Republican New York Congressman George Santos has introduced a bill that would ban U.S. foreign aid to countries that criminalize LGBTQ people and women.
“Discrimination against both women and the LGBTQ community is unacceptable,” said Santos in a March 24 press release that announced the introduction of Equality and Fiscal Accountability Protection Act of 2023. “My bill will send a clear message that the United States will not offer federal aid to countries found to be violating the rights of individuals based on sexual orientation. We as a nation have a responsibility to stand up for the human rights of all people, regardless of race, religion, or sexual orientation.”
The press release notes the bill would require the State Department “to assess a country’s human rights record before providing federal aid.”
“Countries found to be violating these rights would be ineligible to receive aid until they take steps to address the issues,” reads the press release. “If passed, the bill would make a significant step forward in the fight for LGBTQ and women’s rights and would send a strong message to countries that discrimination or criminalization will not be tolerated.”
Congress’ website currently notes “text has not been received for H.R. (House Resolution) 1736.”
Santos introduced the bill two days after the State Department released its annual human rights report that, among other things, details the prevalence of so-called conversion therapy and the treatment of intersex people around the world. U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Linda Thomas-Greenfield on the same day hosted a meeting at the United Nations that focused on the integration of LGBTQ and intersex rights into the U.N. Security Council’s work.
The Biden-Harris administration in 2021 released a memorandum that committed the U.S. to promoting LGBTQ and intersex rights abroad. U.S. Reps. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) and Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.) and U.S. Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) last week introduced a bill that would require the country to promote LGBTQ and intersex rights abroad through its public policy.
The House Ethics Committee last month opened an investigation into Santos, who is openly gay, over allegations of financial and sexual misconduct. The embattled New York Republican has admitted to lying about his professional and educational background.
A school district in Nebraska is facing a lawsuit after a high school shut down its newspaper because students produced an LGBTQ+ edition.
The lawsuit states that Grand Island Northwest Public Schools and its superintendent violated the First Amendment rights of students by axing the Viking Saga in May 2022.
The newspaper had been running for 54 years.
As reported by the Associated Press, legal action has been brought by the Nebraska High School Press Association, and former Grand Island Northwest High School journalist Marcus Pennell.
The student newspaper staff were made aware that the publication was being pulled three days after they published the June edition of the Viking Saga, which was a special LGBTQ+ print for Pride Month.
The June newspaper included an article titled ‘Pride and prejudice: LGBTQIA+’ which examined the history of Pride Month, and included a piece about Florida’s oppressive ‘Don’t Say Gay’ bill.
On 22 May 2022, an email from a school employee said the print edition had been axed because “the school board and superintendent are unhappy with the last issue’s editorial content”.
However, in November, the teacher in charge of running the school’s journalism offering confirmed the paper would return in the spring but under the helm of another teacher, and in digital form only.
‘I was crushed’
Despite this move to somewhat revive the publication, legal action is still being pursued over the decision to cancel the Viking Saga in the first place.
When the return of the paper was announced, the Associated Press reported that an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union said “attempts to quash student journalism and student opinions violate students’ rights to freedom of speech and equal protection”.
Marcus Pennell said: “It is hard to find words for what it felt like watching people who were supposed to be supporting our education instead silence us for covering issues impacting our lives.
“I was crushed.”
Pennell, who is trans, alleges in the lawsuit that he and other staff could not use their chosen name or preferred pronouns in their bylines.
Speaking with Local4Pennell said: “I just don’t want other students to have to go through what I did.
“I’m sure after all this happened all the LGBT students at Northwest don’t feel safe writing about their lives or the issues that matter to them, so anything I can do to kinda increase their inclination to share their stories.”
The lawsuit is seeking a declaration that the school district broke the law, alongside unspecified damages.
The U.S. Justice Department (DOJ) is appealing a judge’s decision to nullify a section of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) that requires insurance companies to cover the HIV prevention drug regimen PrEP.
Last week, U.S. District Juge Reed O’Connor struck down a section of the ACA requiring coverage of certain preventive health care services, which, in addition to PrEP, includes some cancer screenings, contraception, immunizations, and more. O’Connor’s decision leaves over 150 million people vulnerable to the added costs of this care.
A coordinated effort by right-wing media and lawmakers has decimated community-based programs addressing healthcare for LGBTQ+ people in Tennessee
O’Connor’s decision came about in response to a lawsuit filed by two Christian business owners and six individuals who felt being required to cover PrEP promotes “homosexual behavior” and is a violation of religious freedom. The plaintiffs also argued that being required to cover other preventive services makes them “complicit in facilitating… drug use, and sexual activity outside of marriage between one man and one woman.”
In a statement on the appeal, out White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said President Joe Biden “is glad to see the Department of Justice is appealing the judge’s decision” and that the case “is yet another attack on the Affordable Care Act, which has been the law of the land for 13 years and survived three challenges before the Supreme Court.”
“Preventive care saves lives, saves families money, and protects and improves our health,” she continued. “Because of the ACA, millions of Americans have access to free cancer and heart disease screenings. This decision threatens to jeopardize critical care. The administration will continue to fight to improve health care and make it more affordable for hard-working families, even in the face of attacks from special interests.”
Michael Weinstein, the founder and president of the Aids Healthcare Foundation, said O’Connor’s decision “will have dangerous consequences” for millions of Americans.
“While we expect this unconstitutional ruling ultimately will fail, the decision creates uncertainty and is a threat to public health,” Weinstein said.
This is not the first ruling O’Connor has made against PrEP and the ACA. In September 2022, he ruled that a provision of the act requiring employee health insurance plans to provide full coverage of HIV-prevention drugs (as well as other preventive health care services) is a violation of religious freedom. That ruling only applied to the companies of the plaintiffs in the case.
Long known as an anti-LGBTQ+ extremist, O’Connor also ruled in 2021 that businesses that say they’re religious can fire LGBTQ+ people, chipping away at the protections granted by the Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock v. Clayton Co.
He ruled the same year that a Catholic hospital doesn’t have to follow federal anti-discrimination laws when it comes to the provision of health care because of the chance that they’d be forced to provide care for a transgender person that affirms their gender, even if the procedure is not one the hospital objects to. His reasoning for the sweeping religious exemption for the Catholic hospital was that Biden and Barack Obama have a “pattern” of religious animus, so they can’t be trusted to enforce the law correctly.
Statement from Kasey Suffredini (he/him), Vice President of Advocacy and Government Affairs for The Trevor Project:
“These latest report findings punctuate much of what we already know about the dangerous and discredited practice of so-called conversion ‘therapy’: it doesn’t work, it is associated with poor mental health outcomes and increased suicide risk, and tragically — it’s still happening.
“Our research has found that 17% of LGBTQ youth in the U.S. reported being threatened with or subjected to conversion therapy — including more than 1 in 5 transgender and nonbinary youth. In addition to being dangerous and detrimental for the young people who undergo it, the harms associated with conversion therapy — such as substance abuse and suicide attempts — cost the U.S. billions of dollars each year.
“As we continue to defend LGBTQ young people, especially trans young people, against a record number of political attacks at the state level, we are grateful to the federal government for sending a powerful message to every LGBTQ young person that they should be proud of who they are and deserve access to affirming environments and care. We are committed to building upon this momentum to protect LGBTQ young people from conversion therapy in every state, and create a safe, accepting world for the transgender community.”
Statement from Mathew Shurka (he/him), Co-Founder of Born Perfect:
“This landmark report is based on a comprehensive survey of existing research, including many new studies and data that have been generated in the eight years since HHS first issued a report on this topic. As the report confirms, conversion therapy causes lasting harm to LGBTQ young people, including by separating them from their families and, for many youths, putting them at risk of depression and suicidality.
“Both as a survivor who was subjected to conversion therapy for five years as a minor and as an advocate on this issue, I am grateful to HHS for compiling this important report and for providing this critical information to families, providers, and policymakers. It is past time for these deadly practices to end.”
Key Takeaways from the Report:
No available research supports the claim that sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) change efforts are beneficial to children, adolescents, or families.
Available research indicates that SOGI change efforts are not effective in altering sexual orientation. Further, no available research indicates that change efforts are effective in altering gender identity.
Available research indicates that SOGI change efforts can cause significant harm.
SOGI change efforts are inappropriate, ineffective, and harmful practices that should not be provided to children and adolescents.
The report also includes recommendations about how families, policymakers, and healthcare providers can support LGBTQ youth, including by ensuring that transgender youth can receive the medically necessary care they need.
Research from The Trevor Project cited in the report:
A 2020 peer-reviewed study published in the American Journal of Public Health found that youth who reported undergoing conversion therapy were more than twice as likely to report having attempted suicide and more than 2.5 times as likely to report multiple suicide attempts in the past year.
A 2020 peer-reviewed study published in the Journal of Adolescent Health found that transgender and nonbinary youth were 2 to 2.5 times as likely to experience depressive symptoms, seriously consider suicide, and attempt suicide compared to their cisgender LGBQ peers.
A 2020 peer-reviewed study published in the Journal of Adolescent Health, found that transgender and nonbinary youth who report experiencing discrimination based on their gender identity had more than double the odds of attempting suicide in the past year compared to those who did not experience discrimination based on their gender identity.
A 2021 peer-reviewed study published in LGBTQ Health found that LGBTQ youth who reported high levels of sexual orientation acceptance from any adult had nearly 40% lower odds of a past-year suicide attempt compared with LGBTQ peers with little to no acceptance.
A 2021 peer-reviewed study published in Transgender Health found that transgender and nonbinary youth who reported gender identity acceptance from adults and peers had significantly lower odds of attempting suicide in the past year.
A 2021 peer-reviewed study published in the Journal of Adolescent Health found that gender-affirming hormone therapy is significantly related to lower rates of depression, suicidal thoughts, and suicide attempts among transgender and nonbinary youth.
A 2022 peer-reviewed study published in JAMA Pediatrics found the practice of conversion therapy on LGBTQ youth, and its associated harms – such as substance abuse and negative mental health outcomes, including depression, anxiety, and suicide attempts – cost the U.S. an estimated $9.23 billion, annually.
###
Born Perfect is a survivor-led campaign created by the National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR) in 2014 to end conversion therapy by passing laws across the country that protect LGBT children and young people, fighting in courtrooms to ensure their safety, and raising awareness about the serious harms caused by these dangerous practices. http://bornperfect.org/
If you or someone you know needs help or support, The Trevor Project‘s trained crisis counselors are available 24/7 at 1-866-488-7386, via chat at TheTrevorProject.org/Get-Help, or by texting START to 678678.
A federal judge has ordered government officials in Llano County, Texas to return books with LGBTQ+ and anti-racist themes to the county’s public libraries after conservative officials removed them.
Seven Llano County citizens sued county officials when local officials removed 12 titles from county libraries. The books included Being Jazz: My Life as a (Transgender) Teen by Jazz Jennings, In the Night Kitchen by gay children’s book author Maurice Sendak, It’s Perfectly Normal: Changing Bodies, Growing Up, Sex, and Sexual Health by Robie H. Harris, and They Called Themselves the K.K.K.: The Birth of an American Terrorist Group by Susan Campbell Bartoletti.
Additionally, the lawsuit alleged that county officials suspended access to e-books in order to block other titles, dissolved the county’s existing library board, and replaced the board with an “advisory board” containing appointed members who favor book bans. Officials also closed the advisory board’s meetings to the public and staff librarians, CNN reported. The officials’ actions violated county residents’ constitutional rights to free speech and due process, the lawsuit said.
The county had removed the books after community groups complained that they contained “pornographic filth” that promoted “acceptance of LGBTQ views.” Bonnie Wallace, one of the newly appointed advisory board members, even suggested allying with local pastors to “organize a weekly prayer vigil on this specific issue…. May God protect our children from this FILTH.”
The lawsuit stated, “Public libraries are not places of government indoctrination. They are not places where the people in power can dictate what their citizens are permitted to read about and learn. When government actors target public library books because they disagree with and intend to suppress the ideas contained within them, it jeopardizes the freedoms of everyone.”
The lawsuit identified Llano County Judge Ron Cunningham, the county’s commissioners, the library system director, and four library board members as defendants. The defendants said that the books were eliminated as part of the county’s regular “weeding” process.
Last Saturday, federal Judge Robert Pittman ordered the defendants to return the books to the shelves within 24 hours and to update the county libraries’ online cataloging system to show that the books are publicly available. The county is also barred from removing any additional books while the legal case remains open.
In his decision, Pitman said there was no evidence that the removed books were even part of the county’s “weeding” process before the county received complaints about them. Pitman also notes that the 12 books removed contain themes and content that are also contained in numerous books that have nonetheless remained available within the county’s three library branches for years.
“Although libraries are afforded great discretion for their selection and acquisition decisions, the First Amendment prohibits the removal of books from libraries based on either viewpoint or content discrimination,” Pitman said in his decision.
Ellen Leonida, an attorney representing the plaintiffs, said, “The government cannot tell citizens what they can or can’t read. Our nation was founded on the free exchange of ideas, and banning books you disagree with is a direct attack on our most basic liberties.” She called Pitman’s ruling a “ringing victory for democracy.”
A new study has found that queer kids aged 10-14 are spending way longer staring at their screens than their straight counterparts. And it’s probably not good for them.
The study says they spend around 10.4 hours on their screens each day. That’s a whopping four hours more than straight kids.
It looked at data on over 10,000 preteens culled between 2018-2020. All the youngsters signed up to take part in the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study. It’s largest long-term study of brain development and child health in the United States.
The study’s lead author is Jason Nagata, MD, an Assistant Professor of Pediatrics at the University of California, San Francisco.
“Lesbian, gay, and bisexual adolescents are more likely to experience school-based bullying and exclusion from peer groups due to their sexual orientation, leading them to spend less time in traditional school activities and more time on screens,” says Nagata in a press statement.
“Texting, and using social media and the internet for virtual communication could be helpful for LGB preteens to find and receive support from other LGB people who may not be available in their local communities.”
On the downside, the kids were also asked if they thought their screen time was problematic. They were asked if they agreed with statements such as, “I play video games so much that it has a bad effect on my schoolwork,” and “I’ve tried to use my social media apps less but I can’t.”
The study concluded that LGB adolescents experienced higher problematic mobile phone and social media use than their straight peers.
Escaping into an online world of gaming and YouTube videos
Nagata told Queerty that turning to the digital world and the internet had benefits but also downsides for gay youngsters.
“Queer youth who don’t have support in their local communities may turn to the internet to find and receive the help they need. Screens can also be helpful to stay in touch with friends and family who live far away.
“Risks of screen use include poorer sleep, less physical activity, and mental health consequences associated with overuse. In another recent study, we found a higher risk of sleep problems among gay, lesbian, and bisexual youth compared to straight youth.”
According to its authors, one of the study’s limitations is that most people don’t identify their sexual orientation until they’re about 17 or 18. Therefore, some of the young participants who said they were straight may turn out to identify as gay when older.
“Some of the adolescents in our study might not have come out yet or fully understand their sexuality. When children in this study were 9-10 years old, 1.5% identified as gay, lesbian, or bisexual. By age 11-12, 4.4% identified as gay, lesbian, or bisexual and 3.8% were questioning. The percentage of study participants who identify as gay, lesbian, or bisexual will likely increase through their teenage years.”
The study did not seek to ask kids exactly what they were watching online. However, it noted many said they watch a lot of YouTube videos.
Do parents know how much time their kids spend online?
The researchers recommend parents are aware of how much time their children spend online. It suggests they are active in discussing these issues with their offspring.
“Parents should regularly talk to their teens about screen usage and develop a family media use plan. Parents can develop a family media use plan which could include setting limits and encouraging screen-free time, such as before bedtime or during family meals,” he told Queerty.
“We know screen use interferes with sleep, and good sleep is important for mental health.”
He also recommends parents keep an eye on their kids’ eating habits. This is because “Social media use is linked to body image dissatisfaction in LGB youth.”
Is there a set number of hours that kids should spend looking at their screens?
“The American Academy of Pediatrics used to recommend less than two hours of daily screen time for children and adolescents ages 5 to 18,” he replies. “Now they are moving away from giving specific hours because the reality is that most kids spend far more than two hours a day on screens, and not all screen time is equal. Now they recommend creating a plan based on what makes sense for your family given your kids’ screen habits and your family’s situation.”
A second suspect was arrested and charged with murder in connection with a string of drug-facilitated robberies of men who visited gay bars in New York City that included two deaths, two senior law enforcement officials told NBC News on Monday.
Robert Demaio, 34, was charged with murder, robbery, grand larceny, identity theft and conspiracy in connection with the death of John Umberger, a 33-year-old political consultant, and in a separate incident in which an unidentified victim did not die, the officials said.
Umberger and Julio Ramirez, a 25-year-old social worker, were both found dead after visiting gay bars in Manhattan’s Hell’s Kitchen neighborhood last spring. Both had left the bars with at least one unknown person before their bank accounts were drained of thousands of dollars using facial recognition access on their phones, according to their family members.
Last month, the medical examiner’s office ruled their deaths as homicides caused by a “drug-facilitated theft.” Multiple drugs were found in their systems, including fentanyl, lidocaine and cocaine.
John Umberger and Julio Ramirez were drugged and killed in separate incidents following visits to New York City gay bars.Linda Clary; Family photo
The two law enforcement officials said that police obtained security video showing Demaio and Jayqwan Hamilton — one of three suspects police have named in connection to the homicides of Umberger and Ramirez — entering and leaving Umberger’s temporary residence in Manhattan’s Upper East Side.
Through a search warrant, police also recovered two videos from Demaio’s phone that showed Demaio at the site of Umberger’s death, the officials added. In one of the videos, according to the two officials, Umberger appears to be unconscious, lying face up on a bed at his temporary New York City residence.
“It speaks volumes of the heartlessness of these people,” Umberger’s mother, Linda Clary, said of the videos. “That’s what I find very troubling and why I don’t think these people should be allowed to be amongst us.”
Demaio’s detention follows the arrest of Jacob Barroso on Saturday. Barroso, 30, was charged with murder, robbery, grand larceny and conspiracy in connection with Ramirez’s death and in a separate incident where the victim survived, police said Sunday.
Barroso was arraigned Monday in Manhattan Criminal Court on murder and robbery charges. He pleaded not guilty ,and the judge set bail at $3 million.
“We intend to fight this case vigorously,” his attorney, David Krauss, said.
Several family members and friends of the defendants crowded into the courtroom Monday afternoon. Outside the courtroom, one of Barroso’s supporters said he was “not a murderer. You guys got this backwards. We will prove his innocence.”
Several family members and friends of Ramirez were in the courtroom for the proceeding, and the victim’s mother was seen crying.
On Friday, police said they believe Demaio, Barroso and Hamilton are among those responsible for a broader “citywide robbery pattern” that includes at least 17 victims. The incidents — which include Ramirez’s and Umberger’s robberies and deaths — occurred from Sept. 19, 2021, to Aug. 28, the spokesperson said.
An additional suspect was arraigned Monday afternoon on robbery, grand larceny and identity theft charges in connection with the string of robberies. Andre Butts, 28, was captured on security video buying sneakers with Ramirez’s credit card, according to prosecutors from the Manhattan district attorney’s office. Butts, who was arrested Friday and pleaded not guilty, is being held on $100,000 bail after he tried to flee during his arrest, prosecutors said.
An indictment naming Hoskins, 31, and four other unidentified co-conspirators outlined a pattern where victims were “incapacitated to the extent that their ability to perceive events became diminished,” so that the suspects could then steal their victims’ cellphones and credit cards and use the physical cards and information stored on the victims’ phones to transfer money to themselves and make purchases.
The New York City Police Department previously confirmed to NBC News that there are multiple groups of criminals committing these types of crimes against men visiting the city’s gay bars. Police also said that comparable crimes were being committed against patrons of bars without any LGBTQ affiliation.
One separate group is suspected of committing similar crimes on 26 victims, two law enforcement officials told NBC News last week. Fashion designer Kathryn Marie Gallagher, whose death in July was ruled a drug-facilitated homicide by the medical examiner’s office, was one of the subsequent group’s victims, the officials said.
Last week, the New York City medical examiner’s office also confirmed that it is investigating “several additional deaths in similar circumstances” to those of Ramirez and Umberger. It is unclear, however, if they were found dead after visiting gay bars or whether they were connected with Demaio, Barroso and Hamilton.
A spokesperson for the medical examiner’s office said they “could not comment further due to the ongoing criminal investigations.”
A new national survey has reassuring findings that Americans of almost all religions and no religion are growing ever more supportive of LGBTQ rights.
For instance, eight in 10 Americans (80 percent) in the Public Religion Research Institute survey support laws against discrimination in jobs, public accommodations and housing against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people. Even 62 percent of white evangelical Protestants, tied with Hispanic Protestants, favor such nondiscrimination laws. Jehovah’s Witnesses were at the bottom of the barrel, yet half support nondiscrimination protections. Interestingly, in states showing the lowest level of support for nondiscrimination (Alabama, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota), two-thirds of state citizens themselves are against such discrimination, showing that state legislatures are not keeping up with demographics. (Scroll to Figure 5 to see where your state falls on this issue.)
In what seems contradictory, given widespread disapproval of discrimination by places of public accommodation, Americans are slightly less supportive of LGBTQ rights when it comes to a business owner refusing to serve LGBTQ individuals. This is a hot-button issue — with a case, 303 Creative, involving such discrimination by a website designer awaiting a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court. Nevertheless, nearly two-thirds (65 percent) of Americans oppose permitting businesses to discriminate against LGBTQ customers on religious grounds.Those most willing to discriminate are Mormons (only 46 percent oppose such discrimination) and white Protestants (only 37 percent support LGBTQ rights to service). The political parties are polarized over this question, with nearly nine-in-10 Democrats and about two-thirds of independents opposing religiously based refusals, but 57 percent of Republicans supporting them.
The 2015 Obergell v. Hodges Supreme Court decision legalizing same-sex marriage is threatened by the current extremist-majority Supreme Court, making the survey’s findings on marriage equality very timely. On this subject as well, the institute similarly found that overall, 68 percent of Americans support same-sex marriage. In fact, support for same-sex marriage is steadily increasing in the United States, up from 58 percent in 2016 to 69 percent today.
Once again, white evangelical Protestants are the odd ones out, with only about a third (38 percent) supporting marriage equality. Even so, support is growing among their ranks. In 2014, only a quarter of Mormons supported same-sex marriage, but today half do. The survey found that Hispanic Protestants, white evangelical Protestants and Jehovah’s Witnesses show lowest support for marriage equality, with 43 percent, 38 percent and 19 percent respectively supporting it. Meanwhile, the religiously unaffiliated show the greatest acceptance, with nine in 10 in favor of marriage equality. Support for same-sex marriage from white mainline Protestants and white Catholics has risen from about two-thirds to three-fourths.
Of note, while 10 percent of Americans identify as LGBTQ (3 percent gay or lesbian, 4 percent bisexual and 2 percent as something other), they are twice as likely as the general population to identify as religiously unaffiliated. The institute identifies 26 percent of the general population as unaffiliated, but 50 percent of LGBTQ are in that category. About two-in-10 non-Christians (including Unitarian Universalists, religiously unaffiliated, Buddhists, Jews, Muslims, Hindus and other non-Christians) identify as LGBTQ.
LGBTQ Americans are twice as likely to belong to Generation Z, with almost half of them under age 30. Although whites make up the majority of the LGBTQ community, LGBTQ individuals are less likely to be white than the population at large. And LGBTQ Americans are six times as likely to identify as Democrats than as Republicans.
The Public Religion Research Institute found that attitudes toward structural racism correlate closely with attitudes toward LGBTQ rights. “Americans who strongly favor protections for LGBTQ people score lower on the Structural Racism Index,” it says.
Similarly, Christian nationalism adherents are about five times as likely as Christian nationalism rejecters to support allowing religiously based service refusals. Americans who agree that in truly Christian households women must submit to a man’s leadership are (no surprise) about twice as likely to favor allowing religiously based service refusals as those who disagree with this idea (49 percent vs. 25 percent).
“These findings are extremely eye-opening in combating those religiously motivated state legislators, governors and members of Congress who are eager to take us back to the bad old days of closets and rampant homophobia,” says Annie Laurie Gaylor, FFRF co-president. “The religiously diverse American people have spoken — and huge majorities of us support LGBTQ rights.”
The Freedom From Religion Foundation is a national nonprofit organization with almost 40,000 members and several chapters across the country. FFRF’s purposes are to protect the constitutional principle of separation between church and state, and to educate the public on matters relating to nontheism.
On Wednesday, March 22, 2023, the Survivors of HIV Advocating for Research Engagement (SHARE) Board conducted a webinar highlighting the results of their survey “Aging with HIV: What do you need to thrive?” They sought to answer questions such as, “What are the key health-related questions/issues that research should address around HIV and aging?,” “What matters most to people aging with HIV?,” and “What health outcomes are of most relevance to people aging with HIV?”
Sadly, the SHARE survey and report revealed nothing new.
Their overall conclusions were that:
Community members living with HIV can be and need to be included in research projects;
Care concerns in long-term survivor groups may reflect the loss of friends and the potential of stigma from family members, necessitating need for paid care;
Planning for older adulthood is challenged further when it living into advanced age wasn’t anticipated; and,
Significant need exists for financial management, housing, medication burden support.
It is notable that SHARE meant for the survey not only to identify priority research issues that matter to long-term HIV survivors, but also to facilitate collaboration among long-term HIV survivors, policy makers, clinicians, and researchers.
They recruited a group of 267 long-term survivors (whom they defined as 50 years or older who had lived with HIV for ten years or more), ranging in age from 42 to 77, with an average length of diagnosis of 29 years. Survey respondents were heterosexual (36%), gay (29%), bisexual (19%), and lesbian (13%), with reported race/ethnicities of Black or African American (33%), Hispanic (28%), and white (52%) from both rural and urban areas around the country. Participants completed a survey and interviews by phone, Zoom, or face-to-face.
The survey revealed slightly different priorities among those who have lived with HIV for less than twenty years compared with those who have lived with HIV for more than twenty years, but overall, the six most frequently reported needs among long-term survivors were: (1) enhancing quality of life (by far the most prominent issue), (2) addressing mental health and cognitive decline, (3) maintaining physical health, (4) addressing loneliness and isolation, (5) issues of medication, including polypharmacy concerns, and (6) accessing appropriate healthcare.
Care planning and caregiving were also identified as critical issues, with more than 50 percent of respondents stating “I’m not sure who would provide care for me,” particularly among those who were diagnosed more than twenty years ago. More than 80% of respondents also reported having experienced stigma based on race/ethnicity, gender identity, sexual orientation, age, and HIV status.
Since January 2016, I have studied and reported on issues faced by us long-term HIV survivors, including several community-based surveys and studies such as this one. I have attended (via Zoom) several webinars reporting on the findings of those studies. While I make no unwarranted claim to expertise in the field of HIV, I can and do claim a great deal of lived experience with HIV as well as knowledge gained through my studying and reporting.
For many years, we long-term survivors have known and made public our concerns about being included in research projects that affect our lives and other issues identified in the SHARE survey. One need look no further than The San Francisco Principals 2020, which five of us long-term survivors wrote and distributed after the virtual AIDS2020 conference.
In the Principles, we identified the same issues (stigma, financial stress, mental healthcare needs, the lack of trained geriatricians, concerns about the effects of the virus and our medications on our bodies, the lack of political will to address those issues, etc.) and proposed solutions. We were not alone — several major AIDS-related groups have long insisted on the inclusion of us long-term survivors in any and all research and clinical trials that affect us. Nothing about us without us is more than just a catchy slogan — it is a priority that many of us have demanded since as early as 1983 when people living with AIDS promulgated the Denver Principles.
For me, this webinar raised several questions: What is being done to get the results of this survey, and others, into the hands of policy makers, clinicians, and researchers who can actually do something with them?
What concrete actions are being taken as a result of these many community surveys?
How many times must we ask the same questions, getting the same answers, before our answers to those questions are implemented in meaningful ways?
It seems to me, and to many of my fellow survivors, that our needs — for informed healthcare, for financial help to afford medications and living expenses, for mental healthcare, for community-based solutions, etc. — have been known for long enough. What we need is policies and actions that address those needs.
We already know what we need. When, if ever, will those needs be met?
U.S. Reps. Adam Schiff and Mark Takano, both Democrats from California, Tuesday called on Twitter CEO Elon Musk to address the rise in hate speech, including anti-LGBTQ+ speech, on the platform since he took it over last fall.
They cited a study from the Center for Countering Digital Hate, also released Tuesday, that notes the volume of tweets characterizing LGBTQ+ people as “groomers” has increased 119 percent since Musk assumed control October 27.
“New studies have demonstrated, once again, that hate speech has dramatically increased on the platform. As a result of these studies, we have new data showing that Twitter is not adequately or consistently acting on the hate speech on the platform,” Schiff and Takano wrote in a letter to Musk.
The congressmen had written to Musk in December, “after multiple reports came out demonstrating that since late October, when you initiated numerous layoffs and changes at the company, hate speech has dramatically increased on Twitter,” they stated in the new letter. Musk responded by tweeting that one of them had a brain that “was too small.”
In the first letter, they cited particularly the rise in anti-Semitic and anti-LGBTQ+ speech. Some of it, in addition to racist speech, has been directed at them; Schiff is Jewish, and Takano is gay and Asian American.
“Unfortunately, our letter was only met with open hostility and a false public attack that did not provide the requested data,” they wrote Tuesday. “Your various tweets to our offices included a decrease in hate speech was followed by massive amounts of antisemitic and anti-LGBTQ comments and threats against us on both of our Twitter accounts.”
The two lawmakers said they are writing again following new data available that contradicts Musk’s comments that hate speech is decreasing on the platform. Schiff and Takano cite research from the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD), which found that anti-Semitic tweets had increased by over 106 percent.
“Additionally, the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) released a new study today, which shows there was a 119% increase in anti-LGBTQ rhetoric and slurs on the platform under your leadership,” they wrote. “This follows a February study from CCDH which demonstrated the harms that you have brought to the platform by reinstating tens of thousands of accounts that were espousing antisemitic, anti-LGBTQ, bigoted, misogynistic, and racist ideologies. Most notably they found that just ten of those hateful accounts have accumulated over 2.5 billion impressions on Twitter since December.”
Schiff and Takano’s letter references the CCDH’s findings that Twitter will gain $6.4 million each year from advertising revenue by just reinstating five accounts known for their anti-LGBTQ+ content.
Those five are Libs of TikTok, Gays Against Groomers, Chris Rufo, James Lindsay, and Tim Pool. The first three “were named by the Anti-Defamation League in its list of the top Online Amplifiers of Anti-LGBTQ+ Extremism,” according to a CCDH press release. Lindsay is known for popularizing the phrase “OK groomer” and was banned from Twitter before Musk’s takeover. Pool was cited by watchdog group Media Matters for appearing to blame the victims of the Colorado Springs LGBTQ+ nightclub shooting and for spreading anti-transgender propaganda.
Schiff and Takano’s letter asks Musk what steps he’s going to take to address hate speech and when; if he has a plan to increase safety for users, particularly those who are LGBTQ+ or Jewish; and how Twitter enforces content moderation and if it will share that process with the public.
In the CCDH press release, CEO Imran Ahmed said, “Hate-filled lies about LGBTQ+ people are spread online to dehumanize fellow citizens and whip up fear purely based on whom they love or how they identify, and is mirrored by an alarming rise in real-world violence. This isn’t an accident. Elon Musk put up the ‘Bat Signal’ to homophobes, transphobes, racists and all manner of disinformation actors, encouraging them to flood onto Twitter. Not only has Musk’s ownership of the platform coincided with an explosion of the hateful ‘grooming’ narrative, but Twitter is monetizing hate at an unprecedented rate.”
Ahmed added: “Twitter must decide if they believe in the fundamental rights and freedoms of LGBTQ+ people, or if they want to continue profiting from and normalizing hate. They cannot do both.”
The Human Rights Campaign, an LGBTQ+ rights organization, also slammed Twitter over CCDH’s findings.
Jay Brown, Human Rights Campaign senior vice president, programs, research, and training said in a statement that the U.S. is facing “a surge of anti-LGBTQ+ attacks as extremists continue to traffic in dangerous disinformation about our community.”
“These threats have caused a rise in verbal and physical abuse, with nearly one-in-five of any type of hate crime being motivated by anti-LGBTQ+ bias — with a continued epidemic of fatal violence facing transgender people, particularly Black transgender women,” Brown said. “Social media platforms have a responsibility to their users to create a space where the exchange of opposing ideas does not result in physical harm, or discriminatory legislation.”
