Editor’s note: This piece is a follow-up to Councilmember Erickson’s August 12 op-ed, “Why California Must Remove the Roadblocks to Safer Streets,” in the Los Angeles Blade.

When I wrote earlier this year about why California must remove the roadblocks to safer streets, I focused on what local governments like West Hollywood can do to fix our own processes. At our October 20 Council meeting, I’m advancing a proposal that will streamline how we plan and deliver infrastructure projects to move traffic better and make our streets safer—without unnecessary delays.

But sadly, this proposal is just not enough. Local reform can only go so far, as California’s cities are bound by outdated state contracting laws that tie our hands, waste taxpayer money, and make it harder to deliver the improvements our residents deserve.

If we’re serious about making our communities safer, cleaner, and more sustainable, we need statewide reform of the Public Contract Code—and that means allowing every city and county to utilize a best value contracting method for public projects.

---

Modernizing How We Improve Infrastructure

Under current state law, most cities must award public works contracts based solely on the lowest bid. On paper, that sounds fair. In practice, it often means that the lowest price wins over the best qualified bid—leading to cost overruns, project delays, and endless change orders. It’s the government equivalent of buying the cheapest option first and paying more for it later.

Best value contracting flips that equation. It allows cities to weigh qualifications, experience, sustainability, and innovation—not just price—when selecting contractors. This approach has already been proven successful by counties, universities, and some charter cities. But most local governments in California don’t have permanent access to this tool.

That needs to change.

If cities like West Hollywood could permanently use best value contracting, we could deliver safer streets, park improvements, and infrastructure upgrades faster, more efficiently, and at lower cost to taxpayers.

---

Cutting Bureaucratic Bloat and Building Trust

Reforming the Public Contract Code to make best value contracting a statewide option would do more than save time and money—it would restore trust in government. Residents are frustrated by projects that take years to design and even longer to build. The truth is, much of that delay is built into the system itself: outdated rules that reward red tape over results.

By embracing a best value model, we’d reduce bureaucratic bloat, empower city staff to focus on outcomes, and give communities more transparency in how projects are delivered—with the best overall outcome. It’s smart, responsible government—and it’s long overdue.

---

From Local Action to Statewide Change

West Hollywood is doing its part. Our “Removing Infrastructure Roadblocks” policy will streamline local project timelines and prioritize safety. But real, lasting change requires partnership from Sacramento.

It’s time for the State Legislature to update the Public Contract Code and give every city the permanent ability to use best value contracting. With that change, we can finally build faster, smarter, and fairer—while saving money and lives along the way.

The path to safer streets starts in our cities, but the power to clear the roadblocks lies with the state. Let’s make it happen.

On Monday, October 20, the West Hollywood City Council will consider my proposal to remove local infrastructure roadblocks and set a new model for how cities can build more efficiently. I’m inviting everyone who believes in safer, smarter, and faster investment in our public spaces to show up and make your voice heard.

You can attend in person at the West Hollywood City Council Chambers (625 N. San Vicente Blvd.) or submit a public comment online at www.weho.org/agendas. Every voice matters — your input helps ensure we build a city and a state that works for everyone.

The path to safer streets starts here in West Hollywood. Let’s take that first step together — and let’s make sure California clears the roadblocks statewide.

California cities can’t keep building 21st-century infrastructure with 20th-century rules. It’s time to give local governments the flexibility to deliver for the people they serve.

John Erickson is a Councilmember and Former Mayor of the City of West Hollywood and a candidate for California State Senate District 24. 

In Los Angeles, where rainbow flags line Santa Monica Boulevard and queer communities carve out space to thrive, it can feel surreal that the federal government might one day classify transgender people as terrorists. Yet this no longer belies a paranoid fantasy. Reports surfaced this fall that the FBI is considering whether to categorize trans people under a newly minted threat label called “Nihilistic Violent Extremists”. This came in the wake of conspiracy theories that Charlie Kirk’s assassin was trans–theories that were later debunked. The Heritage Foundation, through its Project 2025 blueprint, has openly suggested that “transgender ideology” belongs in the same basket as terrorism. What sounds like fringe demagoguery is being whispered in the corridors of federal power. 

The danger of such framing is terrifying. When governments confuse identity with ideology, they are laying the groundwork for persecution. We have seen this playbook before. In the 1930s, Adolf Hitler’s regime did not begin with concentration camps. It began with words. Jews were depicted as corrupting influences, dangerous parasites, and threats to Aryan purity. Bureaucratic edicts stripped them of jobs, banned them from public schools, and erased their presence from civic life. This sort of parallels what is happening to trans people right now–we have been banned from the military, we can’t use the bathroom of our choosing, and we are being denied critical healthcare. A rhetorical shift–from neighbor to danger–makes it possible for ordinary citizens to tolerate, and even participate in, their eventual destruction. 

On his first day back in office, Trump signed Executive Order 14168, erasing gender identity from federal recognition, cutting funding for care, and redefining sex as fixed and immutable. Another order, 14190, criminalizes teachers who affirm a student’s pronouns or facilitate their social transition, equating simple recognition with exploitation. These are not abstract debates over language. They are policies that dictate whether people can live authentically, whether youth can find safety in schools, and whether families can see their children treated with dignity. To then float the idea of designating trans people as extremists is not an isolated thought experiment. It is a continuation of a campaign already intent on erasing us.

Just as Hitler began by classifying Jews as subversives, today’s political leaders risk classifying transgender people as national security threats. In both cases, identity is treated as a contagion. In both cases, the state deploys the language of danger to justify measures that would otherwise be unthinkable. And in both cases, the consequences for silence are catastrophic. When trans existence is conflated with terrorism, it becomes easier for ICE to surveil us, for policymakers to justify banning our gatherings, and for agencies to deny us access to the very structures of public life. What begins as words in a memo can end in barbed wire, if history is any guide.

Los Angeles knows better than to believe itself immune. The city has long been a sanctuary for queer and trans people, a place where art and activism have fused into survival. Yet federal classifications do not stop at county lines. A Pride march in West Hollywood could be branded a security risk if Washington decides that trans identity itself is extremist. A parent advocating for their child at a Los Angeles school board meeting could suddenly find their activism logged in a federal file. 

The stakes of this moment are enormous. If the American public shrugs at the possibility of transgender people being labeled “nihilistic terrorists,” we risk normalizing the logic of persecution. And if that logic hardens, it will not stop with us. Once a regime learns to brand identity itself as dangerous, it will reach for new scapegoats to sustain its power.

Los Angeles has always been a city of resistance, a place where queer life refuses to be hidden, a place where silence is not an option. That spirit must animate our response now. To accept these federal whispers as mere rhetoric is to betray the lessons of history. To resist them is to defend not only transgender lives, but the integrity of democracy itself.

Words prepare the ground for action. Plenty of dictators have taught us that. The only question is whether we will recognize the warning signs in time.

Isaac Amend is a writer based in the D.C. area. He is a trans man and was featured in National Geographic’s “Gender Revolution” documentary. He serves on the board of the LGBT Democrats of Virginia and is a Yale graduate. You can follow him on Instagram at @isaacamend 

APLA Health, a nonprofit providing HIV care, prevention, and sexual health services, announced the return of AIDS Walk Los Angeles on Sunday, October 12, 2025, starting from West Hollywood Park. This year’s theme, “Community Is the Cure,” emphasizes the role of unity in advancing progress against HIV/AIDS and supporting those affected.

Walk day will feature a live performance from RuPaul’s Drag Race star Heidi N Closet, DJ sets, and community booths. Following the celebration, walkers will make their way through the streets of West Hollywood.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by AIDS Walk LA • Supports APLA Health (@aidswalkla)

“This event was born out of urgency, and it’s just as relevant today,” said Craig E. Thompson, CEO of APLA Health. “We’ve made incredible progress in the fight against HIV, but that progress is under direct threat from funding cuts and political attacks. Now is the time to show that we won’t be silenced or set back.”

Since its inception forty years ago, AIDS Walk Los Angeles has grown into one of the largest HIV/AIDS fundraising events in the world, raising nearly $100 million. Proceeds fund APLA Health’s services, including HIV specialty care, sexual health services, food and nutrition support, and housing assistance.

“The HIV/AIDS epidemic has always shown us that progress happens when people come together, when patients, neighbors, families, activists, and health providers stand shoulder to shoulder. Today, with funding under attack and stigma resurfacing, unity is not optional. ‘Community Is the Cure’ is a reminder that science alone isn’t enough. We need collective willpower, advocacy, and solidarity to ensure everyone has access to the care and dignity they deserve,” Thompson said.

Cuts to Medicaid, the Ryan White Program, and prevention funding threaten access to medications, housing assistance, and food security. “Here in Los Angeles, where tens of thousands rely on these programs, even modest reductions can push people back into crisis. AIDS Walk Los Angeles helps fill some of those gaps, but philanthropy cannot fully replace the government’s responsibility,” Thompson explained.

Communities of color, the medically underserved, people living in poverty, and those experiencing homelessness are disproportionately affected. “The barriers aren’t medical. They’re structural: stigma, lack of insurance, unstable housing, and underfunded safety-net services. The administration is underinvesting in the very programs designed to break down these barriers. Until that changes, inequities in HIV prevention and care will persist,” he said.

Funds raised by the walk provide housing, groceries, case management, and access to medical care. Thompson shared the story of one patient who had lost housing and had to choose between medication and meals. “Through AIDS Walk–funded programs, we were able to connect him to stable housing, consistent medical care, and our food pantry. Today, he is virally suppressed, working again, and mentoring others who are newly diagnosed with HIV. Stories like his are common, and they remind us that cuts aren’t just numbers on a spreadsheet, they’re setbacks in real people’s lives.”

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by AIDS Walk LA • Supports APLA Health (@aidswalkla)

Beyond fundraising, AIDS Walk LA is a platform for advocacy. “When thousands of people flood the streets of West Hollywood, it’s a visible reminder to our community that HIV/AIDS has not gone away and to policymakers that their decisions have life-or-death consequences. The walk puts pressure on elected officials to fund programs, fight stigma, and stand up for people affected by HIV,” Thompson said.

He urged the public to take action beyond walking and donating. “Call your elected officials. Demand that HIV services remain fully funded. Show up for community hearings. Support housing initiatives. Share facts on social media to counter stigma. And, importantly, talk. Without continued conversation about HIV/AIDS and sexual health, we jeopardize the incredible advancements we’ve made in HIV care and prevention.”

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by AIDS Walk LA • Supports APLA Health (@aidswalkla)

Thompson also framed the walk as part of a broader activist approach. “Radical action today means showing up for one another in tangible ways, housing someone, feeding someone, advocating for someone, and refusing to accept policies that erase people’s humanity. As our theme emphasizes, when politicians fail us, COMMUNITY IS THE CURE. For participants in AIDS Walk LA, it means recognizing that the walk is just the beginning. Each person can be a messenger, an advocate, and an ally in daily life. When we work together to get people connected to support services, the collective action is radical because it insists on care and dignity in a time when those values are under attack.”

“Activism ensures policymakers cannot quietly dismantle programs. Community solidarity means that no one gets left behind. Public pressure creates accountability. When thousands unite at AIDS Walk LA, it demonstrates the broad mandate to keep fighting until HIV is no longer a public health crisis. That unity is as important as any medical breakthrough,” Thompson concluded.

For more information on AIDS Walk Los Angeles and how to register, visit https://AIDSWALK.LA.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by AIDS Walk LA • Supports APLA Health (@aidswalkla)

In a time when queer folks are often made to decide between affirming care and accessible care, Rainbow Hill Recovery serves as both a lifeline and a lighthouse. Founded by partners Joey Bachrach and Andrew Fox, the LA-based treatment and recovery center is undoubtedly community-first, client-centered, and radically transparent. We took a moment with Joey to talk about the importance of representation, the myths surrounding addiction in our queer communities, and how we can better serve those in our queer family who are struggling.

How do you define LGBTQ+ affirming care, and how does Rainbow Hill ensure it from start to finish?

There’s a huge difference between being friendly and being affirming. A lot of programs will say they “work well” with the LGBTQ+ community, but in practice, that often falls short. To be truly affirming is to see clients exactly as they are, respecting their pronouns, their identity, and creating space where they can recover openly and without judgment.

At Rainbow Hill, our entire staff is part of the community. Gay, bi, trans, non-binary, you name it. Representation is critical, especially in recovery. Our leadership reflects that, and it shows in our culture. It starts at the top.

Was there a specific moment when you realized there was a gap in LGBTQ+ affirming recovery and treatment services?

Absolutely. That became painfully clear when we opened Rainbow Hill Sober Living in 2021. We looked around and realized there were maybe three programs nationwide that exclusively catered to LGBTQ+ individuals. Just three. Sure, there are allies out there doing great work, and we consider many of them friends, but truly community-specific care is still incredibly rare. That was our “aha” moment.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Rainbow Hill Recovery 🌈 (@rainbowhillrecovery)

How has your personal experience shaped the culture and philosophy of Rainbow Hill?

That’s a tough one. I think it comes down to living authentically and being open about our own journeys. My husband Andrew and I are both in recovery, and we wear that proudly. While we’re not 12-step focused, we respect all paths to recovery.

For us, recovery is about planting seeds, watering them, and never taking credit. We give our clients autonomy. They don’t get to dictate their treatment, but they definitely get a say. If someone isn’t connecting with a group, they’re welcome to step out, regulate, and return when ready. We’ve found that this freedom creates a community where people genuinely want to be here.

What are the different levels of care that Rainbow Hill offers?

Rainbow Hill offers three distinct levels of care, each tailored to meet clients where they are in their recovery journey. The most intensive level is the Partial Hospitalization Program (PHP), which runs five days a week from 9:00 AM to 12:30 PM. Clients in PHP participate in five therapeutic groups each day and receive comprehensive support, including regular sessions with a psychiatrist or nurse practitioner, as well as weekly one-on-one therapy with a licensed clinician. This level of care typically lasts between six and twelve weeks, depending on the individual’s needs and insurance authorization.

For those needing a step down in intensity, Rainbow Hill offers an Intensive Outpatient Program (IOP) with two flexible options: IOP 5, which involves three hours of group therapy five days a week, and IOP 3, which provides the same structure but condensed into three days of the client’s choosing—often Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. Both IOP levels include individual therapy sessions with a licensed therapist. Finally, the outpatient program serves as a more flexible, a la carte option for those transitioning back into daily life. Clients can choose between one and three hours of group therapy per week, and by this point, they’re typically paired with an external therapist for ongoing individual support.

How does Rainbow Hill address co-occurring mental health issues and trauma?

We’ve hired an incredible team of licensed clinicians who specialize in trauma and dual diagnosis. Our Clinical Director, Janae Borrego, leads trauma-focused groups, and we have separate tracks for mental health and substance use, depending on the client’s needs.

We’re licensed to treat both primary mental health and primary substance use, which isn’t always the case at other facilities. We don’t pretend to know everything, but we do make sure the right experts are in the room.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by J O E Y BACHRACH (@joeybachrach)

What does aftercare look like at Rainbow Hill?

It starts on day one. Our case manager, Steven, who’s also a counselor, begins discharge planning as soon as someone arrives. Are they going back home? Into sober living? Do they need a support network outside of treatment? We help them build that life.

We also have an Alumni Coordinator who keeps everyone connected post-treatment. They know they can call their clinical team anytime, even if it’s just to say, “I’m struggling.” We want this to be their last stop.

What are the biggest misconceptions about addiction and recovery, especially within the LGBTQ+ community?

That it’s a choice. Addiction is no more a choice than being gay or trans is. Nobody chooses to be bullied or cast aside, just like nobody chooses the chaos and harm that comes with addiction.

I’ve hurt people I love. I was a different person. The idea that we’re beyond help, or that we chose this, is a dangerous lie. A former therapist once told me: “That person you see on the street? They could be the one who saves your child’s life one day.” That really stuck with me. It’s a philosophy we carry at Rainbow Hill.

How is the landscape of LGBTQ+ recovery evolving?

There are definitely more options today than even a few years ago. Programs are getting better educated. Some are true allies. Others, well, a rainbow flag on your website doesn’t make you affirming.

There’s still a long way to go, but we’re seeing progress, and that gives me hope.

What’s the biggest challenge Rainbow Hill faces today?

Clients come to us after being misled – promised one thing, delivered something entirely different. Some centers still ask invasive questions like, “What surgeries have you had?” That’s unacceptable, especially for someone already in crisis.

Too many providers are in it for the wrong reasons, money over mission. If LGBTQ+ care isn’t your specialty, don’t fake it. Learn first. Then show up with integrity.

How does Rainbow Hill incorporate advocacy into its work?

We try to make sobriety look like the joy it can be. That includes humor, community events, and yes, the occasional Smart & Final burrito. We’ve raffled off free treatment at Pride events, and in October, we’re launching a grant-funded program for West Hollywood residents, workers, and unhoused folks to receive two months of free care.

We’re also sex-positive and body-positive. While clients can’t actively engage in sex work during treatment, we prepare them for re-entry if that’s their chosen work.

Transparency is everything. Our office is a literal fishbowl, no curtains, no secrets. Clients see us. We see them. It’s all intentional.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Rainbow Hill Recovery 🌈 (@rainbowhillrecovery)

With rising anti-LGBTQ+ legislation, how are you supporting clients who feel that pressure?

We’ve created a space where those hard conversations can happen. Many of our clients are trans, and we’ve had people express suicidal ideation directly related to the threat of losing access to gender-affirming care.

We don’t shy away from these topics. We meet people exactly where they are, no filter, no shame. Our job is to hold space, not judge. While we try to stay out of politics as a business, our clients live in that world every day, and we don’t ignore it.

Do you think the current administration is doing enough? What policy changes are needed?

Honestly? No. They’re not. Members of our community need access to mental health and substance use services without fearing they’ll lose that care tomorrow.

Technically, we’re not classified as a gender-affirming care provider, but in reality, we absolutely are. We may not perform surgeries, but we affirm and support our clients’ identities every day. We need more protections, period.

On a lighter note, what does joy look like to you, and how do you spread it?

We literally have a group called “Joy.” One week it’s dancing, the next it’s screaming “Pink Pony Club” at the top of their lungs. For me, joy is living authentically. I’m a proud gay man in a loving marriage. I dyed my hair blue the other day. My mom said, “Well, at least you don’t live under my roof.” And I said, “Exactly!”

Joy is not caring what others think. It’s different for everyone. But for me, it’s being unapologetically myself.

What’s one self-care practice you have now that younger you would’ve laughed at?

Breathing. Slowing down. Resting. My brain never stops, so I still struggle with it. But the basics are often the most powerful. 15 years ago, I was deep in addiction. I couldn’t have imagined any of this. Younger me needed to buckle up.

What’s next for Rainbow Hill? Any expansion or partnerships on the horizon?

We just moved into a larger space in Miracle Mile, so we can now run three groups simultaneously instead of one. That means we can help more people.

We also launched the Rainbow Hill Foundation, our nonprofit arm, to provide financial assistance for treatment and sober living. Eventually, we’d love to expand into smaller-minded cities and states where programs aren’t available.

Check out Rainbow Hill Recovery

When I learned I was living with HIV nine years ago, there were a lot of questions to be answered: how will I access treatment? Will I feel safe and respected by my care team? What does stigma look like for me in the fourth decade of the HIV epidemic? 

While I was fortunate to have a wonderful team of case managers and health care providers who guided me through an unfamiliar and complex medical system, I’ve heard countless stories of people fighting tooth and nail just to find appropriate care, let alone treatment.  

Our country’s labyrinthine, convoluted health system is cluttered with obstacles like prior authorization and step therapy. Both of which needlessly delay access to health care by imposing vague requirements and/or forcing patients to “fail” a series of medications before they are granted access to the one actually prescribed by their physician. For game-changing HIV prevention drugs like PrEP, these hurdles endanger lives. Combined with our current federal landscape being incredibly antagonistic (i.e., the Trump Administration trying to gut $1.5 billion in HIV prevention funding, among a laundry list of offenses), the LGBTQ+ community is facing disproportionate hardships that are exacerbating disparities and contributing to further stigmatization.  

Thankfully, California policymakers are doing their part to protect our community. Assembly Bill 554, authored by Assemblymember Mark González (D-Los Angeles), follows in the footsteps of nine other states by ensuring coverage for all long-acting, injectable drugs used for PrEP and PEP. The bill “safeguards patient and provider choice” by eliminating cost-sharing and expanding access to a wider range of ARV medications to help bolster medication adherence rates. It also ensures coverage for future formulations of ARV drugs that are better at making HIV undetectable and untransmissible. 

PrEP (pre-exposure prophylaxis) and PEP (post-exposure prophylaxis) are effective regimens for preventing the transmission of HIV when taken as prescribed. AB 554 enshrines quick access to these treatments, satisfying calls for health equity, especially for Black and Latino Californians, who face disproportionate transmission and infection rates. 

AB 554 is a huge step in the right direction; however, without consistent leadership from policymakers, those living with HIV will continue to be the first on the budget chopping block. Just last week, the California Legislature passed a budget trailer bill (AB 144) that includes provisions to divert funds from the AIDS Drugs Assistance Program Rebate Fund toward general state operations.  

California policymakers can’t say they’re countering the Trump Administration and supporting the HIV community if they’re also ripping the rug out from underneath us. AIDS Drug Assistance Programs are lifelines – they normalize diagnoses, fund direct services, and help uninsured and underinsured patients access essential care.  

Ironically, while AB 554 will build upon the work of ADAPs to eliminate prohibitive barriers, AB 144 will steal funds from the program to instead boost state revenue. ADAPs already operate from a very small annual revenue of fixed federal funding awards per state. States taking more money away from these critical programs will threaten their ability to serve HIV patients. Moreover, these dollars are statutorily prohibited from being used for non-HIV care by Title II of the Ryan White CARE Act. 

California is destined to repeat the sins of the past unless Governor Newsom steps in. For too long, those living with HIV have been isolated, cast aside, leveraged for political gain, and dropped soon thereafter if something better comes along. We are not budget dust, we are not pawns in a political game, we are real people with real voices, and we’re asking Governor Newsom to do what’s right: redline the ADAP provisions from AB 144 and sign AB 554 into law.  

California can lead the nation in doing what’s right for all communities. But it starts with policy, and we have to make sure policies are centered around those they impact. 

Kalvin Pugh is the state policy director for the Community Access National Network, a national 501(c)(3) nonprofit that works to improve access to health care services and supports for people living with HIV/AIDS and viral hepatitis through advocacy, education and networking.

As gay men, are we having more sex than our fore-daddies or just more open about it? Between Grindr dings that hit harder than Double Scorpio, PrEP prescriptions as our daily gay-ly vitamin, and the ever-present anxiety of FOMO, I think it’s fair to ask, is hooking up becoming a numbers game, more focused on quantity vs. quality, for many of us ‘mos?

For eons, gay sex has been both a subject of fascination and moral panic for those on the hetero side of the picket fence. But the conversation has shifted. Today, the questions come less from pearl-clutching conservatives and more from within our own community. How much is too much? Are we liberated yet? Are more and more of our gay brethren basking in the waters of heteronormativity? And to what extent are our sex lives driven by libido, validation, or the simple fact that we can?

Let’s start with the obvious culprit: technology. Of course, as gay men, the first thing that we did following the birth of the smartphone was create a way to see all of the fair-game dick within a one-mile radius. We were the first to adopt hookup apps as essential social tools, from the early days of Grindr to the onset of Sniffies. According to research cited by Gay Counsellor, compulsive use of apps can mirror patterns of behavioral addiction, where “likes” and “messages” stimulate dopamine in ways eerily similar to gambling. The buzz of a notification becomes less about actual intimacy and more about self-worth. Sex as currency, matches as validation.

A TIME article warned in 2014 that hookup apps might be “destroying gay relationships,” arguing that the sheer efficiency of digital cruising left little incentive for building intimacy. Why invest in a partner when you can have instant access to some NSA ass five feet away? It’s the Amazon Prime of getting off – quick delivery, same-day service.

I think that these critics are missing a nuance here. Apps aren’t inherently bad; they are simply adding a Cialis to what’s already in our culture. If we already treat sex as a form of transactional validation in normal life, apps inject that insecurity with steroids.

Then there’s PrEP, the little blue pill that revolutionized sexual health and, in turn, our sex lives. Since its FDA approval in 2012, Truvada has been both a miracle and a lightning rod. A CUNY study found that PrEP has fueled perceptions of promiscuity. The assumption is that biomedical safety nets invite reckless raw-dogging abandon, reinforcing the stereotype of gay men as hedonistic ho-bags.

But the data tells a more complicated story. Research published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (2022) suggests that while PrEP use does correlate with higher numbers of sexual partners for some, it also fosters healthier discussions about safety and reduces anxiety around HIV. Translation: PrEP doesn’t make people slutty, it makes them feel secure. If this sense of sexual security emboldens them to embrace their sexuality more fully, is that really a problem? Or is it just a shift in norms?

Of course, none of this exists in a vacuum. As The Conversation notes, homosexuality may have evolved as much for social bonding as it did for reproduction. Historically, gay sex wasn’t just about pleasure but also survival, solidarity, and even networking. In the years after Stonewall, sex was political. It was a sweaty form of protest against heteronormative repression, a celebration of community in defiance of shame.

But in 2025, sex has also become… a competition. Liam Heitmann-Ryce-LeMercier’s essay on Medium critiques how queer culture sometimes conflates liberation with obligation. Promiscuity is framed less as personal choice and more as proof of authenticity. Don’t want to sleep around? Then maybe you’re repressed, prudish, or not “gay enough.” The pressure cuts both ways – to have sex, to crave sex, to keep up with everyone else’s sex.

And here’s where FOMO comes in. For every wild Saturday night Instagram story, there’s someone scrolling at home, wondering if they’re missing out – not on an orgasm, but on acceptance and belonging. The sex itself is just the trophy to the win, secondary to the validation of being chosen, the real prize.

So what actually drives this culture? Libido is undoubtedly up in this. Gay men, like all people, are wired with sexual impulses. But the psychological factors are harder to ignore. Validation looms large. The “yes” of a stranger affirms desirability. The “no” can often feel like a reflection of our worth. Ego magnifies the stakes, turning sex from a dance in the sheets into a scoreboard.

A telling study in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health posited that compulsive app users often report using sex as a coping mechanism for loneliness and low self-esteem. Which inevitably raises the question – are we having more sex because we want it, or because we need to prove something, whether that is to ourselves and to others?

No discussion of queer sex culture or sex as a whole would be complete without tackling entitlement. Many of us know the type: the man who can’t take “no” for an answer, who interprets rejection as an insult, who cloaks his bruised ego in accusations of rudeness or exclusion.

Here’s the truth: just because you hand out a cookie or two doesn’t mean you have to share with the class. Consent is not a punch card system, and no one is entitled to anyone else’s body. Yet too often, rejection is reframed as cruelty, with aggressors painting themselves as victims. Is it gaslighting? Maybe. Is it delusion? Almost certainly. The lesson is simple: declining sex doesn’t make you a monster, and other people’s inability to handle rejection doesn’t make it your problem. Autonomy is not negotiable.

So are gay men more promiscuous today? In some ways, yes. Apps have streamlined access, PrEP and doxy have lowered risks, and cultural stigma is withering. But promiscuity isn’t the villain or the hero of this story. It’s a spectrum, shaped by psychology, politics, history, technology, and so much more.

For some, sex is liberation; for others, it’s compulsion. For some, it’s community; for others, it’s ego. The pearl-jammed peril lies not in the sex itself but in mistaking quantity for quality, validation for value, or pressure for choice.

Our challenge isn’t to moralize but to contextualize. To ask ourselves (and only ourselves)  not how much sex we’re having, but why, and to respect that everyone’s reasons for getting down are their own. And to remember that liberation isn’t measured by tallies on a jockstrap waistband but by freedom from stigma, coercion, and shame. Stay safe and stay self-aware, my fellow bedfellows.

Karl Schmid has long been a staple in queer news and media. Hailing from Australia, Schmid grew accustomed to the limelight from a young age, and eventually made a successful transition into American network television through his work on red carpets for ABC. 

In 2018, he would be thrust into the spotlight for a different reason. Despite repeated warnings from professional acquaintances, Schmid came out as HIV positive to share his story, wear down stigmas, and to educate people about important and misunderstood science like the concept of undetectable equals untransmittable. 

And so, Schmid would grow accustomed to renewal. In 2019, he launched Plus Life Media, a platform that shares HIV resources, education, and stories of resilience from people living with HIV/AIDS. He was part of the team behind the Emmy-nominated short documentary, Marty’s Place: Where Hope Lives: an intimate look into a housing cooperative created in the 1990s to support people with HIV/AIDS. Late last week, he flew to New York for the U.S. debut of his latest initiative: HIV Unwrapped. The project pairs researchers and scientists in HIV studies with fashion design students, culminating in a runway show that features bold reimaginings and interpretations of crucial science. 

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Karl Schmid (@karljschmid)

The Blade spoke with Karl about the cross-pollination in his own life and career, and how his latest effort is shaping the way he blends activism and media to reinvigorate conversations around HIV/AIDS.

HIV Unwrapped feels like a really interesting pivot into a different kind of modality and platform for you. Can you tell me more about the initiative and how it fits into your legacy of activism and work?

Well, HIV Unwrapped came out of Australia and this wonderful activist named Brent Allan, who I’m good friends with. And Brent had been at, I think, the WorldPride, or something that was happening in Australia, and there was an exhibition where they paired some engineers and science people of varying professions with a fashion designer to try and illustrate their work. 

And he thought, “Wow, what a great way to maybe try and interpret HIV science and reignite the conversation around HIV.” So it started in Melbourne, Australia, and it was successful there. And then they did a version in the UK earlier this year. And then in July for the International AIDS Conference that took place in Kigali, in Rwanda, they did a version. 

And that’s kind of where I stepped in. I think with HIV Unwrapped, you’re drawn into the fashion first — and then the science comes. It’s just a really unique and different way of reframing the conversation about HIV. But beyond that, it’s also working with fashion students, young people, and to see them become so invested in HIV science. That’s what gets me the most excited. Because you’re opening a whole new world to a person who doesn’t maybe really think about HIV all that much, and now they’ve learned all this amazing stuff. Suddenly you’ve got a whole new bunch of people talking about HIV in exciting and fresh ways, and they’re telling their friends and they’re having conversations about it. 

You’re trying to create different entry points for people to not only talk about the science behind HIV and AIDS, but also how we can reinterpret it in original and visually interesting ways.

I mean, look, you’ve got the House Appropriations Committee willing to advance this “Big Beautiful Bill” that slashes $2 billion in HIV funding in this country, and as someone living with HIV, you keep going, “Why would they do that? Why? We are so close to ending HIV.” All of a sudden, we’ve stopped funding research, and we’re stopping this, and I’m just like, “Why?” 

Now more than ever, we’ve got people and politicians and government and a large part of the United States who think, “Oh yeah, HIV isn’t a thing anymore. It’s not important.” Well, it is still a thing. It is still important, and HIV Unwrapped is a way to be creative and open new avenues of dialogue. 

A friend of mine sent me a handwritten note the other day. This is in Texas. One of his roommates wrote a handwritten note to another roommate, saying, “Oh, just so you know, ‘such and such’ has AIDS. So I’d be scrubbing the shower if I were you after he uses it. I personally have decided to go and shower at the gym.” And this is a person in their 30s, so we’re still having these dumb conversations from 1984. 

That’s why I do what I do with Plus Life, and that’s why I’m like, “Wow, HIV Unwrapped is another tool in our toolbox we can use.” And I guess our hope is really that scientists will see this across the country and around the world and go, “Well, that is a really cool way to explain my science and make it accessible,” and want to engage in future projects like this.

How queer communities are represented in the media can leave deep imprints. I was watching an older interview you did where you recall this HIV ad you saw in a movie theater as a kid. The Grim Reaper’s there, and it’s creepy and sinister. It seems like we’ve moved away from that kind of imagery — but it doesn’t feel like we’ve necessarily come to a much better understanding of HIV/AIDS. Where do you think we’re at now in terms of representation?

The fact that, to this day, I can tell you where I was, what the movie was, that it was a Saturday, which cinema it was in, and I was a seven year old kid. It gives you an idea of how burned into my memory that is. And, I agree. I think we’ve moved away largely from the fear tactics, but we’ve stopped talking about it. I’d like to think that we’ve gotten better in representing people living with HIV, on television and film, as just people living with HIV. Where HIV doesn’t become the central storyline, and it’s not a doom and gloom, “woe is me” story. It’s just part of who they are. 

But we sort of dance around anything that’s to do with our bodies or sex or sexuality, because it makes us uncomfortable. And so when I pitch stories to ABC and other networks, and even, quite frankly, trying to get press to cover HIV Unwrapped: we get passed on. People don’t want to talk to us because HIV isn’t sexy. As long as we keep doing that and having that reaction — if we don’t talk about it — we don’t get to a place where we can be comfortable with it. 

Since I came out about my status all those years ago, my focus has been trying to normalize the conversation. That’s how we grow, and that’s how we learn — whether it’s HIV, whether it’s politics, whether it’s anything. But if we don’t talk about it, and we sort of pretend it doesn’t exist, and then we cut funding for it, and we sort of sweep it under the rug: it ain’t going to go anywhere. 

Women of color, Black and brown women, have the highest infection rates in the United States. In the south those rates keep going up and up and up, and now we’re cutting funding to testing and to counseling and to services. I’m really worried that we will end up back with AIDS wards in hospitals again, and there’s no need for it.

To bring it back to HIV Unwrapped, that’s why, if I can come up and work with an amazing group of people to tell stories and to have conversations in fresh ways, then I’m going to keep doing it — whether it’s HIV Unwrapped, whether it’s what I do on Plus Life, whether it’s a television show or whatever crazy thing I come up with next.

It feels like there’s so much watering-down in terms of conversations around sexual health, HIV and AIDS. What is the resistance that you’ve faced, and how has that resistance changed over the years?

I’ve heard, “I think what you’re doing is great. It’s just not the right time to tell the story.” Well, when is the right time to tell the story? I think so many people in America think HIV doesn’t affect them. And the reality is very different. HIV affects everybody. If not now, when? People are still dying in this country. People are afraid to get tested, and they’re living in shame. And they’re hiding what’s wrong with them because of the stigma — and that just shouldn’t be happening. 

I’ve said this a million times too. You know, HIV and AIDS doesn’t kill you. That’s not what’s going to put me in the grave. But it’s the stigma. It’s the bigoted, out-of-date opinions of Congress and politicians and public figures and uneducated people who just think this is somehow some deviant, dirty “sex disease” or drug disease, and those of us who get it deserve it. And you know, television networks, especially, are in the business of making money. And to do that, they sell advertising, and so they’re worried that advertisers will turn off if you talk about this kind of stuff. 

And I think it’s maybe a little bit the opposite. I think if you can find, again, engaging and interesting ways to have real conversations, I’ve certainly found that you get a very vast and wide audience of people who will chime in and may have an opinion. And again, our opinions may differ, and that’s okay, but, but as long as we’re having the conversation, the more you say it, the less scary it is. 

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Plus Life (@pluslifemedia)

Almost 20 years after you were first diagnosed with HIV, do you see yourself pivoting now to work more on activism? Is that something you’re trying to focus more on now at this point of your career?

I will say that I’m incredibly fortunate to have worked for as many years as I have in broadcast, and I’ve done some really amazing things, and had some phenomenal opportunities going to the Oscars and doing all those red carpets and celebrity interviews all over the world. They’re all valuable experiences that I’ve been able to build upon. But I will say that in the last sort of two years, especially, my focus has become more about Plus Life and doing these kinds of stories and these kinds of initiatives. 

I am fascinated by people. I think to be a decent journalist or broadcaster, you have to have that innate curiosity. And I am deeply curious about people and people’s behavior and where they come from, and what kind of homes they grew up in, what their friends are like. It’s incredibly satisfying to me. Do I miss being on regular, scheduled programming and television? Sure. It was a fantastic platform, and there’s nothing quite like the thrill of live television for me, and that’s why I loved being in news and entertainment news. 

I think as I sort of get older, and I’m no longer the young kid on the block, and I’m not so nimble with my thumbs and my forefingers when it comes to putting stuff up on social media and Tik Tok and all of that…If I’ve got an opportunity to really hone in on the stuff that I do with Plus Life, there’s nothing more rewarding than that, right?

A behind-the-scenes documentary of the U.S. debut of HIV Unwrapped will be available to stream on November 30th, just before World AIDS Day.

Charlie Kirk was no stranger to controversy. He thrived in it. He built his career on standing at the microphone in crowded lecture halls and telling skeptical young progressives to “prove me wrong.” At just 18, he saw a vacuum on the political map and filled it, co-founding Turning Point USA, which now calls itself the largest conservative student movement in the nation. His reach stretched from high school classrooms to the White House, his podcast drawing millions, his organization boasting thousands of programs, and his presence sparking protests wherever he spoke.

Kirk’s sudden and tragic death has left America reeling. For his followers, he was a bold voice who gave them language to express frustration with the left. For his critics, he was a provocateur who stoked division for profit. But for all of us, his passing should force us to reckon with the fire we’ve built around politics. Because let’s be honest: it isn’t just rhetoric anymore. Words are hardening into violence. Ideas are becoming weapons. And a democracy that devours itself from within cannot endure.

America is fractured. Our civic life feels like it’s splintering beneath our feet. Whether you are gay or straight, trans or cisgender, conservative or progressive, the same truth echoes: hate is taking lives. Too often, leaders build their platforms not by lifting people up but by tearing communities down.

We’ve seen how quickly careless words can spiral into fear, how easily fear becomes cruelty, and how cruelty ends in tragedy. This isn’t about one man’s career or ideology. This is about us — a country that keeps choosing division over dignity, suspicion over solidarity. That choice is killing us.

In this moment, America needs courage. And often, that courage comes most clearly from the communities that have borne the brunt of hate the longest. LGBTQ Americans know what it means to be targeted, to be legislated against, to have their very existence debated in the public square.

And yet, despite that, queer communities have built joy. They’ve built love. They’ve built families, art, churches, businesses, neighborhoods — not in spite of being different, but because difference can be beautiful. That resilience holds a mirror up to America: this is what it looks like to endure, to rise above rhetoric, to keep creating hope even when the world insists you don’t belong.

It’s not the LGBTQ community that needs to be convinced of America’s worth. It is America that needs to be reminded of its own soul.

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. spoke of a dream where children of every race could sit side by side in dignity. Today, that dream must stretch wider. It must include queer children who deserve safety, trans youth who deserve freedom, and every marginalized person who deserves to breathe the air of equality without fear.

But make no mistake: this dream will not be realized by vilifying those with whom we disagree. It will not be achieved by mocking faith or silencing the voices of the right. It will come only when conservatives and progressives, red states and blue, stand together and admit that diversity is not America’s weakness — it is America’s genius.

To those on the far right who fear LGBTQ neighbors: your fear is misplaced. The call is not to give up your faith or your freedom. It is to recognize others’ right to theirs. And when we recognize each other’s humanity, the promise of America is finally fulfilled.

What we must do now is clear. If America is to survive this age of division, we must begin by reclaiming empathy. That means looking beyond the noise of politics and policy to truly see one another as human beings — neighbors, families, and communities whose dignity is not up for debate. We must protect the vulnerable, standing firmly with LGBTQ youth, immigrants, people of color, and all who have been pushed to the margins of society. Their safety and belonging cannot be treated as optional. We must celebrate difference, treating diversity not as a problem to be managed but as one of our nation’s greatest gifts. Our strength has always come from the kaleidoscope of identities, cultures, and voices that call this country home. And finally, we must hold speech accountable. Words shape worlds. When leaders choose language that harms, divides, or stokes fear, they corrode democracy itself. When they choose words that heal and summon courage, they open the door to renewal. Only when we embrace these commitments can we move from rhetoric to renewal—and begin the work of healing America together.

Charlie Kirk’s life was proof that words carry weight. His death must remind us that the weight of our words can no longer crush the spirit of this country. The question before us is not whether America will be divided — it already is. The question is whether we will summon the courage to heal it.

The time for slogans and soundbites has passed. The time for renewal is now.

Because if America continues to treat difference as danger, then democracy itself will wither. But if we choose to see difference as destiny, then we can build a nation strong enough to hold us all. That choice is not theirs. It is not mine. It belongs to all of us. And history will remember what we decide. Only when we embrace these commitments can we move from rhetoric to renewal—and begin the work of healing America together.

Emma Roshioru is a senior at Virginia Tech majoring in Political Science and Public Relations. Dr. James Bridgeforth is an independent, nationally syndicated columnist whose work has appeared in the Los Angeles Blade, The Washington Post, and the Washington Examiner.

On September 10, Assembly Bill (AB) 554, or the PrEPARE Act (Protecting Rights, Expanding Prevention, and Advancing Reimbursement for Equity Act), was passed with a majority vote by the California State Assembly and Senate. Today, the bill’s leaders are urging Governor Newsom to sign it into law.  

“With a powerful coalition behind AB 554, we were able to get this bill through the process swiftly, and are hopeful that the Governor will see the need for the LGBTQ+ community,” Los Angeles Assemblymember Mark Gonzalez, one of the bill’s co-authors, told the Blade.

AB 554 was first introduced in February, and was penned by Assemblymember Gonzalez and San Francisco Assemblymember Matt Haney. It was formed to amend existing laws around health insurance coverage that currently restrict access to certain antiretroviral drugs, or HIV preventative medicine like PrEP and PEP, and to ease difficulties community clinics face in administering these medications and receiving reimbursement. The bill will also require health care plans to cover FDA-approved HIV medication without enforcing prior authorization or step therapy. 

For Gonzales and the bill’s supporters, AB 554 is about boosting access to various forms of effective HIV preventative medicine and providing a safeguard for people as the state of HIV research and treatment enters unsteady ground. This all comes in the midst of the debate around the House Committee on Appropriations’s 2026 Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies funding bill, which proposes $1.7 billion in cuts to domestic HIV prevention and research efforts, as well as programs that provide care for people living with HIV/AIDS — particularly, low-income people of color.

Assemblymember Gonzalez stated to the Blade that this is a “stark reminder that this epidemic still hits our communities of color the hardest,” and wants to address this by evolving and updating laws to reflect local needs. He is hopeful about the Governor’s impending response, and stated that the bill is “not just a policy; it is a lifeline.”

“It’s about giving people real choices, equipping small clinics with the tools they need to protect lives,” Gonzalez continued, “and ensuring that California continues to put public health over politics.”

Trans advocates have argued for years that anti-trans speech leads directly to anti-trans violence, and were eye-rolled to oblivion. Charlie Kirk, whether as a mouthpiece for what politicians dared not say out loud, or as a hype man keeping the politics of resentment ever inflamed, built a career out of weaponizing right-wing talking points, fueling a culture of violence that ultimately killed him, and now threatens all of us.

The trail of harm caused by Kirk’s rhetoric is not abstract—it lines up with real blood and real deaths. When he blasted the phrase “China virus” into cultural discourse—parroted days later by Trump—anti-Asian hate crimes spiked. His COVID misinformation spread right alongside hundreds of thousands of needless fatalities. When he compared abortion to the Holocaust, he sanctified the moral panic that cleared the way for Roe v. Wade’s destruction—and pregnant people now die totally preventable deaths like it’s 1972 again.

Kirk also called gender-affirming care for youth “child mutilation,” language now enshrined in legislation that has severed a lifeline for vulnerable kids and their families. He urged that trans people be “taken care of the way society handled us in the 1950s and 60s,” that is, with lobotomies, shock therapy, and police persecution. He spent his last moments on earth promoting the conspiracy theory that trans people make up an imaginary majority of mass shooters—classic fascist scapegoating with the obvious aim of inciting more violence against trans people.

The irony cannot be overstated that his actual last words, spoken as he was shot, minimized the human toll of gun violence. In death, Charlie Kirk proved the point that sowing violence with words reaps real-world tragedy. He gave trans activists the last word on the matter forever.

And now we know the truth: Kirk was not killed by a leftist or a trans activist, but by Tyler Robinson—a young white man evidently radicalized by the toxic masculine internet culture that Kirk and his allies normalized. When you cultivate a culture of hate and fear, when you normalize conspiracy and scapegoating, when you insist that violence is the only solution, eventually your own people will turn those weapons back on you. And your personal world is left bereft and traumatized, just like the 47,000 families affected by gun violence last year alone. 

In the aftermath of the assassination, we are now drowning in a pool of speech violence that could lead to an American catastrophe. That is, it does if we miss the opportunity for real liberation that it offers us. 

The Right cannot stop itself from using speech violence—terror carried out with words, designed to destabilize and intimidate. In the hours after the assassination, Republican leaders used Kirk’s blood to paint a target on our backs, issuing statements rife with misinformation that unleashed a wave of bomb threats across the country, forcing schools, hospitals, and community centers to evacuate.

It seems as if they know no other language. But do we? Or have we become radicalized in the same way, just with different targets? Understandable as it may be, and satisfying as it may feel, the Left’s memefied celebration of Kirk’s death only amplifies the violence he put into the world. 

A friend told me about a teacher at their children’s Miami school who tweeted “Karma’s a bitch;” the school was immediately bombarded with mass shooting and bomb threats. I am publishing this article anonymously due to the doxxing and threats happening to anyone who doesn’t lionize Kirk online right now. I won’t be silenced, but I won’t risk my own physical safety, either, and that is how bad it really is right now. This even causes me to question my anger at Center-Left figures like Gavin Newsom, who seem to be glossing over the harm Kirk caused in his life in their public statements—maybe they’re just afraid of getting assassinated themselves. 

We have to see the bigger picture: only Right-wing politicians and billionaire-owned platforms profit from making Americans hate each other to the point of physical violence. Speech that incites violence is not freedom of expression; it is a tool of fascism. It sows chaos, breeds fear, normalizes inaction, allows politicians to consolidate power, and enables the ultra-wealthy to “buy the dip,” profiting off instability. At the end of this cycle, ordinary people will be less safe, less free, and more hopeless—unless we end it.

One of the most radical progressive things we can do right now is refuse hate speech altogether. We have an opportunity to liberate ourselves by creating where Kirk sought to destroy. Stop participating in this angry tit-for-tat, regardless of how righteous your emotions may feel. Don’t share the memes. Don’t feed the cycle. Don’t let your kindness and goodwill corrode by mimicking the hate Kirk aimed at us.

Roll your eyes, but also consider this approach: When you feel the urge to fire back online, step away. Then imagine a possibility. Then take one action that feeds your soul. Call a friend. Organize something that makes your community measurably better. God knows, the Left needs a plan right now—we can use these provocations as fuel to build one.

Of course, it takes a kind of saintly strength to live this principle—one I’m not sure any of us possess right now. But we can resist fascism if we start by noticing the urge to answer hate with hate, and jiu-jitsu that energy into strengthening ourselves and our communities.

Remember the classy response to the death of Fred Phelps, leader of the hate organization also known as Westboro Baptist Church. Queer activists held signs for his family to see at his funeral: WE ARE SORRY FOR YOUR LOSS. Members of his family have since become outspoken against their own work. A few picketers still find their only meaning in protesting funerals, but when was the last time you ever cared about that sad little man, or what he did?

One head of the Far Right media ecosystem hydra has been cut off. That is not a cause for celebration, but it is a real opportunity. Figures like Charlie Kirk are not just another talking head—he was a cult figure who can’t simply be swapped out. There is now a vacuum, and the questions remain: Who fills it? With what?

We have just inherited the gift of a world free of Charlie Kirk’s vitriol. Instead of polluting our future with more of the same, let’s seize this opening and direct our energy toward manifesting the world we wish out loud for every day.