Can there ever really be sex without politics?

— When elections impact your relationship

We’ve all heard the saying, ‘opposites attract’, but that’s becoming less and less true when it comes to love and politics. Here’s how to navigate a conversation with a date who sits on the opposite side of the political spectrum.

In Season two of Sex and the City, Carrie Bradshaw couldn’t help but wonder: “Can there be sex without politics?” In 2024, that question feels almost laughably rhetorical.

The short answer? No.

In today’s dating world, especially in the countdown to the next U.S. presidential election, politics are more entangled with sex, love, and relationships than ever. According to research in the US, political alignment is now a non-negotiable for many singles.

Political dealbreakers are on the rise

Results from the 2024 survey show 28 per cent of Gen Z and millennials have ended relationships due to differing political beliefs. Even more eye-opening? Nearly half of people on both sides of the political spectrum are reluctant to date across party lines. Political beliefs are no longer just opinions; they’re core values. And when values clash, it’s not something you can just “agree to disagree” about.

Dating apps are adapting to this shift, too. Tinder US partnered with Vote.org, enabling voter registration resources in-app and “I Voted” stickers for users to slap on their profiles. But more than getting people to the polls, these features serve a bigger purpose: offering a shortcut to signal, “Here’s where I stand,” without having to grill someone on their political leanings before the first date is up (if you even make it on the date..)

Navigating the politics of dating: when the stakes are high

Based on the same US research, heterosexual women often avoid asking men directly about their politics, afraid of getting vague or non-committal answers. Instead, they drop “proximity questions” about current events or pop culture to gauge where someone stands. It’s a strategic move but points to a more significant issue: people are protecting themselves from potential dealbreakers by skirting around it.

But is sidestepping really a solution? Not if you’re after a real connection.

How to ask the right questions

When it comes to politics, it’s easy to reduce someone to their stance on one hot-button issue and dismiss them. We’ve all been there: rolling our eyes at that cousin’s rant or cringing at a date’s “crazy” take in the girl’s group chat. But if your goal is a meaningful relationship, contempt will get you nowhere.

The first step is checking your own biases. Ask yourself: are you seeing the person before you or just the political caricature you expect? Relationships are more nuanced than a few talking points.

So before you write someone off, ask genuine questions – not the “gotcha” kind, but those fueled by curiosity. A simple “Where are you coming from with that?” can invite a deeper conversation.

You don’t have to agree, but you do need to listen.

Depolarise your dating experience

Navigating politics in dating doesn’t mean abandoning your values, but it does mean lowering the temperature. Politics shouldn’t feel like a battlefield, it should be an opportunity to understand someone’s life experiences.

Here’s a quick reality check: Are you spending your days doom-scrolling through a political echo chamber? Liking or sharing hate posts that slam the other side without offering any real insight? When social media becomes your rage room, it inevitably seeps into your dating life.

So, take a breath. Set time limits on how much news you consume, curate your feed, and remember: your date isn’t your debate partner. By stepping out of your bubble, you can clear up some mental space to get to know the person in front of you without letting politics hijack the connection before it starts.

How to have a productive conversation about politics

When it’s time to talk politics (and it will come up), here are a few ways to keep things productive:

Don’t rush in with labels

The person across from you is more than their political stance. Reducing them to one label narrows the conversation and limits your ability to see the bigger picture.

Lead with curiosity

Instead of, “How can you even believe that?” try, “What led you to that perspective?” It’s not about proving them wrong but understanding the origin point.

Acknowledge, don’t agree

You don’t have to nod to everything they say, but acknowledging their perspective with “I hear you” helps make the conversation less combative.

Check-in

Ask if they feel truly heard before ending the conversation. It hopefully trains them to reciprocate when it’s your turn to share.

The parting line

In 2024, politics is on our apps, at our dinner tables, and, sometimes, in our bedrooms. We’re not going to agree on everything but we should approach these conversations with curiosity and respect. It’s the only chance we have at building connections that can weather our increasingly divided world.

So, can there be sex without politics? Probably not. But with the right approach, you can have sex despite politics.

Complete Article ↪HERE↩!

October 18, 2024May 9, 2026

How Project 2025 Seeks to Obliterate Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights

— The far-right blueprint would severely limit reproductive autonomy and access to reproductive healthcare, while turning back the clock on hard-won gains, both domestically and globally.

People attend the Our Bodies Our Lives Rally for Reproductive Freedom at the Bayfront Amphitheater on Sept. 14, 2024, in Miami. The rally was held to advocate for the passage of Amendment 4, which will be on Florida’s ballot, which would protect the right to abortion in the state.

By Anna Bernstein, Amy Friedrich-Karnik and Samira Damavandi

Project 2025 promotes a presidential agenda that rolls back civil and human rights and implements extremist conservative policies across every federal department and agency. Its sweeping far-right policy framework, by the conservative think tank the Heritage Foundation, includes numerous attacks on sexual and reproductive health and rights.

The plan’s far-reaching recommendations would severely limit reproductive autonomy and access to reproductive healthcare, while turning back the clock on hard-won gains, both domestically and globally. This fact sheet enumerates some of the agenda’s most serious threats to sexual and reproductive health and describes potential effects.

1. Threats to Medication Abortion

Project 2025 proposes several strategies for restricting—and ultimately eliminating—access to mifepristone, an extremely safe and effective medication used in the most common regimen for medication abortion in the United States.

The plan proposes reinstating medically unnecessary restrictions on mifepristone that require in-person dispensing and limit who can prescribe and receive the medication. By effectively ending telehealth provision of the method, these restrictions would limit access to the method for anyone who faces barriers to reaching a brick-and-mortar clinic, including individuals receiving telehealth care (under the protection of shield laws) in states where abortion is banned.
It also recommends revoking mifepristone’s U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval, which would remove the drug from the market entirely. Nearly two-thirds of all abortions provided by clinicians are medication abortions, and the vast majority of them use the combined regimen of mifepristone and misoprostol. Although use of misoprostol alone is also safe and effective, it is unclear how widely this regimen would be offered by providers, or taken up by patients, if mifepristone were no longer available.
Decreasing access to medication abortion by either mechanism could in turn increase demand for procedural care, placing additional strain on clinics and increasing wait time for patients.
Project 2025 suggests that a hostile administration could bypass the FDA and effectively ban medication abortion—and potentially all abortions—through enforcement of the Comstock Act, an 1873 anti-obscenity law that prohibits mailing anything “intended for producing abortion.” The law could be used to prevent the distribution of medication and supplies needed for abortion care and if applied broadly, it could result in a nationwide total abortion ban.

2. Broader Attacks on Abortion Access

Project 2025 also seeks to dismantle U.S. abortion access in a number of other ways.

The plan calls on Congress to codify into law the Hyde and Weldon Amendments, harmful policies that limit access to abortion care in the United States by restricting the use of federal funds for abortion care and coverage.
It also proposes a full audit of Hyde compliance, including reviewing Biden administration executive actions and Medicaid-managed care in “pro-abortion states.” These investigations may suggest an intention to retaliate against states where state Medicaid funds are used—entirely legally—to provide abortion care. In reality, the documented violations of the Hyde Amendment involve the opposite: states refusing to cover abortion care under circumstances where Medicaid coverage is mandated.

3. Denying Access to Abortion Care in Emergency Situations

Project 2025 calls for the Department of Health and Human Services to dismantle the abortion protections provided under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), a federal policy that outlines requirements for emergency departments that receive Medicare funds.

The plan recommends rescinding Biden administration guidance from 2022 stating that people needing abortion care as part of emergency treatment are entitled to that care under federal law, even in states where abortion is banned. It would also end investigations into cases where patients’ rights were violated by denial of necessary emergency abortion care.
Further, it seeks to eliminate injunctions against states that have violated EMTALA and recommends that the Department of Justice withdraw from all ongoing litigation where it is currently defending the right to emergency abortion care.
Refusal to enforce EMTALA’s protections for abortion care puts pregnant people’s lives in jeopardy, by forcing providers to risk criminal charges if they perform potentially lifesaving abortion care.

4. Increasing Misinformation, Disinformation and Stigma

Project 2025 aims to implement a broad anti-sexual and reproductive health and rights agenda across the government—including by changing the mandate of key agencies and rewording policies to stigmatize and delegitimize sexual and reproductive health terms and concepts.

The plan proposes changing the Department of Health and Human Services into the Department of Life, complete with an anti-abortion task force to replace the existing Reproductive Healthcare Task Force and a newly created position of “Special Representative for Domestic Women’s Health” to lead anti-abortion policy efforts across agencies.
It recommends deleting all terms related to gender, gender equality, reproductive health, reproductive rights, abortion, sexual orientation and gender identity from all legislation, federal rules, agency regulations, contracts, agency websites and grants. Likewise, it encourages the use of U.S. influence at the United Nations to remove language “promoting abortion” from U.N. documents, policy statements and technical literature.
Project 2025 uses charged, medically inaccurate anti-abortion rhetoric—including language falsely portraying abortion as unsafe—to break down support for abortion rights and bolster efforts to criminalize providers, misuse laws and regulations meant to protect against discrimination, and ultimately cut off access to abortion care.
The agenda also uses the false implication that abortion is unsafe to justify proposals to increase pregnancy and abortion surveillance at the federal level. The plan suggests mandated reporting of abortions—as well as of miscarriages and stillbirths—by all states (using denial of federal funding streams as means of enforcement). The potential weaponization of this data collection by a hostile administration poses an immediate threat to abortion providers and patients, and it paves the way for increased criminalization of pregnancy outcomes other than abortion.
Project 2025 seeks to redefine basic sexual health education as “pornography”—and then to make pornography illegal—and also recommends replacing comprehensive sex education with abstinence-only curricula.

5. Weaponization of Federal Medicaid Dollars

Project 2025 calls for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to encourage states to eliminate all Planned Parenthood facilities from their state Medicaid programs, as some states have attempted in the past. It also suggests that CMS create a new regulation that would disqualify abortion providers nationwide.

This would have disastrous effects on access to basic health care services, particularly family planning, with other safety-net providers unable to increase their capacity to fill the gap that would be left if federal funding were pulled from Planned Parenthood and other reproductive health providers.
The agenda also makes baseless claims that some states are violating the Weldon Amendment by requiring coverage of abortion care in private insurance plans. Project 2025 calls for withdrawing partial Medicaid funds from these states in retaliation—a weaponization of funding that provides crucial health insurance for people with low incomes.

6. Attacks on Contraception

Project 2025 seeks to severely undermine two cornerstones of U.S. contraceptive provision: Title X, the national publicly funded family planning program, and the federal contraceptive coverage guarantee of the Affordable Care Act.

The plan proposes reinstating the harmful “domestic gag rule,” which would prohibit health care providers who receive Title X funding from providing abortion referrals and would require them to be physically and financially separated from any abortion-related activities, including counseling. Within about a year of this policy going into effect in 2019 (before it was rescinded in 2021), hundreds of clinics left the program and the number of patients served dropped by 2.4 million.
Project 2025 goes further and recommends legislation that would prohibit Title X funding from going to entities that perform or help fund abortion care. Legislating such a policy makes it harder to reverse in the future (compared with administrative rulemaking); it would also disqualify providers who meet the gag rule’s already stringent requirements.
In addition, the plan calls for broadening the contraceptive coverage guarantee’s existing religious and moral exemptions to make it easier for any employer—including large, for-profit corporations—to exclude contraceptive coverage from their employees’ health plan. Such exemptions deny people reproductive autonomy and access to needed health care, while over a decade of evidence show that the coverage guarantee reduced patients’ costs and helped them to use the birth control method of their choice and to use it effectively.

7. Impact on Reproductive Health Worldwide

Project 2025 also seeks to leverage U.S. influence to undermine sexual and reproductive health and rights globally, including by cutting U.S. financial support to countries and initiatives.

It proposes immediately reinstating the global gag rule, which would prevent non-U.S. NGOs from receiving U.S. government global health assistance if they used their own, non-U.S. funds to provide abortion services, information, counseling, referrals or advocacy. Past iterations of the rule have detrimentally impacted reproductive health outcomes, systems and services by decreasing access to contraceptive services and leading to clinic closures.
Project 2025 wants to take the policy further and have it apply to all U.S. foreign assistance, including humanitarian aid.
The plan also proposes blocking funding to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) which provides a wide range of critical sexual and reproductive health services to women and girls globally. When funding to UNFPA was withheld by the Trump-Pence administration, it caused a significant disruption to service delivery.
Project 2025 wants to impose its anti-rights ideology at the United Nations, too. It suggests expanding on the Trump-Pence administration’s Geneva Consensus Declaration on Women’s Health and Protection of the Family, an anti-rights, anti-abortion, anti-gender joint statement that undermines human rights (although that declaration was nonbinding and was never adopted by the U.N.).

Complete Article ↪HERE↩!

October 13, 2024May 10, 2026

My Body Doesn’t Belong to You

— In this essay from 2017, a young woman offers powerful testimony about the damaging effects of men’s possessiveness over women’s bodies.

By Heather Burtman

When the stranger yelled at me from his car window, I was carrying my Zamioculcas zamiifolia, a large tropical plant I had just bought at a greenhouse. I couldn’t hear what he said, but I don’t think he was complimenting my plant.

His words, whatever they were, brought to mind all of the derogatory comments and crude propositions I had heard before, from different car windows and different men: all of the comments about my body and suggestions for what I could do with it. It was as if, once I turned 16, my body no longer belonged to me but to the world at large and to certain men who drove their cars past it.

When I was a little girl, playing shirtless in my family’s garden, my body felt as if it belonged only to me. We had a rectangle-shaped yard out of which we would dig a smaller rectangle, and this dark patch of soil would become our garden. At 5, 6 and 7 years old, my siblings and I laughed as we shook out fat chunks of grass and produced a shower of dirt that went up our noses and down our chests.

I liked the way the dirt felt, all freshly dug, against my skin, and I asked my mother to bury me in it the way she sometimes did at the beach. She buried me halfway, and I smiled and posed for a picture. I liked being that way: a bare, muddy torso with a handful of seeds that I thought might grow carrots and yield a future in which my body was my body. And your body was your body.

Nakedness was swimming in the bay as the sunlight dimmed behind the apple trees, and when we walked down the street and men smiled at us, they didn’t mean it like that.

During my senior year of high school, I went in for my second bra-fitting at J.C. Penney, where the fitter sniffed a little in disapproval when telling me my cup size, as if she were thinking, “How dare you grow those.”

I was now the keeper of this secret: There are sizes beyond DD. You can be an H, for example. That is British sizing. Or a K. That is American sizing. The British make better bras. I was the girl with the big breasts. There were jokes, compliments from female friends, promises that my future boyfriend or husband or lover would have plenty to be happy about.

There were men who ogled. Men who asked, “Are those real?”

I had no answer. I didn’t remember consciously deciding about their size or doing anything about it.

Around then I realized that, in this world, there would be many instances when my body would not feel like my body. When I was in a club and a man grabbed my buttocks and then my hands, trying to pull me in to dance. You can say no 100 times, and he will still pull.

There is the knot of your hands and his, and the harder you pull away, the harder he pulls closer. It is like a game to him, like one of those colorful woven tubes that trap your fingers when you exert opposing forces.

If you are lucky, your friends will yell at him until he lets go. You will stand there stunned, suddenly realizing how sticky the dance floor is, also wondering if they have nice-smelling hand soap in the bathroom, hand soap that smells like summer air, being young, outside. But that is the smell of another world entirely, one that no longer seems to exist.

When I walk to work, and men smile at me along the way, they don’t have nice smiles anymore. “What’s your name?” they say. “Come on, sweetheart, tell me your name.”

They follow me, their footsteps like trees falling. I can feel it in the air, their need to take something from me. It has nothing to do with me in particular, with me as an individual. It has nothing to do with how I was once a fearless, naked gardener with a blue plastic teapot and a collection of Ravensburger puzzles.

If I were to tell them my name, would they remember it? Would they invite me out to a nice dinner and listen as I told them stories about my childhood? Would this be true love?

I can picture the scene now. I’m at brunch with my girlfriends at a place that serves bottomless Bloody Marys and slightly overcooked eggs. After Round 3, we find ourselves on the usual subject: how we met our significant others.

My girlfriends lean in a little closer and say: “Oh Heather, please tell the story again. Tell us how you and Lyle met.”

“Well,” I begin, taking one last sip of Bloody Mary. “I was walking down the street when Lyle drove by and yelled, ‘Hey, baby!’ and asked me to have sex with him. And I thought, ‘This one’s a keeper.’”

Such behavior is not about me. It’s not about love. It’s not even about sex. It is about fear and power. What certain men gain from feeding on such things, I do not know, and I do not want to know.

While traveling in France one year, I held onto my friend’s arm as a man followed us for maybe half a mile, yelling I know not what. There was the glittering river, the stone bridge, the creperie closed for the night. Only the fear really existed.

“We can take him,” I whispered to her. “I mean, if anything happens.”

We marched forward, eyeing the distance between the hunted and the hunter. I was too scared to think and uncertain of how one even got a hold of the police out there.

In Connecticut one day, a man drove past me only to turn around and come back.

“Oh, my God,” I thought. “He came back.” I felt the fear descending upon me the way a colorful parachute does in a childhood game of cat and mouse. He talked, he laughed, he watched me try not to blink. I always blinked. What is the verb? To savor. To luxuriate in torturing another. Sadism.

If someone does this to you, do not give in to the temptation to smile. I tell myself to be the strong woman my mother taught me to be and not smile, but I almost always do.

One man said to me: “Do you know who I am? I am Don Juan, and I am the best lover in the world. See for yourself.”

And I thought: Good for you, sir. Good for you. I smiled at him, laughed even.

Another man on another day stood on the sidewalk in front of me as dusk was falling. He was with his friends, and he reached out his arms and pulled me toward him. And what did I do? “I’ve got to go,” I said. “I’ve got to go.” Sweet smile. Walk, don’t run. They smell fear. They chase.

I will never be 6 again. I no longer remember what it is like to bask shirtless with a garden against my skin, or for someone to take a picture of my naked torso that they will actually develop at Walgreens. I am 24, and my body makes life dangerous for me. My breasts, my hips, the way I walk. Any woman’s breasts, any woman’s hips, the way any woman walks.

It’s all somehow too tempting. Our full lips or thin lips. Our necks exposed beneath cropped hair, or our long hair, or the split ends we pick at while sitting on the bus. Our pierced or unpierced ears. The infinite circle of belly button winking beneath our shirts. We look too good in our T-shirts and jeans. We look too good bundled up in our coats, carrying houseplants down the street.

When we walk home to our apartments late at night, we carry our keys spread out between our fingers, and we jump at the shadows of shadows. In the daylight, we pretend we were never afraid.

A couple of years ago, in the warmth of summer, I stood naked on a dock, and my body was my body. My two girlfriends were standing naked beside me, and their bodies were their bodies. Our breasts were our breasts. Our clothes were our clothes that we had chosen to wear and chosen to take off, leaving them in warm heaps on the chilled wood next to the damp footprints, which were also ours.

When we jumped into the water, we chose to jump in. The weeds brushed against our bodies obliviously, encircling our fingers and toes and hips with no knowledge of or care about which was which.

We splashed water with our fists and yelled, but if we were afraid, it was only of fish. That thought made us laugh. We saluted the dark, starry, silent sky, and it did not so much as whistle or wink back.

Complete Article ↪HERE↩!

October 3, 2024May 10, 2026

Your pride, your power

— The essential LGBTQ voter guide for 2024

Navigate the complex landscape of LGBTQ politics with Reckon’s roadmap to what’s really at stake for queer and trans Americans in this election.

By Denny

What’s the issue? Break it down.

In recent years, we have seen the rights of LGBTQ Americans nationwide used as political pawns. During the presidential election year in 2020, anti-trans legislation reached an all-time high with 118 anti-trans bills. In 2024, the number of bills introduced has skyrocketed more than five-fold, with 658 bills aiming to restrict bodily autonomy, healthcare access, sports participation, and attempts to erase the public existence of the LGBTQ community. Trans youth are the primary target.

Simultaneously, persistent misinformation about gender-affirming care from anti-trans conservatives has emboldened hostile rhetoric surrounding the community. As a result, 45 anti-trans bills across the country have passed into law, affecting 16 states. As we approach the 2024 election, the fight for LGBTQ liberation remains crucial—perhaps more urgent than ever before.

Why does it matter? What’s at stake?

As a direct result of rising anti-trans rhetoric, major cities have seen a record high in hate crimes, according to the 2023 “Report to the Nation” by Brian Levin, who found that three of the five demographics experiencing increased hate violence were from the LGBTQ community. This underscores the widespread impact of anti-LGBTQ sentiment, affecting all communities regardless of political affiliation.

Although trans youth are targeted in legislation, this year alone has seen violent incidents that resulted in trans and nonbinary teens dying, including Nex Benedict from Oklahoma and Pauly A. Likens from Pennsylvania. Additionally, mental health issues for young LGBTQ people continue to worsen as anti-LGBTQ laws increase. Voting in favor of pro-LGBTQ policies and ensuring pro-LGBTQ politicians win their seats then can mitigate the rampant attack on trans youth, and potentially proactively turn the tides for the better.

Current status

The numerous anti-trans bills and laws across various states have caught the attention of many in the community. In anticipation of the 2024 election, the Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case brought on by the ACLU, challenging Tennessee’s Senate Bill 1, enacted in July 2023 under Gov. Bill Lee. This law bans gender-affirming care for trans minors in Tennessee. Government officials defending the law argue that gender-affirming care is not only harmful and unnecessary, but also that trans people are not protected under the Constitution.

This case is significant because how the Court interprets transgender rights under the Constitution can set a major precedent for LGBTQ protections moving forward.

Where do the presidential candidates stand on this issue?

Democratic Party:

Kamala Harris: Harris, who currently serves as Vice President, supported gay marriage over a decade before it was federally legalized. She also helped her home state of California become the first state to ban the “gay and trans panic” defense law in 2014, and introduced a bill to prohibit the practice at the national level. Her policies on sex work and incarceration as attorney general have been criticized by the trans community, particularly an instance when she was against allowing incarcerated trans people to transition.
As Vice President, she has shown increased support for LGBTQ rights, hosting Pride events at the White House. Her running mate Tim Walz, governor of Minnesota, shows a history of pro-LGBTQ advocacy spanning over two decades.

Republican Party:

Donald J. Trump: As the 45th president, Trump initiated a concerted effort to remove protections for LGBTQ people. In 2018, his administration attempted to define “sex” in federal civil rights laws to eliminate non-discrimination protections for trans people. Trump sought to “define ‘transgender’ out of existence,” erode protections for transgender students and workers, and weaken access to gender-affirming health care—which we now see as a prominent debate topic amongst nominees.
In his current campaign, Trump has announced plans to severely restrict queer, trans and nonbinary rights if he wins a second term. His plan “Agenda 47” aligns closely to anti-trans bills becoming law this year. His running mate J.D. Vance has actively spread misinformation about gender-affirming care.

Independent, Green, Libertarian or Third-Party:

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (Independent): Kennedy Jr. suspended his campaign and endorsed Trump on Aug. 23.

Kennedy lacks concrete opinions regarding trans rights—at least not the ones that are often debated over. He faced criticism early on for accepting an invitation to speak at a summit hosted by Moms for Liberty—an anti-trans extremist group, according to civil rights watchdogs, rallying school curricula, sports participation and bathroom usage. Kennedy backed out of the event, while reaffirming his support for gay marriage.
He has also been wary of supporting hormone replacement therapies (HRT) for trans youth, questioning its practices and long term effects. Comparing it to driving, voting, joining the army, even getting a tattoo, Kennedy is hesitant to support underage access to gender-affirming care “because we know that children do not fully understand the consequences of decisions with life-long ramifications,” he said on X. He has stressed the importance of showing the trans community support as they “shouldn’t ever be shamed.”

Cornel West (Independent): Known for longstanding racial justice activism, West has spent his career advocating for marginalized people to have equitable access to democratic institutions and social spaces. But his looming uncertainty over trans athletes’ participation in sports casts a shadow in understanding just how pro-LGBTQ he is. During Pres. Obama’s reelection campaign in 2012, West criticized Obama’s usage of gay marriage above other issues, though clarified his support for it two years later.

In an interview last year with Fox News, West expressed empathy for trans people and their vulnerability when asked about sports participation. The following month in an interview on “The Karen West Show,” West seemed to have backtracked, proposing a third gender category for trans athletes for “fairness.” Regarding bathroom usage, discrimination policies and anti-LGBTQ school curricula, West has no concrete proposed policies surrounding transgender rights.

Jill Stein (Green Party): Stein is known for protesting at coal plants and testifying before legislative bodies about environmental concerns. According to iSideWith, another voting guide system, voters of Stein would support gender-affirming care for minors under the condition that they are non-surgical—though she herself has not made any direct statements about her stance on trans healthcare.

It is worth nothing, however, that Stein has an up-to-date understanding of what is at stake for the trans, nonbinary and gender-nonconforming community given that this Trans Day of Visibility, she took it to X to express her awareness of the current climate, escalating political and physical violence surrounding trans issues. She mentioned having a “longstanding” record of affirming trans rights, and promises to implement federal protections for all LGBTQ people nationwide.

Chase Oliver (Libertarian): A former Democrat, Oliver is a 39-year-old gay candidate who is pro-gun, anti-cop, pro-choice. He self-describes himself as Georgia’s first LGBTQ candidate who is “armed and gay.” Oliver himself was the person behind his high school’s inaugural Gay Straight Alliance (GSA).

In a tense interview with Reason TV in May, he strongly argues that gender-affirming care is valid and should stay private between the minor, their parent, and the doctor. Oliver has defended the artistry of drag performance against those labeling it as harmful to children.

Key bills to know

CALIFORNIA

Assembly Constitutional Amendment (ACA) No. 5 (Proposition 3): Under Proposition 8, the California Constitution defines marriage as between a man and a woman in the state, which eliminates the rights of same-sex couples to marry.
- A yes vote = removes the ban on same-sex marriage from the California Constitution and declares the right to marry as a fundamental right for all couples, regardless of gender.
- A no vote = keeps the current language defining marriage as between a man and a woman in the state constitution and maintains a constitutional conflict with federal law, which recognizes same-sex marriage

COLORADO

SCR24-003: The Colorado constitution states that a marriage is valid only if it is between one man and one woman. That provision has been unenforceable since the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015. The Constitutional Same-Sex Marriage Ban Amendment repeals the provision in Colorado.
- A yes vote = Removes the phrase “only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state” from the Colorado Constitution. Aligns the state constitution with current federal law and practice.
- A no vote = Keeps the outdated, unenforceable language in the state constitution and maintains a symbolic barrier to marriage equality in Colorado.

HAWAII

House Bill 2802: The Hawaii Remove Legislature Authority to Limit Marriage to Opposite-Sex Couples Amendment proposes a constitutional amendment to repeal the Legislature’s authority to limit marriage to opposite-sex couples.
- A yes vote = Removes the phrase “the legislature shall have the power to reserve marriage to opposite-sex couples,” from Hawaii’s constitution.
- A no vote = Keeps the current recognition that a marriage under the constitution is limited to straight couples.

NEW YORK

Proposal 1: This proposal amends Article 1, Section 11 of the Equal Rights Amendment. Section 11 now protects against unequal treatment based on race, color, creed, and religion. Proposal 1 seeks protection against unequal treatment based on ethnicity, national origin, age, disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, pregnancy, and pregnancy outcomes, abortion, as well as reproductive healthcare and autonomy.
- A yes vote = protection against unequal treatment based on ethnicity, national origin, age, disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, pregnancy, and pregnancy outcomes.
- A no vote = keeps the lack of protections in instances of discrimination based on identity in the state.

SOUTH DAKOTA

Senate Joint Resolution 505: This amendment was designed to remove gender-specific language in the state constitution and replace it with gender-neutral language. Specifically, the measure was designed to replace male pronouns with gender-neutral terms or the titles of offices referenced.
- A yes vote = amending the text of the South Dakota Constitution to change male pronouns to gender-neutral terms or titles.
- A no vote = keeps the state constitution pronouns to only “he/him,” when referring to the state constituents.

Notable races of LGBTQ candidates in swing states

ARIZONA

Lorena Austin is running for reelection to the State House in Legislative District 9, a frontline district to protect the Arizona Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee (DLCC), which seeks to elect Democrats to the state House and Senate.
- Running for the House are Oscar de los Santos, Patricia Contreras, and Brian Garcia.
Notable statewide candidate:
- Josh Polacheck (Democrat) for Arizona Corporation Commissioner.

MICHIGAN

Kyle Wright is running for a House seat in one of the most competitive districts in the state, against James DeSana, a MAGA extremist with strong anti-trans stances. Wright would be the youngest state representative in Michigan.

NEVADA

In order to maintain a pro-equality supermajority in the Nevada Assembly, all eyes are on Assembly District 4 where gay candidate Ryan Hampton is working tirelessly to flip this open seat.
Assemblywoman Cecilia Gonzalez is running for reelection.

NORTH CAROLINA

Lisa Grafstein is the sole LGBTQ voice in the State Senate and in a newly drawn 50/50 seat. With the gubernatorial election likely favoring the Democratic Party, ensuring there is not a GOP supermajority would be key to preventing further anti-LGBTQ legislation.

PENNSYLVANIA

Notable statewide candidate:
- Malcolm Kenyatta (Democrat) for Pennsylvania State Auditor. Kenyatta would be the first out LGBTQ+ statewide official in Pennsylvania.

WISCONSIN

Wisconsin State Assembly: Wisconsin might elect its largest-ever bloc of LGBTQ State Assembly members, who will be a crucial part of the state’s legislative branch in charge of making and passing laws.
- Ryan Spaude is running in what is likely the most competitive district in Wisconsin, with the Democratic party leading by one point in the Partisan Voting Index (PVI), according to the LGBTQ+ Victory Fund.
Kristin Alfheim’s Senator campaign is a crucial win that Democrats need in order for control of the state Senate. She is facing an opponent in the general election who has strong anti-LGBTQ stances.
Notable statewide candidate:
- Tammy Baldwin (Democrat) for Wisconsin U.S. Senator. Baldwin made history in 2012 as the first out LGBTQ member elected to the U.S. Senate, and was re-elected for her second term in 2018.

Key Points for Voters

What to Consider When Voting
- Representation matters to an extent: LGBTQ representation matters, but it’s not everything. Research candidates thoroughly, regardless of their identity. Focus on track records, policies and visions that align with LGBTQ rights and your values.
- Prioritize intersectionality: Consider how LGBTQ issues intersect with other social justice movements. Look for candidates who understand and advocate for reproductive rights, immigrants’ rights, racial equality, economic equity, environmental protection. Support candidates who recognize the interconnectedness of identity and systemic issues.
- Keep your politicians accountable: Voting is just the beginning of political engagement. After elections, monitor your representatives’ actions and votes, communicate regularly with their offices, and collaborate with advocacy groups to ensure promises are kept. Remember: Your role as a constituent continues beyond Election Day.
- Engage in local activism: Don’t wait for national elections to make a difference. You can create change in your community by joining or starting local LGBTQ organizations, attending city council meetings, volunteering for local causes and organizing community events to raise awareness. Stay informed and educate others and challenge misinformation about LGBTQ issues when you encounter it.

Resources and Further Reading

Where to Learn More
- Equality PAC: The political arm of the Congressional Equality Caucus, Equality PAC is dedicated to the full legal and societal equality for LGBTQ Americans where all funds raised are spent supporting and electing openly LGBTQ individuals and strong LGBTQ allies to the United States Congress who are committed to full civil rights and protections for all LGBTQ Americans.
- Gender Liberation Movement March: Washington, D.C. march, protest and festival for gender-affirming care, abortions rights and democracy on Sept. 14
- LGBTQ+ Rights Voter Guide on Who to Vote For: Keep tabs of which LGBTQ or LGBTQ-ally candidates are running in your state for some of the crucial seats in this upcoming election, and what and who they are up against.
- LGBTQ+ Victory Fund: The only national organization devoted to electing pro-equality, pro-choice LGBTQ+ leaders to public office at every level—from local school boards, to city council, and even a seat in Congress.
- “Plugged In”: WABE, the NPR and PBS affiliate for the Metro Atlanta Area, their podcast “Plugged In” explores LGBTQ life in Georgia, wherein this episode dives into what is at stake for queer, trans and nonbinary Georgians, and how LGBTQ voters could shape the upcoming presidential election.
- ACLU Tennessee: “U.S. Supreme Court Will Hear Challenge from United States, Families, and Doctors Against Transgender Health Care Ban”
- GLAAD: “GLAAD’s Voter Poll Indicates Anti-Trans Campaigning is Failing.” 94% of LGBTQ Americans Are Motivated To Vote; 72% Report Negative Impact of Political Discourse on Mental Health and Emotional Well-Being
Complete Article ↪HERE↩!

June 23, 2014May 11, 2026

More SEX WISDOM with PJ Raval — Podcast #422 — 06/23/14

[Look for the podcast play button below.]

Hey sex fans, welcome back.

Award winning filmmaker and documentarian, PJ Raval is back with us again today to continue our discussion of his groundbreaking move, Before You Know It. Like last week, he’s here as part of the SEX WISDOM series because his film shines a spotlight on an often-ignored segment of our youth-oriented culture, LGBT seniors and elders. And the result is nothing short of stunning.

But wait, you didn’t miss Part 1 of our conversation, did you? Well not to worry if ya did, because you can find it and all my podcasts in the Podcast Archive right here on my site. All ya gotta do is use the search function in the header; type in Podcast #420 and Voilà! But don’t forget the #sign when you do your search.

PJ and I discuss:

Difficulties faced by LGBT seniors and elders;
His earlier film, Trinidad;
Dennis, his alter ego, Dee, and his coming out story;
Rainbow Vista;
Ty and his work with the Harlem chapter of SAGE;
Robert “The Mouth” and his Texan drag bar;
Intertwining the three stories for the greatest effect;
Collaborating with other artistic people;
Sex and aging;
Queer Bomb;
Christeene.

PJ invites you to visit him on his movie’s site HERE!

(Click on the movie poster below to find out more about PJ’s movie.)

BE THERE OR BE SQUARE!

Look for all my podcasts on iTunes. You’ll find me in the podcast section, obviously. Just search for Dr Dick Sex Advice. And don’t forget to subscribe. I wouldn’t want you to miss even one episode.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

June 11, 2014May 11, 2026

More of the SEX WISDOM of Benjamin Law — Podcast #420 — 06/11/14

[Look for the podcast play button below.]

Hey sex fans,

Benjamin Law, the author of the critically acclaimed book, Gaysia; Adventures in the Queer East is back with us for Part 2 of his turn on this is the SEX WISDOM show. I’m so glad he has more time to spend with us again this week because he charmed the pants off me last week.

But wait, you didn’t miss Part 1 of this conversation, did you? Well not to worry if ya did, because you can find it and all my podcasts in the Podcast Archive right here on my site. All ya gotta do is use the search function in the header; type in Podcast #419 and Voilà! But don’t forget the #sign when you do your search.

And I’m sure we’ll have another opportunity to hear Benjamin read from his book.

Benjamin and I discuss:

Sham marriages and marriages of convenience;
Growing gay consciousness in China;
Reparative therapy through the power of Christ, Allah, or Yoga;
Colonialism and sexual oppression;
The resilience of the sexual minority communities throughout Asia;
Asia, the gayest continent;
Cultural relativism and cultural imperialism;
How his travels changed his life;
Our queer family is global
His next book project.

Benjamin invites you to visit him on his site HERE!

Click on the cover art below for more information about Gaysia; Adventures in the Queer East.

BE THERE OR BE SQUARE!

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

May 11, 2014May 13, 2026

SEX WISDOM With Benjamin Law — Podcast #419 — 06/04/14

[Look for the podcast play button below.]

Hello sex fans! Welcome back.

June is indeed bustin’ out all over. And that can mean only one thing here at Dr Dick’s Sex Advice. IT’S LGBT PRIDE MONTH! Hurray!

To kick off our celebration we’re gonna take an audio fieldtrip to the land down under to visit with one of the most interesting men I’ve had the pleasure of meeting. And seeing this is the SEX WISDOM show, you can be certain that my guest is among the movers and shakers in the field of human sexuality. Because this is the series where we meet researchers, educators, clinicians, pundits and philosophers who are helping us take a fresh look at our sexual selves.

My guest is none other than Benjamin Law, the author of the critically acclaimed book, Gaysia; Adventures in the Queer East. Benjamin is a journalist, columnist, and screenwriter. And has a Ph.D. in television writing and cultural studies, don’t cha know. His passion is evident in all he does, but he is also funny as all get out. I can’t wait for you to meet him.

Benjamin and I discuss:

His way with words;
Cleis Press, his North American Publisher;
His international audience;
Modern gay consciousness is linked to a certain economic class;
Bad reviews;
Sex tourism;
Living on the sexual fringe;
His travels throughout south Asia;
Religion, family responsibilities, and sexual minorities;
Sex work can come from a place of pride or from a place of desperation;
The double standard for women and men.

I’m going to make sure that Benjamin reads from Gaysia; Adventures in the Queer East, so you won’t want to miss that.

Benjamin invites you to visit him on his site HERE!

Click on the cover art below for more information about Gaysia; Adventures in the Queer East.

BE THERE OR BE SQUARE!

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

January 12, 2009May 23, 2026

Sex Advice With An Edge — Podcast #94 — 01/12/09

[Look for the podcast play button below.]

Hey sex fans,

I have a really delectable show for you today. We have a big hot juicy load of stimulating questions from the sexually worrisome. And I respond with an equal number of dazzling, engaging and oh so informative responses! Hey, it’s what I do.

Rachel thinks she ready to be a dominatrix. I beg to differ.
Daniel had sex with his friend. Now he regrets it.
Dave has a short fuse and he turns to his “dad” for help.

Finally a SEX IN THE NEWS feature — “Recent Survey says Internet satisfies better than sex!”

BE THERE OR BE SQUARE!

Look for my podcasts on iTunes. You’ll find me in the podcast section, obviously. Just search for Dr Dick Sex Advice. And don’t forget to subscribe. I wouldn’t want you to miss even one episode.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

June 30, 2008May 16, 2026

Sex Advice With An Edge — Podcast #69 — 06/30/08

[Look for the podcast play button below.]

Hey sex fans,

It’s hotter than blazes here in the Emerald City. It has been all weekend! So here I am, slinging my tits over this hot microphone, just so I can bring you today’s show. What a guy, huh? Well, you know what they say; the show must go on. So to liven things up a bit I’ve have a terrific lineup for ya.

Roger is dealing with the aftermath of radiation therapy.
Chris searches for the illusive hands-free orgasm!
A Product Review — Fleshlight Ice

Finally, more Sex In The News!

BE THERE OR BE SQUARE!

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

October 8, 2007May 14, 2026

Sex Advice With An Edge — Podcast #34 — 10/08/07

[Look for the podcast play button below.]

Hey sex fans,

I have a really swell show for you today. We have a load of very interesting questions from all over the globe. And I respond with an equal number of lively, affable and oh so informative responses! Hey, it’s what I do.