Share This with A Conservative: Transgender Children Are At Risk

Share This With a Conservative: Transgender Children Are at Risk

For a short while, it looked like society had advanced far enough that it had left behind a terrible symptom of homophobia, one that's been seen after the infamous Upstairs Fire and the AIDS crisis that killed so many LGBT people.

Bodies for 48 of the 49 victims were claimed by family. Then, an article posted by Orlando Latino revealed there had been one outstanding case, and that the father of a gay man who died in the Orlando shooting rejected his son’s body.

The Florida news outlet did not release their names, as it did not want “to further victimize the deceased.” But it did identify the victim as Puerto Rican.

“The tale is part of the untold stories of the Latino victims of the Pulse nightclub massacre,” wrote Orlando Latino.

Fortunately, the Orange County Medical Examiner and Florida Emergency Mortuary Operations Response System were able to convince other family members living in Orlando to claim the body and arrange a funeral. And thankfully, there have been no other reports of similar rejections.

The case echoes a reality that was widely seen during the height of the AIDS crisis, in which countless numbers of young gay men died and family members did not claim the bodies of their so-called loved ones. This story was recently retold in Out magazine, in which caretaker Ruth Coker Burks revealed in an interview how she tended to and then buried hundreds of AIDS victims that their relatives feared to touch.

Some 32 people died in 1973 in an arson attack on the Upstairs Lounge, a gay bar in New Orleans. Filmmaker Robert L. Camina revisited the tragedy and was astounded that many of the victims’ bodies were never claimed. 

“I think a lingering issue that is rarely talked about is the mystery surrounding the unknown victims,” Camina toldThe Advocate in a feature on the tragedy. “These men went missing and no one claimed them? I can't wrap my head around it. It's unfathomable. I grieve for the unidentified victims of the fire. I don't believe they have found peace yet. I am shocked and sickened that the families never claimed them and that their bodies were dumped into a pauper's grave.”

Then, as now, stigma is the culprit. Orlando Latino points to systemic homophobia in Puerto Rico as a factor that may have led to the unfortunate case of the Pulse victim, including the island’s social conservatism and its prolonged judicial fight against marriage equality after the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision last June.

“The pain of being Puerto Rican and gay is real," the outlet wrote. "In the island’s macho culture (relative to the states), anti-gay bias is not subtle and has reached the highest levels of government.”

Regardless of its roots, homophobia can cause a massacre, as Pulse reminded us. But it can also destroy a family.

Why You Won't Be Seeing Josh Duggar on TLC Again Anytime Soon

Why You Won't Be Seeing Josh Duggar on TLC Again Anytime Soon

We’ve all been there. Your pet’s giving you those eyes, whimpering, nudging against your leg, and you just can’t resist the poor thing. But it can be hard to know just how much that bite will affect your dog or cat. While it’s always good to stick to their regular diet, there are some foods that are safe to feed them every once in once in awhile. 

DOGS

Baby carrots

These tiny treats can be fun for both you and your best friend to snack on. Bonus: they’re usually compact, super healthy, and easy to take on the go. 

Peanut or almond butter (either a small spoonful or a peanut butter bone)

Offer dogs just a small dab of the stuff either on a spoon, a peanut butter bone, or your finger. This is also a great way to sneak in any medicine. 

Sweet potato chews (they’re great for their teeth too!)

This vegetable was domesticated in Central America 5,000 years ago, and it’s still a healthy treat for your pup today. In parts of North America, they’re called yams as well, but these are actually rather distinct from a genuine yam, which belongs to the Discorea genus of plants. 

Apples

Feel free to bring your dog a sweet Red Delicious or a juicy Granny Smith. But be cautious: some dogs can be sensitive to fruits, so check their poop afterward to determine if you might want to provide those vitamins and minerals some other way. In general, apples are a safe bet.

Cheese (but not too much, of course) 

Another way to hide medicine if your dog catches onto the peanut butter. The calcium can also be good for their joints, and or keeping pregnant dogs healthy.

CATS

Fish

Yes, the stereotype is true. In particular, cats like tuna and salmon, but always make sure to cook it.

Eggs

Scrambled, sunny side up, poached, or over easy—no matter how they like it—eggs are a fine choice for cats. Share a nice, filling, and healthy breakfast together in the morning!

Whole Grains

Perhaps you’ve heard the hype about whole grains: in humans, they can reduce the risk of heart and kidney disease, Type 2 Diabetes, and obesity. The same can be said for cats, so make sure they get their grains.

Meat

Your dog isn’t the only one who would enjoy a T-bone. When you fry up the grill this summer, your cat doesn’t have to miss out on the barbecue fun. Like fish, just make sure any meat is well-cooked.

While the Republican National Convention is busy demonizing LGBT people in Cleveland, the Human Rights Campaign is trying to change the conversation.

The latest volley in that effort hit the web Wednesday, when the nation's largest LGBT advocacy group released a new educational video featuring the fathers of four transgender children — including Wayne Maines, whose daughter Nicole won a landmark legal victory in 2014 after a years-long battle to have her Maine school district recognize her as the girl she is.

In the video, dads of a diverse group of trans youth discuss their experiences in raising and supporting their children, and get candid about the unique challenges presented by parenting a transgender child.

“We are concerned about her safety as she gets older,” acknowledges J.R. Ford, who is raising a young daughter in Washington, D.C. “The only way to try to mitigate that is to continue to educate people, schools, administration, about, what are the issues when you are excluding a certain group of people.”

The men also share the fears they each have as their children grow up in a harshly anti-transgender climate, and the hurt that their families have endured from the backlash against transgender inclusion.

“Anytime there’s vitriol and bile that blows back from parts of society, or in the media, or in print or whatever, or even just peers, that takes a toll,” says Keith Thompson, who lives in Winterville, North Carolina with his transgender son, Skye. 

"Supportive parents can make all the difference in the lives and wellbeing of transgender children," said HRC communication director Jay Brown in a press release announcing the PSA. "In a world that so often hurls insults and condones bullying, these dads exemplify love of family and a steadfast commitment to the health and safety of the children they cherish."

Research has shown that having supportive parents has a profound effect on the emotional well-being of trans children, with one study showing supportive parents reduce the rates of depression and anxiety in trans youth to nearly the national average. On the flip-side, other research has shown that parental rejection can triple the risk of suicide in trans people.

The video is a follow up to one HRC released last year that featured the mothers of transgender children. That first video was viewed more than 7.5 million times, according to HRC.

Watch the moving video below. 

It’s back-to-school season. And a new video from The Next Family resonates with any parent whose felt that growing sense of paranoia about whether and how to make the inevitable disclaimer.

“I have a hundred different ways to politely tell people that we are a two-mom family,” says the site’s founder (and star of the video) Brandy Black. “I’m gearing up for another year of new faces and new ways to come out.”

Black and her wife have three kids, so that means a lot of new teachers, administrators and fellow parents to meet. They’ve been making fun videos for The Next Family for the last year.

“I am asked or it's assumed quite often that I have a husband or the kids have a dad,” said Black, whose wife, Susan Howard, dons a few costumes in the video to play the usual archetypical characters.

Black assures anxious parents, though, that she’s most often welcomed and hears “Sorry, I didn’t realize!” before venturing into another topic.

But it does make you a little crazy. Watch below:

It Does Make LGBT Parents a Little Crazy to Come Out All the Time

It Does Make LGBT Parents a Little Crazy to Come Out All the Time

Now in its ninth season, Bravo TV’s reality show Flipping Out has been following the adventures of champion house flipper Jeff Lewis, his trusty staff, and his posse of pets. This season, he and his partner, Gage, have embarked on their most ambitious endeavor ever; they are expecting a baby via surrogate. I’m not going to lie — when a recent episode saw them dealing with many of the financial issues they needed to figure out before their child’s birth, I said to myself, “OK, now they’re talking.” 

The gayby boom is logical given the wave of same-sex couples marrying since our historic win in the Supreme Court, showing that love is love. But the desire to build a family as a profound expression of that love also brings with it some very critical financial issues and consequences.

Here are a few things that same-sex couples expecting a baby should consider:

Financial Readjustment
According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, it’s estimated that it will cost a middle-income couple around $245,000 to raise an average child to age 18. However, like Jeff Lewis, who is a celebrity, many parents in the LGBT community are not “middle-income” or trying to raise “average” children. (Sad but true, many of gaybies I’ve had the pleasure of meeting have sported more luxury duds by the ripe old age of 18 months than I have owned in my entire life.) But the reality is that the more opportunities you want to offer your child and the higher the quality of life you want to provide, the deeper you’re going to be digging into your pocketbook. And whether you are fabulous, frugal, or a workable combination of the two, raising a child will mean a major readjustment to your cash flow and spending plans. Get ready, because it’s going to be a bumpy ride.

Life Insurance
I was pleased to see Jeff going through his paramedic exam to get life insurance because it brings up an important issue for all parents. No matter how careful or motivated you are, you cannot control everything in life. But what you can do is prepare for contingencies in the event that things go wrong.

In the case of Flipping Out, Jeff and Gage work together at the former’s business. Without Jeff, I’d bet much of the income would dry up rather quickly. Even if one partner is a stay-at-home, you should still get life insurance coverage on both spouses.   

Life insurance coverage on both spouses regardless of income is important. Many same-sex couples have ignored life insurance, assuming each partner can get a job and pay the bills solo if the worst were to happen. But it’s not a safe assumption, because as with so much of life, you just never know. What you do know is that your offspring can’t get jobs as children and are totally dependent on you for their care. A good rule of thumb is for each partner to have 12 to 15 times his income in life insurance coverage. You may need more or less depending on your situation and other assets, lifestyle, family, and other dependents. Often the difference in cost between getting enough coverage and putting your family at risk is just a few dollars per month.

Estate Planning 
Mortality issues are never fun to deal with, but hopefully a new family member on the way will be the kick in the butt to you get your estate planning documents in order. Now is the time for both parents to put together a will, trust, power of attorney, health care proxy, and medical directive. It all sounds scarier than it is, and once it’s completed, you’ll rest easier.

Marital Status
LGBT people have been basking in the glow of our hard-fought win for marriage equality across this country. Many more couples are getting married, but all the same, I know many who are sticking with the if-it-ain’t-broke-don’t-fix-it status quo and not wandering down the aisle. When it comes to kids and finances, it varies from family to family whether marriage is a good idea.

If you as a committed but unmarried gay couple are already the proud parents of a teenager. make sure to check how getting married may affect your child’s college financial aid (hint: It’s often not good). For those with younger children, I’d say do what’s right for you. Keep in mind that all of the financial planning stuff above — which is important for everyone — is even more imperative if you aren’t legally married so that everyone is, literally, on the same page.  

Financial House in Order
“We’re going to end up redoing this little girl’s room like a hundred times,” Jeff Lewis told People magazine in May. While decorating the nursery may be way more fun, getting your financial house in order before your new baby turns your life upside down is advice I pass along to any expectant parent.  Proactive moms or dads can set smart examples of how to be a financially savvy gay (link to previously approved article) for their progeny.

If you need a help cutting through the clutter, reach out to a savvy professional, whether an estate planning attorney, Certified Financial Planner, or both. These pros are in business of getting you on the road to financial independence to make your dreams — and the dreams of your growing family — a reality.

Until next time, be fiscally fabulous, and remember gay money matters!

DAVID RAE, CFP®, AIF®. is a Los Angeles-based retirement planner with Trilogy Financial Services. He has been helping friends of the LGBT community reach their financial goals for over a decade. He is a regular contributor to The Advocate and The Huffington Post as well as the author of the Financial Planner Los Angeles blog. Follow him on Facebook or via his website, www.davidraefp.com.

Securities and advisory services offered through National Planning Corporation, member FINRA/SIPC, a Registered Investment Adviser. Additional advisory services offered through Trilogy Capital, a Registered Investment Adviser. Trilogy Capital, Trilogy Financial, and NPC are separate and unrelated companies. The opinions voiced in this article are for general information only. They are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual and do not constitute an endorsement by NPC.  NPC does not render tax or legal advice.

Flipping Out: We’re Havin’ a Gayby

“That’s Donald Trump,” the little squeak of a voice said next to me as she drank her milk. While the duck-lipped Trump blistered and blustered loudly throughout the minute-plus morning show clip, I turned slowly to gaze down at my two-and-a-half-year-old daughter snuggled up against me.

Her adorably sweet face beamed gleefully. I smiled thinly back at her, fruitlessly trying to mask my utter terror.

Her innocent bright eyes beamed as she conveyed a sense of pleasure, a genuine satisfaction from being able to identify and name drop the orange-hued man-baby himself. I was dumbstruck.

Something about the way the Donald addressed his political zealots, from his mannerisms to his megaphone voice to the way he was surrounded by his usual sea of American flags, connected with her.  

My thoughts scrambled as I grasped for what to do, what to say.

How could I carefully and gently convey to my intelligent, impressable, very observant toddler that this laughably scary human being, this incompetent in chief she was so tickled by, was actually, in the wise and sage words of the poetess Samantha Bee, a human “trash can fire?”

“Donald Trump is poop-poop caca,” I brainlessly blurted before I could fully consider a more refined, nuanced, well-rounded response.

Not my finest parental hour, I realized as my husband rolled his eyes in amusement. “It’s the media’s fault,” I stammered lamely. 

Being a jaded adult who half watches/half tunes out the news, I had not realized just how much the media favored and featured Donald Trump over his political rival. Clearly, my more attuned daughter not only noticed but committed his ill-gotten name to memory.

Now, to be honest, I generally believe my child should be able to make up her own mind, determine her own likes and loves, and craft her own opinions. We encourage her to speak her mind and take a leadership role in her young life. I want her to grow into a confident, powerful woman. Even if (ugh) one day that means she becomes a (gasp) Republican.

But at two-and-a-half years old? She could not, must not, store anything of this man, much less his name, in her still-growing brain. As a parent, I will not, cannot allow his toxicity to seep into any part of her delicate neurons. 

From that ill-fated morning on I made a conscious effort to actively point out each and every time Hillary Clinton appeared on the TV screen.

Very quickly I learned that I would need to work overtime — Hillary was allotted half the time in her news segments to her comb-over rival. It might be a battle, but I was undaunted.

Thus began my effort, during our daily morning snuggle, to follow up each appearance by Hillary Clinton by not only verbalizing her name but by also delivering a cheerful smile as well as a very enthusiastic thumbs-up along with it.

There are numerous reasons my household actively opposes Donald Trump — his sexism, bigotry, religious intolerance, his dislike of babies, the fearmongering, the hateful rhetoric, the lack of experience, his ability to incite a mob, his vile efforts to encourage divisiveness in our nation, his asinine claims without any factual evidence to support them, a general lack of class and decorum — but beyond all these terrible attributes, because of his desire to overturn my equal marriage rights, he is not a presidential candidate we can ever support.

Now, I don’t believe Hillary Clinton doesn’t also have faults of her own, although her most grievous flaws appear to be mostly manufactured — her emails (she’s apologized and addressed this 900 million times, can we please just move on?), Benghazi (she was cleared! Can we just move on?), she (maybe? possibly? probably?) lies, she’s corrupt (heresay and conjecture). The negative propaganda machine against her is massive and constant. Yet ultimately for us, the fact that Clinton supports my family’s right to equality trumps Trump.

What it boils down to — in the case against Clinton — is that she is a politician. And a female one at that! She’s part of the system. A system most Americans are finally realizing is broken — unless you’re a rich white straight man, that is.

While Trump wields his pulpit like a battering ram of oppression and fear, touting his outsider status like some medal of honor, Clinton makes every effort to connect with her audience as an experienced expert. Someone who understands, as only a politician can, how to, in fact, effect change in our political system.

Clinton has many attributes I would love my daughter to develop: her drive, her fight, her willingness to learn and admit mistakes. I trust that she, unlike the Donald, won’t bring about the destruction of our nation.

A few weeks later A.D. (after the Donald incident), having quizzed my daughter on who that neatly coiffed blond woman in the smart pantsuit was and after having received a casual “It’s Hillary Clinton” reply, I felt I had made a difference. My daughter finally knew and could identify a woman who might be president. Parental pat on the back time!

Or as least so I thought. Until a day or so later, as we were out in our quiet Bay Area suburb, and we passed an American flag in a neighbor’s window that my daughter gleefully pointed at and cheerily declared, “It’s Donald Trump!”

My eyes widened in horror as I struggled to mask the full range of my disgust. Somehow my nation’s flag, which speaks to me as a proud American, the red, white, and blue that symbolized the freedom and liberty of my great nation, had been usurped! The flag had become linked with Donald Trump and his campaign of fear. It was the first time I felt somehow assaulted by my flag. 

Clearly, I thought, casual subliminal messages are real. Trump’s campaign knows this, hence the reason for the wall to wall Old Glories backing him up at each event.

It upsets me that Trump can wrest meaning away from a symbol of goodness and tie it to his awful message of gloom and doom. And it upsets me even more this message was received by my daughter.

I quickly went about changing the narrative of the flag by proclaiming “America!” in a joyful voice accompanied with my big eyes and a toothy smile.

Time to take a small break from the morning news, I decided.   

Now, each morning, we snuggle while she drinks her milk, and we chat and laugh and play while she watches her favorite cartoons. Because, unlike the living political cartoon character that is Donald Trump, these animated characters won’t one day run for president of the United States.  

BRIAN ANDERSEN is a writer and indie comic book creator who lives in San Francisco with his husband and gorgeous baby daughter. 

Shock and Horror: My Daughter Likes Trump

Rosie O'Donnell and Daughter Reunite: 'What A Difference A Year Makes'

Rosie O'Donnell and Daughter Reunite: 'What A Difference A Year Makes'

Christo and Theo Menelaou, a South African gay couple, just made medical history as both partners fathered triplets, making them the first same-ses couple in their nation and possibly the world to do so.

One man's sperm was used to fertilize one egg, the other's to fertilize a second egg, and both were carried by the same surrogate, the U.K.'s Sky News reports. One of the eggs split in two to produce twins, for a total of three children — a boy and two girls, the latter being identical twin.

A doctor recommended terminating two of the fetuses, but the couple decided to proceed. The children were born prematurely in July, each weighing just a little over a kilogram — two pounds. The babies stayed in the hospital for several weeks but now are home in Pretoria with their fathers, who have the assistance of nurses.

The men met their surrogate at a gathering of neighbors of Paralympian Oscar Pistorius after his murder trial, in which he was found guilty of killing his girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp. One of the witnesses for the prosecution introduced them to her, Sky News notes.

Christo Menelaou told Sky News he and his partner never expected to overcome obstacles to becoming parents. "It's very hard to be accepted for adoption, and we were told we would always come after heterosexual couples," he said. "And then we just never thought we'd ever find a person who would want to be surrogate to a gay couple."

Watch video footage of the couple below:

New York State may pride itself on being in the forefront of progress on many social issues — it was an early adopter of marriage equality, for instance — but it’s just now catching up to most other states in expanding the definition of parenthood.

The New York State Court of Appeals, the state’s highest court, ruled Tuesday that “a caretaker who is not related to, or the adoptive guardian of, a child could still be permitted to ask for custody and visitation rights,” The New York Times reports.

The ruling, which involved a same-sex couple, is important to all types of families and brings New York in line with most of the states in the nation, including some very conservative ones, which allow these “de facto parents,” as the Times puts it, to seek custody and visitation rights.

The judges ruled in a dispute between women identified in court papers only as Brooke S.B. and Elizabeth A. C.C. They entered into a relationship in 2006 but did not marry, as New York did not allow same-sex marriages at the time, and they could not afford to travel to a state that did. Elizabeth became pregnant through alternative insemination in 2008 and gave birth to a son the following year.

“Though Brooke had no legal or biological ties to the child, a boy, she maintained a close relationship with him for years, cutting his umbilical cord at birth, giving him her last name and raising him jointly with Elizabeth,” the Times reports. The couple split up in 2010, but Brooke continued to be a parent to him, according to Lambda Legal, which was part of her legal team in the case. In 2013, Elizabeth cut Brooke off from contact with the boy, leading Brooke to sue for custody and visitation.

A family court dismissed her case, and an appellate court agreed, both saying they had to follow the precedent set by a 1991 Court of Appeals ruling in a case known as Alison D., which held that “nonbiological, nonmarried, nonadoptive parents are legal strangers to the children they raised with a same-sex partner,” Susan Sommer, Lambda Legal’s national director of constitutional litigation, explained in a press release.

But in ruling on the new case, the Court of Appeals recognized that the understandings of marriage and family have evolved since 1991. “The definition of ‘parent’ established by this court 25 years ago in Alison D. has become unworkable when applied to increasingly varied familial relationships,” Judge Sheila Abdus-Salaam wrote for the court majority.

She further noted, “Alison D.’s foundational premise of heterosexual parenting and nonrecognition of same-sex couples is unsustainable,” especially in light of the marriage equality law New York State passed in 2011 and the U.S. Supreme Court ruling last year that brought equal marriage rights to all 50 states.

“Where a partner shows by clear and convincing evidence that the parties agreed to conceive a child and to raise the child together, the nonbiological, nonadoptive partner has standing to seek visitation and custody,” Abdus-Salaam added.

“We are extremely gratified that Brooke will finally have her day in court to establish that she is the parent of the son she cherishes,” Sommer said. We are eager for them to be reunited as soon as possible.”

The ruling also applies in a similar case, Estrellita A. v. Jennifer L.D., which involved similar issues, Lambda Legal notes. In this case a lesbian nonbiological parent who was ordered to pay child support argued that she should be able to petition for custody and visitation rights.

The decision puts New York on the same page as many other states, even conservative ones like Oklahoma and South Carolina, the Times notes. “Many courts have simply said that this person looks like a parent and you cannot just eliminate them from the child’s life,” Nancy D. Polikoff, a professor at the American University Washington College of Law, told the paper. “To have New York, where there are so many same-sex couples, be an outlier was a problem. But this catches New York up.”

Courtesy of Kathy Valentine.

I remember the crying the most. There were a sobbing 7-year-old, a teary-eyed middle schooler, and even a glum collection of adults in the elevator with me. This is not how my vacations usually end. 

I saw sullen teenagers, too, a few exchanging phone numbers in the lobby, others doing one last dip in the pool with friends, all with an air of resignation. I assumed that after this long week of celebration and frivolity, we were all just exhausted, sunburned, fulfilled but ready to go back to regular life. I had just spent the week snorkeling and body surfing and boogieing to the oldies with dance partners young and old (and the one I’m married to). I had at least two dozen piña coladas and enough food to feed a football team. We were all just drained, sun burned, and happy, but ready to go back to regular life. I assumed the kids were too.

It wasn’t until I spoke to a group of the older kids, who were bracing themselves for the trip back to the heartland, that I finally got it. What was a delightful vacation for me — an out queer person who lives near other queers and works full time with LGBT people — was, for some of these kids, their one respite from a world of homophobia and bullying. It was a break from living in states that are battling over bathroom access, among neighbors with campaign posters for “build a wall” politicians, going to schools where lockers are routinely emblazoned with slurs like “faggot,” even when the locker user isn’t gay. 

This week in Puerto Vallarta was, as one mom explained on Facebook later, a rare time when the kids were “free to make connections without explanation or otherness,” and a week when they felt “unconditional love in every smile, hug, and hello.”

Let me back up. My co-pilot and I have just spent a week in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico, at a Hard Rock resort with hundreds of LGBT families of at least a dozen different configurations. It’s a combination trip, officially the first Olivia and R Family LGBT Family & Friends Puerto Vallarta vacation. It combined elements of Olivia Travel (great entertainment and excursions, lots of powerful queer women) and R Family Vacations (lots of LGBT parents and kids and programs for them) and some elements of both (growing diversity, safety in numbers, and socially conscious programming). 

For me, it was the first chance to really see the kinds of families queer people have created over the generations. While Olivia trips are usually adults only, 80% of these vacationers had kids with them. Even the headliners, Alec Mapa and Elvira Kurt, had their kids and partners with them, as did cruise staffers including Tisha Floratos-Silano, Olivia’s vice president of travel and business operations, and her wife DJ Rockaway. 

I expected there would be a lot of lesbian or gay male couples with kids, but there were also tons of families that included both gay men and queer women and children that belonged to all of them. There were also big families supporting older LGBT people. There were families made through adoption, surrogacy, in vitro, and plain old doing it. I met two grown daughters who were there with their husbands and kids — nine of them, all straight — all in support of their lesbian mom’s 70th birthday. For someone who long ago thought that being gay meant you would forgo having kids, it was an eye-opening experience to see how many of us are parents and grandparents — and that we’re parenting differently too. 

In a post-marriage-equality world, parenting is the next venture for some. But this trip underscored how we’ve been creating family in our own way forever, really. For good chunks of the trip I got an “it takes a village” feel and didn’t know to whom many of the kids belonged. There were just groups of men and women, queer and straight, cis and trans, in a multitude of configurations, parenting.

Canadian comic Elvira Kurt let loose both about how
workaday patterns go out the window on vacation (“Ice cream for breakfast? Sure!”) and about how queer parents are reinventing the rules for raising kids. The parents in the audience laughed and nodded and clapped as Kurt mimicked her seemingly endless negotiation with her child, something, she admitted, none of our parents would have done. As much as we’re alike, LGBT parents are different too, and dare I say, it may make our kids better people.

On this trip, there were scores of teens and younger kids, many who looked and sounded more fluid in both orientation and gender expression than I see in my Southern California city. That meant that in addition to butchy soccer players of all genders, there were boys with pink hair doing cartwheels and girls with short hair going surfing. The Olivia–R Family team had their own teen program (many parents hardly saw their kids all week); judging from one pop in on it, it was quite clear that the teens and millennials, even those who were straight, were really smartly accepting and progressive.

“These trips have been life-changing and inspirational to me in so many ways,” says Zoe Chaney, a teen from Erie, Pa. She’s been on R Family Vacations trips each year for the past 10 years, and her lesbian grandmothers have traveled with Olivia on 23 trips. “The diversity and culture brought to these trips from all over have given us a chance to engage in all types of life in a short, fun, loving week. The love that comes with these trips is amazing. R Family is truly my family. I’m so thankful for my grandmothers that let my sisters and me experience this.”

 Chaney’s experience isn’t unique. Micah
McKinney, a teen from Atlanta who has traveled with R Family for seven years, told me, “These R Family trips really mean a lot to me. I look forward to them all year. I get to have a lot of freedom. I meet new friends and get to see all my old friends. We grew up together.”

Parents profoundly affect the culture’s progressiveness, the values of the next generation, and how we got here. The children of LGBTs, and their millennial friends, are leading us someplace that sounds inherently different, and fluid, and accepting, but they’re getting there in small bursts. 

My nephew, who just graduated, told me his high school in Washington state didn’t have
“popular kids” or any of the tropes of teen movies like mean jocks. If nobody is the outcast, I wonder, will this generation have nothing to prove? Will they grow up happy and content?

Well, maybe. Culture is more accepting than it was in the 1980s, when I came out, and certainly more so than the Stonewall generation when they were booted out. But it’s not all pure acceptance — or I wouldn’t have been surrounded by sad kids on the last day of vacation. 

“These trips are important for the kids with LGBT parents to experience a week with hundreds of families that look just like their own. Two mommies and two daddies everywhere!” says Gregg Kaminsky, a founding partner of R Family Vacations. Kaminsky began his gay-travel career in the ’90s at Atlantis Events. He says Charlie Rounds, one of the original partners at RSVP Vacations, “influenced me over the years to never forget that LGBT travel companies are much more than just a business — they change lives and change the way the world sees us.”

Since he and his lesbian bestie Kelli Carpenter (Rosie O’Donnell’s ex-wife) started R Family Vacations, they have spoken every day for the past 15 years. Now he and Carpenter have what he calls a “successful partnership with Olivia Travel and Judy Dlugacz, one of the most inspirational people I’ve ever met.”

Dlugacz, who founded Olivia more than 40 years ago and grew it into the largest lesbian travel company in the country, knows how to effect change both on the world and among the people in her trips. The fact that she’s opened up Olivia to LGBT families just might change more than her company’s bottom line. 

She says that she and Kaminsky and Carpenter “have the same values and work incredibly well together. The love and respect is all part of the spirit of these family trips. Together we were able to bring over 800 parents and kids, grandparents and friends, LGBT and straight families of all kinds together for the greatest experience for everyone.”

Dlugacz says the trip was “a dream come true” and one that will be repeated next year and perhaps for years to come. She had her niece and siblings aboard, an amazing reminder that even one of the most powerful lesbians in America has a family just like yours, one that needs to be in an unconditionally supportive LGBT-friendly environment. That it happened at a Hard Rock in Puerto Vallarta is just icing on the cake.

Surf, Sand, and Solidarity

It’s been nearly four years since we first became international news after the owners of Sweet Cakes by Melissa refused to sell us a wedding cake — and our family is still fighting for the respect, safety, and dignity most Americans take for granted. The threats and hate mail have lessened over time, but the strategic maneuvering by the right to use this case — and our family — as pawns in their cause to protect “religious freedom” continues to impact us every day. 

As anyone who has been following this case knows, it is about so much more than “just” a cake.

Aaron and Melissa Klein’s discrimination was particularly shocking to us because Rachel had previously worked with Melissa to arrange a wedding cake for her mother’s wedding. Melissa knew then that the bride’s daughter was in a same-sex relationship; in fact, when we got engaged a year later, it was Rachel’s mom who said, “I know just where we have to get the cake!” Plus our caterer and venue — both of whom welcomed our same-sex wedding — also recommended Sweet Cakes, so it seemed like a perfect match.

After enthusiastically discussing the cake with Melissa at a local wedding expo in January 2013, Rachel scheduled a cake-tasting appointment. When the day came, she and her mom went to Sweet Cakes by Melissa, excited to share the joy of planning another wedding cake together. But much to their surprise and Rachel’s humiliation, they were met at the bakery not by Melissa but by her husband, Aaron, who announced they would not serve us because we were a same-sex couple.

Why didn't Melissa share her concerns two weeks earlier at the wedding expo? Like many observers, we believe we were part of the right's larger plan to carve out exemptions in the law to discriminate.

Within days Aaron was on talk radio promoting his plight of  “religious freedom” and claiming religious discrimination. We’re not political people, never wanted this attention, and only filed a claim with Oregon's Bureau of Labor and Industries after six months of relentless media attention and harassment. 

Meanwhile, the Kleins quickly became media darlings of the right wing. Conservative groups flew them out to appear at events, Ted Cruz featured them in a campaign video, and their fundraising page raised over $600,000.

In contrast, we became the target of hateful, violent threats and a daily onslaught of negative calls and emails from around the world. Over the past three years, we have received several thousand Facebook messages calling us fat, evil, and dumb — some with threats so violent that we have sincerely feared for our lives, moved houses, and lived in hiding in hopes of protecting our family.

Part of the reason we decided to get married in the first place was to provide stability for our daughters. Before we became engaged, we became foster parents for two very high-needs girls after their mother, a close friend of ours, died suddenly. Lizzy, now 9, has cerebral palsy, autism, and a chromosomal disorder that causes developmental delays. Anastasia, now 7, has Asperger's and stopped speaking when her mother died.

While the case wound its way through the courts, we won full adoptive custody of Lizzy and Anastasia, and they are the light of our lives.

Lizzy needs round-the-clock care and Laurel stays home with her as a full-time caregiver. She had a spinal cord surgery in June, and we’re preparing her for surgery next month to correct a lesion on her brain. On top of our girls’ challenges, Laurel was diagnosed with cervical cancer last year and is also scheduled for surgery this fall.

These health challenges as well as the time and energy required by the case have made it hard to find full-time work. We often find ourselves struggling to put food on the table, and there have been months when we went hungry to make sure our girls were fed.

Though the Bureau of Labor and Industries ruled the Kleins violated the 2007 Oregon Equality Act, they are now appealing that ruling and essentially seeking an exemption from Oregon law. Now represented by C. Boyden Gray, a member of the Federalist Society and former White House counsel to George W. Bush, they filed their appeal was filed in August, and the case — and settlement — will likely be held up for years. The bureau's order for $135,000 in damages also is on hold.

We’ve kept silent for a long time. We stopped leaving the house, opening messages, and picking up the phone, and we even quit our jobs to try to keep our family safe from the outpouring of vitriolic attention that came from the case. Retreating didn’t make a difference, and as we remained secluded and silent the fury over the case just grew. The right wing’s backlash increased as the freedom to marry became the law of the land, fueling the “religious freedom” movement.

At every step of the way, we have felt guilt and humiliation at seeing our name used by the right to justify discrimination. Our family has been caught in the middle. The human cost to this battle is real to us because we are living it.

Despite the United State’s progress with LGBTQ equality, it's clear the so-called Religious Freedom Restoration Acts are not going away. We believe religious freedom is a fundamental aspect of America, but those beliefs don’t entitle anyone to discriminate, target, or hurt others.

In recent months we’ve decided to speak out for one primary reason: We don’t want any person or family to go what we’ve gone through. Every family deserves respect, dignity and a life free from discrimination and harassment.

RACHEL and LAUREL BOWMAN-CRYER live in Oregon with their two daughters. To help support Rachel, Laurel, Lizzy, and Anastasia with transportation, housing, lost wages, and other costs associated with the ongoing care of their children, visit their YouCaring page here.

The Women Who Challenged Sweet Cakes on the Cost of Their Battle

I saw a cheesy bumper sticker from an animal rescue organization that read, “Who Rescued Who?”. It was referring to the many blessings that animals bring into our life. Some may roll their eyes at such thick sentimentality, but being the proud papa of two rescue pets I totally get it.

Sammy is now sixteen years old-ish. When he was adopted outside a pet store in 2002, they said he was probably about one or two. Like most of my friends in Los Angeles, his actual age is a mystery. Sammy was my rock through the awkwardness of my twenties, through breakups, major moves and even personal tragedies. No matter what occurs in life he remains my constant friend, always available to give a little love when it’s needed the most.

My family has grown.  I’m in my thirties, have a husband and another rescue dog, Bodhi. We do everything together. I’m proud of the level of attention we put into taking care of one another. I like to think that everyone feels loved; that’s what family’s all about, right?

We acknowledge our pets’ contribution to the family by making sure they get plenty of attention, exercise and nutritious food. Like most things, the relationship we have with our pets is an exchange. They provide enthusiasm, comfort, and love, and in exchange we do our best to give them the ingredients to live a healthy active life.

As a chef, I’m particular when it comes to the food I serve. The quality of our meals have direct effects on our energy level, brain function and general health. I’m not going to eat something that makes me feel lethargic and heavy and I’m definitely not serving a bunch of junk to my family either. 

My pets eat the same kind of quality food that my husband and I enjoy. Sure, it comes in different packaging, but the labels are similar and so is the care put into its preparation. We look for natural ingredients and support trusted brands that put thought into the manufacturing process. Our pets take such good care of us, and we do our best to return the favor.

Any quality pet-owner will tell you that every pet has a personality of their own. They’re members of the family, and that’s why their health and well-being is a priority. It’s essential that they have balanced diets that help them feel their best. When our pets feel good, everyone wins.

When I think of how much Sammy and Bodhi had enriched my life, making sure they have good food in their bowl seems like the very least I can do.

Jesse Brune-Horan is a healthy and happy living expert living in Los Angeles with his husband Christopher, and his two dogs Sammy (Age 16), and Bodhi (Age 4). 

Why It’s Important That Our Pets Eat as Well as We Do

In a landmark decision August 30, New York State’s highest court reversed a 25-year-old precedent, which precluded people not related to a child by birth or adoption from seeking visitation with or custody of a child, irrespective of the bond that may have developed between them. But does the decision go far enough?

In the consolidated cases of Brooke S.B. vs. Elizabeth A. and Estrellita A. v. Jennifer L.D., unmarried women agreed that their respective partners would become pregnant through artificial insemination. In both cases, the nonconceiving parent shared in all of the major parental responsibilities, but when the relationships soured, the biological parents effectively terminated contact between the child and their former partners on the basis that they did not fall within the purview of a “parent” under the law. Ultimately, in Judge Sheila Abdus-Salaam’s 27-page decision, the Court of Appeals held that where a petitioner can prove by “clear and convincing evidence” that an agreement exists with the biological parent to conceive and raise the child, the nonbiological, nonadoptive parent may assert standing to seek custody of and visitation with the child.

However, the court specifically left open the issue of whether a nonbiological, nonadoptive partner may seek custody of a child in a case where the biological or adoptive parent consented to the creation of a parent-like relationship but did so after conception. That, the court said, is a “matter left for another day.”

So why didn’t the Court of Appeals take an even broader approach to parenthood? Why not take a more functional view, which focuses more on the post-birth relationship between putative parent and child and less on the existence of a preconception agreement? In order to answer this question, we need to understand the competing interests at play in the line of cases, beginning with the court’s 1991 decision in Alison D. v. Virginia M, which adopted the restrictive approach to parenthood in the first place.

In Alison D. and the cases that followed, the court was presented with similar fact patterns — two unmarried women agreed that one would become artificially inseminated, they would both raise the child, and when the relationship deteriorated, the biological mother denied the nonbiological mother access to the child. The court, careful not to overstep its bounds, declined to expand the definition of “parent” because the judges felt it was a job more suitable for the legislature. After all, it was the legislature that expressly gave siblings and grandparents standing to seek custody and visitation, and if lawmakers thought additional, non–biologically related third parties should be able to assert the same claim, then surely they would have been expressly included in the statute.

When the issue arose again 19 years later in Debra H. v. Janice R., the court lauded the bright-line rule that parentage derives from biology or adoption, because it “promotes certainty in the wake of domestic breakups.” To replace that rule with a nonobjective test to determine “functional” or “de facto parentage” would simply overburden the New York courts. In addition to the “best interest” determination, which the court must conduct in all custody cases to decide whether it is in the best interest of the child to award custody to a parent, the court would have to first conduct a threshold “equitable estoppel” hearing, to determine whether an individual’s level of involvement tipped the scale in favor of parentage. This preliminary hearing, the court said, would be “contentious, costly, and lengthy.”

When considering the Court of Appeals’ concerns regarding judicial activism and judicial economy, it is not difficult to see why the concept of “parenthood” was not expanded to include nonbiological or nonadoptive partners who consented to a parent-like relationship after the child’s conception. However, it must be noted that courts in other jurisdictions have adopted functional tests rhat consider a variety of factors relating to the post-birth relationship between the putative parent and the child in the contexts of custody and visitation. For example, in Wisconsin a nonbiological, nonadoptive individual may seek custody of a child where (1) the biological or adoptive parent consented to and fostered the parent-like relationship; (2) the individual and child reside in the same household; (3) the nonbiological, nonadoptive party assumed obligations of parenthood without expectation of financial compensation; and (4) the relationship between the nonbiological, nonadoptive party existed for a sufficient time to develop a relationship parental in nature.

Understandably, the court did not rule on the issue of “de facto parentage” in the absence of a pre-conception agreement because a conception agreement was present in both Brooke S.B. and Estrellita A. However, by refusing to adopt a functional approach to parentage, which better suits the growing number of nontraditional families across the state, it is hard to imagine how the courts can achieve their overarching goal — to determine a custodial arrangement that suits the best interests of a child.

Because I am a transgender woman, my tenuous value in the eyes of society is never as painfully obvious to me as when my motherhood is questioned. A transgender mother? “Where is the real mother?” some ask; “But how did you have your children?” others inquire. Whenever I enter the playground with my children, I can see the eyes wandering around me, behind me, in search of that elusive body — the children’s “true” mother, the one who must have given birth to them. I am forever met with doubtful stares that mark me as an imposter, even as the children call out to me with the only name they know me by, Mother. Especially then.

In these moments I am reminded how easily our worth as individuals, along with the bonds we form with our loved ones, can wither before the relentless gaze of society. That is the prison not only for transgender women and mothers but, I increasingly realize, for all women and mothers.  We inhabit a world in which we are seen as passive receptacles, defined by an oppressive normative gaze sharpened through millennia of misogynistic formulations long accepted as inarguable facts of nature. In this gaze, personhood is the realm of men, while the value of women resides in their physical bodies

Transgender women occupy the fault line of this gender gulag. Our womanhood resides solely in who we are as persons, not in the set of physical attributes conventionally expected of our gender. Therefore, granting transgender women their womanhood is tantamount to granting women personhood. It means affirming that women are not walking and talking composites of ovaries, uteruses, and vaginas, but something more intangible and cerebral.

This, I believe, explains the ferocity of society’s attempt to invalidate transgender womanhood. To acknowledge our existence as women is to disentangle the woman-body complex on which patriarchy is built. It challenges the notion that men and masculinity have sole proprietorship of personhood, relegating women and the feminine to the carceral condition of being nothing but bodies.

My transgender motherhood is silently denied, as in the case of those demeaning glances at the playground, when it is not being vocally attacked in the media as inauthentic, unreal, fraudulent. I do not have the parts in flesh that are required of me in the patriarchal constructs to be accepted as mother. The uterus is prized more in this regime than the countless years of attentive engagement with babies that motherhood entails. Breast milk is hailed as liquid gold, while the hours of rocking and settling a newborn is mere detail.

The societal gaze is essentially collective and normalized blindness.

Yet there exist facts that cannot be banished even by this tyrannical gaze. Though there is no womb of flesh in my loins, there was a womb in my heart that carried all three of my children; my soul was pregnant with them though my body could not be. It is of little relevance to those who deem me unfit or incapable of motherhood that my young children know nothing of eggs and sperm, uteruses and labor; they know about cuddles and stories, diapers and creams, and my bottomless love.

What my children care about is the temporal strength of our bond, the songs I sing to them, and the warmth of my body when they wake up at night after a bad dream and crawl into bed with me. They neither know nor care what is in between my legs, let alone what lies beneath my pubic bone or in my chromosomes. They perceive, in a way society somehow cannot, that I love them as only a mother can. The pain my transgender status can inflict on them comes primarily from those who deny that simple fact. Those who invalidate me also harm my children, telling them that the central truth of their lives is actually a lie.

Tragically, transgender women with children often eschew the term “mother,” resigning themselves to society’s reduction of motherhood to reproductive organs. Or else they accept some hyphenated version of the term, placing themselves secondary to the person who carried and birthed their children, regardless of the living truth of their families. For many, though perhaps not all, I suspect that abjuring the language of motherhood is done reluctantly, as a result of social coercion. How dare they call themselves mothers when they possess neither ovaries nor birth canal?

I am a mother, and those with presuppositions to the contrary must lose them. I am the real, entire, and, in my case, only mother of my children. My motherhood is without hyphens, qualifications, or apologies, the injudicious prejudices of a blinkered society be damned. Such prejudices wound not only families with transgender mothers or other LGBTQ mothers. Even cisgender, heterosexual mothers who adopt, for example, face similar styles of questioning and are not considered their children’s “real” mothers. Alas, our supposedly advanced civilization continues to foreground the most ancient rites of flesh and blood.

In our social matrix there are male subjects and female objects, and this informs our received notions of motherhood and fatherhood. Unlike mothers, fathers are not merely corporeal entities. One consequence of this is that nonbiological fathers are more readily accepted by society as fathers in a way that nonbiological mothers are never accepted as mothers. A mother is fundamentally deemed to be the woman who birthed a child, not the woman who lives the life of a mother with the child.

Reductively, man is person and woman is body. This is the predicament of all womanhood, made visible in larger relief under the magnifying glass of transgender womanhood. The man does and the woman is done, the man fucks and the woman is fucked. Women have a shelf life both as mothers and as lovers. Our worth is tied to our bodies, our ability to become pregnant and be pleasing objects with virginal orifices for the male member to penetrate and to possess. If our bodies are determined to be inadequate by the arduous metrics imposed on them, we are regarded as worthless sacks of flesh, not women and certainly not mothers.

I am not a perfect mother; no woman is. One day, my children may fault me for my mothering style and may conclude that I am a bad mother. But no one, not even they, can revoke my motherhood, just as no one can revoke my womanhood. This is a fact with which the puzzled onlookers at the playground and everywhere else will have to come to terms.

Ivanka Trump is having a bad week.

The 34-year-old sat down with Cosmopolitan to discuss her father’s maternity leave plan, one the younger Trump has pushed for throughout Donald Trump’s presidential run. That interview, published on Wednesday, was cut short, however, after Trump avoided uncomfortable questions about how the plan would affect same-sex parents.

On Tuesday, the billionaire businessman unveiled a policy that would stipulate six weeks of paid-time off for recent mothers and lower the cost of childcare. Currently, just three states — Rhode Island, New Jersey, and California — offer paid family and medical leave. 

That plan has been the brainchild of Ivanka Trump, who promised to make “quality childcare affordable and accessible for all” during a July speech at the Republican National Convention. During her address, Trump further boasted that her CEO father has built a workplace founded on gender equality, where women “are paid equally for the work that we do.”

“When a woman becomes a mother she is supported, not shut out,” she said.

Cosmo’s Prachi Gupta, though, questioned her father’s corporate policies. During a 2004 interview with NBC, the elder Trump referred to pregnant women as “inconvenient” in the workplace. Gupta called his maternity leave plan “surprising.”

Trump bristled at the characterization, saying she didn’t “know that he said those comments.”

Things got more awkward when the two discussed how the maternity leave plan would impact gay dads, who aren’t overtly covered by the policy. If two men had a child, would one of them be allowed to take time off?

Trump avoided answering.

"This is a giant leap from where we are today, which is sadly, nothing,” she said. “Both sides of the aisle have been unable to agree on this issue, so I think this takes huge advancement and obviously, for same-sex couples as well, there's tremendous benefit here to enabling the mother to recover after childbirth. It's critical for the health of the mother. It's critical for bonding with the child, and that was a top focus of this plan.”

Gupta pressed further. “So I just want to be clear that, for same-sex adoption, where the two parents are both men, they would not be receiving special leave for that because they don't need to recover or anything?” the interviewer asked.

"Well, those are your words, not mine,” Trump responded. “Those are your words. The plan, right now, is focusing on mothers, whether they be in same-sex marriages or not.”

In a separate interview with Fox News’ Megyn Kelly, Trump further attempted to talk up her father’s maternity leave plan by contrasting his position with that of Hillary Clinton, his Democratic opponent. Trump claimed that the former Secretary of State has no agenda in place for mothers in the workplace.

“There’s no policy on Hillary Clinton’s website pertaining to any of these issues, child care, elder care, or maternity leave or paternity leave, for that matter,” she said.

That’s untrue. On Clinton’s campaign website, the presidential nominee spells out her own maternity and medical leave policies in a three-page document. Her plan promises up to 12 weeks of paid time off, twice what the Trump plan offers.

As Clinton argued during a May speech, she believes it’s important that all types of parents be protected under paid leave laws.

“Too many moms have to go back to work just days after their babies are born,” Clinton said. “And too many dads and parents of adopted children don’t get any paid leave at all. Neither do sons and daughters struggling to take care of their aging parents. None of this is fair to families.”

The more technology improves, the more options we have to take care of our pets. Finding a reliable dog walker or pet sitter is as easy as finding someone to date on Tinder; the only difference is that your pet sitter comes with references and ratings. 

If I had the option to stay at home and chill with my pets all day while still making a living, I would hop on the opportunity. However, both my husband and I work full-time, and it’s not uncommon for me to travel as part of my work. It’s essential that we have a plan in place when I’m away or we both have extra busy work weeks.

Remember Hillary Clinton’s book It Takes a Village? It can feel like the same concept applies to quality pet care these days. I’m fortunate because my mother and sister have both moved within 30 minutes to my home, so when we’re in a pinch Grandma will come over and walk the boys and spend time with them. We don’t like to leave our pets alone for more than three or four hours, especially because our older dog needs to use the bathroom more often than in the past.

I know everyone doesn’t have the luxury of close-by relatives, but it’s important that pet owners have a support system in place, especially if your pets benefit from interacting with others. There are so many affordable solutions in pet care that there’s no excuse to not take advantage of local businesses that serve people like you. If you’re on a budget, do your research! When I was on the television show Home Made Simple, I learned how to find incredible bargains for home items. This has poured over into all areas of my life. I’m a self-proclaimed bargain hunter!

Take the time to research local pet care specialists. There’s everything from pet sitting to personal training for dogs available out there. Then compare the pricing. Find something that works for your budget and feels like it’s a level of quality you trust. If possible, get references from people you trust. If your friend has a pet sitter they really love — go there! Nothing is better than solid referrals from friends you trust.

There are also wonderful products that will work for you while you’re away. Pet food dispensers that work on timers, scentless grass patches that you can keep in your apartment, and long-lasting snacks are a few examples of tools you can utilize when you need to step away for a few hours.

Neglecting your pet is not an option. Being a responsible pet owner is a commitment and an investment. If caring for a pet is a priority in your life, you must be willing to do the work to ensure that their needs are met.

I know it can get crazy out there — I’m not denying that. However, it’s important to ask yourself this question before committing to pet ownership: “Do I have enough time to meet all my needs?” If the answer is no, then it’s probably not the right time to welcome a critter into your home. Our pets can be an endless channel of love and affection, but we have to remember they’re living creatures with certain needs and it’s our job to make sure those needs are met.

Jesse Brune-Horan is a healthy and happy living expert living in Los Angeles with his husband, Christopher, and his two dogs, Sammy (age 16) and Bodhi (age 4). 

How to Manage a Busy Life and Still Be a Good Pet Owner