WASHINGTON – A Gallup Poll released Monday showed that support for same-sex marriage is maintaining a position of Seventy-one percent of Americans who think it should be legal, matching the previous year’s percentage.

Gallup noted that public support for legally recognizing gay marriages has been consistently above 50% since the early 2010s.

The latest figures are from Gallup’s annual Values and Beliefs poll, conducted May 1-24.

When Gallup first polled about same-sex marriage in 1996, barely a quarter of the public (27%) supported legalizing such unions. It would take another 15 years, until 2011, for support to reach the majority level. Then in 2015, just one month before the U.S. Supreme Court’s Obergefell v. Hodges decision, public support for legalizing gay marriage cracked the 60% level. In 2021, it reached the 70% mark for the first time and has been there each of the past three years.

Support Relatively Low Among Republicans, Weekly Churchgoers

Gallup has recorded increases in support for same-sex marriage across all major subgroups over time. Today, majorities of all but two key subgroups — Republicans (49%) and weekly churchgoers (41%) — say gay marriages should be legally recognized.

Republican support for gay marriage has hovered around the 50% mark since 2020, with slight majorities backing it in 2021 and 2022. The latest 49% recorded for this group is statistically similar to the level of support Gallup has recorded in recent years.

Like all other subgroups, weekly churchgoers (41%) are more supportive of gay marriage now than they were in the previous two decades. However, their level of support has been steady since 2018 — ranging between 40% and 44%.

Bottom Line

Same-sex marriage has received majority support in the U.S. for over a decade, and support has been on an upward trajectory for most of Gallup’s polling since 1996.

Gay marriage became the law of the land after the Supreme Court’s 2015 Obergefell decision, and President Joe Biden signed bipartisan legislation to ward off future judicial attempts at undoing its legality late last year.

Among many groups — including older adults, Protestants and residents of the South — perspectives on gay marriage have gone from majority opposition to majority support over the course of Gallup’s trend spanning more than a quarter of a century. But two groups remain holdouts on the issue, with Republicans evenly divided on the legality of same-sex unions and weekly churchgoers maintaining their position against it.

By Nicolas Boyon |PARIS, France – A new global poll released by French international multinational market research and consulting firm, Institut Public de Sondage d’Opinion Secteur, (Ipsos SA) in its LGBTQ+ Pride 2023 survey finds that an average of 9% of adults in 30 countries identify as LGBTQ+, with sharp generational differences. Other findings include:

• Increased LGBT+ visibility since the 2021 survey with large geographic variations remaining;
• Majority support in most (but not all) countries surveyed for allowing same-sex couples to marry and to adopt children; and
• Widespread support for protecting transgender people from employment and housing discrimination, but divided views on other pro-transgender measures.

The survey was conducted by Ipsos on its Global Advisor online platform in February and March 2023 among more than 22,500 adults under the age of 75.  

On average, across the 30 countries surveyed, 3% of adults identify as lesbian or gay, 4% as bisexual, 1% as pansexual or omnisexual, and 1% as asexual.

Gen Zers are about twice as likely as Millennials and four times as likely as Gen Xers and Boomers to identify as bisexual, pansexual/ omnisexual, or asexual.

Sexual orientation by gender and generation

Source: Ipsos Global Advisor | LGBTQ+ Pride 2023

Men are more likely than women to identify as gay/lesbian/homosexual (4% vs. 1% on average globally), but both are equally likely to identify as bisexual, pansexual/omnisexual, or asexual.

Spain is where respondents are most likely to say they are gay or lesbian (6%) while Brazil and the Netherlands are where they are most likely to say they are bisexual (both 7%). Japan is the country they are least likely to identify as either gay or lesbian (less than 1%) and as bisexual (1%).

When asked about their gender identity, 1% on average globally describe themselves as transgender, 1% as non-binary, gender non-conforming, or gender fluid, and 1% as neither, but differently from male or female. There are also large differences between younger and older adults when it comes to their propensity to describe themselves as any of these. This is the case of 6% of Gen Zers and 3% of Millennials, compared to 1% of both GenXers and Boomers. And the gap is growing: +2 percentage points since 2021 among both Gen Zers and Millennials vs. +1 point or less among Gen Xers and Boomers.

Overall, the average share of the self-identified LGBT+ population^[1] is 9%. The share of self-identified LGBT+ adults varies widely across generations and geographies: from a 30-country average of 18% among Gen Zers to 4% among Baby Boomers, and from 15% of all respondents in Brazil to 4% in Peru.

LGBTQ+ visibility is up, but still differs widely across countries

The visibility of LGBTQ+ people has increased since the previous LGBTQ+ Pride survey, two years ago. On average, across the 30 countries surveyed this year:

• 47% of all adults say they have a relative, friend, or work colleague who is a lesbian/gay/ homosexual, up 5 points since 2021;
• 26% say they know someone who is bisexual, up 2 points;  
• 13% say they know someone who is transgender, up 3 points; and
• 12% say they know someone who is non-binary, gender non-conforming, or gender fluid, up 3 points.

LGBTQ+ visibility varies widely across countries. Having a relative, friend, or work colleague who is lesbian/gay or bisexual is most commonly reported in Latin America, Spain, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa. Gender diversity is most visible throughout the Anglosphere, in Brazil, and especially in Thailand.

On the other hand, the visibility of different segments of the LGBTQ+ community is lowest in Japan, South Korea, Turkey, Romania, Hungary, and Poland.

Women are more likely than men to report knowing people of different sexual orientations and gender identities. Consistent with self-identification, the prevalence of knowing someone who is LGBTQ+ is much higher among younger adults than among older adults. Generational differences are particularly pronounced when it comes to knowing people who are bisexual and people who are non-binary/ gender non-conforming or fluid: in both cases, Gen Zers are twice as likely as Gen Xers, and three times as likely as Boomers, to say they do.

Majorities support same-sex marriage and parenting in most, but not all countries

On average, across the 30 countries surveyed, 56% say same-sex couples should be allowed to marry legally while 16% say they should be allowed to obtain some legal recognition, but not to marry and just 14% say they should not be allowed to marry or get any kind of legal recognition. Another 14% are not sure.

Support for same-sex marriage ranges from 49% to 80% in all 20 countries surveyed where it is legal. Among the other 10 countries, majorities in Italy and Thailand support same-sex marriage and majorities in all other countries except Turkey support at least some form of legal recognition for same-sex couples. Opponents of any form of legal recognition for same-sex couples make up no more than one-third of all respondents in any of the countries surveyed.

Women are significantly more likely than men to support same-sex marriage with a difference between both of 10 percentage points on average globally.

In 2021, support for same-sex marriage was significantly higher in 13 of the 15 countries where Ipsos began tracking it in 2013. However, it has plateaued or declined in many countries over the past two years. Of the 23 countries Ipsos surveyed both in 2021 and this year, nine show a decline of 4 points or more in the percentage saying same-sex couples should be allowed to marry legally (Canada, Germany, the United States, Mexico, the Netherlands, Sweden, Great Britain, Brazil, and Turkey), while only two show an increase of 4 points or more (France and Peru).

While views on same-sex parenting are warmer than those on same-sex marriage, they show similar patterns. Globally, 65% say same-sex couples are just as likely as other parents to raise children successfully and 64% say they should have the same rights to adopt children as heterosexual couples do. These views are held by majorities in 26 countries, including several where same-sex couples are not allowed to adopt. The only countries where more people disagree than agree with both opinions are Poland, Turkey, Romania, and South Korea.

Again, women are more supportive of same-sex parenting than are men (by an average of about 10 points) as are younger adults vs. older adults.

Over the past two years, support for same-sex adoption has declined significantly in Sweden, the U.S., Canada, the Netherlands, and Turkey, but it has increased significantly in France, Italy, Colombia, and Peru.

Support for protection from employment and housing discrimination is broader than for other pro-transgender measures

Globally, 67% say that transgender people face at least a fair amount of discrimination, compared with 19% who say they face little or no discrimination. Perceptions of discrimination are highest in Spanish- and Portuguese-speaking countries, and lowest in Switzerland, Germany, and Japan.

Majorities in each of the 30 countries surveyed (76% on average) agree that transgender people should be protected from discrimination in employment, housing, and access to businesses such as restaurants and stores.

Other measures receive more lukewarm support: on average, 60% agree that transgender teenagers should be allowed to receive gender-affirming care with parental consent; 55% agree that transgender people should be allowed to use single-sex facilities (e.g., public restrooms that correspond to their gender); 53% agree that government-issued documents such as passports should have options other than “male” and “female” for people who do not identify as either; and 47% agree that health insurance systems should cover the costs of gender transition no differently than the costs of other medical procedures.

Among the 30 countries surveyed, support for various pro-transgender measures is consistently high in Thailand, Italy, Spain, and throughout Latin America; it tends to be lowest in South Korea, throughout Eastern Europe, in Great Britain, and in the United States where transgender rights and protections have become polarizing political issues.

Women and younger adults are more likely than men and older adults, respectively, to say the transgender community faces a lot of discrimination. They also show higher levels of support for all types of measures in favor of transgender people differences of about 6 to 9 points between women and men and between Gen Zers and Boomers. Partly driving this generational gap, Gen Xers and Boomers are more likely than younger adults to have no opinion about specific transgender issues or about the amount of discrimination transgender people face, possibly because they are less likely to know a transgender person.  

About the study 

These are the results of a 30-country survey conducted by Ipsos on its Global Advisor online survey platform between February 17 and March 3, 2023. For this survey, Ipsos interviewed a total of 22,514 adults aged 18-74 in Canada, South Africa, Turkey, and the United States, 20-74 in Thailand, 21-74 in Singapore, and 16-74 in all other countries

The preceding article was previously published by Institut Public de Sondage d'Opinion Secteur, (Ipsos SA) and is republished with permission.

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

Related:

By Erin Reed | WASHINGTON – It’s been 15 days since Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis put his signature on Senate Bill 254, putting a halt to 80% of trans adult care while leaving the remaining 20% stuck in limbo.

The repercussions are profound, with many transgender individuals throughout the state losing access to their medications, pushing a multitude into medical detransition. The situation grows ever more critical for transgender residents, with the majority unable to secure prescription refills or make new appointments.

A fortunate few, who either stockpiled their medication or found willing pharmacies, are living on a borrowed time. For the rest, Florida, bearing the second-largest population of adult transgender individuals, is experiencing a chilling experiment: a rapid and extensive removal of lifesaving medication, and people are suffering.

Up until this point, gender affirming care bans have mostly focused on transgender youth. Though there were murmurings of bans that could go up to 26 years old, these were quickly quashed in state legislatures. A few bills, such as a bill in Oklahoma, were amended to bans on gender affirming care under 18 years of age – these bills are extreme enough and represent a major step backwards in transgender rights.

The landscape shifted significantly in recent months, beginning in Missouri. Attorney General Andrew Bailey signed a decree prohibiting the majority of gender-affirming care for transgender adults. The instituted regulations echoed Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers (TRAP) laws, which impose almost insurmountable requirements on abortion clinics. The policy advanced to a court hearing where it seemed to significantly falter under scrutiny. In a pre-emptive move, the Attorney General withdrew the policy before the judge could render a final verdict.

Several weeks later, DeSantis enacted Senate Bill 254, a law that uniquely targets the transgender community in Florida. Initial news reports characterized it as a ban on transgender youth, but its provisions concerning transgender adults have incited severe distress among this group within the state. The law blocks 80% of gender-affirming care for transgender adults by barring nurse practitioners from offering this care. Organizations like Planned Parenthood, one of the largest providers of this care, rely on nurse practitioners heavily.

For the remaining 20% who receive their care from MDs or DOs, they face significant challenges refilling prescriptions at pharmacies that are currently trying to interpret the implications of these regulations on their risk. Additionally, the bill stipulates that transgender adults, even those who have previously received care, must be given a medical disinformation and informed consent form sanctioned by the state’s Board of Medicine. The Board, however, has yet to produce such forms, leading to an additional layer of difficulty.

Transgender researcher Zinnia Jones’ website, Gender Analysis, has outlined the exact impact of this bill on the community in a flowchart, showing how no matter how you received your care as a transgender adult in Florida before, it is likely you are facing severe disruptions:

Speaking with Erin In The Morning, Mia, a 38 year old transgender woman, shared an email from Planned Parenthood stating that gender affirming care services were paused. Though Planned Parenthood sent an emergency refill to Publix that was valid before the law took effect, the pharmacy has refused to fill her prescriptions and she was told to return in 4 months once the impact of the law could be evaluated.

See the email she received:

When asked what would happen if she lost access, she said, “I’m scared to lose access completely, especially since moving isn’t really an option right now. Losing access or not being able to refill would be possibly the worst thing. The last 9 months have been the best mental health wise, even with all of the fear from the law changes. I’ll find refills through the gray market before being forcibly detransitioned.”

She is still trying to find ways to fill her prescription legally.

She has stated that leaving the state may be an option after she finishes her bachelors in legal studies and can work long enough to afford to move, stating that it will take “about 6 months to a year to get out.”

However, as Jones points out, “Leaving the state is also not a realistic or scalable option: Florida has the second-largest adult trans population in the country after California. 94,900-100,000 adult trans people are affected by this ban.”

You can see the figures here:

Kameron, an 18 year old transgender man in the state, agrees that leaving would not be an easy option, stating that “it would uproot my entire life here.”

Kameron also received his refills from Planned Parenthood and was told that he would be unable to refill his prescriptions. Though he has heard that some doctors might be able to prescribe medication, he knows that the informed consent form to receive care mandated by the state has not been developed yet. As a result, he has been forced to rely on his stockpile that he gathered in preparation for laws like this.

Lucina, a trans individual residing in Florida, received a notification from her healthcare provider stating her care would be discontinued due to her provider being a nurse practitioner. The correspondence indicated that the enactment of the bill prohibited the continuation of her care, and she should promptly seek a legally authorized physician. The letter suggested that she contact primary care providers as a desperate measure, even though these providers often lack training in gender-affirming care. Even if they agreed to provide such care, without the necessary informed consent form, which is yet to be produced by the Board of Medicine, these physicians would likely be unable to administer it.

Here is the letter she received:

Gender-affirming care is lifesaving. Numerous studies have proven its positive effect on transgender individuals, including research that indicated a 73% reduction in suicidality and another study that reflected a 40% decrease in recent suicide attempts. Over 50 studies underscoring the advantages of gender-affirming care have been collected by the Cornell University Center for the Study of Inequality. Policies such as Senate Bill 254 not only deprive individuals of this essential care but also inflict trauma on transgender people by abruptly discontinuing their treatment.

The future of transgender people in Florida hangs in the balance. The contentious law is currently under legal scrutiny, with an imminent decision expected regarding a motion for a temporary restraining order to halt its enforcement. Concurrently, the Florida Board of Medicine is scheduled to convene on Thursday to deliberate on the law, possibly initiating the process to create state-required informed consent and disinformation forms. As each day passes, the situation becomes more precarious for many transgender individuals in the state who are being forced to discontinue their hormone therapy unsafely or turn to alternate methods.

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

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.

By Tyler Monroe | WASHINGTON – Over the past week, we’ve seen right-wing media’s backlash against Target’s LGBTQ Pride displays as part of a recent crusade against corporate Pride Month campaigns. And Target ultimately decided to pull some merchandise celebrating Pride from store shelves after receiving threats against the safety of their workers.

But Fox News was one of many right-wing media outlets that feigned outrage, spending over 2 hours of coverage of the Target controversy from May 23 through 9 a.m. ET on May 30. 

And much of Fox’s extensive coverage of the Target boycott included expressions of outrage that children were exposed to clothing with positive messages about the LGBT community.

But as a comparison number, Fox reported for just 22 seconds during the same timeframe on the Illinois attorney general’s recent report that Catholic Church clergy members and lay religious brothers had abused nearly 2,000 children in the state since 1950.

Fox News aired more than 2 hours of coverage of the backlash to Target’s Pride Month displays, while running less than a minute of coverage on a new report detailing sex abuse in the Catholic Church in Illinois. Fox added to the right-wing media backlash against Target’s LGBTQ Pride displays as part of a recent crusade against corporate Pride Month campaigns. The company decided to pull some merchandise celebrating Pride Month from store shelves after receiving threats against the safety of its workers.

From May 23 through 9 a.m. ET May 30, Fox aired over 2 hours and 12 minutes of coverage of the Target controversy. In comparison, Fox reported for just 22 seconds on the Illinois attorney general’s recent report that Catholic Church clergy members and lay religious brothers had abused nearly 2,000 children in the state since 1950.

Much of Fox’s extensive coverage of the Target boycott included expressions of outrage that children were exposed to clothing with positive messages about the LGBTQ community. While Fox repeatedly fearmongered about this supposed threat to children, the network almost completely ignored the reports of sexual abuse in the Illinois Catholic Church, airing only one segment on the attorney general’s report. 

Target is just the latest brand Fox has taken aim at in its anti-LGBTQ coverage, adding to attacks on Bud Light for its Dylan Mulvaney promotional content and Disney, which the network falsely accused of grooming and sexualizing children. The repeated targeting of pro-LGBTQ products and sentiments, thinly veiled as defenses of children’s innocence, fit into Fox and right-wing media’s larger homophobic campaign to conflate the LGBTQ community with grooming and child abuse.

Methodology

Media Matters searched transcripts in the SnapStream video database for all original programming on Fox News Channel for any of the terms “Target,” “clothing,” “merchandise,” or “display” within close proximity to any of the terms “trans,” “transgender,” “pride,” or “gay” or any variation of the term “LGBTQIA+” from May 23, 2023, when media first reported on Target patrons’ backlash against LBGTQ merchandise, through 9 a.m. ET May 30. 

We also searched transcripts in the SnapStream video database for all original programming on Fox News Channel for any of the terms “Catholic,” “church,” “Illinois,” or “brother” or any variation of the term “clergy” within close proximity to any variation of any of the terms “child,” “sex,” “abuse,” or “allegation” from May 23, when a report was released alleging that 450 clergy in the Illinois Catholic Church sexually abused almost 2,000 children since 1950, through 9 a.m. ET May 30. 

We timed segments, which we defined as instances when either the anti-LGBTQ backlash at Target stores or the report regarding child sex abuse by the Illinois Catholic Church was the stated topic of discussion or when we found significant discussion of either story. We defined significant discussion as instances when two or more speakers in a multitopic segment discussed either story with one another.

We also timed mentions, which we defined as instances when a single speaker in a segment on another topic mentioned either story without another speaker in the segment engaging with the comment, and teasers, which we defined as instances when the anchor or host promotes a segment about either story scheduled to air later in the broadcast.

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

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

By Erin Reed | WASHINGTON – Advocates for bans on gender-affirming care often argue that their bills are not religiously motivated and claim they do not support conversion therapy. Groups such as the Society for Evidence in Gender Medicine and Genspect are frequently used to propagate pseudoscience around gender identity and standards of care.

In Ohio, Rep. Gary Click, sponsor of House Bill 68 that would prohibit gender-affirming care for transgender minors, has consistently stated that his bill is not influenced by religious beliefs and has denied endorsing conversion therapy in hearings.

However, recent recordings uncovered by local reporter Riley Roliff from his church sermons seem to contradict his statements. In these videos, Click defends conversion therapy and states he has counseled individuals who expressed no desire to identify as LGBT.

House Bill 68 mirrors many of the bans on gender-affirming care proposed throughout the U.S. this year. Alarmingly, though, new provisions target trans people in ways not seen in other states. One provision, for example, would criminalize “aiding and abetting” gender affirming care by physicians, including psychiatrists.

Additionally, the bill would prohibit mental health professionals from affirming and diagnosing transgender youth without first “screening for other comorbidities that influence gender identity,” such as depression, autism, anxiety or ADHD.

This requirement is problematic given there are no established screenings and no confirmed causal links between any of these conditions and gender identity. This requirement essentially bans evidence-based mental healthcare for trans youth.

The bill also proposes burdensome reporting requirements for mental health professionals treating transgender patients. It requires them to meticulously document aspects of their patients’ personal lives and report summary data to the health department. Lastly, the legislation would sanction “watchful waiting” and other related therapies like the misleadingly named “gender exploratory therapy” and “watchful waiting” therapies, which are forms of conversion therapy for transgender individuals that seek to blame being trans on anything other than the youth actually being transgender. These therapies seek to delay transition until the teen feels like it is no longer an option or they age out of care.

Collectively, these provisions amount to forced conversion therapy for transgender youth. It pulls them from their medical care, it bans well-supported psychological care by imposing burdensome reporting requirements and mandating assessments that do not exist, it bars aiding and abetting gender transition for trans youth, and it explicitly legalizes conversion therapy for this population.

Local activist Cam Ogdon agrees, “HB 68 mandates that families detransition their children and follow a specific path of care that is not endorsed by any major medical association. Then those kids’ medical information is collected in a registry for analysis. It is nothing more than a conversion therapy experiment that Representative Click wants to run on Ohio’s children.”

See the provision for instance, explicitly legalizing conversion therapy for trans people:

The bill’s sponsor, Representative Gary Click, has claimed that he has no religious motivations behind his bill and has even claimed to not support conversion therapy. For instance, in a tweet earlier this year, he stated that being trans was a form of conversion therapy at its worse – implying that he is against conversion therapy while also misrepresenting what gender identity is. In a hearing this year, he claimed to be against “changing people’s minds to match their bodies.” In numerous tweets, he claims his bills are following “science, not activism.”

Yet recently, video has emerged from his own church where he not only defends conversion therapy: he claims to have done it himself. “When you counsel with someone who struggles with same sex attraction and gender identity, and you show them what the bible says and how they can be at one with the body that god gave them and you help them and you counsel them, they want to make that illegal.”

Later in the sermon, he says, “I’ve counseled with people. I’ve helped people overcome that before.”

See the video here:

Following news media discovering this video, Rep. Click has reacted with outrage, accusing those who post it of “misusing the phrase.” Yet his bill requires that the medical standard of care for trans youth be ignored, that those already receiving care be medically detransitioned through pulling them from that care, and that all forms of mental health therapy seek to find “explanations” for transness that do not exist while also forcing them to report on all of their patients to the state. When you seek to deny a trans person’s gender identity and withdraw their medical care while also explicitly legalizing gender exploratory therapy and watchful waiting, that is establishing a mandate for conversion therapy.

This carries forward a trend of religious organizations trying to front anti-trans bills while pretending their motivations are based in science. Earlier this year, we learned for instance that the Florida standards of care were written by doctors from a conversion therapy organization, the American College of Pediatricians, designated as a hate group by the Southern Policy Law Center. The standards of care were later shown to be manipulated to support a gender affirming care ban there in court filings. One of the head experts for Florida behind this ban, Dr. Van Mol, was discovered to be supporting “sexual orientation change efforts” in a recent video:

It is important to note the religious conversion therapy roots of anti-trans legislation. Representative Click, when supporting legislation like HB68, is attempting to mandate conversion therapy on all trans youth in Ohio. He, according to his sermons, sees transgender identity and trans people “straying from God’s plan” as part of the “crumbling” of society caused by Satan. Anti-trans bills are not driven by science, and their sponsors are being intentionally dishonest when making these claims. Instead, they seek to legislate morality and force trans youth out of their care teams and into a world where they are no longer allowed to be themselves.

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

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.

 By Jack Winstanley & Charis Hoard WASHINGTON – As major consumer brands continue to partner with members of the LGBTQ+ community, release Pride Month products, and carry out Pride campaigns, right-wing figures are responding with an escalating anti-LGBTQ+ crusade that aims to make inclusive branding a “market death wish.”

Currently, right-wing figures are celebrating Target’s decision to remove some of its Pride Month merchandise after a month-long campaign saw anti-LGBTQ activists harass and threaten store employees, with some figures even endorsing violence and acts of vandalism against the retailer. On May 25, disgraced CPAC Chair Matt Schlapp sent a letter to Target’s CEO & Board of Directors calling for an end to their partnership with a designer of the Pride collection who Schlapp claims is a “self-declared ‘satanist’” and “openly flaunts his anti-Christian agenda.”

Calling for boycotts is not a new tactic for right-wing activists. Former President Donald Trump and his allies attempted to organize a boycott against Major League Baseball after the 2021 All-Star Game was removed from Atlanta in protest of the state’s restrictive voting laws. Right-wing figures also attempted to start a boycott of the country band The Dixie Chicks (now known as The Chicks) in 2003 over their public opposition to the Iraq War.The right-wing attacks against Bud Light for their collaboration with trans influencer Dylan Mulvaney has ignited current frenzies to boycott companies seeking to be more inclusive.

While acknowledging that they “can’t boycott every woke company or even most of them,” right-wing figures have created a playbook for future boycotts that aims to make Pride messaging “culturally toxic” and make all companies fearful of eliciting similar responses to inclusive campaigns. Some figures have been encouraging their followers to pick their targets, and have only been increasing calls for boycotts and violence as Pride Month approaches. Some have even attempted to cash-in on the outrage, peddling products mocking companies that have expressed their support for the LGBTQ+ community.

Below is a timeline of the right’s biggest pressure campaigns from the last year:

Key Events

State Farm (May 2022): In May 2022, a right-wing consumer advocacy group released emails showing State Farm’s participation with a non-profit organization that provides trans-inclusive books to schools in Florida. 

The violently anti-trans social media outlet Libs of TikTok amplified the campaign against State Farm, and the conservative outlet The Washington Examiner accused State Farm of “encouraging its agents in Florida to donate books promoting transgenderism to 5-year-olds.”Following the backlash, a spokesperson from State Farm confirmed to the Washington Post that the company had ended its partnership and would explore new ways to pursue diversity and inclusion.

M&M’s (2022 – January 2023): In early 2023, M&M came under fire from right-wing media for making changes to their “spokescandies” with the intent to make the mascots more inclusive.

Former Fox host Tucker Carlson took to his show to criticize the changes made to the mascots, and other Fox hosts followed suit, calling the changes made “virtue signaling gone wrong.” Carlson famously had an on-air meltdown over the changes to the mascots, slamming them for being “less sexy,” and America First Policy Institute ambassador Nick Adams berated the changes as a “nuclear strike in the war on men.”

In late January 2023, M&M announced that their mascots will be taking an “indefinite pause” and replaced by actor Maya Rudolph. The “indefinite pause” ended in February 2023, when the mascots were brought back after Rudolph’s appearance in M&M’s Super Bowl ad. 

LEGO (February – April 2023): The LEGO Group announced that it would create minifigures representing people with disabilities, different skin tones, and other diverse characteristics, including pivoting some existing product lines to feature characters with LGBTQ identities and mental health conditions.

Fox News and other right-wing outlets quickly criticized the toymaker for “going woke.” In April, a TikTok showing a man harassing a Lego Store employee for wearing a Pride flag pin went viral, with right-wing social media users sharing it widely.

Hershey’s (March 2023 – ongoing): To celebrate International Women’s Day in Canada, Hershey’s released an ad campaign including a trans woman. Right-wing social media users called for a boycott of Hershey, claiming that the company is “erasing women.” 

In response, Daily Wire co-founder Jeremy Boreing launched his own chocolate company featuring branding that mocked Hershey’s attempts to incorporate pronouns into its packaging. Boreing’s chocolate brand was criticized for its ineffective packaging and inflated pricing.

Bud Light (April 2023 – ongoing): Transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney shared a sponsored post with Bud Light, resulting in an intense boycott campaign against Bud Light and other Anheuser-Busch products.

Some right-wing figures, including singer Kid Rock, posted videos of themselves destroying cans of Bud Light in protest. Right-wing media fixated on the outrage, with figures using the ad campaign as an excuse to launch bigoted attacks against Mulvaney and Bud Light for partnering with her.

Some even took the chance to peddle their own products as alternatives to Bud Light. Anheuser-Busch responded to the backlash by claiming that the company “never intended to be part of a discussion that divides people,” and dismissing two high-level marketing directors.

Nike (April 2023 – ongoing): Mulvaney also unveiled a partnership with Nike, with Mulvaney posting a video on Instagram advertising the brand’s leggings and sports bras. Right-wing commentators and social media figures, including former Olympic athletes Sharron Davies and Caitlyn Jenner, condemned the partnership. Soon after, a “burn bra challenge” started on TikTok in protest. 

Nike responded to the hate directed at Mulvaney through an Instagram comment, which read in part: “Be kind. Be inclusive. Encourage each other.”

Jack Daniel’s (April 2023 – ongoing): In early April, right-wing social media users dug up two-year-old Pride Month advertisements for Jack Daniel’s whiskey that featured contestants from RuPaul’s Drag Race, claiming that the distiller had “gone woke.”

Soon after, a video went viral of a man setting alite hundreds of dollars worth of Jack Daniel’s whiskey and merchandise in a belated protest of the 2021 ad campaign. A spokesperson stated to PinkNews that “Jack Daniel’s is made with everyone in mind, including the LGBTQ+ community.”

Sports Illustrated (May 2023 – ongoing): Sports Illustrated unveiled that transgender singer Kim Petras would be on one of the four covers of this year’s Swimsuit Edition, sparking backlash from right-wing commentators.

Right-wing backlash divulged into transphobic attacks, even going so far as to say that Petras, who received permission for gender confirmation surgery at age 16, is aiding in the promotion of “the trans agenda” and “the idea that, yes, children can consent to being permanently mutilated and, yes, sterilized.”

Los Angeles Dodgers (May 2023 – ongoing): The Los Angeles Dodgers announced that the team would be removing the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence after the club received backlash from right-wing figures for including the group in its annual Pride Night celebration.

The Sisters have been active in raising money for HIV/AIDS awareness and treatment in Southern California since the 1970s and have made religious-themed drag outfits a hallmark of their charity organization.

Right-wing figures had labeled the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence a “hate group” over their use of Christian imagery and criticized the Dodgers for inviting them, claiming the Pride Night event was hostile to Christians.

Later, the Dodgers rescinded their previous statement and reinvited the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence to the Pride Night celebration. Right-wing responses to the Sisters’ reinstatement have been rife with calls to violence; BlazeTV host Steve Deace called for a “fatwa” against the team “that would draw blood,” and Infowars host Owen Shroyer encouraged his audience to join “conservatives” at Pride Night, sardonically questioning, “I wonder how that’s going to go.”

Adidas (May 2023 – ongoing): Sportswear brand Adidas released its Pride Month campaign featuring a male-presenting model wearing the brand’s “Pride Swimsuit,” and immediately faced transphobic attacks from right-wing media.

The backlash from conservative figures included insulting the model for having a noticeable genital bulge and claiming that the campaign “erases women” by not labeling the campaign as unisex.

Target (May 2023 – ongoing): As Target’s annual Pride Month merchandise line gradually hit stores in the first half of May, right-wing social media users began posting calls for boycotts over the product line.

Prominent right-wing commentators attacked the retailer, claiming that anyone shopping at Target was a pervert, endorsing vandalism against Pride displays, or stating that Target was “perverting our children and grooming them.” Target announced that it would remove part of its Pride collection from stores following harassment and threats against employees and instances of vandalism against in-store pride displays.

Walmart (May 2023 – ongoing): Walmart is reportedly being targeted by a number of right-wing social media users over its Pride collection after their apparent success against Target.

The North Face (May 2023 – ongoing): In May 2023, The North Face announced its second Summer of Pride campaign coinciding with the release of its Pride collection, with advertisements featuring drag queen Pattie Gonia. In response, right-wing media began their typical attacks, saying that The North Face had the goal of “making fun of women” by featuring a drag queen in its campaign, and claiming that the company has “gone trans.”

From the March 25, 2023, edition of The Daily Wire’s The Micheal Knowles Show:

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

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

By Erin Reed | WASHINGTON – The trend of banning gender-affirming care for transgender youth was gaining momentum in conservative-leaning states, leading many to fear that the entirety of the Southeastern United States would follow suit.

However, on Wednesday, Louisiana bucked this trend. Louisiana became the only state in the Southeast and one of only four states with Republican trifectas or legislative supermajorities to defeat such a ban in its legislature.

This defeat provides transgender individuals, particularly those in neighboring states where such care is banned, with a vital source for their medical needs. Coupled with court blocks on similar bans in other Southeastern states, those who must cross state lines for their care likely feel a sense of relief. Without a doubt, transgender individuals in Louisiana are among those breathing easier.

House Bill 648, which had already passed the Louisiana House of Representatives with a 71-27 vote, faced strong opposition during the committee hearing. Aware that it could be their last opportunity to quash the bill, family members and allies delivered impassioned testimonies.

Louisiana Trans Advocates played a crucial role in these efforts, holding private meetings with Senators to provide education on the treatment in question. The deciding moment arrived when Republican Senator Fred Mills broke ranks and voted against the bill. His unexpected decision prevented the bill from reaching the Senate floor for a full vote, surprising advocates across the nation and effectively halting the bill’s progression.

Related:

Louisiana lawmaker who bucked GOP on gender-affirming care ban unfazed by national critics 

When asked why he voted against the bill, he cited a Louisiana Department of Health report commissioned in 2022 and released earlier this year that returned strong findings in support of gender affirming care.

“My decision was really, really based on the numbers. All the testimony I heard by the proponents that children are getting mutilated, I didn’t see it in the statistics,” Mills said in an interview.

The findings of the Louisiana Department of Health when looking at their medicaid data and summarizing research were extensive. Importantly, they found that zero surgeries were ever done on minors in the state, puberty blockers were exceedingly rare, regret rates were extremely low, and trans youth had positive mental health outcomes. They also compared consent to transgender care to many other forms of care where medical consent on the behalf of youth is allowed. See the relevant findings:

Interestingly, the report provides a sharp contrast to a widely reported study commissioned by the State of Florida later shown to be based on unethical omissions and intentional misrepresentations of data. The Florida report claims that gender-affirming care is harmful and experimental, directly contradicting the stance of all major U.S. medical organizations. This controversial report was overseen by physicians chosen from the American College of Pediatricians, a conservative group known for endorsing conversion therapy. The group’s name, intentionally similar to the larger professional society, the American Academy of Pediatrics, was designed to mislead lawmakers.

Recent court findings reveal that the Florida report’s authors manipulated research findings to support a gender-affirming care ban in the state. Despite receiving considerable media attention, and even a citation in The BMJ, this report has come under scrutiny for the apparent manipulation of data. Conversely, the Louisiana report, which did not distort data, stayed under the radar until yesterday’s vote.

Following the vote, Louisiana is set to become a crucial and unlikely refuge for transgender youth seeking care. Given the ban on gender-affirming care for transgender youth in many of its neighboring states, individuals often must cross state lines for treatment. Had Louisiana enacted such a ban, its transgender youth would have faced some of the longest travel distances in the country to access care, with many needing to embark on drives exceeding 10 hours to reach the nearest legal clinic.

The response to the vote from the far right was predictable, with Matt Walsh stating that this would be “one of the biggest mistakes of his career” and with Greg Price, a leader of the State Freedom Caucus Network, asking his followers to bombard Mills with phone calls:

When asked about his vote, Senator Mills simply stated, “They don’t live in District 22. They don’t have a 337 area code. I didn’t run for office to serve those people.”

Moving forward, Republicans are making attempts to revise the bill, although there are indications that Governor John Bel Edwards would likely veto the measure. If the bill remains defeated, Louisiana will likely see desperate families looking to its borders with hope. At minimum, the trans youth residents in Louisiana have more time to obtain their care and can rest a little easier tonight.

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

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.

By Erin Reed | WASHINGTON – Gov. Bill Lee enacted Senate Bill 1440 today, which redefines sex in Tennessee’s legal code in a manner that excludes transgender individuals from legal protections.

The bill stipulates sex as “immutable at birth,” and “defined by anatomy and genetics existing at the time of birth” under all state laws. The legislation could profoundly impact transgender residents, threatening their anti-discrimination protections and access to certain services like shelters.

It also would mean that transgender people could not change their sex on their drivers licenses or birth certificates – something that every other state before this year allowed.

The actual bill is short – barely half a page – and presents a simplistic definition of sex. Proponents of the bill often suggest it “changes little” or merely “establishes a definition,” yet for transgender individuals, this bill fundamentally alters their rights.

Prior to its passage, gender markers on driver’s licenses in Tennessee could be modified according to the National Center for Transgender Equality. Until today, changes required “a statement from the attending physician that necessary medical procedures to accomplish the change in gender are complete.”

This new definition of sex will be used across countless legal documents, the implications of which may not be fully realized for years to come. It’s only through future court cases that the full impact of this new definition will be tested and understood. The newly implemented definition reads as follows:

There are clear and immediate problems with this definition of sex. It entirely excludes intersex people and does not provide any clarity on how intersex people should be treated under this law. Not all intersex conditions easily lean in a binary fashion. Some intersex conditions have both ovarian and testicular tissue present. Some intersex conditions, such as Mosaicism, can cause this. The law provides no clarity for the definition used for of these individuals.

The bill is also flatly discriminatory. Legal precedent exists protecting transgender people as covered under sex-based discrimination. The Supreme Court sided with transgender people in 2021 under the Bostock v. Clayton County decision. In Bostock v. Clayton County, which was heard over discrimination in employment law, the Supreme Court decided 6-3 with Neil Gorsuch writing the majority opinion that, discriminating against transgender people is sex discrimination: “When an employer fires an employee for being homosexual or transgender, it necessarily and intentionally discriminates against that individual in part because of sex.”

Gender marker changes are important for trans people. When stopped in an airport, when presenting your ID for age verification at bars, or when requested by police officers, having mismatched IDs can cause uncomfortable and sometimes dangerous situations. The 2015 US Transgender Survey reported that as a result of showing incorrect IDs, 25% of transgender people experienced verbal harassment as a result. You can see the results here:

Social transition is a major part of transition, and laws like this one in Tennessee target social transition. Changing legal documents in and of itself results in better mental health outcomes for trans people. A survey from the Trevor Project confirmed that gender marker changes and correct legal documents could reduce suicide risk by more than 50%:

Tennessee joins several other states that have passed similar laws recently. North Dakota and Kansas enacted comparable legislation earlier this year, with Kansas going a step further to restrict bathroom access for transgender individuals, although it lacks enforcement mechanisms for this provision. Similarly, Montana passed a law excluding transgender people from 41 sections of its legal code. This same law famously led to Rep. Zooey Zephyr being silenced, at which point she raised her microphone in a show of solidarity with protesters.

These recent laws clearly show an alarming trend that targets not only transgender youth and athletes, but also transgender adults. They insidiously strip away all legal protections and recognition for trans individuals. They are also signify a sweeping societal setback – up until this year, trans people could have full legal recognition.

By eliminating the ability to amend documents and stripping away anti-discrimination protections, these laws push transgender people towards precarious situations and effectively treat them as second-class citizens in comparison to their cisgender peers. Tennessee has shown disregard for these concerns this year, as it hastens to demote transgender citizens to that status.

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

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.

By Erin Reed | WASHINGTON – Today, Ron DeSantis posed with several children as he signed multiple laws targeting the transgender community. 

One law expands “Don’t Say Gay” to the 12th grade, bans books, and bans updating pronouns, making transition in a school environment much more difficult. Another uses obscenity laws to potentially target drag events, which has already led to pride parades being cancelled.

Yet another bill bans gender affirming care for trans youth and bans nurse practitioners — the providers of nearly 80% of gender-affirming care — from treating trans adults. The most troubling bill, though, is a ban on transgender people in bathrooms that comes with criminal charges and jail sentences.

The wording of the ban raises serious concerns that many transgender adults are in imminent danger of arrest once the law comes into effect.

House Bill 1521 will effectively give second-class citizen status to transgender people in Florida. The wording of the bill states that if a cisgender person is in the bathroom with a transgender person, an employee can tell the transgender person to leave. Should the transgender person not leave immediately for any reason, they will be charged with criminal trespass, which can carry sentences of up to 1 year in jail – likely a jail of the wrong gender identity, which will put trans people in immense danger of sexual assault.

While the provisions do not ban all bathroom usage, they cast a wide net over an alarming number of locations that would fall under definitions of “public” in the bill. This includes all buildings owned or leased by any governmental entity, educational institutions spanning from elementary schools to private colleges and universities, numerous hospitals owned by universities, many sports arenas, convention centers, city parks, beaches, airports, and more.

You can see the provisions on public bathrooms here:

Many transgender people erroneously believe they will be exempt from this law due to updated gender markers and birth certificate changes. The Florida bathroom ban specifically defines sex in a way that does not utilize legal sex or birth certificate sex. Instead, it states that sex is determined by this law as “indicated by the person’s sex chromosomes, naturally occurring sex hormones, and internal and external genitalia present at birth.” It then defines male and female based on reproductive capacity.

As a result, enforcement might involve criminal investigations into transgender people’s sex based off of profiling alone. Transgender people may be forced to undergo genitalia exams, DNA testing, and historical investigations if they are accused of violating the bathroom ban.

See the definitions used for sex in this law here:

The bill will result in many arrests of transgender people based on the wide range of places that it applies to as well as the lack of knowledge on how sex is defined and will be applied. Worse, many transgender people will risk arrest by going into the bathroom that the state law requires trans people to enter. Transgender people who are androgenous or pass as their gender identity will likely be challenged in the bathroom of their birth sex. Those trans people will then be forced to undergo the same investigation into their gender. In essence, it amounts to a ban on bathrooms for transgender people entirely.

Due to the way that laws go into effect in Florida, the bathroom ban will go into effect on July 1st – the day after Pride Month.

The bathroom bill would be bad enough, but DeSantis signed three other anti-trans bills into law as well. One of the most problematic of those bills is a ban on most gender affirming care for transgender adults. Senate Bill 254 bans gender affirming care for trans youth and bans nurse practitioners from providing gender affirming care to trans adults. SPEKTRUM Health, a provider in Florida, has indicated in an exclusive interview with Erin In The Morning that up to 80% of all gender care in the state is provided by nurse practitioners – a statistic in line with information provided by Planned Parenthood.

Already, people are losing access to medication in Florida and Lana Dunn of SPEKTRUM Health has stated that transgender people are having appointments cancelled by medical organizations around the state. This is because unlike the bathroom ban, which goes into effect July 1st, SB254 has an immediate effective date. Due to penalties provided by SB254, many medical providers have determined they can no longer provide that care.

Medical appointments are not the only thing being cancelled – a third law signed by DeSantis is an obscenity law that will likely be utilized to go after pride parades and drag. Senate Bill 1438 has an immediate effective date and has already led to cancellations of pride events, including the Treasure Coast Pride Parade.

The final law signed by DeSantis was House Bill 1069, a Don’t Say Gay expansion, attacks trans and queer people in new ways. Transgender people will not be able to share updated pronouns with their classmates and students. It will also allow for challenging of books in libraries that have LGBTQ+ topics and will expand existing Don’t Say Gay provisions to the 12th grade. This will go into effect on July 1st.

The effective dates of these laws are as follows:

• HB1521 – Bathroom Ban – Effective July 1, 2023
• HB1069 – Don’t Say Gay Expansion – Effective July 1, 2023
• SB254 – Trans Youth Ban, Adult 80% Care Ban – Effective Immediately
• SB1438 – Obscenity Law Targeting Drag – Effective Immediately

Collectively, these laws represent a direct affront to the liberties of transgender and queer Floridians, marking the most radical assortment of laws targeting transgender people ever ratified by any state. The bathroom ban, in particular, if permitted to take full effect, may serve as an ominous blueprint for other states that have exhibited an interest in passing anti-transgender legislation this year. Given the escalating, heated rhetoric and increasingly draconian laws that typically gain traction across the nation after Florida’s endorsement—a pattern we have observed consistently over recent years— it’s plausible that such a bathroom ban will emerge as a legislative template in 2024.

As it stands, transgender Floridians are unwittingly stepping into a perilous landscape, and if the law is vigorously enforced, the impending surge of arrests will likely take everyone aback in the coming months.

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

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.

By Rob Salerno | HOLLYWOOD – The future of queer representation in film and television could be at stake in the ongoing negotiations between the Writers Guild of American and the Association of Motion Picture and Television Producers, many people are saying at the WGA strike enters its third week. 

The WGA is broadly demanding better pay and better working conditions for film and television writers, alleging that studios are increasingly demanding unpaid labor from writers and reducing writing jobs in television. They’re also demanding limitations on the use of artificial intelligence in drafting scripts. The WGA says these developments are making writing in Hollywood unsustainable for the vast majority of writers.

Rob Forman, Co-Chair of the WGA West LGBTQ+ Committee, says the WGA’s demands will help support the development and advancement of queer talent in Hollywood.

“I don’t necessarily think this WGA action targets queer content so much as it targets the career growth of queer creators. Because with small rooms and short orders and inability to train on set and get experience, we’re not training up as many queer showrunners and creators as we could,” he says. “Queer writers having that track record and credit sheet is as important to getting that content as the idea itself.”

Gay literary manager Garrett Greer says the career track for writers has broken, and that’s already causing hiring issues in Hollywood. 

“Basically, because the pipeline has been broken so long, there aren’t a more diverse array of writers in these upper-level jobs because they haven’t gotten the opportunity to grow to that,” he says. “So many times I’ll get the call looking for an upper-level ‘insert demography here,’ and I’ll say, ‘cool, all those people are working,’ because there’s so few because they haven’t had the opportunity to grow into those jobs.”

Increasingly, studios have been trending toward smaller “mini-rooms” – writing rooms with fewer staffed writers, hired for shorter periods, often without assistants and without including employment on set or during post-production.  

Greer says the WGA’s demand for minimum writing staff sizes on television shows could have an important impact on diverse content. 

“[With guaranteed staff sizes] there would be a constellation of writers of varying levels and perspectives. When it’s a mini-room, the showrunner is like, ‘great, I’ll hire two of my buddies,’ and they’ll likely be similar to the showrunner, and statistically, that’s a straight cis white man. Hopefully, this will increase opportunities and foster a wider diversity of voices in those rooms, because there would be spots in those rooms,” he says. 

Often a writer from a diverse background will get hired as a staff writer in a mini-room, and be the only diverse voice in the staff.

“They get a staff writer who has to be the voice of that point of view to a showrunner, and they’re the ones with the lowest currency in the room. They can’t even be the squeaky wheel,” Greer says.

It hasn’t been lost on writers that studios’ moves to make writing an unsustainable career path is happening right as the push for more diversity in writing rooms and on screen is bringing more queer people and people of color into the industry.

“Whether its coincidence or causal, the fact of the matter is there’s a push for diversity and a simultaneous downward pressure on writer salary and opportunity. I would like to think better of our creative partners in studios,” Forman says. “We didn’t ask for the business model to be broken. We’re not asking for the business to go back to the way it was. We deserve a piece of what we create.” 

Forman says that a lot of people outside of the writing side of the industry don’t understand the demands that are placed on writers to do unpaid work.

“In development, there are months and months of work that isn’t compensated,” he says. “If you were in a writer’s room 40 weeks a year for a 22-episode show, no one would be complaining about what we’re complaining about now, but again, that model was broken.” 

These pressures impact feature film writers as well. Often feature writers are pressured to spend months developing or rewriting a script without receiving pay, an practice the WGA is seeking to rein in.

Up-and-coming bisexual screenwriter Lynn Yu says she’s experienced this firsthand.

“In what’s known as screenwriting bake-offs, a studio will put out an assignment for writers to have a take on this idea, or a job that’s up for a rewrite, and in order to get those jobs, sometimes you’re turning in ten-page outlines, whipping up pitch documents, all of which is uncompensated. You’re taking meetings and feedback and this can go on for weeks at a time, and if you don’t get the contract, you spend all of that time for nothing,” she says. “It’s very possible for a writer to spend a whole year pitching on four or five projects and nothing comes to fruition.”

The expectation of free labor limits who can afford to pursue screenwriting as a profession, Yu says.

“It’s definitely going to favor people who are privileged enough to be able to sustain living in a city like this with little to no income, whether that’s people who come from money, nepo babies,” she says.

While the WGA’s demands to limit the use of AI for writing has generated headlines about the fear of AI simply limiting job opportunities for writers, Forman says the use of AI may have a more insidious effect on diverse content, particularly queer content.

He says that because AI text generators work by scouring existing content to use as ‘inspiration’ for its texts, scripts generated by AI will likely be informed by works that have historically underrepresented or poorly represented queer and trans people and other diverse voices.  

“Because of how homophobic and transphobic society has been and continues to be in many ways, the texts that this AI is learning from and pulling from when it’s trying to create, are never going to be as inclusive of our community as we want it to be,” he says. “I don’t look forward to AI remixing hoary old tropes that exist out there instead of people growing up and telling the story they never got see.”

“For a community that’s had to look into the subtext of movies to find itself represented because for so long you couldn’t have a gay character, it’s up to us to tell our own stories.”

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

Rob Salerno is a writer, journalist and actor based in Los Angeles, California, and Toronto, Canada.