Connect with us

News Analysis

The political smear campaign to stop same-sex marriage bill

Liberty Counsel’s CEO amplified the lie that same-sex marriage would lead to “grooming” and child sexual exploitation

Published

on

Supporters of same-sex marriage gather at the U.S. Supreme Court during oral arguments for Obergefell v. Hodges 2015 (Blade photo by Michael Key)

WASHINGTON – A procedural vote on the Respect for Marriage Act legislation (H.R. 8404/S. 4556) in the Senate, which requires 60 votes to succeed, is scheduled for 5:30 p.m. Eastern on Nov. 28. Ahead of the Monday vote the major anti-LGBTQ+ hate organizations are executing a full court press to get Republicans Senators to derail the bill.

Listed by the Southern Poverty Law Center’s ‘Hatewatch‘ for lies, propaganda, and smearing of LGBTQ+ people, the Family Research Council, (FRC) based in Washington D.C., Liberty Counsel based in Orlando, Florida, The Alliance Defending Freedom, (ADF) based in Scottsdale, Arizona, and the National Organization for Marriage, (NOM) also based in Washington D.C., have escalated a publicity campaign smearing the intent of the law and labeling it ‘perversion and child sexual abuse.’

The president and CEO of Liberty Counsel, Mat Staver, sent out several email blasts to supporters urging them to contact GOP Senators to stop the bill. In a tweet Stavers said; “It doesn’t matter what courts, legislatures or voters say. They do not define marriage, God does.”

In one email Stavers wrote: “On MONDAY, senators are scheduled to vote on a sickening bill that will normalize child-bride, same-sex and pedophiliac “marriages” in every state. Several amendments will be debated, and then the Senate will need another 60 votes to proceed. We can stop HR 8404 if we let the Senate hear from us NOW!”

Stavers then amplified the lie that same-sex marriage would lead to “grooming” and child sexual exploitation: “Children have always been under demonic attack because they represent a new generation. But this evil attack is being unmasked now under the “Respect for Marriage” bill like never before. It will put a target on children in at-risk families to be groomed for abuse and makes this molestation legal—if done within the confines of “marriage.”

“This level of debauchery has always been the goal. Our nation is on the cusp of making sexual abuse against children legal,” Stavers said.

The ADF and FRC are raising alarm over the bill saying that the legislation poses a threat to religious liberty. A conservative right-wing religious journal, the official news media of the Missouri Baptist Convention, cautioned that both ADF and FRC, labeling those groups as faith-based policy experts, stated the bill “shows great disrespect for marriage, and intolerance for those who hold a traditional or biblical worldview.” The bill “is an intentional attack on the religious freedom of millions of Americans with sincerely held beliefs about marriage, based on dictates of faith in God and His revealed Truth.”

Family Research Council president Tony Perkins released the following statement after the “Respect for Marriage” Act passed the first step in a full Senate vote for passage or defeat:

“The U.S. Senate is making a mockery of marriage as it tramples on a foundational right — religious freedom of the individual. Whether by the Court or by the Congress, truth cannot be altered. Regardless of the action of Congress, there are millions of Americans who will remain steadfast in their love for their fellow human being, by remaining committed to these truths: that marriage is ordained by God and men and women are created in His image.”

Stavers in his email and public statements noted: “Alfred Kinsey’s [See note below] work is being used to destroy marriage, replacing that honorable estate with perversion and child sexual abuse … just as Kinsey intended. This is their end goal—to legalize this perversion and to silence the opposition.

HR 8404 is built on the foundation of Kinsey. This bill that will expand child-bride, same-sex and pedophiliac “marriages” in every state—is scheduled for debate and more votes on MONDAY!”

The amplification of the hate-filled rhetoric comes as the LGBTQ+ community is coming to terms with another horrific act of violence, this time in Colorado Springs, resulting in the death of five people at the LGBTQ+ nightclub Club Q.

Incoming HRC President Kelley Robinson, in an interview with the Blade’s White House correspondent Chris Kane, cautioned:

“What we saw this past year is that our opposition gets intersectionality,” Robinson said. “They are coming for us, for all of us,” she said, citing as examples the Supreme Court’s decision revoking Americans’ constitutional right to abortion, the hateful rhetoric of Fox News host Tucker Carlson, and recent spate of statewide anti-LGBTQ bills.

“They are launching an intersectional attack against us and trying to divide our power,” she said. “And we are going to fight back together, because ultimately we are stronger together.”

One organization that had long opposed same-sex marriage had an abrupt reversal of its decades long held views. The Salt Lake Tribune reported that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints battled any effort to legalize same-sex marriage as a threat to society, one that ultimately could destroy families.

This week, however, the Utah-based faith issued a stunning statement, supporting a proposed federal law that would codify same-sex marriage, the Tribune reported.

In its news release, the church reiterated its doctrine that marriage is between a man and a woman but embraced the Respect for Marriage Act, which includes “appropriate religious freedom protections while respecting the law and preserving the rights of our LGBTQ brothers and sisters.”

Editor’s Note: Alfred Charles Kinsey was an American sexologist, biologist, and professor of entomology and zoology who, in 1947, founded the Institute for Sex Research at Indiana University, now known as the Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender, and Reproduction.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Research/Study

Libs of TikTok is going beyond anti-LGBTQ attacks

Raichik has publicly pushed the white nationalist “great replacement” conspiracy theory & posted about a so-called “planned invasion”

Published

on

Graphic by Molly Butler for Media Matters

By Camden Carter | WASHINGTON – Chaya Raichik, who started the Libs of TikTok social media accounts known for anti-LGBTQ posts with context-free clips and videos that are regularly followed by harassment and threats of violence, recently told journalist Taylor Lorenz the U.S. is “importing people who want to destroy America” and is “bringing them in to replace us.”

Raichik’s comments to Lorenz mirror a dogma that has been pushed in right-wing media over the past decade: Migrants are “invaders” who are being “imported” by Democrats to “replace” white voters — also known as the “great replacement” conspiracy theory.

As the 2024 election approaches, right-wing media have renewed their push to convince voters that an “invasion” is unfolding at the U.S. southern border and violent crime is rampant across the country. Simultaneously, Libs of TikTok has seemingly expanded its focus to include fearmongering about immigration and violent crime. In these posts, she has used context-free clips and videos, alleging migrants and Black people are committing heinous crimes in the U.S.

Libs of TikTok has a history of posting hateful anti-LGBTQ content, some of which has been linked to harassment and violent threats

  • The Libs of TikTok social media accounts have spread anti-immigrant bigotry
  • In the last few months, Libs of TikTok has made numerous posts pushing “invasion” rhetoric, including spreading the debunked narrative that migrants are a danger to the U.S. Many of Libs of TikTok’s posts use single incidents of crime to assert that undocumented migrants are “harming Americans” and “putting Americans’ lives in danger.”
    • Florida Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis even criticized the account “for lying about FL law,” in regards to immigrants and drivers’ licenses. The initial post, which was viewed at least 2.9 million times, claimed that “Apparently FL also gives illegals drivers licenses! Biden’s open borders allows v*olent criminals to terrorize Americans.” In a response post on X, DeSantis emphasized that the account “got community noted for lying” and said the post is among “attempts to generate clicks and engagement farm.” Libs of TikTok also posted this claim on Instagram, earning thousands of likes. [Twitter/X, 3/13/243/12/24; Instagram, 3/13/24]
    • Libs of TikTok posted a video of a group of migrants supposedly crossing a river in Eagle Pass, Texas, and claimed that it showed “someone is giving migrants GPS coordinates to invade our country,” arguing that “the invasion at the border is a coordinated plan.” [Instagram, 11/27/23
    • In a video that supposedly showed “a group of mostly military-age Chinese nationals entering our Country illegally,” Libs of TikTok claimed that “this is a planned invasion.” Right-wing student organization Turning Point USA Events commented on the post, writing, “100% planned.” [Instagram, 12/4/23, accessed 3/7/24]
    • Libs of TikTok posted with a caption claiming that “Illegals are invading our country and harming Americans!” The caption accompanied a photo of a person whom the post referred to as an “an illegal from Haiti” who had supposedly been “arrested for r*ping a developmentally disabled person.” [Instagram, 1/22/24]
    • Libs of TikTok posted a claim that “Haitian cannibal gangs coming soon to a city near you! Joe Biden’s America.” The post, which seemingly refers to claims related to a falsely captioned video spreading on social media, also shared another post from TPUSA’s Charlie Kirk about anticipated “mass migration” of Haitians to the U.S. [Twitter/X, 3/12/24; Snopes, 3/13/24]
    • On X and Instagram, Libs of TikTok claimed that “local woke courts” released a man from El Salvador who supposedly killed a 2-year-old, asking, “How many more people need to die before Biden does something about our nonexistent border?!” [Twitter/X, 2/27/24; Instagram, 2/29/24]
    • In response to an X user claiming the Biden “administration is never going to secure the border regardless of the number of crimes they commit,” Libs of TikTok responded, “Because they need their new voters.” The X user had been commenting on Libs of TikTok’s post about the “local woke courts.” [Twitter/X, 2/27/24]
    • In another post, Libs of TikTok claimed that “Biden’s open border is leading to crimes all over the country and putting Americans’ lives in danger. We have no idea who’s in our country.” The post claimed that three men — whom Libs of TikTok referred to as “Mexicans” — had been caught “recruiting other illegals to commit theft for fake IDs.” [Instagram, 2/2/24]
    • Libs of TikTok has posted individual acts of violence and fearmongered about migrants committing crimes at least 7 other times on Instagram and X. One of those posts claimed that “Biden’s border policies allow v*olent criminals, pedos, and r*pists to put Americans’ lives in danger!” [Instagram, 1/30/242/14/2412/11/23; Twitter/X, 2/27/242/28/242/27/242/27/24
  • Libs of TikTok has also pushed anti-Black narratives and claimed that white people are being demonized in mainstream media
  • In addition to pushing anti-immigrant rhetoric, Libs of TikTok has also been posting about isolated cases of Black people allegedly committing violent crimes against white people, arguing that such cases aren’t reported by media outlets because they “don’t fit the narrative.” While no doubt tragic, these incidents are not representative of the larger reality of crime in America, and white supremacists have historically used instances of Black crime to push their bigotry.
    • In one post, Libs of TikTok claimed that a scene from a Netflix show “demonizes white people,” adding, “They’re injecting anti-white racism into movies.” [Instagram, 12/22/23]In another post, the account claimed that the gun used in the Kansas City Chiefs Super Bowl parade shooting had been “stolen” and that because the alleged shooters “weren’t white” the public “won’t hear about this story from the MSM [mainstream media] because it doesn’t fit their narrative.” In reality, mainstream outlets extensively covered the shooting, though they did not reveal certain details about the suspected shooters because they were juveniles. [Twitter, 2/21/24; NBC, 2/20/24; CNN, 2/14/24; Associated Press, 2/16/24]Libs of TikTok claimed in another post that “you won’t hear about this story” of an alleged incident of a Black person murdering a white person from the mainstream media because it “doesn’t fit the narrative.” This story was in fact reported by local media, as well as several larger outlets. [Instagram, 2/20/24; New York Post, 2/18/24; Daily Mail, 2/19/24; WISN, 2/16/24; Fox 6 Milwaukee, 2/16/24]In other posts, Libs of TikTok highlighted incidents of nonwhite suspects supposedly killing white law enforcement officers. [Twitter, 2/21/24; Instagram, 2/18/242/19/24
    Other far-right social media accounts on Instagram that similarly post about isolated incidents of crimes supposedly committed by nonwhite suspects to promote racist stereotypes have avoided moderation from social media platforms by leaving it to the audience to glean the implied racist narrative.
  • The Libs of TikTok social media accounts have historically spread vile hatred and misinformation about LGBTQ people, which has been linked to harassment and threats of violence against at least 39 institutions, events, or individuals. The account once mocked a trans murder victim, and it has repeatedly equated being LGBTQ with sexually “grooming” children. On her personal account, Raichik has also falsely claimed that there is an “epidemic” of trans people committing violence. [Media Matters, 11/2/231/23/23; Twitter/X, 2/12/24]
  • Libs of TikTok has amassed a robust social media following, with more than 2.9 million followers on X (formerly Twitter) and nearly 500,000 followers on Instagram. The account has been temporarily suspended on multiple platforms. It remains on Facebook and Instagram, even though some of its posts seemingly violate Meta’s content moderation policies. [Media Matters, 10/3/228/18/22, Twitter/X, accessed 3/7/24; Instagram, accessed 3/7/24]

************************************************************************************

The preceding article & research study was previously published by Media Matters for America and is republished with permission.

Continue Reading

Research/Study

New MAP Report: The far right’s battle to control America

The far-right forces attacking diverse freedoms across the nation ultimately want to create a rigid, restrictive society

Published

on

Screenshot/YouTube

BOULDER, Colo. – Across virtually every aspect of life, people’s freedoms are under assault in the United States. The forces attacking these diverse freedoms ultimately want to create a rigid, restrictive society  according to their worldview only, with little room for  those of different beliefs, values, or expression.

Amid a continuing onslaught of political attacks on LGBTQ people, abortion access, the right to vote, and much more, the Movement Advancement Project (MAP) released a new report that describes the web of attacks on virtually every area of American’s lives, including who people can be, what they can do with their bodies, and how to live their lives.

“These varied attacks may seem disparate and disconnected, but in fact they are part of a coordinated campaign. The goal is to force all of us into lockstep with far-right extremists’ narrow and exclusionary view of the world,” said Tessa Juste, a researcher at Movement Advancement Project.

MAP’s new report, Freedom Under Fire: the Far Right’s Battle to Control Americaconnects the dots on extremist politicians’ attempts to fundamentally remake this country.  These attacks affect nearly every aspect of our lives, including the following: 

Restrictions on health care and the right to make decisions about one’s body  

  • Lawmakers want to decide what kind of health care people can receive, including limiting the ability to get an abortion, receive medical care as a transgender person, and access preventative care like contraception and PrEP.  

Restrictions on the freedom of ideas and the ability to get a comprehensive education 

  • Recently passed laws include censor what schools can teach about a range of important topics such as slavery and the Holocaust, and about the contributions of people of color and LGBTQ people. Similarly, the surge in banning books from public libraries and schools limits the ability to learn about topics the far right disagrees with.  

Restrictions on the freedom of travel and the ability to be in public places 

Restrictions on accurate legal recognition of people’s identities 

  • Attacks include making it harder, if not impossible, for people to obtain ID documents. This puts transgender people, undocumented immigrants, and others at risk and limits their ability to move through daily life.  

Restrictions on freedom of the press and freedom of expression 

  • Despite the First Amendment as a core principle, attacks in this area include policies that limit and punish free expression and that infringe on freedoms of the press, speech, and protest. Efforts to force journalists to register with the state, to restrict the right to protest, to ban drag shows, and to remove LGBTQ Pride flags from public spaces speak to the pervasiveness of these efforts. 

Restricting the right to vote and participate in free, fair elections 

  • Far-right politicians are attacking the cornerstone of our democracy with a range of restrictions on the right to vote. Targeted efforts disenfranchise younger voters and voters of color and limit people’s ability to elect leaders to represent their values. Further, even elected officials who advocate for their constituents’ freedoms have been censured, trying to silence them. 

“These attacks are a deeply connected part of a broad, coordinated effort to strip people of their basic freedoms and to enact authoritarian state control over American life. The forces behind these attacks want to create a rigid society that conforms to a Christian nationalist worldview that demands obedience and leaves no room for individuality. The reality is that this harms people across all backgrounds, religions, and political beliefs,” said Juste. 

For additional research and analysis, see the following reports from MAP: 

******************************************************************************************

MAP’s mission is to provide independent and rigorous research, insight and communications that help speed equality and opportunity for all. MAP works to ensure that all people have a fair chance to pursue health and happiness, earn a living, take care of the ones they love, be safe in their communities, and participate in civic life. 

Continue Reading

Research/Study

Gallup Poll: 7.6% of adults in the U.S. identify as LGBTQ+

Increases in LGBTQ+ identification in recent years have occurred as members of Gen Z and the millennial generation have entered adulthood

Published

on

Graphic by the Hlliburton Foundation

WASHINGTON – Researchers from the Gallup Polling organization released the results of the latest Gallup Poll that LGBTQ+ identification among adults continues to grow, with 7.6% of the population in the United States now identifying as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or some other sexual orientation besides heterosexual.

The current figure is up from 5.6% four years ago and 3.5% in 2012, Gallup’s first year of measuring sexual orientation and transgender identity.

Graphic via Gallup Poll

According to Gallup Polling:

These results are based on aggregated data from 2023 Gallup telephone surveys, encompassing interviews with more than 12,000 Americans aged 18 and older. In each survey, Gallup asks respondents whether they identify as heterosexual, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or something else. Overall, 85.6% say they are straight or heterosexual, 7.6% identify with one or more LGBTQ+ groups, and 6.8% decline to respond.

Bisexual adults make up the largest proportion of the LGBTQ+ population — 4.4% of U.S. adults and 57.3% of LGBTQ+ adults say they are bisexual. Gay and lesbian are the next-most-common identities, each representing slightly over 1% of U.S. adults and roughly one in six LGBTQ+ adults. Slightly less than 1% of U.S. adults and about one in eight LGBTQ+ adults are transgender. The most commonly volunteered LGBTQ+ identities are pansexual and asexual, mentioned by less than 2% of LGBTQ+ adults each.

Graphic via Gallup Poll

LGBTQ+ identification higher among Gen Z

Increases in LGBTQ+ identification in recent years have occurred as members of Generation Z and the millennial generation have entered adulthood. Adults in these younger generations are far more likely than those in older generations to identify as LGBTQ+.

Researchers reported that overall, each younger generation is about twice as likely as the generation that preceded it to identify as LGBTQ+. More than one in five Gen Z adults, ranging in age from 18 to 26 in 2023, identify as LGBTQ+, as do nearly one in 10 millennials (aged 27 to 42). The percentage drops to less than 5% of Generation X, 2% of baby boomers and 1% of the Silent Generation.

Graphic via Gallup Poll

Continue Reading

Research/Study

YouTube lets right-wing creators misgender & deadname trans folks

Right-wing YouTubers & Daily Wire personalities with millions of subscribers regularly misgender and deadname trans people in content with ads

Published

on

Graphic by Molly Butler for Media Matters

By Payton Armstrong | WASHINGTON – YouTube is allowing right-wing creators with millions of subscribers to misgender and deadname trans people on its platform — and monetizing that content through advertising. 

YouTube has claimed for years to be committed to protecting trans people from hate speech and harassment on the platform while resisting advocates’ calls to explicitly prohibit intentionally deadnaming or misgendering trans people — forms of harassment that involve using a trans person’s former name or incorrect pronouns. 

Media Matters reviewed the YouTube channels of popular right-wing pundits including The Daily Wire’s Matt Walsh, Ben Shapiro, Michael Knowles, and Candace Owens and found that they have repeatedly misgendered and deadnamed high-profile trans people, including minors. What’s more, their content misidentifying trans people was frequently monetized, meaning that YouTube and the creators likely profited from this bigotry.

Though YouTube has temporarily suspended or demonetized accounts in the past for violating its hate speech and harassment policies by promoting bigotry against LGBTQ people, the platform’s lack of explicit rules around misgendering and deadnaming has left YouTube rife with monetized anti-trans vitriol.

YouTube has unevenly penalized right-wing creators for misidentifying trans people while ignoring advocates’ calls to strengthen its hate speech policies

  • YouTube’s guidelines claim to protect trans people but as Axios reported, the platform’s inconsistent moderation of anti-trans content indicates that YouTube “doesn’t view deliberately misgendering someone, even repeatedly, as a violation” of its policies. 
  • YouTube’s hate speech and harassment policies prohibit “content that promotes violence or hatred against individuals or groups” or “targets someone with prolonged insults or slurs based on their physical traits or protected group status,” including gender identity or sexual orientation. But the platform does not explicitly mention misgendering or deadnaming in its policies. In 2022, after YouTube demonetized two videos from right-wing pundit Jordan Peterson that misgendered actor Elliot Page, Axios reported that YouTube was “actively looking at this policy,” but it appears no changes were made with respect to misgendering or deadnaming. [YouTube hate speech policy, accessed 2/13/24; YouTube harassment policy, accessed 2/13/24; Axios, 8/2/22; GLAAD, 12/11/23]
  • YouTube has resisted advocates’ calls to ban targeted deadnaming and misgendering. 
  • In 2021, 20 organizations (including Media Matters) called on YouTube to ban targeted deadnaming and misgendering trans people. In December 2023, GLAAD once again called on YouTube and other social media platforms to prohibit targeted misgendering and deadnaming. As noted by GLAAD for Tech Policy Press, “the practice of targeted misgendering and deadnaming has emerged in recent years as one of the most common modalities for expressing contempt toward trans and nonbinary people across social media platforms.” [Media Matters, 8/12/218/12/21; GLAAD, 12/11/23; Tech Policy Press, 6/7/23]
  • YouTube has stated publicly that it views “deliberate misgendering as potentially violative of its monetization” guidelines. 
  • YouTube claims to set “a higher bar for monetization,” and it deems videos ineligible for ads if their content “incites hatred against, promotes discrimination, disparages, or humiliates an individual or group of people,” including attacks based on gender identity. In June 2023, Candace Owens claimed YouTube told her that instances of misgendering individuals were considered “hateful conduct,” and a Google spokesperson told NBC News that the company, which owns YouTube, had blocked ads on “several videos on Candace Owen’s channel for violating our monetization policies, including those against hateful and derogatory content.” [YouTube content monetization policies, accessed 2/13/24; YouTube advertiser-friendly content guidelines, 2/13/24; NBC News, 6/8/23]
  • Overall, YouTube’s enforcement actions against content misidentifying trans people have been uneven — particularly for creators from right-wing outlet The Daily Wire. 
  • In April 2023, YouTube stripped Daily Wire’s Matt Walsh of advertiser revenue from his channel after he repeatedly attacked TikTok star Dylan Mulvaney with anti-trans vitriol on the platform. The channel’s monetization was restored just 90 days later despite Walsh publicly vowing not to change his behavior. Additionally, Daily Wire’s Candace Owens and Michael Knowles were temporarily suspended from YouTube for directing vitriol to LGBTQ people. On her channel prior to her suspension, Owens had said “transgenderism” is “a cancer and we should fight it,” and boasted that she could “beat up” a nonbinary naval service member. However, YouTube has allowed Owens to post other anti-LGBTQ content that appears to violate its hate speech and harassment rules. [Media Matters, 6/15/234/20/238/25/233/10/239/15/23]
  • YouTube is allowing Daily Wire personalities to seemingly profit from videos that misgender and deadname trans people
  • Matt Walsh
  • Walsh is a host for The Daily Wire and has over 2.8 million subscribers on YouTube.
    • Walsh posted a video calling for Dwyane Wade to be arrested for supporting his trans daughter, Zaya Wade — who is a minor — and he also repeatedly misgendered her, including in the video title. In the video titled “Washed Up NBA Player Sells His Son To The Trans Ideology,” Walsh claimed there is no such thing as a trans child, incorrectly referred to Zaya Wade using he/him pronouns, and said it is “emphatically not true” that “transgenderism should be affirmed.” Walsh declared that Wade “is actively leading his son into self-rejection, self-loathing, deeper and deeper confusion. He has taken his son by his hand and guided him straight over the cliff, and profited from it the whole way down. It is again pure evil. He should be shamed for it and disgraced for it. Ostracized from society, arrested. This is abuse.” The video is monetized and has over 480,000 views. [YouTube, 11/4/22, accessed 3/4/24]
    • Walsh posted a video repeatedly misgendering trans MMA fighter Alana McLaughlin. 
    • In the video — which is monetized and has over 1.4 million views — Walsh declared, “Literally every part of him is male. If they dig up his remains a hundred years from now, no matter how much of him is left, they will be able to tell that he was male.” Walsh continued arguing that “your maleness or your femaleness is one of the most ingrained, most permanent, most enduring aspects of who you are. It’s so enduring that it remains even after you die. McClaughlin will be a male even when he doesn’t exist anymore. That’s how male he is.” [YouTube, 9/14/21, accessed 3/4/24]
    • Walsh posted a video misgendering trans activist Jazz Jennings and attacked her mother for supporting her transition. 
    • During the video — which is monetized and has over 1.7 million views — Walsh used he/him pronouns for Jennings and declared to her mother: “Your son is mutilated beyond recognition and he’s gone through with the whole quote-unquote ‘sex change,’ quote-unquote ‘gender affirmation,’ medical — you know, the whole catalog, he’s got.” [YouTube, 3/20/23, accessed 3/4/24]
    • Walsh posted a video repeatedly misgendering U.S. Assistant Secretary for Health Dr. Rachel Levine and suggesting her support of trans rights “should qualify you for a mental institution or prison.” 
    • Walsh called Levine a “male” and derided her for supporting health care for trans youth, saying that her support “should qualify you for a mental institution or prison, not for a position in government.” The video is monetized and has over 50,000 views. [YouTube, 2/26/21, accessed 3/4/24]
    • Walsh posted a video misgendering Dylan Mulvaney and reality TV star Caitlyn Jenner. 
    • Walsh opened the video — which is monetized with nearly 700,000 views — calling Mulvaney and Jenner “two males” and using incorrect pronouns. [YouTube, 11/3/22, accessed 3/4/24]
    • Walsh posted a video repeatedly misgendering and deadnaming trans actor Elliot Page. 
    • Walsh used female pronouns for Page throughout the 12-minute video — which is monetized and has over 1 million views. [YouTube, 12/2/20, accessed 3/4/24]
  • Ben Shapiro
  • Shapiro is the founder of The Daily Wire and has over 6.7 million subscribers on YouTube.
    • Shapiro posted a video repeatedly misgendering and deadnaming Elliot Page — including in the video’s title — declaring that “[Elliot] Page is, was, and shall remain a woman.” 
    • (In accordance with the Trans Journalists Association style guide, Media Matters has replaced Page’s deadname in brackets in the previous quote.) Shapiro complained about using the correct pronouns for trans people generally, saying that “the media have created this bizarre standard whereby if a person declares themselves a member of the opposite gender, the entire world, especially in the media, must immediately flip on a dime, stop calling them by the name everybody knew them as, and stop calling them by their biological sex.” The video is monetized and has over 2.9 million views. [YouTube, 12/2/20, accessed 3/4/24]
    • Shapiro posted a video repeatedly misgendering two trans parents. 
    • The video piled onto a right-wing harassment campaign against two trans parents who were featured in a Facebook Watch docuseries about pregnancy. Shapiro also demeaned the parents, calling the mother “a pervert.” The video is monetized and has over 2.8 million views. [YouTube, 7/13/21, accessed 3/4/24]
  • Candace Owens
  • Owens is a host for The Daily Wire and has over 2.8 million subscribers on YouTube.
    • Owens posted a video repeatedly misgendering a trans child and urged parents to reject their child if they are trans. 
    • Owens used the incorrect pronouns for a trans child, saying that “a mother posted regarding her son, who she believes is her daughter because he has begun transitioning.” Owens said that the mother had “mutilated your once perfectly healthy, growing son over a feeling that he had,” and also compared parents’ choosing to affirm their trans children to allowing them to jump out of a window. The video is monetized and has over 130,000 views. [YouTube, 4/30/22, accessed 3/4/24]
    • Owens posted a video attacking the concept of using the correct pronouns for trans people. 
    • In the video, which is monetized and has nearly 400,000 views, Owens agreed with right-wing pundit Elijah Schaffer that being trans is “all made up in their heads,” and is “state-sponsored, this is socially sponsored, tech-sponsored mental illness.” (YouTube’s hate speech policy prohibits content including statements that an individual or group with a protected attribute “is just a form of mental illness that needs to be cured.”) [YouTube, 4/16/22, accessed 3/4/24; YouTube hate speech policy, accessed 2/13/24]
  • Michael Knowles
  • Knowles is a host for The Daily Wire and has over 1.8 million subscribers on YouTube.
    • Knowles uploaded a video repeatedly misgendering Elliot Page, including in the video’s title. 
    • Knowles also repeatedly deadnamed Page in the nearly six-minute video, even acknowledging at the beginning that he was not supposed to use Page’s deadname otherwise “this podcast is going to be taken down.” The video is monetized and has over 175,000 views. [YouTube, 12/2/20, accessed 3/4/24]
    • Knowles repeatedly misgendered Caitlyn Jenner while discussing her run for California governor, declaring he would never use her correct pronouns. 
    • Knowles stated, “I’m not going to call him her. I can’t do it because he is not a woman. And so I’m not going to pretend that he is.” Knowles also urged others to misgender trans people, saying that conservatives need to be “united in fighting this very subtle linguistic strategy.” The video is monetized and has over 125,000 views. [YouTube, 4/26/21, accessed 3/4/24]
  • Brett Cooper
  • Cooper is a host for The Daily Wire, and her YouTube channel has over 4 million subscribers.
    • Cooper posted a video misgendering trans internet personality Grant Sikes. 
    • In the video — which is monetized and has over 1 million views — Cooper attacked Sikes for trying to join a sorority, declaring that “he was so sad that he didn’t get in. You’re a man! Obviously you are not going to get into a sorority. I don’t care if you put on a skirt. … There are fraternities for you.” [YouTube, 12/1/22, accessed 3/4/24; Business Insider, 11/16/22]
    • Cooper posted a video mocking, deadnaming, and repeatedly misgendering former NCAA swimmer Lia Thomas, who has been the subject of a yearslong right-wing media hate campaign. 
    • Cooper questioned, “What does Lia Thomas actually think he is when he’s calling himself a woman?” During the video — which is monetized and has over 650,000 views — Cooper described Thomas as a “man” and used the incorrect pronouns. [YouTube, 6/1/22, accessed 3/4/24; Media Matters, 2/2/22]
  • Other right-wing YouTubers with millions of subscribers have seemingly profited from monetized videos that misgender and direct vitriol toward trans people
  • Hodgetwins
  • Keith and Kevin Hodge, who go by the “Hodgetwins,” are YouTubers who have nearly 3 million subscribers.
    • The Hodgetwins posted a video mocking and referring to a trans person as “it.” 
    • The pundits rejected the notion of using a trans person’s correct pronouns, complaining, “They say that we are misgendering them when they have misgendered themselves.” They also said that LGBTQ people should not be allowed to get married or adopt children, claiming that “where it went wrong is the whole pronoun thing.” The video is monetized and has over 250,000 views. [YouTube, 12/29/23, accessed 3/4/24]
    • The Hodgetwins posted a video repeatedly misgendering a trans person and seemingly justifying violence against them. 
    • Referring to a trans woman, the Hodgetwins said that “he tricked another dude” and that, “it’s all fun and games online but can’t do that in real life, bad things happens — when you question or attack someone’s sexuality, make them confused, and you back them in a corner and you got all that cock showing? I mean, right to your instincts.” The video is monetized and has over 200,000 views. [YouTube, 12/29/23, accessed 3/4/24]
    • The Hodgetwins posted a video repeatedly misgendering Zaya Wade, who they noted was 14 at the time of the video. 
    • In the video — which has over 300,000 views and is monetized — the commentators also misgendered Zaya’s significant other and declared, “I don’t like playing that game though, with the pronouns. I ain’t playing that game.” [YouTube, 4/28/22, accessed 3/4/24]
  • Brandon Tatum
  • Tatum is a right-wing commentator with over 2.8 million subscribers on YouTube.
    • Tatum posted a video repeatedly misgendering Zaya Wade, including in the video’s title. 
    • The video titled “Dwayne Wade’s EX SPEAKS OUT After TRANSITIONING Son Zaya Wade” is monetized with over 1.4 million views. Tatum repeatedly referred to Zaya Wade as “D. Wade’s little boy,” and said that her father “should be ashamed of himself” because “what man would do his son like this?” [YouTube, 11/3/22, accessed 3/4/24]
    • Tatum posted another video misgendering Zaya Wade, disparaging her physical appearance and claiming that Dwyane Wade “pushes grooming” by affirming her gender identity. 
    • Tatum said, “We’re sick of y’all grooming these kids — you should be ashamed of yourself if you’re running around doing what D. Wade [is] about to do,” and claimed that the former NBA star “emasculated your boy.” Tatum claimed, “Zaya is going to be 6’8 with a size 40 shoe — ain’t no man is going to want you! And they know that no man is going to want their boy.” Tatum continued, “Nobody is going to want that 6’8 big old boy with shoulders this big and he trying to wear a dress.” The video is monetized and has over 400,000 views. [YouTube, 2/27/22, accessed 3/4/24]
    • Tatum posted yet another video misgendering Zaya Wade and suggested she would either end up attempting suicide or “doing pornography.” 
    • Tatum repeatedly referred to Zaya as a “boy,” and said that “I’m predicting that in the future, this boy is going to have tremendous issues. This boy is going to have a tremendous identity crisis. … It’s going to come out in oversexuality — which means he’s going to go to doing pornography and posing in nude stuff and being overly sexualized, or it’s going to come out in a huge amount of depression and suicide. I’m not saying actual suicide, but at least depression and suicide attempts or suicidal ideations.” Tatum also said that Zaya may now be able to “pass for a girl,” but “when them cheek lines start getting real strong and you look like you’ve been chewing tobacco all day, it’s not going to be cute.” The video is monetized and has over 480,000 views. [YouTube, 9/20/22, accessed 3/4/24]

*****************************************************************************************

The preceding piece was previously published by Media Matters for America, a Los Angeles Blade media partner and is republished with permission.

Continue Reading

News Analysis

Transphobic J.K. Rowling calls trans journalist “A man…cosplaying”

The posts will likely become the clearest examples people point to in the future when asked about the author’s transphobia

Published

on

Transphobic British writer J.K. Rowling in a 2020 BBC interview. (Screenshot/YouTube BBC)

By Erin Reed | WASHINGTON – On Monday, J.K. Rowling, while advocating for banning transgender women from women’s restrooms, called transgender journalist India Willoughby “a man reveling in his misogynistic performance of what he thinks ‘woman’ means.”

She then later stated that Willoughby is “cosplaying” her gender identity. The author had previously made several remarks widely seen as transphobic and hateful. However, these latest remarks are some of the most brazen from the childhood author, who has since doubled down after receiving heavy criticism.

Rowling took to Twitter on Monday to call trans journalist and broadcaster India Willoughby “a man,” “cosplaying a male fantasy,” the latest in a long list of transphobic remarks from the author.

Her post targeting Willoughby and her transgender allies came after she compared allowing transgender people to use bathrooms with being permissive about pedophile teachers. She then advocated for forcing transgender women to use men’s restrooms later in the post. When a commenter questioned her stance by asking, “So you are saying this lady should use the men’s locker room then?” she responded, “There isn’t a lady in this , just a man reveling in his misogynistic performance of what he thinks a ‘woman’ means.” She later added that Willoughby is “cosplaying a misogynistic male fantasy,” a claim that stems from the notion that transgender people are “fetishists.”

You can see her posts here:

JK Rowling calling India Willoughby “a man” [top tweet] and saying she is “cosplaying a misogynistic male fantasy” [bottom]

The posts will likely become the clearest examples people point to in the future when asked about the author’s transphobia. In recent years, Rowling has made increasingly hostile remarks towards transgender people.

Previous instances of statements and remarks targeting trans people include:

Despite these examples, some columnists such as EJ Rosetta have claimed that they have searched for “12 weeks” to find transphobic quotes and could find none, an opinion echoed by UK paper The Daily Mail.

The reaction to and condemnation of her remarks were swift. Alejandra Caraballo, a transgender Harvard Law clinical instructor, said that Rowling “openly attacked a transgender woman solely for being trans,” adding that it was “pure bigotry.”

Transgender actor Nicole Maines stated that anyone who “continues to support, employ, and collaborate with Rowling is directly harming transgender people globally.” Jo Maugham, director of the Good Law Project, asked, “If you don’t ‘pass’ you are the butt of jokes. If you do pass you are ‘cosplaying a misogynistic fantasy’. So how are you to be yourself in this world?”

Even Tom Harwood, Deputy Political Editor at the right-leaning news outlet GBNews, noted, “J.K. Rowling has moved a long way from her original framing of her views back in 2020: ‘I respect every trans person’s right to live in any way that feels authentic and comfortable to them.’”

India Willoughby herself responded, “Genuinely disgusted by this. Grotesque transphobia, which is upsetting. I am every bit as much a woman as JK Rowling. Recognised in law, and by everyone I interact with every day. The debate about whether JK Rowling is a transphobe is over.”

Despite this, prominent anti-trans figures in the United Kingdom have continued to defend her, asserting that her comments were “not transphobic.” This group includes notable “gender critical” activist Maya Forstater and online anti-trans activist Jack David. Rowling herself doubled down, stating, “accurately sexing trans-identified men” is “not discrimination.”

For transgender individuals, however, this latest incident will serve as a potent example of transphobic remarks in future discussions.

***************************************************************************

Erin Reed is a transgender woman and researcher who tracks anti-LGBTQ+ legislation around the world and helps people become better advocates for their queer family, friends, colleagues, and community. Reed also is a social media consultant and public speaker.

The preceding post was previously published at Erin in the Morning and is republished with permission.

Continue Reading

Research/Study

Race & LGBTQ+ issues negatively impact K-12 classrooms

50% of K-12 teachers say students shouldn’t learn about gender but should learn that the legacy of slavery still impacts Black Americans

Published

on

Los Angeles Blade graphic

LOS ANGELES, Calif. – As debate rages over K-12 classroom curriculum nationally over forced outing of trans students and accompanying bathroom bans, coupled with bans on books that deal with race and LGBTQ+ issues, a recent survey by Pew Research found that a sizeable share of teachers (41%) say these debates have had a negative impact on their ability to do their job.

Pew researchers found that 71% of teachers say teachers themselves don’t have enough influence over what’s taught in public schools in their area.

In turn, a majority of teachers (58%) say their state government has too much influence over this. And more say the federal government, the local school board and parents have too much influence than say they don’t have enough.

The survey of 2,531 U.S. public K-12 teachers was conducted from Oct. 17-Nov. 14, 2023, and also includes some findings from a survey of U.S. teens ages 13 to 17 and a survey of U.S. adults.

Key Findings of those two groups includes:

  • 38% of teens say they feel comfortable when topics related to racism or racial inequality come up in class (among those who say these topics have come up). A smaller share (29%) say they feel comfortable when topics related to sexual orientation or gender identity come up.
  • Among the American public, more say parents should be able to opt their children out of learning about LGBTQ issues than say the same about topics related to race (54% vs. 34%).

The Pew researchers also asked public K-12 teachers what they think students should learn in school about two topics in particular:

  • Whether the legacy of slavery still affects the position of Black people in American society today.
  • Whether a person’s gender can be different from or is determined by their sex at birth.

The legacy of slavery

Most teachers (64%) say students should learn that the legacy of slavery still affects the position of Black people in American society today.

About a quarter (23%) say students should learn that slavery is part of American history but no longer affects the position of Black people in American society. Just 8% say students shouldn’t learn about this topic in school at all.

Majorities of elementary, middle and high school teachers say students should learn that the legacy of slavery still has an impact on the lives of Black Americans, the researchers found.

Gender identity

When it comes to teaching about gender identity – specifically whether a person’s gender can be different from or is determined by their sex assigned at birth – half of public K-12 teachers say students shouldn’t learn about this in school.

A third of teachers think students should learn that someone can be a boy or a girl even if that is different from the sex they were assigned at birth.

A smaller share (14%) say students should learn that whether someone is a boy or a girl is determined by their sex at birth.

Views differ among elementary, middle and high school teachers. But teachers across the three levels are more likely to say students should learn that a person’s gender can be different from their sex at birth than to say students should learn gender is determined by sex at birth.

Most elementary school teachers (62%) say students shouldn’t learn about gender identity in school. This is much larger than the shares of middle and high school teachers who say the same (45% and 35%).

How teachers’ views compare with the public’s views

Like teachers, Americans overall are more likely to say parents should be able to opt their children out of learning about sexual orientation or gender identity (54%) than to say they should be able to opt their children out of learning about racism or racial inequality (34%).

Across both issues, Americans overall are somewhat more likely than teachers to say parents should be able to opt their children out.

Researchers also found that most teachers who’ve been teaching for more than a year (68%) say the topics of sexual orientation and gender identity rarely or never came up in their classroom in the 2022-23 school year. About one-in-five (21%) say these topics came up sometimes, and 8% say they came up often or extremely often.

Topics related to racism or racial inequality come up more frequently. A majority of teachers (56%) say these topics came up at least sometimes in their classroom, with 21% saying they came up often or extremely often.

Continue Reading

Research/Study

Problematic new “Finnish study” shows trans care saves lives

The study is being used to claim that trans care is not lifesaving. Experts say this is false- the study itself shows trans care saves lives

Published

on

EIM/Los Angeles Blade graphic

By Erin Reed | HELSINKI, Finland – A new study in Finland, which is garnering attention among anti-trans activists, is being used to claim that gender-affirming care “is not lifesaving.” Journalist Benjamin Ryan explicitly stated this claim when discussing his article published in The New York Post.

However, leading researchers, including Dr. Meredithe McNamara from the Yale University School of Medicine and epidemiologist Gideon Meyerowitz-Katz, argue that the study’s methodology fails to support this conclusion.

They point out critical flaws, such as the study controlling for the variable it aims to measure and relying on outdated data from a time before “gender dysphoria” was even recognized as a diagnosis. Moreover, a detailed examination of the study reveals that, despite these issues, gender-affirming care likely reduces the risk of suicide—those who do not receive care face a risk three times higher than controls. Surprisingly, the study’s authors do not address this finding.

The new study examines Finnish health data from 1996 to 2022, exploring the connection between gender-affirming care and suicide. Numerous studies have demonstrated that gender-affirming care significantly reduces suicidality, with some showing a decrease in suicidality by up to 73%.

However, this study introduces an additional factor: visits to psychiatric specialists. It concludes that, after adjusting for psychiatric specialist visits, the suicide rates among those who undergo medical gender reassignment “did not statistically significantly differ from that of controls.” Therefore, the study asserts that the data “does not support the claims that [medical gender reassignment] is necessary to prevent suicide.”

Shortly after publication, nearly every organization opposed to gender affirming care publicized the findings widely. Genspect, an organization which has engaged in online teasing of transgender youth, stated the study put the “suicide myth” to rest.

Transgender Trend used the study to claim that “medical transition is ineffective in preventing suicide.” Leor Sapir of the Manhattan Institute used the study to claim “the suicide narrative is baseless.” Meanwhile, journalist Benjamin Ryan published a story in the New York Post and claimed the study showed “gender-transition treatment is not life saving.”

A closer examination of the study reveals that it does not support such conclusions. Now, in a thorough and comprehensive fact-check, leading experts refute these assertions by highlighting critical flaws that directly oppose these claims.

Ultimately, despite these shortcomings, the study actually suggests that gender-affirming care is lifesaving. This is despite statistical missteps and issues with data sources which, whether intentionally or not, obscure the conclusion supported by the extensive body of research indicating that gender-affirming care saves lives and decreases suicidality.

The Study Looks At Data From Before “Gender Dysphoria” Existed As A Diagnosis And Likely Includes Many People Who Are Not Transgender

The majority of data within the Finish study does not actually look at gender dysphoria, but instead looks at gender identity clinic referrals from 1996 to today. Importantly, gender dysphoria did not exist as a diagnosis until 2013. Prior to 2013, “gender identity disorder” covered a broad range of gender-related issues and was considered pathological in nature. People referred to a gender identity clinic prior to 2013 could include, for instance, feminine boys or masculine girls whose gendered behavior did not conform to social standards of the time.

Importantly, prior to 2013, you did not need to desire “to be the other sex” in order to be diagnosed with gender identity disorder. Gender dysphoria as a diagnosis in the DSM-V, however, now requires this desire. You can see the new criteria here:

In the new Finish study, this is particularly problematic because the vast majority of people included in the study do not obtain gender affirming care – only 38% do. Though we do not know how many people referred fell under the old diagnostic criteria or the new diagnostic criteria, this suggests that many likely did not identify as transgender.

This could have been partially controlled for, according to Dr. McNamara, by including a “year of diagnosis” variable, to account for changes in diagnostic criteria, but such a variable was not included.

The Study Overcontrolled For Suicide In A Fatal Way

A central assertion of the study is that suicide rates are unaffected by gender dysphoria or gender-affirming care. To support this claim, the authors control for visits to psychological specialists. Dr. McNamara, however, identifies this as a critical flaw “amounting to a tautology.” Essentially, by adjusting for suicide in research aimed at determining the effect of gender-affirming care on suicide, the authors inadvertently controlled for the very outcome they sought to measure. This is because individuals at higher risk of suicide are more likely to have had “psychiatric contact.”

In an illustrative example, Dr. McNamara compares controlling for psychiatric contact in a study on suicide to controlling for variables such as “hours worked” in a study on the gender pay gap and using it to claim that a gender pay gap does not exist. If women work less hours due to gendered expectations, then controlling for hours worked “controls for the pay gap itself because they are so intrinsically connected.” Despite this, there have been similar attempts to over-control for the gender pay gap in order to try to erase claims that it exists.

One can imagine several more examples of controlling for variables that actually measure the outcome. If one wanted to erase the impact of CO2 on climate change, for instance, you could control for ice thickness and claim that it’s actually polar ice that determines the temperature of the earth rather than CO2 output, even though ice thickness and temperature are intrinsically connected. If you wanted to erase the impact of smoking on death, you could control for specialist doctor visits while claiming that “it’s actually visits to the doctor that predict death, not smoking.”

Therefore, it’s not surprising that the study concludes psychological specialist visits correlate with suicide deaths, causing the connection with gender-affirming care and gender dysphoria to seemingly vanish. This overlooks the evident fact that those at higher risk of suicide are indeed more likely to have interactions with psychological specialists and amounts to a critical flaw in the article’s central premise.

The Paper Still Shows Trans Care Saves Lives

While the vast majority of the article only looks at those referred to Finland’s gender identity clinic, the impact of gender affirming care is tucked away in one paragraph and is the only part of the results section where the researchers do not include a table comparing the model with and without psychological referrals.

See the following excerpt (emphasis added):

To explore the role of GR, models accounting for sex, year of birth, and psychiatric treatment were repeated by dividing the GR group into those who had and those who had not proceeded to GR. Adjusted HRs for all-cause mortality were 1.4 (95% CI 0.6 to 3.3; p=0.5) in the GR- group and 0.7 (95% CI 0.2 to 2.0; p=0.5) in the GR+ group, as compared with the controls. Adjusted HRs for suicide mortality were 3.2 (95% CI 1.0 to 10.2; p=0.05) and 0.8 (95% CI 0.2 to 4.0; p=0.8), respectively.

Essentially, the paragraph states that for suicide, those who did not receive gender affirming care saw a 3x higher suicide rate than controls – and this is with overcontrolling for psychological treatment visits. Those who did receive care had no significant difference in suicide rates from controls. Dr. Meyerowitz-Katz, epidemiologist, stated of these findings, “The authors in their discussion focus on the fact that this difference was not statistically significant (presumably the p-value was 0.051-0.054), but that’s not a useful distinction. There’s a lot of uncertainty here, but the increased risk is still remarkable!”

Notably, this is the only section where the researchers withhold the model that doesn’t include visits to psychological specialists. It’s likely that the correlation between receiving gender-affirming care and a decreased suicide risk would be even more pronounced in a model free from the issue of overcontrolling.

If the researchers had presented such a finding, it would fundamentally challenge the basis of their paper… that gender-affirming care indeed saves lives. Even in attempts to dilute this relationship with confounding variables, the signal around gender affirming care remains strong!

Additional Major Limitations And Issues

Several other shortcomings challenge anti-trans interpretations of the study. Although the study discusses adolescents, the median referral age is 19, with more than half of the participants older than this. While 19-year-olds technically fall within the “adolescent” category, the discourse around gender-affirming care predominantly centers on individuals under 18 and the importance of early intervention. For the population examined in the study, many of the critical effects of puberty and unaddressed gender dysphoria would have already manifested. Consequently, the study lacks any basis to assert the impact of gender affirming care on trans youth.

The study also asserts that “gender dysphoria does not seem to predict suicide mortality” and organizations like SEGM handwave the positive gender affirming care findings by stating that suicide is “low” for gender dysphoric trans people. On a cursory glance, one might accept this claim – only 20 suicides are recorded in the Finnish dataset. However, this claim stretches far beyond what the study can actually conclude, as it solely focuses on individuals who have been formally referred for specialized gender identity services.

This approach neglects a significant portion of the population: youths with non-affirming parents, those who haven’t disclosed their gender identity to their parents, and individuals not seeking a formal diagnosis – all groups that may be much more likely to experience suicide. Claims suggesting low suicide rates among those with gender dysphoria overlook transgender individuals in unsupportive environments, who are seldom if ever recorded as “transgender” in any official death records.

Dr. Riittakerttu Kaltiala And Her History With Anti-Trans Activism

Lastly and separately from issues with the study itself, a disclosure issue exists with at least one of the study’s authors. Dr. Riittakerttu Kaltiala is the chief psychiatrist at Finland’s Tampere University Hospital and has a long history with allegations of misconduct in her hospital’s gender clinic. She has regularly been involved with the anti-trans organization SEGM and was one of the main witnesses called to defend a gender affirming care ban proposed by the Florida Board of Medicine. Notably, the Southern Poverty Law Center has mapped out extensive ties between SEGM and anti-trans extremist groups, including shared funding streams with the Heritage Foundation and the Alliance Defending Freedom. Similarly, the Florida Board of Medicine was stacked by Governor Ron DeSantis to ban care.

Dr. Kaltiala’s patients have shared stories of conversion therapy and abusive statements. Finnish LGBTQ+ platform, Kehrääjä, has outlined many stories of trans people’s negative experiences with Dr. Kaltiala’s clinic, including accusations of transgender identity being a fetish, telling patients that bottom surgery “seldom functions correctly,” and trans men being being denied care for being too short or having hobbies that are “too girlish.” Numerous patients report being addressed by their old names in the clinic, and Dr. Kaltiala opposes allowing trans youth to change their gender markers and IDs. Her clinic even allegedly reported a patient’s parents to child protective services and filed a criminal complaint when they obtained care legally at another clinic.

Dr. Kaltiala cannot be characterized as an impartial medical researcher; she has emerged as a key figurehead for an anti-trans movement. She has been deeply involved with many of the key players in trans care bans. She’s appeared in a podcast by Genspect, an entity known for opposing gender affirming care up to the age of 25teasing transgender children on social media, and promoting Moms for Liberty—a staunchly conservative anti-LGBTQ+ “parental rights” organization in the U.S.

In her appearance on a Genspect podcast, Dr. Kaltiala was featured alongside Stella O’Malley, founder of Genspect, who has labeled trans girls as “porn induced” fetishists and stated they warrant “no empathy.” She similarly has worked with the Catholic Medical Association’s Patrick Hunter, a Desantis-handpicked Florida Board of Medicine member who was integral to the care bans in the state.

The Study Falls Far Short Of Evidence Against Trans Care

Ultimately, the study fails to demonstrate that gender-affirming care is ineffective, particularly for transgender youth, and might even contribute to the body of evidence supporting the efficacy of such care. The study contains the same deep flaws as other research that relies on outdated diagnostic criteria from a time before “gender dysphoria” was recognized as a diagnosis and transgender identities were pathologized.

Moreover, it also overcontrolled for suicide by including a variable that is implicitly highly linked to suicide—mental healthcare visits—so as to erase the impact that gender affirming care has on suicidality.

Given that the study’s cohort predominantly consists of adults, it offers little insight into the effects of gender-affirming care on transgender youth, even without these methodological flaws. Similarly, it fails to address the experiences of transgender youth with unsupportive parents who are denied a gender identity diagnosis.

Nevertheless, the study appears to be providing anti-trans activists with exactly what they need: a study that lets them make a claim, however flimsy, that “gender affirming care does not save lives.” This narrative should be approached with skepticism, especially when propagated by individuals with ties to anti-trans groups or those involved in clinics where trans patients have reported mistreatment.

Contrary to such claims, gender-affirming care is indeed life-saving and associated with reduced rates of suicidality, even in this flawed study. Assertions to the contrary are challenged by more than 50 studies that affirm the positive impact of gender-affirming care.

***************************************************************************

Erin Reed is a transgender woman and researcher who tracks anti-LGBTQ+ legislation around the world and helps people become better advocates for their queer family, friends, colleagues, and community. Reed also is a social media consultant and public speaker.

The preceding post was previously published at Erin in the Morning and is republished with permission.

Continue Reading

Research/Study

Over 90,000 satisfied responses in trans survey

Narratives of trans regret have been prevalent in anti-trans media. A recent survey of trans people shows most are satisfied with transition

Published

on

Los Angeles Blade file graphic

By Erin Reed | WASHINGTON – The early results of the 2022 U.S. Transgender Survey are in, and they are stunning: For transgender individuals who have transitioned and are living as another gender, only 3% report lower satisfaction rates, with 79% stating they are “a lot more satisfied” after transitioning.

That number is even higher for transgender people receiving gender-affirming care – 98% of transgender individuals taking hormones are more satisfied with their lives. These numbers challenge prevailing narratives in anti-trans media that transgender people experience significant degrees of regret or resentment towards their transition, including those published in The New York Times last weekend.

The survey managed to get responses from over 90,000 transgender people – more than 3 times the responses of the 2015 survey. This number represents a significant fraction of the estimated 1.6 million transgender people in the United States, and immediately becomes the largest dataset on transgender people in history. The vast majority of these transgender people report increased satisfaction, despite an increasing number of anti-trans laws passed in recent years.

These figures contradict recent media narratives, such as those published by Pamela Paul in The New York Times, suggesting that transgender individuals regret transitioning and that transition does not enhance the lives of trans people. For instance, Paul references a detransitioner under the subhead, “The Process of Transition Didn’t Make Me Feel Better.” While it is undisputed that transition does not improve outcomes for a small number of individuals, the release of this survey following The New York Times story highlights the skewed coverage, showcasing 4,500 words of regret without so much as mentioning the words “joy” or “satisfaction” experienced by most transgender individuals.

It should be clear, following the release of this data, that detransition and regret is rare and do not represent the normal transgender experience. Even the largest of the studies by Lisa Littman, Pamela Paul’s favorite “rapid onset gender dysphoria” and detransition researcher, only could recruit 100 responses from detransitioners after medical transition, excluding a slightly larger 239-response study that also included desistance and non-medical transition. This is despite a similar sample collection method, utilizing convenience sampling in common detransition forums. If detransitioners are so common, why do they seem to be so incredibly hard to find? If regret is the prevailing narrative, why has there never been a study showing high levels of regret among transgender people?

This year, over 370 bills have targeted transgender individuals in the United States, and many of the debates surrounding these bills focus on the fear of transgender regret. Proponents of these bills use this rationale to justify banning care and show no sign of halting their efforts. In released audio of Republican legislators in Ohio and Michigan, they state that the “endgame” of this legislation is to “ban this care for everyone.” 

Related

Anti-trans documentaries, regularly published by both right-wing media outlets and mainstream journalists, often highlight trans regret. These documentaries invariably feature the same dozen detransitioners to justify these bans. The consequences of such bans on care would be severe, directly resulting in a decline in life satisfaction for the transgender individuals responding to this survey.

The release of this survey’s early results should be a clear signal that fact checkers need to interrogate claims of high regret that are not justified through the sources anti-trans journalists and columnists often cite. Publishing stories that center on transgender regret and portraying them as a common narrative distorts the reality around gender affirming care that has been found by over 50 studies and every major medical organization: that gender affirming care improves saves lives for transgender people.

Despite this, anti-trans columnists cannot seem to stop covering the stories of the 100 found in Littman’s studies while discrediting or ignoring the stories of the other 90,000.

****************************************************************************

Erin Reed is a transgender woman (she/her pronouns) and researcher who tracks anti-LGBTQ+ legislation around the world and helps people become better advocates for their queer family, friends, colleagues, and community. Reed also is a social media consultant and public speaker.

Follow her on Twitter (Link)

Website here: https://www.erininthemorning.com/

******************************************************************************************

The preceding article was first published at Erin In The Morning and is republished with permission.

Continue Reading

Research/Study

James O’Keefe is using Grindr to find targets for undercover videos

O’Keefe is using dating apps to find targets for undercover videos and recruiting followers to sell it as “journalism”

Published

on

Graphic by Melissa Joskow for Media Matters

By Audrey McCabe | WASHINGTON – James O’Keefe, the ousted founder of Project Veritas who is now trying to build up O’Keefe Media Group as a new outlet for his right-wing sting operations, has been targeting Democratic officials and high-level corporate employees through dating apps, luring them to meet up, and secretly recording them speaking about their jobs.

O’Keefe is also trying to recruit followers to employ the same tactics, promoting a $20 webinar and claiming that he will pay $5,000 for usable footage from fake dates with targets.

  • O’Keefe is building a new media company to release undercover footage obtained from fake dates, including targets lured on dating apps:
    • After being ousted from Project Veritas last year, O’Keefe is trying to build up O’Keefe Media Group through sting operations targeting political opponents and videotaping them on fake dates. O’Keefe has released videos of at least four sting operations that were based on footage obtained under the cover of dates. [NPR, 2/21/23; Twitter/X, 1/25/23; YouTube, 6/22/231/24/241/31/24]
    • O’Keefe has introduced a “D.C. Swamp Exposed” series, releasing two videos on January 24 and 31 that purport to expose political corruption. Both videos — the first with a Capitol Hill intern and the second with a White House cybersecurity official — were captured on fake dates, at least one of which was set up using Tinder. [YouTube, 1/24/241/31/24]
    • O’Keefe claimed, “Tinder has just gotten rid of my profile, ladies and gentlemen. Tinder has shut down James O’Keefe’s dating profile.” He then said, “I guess I’m going to use Grindr from now on.” [Twitter/X, 1/31/24
    • O’Keefe claimed that O’Keefe Media Group plans to release a new investigation every Wednesday. He also said he intends to expand the program by recruiting followers to set up their own stings. [Real America’s Voice, War Room2/1/24; Twitter/X, 10/30/23]
  • O’Keefe has been recruiting followers to pay for his “American Swiper” program, encouraging them to use dating apps for sting operations
    • In addition to his $497 “Citizen Journalism MasterClass,” O’Keefe created an “American Swiper” workshop in November for people to learn how to spot progressives and Democratic government officials on dating apps. The workshop was accompanied by a number of promotional social media posts showcasing two earlier stings that allegedly used this tactic. [O’Keefe Media Group, accessed 2/2/24; Twitter/X, 10/30/23, 10/31/23, 11/29/23]
    • O’Keefe is charging $19.95 for access to the workshop and selling “covert camera” equipment. The description for the event reads, “As the landscape of information gathering evolves, so do the tools of the trade. Swipe right into the heart of investigative reporting with this one-of-a-kind training session, crafted to equip you with the skills to covertly extract information using popular social platforms. Without the constraints of a live event, you can now delve into the art of undercover investigations at your own pace, learning how to leverage dating apps like Tinder and Bumble to unearth compelling stories.” [O’Keefe Media Group, accessed 2/2/24
    • O’Keefe has also stated that he would pay $5,000 for usable footage of dates with targets that end up getting published. He told Patriot.TV host Kristi Leigh, “I’d like to have you as an American Swiper. … We’ll pay you 5,000 bucks to go do one of these stories if we publish it.” [Twitter/X, 1/31/24]
  • O’Keefe has openly admitted to using fake dates for sting operations and said he uses dating apps to find his targets:
    • O’Keefe has promoted the American Swipers program with footage of him confronting a Pfizer employee at the end of a fake date with a member of Project Veritas. The target confirmed that they thought they were on a date, admitting, “I was trying to impress a person on a date by lying.” The video was taken while O’Keefe was still at Project Veritas, but he has since used it to promote his new outlet. [YouTube, 1/26/23; Twitter/X, 10/30/23]
    • O’Keefe seemingly had a woman target a BlackRock recruiter and later used the footage in a promotion for American Swipers, saying “some of our biggest and most impactful, hard-hitting journalism has come from undercover reporters meeting subjects this way.” The target appears to go on multiple dates with the “undercover reporter” before her identity is revealed. [Twitter/X, 6/20/2310/30/23]
    • O’Keefe went on a fake date with a Capitol Hill intern as the first installment of his “D.C. Swamp Exposed” series, and said in a Twitter/X Space, “I’ve never actually done one of these so-called guy-to-guy date meeting recordings, but I did it myself … because I want to inspire you guys to go do it yourselves.” O’Keefe wrote in a post about the date, “Sign up to be an undercover journalist with The American Swiper Program at this link.” [Twitter/X, 1/24/241/24/24]
    • For the second part of his “D.C. Swamp Exposed” video series, O’Keefe admitted to creating a Tinder profile, telling right-wing influencer and “Pizzagate” conspiracy theorist Jack Posobiec: “The most extraordinary thing about the tape with the executive office of the White House guy for the executive office is that I actually used my actual name, James, on Tinder.” He also posted screenshots of the target’s Tinder profile. [Twitter/X, 1/31/241/31/24]
  • Right-wing figures are praising O’Keefe’s deceptive tactics and promoting his videos on social media:
    • Former Trump adviser Steve Bannon celebrated O’Keefe’s fake date with the White House cybersecurity official, saying, “Your investigative techniques are amazing.” He also said, “This is the most important tape, in my mind, that you’ve ever done.” [Real America’s Voice, War Room2/1/24]
    • Infowars’ Alex Jones praised O’Keefe, saying that he “needs to get an Academy Award for best actor.” Jones continued, “He dresses up as a blonde-haired, gay, trendy dude and is able to get the head White House liaison who’s over all the intelligence agencies, and cybersecurity, and the Pentagon, that gives policy advice to the president, to openly brag and say, ‘Biden has dementia, he’s an idiot, he’s our puppet.’” [Twitter/X, 1/31/24]
    • The Babylon Bee’s Ashley St. Clair celebrated O’Keefe’s January 31 video on X, posting, “Pro tip: If you are a gay man who works for the White House + your date just cant hear enough about Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, you are being James O’Keefe’d.” She went on to say, “It always amazes me how willing these suckers are to talk. You work for the WHITE HOUSE Cyber team & are just spilling it all?! A cheap vault too… just dinner and drinks!” [Twitter/X, 1/31/24]
    • Conspiracy theorist Lara Logan also shared the video and posted, “James O’Keefe does it again. Unbelievable.” [Twitter/X, 2/1/24]
    • Right-wing influencers the Hodgetwins shared O’Keefe’s January 31 video and celebrated his sting against a White House official. [Twitter/X, 1/31/24]
  • The Daily Wire’s Brent Scher posted, “The James O’Keefe gay date costume is the funniest thing to happen this year.” [Twitter/X, 1/31/24]

******************************************************************************************

The preceding article was previously published by Media Matters for America and is republished with permission.

Continue Reading

Research/Study

Unstable housing for LGBTQ+ youth cited most for food insecurity

Half of the LGBTQ+ youth programs surveyed reported that over 20% of the young people did not have enough food to eat in the past week

Published

on

Typical streetside homeless encampment in the greater Los Angeles region. (Photo Credit: County of Los Angeles)

LOS ANGELES – A new report by the Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law finds that 85% of LGBTQ+ youth programs surveyed said unstable housing was the main reason LGBTQ+ youth had inadequate access to food.

The programs highlighted other common causes of food insecurity among LGBTQ+ youth, including a lack of access to jobs that pay a livable wage, family food insecurity, a lack of family support, and transportation barriers.

Using data gathered from 73 LGBTQ+ youth programs affiliated with the CenterLink network or identified through a targeted internet search, researchers examined the programs’ experiences and perspectives on addressing food insecurity among LGBTQ+ youth.

Half of the LGBTQ+ youth programs surveyed reported that over 20% of the young people they serve often did not have enough food to eat in the past week. The most successful support strategies aligned with the multi-faceted needs of LGBTQ+ youth. These included providing meals or snacks directly, offering a food pantry, and giving gift cards to grocery stores or restaurants. However, strategies that required time and travel (such as referrals to off-site food pantries) or administrative hurdles (such as SNAP enrollment) were less successful.

“Community-based LGBTQ+ youth programs are feeding youth. With additional support, these organizations could grow their capacity and expand food access for LGBTQ+ youth.” said lead author Kerith J. Conron, Research Director at the Williams Institute. “While initiatives like the National School Lunch and National School Breakfast Program are reliable sources of food for millions of U.S. students, LGBTQ+ youth may not have the same opportunities to participate in them due to stigma and harassment.”

ADDITIONAL FINDINGS

  • The most frequently cited sources of food for LGBTQ+ youth were food pantries or kitchens (92%), chosen family or friends (82%), and school meals (73%).
  • Only 60% of programs identified family of origin as a food source for the youth they serve, just slightly more than the percentage (56%) who identified obtaining food through street economies, such as sex work, the drug trade, and other nontraditional exchanges.
  • Among the programs that reported providing food directly to LGBTQ+ youth, less than half (42%) offered access to food daily, and over one-third offered food less than once a week or only on a case-by-case basis.
  • When LGBTQ+ youth programs were asked about broader changes for improving youth access to food, the majority prioritized access to transitional housing (77%), affordable housing (58%), and housing vouchers for youth ages 18 to 25 (55%).
  • Programs also recommended the following broader changes:
    • Increasing the minimum wage (51%)
    • Changing SNAP eligibility criteria (43%)
    • Free or discounted transit passes (41%)
    • Changing identity document laws (30%)

Read the report

Continue Reading

Popular