Tag: Happy

Happy Mother’s Day/Mothers’ Day/Motherz Day

Happy Mother's Day/Mothers' Day/Motherz Day

Wishing a very happy day to all who claim today as their own, whether you spell it Mother’s Day, Mothers’ Day, or (my proposal from a few years back) Motherz Day. No matter what parental name your kids call you, if you want to celebrate today, then do it.

Rhodedendron flowers

We mothers are a varied lot, who include biological moms, nonbiological moms, adoptive moms, birth moms, surrogate moms, foster moms, step moms, gestational moms, genetic moms, chosen moms, lesbian moms, bisexual moms, transgender women who took on the title “mom” as they transitioned (though not all do), transgender men who prefer the title “mom” (though not all do), relatives or others who became mother figures to a child, feminine moms, masculine moms, androgynous moms, nonbinary moms, genderfluid moms, and moms who prefer no label.

We may be coupled, single, polyamorous, separated, divorced, or co-parenting with one or more non-romantic partners. We or our children may be differently abled. We are sometimes the same race, ethnicity, or religion as our children, and sometimes not. Our children may be living with us or not. They may be alive or may have passed from this life. We may be employed outside the home full time, part time, or not at all, by choice or circumstance. We are rich, poor, and in between. We are moms of one, two, or many. We’re combinations of the above and definitely a varied lot (and I’m sure I missed some variations).

I even just wrote a guest post for Gays With Kids, too, in which I hoped that all dads and men whose roles and identities incline them more towards celebrating today would do so, too. I’m happy to have more at the party. (And conversely, if you are a person more inclined to celebrate on Father’s Day or the recently created Nonbinary Parents Day, then by all means do that.)

Perhaps in an ideal world there would be no gendered parental holidays. For families with more than one parent, yes, it’s nice if each person gets their own day. Maybe the solution is to celebrate over a week, with each parent getting their own day no matter their gender, and using the remaining days to celebrate other people (donors, birth parents, etc.) or other aspects of family life (love, togetherness, respect, caring, etc.) Since different families may have different structures, this could all be up to the individual family to configure. I offer this as an idea for anyone who wants it—if your family does something like this, please leave a comment to let us know!

One additional way to celebrate during this season is on #LGBTQFamiliesDay, an event I created in 2006 as a day for online storytelling and sharing about LGBTQ families. I hold it each year at the beginning of June, which is not only the start of Pride Month, but also roughly midway between Mother’s Day and Father’s Day—honoring both, but reminding us that not all parents exist at one of those poles. Please join me on June 1, 2021, for the event’s 16th year. Simply post, tweet, or share on any social media channel in celebration and support of LGBTQ families and include the hashtag #LGBTQFamiliesDay. You can also follow the hashtag throughout the day and share the stories, images, and thoughts from other participants, and optionally, submit a link to one of your posts for inclusion in the master list of #LGBTQFamiliesDay stories. Many thanks to Family Equality for once again sponsoring the event. (Maybe I’ll take my own idea and extend it into a week in the future….)

However you celebrate and whomever you celebrate with, may today be full of joy and love.

Happy Trans Day of Visibility! : actuallesbians

Happy Trans Day of Visibility! : actuallesbians

Today is a day to celebrate and lift up the voices of our trans* and non-binary siblings. Visibility on its own however does not provide equality. Instead we must continue the fight for the human rights of our community at a time when they are under attack from many directions.

Many US states are in the process of pushing anti-trans legislation. If you live in one of these states please contact your political representatives and urge them to vote against these attacks on members of our community.

And finally, thank you to all members for reporting transphobic comments and posts to the mod team, you’re an integral part in helping us keep this subreddit an accepting place.

Happy Anniversary to Us – Mombian

Happy Anniversary to Us - Mombian

Today, my spouse Helen and I are celebrating our second anniversary in a pandemic and our 28th overall. I can’t think of anyone I’d rather quarantine with than you, dear—and that’s no April Fool’s joke.

Dana and Helen

When I posted about our anniversary last year, I hoped (rather naively) that we’d be able to go out again by November, our “Massaversary” of being legally wed in Massachusetts. (One of the perks of being queer is that we often get multiple anniversaries.) Clearly, that didn’t happen. And this year, our anniversary falls right in the middle of Passover, which means that for me, cake is out of the question. (I know, I know, there are kosher for Passover cakes, but they’re never quite the same.) We’re therefore delaying our celebration until next week—but flexibility is one of the hallmarks of a good relationship, I think. Certainly it’s worked for us!

It’s been quite the year of changes for us in many ways beyond the pandemic, too, as our son prepares to finish high school and head off on his own. In the coming year, we’ll have to figure out how to live as just the two of us again. Family board game nights won’t be quite the same (though I suspect the three of us will continue to play over the holidays). Still, whatever the next 28 years (and beyond) may bring, I’m looking forward to spending it together. Happy anniversary, my love!

Ella Hunt is ‘queer and happy’ thanks in part to Dickinson

Ella Hunt and Hailee Steinfeld wearing top hats and period garbs in front of a window

Ella Hunt and Hailee Steinfeld in Dickinson. (Apple TV+)

Actor Ella Hunt clarified that she “loves women” after her coming out as “queer and happy” was questioned by fans.

The 22-year-old, who plays Sue Gilbert on the series about poet Emily Dickinson, opened up about how she defines queerness in an interview with Square Mile.

Hunt spoke about finding herself when she moved from Devon, England, to New York, US, for the role on Dickinson.

“Maybe that combination of being away from England and working on a show about a female poet who wasn’t understood in her time, such an outwardly queer show that glorifies queerdom, made it less scary to enjoy those elements in myself and explore it in a way that I might not have done if I hadn’t got the show,” she explained.

“I love the term queer,” she continued.

“I don’t think it is specifically about sexuality, I see it as a mindset and feeling empowered in the bizarre and the strange sides of myself.

“I think queer is a beautiful word in that sense. It’s an attitude. That’s how I identify to my friends in New York.”

Ella Hunt wearing a black dress with her hands on her hips
Ella Hunt in Dickinson. (Apple TV+)

Some fans were unsure whether Ella Hunt had meant queer in reference to her sexuality.

But when a reader challenged Hunt’s definition, that queerness is an “attitude”, she clarified that she had “fumbled” her words.

“Being queer isn’t an attitude. I can’t just change being this way like I can my attitude when having a bad day,” the fan wrote.

“I actually completely agree with you,” Hunt responded, “and when the interviewer asked me directly if I was queer I got anxious and fumbled my answer (having not openly talked about my identity for long).”

“I still adore and love you completely,” the fan replied, adding: “I’m sorry. Growing up, being a lesbian was something I was always ashamed of due to church.

“I think that we all have to come to terms with ourselves and live our truth. Even if we’re not ready.”

Hunt wrote: “You don’t need to be sorry at all! I’m so sorry you had such a tough time growing up.

“I am queer and I am happy to be open about it. (I just get all kinds of nervous and fumbly in interviews sometimes).”

And just in case you weren’t sure what she meant, Hunt made things clear in a tweet Dickinson herself would no doubt dub poetry.

 

I’m a pre hrt trans girl, still closeted publicly and with lots of family and a lot sucks, but today was a good day and my fiancé did my makeup and I felt happy. ❤️ : actuallesbians

I’m a pre hrt trans girl, still closeted publicly and

A place for discussions for and by cis and trans lesbians, bisexual girls, chicks who like chicks, bi-curious folks, dykes, butches, femmes, girls who kiss girls, birls, bois, aces, LGBT allies, and anyone else interested! Our subreddit is named r/actuallesbians because r/lesbians is not really for or by lesbians–it was meant to be a joke. We’re not a militant or exclusive group, so feel free to join up!

Happy November 18th, the Queer Holiday that Should Be

Happy November 18th, the Queer Holiday that Should Be

Happy November 18th! Today is the anniversary of the historic 2003 ruling that made Massachusetts the first U.S. state to allow same-sex couples to marry. It also marks the 2003 repeal of the U.K.’s anti-LGBTQ Section 28 law. Additionally, it’s the “Massaversary” of when my spouse and I legally wed (though we celebrate our true anniversary in April).?

Rainbow cake

Although same-sex couples in Massachusetts could not marry until May 17, 2004, state Chief Justice Margaret Marshall had issued her groundbreaking ruling in Goodridge v. Department of Public Health six months earlier, on November 18, 2003. My spouse Helen and I didn’t intend to have our wedding on this historic date, however. We had been living in New York but were moving to Massachusetts, driven by a new job offer that Helen had just gotten. Her new Massachusetts employer covered health insurance for employees’ spouses of any gender, but had stopped covering it for unmarried same-sex partners after marriage became legal for them (a short-sighted move, but that’s a whole other discussion). We therefore planned our wedding in about two weeks, since I was staying home with our son at the time and needed health insurance through her employer. We only realized the coincidence of the date when our justice of the peace mentioned it.

But yes, we were one of the many couples to use the quote from Marshall’s decision as part of our ceremony. We still view our original anniversary, in the spring, as our “real” one, with this being simply the occasion that the state caught up with what we’d known for 10 years. Still, we try to mark the day as a milestone (though not the beginning) of our lives together.

Over in the U.K., November 18, 2003, also marked the repeal of the Section 28 law that had since May 1988 forbidden “the teaching in any maintained school of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship.” It had been the fear-driven response of Margaret Thatcher’s Conservative Party to the 1980s AIDS crisis.

Additionally, this week marks Trans Awareness Week, a time to both celebrate trans identities and (for us cisgender folks) learn more about how to honor and support them.

Even if it’s not your anniversary today, then, take these other occasions in queer history as a reason to celebrate (and do so again on May 17). We could all use an excuse to do so in a year like this. (And to eat cake—because if you know anything about my household, you know there will be cake.)

Austrian supermarket ad depicts our last emperor and empress (Franz Josef & Sisi) as a lesbian couple and it makes me way too happy : actuallesbians

Austrian supermarket ad depicts our last emperor and empress (Franz

A place for discussions for and by cis and trans lesbians, bisexual girls, chicks who like chicks, bi-curious folks, dykes, butches, femmes, girls who kiss girls, birls, bois, aces, LGBT allies, and anyone else interested! Our subreddit is named r/actuallesbians because r/lesbians is not really for or by lesbians–it was meant to be a joke. We’re not a militant or exclusive group, so feel free to join up!

Extra! Extra!: Is That Big Tech in Your Pocket or Are You Just Happy to See Me?

Extra! Extra!: Is That Big Tech in Your Pocket or

This week’s Extra! Extra! covers a few topics that haven’t gotten much attention in our coverage lately: big tech and the surveillance state, a look at America’s broken education system from several angles and violence against women. We continue to provide an update on the Black Lives Matter protests, immigration and the COVID-19 pandemic.

Update on the Surveillance State

DHS Authorizes Domestic Surveillance to Protect Statues and Monuments

Natalie: Remember when progressives were calling for the elimination of the Department of Homeland Security and conservatives (both Democratic and Republican) absolutely lost their shit? What better indication that the Department of Homeland Security is a pointless entity than the revelation that it has time to devote to protecting statutes? I am astounded that the government thinks that this is a worthy use of American taxpayer dollars.

The most important question, though, is: what’s the constitutional basis for this? While the memo purports to prohibit “monitoring activities protected by the First Amendment or the lawful exercise of other Constitutional or legal rights, or for the purpose of suppressing or burdening criticism or dissent, it’s hard to read this as something other than an effort to do precisely that.

The White House and Congress seem to be on a collision course on this issue, though. Last night the Senate approved the National Defense Authorization Act which included an amendment from Elizabeth Warren to change the names of military installations bearing the names of Confederate leaders. The White House has vowed to veto any bill that seeks to change the names of these facilities but the NDAA passed by such substantial, bipartisan margins in the House and the Senate, a veto override would seem almost inevitable.

Your Zoom Interrogation Is About To Start

ADVERTISEMENT

Himani: For the various reasons described in this article, this is generally a good thing from a police accountability standpoint. But the question I am always, always left with is: How are tech companies using this data for their own self-serving and nefarious purposes?

Natalie: To your point, Himani, I’m reminded again of Andrew Yang’s campaign plank about treating data as property and I’m becoming increasingly convinced that it’s the only way to protect ourselves against the misuse of our data by tech companies.

With respect to the article, though, I think this is a really underreported aspect of the pandemic… not just interrogations — but I do think it’s interesting how this takes away officers’ ability to intimidate — but with the conduct of the judicial system as a whole. If we had a working justice department, perhaps there’d be more energy invested in creating a pathway for all aspects of the judicial system to continue working in the wake of this pandemic. Right now, we’re just accepting the suspension of people’s 6th Amendment rights and, honestly, the presumption of innocence, as if it doesn’t matter.

Rachel: I very much agree with Himani’s concerns about the long arm of tech’s involvement here, and hope that on the whole the takeaway that we settle on for this development is not “we need more tech disruption in justice” but “we actually get more and better justice when we abandon the myth of the cop as central and heroic.” The specific things that are being ID’d here as helpful — safer, more open conversations with suspects with community being able to observe the interaction — aren’t just arguments against intentionally threatening and violent police practices, although they are, but are arguments against the cop (even “good” cops like detectives) as primary driver and authority in investigations of crimes overall. The practices described here — intimidating, confusing and threatening witnesses, creating psychologically coercive environments, crafting narratives of guilt and blame that citizens are then challenged to disprove — aren’t just a few occasional police techniques, they’re part of what police are. What’s left when you remove them from interrogation is just “asking someone what happened and documenting their responses,” and evidence here shows that we actually get better results when we do that — and we don’t need a militarized police force for that.

Customs and Border Protection Can Track Cars Nationwide Via Commercial Database

Himani: This was an incredibly disturbing read and is more consistent with my usual understanding of tech’s role in law enforcement and the criminal justice system: more tools for civilian surveillance that no one has any reasonable way of opting out of.

Hong Kong’s protest movement keeps getting stymied by Apple

Himani: Related to the above point about surveillance technology, the situation in Hong Kong puts into relief what has been true around the world for a while now: Tech companies hold a substantial amount of political power. Their decisions make and break movements, which is literally the case in Hong Kong right now. Apple invested in the Chinese market, and, to that end, it is willing to cave to the Chinese government’s censorship demands in Hong Kong at this critical moment in Hong Kong’s history.

Update on the Protests and Local Activism

Accounts from the Battle of Grant Park

Breonna Taylor Activists Are Live-Streaming Their Hunger Strike

Natalie: It pains me that it’s come to this. It shouldn’t have to come to this. Enough bodies have been sacrificed at the altar of police violence, we don’t need more.

Arrest. The. Cops.

Police in riot gear clear New York’s Occupy encampment in dawn raid

Rachel: This is all so heartbreaking and enraging, and I’m thinking of all these stories in tandem with the absurd statue defense army developments above. Specifically: none of this is necessary. None of this needed to happen, and none of this is about making anyone safer or protecting anyone that matters. It is an exercise of power for the sake of power, harm and destruction for the sake of destruction.

Are We Hurtling Towards an Authoritarian State? Or Are We Already in One?

Trump’s Legal Justification for the Abduction of Portland Protesters Is Absurd

Himani: This situation in Portland and Trump’s subsequent dispersal of federal forces to cities across the US is just … honestly I have no words. As Slate reports, “The Federal Protective Service has the authority to make arrests ‘if the officer or agent has reasonable grounds to believe that the person to be arrested has committed or is committing a felony.’” The bar for arresting someone seems to be going lower and lower by the minute. Which is a disturbing prospect, given everything we know about what happens, particularly to Black people, in police “custody” and in correctional institutes. In the words of the late John Lewis, “One of my greatest fears is that one day we wake up and our democracy is gone.”

Leaked Documents Show Police Knew Far-Right Extremists Were the Real Threat at Protests, Not “Antifa”

Natalie: Of course they did. They’ve known for a while.

Back in 2009, the Obama’ DHS released a report called “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment” (PDF) and Republicans lost their shit. The then-Minority Leader John Boehner chided then-Secretary Janet Napolitano, saying, “[T]he Secretary of Homeland Security owes the American people an explanation for why… her own Department is using [‘terrorist’] to describe American citizens who disagree with the direction Washington Democrats are taking our nation.”

And just as predictably as the Republicans’ knee-jerk response, came the response of Democrats: folding like a cheap suit amid the criticism (despite the fact that they’d issued a similar report on Leftwing Extremism earlier in the year). Napolitano apologized and the report was shelved.

We’ve known for a long time how these groups operate and what their motivations are…and even though this administration feels obliged to divert attention to the lesser threat, the facts still remain.

Revealed: US spends millions of taxpayer dollars on ineffective voting restrictions

Natalie: I think this headline is a tad misleading: voting restrictions are ineffective only if you believe that they are a legitimate effort to prevent voter fraud… which, of course, is the reason Republicans give when they’re passing legislation like Voter ID. If you accept that voting restrictions are not actually meant to prevent voter fraud — because, as numerous studies have shown, it hasn’t — but instead to disenfranchise a specific segment of voters, then voting restrictions are highly effective. Voting restrictions are created to reduce the size of the electorate and bolster Republican chances in the general election…whatever it costs, monetarily or in terms of diminishing our democracy, it’s worth it to Republicans.

Everything That Is Broken in the American Education System

In Defense of Our Teachers

GOP Senators Push Big Private School Choice Bill Amid Pandemic Relief Debate

NAACP Sues Betsy DeVos Over Federal Aid Money For Private Schools

Natalie: I’ll admit: I’m surprised it took this long for Republicans to use the pandemic as an opportunity to undermine public education. I thought, for sure, that there’d be a big push for a divestment from public schools during the pandemic and a reallocation to pre-existing online schools like Connections Academy that already have the infrastructure in place to support online education. Then, once schools moved to reopen, there’d be a shortfall and kids would move to charter/private schools out of necessity. But no matter what path they took: the idea that Republicans — especially Besty DeVos, given her history of grifting money from Michigan to fund unaccountable charter schools — would seize on this as an opportunity to erode our public education system.

Himani: Unlike Natalie, I really didn’t see this coming because I was so caught up in the healthcare and economic side of what was going on with the pandemic. There are so many things I can say about “school choice” and all of its failings, but I will focus on just two. First, the Orlando Sentinel reported earlier this year that many schools receiving state money have explicit anti-LGBTQ+ policies. Second, school choice has had a direct role in increasing inequality. As Michael Seeling explains writing for SSIR: “School choice doesn’t necessarily drive schools to compete for best practices; it more often drives them to compete for the best kids, the students who are easiest—and cheapest—to teach.”

Sen. Tom Cotton introduces bill withholding federal funding for schools teaching the 1619 Project

Himani: Natalie perfectly captured everything that needed to be said about this in our conversation in Slack: “Small government conservatism being proven for the farce that it is!”

And for further context on this point:

Also, because I am bad with names, it wasn’t until I did some digging into this latest news that I discovered that this is the same Tom Cotton who wrote that infamous op-ed for the New York Times invoking the US military to respond to the Black Lives Matter protests in June.

Rachel: As a ~media professional~, I have to admit that my first thought in reaction to this story was what a resounding testimonial it is to the success of the 1619 Project — although Cotton’s vile move here isn’t something to celebrate, it’s hard to imagine a clearer sign that your work on clarifying the real facts of America’s history is doing its job than hardline Republicans doing everything in their power to suppress it.

‘I Miss My Mom’: Black Teen Detained for Not Doing Her Homework Was Just Denied Release

Natalie: This is the most infuriating story I’ve read in the last weeks.

Understanding Native Rights and Tribal Sovereignty

Q&A: Lauren King on What the Five Tribes’ Agreement-in-Principle Means for Oklahoma

Half of Oklahoma Is “Indian Country.” What If All Native Treaties Were Upheld?

Natalie: Both these pieces were really helpful for me. As I mentioned a few weeks ago, in reading the Supreme Court’s decision in McGirt v. Oklahoma, it was hard to get my mind around the selective enforcement of treaties and respective for Native sovereignty…and both these pieces helped crystallize my thinking on those issues a bit more.

Rachel: I echo Natalie, and want to point up the question in the Intercept article — what if all Native treaties were upheld? — and its significance. Clearly America right now is going through something of a mainstream (white) reckoning of just how much of the fabric of its identity and present as a nation was formed by chattel slavery — a lot! arguably all of it! — and similarly, the questions of what treaties were made with the Indigenous people of North America from when it was colonized into the 19th century and the ways in which they were broken have had a determining role in almost everything about our nation as it is today. Looking at that closely has to be part of any conversation around what justice looks like and how it can be embodied.

How to Make a Deadly Pandemic in Indian Country

Immigration Update

Sex abuse claims revealed at Homestead shelter, where staff was not vetted for child abuse

Natalie: So the Department of Homeland Security has time to watch statues but it doesn’t have time to run a basic records check to see if its employees have histories of child abuse? The agency is behaving similarly with subcontractors who, according to a recent report by the Associated Press, are keeping migrant children as young as 1 year old, IN HOTELS to skirt the asylum process and allow for immediate deportation. DHS and ICE claim those subcontractors have been trained but won’t say “whether they’re licensed child care professionals or have received FBI background checks”

This is infuriating.

Federal Court Orders Trump Administration to Accept New DACA Applications

Rachel: So even just within the realm of domestic immigration policy, we can see a multiplicity of the ways that the Trump administration has undermined even the limited advances made by previous leaders — with DACA, they tried to shutter the program and ended up going through the court system, but with some programs like asylum, they (in an extreme oversimplification) just… quietly stopped doing it. As we are being reminded in so many ways right now, there’s what the law says and what those in power actually do, and sometimes even when they’re in conflict, nothing happens. Even though Trump’s admin lost on DACA—- a huge victory that I don’t want to dismiss or undercut! — there’s a remaining question of whether they’ll actually, like, do it. This court order is an attempt to make them do so, instead of starving the DACA program through inaction where they failed to effectively execute it; will it work? We’ll see!

On Violence Against Women

A Men’s Rights Activist Is Suspected Of Killing A Federal Judge’s Son And Shooting Her Husband

Femicides rise in Mexico as president cuts budgets of women’s shelters

What Domestic Violence Activists Can Teach Us About Police Abolition

Rachel: My feelings on all of these stories together are a sort of Greek chorus of “I told you so”s of varying emotional registers. We know that repeatedly demonstrated misogyny is a prime indicator for violence! We have seen this so, so many times! Why do we keep having to read stories like this and think “oh, look, it happened again”? We know that when women don’t have access to resources to safely leave their homes or be financially solvent outside of a marriage or nuclear family, they are at incredible risk for violence, and they die. Why do we have to watch that happen over and over and over again on a policy level? We know that there are myriad ways forward that don’t rely on a carceral state, and that if you just listen to criminalized folks like sex workers or women trying to escape violence (arguably a criminalized demographic especially when those people are women of color and Black women), you can see them modeled in real life! I think there is maybe some kind of crystallized larger lesson to take from these stories together that I am a little too worn out from reading these over and over to articulate – maybe it’s just that yet again, these are the places the state (globally) is repeatedly failing us; these are the places where the most successful solutions are being modeled by communities that care about each other.

COVID-19 Update

What Coronavirus Job Losses Reveal About Racism in America

White Neighborhoods Have Better Access to COVID-19 Testing Than Black and Hispanic Communities, Study Finds

Natalie: Imagine my shock.

‘We suffer in silence’: coronavirus takes heavy toll on Brazil’s army of gravediggers

Natalie: We don’t think enough about what these folks are witnessing…sure, they see death regularly but not like this…not so many people, in a relatively short amount of time, at the hands of the same malady. It’s awful. These will be the uncounted casualties of COVID-19…those workers who have to stare an unprecedented amount of death in the face and either learn to live with it or take their own lives, like Dr. Lorna Breen or John Mondello.

Happy Friday~ : actuallesbians

Happy Friday~ : actuallesbians

A place for discussions for and by cis and trans lesbians, bisexual girls, chicks who like chicks, bi-curious folks, dykes, butches, femmes, girls who kiss girls, birls, bois, aces, LGBT allies, and anyone else interested! Our subreddit is named r/actuallesbians because r/lesbians is not really for or by lesbians–it was meant to be a joke. We’re not a militant or exclusive group, so feel free to join up!

16 Shows With Happy Endings For Their Queer Female Characters – KitschMix

16 Shows With Happy Endings For Their Queer Female Characters

It should go without saying, but… This post is gonna have some spoilers in it. Just getting that out of the way ahead of time.

The past few years have been a miracle in terms of queer representation on TV. More and more shows are starting to include (or at least allude to) non-heteronormative storylines, even if the LGBT characters aren’t the greatest representation of queer culture at large.

Still, even with all the representation we get these days, it’s still really, really hard to find a show that not only has queer characters, but lets them stay alive and partnered up and… You know… Not total jerks. (Sigh, PLL… Why did you have to make the only transgender character a psychopath, who then dies in a horrible way? And, of course, there have been two other queer ladies to die in that show, too. But I digress.)

With all that being said, there are a few shows which offered their lady-loving-ladies a happy ending when the show ended. Join us as we count them down now:


1. Ellen and Laurie, Ellen (1998)

It might be safe to assume that Ellen DeGeneres wouldn’t have allowed for her own character to have a horrible ending… But still, Ellen and Laurie finish out the show by confirming their commitment to each other, with the vow that they would be legally married as soon as it was possible to do so. 17 years later, it finally was – so the fandom should rejoice that the couple (presumably) made it down the aisle eventually.


2. Helen and Nikki, Bad Girls (2001)

Most jailhouse romances don’t seem to make it – partially because there’s the twisted idea that what happens behind bars “doesn’t really count.” Regardless, though, Helen and Nikki ended up running off into the proverbial sunset together, promising to take things slow onto the future. Aww. Slow-moving lesbian couples are my favorite.


3. Jessie and Katie, Once and Again (2002)

As a huge Evan Rachel Wood fan, it always makes me super happy to see her in anything… Even if she’s not playing a queer character. However, her character in Once and Again was definitely queer, and the two were still together when the show was cancelled. We can only assume that they’re still together 14 years later, because hello, who doesn’t dream of marrying their high school sweetheart? (At least, you dream of that while you’re with that person. I’m sure things change if you break up. I didn’t exactly have a high school sweetheart, so I can’t confirm.)


4. Willow and Kennedy, Buffy (2003)

Okay, okay… Kennedy isn’t Tara, and maybe we all hated her for that for a little while. But, to be fair, Willow seemed pretty happy with her – and they were still together when the show ended. TBH, our opinion about their relationship doesn’t matter as much as their happiness in their relationship, am I right? I’m right. Just trust me on this one.


5. Carol and Susan, Friends (2004)

Again, regardless of how you feel about the couple – and the fact that they were often paraded in front of poor Ross’s face at every available opportunity – there’s no doubt that they made each other happy. They even got married and raised little Ben together as a couple. Plus, Lea DeLaria and Candance Gingrich were in attendance at their wedding, which sort of gives them extra cool points. (We all wish we had such cool lesbian friends. Don’t even try to pretend you don’t.)


6. Melanie and Lindsay, Queer as Folk (2005)

Does it count as “happily ever after” if you break up and then get back together? I’d like to think it does. When they moved to Canada to get away from the US government, the rest of the LGBT community in the United States wanted to be right there with them. Sadly… I’m still stuck in the middle of California myself… But one day I, too, will flee to Canada with my other half. One day.


7. Kerry and Courtney, ER (2007)

Dr. Kerry Weaver went through more than her fair share of lesbian relationship woes before ending up with Courtney, but apparently the writers and producers came to their senses and made her fall for… a hot TV producer. Of course. Pat on the back to themselves, here, but whatevs – at least she’s happy at last!


8. Spencer and Ashley, South of Nowhere (2008)

Fun fact: This particular show had a lot to do with the timing of me coming out. Spashley went through a ridiculous number of bisexual back-and-forth, often trading turns with Aiden, the third side of their love triangle. However, once everything was said and done, Spashley ended up Uhauling off into the sunset together like every millennial queer chick in the fandom always knew they would.


9. Olivia and Natalia, Guiding Light (2009)

GL fans weren’t super happy about all the crazy trials and tribulations that these two had to face, but thankfully the writers came to their senses in the end and let the two stay together, “forever” – or at least until after the show ended.


10. Bette and Tina & Alice and Tasha, The L Word (2009)

It’s rare enough for a TV show to let one queer couple ending, but for one show to allow two couples to stay together and live happily ever after? Pure joy. However you might feel about Bette and Tina (I’m not a big fan, myself) it’s nice to know that they were able to work through things, I guess.

And, Alice and Tasha will always be my favorite couple from the show, even if it wasn’t exactly confirmed that they were getting back together. They totally were.


11. Chris and Kris & Jen and Sam, Exes & Ohs (2011)

Chris and Kris end up getting married and having a baby, while Jen and Sam happen to end up together too. Sure, it might have been another lesbian-centric storyline to begin with (which does increase the odds of an all-female relationship making it through), but still… Good job, Michelle Paradise, for making everyone happy with this one.


12. Remy and her girlfriend, House (2012)

As sad as it is that Thirteen lost her job, and she’s got Huntington’s Disease (probably), and that her girlfriend’s name wasn’t ever revealed… They had a lovely relationship, we’re sure of it. And, as far as we can tell, they’re going to spend the rest of their lives together, because if you break up off-camera in a TV show it doesn’t really count.


13. Brittany and Santana, Glee (2015)

I never really got into Glee when it was super popular, but Tumblr taught me all about the wonders that were the Brittana ‘ship. Once I ended up (briefly) dating a girl who was Brittana-obsessed, I got a little into it… And it turns out, the Brittana fandom got their way in the end, when the producers decided to let Brittany and Santana get married finally.


14. Julie and Nikki, The Returned (2015)

In a show that is literally about dead people, it’s hard to picture anything resembling a happy ending… Well, that is, anything about dead people that wasn’t directed by Tim Burton, of course. Anyway, Julie and Nikki not only made it in the end, but they even got to kiss when it was all said and done. Aww.


15. Alana and Margot, Hannibal (2015)

When the main character is a serial killer, you just know that people are going to die left and right. It was quite a shock, then, that Alana and Margot got to stay alive all the way to the end. Kudos, Alana and Margot… You guys really made it.


16. Bo and Lauren, Lost Girl (2016)

Any show that deals primarily in the supernatural is sure to have extra pressures put on the characters… Especially when most LGBT characters get killed off pretty early on. However, Bo and Lauren made it, which just proves that things can work out – as long as you’re a supernatural entity, at least.