Images)
The investigation had been prompted by complaints lodged by 21 different Romanian couples to the ECHR, arguing that there was no way to legally safeguard their relationships due to the country’s lack of recognition.
Each of the couples had given notice to their local registry offices expressing their intention to marry, but their requests were rejected under an article that defines marriage as being between a man and a woman.
Their requests were also rejected under a separate article which states that same-sex marriage is “prohibited” in Romania.
LGBTQ+ propaganda bill
In 2022, Romanian lawmakers came under fire when the government introduced a so-called LGBTQ+ “propaganda” bill, which would ban the use of materials in schools that “promote” being queer.
According to the World Values Survey conducted between 2017 and 2020, three-quarters of the population said that they believed that homosexuality is “not justifiable”.
What rights could Romanian LGBTQ+ people lose under Calin Georgescu?
LGBTQ+ rights in Romania (Equaldex)
Equaldex – a collaborative knowledge base for the LGBTQ+ movement – give Romania an overall score of 46/100 for its treatment of LGBTQ+ people, taking into account factors like legal rights and also public opinion about queer people in general.
Trans people are currently banned from serving in the military and can’t legally change gender unless they have gender affirming surgery. Non-binary people are not legally recognised. Gay marriage is banned.
Homosexuality is, however, legal, as is gender affirming care. LGBTQ+ people are permitted to donate blood and the age of consent for queer people is equal to that of heterosexual people.
At the time of writing, it is still unclear whether Elena Lasconi or Calin Georgescu will win on 8 December, and what the premiership of either candidate could mean for the already less-than-comprehensive LGBTQ+ rights in the country. We’ll update this article when the results are known.
Texas wasted no time escalating its attacks on transgender people as the state GOP prefiled 32 anti-trans bills on the first day of the 2025 legislative session’s prefiling period. In recent years, Texas has become a hotbed for anti-trans legislation, with each session delivering harsher crackdowns. Last session alone, the state passed six anti-trans laws, including a criminal ban on drag (currently enjoined in court), sports bans, a youth healthcare ban, and DEI restrictions. Following a national ad campaign which saw hundreds of millions poured into demonizing transgender people, Republican-controlled states are now under scrutiny over their future plans for transgender residents. Texas GOP lawmakers have made their intentions clear: the next wave of crackdowns is on its way.
The bills filed by Texas Republicans target transgender people in nearly every aspect of their lives. One such measure, HB1123, would impose stricter laws on sports by requiring every athlete in the state to undergo a chromosome test—an invasive and costly procedure that could wreak havoc on high school and college athletics. Many people are unaware they have atypical chromosomes, making this requirement particularly problematic. A similar guideline was used at the 1996 Olympics, where mandatory chromosomal testing of female athletes revealed that eight women had XY chromosomes without knowing it, due to unknown intersex conditions. The discovery led to widespread backlash as intersex athletes faced threats of removal and the emotional toll of learning their genetic status. Chromosomal testing was subsequently discontinued, deemed deeply violating, unfair, and unworkable as a standard.
Other bills take aim at transgender people’s use of bathrooms. House Bill 239mirrors Florida’s adult bathroom ban, and would bar transgender individuals from using facilities in any publicly owned building in Texas. This sweeping measure wouldn’t stop at the Texas Capitol or courthouses—it extends to park bathrooms, rest stops, schools, state-run hospitals, and even major airports like Dallas-Fort Worth, a critical hub for American Airlines. Texas has already garnered attention for Odessa’s “bathroom bounty” law, which allows cisgender individuals to sue transgender people for using the restroom, promising a minimum $10,000 payout for successful claims.
Bounty bills also resurface in the latest wave of filings. Texas HB 1075 would allow any individual performing in drag to be sued for a $5,000 bounty. The bill’s definition of “drag” and “perform” is alarmingly broad, labeling anyone “exhibiting a gender that is different from the performer’s gender recorded at birth using clothing, makeup, or other physical markers” as being in “drag.” This definition clearly encompasses transgender people. Should a bill like this become law, transgender performers would undoubtedly be targeted. In Montana, under a similar drag ban, the first person targeted wasn’t a drag performer but a transgender public speaker discussing transgender history at a library. Additionally, such a measure would almost certainly force the cancellation of Pride parades across Texas, where transgender people and drag performers dance, lip-sync, and otherwise celebrate.
Multiple bills take aim at transgender people in schools, as well as books about queer and transgender individuals. Among the most troubling is Senate Bill 86, which would require parental permission for high school students to join a Gay-Straight Alliance or any club that “promotes themes of sexuality, gender, or gender identity.” According to Lambda Legal, this requirement violates the Equal Access Act, which mandates that rules apply equally to all student groups and prohibits singling out GSAs for restrictive policies.
Many bills aim to strip transgender Texans of legal recognition of their gender identity entirely. Senate Bill 84, for example, mandates that government documents classify individuals based on their “biological reproductive system,” defining “female” as “an individual whose biological reproductive system is developed to produce ova.” The bill notably fails to address how it would handle intersex individuals or those with congenital conditions that prevent them from producing gametes. The same bill specifies that “biological differences between the sexes are enduring,” and says that those differences “warrant the creation of separate social, educational, athletic, or other spaces.”
With Texas as the first state to unleash a torrent of anti-transgender legislation, 2025 is shaping up to be a brutal year for transgender people nationwide. Emboldened by the Trump administration, Republican-led states are poised to escalate their attacks, expanding the ways they target transgender communities. Nationally, similar bills could gain traction, while some political pundits and even a few Democratic politicians argue that accepting such laws is a price worth paying for political victories. But the real cost is borne by transgender individuals themselves—those most at risk, facing a future stripped of rights and dignity. Texas has made its stance clear, and it serves as a chilling preview of what lies ahead.
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.
Unlike so many readers, I’m not stressing about Thanksgiving.
Between my siblings moving between Turkey Day and Black Friday and my mother maintaining her peace after a very long year, I’m most thankful for takeout and a few days off work.
But I also know only a few are lucky.
Thanksgiving is a time to reconnect with family and friends and give thanks for the things we have. But this holiday season may feel slightly different, thanks to the latest election. Admittedly, I was as surprised by the results as the number of folks in my network who favored Donald Trump. I couldn’t imagine how the same people who voted for him, the man at the head of an anti-trans party, could count me as a Black trans woman among those they knew so fondly.
How do I break bread at a table with those who vote against my best interests?
There’s something undeniably electrifying about sitting down with someone like Brit Barron, partly because it was only a week after the election results. Concern and confusion were still settling when I spoke to the writer, speaker, and self-professed advocate. Barron makes you feel like saving the world starts at your dinner table in an increasingly polarized world.
And given the topic of our conversation, that feels like a necessary superpower. Joshua Lott/The Washington Post via Getty Images
“Depolarization,” she says with conviction, “Is going to be some of our most important work moving forward.” It’s not a casual statement; it’s the kind of thesis that feels at home in one of her workshops or keynote speeches. But with Barron, it’s clear she’s not just practicing for a word. She lives and breathes this philosophy.
And lucky for us, she’s got the receipts to back it up.
From Evangelical Roots to Radical Empathy
To understand Barron’s current mission, you must start with her past. It’s a kaleidoscope of identities and experiences that she refuses to distance herself from. “I grew up super religious,” she shares. “Very conservative, evangelical Christian. That’s informed a lot of the work I do now, even though I’m on the opposing end.”
Barron doesn’t just skim over her history but embraces it as a crucial part of her story. Coming out, marrying her wife, and existing as a queer woman of color have all shaped her work. “I know what it’s like to buy into a message, to be indoctrinated, and to now stand on the other side,” she explains. She’s not interested in shaming the person she used to be. Instead, she uses that understanding to approach others with radical empathy.
“Sometimes, as progressives, we forget what it was like before we know what we know now,” she affirms. “I call it progressive amnesia. We lose sight of our journeys and how we evolved, making it harder to invite others into that evolution.”
A Balancing Act in Bridging and Bonding
Barron’s work often circles back to one central question: How do we connect with people who don’t share our beliefs?
She recalls the sociological framework of “bonding circles” and “bridging circles,” which are vital for a balanced life. Bonding circles are the safe spaces where we exhale and feel seen. Bridging circles, on the other hand, challenge us to engage in tough conversations.
“You can’t live fully in either,” she insists. “If you’re always in a bonding circle, you’re never challenged. If you’re always in a bridging circle, you’ll burn out. You need both.”
For Barron, these circles are as theoretical as they are personal. Existing at the intersection of racial, sexual, religious, and political identities, Brit knows what it’s like to feel like you don’t fully belong. Her advice? “Find the spaces where you can breathe deeply and the spaces where you can grow. And if you’re missing one, go seek it out.”
So…Do You Still Talk to Grandma?
With the holidays approaching, Barron’s wisdom feels especially relevant. Her latest book, Do You Still Talk to Grandma?, explores the complexities of maintaining relationships across political divides. The title itself was inspired by a friend’s dinner-table anecdote about a beloved grandmother who happened to vote for Trump. Courtesy Penguin Random House
“Can you hold deep love and deep disappointment at the same time?” Barron asks, her voice equal parts earnest and inquisitive. “Can you maintain your own integrity and still have relationships with people you disagree with?”
Her answer, of course, is yes…but it’s not easy.
Barron offers this mantra for those dreading holiday conversations: “More than one thing can be true.” She explains, “This person picked me up from school and made me spaghetti when I was sick. And this person also voted in a way I find hurtful. Both can be true, and we can sit with that tension.”
From Cancel Culture to Connection
Barron’s work pushes back against the extremes of cancel culture, which she views as a dead-end road. “What’s on the other side of culture culture?” she asks. “How do we move forward in a way that actually gets us where we want to go?”
Her approach isn’t about sweeping disagreements under the rug but leaning into them with curiosity and courage. She acknowledges that social media, with its penchant for amplifying the most extreme versions of people, doesn’t make this any easier. “We consume these stories, and then we convince ourselves that everyone we know is the most extreme version of the thing we just saw online,” she says. Her solution? Step away from the noise and engage with the real, flawed, multifaceted humans in your life.
A Reminder for the Rest of Us this Holiday Season and Beyond
I asked Barron what she hopes readers will take away from her story as they sit at the Thanksgiving table and beyond. “I hope people feel empowered to decide what their ‘work’ looks like,” she says. “It doesn’t have to look like your neighbor’s work or the person in your newsfeed. It just has to feel true to you.”
Whether that means diving headfirst into tough conversations, skipping the family gathering entirely, or something in between, Barron’s message is clear: Bridging divides starts with each of us in the places where we are most uncomfortable and most loved. shutterstock creative
These next few years will be increasingly challenging as politicians and pundits continue to thrive in a division between the “us” versus “them” rhetoric. However, the real revolution will not be in the streets or on social media but in sitting at the table.
An act so simple—yet so complicated—as staying there, holding space, and discussing how we build a shared community and world with a common destiny.
Voices is dedicated to featuring a wide range of inspiring personal stories and impactful opinions from the LGBTQ+ community and its allies. Visit out.com/submit to learn more about submission guidelines. We welcome your thoughts and feedback on any of our stories. Email us at voices@equalpride.com. Views expressed in Voices stories are those of the guest writers, columnists and editors, and do not directly represent the views of Out or our parent company, equalpride.
As vaping’s popularity endures, a report issued by the surgeon general’s office Tuesday shows that LGBTQ Americans are among those helping to keep smoke shops in business.
The surgeon general’s 837-page report on tobacco use found that 37.8% of gay, lesbian and bisexual U.S. adults have tried electronic cigarettes, compared with just 16.5% of their straight counterparts. Electronic cigarettes, also known as e-cigarettes, include e-cigars, e-pipes, e-hookahs, vaping pens and hookah pens.
When broken down further, the data, collected from 2019 to 2021, found nearly half of bisexual adults have tried e-cigarettes, compared with 31.8% of gay men and 26.7% of lesbians. The authors noted that figures on transgender Americans’ tobacco use were not widely available for analysis in all areas of the report.
The report found similar disparities exist among the nation’s youths and young adults: Over 42% of young adults and 56% of high school students who identify as gay, lesbian or bisexual reported trying e-cigarettes, compared with 30.3% and 49.8% of their straight counterparts.
“Tobacco use is a singular health threat to LGBTQAI+ communities,” said Kristy Marynak, a senior science adviser at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and a co-editor of the report. “This report finds that nearly 1 in 5 of all deaths in the United States are caused by tobacco, and it shines a light on the disproportionate burden borne by certain communities, including LGBTQAI+ communities.”
Marynak noted that the study — and the federal government more broadly — considers products containing nicotine, including e-cigarettes, to be tobacco products. The exceptions, she said, are therapeutic products, like nicotine gum and patches.
Long-term research on the health outcomes of e-cigarettes is not available because the products are relatively new. However, there is clear scientific consensus concerning the adverse effects of some of the chemicals commonly found in e-cigarettes.
E-cigarettes produce a number of dangerous chemicals — including acetaldehyde, acrolein and formaldehyde — that can cause lung and heart disease, according to the American Lung Association.
Nicotine is also commonly found in e-cigarettes. Not only is nicotine addictive and likely to fuel anxiety or depression, it also can harm brain development, which occurs until age 25, according to the CDC.
Dr. Scott Hadland, the chief of adolescent and young adult medicine at Mass General for Children and Harvard Medical School, said he’s observed greater e-cigarette use among gay, lesbian and bisexual youths. He said that LGBTQ people use tobacco products at higher rates largely because of “long-standing stigma” within health care settings.
“LGBTQ+ people might be afraid to present for care to help support their quit attempts,” Hadland said. “They might be afraid to talk to their doctor about it because they’re afraid to go to the doctor in general.”
LGBTQ adults are twice as likely as their non-LGBTQ counterparts to report having had negative health care experiences over the last three years, according to a report published this year by KFF, a health care research nonprofit formerly known as the Kaiser Family Foundation.
Hadland also attributed higher e-cigarette use among LGBTQ Americans to marketing tactics, as is noted in the report.
Tobacco companies marketed directly to the LGBTQ community in the mid-1990s, including through “Project Scum,” which advertised Camel and Red Kamel cigarettes to “consumer subcultures” in San Francisco, according to the study.
Today, tobacco companies advertise in queer magazines and donate to organizations focused on promoting LGBTQ rights and Pride events, the report noted.
In 1964, the surgeon general’s office released its first report on the hazards of smoking and has since then dedicated vast resources to combat cigarette use. The new report shows that those efforts have largely been successful, as only 11.5% of U.S. adults reported being cigarette smokers in 2021, compared with 42.4% in 1965.
Still, 36 million U.S. adults and 760,000 middle and high school students smoke tobacco products, according to the report. Since 2014, the most commonly used tobacco product among U.S. youths and young adults is e-cigarettes.
“These and other noncombustible tobacco products such as nicotine pouches have the potential to undermine overall progress in preventing and reducing young people’s use of tobacco products,” the authors stated.
In June, the Justice Department and Food and Drug Administration announcedthey will create a federal multiagency task force to combat the illegal distribution and sale of e-cigarettes.
