Tag: People

Gay dad shares worst things people have said since having his son

Gay dads with their child

Robin Morgan-Bentley shared a list of the worst things people have said to him since becoming a father. (Stock image from Envato Elements)

A gay man has shared a list of the top 10 bizarre, offensive things people have said to him and his husband since they became dads.

Robin Morgan-Bentley shared the list on Twitter, highlighting the discriminatory attitudes queer parents often face in their everyday lives.

“Top 10 things actual people have said to me and my husband this year, as new gay dads,” Morgan-Bentley wrote.

Some of the points are hilarious, showing that people can be ignorant without meaning to be offensive – but others are truly shocking.

“Oh it’s lads’ day out today! So cute. Is mummy having the day off?” is the number one bizarre thing Morgan-Bentley has heard since becoming a dad.

Is the mum still involved? It must be so hard for her

But the list also reveals that people have questioned which of them is the “real dad”, while others have interrogated them on whether they worry about their son not being breast-fed.

Other questions include: “Is the mum still involved? It must be so hard for her,” and: “Do you reckon he’ll also be gay when he grows up?”

“What if his first word is mummy?” another person asked him, while another concerned straight person said: “Do you want me to help settle him?”

Gay dad was told: ‘I can be his mummy if you want’.

Perhaps most worryingly, one person actually said to him: “I can be his mummy if you want.”

Other people also alluded to the fact that their son was born in 2020 as COVID-19 began its rapid spread across the world.

“Oh he’s going to miss out on so much!” one person said to them. “Think of all the facial expressions he’s missing under these masks.”

Other Twitter users quickly shared their own horror stories of cis and straight people making bizarre, offensive, and sometimes hilarious faux-pas with their children.

Trans dad Freddy McConnell replied: “Solidarity! I’ve had many of these. Also virtually every one of my female friends/relatives has been assumed to be my kid’s mum more than once.”

Another gay dad replied: “We’ve had all of these and more. My particular fave: on seeing me choose a Fathers’ Day card with junior: ‘Oh your grandson is so adorable!’ (Though, maybe I just looked old).”

One woman added: “People are so intrusive to LGBTQ people’s lives. I’ve had a colleague ask me in a lift at work if I want kids, who will have them, how it will work… All in a one minute lift ride to the canteen (with other people in there…).”

But author CL Taylor perhaps summed it up best in her response to the thread, simply writing: “Woah. People are so rude.”

Billy Porter reminds us that LGBTQ people made the difference in the election. But the work’s not done yet. / LGBTQ Nation

FEBRUARY 09, 2020: Billy Porter walks the red carpet at the Elton John AIDS Foundation Party on February 09, 2020 in Los Angeles, California.

Billy Porter walks the red carpet at the Elton John AIDS Foundation Party on February 09, 2020 in Los Angeles, California.Photo: Silvia Elizabeth Pangaro / Shutterstock

The LGBTQ community made a major impact on the outcomes of the 2020 election season. LGBTQ Nation analysis of data revealed that without LGBTQ voters in key states, Donald Trump likely would have won reelection as President, for example. Further reviews have also concluded that Trump could have won again, if not for the force of LGBTQ voters all over the country.

Billy Porter doesn’t want you to forget. He’s working with GLAAD to remind everyone that LGBTQ voters, organizers, and groups like GLAAD made the difference in what was considered the most pivotal election of our time.

Related: These queer organizers in Georgia are working overtime to flip the Senate blue

In a new video, the Pose star himself narrates a review of the tireless work that GLAAD committed to during the 2020 primary and general elections. The two-and-a-half minute spot highlights “the LGBTQ community’s impact on the 2020 general election, as well as the impact we are posed to have in the Georgia run-off,” GLAAD announced.

“After five primary debates without a single question about LGBTQ health care protections, workplace discrimination, violence against the community or support for the Equality Act, GLAAD deployed thirty years of media expertise to amplify the LGBTQ voice in the election conversation,” Porter explains.

He lists their media guide for journalists, petitions to debate moderators, and self-hosted Presidential Forum in Iowa as examples of the group “spotlighting LGBTQ issues on the national stage.”

“GLAAD went into combat mode against rampant lies and disinformation,” Porter continues, “with daily media pushback from its news and rapid response team, pre-election polling, and a heart-wrenching ad that aired on Fox News.”

“GLAAD led the charge to turn out LGBTQ and ally voters,” says Porter, “resulting in the biggest LGBTQ turnout ever.”

“Because of GLAAD, the voices — and the votes — of LGBTQ people and their allies were heard loud and clear at the ballot box, and GLAAD will continue to lead the fight for equality and acceptance,” Porter concludes.

Yet, the extent of progress for LGBTQ rights under incoming President Joe Biden’s administration remains uncertain. It all depends on if Democrats can take hold of the Senate by winning the runoff elections for Georgia’s two seats on January 5.

If either incumbent — Kelly Loeffler or David Perdue — were to defeat their challenger — Rev. Raphael Warnock or Jon Ossoff, respectively — Republicans would retain control of the Senate. That means current Majority Leader Mitch McConnell would remain in charge of the chamber’s agenda.

If both Loeffler and Perdue lose, there would be exactly 50 Republican and 50 Democrat Senators in the next Congress. That would allow Vice President-elect Kamala Harris to cast the deciding vote to end tiebreakers in the chamber, and giving pro-LGBTQ legislation like the Equality Act a chance of passing.

As Porter says, “the election is over, but GLAAD’s work goes on.”

That’s why GLAAD also announced that it will undertake yet another text messaging campaign this week, hoping to encourage millions of potential voters to make that difference yet again. They are working with LGBTQ organization Georgia Equality and VoteAmerica to reach as many voters as possible before polls close next Tuesday.

“Join millions of people supporting diversity and inclusion by voting in the Jan. 5th Senate runoff,” the sample text messages shared with LGBTQ Nation read. “Early voting is open now,” they remind readers, before encouraging them to find their nearest polling location and other information on the runoffs at GLAAD.org/georgia.

“The texts will continue through December 30 when early voting ends in select locations,” GLAAD said in a statement.

Earlier this month, the anti-LGBTQ records of Sens. Loeffler and Perdue were published to GLAAD’s Trump Accountability Project, also in collaboration with Georgia Equality. They found that Loeffler donates her salary to an anti-LGBTQ group and has close ties to the Family Research Council, a hate group, while Perdue has earned praised from the Council and the Family Policy Alliance, a lobbying front for another anti-LGBTQ hate group, Focus on the Family.

Neither have voiced support, or even acknowledged, the proposed Equality Act, GLAAD points out. Both Ossoff and Rev. Warnock support it.

That’s part of why GLAAD is working just as hard to get the vote out in the Peach state — and so far, early voting numbers reflect higher turnout than in November’s election.

“The general election began with a lack of attention given to LGBTQ issues and pivoted to the Trump Administration falsely positioning itself as LGBTQ-affirming in a shameless effort to court LGBTQ voters and our allies,” GLAAD President and CEO Sarah Kate Ellis told LGBTQ Nation.

A post-election poll by GLAAD found that Trump only earned 14 percent of the LGBTQ vote, which was the same as he had in 2016. By contrast, Joe Biden earned 81 percent of the community’s vote.

That contradicted a previous analysis that determined that Trump had doubled his LGBTQ support in this election, based on an exit poll using a much smaller sample of LGBTQ respondents.

“Combatting that false narrative and growing visibility for LGBTQ issues became centerpieces of GLAAD’s largest election campaign ever,” Ellis said. “LGBTQ voters turned out in historic numbers and it’s thanks to our community, along with other diverse Americans, that pro-equality candidates crossed the finish line.”

GLAAD found that approximately 93 percent of LGBTQ identifying people voted, and 25 percent did so for the first time.

“Now, we must join together to secure another win for equality in the Senate run-off,” Ellis said, because “the Equality Act, an end to the trans military ban, and rollbacks of other recent anti-LGBTQ policies can become realities” after “years of advocacy.”

See GLAAD’s video as narrated by Billy Porter here first.

Man punches bus passenger and says “I hate gay people” / Queerty

Man punches bus passenger and says “I hate gay people”

Law enforcement officials in New York City have made an appeal to the public in hopes of identifying a suspect in a hate crime.

The attack in question occurred November 22 on the M23 bus in Chelsea just before 5 PM. Video footage of the encounter taken from security cameras shows the suspect–a middle-aged white man–punching a teenager.

According to the victim–whose name has not been made public–the suspect approached him saying “You have long hair. I don’t like people like you.”

The suspect then added “I hate gay people,” reports The New York Post

Related: His attackers yelled “f*ggot” as they beat him. Cops say it’s not a hate crime.

The man then followed the victim as he exited the bus, where he then punched the teenager in the face. The man then escaped back aboard the bus which drove off into the night.

The victim refused medical attention at the scene, though he did suffer moderate bruising.

Anyone with any information regarding the suspect or the crime should contact the New York City Police Department Crime Stoppers Hotline at 1-800-577-TIPS.

Sometimes, I forget straight people exist too : actuallesbians

Sometimes, I forget straight people exist too : 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!

COVID ‘amplifying’ inequalites faced by queer Black people, study shows

COVID 'amplifying' inequalites faced by queer Black people, study shows

Black LGBT+ lives land in the intersection of racism and homophobia. (Getty/Hollie Adams)

The COVID-19 pandemic is placing huge strain on Black queer households as decades of discrimination compound economic insecurity, a worrying new study has found.

The report released by the Movement Advancement Project (MAP) identifies American communities that are bearing the brunt of COVID-19, noting that LGBT+ households were disproportionately challenged in work, school, childrearing, healthcare, financial insecurity and social isolation.

In particular Black and Latinx LGBT+ people are facing significantly higher levels of financial insecurity, with a shocking 95 per cent of queer Black households and 70 per cent of queer Latinx households experiencing at least one serious financial problem since the pandemic began.

And more than half of Black LGBT+ households have been unable to get medical care or had delayed medical services because of the economic strain of the pandemic.

“The pandemic has disrupted life for all of us. Yet, some communities have borne the brunt: Black and Latinx people, low-income people, and, as this new data shows, LGBT+ people,” said Ineke Mushovic, Executive Director at MAP.

“Decades of discrimination on the job, in healthcare and beyond, combined with uneven legal protections around the country make LGBT+ people more vulnerable to pandemic-related instability and insecurity, with an even more devastating impact on LGBT+ people of colour.”

The long history of racial discrimination in the US is contributing to many problems, but the disparity is also seen in the wider LGBT+ community, with queer people of all backgrounds experiencing increased challenges compared to the straight population.

For example, LGBT+ households are twice as likely to be unable to get necessary medical care and four times more likely to go hungry.

Nearly two-thirds (64 per cent) of LGBT+ people and their families experienced a job loss or disruption, compared to just under half (45 per cent) of non-LGBT+ households.

29 per cent had serious problems with internet connection for work or schoolwork at home, compared with 17 per cent of non-LGBT+ families. And a quarter were unable to access prescription drugs or experienced a delay, compared to just eight per cent of straight people.

“It’s clear that the COVID-19 has amplified and exacerbated disparities that existed before the pandemic,” concluded Logan Casey, policy researcher at MAP.

“LGBT+ people were more likely to struggle with economic stability and have challenges with access to health care prior to COVID, and that’s even more true now.

“The existing patchwork of legal protections is insufficient, which is why we need a nationwide law like the Equality Act so that LGBTQ people in every community are protected from discrimination.”

 

 

 

 

 

Hungary Bans Same-Sex Couples and Most Single People from Adopting

Hungary Bans Same-Sex Couples and Most Single People from Adopting

In the latest of a series of anti-LGBTQ moves, Hungary’s parliament has changed its constitution to ban same-sex couples and most single people from adopting children.

Hungarian Parliament Building - Budapest

Hungarian Parliament Building – Budapest. Photo credit: Jorge Franganillo. Used under CC BY 2.0

The change on Tuesday, championed by Prime Minister Viktor Orban and his right-wing Fidesz party, will allow adoption only by married couples and single people “granted special permission by the government,” reports the Washington Post. Same-sex couples cannot marry in Hungary, although they may get civil unions. Same-sex couples had previously been able to adopt by having only one partner apply to be the legal parent, “but the new law puts an end to this practice,” the Post says.

Justice Minister Judit Varga posted part of the text of the new legislation on her Facebook page:

Hungary protects the institution of marriage as a cohabitation between a man and a woman, based on voluntary decision, and the family as the basis for the survival of the nation. The basis of the family relationship is the marriage and the parent-child relationship. The mother is a woman, the father is a man.

The Háttér Society, the largest and oldest non-governmental LGBTQI organization in Hungary, tweeted that this legislation, however, will “stigmatize same-sex couples raising children and transgender people, make LGBTQI school education programs impossible and complicate single-parent adoption.” They add, in a series of tweets:

These provisions are very problematic on their own, as they go against international human rights norms and especially the rights of children. LGBTQI children exist, forcing them to live according to conservative ideals might make them invisible, but will not make them disappear.

Restricting the number of potential adoptive parents means that more children will remain in state care or be adopted abroad where they can’t maintain their language or cultural identity. There are already hundreds of children being adopted outside of Hungary.

Adopting such highly problematic laws at the peak of the COVID pandemic is even more appaling [sic]: it is part of a political strategy to divert attention away from the government’s inability to control the health and economic crisis.

The adoption legislation is not the only anti-LGBTQ move made by Orban’s government, however. In May, it banned transgender people from changing their gender identity on identification documents. These are shameful moves by the government. I hope that both national and international pressure comes to bear to reverse these harmful and short-sighted policies.

Also coincidentally released on Tuesday was the “State-Sponsored Homophobia 2020: Global Legislation Overview Update ” from the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association, a worldwide federation of more than 1,600 organizations from over 150 countries and territories. Among other findings, it notes that “69 UN member States still criminalise consensual same-sex sexual acts between adults,” with six member States prescribing the death penalty.

On the positive side, 11 UN member States have constitutional provisions that specify sexual orientation in their anti-discrimination protections; 57 offer broad protections against discrimination based on sexual orientation; 81 protect against workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation; 48 impose enhanced criminal penalties for offences motivated by hate towards the victim’s sexual orientation; and 4 have nationwide bans against “conversion therapies.” Twenty-eight recognize marriage for same-sex couples (plus one non-UN jurisdiction, Taiwan); 34 provide for some partnership recognition; and 28 have joint adoption laws, with 32 allowing for same-sex second parent adoption. (Yet the data alone can be deceiving: “In Ecuador, constitutional protection co-exists with a constitutional ban on adoption of children by same-sex couples,” the report notes.) This report shows the progress that has been made over the past decades—but also, as this latest move from Hungary emphasizes, how far we have yet to go. Onward….

“Many people” believe Don Jr. was high out of his mind in cellphone video taken inside budget motel / Queerty

“Many people” believe Don Jr. was high out of his

Oh, how the mighty have fallen.

A truly, truly bizarre cellphone video of Donald Trump Jr. went viral over the weekend and when you see the tape you’ll understand why.

The video looks as though it was shot inside a budget motel room. In it, Don Jr. appears glossy-eyed as he slurs his words in a barely coherent tirade against Hunter Biden.

Many people believe the video was filmed at a Motel 6 and that Don Jr. was coked out his mind. Queerty cannot independently verify whether these rumors are true.

Others claim the video is fake.

Junior, who tested positive for coronavirus last month, hasn’t commented on it, but after it went viral, Motel 6, bless its heart, was trending on Twitter under the “Politics” category.

Here’s what people have been saying about the whole thing…

Related: Don Jr., infected with coronavirus, posts totally unnecessary fart video from quarantine

A lot of the people in my classes act this way towards me, and it honestly hurts so fucking much to be treated as if I’m a rabid animal after they find out that I’m queer. : actuallesbians

A lot of the people in my classes act this

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!

Queer elf replies to boy’s letter to Santa asking if God loves gay people

Queer Latino volunteer elf Michael Muñoz poses with Santa.

Queer Latino volunteer elf Michael Muñoz poses with Santa. (TheKitchenGaily/ Twitter)

A queer elf has revealed that he responded to a boy’s heartbreaking letter to Santa, asking if he supports the LGBT+ community and if God “loves me for being gay”.

Last month, the United States Postal Service’s (USPS) Operation Santa, which coordinates responses to letters addressed to Father Christmas, shared a heartbreaking message from a boy named Will.

His letter reads: “Dear Santa, do you support the LGBTQ community and if you can speak to God, can you tell him I love him, and if he loves me for being gay? Thank you. Love, Will.”

The letter broke the hearts of many after it was shared on Twitter, but luckily it has been revealed that Will received an incredible response.

Michael Muñoz is a queer Latino volunteer elf who works with Operation Santa, and who appeared in a new documentary titled Dear Santa focused on the USPS project.

Last Christmas, Muñoz felt that he “needed a break” from his volunteer elf duties – until he saw Will’s letter.

He told The Advocate: “I was heartbroken point-blank. Every year I read dozens of letters from children; some ask for toys, but most ask for clothes or presents for their moms as they can’t afford anything.

“What made this different and really difficult for me to read was that he didn’t ask for anything physical.

“All he wanted was to know that he was loved and accepted. So how could I not answer his letter, being a queer Latino male who growing up had those same feelings?

“Within minutes I had texted a dozen or so of my family, chosen and blood, and we were off to the races to make it the biggest, gayest, love-filled Christmas he hopefully will remember forever!”

Muñoz quickly “mobilised” his network of queer friends and family to send the young boy a collection of LGBT-inclusive children’s books and a rainbow Santa hat.

Although he didn’t hear back from Will, Muñoz said over the last year he has often “meditated and prayed that he is safe, healthy, well, and most importantly, surrounded by love”.

In a message to LGBT+ children who may be having a difficult time during the festive season, the queer elf added: “Love and joy come in many forms, and sometimes it finds you and other times you have to find it for yourself.

“There, unfortunately, will always be a bully or someone with something negative to say, but if you love yourself, give love, and spread love they can’t affect you.

“Remember, Rudolph was different, bullied, and dare I say, unloved. But in the end, it was his differences that made him beautiful and a hero. Your differences are what make you unique and beautiful and no one can take that away from you.”

Supreme Court Considers Whether Child Service Agencies Can Discriminate Against LGBTQ People

Next Week, a Crucial SCOTUS Case on Discrimination in Foster

Even as we have been waiting for the results of the presidential election, the U.S. Supreme Court heard a case yesterday that will determine whether taxpayer-funded foster care and adoption agencies—and possibly any provider of government-contracted services—can cite religious beliefs as a reason to discriminate against LGBTQ people and others. Here are some of the arguments made.

U.S. Supreme Court

For detailed background on the case, Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, I refer you to my piece from last week. In short, it began in 2018, when the City of Philadelphia stopped referring foster children to Catholic Social Services (CSS) because the agency would not license qualified same-sex couples to be foster or adoptive parents. CSS then brought a lawsuit in federal district court, which ruled for the city, as did an appeals court. CSS appealed to the Supreme Court, which took the case in February 2020. In June, the Trump administration filed a brief siding with CSS.

Yesterday, in front of a court that included the newly seated Amy Coney Barrett, lawyers for both CSS and the city presented their cases. All of the justices pushed on the question of whether CSS, in taking the city’s contract, was doing the city’s work or doing its own work and simply being licensed by the city. If the latter, the city would have less authority to enforce its nondiscrimination laws.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor pointed out that the city was paying CSS, and the government does not pay entities to take a license. Justice Stephen Breyer noted that the city isn’t asking CSS to endorse marriage for same-sex couples, merely that they meet the statutory requirements to be foster parents.

Prompted by more conservative Justices Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh, however, CSS claimed that no same-sex couple had ever applied to the agency. If they had, it said, they would simply have been referred to another agency. CSS also emphasized its 200-year history of providing services to children and families and said the city was targeting it because of its religion.

Attorney Neal Katyal, arguing for the city, said it is not targeting CSS because of its religious beliefs, but because there are no exemptions to the city’s nondiscrimination laws. This isn’t a matter of religion versus LGBTQ rights, they said, but rather of religion versus religion. A ruling in favor of CSS could mean that people are turned away from government services because of their religion.

Alito, however, seemed to side with CSS in opining that the city wasn’t actually trying to ensure that same-sex couples could be foster parents, but that it simply “can’t stand the message that Catholic Social Services and the Archdiocese are sending by continuing to adhere to the old-fashioned view about marriage.”

CSS also argued to overturn the 1990 Supreme Court case Employment Division v. Smith, in which former Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority, said that Free Exercise Clause of the Constitution, which permits freedom of religion, does not mean that there are exemptions from “a neutral, generally applicable law” that is “not specifically directed to religious practice.” It was hard to tell if the justices seemed interested in overturning Smith, however.

Additionally, Hashim Moopan, a Justice Department lawyer arguing for CSS, said that the city does permissibly consider race or disability in placing children with foster parents. Why can’t it also consider sexual orientation? The city’s lawyers countered that there was a difference between child placements and the screening of potential parents, and it is the latter, where there are no exceptions, at issue here. When asked if CSS’ position of allowing exemptions to nondiscrimination laws could lead to discrimination on the basis of race, Moopan indicated that it wouldn’t, leading Breyer to ask whether “discrimination on the basis of race is different from discrimination based on gender, religion, and sexuality.” Moopan responded that “Race is unique in this country’s constitutional history,” and that eradicating racial discrimination “presents a particularly unique and compelling interest.” When pushed by Justice Elena Kagan on whether it is a compelling state interest to eradicate discrimination against gays and lesbians, he equivocated.

Alito seemed to side with the idea that racial discrimination and discrimination against same-sex couples are fundamentally different, citing Obergefell v. Hodges, the 2015 decision that legalized marriage for same-sex couples. “Didn’t we say in Obergefell that there are honorable reasons to continue to oppose same-sex marriage?” he asked. (The Obergefell decision, written by former Justice Anthony Kennedy, does indeed say, “Many who deem same-sex marriage to be wrong reach that conclusion based on decent and honorable religious or philosophical premises, and neither they nor their beliefs are disparaged here.”)

Justice Brett Kavanaugh also brought up this point in Obergefell, and told the city’s lawyers that while he understood the “stigmatic harm” of CSS’ policy on same-sex couples, “What I fear here is that the absolutist and extreme position that you’re articulating would require us to go back on the promise of respect for religious believers.”

Overall, the justices seemed split along ideological lines, although Chief Justice John Roberts’ thinking was less clear. The newest justice, Barrett, while she didn’t seem eager to overturn Smith, at one point tried to get Katyal to respond to a hypothetical situation in which a city has taken over all health care and contracts with private entities to provide it. Must a Catholic hospital then perform abortions? Katyal replied that the current case does not involve a government monopoly of previously private services, and that the government takeover of a private care system in itself raises constitutional problems.

Depending on how the court rules, the case could have far-reaching implications beyond just child services, as I explained last week. What’s next? Now we wait—even longer than for the outcome of the presidential election. A decision is expected by the end of the court’s current term next June.

H/t to C-SPAN and to ACLU lawyers Chase Strangio and Josh Block, who live tweeted the hearing.