Gaggle Drops LGBTQ Keywords from Student Surveillance Tool Following Bias Concerns


Mark Keierleber
Fri, January 27, 2023 


Digital monitoring company Gaggle says it will no longer flag students who use words like “gay” and “lesbian” in school assignments and chat messages, a significant policy shift that follows accusations its software facilitated discrimination of LGBTQ teens in a quest to keep them safe.

A spokesperson for the company, which describes itself as supporting student safety and well-being, cited a societal shift toward greater acceptance of LGBTQ youth — rather than criticism of its product — as the impetus for the change as part of a “continuous evaluation and updating process.”

The company, which uses artificial intelligence and human content moderators to sift through billions of student communications each year, has long defended its use of LGBTQ-specific keywords to identify students who might hurt themselves or others. In arguing the targeted monitoring is necessary to save lives, executives have pointed to the prevalence of bullying against LGBTQ youth and data indicating they’re significantly more likely to consider suicide than their straight and cisgender classmates.

But in practice, Gaggle’s critics argued, the keywords put LGBTQ students at a heightened risk of scrutiny by school officials and, on some occasions, the police. Nearly a third of LGBTQ students said they or someone they know experienced nonconsensual disclosure of their sexual orientation or gender identity — often called outing — as a result of digital activity monitoring, according to a national survey released in August by the nonprofit Center for Democracy and Technology. The survey encompassed the impacts of multiple monitoring companies who contract with school districts, such as GoGuardian, Gaggle, Securly and Bark.

Gaggle’s decision to remove several LGBTQ-specific keywords, including “queer” and “bisexual,” from its dictionary of words that trigger alerts was first reported in a recent VICE News documentary. It follows extensive reporting by The 74 into the company’s business practices and sometimes negative effects on students who are caught in its surveillance dragnet.

Though Gaggle’s software is generally limited to monitoring school-issued accounts, including those by Google and Microsoft, the company recently acknowledged it can scan through photos on students’ personal cell phones if they plug them into district laptops.

Related: With ‘Don’t Say Gay’ Laws & Abortion Bans, Student Surveillance Raises New Risks

The keyword shift comes at a particularly perilous moment, as Republican lawmakers in multiple states push bills targeting LGBTQ youth. Legislation has looked to curtail classroom instruction about sexual orientation and gender identity, ban books and classroom curricula featuring LGBTQ themes and prohibit transgender students from receiving gender-affirming health care, participating in school athletics and using restroom facilities that match their gender identities. Such a hostile political climate and pandemic-era disruptions, a recent youth survey by The Trevor Project revealed, has contributed to an uptick in LGBTQ youth who have seriously considered suicide.

The U.S. Education Department received 453 discrimination complaints involving students’ sexual orientation or gender identity last year, according to data provided to The 74 by its civil rights office. That’s a significant increase from previous years, including in 2021 when federal officials received 249 such complaints. The Trump administration took a less aggressive tack on civil rights enforcement and complaints dwindled. In 2018, the Education Department received just 57 complaints related to sexual orientation or gender identity discrimination.

The increase in discrimination allegations involving sexual orientation or gender identity are part of a record spike in civil rights complaints overall, according to data obtained by The New York Times. The total number of complaints for 2021-22 grew to 19,000, a historic high and more than double the previous year.

Related: Anger & Fear: New Poll Shows School-Level Impact of Anti-LGBTQ Political Debate

In September, The 74 revealed that Gaggle had donated $25,000 to The Trevor Project, the nonprofit that released the recent youth survey and whose advocacy is focused on suicide prevention among LGBTQ youth. The arrangement was framed on Gaggle’s website as a collaboration to “improve mental health outcomes for LGBTQ young people.”

The revelation was met with swift backlash on social media, with multiple Trevor Project supporters threatening to halt future donations. Within hours, the group announced it had returned the donation, acknowledging concerns about Gaggle “having a role in negatively impacting LGBTQ students.”

Related: Trevor Project to Refund Donation From Student Surveillance Company Accused of LGBTQ Bias Following 74 Investigation

The Trevor Project didn’t respond to requests for comment on Gaggle’s decision to pull certain LGBTQ-specific keywords from its systems.

In a statement to The 74, Gaggle spokesperson Paget Hetherington said the company regularly modifies the keywords its software uses to trigger a human review of students’ digital communications. Certain LGBTQ-specific words, she said, are no longer relevant to the 24-year-old company’s efforts to protect students from abuse and were purged late last year.

“At points in time in the not-too-distant past, those words were weaponized by bullies to harass and target members of the LGBTQ+ community, so as part of an effective methodology to combat that discriminatory harassment and violence, those words were once effective tools to help identify dangerous situations,” Hetherington said. “Thankfully, over the past two decades, our society evolved and began a period of widespread acceptance, especially among the K-12 student population that Gaggle serves. With that evolution and acceptance, it has become increasingly rare to see those words used in the negative, harassing context they once were; hence, our decision to take these off our word/phrases list.”

Hetherington said Gaggle will continue to monitor students’ use of the words “faggot,” “lesbo,” and others that are “commonly used as slurs.” A previous review by The 74 found that Gaggle regularly flagged students for harmless speech, like profanity in fictional articles submitted to a school’s literary magazine, and students’ private journals.

Related: Nearly Half of LGBTQ Youth Seriously Considered Suicide in the Last Year, Survey Finds. A Simple Strategy Could Save Lives

Anti-LGBTQ activists have used surveillance to target their opponents for generations, and privacy advocates warn that in the era of “Don’t Say Gay” laws and abortion bans, information gleaned from Gaggle and similar services could be weaponized against students.

Gaggle executives have minimized privacy concerns and claim the tool saved more than 1,400 lives last school year. That statistic hasn’t been independently verified and there’s a dearth of research to suggest digital monitoring is an effective school-safety tool. A recent survey found a majority of parents and teachers believe the benefits of student monitoring outweigh privacy concerns. The Vice News documentary included the perspective of a high school student who was flagged by Gaggle for writing a paper titled “Essay on the Reasons Why I Want to Kill Myself but Can’t/Didn’t.” Adults wouldn’t have known she was struggling without Gaggle, she said.

“I do think that it’s helpful in some ways,” the student said, “but I also kind of think that it’s — I wouldn’t say an invasion of privacy — but if obviously something gets flagged and a person who it wasn’t intended for reads through that, I think that’s kind of uncomfortable.”

Student surveillance critic Evan Greer, director of the nonprofit digital rights group Fight for the Future, said the tweaks to Gaggle’s keyword dictionary are unlikely to have a significant effect on LGBTQ teens and blasted the company’s stated justification for the move as being “out of touch” with the state of anti-LGBTQ harassment in schools. Meanwhile, Greer said that LGBTQ youth frequently refer to each other using “reclaimed slurs,” reappropriating words that are generally considered derogatory and remain in Gaggle’s dictionary.

“This is just like lipstick on a pig — no offense to pigs — but I don’t see how this actually in any meaningful way mitigates the potential for this software to nonconsensually out LGBTQ students to administrators,” Greer said. “I don’t see how it prevents the software from being used to invade the privacy of students in a wide range of other circumstances.”

Gaggle and its competitors — including GoGuardian, Bark and Securly — have faced similar scrutiny in Washington. In April, Democratic Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey argued in a report that the tools could be misused to discipline students and warned they could be used disproportionately against students of color and LGBTQ youth.

Jeff Patterson

In a letter to the lawmakers, Gaggle founder and CEO Jeff Patterson said the company cannot test the potential for bias in its system because the software flags student communications anonymously and the company has “no context or background on students,” including their race or sexual orientation. They also said their monitoring services are not meant to be used as a disciplinary tool.

In the survey released last summer by the Center for Democracy and Technology, however, 78% of teachers reported that digital monitoring tools were used to discipline students. Black and Hispanic students reported being far more likely than white students to get into trouble because of online monitoring.

In October, the White House cautioned school districts against the “continuous surveillance” of students if monitoring tools are likely to trample students’ rights. It also directed the Education Department to issue guidance to districts on the safe use of artificial intelligence. The guidance is expected to be released early this year.

Evan Greer (Twitter/@evan_greer)

As an increasing number of districts implement Gaggle for bullying prevention efforts, surveillance critic Greer said the company has failed to consider how adults can cause harm.

“There is now a very visible far-right movement attacking LGBTQ kids, and particularly trans kids and teenagers,” Greer said. “If anything, queer kids are more in the crosshairs today than they were a year ago or two years ago — and that’s why this surveillance is so dangerous.”

If you are in crisis, please call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 1-800-273-TALK (8255), or contact the Crisis Text Line by texting TALK to 741741. For LGBTQ mental health support, contact The Trevor Project’s toll-free support line at 866-488-7386.

HUMAN RIGHTS VS GLOBAL FUNDAMENTALISM

Rights group: Mideast governments target LGBTQ people online






Lebanon Egypt Iraq LGBTQFILE - 

Activists from the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBTQ) community in Lebanon shout slogans and hold up a rainbow flags as they march calling on the government for more rights in the country gripped by economic and financial crisis during ongoing protests, in Beirut, Lebanon, June 27, 2020. Security agencies and government officials across several countries in the Middle East and North Africa have been using social media platforms and mobile dating apps to track and crack down on LGBTQ people, international rights group Human Rights Watch said Tuesday, Feb. 21, 2023.

 (AP Photo/Hassan Ammar, File)

KAREEM CHEHAYEB
Tue, February 21, 2023

BEIRUT (AP) — Security agencies and government officials in several countries in the Middle East and North Africa have been using social media platforms and mobile dating apps to crack down on LGBTQ people, a rights group said Tuesday.

The findings of a new report by Human Rights Watch exposed digital methods of clamping down on the LGBTQ community in the region. For years the community has relied on online platforms for safety and privacy to sidestep oppression and discrimination due to social stigma and laws that criminalize their expression.

The report, “'All This Terror Because of a Photo': Digital Targeting and Its Offline Consequences for LGBT People in the Middle East and North Africa," documents dozens of cases of security agencies in Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq and Tunisia extorting, harassing, publicly outing, and detaining LGBTQ people based on their activities on Facebook and Instagram, as well as queer dating app Grindr. The publication also questions major tech companies for not investing sufficiently in Arabic language content moderation and protection.

“This type of social media frenzy really had implications on people’s lives,” Rasha Younes, senior researcher with the LGBT Rights Program at HRW, said at the press conference.

One case the report documents is a 27-year-old gay man from Egypt named Yazid who said he was arrested and beaten in prison until he would sign papers that said he was “practicing debauchery” and publicly outing himself. He said one of the officers was someone impersonating a gay man who he met on Grindr. Human Rights Watch documented several cases of ill-treatment and sexual assault among other detainees.

In some cases, private individuals and gangs were involved in the extortion. In Lebanon, some people who were extorted online told HRW that they were threatened with being outed to their families and the authorities if they did not pay them a certain amount of money.

Younes added that many of the victims lost their jobs, faced violence and deleted their online accounts, while some opted to leave the country. Many of the victims say they suffered depression, anxiety and distress, while some reportedly attempted suicide.

Mohamad Najem, executive director of the Beirut-based digital rights organization SMEX, accused tech companies of a lack of transparency on their content moderation process. Content moderation is when a company monitors what is published on their platforms to ensure they are not abusive, illegal or in violation of their rules and guidelines.

“The problem with these tech companies is that you start a process with them and they disappear in the middle of it (and) you don't know what happened with them,” he said at the news conference.

While Human Rights Watch called on governments to respect LGBTQ rights and end the criminalization of their expression, they also called on major tech companies, notably Meta, Twitter and Grindr, to invest in stronger Arabic-language content moderation and respond more proactively to these incidents, as many of the victims who reported harassment and threats say they received no answers from the companies.

Younes said it was unclear whether tech companies are doing the best they can to protect users from online harassment and other abusive practices, especially in the Middle East and North Africa.

“In my brief engagement with platforms there is a repetition of how policies are meant to account for hate speech for everyone,” she said, but that there is “inequity in moderating content."

'A pivotal time': LGBTQ Task Force enters 50th year fighting blitz of anti-LGBTQ bills

LGBTQ communities face increased hate crimes as 'rhetoric drives violence,' says GLAAD CEO

Susan Miller, USA TODAY
Wed, February 22, 2023 

In 1973, LGBTQ activists took a bold step.

Four years after the roots of resistance ignited the Stonewall uprising, most states still had anti-sodomy laws on the books. Homosexuality was considered a mental illness, and violence against LGBTQ people was routine.

An arson attack at a New Orleans gay bar killed 32 people – and barely made headlines.

Advocates decided to form a task force with an urgent mission: Push for equality at a national level.

Now, 50 years later, activists from that same task force say they are at another defining moment – and they are mobilizing again.

“I’m struck at how many arguments in the past that were focused on our community have been refreshed to target LGBTQ people again,” said Kierra Johnson, executive director of the National LGBTQ Task Force.

The task force, the nation’s oldest LGBTQ advocacy group, is marking its 50th anniversary waging a battle over a cascade of bills that have put the community in the crosshairs, Johnson said. “To be really specific, the legislation is targeting transgender and nonbinary people. … And they are targeting children.”

STUDENTS FEAR BACKLASH: LGBTQ students share their plans, fears for new school year

A memorial grows outside of Club Q on Nov. 22, 2022, in Colorado Springs 

after a gunman opened fire inside the LGBTQ+ club on Nov. 19.

More than 300 anti-LGBTQ bills introduced this year

Just two months into 2023, the landscape has already seen a wave of anti-LGBTQ legislation. The Human Rights Campaign (HRC) said last week that that it is tracking 340 anti-LGBTQ bills that have been introduced in statehouses. About 150 of those would restrict rights of transgender people, the highest number of bills targeting the trans community in a single year to date, according to the HRC.

Ninety of those bills would prevent transgender young people from being able to access age-appropriate health care, the HRC said.

Utah become the first state this year to ban gender-affirming health care for trans kids – which has been supported by major medical groups such as the American Medical Association and the American Psychiatric Association.

The bill prohibits transgender surgery for those under 18 and bars hormone treatments for minors who have not yet been diagnosed with gender dysphoria. Utah Gov. Spencer Cox, a Republican, defended the bill last week on NBC's "Meet the Press," saying he wants more research into such treatments.

"We take power away from (parents) on a lot of things involving our young people. If there is potential long-term harm for our kids, we need to find that,” Cox said. “And what Utah did was just push pause until we get better data."

BANS CALLED 'CRUEL'': Should transgender kids have access to gender-affirming care?

Other bills tracked by HRC would ban transgender students from playing sports consistent with their gender identity; some would ban transgender students from using bathrooms and other school facilities that align with their gender identity.

Johnson says the "community builder" in these bills is fear. "You should be afraid of trans kids, you should be afraid of parents of LGBTQ people because they are going to be coming for your children,” she said. “They are coming for your kids in school, they are coming for your kids in bathrooms, they are coming for your kids in locker rooms.”

In 1973, LGBTQ people were painted as “degenerate, not normal,” Johnson said. But in 2023, the focus has shifted and the community is being portrayed as “predators.”

 

David Rothenberg, left, with David Dinkins in 1984.

'Ignorance has always played a part, 50 years ago and today'

David Rothenberg, now 89, was “classic closeted” in 1973, living a double life in New York City as a successful playwright, producer and founder of The Fortune Society, which advocates for prisoners and the formerly incarcerated.

“You lost jobs, you committed suicide, you lost housing, you lost friends and families – you didn’t come out,” Rothenberg said.

When Rothenberg was asked to join the original board of the task force because of his criminal justice expertise, he made a monumental decision at age 39: to come out in a very public way on "The David Susskind Show."

LGBTQ ELDERS' CONCERNS:Stonewall generation has a warning for the LGBTQ community post-Roe: 'Be really afraid right now'

The task force soon went full throttle, he said, marching, protesting, writing letters and testifying. And there were many successes, including the group’s role in persuading the American Psychiatric Association to declare by December of that year that homosexuality was not a sickness or mental illness.

Rothenberg sees parallels in today's climate and that of 1973. “There is a political component to homophobia,” he said. “But ignorance has always played a part, 50 years ago and today.”
Bills are part of a 'continuous pattern'

Dee Tum-Monge, 25, a digital organizer and senior communications manager for the task force, says there are some key differences in how advocates handle challenges today. Issues such as abortion rights, gun control and racial justice intertwine with the fight for LGBTQ equality like never before, they said.

“I think the way it’s being approached is new. The task force has been a leading voice in building intersectionality and how we approach advocacy on these issues. But the way people experience these issues is not new,” they said.

Tum-Monge said the bills are an attack on young people who can’t advocate for themselves, and they are bolstered by swirling rhetoric and misinformation. It’s part of a “continuous pattern that has just found a new light and new platform to spew a lot of LGBTQ hate” through the internet, they said. “People my age are just sick of it.”

'STILL LIVE IN FEAR': LGBTQ Americans hope push for Equality Act will finally end bias
Task force confident the tide will turn

The task force is combating the blitz of bills by collaborating with other national organizations and engaging with the people most affected, Johnson said.

This year is "a pivotal time," Johnson said, but she is confident LGBTQ advocates will prevail. “I fundamentally believe that the ferocity at which the opposition is coming at us is because we are winning. You don’t get this kind of anger, this kind of vitriolic energy … and creation of lies unless it’s your last-ditch effort.”

After decades of activism, Rothenberg offers a simple motto he has leaned on for years: “While you are waiting to change the world, deal with the one person in front of you. … You deal with them one at a time, and you build an army of change.”

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: LGBTQ Task Force enters 50th year fighting blitz of anti-LGBTQ bills

LGBTQ Rights Take Center Stage in Scottish Leadership Race


Olivia Konotey-Ahulu
Tue, February 21, 2023

(Bloomberg) -- Health Secretary Humza Yousaf is favorite to succeed Nicola Sturgeon as leader of the pro-independence Scottish National Party and Scotland’s semi-autonomous government after his main rival lost support by saying she would have voted against same-sex marriage.

Bookmaker William Hill put Yousaf at 8/15 to replace Sturgeon after her surprise resignation last week while Kate Forbes, Scotland’s finance and economy secretary, was second on 15/8.

Both candidates kicked off their campaigns on Monday. They fielded questions about their position on Scotland’s controversial gender recognition reform bill, which Yousaf, 37, backed and Forbes, 32, said she would have voted against. The bill would have made it easier for people to legally change their gender.

Forbes, a member of the socially conservative Free Church of Scotland, also suggested she wouldn’t have supported single-sex marriage, though would defend the policy as leader. Some SNP politicians, including the public finance minister and the minister for children and young people, withdrew support for her after the comments.

Forbes said she would have “respected and defended the democratic choice that was made” on same-sex marriage, but the issue was “a matter of conscience”. Scotland passed the law introducing marriage for same-sex couples in 2014.

LGBTQ rights were already set to be a contentious issue in the race for the Scottish leadership, with Forbes on maternity leave when the Scottish Parliament passed the gender reform legislation. In addition to lowering the age at which transgender people can legally change their gender, it also removed the need to have a medical diagnosis of “gender dysphoria.” Sturgeon stepped down from power weeks after the UK government blocked the bill, the first time it had used such powers against the Scottish Parliament.

Yousaf said that he backed the former First Minister on a range of LGBTQ issues, including same-sex marriage and the gender recognition reform bill, and would challenge the UK’s decision if elected leader.

“I’m a Muslim. I’m somebody who’s proud of my faith,” Yousaf said in an interview with LBC on Monday. “But what I don’t do is, I don’t use my faith as a basis of legislation.”

A survey of the Scottish public last week by Savanta for Scotland found that Sturgeon’s successor will face a difficult choice over the trans rights bill. 53% of the Scottish public think the Scottish government shouldn’t proceed with a legal challenge over the UK government’s decision to block the legislation. A similar proportion of SNP voters took the opposite view, with 51% wanting the government to stand up to Westminster.

The race to replace Sturgeon so far is seen as being between Yousaf and Forbes after Angus Robertson, a former UK parliamentarian who now serves in the Scottish government as cabinet secretary for the constitution, culture and external affairs, said the time wasn’t right to seek the post.

Ash Regan, a member of the Scottish Parliament who stepped down from a ministerial role over the gender reform bill, is also running. William Hill on Tuesday put her odds of winning at 6/1.

The deadline for nominations for the SNP leadership is Friday, Feb. 24, at noon. The party will announce the winner on March 27 after a vote by members.

Despite the criticism, Forbes said on Tuesday that her campaign was “absolutely not” over.

“I think the public are longing for politicians to answer straight questions with straight answers,” she said in an interview with BBC Radio. “My position on these matters is that I will defend to the hilt everybody’s rights in a pluralistic and tolerant society, to live and to love free of harassment and fear.”

People of faith must be respected in any conversion therapy ban, says Kate Forbes

Ross Hunter
Tue, 21 February 2023

SNP leadership candidate Kate Forbes (Image: PA)

THE views of people of faith must be respected in any legislation which seeks to ban conversion therapy in Scotland, according to SNP leadership candidate Kate Forbes.

Last year, the Scottish Government’s expert advisory group on ending conversion practices published a report which recommended the measures that should be taken to end conversion therapy in Scotland.

It defined conversion therapy as any practice which aimed to “change, suppress and/or eliminate a person’s sexual orientation, gender identity and/or gender expression”.


Some faith groups have criticised the move to ban the practice, claiming that it would criminalise their religious work.

The UK Government has previously committed to implementing a ban but the Scottish Government said that it would also bring forward legislation if a UK-wide ban was not forthcoming.

READ MORE: Kate Forbes loses SNP endorsements following equal marriage comments

Speaking to The Scotsman on Monday, Forbes was asked for her views on the prospective ban of conversion therapy practices in Scotland.

She said: ““As somebody of faith, the concept of coercion is absolutely abhorrent. I strongly condemn the use of any coercion when it comes to people's sexuality or when it comes to people's faith.

"I would argue that in a pluralistic and tolerant society I would certainly defend to the hilt everybody's right to live and to love free of harassment.

"The conversion therapy bill hasn't been introduced yet as far as I know. But equally we should defend the rights of other minorities like people of faith, as well, when it comes to their freedom of expression, their freedom of speech and their freedom of practice.

"I think there's a way for a bill to respect that whilst at the same time ensuring that coercion has no place in Scotland."

The Finance Secretary also cast doubt on the bill being brought forward by Liberal Democrat MSP Liam McArthur which aims to legalise assisted dying in Scotland.

She said she had “never seen a law” on the subject with “sufficient safeguards” in place to avoid people being exploited.

Kate Forbes: I would have voted against gay marriage in Scotland

20th February


By Abbi Garton-Crosbie@agc_reports

Multimedia Political Reporter


The Finance Secretary told The Scotsman that she would not have supported equal marriage as a 'matter of conscience'

SNP leadership contender Kate Forbes has said she would have voted against gay marriage in Scotland.


The Finance Secretary told The Scotsman that she would not have supported equal marriage as a "matter of conscience" if she had been a member of parliament at the time.

Equal marriage was made legal in Scotland in 2014 with an overwhelming majority of 105 votes to 18, while Forbes was not elected to Holyrood until the 2016 election.

READ MORE: Kate Forbes: Scottish independence strategy needs a 'reset'

Forbes said while she wouldn't have backed the legislation, she would have "respected and defended the democratic choice that was made".

A senior member of her leadership campaign team said Forbes had "f***ed it" by making the comment, according to The Scotsman's Alexander Brown.

The 32-year-old said: "I believe that it should be a conscience vote because of its profound significance in all mainstream faiths.

"I think for me, Angela Merkel is the example I would follow, I would have voted, as a matter of conscience, along the lines of mainstream teaching in most major religions that marriage is between a man and a woman.

"But I would have respected and defended the democratic choice that was made.

"It is a legal right now and I am a servant of democracy, I am not a dictator.”

Forbes previously said she wouldn't have voted for Scotland's gender reforms (Image: PA)

Forbes was earlier asked by BBC Radio Scotland if she believed a man could marry another man.

She said: "I do, under the legal provisions in this country.

"I am a servant of democracy in this country, equal marriage is a legal right and therefore I would defend that legal commitment.

"Incidentally, though, I would hope that others can defend the rights of other minorities, including religious minorities that might take a different view."

Asked about her position on the morality of the issue, she added: "In terms of the morality of the issue, I am a practising Christian.

READ MORE: Scottish independence strategy: Where the SNP leadership candidates stand

"I practice the teachings of most mainstream religions, whether that's Islam, Judaism, Christianity, that marriage is between a man and a woman.

"But that's what I practice.

"As a servant of democracy in a country where this is law, I would defend to the hilt, your right and anybody else's right to live and to love without harassment or fear."

Forbes was asked by The Scotsman newspaper why she would defend the right to gay marriage but not challenge the UK Government's blocking of Scotland's gender reforms from becoming law.

The SNP leadership contender said she didn't "see that contradiction".

She said: "I do absolutely believe that Holyrood should pass its own laws, but the question right now for any future leader is, do we, obviously after seeking legal advice, challenge it in the courts at a time when people want us to focus on the NHS and cost-of-living?

"Do we do that, or do we find a way to work with the UK Government to make the amendments required to enable it to pass.

"I think it is a question of how we govern, right now, at a time of difficult choices in a way that most aligns with the people who sent us here to govern.”

Speaking on BBC radio, earlier Forbes said that it was "right" she was under greater scrutiny after deciding to run in the contest to replace Nicola Sturgeon.

She said: "I think we get into very dangerous territory when we say that certain public offices are barred to certain minority groups.

"Now, that could include anything under the Equality Act in terms of protected characteristics.

"I'm talking to you as somebody who has a Christian faith, I've never kept that a secret, but I would like to ask in six years, when have I ever imposed that on other people?

"I think it's possible to have a confidence vote on certain matters, and also to hold high public office."

Referencing Merkel's stance on equal marriage again, Forbes added: "Now Germany has obviously been able to cope as a genuinely pluralistic and tolerant society with that.

"I guess what the next few weeks will demonstrate is, can Scotland cope?"

It comes after Forbes said she would not have voted for the Scottish Government's gender reforms in its current form and said she does not support self-ID.

Pope Francis on civil unions: Another step toward common ground with the LGBTQ movement
Underlying the pope’s support for gay civil unions is his own long history decrying homophobia and calling for LGBTQ people to be treated with respect and dignity.
Pope Francis waves at the end of his Angelus noon prayer from the window of his studio overlooking St. Peter's Square, at the Vatican, Oct. 25, 2020. (AP Photo/Alessandra Tarantino)

October 29, 2020
By Alphonso David, James Martin


(RNS) — In a significant step for the Catholic Church, Pope Francis signaled his support for civil unions for same-sex couples in a documentary released last week. This is the first time Pope Francis has so clearly and so publicly recognized the value of civil legal protections for same-sex couples.

As archbishop of Buenos Aires, Francis (then Jorge Mario Bergoglio) made similar statements in private. Later, as pope, he mentioned these legal protections in subtle ways in books, interviews and press conferences, but never as clearly as in the new documentary, “Francesco,” which includes comments on civil unions taken from an interview with a Mexican journalist last year.

The movement for LGBTQ equality has an especially complicated relationship with the Catholic Church, which has only rarely affirmed LGBTQ people’s dignity and their rights to legal protections. History is rife with examples of clergy and laypersons persecuting, rejecting and marginalizing LGBTQ people, even within the church — at times, in violation of the church’s own teaching of love, mercy and compassion.

And while history is also full of stories of radical love and inclusion by Catholic leaders and laypeople (the church’s medical care for those living with HIV/AIDS in the 1980s is one of these many untold stories), senior church leaders’ opposition toward, and minimal advocacy on behalf of, the LGBTQ community is a tragic legacy.

RELATED: Six things you need to know about Pope Francis and gay civil unions

Even today, we see church leaders in Poland declare LGBTQ people as a “rainbow plague,” comparing the movement for LGBTQ equality to Nazism. In Uganda, some bishops have sided with repressive laws that criminalize same-sex relations.

The pope’s comment, then, is but one step in the long and often arduous journey for treating LGBTQ people with the “respect, compassion and sensitivity” that the Catechism asks, and the love and mercy that Jesus demands.

Pope Francis delivers his message on the occasion of the weekly general audience in the Paul VI Hall at the Vatican on Oct. 21, 2020. Francis endorsed same-sex civil unions for the first time as pope while being interviewed for the feature-length documentary “Francesco,” which premiered at the Rome Film Festival. (AP Photo/Gregorio Borgia)

Many LGBTQ people today would agree with Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s famous comment that civil unions are nothing more than a “skim milk” version of marriage. But, though small, this step by the pope helps to establish common ground between the LGBTQ movement and the church, however tenuous.

That common ground is a mutual understanding of our shared humanity and dignity.

Underlying Francis’ statement is his own long history decrying homophobia and calling for LGBTQ people to be treated with respect and dignity. Signaling support for civil protections is but an extension of his overall pastoral ministry to LGBTQ people, which is attempting to reconcile church teaching on human dignity and nondiscrimination with church practice.

It’s worth noting that this is the first pope ever to use the word “gay” publicly. Francis has often spoken of the need for LGBTQ children to be welcomed by their parents and families and has reminded his followers that Jesus Christ would never say, “Go away because you’re homosexual.” His papacy is surely the most open to LGBTQ people in the history of the church.

Catholics in the United States and around the world are increasingly coming to recognize that LGBTQ people belong in the church and that they deserve to be treated with the utmost respect in their homes, in their families, in their faith communities and in the public square.

Francis’ most recent statement may mark a moment for all faith leaders and people of faith to further reflect on how their own actions are advancing — or working against — greater progress and inclusion.

Just a few weeks ago, Francis published his third encyclical, “Fratelli Tutti,” a papal letter addressing pressing moral and theological questions. Rooted in the parable of the good Samaritan, the letter is a summons to affirm and defend the dignity of all by creating more just and inclusive societies. Francis reflects on the underlying imperative of the parable, an ethic of justice and inclusion rooted in our common humanity and the need to defend the common good.

He wrote: “The parable does not indulge in abstract moralizing, nor is its message merely social and ethical. It speaks to us of an essential and often forgotten aspect of our common humanity: we were created for a fulfillment that can only be found in love. We cannot be indifferent to suffering; we cannot allow anyone to go through life as an outcast. Instead we should feel indignant, challenged to emerge from our comfortable isolation and to be changed by our contact with human suffering. That is the meaning of dignity.”

LGBTQ people deserve to be treated with respect, compassion and sensitivity, and deserve to be welcomed and protected. On this, the LGBTQ movement and the pope can find common ground. Leaders within all churches and in the public square can see in Francis’ words an invitation to defend the rights and dignity of the LGBTQ community and to create more just and inclusive societies for all human beings.

(Alphonso David is the president of the Human Rights Campaign. The Rev. James Martin is an American Jesuit priest and writer. The views expressed in this commentary do not necessarily represent those of Religion News Service.)

Can the Black Lives Matter Movement Inspire a More Inclusive Pride Month?

It’s time for an overdue conversation about how anti-Blackness has often manifested within queer spaces.

by Giulia Heyward

June 24, 2020

Getty Ima

Pride Month was always going to look different this year—at least, once the pandemic hit.

When the novel coronavirus arrived to America earlier this year, states and municipalities implemented physical-distancing measures to mitigate its spread; universities sent college students home; and businesses were forced to furlough or fire millions of employees due to the economic fallout. Naturally, more than 500 parades and festivals scheduled for June’s Pride Month were cancelled in major cities across the world, from New York City and Washington, D.C., to London and Paris.

Then, on May 25, police officer Derek Chauvin killed George Floyd, sparking mass protests and riots. Countless Americans decided to get out of their homes and onto the streets—furious over police brutality and widespread racial injustices.

Quickly, it became apparent that LGBTQ people were playing an outsize role at the protests, where pride flags have been common fixtures. This makes sense: Gay, lesbian, and transgender individuals have also been victims of systemic oppression. In the 1960s, for instance, it was common practice for cops to threaten and harass gay bars.  

No doubt, that was part of what compelled so many in the community to speak out. On May 29, four days after Floyd’s murder, more than 100 LGBTQ organizations released a joint statement condemning racial violence. “We understand what it means to rise up and push back against a culture that tells us we are less than, that our lives don’t matter,” they said.  

But while LBGTQ groups have emphatically supported the Black Lives Matter movement, some civil rights activists argue that they haven’t done enough to stamp out racism within their own community. “The statement is great for solidarity,” said Earl D. Fowlkes, Jr. “But it’s empty if there is no action behind it.”  

Fowlkes is the founder of the Center for Black Equity, a nonprofit dedicated to advancing equality for Black LGBTQ people. One of the biggest obstacles they face, he told me, is not just acceptance in straight society—but in white LGBTQ society.

In 2017, for instance, Philadelphia’s Commission on Human Relations ordered 11 gay bars to take a training course on the city’s anti-discrimination laws after there were reports of them denying Black people entry for vague dress codes and bartenders giving preferential treatment to white gay men. One bar owner was caught on YouTube saying racial slurs.

Unfortunately, stories like these are all too commonplace. In 2018, an Atlanta gay bar owner posted on Facebook that “if the South had won, we would be a hell of a lot better off.” Fowlkes told me of an incident from two weeks ago when a group of Black men were seated at a different section of a D.C. gay bar than the rest of the white patrons. CBE was contacted about it as a potential discrimination case. “It happens all the time,” he told me.

Yet some queer people are more at-risk than others. According to the Human Rights Center, Black transgender women face the highest levels of fatal violence within the LGBTQ community—and are less likely to turn to the police for help for fear of revictimization by law enforcement personnel. 

But with LGBTQ organizations now thrusting themselves into the national fight against racism, it’s time for them to take a hard look inward. 

One of the ways they can start is by refashioning this year’s Pride Month in yet another way: by embarking on a long overdue conversation about how anti-Blackness has long manifested within queer spaces. That might mean a departure from the joyful and triumphant marches in years past—we are still in a pandemic, after all—but it may spur some much-needed progress on an issue that is too often neglected. 

In the 1960s, community centers or meet ups didn’t exist for LGBTQ people as they do now. This meant that bars were one of the few, if not the only, spaces where police officers knew they could openly target gays and lesbians.

For a long time, this was simply the way things were. Police would barge into these establishments to harass and beat up the patrons. “Gay people just took it,” historian Lillian Faderman, author of The Gay Revolution, told me. “They would scurry off, people who were let go by the police would run off.”

Until, one day, they stopped taking it.

On June 28, 1969, a group of police officers showed up at the Stonewall Inn—a gay bar in Greenwich Village, New York—for what they probably thought would be yet another routine night of harassing patrons. But this night ended differently. A fight broke out between the cops and everybody else. More people resisted, others joined in the pushback. At some point, someone threw a brick through the bar’s window, igniting the famed Stonewall Riots. 

Who, exactly, threw that first brick remains unknown. The two main suspects, however, shared something in common: Marsha P. Johnson, a prominent figure during this period, was a Black trans woman. Sylvia Rivera, who was present at the first fight, was a Latina trans woman. Witnesses have also described what the majority of the people at Stonewall looked like that night: drag queens or gay men of color. In other words, Black LGBTQ people were some of the first who resisted brutality and oppression on behalf of the entire LGBTQ community.  

Images from that night shocked the nation—and shifted the public consciousness about the treatment of gay people. Shortly thereafter, a movement was formed. Over the next few years, more than 1,500 new LGBTQ organizations were created. Still, it took decades of sustained advocacy to gain traction. By 1999, then president Bill Clinton enacted Proclamation 7203, turning the month of June into a federally recognized holiday. Pride Month was born.

But as the LGBTQ community continued to make progress—through increased representation in politics and media, through legislative actions, executive orders, and court rulings to protect gays and lesbians from discrimination—its non-white members have often been left behind.

A 2013 study found that while LGBTQ youth are more likely than their straight counterparts to be homeless, and that the bulk of homeless youth are LGBTQ people of color. Other studies have shown that Black LGBTQ people are more likely to commit suicide. At the same time, Black queer people have amassed far less political capital. A recent study from the Victory Institute found that 77.4 percent of all openly LGBTQ people in elected office are white.  

The increased acceptance of white LGBTQ Americans in mainstream society is at least partly due to the fact that the vast majority of media depictions of queer life—which have helped change the culture—have historically been white-centric.  

Groundbreaking films that found mass audiences have tended to focus on white gay men, such as The Times of Harvey Milk (1984), My Own Private Idaho (1991), Brokeback Mountain (2005), and Call Me by Your Name (2017). The few films about queer people of color—such as Tongues Untied (1989) or The Watermelon Woman (1996)—have generally not been as widely seen. In essence, Black LGBTQ people have always been left out of the aesthetic representations that have helped to normalize the white LGBTQ experience.

For this reason, Cleo Manago coined the term “same-gender loving” for Black gay men and lesbians in the 1990s as a separate identity, due to how isolated many felt in traditional LGBTQ spaces.  

Pride Month festivities have been no exception. Even after the 2015 landmark Supreme Court ruling declaring same-sex marriage a constitutional right, and Pride marches became an established mark of the beginning of the summer in major cosmopolitan cities, many noticed that they seemed awfully white.

Non-white queer people have complained they aren’t always as welcomed at Pride events by their white counterparts. Moreover Pride celebrations have often whitewashed the fact that the early leaders of this movement were people of color, such as Johnson and Rivera.  

Black LGBTQ people felt even more alienated in 2017, when a proposed addition to the pride flag of brown and Black stripes to represent racial diversity received immediate backlash from white, gay members of the community.  

Of course, queer people of color don’t just face racism from inside the LGBTQ community. They have to face it from the rest of the world, too. Indeed, Black queer people are more susceptible to assault and discrimination and the very forms of bigotry and police brutality that the Black Lives Matter movement is fighting against.

Just two days after George Floyd’s death, a Black trans man named Tony McDade became the third victim of a fatal officer-involved shooting in Florida in the past two months. That’s why Black LGBTQ activists argue that the anti-racism and queer-rights movements are deeply intertwined. 

“We know that queer liberation also means Black liberation,” Tyrone Hanley, senior policy council for the National Center for Lesbian rights and a black queer man, told me. “There is a desperate need to look inside and re-examine how LGBTQ communities reinforce white supremacy and anti-blackness.”  

That means reimagining Pride Month. It means placing Black and brown issues at the forefront of the agenda. It means no longer allowing LGBTQ spaces or marches where queer people of color are invisible, nor ignoring the plight of this vulnerable population.

There are already signs of progress. Roughly 30,000 people rallied in West Hollywood on Sunday to protest police brutality and systemic racism, with a specific focus on Black LGBTQ people.

The COVID-19 pandemic made this year’s Pride Month look different. But the entire LGBTQ community’s commitment to tangible anti-racist action should be what does the trick next year—and every year after that.

Giulia Heyward

Giulia Heyward is an editorial intern at the Washington Monthly.

GOP HOMOPHOBIC HETEROSEXISM

More than half of LGBTQ parents in Florida say they are considering leaving the state

Brooke Migdon
Tue, January 24, 2023 

More than half of LGBTQ parents in Florida are considering moving their families to another state over concerns that a new Florida education law – known to its critics as the “Don’t Say Gay” law – stigmatizes LGBTQ identities and creates a hostile learning environment for LGBTQ children or students with LGBTQ family members.

In a report issued Tuesday by the Williams Institute, a public policy research institute based at the UCLA of Law, and Clark University in Massachusetts, 56 percent of LGBTQ parents surveyed said they were considering leaving Florida over concerns about how the new law may impact their children and family. Another 17 percent said they had already taken steps to do so.

“I am terrified that I would need to make the decision to leave Florida and leave my parents,” one respondent said. “The idea of having to leave to protect my child and my partner is scary but one I am willing to do.”

The new law, officially titled the “Parental Rights in Education” law, bars public kindergarten through third grade teachers from engaging in classroom instruction related to sexual orientation and gender identity – subjects the measure’s proponents in the state legislature last year argued are inappropriate for young students.

Educators through high school are barred from addressing either topic in the classroom in a manner that is not “age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate” for their students. Florida public school teachers who violate the law risk having their licenses suspended or revoked under a rule adopted by the state Board of Education in October.

LGBTQ parents in Florida surveyed by the Willams Institute between June and September said their initial response to the bill, introduced last January in the state House, ranged from fear to disbelief. Many were unconcerned about the measure at first because they believed it would not be signed into law or was unenforceable.

Over time, however, as the measure moved swiftly through the legislature, LGBTQ parents who were initially not worried became increasingly concerned. Some even considered removing their children from the public school system altogether, according to the Williams Institute survey.

LGBTQ parents surveyed by the group voiced a variety of concerns about the “Don’t Say Gay” law’s expected impact on their children, including that it would restrict them from speaking freely about their families, negatively impact their sense of legitimacy and encourage a hostile school climate.

“Many are concerned that the bill will not only result in restricted or nonexistent education about the existence of diverse sexual and gender identities, but it will result in a chilly or hostile school climate for LGBTQ educators, students, and families because it suggests that something is wrong with LGBTQ identities,” researcher Abbie E. Goldberg, a psychology professor at Clark University, wrote in the report.

LGBTQ parents with LGBTQ children said they were especially worried how the law would impact their child’s learning environment and mental well-being, and 13 percent said their children have expressed fears about continuing to live in Florida as an LGBTQ young person.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R), seen as a top GOP contender for the 2024 presidential election, has spearheaded a statewide crusade against LGBTQ issues and identities over the last year, calling for physicians who provide gender-affirming medical care to transgender minors to be sued and accusing teachers and public school systems of indoctrinating vulnerable young people with “woke gender ideology.”

Earlier this month, as he was sworn in for his second term as governor, DeSantis touted his administration’s success in passing educational reforms including the “Parental Rights in Education” law and pledged to ensure Florida schools “are focused on academic excellence and the pursuit of truth, not the imposition of trendy ideology.”

“Florida must always be a great place to raise a family – we will enact more family-friendly policies to make it easier to raise children and we will defend our children against those who seek to rob them of their innocence,” DeSantis said.

But according to LGBTQ parents, Florida has become an increasingly hostile place to live.

Nearly a quarter of LGBTQ parents surveyed in the Williams Institute report said they feared being harassed by their neighbors because of their sexual orientation or gender identity or expression, and more than 20 percent said they had been out less in their neighborhood, workplace or community over the past 3 to 6 months.

“The Don’t Say Gay bill claims to be for parent rights, but my rights have been taken away since its passage,” one respondent said. “My right to send my daughter to school freely, my right to live without fear of who I am, my right to not be discriminated against based on my sexual orientation, and my daughter to not be discriminated against based on her parents’ sexual orientation.”

For some LGBTQ parents, the passage of Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay” law has motivated them to engage more directly in community activism; nearly 20 percent said they participated in a demonstration to protest the legislation over the past 6 months.

Others spoke to how their parenting and activism serves as means of queer resistance and empowerment.

“We do our best to instill the right things in our children to help them grow to be kind collectivemembers of society,” one survey respondent said. “As queer parents we do this all in spite of a society that actively tries to silence us. But what they do not understand is that we also raise our children to scream above the silence and fight for the right to love and exist without persecution.”