Tag: LGBTQ+

Amazon cuts mentions of DEI and LGBTQ rights from public policies

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2025/01/10/amazon-removes-black-trans-rights/

Another large company has fallen to right wing pressure and the fear of being on tRump’s bad side.  This right wing media pressure campaign we had better find a way to stop and combat.  Hugs.  

===============================================================

A commitment to helping Black people live “free from fear,” and all occurrences of the term “transgender” disappeared from a page listing the online retailer’s policies late last month.

 
An Amazon logo hangs on a wall at Amazon’s HQ2 in Crystal City, Virginia in 2023. (Eric Lee for the Washington Post)
 
By 
 

As Donald Trump prepares to return to the White House, Amazon has cut commitments to protecting the rights of Black and LGBTQ+ people from a public listing of its corporate policies.

Statements that said Amazon supported the rights of transgender people and would protect the safety of Black employees and customers disappeared from a webpage stating the company’s positions late in December, archived versions show.

Sections titled “Equity for Black people” and “LGBTQ+ rights” were removed from the page, along with all mentions of the term transgender. The “Diversity, equity, and inclusion” section was updated to say that “inequitable treatment of anyone — including Black people, LGBTQ+ people, Asians, women, and others — is unacceptable.”
 

The changes come as other corporations have also adjusted their policies in ways apparently calculated to fit the change of political weather in Washington.

 

McDonald’s this month scaled back its diversity goals and Meta confirmed Friday that it would dismantle its employee diversity and equity, or DEI, programs. A growing number of Fortune 500 companies have abandoned or reduced DEI initiatives in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn affirmative action in college admissions in 2023.

Some Amazon employees who noticed the changes to its policy page this week were dismayed by the apparent changes in the company’s positions, screenshots of internal conversations seen by The Washington Post showed. The Information earlier reported the changes.
 

Amazon spokesperson Kelly Nantel said in an email statement, “We update this page from time to time to ensure that it reflects updates we’ve made to various programs and positions.” The company also pointed to an internal memo from December in which vice president Candi Castleberry said it was rolling back some DEI initiatives. Amazon founder Jeff Bezos owns The Washington Post.

 

Before late December, Amazon’s webpage listing its policy positions said the company stood “in solidarity” with Black employees and customers, and supported “legislation to combat misconduct and racial bias in policing, efforts to protect and expand voting rights, and initiatives that provide better health and educational outcomes for Black people.”

The paragraph containing those statements is no longer on the webpage.

 

Amazon also previously said on that page it was “working at the U.S. federal and state level on legislation” on protections for transgender people. It said that the company provided “gender transition benefits based on the Standards of Care published by the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH).” The section with those claims has also been deleted.

Hayes: The trans population is far smaller than the right would have you believe

“Here is what is true: There are far, far fewer transgender Americans than the far right wants you to think there are,” says Chris Hayes

“Orange Ya Glad She’s Not In Heaven? by Clay Jones”

Bigots burn in Hell Read on Substack

Anita Bryant was famous for being a singer and had several hits way back in the day. Then she was known for orange juice as she became a spokesperson for the Florida Citrus Commission. Finally, she was known for being a bigot.

Bryant conducted herself as a wholesome Christian years before she campaigned against gay rights. Among her endorsements and products was a cookbook with a Jesus theme. It’s just not breakfast without orange juice and Jesus. Bless this bacon.

In 1979, she tarnished her image and her endorsements started to evaporate. What happened?

Dade County, Florida passed an ordinance that prohibited discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. This upset many bigots, one of them being Anita Bryant. Her fear was that LGBTQ people would be treated like human beings and the nation would stop discriminating and spitting on them. Bigots gotta spit. She led a highly publicized campaign against gay rights and gay people as part of a homophobic organization called Save Our Children. The organization later had to change its name as there was another group that had the name first, and who really wanted to save children and not just use them to push a homophobic agenda.

Bryant and her fellow homophobes feared gay meant pedophilia and LGBTQ people having equal rights would teach children to grow up and treat them like equal human beings. Bryant was against LGBTQ people working in schools and becoming role models. She believed gays were recruiting, which was true. Men all over the country were given free toasters in exchange for sleeping with other men, attending Broadway musicals, and being all-around fabulous.

Bryant said at the time, “What these people really want, hidden behind obscure legal phrases, is the legal right to propose to our children that theirs is an acceptable alternate way of life. I will lead such a crusade to stop it as this country has not seen before.”

During her anti-LGBTQ campaign, she said, “The recruitment of our children is absolutely necessary for the survival and growth of homosexuality… for since homosexuals cannot reproduce, they must recruit, must freshen their ranks.”

Here’s a fun fact: LGBTQ people are mostly born from straight parents.

She also said, probably while Jerry Falwell was standing beside her, “As a mother, I know that homosexuals cannot biologically reproduce children; therefore, they must recruit our children” and “If gays are granted rights, next we’ll have to give rights to prostitutes and to people who sleep with St. Bernards and to nail biters.” Nail biting is a sin? Was that the rejected 11th Commandment?

Also, the government needs to take my rights away because I used to sleep with a Beagle, and I’m not gonna lie. I miss sleeping with a Beagle.

Bryant was able to overturn the ordinance and continued her hate campaign throughout the nation. She galvanized America’s bigots but the LGBTQ community along with hetero friends conducted a campaign against Bryant and orange juice. Eventually, Bryant got pied. A civil rights supporter threw a banana cream pie right into Bryant’s face. Bryant responded with a homophobic slur, saying, “At least it was a fruit pie.”

I don’t know if I can condone or condemn the pieing as I’ve never had a banana cream pie.

Bryant said she loved homosexuals but hated their sins, which is bullshit.

Bryant eventually lost all her endorsements as she became toxic. Even other fundamentalist Christian organizations shunned her and stopped inviting her to their events. she stopped getting invites to singing events and even had a planned variety show canceled. Bryant eventually had to declare bankruptcy.

During the campaign against Bryant, bars stopped serving screwdrivers because of the orange juice and instead served Anita Bryant specials, which were made from vodka and apple juice which were hopefully served with a side of banana cream pie. Drag queens started impersonating Anita Bryant.

One of Bryant’s granddaughters came out and wasn’t sure about inviting her grandmother to her marriage to another woman. She should have invited her and not told her beforehand what was happening. That would have been fun.

Today, there are still bigots in government targeting the LGBTQ community and trying to suppress their rights. There are laws in places like Tennessee and Florida discriminating against drag shows. The should all be pied with banana cream pies.

I hope Anita Bryant, Ron DeSantis, that Duck Dynasty asshole, and every bigoted Republican likes pulp in their orange juice.

Thank you: To everyone who’s a subscriber, especially those who are PAID subscribers. You’re keeping me alive and free to focus on drawing cartoons, writing blogs, making videos, and creating my usual chaos for MAGAts. You rock! If you’re not a paid subscriber yet, please consider becoming one at $8 a month.

Music note: I listened to The Beatles’s Sgt. Pepper while coloring.

Drawn in 30 seconds: (snip-go see)

Suggestions for Resources, Actions

Building an open web that protects us from harm

We live in a world where right-wing nationalism is on the rise and many governments, including the incoming Trump administration, are promising mass deportations. Trump in particular has discussed building camps as part of mass deportations. This question used to feel more hypothetical than it does today.

Faced with this reality, it’s worth asking: who would stand by you if this kind of authoritarianism took hold in your life?

You can break allyship down into several key areas of life:

  • Who in your personal life is an ally? (Your friends, acquaintances, and extended family.)
  • Who in your professional life is an ally? (People you work with, people in partner organizations, and your industry.)
  • Who in civic life is an ally? (Your representatives, government workers, individual members of law enforcement, healthcare workers, and so on.)
  • Which service providers are allies? (The people you depend on for goods and services — including stores, delivery services, and internet services.)

And in turn, can be broken down further:

  • Who will actively help you evade an authoritarian regime?
  • Who will refuse to collaborate with a regime’s demands?

These two things are different. There’s also a third option — non-collaboration but non-refusal — which I would argue does not constitute allyship at all. This might look like passively complying with authoritarian demands when legally compelled, without taking steps to resist or protect the vulnerable. While this might not seem overtly harmful, it leaves those at risk exposed. As Naomi Shulman points out, the most dangerous complicity often comes from those who quietly comply. Nice people made the best Nazis.

For the remainder of this post, I will focus on the roles of internet service vendors and protocol authors in shaping allyship and resisting authoritarianism.

For these groups, refusing to collaborate means that you’re not capitulating to active demands by an authoritarian regime, but you might not be actively considering how to help people who are vulnerable. The people who are actively helping, on the other hand, are actively considering how to prevent someone from being tracked, identified, and rounded up by a regime, and are putting preventative measures in place. (These might include implementing encryption at rest, minimizing data collection, and ensuring anonymity in user interactions.)

If we consider an employer, refusing to collaborate means that you won’t actively hand over someone’s details on request. Actively helping might mean aiding someone in hiding or escaping to another jurisdiction.

These questions of allyship apply not just to individuals and organizations, but also to the systems we design and the technologies we champion. Those of us who are involved in movements to liberate social software from centralized corporations need to consider our roles. Is decentralization enough? Should we be allies? What kind of allies?

This responsibility extends beyond individual actions to the frameworks we build and the partnerships we form within open ecosystems. While building an open protocol that makes all content public and allows indefinite tracking of user activity without consent may not amount to collusion, it is also far from allyship. Partnering with companies that collaborate with an authoritarian regime, for example by removing support for specific vulnerable communities and enabling the spread of hate speech, may also not constitute allyship. Even if it furthers your immediate stated technical and business goals to have that partner on board, it may undermine your stated social goals. Short-term compromises for technical or business gains may seem pragmatic but risk undermining the ethics that underpin open and decentralized systems.

Obviously, the point of an open protocol is that anyone can use it. But we should avoid enabling entities that collude with authoritarian regimes to become significant contributors to or influencers of open protocols and platforms. While open protocols can be used by anyone, we must distinguish between passive use and active collaboration. Enabling authoritarian-aligned entities to shape the direction or governance of these protocols undermines their potential for liberation.

In light of Mark Zuckerberg’s clear acquiescence to the incoming Trump administration (for example by rolling back DEI, allowing hate speech, and making a series of bizarre statements designed to placate Trump himself), I now believe Threads should not be allowed to be an active collaborator to open protocols unless it can attest that it will not collude, and that it will protect vulnerable groups using its platforms from harm. I also think Bluesky’s AT Protocol decision to make content and user blocks completely open and discoverable should be revisited. I also believe there should be an ethical bill of rights for users on open social media protocols that authors should sign, which includes the right to privacy, freedom from surveillance, safeguards against hate speech, and strong protections for vulnerable communities.

As builders, users, and advocates of open systems, we must demand transparency, accountability, and ethical commitments from all contributors to open protocols. Without these safeguards, we risk creating tools that enable oppression rather than resisting it. Allyship demands more than neutrality — it demands action.

https://werd.io/2025/building-an-open-web-that-protects-us-from-harm

Why Are Conservatives So Obsessed With Trans Kids?

Trans Kids Are On The Chopping Block

The thing I like about the video is that she points out how the state claims it must do this to protect kids from the dangerous drugs yet allows their use for straight cis children just not for trans children.  The law states it is about making kids accept their birth assigned gender and keeping them from transitioning.   

They tried these laws with kids who were gay decades ago and some still fight for it.  Force gay kids to accept a heterosexual orientation through conversion methods and then outlaw being homosexual along with erasing anything homosexual from society.  It did not work.   The courts vigorously defended and backed up gay people’s rights to exist as themselves and have full equality of societies benefits as straight people do.  

Sadly we have much different courts now stacked with bigots and racists by bigots and racist who will push and promote the bigotry.  But in the law itself they wrote the bigotry out loud, clear, and easy to see.  The republican lawmakers are making it plain this is about erasing trans kids and that will make erasing trans adults much easier.   I wonder if they will succeed, but I am worried.   The video is well worth the watch.  If you do not wish to watch the video but prefer to read the transcript she provides a link to it in the description box.  Many of the podcasters now do.  Hugs

Some trans short news videos.

President-elect Donald Trump repeatedly pledged to roll back rights for transgender people during his campaign. Kate Sosin, LGBTQ+ reporter for The 19th, joins “America Decides” to discuss how those Americans are preparing for the incoming Trump administration.

Three transgender youths and their families from Arizona traveled across the country to ensure their voices were heard on the steps of the Supreme Court as justices heard oral arguments for the most important transgender rights case the court has ever reviewed — one that could have significant consequences on the future of lifesaving gender-affirming care for youth in the country. About a third of the teenagers in the United States who identify as transgender live in states that have limited access to puberty-blocking medication and hormone therapies. In an election cycle that saw Republicans spend at least $215 million on attack ads about transgender rights, these families share their fears, hopes, and determination to fight for their right to exist. Lucy Kafanov explores the emotional toll of anti-trans legislation, the fight for bodily autonomy, and what it means for trans youth to lose access to life-saving care.

Ben Shapiro vs Neil deGrasse Tyson: The WAR Over Transgender Issues

Ok I know I posted a clip of this from a different channel but this one gives more of Neil deGrasse Tyson’s full answer with a calmer host who did not chop it up.   I like this version better because you can see how forceful and direct Tyson is being and that he is clearly amused by the trans hater who think someone’s gender expression is their business.  It also shows Shapiro’s growing apprehension as he realizes that Tyson doesn’t agree with him.  He clearly thought incorrectly that Tyson would echo his own bigoted opinion.  He gets flustered because at the point he normally bullies someone and talks over them, Tyson doesn’t let him do it.  This is a beautiful short well crafted answer to any transphobe.   Hugs

Join renowned astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson and political commentator Ben Shapiro in a thought-provoking debate exploring one of today’s most complex and polarizing topics: transgender identity and rights.

In this intellectual face-off, Tyson brings his scientific expertise and philosophical perspective, emphasizing individual identity, societal progress, and inclusivity. Meanwhile, Shapiro approaches the topic from a traditionalist and legalistic angle, focusing on biological realities, societal norms, and policy implications.

The discussion between Ben Shaprio and Neil deGrasse Tyson dives deep into the intersections of science, culture, and ethics, tackling questions about gender identity, biological sex, free speech, and the role of government in regulating such matters. As always, both figures present their arguments with their characteristic wit and rigor, challenging viewers to think critically about the nuanced dimensions of the topic.

Whether you’re here to learn, debate, or deepen your understanding of the issues, this conversation promises to spark reflection and dialogue. Don’t forget to share your thoughts in the comments below—respectful discussion is encouraged! 

Joe Rogan GOES OFF After Falling For INSANE Hoax | Hasanabi reacts

This is for those who think Joe Rogan is the top of the right wing media thinkers.  Like Tim Pool, he doesn’t think about what he is to say or post.  Rogan decided that he needed to post about kids in schools demanding cat litter boxes in schools without ever looking into it claiming it was because of furry kids.  During the transphobia panic.   Not bothering to ask any school about it.  Yes some schools did have buckets of cat litter in the classrooms, not for kids who were furries but for kids who were in a mass shooting situation that had to pee.  I am tired of these sad right wing media lying assholes.     Hugs

Gay couple brought to tears as Japanese court rules marriage equality ban unconstitutional

https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2024/12/gay-couple-brought-to-tears-as-japanese-court-rules-marriage-equality-ban-unconstitutional/

As other countries with much smaller fundamentalist Christian influence over the government are working steadily towards equality and full legal rights of the LGBTQ+ communities the US is falling backwards in a regressive retreat of minority rights.  Again for some reason driven by fundamentalist Christian religious groups who create problems that never existed and use lies to promote disinformation creating hate towards the minorities they target.  You ask why the republicans have partnered with these fundamentalist Christians?  Because both groups seen the lost of group power over society they banded together to force society back to a time and culture when they did have majority power.   It comes down to power over others, and control of society.   I did not think that Christians believed in that.   At least I know Rev. Ed Trevors doesn’t.   But for far too many tradition, what was done by my grandparents, done by my parents, should be done by me also.  That is wrong because time, cultures, and the understandings change.   Hugs.

=============================================================

One of the same-sex partners uncontrollably cried as the judge read the ruling.
By  
2017 MAY 08. TOKYO JAPAN. LGBT rainbow flag covered on back of a man
2017 MAY 08. TOKYO JAPAN. LGBT rainbow flag covered on back of a man

The Fukuoka High Court of Japan has become the third of Japan’s eight high courts to rule that the government’s policy against same-sex marriage is unconstitutional. However, the court upheld a lower court ruling that dismissed three same-sex couples who had sought 1 million yen ($6,540) each for being denied their constitutional rights to gender and legal equality, individual dignity, and the pursuit of happiness.

The couples, who live in the southwestern cities of Fukuoka and Kumamoto, had their damage claims dismissed by the Fukuoka District Court in 2023 after the court ruled that the government wasn’t obliged to compensate them or legalize marriage equality legislation despite being in “state of unconstitutionality,” The Mainichi reported.

Related:

Historic Japan court ruling allows trans woman to change gender without surgery

Trans people just scored an important win for bodily autonomy and freedom.

High Court Judge Takeshi Okada ruled that civil laws forbidding same-sex marriages violate the nation’s constitution, saying, “There is no longer any reason to not legally recognize marriage between same-sex couples.” However, he noted that any change in national marriage laws must be decided by Japan’s legislature, known as the National Diet.

As the judge read his ruling, a 35-year-old plaintiff identified in the media as Kosuke couldn’t stop crying. Despite this, his 37-year-old partner Masahiro said “[the judge] understood our suffering, and I felt very reassured.”

 

 

 

Opponents of marriage equality in Japan have noted that Article 24 of the Japanese constitution specifically states, “Marriage shall be based only on the mutual consent of both sexes and it shall be maintained through mutual cooperation with the equal rights of husband and wife as a basis.”

However, marriage equality advocates have also pointed out that the constitution’s other articles state, “The people shall not be prevented from enjoying any of the fundamental human rights,” and, “All of the people are equal under the law and there shall be no discrimination in political, economic or social relations because of race, creed, sex, social status or family origin.”

 

Regardless, in October the Tokyo High Court ruled similarly, echoing another one made by the Sapporo High Court in March, which said that limiting marriage to couples of the opposite sex is “unconstitutional” and “discriminatory.” Despite the rulings, the country’s judiciary doesn’t have the power to overturn existing civil marriage codes.

Marriage equality has divided the country’s court system in opposing rulings over several years. Meanwhile, Japan’s conservative government lags behind increasingly supportive public opinion. Seventy percent of the Japanese public supports marriage equality, but it faces opposition from the ruling Liberal Democratic Party of Prime Minister Fumio Kishida.

The party lost its parliamentary majority in last Sunday’s election and will likely have to compromise on more liberal policies pushed by the opposition parties, like marriage equality, the aforementioned publication noted.

 

Right now, Japan doesn’t offer national LGBTQ+ non-discrimination protections or same-sex marriage. As a result, LGBTQ+ people in Japan often face inequities in employment, housing, education, and health care.

More than 200 Japanese municipalities offer some form of recognition for same-sex couples. Such recognition can help same-sex couples rent apartments together, visit each other in city hospitals, and receive other services that married heterosexual couples enjoy.

Though several jurisdictions offer “partnership certificates,” they’re entirely symbolic and don’t offer federal benefits given to married heterosexual couples.

 

LGBTQ+ advocacy groups have pushed for a national bill that would enshrine equal civil rights and non-discrimination protections into law. However, the conservative party of Prime Minister Fumio Kishida helped defeat the effort in the lead-up to the 2021 Olympic Summer Games.

Japan remains the only country in the G7, a political and economic forum of seven of the world’s most advanced economies, that has not legalized marriage equality. Currently, the only Asian countries that have legalized same-sex marriage are Taiwan, Nepal, and Thailand.

Subscribe to the LGBTQ Nation newsletter and be the first to know about the latest headlines shaping LGBTQ+ communities worldwide.

 

Don’t forget to share:

Representation: People who received Presidential Citizens Medals Today

They won’t get nearly the jabber that Liz Cheney’s and Bennie Thompson’s medals are getting, and all are good people. I emboldened a bit especially pertinent to this blog.

Biden Giving Liz Cheney A Fancy Medal Today, So That’ll Make Trump’s Butt Itch by Rebecca Schoenkopf

Every 2024 Presidential Citizens Medal winner is a better human than the bastard who’s about to be president again. Read on Substack

The first time Donald Trump was president, one of the ways he absolutely beclowned the office and rendered it meaningless was who he’d pick to give the Presidential Medal of Freedom and other similar honors.

Historically, such awards went to people who had done something important. Under Trump 1.0, it was more like “Here is the presidential medal of excellence in giving me money!” It went to Miriam Adelson, AKA one of Trump’s big bucks no whammies donors. (That’s the one where he got in trouble recently for saying Adelson’s award was better than Medal of Honor winners, AKA the military’s highest honor.)

Trump gave the Medal of Freedom to Rush Limbaugh, before that guy waddled off to hell. He gave it to Devin Nunes and Jim Jordan, for excellence in doing congressional coverups for Trump or something.

We are sure Trump 2.0 will make those recipients look like American patriots.

The Presidential Citizens Medal is the award just below the Medal of Freedom, and Trump didn’t seem to give much of a shit about it during his first term. He awarded it in 2019 to a 9/11 first responder, posthumously. But that appears to be it. The award is given to someone “who has performed exemplary deeds or services for his or her country or fellow citizens,” so you can see why it might not get Trump very excited.

President Joe Biden is big on giving it, though. In 2023, he gave it to people like Capitol Police officers Michael Fanone and Aquilino Gonell, who protected Congress during the terrorist attack Trump’s supporters committed on January 6, 2021. (He awarded it posthumously to former Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick, who died after he was assaulted by Trump supporters at the Capitol that day.) Also to Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss, the Georgia election workers Rudy Giuliani owes all his money to, for repeatedly lying about and defaming them.

In all, he gave it to 12 people who in various ways defended American democracy from Trump’s attacks in 2020.

Now, today, Biden is giving another set of 20 of these medals for 2024, and damn, they are just more people Donald Trump could never ever fucking be, not in a million years, not if he went to the Emerald City and grabbed the Wizard by the pussy and begged him for a soul, or for integrity, or decency, or goodness. (In this mental image Elon is in drag as Dorothy, obviously.)

Liz Cheney is getting one for her work on the House January 6 Select Committee, and all the ways she’s stood up to defend democracy the last couple years, so that’ll piss Trump the fuck off.

Democratic Rep. Bennie Thompson, who co-chaired the January 6 Committee with Cheney, will also receive the medal.

We are sure Trump will have some sort of hallucinatory conniption about how they deleted all the evidence that TOTALLY EXONERATES him, because once Trump gets an incorrect conspiracy theory mangled up inside that big ugly head of his, he never gets free of it.

On top of those types of folks, there’s Mary Bonauto, who argued Obergefell v. Hodges, AKA the marriage equality case, before the Supreme Court. Plus Evan Wolfson, perhaps the single most important activist over the decades of that fight.

You can check out the whole list here. On top of a number of former politicians like Bill Bradley and Chris Dodd, it’s full of people with bios that read like that of Diane Carlson Evans, who “founded the Vietnam Women’s Memorial Foundation to ensure female service members received the recognition they deserve.” Plus civil rights leaders and more women’s rights leaders, and so on and so forth.

And this posthumous award, which seems to contain a pre-emptive rebuke for the incoming Hitler wannabe administration:

Mitsuye Endo Tsutsumi

In a shameful chapter in our Nation’s history, Mitsuye Endo was incarcerated alongside more than 120,000 Japanese Americans. Undaunted, she challenged the injustice and reached the Supreme Court. Her resolve allowed thousands of Japanese Americans to return home and rebuild their lives, reminding us that we are a Nation that stands for freedom for all.

The entire list is a rebuke of Trump, really. American heroes, all.

But yeah, the Liz Cheney part is the part that’s gonna stick up Trump’s ass and give him sideways bowel movements. Bet those sting REAL bad. (snip-comments on the page)