National
DNC hiring of minister disappoints activists
Gay Dem officials defend Harkins, who opposes same-sex marriage

‘My record clearly shows that I am a strong defender of the rights of all people, including LGBT people,’ Rev. Derrick Harkins told the Blade. (Photo courtesy of Nineteenth Street Baptist Church)
A minister opposed to same-sex marriage that the Democratic National Committee hired to reach out to people of faith says he’s a “strong defender” of the rights of LGBT people and supports civil unions for gay and lesbian couples.
But same-sex marriage advocates say support for civil unions over marriage is unacceptable for the Democratic Party and that the DNC could have chosen among a number of prominent ministers that support marriage rights for same-sex couples.
The DNC’s announcement in October that it had named Rev. Derrick Harkins, senior pastor of D.C.’s Nineteenth Street Baptist Church, to head its faith outreach program created an immediate stir when news surfaced that Harkins doesn’t support same-sex marriage and that he was incorrectly identified in 2009 as a supporter of D.C.’s same-sex marriage law.
“My record clearly shows that I am a strong defender of the rights of all people, including LGBT people,” Harkins told the Blade in an email exchange last week. “I consistently state, from the pulpit and elsewhere, that there is never a time when words or actions that dehumanize or marginalize any individual have a place in our life as a church and faith community.”
Observers in the religious press, including Christianity Today, have said Harkins is a generally progressive minister with strong ties to the Evangelical Christian community and black churches, attributes that could boost the Democratic Party’s standing with evangelical voters while shoring up support from black churches.
Although some LGBT advocates for same-sex marriage say they are disappointed and puzzled over the DNC’s decision to hire a same-sex marriage opponent for an important staff position, two prominent gay Democratic leaders have rallied to Harkins’ and the DNC’s defense.
Rick Stafford, chair of the DNC’s LGBT Caucus, and Brian Bond, former liaison to the LGBT community at the Obama White House and the current DNC national constituency director, released statements pointing to Harkins’ longstanding record of support on LGBT equality issues.
The two noted that while Harkins doesn’t support same-sex marriage, he supports full legal rights for same-sex couples through civil unions.
Stafford said in his statement, released by email, that it was Bond who “brought Rev. Harkins onboard at the DNC.”
In his own statement, Bond called Harkins “a progressive faith leader who supports the right of same-sex couples to equal benefits and equal protection under the law.”
Stafford, a longtime gay Democratic Party activist in Minnesota, said that “to mischaracterize Rev. Harkins’ views and demonize him as a roadblock to equality for LGBT Americans is not helpful to the ongoing effort of building coalitions in our journey to full equality.”
But a number of prominent LGBT advocates, including gay rights attorney Evan Wolfson, said the DNC’s decision to hire a minister opposed to same-sex marriage sends the wrong message to gays and their straight allies as the 2012 elections are fast approaching.
“The overwhelming majority of Democrats support the freedom to marry as do independents and growing numbers across the political spectrum,” said Wolfson, who heads the same-sex marriage advocacy group Freedom to Marry.
“The Democratic Party should be speaking out forcefully and forthrightly in support of the dignity and equality of all Americans and equal protection under the law, which includes the freedom to marry,” Wolfson said.
Asked if Rev. Harkins’ support for civil unions was an acceptable position for a DNC official, Wolfson said, “Does the reverend have a civil union?” When told that Harkins’ official biography says he’s married, Wolfson added, “Right, and for the same reason that marriage matters to people like him it matters to all of us, and that’s what equality does mean.”
DNC spokesperson Melanie Roussell, who said Harkins would not be available for a direct interview, arranged last week for Harkins to answer written questions submitted by the Blade.
When asked to explain his thinking on legal rights for same-sex couples, including civil unions versus marriage, Harkins suggested that his views were evolving.
“In my own journey, I am glad to be part of the ongoing dialogue that brings people of good will toward the goal of common ground, and to acknowledge that perspectives continue to change,” he said. “It’s worth noting that in the not too distant past, ‘traditional’ marriage was limited to same race, same religion, and same nationality. While theological debates may persist, the protections of the law, and the acknowledgement of the rights of same sex couples should be seen as just and fair.”
Roussell said Harkins could not respond to a question asking if he would support adding language to the Democratic Party platform next year backing same-sex marriage and calling on Congress to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, which bans the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages performed in states that have legalized such marriages.
“It is inappropriate for any DNC staff member to comment on the party platform at this time,” Roussell said.
Harkins told the Blade in an email response that ministers he knows who supported the marriage bill pending before the D.C. City Council in 2009 “inadvertently” added his name to a list of clergy backing the marriage measure.
He said he was never contacted by members of D.C. Clergy United for Marriage Equality to confirm whether he supported same-sex marriage. That was the group that compiled the list of clergy backing the law.
“I am certain that my name was inadvertently moved to the ‘confirmed’ category,” he said.
The list shows Harkins as the 93rd clergy person to be added to the 2009 petition declaring, “God is love and love is for everyone. In this spirit we raise our voices in the struggle for the right and freedom to marry” for same-sex couples.
“I count a number of the signers of the petition as personal friends, and all of them as colleagues in ministry, and take no exception to the fact that my name may have been included in initial discussions about potential signers,” Harkins said.
“But my signing the marriage equality petition would have implicitly taken our church toward a position on the issue without the benefit of the extensive consideration, and ultimately, congregational approval that would be needed for a decision as significant as this,” he said.
Nearly 200 ministers, rabbis and other clergy that supported the same-sex marriage bill agreed to have their names placed on the petition.
The D.C. Council passed the same-sex marriage law in December 2009 and then Mayor Adrian Fenty signed it a short time later. It took effect in March 2010 after clearing a required review by Congress.
Rev. Cedric Harmon, a member of the steering committee of D.C. Clergy United for Marriage Equality and a leader among the city’s black clergy in support of the D.C. same-sex marriage law, said he was surprised and puzzled over Harkins’ assertion of opposition to same-sex marriage.
Harmon said he has known Harkins for many years and has worked with him on various progressive causes, including the development of sex education programs for the city’s historic black churches that called for acceptance of LGBT people.
“I know he personally had done a lot to move the conversation and dialogue around full equality forward, especially as it relates to sexual orientation and gender,” Harmon said.
John Aravosis, the gay rights advocate and publisher of America Blog was the first to report that Harkins’ name appeared on the 2009 list of clergy backing D.C.’s marriage law.
Aravosis took exception to Bond’s and Stafford’s assessment of Harkins, writing in an Oct. 28 posting that at least some in the LGBT community “were pretty upset that the Democrats would hire someone who doesn’t support our full and equal status as human beings.”
Lateefah Williams, president of D.C.’s Gertrude Stein Democratic Club, the city’s largest LGBT political group, said the club has not taken a position on the DNC’s decision to hire Harkins. She said she had no immediate comment on the development.
Rick Rosendall, vice president of the Gay and Lesbian Activists Alliance of Washington, D.C., called the DNC’s action “a politically tone-deaf decision” that falls far short of what the Democratic Party should be doing in meeting its stated commitment to equality for all Americans.
“The Democrats are better overall than the Republicans by far, of course,” Rosendall said. “But that’s just not good enough. If the Democrats want gay voters to be strongly motivated in the coming election they need to stop being so hand-cringingly cautious in a way that this demonstrates.”
Rosendall said both the DNC and President Obama would gain more overall support in the 2012 election than they would lose by backing same-sex marriage. Obama has said he supports civil unions rather than same-sex marriage but that his position on the issue is evolving.
“It’s pretty clear to most folks who look at this that the people who are opposed to our equality are generally not going to vote for the president anyway,” he said.
Michael Cole-Schwartz, spokesperson for the Human Rights Campaign, said that while HRC is disappointed that the DNC’s new faith outreach director “is not a supporter of marriage equality, we recognize that Rev. Harkins is a strong supporter of many LGBT equality issues and we look forward to working with him on areas of mutual agreement.”
The White House
‘Lavender Scare 2.0’: inside the White House’s campaign against LGBTQ federal employees
LGBTQ federal workers organization sounding the alarm
Since the beginning of the modern LGBTQ civil rights movement, there have been small but meaningful shifts in policy and public attitudes over the past 55 years that have allowed many within the LGBTQ community to feel safe in their right to love. The Trump-Vance administration is dramatically eroding that sense of security by enacting policies that directly harm LGBTQ people.
The Lavender Scare 2.0 is here, LGBTQ advocates warn, with stark decisions regarding LGBTQ federal employees that harken back to a time when you could be arrested — or worse— for not being a straight, cis citizen.
The Washington Blade spoke with Lucas F. Schleusener, the co-founder and CEO of Out in National Security, a nonprofit and nonpartisan organization that works to “empower queer national security professionals,” about the change in tone coming from the White House on LGBTQ government employees in national security and other federal circles.
There are almost 2.3 million federal government employees — not including uniformed military personnel, U.S. Postal Services employees, employees of federal contractors, and employees of federal grants — but only 7.3 percent of federal employees identified as LGBQ, and less than one percent identified as transgender, according to the 2023 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey. Despite these numbers showing that this population is a minority within federal government employees, the steps the Trump-Vance administration is taking to erode LGBTQ federal workers’ protections seem to be of grave importance — especially within the military.
There are many things that caused shifts in public opinion of LGBTQ people (and their rights). Small victories over time build up and can change how the public views a particular issue — from the beginning legal fights for LGBTQ rights, which started nearly a decade before Stonewall by Frank Kameny, to the assassination attempt of the first openly gay public official Harvey Milk, to even the widespread humanizing impact of the HIV/AIDS epidemic on LGBTQ people who have suffered the most from the disease. All help make up the concept of American LGBTQ rights. Trump — laid out by Project 2025 and aided by other conservative politicians — is beginning to erode these rights.
One of the clearest ways the slow erosion of this protective space for LGBTQ federal employees can be seen, Schleusener explained, is through destabilization efforts within the bureaucratic system coming from the Oval Office — and with that is the return of 1980s–90s–style harassment.
“There’s an overwhelming bureaucratic trauma happening — a destabilization that feels intentional,” Schleusener said. “And underneath that, we’re seeing a return of different flavors of workplace harassment across national security agencies, from the CIA to the Import-Export Bank.”
GLIFAA, an employee resource group founded in 1992 that advocates for LGBTQ inclusion, equality, and workplace protections within U.S. foreign affairs agencies, was forced to have its entire board resign to comply with Trump’s “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government” executive order the Blade covered in January, ultimately removing an important social and professional group that supported public servants. Since the executive order, the GLIFAA website has removed most of it’s content and contacts.
Schleusener continued, explaining that this policy will hurt LGBTQ federal workers.
“The administration has dissolved all minority employee resource groups, destroying networks of belonging and leaving queer federal employees in a state of psychological precarity,” he said.
Other organizations that have had to change their approach to supporting LGBTQ federal employee worker rights include the American Federation of Government Employees’ PRIDE program, a subsection of the largest federal employee union representing 820,000 federal and D.C. government workers. AFGE PRIDE was founded in 2015 to get more LGBTQ-inclusive contracts for federal workers and educate all members on LGBTQIA+ workplace and safety issues. AFGE has had numerous public disagreements with both Trump administrations’ anti-LGBTQ policy, notably when the federal employee union criticized the government’s multiple implementations of transgender military bans, and when it called out questionable budget-cutting techniques within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and multiple LGBTQ specific organizations by flagging — and subsequently removing — funding for anything with “transgender” in it.
Beyond minimizing the power of official structures created to specifically protect workers’ rights, the current administration and some members of the Republican Party have started to use “digital witch-hunts,” using social media to harass, dox, and lie about LGBTQ federal employees. While not as bad as denying a job to a deserving candidate for past homosexual “proclivities” like what happened with Frank Kameny, there are consequences to this shift in what is deemed acceptable for the online appearances of LGBTQ federal workers inside and outside of federal buildings.
“It’s not clearances being denied so much as it is targeted harassment. Laura Loomer has essentially declared herself the new Joe McCarthy, going through the Plum Book to identify anyone with ‘LGBT,’ ‘DEI,’ ‘equity,’ or ‘trans’ in their job titles and doxxing them.”
This intolerance promoted by the Trump-Vance administration and his party is not like whistleblowing on a State Department official for selling secrets to foreign governments, Schleusener explained, but rather attacking a part of LGBTQ federal workers’ human identity.
“These are ordinary federal workers — not public figures — whose home addresses end up on the internet simply for doing their jobs.”
Recently Laura Loomer, the far-right political activist, conspiracy theorist, internet personality, and Trump confidante, accused the trans community of playing some role in the assassination of right-wing political pundit Charlie Kirk, even going as far as to say that transgender people are “a national security threat” and constitute a terrorist movement, despite the shooter not being trans.
Trans federal employees have been facing a particularly difficult time under Trump’s second presidency. From bathroom bans restricting what gender bathrooms people can use to harassment on behalf of the federal government to remove them from military positions, there is a hyper-critical lens being placed on trans federal workers.
“There’s an organization called STARRS that combs through Instagram and LinkedIn looking for minority service members who show any pride in their identity. If you’re LGBTQ, a person of color, or even an ally who took your kids to Pride, they will tag and harass you — and they have a direct line into the Pentagon,” Schleusener pointed out. “People have been removed from their posts because of this, including the Navy’s top West Coast endocrinologist, whose only ‘offense’ was having a rainbow banner and pronouns on LinkedIn.”
Commander Janelle Marra was the medical director of Expeditionary Medical Facility 150 Bravo in San Diego until the TikTok account “Libs of TikTok” posted about her role as the Navy deputy medical director for trans healthcare, which was listed on her LinkedIn page, leading Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to publicly order her removal from the role.
In addition to formally using the government to be hostile — if not outright discriminatory — against LGBTQ federal employees, the Trump-Vance administration has also fostered more informal harassment directed toward LGBTQ federal employees.
“It’s a climate of fear without any logical pattern — people doing important, everyday work suddenly find themselves targeted. These are not public political actors; they’re regular federal employees who now have to manage LinkedIn as if they were cabinet officials,” the former Pentagon employee and Obama national security associate shared.
“Between the administration’s formal hostility and these informal digital witch-hunts, queer employees are being squeezed from every direction.”
While there are some very clear discriminatory policies being put out by the White House, there is clear pushback from LGBTQ, human rights, and democracy advocates to stop them within the courts. With such a high amount of discriminatory action being taken by the Trump-Vance administration, it leaves the possibility for “legal chaos” within an already unhelpful system and the risk of a bad U.S. Supreme Court precedent.
“A lot of what we’re dealing with legally is documenting enough harassment to file viable claims, but the system is stacked against us. Even when we find a legal path — like restoring pensions for trans service members whose retirement benefits were revoked — everything is designed to be slow, difficult, and demoralizing,” Schleusener said. “And the frightening question is always whether fighting back could result in a bad Supreme Court precedent that hurts queer workers nationally.”
These pointed actions taken to harm LGBTQ federal worker protections by Trump and his followers in the federal system warrant a declaration of a second Lavender Scare, Schleusener told the Blade.
“Yes — this absolutely constitutes a second Lavender Scare. The federal government is saying trans people don’t belong in the military, even after spending billions training them for an all-volunteer force, which is both dangerous and absurd. Combined with attacks on ERGs, human rights reporting, and attempts to purge queer employees, it mirrors the patterns of the Cold War era.”
But this isn’t your grandparents’ Lavender Scare with vice squad cops trying to catch federal employees cruising like in the 60s. This is a whole other beast, Schleusener said.
The escalation of offenses, particularly for trans women within the government, is a major concern. The distaste for the trans community within the White House and among the president’s supporters on Capitol Hill makes this worse than a fine or a night in jail. The attempts to expand laws and policy regarding gender identity — particularly related to the National Defense Authorization Act and passport approvals — could have lasting impacts on LGBTQ federal workers’ ability to live in the U.S.
“This Lavender Scare is escalating: the NDAA moving through Congress includes a ban on trans women at service academies, and the administration is using Cold War statutes like the Walter McCarran Act to bar trans foreign nationals from entering the country.
Every opportunity they’ve had to go further, they have taken — and there’s no indication they plan to stop at trans people.”
Schleusener explained that although they are different in implementation, this new Lavender Scare is taking just as much of a toll on LGBTQ federal workers as it did the first time around — most of whom just want to help make the U.S. a better place.
“Like the original Lavender Scare, this is a manufactured moral panic weaponized through bureaucracy. Back then, the State Department bragged about driving queer employees to suicide; now we’re seeing trans service members taking their lives under the pressure of these policies. The difference today is that social media makes the harassment instantaneous and far-reaching, even as queer visibility also makes it harder to shove an entire community back into the closet.”
He also pointed out the growing purges of women and people of color from federal roles alongside the targeting of queer federal employees. This is a time to be aware of how federal work policies could shift the culture — and the safety of some of the most disenfranchised citizens.
“This isn’t only about LGBTQ people — there’s a broader purge underway targeting women and people of color in the senior ranks of the military. The first woman to take command of the SEALs was pushed out purely because she was a woman.
It’s a coordinated effort to turn back the clock across multiple identities simultaneously,” Schleusener said.
This manufactured climate of fear for LGBTQ federal employees is causing some to hide, delete, or exit the federal workforce altogether.
“We’ve seen a huge uptick in people trying to scrub their names from websites, delete their public bios, or step back from leadership programs out of fear of being hunted by Laura Loomer or similar groups. Even something as basic as using the bathroom has become a fraught question because the Pentagon now requires people to use facilities based on sex assigned at birth,” Schleusener added. “It’s driving people out of public service early, especially those with skills that are highly valued in the private sector.”
The Blade attempted to speak to multiple LGBTQ federal workers on record about their experience in seeing an overall shift in policy and tone directed toward the LGBTQ community — either anonymously or with their name attached — but no one wanted to speak for fear of losing their job. The Blade also reached out to the White House Press Office but has not received a response to the request for a statement on these allegations.
National
Trans women in state prisons on being targeted by Trump
Uncloseted Media spoke with five incarcerated trans women in state prisons
Uncloseted Media published this article on Dec. 3.
Editor’s Note: This article includes references to topics such as rape, sexual assault, and violence. Reader discretion is advised.
By HOPE PISONI | Being a transgender woman in prison has always been hard for Lexie Handlang. At 38 years old, she’s a writer for the Prison Journalism Project and is currently working on a kids’ fantasy book starring a young trans girl and her friend who encounter a mysterious magical being.
Handlang has been incarcerated in men’s prisons in Missouri for 11 years, where she says she’s experienced a great deal of violence and discrimination.
She says her fears today are at an all-time high. After Trump passed an executive order on his first day in office that rolled back a suite of the scant and hard-won rights of trans women in federal prisons, Handlang remembers prison staff gleefully gloating.
“Transgenders don’t exist no more.”
“It’s not a thing.”
“I’m not gonna call you by your preferred pronouns.”
“I’m gonna call you ‘sir.’”
The executive order, titled “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government,” includes a mandate requiring trans women to be housed in men’s prisons and a ban on the use of federal funds for gender-affirming care.
The following month, the Bureau of Prisons issued a memo banning gender-affirming items like chest binders and undergarments and requiring staff to refer to incarcerated people by their “legal name or pronouns corresponding to their biological sex.”
While the order does not apply to state prison systems, Uncloseted Media spoke with five trans women incarcerated in three different states who say Trump’s crackdown has created a trickle-down effect. They say it has produced a climate where staff are ramping up their mistreatment of trans women, federal grants for prisons are at risk as the Trump administration feuds with states, and anti-trans propaganda is turning fellow prisoners against them.
“There’s a lot of wardens who’ve been waiting for this — the discrimination has increased and it’s not anything new,” says Kenna Barnes, advocacy manager at Black and Pink, a nonprofit focused on prison abolition and the rights of incarcerated trans people. “It’s happening in every faction of the carceral system, and they are getting very emboldened, and this is a cue for them.”
Escalating attacks
Even though the Trump administration can’t force anti-trans policies on state prisons, they have still been pushing for them. In April, the Department of Justice pulled $1.4 million in funds from Maine’s Department of Corrections, the bulk of which had been allocated to support a substance use treatment program for all incarcerated people. The funding was pulled in retaliation for continuing to allow a trans woman, Andrea Balcer, to be housed in the women’s section of the Maine Correctional Center.
“You asked my feelings on being in the center of this feud between Trump and Maine — I am not in the center, I am underneath the feet of these two giants colliding, a mecha and a kaiju if you will,” Balcer, 24, told Uncloseted Media in a phone interview from the prison. “So I am not so much the center as I am collateral damage.”
Balcer was transferred to the women’s section of the prison in November 2023 due to concerns about her safety in men’s prisons, which are notoriously dangerous for trans women.
She spends much of her time playing Pathfinder, a role-playing game based on Dungeons & Dragons, and has been trying to start a group to host discussions on paganism and monthly full-moon rituals.
Balcer says she tries to keep a low profile and was getting along fairly well with her fellow prisoners after a period of adjustment.
But that changed when Attorney General Pam Bondi bullied her on Fox and Friends by calling her a “giant, 6-foot-1, 245-pound guy” and claimed that funding cuts “will protect women in prisons.” Balcer says some women at the facility turned on her and started to parrot Bondi’s rhetoric about a “man in a woman’s prison.”
“The cultural backlash has been astounding,” she says. “And it’s not that I don’t understand these women — I 100 percent understand their position. Things that have helped them and things that have done so many good things for them are being taken away, and they’re angry, as they have every right to be. But they can’t take out their anger on the people who quite frankly deserve it, [so] they take out their anger on the people that are the indirect cause of this.”
While Balcer says things have slightly improved since Maine successfully appealed the funding cuts, life is still much harder under Trump 2.0.
And she’s not the only trans woman who has a target on her back. Michelle Kailani Calvin was housed at the Central California Women’s Facility since the state’s Transgender Respect, Agency and Dignity Act — which she advocated for — passed in 2021. The act allowed trans women to be housed in women’s facilities.
Calvin, 54, was one of several trans women whose photos were included in a consequential advertisement for Trump’s 2024 campaign, which criticized Kamala Harris for supporting gender-affirming surgery in California prisons and included the infamous slogan “Kamala’s for they/them, not you.”
Difficulty accessing gender-affirming care
While gender-affirming surgeries in prison are still legally accessible in California, Calvin told Uncloseted Media via a phone call from CCWF that she has found it “very difficult … to get any kind of care” since Trump’s reelection.
She says she was scheduled for facial feminization surgery and a revision to her bottom surgery earlier this year to address complications including pain, bladder leakage and intense bleeding. Staff kept delaying them, however, claiming that she hadn’t passed a psychiatric evaluation and that she had a “dirty” toxicology report. According to Calvin, the substance that had been flagged was prescription gabapentin.
Calvin believes this foot-dragging is due to the Trump administration’s threats to cut funding, as they did with Maine.
“This is the game that the institution plays. Instead of just saying, ‘We’re not giving you a surgery because Trump ain’t giving us our money,’” she says.
Emboldened staff
Beyond having limited access to health care, Calvin says trans women face emboldened staff in Trump’s new America. In her case, this has involved increased scrutiny: After three years of no rule violations, she says she was hit with five in the span of four months.
She says several of those cases were provoked by abuse from guards. In one instance, which was documented in a report reviewed by Uncloseted Media, a guard forcefully removed her from her wheelchair and slammed her on the ground after he squeezed her shoulder without consent. She was later written up for resisting an officer.
And in March, the prison began investigating Calvin on allegations that she had assaulted her partner, who is also incarcerated. This led the prison to file a case with the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s Departmental Review Board to have her moved to a men’s prison.
Calvin says that numerous advocacy groups then sent letters to CDCR calling on them to reject the push. One lawyer, Jen Orthwein, wrote that “claims made against Ms. Calvin were submitted long after the alleged event by unnamed confidential informants, with no supporting documentation or medical evidence” and that the alleged victim “has indicated that the accusations are entirely false.” Uncloseted Media also spoke with the alleged victim from the prison where she is housed, and she affirmed that “Michelle never hurt me or any other female.”
“[The prison] feels like the Trump administration’s gonna have their back on whatever that they do, so they’re taking more bolder chances to isolate us or send us back to a men’s facility,” says Calvin.
While Calvin is still at a women’s facility, not everyone has been so lucky. CDCR recently proposed new guidelines that explicitly create a process for trans women to be transferred back to men’s prisons if they have “two or more serious Rules Violation Reports within a 12-month period.” Kelli Blackwell, 58, told Uncloseted Media on a phone call from CCWF that at least three trans women have been transferred to men’s prisons since 2024, which we confirmed on the California Incarcerated Records and Information Search website.
Blackwell is hopeful she’ll get released soon. With that in mind, she got her dentistry license and is set to earn a degree in sociology next spring. She also has a partner living with her in the women’s facility. But with increased scrutiny from CDCR and pressure from the Trump administration, she fears that a transfer to a men’s prison could disrupt all of that.
“You have trans women here that’s actually had the surgery, had the vaginoplasty — they’re still finding ways to send them back to a men’s prison,” she says.
In an email, CDCR said that they are “committed to providing a safe, humane, respectful and rehabilitative environment for all incarcerated people.” They also noted that the department “has a detailed process for patients seeking gender-affirming care, including hormonal treatment.”
Support systems have become ‘useless’
Trans women in prison are also losing the little support they had. Patricia Trimble, a 66-year-old trans woman, writer and advocate, has been incarcerated in men’s facilities in Missouri since 1979. While in prison, she’s pursued paralegal studies at Platt Junior College, theology at St. Louis University and business at Central Methodist University.
She’s used her education to advocate for herself, often through the Transgender Committee, a group of staff members required by law at each Missouri prison. The committee is meant to help the prison “make informed recommendations regarding the health and safety of transgender and intersex offenders.”
However, Trimble says that since the start of the year, the committee has become “absolutely useless.”
“At one point in time, I could sit down with the Transgender Committee … and we would discuss things that make the prison safer, and they were receptive,” Trimble told Uncloseted Media on a phone call from the Southeast Correctional Center.
“Since Trump, there are no conversations like that. When I go to the Transgender Committee, the deputy warden just kinda looks at me with that smile on her face like ‘you ain’t gettin’ nothing here, and I already know what you’re gonna ask, so let’s just go through the motions and then you can go away.’”
Trimble says this makes every issue harder to fight. In a recent incident, she tried to get transferred after being housed with a transphobic cellmate who would “bully” and “constantly pick on” her.
Trimble says that even though there were empty cells in her wing, she was sent back and forth between the Transgender Committee, case workers and her unit manager before getting approved to move into one of them. While she had the know-how to stand up for herself, most people don’t.
Even with her experience in advocacy, she says staff have been harder than usual on her. Earlier this year, after advocating for gender-affirming surgery, she says the prison put her on a call with a doctor who said she “will not be filing a report recommending any further treatment.”
“She had the audacity to tell me that she finds that I no longer suffer from gender dysphoria,” Trimble says. “And I just kinda laughed and said, ‘Okay, I guess we’re done here,’ and I got up and left.”
In an email, the Missouri Department of Corrections wrote that they do not “tolerate unprofessional conduct by staff,” and that “no changes [have been] made to policies pertaining to transgender residents of Missouri state prisons after the 2024 election.”
The danger of men’s prisons
While life in the women’s facilities is far from perfect, the people we spoke with say it’s worth fighting to stay.
According to a 2016 analysis by the Williams Institute at UCLA, 37 percent of incarcerated trans people — the overwhelming majority of whom are housed in prisons that do not match their gender identity — had experienced sexual assault within a one-year period, compared to just over 3 percent of cis people.
Blackwell says physical violence at the men’s prison, often spurred by gang activity, is “structured” and “can get you killed.” Calvin says she was raped multiple times at the men’s prison, and Trimble recounted numerous instances when guards strip-searched her in the presence of men.
Handlang says she’s experienced extreme abuse by guards at the men’s prison: “They went in my cell and they were ripping up pictures of family, trying to get me to react, ripping up my clothes, ripping up my bras, ripping up panties, destroying my makeup.” When she tried to fight back, she says “they went off camera and they broke my ankle and my foot and stomped on me and punched on me.”
As threats continue to escalate, and Trump’s policies continue to trickle down, Trimble fears she could lose the few rights she has left.
“I know that all it would take is a phone call from Trump or one of Trump’s surrogates to the governor, and the governor simply signs an executive order and everything we’ve got is taken away and we would end up having to go to court again,” she says. “If the governor wanted to, he could make our lives a lot worse with just a stroke of the pen.”
Fighting back
In the face of all these horrors, these women are advocating for themselves and caring for their trans sisters.
Handlang says that this often involves the most basic gestures: listening to their troubles, teaching them how to do their makeup and helping them buy hygiene products.
Calvin and Blackwell are still working to defend and uphold the trans-inclusive bills they helped pass, and Trimble has used her years of experience to work with legal advocacy groups to get support for things like name changes and to pressure the state to address mistreatment.
“If you’re going to be an advocate or an activist … it can never be about you,” Trimble says. “It’s about our boys and girls that are suffering in this oppressive system.”
National
Victory Institute to honor Biden at D.C. conference
Former president to receive award on Friday
The LGBTQ+ Victory Institute on Friday will honor former President Joe Biden at its annual International LGBTQ+ Leaders Conference in D.C.
Biden will receive the Chris Abele Impact Award in recognition of what the Victory Institute described as “his historic role in championing LGBTQ+ rights and for his leadership in achieving the most LGBTQ+ inclusive administration in U.S. history.” Biden will be the award’s third recipient.
“President Biden has shown unwavering commitment to ensuring LGBTQ+ people can participate fully and openly in our democracy,” said Victory Institute President Evan Low in a press release. “From appointing a record number of LGBTQ+ leaders to reversing harmful policies and expanding civil rights protections, his administration set a new and necessary standard for what inclusive governance looks like.”
“And now, we’re seeing LGBTQ+ elected officials lead the way on everyday issues that are important to most Americans like groceries, housing, and lowering the costs of healthcare,” he added. “This award honors not only his achievements, but also the real impact these changes have had on LGBTQ+ Americans across the country.”
The conference will take place Dec. 4-6 at the JW Marriott Hotel in Downtown Washington, where more than 700 elected LGBTQ+ political leaders and human rights advocates are expected to attend.
Notable officials slated to participate include Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey; Maine Gov. Janet Mills; Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel; Hawaii Attorney General Anne Lopez; Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes; U.S. Reps. Mark Takano (D-Calif.) and Robert Garcia (D-Calif.); Maine House of Representatives Speaker Ryan Fecteau; Mississippi state Sen. Fabian Nelson; San Antonio Mayor Gina Ortiz Jones; San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria; West Hollywood (Calif.) Mayor Chelsea Byers and Providence (R.I.) Mayor Brett Smiley.
Transgender Spanish Sen. Carla Antonelli, former U.S. Ambassador to Bosnia and Herzegovina Eric Nelson, and Robert Biedroń, a gay member of the European Parliament from Poland, are slated to attend. Earlene Budd, a longtime trans activist in D.C., and D.C. Councilman Zachary Parker (D-Ward 5) are also expected to participate.
Michael K. Lavers contributed to this story.
-
India4 days agoIndia’s Jharkhand state works to improve trans people’s access to health care
-
Commentary4 days agoPerfection is a lie and vulnerability is the new strength
-
District of Columbia2 days agoHIV/AIDS activists block intersection near White House
-
Movies3 days agoHoliday movie season off to a ‘Wicked’ good start
