Connect with us

Health

Meet a few of LA’s homeless LGBTQ youth

Before our eyes, a tragedy is growing that must not be ignored

Published

on

Hay, Jazzy, Kathen and Kyle are among 30 LGBT youth are living in a tent encampment, struggling to survive. (Photo by John Boatner for the Los Angeles Blade)

Energy and smarts are the first things you notice about Hay, 20, who had fun explaining his gender.

“I’m male but some of my friends be like, ‘girl,’ so I don’t really conform,” he says as he plopped down, lit a cigarette and showed off his green fingernails. “I need a manicure.”

Hay, like several of the 30 or so LGBT youth living on a sun-blistered sidewalk, just north of Santa Monica Boulevard, aged out of the foster care system and instantly wound up on the streets.

At 14, he says, he’d finally had enough of his father’s physical and emotional abuse. “I guess I put myself in foster care. I called CFS [Child and Family Services]  myself and I went to the school and told them how I had gotten beaten up really badly.”

He says he still carries a great deal of raw trauma. And the trauma is growing.

On his 18th birthday, his social worker dropped him off at Hollywood and Highland. He had nowhere to go and no plan. He was utterly alone and hopeless, entering a spiral of 30-day stays in homeless shelters. “I feel like they pushed my homelessness,” he says.

“I eventually stayed in a tent,” he explains.

His head bowed and eyes narrowing, he said, “I’ve tried several times to get treatment [for trauma]. I don’t feel like it’s necessarily helpful.”

Straightening his posture, Hay added, “treatment for me is having a safe place to be able to think.”

But that’s not possible for him right now.

LGBT youth, like Hay, account for a disproportionate number of the more than 50,000 people living on the streets of Los Angeles, a number that’s increasing every day.  And, though the evidence is largely empirical, it is indisputable.

“There’s no way of knowing exactly how many (homeless) young people are LGBT. These kids, runaway or throwaway young people, are very vulnerable on the streets,” Los Angeles County Supervisor Sheila Kuehl told the Los Angeles Blade.

Still, Hay believes he is self-reliant.

“I’m resourceful, I wanted to be a professional dancer. I would run away from home and go to a dance class,” he says proudly and with a beautiful and full smile.

Dance was his solace but for now it is a dream deferred.

“I’m broke, so, as much as I would like to go to a dance class, I have to worry about being able to feed myself, take care of myself, make sure I have clothes on my back,” he said flatly.

Hay said he finds the shelters and transitional housing challenging because the collective emotional disturbance is profound. “Other people’s mental illnesses make it hard for me because I am going through my own stuff,” he said. “It’s hard to juggle everyone and having their personality thrown at you on top of having to look for a place.”

One agency Hay thought might be a good fit for him was Rapid Rehousing, which helps with the hurdles of finding permanent housing. The agency requires employment, however, a common demand that Hay finds maddening.

“Mentally, I don’t feel like I could get a job. I’ve applied for jobs, you know, but how do you put on a facade that everything is hunky-dory? How do you say ‘hey, I’m still going through homelessness and this job is the only source of income I have, so if you guys fire me I have literally nothing,’” he said.

He proudly added, “I’d quit before I tell them what I’m going through”

The cover of Los Angeles Blade, July 28, 2017. (Photo by Troy Masters)

The city and county of Los Angeles are nearly overwhelmed and non-profits, like the Los Angeles LGBT Center have been operating at full capacity for some time.

The makeshift tent encampment Hay and others live in has become something of a virtual family, with aspirations, dreams, and profound personal stories, enormous insight to offer and even an abiding desire to change the world around them.

“I am not at all surprised to learn that our LGBT homeless youth are forming families; it gives them a semblance of comfort and sense of safety,” said Kuehl.

In 2017, the number of people living on the streets of Los Angeles grew to 34,000 people, an increase of 23 percent in one year, according to a recently released report from the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority. That number grows to 58,000 when you include Los Angeles County.

Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti said, “Our city is in the midst of an extraordinary homelessness crisis that needs an extraordinary response. These men, these women, these children are our neighbors.”

Kathen has an almost disarmingly joyous demeanor. At 22 years old, he is one of the oldest members of the tent group. “I go off people’s vibe,” he says, “I don’t really go off a person’s gender.”

He describes himself as a “stranger and a bit of a random funny guy” and dreams of one day having his own restaurant.

He says his path to near chronic homelessness began five years ago when his stepfather, menacing and knife in hand, demanded he kill himself. Kathen says he never treated him “as his child.”

“I was finally fed up with it,” he said, adding that he “punched the door completely down — I broke it down — I punched the door completely down” he said, gazing away, tears welling in his eyes as he began to fidget. He paused, then added, “They told me to leave and so I just left, at 17, didn’t finish high school. I left when I was in my junior year.”

Kathen says he managed to graduate high school. “I want to go to college. I want to be a chef.” He wants to own his own restaurant, he says.

When asked if he sees a path to his dream he looked at his hands and winced,  “A path?” Then, looking puzzled, he asked “A path right now?”

“It’s crazy because there’s so much I need to do for it. First, I need to go to school and then I need to travel. I want to explore the world and learn. Because in my restaurant I want to have a different menu each month and I want to have, like, different ways to cook.” He grew excited and added, “I want to learn from people around the world and from different cultures.”

Kathen fell in love with cooking while working at a nursing home. “It was fun because, you know, there’s over 300 people there. You have to cook for each one individually because of their diet.”

“It was fun but it’s more by the book. But me? I’m a person who likes freedom and that’s why I want to have my own restaurant,” he said.

In the meantime, Kathen needs help getting off the streets.

He has been through at least three different programs, including the Los Angeles LGBT Center. “They all give you the same thing,” Kathen says, “They tell you to go online and apply for job, but it’s, you know….the resources don’t help out as much as they should.”

When asked how he has been surviving, Kathen said, “right now I am just trying to get some shoes, hustling lately trying to get some food. I sell some clothes. I have my EBT (a food stamp debit card). I sell my tokens…I’d rather walk with money in my pockets than ride the bus or the subway. I have to survive and you have to pay to live in this world.”

“I’m pretty sure I can pull myself out of this,” he says. But he also sees homelessness as an option when things don’t work out. “There’s been a couple of times when I chose to be homeless. Like when my stepfather tried to choke me. I chose safety,” he said.

Last November, residents of the city of Los Angeles approved a $1.2 billion bond measure that aims to build 10,000 units of permanent housing with support services for the chronically homeless.

In March 2017, Los Angeles County voters, concerned about the growing crisis, approved Measure H, a quarter-cent sales tax increase in Los Angeles County that will help fund anti-homelessness initiatives. It should raise $355 million annually.

LA County Supervisors recently approved a funds allocation strategy focusing on subsidized housing, coordinated outreach and shelters, case management and services, homelessness prevention, income support and preservation of existing housing.

That three-year plan includes $295 million in spending for the first year, $374 million in the second year and $431 million in the third.

“Los Angeles County is responsible for the services portion,” Kuehl told the Los Angeles Blade, “but the sales tax increase is not available to us quite yet. We will loan some funds to the Measure H pot until the tax is in place, collected and available.” The tax is set to begin Oct. 1.

The loan against future tax revenues will allow some programs to begin implementation — programs that have been shown to make a difference.

One of those programs makes it possible for seamless transitions from shelter to shelter and program to program. “We also have a coordinated outreach program that helps homeless people more easily access services and housing,” she said.

Jasmine, 20, who is transgender and prefers to be called Jazzy, says she likes to stand up for what’s right.

Wearing a neon pink Pride T-shirt, a yellow Pikachu hat and sporting pink and blonde curls, Jazzy is poised beyond her years and possesses a passion that is clear the moment she engages you.

“I am a person who is fearless, brave and who hurts when other people can’t stand up for themselves,” she said with an edgy certainty.

As an 8-year-old, Jazzy says she “was picked up and thrown through a plate glass window in my own bedroom.” Shortly after that she was placed in foster care and was eventually moved to group homes until she turned 18.

She aged out of the system and found herself living on the streets. Upon leaving the system, she was told of benefits that might be available, but when attempting to access them she says she was denied.

Today, Jazzy claims the only thing she is eligible for is “a TAP card to get where I need to go.”

Jazzy wanders the streets “until I can’t wander no more” during the day, often looking for a safe place to sit and a place to sleep at night. “During the nighttime you just gotta find a place that looks like it’s not being, like, we are barred or a risky place where you will be arrested. You just gotta find a place to lay your head down on the sidewalk or grass,” she says. “You just have to find a place.”

“I’m not eligible for food stamps,” claims Jazzy who says, “we rely on what random good people bring to the park. Or people from the neighborhood who say, ‘hey, would you guys like this?’ And they bring pizza. Today some guy brought two boxes of baked beans popped into chips. He said ‘we want you guys to stay healthy’ There’s good people like that,” she said.

Jazzy wants people to know that she and her friends have been on waiting lists for months and months to get housing from various services around Los Angeles. “We still have to inch up the list,” she says.

The years on the street have not broken Jazzy and she still has a dream: “My passion is tattoos and piercing. I fell in love with tattoos and piercing by the age of 9. I gave my first professional tattoo at age 16. My passion. I don’t care. I’ll do it for the rest of my life.”

Most shelters allow for only a temporary stay and most programs offer short-term services.

Kuehl points to the numbers of people housed in the last year — 14,000 people she said “were taken off the streets last year and housed or given shelter. And even though the problem has grown, that’s an achievement.”

“One of the biggest contributors to the homeless crisis here is the ability of landlords to raise the rents to market level whenever there’s a vacancy or at the end of a lease. No rent control in most cities means your landlord can literally show up at your door and tell you your rent is going to double and you have no recourse.”

Harvard University recently reported that 58.5 percent of renters in Los Angeles are “burdened,” with more than 30 percent of their income going to rent.

When he turned 18, Kyle, now 22, jumped on a bus in Chattanooga, Tenn., and made it all the way to LA without so much as a bus ticket. “I literally snuck on a Greyhound and rode in the back.”

“LA is where it’s at if you are gay, you know. It’s easy to be here because everybody accepts you for who you are,” he says. In Tennessee, Kyle says he was “shot at, stabbed, had dogs go after me and everything so I just got on a Greyhound and left.”

He’s been homeless since. LA has “been alright I guess,” he says with discouragement written on his face. Still, he persists.

Pulling himself out requires a job, something that has so far proven difficult for Kyle. For now the only money he has is what he is able to get by asking for change on Hollywood Boulevard.

Like others, Kyle is paralyzed by the idea of employment while homeless. He had a job that was helping him pay for cosmetics school, but decided to quit both. “I quit. It’s hard to wash your clothes every day and not have a place to wash them. You know, trying to keep your phone charged so you can get up in the morning or worrying about smell. ‘Do I stink?’

“Working with the public [while homeless] is a lot harder than people think,” he says.

Kyle spends his days either on Hollywood Boulevard or at the LGBT Youth Center where he once lived. “I’m just there I’m trying to get into the center but it’s harder because I’ve already been in there once and it’s harder to get in there a second time,” he says.

When asked why he doesn’t just return to Tennessee, his eyes tear up, he bites his lip and looks afraid. “That’s not where my heart is. Being raised in the Bible Belt and being called ‘faggot’ … I don’t want to deal with that.”

Kyle feels though “some days are harder than others…here, at least there are people like me and I don’t have to be alone.”

He is hopeful he can turn his situation around but for the moment, he is living on the sidewalk in a tent. “I don’t want to do this the rest of my life.”

The LGBT youth featured in this issue of the Los Angeles Blade have extraordinary stories of displacement. Some of them have never known a home. Under the most difficult circumstances, some are fighting addiction and some, but not all, are succumbing to it. Some are joyous and determined, while others are bereft and broken. All of them feel they’ve fallen through the cracks of a broken system. None of them feel they are being heard.

We thought you should meet them.  And we urge you to take action.

NOTE:
At the request of the youth, no women are featured in this article. The community was very clear about their desire to protect their lesbian and trans members, one of whom was recently raped and stabbed.

Since this article was written, the police busted the community up but they regrouped one block away and some have found shelters.  However, with new members, their numbers swelled recently to more than 50.

Dedication:  This article is now dedicated to the memory of Carol Singleton, who eased an intense period of rejection and abuse I faced as a child.  Her love helped me adjust and survive, preventing me from running away. Just showing love can prevent homelessness in youth.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Commentary

Claiming space, leading boldly: A new chapter in HIV fight

A time of extraordinary possibility and profound peril

Published

on

Harold Phillips is incoming CEO of National Minority AIDS Council.

I step into the leadership of the National Minority AIDS Council at a time of both extraordinary possibility and profound peril. We are living in a moment where science has given us the tools to end HIV as a public health threat—PrEP, PEP, U=U, long-acting injectables, and decades of research that have transformed what was once a death sentence into a manageable condition. And yet, the systems meant to deliver these tools are under siege.

Public health is being politicized. Science is being undermined. Civil and human rights are being rolled back. The safety and security of LGBTQ+ people—especially Black and Brown queer and trans folks—are increasingly fragile. In some states, even saying the word “gay” in a classroom is considered controversial. In others, access to gender-affirming care is being stripped away. And all the while, HIV continues to disproportionately impact communities that have been historically marginalized and medically neglected.

So yes, I step into this role with a sense of urgency. But I also step in with pride. Because I know what it means to be underestimated. I know what it means to be told you don’t belong. As a Black, church-going, gay boy from the South Side of Chicago, I grew up in a world that didn’t always see me, didn’t always protect me, and certainly didn’t expect me to lead a national movement. But here I am. And I’m not alone.

I carry with me the legacy of those who came before—of Marsha P. Johnson and Bayard Rustin, of Magic Johnson and Ryan White, of the activists who lay down in the streets and shouted “Silence = Death” until the world finally listened. I carry the wisdom of Black grandmothers who raised generations through grief and grit. I carry the fire of young people who refuse to be silent, who organize, who vote, who demand better.

At NMAC, we are not just fighting a virus, we are fighting the systems that allow it to thrive. We are fighting racism in healthcare, transphobia in policy, and stigma in every corner of society. We are fighting for Black and Brown communities, for LGBTQ+ youth, for aging people living with HIV who deserve dignity, not invisibility.

This is not just a job, it’s a calling. And it’s a call to action for all of us.

We must raise our voices louder than the attacks. We must claim space in rooms that were never built for us. We must demand funding that reflects the urgency of our communities’ needs. We must protect the programs that work—like Ryan White, HOPWA, and PEPFAR—and expand access to innovations like long-acting PrEP.

We must also tell the truth: that ending the HIV epidemic is not just a scientific challenge, it’s a justice challenge. It requires confronting poverty, housing insecurity, criminalization, and the erosion of civil rights. It requires centering people who live at the intersection of multiple oppressions. It requires love, radical empathy, and unapologetic leadership.

I am ready to lead. But I cannot do it alone.

To every activist, provider, policymaker, and person living with HIV: this is your movement too. Your voice matters. Your story matters. Your survival is revolutionary.

Let’s build a future where HIV is no longer a threat—not because we ignored it, but because we faced it head-on. Let’s build a future where public health is protected, science is respected, and every person—regardless of race, gender, or sexuality—can live with dignity and thrive.

Let’s build it together.


Harold Phillips is incoming CEO of National Minority AIDS Council. 

Continue Reading

COMMENTARY

A call to act, not just observe, this Suicide Prevention Month: If we meant it, we would fund it

Despite September being Suicide Prevention Month, crucial mental health are being defunded across the country. Real prevention needs more than awareness campaigns.

Published

on

Suicide Prevention Month graphic

September is Suicide Prevention Month, a time to address often-ignored painful truths and readdress what proactivity looks like. For those of us who have lost someone they love to suicide, prevention is not just another campaign. It is a constant pang that stays.

To lose someone you love to suicide is to have the color in your life dimmed. It is beyond language. Nothing one can type, nothing one can say to a therapist, no words can ever convey this new brand of hurting we never imagined before. It is an open cut so deep that it never truly, fully heals.  

Nothing in this world is comparable to witnessing someone you love making the decision to end their life because they would rather not be than to be here. Whether “here” means here in this time, here in this place, or here in a life that has come to feel utterly devoid of other options, of hope, or of help, the decision to leave often comes from a place of staggering pain and a resounding need to be heard. The sense of having no autonomy, of being trapped inside pressure so immense it compresses the will to live, is no rarity. It is a very real struggle that so many adolescents and young adults carry the weight of every day.

Many folks in our country claim to uphold the sanctity of human life.  But if that claim holds any validity or moral grounding, it would have to start with protecting the lives of our youth. Not only preventing their deaths but affirming and improving the quality of their lives. We need to recognize and respond to the reality that for too many adolescents and teenagers, especially those who are marginalized and chronically underserved, life does not feel so sacred. It feels damn near impossible.

Today, suicide is the second leading cause of death for Americans ages 10 to 24. That rate has almost doubled since 2007. Among queer-identifying youth, the statistics are crushing. Nearly 42% have seriously considered suicide in the past year, and almost 1 in 4 have attempted it. These are not just numbers. These are the children and teens we claim to care for and protect. These are kids full of potential and possibility who come to believe that their lives are too painful or meaningless to go on.

For our youth who identify as both queer and BIPOC, the numbers soar to even more devastating heights. Discrimination, housing insecurity, trauma (complex, generational, or otherwise), and isolation pile on the already stacked mental health risks. Transitional times like puberty, continuing education, coming out, or even being outed can all become crisis points. And yet, the resources available to support these youth remain far too limited, particularly in rural and underfunded communities.

We must also call out a disheartening truth. Suicide is not just a mental health issue but also a political one. Despite years of advocacy and an undeniable increase in youth mental health crises, funding for prevention is barely pocket change in regard to national budgets. In 2023, the federal government spent an underwhelming $617 million on suicide prevention efforts. To provide some perspective, that’s less than what we spend each year defending the border wall.

Meanwhile, school-based mental health services, one of the most effective means of reaching children and teens early, are being decimated. A $1 billion mental health grant program, which began after the Uvalde school shooting aiming to increase school counseling services, was recently pulled from hundreds of school districts. In some places, that left over 1,000 students for every 1 mental health provider. And in others,  it left entire counties with zero youth therapists.

This rollback is not an isolated agenda. It operates in tandem with a cultural and legislative attack on the LGBTQ+ community and our access to affirming education, healthcare, and visibility. Programs that create safe spaces and lifelines are being wiped away. The LGBTQ+ line of the 988 suicide hotline, created to offer identity-affirming, culturally competent crisis support, was recently defunded, despite having provided help to over 1.3 million callers. The political message here is unmistakable. Only some lives, some pain, and some needs of a select group are worth the money and care.

I can’t help but contrast this with how our country controls the process of childbirth. Over the last decade, particularly following growing awareness and resulting concern around maternal mortality rates, the U.S. has consistently increased investment in maternal health. Federal funds now support initiatives like Healthy Start, safety improvements in birthing facilities, and dedicated maternal mental health hotlines. In 2022, the Into the Light Act was passed, allocating $170 million over six years for screening and treatment of postpartum mental health conditions. These are great and necessary efforts. But even here, we fall short. A study published in JAMA Psychiatry in November 2023 examined drug overdose deaths among pregnant and postpartum women in the U.S. from 2018 to 2021. The findings revealed that suicide and overdose were the leading causes of death during this period.

Yet even this limited progress for new parents shows us an undeniable contradiction. As a nation, we have shown we are capable of legislating support for life when we are politically and morally motivated to. We can pass bills, allocate funds, and create crisis hotlines. What’s missing is the motivation to extend that same urgency to the mental health and well-being of young people before they become statistics.

At the same time, astonishing amounts of public money have been directed toward restricting reproductive freedom. Since the overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022, states have collectively spent hundreds of millions of dollars enforcing abortion bans, funding legal battles, surveillance infrastructure, and crisis pregnancy centers that often provide misleading information. 

In 2023 alone, Texas allocated over $140 million to the Alternatives to Abortion program, while at the same time slashing funding to health providers that offered comprehensive reproductive care. Nationwide, anti-abortion lobbying and litigation have received sustained state and federal backing, often at the expense of preventive care, contraception access, and the very maternal health supports that claim to be prioritized. Only the willful can ignore the blatant contradiction here. While suicide and overdose silently claim the lives of mothers post-childbirth, far more political and financial energy is funneled into controlling whether people can become mothers in the first place.

Real prevention should not be limited to easy words and good intentions each September. Real prevention should be about intrenching mental health support into the daily lives of young folks. It means funding school counselors and social workers so that every child has someone to talk to. It means restoring services that center the needs of queer, Indigenous, and BIPOC youth, who are far too frequently left behind. It means guaranteeing that crisis lines are open. It means creating and nurturing environments where vulnerability is not discouraged but invited.

We also have to stop criminalizing mental health crises. Way too often, suicidal and struggling youth are met with handcuffs or hospitalization that adds layers to trauma rather than with compassion. Prevention must be proactive, not punitive. We need peer support groups, trauma-informed teachers, and trusted adults who are trained to notice the signs before the worst happens.

We are also overdue for a culture shift. A society with the alleged aim to value life does not shame those who are struggling to hold onto it. Contrary to popular unsaid belief, strength is not stoicism. Strength is connection. It’s knowing when to ask for help.

If we as a country actually and honestly cherish life, we have to prove it. We have to prove it not with words but with resources, policy, and compassion. Suicide prevention cannot begin and end with simple slogans and annual awareness. It has to mean a continuous investment in systems of care that affirm life, especially for those who are most vulnerable.

This September, as we recognize Suicide Prevention Month, I dare us to do more than to just memorialize those lost. Let’s start fighting for those living. Let’s create a world where no child, teen, or young adult feels that their only way out is to stop living. They are not expendable. They are not alone. And their lives are sacred. If only we had the heart to act like it.

I am almost ashamed to say that it wasn’t until I lost someone I love to suicide that I began volunteering my time to the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention. The work that the AFSP does is not only needed, it’s imperative today more than ever. If nothing else, please hit this link and donate.

Continue Reading

Commentary

Lil Nas X and the cost of being seen

We praised his defiance and ate up his content, but now that he’s hurting, how can we show up? What Lil Nas X’s recent struggle says about us.

Published

on

Lil Nas X (Photo by DFree/Bigstock)

At a time when the world feels like it’s already choking on mouthfuls of disheartening news every day – genocide on the Gaza strip, climate crisis, political descent here and abroad – the last thing any of us want to hear about is another headline on a young star reportedly hospitalized following a possible overdose. Yet here we all are, watching a very familiar pattern unfold. This time, it’s our beloved queerby Lil Nas X.

According to TMZ, Lil Nas X, né Montero Lamar Hill, was reportedly hospitalized for a possible overdose mere months after he opened up publicly about how difficult the last few years of his career have been. He took to social media, stating, “I jumped straight into adulthood with extreme fame around me. So it was really nice to be just outside walking and meeting people in the streets and eating at restaurants, just even alone, spending a lot of alone time in solitude.”

Sound familiar? It should. The razzle-dazzling surface of fame seldom shows us the internal clutter and chaos, the pressure, the expectation to always be on, meanwhile mental health is brushed aside. And for our queer artists, particularly Black queer artists like Lil Nas X, the burden becomes that much denser.

We’ve seen this before. Demi Lovato. Aaron Carter. Whitney Houston. Talented, beloved artists who, for one reason or another, found themselves unraveling under the unrelenting scrutiny and chaos that comes hand in hand with fame. Some of them make it through. Some don’t. Many cry for help ages before things reach a breaking point. But what did we do? Did we listen? Did we leave Britney alone? Or are we the ones who light the match, pull out our phones, and film the flames? For once, please don’t tag me.

Lil Nas X sashayed onto the scene not just as a chart-topping artist, but as a cultural disruptor. Diva wore dresses to award shows. He clapped his cheeks on Lucifer in the music video for Montero. He vogued his way into the conversation on gender, sexuality, religion, and race that made a whole lot of folks uncomfortable, and that was the point. We were living for it, for him. We liked, we shared, and we reposted. We ate it tf up and licked our fingers clean. But did we ever truly care?

When a person like Lil Nas X steps out of the spotlight to say, “I’ve been having a  hard time,” do we respond with any empathy, or just wait around for the next head turning lewk or satanic lapdance? It’s easy to forget that behind the headlines is a real human. One with a nervous system, a childhood, a family, and so much more. And, what most often goes ignored by all, a limit.

There is something particularly painful about seeing this happen to queer people in the public eye. We’re told that visibility is freedom. And to an extent, it is. Lil Nas X became a rare symbol of queer Black excellence in mainstream media, an unapologetic icon. But visibility without protection has the potential to be fatal. Fame doesn’t guarantee safety – not physically nor emotionally. As a matter of opinion, for queer people, it’s more often than not the opposite.

When you’re queer in the spotlight, you’re performing resilience first and music second. You’re expected to rise above, to remain unbothered, to smile at all times no matter the weight of the pressure, to be a walking teachable moment at every moment. And when you break down? People either turn their backs or turn you into a meme.

FACT: mental health in the queer community is already a crisis. Study upon study have consistently shown that LGBTQ+ identifying folks are at significantly higher risk for anxiety, depression, and suicide. Add international stardom to the mix, and you don’t get immunity from this. You get fast-tracked.

And yet, we continue to lap up these public struggles like entertainment. The media machine feeds on our thirst, and we keep clicking. Headlines about a “possible overdose” become the most clicked clickbait. Tweets become jokes. Vulnerability becomes viral.

So then we have the question, what does it mean to authentically support an artist like Lil Nas X, not just when he’s on stage, but when off stage as well? When the posts stop posting. When the glitter dulls. Are we prepared to support our icons through their harder times the way we do when they’re on top of the world?

We can start by changing how we engage. Honestly take a moment to ask yourself, are you clicking on these stories to gag or to understand? Are you giving compassion or commentary? Are you holding a mic to their cry for help, or are you fetishizing their struggle?

We also need to shine a light on the entertainment industry to offer real mental health resources and protections, especially for young and marginalized artists whose career they are both responsible for and profit immensely from. Care does not come hand in hand with fame. It’s often the reason care is a concern.

We don’t know the full story of what happened with Lil Nas X, and jumping to conclusions is like eating at Chick-fil-A: only those of low intellect are tempted. But what we do know is that someone allegedly ended up in the hospital after publicly saying they were struggling. That alone should be enough to warrant concern. Not for the gossip or clicks but for simple humanity.

Continue Reading

Commentary

Over the Rainbow: The systemic rollback on LGBTQ+ Rights

From erasing rainbow crosswalks to defunded healthcare, queer communities are sitting front row to a coordinated effort to strip away decades of progress. Take this as a call to pay attention, and to action, before more rights quietly vanish.

Published

on

In the past decade,  rainbow-clad crosswalks have popped up in cities across our country, serving as affirmations of long-overdue queer solidarity and resilience. But today, in more and more places, those colors are now being scrubbed away, painted over, and banned under new regulations. What may seem to some as an inconsequential repaving is, in reality, a call to action. It signals a shift away from inclusion, toward an erasure and the sanitizing of public spaces where visibility is becoming, once again, a luxury for select populations. This is not a simple matter of public art. It’s a matter involving power, belonging, and the right to exist as who we are.

Let’s see this for what it is. In stripping away our technicolor stripes, we also lose the unspoken sense of safety and acceptance that they provide to so many who need just that. Rainbows speak to an array of identities and experiences. Taking this away signals a return to conformity, and ultimately, invisibility. These crosswalks have long functioned as not just decoration but straight-up declarations. They say to LGBTQ+ pedestrians “You belong and you belong here.” Taking away these symbols actively communicates something just as loud yet far more bleak… “Not anymore.”

The erasure of Pride-themed crosswalks echoes a consistent pattern seen throughout American history where public symbols tied to marginalized groups are challenged, removed, or reframed under the gaslighting of neutrality and “tradition.” Just in the past few years, murals honoring Black leaders or giving voice to movements like Black Lives Matter have been vandalized, painted over, and removed after receiving backlash or through political pressure. In some cases, city officials have justified the removals by citing noncompliance with local ordinances or “divisiveness,” ignoring the reality that these images provide our communities with powerful affirmations of identity and solidarity.

Indigenous communities have faced similar symbolic erasure through the renaming of landmarks and suppression of their time-honored cultural practices. In some places in the States, school districts have banned Native regalia at graduation ceremonies using the argument that it conflicts with dress codes and willfully disregarding its deep- rooted significance. Still more, attempts to preserve monuments or language programs are frequently met with bureaucratic pushback, labeling these cultural expressions as “nonessential.” These moves are never one-and-done. They’re the first steps in a broader rolling back of visibility and voice. What starts with paint or policy often crescendos into something much much louder – unless communities recognize the signs early and step up .

Hillary Clinton recently sounded the alarm over the future of same-sex marriage in the United States, warning that the Supreme Court may soon “return the marriage issue to the states,” much like it did with abortion. In a stark comment that has since echoed across Queer advocacy circles both on and offline, Clinton advised LGBTQI+ couples to “get married now.” Clinton explained, “I don’t think they’ll undo existing marriages, but I fear they will undo the national right.” Her statement spotlights the sobering reality that rights once considered settled are no longer secure. Clinton is not simply politically forecasting here. In a way, she is calling us all to action, urging LGBTQ+ folks to safeguard what we can. Clinton’s words mirror a growing recognition that removing symbols – this time being our rainbowed crosswalks – tend to usher in judicial reconsiderations.

Meanwhile, Kim Davis – the former Kentucky county clerk who went to jail in 2015 for refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples – has petitioned the Supreme Court to overturn Obergefell v. Hodges. Davis, Represented by Liberty Counsel, argues that the landmark ruling is grounded in a flawed doctrine of substantive due process and describes it as a “legal fiction.” Liberty Counsel asserts that her First Amendment rights to religious freedom and free exercise were unjustly penalized, asserting that she should not have faced contempt, imprisonment, and a substantial monetary judgment just for simply “acting on her beliefs.” So this is where we are at.

In 2025, a sweeping wave of anti-LGBTQ+ policies has wrapped its talons around multiple levels of government, significantly lessening protections and visibility for queer and trans communities in our country. At the federal level, the Trump administration announced that starting in 2026, gender-affirming care will no longer be covered under the Federal Employees Health Benefits and Postal Service Health Benefits programs, affecting thousands of transgender federal workers and their families. Meanwhile, the Department of Education has labeled several Northern Virginia school districts, including Fairfax, Arlington, and Loudoun, as “high-risk” due to their upholding of inclusive policies for transgender students. These districts must now front over $50 million in education funding.

At the state level, hostility toward LGBTQ+ rights has swelled. More than 700 anti-LGBTQ+ bills have been introduced or passed in 2025 alone, targeting everything from flag displays to healthcare access. In Utah, Pride flags are now banned from government buildings, with daily fines imposed for noncompliance, while funding for Pride events has been drastically reduced. Nowhere is this oppressive legislative surge more aggressive than in Texas, where over 200 anti-LGBTQ+ bills have been introduced, including measures to restrict gender-affirming care, erase gender identity from official records, censor LGBTQ+ topics in schools, and redefine legal sex in rigid binary terminology. Stacked up, these developments represent a coordinated campaign to reverse decades of progress.

What can we do? First, we have to stay engaged. For starters, stop telling people that the news is too depressing to watch and find an outlet or three that resonate. Also, attend city council meetings, demand transparency from elected officials, and hold leaders accountable. Push for alternative expressions of support (public art, monuments, the whole gamut) that preserve the spirit of inclusion even when laws change.

Ultimately, we must amplify visibility. At a time in our country’s story where silence is easily mistaken for obedience, communities must get louder than ever in affirming their values. Take photos, tag photos, share stories, and call out those in places of power. Our rainbow crosswalks may be dropping like soldiers but the people they represent are still standing. Despite this bleak climate, WorldPride 2025 was held in Washington, D.C., doubling as both a queer-centric celebration and an indisputable act of protest against these escalating threats. Let’s keep that energy going, shall we?

In the end, what’s at stake is much greater than paint on pavement. It’s the affirmation that everyone deserves to be protected regardless of their identity. Let’s not wait until the last color is washed off our streets. Let’s repaint and resist. Let’s reimagine a country where all of us belong, every shade on that rainbow we hold so dear. We’re not red, white, and royally f*cked quite yet. Let’s make sure we never are.

Continue Reading

Opinions

State Department’s new human rights reports are silent. We refuse to be

LGBTQ+ people ‘erased’ from 2024 report

Published

on

HIV/AIDS activists place Black Styrofoam coffins in front of the State Department on April 17, 2025, to protest the Trump-Vance administration's foreign aid cuts that impacted PEPFAR-funded programs. The State Department's 2024 human rights report erased LGBTQ people and other marginalized groups. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

In Dhaka, Bangladesh, a young gay man who had traveled five hours to meet us at the U.S. ambassador’s residence spoke softly about the violence he endured. For years, activists like him would meet with U.S. officials to tell their stories, trusting our government to publish their truth for the world to hear. Last week, the Trump administration betrayed that trust and cast aside decades of bipartisan work. Instead of fair and accurate reporting, it systematically deleted almost all references to abuse and persecution of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex (LGBTQI+) people in the 2024 U.S. Department of State Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, known as the Human Rights Reports (HRRs).

Mandated by Congress since the 1970s, the HRRs cover every country in the world. They are an essential resource for courts, governments, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in evaluating human rights abuses, allocating resources, and crafting policy. Though the reports originally did not cover anti-LGBTQI+ violence, persistent education and advocacy from our community led Republican and Democratic administrations, including the last Trump administration, to document abuses based on sexual orientation, gender identity, and sex characteristics annually for the past two decades.

When we served as the Office of the U.S. Special Envoy for LGBTQI+ Rights, these reports were a priority. During our service, we reviewed and incorporated reporting from our embassies, the UN, NGOs, universities, media, and — most importantly — from survivors themselves. By the time we left government in January, every country’s report contained a dedicated, robust section documenting abuses against LGBTQI+ people.

These sections filled a void. They mapped where U.S. investments in human rights could do the most good, reinforcing work by human rights defenders, foreign governments, and allies to make the world safer for LGBTQI+ people. They helped asylum judges evaluate claims from LGBTQI people fleeing persecution. They told activists that their struggle was seen.

This year, the Trump administration did the opposite. After a long delay, they released them last week during the congressional summer recess in order to bury the truth. They erased whole categories of abuse and watered-down others, including against women and girls, workers, indigenous peoples, people of African descent, Roma, and LGBTQI+ people. The LGBTQI+ section was deleted outright. A keyword search across all the 2024 reports we’ve read yields almost nothing: no “LGBTQI+,” virtually no “sexual orientation,” no “gender identity,” no “intersex.” What few references remain are shortened, sanitized, and buried deep.

Read the 2024 chapters for Uganda and Russia, and you might believe there are no LGBTQI+ people or abuses in either country. But read the report from 2023 and you’ll see 45 reports of anti-LGBTQI+ abuses in Uganda and 36 in Russia. Clearly, it is not possible to resolve such systematic abuse in one year. Instead, our State Department just removed any reference to most of the most egregious abuses of LGBTQI+ people worldwide. 

In Iraq, for example, parliamentarians passed an anti-LGBTQI+ law that equates homosexuality with “prostitution,” and punishes same-sex relations with up to 15 years in prison. But that law, reported on in 2023, gets no mention. Same in the Kyrgyz Republic, where a nationwide “LGBTQI+ propaganda” law forced a shutdown of perhaps the country’s oldest LGBTQI+ service provider. No mention. And, in Afghanistan, unspeakable acts of anti-LGBTQI+ violence and abuse at the hands of the Taliban, all reported last year, are gone too.

This erasure is deliberate. It tells authoritarian governments they can abuse minorities with impunity. It also signals to Americans that LGBTQI+ equality is negotiable here at home, too, landing just as the Supreme Court received a petition to overturn marriage equality.

But here is the truth: erasure has never defeated us. Visibility has always been our movement’s most powerful tool — and history shows it cannot be permanently denied. From Stonewall to marriage equality in the United States to countries around the world that have struck down sodomy laws and codified transgender rights, LGBTQI+ people have always overcome silence with courage and persistence. Across continents, when they try to erase us, we turn exclusion into progress.

The administration’s refusal to report on human rights abuses of LGBTQI+ people and other marginalized groups is a political act, not an accident. We urge you: call your U.S. senators and representatives today via the Capitol switchboard, (202) 224-3121, and ask them to confront the administration for failing to do its job on the HRRs and pass Senate bill S. 2611 mandating that future reports cover LGBTQI+ rights and other key categories. We urge other governments to expand their own reporting to rigorously document and condemn abuses. All of us can fill the gap by elevating high-quality data from NGOs, universities, and think tanks that are already setting the global standard for reporting on the status of LGBTQI+ people around the world.

The administration may rewrite its reports to fit its narrow view of the world, but it cannot erase the courage of those who tell their stories or the victories we have already won. Our history as LGBTQI+ Americans proves that visibility, once claimed, cannot be buried for long. The task before us is simple and urgent: to insist on truth, to defend it in every forum, and to carry it forward until equality is beyond erasure.

Jessica Stern is a Senior Fellow at the Carr-Ryan Center at the Harvard Kennedy School and co-founder and principal of the Alliance for Diplomacy and Justice, an organization co-founded by eight former ambassadors, special representatives, and special envoys advocating for human rights in U.S. foreign policy. She is the former executive director of Outright International and the former U.S. Special Envoy for the Human Rights of LGBTQI+ Persons. 

Suzanne B. Goldberg is the Herbert and Doris Wechsler Clinical Professor of Law at Columbia Law School and former senior advisor in the Office of the Special Envoy to Advance the Human Rights of LGBTQI+ Persons.

Reggie Greer is a Global LGBTQI+ Fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School and a former Biden-Harris Administration appointee, serving as Senior Advisor to the U.S. Special Envoy to Advance the Human Rights of LGBTQI+ Persons as well as White House Director of Priority Placement and Senior Advisor on LGBTQI+ Engagement.  

Continue Reading

Commentary

Grindr’s glow‑up: What it means for queer pleasure and platform

Grindr has leveled up from flirty (and sometimes endless) chats to a full-on curated cultural platform for the sex positive queer community. Will it be the future of queer connection or a digital minefield waiting to detonate?

Published

on

Cruising once meant lusty side-glances in our cities’ inconspicuous public parks, pubs, and even the phone booths at Macy’s. Nowadays it’s the far too familiar swipe, grammatically flawed DM, and the vast sea of headless torso pics. Grindr, once the ever so modest rosebud of today’s digital gay cruising, has now bloomed into so much more, upping its game with new features similar to other social media platforms, infusing it with AI matchmaking, and uncensored content under one rainbow‑tinted roof. Is the only connection that matters these days a decent Wi-Fi connection? Arguable.

Grindr’s legacy began as the grid‑style, location‑based hookup platform that we all know and love… to delete only to reinstall two days later. Simple, sexy, and surface-level satisfying. Today, however, Grindr is going under a bit of a nip/tuck. Infused with AI‑powered personalization (think of it like an AI wingman), global discovery (“Discover”) and travel tools like “Explore Heatmap” and “Travel Pass” that give you jet‑setting Gayborhood vibes in real time.

Already at play is the new feature Right Now, a lusty live‑feed not too different from a disappearing story on poppers – post a pic or text that vanishes after an hour – with users now able to signal, “get in me bro,” getting straight to the di… to the point.

But Grindr hasn’t stopped there. Queue Grindr Presents, a hot hot hot new in‑app content hub that offers all types of queer media like video series (hello, Katya’s Who’s The A-hole?), playlists, editorials, behind-the-scenes tour clips, and then some. A pinch of Instagram, a touch of TikTok, a mouthful of YouTube, all intertwined into our shiny new Grindr.

At the core, it’s your hookup app and a commune of queer media. Your one‑stop stop shop for one (hopefully) uncensored and fabulously fae content feed. Grindr describes it as “an unapologetically safe space where the community can be themselves, be heard, and be fabulous without fear of suppression.” Cool, yes, but what about the unfiltered side of that freedom? 

With this digital facelift, Grindr Presents could quite possibly be a girthy gold mine. For adult content creators, it has the potential to be the new brightly lit stage for visibility to fuel income. Expand your brand beyond X, Bluesky, and other password‑protected peen-clad platforms. Get attention from a captive (and c*ck-hungry) audience right when they’re browsing for… connection.

For creators, the above-mentioned AI features help users reconnect. A‑List picks out your hottest yet perhaps more reluctant potential matches, giving creators more chances for recurring benefactors. Chat summaries allow casual viewers to re‑engage without repeating the same flirtatious verbiage. Meanwhile, global discovery tools have the potential to reach new audiences for your content without a passport or risking flying out from Newark.

Let’s talk about Sniffies for a moment. For those who are unfamiliar, Sniffies is our beloved map‑based cruising platform that didn’t bat an eyelash at explicit photos and mapped nearby users and cruising grounds worldwide. It made its iOS debut in March 2025 only to be yanked by Apple around late May due to “ongoing content restrictions” despite implementing a “Safer Work Mode.” The website remains, but the app was scrapped.

This brings up a deliciously delicate question: could Grindr face the same fate? Both Grindr and Sniffies cater to queer cruising, and both push sexual content boundaries of the status quo. The difference is that Grindr has been Apple‑approved to this day. It does have the authority to sanitize profile pictures (would you settle for PG-13?) and frames itself as “dating” as opposed to cruising or hooking up. Sniffies’ unapologetically overt purpose to get down likely was the catalyst for a multitude of sanitized corporate scrutiny whereas Grindr’s more nuanced facade was given the green light.

Still, with Grindr Presents delivering uncensored queer media, even if curated, the Apple gods might clutch their pearls. Particularly in our current political climate where queer content is increasingly met with rigid censorship. But Grindr’s mainstream status and framing as a “social hub” rather than purely pornographic might give it more freedom, for the time being at least.

With Grindr being so free from censorship and regulation, it teeters on the familiar fine line between freedom of speech from salacious to unsavory. Let’s look at X as an example, the same platform that gave voice to the Black Lives Matters Movement while also holding space for white supremacists. On one side of the coin, no censorship means creative freedom, raw authenticity, spontaneous connection, and radical queer expression. On the flip side, it opens the door for hate, trolling, fetishization, and unsafe content to flourish if left unchecked, especially for vulnerable communities.

Grindr’s task then is to enable expression without sliding into the waters of harmful content or hate speech. The platform’s safety, moderation, and responsibility will inevitably be tested. Without a watchful eye, Grindr Presents could become a megaphone for extremist and regressive voices, or at the very least, spotlight internal community biases. Yes, free speech is hot, but unmoderated speech can be a real buzzkill.

Only time will tell which trajectory Grindr is set on. Ignite an eruption of queer creativity and creator‑centric monetization, or get tangled in regulatory red tape, or worse, push back from within the community. Grindr has evolved from a quintessential hookup app into a multifaceted  platform functioning as a gay social hub and media outlet.  In today’s climate of growing anti‑queer censorship, the challenge will be striking a balance between moderation and freedom of expression.

So, sweet little cruisers, charge your iPhone, swipe that grid, and drop into Grindr Presents.  Let your curated content ride the wave. The digital cruising scene is evolving, and Grindr is the savvy (and maybe scandalous) chauffeur ushering us into a new day and age of getting that d. Let’s buckle up and pop our PrEP. It’s gonna be a wild ride.

Continue Reading

Commentary

Why California must remove the roadblocks to safer streets

West Hollywood City Councilmember John Erickson addresses interpersonal politics getting in the way of street safety, specifically on Fountain Ave.

Published

on

West Hollywood streets

By John M. Erickson, West Hollywood City Councilmember and Candidate for California
State Senate District 24

California is home to some of the most innovative thinkers and boldest visions in the world. We have led the way on human rights and climate change. Yet sometimes, interpersonal politics get in the way of implementing the simplest, most straightforward ideas—even when it means saving lives. 

A glaring case in point is what is happening on Fountain Avenue—a street that twists and turns from Los Angeles through West Hollywood and has become a hazard that can easily be fixed by infrastructure changes, but has been caught up in a nonsensical process that has become more political than practical. 

Since March 2021, just a few months after I was sworn in to the West Hollywood City Council, I authored legislation to redesign Fountain Avenue because of the weekly near-fatal or fatal accidents that occurred there. My proposal was straightforward: add protected bike lanes, widen sidewalks, and calm traffic so that people can move safely whether they’re walking, biking, or driving.

The council voted 5–0 in favor. The public supported it. Experts endorsed it. The need was beyond obvious.

And yet—here we are, six years after that first vote, and nothing has changed. The City Council has taken six separate votes just to approve a street design we unanimously agreed on in 2021. Why?

I believe it is because in our car-centric society, age-old ideas of public safety and interpersonal politics have gotten in the way of upholding the first responsibility of an elected official: to keep people safe.  In the meantime, multiple people have been struck and killed by cars on Fountain Avenue, the most recent happening right across the street from my home. Every day we delay implementing the changes we approved years back, we are jeopardizing people’s lives, and as one public commenter said at our last city council meeting, the process is killing people.

This is not just a West Hollywood problem. This is a California problem. Across our state, commonsense projects that would make communities safer, greener, and more livable are caught in an endless tangle of redundant approvals, over-engineered reviews, and bureaucratic inertia. We’ve built a system that treats progress—even public safety—as something to be studied into submission rather than acted upon with urgency.

We need structural reform to change that. Here’s all it should take to make our streets safer for everyone:

  1. Set clear timelines for infrastructure changes—and stick to them. If a city council votes to
    approve a project concept, the clock should start. Departments and agencies must meet
    hard deadlines for design, environmental review, and groundbreaking. Endless “re-
    authorizations” only add delay and cost lives and waste taxpayer money on this endless
    cycle.
  2. Limit duplicative votes. Six council votes for a single street project is absurd, and frankly,
    maddening. All it should take is one vote to approve the concept, one vote to approve the
    final design, and then build it. We need to get back into the business of doing things rather
    than talking about them to death.
  3. Empower staff to act. Once elected leaders set policy direction, professional staff should
    be able to carry it out without returning to the council for permission every step of the way.
    Accountability shouldn’t lead to paralysis.
  4. Adopt “safe streets first” protocols. If a corridor is identified as high-injury, safety
    improvements should be fast-tracked—not forced to compete with routine maintenance
    projects for years on end.

I am working to implement these changes—not just for Fountain Avenue, but for every community waiting on a safer crosswalk, a protected bike lane, a new housing development, or a climate-resilient infrastructure project.  Because if we truly value human life as we claim, our actions cannot sit idle in a staff report. They must mean more than cutting a ribbon or holding a vigil at the site of a fatal accident.

The time has come to take swift action to legislate the infrastructure change process, so that our actions can live up to our number one responsibility as elected officials: keeping the public safe, whether they are in a car, on a bicycle, or walking.

Continue Reading

Commentary

The Westside is unaffordable. Allowing for more housing can help

Three young Westside elected officials call for urgent action to fix our housing shortage—and make room for the next generation.

Published

on

Aerial View of a Neighborhood in Los Angeles California

Over the past few decades, LA’s Westside has changed rapidly. Rents have skyrocketed. The median home now costs over 12 times the median household income—one of the worst ratios in the state. Our housing shortage is pricing out the immigrants, artists, workers, people of color, and young people who make the area so vibrant.

As three elected officials under 40 representing West Hollywood, Santa Monica, and Culver City, we’ve experienced this crisis firsthand. Countless young people in our cities can’t afford to build a life in the communities they grew up in, and others who made their home on the Westside because of its inclusivity are now being displaced by a housing market becoming more unfriendly every year.

For decades, West Hollywood has been a refuge for LGBTQ+ people who couldn’t live openly elsewhere, and both Santa Monica and Culver City were home to large working-class communities. But today’s housing costs are pricing out many of the Westside’s young queer people, workers, Black and brown residents, and seniors hoping to retire. 

The affordability crisis is hitting our queer communities especially hard. LGBTQ+ people in LA County are more likely to rent their homes –and more likely to be cost-burdened by housing – than their straight counterparts. Queer people are twice as likely to have experienced homelessness within the past five years. For trans and nonbinary folks, the difference is even more stark. 25% of trans and nonbinary people in LA County are currently unhoused compared to 1% of the general population.

We understand that the housing shortage has been a direct result of decades of policy failures in our cities – and it’s beyond time we finally address it with urgency. If we want the Westside to remain a welcoming place –not just for the wealthy, but for everyone –we have to make it possible for more people to live here. That means building more homes.

Enter SB 79, a bill under consideration in the state legislature that would make it legal to build small apartment buildings near major transit stops. It’s desperately needed across LA —but especially in communities like ours, where access to cleaner air, strong schools, and good jobs should be available to more than just long-time homeowners and the wealthy. 

Too many neighborhoods around LA’s transit stations are still reserved exclusively for single-family homes, even as taxpayers have invested nearly $80 billion in expanding our public transit system. That keeps housing costs sky high and prevents working families from living anywhere near them.

The result is both unjust and inefficient: underused transit, supercharged housing prices, and the workers our city relies on being subjected to hours-long commutes.

It doesn’t have to be this way.

We know that when there’s housing near transit, people use it. At stations like MacArthur Park and Wilshire/Vermont—which are surrounded by apartments—tens of thousands of riders board each day. And when we reduce car dependence, we also reduce pollution: climate experts estimate that adding homes near transit can cut climate-warming pollution by up to 31%.

Some worry that new housing causes displacement. But history and research show the opposite. When we don’t build enough homes, demand spills over into older, more affordable neighborhoods — driving up rents and pushing low-income renters out. By making room for more people, we’re actively reducing pressure on existing tenants.

On the Westside, we’ve fallen behind. We’ve created tens of thousands of high-paying jobs, but built far fewer homes; indeed, the populations of Santa Monica, Culver City, and West Hollywood haven’t grown meaningfully in over 50 years. That stagnation, driven by restrictive zoning, has priced out all but the most affluent.

SB 79 gives us a chance to change course.

This is about more than zoning. It’s about who gets to live here and what kind of communities we want to be. Are we comfortable becoming a place of diminishing diversity, where only the wealthy can belong? Or can we foster places where teachers, nurses, service workers, artists, LGBTQ+ people, and young families can still build their future?

We’re proud to represent cities committed to tackling this crisis head-on. With SB 79, our state will take a major step toward a more affordable, inclusive future.

Chelsea Lee Byers is the Mayor of West Hollywood, Jesse Zwick is a Santa Monica City Councilmember, and Bubba Fish is a Culver City Councilmember.

Continue Reading

Opinions

Vacationing abroad with an embarrassment in the White House

President Donald Trump is a self-serving buffoon

Published

on

The front page of the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera in Naples, Italy, on July 15, 2025. (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

SYRACUSE, Italy — It was shortly after 7 p.m. on July 22 when I left the beach and returned to my apartment in Ortigia, a small island in which Syracuse’s Old City is located, and turned on the television. An Italian newscast had yet another story about an AI-generated video on Truth Social that showed FBI agents arresting former President Barack Obama in the Oval Office as President Donald Trump watched.

“The Italian news all day has been reporting on Trump’s deep fake showing Obama’s arrest. Is that for real? And seriously WTF? 🤦,” I asked Washington Blade White House Correspondent Chris Kane in a text that I also sent to a mutual friend.

The video that Trump shared on his social media network was fake, but it was yet another example of our commander-in-chief embarrassing our country. Not even a two-week vacation in Italy could temper the embarrassment that I feel as an American with Trump in the White House.

There are myriad other examples of Trump embarrassing our country about which I have written while abroad. Here are some examples:

• I was on assignment in the Mexican border city of Tijuana on Jan. 28 when Trump suggested, without evidence, the Biden-Harris administration’s diversity, equality, and inclusion policies could have caused the midair collision of a U.S. Army Black Hawk helicopter and an American Airlines regional jet near Reagan National Airport that left 67 people dead. 

“He is doing everything possible to ensure the U.S. will no longer stand for human rights — around the world and in our own country — and basic decency,” I wrote in the Blade on Feb. 4.

• Trump on July 16, 2018, defended President Vladimir Putin during a press conference that took place in Helsinki after they met. I watched the spectacle unfold on television while I was on assignment in Mexico City.

“President Trump’s defense of Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday after their summit in Helsinki was yet another moment when I felt embarrassed for my country while on assignment outside the U.S.,” I wrote in the Blade on July 19, 2018. “This ridiculous spectacle also proved once and for all the U.S. under this administration cannot claim with any credibility that it stands for human rights around the world.”

• Hurricane Maria on Sept. 20, 2017, devastated Puerto Rico. I was on assignment in Chile a few days later when Trump attacked then-San Juan Mayor Carmen Yulín Cruz. Our commander-in-chief later threw paper towels into a crowd at a church in Guaynabo, a suburb of the Puerto Rican capital.

“His outrageous attacks against the mayor of an American city who is doing everything possible to help her citizens survive are the latest in a long list of actions (or inactions) that have left this gay American journalist who routinely reports overseas embarrassed,” I wrote in the Blade on Oct. 2, 2017. “I am also increasingly ashamed to identify myself as an American while this man occupies the White House.”

I wrote in response to Trump’s exchange with Putin in Helsinki that American exceptionalism, “however flawed, teaches us the U.S. is a beacon of hope to those around the world who suffer persecution” and also “teaches us the U.S. is the land of opportunity where people can build a better life for themselves and for their families.” These ideals, seven years later, ring hollow. 

A optimist may think the Trump-Vance administration should spend their time on far more important things: protecting transgender people from discrimination and violence, pressuring Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his government to stop committing what two prominent Israeli human rights groups this week described as genocide in the Gaza Strip, forcing Putin to stop his war against Ukraine, ensuring undocumented immigrants in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody have access to due process, and negotiating in good faith with trading partners. A realist may conclude these aspirations are beyond reach with the Trump-Vance administration in the White House.

Trump clearly has his own aspirations. He is a self-serving buffoon who continues to embarrass his country in the eyes of the world.

Continue Reading

Commentary

Love in the time of net worth: The Geffen-Michaels mirror and the myth of pure intent

David Geffen and Donovan Michaels’ split is making waves, but the real story isn’t about scandal – it’s about the uncomfortable truths of love, power, and mutual arrangement.

Published

on

heartbreak and money

Recently, the gay internet was abuzz with the news that entertainment mogul David Geffen, 82, and his tad bit younger husband, model Donovan Michaels (né David Armstrong), 32, were splitting. It was the breakup heard around the mega-yacht docks from the waters of Fort Lauderdale to Marina di Capri, from tweet to shining tweet.

Geffen is, inarguably, one of the most powerful entertainment titans of the last half-century – a music kingpin, Broadway backer, and billionaire art collector. Michaels, Geffen’s husband for two years but together for nine, came from a background that couldn’t be more different: foster care, survival, and, eventually, modeling and escorting. The two first clocked each other on Seeking.com (previously, SeekingArrangements.com), where they each sought an arrangement that benefited both parties, each with their very different yet historically compatible motives. 

Now that the union is dissolving, the backlash has come hard and strong. Geffen is being painted as the predatory puppeteer, quite possibly viewing his child of the sugar as a crystal-cut and curated addition to his art collection. Michaels, meanwhile, is being labeled a gold-digging hustler. So subtle the internet is…

But providing such defamatory, diminutive, and, quite frankly, two-dimensional commentary on the recently divorced is too easy. Perhaps we can approach  Geffen and Michaels’ nullification of nuptials with a touch more compassion and understanding. So many facets to consider, so little time. Let’s dive in.

Of course, the age-old “trophy boy” trope has been given a facelift here. Overdue? Maybe. We have seen this dynamic time and time again. An older, wealthier daddy (or grand-daddy) shacks up with younger, shinier beau with cheekbones to die for. Both parties involved are hungry in their respective avenues.  Comparable instances, however, occur in the straight sphere quite often and we barely bat an eyelash at it. Leonardo DiCaprio swaps out twenty-something year old models like iPhones, resulting in little more than a meme or twelve that he laughs along with. Others win elections.

But when a billionaire butt-connoisseur “friend of Dorothy” does it? Oh no, a scandal. Of course, there’s truth to the concern. Geffen, worth over $7 billion, is at that level of wealth that distorts reality, intimacy, and so, so much more. Michaels, on the flip side, was granted access to a world he wanted into and (hopefully) stepped over the glistening threshold willingly. The question isn’t “Did he know what he was getting himself into?” It’s “Are we prepared to admit that mutually beneficial arrangements are, in fact, also ‘real’ relationships?”

Yes, there’s a 50-year age gap. Yes, that’s pretty far out. But let’s be real for a second – May/December pairings are far from new. What’s intriguing this time around is how judgment shifts when the couple is both same-sex and interracial. A touch of the Meghan Markle effect with a queer twist at play? One can only wonder. Had Geffen been a straight mogul shacking up with a 30-something pageant queen from who-knows-where in the Midwest, folks would still gossip, no doubt, but there’d be less performative outrage and less cultural micro-dissection.

Is it empowering or exploitative? It is silly to believe that only one is possible here. Could it not be both transactional and emotional? The public is far too obsessed with seeing things as black and white, predator and victim, groomer and opportunist, day and night.  On the contrary, reality rarely functions in this binary fashion. Perhaps Donovan found safety, luxury, and more in their relationship. Geffen likely found beauty, admiration, and companionship he didn’t anticipate finding as an octogenarian. The relationship might’ve had its roots in a good ol’ transaction, but maybe it evolved into something more emotionally complex, not to mention legally binding.

It was the lack of prenup that likely fueled the headlines and had people clutching pearls. But if we drop the tabloid tone, it’s worth noting that Michaels offered Geffen the bulk of his twenties and gave his energy to a relationship that asked him to show up emotionally, socially, and (reportedly) carnally. This begs the question, if one spends nearly a decade in someone else’s gold-gilded ecosystem, should they not walk away with something to say for it?

A settlement in this case is not necessarily opportunistic in nature. It is back pay for time served in the multi-billion dollar empire of Bev Hills royalty. Whether that includes a Malibu house, a Warhol print, or just financial breathing room, don’t hate the player. Nine years in Geffenland is practically tenure.

The reality is, partnering purely for love is a relatively modern concept. For the grand part of recorded history, people were motivated into partnership by status, protection, land, and survival. Romance is a Disney-fueled concept barely older than modern plumbing. The word lust predates the word love, and frankly, so does practical partnership.

If anything, Geffen didn’t hide the terms. He made the offer. Donovan accepted. And both benefited. That is, until the arrangement got blurred with real feelings, real power, and real legal exposure. That’s not scandalous. That’s just human nature at its most raw.

Geffen’s legacy has always been about control. He’s curated everything: from record empires to MoMA board appointments to multimillion-dollar art installations. So what happens when the most uncurated element –  his relationship with Michaels – doesn’t quite follow the script he had drafted in his mind?

Look, is Geffen a hoarder of wealth in a world where millions go hungry? Unquestionably. Is he an avatar of late-stage capitalism’s grotesque gap between rich and poor? Most def. But when it comes to his relationship with Michaels, Geffen’s heart, however warped by luxury and excess, seemed to be authentically engaged. He didn’t treat Michaels like single-use plastic. He married him. No prenup. And for someone whose entire life has been about contracts, that’s more than a gesture, it’s a leap of faith. Maybe even trust? Maybe…

So give the poor ol’ queen a break. He hasn’t done anything new. Except, perhaps, look out for the well-being of a sugar child he fell deep and hard for. Listen, I get it. It’s messy. But let’s not pretend it isn’t also deeply, heartbreakingly human.

Geffen will be fine. I have a hunch he has his student loans paid off. Michaels? Hopefully, he will be too. If not today, then eventually. He’s young, sharp, and, fingers crossed, a soon-to-be billionaire. Whatever he walks away from this with, he’s already beaten the odds stacked against a dude with his upbringing.

And the rest of us? We should stop treating their split like a morality play and start treating it like a mirror. These kinds of relationships – cross-class, cross-race, cross-power – are all around us every day – just with less TMZ coverage. The only difference is Geffen and Michaels gave it a name and gave us a front-row seat to see what happens when affection meets arrangement at the icy pinnacle of the 1%.

Three cheers to Mr. Geffen for allowing his heart – and his pocket – to take a leap of faith and embark on a new romance in his golden years; and three more for Michaels, who possesses the wherewithal to advocate for himself and his needs. In a day and age where tuning into the news is an almost constant reminder of the mess that is humanity, it is a joy to know that a foster child can one day become a billionaire. Talk about a Disney ending.

Continue Reading

Popular