William Alejandro Martínez, a trans man from Honduras, stood up for his rights when military police officers stopped him in Comayagüela in May 2019 and asked to see his identity card. They questioned him about his gender identity, physically assaulted him, and threatened to arrest him. “Don’t touch me, I’m a human rights defender,” Martínez insisted. That’s when an officer pointed a rifle at him, saying “I don’t give a damn what you are.” “My life passed before my eyes,” Martínez remembered.
Ten years before Martínez stared into the barrel of a gun, Vicky Hernández, a trans woman, sex worker, and activist, was killed on the streets of San Pedro Sula. Last week, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights heard a case arguing that the Honduran government is responsible for Hernández’s loss of life.
The petitioners acting for the deceased, Cattrachas Lesbian Network and RFK Human Rights, argue the government bore direct responsibility for Hernández’s death, and that in failing to conduct an effective investigation into her killing, including whether it was motivated by anti-LGBT prejudice, Honduras violated her right to life under the American Convention on Human Rights.
The case reached the Inter-American Court because Honduras failed to comply with recommendations the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights issued in 2018. These included establishing a rights-respecting process to secure legal recognition for trans people’s gender identity, mapping violence against LGBT people and introducing a comprehensive policy to address its structural causes, and training security forces on anti-LGBT violence.
Human Rights Watch made similar recommendations in a report published today, part of our work on anti-LGBT violence and discrimination in Central America’s Northern Triangle. The report found that the Honduran government has failed to effectively address violence and entrenched discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation, leading many to seek asylum in the US. In some cases, security officers themselves are perpetrators of violence.
After William Martínez survived a second assault by military police in June 2019, he fled the country. Exile should not be the only way to escape violence. Honduras should take urgent steps to protect LGBT people from violence and discrimination.
GLAAD, the world’s largest lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) media advocacy organization, released the findings of its 2020 Post-election Poll of LGBTQ registered voters, including a phenomenol turnout of the LGBTQ vote, a surge of first-time LGBTQ voters, an overwhelming vote for President-elect Joe Biden, with votes motivated by three top issues urgently demanding a more robust response from our nation’s leaders: COVID-19, healthcare and racial justice.
The poll, conducted November 9-14 with 800 LGBTQ respondents by Pathfinder Opinion Research, found that 93% of respondents who reported being LGBTQ registered voters said they voted in the 2020 general election. 25% voted for the first time. Among all LGBTQ voters, 81% voted for President-elect Biden and 14% for President Trump. Among first-time LGBTQ voters, 86% voted for President-elect Biden, 10% for President Trump.
Among LGBTQ adults, 78% rated President-elect Biden “excellent or good” in addressing LGBTQ issues during the campaign. 80% rated President Trump “not so good or poor” in addressing LGBTQ issues during the campaign. 59% of LGBTQ voters said they didn’t see election-related news coverage of LGBTQ issues during the Presidential campaign, an absence GLAAD repeatedly raised before and after debates and town halls and addressed in multiple stories across the media.
As for the election result itself, two-thirds said Biden’s win made them feel optimistic for the future. But a majority of respondents expressed concern that a conservative Supreme Court could severely impact progress on issues such as marriage equality, abortion rights and employment protections.
“With this Supreme Court being packed with conservative judges, it is concerning to say the least,” says Sarah Kate Ellis, CEO of GLAAD, whose Trump Accountability Project indicates the president “attacked the LGBTQ community 181 times since he took office, or about once a week.”
Ellis is concerned religious rights will be used by the Supreme Court as a way to rule against LGBTQ Americans’ civil rights. She pointed to Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, a case currently before the Supreme Court involving a city agency that denied LGBTQ couples the ability to serve as foster parents on the grounds of religious beliefs.
A Hungarian government proposal to amend the constitution to restrict adoption to married couples is designed to exclude lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people and families and is an affront to common European values, Human Rights Watch said today.
The Hungarian parliament should reject it resoundingly. And the European Commission should make clear that the government’s latest slew of legal changes is not compatible in a European Union based on tolerance and nondiscrimination.
“It seems nothing will derail this government from cruelly and pointlessly targeting one of the most marginalized groups in Hungarian society, not even soaring coronavirus infections and Covid-19 related deaths,” said Lydia Gall, senior researcher in the Europe and Central Asia Division at Human Rights Watch. “Under the pretext of combatting a misguided conception of ‘gender ideology,’ the government further restricts rights and stigmatizes thousands of Hungarian citizens.”
The government presented to parliament a number of constitutional amendments on November 10, 2020, the same day parliament had voted to extend by 90 days the state of emergency Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s government declared on November 3. The ruling party, Fidesz, which has a two-thirds majority in parliament, is set to vote on the proposals within weeks. If passed, it would be the 9th of constitutional amendments since the Orban government came into power for the second time in 2010.
The bill states that only married couples will be eligible to adopt children, with the minister in charge of family policies able to make exceptions on a case-by-case basis. It effectively excludes same-sex couples, single people, and unmarried different-sex couples from adopting children.
The bill includes language that stigmatizes transgender people, stating that “children have the right to their identity in line with their sex at birth” and rejecting diversity and inclusivity by mandating that children’s upbringing should be “in accordance with the values based on our homeland’s constitutional identity and Christian culture.”
The bill is the latest attack on LGBT people in Hungary. In May, the parliament, during the first wave of the Covid-19 pandemic, banned legal gender recognition meaning transgender and intersex people in Hungary cannot legally change their gender or sex (both called “nem” in Hungarian) assigned at birth. The restriction has serious repercussions for people’s everyday lives, Human Rights Watch said. It also follows increasingly hostile anti-LGBT statements by high-ranking public officials, including Prime Minister Orban.
In September, a Hungarian children’s book was published, with new versions of well-known fairy tales, featuring members of marginalized groups, including LGBT people, Roma, and people with disabilities. It sparked a wave of homophobic attacks, with right-wing extremist politicians publicly shredding the book. Other key government officials added their voices to the hate campaign in October, and Orban, on a radio show, commented on the book, saying that the LGBT community should “leave our children alone.”
Days after the government submitted the bills to parliament, the European Commission introduced a new LGBTIQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, intersex, and queer) strategy. EU funds available to member states to carry out the strategy would be linked to compliance with EU anti-discrimination law.
The vice president of the EU Commission, Vera Jourova, on November 12 stated that abuse against the LGBT community “belongs to the authoritarian playbook and has no place in the EU.” The increasingly homophobic policies of populist conservative governments in Hungary and Poland are at odds with the Commission’s proposed LGBTIQ strategy and the principles of tolerance and nondiscrimination it is designed to protect, Human Rights Watch said.
Hungary’s justice minister, Judit Varga, dismissed the strategy, calling it a “seemingly limitless ideology [being] forced on Member States” and saying that Hungary would “not accept any financial threats for protecting the traditional role of family and marriage.” The Hungarian government on November 16blocked the adoption of the seven-year EU budget because the budget ties access to some EU funds to respect for the rule of law.
Earlier in the year, parliament blocked ratification of a regional treaty on violence against women. The Council of Europe Convention on Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence, known as the Istanbul Convention, has established a gold standard for inclusion, recognizing everyone’s right to live free from violence, regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity, or other characteristics.
The government submitted a separate bill to amend the electoral law, which would make it much harder for opposition parties to win elections. It would effectively require opposition parties to create joint party lists and run joint candidates to have any chance of winning an election.
“The Hungarian government’s latest efforts to cement intolerance and remove safeguards against the abuse of power should set off alarm bells in Brussels,” Gall said. “The EU Commission and other member states should strengthen scrutiny and use the EU’s systems and funds to increase respect for EU’s common democratic values and to protect marginalized populations.”
Face to Face presents their Strategic Plan. Executive Director, Sara Brewer, along with Face to Face’s passionate and dedicated staff and Board of Directors have been working on this plan for the past few months in order to keep moving forward to achieve their mission.Central to the plan is their commitment to reduce transmission of HIV in people 25 and younger, enhance care services, scale up prevention services and be more more of a sustainable and resilient community resource. Please take the time to get to know our plan for our community.
Karine Jean-Pierre could become the first out lesbian and first Black woman to be named White House press secretary.
The political heavyweight served as Kamala Harris’ chief of staff during the Biden-Harris campaign, and has now been tipped for a permanent role in the new administration.
NBC’s White House correspondent Geoff Bennett tweeted Wednesday (18 November) that Jean-Pierre has “emerged as a top candidate” for press secretary, citing multiple sources.
Symone Sanders, TV pundit and a senior advisor to the campaign “has also been discussed” for the role, he added.
“No final decisions have been made, officials stress, as the emerging West Wing leadership also considers how to structure the communications office in a rapidly-changing media environment,” Bennett added.https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=PinkNews&dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1329069612911239171&lang=en-gb&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pinknews.co.uk%2F2020%2F11%2F19%2Fpolitical-trailblazer-karine-jean-pierre-tipped-to-be-first-ever-black-and-lgbt-white-house-press-secretary%2F&siteScreenName=PinkNews&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=500px
Were Karine Jean-Pierre to clinch the role, she would be the first Black woman in the role as well as the first out LGBT+ press secretary.
Many will recognise her from a viral video in which she jumped to protect Harris after an animal rights activist attempted to grab her microphone during a campaign event in 2019.
A seasoned campaigner, activist and strategist, she has previously worked on presidential campaigns for John Edwards, Martin O’Malley and Barack Obama.
She also served on Obama’s White House staff as a regional political director, and was hired to Harris’ team in August, becoming the first Black person to serve as a presidential candidate’s chief of staff.
She is well-known as a political pundit thanks to numerous appearances on NBC News and MSNBC, and has long been a vocal advocate for LGBT+ rights and equality.
Karine Jean-Pierre fought Trump for the sake of her daughter.
In 2011 she spoke about her experiences working in politics as an openly gay woman.
Shortly after she left her position in the Obama administration, she told The Advocate: “What’s been wonderful is that I was not the only; I was one of many.
During holiday season, you may be wondering if it is safe to gather and celebrate with loved ones. Here are guidelines for protecting yourself and others from COVID-19.
The safest gathering is one that is a small, stable group that meets outdoors for a short duration and uses face coverings, distance and other safety measures.
Any activity outside of your household increases chances of exposure to the virus. Be selective and space out which public activities you choose. If gathering with your small, stable group is most important, consider forgoing or delaying other activities such as a haircut or indoor dining to reduce your overall exposures and protect your group.
If anyone in your household develops COVID-19 symptoms after attending a gathering:
Get tested for COVID-19
Notify the other attendees as soon as possible regarding the potential exposure
Stay home as much as possible for 14 days after the gathering or until household member tests negative
Avoid being around people who have higher risk for severe illness from COVID-19
If you gather in person, keep it safe, small, short, and stable
Outside is Safer: Gather outside and follow safety guidelines
The risk of COVID-19 transmission is highest in indoor spaces without enough ventilation. That’s why gathering inside is not allowed, except as permitted under the state’s health order. Outdoor spaces that are covered are okay, as long as 75% of the space is open to the outdoors. People may go inside to use restrooms, as long as restrooms are sanitized often and attendees only go one at a time.
Small: Limit gatherings to no more than 3 households
When people from different households are together at the same time in the same space, the risk of spreading COVID-19 goes up. That is why gatherings of more than 12 individuals and more than 3 different households are not allowed.
Short: Limit gatherings to no more than 2 hours
The longer people gather together, the higher the risk of COVID-19 spreading. That’s why gathering for longer than 2 hours is not allowed, under the state’s health order.
Stable: Do not participate in multiple gatherings with many different households
The more people come into contact with others outside their household, the higher the risk of spreading COVID-19. That’s why participating in multiple gatherings with different households is strongly discouraged. If you attend several gatherings over the holidays, keep it to the same group of people.
Considerations before hosting or attending:
Are there many or increasing cases of COVID-19 in areas where attendees live?
Have all attendees been taking precautions against COVID-19?
Will all attendees wear face coverings and keep physical distance at the gathering?
Do not attend if:
Anyone in your household has COVID-19-like symptoms
You are at higher risk of severe illness from COVID-19 due to age or medical conditions
Hosts should let guests know safety guidelines must be followed before the event so everyone is aware.
Safety recommendations
Maintain at least 6 feet of physical distance from people not in your household at all times, whether you’re sitting or standing. More distance is safer.
Wear face coverings at all times, including when talking to others. You can remove face covering briefly to eat, drink, or take medication as long as you stay at least 6 feet away from everyone outside your own household. More distance is safer.
Remain outside as much as possible. If you go inside, open windows and doors to increase ventilation.
Wash hands with soap and water often. If not available, use hand sanitizer.
Serve shared food safely. If it is not possible to use single-serve disposable containers, food and beverages must be served by a person who washes or sanitizes their hands frequently and wears a face covering. If you are dropping off home-prepared food or drink gifts, be sure to wear a mask and disinfect or wash your hands thoroughly.
Avoid singing, chanting, and shouting. If you cannot avoid these activities, keep your face covering on, your volume low, and at least a 6-foot distance from others. More distance and being outdoors are safer.
Travel
Avoid travel during the holidays
COVID-19 is spreading rapidly in many parts of the country. Nonessential travel, including holiday travel, is not recommended. Traveling outside the Bay Area will increase your chance of getting infected and spreading the virus to others after your return. Additional precautions should also be taken when hosting and interacting with people traveling to the Bay Area, especially from other areas with widespread COVID-19.
If you travel outside the Bay Area, it is strongly recommended that you self-quarantine for 14 days after your return if your activities while travelling put you at higher risk of getting COVID-19. These higher risk activities include:
Spending time within 6 feet of people you do not normally live with, while you or anyone around you was not wearing a face mask – especially if you were indoors.
Traveling on planes, buses, trains, public transportation, or other shared vehicles, if face masks were not worn at all times by both you and the other people in the vehicle.
Do NOT travel if you are sick. You could spread COVID-19 or another infection
If you have COVID-19 symptoms, get tested and wait for a negative test result before you start your trip. Even if you test negative for COVID-19, you should not travel if you’re feeling ill as you may spread another infection.
If you must travel, take steps to reduce risk
Wear a face covering
Keep at least 6 feet of physical distance from others (more distance is safer)
Ventilate your space, if possible (for example, open the bus or taxi window)
Wash or sanitize your hands often
Avoid touching your eyes, nose, and mouth
Avoid contact with anyone who is sick
Avoid contact with frequently touched surfaces
Get tested before and after you travel
Get a flu shot
Air travel
Most viruses do not spread easily on flights because of how air circulates and is filtered on airplanes. However, it is likely that you will be sitting within 6 feet of others for long periods of time, which can increase your risk of getting COVID-19. Air travel also requires spending time in security lines and airport terminals, which can bring you in close contact with other people and frequently touched surfaces. Finally, during the holidays, planes and airports may be significantly more crowded than usual, which also increases risk of transmission.
Car travel
Don’t share vehicles with people you don’t live with. Vehicles are small enclosed spaces where COVID-19 can spread easily between people. If you must share a vehicle, try to ride with the same people each time, make sure everyone wears a face covering and open the windows to maximize outdoor air circulation as much as you can.
Are you, your travel companions, or those you are visiting at higher risk for serious illness?
Older adults and people with underlying medical conditions are more likely to get really sick if they get COVID-19. The virus can be spread among people who are not feeling any symptoms.
Will you be able to social distance from others during your trip?
It is hard to maintain 6 feet of space from others when using public transportation like airplanes, buses, trains, and taxis. Even when traveling in your own vehicle, you may find yourself in close contact with other people and frequently touched surfaces while making stops along the way.
Can you watch for symptoms and get tested?
In the event that you must travel, it’s important to monitor yourself for symptoms for 14 days after your return and get tested immediately if you have any symptoms. Even if you don’t develop symptoms, consider getting tested around 3-7 days after your return, particularly if returning from an area with more COVID-19 transmission than we have in the Bay Area, or if you engaged in activities that put you at risk for getting COVID-19. If you do any activity where you might have been exposed to COVID-19, including travel, reduce your contact with other people as much as possible for 14 days, keep your distance from others, and make extra sure that you always wear a face covering anytime you’re outside your household.
While the society’s archives remain closed in compliance with city and state health regulations during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, we have been busy adding digital content for researchers at home and are thrilled to provide you with a roadmap to these resources. We have overhauled the archives area on the website to make it easier to find the content you’re looking for. On the website, click on “Online Resources” under the “Archives” tab, and you’ll find a new launch page for all of our digital materials featuring four colored boxes that link to the four following sections: Digital Collections, accessed through the pink box (top left),are selections from our physical archival collections, scanned and photographed. We’ve vastly expanded this page in the last six months. Recent additions include ACT UP oral histories; videos of performers at the Valencia Rose cabaret in the 1980s; the Posters and Art and Artifacts collections; Jean-Baptiste Carhaix’s evocative photographs of the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence; Hal O’Neal’s home videos of gay men socializing as far back as the 1940s; and collections about lesbian poet Elsa Gidlow, Japanese American World War II incarceration-camp survivor Jiro Onuma, and the famed “Maestrapeace” mural on the Women’s Building in San Francisco. Exhibitions, accessed through the yellow box (top right), takes you to our online exhibitions, curated and built since March by our museum staff. You can view exhibitions that were previously on display at the museum on Roz Joseph’s drag photographs, Angela Davis, Gilbert Baker and more. And some of the exhibitions, such as AIDS Treatment Activism, are “born-digital” shows that are exclusively available online. Primary Source Sets, linked from the orange box (bottom left), are a new resource we’ve introduced this year. These are curated sets of images, articles and recordings on specific topics, ranging from drag to the Gay Games, to gays and lesbians in the military, to queer feminism and trans men and women. They’re great jumping-off points for research, and are intended to be especially helpful to students, educators and novice researchers. Research Guides are available through the blue box (bottom right). They’re textual roadmaps of the archives, also themed around specific topics, and intended for researchers who are planning to dig deeper and ultimately consult the physical archives. They list relevant collections, oral histories and periodicals. Also available here are our presentations about research and collection donation, as well as information about local LGBTQ historic places, links to other LGBTQ archives and more. We hope you’ll explore our online resources. And if you have any suggestions for topics you might like to see covered or any questions, email us at reference@glbthistory.org. We’re here to help you!
Kelsi Evans is director of the Dr. John P. De Cecco Archives & Special Collections at the GLBT Historical Society. Isaac Fellman is the reference archivist at the GLBT Historical Society.
Almost half (46 per cent) of LGBT+ school students in England do not feel safe to be themselves at school, a study has revealed.
LGBT+ education charity Diversity Role Models released its “Pathways to LGBT+ Inclusion” report Wednesday (18 November), which quizzed 6,136 students and 5,733 adults from 90 schools, which were all “at the start” of their journey towards LGBT+ inclusion.
It found that across the board, 46 per cent of LGBT+ students would not feel safe coming out at school. Of secondary school students, this figure jumped to almost three quarters (73 per cent).
In a foreword for the report, presenter Clare Balding said: “Just let that sink in. The place you are relying upon to prepare you for the world, the place where you are supposed to get an all-round education is not currently a safe space if you are LGBT+.”
The report also highlighted a huge disparity between the experiences of LGBT+ students and what the teachers responsible for their care were willing to admit.
While 42 per cent of year five and six primary school students and 54 per cent of secondary school students said that homophobic, biphobic and transphobic language was common at their school, just 26 per cent of teachers admitted this was the case.
When this language did come up, just 67 per cent of primary school teachers and 78 per cent of secondary school teachers said they challenged it.
But, according to students, the situation is even worse. Less than a third (32 per cent) of secondary school kids said that staff challenged anti-LGBT+ language.
Balding added: “The report has discovered that parents, staff and governors tend to underestimate the occurrence of bullying compared to the pupils themselves.
“This is crucial because what adults may think and how adults may react to language will naturally be more considered and resilient. We grow stronger as we grow older but children don’t have those layers of protective experience.
“They respond and react as if stung or burnt and it’s why it is so important that we take these findings seriously and we, as adults, react quickly to protect the most vulnerable.”
Researchers spoke to “selective and non-selective schools, independent, faith schools and non-denominational schools, local-authority-maintained schools, academies, free schools and mixed- and single-gender schools” in London, the West Midlands and the South East of England, to compile the report.
Discrimination and bullying at school can have tragic consequences for LGBT+ youth, who are already at greater risk for mental health problems.
LGBTQ candidates once again made history in terms of the overall number elected to Congress and state legislatures across the country. However, many of them had to contend with homophobic and transphobic attack ads this election cycle.
“There is little doubt that millions of dollars in homophobic and transphobic attacks ads devastated our candidates in key swing districts during the final weeks of their campaigns,” said Annise Parker, president of the LGBTQ Victory Fund, which trains and advocates for queer candidates at all levels of government. “Bigoted politicians and operatives who thrive in the politics of hate were able to peel away support from voters who don’t yet know our community.”
Bigoted ads did not spell defeat for all LGBTQ candidates they targeted, but even the candidates who overcame the attacks did have to invest resources to respond to them.
Impacts ‘hard to quantify’
When it comes to homophobic and transphobic political attacks, “it is hard to quantify the effects,” according to Gabriele Magni, an assistant professor of political science at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles.
“When you have an incumbent president who is such a polarizing figure, it becomes harder to disentangle what is the effect the homophobic attack ad and what is the effect of having Donald Trump on the ballot,” he said.
He also explained that “voter suppression efforts that target constituents that are generally most supportive of Democratic candidates,” also hurt LGBTQ candidates, as the lion’s share of them run as Democrats (at least 90 percent, according to LGBTQ Victory Fund’s estimate).
Whether a candidate won or lost may not be indicative of the impact of the bigoted attacks either, as Magni said the bar tends to be higher for LGBTQ candidates who make it to the general election, so “the exceptional quality of some of these candidates allowed them to overcome the negative effects of some of these attacks.”
Nonincumbents and purple districts
Homophobic and transphobic attacks produced mixed impacts on congressional races, with nonincumbents and those in purple districts most likely to suffer defeat.
In New Hampshire, Democrat Chris Pappas — who in 2018 became the first openly gay man to represent the state in Congress — was able to stave off what supporters called homophobic challenges to his integrity to win re-election against Republican challenger Matt Mowers.
During a debate Oct, 21, Mowers brought up Pappas’ alleged relationship with a lobbyist and accused the candidate of impropriety. Pappas denied the claim, and in a statement after the debate, he said Mowers’ behavior was “despicable” and that he had “crossed a line.”
Rep. Chris Pappas, D-N.H., speaks during a news conference on Sept. 27, 2019.Bill Clark / CQ Roll Call via AP
Mowers’ campaign manager, John Corbett, called the homophobia claims “untruthful accusations” designed to divert public attention from policy issues and obscure Pappas’ relationship with the lobbyist.
“Matt Mowers learned the hard way that his desperate homophobic dog whistle attacks cost him votes amongst Republicans and independent voters in the closing days of the campaign,” Lucas Meyer, campaign manager for Pappas, said in an email to NBC News after his election victory. “Granite Staters saw right through his baseless attacks and rejected his blatant bigotry that he made the focus of his closing message.”
While Pappas was in a purple district, which President Donald Trump carried in 2016, he had the advantage of incumbency this year. “Homophobic attacks are less effective against well-known candidates, because voters already know them,” Magni said.
Nonincumbent congressional hopefuls in purple districts had a tougher time trying to flip red to blue districts.
Two races for which LGBTQ advocates and Democrats had high hopes — Gina Ortiz Jones and John Hoadley — did not pan out.
Hoadley lost against incumbent Republican Rep. Fred Upton, who voted against the Equality Act last year and for a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage in 2004 and 2006.
Texas Democrat Gina Ortiz Jones, who ran for a House seat in 2018 and 2020, in San Antonio, Texas, on Aug. 10, 2018.Eric Gay / AP file
Former U.S. Air Force Capt. Jones lost to Republican Tony Gonzales, a Navy veteran, failing to flip Texas’ 23rd Congressional District for Democrats.
The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) spent millions of dollars on attack ads against both of these candidates.
“If you are running for congress as a nonincumbent,” Magni said, “not so many people know who they are.” This means that voters may “rely more heavily on stereotypes or homophobic tropes,” especially in the context of Covid-19 in which personal contact is even more limited.
By contrast, derogatory comments directed at Rep.-elect Ritchie Torres did not harm his chances of becoming the first Afro-Latinx LGBTQ person elected to Congress. He easily won the general election for his congressional seat against his Republican opponent in one of the most progressive districts in the country. Magni said the attacks are “less consequential” in heavily Democratic districts like New York’s 15th.
Hateful messages
Magni explained that the diverse candidate pool, with many women, people of color and transgender candidates are “especially vulnerable targets” for anti-LGBTQ messaging.
Jenna Wadsworth, an outspoken progressive, lost her bid for North Carolina’s agriculture commissioner. In October, Wadsworth became the target of online vitriol after she posted a video asking viewers if Donald Trump’s diagnosis with Covid-19 was their “favorite or most favorite October surprise.”
Wadsworth, who described animosity toward her prior to the video as “minimal,” quickly became inundated with thousands of messages on social media.
Many of the hateful messages, however, were not about Wadsworth’s controversial remarks about Trump’s health — they were about her being unfit for office because of her sexual orientation, gender identity and sex.
“That does a lot to you emotionally, psychologically. It’s very draining,” she said.
Some of the messages made Wadsworth fear for her physical safety. “I received gang rape threats after that video,” Wadsworth said. “Until election night, I was not able to stay in my own home for three weeks.”
Magni described North Carolina as a “deeply divided state when it comes to LGBTQ attitudes” and added that part of the electorate “is receptive to these kinds of attacks.”
Wadsworth, who at 31 would have been the youngest LGBTQ statewide elected official in the country’s history, lost the race and said she believes her campaign suffered due to the bigoted attacks. She said she has not decided what is next for her politically.
Unexpected boost?
Several candidates experienced an unexpected boost in support and financing as a result of homophobic and transphobic attacks.
Shevrin Jones easily won his race for Florida Legislature last Tuesday to become Florida’s first LGBTQ state senator.
In August, a blood bank rejected Jones when he sought to donate plasma after recovering from Covid-19 because he is in a same-sex relationship. A robotext, whose sponsor remains unknown, was sent to voters saying Jones was “discriminated against for recent homosexual contact,” and linked to ShevJones.com, which is not Jones’ website and does not appear to ever have had any information on it. Jones was also the subject of a homophobic flyer with a photo of himself and his partner on vacation and asked, “Is this who you want for your next state senator?”
Shevrin Jones.Greg Reed Photography
The attacks did not stop Jones, and paradoxically may have helped in terms of support and funding.
“We raised over $1 million,” Jones said. “When those attacks were coming people just gave more.”
Brianna Titone, who won her bid for re-election to the Colorado Statehouse, experienced several transphobic attack ads.
The group Take Back Colorado released a Facebook ad this month that misgendered Titone and referred to her by her “deadname,” the name she used before her transition. The ad also claimed Titone has “always supported violence” and sexualizes children. Then Republican state Rep. Stephen Humphrey voiced a robocall paid for by the Colorado Family Values Victory Fund attacking Titone’s gender identity.
Magni said transgender candidates may be more likely to become the target of attacks because “public support for trans rights is still lower” than for lesbian and gay rights.
Titone triumphed over the attacks, which led to increases in volunteer support and campaign contributions. “The attacks I had to endure didn’t create any obstacles for me that I didn’t already have,” she told NBC News. “If anything, it helped me with raising money and it convinced some people to support me based on the ads.”
She also feels that her attackers were emboldened by the Trump administration that has “given permission to be rude.”
“I’m curious to see how my new colleagues will treat me. Will they be towing the line of those messages, or will they realize that that is not productive and move away?,” she said.
Omar Leos, who won his race for North East School District board in San Antonio, had a similar experience.
“I think it helped energize the campaign. It mobilized more people to come out to volunteer and it definitely helped me financially too,” Leos told NBC News.
“In my personal opinion, it backfired on them,” Leos said.
Texas Family Action, a political action committee affiliated with the conservative San Antonio Family Association, sent a mailer to voters in Leos’ district describing him as being “‘married’ to same-sex man” and noting he has “no children” in the school district. In contrast, the mailer described Leos’ opponent, Ione McGinty, as a “wife and mother of 6.”
While Leos still won, Magni said that such attacks can “force the campaign to redirect the resources and shift media focus,” he said. “The campaign has to respond.”
Leos did say the homophobic attacks prompted him to shift his campaign message to highlight the unwillingness of his opponent to be an advocate for LGBTQ students.
“Before on my signs was ‘Keep Omar Leos,’” he said. After the homophobic attacks he shifted his message to “A voice for all.”
“I’m a voice for all students, for all people,” Leos said.
‘Soldier on’
There is no reason to believe LGBTQ candidates have seen the last of homophobic and transphobic attacks, but Magni said a swift response by candidates and their allies is important to prevent their opponents from defining the narrative of the campaign.
LGBTQ candidates also need to remember that they are targets because they are strong candidates who have the potential to win, Magni added.
“That should encourage them to soldier on and to keep in mind the ultimate goal — that is, that they are running to serve their constituents.”
