Right now, there are active campaigns to secure the freedom to marry for same-sex couples in dozens of countries around the world – spanning every continent and a wide variety of political contexts. While each of these campaigns is rooted in unique cultural and political dynamics, they have in common the potential to harness the power of marriage as both a goal and a strategy – leveraging the marriage conversation to change hearts and minds about LGBTQ people. Public campaigns for the freedom to marry are a unique opportunity to demonstrate that LGBTQ people are part of families and have the same need for family recognition as everyone else – helping to bring the needs and rights of  LGBTQ people into a more familiar context for the broader public.  

Not only does changing public attitudes toward LGBTQ people and their families have immediate, tangible impacts for the community, marriage campaigns have proven to yield an array of long-term benefits for LGBTQ civil society and democratic participation – including increasing overall support for LGBTQ causes, strengthening civic organizations, testing the implementation of new strategies to engage decision makers, training new generations of LGBTQ leaders, and instilling belief in activism, the rule of law, and effecting democratic change. 

By familiarizing the public with LGBTQ couples and families and lifting the voices of allies, campaigns for the freedom to marry reduce homophobia and transphobia, leading to greater acceptance. The public conversation about the freedom to marry is uniquely centered on the resonant values of love and family, as well as freedom and dignity, helping non-gay people better understand gay people as individuals with loving relationships and families, just like everyone else. Also, unlike other policy changes, the legalization of marriage for same-sex couples is typically accompanied by strong media attention that magnifies the campaign’s potential to shift public attitudes. Even after securing the freedom to marry, polling data shows that public support for LGBTQ people continues to accelerate, creating a more inclusive society and enabling political progress on several other fronts, especially those most important to LGBTQ people. 

For example, after Costa Rica in May 2020 became the first Central American country to affirm the freedom to marry for same-sex couples, a poll conducted by international research firm Borge & Asociados found an 18% increase in support for civil marriage for same-sex couples, as well as an increase in support for LGBTQ people more broadly. Nearly 40% of poll respondents reported personally developing a more positive opinion of gay and lesbian people in the previous 12 months and support for adoption and transgender nondiscrimination grew strongly after securing the freedom to marry. Costa Rica went on to enhance hate crimes and second parent adoption laws shortly after the marriage victory. 

After Taiwan in 2019 became the first government in Asia to end the exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage, support grew significantly. According to government polling, only 37.4 percent of country residents had previously reported that they believed same-sex couples should be able to marry. However, by May 2023, four years after the marriage victory, the same agency reported that support for marriage had increased to strong majority support (62.6%), an increase of 25.2 percentage points. By 2024, support had climbed an additional 6.5 percentage points to reach an all-time high of 69.1%. 

Even in countries that have not yet achieved victory, marriage campaigns are making an impact. In Romania, advocacy organization Asociatia ACCEPT launched a public education television ad in late 2023 that featured parents and their LGBTQ children. Months later, polling demonstrated a 26% swing in support for legally protecting same-sex couples, with a growth of 13% while opposition to protections decreased by 13% compared to 2021. Parents – the target audience of Accept’s paid media campaign – showed significant increases in support, with 55% now saying that if their child were gay they would like the law to allow them marry like anyone else, an 11 point increase. Demonstrating impacts beyond the issue of relationship recognition, the overall visibility of LGBTQ people in Romanian society has increased, with the number of people who know or interact with an LGBTQ person, from 19% in 2021 to 29% in 2024 as a result of a large-scale public education campaign centering LGBTQ people, their families, and marriage.

Similarly, Panama’s 2023 polling showed a 15.3% increase in support for protections for same-sex couples after two years of their “Sí Acepto” marriage campaign. Support for legal protections among Catholic Panamanians rose to 74.5% and, when asked about specific protections, such as visiting their partner in the hospital or making legal decisions together, Catholic Panamanians supported gay and lesbian couples at 84.3%. While the goal of achieving marriage may be a longer journey in countries like Romania and Panama, campaigns for the freedom to marry can still drive significant achievements in public opinion, paving the way for eventual victories.

Research shows similar gains in other countries where marriage campaigns are active. For instance, behind the efforts of Marriage for All Japan, support for marriage in Japan is now at an all-time high of 72%, rising 7% in two years. The Czech Republic also reached 72% support for marriage in 2023, months before the Jsme Fér campaign won the passage of civil partnership, representing an increase of nearly 25 points in four years of active campaigning. Pew research showed 60% support for marriage in Thailand in 2023, one year before the Thai legislature passed marriage legislation with a wide bipartisan majority.

Experience gained from working on marriage campaigns trains campaign leaders to achieve advancements on other issues. Once marriage was secured, Taiwan’s Marriage Equality Coalition, the campaign organization, was re-formed as the Taiwan Equality Campaign. Using strategies implemented to win marriage, TEC led successful advocacy efforts in 2023 to allow same-sex couples to adopt children to whom they are not biologically related. The large-scale campaign for the freedom to marry strengthened Taiwanese civil society, enabling sustainable, ongoing progress and paving the way for future victories. Government leaders now cite marriage for same-sex couples as a key indicator of Taiwan’s democratic society. 

Achieving victory in a change campaign invites civil society organizations to empower leaders and supporters to engage in the democratic process, hold elected leaders accountable, and build the political power they need to make change. Marriage campaigns have encouraged leaders to learn and deploy key (and for some countries, new) tactics such as engaging business or faith voices, monitoring and publicizing elected officials’ stands and evolution, and promoting voter engagement. Freedom to Marry Global has worked with advocates to share best practices from around the globe and support local leaders as they test and implement these strategies in ways that suit the local context. This type of coordination and skill-sharing among LGBTQ groups within and across regions is exactly what our LGBTQ movement needs more of to succeed and not reinvent the wheel campaign by campaign. 

Additionally, each campaign victory sends a positive message of momentum to neighboring countries. As the first-of-its-kind public education campaign in Latin America, Costa Rica’s Sí Acepto served as a model for the region. Leaders of Sí Acepto collaborated to export the materials and successes to other Latin American countries working to implement the Inter-American Court of Human Rights Advisory Opinion (OC-24). As a result, the impact of the Sí Acepto campaign is felt far beyond the borders of Costa Rica with similarly styled campaigns now active in Guatemala, Panama, Bolivia, and Peru. Progress is powerful and radiates in powerful ways beyond national borders.

While the freedom to marry and the critical protections and fundamental freedom and dignity that marriage brings to LGBTQ couples and their families are important ends in themselves, the public campaigns to secure marriage deliver much more. Marriage is important not just for the tangible and intangible meanings and protections it entails, but also as a strategy to fundamentally change the perception of LGBTQ people, generate momentum and support for further gains, and empower leaders with the skill and political muscle to continue making progress for their communities and their countries. Campaigning for the freedom to marry and the marriage conversation yield meaningful economic and democratic dividends for everyone. Love wins – and we all win.

Freedom to Marry Global and Council for Global Equality advocate for marriage equality in countries around the world.

You may know by now that Ghana’s parliament has just passed one of the harshest laws against its LGBTQ citizens in West Africa. Many advocates, activists, LGBTQ people, and allies are still trying to process why and how this happened.

During this announcement a person I’m closely tied to was in Juaben, Ghana. 

They were celebrating the life and passing of their grandmother, who happens to be a Queen Mother (Juabenhemaa) of the Asante Kingdom in Ghana. It was an elaborate two week traditional ceremony with both private and public events and was attended by thousands as well as the who’s who in Ghana including President Nana Akufo Addo himself.

As a history major, a cultural enthusiast and Afro-futurist, I was excited to have first hand accounts with photos and videos of all the ceremonies and to see beautiful Ghanaian royalty and people in their decorated clothes, dress, dance, and tradition. While at the same time supporting my loved one virtually.

About four days into the two week ceremony, my person in Ghana texted me about a male dancer wearing traditional women’s clothes, wearing makeup with a stuffed buttocks. They found it intriguing and was eager to share with me. In this traditional space, it was normalized and the cultural dancer continued to even dance with other men at the ceremony.

They reported to me that some of the young anti-LGBTQ Ghanian Americans at the ceremony were disgusted and confused. One remarked ‘What? Is this ‘Drag Race now?’ as the colorfully dressed person continued to skillfully dance their traditional dance in honor of the Asante Queen Mother. 

Four days later the anti-LGBTQ law passed through the parliament of Ghana, devastating LGBTQ Ghanians, advocates, allies, and diaspora. 

The bill now awaits the president’s signature to be enacted.

As I read through the 36-page long document called Promotion of Proper Human Sexual Rights and Ghanaian Family Values Bill of 2021, the basis document for this legislation, it includes repetitive emphasis of resistance to foreign imposition and the maintenance of Ghanaian values, culture, sovereignty, and independence and rejection of homosexuality. The document is a combination of the efforts of various groups including Christian organizations, Muslim organizations, family rights organizations, and the traditional chiefs of Ghana.

I found it interesting that there was but one paragraph that mentioned the importance of protecting the lives of LGBTQ people. Can you guess which one group (Christian organizations, Muslim organizations, Family rights organizations and the traditional chiefs of Ghana) was solely appealing to protect the lives of LGBTQ people in the bill? 

The National House of Chiefs, the group most steeped in Ghanaian historical and cultural tradition, made some attempt within the document to shield the lives of LGBTQ people from harm.

Time and time again, advocates have purported that it is indeed the hatred of queer people that is an imposition. Yet they are Christian and family value organizations funded by the right wing organizations that claim to protect local culture and values but instead create divisions that threaten the livelihoods of their Ghanaian queer families.

It begs the question, What is so western about LGBTQ people?

If we are being completely honest, the language, culture and framework is certainly western. 

The expression of self was never demonized in many now erased cultures across the world but the idea and framework of queerness today is.

The LGBTQ movement is largely a western movement and culture. From the rainbow flag to its terminology. Today LGBTQ/queer is the language we use universally to describe people whose self and sexual expression is not mainstream.

During colonization, many cultural indigenous traditions were lost including the language we used to identify our family and communities. It was then replaced with Christianity used as a tool to control and restrict — as it continues to do so today.

Indigenous Native Americans are fortunate to have retained their language and some of their culture. Their language of two-spirit makes room culturally for those Indigenous people we would call queer today.

There are countless examples of cultures within West African traditions and culture that have celebrated and have space and language for their “two-spirit” people as described by the Native Americans or their “Dagara” people as described by people from the Ghanaian neighboring country Burkina Faso.

That said, as a result of our erased cultures today, LGBTQ/queer is the language and culture we have globally adopted – obviously to the ire of those who don’t quite understand their own culture.

Regardless of language, culture or foreign imposition, there is no excuse for the hatred, exclusion, and persecution of any group of people — period.

From Uganda in East Africa, Ghana, West Africa to St. Vincent in the Eastern Caribbean the sentiment remains the same where there seems to be a confusion around cultural identity and the clutching onto an idea of sovereignty in efforts to continue to resist years of colonial oppression, imposition, and trauma.

We haven’t even begun to discuss how Christianity, another colonial tool, has culturally divided us and has our societal progress in a chokehold.

However, as a futurist, it is not helpful to remain in a place of blame, anger and self pity — it gets us nowhere. This is the hand that we have been dealt and we must work in various ways to build up our businesses and to nurture and grow families, communities, and our people.

And so I offer this piece to the brave advocates across various post colonial landscapes — draw close to the cultures and identities from whence you came. Activists like Lady Phyll and Alex Kofi Donor have remained entrenched within their cultural tradition signifying that being queer identifying people and being African in identity and culture aren’t mutually exclusive. 

We ought to be bold in addressing and working with external groups — the extremely tough and dangerous part of advocacy — entering churches, parliaments, universities, and being visible and contributing citizens not only within local queer communities but outside of the silos and enclaves of our safe spaces. That visibility puts a human face and personality to our cause. We must be our own politicians. Building real relationships with folks who we may not always agree with but who we may see eye to eye with on other issues. Start showing up for other marginalized groups besides our own.

And perhaps I’m blinded by the context of the advocacy done in little Barbados, perhaps it’s a safer place these days, an easier place to exercise this level of visibility … maybe.

What I do know is that we need to employ thoughtful strategy to our advocacy efforts because it was the strategy of the colonial powers that got us in this situation in the first place. 

And it will be our understanding of our own people and the application of strategic thinking that will get us out.

Exactly one year ago today, I was working at The Wall Street Journal as a Digital Innovation Fellow when news broke one early morning — a terrorist attack had rocked the Nova Music Festival near Re’im, sending the world into a catastrophic and schismatic debate over life, death, war, zionism and settler colonialism.

What many people may not know is that Israel had already made 2023 the deadliest year on record for Palestinians. Before this attack on Oct. 7, Israel had already killed over 200 Palestinians in the West Bank and zionist settlers were responsible for other killings and enforcing violence on civilians in Gaza. 

Before that, the history of settler colonialism and zionist attacks against the Palestinian people goes as far back as 70 years. 

What a lot of people don’t know is that Gaza was already a nation of refugees who were forced to flee oppression and casualties of military rule from the Egyptian army. The Ottoman Empire held rule over Gaza until 1917 and it then passed from British to Egyptian to Israeli rule. What it had become prior to the current genocide and displacement, was a fenced-off enclave that served as the refugee location of over 2 million Palestinians. 

The end of British rule over the area ended in 1948, where conflict and tensions then arose between Arabs and Jews. This conflict escalated and culminated in war between the newly formed State of Israel and the surrounding populations of Palestinians. 

During the 1950s and 60s, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency provided a refugee agency that, to this day, provides services for over 1.6 million registered Palestinian refugees. 

During the Middle East war in 1967, Israel violently captured the Gaza strip. 

In 1987, Hamas – an extremist organization was formed out of the first Palestinian intifada. 

The uprising was due to the continued siege of the area and settler and zionist colonialism which continuously oppressed Palestinians. 

The war then intensified and the Egypt-based Muslim Brotherhood formed into Hamas. The armed branch dedicated itself toward destroying Israel and re-establishing Islamic rule in what was then, occupied Palestine. 

The conflict and killings continued as Israel continued to enforce its power over Palestinians, who had already fled prosecution and were displaced due to military rule. 

In 1993, The Oslo Accords were signed between Israel and Palestine, creating a moment of peace. The agreement allowed Palestine to have limited control over Gaza and Jericho in the West Bank. 

Israel then accused Palestinians of undertaking the security agreements and Palestinians were angered by Israel’s accusations and continued settler colonialism. 

This led Hamas to carry out bombing to derail the peace agreement because Israel would not allow Palestinians to live freely after nearly 5 decades of conflict and war. 

During this time, many innocent civilians lost their lives, businesses, homes and any form of stability that they once knew. 

A second intifada happened in 2000 and Israel destroyed the Gaza International Airport – the only direct link for Palestinians to the outside world that wasn’t controlled by Israel. 

Israel then cut off the fishing industry and greatly reduced the output of fish, creating another direct human rights violation to innocent Palestinians. 

In 2005, Gaza was controlled by Israel and completely fenced off to the outside world. 

In 2006, Hamas gained control of Palestinians by overthrowing the successor of Yasser Arafat, President Mahmoud Abbas. 

This is the point in history where international aid was cut off to the civilians that had already endured the casualties of war because Hamas was deemed as a terrorist organization. Israel then left Palestine virtually in the dark by destroying Gaza’s only electrical power plant, causing blackouts. 

Palestinians were literally left in the dark, cut off from the world and its resources, and civilians struggled to survive. 

In 2014, some of the worst casualties of war took place – thousands of Palestinians were murdered, while Israel only counted 67 dead soldiers and six civilian deaths. 

On Oct. 7 2023, Hamas gunmen launched an attack and killed hundreds, while taking dozens of others as hostages. 

This did not begin a war – it further perpetuated a war that had been on-going for over 70 years. 

The Washington Blade returned to Israel to report on the one year mark of the Hamas attacks and spoke to LGBTQ+ sources who condemned Hamas’ actions that led to the retaliatory attacks from Israel following Oct 7. 

The Blade’s article on the LGBTQ+ Palestinian perspective, has since then been censored and removed by Meta. 

The fear behind many publishing platforms and Western media outlets is that pro-Israeli extremists will attack any conscious efforts to report on all sides of the issue fairly – often referencing anti-semitism and other types of hate associated with Jews. 

During my fellowship at WSJ, I felt that I was at a disadvantaged standpoint in my career because there I was – at one of the most prestigious and long-standing newspapers in the country during my first year in the professional world — but in the lowest position possible and with no real power to enact change or share much of my opinion in a way that had any impact. More than that, I was scared to speak up and now realize that this fear was nothing compared to the fear that the murdered and martyred journalists felt at the time leading up to their deaths, or the fear that journalists like Bisan Owda feel everyday as they continue to report from Gaza. 

Being a fellow at a high-ranking newspaper during this pivotal and chaotic time in recent human history, taught me how to be and how not to be a reporter. I learned to report on facts and the facts are, that this war has been greatly disproportionate in terms of a death toll and amount of casualties resulting in one of the largest and most complex human rights issues in history. 

One thing is for sure – I never want to be the type of journalist who reports on such deep and intricate issues, without the care and empathy to understand all the sides involved and the historical background that gives an issue the context necessary to form an opinion. 

The anti-Palestinian movement quickly gained traction because of Hollywood celebrities who took to social media to share their uninformed views on the issue and spearhead campaigns to fund the settler state of Israel that has been colonizing and murdering Palestinians for over 70 years. 

Palestine has been at the forefront of the news for 365 days because of the Oct. 7 attack by Hamas – an extremist group of militants that does not represent the entire Palestinian community.

Blaming the entire population of civilians in Gaza for the monstrous attack on Oct 7, would be like blaming the entire population of the United States for a terrorist attack that an extremist group like The Proud Boys or the KKK spearheaded and using that event to justify an entire genocide of North American people. 

On an academic level, Pro-Palestinian liberation is not about destruction, death or creating more casualties of war – it is about liberating themselves from all of those things. It is about Palestinians finally gaining the same rights to live freely and safely as we do here in the United States. 

The frustrations, emotions and anger that are fueling the hate against Palestinians is deeply misplaced and misdirected. 

From a human rights perspective – the only perspective that should really matter – innocent civilians are being murdered, displaced, starved and disappeared on all sides – which is fundamentally wrong. 

Hamas was formed out of frustration, desperation, hate and anger toward settler colonialism, which has only brought on only more pain and suffering to all involved. 

There is ultimately no excuse to fund war or to continue the genocide of Palestinian adults, children and even animals. 

Looking at the numbers, it is evident that Israel’s retaliation against Palestinians for the actions carried out by Hamas has been greatly disproportionate. The death toll became innumerable for the Gaza Health Ministry only a month into the newest phase of this war against Palestinians and lost count as a result of blackouts, a high death toll and the collapse of the healthcare system in Gaza. 

The Gaza Health Ministry estimates that over 40,000 Palestinians – including children, infants and journalists – have been murdered since last October. 

In comparison, ABC 7 reported that the Israeli death toll is estimated to be around 1,200.

None of it is truly justified and we have to hold ourselves, eachother and corporations that fund genocide, accountable for actions that further incites this phase of the war.

LGBTQ+ people especially, have a responsibility to hold people accountable for carrying out acts of hate and creating or further perpetuating human rights violations. 

Being pro-Palestinian does not mean being pro-Hamas and it does not mean being anti-semitic. It simply means that the movement supports Palestinian peoples’ liberation from war, death and zionism. 

In the words of Marsha P. Johnson, ‘no Pride for some of us, without liberation for all of us.’

Though the movement called ‘Queers for Palestine’ has dealt with a lot of negative backlash, they held a march and rally at Saturday’s Day of Action in Los Angeles. More events and information can be found on their social media channels.

The use of silicone injections and other unconventional fillers like cooking oils, have gained traction within the transgender community as a method for body enhancement. These substances — often used in non-medical settings — are offered as cheaper, quicker alternatives to professional, medically supervised, gender-affirming procedures. While these treatments may seem like a lifeline for some people, their consequences are far more complex.

Imagine living a life wearing a suit that doesn’t quite belong to you, explained Dr. Natalia Zhikhareva, better known as Dr. Z, a gender psychologist based in Los Angeles.

Every day, they step outside, and people see a body—responding, interacting and defining based solely on what they perceive. Inside that body, there’s someone else. Someone with a different gender identity, and each time people misgender them based on that outer shell, it makes them feel like they’re being punched. It’s not just uncomfortable, but also painful, and a constant reminder that who they see, doesn’t match who they are.

This psychological distress is known as gender dysphoria. For many transgender individuals, altering their appearance can be an essential part of alleviating  dysphoria, allowing them to feel more at home in their own bodies and engage with the world in a way that authentically reflects who they are.

According to a 2023 study by the Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law, “81% of transgender adults in the U.S. have thought about suicide.” This statistic highlights the need to address the systemic inequalities and societal pressures that transgender individuals face. From discrimination in healthcare, to pervasive stigma in everyday life, transgender people are navigating a world often hostile to their identity. 

The emotional and physical impact of body enhancements

 “I started to transition when I was about 19. At that time, they were using cooking oil [for body enhancements]. And I had that procedure done on my body. I got the oil injections because I looked at my trans friends, who were so beautiful and slender. It was easy for me to agree to do it,” Maria Roman-Taylorson, vice president & chief operating officer of the TransLatin@ Coalition, said in Spanish. 

The procedure involved injecting oil into different body areas, creating pockets under the skin. Her body later rejected the procedure and she found herself in the emergency room.

“It seems either the liquid was infected or the technique was flawed, and I got infected all over my lower back and hip,” she explained. “The doctor had to cut each pocket to drain it, which was incredibly painful.” 

Why trans people turn to these methods

Dr. Z explains that many people endure prolonged mental anguish to the point where they are willing to sacrifice their physical health to recover their peace and sense of self. She reflects on how access to gender-affirming care is both limited and costly, and in the current socio-political climate, it is becoming even more restricted. Dr. Z noted that in her practice, she has witnessed individuals taking extreme measures to alleviate their distress, such as self-administering silicone injections or traveling to other countries without knowing if the practitioners are qualified, all in a desperate effort to find relief.

“When society doesn’t provide treatment options, people have no choice,” she stated. 

“The trans community is part of society. I pay taxes. I contribute and as such, I should have a place where they can provide me with services that respect my life and focus on helping and offering me with the best quality of services,” affirmed Roman-Taylorson. 

Dr. Z believes that some people struggle to understand the complexities of gender, mainly because many of them don’t think about it in their daily lives. However, just because some may not fully grasp the concept, it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist, nor does it negate the profound pain and unhappiness it can cause for some individuals. People often seek concrete facts—like a specific gene or medical evidence—to explain gender identity, but she feels this is the wrong approach. 

Instead, she emphasizes the importance of recognizing when a fellow human being is in deep distress and pain, even to the point of contemplating suicide. Dr. Z believes that when witnessing such suffering, the compassionate response is to offer help in whatever way possible. For her, gender-affirming care is one of the most effective means of providing that support. 

In a 2016 study, the National Library of Medicine indicated that liquid silicone injections could cause serious complications, including “…chronic cellulitis and abscess formation, ulceration, pneumonitis, cosmetic irregularities and asymmetries, perforation or injuries to critical structures, foreign body reactions and migration of silicone. These can present even years after injection.” 

Silicone, in particular, can migrate over time, distorting the intended body shape and potentially leading to embolisms — blockages in blood vessels — if the substance reaches the bloodstream. 

Roman-Taylorson describes that at 55 years old, she was hospitalized due to her body’s rejection of the silicone. She shared that in her case, one of the side effects of the liquid silicone injections, is cellulitis which led to a severe infection. The side effects cause her skin to turn black or red, swell, and become hot as if she has a fever. At times, the pain is so intense that it prevents her from walking, requiring hospitalization. Reflecting on her experience, Roman-Taylorson, acknowledged that she has paid a high price for the body she has today. 

She said that desperation for acceptance can lead people to disregard fear, even in the face of considerable risk. Rather than dwelling on the dangers, she emphasizes that her decision to accept liquid silicone injections was driven by the possibility of finally being accepted by the world. She longed to be recognized as the woman she truly felt she was. For her, the surgery she underwent was the sole accessible option to achieve that sense of recognition and validation. 

“When visiting the emergency room, doctors often lack the knowledge to address complications from these injections properly,” said Roman-Taylorson. In addition to medical challenges, trans people face judgment from healthcare providers who subtly question their decision to undergo these procedures. This leads to a sense of guilt and discrimination in the way they are treated. She emphasized that dealing with these biases only adds to the difficulty of managing their serious health issues. 

The unpredictable journey 

Yahni Ross, intake specialist and research assistant the TransLatin@ Coalition, expressed that despite having undergone the procedure herself, she would not recommend it to others because of the risks involved. At 32, she lives with loose silicone in her body and acknowledges that anything could happen. She explained that in the event of an accident, the silicone could shift, causing severe complications. She shared the story of a friend who was attacked and left with a deformed body after being stomped on. Ross noted that if the silicone in her body were to move, especially to sensitive areas like her eye, it could cause blindness. She stressed that the risks posed by silicone are significant and unpredictable. 

An analysis by the National Library of Medicine reveals that many trans women turn to fillers, not just for enhancing their appearance, but also for safety. By using fillers to achieve a more feminine look, they aim to blend in and avoid being recognized as transgender in situations that could potentially put them at risk for transphobic violence or harassment, like being unwelcome in bathrooms or locker rooms, or being misgendered. 

The threats of using liquid silicone and other harmful substances as body fillers highlight the urgent need for nationwide, accessible, and considerate gender-affirming care. Providing safe, affordable, and supportive medical procedures can save lives—not just by preventing dangerous physical complications, but also by ensuring trans people feel understood, and respected. 

“People are born experiencing gender dysphoria, and as a result, [they] sometimes suffer decades and decades,” said Dr. Z. She advises that people don’t have to change their views to show compassion and kindness towards trans people.

The Biden-Harris administration has a historic opportunity to help end HIV. New, cutting-edge drugs that prevent HIV are hitting the market, but insurance companies are trying to twist the rules to deny access to these remarkable therapies.

The White House could stop these abuses and put the country on the right course for decades ahead and prevent hundreds of thousands of new HIV transmissions.

Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) drugs represent one of the strongest tools we have to combat HIV. These highly effective therapies can reduce the risk of contracting HIV by up to 99%. So far, the FDA has approved two once-daily PrEP pills, and in 2021 approved the first long-acting version of PrEP. Other groundbreaking PrEP innovations, such as a biannual dosage form, are in active development. 

PrEP is a major reason why new HIV infections dropped 12% from 2018 to 2022. Yet there’s still work to do. Currently, just 36% of people who could benefit from PrEP are using it. Racial and ethnic groups face wide disparities in PrEP uptake. For example, Black individuals constitute 39% of new HIV diagnoses but only 14% of PrEP users. Hispanics make up 31 percent of new HIV diagnoses, but only 18 percent of PrEP users.

A new federal directive, if properly enforced, could help close these gaps. In August 2023, a panel of prevention experts issued an updated recommendation to clinicians, recommending PrEP — including long-acting forms of the drugs — to people who want to prevent HIV acquisition. Under the Affordable Care Act, most newly issued private health plans must cover without patient cost-sharing to comply with this recommendation beginning this month.

Yet many HIV experts and patient advocates have raised concerns that insurers could misinterpret — or downright ignore — the task force’s decision and keep barriers to PrEP in place. 

One top concern is that insurance companies could decide to cover only one kind of PrEP, even though the task force’s recommendation isn’t drug-specific — it applies to all versions. For example, a health plan might refuse to cover long-acting PrEP and force patients to take oral pills instead. 

Yet long-acting PrEP is a critical option for many patients, such as those who struggle to adhere to once-daily drug regimens, are unhoused, or have confidentiality concerns. One study found that patients taking long-acting PrEP had a 66% reduction in HIV infections compared to those using oral pills. Another analysis calculated that long-acting PrEP could help avert 87% more HIV cases than oral pills, and could save over $4 billion over the course of a decade.

Another concern relates to insurers’ increasing use of “prior authorization,” a practice in which health plans refuse to cover certain drugs unless doctors obtain prior permission. Insurers could also force patients to try a number of therapeutic alternatives before agreeing to cover the medicine they and their doctors agreed upon — this is known as “step therapy.” There’s evidence that “prior authorization” policies may disproportionately impact Black and Hispanic individuals, who are already at higher risk of HIV.

Fortunately, these insurer-imposed barriers aren’t inevitable. The Biden-Harris administration, through the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), has an opportunity to issue clear, detailed guidance that ensures health plans follow through on the legal requirement to cover PrEP for all eligible patients and at no cost.

CMS’s guidance should clarify that insurance companies are obliged to cover all FDA-approved versions of PrEP, including both daily pills and long-acting injectables. When now Vice President Harris was Sen. Harris, she introduced groundbreaking legislation called the PreP Access and Coverage Act, which would require all insurers to cover all forms of PrEP without cost-sharing and prior authorizations. So we know where she stands on the issue. 

A number of states, including New York and California, have already established similar coverage requirements and prohibitions on prior authorization for PrEP. 

A similar requirement already exists for contraception. Plans are required “to cover without cost sharing any contraceptive services and FDA-approved, -cleared, or -granted contraceptive products that an individual’s attending provider determined to be medically appropriate.”  

CMS just needs to adopt language along these lines for PrEP. Doctors — not insurance companies — should decide which drugs best suit patients’ needs.

Thanks to revolutionary research happening every day, people with a reason to be on PrEP have more options available to them than ever before. Yet insurers are intent on restricting access to these innovative therapies. New federal guidance can help combat this and if properly enforced set us on a path toward ending HIV.

By Dacey Romberg, Madison Zucco, Luke Lamberti, and Xan Wolstenholme-Britt

Around the country, Women’s Bills of Rights (“Women’s BoRs”) have emerged as a mechanism to spread anti-transgender policy under the guise of women’s rights. These laws redefine terms like gender, sex, woman, and man to binary definitions that exclude protections and recognition of transgender, nonbinary, and in some contexts, intersex individuals. The focus of these laws is on public institutions and facilities, such as restrooms and changing rooms.  

What do these laws mean for students and employees of public institutions, such as public schools and government agencies? How may private employers react to these laws? We will dive into the rise of Women’s BoR laws, their impact on workplace protections, and what we can expect with the rise of anti-transgender policies.  

In early 2022, Independent Women’s Voice and the Women’s Liberation Front introduced the Women’s BoR as model legislation seeking to limit legal recognition of sex to one’s sex assigned at birth. While both groups identify as women’s advocacy organizations, Independent Women’s Voice and the Women’s Liberation Front have long sought to limit the rights of transgender Americans as a primary area of focus. The Women’s BoR entered mainstream politics when Republicans in the House of Representatives and Senate attempted to endorse the legislation in a resolution in 2022. While federal attempts to pass a national Women’s BoR have not been successful, states have begun to adopt similar bills. Throughout 2023 and 2024, state legislators in Kansas, Louisiana, Montana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Utah enacted statutes based on the federal bill. 

Advocates frame Women’s BoR as supporting women, but they do not positively affect or protect cisgender or transgender women; in actuality, their only impact is to exclude transgender Americans from legal recognition and erase the experience of nonbinary and intersex individuals. In light of this worrisome impact, transgender, nonbinary, and intersex people may wonder what protections they have in workplaces if their state has passed a Women’s BoR.  

Each state’s Women’s BoR is unique depending on what laws it sought to amend and how far-reaching its impact will be, but clear throughlines exist nationwide. Transgender, nonbinary, and intersex employees are affected by the redefinition of terms including sex, gender, men, and women, as legislators use outdated and transphobic lenses to categorize individuals and essentially erase any protection of those who do not identify as cisgender women or men. Furthermore, some of these bills place legal consequences on transgender, nonbinary, and intersex employees who use public facilities that align with their gender identity. For example, under the Louisiana Women’s Safety and Protection Act, an individual who alleges they have suffered “any direct or indirect harm as a result of a violation of” this law may file a lawsuit against the party in violation for relief that may include injunctive relief (a court order to do something or to stop doing something) and attorney fees, damages, and costs associated with the lawsuit. The state seems to be incentivizing these cases by waiving a procedural hurdle that is usually required to get an injunction.  

What do these bills mean for transgender, nonbinary, or intersex employees that are employed in states that have enacted a Women’s BoR? If the individual is employed by a state government, public school, or another form of public institution, that institution may take the position that only cisgender employees are protected by the state’s anti-discrimination laws, which they may now interpret as only applying to cisgender women and men.  

Oklahoma’s Women’s BoR states that “any policy, program, or statute that prohibits sex discrimination shall be construed to forbid unfair treatment of females or males in relation to similarly situated members of the opposite sex.” By stating that laws only forbid “unfair treatment of females or males,” the bill may result in transgender, nonbinary, and intersex employees no longer being covered by the Oklahoma Anti-Discrimination Act. Montana similarly appears to have passed legislation that limits “sex discrimination” to only males and females, which could be interpreted as removing transgender, nonbinary, or intersex individuals from the protections of the Montana Human Rights Act.

These employees may still be protected by federal anti-discrimination laws, though, including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits employment discrimination based on gender identity. For instance, if a transgender employee is barred by their employer from using the office locker room that aligns with their gender identity, they may be able to establish a Title VII violation. Similarly, a Title VII or Affordable Care Act violation may be established where a transgender employee is denied coverage for gender-affirming care but cisgender employees are covered for the same procedure or treatment. 

Though not all have been labeled Women’s BoR, more than 40 “re-definition” bills were introduced in state legislatures this year, according to the ACLU, marking a significant increase in this type of legislation. This indicates a concerted effort by certain political groups to roll back protections and recognition for transgender and nonbinary individuals. This legislative push not only threatens to erode hard-won rights but also fosters a climate of discrimination and exclusion. As these bills have gained traction in the past few years, it becomes increasingly important for employers and allies to stay informed and engaged to protect and advance the rights of transgender and nonbinary individuals at both the state and national levels. 

It is essential for public and private employers to understand the implications of these laws and how they might affect their workforce. When possible, employers should be proactive in counteracting harmful policies by incorporating specific protective language into their company policies and providing robust support systems for their transgender, nonbinary, and intersex employees. This could involve conducting informational sessions to ensure that employees know their rights and the potential impacts of these laws.  

While public employers in states that have passed Women’s BoRs may be more limited in how they can support their transgender, nonbinary, and intersex employees, private employers can support their employees by implementing inclusive policies and practices such as anti-discrimination policies that explicitly protect gender identity and expression; providing comprehensive healthcare benefits that cover gender-affirming treatments and ensuring that facilities, such as restrooms, are accessible to all employees. Additionally, providing support networks, such as employee resource groups, and ensuring that all employees are aware of and have access to these resources can significantly enhance the sense of belonging and safety for transgender, nonbinary, and intersex employees. By doing so, employers can create a more inclusive and supportive work environment, helping to mitigate the negative effects of these legislative changes on their employees. 

Dacey Romberg, Madison Zucco, Luke Lamberti, and Xan Wolstenholme-Britt are with Sanford Heisler Sharp.

I don’t think President Eisenhower ever thought of transgender people when the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights was founded in 1957. But today the horrific killings of transgender women of color is too much to be ignored. In 2018, 82 percent of recorded transgender homicides were of women of color.

So it was critical that the commission examine the violence against transgender women of color as part of its larger investigation of racial disparities among crime victims. 

Today, on Wednesday, Sept. 18, as a commissioner, I am proud to present to Congress and the White House our findings and my recommendations to address the rising violence and killings of transgender women of color. 

The commission’s report, and its documentation of this violence, recognizes transgender women of color under federal law. They are entitled to all of the protections of the Constitution and federal civil rights laws.  

Over the past year, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights investigated racial disparities in crime victimization as violent crime rose from 2017-2021.  The commission’s investigation did not find differences in the risk of victimization for different races at a national level, as some might have suggested. But the data shows that LGBTQ+ and transgender communities of color are at a higher risk of violent crime.  

Transgender people, especially transgender African Americans face persistent and pervasive discrimination and violence. Kierra Johnson, the executive director of the National LGBTQ Task Force, testified in how transgender individuals are victimized four times more often than non-trans people, with young Black and Latina transgender women at the highest risk. It was historic for the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights to recognize that sexual and/or gender minorities face increased risk for violent victimization. 

Still, we must more accurately capture the rates of violent victimization against LGBTQ+ people. There are inadequate data collection measures of gender and sexuality. A large percentage of Black transgender deaths are unaccounted for. 

Transgender homicides are likely undercounted for because of misgendering and “deadnaming” in police and media reports. Audacia Ray at the New York City Anti-Violence Project, explained that transgender individuals often do not share their legal names so when they are reported missing under their known name, their loved ones do not know what happens. 

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 only considers “sex” and does not look at “gender” or “sexual orientation.” So as the commission advises Congress and the federal agencies on the enforcement of modern civil rights, we must incorporate “race” and “gender” under our civil rights purview. The FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program should include disaggregated data on sexual and gender identity.  

Transgender and gender-diverse victims of crime are unable to access crucial assistance and vital services. The commission’s investigation formally documented how LGBTQ overall, and especially those of color or transgender experience, continued to face discrimination and harassment by law enforcement. The U.S. Transgender Survey, found that 61 percent of Black respondents experienced some form of mistreatment by police, including being verbally harassed, or physically or sexually assaulted. 

Victim service providers testified that LGBTQ+ survivors hesitate to seek help because of fear of being blamed themselves; distrust or discrimination by the police; and expectations of indifference. Survivors of violence — of any race, sexual orientation, gender, or gender-identity — must be able to receive essential services and assistance to help them heal from the trauma of violence. Mandatory and proper training for law enforcement and victim service providers can help victims feel safe when reporting incidents. 

Queer and trans Americans often fear retaliation by a world where they are living their true selves. The intersectional experiences of race exacerbates this fear. Our federal government needs to do more to ensure that all marginalized communities are better protected in our society. 

I never would have imagined that a federally authorized report to Congress would have the powerful statement on its public record “Black Trans Lives Matter!” That was until Kierra Johnson of the National LGBTQ Task Force said “I am here to say that Black Trans Lives Matter!” I am proud of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights’s report to Congress and the country on the rise of violent crime in America and its highlights of the violence against transgender women of color. 

Glenn D. Magpantay is a member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, an independent, bipartisan federal agency that advises the White House and Congress on federal civil rights policy. The views expressed herein are as a commissioner, Magpantay’s own, and does not represent the entire commission. 

“I stopped reading Facebook feeds,” one of my queer Jewish American friends told me. I won’t say their name, but they are one of the many who showed similar sentiments.

We were speaking about increasing antisemitism among the LGBTQ community, and they were devastated.

Unfortunately, recent events in the Gaza Strip caused a peculiar situation when all Jewish people are blamed for the brutal response of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government; and LGBTQ Jews faced microaggression and direct violence, get insulted and attacked, even at Prides. 

First and foremost, I want to say that indiscriminate slaughtering of Gazan civilians is definitely a war crime that should be condemned and avoided in the future, but there are a lot of articles written on this topic by others who are more competent on this topic. This time I deliberately wouldn’t discuss Hamas and Israeli politicians here, because this story is not about them — this story is about the way the LGBTQ community is treating their Jewish siblings right now.

There are not so many visible queer politicians among Netanyahu supporters, and they are not spending time in social media queer groups. 

Moreover, right-wing LGBTQ people with connections to the Israeli government don’t care much about LGBTQ communities in the US, the UK, or Russia. 

LGBTQ people who suffer from everyday antisemitism are the ones who need community the most. Unfortunately, we live in a world where many families don’t accept their LGBTQ children, and for many queer people, the LGBTQ community became the only family support they had. 

And now antisemitism is taking this support away.

Why political opposition toward the Israeli government turned into Middle Ages-style bigotry is a very good question that doesn’t have a simple answer. 

Double standards

For a person who is not deeply into political and social issues, this situation may seem quite typical. After all, people are often used to judging the whole nation based on what their government did, right? Actually, wrong.

As a person from Ukraine, I may say that I spoke a lot about the Russian-Ukrainian war with LGBTQ and progressive activists in the West, and most of them showed enormous levels of compassion to “ordinary Russians,” despite the fact that the vast majority of the Russian population supports the Russian-Ukrainian war. Moreover, even after Russia in 2022 deliberately bombed the Mariupol Theater with Ukrainian children inside, Russians en masse weren’t called “child killers” by the American and European LGBTQ communities, and Russian activists still welcomed at Prides.

So it is definitely not about bombing children.

Also, all LGBTQ organizations in the US, UK, and European Union known to me that now openly support Palestine and call themselves anti-Zionists have never openly spoken up against concentration camps, ethnic cleansing, and the genocide of Muslim Uyghur populations in East Turkestan, which is under Chinese occupation right now. 

But LGBTQ groups and activists have never called themselves anti-Chinese, didn’t create a “queer for Eastern Turkistan” movement, and didn’t push Chinese LGBTQ people on campus to condemn the actions of the Chinese government.

So, it is also not about fighting Islamophobia.

What is it about? I have been a refugee in three different countries, and I have been involved in LGBTQ activism in some way in Russia, Ukraine, the UK, and the US, and I may say that antisemitism in LGBTQ communities exists in all those countries in some way. 

And in different cultural contexts, antisemitism represents itself differently among LGBTQ people. 

Eastern European antisemitism 

Me and three other LGBTQ activists in 2018 held a small demonstration in the middle of St. Petersburg on Victory Day, a big state-promoted holiday when Russians celebrate the Soviet victory over Nazism. We were holding posters about the common threats between Nazi Germany and the modern Russian Federation, including the persecution of LGBTQ people.

Suddenly, a very respected-looking man came to us, blaming us for an anti-Russian Western conspiracy just because we criticized the Russian government, and then started to say that the Holocaust never happened. When I yelled back at this man, telling him that I’m partly Jewish and daring him to repeat his antisemitic accusation, the man announced that Jews “paid to live in Auschwitz, so later they would create their own state.”

No one said anything against this man, but Russians were angry with me for “spoiling a holiday.”

Holocaust denial and everyday antisemitism are extremely prominent in Eastern Europe, from Poland to Russia. It is especially strong in Russia.

Russian pride about “victory over Nazis” is not about fighting Nazi ideology, but rather about being proud of a Soviet legacy. Simplifying Nazis is bad only because they killed Russian Soviets.

Even in state Russian Orthodox Churches, you could buy the “Protocol of the Elders of Zion” Nazi propaganda book.

LGBTQ activists in Russia are generally less antisemitic than the majority of the population, but all the same, they were raised in this culture, so they allow themselves antisemitic jokes and sometimes share Russian supremacy ideas.

So, for them, anti-Zionism is just another, new, and more appropriate way to hate Jews, and they didn’t even try to hide antisemitic rhetoric, especially because many prominent Jewish LGBTQ people moved to Israel or to the US, so the community is mostly non-Jewish. 

Western European and American antisemitism

The situation is quite different in America and Western Europe.

“Why are you supporting Palestine in a way you have never supported people from other war zones, including any other Muslim lands?” I asked my friend and activist from Sheffield in the UK.

“Because there is a first time in modern history when a country committed such an attack against civilians!” They answered me. “Especially with our government’s support.”

I closed my eyes, suddenly remembering the Iraqi city of Mosul that was wiped out to the ground by US-led allies, killing not just ISIS fighters, but also peaceful townsfolk stuck under the occupation of the self-proclaimed “caliphate,” or the Syrian town of Baqhuz Fawqani, where families of ISIS fighters, including babies and pregnant women, were bombed together with Syrian civilians. 

And to mention, once again, Russian “clearing” operations and bombings in Chechnya and Ukraine, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s crimes against his own people in Syria, crimes committed by ISIS, or the ongoing war in Mali. 

My friend has no idea how wrong they were. 

Modern wars are extremely brutal, and there is an ongoing problem of dehumanizing enemies and war crimes that need to be solved. It’s a much broader problem than just Israeli‘s actions, but like one of my Jewish nonbinary friends is saying, “no Jews, no news.” 

Western antisemitism in the LGBTQ community, including the idea that all Jewish people are extremely privileged white oppressors, is based on a simple ignorance, no less than on prejudice. If in Russia I saw more activists who hate Jews and just want to be anti-Jewish in a modern way, in the UK and US LGBTQ community I saw more people who are generally caring about war crimes. But they refused to make their own analysis and refused to use the same standards for Jews that they use for other minorities — for example, not pushing them to condemn crimes they never committed.

The Palestinian rights movement has one of the biggest and more successful PR campaigns in modern history, while Jewish organizations failed to promote their agenda among non-Jewish populations.

“Most of them [LGBTQ activists and friends] don’t even know what Zionism is, to be really anti-Zionist,” my queer American friend noticed.

But, just like in Russia, some queer people are just bigots who now could show their hate publicly in a way that wouldn’t be condemned by their community.

Ayman Eckford is a freelance journalist, and an autistic ADHDer transgender person who understands that they are trans* since they were 3-years-old.

Although few Americans heard about it at the time, LGBTQ+ Africans remember that Kamala Harris stood up for them when she visited Africa as vice president in March 2023.  

On March 27, 2023, she appeared at a joint news conference in Accra, Ghana, with Ghanaian President Nana Akufo-Addo. The final question came from Zolan Kanno-Youngs of the New York Times. Referring to the bill that would impose harsh jail terms on LGBTQ+ people, then being considered by the Ghanaian parliament, and citing the Biden administration’s commitment to” calling out any foreign government that advanced anti-gay legislation or violates human rights,” he asked her “what have you said to the president and plan to say to other leaders on this trip about the crackdown on human rights?”

Under the “Human Sexual Rights and Ghanaian Family Values Bill,” which was passed by the Ghanaian parliament on Feb. 28, 2024, people who engage in same-sex relations will be subject to up to three years imprisonment, anyone who promotes LGBTQ+ rights can be jailed for six to 10 years, and all LGBTQ+ organizations will be banned. The act is now being challenged in the country’s Supreme Court as unconstitutional.

As Nii-Quarterlai Quartner, professor at Pepperdine University, writes in his new book, “Kamala, the Motherland, and Me,” “even before he completed his inquiry, members of the Ghanaian cabinet made their disapproval apparent. You could see their faces get tight and hear the whispers. You could even hear some laughter. Was it nervous laughter? Was it belittling laughter? Was it somewhere in between? I don’t know. But the immediate shift in energy was palpable. Despite the angry stares and even some snickers from around the room, Vice President Harris never paused or hesitated in her response.”

Standing at Akufo-Addo’s side, Harris answered the question directly and at length. 

“I’ll start,” she said, “I have raised this issue, and let me be clear about where we stand. First of all, for the American press who are here, you know that a great deal of work in my career has been to address human rights issues, equality issues across the board, including as it relates to the LGBTQ+ community. And I feel very strongly about the importance of supporting freedom and supporting and fighting for equality among all people, and that all people be treated equally. I will also say that this is an issue that we consider, and I consider to be a human rights issue, and that will not change.”

Former President Donald Trump’s policy, if he wins the election this coming November, would be quite different.  

According to the Project 2025 report, prepared under the direction of the Heritage Foundation by leading Trump advisors, in Trump’s second term, the United States will “stop promoting policies birthed in the American culture wars” and stop pressing African governments to respect the rule of law, human rights/LGBT+ rights, political and civil rights, democracy, and women’s rights, especially abortion rights. “African nations are particularly (and reasonably) non-receptive to the US social policies such as abortion and pro-LGBT initiatives being imposed on them,” by the United States, the report declares. Therefore, “the United States should focus on core security, economic, and human rights engagement with African partners and reject the promotion of divisive policies that hurt the deepening of shared goals between the US and its African partners.”

The fate of LGBTQ+ Africans may not matter much to most American voters, but the results of the US election matter to them. Their safety, freedom, and lives depend on it.

Daniel Volman is the director of the African Security Research Project in Washington, D.C., and a specialist on US national security policy toward Africa and African security issues.

Ukrainian men are being pulled away from vital humanitarian work and drafted into the military under new conscription laws, according to local activists.

One huge challenge facing Ukraine’s war effort is a shortage of conscripts. Kyiv hopes new laws passed in April 2024 aimed at recruiting many more soldiers will help it get on the front foot militarily, particularly after a fresh wave of attacks from Russia in May 2024 in the northeast.

Vasyl Malikov is the Kharkiv coordinator of Alliance.Global northeastern Ukraine. The NGO provides a wide range of services to the LGBTQ community in the Kharkiv region, including HIV prevention and testing, psychosocial help, medical, and humanitarian aid.

He told me that most of the men who work with the organization to provide these services as well as their volunteers are liable to be called up for military service under the new conscription drive.

Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014 and 2022 have resulted in a protracted war being fought along a front line stretching over several hundred miles. In August 2024 Ukraine opened a new line of attack when it pushed into Russia’s Kursk region, with reports estimating Ukraine could commit as many as 10,000 troops to the attack. Despite the widespread use of new technology on the battlefield, much of the war is being fought by more traditional means, with large numbers of soldiers armed with rifles defending the country from trenches.

The new laws aim to reinforce Ukraine’s tiring military and lower the age of conscription from 27 to 25, although volunteers over 18 are still accepted.

Ukraine has for a decade been successfully pressing the United States government and leaders in Europe for weapons to defend itself against Russian aggression, but having enough soldiers to use them is a significant challenge.

An initial target of conscripting 450,000 to 500,000 new recruits has been lowered, but it is not clear what the new number is. I’ve been regularly reporting from the front line in and around Kharkiv, the country’s second biggest city, over the last two years, and it’s obvious that Ukraine’s military is running short of personnel.

Malikov says some of the men who work with Alliance.Global have already been called into the army, and are hard to replace. “Good international practice is that many of the services we provide to LGBTQ people are best done by social workers and volunteers who come from the communities they serve (peer-to-peer),” he said. 

“We do an enormous amount of work providing vital social and other support to gay men and bisexual men in and around Kharkiv. Trust is important in the outreach to these communities, and if men from our team are taken for the army you can’t just get anyone to replace them. These are experienced professionals, committed to this work.”

A few of the Alliance.Global team are exempt from the military draft on medical grounds, or for some other reason. Malikov is himself currently exempt because he is also a university professor, but this academic certificate has to be renewed every three months – a long bureaucratic process, he says, which can involve him queueing for five hours at a time. 

This new challenge comes as the country’s LGBTQ community confronts a halt to progress on legislation to introduce same-sex civil partnerships, despite more than 70 percent of Ukrainians polled saying that LGBTQ people should have the same rights as other citizens. This is a huge improvement from 2010 attitudes, when only 28 percent of Ukrainians thought that “gay men and lesbians should be free to live their lives as they wish.”

Yet, as Bogdan Globa, president and co-founder of QUA – LGBTQ Ukrainians in America, notes, “thousands of LGBTQI+ are serving in the army with a civilian partner back at home. For straight couples, if something happens with a military partner (wounded or killed), a civilian partner will obtain a variety of government benefits, from cash support to housing. In the case of same-sex couples, they are invisible to the government and have no help or recognition. A civilian person has no right to even bury their partner’s body.” 

Malikov says, “any Ukrainian man could find himself in the military in a matter of weeks from now, because it’s a civic duty of Ukrainian men during wartime, including any number of the 80 or more men who are part of the Alliance.Global network.” 

The new recruitment drive presents new tests for his work in Kharkiv. “It makes things very difficult to plan. We don’t know who will be called up, or when, and it’s another layer of unpredictability to an already uncertain future,” he says.

For more, see Human Rights First’s new report, “New Recruits: Ukraine’s Military Conscription Laws Threaten Humanitarian Efforts,” written by Maya Fernandez-Powell and myself.

Brian Dooley is senior adviser for Human Rights First.