Opinions
Second Trump administration will put trans youth at further risk
American politics, culture has global impact
When Andrew Joseph White, a 26-year-old transgender author, released his third novel, “Compound Fractures,” a young adult thriller, last fall, it became an instant New York Times, USA Today, and Indie bestseller.
This book is a story about an autistic trans* boy who was dragged into a generational feud. It also mentioned President-elect Donald Trump and his influence on the working class in the American South. The popularity of this novel among young readers shows that modern day teenagers are more political than some folks from older generations expect them to be.
The novel became a bestseller in the midst of the 2024 presidential campaign and White, in his letter to readers, confessed that he wanted to give it a different intro, but had to speak about how tough it is to be a young trans* person in modern-day America.
Donald Trump on Dec. 22 confirmed the fears of A.J. White and millions of other LGBTQ folks from Z and Alpha Generations. At the AmericaFest conference, Trump promised to “stop the transgender lunacy” on the first day of his presidency. He was particularly speaking up against trans* young people’s rights, and against trans* adults’ rights to work with young people.
Donald Trump’s election also increased worries about censorship around children’s and young adult literature, especially in public and school libraries.
A new report by PEN America showed that during the 2023-2024 school year, book bans increased by nearly 200 percent, targeting not just books about gender and sexuality, but also about racial discrimination, mental health, substance abuse, and other social problems that young people are facing in the everyday world. Such bans are not just making printed books unacceptable for youth who cannot afford buying their own copies. They may prevent authors from writing new books for younger generations, which will also affect American mass culture.
Republicans throughout the U.S. for a long time have behaved more and more authoritarian toward youth. Republicans are trying to attack LGBTQ youth everywhere, erasing them from academia and implementing social media restrictions.
It is tough to be a young person in modern-day America under any administration, even without new laws. All American citizens under 18 can easily be prevented from expressing their religious and political beliefs, forced to stay in abusive environments, can be medicated and institutionalized without their consent, can be separated from their supportive community if their parents say so. Young people under 18 can also be tried in adult court, but they cannot vote or run for office.
All the decisions about their rights are made by people from the older generation.
It is legal to pay young people less for their work, and deny the right to manage their property. Young people from non-supportive families are denied any chances to have normal lives until they turn 18, or even 21. This is basically the situation in most Western cultures, but American teenagers could start to change the system with more informational freedom and support.
But now Donald Trump and his supporters are trying to make everyone believe that young people cannot have their own gender identity, do not have any rights to their body autonomy, and should not be asked about their own feelings until they turn 18. Republicans have also tried to deny young people basic knowledge about the complicated world around them, as if this knowledge could be magically downloaded into a person’s mind when they turn 18.
These dangerous trends will create a generation who is used to obeying, but not very used to thinking for themselves and trusting their own feelings. It is basically a very anti-American, anti-individualistic, and authoritarian tendency.
This tendency could have a long-lasting impact on world politics.
It is not an exaggeration to say that no other culture has had such a global impact on the way people around the world think than the American culture, and it is especially true on LGBTQ issues.
When I was an LGBTQ activist in Russia and Ukraine, my fellow post-Soviet activists spoke more about Stonewall and the AIDS epidemic in San Francisco than about the persecution of LGBTQ people in the Soviet Union. By my own experience as a person who was into LGBTQ blogging and journalism in the post-USSR; the videos, posts, features, and essays on LGBTQ issues that you could find on Ukrainian and Russian social media were either a direct translation from English or based on language that American LGBTQ activists created.
Young LGBTQ people around the world are learning to speak for themselves by watching their peer influencers on English-language platforms.
As a young transgender person from Ukraine who had never heard the word trans* until I was a teenager, I understood that I was trans* since I could remember myself. I began accepting myself only after I read more about the American LGBTQ movement.
I saw a lot of young people from Eastern Europe and the Middle East for whom Lana Watchevski became a first name when they came out to their parents, or the first person who helped them to believe that yes, they could be trans* and have a fulfilling life. Folks accepted their transgender peers because there was a transgender person in a Kardashian show. And we badly need more LGBTQ films, cartoons and books for young people, and more freedom for LGBTQ youth to find their own communities. All of this will more likely come from the U.S.
I think Americans would wonder if they find out how often I saw a situation like that — a young queer Gen Z Tatar person from a small, almost isolated Russian village — or situations when a Gen Z refugee person from Iran felt comfortable to chat about American LGBTQ culture, and use it to explain their own cultural context. American culture, and America’s online spaces are quite universal.
The same rules work for conservatives.
It is not enough that such dictators as Vladimir Putin, who mirror old American anti-LGBTQ conspiracies in his statements, say that LGBTQ ideas are dangerous for children, or conservative people all around the world began to use “groomer” rhetoric to describe people who support LGBTQ rights for young people when the pro-Trump Q-Anon movement went global. It is not just endangering LGBTQ youth worldwide, but increasing a gap in mentality between different generations.
But LGBTQ young people already know that there is something unusual about them, and they need information to figure out who they are. Americans could provide it via mass culture. It is worthy to note that Gen Z is much better at understanding the power of the internet, and American Gen Zers could literally make America greater by helping marginalized people in other countries.
Moreover, LGBTQ young people in America are speaking about their experience.
They are able to say what they need. All we need to do is listen, or we will have an international atmosphere where the new generation was raised in denial of basic rights to be themselves, and prevented from learning and thinking independently.
Editor’s note: The author uses trans* in order to be inclusive of nonbinary and gender queer people.
Opinions
D.C. is the place for the Democratic Socialists of America
Our endorsed candidates hold their affiliation as a badge of honor
D.C. is the place for the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA). We believe in a District where everyone can live a happy and dignified life. That means housing, healthcare, transit, education, and safety are treated as guarantees rather than privileges reserved for the wealthy and well-connected.
Our endorsed candidates do not hide what they believe. They engage in the democratic process openly, explain their politics clearly, and ask their fellow members to spend long nights and weekends doing the hard work of campaigning. And as the last six years of local elections have shown, including three successful D.C. Council campaigns and the overwhelming passage of Initiative 82, D.C. voters are often a great deal more interested in the endorsement of Metro DC DSA than in the handwringing of the Washington Post editorial board.
That is what makes Peter Rosenstein’s April 2 op-ed in the Blade so revealing. His piece was not just wrong. It was smug, unserious, and politically disconnected from the actual lives of queer people in this city. Worse, he used the platform of our local LGBTQ outlet to disregard Palestinian humanity while scolding democratic socialists for refusing to join him in that moral failure. Put plainly, Rosenstein has been publishing crank op-eds for years, and this one was no exception.
My name is Hayden Gise. I am a transgender, lesbian, Jewish, Democratic Socialist, and I am a union organizer. I do not speak on behalf of the national DSA organization, the local chapter, or any campaign. But I will not sit quietly while Rosenstein wraps himself in the mantle of queer Jewishness to sell the lie that anti-Zionism is antisemitism.
He packages that lie in the same kind of pinkwashing rhetoric used by Benjamin Netanyahu, who mocked solidarity with Palestinians by saying, “Some of these protesters hold up signs proclaiming ‘Gays for Gaza.’ They might as well hold up signs saying ‘Chickens for KFC.’” Rosenstein’s liberal Zionism is not thoughtful, brave, or nuanced. It is just a more polished way of telling Palestinians their lives matter less and telling queer people we should be grateful for the empire so long as it flies a rainbow flag. Which, by the way, is showing itself to be a losing strategy.
The ongoing genocide in Gaza is not some tragic deviation from the history of an otherwise peaceful Israel. The Nakba was the mass expulsion and displacement of Palestinians during Israel’s establishment in 1947–49, when hundreds of thousands were driven from their homes. My Jewish values tell me that is wrong. Rosenstein’s politics treat anti-Zionist Jews like me as illegible. No serious person should treat that accusation as an argument.
But the deeper problem with Rosenstein’s piece is that he has no real understanding of why Democratic Socialism resonates here. For queer people in D.C., Democratic Socialism is not an abstract theory. It is rent that does not consume half your paycheck, a union on your job, childcare you can actually afford, public transit that works, and a city where working-class Black and brown queer people are not displaced so developers and donors can cash in. Queer politics is not only about recognition. It is also about whether ordinary people can afford to survive.
That is why D.C. is fertile ground for Democratic Socialism. In the race for mayor, one of the leading candidates is Kenyan McDuffie, whose campaign already looks like a focus-grouped merger of Andrew Cuomo’s slogan and Donald Trump’s graphic design instincts, backed by big business interests and the super PAC money that follows them. The other has the endorsement of the major labor unions in the District. Who has a cohesive vision to make D.C. more affordable and childcare universal. Who puts people over profit and human rights over political expediency. Our next mayor, and our first Democratic Socialist Mayor: Janeese Lewis George.
D.C. is exactly the kind of city where Democratic Socialism should grow: working-class, queer, tenant-heavy, union-minded, and tired of being told that dignity is too expensive. Which side are you on? I know what side the queer people of the District of Columbia will be on.
Hayden Gise is a union organizer in Washington, D.C.
For half a century, the arc of LGBTQ progress in America has bent—slowly, imperfectly—toward justice. We fought for visibility, for legal protections, for the right to marry, serve openly, and live with dignity. Each generation built on the courage of the last.
And yet today, that progress is in peril. Across the country, lawmakers are rolling back protections, demonizing LGBTQ people for political gain, and trying to erase us from public life.
Opponents of our equality are working to erase us from the Constitution, and indeed, public life. In moments like this, based on my personal involvement working with one of the most effective leaders for LGBTQ rights I find myself asking a simple question: What would Jeffrey do?
Jeffrey Montgomery—the focus of a new documentary “America You Kill Me” and a long time Michigan activist and founder of the Triangle Foundation—was never content with quiet advocacy or compromise. He was a rabble-rouser, a strategist, and a relentless thorn in the side of powerful bigots. When politicians tried to marginalize LGBTQ people, Jeffrey didn’t politely ask for scraps. He forced the issue.
Jeffrey Montgomery started with his own determined voice and turned it into a movement. His story is living proof that personal courage can spark national conversations about justice and inclusion.
At a moment when the LGBTQ movement again faces hostility and regression, Jeffrey’s playbook offers lessons we would be wise to remember.
First, Jeffrey understood the importance of punching above our weight. In the early days of LGBTQ organizing, our movement was small, underfunded, and politically marginalized. But Jeffrey refused to let opponents see us that way. Through visibility, media savvy, and relentless organizing, he made LGBTQ advocates appear larger, stronger, and more unified than our numbers alone might suggest.
That perception mattered. Political opponents think twice before attacking a movement that looks organized, energized, and capable of mobilizing public pressure. Jeffrey knew that power is partly about reality—but also about what your opponent believes your power to be.
Second, Jeffrey never compromised on the value of our lives. Movements make compromises all the time. Politics often requires it. But Jeffrey understood that some things are not negotiable. The basic humanity of LGBTQ people is one of them. You can’t put our basic rights on the ballot. You don’t tell people to wait their turn. There are no turns. It’s now. It’s always now.
Too often, our opponents frame equality as something to be bargained over—as if the dignity and safety of queer people were a policy preference rather than a fundamental right. Jeffrey rejected that premise entirely.
You can negotiate strategy. You can negotiate timelines. But you cannot negotiate the worth of human lives.
And finally, Jeffrey understood the power of coalition. Today, one of the most effective tactics used against marginalized communities is division. If LGBTQ people can be fractured—by identity, ideology, generation, or strategy—our collective strength weakens.
Jeffrey instinctively resisted that trap. He worked with civil rights groups, labor leaders, faith communities, civic leaders and allies across movements. He understood that the fight for LGBTQ equality was never isolated from the broader fight for justice.
When opponents try to divide us, the answer is not retreat into smaller camps. The answer is to build broader ones.
If Jeffrey Montgomery were here today, he would not be discouraged by the backlash we are seeing. He would recognize it for what it is: the predictable response of those who feel their power slipping away.
And he would remind us that progress has never been linear. It has always required courage, persistence, and a willingness to challenge power directly.
So, when the moment feels uncertain, when the political winds shift against us, and when our opponents try to make us feel small, the question remains a useful one: What would Jeffrey do?
If history is any guide, the answer would be simple. He would make some noise. And making noise, today, means refusing to let fear, fatigue, or false unity quiet us when our lives are on the line.
Sean Kosofsky was director of policy at the Triangle Foundation.
Opinions
D.C. not the place for antisemitic Democratic Socialists of America
Candidates like Janeese Lewis George should reject its endorsement
D.C. is not the place for the antisemitic Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), who advocate for the end of the State of Israel from the ‘river to the sea.’ The candidates they endorse agree to their platform, which includes not talking to any Zionist organizations. Being a Zionist simply means supporting the existence of the State of Israel. It does not mean supporting the war criminal who heads the government, or what he is doing, including murdering innocent Palestinians, or bombing civilians in Iran and Lebanon. As Ron Halber, CEO of the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Washington, wrote in a column in DC Jewish Week, the views of the DSA are totally unacceptable.
The Council is non-political, but I am not. I can say one candidate for mayor, Janeese Lewis George, has asked for, and received, the endorsement of the DSA, and by doing so agrees to its antisemitic platform. After her endorsement became public, George tried to ‘privately apologize’ saying she didn’t see the questionnaire submitted by her campaign, rather it was submitted by a staffer. Now George says she is both not antisemitic, and supports Palestinians. Well, that sounds good. But she, and anyone else who accepts the DSA endorsement, has to answer a series of questions: 1. Are you for a two-state solution and the continued existence of the State of Israel, contrary to the position of the DSA? 2. Do you support BDS? 3. What is your definition of a Zionist? 4. What is your acceptable definition of antisemitism? 5. Will you meet with Zionist groups in DC?
Then, we must recognize if one candidate, like George, can go after and accept an endorsement from an antisemitic organization, it gives tacit permission for others to do the same with organizations that might be Islamophobic, racist, homophobic, sexist, or anti-immigrant. All unacceptable. I urge D.C. voters to reject any candidate, for any office, who has the endorsement of the DSA. That is not what we want the leaders of our government to represent.
Thankfully, there are many choices in this year’s Democratic primary elections for every office. There is a race for mayor, congressional delegate, attorney general, Council chair, two D.C. Council at-large seats, additional Council seats, Democratic State Committee seats and ANCs. D.C. political leadership will look very different after this election.
I urge voters to whittle down their choices by first rejecting anyone endorsed by the DSA. The DSA’s platform, aside from being antisemitic, also includes suggestions to ‘Defund the Police.’ That is a slogan some of the candidates running adopted a few years ago, thinking the people wanted it. They quickly found the people of D.C. didn’t want fewer police, they wanted their police better trained, with better community oversight. They wanted to be sure the police were here to protect them, not to harass them. People should know the DSA at one point even withdrew its endorsement from Rep. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) as she wasn’t strident enough in her opposition to Israel and actually met with a Zionist organization. There are many Zionists like me — a gay, Jewish man — who support the existence of the State of Israel, yet want to see Netanyahu, a war criminal, a murderer, tried for his crimes and in jail, and his government replaced. Zionists who support Palestinians and want them to have their own free state.
As you decide who gets your vote, one way to find out about a candidate is looking at their website. I would suggest you reject any candidate who doesn’t have a strong issues section. The least you can expect of a candidate is to tell you in detail what they intend to do if you elect them. That includes our delegate to Congress, even if they won’t have a vote. If Democrats take back the House of Representatives, we can expect our delegate to once again get a vote in committee, and that can be very important.
In the next couple of weeks, I will make some endorsements and share them with you in the Blade, for anyone who might be interested. They will detail why I endorse a particular candidate. I will not suggest second, third, fourth, or fifth choices. That is for you to decide. No matter who you give your first vote to, even with ranked choice voting, you can still vote for only one person. If you decide to list more choices, make sure the views of your second, and other choices, coincide with those of your first choice.
So here is to an honest election season, one in which we end up with candidates winning who really care about our city, who have proven track records, and who will make us proud. Your job is to VOTE, and I hope everyone will.
Peter Rosenstein is a longtime LGBTQ rights and Democratic Party activist.
-
The White House5 days agoVIDEO: Gay journalist detained for booing Trumps at ‘Chicago’ opening night
-
Movies5 days agoTrans-driven ‘Serpent’s Skin’ delivers campy sapphic horror
-
Opinions5 days agoD.C. not the place for antisemitic Democratic Socialists of America
-
The White House4 days agoPam Bondi ousted as attorney general
