Connect with us

National

‘Don’t Ask’ repeal could be certified mid-summer

Pentagon officials testify on ending military’s gay ban

Published

on

Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel & Readiness Clifford Stanley (Blade photo by Michael Key)

Top Pentagon officials said Friday that “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal training could sufficiently be complete by mid-summer to allow for certification to end to the law at that time during a congressional hearing in which GOP lawmakers expressed discontent with moving toward open service.

In a hearing before the House Armed Services personnel subcommittee, Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel & Readiness Clifford Stanley and Director of the Joint Staff Vice Adm. WilliamĀ Gourtney said implementation for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repealĀ is proceeding on track and troops are being trained to handle open service.

Stanley told the Republican-controlled panel that training could be sufficiently finished by mid-summer to allow for certification for repeal.

“We’re looking at mid-summer” to move towards certification, Stanley said, adding that this target time could be delayed if something disruptive emerges that Pentagon leaders don’t anticipate.

According to Stanley, the U.S. military has trained more than 200,000 members of the armed forces on handling open service, or about nine percent of the armed forces.

Gourtney concurred that mid-summer is the time for when certification for repeal is expected to happen.

“It’s really the magnitude of the challenge that’s out there and making sure that as we get our arms around the magnitude of the challenge, we don’t miss anything,” Gourtney said. “So we’re grateful for the deliberate process that has been laid out and we’re [looking at] mid-summer for the recommendation. Followed by 60 days after that, repeal is achievable.”

In December, President Obama signed legislation allowing for repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” but the anti-gay law will only be off the books after 60 days pass following certification from the president, the defense secretary, and the chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Gay service members are still in danger of discharge from the armed services until the certification process is complete.

The military services are progressing with three tiers of training to prepare troops for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” The Pentagon previously established in its repeal implementation plan that the completion of Tier 2 training — or the training of leadership of troops within a service — could be the time when certification could happen.

According to Stanley’s written testimony before the committee, Tier 2 training for the Navy is set to end on April 30, for the Air Force on May 1 and for the Coast Guard on May 15. For the Army, Tier 2 training is set for completion for its active component on July 15 and its reserve component on August 15. The Tier 2 training for the Marine Corps was already set for completion on March 15.

Goutney said the time for issuing repeal certification is dependent on when the Army completes its training for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” The admiral said instruction for the Army is expected to be complete at a later time because the service is larger than others.

Following the hearing, Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, told the Washington Blade he believed training for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” could be accelerated and should be concluded by May 1.

“There’s no reason why it should take the better part of this year to get to open service,” Sarvis said. “So, if we don’t have certification until mid-July or August, then we’re talking about October or November before we get there. I don’t think that’s what the majority of members of voted for repeal had in mind.”

The subcommittee testimony from Stanley and Gourtney was expected to precede a hearing the full House Armed Services Committee on April 7. Josh Holly, a committee spokesperson, told the Blade each of the military service chiefs are slated to testify on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal on that date.

As Stanley and Gourtney provided an update on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal implementation efforts, they fielded questions from Republican subcommittee members who were hostile to moving torward open service.

Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.), chair of the subcommittee, expressed displeasure with the pace at which the Democratic-controlled Congress last year moved forward with repeal legislation during the lame duck session of Congress.

“I felt the repeal was rushed through without adequate review and consideration of the extent of the full implications of repeal,” Wilson said. “I believe the lame duck session was undemocratic and that dozens of defeated congress members adopted a law with significant consequences, but it failed to even pass a budget. It was a violation of the principles of representative democracy.”

In response, Sarvis blasted Wilson for suggesting that Congress improperly moved forward with “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal last year.

ā€œMr. Wilson knows better,” Sarvis said. “There was nothing undemocratic about last year’s vote to repeal ā€˜Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.ā€™ The measure passed both houses of Congress on a strong bi-partisan vote.”

Rep. Mike Coffman (R-Colo.), a veteran of the Army and Marine Corps, was particularly critical of the Pentagon report favoring open service that came out before Congress repealed the law and said he had “no confidence in the process” for implementing open service.

“I think that this survey and study was a conclusion looking for a study,” he said. “This is a political decision made by the executive branch and the military will follow it under whatever circumstances or ramifications it has to the combat effectiveness of our forces.”

Some of the more pointed criticism of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” came from freshmen GOP lawmakers who were elected to office in 2010 during the Republican wave and weren’t present for the vote last year on ending the military’s gay ban.

Rep. Allen West (R-Fla.), an Army veteran of the first Persian Gulf War, said allowing open gays to serve in the armed forces is, in effect, forming “the military to a behavior.”

“I remember going through the military, we took behaviors and we formed it to the military,” West said. “Using a term that they have over in the Middle East, I’m just very wary of the fact that this could be the camel getting his nose under the tent.”

West also invoked the 2009 Foot Hood shootings in which Nidal Hasan, a U.S. Army major serving as a psychiatrist, was charged with killing people 13 with a firearm and wounding 29 others. Hasan is an American-born Muslim of Palestinian descent, and questions have emerged over whether pressures over his religion prompted the incident.

“We had commanders up here at Walter Reed that saw some very disturbing behaviors there with Maj. Nidal Hasan, but for whatever reasons — I think one of the main reasons is the retribution of an atmosphere of political correctness — they did not speak out about that,” West said. “Of course, we know what happened when he was transferred down to Foot Hood, Texas.”

R. Clarke Cooper, executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans, said he’s offended West would suggest “political correctness would trump military order and discipline” in addition to the lawmaker’s comparison of the service of gay troops to the Fort Hood assault.

“Congressman West’s remarks were an unnecessary and unfortunate distraction from the valuable report by the repeal implementation team,” Cooper said.

Rep. Austin Scott (Blade photo by Michael Key)

Questioning backfired on one freshman Republican who apparently was attempting to demonstrate that gay troops have been discharged not for identifying as gay, butĀ for violating the military’s code of conduct.

Rep. Austin Scott (R-Ga.) asked Gourtney whether as a Navy officer he had discharged anyone from service because of sexual orientation. Gourtney admitted that he had in either 1994 to 1995.

“We had an incident shortly after ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ passed that a young sailor came forward through his chaplain, through our chaplain, that he was gay, and we discharged him from the service,” Gourtney said.

When Scott pressed on whether this sailor was discharged because he was gay or because he violated a standard of conduct, Gourtney replied that it was because of the sailor’s gay identity and not for any other violation, much to the surprise of Scott.

“That’s not the answer I thought you would give,” Scott said, eliciting laughter from those who were in attendance at the hearing.

Gourtney added that there are cases in which standards of conduct have been violated as part of separations under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” but said these incidences are few in number.

Additionally, Scott asked about the cost of implementing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Stanley replied the cost of training material has been about $10,000 — considerably a low number for government spending.

But Scott expressed skepticism about the estimate and requested further information.

“If something was done at the [Defense Department] for $10,000, I’d like to know what it was,” Scott said. “I haven’t seen anything out of there with a price-tag that low.”

Rep. Vicky Hartlzer (R-Mo.), another freshman Republican, noted that men and women aren’t permitted to bunk or shower to together in the armed forces and questioned why the military would ask straight troops to shower with gay service members.

In response, Gourtney said the rationale is based on the difference between gender and sexual orientation.

“Gender is very public and sexual preference is very private,” Gourtney said. “We’re not asking about their sexual preference.”

But Gourtney’s answer apparently didn’t allay Hartlzer, who said the military isn’t “being consistent” with its policy.

“I’m very concerned that in a time of war in our country — we have men and women in harm’s way — that we are making such a radical, major shift in our policy,” she said.

Hartlzer isn’t a stranger to taking anti-gay positions. Last month, she introduced a House resolution condemning President Obama for dropping defense of the Defense of Marriage Act against litigation in court.

Democrats who voted in favor of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal defended the decision of Congress to end the statute last year and said the focus of the 112th Congress should be moving toward that goal.

Rep. Susan Davis (D-Calif.), ranking Democrat on the subcommittee, said discussion should move away from whether open service should be implemented and Congress should instead focus on proper oversight of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal.

“I think the debate is no longer really on whether or not to allow gay, lesbian and bisexual American from serving in uniform,” Davis said. “The issue that we are here to focus on today is how the services and the department are preparing — and informing leadership — on how the policies and regulations that are being considered have an impact on military readiness, military effectiveness, unit cohesion and recruiting and retention of the armed forces.”

Rep. Chellie Pingree (D-Maine) said “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal was a change that Congress needed last year to enact because the anti-gay law is “morally reprehensible policy.”

“I just think that it violated the fundamental value of fairness and equal treatment that we cherish in this country, and I’m just so pleased that we’re here to talk about the end to it and the transition out of it, which, I think, is great,” she said.

Following Scott’s question on the cost of implementing repeal, Pingree said the $10,000 number is infinitesimal compared to the $193.3 million estimate offered by the Government Accountability Office in January on the cost of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” from fiscal years 2004 to 2009.

“It’s not only unconscionable that these people were willing to serve their country and came forward, or were asked to leave, but the costs are horrendous,” she said.

Despite the qualms of Republican subcommittee members, LGBT advocates dismissed the possibility that Congress could at this point delay or derail the end to the military’s gay ban. Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) has introduced legislation that would expand the certification requirement to include input from each of the service chiefs, which, if enacted into law, could disrupt the repeal process.

Davis told the Blade she doesn’t think Congress has a chance of interfering with “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” now that legislation has already passed a measure that would repeal the statute.

“I think there are people that would love to slow down the process, but actually I think it’s proceeding fairly well and I don’t know that that would be necessary,” she said.

Sarvis said the ability of the opponents of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal in Congress to thwart open service at this time is “highly unlikely.”

“Obviously, there are a few members who would like to delay or derail, but I don’t think that’s where a majority are,” Sarvis said.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

National

Leaders of terrorist group targeted ā€˜Black, immigrant, LGBT, Jewish peopleā€™

FBI arrests two leaders of ā€˜Terrogram Collectiveā€™

Published

on

The FBI and Justice Department arrested two men in connection with a terror plot targeting LGBT people, among others. (Photo by BILLPERRY/Bigstock)

In a little-noticed development, the FBI and the U.S. Department of Justice announced on Sept. 9 that federal prosecutors obtained indictments against two leaders of a U.S.-based terrorist group that allegedly was arranging for the murder of federal government officials and soliciting others to commit hate crimes against ā€œBlack, immigrant, LGBT, and Jewish people.ā€

The Sept. 9 announcement says Dallas Humber, 34, of Elk Grove, Calif., and Matthew Allison, 37, of Boise, Idaho, who are leaders of the Terrorgram Collective, a transnational terrorist organization, were charged in a 15-count indictment for ā€œsoliciting hate crimes, soliciting the murder of federal officials, and conspiring to provide material support for terrorists.ā€

It says the two men were arrested on Sept. 6, but it does not say where they were at the time of their arrest.

ā€œTodayā€™s indictment charges the defendants with leading a transnational terrorist group dedicated to attacking Americaā€™s critical infrastructure, targeting a hit list of our countryā€™s public officials, and carrying out deadly hate crimes ā€“ all in the name of violent white supremacist ideology,ā€ U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland said in the announcement.

ā€œThis indictment charges the leaders of a transnational terrorist group with several civil rights violations, including soliciting others to engage in hate crimes and terrorist attacks against Black, immigrant, LGBT, and Jewish people,ā€ Assistant U.S. Attorney General Kristen Clarke said in the announcement. ā€œMake no mistake, as hate groups turn to online platforms, the federal government is adapting and responding to protect vulnerable communities,ā€ Clarke said.

U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of California, Phillip A. Talbert, one of the prosecutors in the case, added in the announcement, ā€œThe defendants solicited murders and hate crimes based on the race, religions, national origin, sexual orientation, and gender identity of othersā€¦My office will continue to work tirelessly with our partners in law enforcement and in the Justice Department to investigate and prosecute those who commit such violations of federal criminal law.ā€

The announcement also says federal investigators determined Hunter and Alison helped to develop a ā€œhit listā€ of targets for terrorist attacks and hate crimes that included ā€œU.S. federal, state, and local officials, as well as leaders of private companies and non-government organizations, many of whom were targeted because of race, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, or gender identity.ā€

Continue Reading

The White House

The Washington Blade interviews President Joe Biden

Oval Office sit-down was the first for an LGBTQ newspaper

Published

on

President Joe Biden and Christopher Kane in the Oval Office on Sept. 12, 2024 (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Writing about President Joe Biden’s legacy is difficult without the distance and time required to assess a leader of his stature, but what becomes clear from talking with him is the extent to which his views on LGBTQ rights come from the heart.

Biden leads an administration that has been hailed as the most pro-LGBTQ in American history, achieving major milestones in the struggle to expand freedoms and protections for the community.

Meanwhile, conservative elected officials at the local, state, and national levels have led an all-out assault against LGBTQ Americans ā€” especially those who are transgender, and especially transgender youth, who face an uncertain future with Donald Trump promising to strip them of their rights and reverse the gains of the past four years if he is elected in November.

Biden shared his thoughts and reflections on these subjects and more in a wide-ranging sit-down interview with the Washington Blade on Sept. 12 in the Oval Office, which marked the first time in which an LGBTQ newspaper has conducted an exclusive interview with a sitting U.S. president.

Looking back on the movement, the president repeatedly expressed his admiration for the “men and women who broke the back of the prejudice, or began to break the back” starting with those involved in the nascent movement for gay rights that was kicked off in earnest with the 1969 Stonewall Riots.

They “took their lives in their own hands,” Biden said. “Not a joke. It took enormous courage, enormous courage, and that’s why I’ve spent some time also trying to memorialize that,” first as vice president in 2016 when President Barack Obama designated a new national monument at the site of the historic uprising, and again this summer when speaking at the opening ceremony of the Stonewall National Monument Visitor Center.

“I think it set an example,” Biden said, not just in the U.S. but around the world.

Stonewall “became the site of a call for freedom and for dignity and for equality,” he said, and at a time when, “imagine ā€” if you spoke up, you’d be fired, or you get the hell beat out of you.”

The president continued, “I was really impressed when I went to Stonewall. And I was really impressed talking to the guys who stood up at the time. I think the thing that gets underestimated is the physical and moral courage of the community, the people who broke through, who said ā€˜enough, enough,ā€™ and they risked their lives. Some lost their lives along the way.”

Through to today, Biden said, “most of the openly gay people that have worked with me, that I’ve worked with, the one advantage they have is they tend to have more courage than most people have.”

“No, I’m serious,” he added, “I think you guys underestimate that.”

The president has spoken publicly about his deep respect and admiration for LGBTQ people, including the trans community, and trans youth, whom he has repeatedly said are some of the bravest people he knows.

A record-breaking number of LGBTQ officials are serving in appointed positions throughout the Biden-Harris administration. Among them are Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, the first openly gay Senate-confirmed Cabinet member; Rachel Levine, the highest-ranking transgender appointee in history, who serves as assistant secretary for health at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; the first out White House communications director and press secretary, Ben LaBolt and Karine Jean-Pierre; and 11 federal judges (the same number of LGBTQ judicial nominees who were confirmed during the Obama-Biden administration’s two terms).

Even though “everyone was nervous,” Biden said, “I wanted an administration that looked like America,” adding, “all the LGBTQ+ people that have worked for me or with me have reinforced my view that it’s not what your sexual preference is, it’s what your intellectual capacity is and what your courage is.”

“I never sat down and said, ā€˜it’s going to be hard, man, she’s gay, or he’s gay,ā€™ or ā€˜she’s a lesbianā€™” he said, and likewise, “it wasn’t like the people I work with, I went, ā€˜God, I’m surprised theyā€™re competent as anybody else.'”

And then there is Sarah McBride, the Delaware state senator who is favored to win her congressional race in November, which would make her the first transgender U.S. member of Congress, a sign that “we’re on the right track,” Biden said.

A close friend of the Biden family, McBride worked for the president’s eldest son, Beau, who died from cancer in 2015. (As the Blade reported on Friday, Biden called to congratulate her on winning the Democratic primary race last week.)

While the president’s close personal and professional relationships with LGBTQ friends and aides has often been highlighted in the context of Biden’s leadership on efforts to expand freedoms and protections for the community, he credits first and foremost the values he learned from his father.

“I think my attitude about this, from the very beginning, was shaped by my dad,” Biden said. “You think I’m exaggerating, but my dad was a well-read guy who got admitted to college just before the war started” and in addition to being well educated was “a decent, decent, decent, honorable man.”

“My dad used to say that everyone’s entitled to be treated with dignity,” the president said, recalling a story he has shared before about a time when, as a teenager, he was surprised by the sight of two men kissing in downtown Wilmington, Del., and his father responded, “Joey, it’s simple. They love each other.”

“As a consequence of that, most of the things that I’ve done have related to just [what] I think is basic fairness and basic decency,” Biden said.

In his 2017 memoir, “Promise Me, Dad,” Biden writes that the country was too slow to understand “the simple and obvious truth” that LGBTQ people are “overwhelmingly good, decent, honorable people who want and deserve the same rights as anyone else.”

Plus, “It’s not like someone wakes up one morning says, ā€˜you know, I want to be transgender,ā€™ that’s what I want to do,” he said. “What do they think people wake up, decide one morning, ā€˜that’s what I wantedā€™ ā€” it’s a lot easier being gay, right?”

As vice president, Biden had pushed for the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and for the designation of a national monument to honor Stonewall, but he took a lot of heat ā€” along with a lot of praise from the LGBTQ community ā€” for voicing his support for same-sex marriage before Obama had fully come around to embracing that position.

His remarks came in the heat of the 2012 reelection campaign during an interview with NBC’s “Meet the Press.” Biden told the Blade he had just “visited two guys who had children” and “if you saw these two kids with their fathers, youā€™d walk away saying, ‘wait a minute, they’re good parents.ā€™”

At the event, a reception hosted by Michael Lombardo, an HBO executive, and Sonny Ward, an architect, Biden pointed to the children and said, ā€œThings are changing so rapidly, itā€™s going to become a political liability in the near term for someone to say, ā€˜I oppose gay marriage.ā€™ā€

Nevertheless, “I remember how everyone was really upset, except the president,” Biden said, when he told David Gregory, ā€œI am absolutely comfortable with the fact that men marrying men and women marrying women and heterosexual men and women marrying men and women are entitled to the same exact rights, all the civil rights, all the civil liberties and, quite frankly, I donā€™t see much of a distinction beyond that.”

It was a watershed moment. Obama would pledge his support for marriage equality three days later. And 10 years later, as president, Biden would sign the Respect for Marriage Act, a landmark bill codifying legal protections for married same-sex and interracial couples, rights that conservative U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has expressed an interest in revisiting.

The president glanced at a print-out with bullet points, presumably a list of the various ways in which he and his administration have advanced LGBTQ rights over the past four years. “I forgot half the stuff I had done,” he said. “But you know, I’m just really proud of a lot of things we did.”

Ticking through some highlights, Biden started with the Respect for Marriage Act. “I was very proud” to sign the legislation, he said, with a ceremony in December 2022 that included Vice President Kamala Harris, first lady Jill Biden, and second gentleman Doug Emhoff.

Biden pointed to several advancements in health equity, such as the FDA’s decision to change “the law so that you could no longer discriminate against using the blood of a gay man or a gay woman,” progress in the national strategy to end HIV by 2030, an initiative coordinated by HHS, and a push to expand access to prophylactic drug regimens to protect against the transmission of HIV.

He added, “I directed the administration to promote human rights for LGBTQ [people] everywhere, particularly, for example, Uganda ā€” they want help from us; theyā€™ve got to change their policy, in terms of the discrimination.”

President Yoweri Museveni in May 2023 signed a law that carries a death penalty provision for ā€œaggravated homosexuality.ā€ The U.S. subsequently imposed visa restrictions on Ugandan officials and removed the country from a program that allows sub-Saharan African countries to trade duty-free with the U.S. The World Bank Group also announced the suspension of new loans to Uganda.

Several of the administration’s pro-LGBTQ accomplishments and ongoing work address Republican-led efforts to restrict rights and freedoms. For instance, the president noted the importance of protecting in-vitro fertilization treatments, which are threatened by Trump “and his buddies” who were involved in Project 2025, the 900+ page governing blueprint that was drafted in anticipation of the former president’s return to the White House. The document contains extreme restrictions on reproductive healthcare and provisions that would strip away LGBTQ-inclusive non-discrimination rules.

“Fighting book bans” is another example, Biden said, adding, “I mean, come on, these guys want to erase history instead of make history.”

Last year, the president appointed an official to serve in the Education Department for purposes of advising schools on instances where their restrictions on reading material, which have been shown to disproportionately target content with LGBTQ characters or themes, may run afoul of federal civil rights law.

Before “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was repealed, Biden said, “I spoke up when they were dismissing people, discharging people in the military because they were gay.” In 2021, just a few days after his inauguration, the president issued an executive order reversing the Trump administration’s ban on military service by transgender service members.

Lowering his voice for emphasis, Biden added, “They can shoot straight. They can shoot just as straight as anybody else.”

Other major pro-LGBTQ moves by the Biden-Harris administration include:

  • ā€¢ Issuance of a new Title IX policy prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in public schools, educational activities, and programs;
  • ā€¢ A proposed rule from HHS that would protect LGBTQ youth in foster care;
  • ā€¢ Expansion of mental health services, including the establishment of a 988 suicide and crisis lifeline, which provides the option for callers to be connected with LGBTQ-trained counselors;.
  • ā€¢ Legal challenges of anti-trans state laws, such as those restricting access to health treatments;
  • ā€¢ Repeated pushback against these bills by the president and other officials like Jean-Pierre;
  • ā€¢ The president’s remarks reaffirming his support for the LGBTQ community, including in all of his State of the Union addresses;
  • ā€¢ The administration’s work tackling the mpox outbreak;
  • ā€¢ Expanded non-discrimination protections in the healthcare space;
  • ā€¢ Issuance of new guidelines allowing for changes to gender markers on official government-issued IDs;
  • ā€¢ Efforts to bring justice to veterans who were discharged other than honorably under discriminatory military policies, and;
  • ā€¢ ‘The biggest Pride month celebrations ever held at the White House.

“But the one thing I didn’t get done was the Equality Act,” Biden said, “which is important. important.”

The president and his administration pushed hard for Congress to pass the legislation, which would codify LGBTQ-inclusive nondiscrimination protections in areas from housing and employment to lending and jury service.

Biden raised the issue again when the conversation turned to his plans to stay involved after January 2025. “Look,” he said, “when a person can get married” to a spouse of the same sex but might “show up at a restaurant and get thrown out of the restaurant because they’re LGBTQ, that’s wrong.”

“That’s why we need the Equality Act,” Biden said. “We need to pass it. So, I’m going to be doing everything I can to be part of the outside voices, and I hope my foundations that I will be setting back up will talk about equality across the board.”

“Lawmakers, aides, and advocates say that significant obstacles to progress on the Equality Act remain, including polarized views on how to protect the rights of religious institutions that condemn homosexuality and Republicansā€™ increasing reliance on transgender rights as a wedge issue,” the Washington Post wrote in 2021, after the bill was passed by the House but left to languish in the Senate.

On LGBTQ issues more broadly, Biden said, “I think there are a lot of really good Republicans that I’ve served with, especially in the Senate, who don’t have a prejudiced bone in their body about this but are intimidated.”

“Because if you take a position, especially in the MAGA Republican Party now, you’re going to be ā€” they’re going to go after you,” he added. “Trump is a different breed of cat. I mean, I don’t want to make this political, but everything he’s done has been anti, anti-LGBTQ, I mean, across the board.”

Project 2025, the president said, “is just full of nothing but disdain for the LGBTQ community. And you have Clarence Thomas talking about, when the decision was made [to overturn] Roe v Wade, that maybe we should consider changing the right of gays to marry ā€” I mean, things that are just off the wall ā€” just pure, simple, prejudice.”

“What I do worry about is I do worry about violence,” Biden said. “I do worry about intimidation. I do worry about what the MAGA right will continue to try to do, but I’m going to stay involved.”

“I’m going to remain involved in all the civil liberties issues that I have worked for my whole life.”

Continue Reading

National

How data helps ā€”Ā and hurts ā€” LGBTQ communities

ā€˜Even when we prove we exist, we don’t get the resources we needā€™

Published

on

ā€˜To convince people with power, especially resource allocation power, you need to have data,ā€™ says MIT professor Catherine Dā€™Ignazio.

When Scotland voted to add questions about sexuality and transgender status to its census, and clarified the definition of ā€œsex,ā€ it was so controversial it led to a court case.

It got so heated that the director of Fair Play for Women, a gender-critical organization, argued: ā€œExtreme gender ideology is deeply embedded within the Scottish Government, and promoted at the highest levels including the First Minister.ā€

Data, like the census, ā€œis often presented as being objective, being quantitative, being something that’s above politics,ā€ says Kevin Guyan, author of ā€œQueer Data.ā€

Listening to the deliberations in parliament breaks that illusion entirely. ā€œThere’s a lot of political power at play here,ā€ says Guyan, ā€œIt’s very much shaped by who’s in the room making these decisions.ā€

Great Britain has been a ā€˜hotspotā€™ for the gender-critical movement. ā€œYou just really revealed the politics of what was happening at the time, particularly in association with an expanded anti-trans movement,ā€ explains Guyan.

Ultimately, the LGBTQ community was counted in Scotland, which was heralded as a historic win.

This makes sense, says Amelia Dogan, a research affiliate in the Data plus Feminism Lab at MIT. ā€œPeople want to prove that we exist.ā€ 

Plus, there are practical reasons. ā€œTo convince people with power, especially resource allocation power, you need to have data,ā€ says Catherine D’Ignazio, MIT professor and co-author of the book ā€œData Feminism.ā€ 

When data isnā€™t collected, problems can be ignored. In short, Dā€™Ignazio says, ā€œWhat’s counted counts.ā€ But, being counted is neither neutral nor a silver bullet. ā€œEven when we do prove we exist, we don’t get the resources that we need,ā€ says Dogan.

ā€œThere are a lot of reasons for not wanting to be counted. Counting is not always a good thingā€ they say. Dā€™Ignazio points to how data has repeatedly been weaponized. ā€œThe U.S. literally used census data to intern Japanese people in the 1940s.ā€ 

Nell Gaither, president of the Trans Pride Initiative, faces that paradox each day as she gathers and shares data about incarcerated LGBTQ people in Texas. 

ā€œData can be harmful in some ways or used in a harmful way,ā€ she says, ā€œthey can use [the data] against us too.ā€ She points to those using numbers of incarcerated transgender people to stoke fears around the danger of trans women, even though itā€™s trans women who face disproportionate risk in prison.

This is one of the many wrinkles the LGBTQ community and other minority communities face when working with or being represented by data.

There is a belief by some data scientists that limited knowledge of the subject is OK. D’Ignazio describes this as the ā€œhubris of data scienceā€ where researchers believe they can make conclusions solely off a data set, regardless of background knowledge or previous bodies of knowledge. 

ā€œIn order to be able to read the output of a data analysis process, you need background knowledge,ā€ Dā€™Ignazio emphasizes. 

Community members, on the other hand, are often primed to interpret data about their communities. ā€œThat proximity gives us a shared vocabulary,ā€ explains Nikki Stevens, a postdoctoral researcher in Dā€™Ignazioā€™s Data plus Feminism lab.Ā 

It can also make more rich data. When Stevens was interviewing other members of the transgender community about Transgender Day of Remembrance, they realized we ā€œthink more complicated and more meaningful thoughts, because we’re in community around it.ā€Ā 

Community members are also primed to know what to even begin to look for.

A community may know about a widely known problem or need in their community, but they are invisible to institutions. ā€œIt’s like unknown to them because they haven’t cared to look,ā€ says Dā€™Ignazio.

That is how Gaither got involved in tracking data about incarcerated LGBTQ people in Texas in the first place.

Gaither received her first letter from an incarcerated person in 2013. As president of the Trans Pride Initiative, Gaither had predominately focused on housing and healthcare for trans people. The pivot to supporting the LGBTQ incarcerated community came out of needā€”trans prisoners were not given access to constitutionally mandated healthcare

Gaither sought a legal organization to help, but no one stepped inā€”they didnā€™t have expertise. So, Gaither figured it out herself.

As TPI continued to support incarcerated, queer Texans, the letters kept rolling in. Gaither quickly realized her correspondences told a story: definable instances of assault, misconduct, or abuse. 

With permission from those she corresponded with and help from volunteers, Gaither started tracking it. ā€œWeā€™re hearing from people reporting violence to us,ā€ says Gaither, ā€œwe ought to log these.ā€ TPI also tracks demographic information alongside instances of abuse and violence, all of which are publicly accessible

ā€œIt started off as just a spreadsheet, and then it eventually grew over the years into a database,ā€ says Gaither, who constructed the MySQL database for the project. 

Gaitherā€™s work especially focuses on the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA), which ostensibly includes specific protections for transgender people. 

To be compliant with PREA, prisons must be audited once every three years. Numerous investigations have shown that these audits are often not effective. TPI has filed numerous complaints with the PREA Resource Center, demonstrating inaccuracies or bias, in addition to tracking thousands of PREA-related incidents. 

ā€œWe are trying to use our data to show the audits are ineffective,ā€ says Gaither.

Gaither has been thinking about data since she was a teenager. She describes using a computer for the first time in the 1970s and being bored with everything except for dBASE, one of the first database management systems. 

ā€œEver since then, I’ve been fascinated with how you can use data and databases to understand what your work with data,ā€ Gaither says. She went on to get a masterā€™s in Library and Information Sciences and built Resource Center Dallasā€™s client database for transgender health.

But gathering, let alone analyzing, and disseminating data about queer people imprisoned in Texas has proven a challenge.

Some participants fear retaliation for sharing their experiences, while others face health problems that make pinpointing exact dates or times of assaults difficult.

And, despite being cited by The National PREA Resource Center and Human Rights Clinic at the University of Texas School of Law, Gaither still faces those who think her data ā€œdoesn’t seem to have as much legitimacy.ā€ 

Stevens lauds Gaitherā€™s data collection methods. ā€œTPI collect their data totally consensually. They write to them first and then turn that data into data legible to the state and in the service of community care.ā€Ā 

This is a stark contrast to the current status quo of data collection, says Dogan, ā€œpeople, and all of our data, regardless of who you are, is getting scraped.ā€ Data scraping refers to when information is imported from websites ā€“ like personal social media pages ā€“ and used as data.

AI has accelerated this, says Dā€™Ignazio, ā€œitā€™s like a massive vacuum cleaning of data across the entire internet. Itā€™s this whole new level and scale of non-consensual technology.ā€ 

Gaitherā€™s method of building relationships and direct correspondence is a far cry from data scraping. Volunteers read, respond to, and input information from every letter. 

Gaither has become close to some of the people with whom sheā€™s corresponded. Referring to a letter she received in 2013, Gaither says: ā€œI still write to her. Weā€™ve known each other for a long time. I consider her to be my friend.ā€

Her data is queer not simply in its content, but in how she chooses to keep the queer community centered in the process. ā€œI feel very close to her so that makes the data more meaningful. It has a human component behind it,ā€ says Gaither.

Guyan says that data can be seen as a ā€œcurrencyā€ since it has power. But he emphasizes that ā€œpeople’s lives are messy, they’re complicated, they’re nuanced, they’re caveated, and a data exercise that relies on only ones and zeros canā€™t necessarily capture the full complexity and diversity of these lives.ā€ 

While Gaither tallies and sorts the incidents of violence, so it is legible as this ā€œcurrency,ā€ she also grapples with the nuance of the situations behind the scenes. ā€œIt’s my family that I’m working with. I think it makes it more significant from a personal level,ā€ says Gaither.

Guyan explains that queer data is not just about the content, but the methods. ā€œYou can adopt a queer lens in terms of thinking critically about the method you use when collecting, analyzing, and presenting all types of data.ā€ 

(This story is part of the Digital Equity Local Voices Fellowship lab through News is Out. The lab initiative is made possible with support from Comcast NBCUniversal.)

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular