Living
Milestones in LGBT parenting history
From TV’s first gay dad in 1972 to ‘Kids Are All Right’ success
October is LGBT History Month, so I want to celebrate with a look at some of the historical milestones—of laws, visibility and community—related to LGBT parents. This is not meant to be a comprehensive look at the 40-year history of out LGBT parents, but simply a brief list of a few LGBT parenting “firsts.” These items may show only part of the story, but I hope they will give readers a sense of the rich history of which we are part.
1972: “That Certain Summer,” the first television movie to depict a gay dad, airs on ABC, starring Martin Sheen as a dad who comes out to his teenage son, and Hal Holbrook as his partner. Scott Jacoby, who played the son, won a Best Supporting Actor Emmy.
1973: “Sandy and Madeleine’s Family” becomes the first U.S. documentary about a lesbian-headed family.
1973: A Colorado court issues the country’s first known opinion involving a transgender parent, upholding his right to retain child custody.
1974: A New Jersey superior court judge rules that a father’s sexual orientation is not in itself a reason to deny him child visitation, the first time a U.S. court has acknowledged the constitutional rights of gay fathers.
1974: Several lesbian mothers and friends in Seattle form the Lesbian Mothers National Defense Fund to help lesbian mothers in custody disputes.
1976: Washington, D.C. becomes first jurisdiction in the country to prohibit judges from making custody decisions based solely on sexual orientation.
1977: Lawyers Donna Hitchens and Roberta Achtenberg in San Francisco form the Lesbian Rights Project (LRP), which evolves into the National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR), still helping LGBT parents (and others) today.
1978: The Washington Supreme Court issues the country’s first custody ruling in favor of a lesbian couple (Sandy Schuster and Madeleine Isaacson of the 1973 film above).
1978: New York becomes the first state to say it will not reject adoption applicants solely because of “homosexuality.”
1979: A gay couple in California becomes the first in the country known to have jointly adopted a child.
1979: Jane Severance’s When Megan Went Away becomes the first picture book in the U.S. to show a lesbian relationship.
1982: The Sperm Bank of California begins operations, the first in the country to serve lesbian couples and single women.
1985: A court for the first time allows a non-biological mother to adopt the biological child of her female partner. The ruling, in Alaska, also allows the biological father to maintain a relationship with the child.
1988: A group of youth with LGBT parents meets at a conference organized by a precursor to the Family Equality Council, and begins the organizing that in 1999 leads to Children of Lesbians and Gays Everywhere (COLAGE) as an independent national organization.
1989: Author Lesléa Newman self-publishes “Heather Has Two Mommies,” the first children’s book in the U.S. to show a lesbian couple planning and raising a child together.
1990: LGBT publisher Alyson Publications launches the Alyson Wonderland imprint for children’s titles. It publishes “Daddy’s Roommate,” by Michael Willhoite, the first children’s book to depict gay male parents, and mass produces “Heather Has Two Mommies.”
1997: New Jersey becomes the first state to allow same-sex couples to adopt jointly.
2008: Marcus Ewert publishes “10,000 Dresses,” the first children’s book to show a clearly transgender child.
2009: First explicit mention of same-sex parents in a presidential proclamation. In announcing Sept. 28 as Family Day, President Obama says, “Whether children are raised by two parents, a single parent, grandparents, a same-sex couple, or a guardian, families encourage us to do our best and enable us to accomplish great things.”
2010: “The Kids Are All Right,” starring Annette Bening and Julianne Moore, becomes the first major feature film to focus on an LGBT couple and their children.
2010: President Obama revises hospital visitation rules so patients may designate their own visitors, including same-sex partners.
2011: The U.S. State Department updates passport applications to say “Mother or Parent 1″ and “Father or Parent 2” instead of just “Mother” and “Father.”
(I have compiled these items from a number of sources; special recognition goes to Carlos Ball’s The Right to Be Parents and Jaime Campbell Naidoo’s Rainbow Family Collections.)
Dana Rudolph is the founder and publisher of Mombian (mombian.com), an award-winning blog and resource directory for LGBT parents.
Real Estate
Does Pride decor resemble Trump’s design aesthetic?
Glitter, gold, and rejecting the idea that a home should be understated
Interior design is often a balancing act between taste, personality, and restraint. Sometimes, however, restraint leaves the building entirely. Such is the case when the colorful exuberance of gay Pride-inspired decorating collides with the famously excessive decorating style associated with the current occupant of the White House. The result can be a fascinating study in maximalism, spectacle, and unapologetic visual overload.
Donald Trump’s personal decorating style has long been a subject of debate among designers and critics. Admirers see luxury and grandeur. Critics see something else: a dizzying display of gold leaf, marble, mirrors, crystal, and oversized furnishings that often crosses the line from elegant into what many designers would call tacky. More is rarely enough. If one chandelier sparkles, three are better. If a room has gold accents, why not make every available surface gold? (See Oval Office and ballroom rendition for details.)
In many ways, this excess shares common ground with certain Pride celebrations. Pride has never been about blending into the background. It celebrates visibility, self-expression, individuality, and joy. Rainbow colors, dramatic costumes, glitter, flamboyant artwork, and bold statements have long been part of Pride culture. Yet there is an important difference. Pride’s extravagance is often playful, self-aware, and rooted in personal expression, while Trump’s aesthetic has frequently been criticized for equating luxury with sheer quantity and visual intensity.
Combining these influences creates an interior that could best be described as “glamorous chaos.”
Imagine entering a living room in which gold-trimmed mirrors stretch from floor to ceiling. Crystal chandeliers hang above a bright rainbow velvet sectional. Marble floors gleam beneath metallic furniture that appears determined to reflect every available light source. Pride flags become framed artwork surrounded by ornate gold moldings. A room designed this way doesn’t whisper. It shouts.
Color is central to the concept. Pride-inspired interiors often embrace the full spectrum of colors. Trump’s style, meanwhile, traditionally favors cream, gold, black, and glossy finishes. Combining them means introducing vivid jewel tones against a backdrop of faux-palatial luxury. Emerald green chairs, ruby-red draperies, sapphire-blue accent walls, and gold-trimmed furniture can coexist in a way that feels deliberately theatrical.
The key word is theatrical.
Many professional designers spend years learning how to create visual balance. A Pride-meets-Trump interior intentionally ignores many of those rules. Pattern competes with pattern. Shine competes with shine. Artwork competes with furniture. The eye rarely gets a chance to rest. For some homeowners, that sounds exhausting. For others, it sounds like the perfect party.
Lighting offers another opportunity to embrace excess. Crystal chandeliers, mirrored lamps, illuminated shelves, and color-changing LED lighting can transform a room into something resembling a cross between a luxury hotel lobby and a Pride festival. The goal is not subtlety. The goal is spectacle.
A dining room inspired by this combination might feature a massive glass table, gold dining chairs, rainbow floral arrangements, mirrored walls, and enough crystal accessories to keep a polishing cloth busy year-round. Critics would call it gaudy. Fans would call it fabulous.
Artwork becomes particularly important. Pride-themed pieces featuring LGBTQ+ history, activism, and culture can provide meaning beneath the decorative excess. Without these personal and cultural elements, the room risks becoming little more than a collection of expensive looking, but not necessarily expensive, objects. Pride design can work best when it reflects identity and community rather than simply displaying color for color’s sake.
While normally a haven for restful sleep, bedrooms can take a similar approach. Plush velvet fabrics, oversized tufted headboards, metallic and mirrored finishes, colorful accent lighting, and dramatic artwork create a space that feels more like a boutique hotel suite than a traditional bedroom. Again, the challenge is avoiding the temptation to add one more decorative element to an already crowded visual landscape.
What makes this design combination interesting is that both aesthetics reject the idea that a home should be understated. Both embrace visibility. Both invite attention. Both encourage occupants to take up space unapologetically. Yet where Pride design often celebrates authenticity and self-expression, Trump’s decorating style is frequently criticized for prioritizing conspicuous luxury over cohesion and refinement.
The result is an interior style that many people would consider delightfully outrageous and others would consider a decorating nightmare. Either way, nobody is likely to forget it.
In the end, a Pride-inspired interpretation of Donald Trump’s famously over-the-top aesthetic would be colorful, glittering, excessive, and impossible to ignore. It would break nearly every rule of minimalist design while embracing the philosophy that if something is worth doing, it is worth overdoing. Whether one sees that as fabulous or tacky may depend entirely on how much gold leaf and rainbow velvet one can tolerate in a single room.
Valerie M. Blake is a licensed associate broker in D.C., Maryland, and Virginia with RLAH @properties. Call or text her at 202-246-8602, email her at [email protected] or follow her on Facebook at TheRealst8ofAffairs.
Ragtops rock! For drivers looking to carve their own lane, the world already has enough sensible crossovers, minivans, and pickups. These three convertibles trade practicality for sunshine, wind, and the occasional wild-hair day.
BMW Z4
$58,000
MPG: 25 city/33 highway
0 to 60 mph: 5.2 seconds
Trunk space: 10.0 cu. ft.
PROS: Strong engines. Uber comfy. Stylish.
CONS: Expensive. Final year of production.
Act fast, Bimmer fans, this is the last year the BMW Z4 roadster will be produced. Along with the entry-level xDrive30i and high-performing M40i, there is a Final Edition model.
Since 2002, the Z4 has expertly balanced performance, comfort, and style. The long hood and short rear deck still look fantastic. The stance is athletic. And with the top down, this car gains an extra dose of drama.
Under the hood, BMW offers turbo power that feels eager rather than overwhelming. Acceleration is brisk. The steering precise. The chassis composed.
Upgrading to the premium models lets you scoot from 0 to 60 mph in just 3.9 seconds. But—ka-ching!—the MSRP soars to $79,000.
Available in manual or automatic transmissions, this convertible can sprint through mountain roads on Saturday and soothingly devour highway miles on Sunday.
As for the interior, it blends luxury and functionality. Materials feel expensive. Controls are easy to use. And the seats are supportive.
For me, other ragtops may be more party hearty, but the Z4 is low-key, impeccably tailored and still the center of attention. Think suave James Bond versus sparkling RuPaul.
MAZDA MX-5 MIATA
$32,000
MPG: 26 city/35 highway
0 to 60 mph: 5.5 seconds
Trunk space: 5.0 cu. ft.
PROS: Nimble. Lightweight. Affordable.
CONS: So-so power. Wind noise. Limited space
For decades, the Mazda MX-5 Miata has followed a simple formula: Keep it light, keep it balanced and make every drive feel special. The result: Automotive comfort food that never gets old.
Many vehicles grow larger every year, but the Miata has remained Lilliputian in a way that feels rebellious. You sit low. The controls are user-friendly. Visibility is excellent.
No, the engine power won’t blow you away. But this beachcomber isn’t about brute force. It’s about how the Miata makes you feel wonderfully alive, whether tootling along city streets or a winding road.
Inside, the dashboard is sparse but echoes a traditional sports car. Large analog tachometer and analog speedometer. And while the 8.8-inch infotainment display is dinky, it works nicely.
Alas, storage is limited. The cabin is snug. And taller drivers may wish for a bit more room.
Yet somehow even those compromises feel almost charming. This ride knows exactly what it is and refuses to apologize. Sort of like showing up to Pride wearing what makes you happy rather than chasing trends.
MINI COOPER
$27,000
MPG: 28 city/39 highway
0 to 60 mph: 7.9 seconds
Trunk space: 5.2 cu. ft.
PROS: Playful styling. Fun handling. Extra stowage.
CONS: Ride can be firm. Not a speed demon.
Mini Coopers approach life with a wink and a grin. Rounded headlights. Compact dimensions. Cheerful styling. It all works to create a vehicle that looks like it’s having fun before you’ve even started the engine.
Driving this ragtop is equally entertaining. The steering is quick, and the chassis feels eager to please. Overall performance is lively rather than blistering.
The cabin leans heavily into Mini’s playful design language. Circular elements appear throughout. Details feel intentionally quirky. Many modern interiors seem created by committees that fear excitement. This cabin feels designed by someone who enjoys color, personality and perhaps spontaneous dance breaks.
Unlike the BMW Z4 and Mazda Miata, the Mini offers a small rear seat. “Small” is doing some heavy lifting there, but the extra space adds flexibility. It may not be enough room to comfortably squeeze in friends, but you can easily stow a few bags here.
To me, driving this convertible feels like attending the world’s friendliest block party. People notice it. People smile. Sometimes people even wave.
While one would hope it’s easy to calculate a break-even point for a home purchase – such as you could calculate for “how many widgets a month do I need to sell to break even?” It’s not always easy when looking at the return on investment for a home purchase. Condo buildings can lose a view due to new construction next door. Weather patterns can expose deficiencies. Conversely, new dining and entertainment options in a neighborhood can cause home prices to skyrocket. The addition of public transportation and employment options can make a neighborhood more desirable. Or, as we have recently seen in the District of Columbia – an incoming presidential administration can severely affect the “vibe” of an entire city’s economy – for better or for worse.
Homeownership is not necessarily a get rich quick scheme. Most homeowners find that staying in a house for at least 5-10 years – whether owner occupied or not, makes for a significant return on their investment. An owner may not completely pay off a home in 10 years, but they might gain enough equity that they can receive quite a large check when they decide to sell or move. And the old reasoning that “your apartment rental community does not cut you a sizeable check when moving out after 15 years.” still stands. Is homeownership for everyone? Absolutely not. But many have reported other benefits besides purely financial gains. What are those benefits?
- Feeling a sense of community. – homeowners tend to take more pride in their buildings and neighborhoods, because they feel more invested and tend to want to protect their investment. Neighborhood watch programs, getting to know elderly neighbors, forming building wide or cul-de-sac wide favorite TV show watch nights, super bowl parties, and other such communal and social ties lead to an overall sense of wellbeing and help to stabilize a nervous system in uncertain times.
- Feng Shui? Well, maybe there’s something to it. If you have been wanting to customize your own home but live in an apartment, there are many more restrictions on what you can do in a rental, than when you own your own home. Do you want new countertops? Would you love to remove that popcorn ceiling? Open up that kitchen? Convert the back yard into a curated patio/cold plunge/hot tub time machine cookout/spring break adventure campsite of your wildest dreams?
- Forming longer lasting relationships – sharing that CostCo membership with others on your floor, making a pan of lasagna and inviting the neighbors over for dinner, picking your neighbor’s brain for stock investment advice, asking your neighbor’s son to help you create a marketing plan for your new business, hosting the Friendsgiving you dreamed of – there are multitudes of reasons and ways that homeowners tend to feel a sense of community, sharing of resources, and realizing over time that “it takes a village.”
- Higher civic engagement – Studies have shown that homeowners tend to be more politically active in their districts, participate in local school boards, know the names of and how to contact their local representatives to affect change, etc. Having a higher financial investment in and a commitment to stay in a neighborhood beyond just one or two years makes a big difference in who decides to show up at election time, especially for local elections.
If you would like to know more about the research on homeownership, feel free to read the report from the National Association of Realtors here.
Joseph Hudson is a referral agent with RLAH. Reach him at 703-587-0597 or [email protected].
Eswatini’s government ordered to allow LGBTQ group to legally register
Does Pride decor resemble Trump’s design aesthetic?
Nearly 6,000 turn out for Pride Night Out at the Nationals
White House to end PEPFAR funding for South Africa
