A newly released report based on a nationwide U.S. survey of 1,267 LGBTQ young people from the age of 15 to 24 shows that LGBTQ youth living in rural communities face greater hurdles in coping with their sexual orientation or gender identity.

But the report, released by the youth advocacy organizations Hopelab and Born this Way Foundation, also shows that rural LGBTQ youth have benefited significantly by accessing online resources and support services.

The 20-page report, which was released on June 24, is entitled, “Exploring Pride and Support of LGBTQ+ Young People In Rural Communities.”

Here are the key findings of the research as stated in the report:

• Rural LGBTQ+ young people report that their schools (28% vs. 49%), communities (13% vs 35%), and households (47% vs 61%) are less supportive than those of their suburban/urban peers.

• Rural LGBTQ+ young people are significantly more likely than their suburban/urban peers to give (76% vs 70%) and receive (57% vs 51%) support through online friends and communities.

• Rural LGBTQ+ young people are significantly more likely than their suburban/urban peers to meet the threshold for depression (57% vs 45%) and report less flourishing than their suburban/urban counterparts (43% vs 52%).

• Rural LGBTQ+ young people who receive support from those they live with are more likely to be categorized as flourishing (50% vs 35%) and less likely to meet the cutoff for depression (52% vs 63%)than their counterparts with little or no support.

• Despite having less support for LGBTQ+ people in their in-person environments, rural young people report high LGBTQ+ pride at all levels comparable to their suburban/urban peers (85% vs 86%).

 “The survey was developed through a collaborative process that included young people in every step, from co-designing survey methods to youth-centered co-distillation support in interpreting results,” a statement released by Hopelab and Born This Way Foundation says.

The statement adds, “The insights directly center on the perspectives of LGBTQ+ young people, ages 15-24, examining how they give and receive support online, their experiences with mental health and well-being, and ways they show kindness and offer support in the face of challenges.”

The report includes a quote from a survey interview of a participant it describes as a white, nonbinary young adult: “Being neurodivergent and Queer in a small town in the South means you’re not very likely to have friends. Finding these people online was my first gateway to being treated like a normal person by my peers. It has greatly shaped who I am today in a positive way. I think I’d still be terribly depressed had I never met them.”

The report concludes by pointing out that despite facing challenges, rural LGBTQ+ young people “demonstrate levels of pride and identity connection that are comparable to their suburban and urban peers.” It adds, “This suggests that even when direct support is lacking, many rural LGBTQ+ young people are still able to find avenues to connect to others similar to them and develop a sense of identity.”

The full report can be accessed at hopelab.org.

On Friday afternoon, nine transgender organizers and allies were arrested on the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court for blocking the street and protesting the recent U.S. v. Skrmetti ruling.

The ruling, decided 6-3 by the conservative majority on Wednesday, upheld Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming care for minors. The decision will allow states to pass laws restricting gender-affirming care for minors and further minimizes bodily autonomy.

The nine arrested were part of a larger group of more than 30 protesters wearing colors of the trans Pride flag— pink, blue, and white, — standing outside of the nation’s highest court. Organizers unfurled large cloths in pink, blue, and white, shared personal testimonies about how their gender-affirming care was a matter of life and death, released pink and blue smoke, and saw nine trans participants take their hormone replacement therapy.

The protest was led by the Gender Liberation Movement, an organization that “builds direct action, media, and policy interventions centering bodily autonomy, self-determination, the pursuit of fulfillment, and collectivism in the face of gender-based sociopolitical threats.” Among the nine arrested was GLM co-founder Raquel Willis.

Before being arrested, Willis spoke to multiple media outlets, explaining that this decision was an overreach of power by the Supreme Court.

“Gender-affirming care is sacred, powerful, and transformative. With this ruling in U.S. v. Skrmetti, we see just how ignorant the Supreme Court is of the experiences of trans youth and their affirming families,” said Willis. “Everyone deserves the right to holistic healthcare, and trans youth are no different. We will continue to fight for their bodily autonomy, dignity, and self-determination just like previous generations. No court, no law, no government gave us our power, and none can take it away.”

GLM co-founder Eliel Cruz also spoke to media outlets about the Skrmetti ruling, calling it “a historical moment of fascist attacks,” and encouraged the LGBTQ community to “organize and fight back.”

“As a cisgender man, I stand in solidarity with the trans community during these escalating attacks on their safety, well-being, right to exist in this world, and ability to live a future free of violence,” Cruz said. “I’m enraged at the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold a ban on gender-affirming care for youth. My heart hurts for the families and young people who this will negatively impact and harm.”

The Washington Blade reached out to Capitol Police for comment.

A spokesperson said the nine activists were arrested for violating D.C. Code §22-1307 — “Crowding, Obstructing, or Incommoding” — on First Street, N.E., after receiving three warnings.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on June 18 approved a newly developed HIV/AIDS prevention drug that only needs to be taken by injection once every six months.

The new drug, lenacapavir, which is being sold under the brand name of Yeztugo by the pharmaceutical company Gilead Sciences that developed it, is being hailed by some AIDS activists as a major advancement in the years-long effort to end the HIV/AIDS epidemic in the U.S. and worldwide.

Although HIV prevention drugs, known as pre-exposure prophylaxis medication or PrEP, have been available since 2012, they initially required taking one or more daily pills. More recently, another injectable PrEP drug was developed that required being administered once every two months.

Experts familiar with the PrEP programs noted that while earlier drugs were highly effective in preventing HIV infection – most were 99 percent effective – they could not be effective if those at risk for HIV who were on the drugs did not adhere to taking their daily pills or injections every two months. Experts also point out that large numbers of people at risk for HIV, especially members of minority communities, are not on PrEP and efforts to reach out to them should be expanded.

“Today marks a monumental advance in HIV prevention,” said Carl Schmid, executive director of the D.C.-based HIV + Hepatitis Policy Institute, in a statement released on the day the FDA announced its approval of lenacapavir.

“Congratulations to the many researchers who spent 19 years to get to today’s approval, backed up by the long-term investment needed to get the drug to market,” he said.

Schmid added, “Long-acting PrEP is now not only effective for up to six months but also improves adherence and will reduce HIV infections – if people are aware of it and payers, including private insurers, cover it without cost-sharing as a preventive service.”

Schmid and others monitoring the nation’s HIV/AIDS programs have warned that proposed large scale cuts in the budget for the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention by the administration of President Donald Trump could seriously harm HIV prevention programs, including PrEP-related efforts.

“Dismantling these programs means that there will be a weakened public health infrastructure and much less HIV testing, which is needed before a person can take PrEP,” Schmid said in his statement.

“Private insurers and employers must also immediately cover Yeztugo as a required preventive service, which means that PrEP users should not face any cost-sharing or utilization management barriers,” he said.

In response to a request by the Washington Blade for comment,  a spokesperson for Gilead Sciences released a statement saying the annual list price per person using Yeztugo in the U.S. is $28,218. But the statement says the company is working to ensure that its HIV prevention medication is accessible to all who need it through broad coverage from health insurance companies and some of its own support programs.

“We’ve seen high insurance coverage for existing prevention options – for example, the vast majority of consumers have a $0 co-pay for Descovy for PrEP in the U.S. – and we are working to ensure broad coverage for lenacapavir [Yeztugo],” the statement says. It was referring to the earlier HIV prevention medication developed by Gilead Sciences, Descovy.

“Eligible insured people will get help with their copay,” the statement continues. “Gilead’s Advancing Access Copay Savings Program may reduce out-of-pocket costs to as little as zero dollars,” it says. “Then for people without insurance, lenacapavir may be available free of charge for those who are eligible, through Gilead’s Advancing Access Patient Assistance Program.”

Gilead Sciences has announced that in the two final trial tests for Yeztugo, which it describes as “the most intentionally inclusive HIV prevention clinical trial programs ever designed,” 99.9 percent of participants who received Yeztugo remained negative. Time magazine reports that among those who remained HIV negative at a rate of 100 percent were men who have sex with men. 

Time also reports that some HIV/AIDS researchers believe the success of the HIV prevention drugs like Gilead’s Yeztugo could complicate the so-far unsuccessful efforts to develop an effective HIV vaccine. 

To be able to test a potential vaccine two groups of test subjects must be used, one that receives the test vaccine and the other that receives a placebo with no drug in it. 

With highly effective HIV prevention drugs now available, it could be ethically difficult to ask a test group to take a placebo and continue to be at risk for HIV, according to some researchers. 

“This might take a bit of the wind out of the sails of vaccine research, because there is something so effective in preventing HIV infection,”  Time quoted Dr. David Ho, a professor of microbiology, immunology, and medicine at New York’s Columbia University as saying.