I think the article is self explaintary and clear. The hate directed against the LGBTQ+ seems irrational and immoral. Why is it immoral if it is being done by religious groups? Because they have no qualms about lying, giving false and misleading information, and forcing their church doctrines on others who don’t agree with those doctrines. Below are just a few quotes from the article. The last one from florida would make pointing out the truth about how a person is acting or speaking illegal, but doing the racist bigoted stuff would stay legal. Hugs
Anti-trans bathroom bans made a comeback, with four passed in Alabama, Idaho, Ohio and South Carolina.
Policy changes enacted barriers to gender markers and name changes for IDs/personal documents in Arkansas and Florida.
Florida introduced a bill that limited free speech, making public accusations, whether true or false, of a person being homophobic, transphobic, racist or sexist equivalent to defamation and punishable by fine. The bill did not pass.
A central theme of anti-LGBTQ+ organizing and ideology is the opposition to LGBTQ+ rights or support of homophobia, heterosexism and/or cisnormativity, often expressed through demonizing rhetoric and grounded in harmful pseudoscience that portrays LGBTQ+ people as threats to children, society and often public health.
Top Takeaways
In 2024, the number of anti-LGBTQ+ groups increased by about 13% from the previous year. Anti-LGBTQ+ groups maintained a trend in heavy mobilization across multiple strategies with increasing political and financial support from the hard right.
Anti-trans narratives were instrumental to the 2024 election at all levels of government, especially at the local level where anti-LGBTQ+ and anti-inclusive education activism continue to heavily overlap. The politicization of gender-affirming health care and LGBTQ+-inclusive school curricula contributed to what has been characterized as the “most Anti-LGBTQ election in decades.” Republicans spent almost $215 Million on TV ads to smear trans people, surpassing ads on rival issues such as economy, immigration and housing. Another wave of anti-LGBTQ+ legislation broke records at state and federal levels, but such bills were not as nearly as successful as last year.
Anti-LGBTQ+ groups are heavily invested in the courts and pushing policy change by judicial decision. Hard right and anti-LGBTQ+ extremists on social media continue their campaign to “make pride toxic” by targeting inclusive business and marketing practices while anti-LGBTQ+ legal groups take up administrative law and lobbying strategies to eliminate diversity, equity, and inclusion practices in the public and private sectors under the guise of “viewpoint diversity” and “religious freedom” advocacy.
Key Moments
Throughout the state legislative sessions, anti-LGBTQ+ movement organizations continued their facilitation of a decades long effort to foment anti-trans moral panic in public discourse. Legislative assaults broke records for the fifth consecutive year, albeit with fewer successes.
Several factors slowed the trend, including coordinated community responses and reporting, such as the SPLC’s Project CAPTAIN, on the networks that perpetuate anti-LGBTQ+ talking points and legislation. Legislation trends of concern include:
A Florida bill promoted insurance coverage conversion therapy for detransition. The bill passed the House, but died in the Senate.
Anti-trans bathroom bans made a comeback, with four passed in Alabama, Idaho, Ohio and South Carolina.
Policy changes enacted barriers to gender markers and name changes for IDs/personal documents in Arkansas and Florida.
Florida introduced a bill that limited free speech, making public accusations, whether true or false, of a person being homophobic, transphobic, racist or sexist equivalent to defamation and punishable by fine. The bill did not pass.
In February 2024, anti-trans influencers spun a disinformation campaign to exploit the tragic shooting at Lakewood Church in Houston by alleging the shooter was trans. Hard-right social media influencers, equipped with talking points that help fuel gun purchases, used this and other mass shootings in 2024 to perpetuate anti-immigrant and anti-trans conspiracy theories. Despite claiming anti-trans activism helps “protect children,” the SPLC reported that in the wake of mass shootings, anti-trans extremists divert attention from meaningful reforms to prevent gun violence, which is the leading cause of death for children in the United States.
In response to online campaigns by hard-right social media personalities, many major brands scaled back Pride merchandise in 2024. Armed Conflict Location and Event Data (ACLED) reported anti-LGBTQ+ protests at Pride events decreased in 2024; however, GLAAD documented 110 anti-LGBTQ+ incidents during June 2024. In addition, the SPLC monitored at least 74 bomb threats targeting LGBTQ people and events between January 1 and June 30, 2024.
The Colorado Republican Party posted “Burn all the #pride flags this June” and shared a video clip titled “God Hate F__s.” There was no shortage of vandalism: In Poulsbo, Washington, 14 Pride banners were slashed, and over 200 pride flags were stolen from the town center in Carlisle, Massachusetts. Throughout June, SPLC tracked dozens of protests, bomb threats and harassment campaigns directed at civil society groups like Pride committees and LGBTQ+-inclusive religious congregations. Hate groups including MassResistance, Gays Against Groomers, Protect Texas Kids, White Lives Matter, and Aryan Freedom Network were active at Pride events in June 2024.
In July and August 2024, anti-trans influencers manufactured controversy over the gender identity of Olympic athletes Imane Khelif and Lin Yu-ting. This anti-trans controversy exclusively targeted Taiwanese and Algerian athletes, scrutinizing the legitimacy of their womanhood. The crux of arguments made by the anti-trans actors re-animated misogynoir stereotypes to exclude women of color from being considered women based on white Eurocentric beauty standards of femininity. The series of events suggests eugenics and racism underlie transphobia and exhibited how anti-trans hysteria disproportionately impacts women of color on an international scale.
In September 2024, the anti-LGBTQ+ hate group Family Research Council held its annual Pray Vote Stand conference. FRC hosted a variety of anti-immigrant commentary ranging from Katy Faust, president of the anti-LGBTQ+ hate group Them Before Us, urging attendees to “breed out” immigrants and trans people. At the conference, Oklahoma superintendent of public instruction Ryan Walters alleged illegal immigrants were bringing fentanyl into schools; and the summit featured population control myths espoused by both anti-abortion and anti-vax panelists. FRC devoted multiple plenary sessions to anti-trans, anti-abortion and anti-immigrant coded topics.
The election of the first trans member of congress, Sarah McBride, was immediately met with a trans bathroom ban on all restrooms on the House side of the Capitol complex. The resolution was introduced by Nancy Mace and supported by House Speaker and former Alliance Defending Freedom attorney Mike Johnson. Mace posted anti-trans slurs on X following a bathroom sit-in at the Capitol in protest of the bathroom ban. The protesters were arrested and taken to the Capitol Police station; Mace then posted a video showing her outside the stations saying, “Some tr——s got arrested protesting my ban.” She then began reading them their Miranda rights along with demeaning commentary about the protesters.
States will continue to be labs for experimenting with anti-LGBTQ+ public policy. The legislative early filing period in Texas shows 32 anti-trans bills already filed for the 2025 legislative session. This year will show a continued pressure on erasing trans people from public life. With Donald Trump’s re-election, federal civil rights enforcement litigation will likely swing against LGBTQ+ inclusion.
Authors of Project 2025 are being tapped as cabinet picks for the second Trump administration. Project 2025 is an authoritarian and theocratic road map, and anti-trans scapegoating makes up key policy recommendations.
Background
Anti-LGBTQ+ groups in the United States oppose LGBTQ+ rights but also generally support heterosexism, an ideology that assumes heterosexuality is the only “normal” sexuality, and/or cisnormativity, an ideology that assumes one’s gender identity always matches the sex one was assigned at birth. Anti-LGBTQ+ groups primarily consist of Christian Right groups but also include such organizations as the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) that purport to be scientific. Anti-LGBTQ+ groups in America have employed a variety of strategies in their efforts to oppose LGBTQ+ rights or support heterosexism and/or cisnormativity, including engaging in the crudest type of name-calling.
Anti-LGBTQ+ groups on the SPLC hate list often link being LGBTQ+ inherently to criminal behavior; claim that the marriage equality and LGBTQ+ people in general are dangers to children and families; contend that being LGBTQ+ itself is dangerous and support the criminalization of LGBTQ+ people and transgender identity. These groups also believe in a false conspiracy that LGBTQ+ people seek to destroy Christianity and the whole of society. More recently, hard-line anti-LGBTQ+ groups have promoted their discriminatory laws and policies that limit the rights of LGBTQ people under the guise of religion, blurring the lines between the separation of church and state and discarding anti-discrimination civil rights policies. These same groups have promoted legislative models to push anti-trans legislation into law under a conservative religious assumption that gender can only be understood as either “male” or “female.”
Many leaders and spokespeople of SPLC-designated anti-LGBTQ+ groups have used degrading and derogatory language to describe LGBTQ+ people. Others disseminate disparaging information about LGBTQ+ people that are simply untrue – an approach no different from how white supremacists and nativist extremists propagate lies about African American people and immigrants to make these communities seem like a danger to society. Viewing LGBTQ+ people as unbiblical or simply opposing marriage equality does not qualify an organization to be listed as an anti-LGBTQ+ hate group.
2024 Anti-LGBTQ+ Hate Groups
* – Asterisk denotes headquarters.
Abiding Word Baptist Church, Revival Baptist Church
Orange Park, Florida
Advocates Protecting Children
Arlington, Virginia
Alliance Defending Freedom
Scottsdale, Arizona
American College of Pediatricians
Gainesville, Florida
American Family Association
Indianapolis, Indiana
Tupelo, Mississippi *
Franklin, Pennsylvania
American Vision
Powder Springs, Georgia
Americans for Truth About Homosexuality
Columbus, Ohio
ATLAH Media Network
New York, New York
California Family Council
Fresno, California
The Campus Ministry USA
Terre Haute, Indiana
Center for Christian Virtue
Columbus, Ohio
Center for Family and Human Rights (C-FAM)
New York, New York*
Washington, D.C.
Chalcedon Foundation
Vallecito, California
Child and Parental Rights Campaign
Johns Creek, Georgia
Church Militant/St. Michael’s Media
Ferndale, Michigan
Concerned Christian Citizens
Temple, Texas
D. James Kennedy Ministries
Fort Lauderdale, Florida
Do No Harm
Glen Allen, Virginia
Faith2Action
North Royalton, Ohio
Faithful Word Baptist Church
Tempe, Arizona
Straight Paths Baptist Church
Tucson, Arizona
Family Action Council of Tennessee
Franklin, Tennessee
The Family Foundation of Virginia
Richmond, Virginia
Family Policy Alliance
Colorado Springs, Colorado
Family Research Council
Washington, D.C.
Family Research Institute
Colorado Springs, Colorado
Family Watch International
Gilbert, Arizona
First Works Baptist Church
Anaheim, California
Florida Family Voice
Orlando, Florida
Focus on the Family
Colorado Springs, Colorado
Frontline Policy Council
Atlanta, Georgia
Gays Against Groomers
Fountain Hills, Arizona
California
Georgia
Kansas City, Missouri
Monroe, North Carolina
Vancouver, Washington
Milwaukee, Wisconsin*
Generations
Elizabeth, Colorado
Genspect
Chicago, Illinois
Heterosexuals Organized for a Moral Environment (H.O.M.E.)
Downers Grove, Illinois
Illinois Family Institute
Tinley Park, Illinois
Liberty Baptist Church
Rock Falls, Illinois
Liberty Counsel
Orlando, Florida
Louisiana Family Forum
Baton Rouge, Louisiana
MassResistance
Torrance, California
Pocatello, Idaho
Idaho
Waltham, Massachusetts*
New Jersey
Fort Worth, Texas
Houston, Texas
Kenosha, Wisconsin
Gilette, Wyoming
Lander, Wyoming
Massachusetts Family Institute
Wakefield, Massachusetts
Mission: America
Columbus, Ohio
Montana Family Foundation
Laurel, Montana
Pacific Justice Institute
Sacramento, California
Santa Ana, California
Miami, Florida
Mississippi
Reno, Nevada
Salem, Oregon
Seattle, Washington
Partners for Ethical Care
Chicago, Illinois
Pass the Salt Ministries
Hebron, Ohio
Pennsylvania Family Institute
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
Pilgrims Covenant Church
Monroe, Wisconsin
The Pray In Jesus Name Project
Colorado Springs, Colorado
Probe Ministries
Plano, Texas
Public Advocate of the United States
Merrifield, Virginia
Revival Baptist Church
Clermont, Florida
Ruth Institute
Lake Charles, Louisiana
Save California
Sacramento, California
Scott Lively Ministries
Springfield, Massachusetts
Society for Evidence-Based Gender Medicine
Twin Falls, Idaho
Stedfast Baptist Church
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Cedar Hills, Texas *
Strong Hold Baptist Church
Norcross, Georgia
Sure Foundation Baptist Church
Indianapolis, Indiana
Vancouver, Washington*
Seattle, Washington
Spokane Valley, Washington
Them Before Us
Seattle, Washington
Tom Brown Ministries
El Paso, Texas
True Light Pentecost Church
Spartanburg, South Carolina
United Families International
Gilbert, Arizona
Verity Baptist Church
Sacramento, California
Warriors for Christ
Mount Juliet, Tennessee
Westboro Baptist Church
Topeka, Kansas
World Congress of Families/International Organization for the Family
Rockford, Illinois
Every litter bit helps, as was sung on TV when I was a child. Here is a thing that might be done these days, or we can share it and that will still help. Earth is our only home (no matter where our legislators tend to spend their time…)
Earth Month Ecochallenge, running from April 1st to April 30th, is a 30-day program focused on environmental and social engagement. During this month, you’re invited to select actions that resonate with your values, committing to them for 30 days to foster and reinforce positive habits. Each action you complete earns points and generates real-world impact. Your efforts, combined with those of your team, contribute to a significant collective difference.
This year’s theme, People and Planet: Resilient Together, focuses on resilience: the capacity to adapt, recover, and grow stronger through change. Resilience lives in people, in communities, and in the natural systems that sustain us. In a world shaped by uncertainty, it helps us stay grounded, connected, and capable of creating positive change. Our new actions and categories will help you explore resilience at many levels – personal, in your community, in the organizations you are part of, and in nature. (snip)
House Resolution 7661 is a potentially significant piece of book ban legislation. Here’s what you need to know about it.
On March 17, the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce advanced H.R. 7661. There is no word regarding when the bill will be voted on, but the vote is expected to occur sometime in the coming weeks. While that bill number may not sound familiar, there’s a good chance you have recently heard it referred to as the National Book Ban Bill.
Though that title is not formally associated with the proposed resolution, it does speak to the concerns many have regarding the bill’s language, intentions, and potential long-term impact. While it can understandably feel overwhelming to keep up with every potentially impactful piece of legislation in the modern United States government, the details of H. R. 7661 (including those not printed, which only exist between the lines) make it worth knowing about for anyone who opposes the growing trend of book bans and public education funding.
What is H. R. 7661, or the Stop the Sexualization of Children Act?
Formally, what is sometimes referred to as the National Book Ban Bill is being presented as H.R. 7661 or the “Stop the Sexualization of Children Act.” You can read that act here. It has also been referred to as the “National Don’t Say Gay bill,” a reference to a 2022 statute that triggered significant school policy changes, including legislation that restricted public schools from introducing material in kindergarten through 3rd-grade classrooms that was deemed to be related to matters of sexual orientation and gender identity. The law also included requirements specific to students in higher grades and age ranges.
A sweeping initiative, the Don’t Say Gay bill (formally referred to as the “Parental Rights in Education” bill) established several education restrictions regarding both curricula and school policies that could be enforced via various means (including potential legal action). It required schools to inform parents if their children received any mental health services at school, it allowed parents to have greater access to formerly private documents related to their kids, and it enacted a series of moderation policies that effectively enabled legislators to have greater control over what is (and isn’t) taught to students in those age ranges via funding decisions and similar policies. Said policies included book bans, which are also at the heart of H.R. 7661’s many potential effects.
The Main Provisions of H. R. 7661
The primary purpose of H. R. 7661 is to enable the U.S. government to deny federal funding to schools that use those funds for programs and materials the bill deems to be inappropriate.
The bill is effectively an amendment to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. The act was designed to provide expanded federal funding to public schools to ensure that their students (more specifically, public school students in lower-income areas) didn’t continue to fall far behind students at schools with access to more resources. It was a milestone piece of legislation that remains one of the cornerstones for federal public school funding in the United States to this day.
While H. R. 7661 would not eliminate that act, it would, in the bill’s own language, “prohibit the use of funds provided under such Act to develop, implement, facilitate, host, or promote any program or activity for, or to provide or promote literature or other materials to, children under the age of 18 that includes sexually oriented material, and for other purposes.”
The broad nature of that language is one of the more controversial aspects of the bill. For instance, it would deny schools the ability to use federal funding for programs, literature, and related texts that include “sexually oriented material” and “material that exposes such children to nude adults, individuals who are stripping, or lewd or lascivious dancing.” H. R. 7661 also includes exemptions for scientific texts, works related to major religions, as well as “classic works of literature” and “classic works of art” (more on those in a bit) that may naturally include references to the content it intends to restrict. Furthermore, the authors of the bill note that “sexually oriented material” includes “any depiction, description, or simulation of sexually explicit conduct (as defined in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of section 2256(2) of title 18, United States Code).” You can read those United States Code subparagraphs here. They largely reference material such as “bestiality” and “sadistic or masochistic abuse” but also include the far more general idea of “sexual intercourse… whether between persons of the same or opposite sex” as sexually explicit content. It is a rather large collection of topics which could potentially fall under that umbrella definition.
However, H. R. 7661 would expand the definition of “sexually oriented material” to include material that “involves gender dysphoria or transgenderism.” Along with suggesting that matters of identity should be considered a sexually obscene topic, the inclusion of that language has significant legal implications. That choice of wording makes it clear that this bill will most directly and immediately affect transgender students, transgender-related materials, and it could be argued, gender non-conformity topics in general, which may include discussions of specifically prohibited subjects in affected schools.
What’s important to remember is that the bill specifies works that will be excluded, but it is more vague regarding what, exactly, could be impacted. It could, for instance, be determined that a variety of LGBTQIA+ books that make passing reference (or even perceived passing references) to such materials could also be effectively banned from federally funded schools. The policies for such determinations and review procedures are not set. It should also be noted that the use of “sexually oriented material” and similar pieces of broad language have often been contested as the basis for similar pieces of legislation (more on those below).
There are undoubtedly concerns regarding the direct targeting of students and materials that would be most obviously impacted by the “gender dysphoria or transgenderism” language. The reason that this is being referred to as a “National Book Ban Bill,” though, is due to both the bill’s relationship with current federal funding policies (and thus its potential reach) and the ways that its language could be used to legally justify a variety of bans or create a precedent for similarly sweeping bills.
It’s a familiar question in time travel narratives: If you could go back in time and kill Adolf Hitler, would you? Sometimes, of course, there are time travel rules in place that prevent such interference; for instance, in About Time (2013) time travelers can only go back to moments in their own pasts. But there are plenty of other stories where the opportunity does present itself (although not everyone is able to follow through with it, including antihero Deadpool).
While the basic premise—removing Hitler from existence in some way (often as a baby, or before he can be born)—is sometimes only briefly touched on in time travel narratives, there are a number of stories that explore the problems and ramifications of such an action in a bit more depth. Here are five short stories (well, four stories and one comic, which is arguably a short story with art) that do just that.
Just a few years into World War II—before America had even joined the fight—Ralph Milne Farley wrote the earliest known story about using time travel to kill Hitler. The unnamed main character is one of the Nazi leader’s distant cousins but he lives half a world away in Massachusetts. He’s deeply unhappy about Hitler’s warmongering—partly because the genocidal leader’s actions are unequivocally wrong, but also partly (and honestly… largely) because being drafted into the war is going to interfere with our narrator’s painting career.
After complaining to a friend about all the Allies who haven’t taken the chance to assassinate Hitler during their face-to-face meetings, our protagonist gets the chance to go back in time and murder the Führer while he’s still a young boy. Although the outcome is now a fairly basic rendition of the theme, this story remains notable for being the first take on the idea.
Set in a world where being a killer-for-hire is a legitimate profession, this comic book sees our protagonist, an anthropomorphic dog who is once again unnamed, take on an unusual job: killing Hitler. The time machine that sends him back only has enough energy for one round trip every 50 years, so it’s crucial that he doesn’t mess it up—which, of course, he does. Not only does he fail to kill Hitler, but the Führer uses the time machine’s one ride back to the present and then promptly blends in with modern society.
Our hitman still needs to finish the job, though, and now he’s tasked with tracking down the Nazi leader, in spite of the fact that he’s much older once he’s caught up to his target (because, after being stranded in the past, he had to live through the years to get back to the present). He decides to enlist the help of his (now much younger) ex-girlfriend and the journey they go on together is filled with both dry humor and unexpectedly tender moments. Sure, their goal might be murder, but there’s still room for touching character growth along the way…
Written in the second person, this short story sees you sampling a technology called Multiversity™, which is essentially Google Search for the multiverse. You enter “THE DEATH OF ADOLF HITLER”—one of the most popular searches—and are shown eight sample realities based on the various ways that Hitler has died in alternate histories. This story is short and sweet, with only a few sentences outlining each scenario (although you’re informed that you can get a more detailed breakdown for the low, low price of $59.95!).
The hilarious scenarios become increasingly unhinged (and one does explicitly feature time travel!), but because there are only eight I don’t want to spoil any of them by going into too much detail, here. What I will say is that I would absolutely pay to find out more about the squids in Scenario #8…
This short story served as the basis for the “Alternate Histories” episode in the first season of Love, Death & Robots—so if this concept seems familiar to you, that might be why.
“Wikihistory” is written entirely as a series of online forum posts from members of the International Association of Time Travelers. The first post in the story comes from FreedomFighter69, a new member of the IATT who is celebrating their first excursion: going to the opening of the 1936 Olympic Games to kill Hitler. SilverFox316 is none too impressed with this move and a few minutes later posts to say that they’ve successfully gone back and stopped FreedomFighter69. Much to the frustration of SilverFox316, new members continue making this same mistake (which could be avoided if they’d simply read Bulletin 1147 as they’ve been repeatedly asked to do!).
The forum format is inventive, the time travel plot is chaotically fun, and the bickering dynamic between the posters feels hilariously true to life.
This is another short story written in the second person; this time you’re a member of a small group of anti-fascists intent on using a time travel rig to kill baby Hitler. Umeko volunteers for the gruesome mission and when she returns, she’s confident that she got the job done. But then she learns that history hasn’t changed, which makes no sense because she’s certain that she beheaded baby Hitler.
While the group squabble over this unexpected result, you as the protagonist take the opportunity to slip into the rig and go back to 1890 to figure out what went wrong with the original mission. You get your answer, but unfortunately both time travel and group projects are a very messy business, so combining the two isn’t exactly a recipe for success.
Although using time travel to put an end to Hitler and his rise to power is a fairly well-trodden trope at this point, hopefully this list has proven that there are still plenty of creative ways to tell this kind of story. I’d love to hear if you have any particularly intriguing, thoughtful, and/or original stories that riff on this theme, regardless of format!
Last April, the president unleashed a tidal wave of tariffs on ‘liberation day’. Analysts say the policy has failed, even by the Trump administration’s own terms
Before Donald Trump declared “liberation day” on 2 April 2025 and shocked the world by raising import tariffs on nearly every country the US did business with, he had spent almost three months causing chaos in Washington.
The wholesale slashing of government jobs under Doge (the “department of government efficiency”) and the defunding of US aid agencies had shown White House watchers that the US president was in a hurry to upset institutions he considered profligate or useless.
Investors quickly understood that chaos was an essential tool in Trump’s armoury. Almost as soon as he was inaugurated, there was a steady decline in the value of the dollar against other currencies. Investors sold assets denominated in dollars and bought assets elsewhere: Europe, Asia, South America.
“If you think that discouraging investors from buying assets in the US is a victory, then you don’t believe in a growing economy,” said Dario Perkins, the head of global research at the consultancy TS Lombard. “If it was possible for Trump to have spent the last 14 months on the golf course, we would be in a better place.”
Russ Mould, the investment director of the British stockbroker AJ Bell, said: “America is still home to the world’s largest economy and its reserve currency, as well as the globe’s largest equity and bond markets, but investors continue to reassess their exposure one year on from liberation day.”
The economy has either gone sideways or declined, depending on the preferred measure. Data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that US companies, which were supposed to be the victors in Trump’s new tariff war, stopped hiring almost as soon as liberation day was announced.
Significant revisions in February to data covering 2025 pushed down payroll employment by 403,000 jobs, resulting in the addition of 181,000 jobs last year. This small boost is set against the 163 million people who are employed in the US.
Figures from the Conference Board, a US thinktank, show consumer confidence sliding after Trump took office. A brief recovery appears to coincide with a huge climbdown on 12 May – the day the US and China agreed to defuse their post-liberation day tariff escalation.
Lots of awareness items for this month! Of course, one designation I’m fully aware of is for Autism, another for Earth Day/Month. I was feeling a bit overwhelmed thinking of blogging these things, which are pertinent to our interests, then thought, well, I don’t want to omit anything. So, I did a search, and holy cow. There are a lot! Below see some; click through to see them all. I ain’t bloggin’ everything, but I love NATIONAL MONTH OF HOPE – April Founded in 2018 by National Day Calendar® and Mothers In Crisis, Inc., so I’ll try to include it this month.
I am unable to figure out if the Florida Real ID driver’s license that the state forced everyone to get a bunch of years ago. I remember having to go to the driver’s license place with a folder of information including utility bills in my name and with my birth certificate and my marriage license. It was touted as the “Real Id” that was the only one we would need. It was OK even for flying. When I told Ron about this he was adamant that after his surgery we get me a passport no matter the cost. I explained that we both should have them in case our same sex marriage gets invalidated. We have one out that I am sure my abusive adoptive parents did not plan to give me. They were Canadian citizens here on green cards and my birth certificate shows me as their kid, something I have always hated. Current Canadian laws let me apply to Canada for asylum or simply to immigrate with my spouse. But it clearly shows this is an attempt to restrict those who have the right to vote to do so. Hugs
The law’s requirements for proof of citizenship to register to vote and stricter voter ID rules won’t take effect until next year.
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a bill into law that is akin to President Donald Trump’s SAVE America Act at the national level.Matias J. Ocner / Miami Herald via Getty Images file
Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a bill Wednesday that will require proof of citizenship to vote and impose stricter voter ID restrictions on Floridians.
The new law, most of which won’t take effect until after the midterm elections, is Florida’s version of the federal SAVE America Act, a bill President Donald Trump has championed. That measure is currently stalled in the U.S. Senate, where it lacks the 60 votes needed to advance under current rules.
“This bill protects and expands integrity in our voter registration process,” DeSantis said. “Our Constitution in the state of Florida says only American citizens are allowed to vote in our elections, so we need to make sure that is the law.”
Democrats and voting rights advocates warn Florida’s law will disenfranchise eligible voters who lack ready access to the documents that are needed to vote.
Already, the League of Women Voters of Florida and a coalition of advocacy groups, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, have filed a federal lawsuit to block the law.
“We are most concerned about impact as it relates to the most vulnerable Florida voters,” said Jonathan Topaz, attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union. “This could mean older Black voters who grew up in Jim Crow South who don’t have access to birth certificates, this could be naturalized citizens — we know naturalized citizens are flagged as noncitizens all the time.”
Voters who were born in Puerto Rico, have changed their name or have lost documents may struggle to meet the requirements of the new law, he said.
Supporters of the legislation note that millions of Floridians have already shown government officials their passports or birth certificates when obtaining a REAL ID. They also argue the law is necessary to prevent voter fraud, despite little evidence of it occurring.
More than 9% of American citizens of voting age do not have proof of citizenship documents readily available, according to a study commissioned by the Brennan Center for Justice. Based on that metric, advocates fear that more than 1 million Floridians could struggle to cast a ballot starting next year, when the law will be fully implemented.
Other states have tried to impose documentary proof of citizenship requirements in the past, but courts have ruled they violate federal law. To comply with one such ruling, Arizona now has a bifurcated election system that allows those who haven’t proved their citizenship to only vote in federal elections.
The system offers a window into the kinds of people who do not have access to the documents required by proof of citizenship laws. In Arizona, they are disproportionately voters of color and younger voters, according to an analysis by the Brennan Center. Votebeat reported that Arizonans who are only eligible to vote in federal elections often live around college campuses, suggesting they are students without their citizenship documents on hand.
Florida’s law has different requirements than Arizona’s, however. It asks election officials to verify voters’ citizenship after registration. For Floridians who have shown their passport or birth certificate to government officials when getting a driver’s license, their citizenship will be affirmed and their registration approved.
Those without this information on file will be asked to prove their citizenship within a month or they could be removed from the voter rolls.
Wendy Sartory Link, the supervisor of elections for Palm Beach County, said implementing this law will be a major challenge for election officials, particularly those in larger, more diverse counties.
Link said her office will need to roll out new rules and forms — all of which do not yet exist and will need to be written by the state — and rush to begin preparing for the proof of citizenship requirements that go into effect in January.
She said that computer systems will need to be updated — the voter file doesn’t currently include a space for citizenship proof — and that new systems will need to be created among agencies to share data. Link also said she will need to hire new staffers to handle the increased workload, though the bill didn’t give her any additional funding to pay for it. Once voters are asked for proof, she said, she’s worried long lines will form with voters bringing proof of citizenship.
She also said she has many unanswered questions: Can she accept proof of citizenship over email even if she can’t touch the raised seal to be sure it’s an original document? Does she need to ask voters to prove their citizenship every time they update their voter registration? Does she need new trainings to evaluate the proof that voters may bring her?
“If somebody brings a birth certificate and it’s an Idaho birth certificate, I don’t know what that looks like. Am I supposed to know whether or not that’s a fraudulent birth certificate, or do I just accept it because it says Idaho birth certificate?” Link said.
Florida’s new law also restricts the kind of photo IDs that voters can use to prove their identities at the poll, eliminating the use of retirement community and student IDs.
At polling sites near college campuses and retirement communities, Link said, this change could trigger long lines as more students fill out provisional ballots and need to later affirm their identities.
Out-of-state students may struggle to obtain the required ID unless they plan months ahead, too. In her community, she said, it also takes time to get an appointment for a Florida driver’s license.
Lawmakers in a dozen states have advanced legislation this year that would require residents to prove their U.S. citizenship to register to vote or bring photo ID to the polls, according to the Voting Rights Lab, a nonpartisan group that tracks election legislation. Utah and South Dakota have also sent bills imposing a proof of citizenship requirement on to their governors.
On this day in 1863 more than 100 women armed with knives, axes, and pistols marched to Richmond, Virginia’s capitol to demand a meeting with the governor. When questioned by passersby, some held up their emaciated arms in explanation: They were starving.
Nine inches of snow had just fallen, the 20th storm that winter. Routes into the city had become rivers of mud, making food transport nearly impossible. Farming was suffering because of labor shortages (with farmers enlisted in the Civil War) and fields damaged by battles. Inflation had sent food prices to 10 times the prewar cost.
For many of the city’s working-class residents, that was what they were already doing.
As the Confederate capital, Richmond’s population had swelled to 100,000, crowded with troops and government workers. Because it was such an important spot, the Union had set up a blockade of its ports. What little food made it through was requisitioned to feed troops.
On April 1 a group of women—wives and mothers of soldiers—met at Belvidere Hill Baptist Church. Led by Mary Jackson and Minerva Meredith, they agreed to confront the governor the next day.
Some sources say the governor’s feeble answers failed to appease the women; other sources say he declined to meet. Either way, the crowd marched on—toward government food supplies, mercantile facilities, and private businesses. By now they had a rallying cry: “Bread or blood!” Their ranks swelled to hundreds or even thousands. They seized flour, ham, bacon, clothing, and shoes. The public guard was summoned but quickly overrun.
Fun Fact
May Walker, a “toothless old woman,” took an axe to the warehouse door and made off with 500 pounds of bacon.
It only ended when Davis ordered the guard to open fire—in five minutes. He waited, holding his watch. The crowd still debated defiance but dispersed at the last possible moment.
In the aftermath, more than 60 men and women were arrested. The city council met that day and dismissed the riot as “uncalled for”—then stationed cannons near the food supplies.
Two days later, however, another meeting was held to discuss how to feed the “meritorious poor,” which did not include the women who’d rioted; they were villainized in the press.
But two weeks later an additional $20,000 was allocated to keep Richmond’s citizens fed.
Remember a couple of things as you read this below. First there is nothing wrong with being LGBTQ+ and the feelings associated with those letters. Second most children are desperate to fit in to the majority, to be “normal”. The country was well on the way to reassuring these kids / adults that those feelings were normal and OK. That the child was not damaged not an abomination to god, and did not need to be fixed. Then the right wing religious hate machine managed to pass don’t say gay laws, bathroom bills, and “lets make those who are not straight or cis be attacked outcasts again” laws.
There are two errors not really mentioned here. Minors who are going to these “religious anti-LGBTQ+ be straight cis only” therapest / religious leaders are normally forced there by parents who have been convinced by religious leaders in their church that their child is damaged and needs to be fixed as they are sinning just for feeling as they do and so will be going to hell. (Side note Jesus never said anything like that. I remember being told that I was “acting gay / doing gay things” because I liked sinning. To which I replied, You have it backwards. I was born gay and I like doing / being gay and so I don’t care that it is sinning to you.) The child is often told this to the point where even if they don’t fully hate themselves they are willing to do anything their parents want to “be normal” or get their parents off their backsides about it. And often the child is threatened with being thrown out of the home if they don’t go to conversion therapy. And then the religious therapist reinforces the message that they are damaged, broken, that they cannot be as they are but must be fixed, must be healed of the sin / feelings. Every major medical association has reviewed and studied conversion therapy and they conclude it is harmful, has no basis in science and those kids who go through it are far more likely to try to end their lives so they recommend helping young people to accept themselves and their feelings except for the minor one started by a religious group that has rejected all the studies and findings for the religious belief that god wouldn’t create anyone that way and because we are not that so those people / kids that feel that way must be forced to change to make them and their god happy.
There are facts, and then there are religious beliefs that disregard those facts. The fact is that the data and medical studies show that helping non-straight non-cis children accept that they are normal also shows that gender afirming care is the most beneficial way to help young people who are LGBTQ+ and struggling with the idea of wanting to be “normal” or like the other students are. I did not want to be gay as a kid growing up. I knew my attraction perhaps sooner than most kids due to my childhood situation. But all the time growing up I heard about how bad and horrible people who had the feelings I did were and how doing what I was being forced to do made me the worst possible human. I was attacked at school even though I was not out but some thought I was different and that was enough. When I had to join the church to get to leave my abusive home to get to safety I heard constantly how bad / sinfull / an abomination I and people like me were to god who wanted mankind to wipe me out… wait why does god need mankind to do that, especially white Christian men to do that, can’t he just stop making gay people with out a demon in them?
At my church school a lot of the boys were flirting with same sex attractions as they were horny teen boys separated from girls. Similar to the situation I found in the military where I had a group of “straight” guys asking me to go on passes with them. And it was very fun, but they always claimed not to be able to remember what happened on those trips. But each of those kids and some of those adults I had consensual fun with blamed themselves for failing god and failing to be normal. I had one really cute fun guy who I would go on passes with who couldn’t wait to get into the hotel room to have sex. And it was not just one way either. He received as he gave and what he enjoyed he returned if you catch my trying not to be too explicit. But that was the same with all the guys, they were not hung up on straight norms while in a hotel room with me. But this one guy would always on the way back to base tell me we couldn’t do that again. It was wrong. It was something we shouldn’t do. I did not argue. But 3 weeks or a month later he was begging me to go on a four day pass with him.
My point was this guy was 18 / 19 like me. I had already long accepted who I was and how I felt. He had taken the be normal message to heart. He could have used therapy to accept his feelings and needs. But the one thing he did not need and would have been harmful was conversion therapy. That guy was with me in Germany, after a wonderful weekend he again said we couldn’t do that again, He got married and it lasted a year, then he got divorced. I lost touch with him. But lives were harmed because he just couldn’t face he was gay, couldn’t tell his religious parents he was gay, and would have been placed in conversion therapy if his parents had known as a teen he struggled with same sex attraction and was not straight. Hugs
The Supreme Court on Tuesday delivered a major win for the free speech rights of counselors and therapists, ruling in an 8-1 decision that a Colorado law prohibiting licensed counselors from engaging in talk therapy to help a person “reduce or eliminate unwanted sexual attractions, change sexual behaviors, or grow in the experience of harmony with [their] bod[ies]” unconstitutionally violated the First Amendment right to freedom of speech.
FRC President Tony Perkins called the decision “A Supreme Court win for free speech and biological reality.”
“I’m encouraged to see the muzzle removed from therapists seeking to help willing patients come to terms with, and be at peace with, how God created them,” reflected Perkins in a statement to The Washington Stand.
“The Left is using the levers of government to block families and individuals seeking help. Under Colorado law, a girl could legally seek a therapist’s help to change her gender but could not seek help from that same therapist to align her identity with her biological sex. Where is the fairness or logic in that? I commend the court for striking down this deeply invasive and unjust law.”
Read the full article. In 2013, Exodus International – then the nation’s largest ex-gay group – disbanded. Its longtime president Alan Chambers declared that not one of his group’s thousands of victims had ever become heterosexual.
Conversion therapy is discredited junk science that inflicts harm on LGBTQ youth.The Supreme Court’s decision is disappointing and puts vulnerable kids at risk.
In the past few days, I’ve been wondering what/how/when to frame Autism Month in a post. We here have learned so much from Barry already, and I want to be respectful to him, to other autistic readers, and also to the students I’ve worked with in years past, none of whom probably read here, but they exist in this world. Anyway, it takes some thinking, for me. So, I’d like to invite autistic and/or neurodivergent readers to guest post if you are inclined; Scottie and I and Randy can put your work up, or you can even use a comment space. One thing I’ve learned from Barry is that autistic people are the best ones to address the subject because they have the actual perspective to do so. But we do want people to be aware that neurodivergent people are amongst the marginalized people to whom we want to give voice. Enjoy Barry’s post this morning!
I read LGM when I have time; haven’t been there in a couple of weeks. But here is this. I thank another friend of the blog for the link to this. It’s concise.
Graham Platner, son of wealthy parents, is cosplaying as a salt-of-the earth oyster farmer who sells his product to his mother and is running to become the Democratic candidate for Senate in Maine, against Susan Collins. He was outed as having a Nazi tattoo, which he had tattooed over with a slightly less Nazi tattoo. His earlier writings and activities include slurs against women and wearing a Blackwater hat to own the libs.
He is now running ahead of Governor Janet Mills, who is an older woman but who actually has experience in government, something Platner lacks.
Why is Platner doing so well? We can look to Donald Trump for that.
All of our politics today are gender politics. It’s very difficult to talk about that, because it permeates everything we do, leaving us fish unaware of the water. The response is frequently that no, it’s something else, maybe power. But power is gender infused too. So let’s focus on gender if only for the amusement of seeing something through a new lens.
We have multiple models in our heads of what women and men are. Mute eye candy, intellectual, blue collar are some general descriptors, but more specifically, we associate particular groups of characteristics with particular manifestations of gender. Graham Platner and Donald Trump are avatars of a particular way to be a man. I will enumerate some of them.
Men tell it like it is. This means that they can say things that are associated with this type of masculinity, like referring to women by their genitals and using slurs against other groups that are not able-bodied white men.
Men are muscular and do hard work. This means that blue-collar men are Real Men™.
Men are strong. This is different from being muscular, but the two bleed into each other. A man can take on emotionally difficult tasks and bull his way through.
Men never apologize. From what I have read, Platner has acknowledged the tattoo and his earlier actions but has not apologized. Trump, well.
Men are by nature fit to lead. Platner has no experience in government, as was the case with Trump in 2016. But they were/are questioned very little on this issue.
Men may become violent. Platner was in the military and Blackwater, with a violent tattoo. Trump shouts, rages, and talks about violence all the time.
To my mind, this type of masculinity is disqualifying for elected office. But obviously others disagree.
He’s a plain-talking guy you could have a beer with. Or at least a man could have a beer with. The comfort factor is enormous, and Platner and Trump give people permission to be comfortable in a particular way. Ezra Klein interviewed (gift link) one of conservatism’s intellectuals, Christopher Caldwell. Caldwell writes at the Claremont Review of Books and is one of the New York Times’s resident conservatives.
One of the things he settles on as an aspect of Trumpism is what he calls free speech. He has felt throttled by woke and was delighted to be able to be comfortable in what he says. That banker interviewed by the Financial Times said it out loud: He can say the “r” word and refer to women’s bodies in conversation. It’s what all conservatives mean by “free speech,” sometimes with Nazi phrases or concepts thrown in. When they say “free speech,” they mean whatever speech white men in charge want to use.
Those “free speech” advocates are given permission to speak freely by Platner and Trump.
There are other reasons people vote for men displaying this cluster of traits considered masculine. It’s a comfortable stereotype – much in the media and what people who don’t have close contact with blue-collar men may believe of them.
Even Rahm Emanuel feels he has to put on a muscular performance of eating his salad.
April 2
Scottie's Playtime 
