Opinions
Treat our political opponents as neighbors not enemies
I want an America where each party makes the other better
For much of my adult life, people have assumed they know my politics before I open my mouth. As a transgender man writing for an LGBTQ publication, many assume I fit neatly into one political camp. The truth is more complicated. I have long felt politically centrist. I believe deeply in protecting LGBTQ Americans from discrimination and violence, and I also vehemently believe in Black Lives Matter, but I also believe in fiscal responsibility, a strong national defense, and institutions that encourage personal responsibility. I have found wisdom on both sides of the aisle, and I have found blind spots on both sides as well. I’ve also found some Republicans close to me to love me deeply, and I’ve found Democrats to do the same.
That leaves me with an unfashionable conclusion as a sort of pioneering transgender man: America desperately needs more bipartisanship.
Not because disagreement is unhealthy. Democracy depends on disagreement. But because democracy cannot survive if we begin treating our political opponents as enemies instead of neighbors.
Sen. John McCain understood this better than most. During his concession speech after losing the 2008 presidential election, supporters booed when Barack Obama’s name was mentioned. McCain immediately stopped them. “No, my friends,” he said. “Senator Obama is a decent person and a person you do not have to be scared of as president.” At a time when it would have been politically convenient to inflame partisan passions, McCain instead reminded Americans that losing an election did not mean losing a country.
Years later, after being diagnosed with brain cancer, McCain returned to the Senate to cast one of the defining votes of his career. More memorable than his famous thumbs-down vote on repealing the Affordable Care Act was the speech he delivered beforehand, pleading for senators to return to “regular order” and legislate together rather than behind closed doors. It was not simply a procedural argument. It was a moral one: institutions work best when neither party assumes it possesses all the answers.
American history repeatedly validates that lesson. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not become law because one party overwhelmed the other. It passed through bipartisan coalitions that included Democrats and Republicans willing to work across ideological divides. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 followed a similar path. Even President Ronald Reagan, remembered today as a conservative icon, ultimately signed legislation establishing Martin Luther King Jr. Day as a federal holiday after bipartisan support made the case impossible to ignore.
LGBTQ equality has followed a similar trajectory.
One of the most significant LGBTQ legislative victories in recent years—the Respect for Marriage Act—was not a partisan triumph. The bill passed the Senate by a vote of 61-36 with the support of 12 Republican senators after bipartisan negotiations added religious liberty protections that broadened its coalition. It later became law with bipartisan support in the House as well. Those Republican senators deserve much attention and a decent amount of respect.
As the son of two State Department diplomats, I also grew up overseas, living in embassies with legions of Marines that protected us kids from violence outside and potential assaults from foreign agents and spies. I learned from a young age that the American military is necessary to the survival of our nation. We need bases in foreign lands, Navy ships, and a CIA apparatus to defend us from overseas enemies. This is the reality that America faces, yet some in the LGBTQ community advocate for the demolition of the military.
As someone who is transgender, I understand why many LGBTQ Americans are skeptical of this argument. There are lawmakers advancing legislation that threatens our dignity or our rights. Those concerns are real. But political victories that endure rarely come solely from defeating opponents. They come from persuading them—or at least persuading enough of them that they become partners rather than permanent adversaries.
Right now, America is in a hellish partisan crisis. Trump is verging on a crazed dictator and Alexandria Ocasio Cortez and Bernie Sanders are yelling platitudes condemning Republicans. This crisis needs to be resolved. We need to dull the flames of political hate. We need to come back to the center, as McCain rightfully said.
This is called the politics of the neighbor. When you step outside your house or apartment, you will inevitably meet neighbors who carry different political views than you. They may believe in gun rights, or even vote for Trump, but if they act decently toward you, you should probably act decently toward them.
The neighbor coaches your child’s soccer team. They teach your daughter mathematics in middle school. They are therapists in addiction centers. They are bus drivers. They are bankers. They are lawyers. They could very well be politicians, too.
The neighbor helps shovel your driveway after a snowstorm. They give you a plant to put in your garden. When you have to go in for a biopsy, they stand by your side and help you through medical results.
The neighbor attends a different church, watches a different cable network, votes differently than you do—and still shows up when your family is in crisis.
But the neighbor means a lot to you, and you should mean a lot to them.
I do not want an America where Republicans disappear. I do not want an America where Democrats disappear. I want an America where each party makes the other better.
That aspiration should not sound naïve. It should sound patriotic.
The measure of a democracy is not whether it eliminates disagreement. It is whether disagreement remains compatible with mutual respect. We can argue fiercely over taxes, immigration, foreign policy, and LGBTQ rights while still recognizing that the person casting the opposite vote is not necessarily a villain.
America has always been strongest when it remembered that political opponents are still fellow citizens. Before they are Republicans or Democrats, conservatives or progressives, they are our neighbors. And neighbors, unlike enemies, have to find a way to keep living together.
Isaac Amend is a transgender man and writer based in D.C. In 2017, he starred in National Geographic’s ‘Gender Revolution’ documentary, hosted by Katie Couric. His author’s portfolio is available at isaacamend.com, and you can catch him on Instagram at @isaacamend.
Opinions
‘Hidden in Plain Sight:’ The story of Odessa Madre
A queer U Street criminal, entrepreneur, and wealthy Black woman
The liquor was flowing, the dice were rolling and the women were plentiful. Down on 14th Street in the U Street corridor in 1946, at Club Madre, your thirst could be quenched and your vices satisfied. At the center of it all was a large, dark-skinned woman whose taste for mink, money, and power made her larcenous — and legendary.
Look at photos of Odessa Madre, clothed head-to-toe in fur, hair freshly curled, and her eyes dared you to question her prowess. Her mischievous smile suggested she knew something you didn’t. Here was one of the most successful women in Washington, D.C. — and yet most Washingtonians have never heard of her. Why?
Madre was a big-time numbers runner during the 1930s, ‘40s, and ’50s, when the illegal lottery was booming. For Black Washingtonians, the underground lottery offered a chance to get ahead economically when segregation made legitimate financial advancement nearly impossible. Those who ran the game always seemed to be making money — and Madre was one of the most successful, with the hustle, resources and smarts to become one of the richest women in the city. Yet she nearly became a footnote in D.C. history, remembered mostly by a small plaque on U Street where her mugshot is captioned: “This was D.C.’s Al Capone.”
Why does someone like her nearly disappear from history? And when someone is erased — what is lost?
Madre graduated from Dunbar High School, the segregated school for African Americans renowned for producing students who went on to earn advanced degrees and returned to teach. The expectation was that if you looked and spoke the “right” way, a respectable job — teaching, civil service — awaited. Those jobs were also often reserved for women who fit a certain mold. As Professor Sharon Harley writes in “Sister Circle: Black Women and Work,” Madre’s turn to criminal life was fueled in part by “deep feelings of rejection by the Washington color-conscious Black middle class.” She didn’t fit the mold. So she built her own path.
She aligned herself with people she was never supposed to befriend — Italian and Irish men who ran the city’s underworld — and turned selling moonshine into a calling card. Childhood friends who became police officers looked out for her, and she looked out for them.
Madre never married and had no interest in men. She kept a steady crew of attractive women close, and accounts suggest she had relationships with women — relationships that would hardly have been acknowledged publicly at the time. Her rejection of the era’s social expectations meant she was never bound by a marriage that could have curbed her ambition, or a divorce that could have wrecked her financially. Her independence gave her a level of control over her life that few women of her era experienced.
Eventually, police stings, betrayals and a government eager to legalize the lottery for itself squeezed the life out of the underground game. Madre’s luck ran out. She died penniless — her funeral paid for by street friends and a detective or two who had quietly admired her hustle for years.
Why does any of this matter? Because it’s a clear-eyed look at what it takes to chase the American Dream when the front door is locked. History can be ugly — but sanitizing it doesn’t make it less true.
Odessa Madre was a criminal, entrepreneur, hustler, queer woman, Dunbar graduate, numbers runner, wealthy Black woman, friend to police, lawbreaker and product of segregation — all at once.
Her story is a reminder that the truth about Jim Crow, and who survived it and how, is more complicated — and more honest — than any diluted version of history could be.
My documentary, “Odessa’s Reign,” is an attempt to give her the fuller portrait she never received in her lifetime. Madre’s path challenges us to think about identity, place and memory: who gets remembered, and why their stories matter.
Robin Hamilton is a filmmaker and journalist and director of ‘Odessa’s Reign.’ There will be a screening and community conversation, ‘Hidden in Plain Sight: The Story of Odessa Madre,’ on Friday, Oct. 30 at Busboys and Poets at 14th and V streets, 6-8:30 p.m. Learn more at www.aroundrobin.com.
Opinions
Solidarity beyond the parade: the actual cost of Pride
Chandreyi Guharay spoke with activists at World Pride in Amsterdam
Editor’s note: Chandreyi Guharay is the global advocacy officer for Walking the Talk. She spoke with queer activists from around the world at World Pride 2026 in Amsterdam about the impact of shrinking aid.
Queer activists and Dutch NGOs gathered at Amsterdam City Hall as part of “Building Bridges,” a World Pride 2026 visitor program for LGBTIQ+ community leaders run by the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs and COC Nederland.
Pride is every day, everywhere
Although we were in Amsterdam, the work back home never stops for activists. Enkhmaa Enkhbold, executive director of the LGBT Center in Mongolia, excused themself a couple of times to check their phone.
“We’re organizing Pride in Mongolia, and it’s happening in two weeks,” they explained.
Among many other things, their organization drives policy advocacy and movement building for LGBTIQ+ rights, and helps queer people facing persecution find a safe way out.
John Mathenge Mukaburu is also doing the daily work of resistance. His organization HOYMAS in Kenya runs clinics across three counties, serving almost 20,000 patients from key populations, including gay and bisexual men and sex workers. In Nigeria, Cosmas Osinachi Ihenacho-Herbert, program director at Obodo, shared how they are changing the narrative by elevating the leading role queer people play in shaping art and culture across the country and the African continent.
And in Vietnam, Nguyễn Diệu Anh co-founded Yêu-nữ (Women Living Wicked), a sapphic collective that hosts regular gatherings where women have a place to find joy and each other. Whether it’s healthcare, protection, culture or belonging, these efforts keep communities alive. Still, they have never been properly funded.
Less funding, more backlash
As an advocate for gender equality and a queer activist myself, I know how much LGBTIQ+ movements do with so little. Even before the dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development and the funding cuts across other major donor countries, just $.04 cents of every $100 in Official Development Assistance (ODA) went to queer communities. Now even that is rapidly disappearing. And what little there is doesn’t land evenly. As trans activist Marcela Morales from Asociación Lambda in Guatemala emphasized: “Most of the funding goes to gay men’s and trans women’s organizations. Very little reaches organizations of trans men and LBQ women.”
But this isn’t just about money. The same politics driving these cuts are shrinking civic space everywhere. Anti-rights actors are growing richer and bolder, finding new ways to target LGBTIQ+ people, as my colleague Jordan Dittmar has written. Queer and feminist activists defend the right to protest, to speak and love freely, to put care for people and the planet at the center and to decide over our own bodies and lives. And yet our rights are always the easiest target, and our funding the first to be cut. We are the canary in the coal mine, and everyone else’s freedoms are never far behind. That should worry all of us.
A lifeline built on solidarity
Bessy Ferrera was a trans activist from Honduras who fought for the rights of trans people, sex workers and people living with HIV, and whose life was violently cut short in 2019. A year later, Hivos established the Bessy Ferrera Emergency Fund in her name. It offers fast, practical help to LGBTIQ+ activists facing threats because of their work, from medical and legal costs to security and relocation. Since 2022, it has helped nearly 100 people and organizations around the world.
When I mentioned the fund to Ribal Maatouk, national chairperson of the LGBTIQ+ Task Force in Lebanon, he told me he already knew it well. Through Israel’s devastating invasion and war, the Task Force, alongside its member organizations, notably specialized local LGBTIQ+ CSOs, have continued to provide humanitarian support to queer people.
“From all the funding initiatives, the Bessy Ferrera Fund was the most easily accessible for our community, allowing for a faster deployment of emergency support than other organizations,” he said. “I need to give credit where it’s due.”
Hope for the long haul
Emergency funds provide a vital lifeline during a crisis, but activists and their movements also need lasting support. For Cosmas, the lesson is hopeful: governments change with elections, and funding changes with them, but movements can outlast both. For activists in the Global South, that has often been the reality.
“Maybe the question is not how we survive this crisis,” he said, “But how we build a movement infrastructure that’s strong enough for us to thrive through whatever comes next.”
He also sees an opening: with the U.S. stepping back, the Netherlands could once again be the champion of gender equality and LGBTIQ+ rights it used to be. With a new Dutch government in place, there are signs of greater political will, and now is the moment to turn it into funding.
What comes after the parade
The activists I met have been holding their communities together, standing alongside feminist and queer movements everywhere to defend rights and freedoms for all. As we often say in the gender equality movement, imagine what they could do with the right support. Solidarity beyond the parade means that governments, funders and allies invest in queer aspirations.
Chandreyi Guharay is a Nicaraguan-Indian gender justice specialist by training, and — in Sara Ahmed’s words — a feminist killjoy by political choice. She’s the Global Advocacy Officer at Walking the Talk/Hivos, weaving together strategic advocacy, policy analysis and coalition-building for gender equality financing. She’s previously worked with Oxfam, Plan International, She Decides, CIVICUS, and Share-Net on research, organizational development and political education. Outside of work, you’ll find her co-conspiring with Feministas en Holanda, a decolonial grassroots collective of Latin American people in the Netherlands, where she is a community organizer around anti-racist and migrant justice struggles.
Opinions
Trump, Netanyahu, and Putin are all war criminals
We are living in a world of chaos as a result
Today there are war criminals leading three major governments. President Trump here in the United States, Benjamin Netanyahu in Israel, and Vladimir Putin in Russia. The world would be a better place if they were thrown into a jail cell together, and the key tossed away.
We are living in a world of chaos. Although these three are not responsible for all of it, they have a major role. All three are carrying out wars that they can’t win. Wars that should have never been started. In the process they are not only killing their stated enemies, but they’re also causing the deaths of their own people.
Here in the United States, we have a felon in the White House, who has done nothing but create chaos in the world since he took office. He has broken every promise he made to get elected, and while many of us knew they were all lies, he won anyway. He promised lower rents, lower mortgage rates, lower inflation, lower gas prices, lower grocery prices, and importantly, no new wars. He has accomplished the exact opposite in each of those areas. He began a war with Iran and started by bombing a school, mistake or not, killing innocent children. This after declaring war on immigrants here at home using his ICE Gestapo. He apparently thinks if he creates chaos, and then gets things back to close to where they were before he acted, he can claim victory. But even that seems out of his reach.
Then there is Prime Minister Netanyahu in Israel. His actions have made things worse not only for his enemies, but for Israelis at home, and Jews around the world. He began a war against Iran that he can’t win. He has committed war crimes against the Palestinian people in Gaza, and the West Bank, and by his actions brought out more anti-Semitism around the world. For me personally, he has made it more difficult to explain to people when I say I am a Zionist, it means I support the existence of the State of Israel, not its war criminal leader, and his government. He should have heeded what President Biden said to him after the Oct. 7 attack on Israel by Hamas. While retribution and getting back the hostages Hamas took was crucial, Biden counseled not to go overboard in response, like the United States did after 9/11. Instead, Netanyahu has killed thousands of Palestinian women and children, and has not made Israel much safer. He then began the war with Iran, and sent troops to fight in Lebanon. Yes, the Iranian government funds Hezbollah and Hamas, but one must ask if anything is better after Netanyahu’s actions. Israelis continue living in a state of active war.
Then there is Putin in Russia. He believed he could attack Ukraine and walk away with pieces of their country, maybe even all of it. Instead, he has Russia embroiled in a four-year war, killing thousands of Ukrainians, including many women and children, destroying parts of their country, and losing thousands of his own troops in a war he can’t win. His own people are suffering, and now, four years later, Ukraine has shown it still has the ability to attack Moscow. All three of these men have managed to show the weaknesses of their own countries.
In his effort to bluster through his many failures, Trump has destroyed relationships with our allies. It will take years, if ever, for them to trust the United States again. He invaded Venezuela and stole their oil, is starving Cuba, and created unease with Canada and Mexico on our own borders. He thinks this makes him look like a strongman, when it really shows all of his weaknesses. People should remember the treaty he abrogated with Canada and Mexico, was one he negotiated in his first term. Now he invites Chinese President, Xi, to the United States, and gives him the same red-carpet welcome he previously gave to Putin in Alaska, and in both cases, received nothing in return. He tries to keep the press he doesn’t like from having access to him.
All three are facing crucial elections that could severely impact their futures. Only Putin, a true dictator, is assured of winning because he controls the process. Trump is trying to emulate him, to keep from losing the Nov. 3, mid-term elections. Thankfully the courts are trying to stop him. Netanyahu could face being thrown out on Oct. 27, if Israelis do the right thing.
Again, I truly believe putting the three of them in a jail cell together would make our troubled world a little safer, and a much better place.
Peter Rosenstein is a longtime LGBTQ rights and Democratic Party activist.
-
District of Columbia5 days agoBet Mishpachah participates in D.C. Oct. 7 commemoration ceremony
-
National5 days agoMan charged in Mall of America shooting plot inspired by Pulse massacre: report
-
Afghanistan4 days agoICC unseals arrest warrants for Taliban officials accused of persecuting LGBTQ people, women
-
District of Columbia4 days agoPhysician: addiction doesn’t always look the way you think it does
