Sometimes, when you're in the middle of a long task and the end is nowhere in sight, it feels as if you haven't accomplished anything. You want to give up — or at least slack off — because there is no feeling of accomplishment. It's the reason good managers set many small goals instead of one large one; our dedication depends on feeling some sort of achievement.
As California celebrates marriage equality, I'm happy to share that the Bilerico Project is working with LGBT newspapers, magazines and organizations to share this moment in our history with the nation. Several outlets will be filing multimedia and text updates of the first two days of same-sex legal weddings on the blog and all of the pictures will be free for download and use by bloggers, media outlets or for personal use. Consider it our gift to the community on our wedding day.
The amount of multisourcing that will surround this online marriage exhibit is a little queer itself. California and national media outlets will be sharing and storing the photos on a blog based out of Indiana. Our Editorial Team will be watching over the site and making sure everything runs smoothly from our home offices in Indiana, Arizona, Florida, Washington DC, and France.
None of the Ed Team members benefit directly from California's marriage laws. Sure, we could travel to California and get hitched, but none of the benefits would follow us home. There are plenty of pieces of paper in Indiana and one that says I'm married to another man is worth about as much as a Target circular. Our joy is vicarious.
I must admit to a certain amount of jealousy. LGBT workers can still be fired in Indiana; we don't even have a hate crimes law. I look longingly at California and consider marrying my partner a pipe dream. I doubt I'll live long enough to see marriage equality in Indiana.
None of our mayors will be directing city clerks to open early or stay late to accommodate an influx of loving partners. Indiana's governor, Mitch Daniels, supports a constitutional amendment; conversely, California's governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, has embraced marriage equality and condemned a proposed amendment. No one will be dancing in the streets of Indianapolis this week for marriage equality as they will in San Francisco or LA.
Instead, Indiana's queer community danced the weekend before as we celebrated Pride in downtown Indianapolis. This year's celebration was larger than ever; I can remember years where there was no Pride. Less than 10 years ago, Pride couldn't fill two blocks of a downtown street. Last weekend over 35,000 people filled a large park. After this year, we'll probably need a new location for next year's crowd since the party just keeps growing.
It wasn't that long ago that Bilerico-Indiana contributor Chris Douglas convinced his employer, Met Life, to be the first major company to have a booth at Indy Pride (other than liquor company sponsors). This year, there were more mainstream companies participating than ever before. While the liquor companies still set the bar high (after the Jagermeister float hotties tossed me a thong and a pleather armband), LGBT employees from Cummins Diesel Engines, Dow-Agra Chemicals, and Eli Lilly all marched in the parade. Resorts, appraisers, banks, cable companies, and politicians all vied for attention at the festival.
When I grew up there were no gay role models. The smalltown library didn't have any books about LGBT subjects or even any books with sympathetic gay characters. Ellen wasn't a star and any show called Queer Eye would never have made it air. Gay Pride was for San Francisco and New York City. When we break our march forward down into the little steps that define it, you can easier see how far we've progressed.
It was raining tonight as my partner and I drove to dinner. After all of the flooding here, I was complaining about the rain and wishing it would stop. Suddenly he pointed out the window. "Look," he said. "A rainbow." Pride in the sky — even in Indiana.
It's not just that I don't expect to see same-sex marriage in Indiana, I didn't expect to see it anywhere. I didn't expect to see half of the advances we've seen in the past few years. The end isn't in sight yet, but as we break down how far we've come we can better appreciate where we're at.
I'm proud our blog can play a small part in LGBT history. Maybe someday another queer from flyover country can play a role when Indiana finally celebrates our love. I've started looking for that day to arrive now.
Learn More About the Issues on This Page
-
Press ReleaseDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
President Biden Must Veto Defense Bill Attacking Military Families with Transgender YouthPresident Biden Must Veto Defense Bill Attacking Military Families with Transgender Youth
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate today passed a version of the National Defense Authorization Act that would ban coverage for gender-affirming care for transgender youth whose parents are active-duty military personnel. The American Civil Liberties Union is opposing final passage of the defense bill over the inclusion of this health care ban and calling on President Joe Biden to veto the bill. Section 708 of the NDAA would prohibit insurance coverage for “medical interventions for the treatment of gender dysphoria” such as hormone therapy and puberty-suppressant medications, which Speaker Mike Johnson says would “permanently ban transgender medical treatment for minors.” The same treatments would be covered by TRICARE for any medical purpose other than treating gender dysphoria, the clinical diagnosis for the psychological distress experienced by transgender people related to their gender identity. “By passing this bill, the House and Senate are forcing thousands of active-duty service members to choose between their careers in the military and the future of their transgender children,” said Mike Zamore, national director of policy & government affairs at the ACLU. “This unconscionable and unjustifiable attack on those families stands in direct contrast to President Joe Biden’s legacy of defending the civil rights of transgender Americans — including when few in his own party showed the courage to do so. President Biden should cement his legacy by vetoing this bill and sending it back to Congress to pass without Speaker Johnson’s last minute health care ban for servicemembers’ kids.” If signed by President Biden, this health care ban would be the first new anti-LGBTQ provision enacted by Congress and signed into law by the president since the enactment of the military’s since-repealed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy for LGBTQ servicemembers and the since-repealed federal law barring recognition of same-sex marriages known as the Defense of Marriage Act. It is unknown how many transgender youth are currently enrolled in TRICARE or how many of those enrolled are currently receiving coverage for gender-affirming care. In one 2022 analysis, 2,500 minor patients sought care for gender dysphoria through TRICARE Prime insurance at military or civilian treatment facilities in 2017, and 900 received puberty suppressants or gender-affirming hormones. Earlier this month, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a landmark case brought by the ACLU, the ACLU of Tennessee, Lambda Legal, and Akin Gump on behalf of three families and a medical provider challenging a Tennessee ban on gender-affirming hormonal therapies for transgender youth on the grounds the ban violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. -
Press ReleaseDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
Montana Court Blocks State From Refusing to Correct Sex Markers on Transgender People's Birth Certificates and Driver's LicensesMontana Court Blocks State From Refusing to Correct Sex Markers on Transgender People's Birth Certificates and Driver's Licenses
HELENA, Mont. – A Montana court has granted a preliminary injunction preventing the state of Montana from enforcing policies that bar transgender people from obtaining accurate sex designations on their birth certificates and driver’s licenses. After a prior restriction on amendments of birth certificates was struck down by the courts, in early 2024 the state of Montana enacted a new rule that categorically bars transgender Montanans from correcting the sex designation on their birth certificates. Around the same time, the Montana Department of Justice adopted a policy similarly restricting amendment of driver’s licenses. The plaintiffs challenged these policies in state district court, arguing that they violate various constitutional provisions, including the right to equal protection of the law. In a recent Montana Supreme Court decision, two justices concluded that discrimination on the basis of transgender status – as the state is engaging in here – is a form of sex discrimination that violates the Montana Constitution’s equal protection clause. The plaintiffs, two transgender women, are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Montana, and Nixon Peabody LLP. Plaintiff Jessica Kalarchik, a veteran who served in the United States Army for 31 years, said: “After finally being able to live my life openly as the woman I know myself to be, I am frustrated that my birth state, Montana, wants me to carry around a birth certificate that incorrectly lists my sex as male. I live my life openly as a woman, I am treated as a woman in my daily life, and there is no reason I should be forced to carry a birth certificate that incorrectly identifies me as male. Fortunately, the court agrees that this ridiculous policy should not be in effect.” “Once again the State of Montana chose to adopt a draconian policy that is clearly intended to marginalize transgender Montanans, only for that discriminatory action to be blocked by the courts,” said Akilah Deernose, executive director for the ACLU of Montana. “Here in Montana we treasure our right to privacy and to live our lives free from governmental intrusion. The State of Montana clearly has not learned any lessons from the past few years, where courts have repeatedly struck down unconstitutional laws targeting transgender Montanans.” “Forcing anyone to carry documents that contradict their identity unjustly violates their rights to privacy, equal treatment, and not being compelled to convey a government message about their sex that they disagree with,” said Malita Picasso, staff attorney for the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project. “Such a policy marks transgender people for further mistreatment and discrimination, essentially requiring them to carry papers that out them as transgender any time they need to provide identity documents. Fortunately, the court has refused to allow the state of Montana to subvert the freedom of transgender Montanans to control their own identity as this case goes forward.” In granting the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction, the court held, “[i]f the challenged state actions discriminate against transgender individuals on the basis of their transgender status, they also necessarily discriminate the basis of sex.” The state has the option of appealing the district court’s ruling to the Montana Supreme Court, but the underlying case will proceed in district court. A trial has not yet been scheduled. -
FloridaDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
Keohane v. DixonKeohane v. Dixon
On September 30, 2024, the Florida Department of Corrections rescinded its policy regarding treatment of gender dysphoria, which allowed for hormone therapy when deemed medically necessary, as well as access to clothing and grooming standards that accord with one’s gender identity. Under this new policy, grooming and clothing accommodations have been stripped away, and hormone therapy is not permitted unless an exception is deemed constitutionally required. The ACLU brought a class action challenging the policy. -
IdahoDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
Robinson v. LabradorRobinson v. Labrador
Two incarcerated transgender women have sued the state of Idaho alleging that HB 688, a 2024 law barring state funding for gender-affirming medical care for transgender people, denies them access to the health care their doctors have prescribed for them and is a violation of their Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. They represent a class of all incarcerated folks within the state of Idaho who face the loss of hormone therapy due to HB 668.