Connect with us

Opinions

LGBT equality in sports

A progress report and 3 steps to ending homophobia, transphobia in athletics

Published

on

homophobia in athletics, gay news, Washington Blade
homophobia in athletics, transphobia in athletics, gay news, Washington Blade

Hudson Taylor is executive director of Athlete Ally and guest editor of the Washington Blade.

The pace at which LGBT equality is being achieved in society and under the law has been remarkably accelerated in recent years. Today, the average age of a person coming out is 16, all U.S. states have marriage equality, hate crime legislation has been passed, and “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” and DOMA have been repealed. These advances are the direct result of an organized strategy across the LGBT civil rights movement, advances that would not be possible without the sacrifice and unwavering determination of those who have made LGBT equality their life’s work.

Despite the staggering progress made in recent years, on the road to LGBT equality we are still forging new paths, and not yet arrived at our ultimate destination. Across the United States, LGBT individuals are not afforded workplace protections and can still be denied housing. Anti-LGBT language is still a common occurrence throughout K-12 education; LGBT youth suffer disproportionately from homelessness; and the majority of LGBT young people still report experiencing anti-LGBT bias and bullying.

Unfortunately, as we begin to assess where our sports culture falls on the continuum of respect, inclusion and equality, it is clear that athletics continues to be one of the last bastions of homophobia, transphobia, and heterosexism.

Below are what I believe to have been successful tactics and philosophies employed by past social justice movements and how they can be applied to sports. I will highlight the particular challenges still facing our work within sports and conclude by positing some of the ways in which individuals and organizations can better work together to maximize the impact and progress of the LGBT sports movement.

Step One: Diversity of Approach

The LGBT civil rights movement has benefitted from a diversity of approaches from the organizations and individuals involved. For sports culture to share similar advancements, we must have equally diverse tactics for our work. Across the movement, there are three primary areas of advocacy: social services, information and education, and civil liberties and social action.

LGBT social services in sports are centered on providing resources and opportunities for those that would otherwise not have them. This includes scholarships for LGBT athletes, creating safe spaces for LGBT individuals, providing sports equipment and putting in place LGBT specific systems of support. This work is crucial as oftentimes the perceived or actual barriers to entry for LGBT individuals are greater than those of their heterosexual counterparts. Unless safe and accessible athletic opportunities are provided, LGBT youth may forego participating in sports for other activities.

The second area of advocacy is that of education and information. The constituents of this work are both LGBT and non-LGBT athletes, coaches, administrators, parents and fans. This work is often comprised of educating communities about the experiences of LGBT individuals in sports, acknowledging the work still needed and highlighting the steps we can take to bring about greater LGBT equality in sports. While there continues to be an emerging field of qualified and passionate educators, the majority of athletic institutions have not yet invested in this type of training. The divide between those who need LGBT education and those who actually receive it, becomes greater when we take into account differences in age, geography, sport and positions of power.

The final area of advocacy is that of civil liberties and social action. This work is chiefly focused on the adoption and implementation of LGBT inclusive policies and best practices. For many institutions this work is centered on having inclusive policies and facilities for transgender athletes, creating appropriate punitive policies for anti-LGBT conduct or clearly articulating an LGBT inclusive non-discrimination policy. For some faith-based institutions, the policy advances look quite different, as prohibition of pre-marital sex forms the foundation for LGBT protections, or lack thereof. It should also be noted that the experiences of our athletic communities extend to life outside of sports, making the city, state, and federal protections of LGBT individuals equally important to the success of the LGBT sports movement.

Step Two: Diversity of Messengers

The success of the LGBT sports movement is contingent upon, in part, finding and elevating diverse voices. While there has never been a successful social justice movement for a minority group without the support of the majority, we must not forget that without the visible testimony of the LGBT community, all our work remains theoretical.

The advancement of LGBT equality in sports is predicated upon reconciling the perception of sports culture, with the reality of sports culture. That is, if the perception is that homophobia, transphobia or heterosexism in sports exists, then LGBT individuals will not be encouraged to share their true selves with their sports community.

To change this, we must find and elevate as many LGBT voices within sports as possible, as well as find and elevate the voices of supportive allies. Because the perception of sports culture is defined by what one sees, hears and experiences, the telling of positive stories will be the connective tissue between each organization and individual’s advocacy approach.

Step Three: Framing the Message

In addition to a diversity of messengers, how the LGBT sports movement collectively frames its messaging is directly proportional to its ability to affect change. Historically, large-scale social change happens in a very particular way. Research suggests that the way a culture changes is not by engaging in conversations of right vs. wrong, but instead by redefining and appealing to the dominant identity of a target audience.

Over the last 10 years, we have seen significant changes to the culture and policies of the majority of Fortune 500 companies. These changes have been made possible by clear and concise messaging articulating the business case for LGBT equality. If we suppose that the dominant identity of a company is to make more money, retain and recruit better talent and appeal to more customers, then the most effective messaging to appeal to corporate culture is that which connects LGBT equality to those business objectives.

Similarly, if we suppose that the dominant identity of athletics is to win more games, recruit better athletes, appeal to more fans and be the best possible teammate, then our most effective messaging within sports will be that which clearly connects LGBT equality in sports with those same athletic objectives. In this way, the efficacy of the LGBT sports movement is contingent upon our ability to make LGBT equality synonymous with athletic success.

Step Four: Understanding Our Obstacles

The continued presence of anti-LGBT bias, bullying and discrimination in sports is not by accident; it’s by design. The institution of sport suffers from three systemic issues. First, it is one of the few environments that is segregated by gender. Second, it is a competitive reward structure designed to rank one athlete over another, due not to the content of their character, but because of physical characteristics. Third, one’s ability to participate in sports is ultimately determined by a third party. Together, these factors create a unique environment within sports in which conforming to a narrowly defined standard of masculinity, femininity, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression is not only strongly encouraged, but often required.

In practice, and because of these factors, male athletes who more readily conform to orthodox concepts of masculinity are likely given more playing time (because that’s how you need to act in order to do well). The increased amount of playing time leads to a disproportionate improvement of skills for those who conform vs. those who do not. The disproportionate improvement of skills leads to increased success, which leads to increased popularity, which leads to an increased likelihood that an athlete will stay with his or her sport through high school and college. Those athletes who compete in high school or college are more likely to go on to become coaches only to teach the next generation of athletes the same value system that afforded them their success. In this way, homophobia, transphobia and heterosexism in sports is cyclical, intergenerational and unlikely to change unless the way in which we think about sports is substantially redefined.

The final obstacle for the LGBT sports movement is the perceived risk of speaking out as an ally or coming out as LGBT, versus the perceived reward. Because our coaches determine participation and our coach’s employment is determined by their athletic director, athletic institutions implicitly disdain uniqueness. If an athlete or coach’s identity or beliefs overshadow their performance as an athlete or coach, they are at risk of losing their livelihood. In this way, conforming to athletic culture and remaining silent on various social justice issues is still unfortunately often the smart decision to ensure longevity of one’s career.

Step 5: The Path to Victory

Ending homophobia, transphobia and heterosexism in sports can be accomplished if we work together. Whether you are a current member of the athletic community, a casual fan or never participated in sports, we all have the ability to help affect positive change within our communities. As the saying goes, “A thousand candles can be lit from a single candle.” Below are a list of actions that if done collectively, will bring us closer to realizing a future of LGBT equality in sport and society.

  1. Spark Conversations – Personal stories change lives. Pick up a pen and paper and write a letter to your old coach, to the athletic director of your alma mater. Ask for a policy to be changed or training to be implemented. Attend the next PTA meeting and ask what your school is doing to address homophobia, transphobia, and heterosexism in sports. Wear an LGBT-themed T-shirt to the next little league game or ask everyone you know why they think there aren’t more out LGBT athletes and what can be done about it.
  2. Build Bridges – Find other social justice groups or organizations within your community, get involved with their work, and ask them to get involved with yours. If we are ever to put an end anti-LGBT bias, bullying and discrimination in sports then we need to work together. Ending one form of prejudice is connected to all other forms of prejudice. If we can make our work intersectional, we can maximize its efficacy by building coalitions of change agents.
  3. Organize and Mobilize – If there is a policy you want to see changed, create a petition. Get others to sign it. If you can organize and mobilize, you have the ability to change the world. This doesn’t mean petition the largest governing bodies of all the sports leagues, this means being strategic. Start small. What do you want to change about your local rec league? What policy should be put in place at the high school? If your community is small, the number of people you need to organize to make an impact becomes far more manageable. Regardless, strength in numbers is strength in advocacy.
Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Opinions

Suicide and the policy crisis facing trans Americans

Not an inevitable statistic but a preventable public health emergency

Published

on

(Photo by Valentina R/Bigstock)

Collegiate swimmer and transgender woman Lia Smith from Middlebury College recently took her own life. Her death has shaken campuses across the country, but it should also shake the conscience of policymakers. We have become too accustomed to treating trans suicide as a tragic but inevitable statistic, instead of the preventable public health crisis it is. The death of one young athlete isn’t an isolated heartbreak — it’s a reflection of national failure.

Transgender people are several times more likely to attempt suicide than the general population. Data from the CDC show that about one in four transgender and questioning high school students has attempted suicide in the past year, compared to fewer than one in 20 cisgender males. That gap is staggering. It’s also reversible. Decades of research and experience show that suicide risk among trans people drops dramatically when they are supported — when their identities are respected, when their healthcare is affirmed, and when they are treated as equal participants in civic life.

So why are we still losing so many?

The answer lies in policy. The mental health of trans Americans is not shaped only in therapy rooms or hospital wards — it is shaped in state legislatures, on college campuses, and in the daily signals society sends about whether we are welcome to exist. Every time a law is passed banning gender-affirming care, restricting participation in sports, or erasing identity from school curricula, it tells trans youth that their lives are negotiable. When adults debate their existence on television, that rhetoric trickles down into classrooms, dorm rooms, and locker rooms, where young people already fighting for belonging are told, in ways subtle and overt, that they do not belong.

The environment on many campuses mirrors the national tension. A college like Middlebury is supposed to be a sanctuary for learning and growth, but trans students often find themselves fighting invisible battles — for pronouns to be respected, for dorms that feel safe, for medical care that affirms who they are. Coaches and administrators rarely receive proper training on how to support gender-diverse athletes, and campus mental health centers are often ill-equipped to handle the specific trauma of identity-based rejection. When that institutional support fails, even the strongest students — those with scholarships, discipline, and community roles — can feel isolated beyond repair.

Policy, at its best, can save lives. Research published in the Journal of Adolescent Health found that access to gender-affirming care significantly reduces suicidal ideation and attempts. The inverse is also true: states with laws restricting such care see measurable spikes in suicide attempts among trans youth. The Trevor Project reports that anti-trans legislation can increase the risk of suicide by as much as 70 percent. These are not abstract percentages; they represent real young people — swimmers, musicians, writers, and scholars — who might have lived had the political climate been less hostile.

Colleges and universities have a duty to fill the gaps that national policy leaves behind. They can start by requiring trans-inclusive mental-health training for faculty, coaches, and residential staff. They can ensure that campus health centers understand the psychological toll of living under attack. And they can collect accurate data on mental health outcomes for trans students so that prevention efforts are based on evidence, not guesswork. These are not radical demands; they are the bare minimum for any institution that claims to care about student wellbeing.

But responsibility does not end at the campus gate. The federal government must recognize suicide among trans Americans as a national emergency — one that requires the same attention we give to veterans, farmers, or law enforcement officers at risk. Funding for research, mental-health infrastructure, and crisis prevention must include the trans community explicitly, not as an afterthought. The message must be clear: protecting trans lives is not a culture-war issue; it is a moral one.

For those of us who have lived through our own storms — the loneliness, the addiction, the feeling of being untethered from a world that doesn’t understand us — these stories hit close to home. I know what it means to feel unseen. I know how fragile the human mind can become when the world tells you that your identity is controversial. And I also know that with community, understanding, and proper care, people can come back from that edge. I have.

When the waters go still, when the headlines fade, we owe it to the swimmer from Middlebury — and to every trans person who has struggled to stay afloat — to act. Policy cannot undo her death, but it can prevent the next one. It can remind trans youth that they are valued, needed, and seen.

The question is whether our leaders have the courage to look past the politics and see the people. Because behind every statistic is a name, a face, and a life that could have been saved.


Isaac Amend is a writer based in the D.C. area. He is a transgender man and was featured in National Geographic’s “Gender Revolution” documentary. He serves on the board of the LGBT Democrats of Virginia. You can follow him on Substack at @isaacamend where he writes about philosophy, love, literature, and 50 cent.  

Continue Reading

Commentary

Nancy Pelosi: an LGBTQ appreciation of the retiring House speaker emerita

Long-time San Francisco congresswoman announced retirement on Thursday

Published

on

House Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) speaks at a press conference announcing the Equality Act's reintroduction in 2023. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

It was not unexpected. House Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi, 85, is retiring after serving 39 years in Congress. Her announcement video, released Thursday, is an ode to her beloved San Francisco, brimming with images of people, landmarks, and the proud liberal story that quickened her heart and stiffened her spine as she fought for progress in making America a more perfect union. 

“My message to the city I love is this: San Francisco, know your power,” Pelosi said. “We have always led the way, and now we must continue to do so by remaining full participants in our democracy and fighting for the American ideals we hold dear.” 

Pelosi’s legacy as the country’s powerful first and, so far, only female House speaker — serving twice in that role, 2007-2011 and 2019-2023 — is replete with examples of how she smartly and bravely stood up to bullies, including Republican President Donald Trump and his violence-prone cult followers who demonize her, and sought her out during the Jan. 6, 2021 insurrection at the Capitol as she led the certification of Joe Biden as president. Roughly three years later, her husband Paul was seriously attacked in their San Francisco home by an intruder intent on kidnapping her. 

As House speaker, Pelosi presided over Trump’s two impeachment votes in his first term. And while she might not reach those heights again while she serves until January 2027, she was a visible force in passing California’s Proposition 50, working behind the scenes, helping Gov. Gavin Newsom raise money and construct the state’s reapportionment initiative in response to Trump’s attempts to rig the 2026 midterms. 

Prop 50 — the only thing on the ballot in this special election — won handily with almost 64 percent of the vote to 36 percent percent. Los Angeles County voted “Yes” 73 percent to 27 percent.  

“Some people go off and they talk about the way the world should be, but they don’t do anything to damn manifest it,” Newsom said on election night, per the New York Times. “Nancy Pelosi doesn’t go out to try to make points. She makes a difference.”

Two of her most memorable achievements as Speaker were her deft political strategy, vote counting and arm-twisting to pass extremely difficult legislation such as the new Obama administration’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act after President George W. Bush’s “too big to fail” Great Recession and the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) — after which she proclaimed that “being a woman is no longer a pre-existing condition.”

(Photo courtesy of Pelosi’s Twitter page)

During her decades in Congress and before, Pelosi has been a towering hero. “She’s just always been there,” longtime AIDS and gay activist Cleve Jones, who at first didn’t take her seriously, told the New York Times. “She’s more than an ally. She’s family.”

In May 2018, I interviewed Nancy Pelosi, then the House Minority Leader, in advance of the important midterm elections — the success of which resulted in her historic election as Speaker for a second time. 

With Trump and Project 2025 erasing our rights and our history with their version of Christianity and with the new AIDS Monument opening on Nov. 16 in West Hollywood, I think Nancy Pelosi illustrates how one can be religious, progressive, and decent, such as her expression of gratitude to President George W. Bush for his PEPFAR AIDS program.

Nancy Pelosi: The famous Leader you may not know (Excerpts) 

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi is the embodiment of the feminist adage “the personal is political.” She celebrated part of her 78th birthday at an LGBTQ equality weekend in Palm Springs, which she declared a “fabulous” fundraiser for the Democratic effort to “take away” the House from the Republicans in the November midterm elections.

Pelosi is so confident of victory, she told the Los Angeles Blade that out Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.) will be the next chair of the House Veterans Affairs Committee come January 2019. 

“‘We will win. I will run for speaker. I feel confident about it. And my members do, too,” the Boston Globe reported May 1 on Pelosi’s meeting with the Globe’s editorial staff. “It’s important that it not be five white guys at the table, no offense,” referring to Trump’s meeting with the top two leaders from the House and Senate. “I have no intention of walking away from that table.”…

Then-Republican House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) hands Nancy Pelosi the speaker’s gavel in 2019 (Screenshot)

Many of the darts thrown at Pelosi over the years have been acid-tipped with LGBTQ-hatred. “One of the things the Republicans like to do around the country is to represent me as a LGBTQ-first-and-foremost supporter. I represent San Francisco, which they caricaturize as being a gay haven and capitol. And that’s something we’re very proud of,” Pelosi [said]. “But the fact is, the country is going to leave them behind because people have a different level of respect because of the work the LGBTQ community has done in many areas to end discrimination and in the fight against HIV/AIDS.”

Pelosi says HIV/AIDS and passage of the Equality Act are top priorities.

“The Equality Act is something that really should be appreciated in a very special way because it really is transformative,” Pelosi says. “It just changes everything. It says whether it’s credit or housing or job discrimination, or you name it — you can no longer discriminate. Well, you shouldn’t discriminate to begin with. But it makes it a part of the Civil Rights Act to protect [LGBTQ] people.”…

To be sure, enshrining discrimination into law seems to be a subtextual plan of the Trump-Pence administration, with more information leaking out about Pence’s behind-the-scenes machinations involving the ban on transgender service members serving openly in the military …

Pelosi’s focus is on winning the House. “We are going to be focusing on the economy in our debate,” she says … “What we have to do is focus on the economic insecurity of American families and people. It’s about their apprehensions and their aspirations. And that’s what we need to be talking about … ”

Pelosi also shares the concern of then-U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff, her appointee to the House Intelligence Committee, about the “dismantling of our democratic institutions that President Trump is so set upon, whether it is dismantling and discrediting the press, which I think is the greatest guardian of our freedom — freedom of press, dismantling of our Justice Department and law enforcement, in terms of the FBI, ignoring the system of checks and balances that exists in our Constitution, which is the strength of our country.”…

“The president is anti-governance. He doesn’t really believe in the role of government in improving people’s situations,” Pelosi says. “So it’s a comprehensive approach to dismantling democratic institutions … One of the reasons people should be very concerned is because the president is doing nothing to protect our electoral system, our democracy.”…

Then-Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) speaks at #Resist March in West Hollywood in 2017 (Photo by Karen Ocamb)

While young people at the #ResistMarch in West Hollywood last year were stirred up by Leader Pelosi’s rhetoric, it was clear they knew she was important — but not really who she was and why she was so passionate about LGBTQ equality.

Some of it is centered in Pelosi’s Catholicism, which is not the set of beliefs the Catholic Church espoused during Prop 8 and other political-religious battles. 

“As a Catholic, I was raised to respect every person. We’re all God’s children. In my family, there was never any question about that,” she says. “In Baltimore, we did have a growing LGBT community — we didn’t call it that then, but it was part of our lives, and it was not any question that we would be any more respectful of one person than another. It wasn’t even an issue with me, and I didn’t ever even describe it or associate it with Catholicism because Catholicism taught me something different. It didn’t teach me discrimination. It taught me respect. And so it prepared me very well, my Catholicism, for being a representative in San Francisco.”

During the 1980s, with the unchecked rise of AIDS, the Vatican came under intense criticism for sticking to its absolute prohibition against using condoms, coupled with Pope John Paul II calling homosexuality “intrinsically evil.”

Pelosi seems momentarily speechless. “I think the church’s position that people could not use condoms — it’s so hypocritical, I can’t even go to that place,” she says. “The church may make a proclamation, but they make a proclamation that people should not be using any contraception or birth control at all — it’s all about having a child. So while people are faithful to their religion, they are certain practicing what they need for the size and timing of their family, according to meeting their responsibility to the free will that God has given all of us.”

Ironically, because San Francisco “took a very big bite of that wormy apple called AIDS,” the church “was more sympathetic to people when they had HIV/AIDS because they needed help then they were to people who weren’t infected. It was the strangest, strangest thing,” Pelosi says.

“It’s a funny thing. The Catholics — and I’m surrounded by Catholics — but the Catholics that I grew up with and I lived with in California were always respectful of the church, of the pope, of our faith, and never thought it was in any way a barrier to us doing what we believed. And sometimes that was diametrically opposed to what their public statements were.”

Not that she thinks the church is immune to criticism. “There’s no question the Catholic Church in California was a participant in Prop 8 in a negative way,” Pelosi says. “We were on the other side of that. But to me, it was their problem. It wasn’t anything that was any moral imperative to me for me to follow the church in enshrining discrimination in the law in California.”

Pelosi also does not concur with churches that pontificate about the “non-negotiable” — being gay, marriage equality, euthanasia, birth control, all generally lumped together. The commonality is the certainty that “all interactions between people are about producing a child. Then you cannot have birth control, family planning, or any of that, and you cannot have homosexual relations,” she says. 

“I view that as kind of their problem. It’s not the reality of life, and it’s not about respecting the dignity and worth of every person.”

But, Pelosi adds, “I’m not making any judgments about how each of us honors our free will and our sense of responsibility that goes with it.”

U.S. Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and actress/AIDS activist Elizabeth Taylor testify before Congress for AIDS funding in 1990 (Photo via POZ Magazine)

Pelosi is also guided by a moral imperative that young people may not understand today — the deep, personal impact of AIDS.

“Some people criticized me for talking about AIDS on my first day in Congress and I realized that it was not just about getting funding for AIDS research and prevention and care but it was about ending discrimination against people with HIV and AIDS,” adding that California has been a “tremendous resource” throughout the years for intellectual, political and economic response to the disease.

Paul and Nancy Pelosi with AIDS activist in 1987 (Photo courtesy of Nancy Pelosi)

Pelosi responds viscerally when asked about losing friends. 

“Oh, my gosh. Oh, my gosh. A little flower girl in my wedding. My dear, dear friends in the community in San Francisco. We were going to two funerals a day. I was visiting people in the hospital all the time, and quite frankly, when I say losing people,” Pelosi says, “I lost friends because I just walked away from them because they were not treating people with HIV and AIDS with respect. They would say to me, ‘I don’t know why you hire that caterer — don’t you know that everybody there has HIV?’ And I’d say, ‘Don’t bother to come to my house anymore if that’s your attitude.’ It just changed my whole view of them.”

Within the span of her life and political career, Pelosi has personally experienced the heartbreak of HIV/AIDS and the political battles to fund and find a cure.

“I’ll never stop missing some of my dearest dear friends from then,” she says. “Of course, we went from funerals to people saying help me make out my will because this is going to end soon, to those very same people looking for a job and then wanting to get married. So everything has improved but I would never have thought 30 years ago when I started all this in Congress that we still wouldn’t have a cure for AIDS. We’ve improved the quality of life, we’ve sustained life. Everything is better but it’s not over, not finished.”

Karen Ocamb is a longtime LGBTQ+ journalist and former news editor for the Los Angeles Blade. This essay is cross-posted from her Substack LGBTQ+ Freedom Fighters.

Continue Reading

Commentary

A nation voting between fear and hope

Pro-LGBTQ, progressive candidates won across the country

Published

on

New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani (YouTube photo)

The United States returned to the polls on Nov. 4, and the results revealed much more than another electoral contest. What unfolded in Virginia, New Jersey, New York, Miami, and California was a moral and political X-ray of a nation voting between fear and hope. Voters spoke from uncertainty, but also from a conviction that the country can still be a place of justice, inclusion, and respect.

The victories of Abigail Spanberger in Virginia and Mikie Sherrill in New Jersey — together with the rise of progressive Zohran Mamdani as mayor of New York City, the Democratic surge in Miami, and the approval of Proposition 50 in California — set the tone for an election that sent a clear message to the Trump administration: fear may mobilize, but it cannot sustain power. Citizens voted with their hearts, tired of hate speech and political spectacle, and hopeful for a government that looks toward people rather than power.

New York became the clearest symbol of this shift.

Mamdani, the son of immigrants, Muslim, and unapologetically progressive, centered his victory speech on dignity and solidarity.

“Tonight we made history,” he declared before a diverse crowd. “New York will remain a city of immigrants: a city built by immigrants, powered by immigrants and, as of tonight, led by an immigrant.” But his most powerful message was directed at the city’s most vulnerable residents: “Here, we believe in standing up for those we love, whether you are an immigrant, a member of the trans community, one of the many Black women that Donald Trump has fired from a federal job, a single mom still waiting for the cost of groceries to go down, or anyone else with their back against the wall.”

Those words echoed across the country as a response to years of political regression and legislative attacks on LGBTQ people, and especially on the trans community. Mamdani pledged to expand and protect gender-affirming care, committing public funds to ensure that “every New Yorker has access to the medical treatment they need.” His stance positions New York as a beacon of resistance against the wave of restrictive policies spreading through many states.

The November results carry a profound meaning for those living on the margins of power. For the trans community, these outcomes represent far more than a political breather — they are an affirmation of existence. At a time when official rhetoric has sought to erase identities, deny healthcare, and criminalize bodies, the victory of leaders who champion inclusion rekindles the hope of living without fear. The trans vote, and the broader LGBTQ vote, was not merely civic participation — it was an act of survival and resistance.

The election also spoke to the hearts of immigrant families, people living with HIV or chronic illnesses, racial minorities, and working-class communities struggling to make ends meet. In a nation where so many feel politically invisible, these local victories renew faith in democracy as an instrument of transformation. They remind us that hope is not naïveté — it is the most courageous act of those who choose to keep standing.

Miami, for its part, sent an unexpected message. In a Republican stronghold historically aligned with the Trump administration, the Democratic candidate led the first round and forced a runoff election. In a city defined by its Latinx, Black, immigrant, and LGBTQ diversity, this progressive surge was a break with fear-driven politics and automatic voting patterns. The ballots in South Florida proved that change often begins where few expect it.

For the Trump administration, the message could not be clearer. The country is issuing a warning: human rights are not negotiable. The economy matters, but so does dignity. Voters are demanding real solutions, not slogans; respect, not manipulation; empathy, not imposition.

LGBTQ and trans communities have been the visible face of a resistance that refuses to surrender. Every vote cast was an act of hope in the face of fear; every victory, an answer to symbolic and institutional violence. The words of New York’s new mayor have become a national emblem because they transcend partisanship — they remind the nation that even in darkness, humanity can still be public policy.

The ballots of November spoke with the voices of those long marginalized or erased. They speak through trans people demanding respect, through couples defending their love, through young activists who refuse to be silenced, through believers who fight for an inclusive faith, and through families who still believe in a possible America. In the midst of fear, the nation chose hope. And that hope — imperfect, fragile, yet alive — may be the beginning of a new story: one in which equality is no longer a dream, but a promise fulfilled.

Continue Reading

Popular