News

/

This church has two giant red ribbons to let “the community know they were loved and accepted”

,

If you’ve ever driven into Hollywood south on the 101 freeway, following signs for the Hollywood Bowl and Highland Avenue, then you were met with the sight on your right of the iconic Gothic bell tower at the Hollywood United Methodist Church.

Dedicated in 1930, as Hollywood boomed and Los Angeles stretched west to the Pacific, the church has been “a sanctuary of hope” since the first congregants started to organize in 1909.

That tradition famously took the form of two enormous red ribbons hung on the bell tower in the 1990s.

“Our church has been proud supporters of our LGBTQIA+ family for decades,” Associate Pastor Devon Jones tells LGBTQ Nation. “Especially back in the early 1990s during the AIDS crisis, when people were being turned away from family and friends.”

In response, “We put two huge red AIDS ribbons on our bell tower, letting the community know they were loved and accepted.”

For years, the Hollywood United Methodist Church has pulled out all the stops for the annual LA Pride Parade, which stepped off a stone’s throw from the church on a route through the heart of Hollywood in 2023.

They requisitioned a double-decker Hollywood tour bus for the occasion, spreading a message of joy and celebrating 30 years since they raised those iconic red ribbons that are a clarion call for love and acceptance in the Southland.

“We want everyone to know there are communities of faith like ours that celebrate and are affirming of our LGBTQIA+ family,” Jones says.

“We are the LGBTQIA+ community, and we also have many allies who love and support us. We believe in a loving God who made us all just how we were meant to be.”

/ /

Roberta Kaplan, legendary LGBTQ+ rights lawyer, leaves her firm amid misconduct allegations

,

Roberta Kaplan, a legendary lawyer in the realm of LGBTQ+ rights and feminism, has resigned from the firm she founded “after clashing with her partners over her treatment of colleagues,” The New York Timesreports.

Kaplan, who is lesbian, represented Edie Windsor in the case that brought down the Defense of Marriage Act in 2013 and more recently represented E. Jean Carroll in her successful lawsuits against Donald Trump for defamation and sexual abuse.

She opened New York-based Kaplan Hecker & Fink in 2017 after 25 years with Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, a major corporate law firm. She once said Kaplan Hecker & Fink operated “on the principle that there always must be someone to stand up to a bully,” according to the Times.

Kaplan told the Bloomberg news service she was leaving the firm because “it grew in size and complexity beyond what I had in mind, and I wanted to get back to something nimbler.” She is starting a firm called Kaplan Martin with Tim Martin, a partner in Kaplan Hecker & Fink, and two other friends, Steven M. Cohen and Mitra Hormozi, both former federal prosecutors.

But the Times story details tensions at Kaplan Hecker & Fink. “Her departure was announced after The Times informed her personal lawyers that it was preparing to publish an article about Ms. Kaplan that would shine a light on complaints about what some employees said was an unprofessional office culture that she presided over,” the paper reports. Kaplan had been removed from the firm’s management committee, according to the Times.

“Several people whom she worked with told The Times that she had insulted employees, inappropriately commented on their looks and threatened to derail people’s careers,” the article continues. Kaplan’s lawyers said this was not the case. They also told the Times, “There is nothing more unremarkable than trial lawyers using colorful language, criticizing their peers and representing diverse clients with no expectation of ideological purity.”

Kaplan herself gave a statement to the paper, saying, “The work I do is high-stakes and challenging, requiring both toughness and precision.” Because she had fought “some of the world’s biggest bullies, there are people who don’t like me, which comes with the territory, particularly when you are a woman,” she added. “I am proud of my record as a lawyer, colleague and mentor.”

She has been involved in controversies before. In 2021, she resigned as cochair of the board of Time’s Up, an organization founded to assist survivors of sexual harassment and assault, after it was revealed that she had advised then-New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo on his response to allegations that he had sexually harassed employees. Kaplan helped found Time’s Up and its legal defense fund in 2017. Cuomo resigned as governor in 2021 after a report from New York State Attorney General Letitia James found the accusations against Cuomo credible and concluded that he and his associates had committed unlawful retaliation against one of his accusers. Both Cohen and Hormozi have “close ties” to Cuomo, Bloomberg reports.

Kaplan Hecker & Fink will be renamed Hecker Fink as of Monday. “It was Robbie’s decision to leave the firm,” partners Julie Fink and Sean Hecker said in a statement to the Times. “We wish her the very best and look forward to working with her and her new firm in the future.”

/ /

For Florida’s LGBTQ teens and teachers, the law is a moving target

Aiden Cordero, 18, was suspended from her Florida high school in February for using the girls’ bathroom.

Cordero is a transgender girl and a senior at Frank W. Springstead High School, in a suburb of Tampa, where, she said, she’s been using the girls’ restroom for the last three years without issues. However, one of a few laws targeting LGBTQ students or topics Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis signed in May 2023 requires that she use either the boys’ restroom or the single-occupancy restroom in the school’s clinic, which she said is far from her classes. 

In February, she had an emergency, so she went to the nearest bathroom, which was the women’s restroom, she said. When she returned to class, she said, two classmates told an administrator she had used the girls’ restroom, and she was suspended for the day.

As a result of her suspension, Cordero said, she wasn’t allowed to join the rest of her classmates on a senior trip, which she had paid $180 for. Before the incident, Cordero was considering staying in Florida for college, because she was awarded a Bright Futures Scholarship, which would have paid partial tuition at an in-state university. Due to her experiences in high school, as well as the passage of state legislation targeting LGBTQ rights, she decided to leave Florida and attend college in New York, even though doing so would mean additional expenses.

“I feel like if I went to college [in Florida], I would have to face that for four more years. If I stayed in a dorm out here, I have to be in a male dorm, using male bathrooms,” she said, referring to a Florida Board of Education rule implemented last year that broadened the May 2023 law.

A spokesperson for the Hernando County School District declined to comment on Cordero’s suspension, citing student privacy.

Aiden Cordero, 18, was suspended from her Florida high school in February for using the girls’ bathroom.
Aiden Cordero, 18, was suspended from her Florida high school in February for using the girls’ bathroom.Bill Angelucci / NBC News

NBC News spoke with Cordero and other students, teachers and parents in Hernando County throughout the most recent school year about effects of laws targeting the LGBTQ community, including what critics have dubbed the “Don’t Say Gay” law, which was expanded in May 2023.DeSantis signed the first version of the law, the Parental Rights in Education act, in May 2022. The original law prohibited “classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity” in kindergarten through third grade “or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards.” 

The expanded measure prohibits sexual orientation or gender identity instruction in prekindergarten through eighth grade, restricts reproductive health education in sixth through 12th grade and requires that reproductive health instruction “be age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards.” The law applies to both public and charter schools. 

Recommended

OUT NEWSAfter 32 years as a progressive voice for LGBTQ Jews, Rabbi Sharon Kleinbaum heads into retirement

OUT POP CULTUREFormer late night host Amber Ruffin comes out on last day of Pride Month

The LGBTQ students and teachers who spoke with NBC News said the resulting climate has been one of confusion about what exactly violates the law and increased hostility toward anything LGBTQ-related. 

Hernando County School District Superintendent John Stratton sent out an email in May 2023 that said teachers should familiarize themselves with the Parental Rights in Education law, according to a copy of the email shared with NBC News. He sent another email shortly thereafter, which was also shared with NBC News, that directed school staff members not to “display any items that can be considered classroom instruction on sexual orientation or gender identity (flags, posters, stickers, etc.).”

Florida teacher Ian Wald removed a rainbow sticker that was behind his desk at the end of the 2022-23 school year.
Florida teacher Ian Wald removed a rainbow sticker that was behind his desk at the end of the 2022-23 school year.Bill Angelucci / NBC News

Ian Wald, a digital cinema production teacher at Nature Coast Technical High School in Brooksville, about 50 miles north of Tampa, said he removed a rainbow sticker that was behind his desk at the end of the 2022-23 school year, shortly after Stratton’s email was sent out.“I wasn’t trying to convert anybody; I was just trying to let students know that they were safe in my classroom,” said Wald, who doesn’t identify as LGBTQ.

However, teachers who are a part of the LGBTQ community, like Alyssa Marano, said the expanded law made them feel they had to hide who they are. Marano, who was also a teacher at Nature Coast, left her job at the end of the 2022-23 school year because of the political climate surrounding LGBTQ issues in Hernando County and at the state level and got a job as a marketing manager at a local gym.

After having missed the first half of the school year, she returned to the classroom in January. 

“When I decided to leave at the end of last year, there were so many emotions, and it was really just a heavy time,” she said. “So I had to put it down.” Now, she added, she’s picking her teaching career back up, hopeful that it will be “a little lighter.”

Alyssa Marano missed the first half of this past school year because of the political climate surrounding LGBTQ issues.
Alyssa Marano missed the first half of this past school year because of the political climate surrounding LGBTQ issues.Michael Gemelli / NBC News

In March, Florida education officials and civil rights attorneys reached a settlement in a lawsuit challenging the parental rights law that allows students and teachers to speak freely about sexual orientation and gender identity in Florida classrooms as long as it’s not a part of class instruction. The settlement will also allow schools to create anti-bullying policies related to sexual orientation and gender identity and create LGBTQ clubs, such as gender-sexuality alliances. In April, a judge in a separate lawsuit temporarily blocked the restriction on teachers’ use of pronouns that don’t align with their birth sexes. However, that injunction blocks enforcement of the law only against two of the teachers who sued.The settlement doesn’t affect the part of the parental rights law that bars teachers from using names and pronouns for students that don’t align with their sexes assigned at birth or the law restricting trans students’ bathroom use. 

Florida has also passed a number of other bills targeting trans youth, including one that restricts trans students’ participation in school sports. Several of the state’s LGBTQ-related bills, however, have been temporarily or permanently blocked in court, including a measure that restricted gender-affirming care for minors and adults, which a judge largely struck down this month. In an emailed statement, DeSantis’ deputy press secretary said the governor’s office plans to appeal the ruling. 

Some Floridians have moved out of the state or considered moving as a result of the so-called Don’t Say Gay law. In a report published in January, before the law was expanded, the Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law found that 56% of 133 LGBTQ parents surveyed in Florida said they had considered moving out of the state because of the measure. Another Williams Institute report, which was conducted in March 2023, when the bill’s expansion was being debated, surveyed 106 Florida parents, both LGBTQ and non-LGBTQ, and found 40% said they had considered moving out of the state as a result of the law. 

Jon Harris Maurer, the public policy director at Equality Florida, an LGBTQ advocacy group founded in 1997, said that this year the organization heard concerns from more parents and families than ever before. 

“Families were afraid to send their children to school because protections had been eliminated, bullying was on the rise, and teachers were being forced back into the closet,” he said. “On top of that, school districts were telling teachers to remove ‘safe space’ stickers and to strip books off the classroom and library shelves.”

School board members from one-third of school districts in the state, representing the majority of Florida’s student population, also reached out to Equality Florida during the 2023-24 school year to say their districts had struggled to interpret the laws and that the state is “refusing to clarify them, amplifying confusion and fear,” Harris Maurer said. 

Cordero, who graduated in May and decided to pursue college in New York City, said that though New York isn’t perfectly safe, she hopes to be able to live her “best life” there. 

“I’m able to use the women’s bathrooms, I’m going to be able to stay in women’s dorms — just be myself basically,” she said. “When I’m in New York, I’m going to be free.”

/

Gay Wine Weekend Kicks Off July 19

The Night Belongs To You at the Twilight T-Dance, the signature event of Gay Wine Weekend! COMING UP IN 2 WEEKS
Reserve your tickets now for the gay event of the season – the Twilight T-Dance at the prestigious La Crema Winery estate. Join us for a night of celebration under the Sonoma sky, dancing to the sounds of DJ Blackwell. Don’t miss this unique opportunity to dance, connect, and celebrate community in a setting that promises unforgettable memories and lasting friendships. 
Act swiftly to bask in the enchantment of Sonoma Wine Country – reserve your place today and prepare to create cherished memories that will endure for a lifetime! 
TWILIGHT T-DANCE TIX 
GAY WINE WEEKEND COMMENCES IN 2 WEEKS!FRIDAY, JULY 19
THE VIP OPENING RECEPTION Friday, July 19th. 3:00pm-6:00pmVintner’s Resort, Host Hotel Event CenterSponsored by the Russian River Valley WineGrowers Association 
THIS EVENT IS FOR BOTH MAGNUM & VIP PASS HOLDERS AND VINTNER RESORT HOTEL GUESTS and SPONSORS
OVER 15 REGIONAL WINERIES WILL BE POURING THEIR BEST FOR YOU AS YOU ARRIVE IN TOWN. UNWIND AND RELAX WHILE MEETING OTHER GAY WINE WEEKEND GUESTS AT THIS VIP OPENING RECEPTION. FOR PASS HOLDERS YOU CAN PICK UP YOUR PASSES AT THE RECEPTION. AFTER THAT YOUR PASSES WILL BE AVAILABLE AT THE FRONT DESK OF THE HOTEL. 
MEET YOU THERE! 
WINEMAKER DINNERS OF GAY WINE WEEKEND FRIDAY, JULY 19TH 
There are a limited number of seats available at some of ourFriday evening Winemaker Dinners. Grab them while you can and experience an evening of food & wine in some of the most beautiful Sonoma County Wine Country settings.
WINEMAKER DINNERS
EVERYONE SHOULD SPARKLE!POP-UP GAY BAR AFTER PARTY FRIDAY EVENING OPEN TO ALL 
STILL IN NEED OF A HOTEL ROOM…THERE ARE A LIMITED NUMBER OF ROOMS AVAILABLE AT OUR HOST HOTEL, 
STAY AT OUR HOST HOTEL AND BE WHERE ALL THE ACTION TAKES PLACE FROM THE VIP OPENING RECEPTION TO THE SUNDAY DRAG QUEEN BRUNCH & WINE AUCTION. ALL SHUTTLES DEPART FROM THE HOST HOTEL THROUGHOUT THE WEEKEND! CALL DIRECTLY AND MENTION GAY WINE WEEKEND 707-575-7350

/

Communities of Resilience: The Lived Experiences of LGBTQ Adults in Los Angeles County

Approximately 665,000 LGBTQ adults live in Los Angeles County. They make up nearly 9% of the county’s adult population, and they live, work, shop, and seek services throughout the county. This report presents information about their experiences with discrimination and harassment in the areas of education, employment, housing, health care, public spaces, and law enforcement, as well as findings about their health and economic well-being. The report uses representative data collected from 1,006 LGBTQ Los Angelenos who completed the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health’s 2023 Los Angeles County Health Survey (LACHS), including 504 LGBTQ Angelenos who also completed the Lived Experiences in Los Angeles County (LELAC) Survey, which was a call-back study to LACHS developed by the Williams Institute. Survey adults were diverse in terms of sexual orientation, gender identity, race, age, income, and other personal characteristics, reflecting the diversity of Los Angeles County’s LGBTQ population. This report is being published with three other reports to provide a fuller view of LGBTQ adults in Los Angeles County:

Several main themes emerge from the analyses presented in this report:

  • Affording life in Los Angeles. Los Angeles County’s historic promise of equality and freedom for LGBTQ adults is being undermined by a rapidly escalating cost of living. More than one-third of LGBTQ adults are living below 200% of the federal poverty level (FPL), and they have higher rates of food insecurity and housing instability than non-LGBTQ adults. Being able to afford living in Los Angeles County is the most common worry among LGBTQ people, and it is the primary issue they would like elected officials to address. As the county’s leaders work to address the housing crisis and other economic issues, they must take the specific challenges of LGBTQ people into account.
  • Safety concerns. Many LGBTQ adults in Los Angeles County shape their daily lives to protect their safety. They are more likely than non-LGBTQ adults to be victims of crime, and many face harassment when out in public. To protect themselves, many avoid public transportation, parks, and beaches; do not frequent LGBTQ-related businesses; and do not attend events such as Pride festivals. LGBTQ adults in Los Angeles County want more protection from law enforcement, including prosecution of hate crimes. However, some are reluctant to contact law enforcement because of bad experiences that include verbal, physical, and sexual harassment. LGBTQ people and spaces need to be protected, and work needs to continue to make law enforcement more reflective of and responsive to the LGBTQ community.
  • Ongoing discrimination and harassment. Even with supportive state and local laws in place, a number of LGBTQ adults in Los Angeles County continue to experience discrimination and harassment in education, employment, housing, public accommodations, and health care. Nearly half are not out to their supervisors at work. As a result of these negative experiences, many don’t get the education, income, opportunities, and services they need. These findings confirm that equality “on the books” does not always translate to equality in lived experience. Local protections need to be strengthened and backed with consistent enforcement, training, and monitoring for compliance.
  • Challenges in building families and receiving social support. Most LGBTQ people are not born into LGBTQ families and communities that pass on community culture, support, and coping mechanisms. Instead, many LGBTQ people in Los Angeles County are not out to all of their friends and families, face unique challenges in having children, don’t feel welcome in their neighborhoods, and are isolated from religious and spiritual communities. LGBTQ adults are more likely than non-LGBTQ adults in Los Angeles County to live alone and to feel lonely, especially those who are older. For some, including LGBTQ adults of color, discrimination within LGBTQ communities adds to isolation. Policy solutions for LGBTQ people must address these unique challenges to building families and communities, with a particular focus on services and programs that assume a certain level of family support or that are administered by faith-based organizations.
  • Resultant health disparities. As a result of their lived experiences, LGBTQ adults in Los Angeles County have higher rates of mental health issues, substance use issues, and disabilities. These health conditions are exacerbated by unfair treatment from health care providers, leading many LGBTQ people to avoid care or to not be out to their providers. Improving the health of LGBTQ people and reducing sexual orientation and gender identity–related health disparities will require initiatives specifically tailored to the community, ongoing training of providers, civil rights enforcement, and community education.
  • Vulnerable subpopulations. Specific subpopulations within the LGBTQ community face even greater challenges. Throughout this analysis, we found that LGBTQ adults living below 200% FPL, transgender and nonbinary adults, LGBTQ adults of color, and bisexual men and women are disproportionately impacted by discrimination, harassment, and isolation and account for many of the disparities between LGBTQ and non-LGBTQ adults.
  • Communities of resilience. Despite the challenges, most LGBTQ adults agree that Los Angeles County is a good place for LGBTQ people to live and that elected officials are responsive to their needs. They celebrate the many ways that LGBTQ people contribute to the unique identity of Los Angeles, including by adding to its rich diversity; serving as models for others to be strong, love, and live their lives authentically; providing leadership in arts and entertainment; and living with some “sparkle” and “joy.” While facing numerous challenges, many LGBTQ people are already working alongside elected officials and others to make Los Angeles County a better place not only for LGBTQ people but for everyone.

Key Findings

Demographics 

  • LGBTQ people reflect the rich diversity of Los Angeles.
    • LGBTQ adults make up 9% of the county’s adult population, approximately 665,000 LGBTQ adults.
      • Approximately 211,000 LGBTQ adults live in L.A. County Supervisory District 3, 120,000 in District 1; 109,000 in District 4; 109,000 in District 5; and 98,000 in District 2.
    • Forty-two percent of LGBTQ adults in Los Angeles County are 18 to 35 years old, 48% are 35 to 64 years old, and 10% are 65 years of age or older.
    • Fourteen percent of LGBTQ adults in the county are transgender or nonbinary.
      • Two-thirds of LGBTQ adults in the county are people of color, including 39% who are Latinx; 13% who are Asian; 8% who are Black; and 4% who are multiracial, American Indian or Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, or “other race.”
    • Nearly one in five LGBTQ adults (18%) in the county were born outside of the U.S.
    • Forty-one percent of LGBTQ adults in the county met criteria used by the U.S. Census Bureau to assess disability.
    • More than one in four LGBTQ adults (28%) are currently married or in a domestic partnership.
    • Almost one in five LGBTQ adults (18%) in the county is a parent.
    • More than one-third of LGBTQ adults (35%) in Los Angeles County are living below 200% of the federal poverty level (FPL).1

Social Climate and Overview 

  • Many LGBTQ adults agreed that Los Angeles County is a good place for LGBTQ people to live (81%), although LGBTQ people of color (77%) and those living below 200% FPL (69%) were less likely to agree than those who are White (90%) or have higher incomes (89%).
    • Most LGBTQ adults felt that California (86%) and the country (84%) have become more accepting over the past decade than their local neighborhood (73%).
  • Despite feeling that Los Angeles County is a good place to live, a number of LGBTQ people reported experiences of mistreatment and harassment and reported that they avoid certain professionals and places because they fear unfair treatment or threats to their safety.
    • Even though many LGBTQ adults view Los Angeles County as supportive, many are not out to others, including family and friends, supervisors and coworkers at work, or health care providers.
    • More than one-third of LGBTQ adults (36%) reported unfair treatment based on their LGBTQ identity while living in Los Angeles County, including 28% who reported that this had occurred within the past five years.
    • More than half of LGBTQ adults (51%) reported being verbally harassed in Los Angeles County because of their LGBTQ identity, including 39% who reported occurrences within the past five years.
    • Many LGBTQ adults said they had avoided public places like businesses, parks, and public transportation in the past year because they feared unfair treatment or threats to their safety due to their LGBTQ identities.

Family, Friends, and Social Support 

  • Many LGBTQ adults in Los Angeles County are not out to all of their family members and friends.
    • Only about half (52%) are out to all of their immediate family.
      • LGBTQ people of color are less likely than White LGBTQ adults to be out to all of their immediate family (43% vs. 69%).
      • Almost half of cisgender bisexual men (48%) are not out to any of their immediate family members, compared to 18% of cisgender bisexual women, 8% of lesbians, and 7% of gay men.
    • Three-quarters of LGBTQ adults (75%) are out to all of their LGBTQ friends, and half (50%) are out to all of their non-LGBTQ friends.
  • Eleven percent of LGBTQ adults in the county are caregivers compared to 18% of non-LGBTQ adults.
  • LGBTQ adults in the county are more likely to live alone (29% vs. 16%) than non-LGBTQ adults and are twice as likely to feel lonely (48% vs. 23%).
    • LGBTQ adults who are 50 years of age and older are twice as likely to live alone than non- LGBTQ adults (43% vs. 21%).
  • Fewer LGBTQ adults than non-LGBTQ adults in Los Angeles County (52% vs. 65%) feel that they always or usually get the social and emotional support they need.
    • LGBTQ adults living below 200% FPL were less likely to report the same as compared to those with higher incomes (39% vs. 59%).

Family Formation 

  • In Los Angeles County, the majority (62%) of LGBTQ residents 18 to 49 years old would like to have a child or expand their families.
  • Most are considering a variety of strategies for doing so, including assisted reproductive technologies (ART) (such as using donor sperm, IVF, and surrogacy) and adoption.
  • Cost was identified as a barrier by 61% of LGBTQ adults who would like to use ART to have a child and by 50% of those who would like to adopt or to foster a child.

LGBTQ Communities and Local Neighborhoods 

  • LGBTQ people reported safety concerns in their own neighborhoods and while visiting LGBTQ events and businesses.
    • Only 46% of LGBTQ adults felt there was a lot of social acceptance for LGBTQ adults in the neighborhood where they lived.
      • Among LGBTQ county residents, fewer of those who were living below 200% FPL (29%) or who were people of color (42%) felt there was a lot of social acceptance in their neighborhoods compared to LGBTQ adults who had higher incomes (55%) or who were White (54%).
    • Almost 30% of LGBTQ adults in Los Angeles County (29%) reported feeling safe none or just some of the time in their neighborhoods.
      • LGBTQ adults living below 200% FPL (42%) and LGBTQ people of color (37%) were twice as likely to not feel safe in their neighborhood any of the time or only some of the time as compared to LGBTQ adults who had higher incomes (22%) or who were White (15%).
    • About one-fourth of LGBTQ adults (23%) reported having been verbally harassed by strangers while attending an LGBTQ event or visiting an LGBTQ establishment in Los Angeles County. Most of these experiences (16%) had occurred within the past five years.
    • Due to fears of being assaulted or attacked because of their LGBTQ status, 15% of LGBTQ adults in the county had avoided LGBTQ bars, nightclubs, or events during the past year, and 6% had avoided going to other LGBTQ organizations or businesses.
      • Transgender and nonbinary adults were more than twice as likely as cisgender LGBQ adults to avoid LGBTQ bars or events (27% vs. 13%) and other LGBTQ organizations or businesses (14% vs. 5%) out of safety concerns.
      • Those living below 200% FPL were nearly twice as likely as those with higher incomes to avoid LGBTQ bars and events (20% vs. 12%) and more than twice as likely to avoid other LGBTQ organizations or businesses (10% vs. 3%).
    • More than one-third (38%) of LGBTQ adults of color reported having been treated unfairly or poorly as a person of color while living in Los Angeles County. Thirteen percent of these instances involved racism within LGBTQ communities.

Religious and Spiritual Communities 

  • More than two-thirds of LGBTQ adults (69%) in Los Angeles County identified as spiritual or religious, although many are not out in their religious or spiritual communities and have experienced negative treatment in these environments.
    • Forty-two percent of LGBTQ adults said that religion is somewhat or very important in their lives, and more than a quarter (27%) attend religious services at least a few times a year.
    • LGBTQ people of color were much more likely than White LGBTQ adults to say that religion is very important in their lives (23% vs. 9%).
  • Nearly half of LGBTQ adults with religious and spiritual communities (48%) were not out to any of the people with whom they attend religious services or spiritual practices.
    • More than half of LGBTQ people of color (53%) are not out to anyone in their religious or spiritual communities, compared to one-third of White LGBTQ adults (36%).
    • Approximately three-fourths of cisgender bisexual men (73%) and bisexual women (75%) are also not out to anyone in these communities.
  • Some LGBTQ adults had avoided religious services or spiritual practices in the past year to avoid poor treatment (19%) or because of safety concerns (15%) due to their LGBTQ status.

Employment 

  • Among adults in the workforce in Los Angeles County, unemployment is higher among LGBTQ adults (16%) than non-LGBTQ adults (11%).
  • Almost half (48%) of employed LGBTQ adults are not out to their supervisor, and nearly one in four (24%) are not out to any of their coworkers.
    • LGBTQ employees of color are more likely than White LGBTQ employees to be out to none or only some of their coworkers (58% vs. 37%).
    • Among cisgender LGBQ adults, three-fourths of bisexual women (73%) and bisexual men (77%) are not out to their supervisor, compared with 23% of lesbians and 30% of gay men.
  • Approximately one in eight LGBTQ adults reported being fired/not promoted (12%) or not hired (11%) for a job because of their sexual orientation or gender identity while living in Los Angeles County, with most of these experiences having occurred in the past five years (7% to 8%).
    • Transgender and nonbinary adults (24%) and LGBTQ adults living below 200% FPL (20%) were more than twice as likely as cisgender LGBQ adults (9%) and those with higher incomes (7%) to have not been hired for a job because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.
  • One in five (20%) LGBTQ employees reported having been verbally harassed at work by their supervisor, coworkers, customers, or clients, including 13% who had experienced such harassment in the past five years.
    • LGBTQ people of color were more than twice as likely as White LGBTQ adults to report verbal harassment by their supervisor or coworkers (23% vs.13%).

Public Accommodations, Public Spaces, and Safety 

  • About one-third of LGBTQ adults (32%) reported experiencing verbal harassment because of their sexual orientation or gender identity from strangers on the street, including 23% who had had these experiences in the past five years.
    • Cisgender lesbians (42%) and gay men (45%) were three times as likely to report harassment from strangers on the street as cisgender bisexual women (15%) and bisexual men (13%).
  • Twelve percent of LGBTQ adults experienced verbal harassment when accessing services from businesses open to the public in Los Angeles County, including 8% whose experiences had been in the past five years.
    • LGBTQ adults living below 200% FPL were more likely than those with higher incomes to report such harassment (20% vs. 8%).
    • Cisgender lesbians (20%) and gay men (17%) were much more likely to report such harassment than cisgender bisexual women (1%) and men (3%).
  • Approximately one in five LGBTQ adults reported avoiding restaurants or stores (22%), places of entertainment (19%), or public transportation (17%) in order to avoid poor treatment based on their LGBTQ status.
    • Those living below 200% FPL were more than twice as likely to report that they had avoided places of entertainment or public transportation to avoid unfair treatment.
    • Cisgender lesbians and gay men were approximately four times as likely to avoid these locations as cisgender bisexual men and women.
  • In the past year, many LGBTQ adults avoided public parks or beaches (16%), restaurants or stores (14%), public transportation (14%), and places of entertainment (13%) due to concerns about being assaulted or attacked because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.
    • Compared to cisgender LGBQ people, transgender and nonbinary adults were more likely to report that they had avoided public parks and beaches (33% vs. 13%) and public transportation (27% vs. 12%) out of safety concerns.
  • Among LGBTQ adults who had lived in Los Angeles County their entire lives, around 40% reported that they had been victims of personal (39%) or property crimes (42%). Of those who had been victims of both types of crimes, 72% felt that they had been targeted because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.

Interactions With Law Enforcement 

  • Forty-one percent of LGBTQ adults strongly or somewhat disagreed that law enforcement treats LGBTQ adults fairly, while 31% strongly or somewhat agreed.
    • LGBTQ adults living below 200% FPL (13%) were more likely than those with higher incomes (5%) to say that they had avoided calling the police in order to avoid unfair treatment.
  • LGBTQ adults reported experiencing verbal harassment (17%), physical harassment or assault (6%), sexual harassment or assault (6%), and being solicited for sex (3%) by law enforcement in Los Angeles County.
    • Transgender and nonbinary adults, LGBTQ adults of color, and those living below 200% FPL were all twice as likely to report verbal harassment by law enforcement compared to LGBQ cisgender adults (34% vs. 14%), White LGBTQ adults (20% vs. 10%), and LGBTQ people with higher household incomes (24% vs. 13%).
  • Among adults who had had contact with law enforcement in the prior year, 31% felt that they had not been treated respectfully or properly and said that the interactions made them less likely to contact law enforcement in the future. However, more than half (52%) were satisfied with their interactions with law enforcement.
    • LGBTQ adults living below 200% FPL were much more likely to feel that law enforcement had not acted properly in a recent interaction compared to LGBTQ adults with higher incomes (46% vs. 23%), and they were much less likely to contact law enforcement in the future as a result (46% vs. 22%).

Income and Food Insecurity

  • Similar to non-LGBTQ adults, one-third of LGBTQ adults (35%) in Los Angeles County were living below 200% FPL, and 13% were living in poverty (below 100% FPL).
    • Among LGBTQ adults, transgender adults (47%) and adults of color (42%) were more likely to be living below 200% FPL than cisgender LGBQ (33%) and White adults (21%).
  • One-third (33%) of LGBTQ adults described their household’s financial situation as just meeting basic expenses (24%) or as not having enough to meet basic expenses (9%).
    • However, nearly two-thirds (65%) of LGBTQ adults living below 200% FPL described their household’s financial situation as just meeting basic expenses (45%) or as not having enough to meet basic expenses (21%).
  • Nearly one in three (32%) LGBTQ adults in Los Angeles County lived in households that experienced food insecurity in the past year, as did more than one five (23%) non-LGBTQ adults.
    • More LGBTQ adults (56%) living below 200% FPL and LGBTQ people of color (42%) had experienced food insecurity than those with higher household incomes (19%) and who are White (19%).
    • More cisgender bisexual men (37%) and women (37%) experienced food insecurity compared to cisgender gay men (22%) and lesbians (30%).

Housing Insecurity 

  • Due to high levels of renting among LGBTQ people in Los Angeles County (61%) compared to non-residents (46%), LGBTQ people are at elevated risk of housing insecurity.
    • Two-thirds of cisgender bisexual men (66%) and bisexual women (68%) are renters, compared to half of cisgender gay men (55%) and lesbians (50%). Over two-thirds (68%) of transgender and non-binary adults are renters.
  • More LGBTQ than non-LGBTQ adults in Los Angeles County live in households that are “cost burdened” or “severely cost burdened” by housing expenses.
    • More than half (61%) of LGBTQ adults and 53% of non-LGBTQ adults in Los Angeles County spend 30% or more of their monthly household income on housing.
    • One-quarter (26%) of LGBTQ adults and 21% of non-LGBTQ adults spend over 50% of their household’s total monthly income on rent or a mortgage.
  • More LGBTQ adults than non-LGBTQ adults live in households that were delayed or unable to pay their mortgage or rent at least once in the prior two years (19% vs. 15%).
    • More LGBTQ people of color live in households that had had any difficulty paying for housing compared to White LGBTQ adults (22% vs. 14%).
  • More than one in 10 LGBTQ adults (11%) and 6% of non-LGBTQ adults had been homeless at some time in the past five years.
  • More than one in 10 LGBTQ adults (12%) reported having a landlord or realtor in Los Angeles County refuse to sell or rent to them because of their LGBTQ identity, with 5% reporting such an experience in the past five years.
    • More cisgender lesbians (36%) and gay men (13%) reported such treatment than cisgender bisexual men (6%) and women (1%).
  • More than one in 10 LGBTQ adults (11%) reported experiencing verbal harassment from their landlord, other tenants, or neighbors, with 8% reporting such experiences within the past five years.
    • More LGBTQ adults living below 200% FPL (22%) reported such harassment than those with higher incomes (6%).

Health

  • While LGBTQ and non-LGBTQ adults had similar self-reports on their overall health and access to health insurance, on 11 out of 16 more specific health indicators—including those related to mental health, and substance abuse—more LGBTQ adults in Los Angeles County had worse outcomes than non-LGBTQ adults. Those living below 200% FPL were the mostly likely to have poor health.
  • Symptoms of depression were twice as common among LGBTQ adults than non-LGBTQ adults (21% vs. 10%).
    • Among LGBTQ adults, 30% of those living below 200% FPL had symptoms of depression, compared to 16% of those with higher incomes.
  • Lifetime suicide attempts were more common among LGBTQ adults than non-LGBTQ adults (13% vs. 3%).
    • Among LGBTQ adults, suicide attempts were reported by more: transgender and nonbinary adults than cisgender LGBQ adults (24% vs. 11%)
    • LGBTQ adults living below 200% FPL than adults with higher incomes (20% vs. 9%)
    • cisgender bisexual women compared to cisgender bisexual men (6%), cisgender lesbians (5%), and cisgender gay men (8%).
  • More LGBTQ adults had engaged in binge drinking (32%) and heavy marijuana use (15%) in the past month than non-LGBTQ adults (21% and 5%, respectively).
    • Among LGBTQ adults, heavy marijuana use was more common among adults living below 200% FPL than among those with higher incomes (20% vs. 12%).
  • While almost half of LGBTQ adults (46%) had received mental health care in the prior year, about one in four (26%) expressed an unmet need for care. While the primary barriers involved cost (75%), 31% were unable to find care supportive of LGBTQ adults.
  • More than a third of LGBTQ adults (37%) had experienced intimate partner violence (IPV)— twice as many as non-LGBTQ adults (18%).
    • Half (50%) of cisgender bisexual women reported IPV.
  • Almost one in 10 LGBTQ adults (9%) said they smoked regularly, compared to fewer non- LGBTQ adults (6%).
    • Among LGBTQ adults, smoking was more common among:
      • cisgender gay and bisexual men than cisgender lesbians and bisexual women (13% vs. 5%)
      • LGBTQ adults living below 200% FPL than those with higher incomes (15% vs. 6%)
  • While somewhat fewer LGBTQ adults than non-LGBTQ adults were overweight (BMI of 25.0–29.9) (28% v. 33%) or obese (BMI greater than 30.0) (28% vs. 30%), obesity was more common among:
    • cisgender lesbians than cisgender gay men (42% vs. 21%)
    • LGBTQ people of color than White LGBTQ adults (32% vs. 22%)
    • LGBTQ adults living below 200% FPL than those with higher household incomes (37% vs. 23%)
  • More LGBTQ adults than non-LGBTQ adults had difficulty accessing needed medical care (32% vs. 23%).
    • Among LGBTQ adults, difficulty accessing care was more common among:
      • LGBTQ adults of color than White LGBTQ adults (36% vs. 27%)
      • LGBTQ adults living below 200% FPL than among adults with higher incomes (43% vs. 27%)
  • In the past year, about one in 10 LGBTQ adults in Los Angeles County (11%) did not go to health care providers for fear of unfair treatment, and 8% did not go for fear of being threatened or physically attacked because of their LGBTQ status.
    • Transgender and nonbinary adults (21%) were approximately twice as likely as cisgender LGBQ adults (11%) to report that they had not accessed health care in order to avoid unfair treatment.
  • Among LGBTQ adults who had health care providers, just over half reported being out to all of their providers (51%), and almost one in four (23%) reported not being out to any of their providers.
    • Among LGBTQ adults, the likelihood of not being out to any of their health care providers was higher among:
      • cisgender bisexual women (54%) and men (37%) than cisgender lesbians (6%) and gay men (6%)
      • those living below 200% FPL compared to those with higher incomes (36% vs. 17%)
      • transgender and nonbinary adults compared to cisgender LGBQ adults (32% vs. 23%)
      • adults of color compared to White adults (28% vs. 14%)
  • More than one in 10 LGBTQ adults (11%) reported being denied medical care or provided inferior care because of their sexual orientation or gender identity while living in Los Angeles County, including 8% who had had these experiences in the past five years.
  • More than one in 10 LGBTQ adults (11%) reported being verbally harassed because of their LGBTQ status while accessing health care in Los Angeles County.
    • LGBTQ adults living below 200% FPL (17%) were more likely to have experienced verbal harassment than those with higher incomes (8%).

Read the full report

/ /

Nonbinary People in Mexico: Results from the 2021 National Survey on Sexual and Gender Diversity

Using data from the 2021 National Survey on Sexual and Gender Diversity in Mexico, this report examines data about sociodemographic characteristics, stressors, sexuality, health care, and mental health experiences of nonbinary people in Mexico. Nonbinary people are those living their gender identity outside the traditional binary gender structure totally or partially. Available in English and Spanish, this report aims to fill existing data gaps on nonbinary people and to address requests from civil society and government officials to improve data collection, develop mechanisms to ensure gender markers align across identity documents, and inform anti-discrimination campaigns about nonbinary people in Mexico.

Key Findings

  • An estimated 340,620 people in Mexico identify as nonbinary.
  • More than half (67.5%) of nonbinary people are under 24 years old, and the majority (80.8%) are single.
  • During their childhood, nonbinary individuals often felt different due to their tastes or interests (45.5%) or their mannerisms and behavior (41.5%).
  • During their childhood, half of nonbinary people (50.3%) were insulted, mocked, or told offensive things, and more than a third (38.7%) were rejected or excluded from social activities.
  • Most people (86.3%) knew that they were nonbinary before they were 17 years old.
  • Nonbinary people face multiple stressors around their sexual orientation and gender identity. For example, one in 10 (10.8%) nonbinary people were forced to undergo conversion therapy due to their sexual orientation, and almost one in 10 (9%) due to their gender identity or expression.
  • The majority of nonbinary people report experiencing multiple mental health problems during the past year, including stress (74%), insomnia (63.7%), anxiety (65.9%), and changes in eating behaviors or weight (64.5%).
  • Almost half (42.5%) of nonbinary people had suicidal thoughts in their lifetime, and a quarter (25.8%) had attempted suicide.

Download the full report

Download the report in Spanish

/ /

Police conduct mass arrest of post-Pride partiers in Chicago

,

Police declared a “mass arrest situation” in Chicago, Illinois on Sunday night following the city’s annual Pride parade.

The arrests began at 1:23 a.m. in the Lakeview neighborhood of Chicago, with police ordering a mass arrest, but no other information was given. The Chicago police department has not announced how many people were arrested during or after the parade.

CWB Chicago reported widespread fights and disruption throughout Boystown, home to one of the largest LGBTQ+ communities in the Midwest. The chaos continued into Monday morning, with videos of people clashing with the police being posted on the social media platform X (formerly Twitter).

Videos show police throwing members of the crowd to the ground, shoving people, and people running away from the scene.

Police also said “of the known arrests, at least two people were taken into custody for gun possession.” 

The police blocked off an area of West Belmont which usually hosts all-night Pride after parties. Rather than people dancing and socializing, the street was “bumper to bumper” with Chicago police vehicles. Residential side streets, however, were filled with people celebrating the last night of Pride.

Chicago’s Pride Parade and its afterparty have led to between 46 and 52 arrests each year between 2013 and 2015, according to CWB Chicago records. There were 25 arrests last year, including 21 adults and four juveniles.

Local Alderman Bennett Lawson addressed the chaos in a statement to The Chicago Sun-Times on Monday Night. 

“The Pride Parade yesterday was a safe and wonderful celebration of our diverse LGBTQ+ community, and it was such a joy to see so many people come out to show their support in the fight for equality,” Bennett said. “Following the Parade’s conclusion, I was extremely disappointed to see disruptive actions in our neighborhood into the early morning hours. I am grateful to the Chicago Police Department for their quick and decisive action to limit any damage and keep people safe, and to the Streets and Sanitation Department for their great work to clean our neighborhood.”

“I look forward to meeting with city departments and stakeholders in the coming days to discuss how we can continue to improve the Parade for participants, attendees and neighbors, and prevent these disturbing actions from occurring in the future,” Lawson said.

/ /

Camp Free2Be helping trans youth find community

In 2019, Elizabeth Erion wished that her trans daughter had an opportunity to create community with other trans kids in the area.

“I knew there were a few sleep-away camps for gender-expansive youth, but they were too far away, and financially out of reach for our family,” Erion said. 

So she worked with another parent of a trans teen and formed Camp Free2Be. It started as a weeklong camp with eight campers and six junior counselors. This year, the camp will serve more than 60 campers. 

Erion said that queer students may have limited opportunities to meet students who are like them, which makes the work Camp Free2Be does so important. With the recent spike in anti-LGBTQ legislation around the country, a recent survey revealed that nearly half of trans youth feel unsafe in school.

“Camps like ours offer trans and nonbinary youth a space where it’s completely safe to be their authentic selves; to wear clothes they might not normally feel able to wear; to try out a new name or pronouns; to meet other kids who know exactly what it’s like to be gender diverse.”

To continue to build queer youth community, the camp is led by junior counselors from 15-18, who are also trans or non-binary. Applications are still being accepted with a June 23 deadline. Counselors who participate in both weeks of the camp will receive a $150 stipend for their participation. 

“[Junior counselors] serve as role models for our younger campers, while also making friends and developing leadership skills.”

This day camp is located in Arlington, in walking distance from the Metro. Campers will engage in STEM, arts and crafts, outdoor games, theater, and more at the camp. Once a day, the entire camp gathers for a lesson on LGBTQ history. 

“These are lessons our youth probably won’t be given in school, and they are important in showing them that they are part of a larger community with a rich history.”

For Erion, the most rewarding parts of the camp are the unscheduled and spontaneous conversations she overhears from campers. 

“While doing arts and crafts or playing board games, they will casually talk about issues unique to growing up trans or nonbinary. They are learning from each other and finding out that they have shared experiences.” she said. 

One of the best parts of the camp is that it will cost parents nothing. Camp Free2Be is in partnership with SMYAL to make the camp free for campers and junior counselors. 

This year, camp will run through two back-to-back weeks, July 15-19 and July 22-26. Registration closes June 23 and can be found at campfree2be.org. If you have already planned your summer, be on the lookout in January 2025 for summer 2025 registration.

/ /

UCLA Williams Institute Releases Perspectives on Marriage Equality in 2024

This year marks the 20th anniversary of legal marriage for same-sex couples in the United States, starting with Massachusetts on May 17, 2004. In recognition of this 20th anniversary, this report provides a portrait of married same-sex couples based on survey responses from 484 LGBTQ+ Americans. These couples come from all 50 states and Washington, D.C. They are diverse racially, ethnically, and socioeconomically. On average, they have been together for over 16 years and married for over nine years. Over 60% were married after the Supreme Court’s 2015 decision in Obergefell v. Hodges that brought marriage equality to all 50 states. Over 30% of these couples have children, and 25% want children in the future.

This report focuses on these couples’ reasons for getting married, how marriage has impacted their lives, and the ways they have come to rely upon their spouse and their spouse’s family for support. It also addresses the experiences that some of them have had with discrimination, the impact of the Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges on them, and their concerns that Obergefell might be overturned.

Overall, these couples appreciate the ways that marriage has strengthened their relationships with their partners, provided security for their children, and provided legal protections, financial security, and greater acceptance by family, friends, and the broader community. They are also worried about the future of marriage equality and the increasingly hostile climate for LGBTQ+ people in many parts of the country—so much so that some are considering moving to another state.

In sum, two decades after the first state in the United States permitted same-sex couples to marry, they report that marriage equality has had a profound positive impact on their lives but are concerned about the future security of their families.

Key Findings

Why same-sex couples got married 

  • When asked why they got married, the vast majority of same-sex couples said love (93.0%), companionship (74.0%), and legal protections (75.0%).
  • Almost two-thirds said they married for the symbolic value and meaning of marriage (63.8%), and almost half said they married for increased financial security (49.4%).
  • Couples in longer relationships before marrying were more likely to cite legal and financial reasons for marrying.
  • Some also married to protect their current (3.5%) or future children (12.4%).
  • When asked about the positive impacts of marriage in general, members of same-sex couples also strongly endorsed: marriage as a symbol of love and commitment (89.3%), the ability to access rights and benefits (76.0%), including health insurance (66.7%), financial benefits more generally (74.4%), and societal (62.2%) and family (66.7%) recognition and acceptance.

How marriage has changed same-sex couples’ lives 

  • Relationship and life satisfaction. When asked how marriage changed their lives, 83.1% of participants reported positive changes in their sense of safety and security, almost three-fourths (74.6%) reported positive changes in life satisfaction, and almost two-thirds (61.0%) reported becoming closer to their partner.
  • Stability and security in their relationship. About two-thirds (66.9%) of participants said that marriage provided more stability to their relationships, including legal protections, financial stability, mutual support, long-term planning, and a stronger sense of security and commitment in the relationship.
  • Shared life planning. Many couples reported that marriage had profoundly changed how they made life plans. Where to live. Over 60% of participants (61.4%) affirmed that marriage affected their life planning in terms of making decisions about moving and where to live, including moving for their partner’s job or to be near their partner’s family.
  • Work and income. Over 60% of participants (61.0%) felt that marriage affected their life planning in terms of working and earning income. Many said that marriage enabled partners to designate one to work at a steady job so the other could take career risks, pursue satisfying but less lucrative work, go back to school, or stay home with children.
  • Financial planning. Almost 60% (59.3%) said marriage affected their financial planning in terms of saving, investing, and planning for retirement, the ability to care for each other in case of illness, buy a house, and afford to have children.
  • Workplace benefits. Over half (51.9%) of married same-sex couples said that marriage equality provided them access to workplace health insurance benefits previously unavailable to them.
  • Parenting. Almost one in five (19.8%) reported that marriage affected their plans about whether or when to have or adopt children and how many children to have. For many, marriage was a “prerequisite” to becoming parents.
  • Stability and security for children. Of those who had children, almost 60% (58.1%) reported that marriage provided more stability or security for their children, including by providing legal protections, offering a greater sense of legitimacy for their children, and conveying a sense of stability in their family to their children.
  • Caretaking. Over one-fourth of participants reported they were living with a disability, and over one-fourth reported that their partner had a disability. Just one partner had a disability in 112 couples (23.1%), and both partners had a disability in 73 couples (15.1%). Regarding caregiving, 14.5% of respondents reported that they were a caregiver for their partner, and 12.4% reported that their partner was a caregiver for them. More specifically, in approximately one out of six couples, one or both partners were caregivers: one partner was a caregiver in 50 couples (10.3%), and both partners cared for each other in 28 couples (5.8%).

Reliance and Mutual Support 

Many of the ways that marriage has impacted couples are related to how partners within a marriage support and depend on one another. For many same-sex couples, this mutual reliance did not start with their wedding but long before and extended not only to their partners but their in-laws.

Reliance prior to marriage 

  • Most (93.4%) participants lived with their spouses before getting married, with 69.7% seeing living together as a step towards marriage. Participants lived with their partners for an average of 3.83 years before getting married.
  • Almost three-quarters (70.9%) were engaged to their partners before they got married. They were engaged to their spouses for an average of 2.3 years. Among those who were engaged, almost all (96.2%) saw being engaged as a step towards marriage.
  • Some forms of mutual support were high at each stage in these couples’ relationships. For example, while they were living together, engaged, and married, approximately one in five of these couples helped pay for each other’s education costs; provided caregiving to the other when they needed help due to a health condition or aging; or moved when the other got a job in a different location. In all three stages of these relationships, over 60% shared savings goals, like buying a car and a house.
  • Some forms of mutual support dramatically increased when couples got married. For example, married same-sex couples were more likely to buy a house together (47.1%) and have a shared bank account (68.2%) than when they were living together or engaged.
  • Compared to when they were living together or engaged, married same-sex couples were more likely to have or adopt children (11.6%), share child-raising responsibilities (18.0%), and decide to have one partner not work to devote more time to childcare (11.6%).

Reliance on family and in-laws 

In addition to members of the couple relying upon one other, marriage also meant that the couple had two families—or sets of in-laws—that they could rely upon.

  • Over 40% (40.9%) of participants and their partners relied on each other’s families of origin in times of crisis, such as to help meet financial or health care needs
  • For example, of couples with the following needs, over three-fourths (76.1%) reported that their families had helped out during a health crisis, 60.5% had relied upon their families for financial support, 31.3% had relied on their families for occasional help with childcare, and 14.5% had relied on their families for regular help with childcare.
  • Of those who had a wedding (77.3%), 35.8% said their family helped pay for the wedding, and 29.4% said their partner’s family helped pay for the wedding.

Discrimination 

  • Participants reported experiences of discrimination both when planning their weddings and as married couples.
  • 10.7% of those who had a wedding said they experienced discrimination while planning their wedding, with another 7.2% indicating that they were unsure of whether they experienced discrimination. Types of discrimination included discrimination by participants’ churches or synagogues, city officials, and wedding vendors.
  • Some participants said they believed they avoided discrimination because they only sought out vendors and officiants known for being LGBTQ+ friendly, lived in an LGBTQ+ friendly area, or did not disclose that they were having a same-sex wedding to certain vendors.
  • In response to an open-ended question, several participants indicated concern about the increased visibility that marriage had brought to their relationship, which made them more vulnerable to discrimination.

Impact of Obergefell v. Hodges decision 

In 2015, the Supreme Court extended marriage equality to all fifty states through its decision in Obergefell v. Hodges. 

  • Almost all participants indicated that the Obergefell decision (94.2%) made a difference to them. In fact, most participants were married post-Obergefell (62.8%), even though their relationships started before 2015.
  • Approximately three-fourths of those in married same-sex couples reported that what made a difference to them was full legal recognition in terms of rights and responsibilities (79.5%), that marriage would be recognized in all 50 states (74.6%), and having marriage equality validated as a constitutional right (72.5%).
  • For over a third (34.7%), Obergefell made a very practical difference: they lived in one of the states that didn’t have marriage quality until the case was decided.

Concerns about the future of Obergefell 

  • Almost 80% (79.3%) of married same-sex couples said they were very (40.9%) or somewhat (38.4%) concerned about the Obergefell decision being overturned.
  • Being trans or having a trans partner, being older, and having less education were associated with being concerned about the future of Obergefell.
  • About one-fourth said they had pursued various actions out of concern that marriage equality might be challenged. Some sped up their timeline for marriage to make sure it would still be available, and others sought second-parent adoptions to ensure that their legal relationship to their children is protected. Others sped up their timeline for having children to ensure both parents had a legal relationship with their child.
  • Concerns about the future of marriage equality, as well as the current anti-LGBTQ+ climate in many states, are prompting many couples to consider moving to another state or another country.
    • Asked about whether they currently wanted to move out of state, over one-quarter (29.0%) indicated that they did.
    • Considering just those participants who indicated that they very much or somewhat wanted to move, their top three reasons for wanting to move were related to the socio-political climate (52.9%), concerns about anti-LGBTQ+ laws (48.6%), and fears about losing rights as an LGBTQ+ person

Download the full report

«‹ 77 78 79 80›»