National
‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ comes to an end
Burden on gay, lesbian service members lifted Tuesday
An estimated 2 million U.S. service members were trained on gay-related issues in the run-up to next Tuesday’s lifting of the military’s gay ban. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)
As gay and lesbian troops await the end of the 18-year-old ban on openly gay service members on Tuesday, observers say the change will have significant impact beyond the military.
“Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” will finally be lifted from the books thanks to the certification of repeal that President Obama, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen sent to Congress on July 22. In accordance with the repeal law that President Obama signed in December, certification started a 60-day timeclock for the end of the ban on Sept. 20.
Aaron Belkin, author of “How We Won,” a book on the lessons learned for progressive causes resulting from “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal, said the end of the military’s gay ban represents the end of what he called the “political paranoia” that led to the institution of the law in 1993.
“Just abstracting away from the question of LGBT rights that’s a danger to every American citizen,” Belkin said. “Sept. 20 is about the cultural change for the military and the political change for gay and lesbian troops … but I would say, even more importantly, it’s a moment when truth and fairness trumped paranoia, and that’s just critical.”
Jeff Krehely, director of the LGBT research and communications project at the Center for American Progress, said allowing open service will be significant for many Americans.
“‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ repeal is huge and tremendous, but I think there are much larger implications for society because a lot of people really respect the military,” Krehely said.
Observers agree the process that led to the end of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” will have a lasting impact as well.
Alex Nicholson, executive director of Servicemembers United, said the training in which service members have been participating will have significant influence on the perspective with which troops — and the American public at large — view gay and lesbian people.
“They really took the time to train and educate the force on the various assets of this policy and hypotheticals,” Nicholson said. “It was an hour of instruction on gays and lesbians, on gay families, on gay partners and it was a really a normalization routine. It was really exposed to millions of America’s most conservative youth to the normality of gays and lesbians.”
Among the situations that the training addressed, Nicholson said, were gay troops holding hands, going on dates or participating in military events with their partners. Nearly 2 million service members received the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” training before certification took place on July 22, according to the Pentagon.
Workplace discrimination against LGBT people could be an issue that gains new focus after “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal. No federal law exists to protect LGBT workers against discrimination. Firing someone for being gay is legal in 29 states and firing someone for being transgender is legal in 35 states.
Krehely said open service could generate support for the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which would prohibit discrimination against LGBT workers in most situations in the public and private workforce, or encourage other employers to add protections for LGBT workers.
“The military is probably one of the biggest and most visible workplaces in our country,” Krehely said. “I think Sept. 20 is a clear indication that this discrimination should not be there any longer, and that we need to move forward on ENDA, and educate people about the broader workplace issues that we’re up against.”
Despite the potential for long-term impact, advocates say the change resulting in the end of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” won’t be immediately apparent and any impact of any lifting the gay ban will be more drawn out.
Krehely said the end of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” next week won’t mean the “world changes necessarily” on Tuesday.
“I think that it’s just people who want to serve their country will want to do that without living in fear,” Krehely said. “That’s the biggest change. It may not be visible, but it’s really important to those people and it’s really important to the military itself.”
Nicholson predicted Tuesday will be a “non-event” and said many gay service members will choose not to come out even though they won’t be in danger of dismissal now that the military’s gay ban is off the books.
“I think you’ll see a good number of them who decide not to come out,” Nicholson said. “I think the post-repeal military is going to resemble any conservative American workplace where individuals judge their willingness and their comfort level in coming out.”
According to the most recent findings from the Williams Institute at the University of California in Los Angeles, an estimated 48,500 lesbians, gay men and bisexuals serve on active duty or in the ready reserve in the U.S. military, while an additional 22,000 are in standby and retired reserve forces. These 70,500 service members make up 2.2 percent of the total force.
But what will happen to those service members who choose to be public about their sexual orientation? Will service members patronize their local gay bars while in uniform? Will Pride parades include contingents of openly gay troops?
Some gay troops have already started brandishing their military credentials during Pride celebrations. In July, about 200 active-duty troops and veterans marched in San Diego’s Pride parade. They weren’t wearing uniforms, but T-shirts indicating their branch of service. The event was the first time a military contingent participated in a Pride celebration in the United States.
Nicholson said that the standards that apply to straight service members with regard to uniforms will also apply to gay troops — so wearing the uniform may not be appropriate in some circumstances.
“Unless it’s some unusual circumstances, service members don’t wear their uniforms out to the bar,” Nicholson said. “I can pretty much guarantee that violations of long-standing and well-understood regulations like that for the sake of publicity is going to be frowned upon by gay troops because the community consensus is they want to blend in like everyone else and not have any special treatment.”
Nonetheless, gay troops will undoubtedly be visible in the post-repeal world. Belkin said the higher visibility of gay troops — and their relationships — following the end of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” will add to the political pressure to advance the fight for same-sex marriage.
“We’re going to see gay and lesbian service members coming back from the Middle East and talking about the importance of marriage equality, and, very tragically, we’re going to see gay and lesbian service members fall in the battlefield and their partners, husbands and wives will not be dealt any benefits their straight counterparts have,” Belkin said. “That is going to illustrate for the public in a much more vivid way the stakes of the marriage debate.”
What’s the next frontier for those who worked to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell?” Securing benefits for gay and lesbian troops is the next step advocates plan to take after the gay ban is lifted from the books.
The Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriage, prevents the military from offering benefits to gay troops, such as health care benefits. But other benefits related to housing and legal services could be changed administratively.
Krehely said benefits for gay troops will be among the issues advocacy groups will be pushing for in the post-repeal world.
“I think that there are still some implementation issues that need to be worked out in terms of benefits and housing, and I think that’s something advocacy organizations and research groups are going to keep trying to make some progress on,” Krehely said.
The White House
Report: Grenell wants Russian ambassadorship
Country’s anti-LGBTQ record a reported barrier
Richard Grenell, President Donald Trump’s special envoy for “special missions,” is making it known that he is interested in the Russian ambassadorship.
According to reporting by the Daily Mail, Grenell has “floated” his interest in the role to coworkers, but issues surrounding the former German ambassador’s sexuality have made securing the position more difficult.
“He had an interest in the job — or at least he floated the idea to select colleagues. But Putin’s regime is extremely anti–LGBTQ, so I’m sure they didn’t take that thought too seriously,” one source close to Grenell told the Daily Mail. “That would never happen anyway.”
Grenell has long been one of Trump’s closest allies and was the first openly gay person to hold a Cabinet-level position. He was ousted last month as acting director of the Kennedy Center, a position he had held since Trump reestablished the board to be composed of his political supporters in 2025.
In addition to leading the nation’s cultural arts center, Grenell previously served as the U.S. ambassador to Germany from 2018 to 2020, and as the special presidential envoy for Serbia and Kosovo peace negotiations from 2019 to 2021. He was also a State Department spokesperson to the U.N. under the George W. Bush administration and a Fox News contributor.
Russia has a longstanding history of being anti-LGBTQ.
In 2013, the country passed a law banning any public endorsement of “nontraditional sexual relations” among minors. In December 2022, Putin signed legislation expanding the ban, making it illegal to promote same-sex relationships or suggest that non-heterosexual orientations are “normal” for people of any age, widening censorship across media and public life.
The Russian courts have also supported the restriction of LGBTQ identity in the country. In November 2023, Russia’s Supreme Court granted a request from the Justice Ministry to outlaw the “international LGBT movement” as “extremist,” allowing authorities to criminalize advocacy and potentially prosecute individuals for expressions of LGBTQ+ identity or support.
In addition to LGBTQ rights issues, the war between Russia and Ukraine has become a global concern. Ukraine, which was part of the former Soviet Union, includes the territory known as Crimea, which Russia annexed in 2014. The annexation remains a major point of international dispute over sovereignty. Since 2022, Russia’s large-scale invasion of Ukraine has escalated the conflict, drawing global attention and sanctions while straining U.S.-Russia relations.
The U.S. has spent $188 billion in total related to the war in Ukraine since the Russian invasion in February 2022, according to the Council on Foreign Relations.
The Russian ambassadorship seems to be a difficult role to fill, according to additional information presented by the Daily Mail. With Trump already being seen as relatively positive by Russian President Vladimir Putin, and with close ties to members of his Cabinet and family — like son-in-law Jared Kushner — the ambassadorship is complicated and viewed as less critical than in previous administrations.
“There is no rush to fill that role because it has now been deemed unnecessary,” another source told the U.K.-based publication.
Bob Foresman, a seasoned businessman with decades-long ties to the Kremlin, was reportedly once the frontrunner, according to the Daily Mail. Foresman served as vice chair of UBS Investment Bank and Deputy Chairman of Renaissance Capital between 2006 and 2009, and earlier led investment banking for Russia at Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein from 1997 to 2000.
“This is a pattern, especially in the Trump administration — special envoys big–footing the ambassadors,” a source told the Daily Mail. “It is shocking that we are already in April and we don’t have an ambassador to one of the most important countries in the world.”
Tennessee
Tenn. lawmakers pass transgender “watch list” bill
State Senate to consider measure on Wednesday
The Tennessee House of Representatives passed a bill last week to create a transgender “watch list” that also pushes detransition medical treatment. The state Senate will consider it on Wednesday.
House Bill 754/State Bill 676 has been deemed “ugly” by LGBTQ advocates and criticized by healthcare information litigators as a major privacy concern.
The bill would require “gender clinics accepting funds from this state to perform gender transition procedures to also perform detransition procedures; requires insurance entities providing coverage of gender transition procedures to also cover detransition procedures; requires certain gender clinics and insurance entities to report information regarding detransition procedures to the department of health.”
It would require that any gender-affirming care-providing clinics share the date, age, and sex of patients; any drugs prescribed (dosage, frequency, duration, and method administered); the state and county; the name, contact information, and medical specialty of the healthcare professional who prescribed the treatment; and any past medical history related to “neurological, behavioral, or mental health conditions.” It would also mandate additional information if surgical intervention is prescribed, including details on which healthcare professional made a referral and when.
HB 0754 would also require the state to produce a “comprehensive annual statistical report,” with all collected data shared with the heads of the legislature and the legislative librarian, and eventually published online for public access.
The bill also reframes detransitioning as a major focus of gender-affirming healthcare — despite studies showing that the number of trans people who detransition is statistically quite low, around 13 percent, and is often the result of external pressures (such as discrimination or family) rather than an issue with their gender identity.
This legislation stands in sharp contrast to federal protections restricting what healthcare information can be shared. In 1996, Congress passed the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPAA, requiring protections for all “individually identifiable health information,” including medical records, conversations, billing information, and other patient data.
Margaret Riley, professor of law, public health sciences, and public policy at the University of Virginia, has written about similar efforts at the federal level, noting the Trump-Vance administration’s push to subpoena multiple hospitals’ records of gender-affirming care for trans patients despite no claims — or proof — that a crime was committed.
It has “sown fear and concern, both among people whose information is sought and among the doctors and other providers who offer such care. Some health providers have reportedly decided to no longer provide gender-affirming care to minors as a result of the inquiries, even in states where that care is legal.” She wrote in an article on the Conversation, where she goes further, pointing out that the push, mostly from conservative members of the government, are pushing extracting this private information “while giving no inkling of any alleged crimes that may have been committed.”
State Rep. Jeremy Faison (R-Cosby), the bill’s sponsor, said in a press conference two weeks ago that he has met dozens of individuals who sought to transition genders and ultimately detransitioned. In committee, an individual testified in support of the bill, claiming that while insurance paid for gender-affirming care, detransition care was not covered.
“I believe that we as a society are going to look back on this time that really burst out in 2014 and think, ‘Dear God, What were we thinking? This was as dumb as frontal lobotomies,’” Faison said of gender-affirming care. “I think we’re going to look back on society one day and think that.”
Jennifer Levi, GLAD Law’s senior director of Transgender and Queer Rights, shared with PBS last year that legislation like this changes the entire concept of HIPAA rights for trans Americans in ways that are invasive and unnecessary.
“It turns doctor-patient confidentiality into government surveillance,” Levi said, later emphasizing this will cause fewer people to seek out the care that they need. “It’s chilling.”
The Washington Blade reached out to the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee, which shared this statement from Executive Director Miriam Nemeth:
“HB 754/SB 676 continues the ugly legacy of Tennessee legislators’ attacks on the lives of transgender Tennesseans. Most Tennesseans, regardless of political views, oppose government databases tracking medical decisions made between patients and their doctors. The same should be true here. The state does not threaten to end the livelihood of doctors and fine them $150,000 for safeguarding the sensitive information of people with diabetes, depression, cancer, or other conditions. Trans people and intersex people deserve the same safety, privacy, and equal treatment under the law as everyone else.”
Iran
LGBTQ groups condemn Trump’s threat to destroy Iranian civilization
Ceasefire announced less than two hours before Tuesday deadline
The Council for Global Equality is among the groups that condemned President Donald Trump on Tuesday over his latest threats against Iran.
Trump in a Truth Social post said “a whole civilization will die tonight” if Tehran did not reach an agreement with the U.S. by 8 p.m. ET on Tuesday.
Iran is among the handful of countries in which consensual same-sex sexual relations remain punishable by death.
Israel and the U.S. on Feb. 28 launched airstrikes against Iran.
One of them killed Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Iran in response launched missiles and drones against Israel and other countries that include Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Azerbaijan, and Cyprus.
Gas prices in the U.S. and around the world continue to increase because the war has essentially closed the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic waterway that connects the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman through which roughly 20 percent of the world’s crude oil passes.
Trump less than 90 minutes before his deadline announced a two-week ceasefire with Iran that Pakistan helped broker.
“We the undersigned human rights, humanitarian, civil liberties, faith-based and environmental organizations, think tanks and experts are deeply alarmed by President Trump’s threat regarding Iran that ‘a whole civilization will die tonight’ if his demands are not met. Such language describes a grave atrocity if carried out,” reads the statement that the Council for Global Equality more than 200 other organizations and human rights experts signed. “A threat to wipe out ‘a whole civilization’ may amount to a threat of genocide. Genocide is a crime defined by the Genocide Convention and by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as committing one or more of several acts ‘with intent to destroy in whole or in part a national, racial or religious groups as such.'”
The statement states “the law is clear that civilians must not be targeted, and they must also be protected from indiscriminate or disproportionate attacks.”
“Strikes on civilian infrastructure — such as the recent attack on a bridge and the attacks President Trump is repeatedly threatening to carry out to destroy power plants — have devastating consequences for the civilian population and environment,” it reads.
“We urge all parties to respect international law,” adds the statement. “Those responsible for atrocities, including crimes against humanity and war crimes, can and must be held accountable.”
The Alliance for Diplomacy and Justice, Amnesty International USA, Human Rights Watch, the American Civil Liberties Union, the NAACP, MADRE, and the Robert and Ethel Kennedy Human Rights Center are among the other groups that signed the letter.
Report: Grenell wants Russian ambassadorship
Log Cabin Republicans to honor Scott Presler
Cuba bajo presión y sin respuestas
Tenn. lawmakers pass transgender “watch list” bill
LGBTQ groups condemn Trump’s threat to destroy Iranian civilization
How Pepper the courthouse dog helps victims of abuse
Iconic Eddie Izzard takes on 23 characters in ‘Hamlet’
Surviving spring cleaning
Risking it all for love during World War II
