Opinions

/ /

The best friend LGBTQ Americans have yet had in the White House

President Joe Biden faces many tough challenges. Foreign adversaries are preparing to test him, rancorous political divisions confront him at home where COVID-19 has ravaged the American economy and spirit. With Washington gridlock threatening to block his most ambitious plans, opportunities for legacy achievements may prove scarce.

Still, in one critical area, Biden can earn an honored place in history: LGBTQ rights. Of all major contemporary American political figures, Biden has been the quickest to take a stand for our rights. He is the best friend LGBTQs have yet had in the White House. I do not say so lightly, I am a lifelong Republican.

From day one, Biden began rolling back the biased policies promoted by Donald Trump’s Marginalizer-in-Chief, Mike Pence. Much damage remains to be undone, especially because the media and many Democrats have gone easy on Pence and his cronies. But Joe himself got off to a fast start placing qualified LGBTQ officials in highly visible positions, including his Cabinet. Secretary of State Tony Blinken set the tone early by flying the rainbow flag at U.S. embassies and naming a special envoy for LGBTQ rights. What a welcome change to have an administration proud of, rather than wary of, its LGBTQ supporters.

Yet much more needs to be done to rid this nation of the cruel blights of LGBTQ stigma and marginalization. There can be neither equality nor equity for people who are systematically stigmatized and marginalized. The cruelty of these violations is evident in a suicide rate among LGBTQ youth five times that of youth in the general population.

A national commission studying patterns, causes, and consequences of LGBTQ stigma, marginalization, and bullying could help awaken Americans to the damage from the prejudices many of us still face. Indeed, older LGBTQs who feel comfortably protected, have a special obligation to defend gay youth who remain vulnerable.

Stigmatization is worse for minority LGBTQs who bear a double burden of bias. BGLM!–Black Gay Lives Matter! Stigma impedes HIV testing and treatment; one consequence is a shocking rate of new HIV-AIDS infections among people of color four times the rate among whites.

Even as we pursue our national struggle to end racial bias, America must recognize our equal moral obligation to expose and repudiate our ugly history of LGBTQ stigmatization and marginalization. How do we stop these evils? Most crucial, we must pass a muscular Equality Act that protects the rights and dignity of all LGBTQs wherever they live in America.

Yet to pass it soon, we must avoid “poison pills” that may doom it to failure. Protection for LGBTQ youth is urgent. Better a bill we can pass now giving us 90% of what we all need, than a failed bill promising 100% of what some wish for.

Education is essential. Students must learn about the sufferings of LGBTQ people and our contributions to humanity and to America. All should be told about LGBTQ civil rights heroes like Bayard Rustin, Harvey Milk, and Barbara Jordan, scientists and thinkers like Alan Turing, George Washington Carver, and Plato, writers like Walt Whitman, James Baldwin, and Henry James, composers like Aaron Copland, Samuel Barber, and Billy Strayhorn, and artists like Michelangelo, Georgia O’Keefe, and Frida Kahlo—the full list is much longer.

Formal recognition of the sufferings and achievements of LGBTQ people is long overdue. As a starter, let’s build an Equality Museum on the Mall to celebrate LGBTQ Americans. No politician has yet ventured to suggest building one; their omission reinforces our marginalized state. President Biden could make history by stepping up.

Although Biden himself has made a strong start on LGBTQ rights, it is a serious mistake for the Democrats to take the gay vote for granted. Polls indicate Trump’s share rose from 16% in 2016 to 28% in 2020. LGBTQs followed a normal tendency to divide more evenly between the parties. In the 2020 campaign Democrats avoided reminding voters that

Trump’s number two, Mike Pence, has been America’s number one stigma super spreader. At the same time, on the QT, they reassured closet Pences among their own. They took us for granted assuming all LGBTQs are Woke Groupthinkers.

In the next election, more LGBTQs who agree with Republicans on issues like Iran, immigration, or taxes will vote GOP if the Democrats fail to raise their ante for us. More Democrats need to follow the leadership Biden is showing on LGBTQ issues.

Biden himself has a big opportunity to become America’s president for LGBTQ rights. But to grasp that opportunity, he will need aggressive initiatives to end stigmatization, celebrate our contributions, and make a crystal clear national commitment to full equality for all LGBTQ peoples.

/ /

Caitlyn Jenner’s gubernatorial run in California is a loser for trans people and the state

There is one positive thing I can say about conservatism: Its systemic fear of the other is quite easily weaponized by its targets.

Enter Caitlyn Jenner, the newest candidate for governor in California.

For those who don’t live here, let me catch you up: Our current governor, Gavin Newsom, was caught having a dinner party in Napaduring the pandemic, right after his administration recommended that Californians not gather for Thanksgiving. Between an alleged $11 billion worth of unemployment benefits the state granted to fraudulent applicants during the Covid-19 outbreak and a dozen other pandemic missteps, a Republican campaign to recall Newsom that actually began pre-Covid started to look to many people in the state like a decent way to rebuke his various indecencies.

Backing a celebrity conservative against an embarrassed Democrat in a recall election has worked once before for the Republicans.

A recall election is now likely — which is why, at a time when more than half of U.S. states are deciding how to enact laws to require broader discrimination against transgender people, Jenner, the reality star (and aspiring pariah), has heeded the call to rip off both taxpayers and the Republican fundraising apparatus.

Holding titles as the gold-medal winner in the 1978 Olympic decathlon and the 17th-place winner for most tolerable character in “Keeping Up With the Kardashians,” Jenner was part of a small contingent of prominent LGBT people effusive in their support of the Trump administration.

Why is not much of a brain teaser: Jenner is rich and wants to stay rich. Actual, material solidarity with other trans people — for whom transition can cost tens of thousands of dollars they often don’t have — could possibly challenge the comfort of her status.

Caitlyn Jenner wins — and the rest of us, trans people and Californians, lose.

She wasn’t going to find a place in the heart of the nation’s trans people, the majority of whom are financially struggling, because she doesn’t really know or appreciate the typical trans experience and has never made any effort to do so.

But in a way, that is fine, because neither do the donors she’s going to spend a recall collection bilking.

The conditions are perfect for the grift. The Republican Party, reeling from a national electoral defeat and its identity as the “party of Lincoln” overshadowed by, among its other acts, its anti-mask, anti-trans, anti-science antics — and a little light treason — has an outside chance of winning the governor’s mansion of the liberal mothership.https://compass.pressekompass.net/compasses/think/could-caitlyn-jenner-earn-your-vote-for-?curl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nbcnews.com%2Fthink%2Fopinion%2Fcaitlyn-jenner-s-gubernatorial-run-california-loser-trans-people-state-ncna1265392&embed=embed&paywall=anonymous

Plus, backing a celebrity conservative against an embarrassed Democrat in a recall election has worked once before for the Republicans.

And here Caitlyn comes: wealthy, white, famous and loves “the queers” but is still iffy on same-sex marriage.

The conditions of the California recall are perfect for the grift.

Caitlyn Jenner is two things in one trans package: She’s both the conservative ideal of a transgender woman (if they have to allow for us to exist at all) in that she has no interest in challenging the gender binary or, really, any status quo; and she’s also the epitome of the critique of trans women supposedly upholding conservative ideas of gender roles through the pursuit of womanly aesthetics made by anti-trans campaigners who claim to be extreme left-wing feminists.

And while I hate to grant that those people are right about anything, getting a bunch of rich old bigots to pay for TV time so you can wring your hands about poor people and foreigners stealing all our benefits is pretty much the gold standard of upholding traditional white womanhood.

The real problem now is that, whatever happens, Caitlyn Jenner wins — and the rest of us, trans people and Californians, lose. She’ll get to do her act, and have it beamed directly into millions of homes across California, on the Republicans’ dime.

And so, whether she ends up as the governor of California or just gets a run on the next season of “The Masked Singer,” she will likely come out of this wealthier, moderately more famous and, if not more accepted, more tolerated by the very political machine that despises and wants to actively institute the legal necessity of discriminating against the children and young adults who haven’t yet grown into adults like her.

It’ll also, either way, be a win for the faux-populist facet of the Republican Party that will try to put anyone with an IMDb page in elected office.

And even if Newsom wins, the Republican Party will come away with just a little more social credibility on LGBT issues that it doesn’t deserve — a morsel of plausible deniability as to its true nature: I’m meeting you halfway, you stupid hippies.

But trans people don’t have to lose because of Jenner’s run. When conservatives point her out as some template of the trans experience, call that out. When your complacent liberal friends who spent their weekends protesting Trump but not Biden’s “overflow facilities” default to low-effort transphobia in defending Newsom, call that out.

And when Jenner eventually goes on “Dancing With the Stars,” maybe use that time slot to watch “Umbrella Academy,” “Pose,” “Dramaworld” or literally any other show starring a trans and nonbinary person not implicated in another person’s death.

Grifters are gonna grift, and trans people exist and are beautiful (if we want to be). But we do not have to countenance the mainstreaming of Jenner normativity.

/ /

Finding Sexual Pleasure in a Modern Pandemic

Taking care of our sexual needs in conventional times has often been a challenge, but with the outbreak of COVID and the ensuing lockdowns, it has become difficult on an entirely different scale. We’ve got to navigate risk, determine our comfort zones and find other who share those same boundaries. The funny thing is, we know how to do this. This is not our first pandemic and gay men have already had to navigate disease, persecution, and violence when pursuing sex. In the face of all of these challenges, we remain resilient and that is perhaps our greatest superpower.

The pandemic and the lockdown policies left many gay men vulnerable economically, physically, and mentally. In a recent survey of LGBT individuals, 30 percent of respondents reported feeling physically and emotionally unsafe in their homes. Over 70 percent report experiencing anxiety since the pandemic began. Very few government policies are in place to meet the unique needs of LGBTQ+ people during COVID, and in places where gay sex is criminalized the fear of arrest or persecution creates an almost insurmountable barrier to much needed health or economic resources.ADVERTISING

Additionally, a majority of gay men reported a very high level of sexual dissatisfaction, particularly those adhering to physical distancing. Such dissatisfaction is not sustainable and eventually gay men are going to take action to have their sexual needs met. It’s natural. Sex is valuable and provides a much-needed social connection. An increase in sexual activity is inevitable but the question becomes what we have learned from this pandemic and how can we apply it to our lives going forward.

Fortunately, over a year of COVID has provided us with many opportunities to learn from this global crisis. Here are some key lessons we can glean from our newest pandemic and its impact on our lives.

Explore all the ways to be sexually satisfied.
Being stuck at home and unable to meet up in person with others brought many of our sex lives to a screeching halt. Fortunately, we were able to adapt with creativity, technology, and, in some cases, a return to the classics. OnlyFans, Zoom sex parties, masturbation clubs, and phone sex were but a few of the tools that helped us get through and get off. PrEPster created a brilliant guide, Navigating COVID When Horny; it was the perfect tool to walk us through all the ways we could still pursue sexual pleasure in the midst of this global pandemic.

Improved sexual communication skills.
In the midst of a pandemic, communication is key. Each of us have different risks we are willing to accept. It gets even more complicated because our comfort level around risk can change daily. This shifting comfort level is something we are familiar with from decades of HIV. The best way forward when navigating risk is clear and honest communication. Tell your partner, or partners, what your boundaries are and ask them about theirs before sex. Our sex is infinitely better if we can let go of the anxiety created by assuming or hoping they know what you want and how far you are willing to go.

It’s okay to prioritize pleasure.
Pandemics suck. We’ve already lived through 40 years of a pandemic that devastated our community and now this new one comes along to pile on top of our existing fatigue. But our existence and our community are testament to the fact that you don’t give up sex just because of a pandemic. In fact, the pandemic can help bring into stark focus just how important sex and pleasure are. We have an opportunity to prioritize sex in our lives and in our movement. The pursuit of sexual fulfillment is intricately linked to our ability to determine what we do with our bodies and that is a fundamental tenant in social justice.

Gay sex spaces matter.
For centuries, gay sex spaces have been a source of community and connection. Not only did they allow us to link up for sexual pleasure, but they allowed us to find those with whom we shared a common experience. It was how we found our people and built a community and social movements. Many of those gay sex spaces are now in danger of closing, if they haven’t already. What plan do we create to keep them alive? As the trajectory of this pandemic changes, there is a great deal of rebuilding that needs to be done. We can’t count on government to maintain the health of gay sex spaces around the globe. It falls to us to find creative ways to keep these spaces open and help them flourish.

Gay sex always finds a way. That should come as a great comfort to us all. Through the darkest days of the AIDS epidemic, we fostered our sexualities. In countries where gay sex is a crime, we defiantly pursue pleasure and intimacy. And we can navigate the calamity of COVID and maintain our sex lives. Our resiliency is our greatest asset and it’s one of the most profound things we can teach others. We don’t survive for sex. We survive because of it.

Alex Garner is Deputy Director, Gay Sexuality and Social Policy Initiative (GSSPI) at UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs.

/ /

Gender-Policing ‘Jokes’ Are Costing LGBTQ+ Lives

Gender policing? Ever hear of it? Let’s talk about it.

I recently got into a social media scuff with an acquaintance over a comedic video she starred in. The video short stars a woman on a date with a man, and the “funny” part of the video is that she is trying to determine if he is gay or straight based on his clothing and job. Her reactions in the video are those of shock and disgust, often scrunching her face into a grimace that would be appalling in real life as a reaction to a stranger’s clothing. Especially on a date.ADVERTISING

You see, beyond the overall judgmental tone of the video being so 2000 and late, the man in the video is in fact gay, so the “funny” parts according to the actor and producer are that they are leaning into the stereotype intentionally of what a gay man is thought to look like. Completely unaware that they are deciding what is correct clothing for a person based on their sexual orientation.

That is a big problem, and sadly when I confronted my acquaintance about it she told me she would not listen to my messages imploring her to take down the video, and she was shocked I cared so much. When I further pushed her to explain what was funny about the video, she referenced the dated character of “Pat” on Saturday Night Live and likened the character to that. Let’s be clear, in 2020 a gender-ambiguous character like “Pat” would no longer be allowed on SNL because of the inappropriate tone, but I digress, let’s dive into this one a bit more.

The first shock-and-awe moment intended to make us laugh is that the man on the date removes his coat to be wearing the same top as the woman. Shock. Horror. A man in a woman’s blouse instantly means he’s gay? Why is that funny? She couldn’t really answer.

The second big shock is that he works at Claire’s accessories. She instantly mocks him and scrunches her face as if she got a bad whiff of something. Because a man working at a jewelry store is so gay, haha.

The video continues, but you get the point.

You see, as a feminine gay man, I have been gender-policed almost since birth. We all are. Blue is for boys, pink is for girls. It is literally ingrained for most from the time we enter the world. But that doesn’t make it OK, and it certainly shouldn’t make it the subject of comedic relief.

I was so petite in my youth, teachers would often mistake me for a girl on the first day of school. Most gay men sympathize with being called “ma’am” on the phone at some point. I remember when it happened I would then lean into it, pretending to be a woman, so that I wasn’t embarrassed when I had to admit, “I’m a boy, I just sound like this.”

Even to this day as a trainer who works in media, I am told often that I am too gay or too feminine for certain roles, auditions, or opportunities simply because of my appearance. Those ideas of what a man should look like have been accepted for centuries as the norm. Luckily, I’m as thick-skinned as they come. I had to be, because I didn’t look like the other boys and I enjoyed feminine things. I became a professional ballet dancer and years later, I started wearing heels as part of my profession, walking on runways for NYFW in sky-high stilettos. I am in fact a raging homosexual, but every other male dancer in my company was straight as can be. They often lamented how hard it was to be in a profession they love and constantly judged and mocked because of it.https://www.instagram.com/p/CIzALIqhvbG/embed/captioned/?cr=1&v=6&wp=910&rd=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.advocate.com&rp=%2Fcommentary%2F2021%2F1%2F15%2Fgender-policing-jokes-are-costing-lgbtq-lives#%7B%22ci%22%3A0%2C%22os%22%3A1815%7D

We find out in the video that the man is in fact gay, so his silky matching top and choice to work at Claire’s are “explained,” and yet there’s still no comedy to this. It’s as if the video sets out to determine what is acceptable for a man to wear, and if it’s not, then he must be gay.

Harry Styles recently caused a huge conversation by wearing a petticoat in Vogue. A whole online movement of “Make men look like men again” was born and letters of disgust poured in. The important thing to remember here is that the clothes we wear are just that. Pieces of fabric that make us happy, or comfortable, and they do not need a justification to anyone, and they certainly should not be used to judge a person’s sexual orientation. There is no rule on how a gay man should dress, nor should there be on what a straight man can wear, or any human for that matter.

Gender policing does real harm. Suicide is the second leading cause of death among LGB people ages 10 to 24. LGB youth are fives times as likely to have attempted suicide as opposed to heterosexual counterparts, according to the Trevor Project. Over 6,000 homeless teens roam the streets of Los Angeles nightly, often vilified and kicked out of their own homes for being gay. Those kids are nearly 10 times more likely to commit suicide than straight teens their same age. Additionally. hate crimes are on the rise across the globe.

I should make a point to say that there were dozens of positive comments on this video. None of the commenters were wearing a silky blouse so I’m not sure if they’re gay or not, but I was the only one who spoke out against the content. Of course, when I shared it on social media those in my network instantly realized what was wrong with it.

Who does this antiquated way of sussing up one’s sexual preference hurt the most? The one’s who can’t hide it, like me. I was never passable as a straight person, not once in my life. When I walk into a room I am instantly judged or made assumptions about based on my appearance. I’m gay and you can tell, but what about the ones not out yet, or still struggling with their own self-realization? I was strong enough to get through it and in fact, it is what made me who I am, but not everyone is and that’s why this sort of “comedic” stance on gender policing needs to stop.

Any person gay or straight can wear a shirt designed for a woman.

Any person gay or straight can work at Claire’s if they wish.

Any person should be able to dress how they please, without fear of being judged or persecuted for their sexual preference.

I consider 2020 to be the year of revelations, where old antiquated ways of thinking are finally falling behind. As recently as June this year, for the first time ever, LGBTQ+ people have workplace protection in all 50 states thanks to a Supreme Court decision. Before then, over 15 states could fire you for being gay. Obviously, lots of work is still to be done.

So while videos like this one on Instagram may seem funny to you, I implore you to stop and think about why you think it’s funny. To the woman who prompted this article, I hope you read this. You told me you wouldn’t and that you don’t care about my opinion, but I hope you change your mind. I believe what we focus on expands, so let’s throw away these lame-ass stereotypes and focus on acceptance. Whether you’re a man who loves to wear ball gowns or a woman who lives in men’s clothing, it doesn’t make you anything but a human wearing a piece of fabric. 

Jason Wimberly is a Los Angeles–based celebrity personal trainer. His signature method “Wimberlean” has attracted followers like Jane Lynch and Selma Blair. Follow him on Instagram and Twitter.

/ /

Global LGBTQ+ Rights Could Be Elevated Through Biden’s Trade Policy

One of the many powers wielded by Congress is the ability to delegate to the president the authority to negotiate most kinds of free trade agreements (“FTAs”) through trade promotion authority (“TPA”). TPA legislation allows Congress to articulate its objectives for FTAs negotiated by the executive branch and facilitates the smooth passage of FTAs in Congress through expedited approval procedures, including “up or down” simple majority votes on completed FTAs without the opportunity for amendment. The current TPA legislation, signed into law in 2015, will lapse this summer, prompting questions on whether and when the Biden administration will seek, and Congress will grant renewed TPA. Whenever TPA is ultimately renewed, Congress should ensure that the legislation includes a provision aimed at securing the rights of LGBT individuals in the countries with which the United States executes FTAs. 

The process of renewing TPA provides Congress with an opportunity to revisit its priorities for U.S. trade policy. These priorities are laid out in negotiating objectives enumerated in the TPA legislation and must be pursued by the executive branch in its FTA negotiations to ensure passage of any negotiated agreement by Congress. Examples of negotiating objectives contained in the current TPA legislation include protecting and preserving the environment, promoting respect for worker rights, and securing greater market access and enhancing the competitiveness of the United States. ADVERTISING

While Congress has yet to consider the next set of negotiating objectives to be included in renewed TPA legislation, many members have already vocalized their support for a more progressive trade agenda. Consistent with this vision for U.S. trade policy, a negotiating objective focused on securing a minimum standard for LGBT rights in U.S. FTA partners would reflect a logical outgrowth of current negotiating objectives, prevailing public sentiment, and good economic policy.

An LGBT rights negotiating objective would represent a meaningful and logical improvement upon current negotiating objectives. For example, a principal negotiating objective in the current TPA legislation is to “ensure that a party to a trade agreement with the United States does not waive or otherwise derogate from…its statutes or regulations implementing internationally recognized core labor standards…” Such core labor standards include “the elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation.” Consistent with this objective, the United States has already endorsed protections against workplace discrimination of LGBT people in the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (albeit at the discretion of each party). Building on this progress, Congress could adopt a negotiating objective aimed at securing a broader set of LGBT rights, demanding the decriminalization of same-sex sexual orientation and protections against discrimination and violence against LGBT people. Such negotiating objective would, in effect, set a floor above which U.S. trading partners must rise to secure commercially-advantageous deals with the United States.

An LGBT rights negotiating objective is also consistent with prevailing public sentiment. Considering the rise of LGBT Americans to new heights in the Biden administration, and the upswell in support for LGBT rights in the United States, it is unimaginable that the United States would negotiate FTAs with countries that arrest and jail LGBT individuals on account of their sexual orientation.  Yet, the Obama Administration did just that during its Trans-Pacific Partnership (“TPP”) negotiations with Brunei, a country with an abysmal LGBT rights record. Under the Trump administration, the United States also commenced FTA negotiations with Kenya, a country that criminalizes homosexuality and where, according to the U.S. Department of State, “{v}iolence and discrimination against LGBT{} individuals {i}s widespread.”  The American people expect that the United States does not reward countries that fail to respect the dignity of human life with lucrative FTAs. This expectation should be enshrined as law, and not subject to mere executive branch discretion.

Finally, and in addition to the positive human rights outcomes that would result from an LGBT rights negotiating objective, such a provision would economically benefit the United States. Just as ensuring U.S. FTA partners’ compliance with fundamental labor rights such as the freedom of association makes American labor more cost competitive, so too does ensuring the full integration and just compensation of LGBT workers overseas. The scale of underemployment and wage discrimination against sexual orientation and gender minorities in major economies is well documented. In South Africa, for example, the Williams Institute at the University of California, Los Angeles determined the cost of such underemployment and wage discrimination to be $316.8 million per year. Renewed TPA legislation should require that U.S. FTA partners eliminate such barriers to LGBT equality as a matter of economic policy.

Although an LGBT rights negotiating objective will almost certainly face criticism from trade “purists” – those who believe social prerogatives have no place in trade policy – and social conservatives, fighting to include such a provision in renewed TPA legislation is a battle worth waging. There has never been a better political climate to integrate and pursue jointly important U.S. economic and human rights objectives, and the Democratic-controlled Congress should seize the opportunity.

Zachary Simmons is an international trade attorney at Steptoe & Johnson LLP in Washington, D.C., and previously served in the Office of the Chief Counsel for Trade Enforcement and Compliance at the US Department of Commerce and the Office of General Counsel at the Office of the United States Trade Representative. He chairs GATT DC, the association of LGBT professionals in international trade and development.

/ /

How Leading on LGBTIQ Rights Abroad Could Restore U.S. Credibility

It did not take long after Joseph Biden won the 2020 U.S. presidential election for him to tweet that America is back. Yet soon after this proclamation, rioters stormed the U.S. Capitol in efforts to prevent him from assuming office. This natural culmination of Donald Trump and his administration’s rhetoric and politicking has left Americans stunned and U.S. allies abroad perplexed. Questions regarding whether the United States would, could, or should regain credibility and moral leadership on the global stage are left unanswered.

As Americans watch the Biden administration attempt to foster unity at home and define a new vision for America’s role abroad, foreign leaders are looking for real evidence of and commitment to what shared values endure. The United States coming out again with strong renewed leadership on LGBTIQ rights globally would send a powerful moral message to the world, bringing old allies closer together and helping restore American credibility abroad. 

Prior to Trump’s election in 2016, the United States was a celebrated vanguard for promoting the human rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex individuals around the world. Early in his administration, President Barack Obama directed all U.S. diplomacy efforts and foreign assistance to promote and protect the human rights of LGBTIQ persons. This — echoed by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in her Human Rights Day 2011 speech that “gay rights are human rights” — was a watershed moment for U.S. foreign policy. 

But past this political pageantry, the United States also took specific action. The Obama administration created the position of the Special Envoy for the Human Rights of LGBTI Persons, who used behind-the-scenes diplomacy to engage world leaders and recruited like-minded partner governments to establish the Global Equality Fund, which provides financial support to LGBTI grassroots initiatives around the world. 

While Obama’s record on human rights was not perfect, his administration’s work on global LGBTIQ issues acted as a model for moral leadership and a case study for how to partner with allies to defend and promote human rights abroad. Given his engagement in multilateral venues and his delicate messaging on these issues with foreign leaders, it is unsurprising that polls show that Europeans had high confidence that Obama would do the right thing in world affairs. 

Then came Donald Trump. In his inaugural address as president, Trump promised that the United States would lead by example rather than “imposing our way of life” on others. Yet few knew what an America First foreign policy meant. With time, that became clear: a radical departure from global norms and multilateralism, leaving human rights, both at home and abroad, behind; eschewing U.S. traditional allies, to boot, while doing so. Trump’s affinity for autocrats and his disrespect for democracy itself were indications that he would actually take America to the brink.

The Biden administration inherited a fractured global order plagued by a myriad of the world’s most urgent challenges, not least among them the COVID-19 pandemic recovery and combating climate change. This is to say nothing of America’s need to first turn inward and address its domestic social and political struggles before it can stand tall on human rights abroad. But these deep existential crises do not obviate the need to protect human rights abroad, nor is the solution as easy as picking up where the Obama administration left off.

With less influence and credibility, traditional American foreign policy priorities, like training foreign security forces or promoting democracy, will ring hollow in the ears of U.S. allies. To do this work effectively abroad, the United States will need to rely on old friends, and those friends will need a reliable partner that they can trust. Reestablishing those ties should begin with an unequivocal reinstatement of U.S. values, including once again recognizing the dignity of LGBTIQ people.

Biden recently campaigned for the U.S. presidency on the promise that he would prioritize his administration’s support for LGBTIQ human rights, and Biden has started to deliver. With less than 12 hours in office, he signed an executive order to prevent and combat discrimination against LGBTIQ Americans, and his nominee for secretary of State unequivocally stated support for protecting LGBTIQ people worldwide in front of Congress.

While these are important first steps in restoring U.S. credibility abroad, the Biden administration should build back bolder in promoting LGBTIQ human rights. 

In its international efforts, beyond immediately filling the vacancy of the LGBTIQ special envoy position, a top priority of the Biden administration should be to reopen U.S. doors to vulnerable LGBTIQ refugees and asylum seekers. Given Biden’s efforts to build an administration that looks like America, those selected to serve as U.S. ambassadors should truly reflect the diversity of America — the first out lesbian and trans ambassadors should be appointed. Further, another profound action would be to swiftly adjust U.S. passports to allow for a nonbinary identification.

The administration should also develop a genuinely inclusive humanitarian relief and development strategy. U.S. foreign assistance should be paired with American values of equality with clear requirements of nondiscrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity and the paltry amount of such foreign assistance should immediately be tripled in the President’s first budget. Given his administration’s focus on pandemic recovery, Biden’s COVID-19 efforts abroad should pay particular attention to the social and economic vulnerabilities that the novel coronavirus poses to LGBTIQ communities around the world.

Lastly, the United States should take leadership once again in multilateral spaces — such as the United Nations Core Group and the Equal Rights Coalition — along with other government champions of LGBTIQ rights to seriously move forward global norms of equality.  

A Biden administration will find like-minded governments and civil society activists eager to work with them in these areas. Since Obama and Biden left the White House in 2017, social acceptance of homosexuality has significantly increased in the U.S.-ally geographic strongholds of Western Europe, Latin America, and the Indo-Pacific. And each year, due to the tenacious work of activists, several nations take progressive action by decriminalizing homosexuality or enacting marriage equality.

In the weeks following the 2020 election, global LGBTIQ activists began celebrating the Biden-Harris win. These elated congratulatory messages came in via emails, calls, and texts from all parts of the world. Ranging from “We’re dancing in the streets of Nigeria like we’re Americans” to “A Biden win is a win for all of us,” the messages were deeply moving. In a collective sigh of relief, one activist texted, “We are all sleeping easier tonight.” Whether from Russia, Uganda, Jamaica, or Lebanon, the expectation that the U.S. government will once again be visibly and solidly on the side of LGBTIQ equality was immediately palpable.

The shock of the Trump-incited insurrection contrasted starkly with the beautiful inauguration of Biden as the 46th president of the United States last week. These images leave Americans and the world deeply aware of the fragility and imperfection of the U.S. democracy and with many questions about moving forward to make a more perfect union. 

But the arc of the moral universe is clearly bending — albeit slowly — toward greater acceptance and fairness for lesbians, gay men, bisexuals, and transgender and intersex people around the world. And the world has been waiting and is ready for renewed U.S. leadership on global LGBTIQ rights. 

Julie Dorf is a senior advisor with the Council for Global Equality. Dominic Bocci is a deputy director at the Council on Foreign Relations.

/ /

Leave nonbinary people alone

Lately, there has been a wave of online commentators who mock nonbinary people. Bloggers, TikTokers, and other posters make fun of an entire population of well-meaning people who lie somewhere “in the middle” of the gender spectrum. 

On TikTok, @feelinmiz2.0 does a mocking dance in a fake doctor’s suit, stating “Notice how the Pr0n0uns in your bio do not alter your genitals.” In July 2020, Elon Musk tweeted “pronouns suck.” In September 2020, Canadian commentator Debra Soh wrote an article titled “How the Nonbinary Trend Hurts Those with Real Gender Dysphoria.” 

Defamation of nonbinary people is everywhere in the media. 

Nonbinary people, born either biologically male or female, don’t feel like they are female, but they also don’t feel male. Some nonbinary people feel more “masculine” than others, while other nonbinary people feel more “feminine.” Other nonbinary people feel like there is no spectrum at all, and that there are infinite genders, just as there are infinite ways to be a person. 

Nonbinary people generally face many more obstacles than individuals who choose to fall on the binary, as either male or female. For instance, they can be in a constant battle against society to “pass” — or appear as either gender. Choosing clothes and a style of presentation that is androgynous or mixed, they can be misgendered all the time. Nonbinary people can also struggle with what gender marker to use on passports or driver’s licenses. 

Additionally, individuals who do not pass as either male or female have a harder time finding employment. Research from the U.S. Census Bureau found that the unemployment rate among transgender workers is two to three times higher than the U.S workforce.

Now that “nonbinary” has come into the public consciousness, and entered the public discourse, many cisgender people feel threatened, or scared, of nonbinary. Even in my personal life, I run into close friends who laugh at the first mention of nonbinary. It seems to be a typical reaction: chuckle at how silly the idea feels. Sometimes, these people are progressives, and they have liberal views. But they still don’t understand nonbinary. 

The general public seems to understand binary transgender people a lot better — people who fall as either male (transman) or female (transwoman). This is because our way of presenting falls in line with theirs. 

The moment our way of presenting falls out of line, and the moment we question the cisgender world view, the public starts to laugh. 

There is some pretty simple logic behind accepting nonbinary people as valid: 

• If you were color blind, and could only see black and white, you would not state that people who saw colors did not exist. 

• If you were a straight man, and only liked women, you would not question that gay men existed. 

• If you were dyslexic, and had a difficult time reading words, you would not question that other people had an easier time reading words. 

• If you grew up cisgender, and there were people — thousands of them — who said they did not feel like either gender, why would you decide to suddenly mock them? What bearing does it have on your life? 

• If you have laughed at nonbinary people, do us a favor and be quiet. I have three words for you: Leave. Them. Alone. 

Laugh at other things, like how there was a fly on Mike Pence’s head during a national debate, or how chihuahuas are hilarious creatures when they’re angry. Just don’t laugh at us. 

CLARIFICATION: An earlier version of this piece included a reference to an article titled “Why I Will Not Be Using Your Preferred Pronouns” in The North Coast Journal. That piece was satirical. The Blade regrets the confusion.

Isaac Amend (he/him/his) is a transgender man and young professional in the D.C. area. He was featured on National Geographic’s ‘Gender Revolution’ documentary in 2017 as a student at Yale University. Isaac is also on the board of the LGBT Democrats of Virginia, @isaacamend.

/ /

To pod or not to pod?

Is it me or do others find COVID social pods (aka bubbles) elusive?

I watched from the Wharf’s dock as the pod boat sailed south. Where was the pod sign-up sheet? Was there an email campaign? When did registrations end?

According to an Axios-Ipsos poll, almost half (47 percent) of Americans have formed a COVID-19 pod for pandemic interaction with trusted friends. In general, participation favors women and people with college degrees. City dwellers aren’t as hip to it as suburbanites. I’d estimate with the DMV’s educated population and our LGBTQ networks, participation may be higher.

What happened to the 53 percent who aren’t in a pod? Are they still idling on the dock?

As a loosely connected LGBTQ man, I find pods intriguing. Outside of dating (what’s that?), I can be friend finicky. I seek companions for activities when the mood strikes and can be aloof. Maybe I’m a pan-intro/extrovert.

The question is, who’s in a pod and where are they? This pod culture feels like an underground society.

Are there pod meetings? Weekly check-ins? Can a pod have only three people? Are there mixed-gender and hookup pods? The answers vary.

Few people admit to their pods in casual chit-chat. And when they do, it’s in a hushed tone. George mumbles under his breath (similar to when talking about a therapy session), “shhh, yeah, on Saturday I’m going to outdoor brunch with my pod.”

My reply to George might be “thanks for sharing. And all of these years I thought we were friends. Guess my invite’s in the USPS mail.”

It’s ironic that the pod concept — a safe-meetup fix for a justified fear of managing pandemic, social activity — can also be exclusionary.

What are the criteria for joining a pod? Do they have membership drives?

What behavior cut Peter from the pod list? Was it the tacky face mask design; the White Claw flavor; the frontline job?

Pods arrived when we confronted plague reality in March 2020. People shouted from rooftops, “where do I go and with which friends do I spend time?”

Keith on Capitol Hill said, “[COVID-19] was something that needed to be taken seriously, and I limited my interactions with family and friends.” Keith hasn’t seen his parents, who are in high-risk groups, since February 2020.

Keith went on to say, “I gauge those in my bubble to their level of COVID-19 awareness, and my trust of them not exposing [themselves] to possible risks [and endangering me].” 

Noah, who lives near Columbia Heights, said since May 2020 he’s had two or three meetups a month with the same two friends. They spend time cooking up a storm and watching TV series together. It’s an intimate group with consistent comfort.

Keith is in two pods — one local and one outside the DMV. Each bubble has three people and they primarily meet outdoors.

A Dupont resident said he has a hookup buddy with whom he spends time because it’s pandemic-safe and convenient. Their future is unclear post-COVID-19.

Two camps

There are two pod campsites — either you’re in or you’re out. For those inside a pod, they vary by makeup and importance. The social safety net is the common denominator.

Keith hopes his pod ends with the pandemic. “I want to see my entire social network, locally and not-so locally, post-pandemic and specifically post-vaccine,” he says. 

Conversely, Noah wants to continue his pod for as long as possible.

What about for those of us not in an official pod?

For us and everyone, there’s no pandemic end date. Fortunately, we have spring/summer vaccine appointments and more certainty than in 2020. Otherwise, caution as usual until Dr. Fauci says, “all clear!”

Noah admitted, “I’m not a person who craves a lot of in-person activity. I spend time on social media and take walks solo or occasionally with a friend (masked). Being with a small group of dear friends who are mindful of the risks has been important to me.” 

Keith’s approach is “even in my bubble, I have increased my outdoor activities — long walks and reading — in outdoor public spaces where it’s safe.”

As the pandemic’s end lies ahead, do you find a pod or wait it out? The trick is to balance safe in-person time with personal comforts to get you through the summer.

/ /

Conservatives opposing the Equality Act don’t speak for most people of faith, and they know it

, , ,

For years the religious right has trumpeted a lie: that its opposition to LGBTQ nondiscrimination protections has to do with, or is even required by, religion. It has even, on occasion, distorted the meaning of religious freedom to make this argument.

But as its opposition to the Equality Act, which passed the House on Thursday, shows, the idea that LGBTQ nondiscrimination protections undermine protections for religious Americans is an egregious mistruth.

The Equality Act would expand protections for religious Americans by updating the public spaces where the Civil Rights Act applies. Under current federal law, it is perfectly legal to discriminate against someone in a retail store or a taxicab, for example, for being visibly Christian (or Muslim or Hindu — or anything else). The Equality Act would ensure that Americans’ religious freedom is protected in those places, preserve all of the religious liberty provisions of our current civil rights laws and protect LGBTQ Americans from discrimination in housing, employment and public accommodations.

That truth was not an obstacle to the legislation’s opponents. “The Equality Act would discriminate against people of faith,” a group of Catholic bishops warned; Franklin Graham warned that it was “very dangerous.” Similar exhortations have been made against the bill in past years: Televangelist Pat Robertson told his audience in 2019, “If you want to bring the judgment of God on this nation, you just keep this stuff up,” and radio host Eric Metaxas that year called the legislation “madness.”

The religious right’s loud, often bigoted opposition to the Equality Act obscures the fact that most Americans who self-identify as religious support this legislation.

As the weakness of the religious right’s arguments has become more and more visible, and as more and more Americans who identify as religious reject the edicts to discriminate, its fearmongering about the dignity of LGBTQ people has shifted, both over the past decades and more recently. These days, it focuses on scaring Americans about transgender people, from their participation in youth sports to the standards of medical care for transgender youth, about which it spouts vicious fictions. All of its fearmongering is based on falsehoods or stereotypes, like those that have been proven incorrect in states that already have nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ youths playing sports.

But facts have never stopped Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., before. She captured the essence of opposition to Equality Act on the House floor Wednesday in a speech scorning all transgender Americans and laced with religious rhetoric. She then proceeded to do the opposite of “love your neighbor” by singling out and attacking the transgender daughter of Rep. Marie Newman, D-Ill., in tweets and then with a sign outside her own Capitol Hill office, about which she also tweeted.

Still, it is not just the lies the religious right tells about transgender youth or religious freedom that should rankle other Americans of faith: Its loud, often bigoted opposition to the Equality Act obscures the fact that most Americans who self-identify as religious support this legislation.

The vast majority of Americans — 83 percent — favor laws that would protect gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people against discrimination in jobs, public accommodations and housing. That includes majorities of every major religious group in the country, according to the Public Religion Research Institute. Even 59 percent of white evangelical Protestants — the largest and most reliably conservative bloc of religious voters — support the type of protections in the Equality Act.

As the weakness of the religious right’s arguments has become more and more visible, its fearmongering about the dignity of LGBTQ people has shifted.

Americans of all religious backgrounds also reject the distorted “religious freedom” framing of the religious right’s opposition to the Equality Act, as outlined Wednesday by Greene. When given a choice between these two statements —”Everyone is free to follow their religious beliefs and practices in their personal lives, provided they do not cause harm to others,” and “Everyone is free to follow their religious beliefs and practices in every part of their lives, including performing their jobs, even if that means excluding certain groups of people” — 89 percent of Americans, as well as majorities of all major religious groups, chose the former.

All of this is among the reasons that over 100 faith-based organizations have endorsed the Equality Act, including Catholic, evangelical Protestant, mainline Protestant, Jewish, Muslim, Unitarian Universalist and Hindu groups. And faith groups that recognize the dignity of LGBTQ people have a faithful ally in the White House: President Joe Biden — one of the most overtly religious presidents since Jimmy Carter — has made the Equality Act a priority for his administration.

Despite not representing the majority of Americans of faith on this issue, the religious right will do all it can in the coming weeks to derail the Equality Act by purporting to represent those very Americans. It is certainly its prerogative to advocate against civil rights, but Americans deserve to know that faith communities and people of faith largely support this historic legislation.

And most religious Americans understand that the response to LGBTQ discrimination most in keeping with the highest callings of the tenets of their various traditions is to enact laws that protect everyone.

Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, delivered a powerful witness on the House floor Thursday when he said, “God created every person in this room,” referring to his LGBTQ colleagues. “Are you saying that God made a mistake? This is not about God. It’s about men who choose to discriminate against other people because they have the power to do so.”

He then cast his vote with the majority of his colleagues, representing the majority of Americans, in favor of this historic civil rights legislation.

/ /

Trump’s final blow to patients with HIV

The day before Donald Trump left the White House, his administration dealt one final, brutal blow to some of America’s most vulnerable patients. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services announced a policy that, if implemented, will put numerous lifesaving drugs off-limits to Medicare recipients. 

Medicare provides health insurance to 63 million seniors and people with disabilities. Trump’s gut punch affects Part D, the section of Medicare that covers most prescription drugs. The last-minute policy change would allow the private insurance companies that sponsor Part D plans to stop covering many medications in Part D’s “six protected classes” as early as 2022. 

The protected classes include anticonvulsants, antidepressants, antineoplastics, antipsychotics, antiretrovirals, and immunosuppressants — drugs that treat conditions including epilepsy, depression, cancer, and HIV. The protected categories exist because these types of drugs are not easily interchangeable. An antipsychotic that treats one person’s schizophrenia, for instance, may be ineffective in another patient. Patients often have to try multiple treatments until they find one that works well for them. 

Today under Part D, insurers must cover “all or substantially all” of the drugs that fall into those six classes. But under the proposed new policy, insurers would only have to cover one drug per class, starting next year. The policy makes one exception, for antiretrovirals to treat HIV, which would remain protected until 2023. 

I live with HIV and depression, conditions I manage with drugs in the protected classes. So I know from personal experience that there is no one-size-fits-all pharmaceutical solution to my health challenges. It can be hard enough to find a prescription that helps treat one condition, and having two conditions means I have to find medications that work together effectively. 

More than 47 million Americans depend on Part D plans, and many of them need medicines from the protected classes. If the new policy goes into effect, doctors and patients will lose options, and some will even find themselves suddenly cut off from trusted treatments. It’s a cruel thing to do to sick people. 

Thankfully, I’m able to manage my HIV with medication. But the consequences of stopping treatment could be deadly for me, as it could for any of the estimated 1.2 million Americans living with the virus. This is a population, moreover, that is disproportionately Black. Whereas Blacks make up 13.4 percent of the U.S. population, they account for 42 percent of new HIV cases. 

President Biden has promised to make healthcare “a right for all, not a privilege for just a few,” vowing to prioritize health care for people of color. He can do that by scrapping this callous policy. 

The former administration’s reforms admittedly weren’t all bad. Last year, the Department of Health and Human Services proposed closing a legal loophole that allows middlemen in the drug supply chain to pocket rebates offered by biotech companies without passing those savings on to patients at the pharmacy. Allowing this “rebate rule” to take effect would make drugs more affordable. 

But aside from scattered exceptions like the rebate rule, the Trump administration’s policies need to be reversed. The Biden administration can start with the disastrous, last-minute proposal to sabotage the six protected classes.

Guy Anthony is president and CEO of Black, Gifted & Whole.

1 2 3 4 ›»