National
Spotlight on bullying after rash of teen suicides
Experts say anti-gay harassment widespread in D.C. schools
Trevor Project fundraiser
Friday at 7 p.m.
Duplex Diner
2004 18th St., N.W.
$10 donation
The death by suicide of four gay male teenagers within a four-week period last month has triggered international media coverage of the topic of anti-gay bullying and harassment and prompted renewed calls for Congress to pass anti-bullying legislation.
Much of the media attention focused on the Sept. 22 death of 18-year-old Rutgers University freshman Tyler Clementi, who leaped off the George Washington Bridge connecting New York and New Jersey.
University officials said Clementi took his own life days after discovering his roommate planted a video camera in his dorm room that captured Clementi and a male visitor “making out” during an apparent sexual encounter and then broadcast the video online.
New Jersey authorities have charged the roommate, Dharun Ravi, and one of his friends, Molly Wei, with criminal invasion of privacy, an offense that carries a possible five-year prison sentence.
A New Jersey prosecutor said Ravi, who shared the dorm room with Clementi, left his webcam-equipped laptop computer in the room with the intention of spying on Clementi, who informed him he planned to bring a visitor into the room. Ravi agreed to allow Clementi to use the room in private to host his guest.
Prosecutors said Ravi went to Wei’s nearby dorm room and used another laptop he owns to remotely turn on the webcam while Clementi and his male guest were in the room.
He then broadcast the video of Clementi and his guest live on iChat, according to technology blogger Kashmir Hill, who discovered separate online chat room conversations by both Ravi and Clementi talking about the incident.
Although the suicides of Clementi and the other three gay teens took place outside the D.C. metropolitan area, the head of D.C.’s Sexual Minority Youth Assistance League, known as SMYAL, said a 2007 study showed that local LGBT youth are at great risk for suicide.
Andrew Barnett, SMYAL’s executive director, noted that the D.C. Youth Risk Behavior Survey, which is conducted under the supervision of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, found that 37 percent of D.C. high school students who identify as gay, lesbian or bisexual reported being bullied over their sexual orientation during the previous year. Only 15 percent of heterosexual-identified students reported being bullied, the survey found.
The same survey found that 32 percent of students identifying as gay, lesbian or bisexual reported attempting suicide in the previous 12 months compared to just 8 percent of heterosexual students who reported a suicide attempt.
“That’s almost one in three,” said Barnett, in referring to the suicide attempts reported by the gay, lesbian or bi sample. “It’s shocking. It’s devastating,” he said. “That’s not thinking about suicide, that’s actually attempting suicide.”
The 2007 survey, the most recent one conducted, did not cover transgender students. D.C. school officials have said they plan to add a transgender component to future Youth Risk Behavior Surveys.
According to Barnett and Laura McGinnis, communications director for the Trevor Project, a national LGBT youth suicide prevention group, the D.C. public school system has one of the nation’s most far-reaching anti-bullying policies.
However, Barnett said many LGBT high school students in D.C. who frequent SMYAL’s drop-in center on Capitol Hill report that teachers and school administrators often don’t enforce the policy. He said LGBT students from D.C. area suburban schools also report widespread incidents of anti-LGBT bullying and harassment.
“Unfortunately, bullying and specifically bullying targeting LGBT students very much happens in D.C. area schools,” he said.
McGinnis said the recent rash of gay teen suicides has prompted media outlets to report on the Trevor Project’s 24-hour telephone “Lifeline,” where trained counselors help LGBT youth grapple with bullying and other problems linked to their sexual orientation.
But she said media reports and public policy makers sometimes have misinterpreted studies similar to the D.C. Youth Risk Behavior Survey, nearly all of which show LGBT youth having a higher suicide rate than non-LGBT youth.
“A person’s sexual orientation or gender identity is not, in and of itself, something that makes you more likely to take your own life,” McGinnis said. “Just being gay doesn’t mean you’ve also got the suicide gene.
“But what it does mean is that you are more likely to be bullied or harassed,” she said. “You’re more likely to be rejected by your family or your church. You’re more likely to not feel welcome in your community. You’re more likely to have a number of ills associated with you, whether it’s being told you’re going to go to hell or being told that homosexuality makes you less of a person,” she said.
It’s these external factors, McGinnis said, that lead some LGBT youth to depression or suicide, not their sexual orientation.
The three other gay youth-related suicide cases occurring in September involved high school and middle school students.
Seth Walsh, a 13-year-old middle school student from Tehachapi, Calif., died Sept. 29, 10 days after he hanged himself in the backyard of his home. His mother reported that she offered him love and support when, as a sixth grader, he told her he was gay.
But she and others who knew Walsh said he had been subjected to relentless taunting, bullying and harassment by fellow students over his being gay, a burden with which he apparently could no longer cope.
On Sept. 9, Billy Lucas, 15, hanged himself at his home in Greensburg, Ind., after years of being harassed by fellow students who perceived him to be gay.
Less than two weeks later, on Sept. 23, Asher Brown, a 13-year-old in Harris, Texas, a Houston suburb, shot himself in the head after being subjected to taunting and bullying by fellow students who believed he was gay.
His parents told the media, including the Houston Chronicle and CNN, that school officials ignored their pleas that they intervene on their son’s behalf to stop the harassment. School officials dispute those allegations, saying the parents never reported their son was the target of anti-gay harassment.
A fifth incident of anti-gay school bullying in September received national attention when “Good Morning America” interviewed 11-year-old Tyler Wilson of Ohio, who suffered a broken arm at the hands of two fellow students who believed him to be gay and subjected him to anti-gay taunts.
Wilson, who has not disclosed his sexual orientation, said he was attacked after he joined his school’s cheerleading team, becoming the first boy to become a part of what had always been an all-girls group. Since returning to school after being treated for his injury, he’s been threatened with having his other arm broken, he told “Good Morning America.”
Local colleges sensitive to anti-LGBT bullying
Officials with Georgetown University and the University of Maryland said their schools were among several in the D.C. area that have campus LGBT resource centers and policies in place that prohibit bullying, harassment and other aggressive acts targeting students because of personal characteristics such as race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation or gender identity.
“I know that American University and George Mason University have similar LGBT resource centers or offices that also address these issues,” said Sivagami “Shiva” Subbaraman, director of Georgetown’s LGBTQ Resource Center.
Subbaraman said Georgetown and several other D.C. area universities held vigils or special gatherings during the past week in honor of the gay teens who committed suicide last month. She said the Clementi case was especially troubling to her and LGBT students and their supporters at Georgetown because it showed that campus support systems at Rutgers University did not reach Clementi.
Both Subbaraman’s office and the University of Maryland’s Office of LGBT Equity issued e-mail statements to all students, faculty and staff discussing the September gay teen suicides and reminding students of the availability of mental health counseling services and LGBT student support groups on their respective campuses.
Amari Ice, president of CASCADE, a Howard University group that represents LGBT students, said Howard doesn’t have an LGBT resource center but has counselors and other support personnel who are trained to assist LGBT students in need.
Rutgers University President Richard McCormick issued a statement last week addressing the death of Rutgers freshman Clementi.
“We grieve for him and for his family, friends, and classmates as they deal with the tragic loss of a gifted young man who was a strong student and a highly accomplished musician,” McCormick said.
“This tragedy and the events surrounding it have raised critical questions about the climate of our campuses,” he said. “Students, parents, and alumni have expressed deep concern that our university, which prides itself on its rich diversity, is not fully welcoming and accepting of all students.”
McCormick noted that a gay student group formed on the Rutgers campus in 1969, becoming only the second gay group in existence at the time on any college campus in the country. He said the college has long been fully supportive of its LGBT students, but will arrange to meet with LGBT students and faculty in the coming weeks to discuss how the school can improve its status as place where all people “feel accepted and respected.”
In D.C., meanwhile, gay activist Trevor Thomas organized a fundraiser for the Trevor Project on Friday, Oct. 8, at 7 p.m. at the Duplex Diner at 2004 18th St., N.W., in Adams Morgan. A donation of $10 is requested.
The Trevor Project’s 24-hour, seven-day help line can be reached at 1-866-488-7386. More information about the group, including access to its online chat site for LGBT youth, can be accessed here.
National
United Methodist Church removes 40-year ban on gay clergy
Delegates also voted for other LGBTQ-inclusive measures
The United Methodist Church on Wednesday removed a ban on gay clergy that was in place for more than 40 years, voting to also allow LGBTQ weddings and end prohibitions on the use of United Methodist funds to “promote acceptance of homosexuality.”
Overturning the policy forbidding the church from ordaining “self-avowed practicing homosexuals” effectively formalized a practice that had caused an estimated quarter of U.S. congregations to leave the church.
The New York Times notes additional votes “affirming L.G.B.T.Q. inclusion in the church are expected before the meeting adjourns on Friday.” Wednesday’s measures were passed overwhelmingly and without debate. Delegates met in Charlotte, N.C.
According to the church’s General Council on Finance and Administration, there were 5,424,175 members in the U.S. in 2022 with an estimated global membership approaching 10 million.
The Times notes that other matters of business last week included a “regionalization” plan, which gave autonomy to different regions such that they can establish their own rules on matters including issues of sexuality — about which international factions are likelier to have more conservative views.
Rev. Kipp Nelson of St. Johns’s on the Lake Methodist Church in Miami shared a statement praising the new developments:
“It is a glorious day in the United Methodist Church. As a worldwide denomination, we have now publicly proclaimed the boundless love of God and finally slung open the doors of our church so that all people, no matter their identities or orientations, may pursue the calling of their hearts.
“Truly, all are loved and belong here among us. I am honored to serve as a pastor in the United Methodist Church for such a time as this, for our future is bright and filled with hope. Praise be, praise be.”
Federal Government
Republican state AGs challenge Biden administration’s revised Title IX policies
New rules protect LGBTQ students from discrimination
Four Republicans state attorneys general have sued the Biden-Harris administration over the U.S. Department of Education’s new Title IX policies that were finalized April 19 and carry anti-discrimination protections for LGBTQ students in public schools.
The lawsuit filed on Tuesday, which is led by the attorneys general of Kentucky and Tennessee, follows a pair of legal challenges from nine Republican states on Monday — all contesting the administration’s interpretation that sex-based discrimination under the statute also covers that which is based on the victim’s sexual orientation or gender identity.
The administration also rolled back Trump-era rules governing how schools must respond to allegations of sexual harassment and sexual assault, which were widely perceived as biased in favor of the interests of those who are accused.
“The U.S. Department of Education has no authority to let boys into girls’ locker rooms,” Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti said in a statement. “In the decades since its adoption, Title IX has been universally understood to protect the privacy and safety of women in private spaces like locker rooms and bathrooms.”
“Florida is suing the Biden administration over its unlawful Title IX changes,” Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis wrote on social media. “Biden is abusing his constitutional authority to push an ideological agenda that harms women and girls and conflicts with the truth.”
After announcing the finalization of the department’s new rules, Education Secretary Miguel Cardona told reporters, “These regulations make it crystal clear that everyone can access schools that are safe, welcoming and that respect their rights.”
The new rule does not provide guidance on whether schools must allow transgender students to play on sports teams corresponding with their gender identity to comply with Title IX, a question that is addressed in a separate rule proposed by the agency in April.
LGBTQ and civil rights advocacy groups praised the changes. Lambda Legal issued a statement arguing the new rule “protects LGBTQ+ students from discrimination and other abuse,” adding that it “appropriately underscores that Title IX’s civil rights protections clearly cover LGBTQ+ students, as well as survivors and pregnant and parenting students across race and gender identity.”
Federal Government
4th Circuit rules gender identity is a protected characteristic
Ruling a response to N.C., W.Va. legal challenges
BY ERIN REED | The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Monday that transgender people are a protected class and that Medicaid bans on trans care are unconstitutional.
Furthermore, the court ruled that discriminating based on a diagnosis of gender dysphoria is discrimination based on gender identity and sex. The ruling is in response to lower court challenges against state laws and policies in North Carolina and West Virginia that prevent trans people on state plans or Medicaid from obtaining coverage for gender-affirming care; those lower courts found such exclusions unconstitutional.
In issuing the final ruling, the 4th Circuit declared that trans exclusions were “obviously discriminatory” and were “in violation of the equal protection clause” of the Constitution, upholding lower court rulings that barred the discriminatory exclusions.
The 4th Circuit ruling focused on two cases in states within its jurisdiction: North Carolina and West Virginia. In North Carolina, trans state employees who rely on the State Health Plan were unable to use it to obtain gender-affirming care for gender dysphoria diagnoses.
In West Virginia, a similar exclusion applied to those on the state’s Medicaid plan for surgeries related to a diagnosis of gender dysphoria. Both exclusions were overturned by lower courts, and both states appealed to the 4th Circuit.
Attorneys for the states had argued that the policies were not discriminatory because the exclusions for gender affirming care “apply to everyone, not just transgender people.” The majority of the court, however, struck down such a claim, pointing to several other cases where such arguments break down, such as same-sex marriage bans “applying to straight, gay, lesbian, and bisexual people equally,” even though straight people would be entirely unaffected by such bans.
Other cases cited included literacy tests, a tax on wearing kippot for Jewish people, and interracial marriage in Loving v. Virginia.
See this portion of the court analysis here:
Of particular note in the majority opinion was a section on Geduldig v. Aiello that seemed laser-targeted toward an eventual U.S. Supreme Court decision on discriminatory policies targeting trans people. Geduldig v. Aiello, a 1974 ruling, determined that pregnancy discrimination is not inherently sex discrimination because it does not “classify on sex,” but rather, on pregnancy status.
Using similar arguments, the states claimed that gender affirming care exclusions did not classify or discriminate based on trans status or sex, but rather, on a diagnosis of gender dysphoria and treatments to alleviate that dysphoria.
The majority was unconvinced, ruling, “gender dysphoria is so intimately related to transgender status as to be virtually indistinguishable from it. The excluded treatments aim at addressing incongruity between sex assigned at birth and gender identity, the very heart of transgender status.” In doing so, the majority cited several cases, many from after Geduldig was decided.
Notably, Geduldig was cited in both the 6th and 11th Circuit decisions upholding gender affirming care bans in a handful of states.
The court also pointed to the potentially ridiculous conclusions that strict readings of what counts as proxy discrimination could lead to, such as if legislators attempted to use “XX chromosomes” and “XY chromosomes” to get around sex discrimination policies:
Importantly, the court also rebutted recent arguments that Bostock applies only to “limited Title VII claims involving employers who fired” LGBTQ employees, and not to Title IX, which the Affordable Care Act’s anti-discrimination mandate references. The majority stated that this is not the case, and that there is “nothing in Bostock to suggest the holding was that narrow.”
Ultimately, the court ruled that the exclusions on trans care violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution. The court also ruled that the West Virginia Medicaid Program violates the Medicaid Act and the anti-discrimination provisions of the Affordable Care Act.
Additionally, the court upheld the dismissal of anti-trans expert testimony for lacking relevant expertise. West Virginia and North Carolina must end trans care exclusions in line with earlier district court decisions.
The decision will likely have nationwide impacts on court cases in other districts. The case had become a major battleground for trans rights, with dozens of states filing amicus briefs in favor or against the protection of the equal process rights of trans people. Twenty-one Republican states filed an amicus brief in favor of denying trans people anti-discrimination protections in healthcare, and 17 Democratic states joined an amicus brief in support of the healthcare rights of trans individuals.
Many Republican states are defending anti-trans laws that discriminate against trans people by banning or limiting gender-affirming care. These laws could come under threat if the legal rationale used in this decision is adopted by other circuits. In the 4th Circuit’s jurisdiction, West Virginia and North Carolina already have gender-affirming care bans for trans youth in place, and South Carolina may consider a similar bill this week.
The decision could potentially be used as precedent to challenge all of those laws in the near future and to deter South Carolina’s bill from passing into law.
The decision is the latest in a web of legal battles concerning trans people. Earlier this month, the 4th Circuit also reversed a sports ban in West Virginia, ruling that Title IX protects trans student athletes. However, the Supreme Court recently narrowed a victory for trans healthcare from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and allowed Idaho to continue enforcing its ban on gender-affirming care for everyone except the two plaintiffs in the case.
Importantly, that decision was not about the constitutionality of gender-affirming care, but the limits of temporary injunctions in the early stages of a constitutional challenge to discriminatory state laws. It is likely that the Supreme Court will ultimately hear cases on this topic in the near future.
Celebrating the victory, Lambda Legal Counsel and Health Care Strategist Omar Gonzalez-Pagan said in a posted statement, “The court’s decision sends a clear message that gender-affirming care is critical medical care for transgender people and that denying it is harmful and unlawful … We hope this decision makes it clear to policy makers across the country that health care decisions belong to patients, their families, and their doctors, not to politicians.”
****************************************************************************
Erin Reed is a transgender woman (she/her pronouns) and researcher who tracks anti-LGBTQ+ legislation around the world and helps people become better advocates for their queer family, friends, colleagues, and community. Reed also is a social media consultant and public speaker.
******************************************************************************************
The preceding article was first published at Erin In The Morning and is republished with permission.
Blade Summer Kickoff Party returns to Rehoboth
Andy Cohen coming to D.C.
Want to dance for a good cause?
Calendar: May 3-9
Brittney Griner considered suicide in Russian prison
HHS reverses Trump-era anti-LGBTQ rule
4th Circuit rules gender identity is a protected characteristic
Pride season has begun
PHOTOS: Capital Pride Pageant
