# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
LGBTQ+ Resources | University of Illinois Springfield

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Suggested Links Bi/Trans Resources BiNet USANational Center for Transgender Equality (NCTE) LGBTQ Youth GLSENNational Youth Advocacy Coalition (NYAC)Youth ResourceWe Are the Youth LGBT Families COLAGEFamily Equality CouncilFreedom to MarryGay and Lesbian Medical Association (GLMA)Marriage Equality U…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
All anybody is trying to do is live their lives and be given the service, be treated with respect as anyone else is treated. All we want is equality.
-Petra E., Biloxi, MS, October 4, 2017

Over the past decade, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people have made significant legal and political gains in the United States, including the freedom to marry. Despite this progress, federal law does not expressly prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in fields like employment, housing, and access to services, and fewer than half of the states offer explicit protections for LGBT people at the state level. Without these protections, LGBT people across the United States lack clear recourse and redress when they are fired, evicted, or refused service because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.

Against this backdrop of legal vulnerability, lawmakers who oppose marriage for same-sex couples and recent moves to advance transgender equality have led an anti-LGBT charge, pushing for, and often succeeding in getting, new laws that carve out religious exemptions for individuals who claim that compliance with particular laws interferes with their religious or moral beliefs. While LGBT equality is not the only area where exemptions have been debated-particularly as lawmakers have sought to substantially broaden exemptions related to sexual and reproductive healthcare-this report specifically examines a worrying wave of exemptions being introduced to blunt the recognition of LGBT rights across the United States.

The freedom of religion, as well as nondiscrimination, is a significant rights issue, and it is important that governments do not unnecessarily burden the exercise of religious conscience. This is especially important to minority religious groups, whose practices are all too easily trampled on by laws and policies enacted by majorities. But when exemptions to laws to accommodate religious beliefs or practices impinge on the rights of others or core societal values like nondiscrimination, lawmakers should proceed with caution.

Proponents of these laws argue that they properly balance religious freedom with the rights of LGBT individuals. In fact, with few exceptions, the laws as drafted create blanket exemptions for religious believers to discriminate with no consideration of or even mechanism for consideration of the harms and burdens on others. Because of their narrow focus on the objector, the laws provide little protection for the rights, well-being, or dignity of those who are turned away.

Statements made by legislative supporters of the laws, and in some cases the content of the laws themselves, moreover, make clear that they aim to push back against recent gains toward LGBT equality and to dilute the rights of LGBT people to secure protection from invidious discrimination.

They send a signal that the state governments enacting them accept and even embrace the dangerous and harmful notion that discrimination against LGBT people is a legitimate demand of both conscience and religion. Particularly in states that lack any underlying laws prohibiting discrimination against LGBT people, many of the laws are not "exemptions" so much as a license to discriminate.

In recent years and mostly since 2015, when the US Supreme Court ruled in favor of marriage equality, numerous states have considered and at least eight US states have enacted new laws that permit people to infringe on the rights of LGBT individuals and their families to the extent they believe that discriminating against them is necessary to uphold their own religious or moral beliefs. In 2018, lawmakers in at least six other states will consider similar legislation.

These laws and bills vary in scope. As has been widely publicized, some would permit people to refuse to participate in same-sex wedding ceremonies or to provide goods and services related to such weddings. Others, less widely publicized, would permit child welfare agencies, physical and mental health providers, businesses that serve the public, and other actors to refuse service to LGBT people and other groups. Such legislation immediately endangers LGBT rights. By allowing people to elevate their prejudices above fairness and equality, it also threatens the broader principle that people should not be refused goods and services solely because of who they are.

Together, the failure of most states to enact nondiscrimination protections and the growing number of religious exemption laws leave many LGBT people with little recourse when they encounter discrimination. While these exemptions are almost always couched in the language of religious freedom or religious liberty, they directly and indirectly harm LGBT people in a variety of ways.

Some laws enable and embolden businesses and service providers to refuse to serve LGBT people, compelling LGBT people to invest additional time, money, and energy to find willing providers; others simply give up on obtaining the goods or services they need. More insidiously, they give LGBT people reason to expect discrimination before it even occurs, and to take extra precautions or avoid scenarios where they might face hostility out of self-preservation.

Such laws also threaten the basic dignity of LGBT people, sending a clear message that their rights and well-being are not valued and are contingent on the goodwill of others. Our interviewees explained that, by enacting religious exemptions to blunt the advancement of LGBT equality, lawmakers sent a powerful signal that they were unequal or unvalued in their community.

Brandiilyne Mangum-Dear, a lesbian pastor in Mississippi, described that harm in these words: "We're not being melodramatic. You're being treated with disrespect, as a second-class citizen-not even a citizen, an outsider. And after a while, that begins to tear a person down, to hurt them emotionally and spiritually. Rejection is hard for everyone, and we get it over and over."

This report documents how religiously motivated discrimination against LGBT people can inflict real harm and why state endorsement of this discrimination is dangerous. From August 2017 to January 2018, researchers interviewed 112 LGBT people, service providers, and advocates, primarily in states that have enacted religious exemptions in recent years, about the discrimination that LGBT people have faced because of an absence of comprehensive nondiscrimination legislation and the passage of legislation that provides for exemptions based on religious or moral beliefs.

The results of this research indicate that the laws already enacted in eight states and the bills still under consideration in many more do not strike a proper balance between the freedom of religion and the equal rights of LGBT people under the law. And in fact, few if any of these laws even represent a serious attempt to do that. Lawmakers at the federal, state, and local level should work to ensure that LGBT people are protected from discrimination in employment, education, housing, healthcare, adoption and foster care, and public accommodations, and should repeal religious exemption laws that give government support to those who would discriminate based on their religious or moral beliefs.

Human Rights Watch conducted the research for this report between August 2017 and January 2018. To identify interviewees, researchers conducted outreach through national and state LGBT groups, legal advocates, and service providers who circulated information about the project to their networks. The outreach focused on eight states where statewide exemptions affecting LGBT people had been legislatively enacted at the time the research began: Alabama, Michigan, Mississippi, North Dakota, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia. Researchers conducted a total of 112 interviews, including 30 individuals who were affected by discrimination and 82 advocates and providers working with affected individuals.

Interviews were primarily conducted by telephone due to the geographic dispersion of the interviewees for the project. Interviews were conducted in person in Mississippi in November 2017, Tennessee in December 2017, and Michigan, Mississippi, and Tennessee in January 2018. No compensation was paid to interviewees. Researchers obtained oral informed consent from interviewees, and notified interviewees why Human Rights Watch was conducting the research and how it would use their accounts, that they did not need to answer any questions, and that they could stop the interview at any time. Interviewees were given the option of using pseudonyms in published materials for the project; where pseudonyms are used in this report, that is reflected in the footnote citation.

On June 26, 2015, the US Supreme Court issued its decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, which invalidated bans on marriage for same-sex couples across the United States. As marriage equality became a reality, first in individual states and then nationally, lawmakers proposed allowing those with religious or moral objections to refuse or decline to provide a range of goods and services to same-sex couples.

When they are carefully designed, religious exemptions can play a valuable role in safeguarding the freedom of religious exercise and belief. The laws that states have introduced in response to recent advances towards LGBT equality, however, tend to tip the scales much too far in one direction, often with complete disregard for the very real harm they are likely to inflict. As this report describes, they are born of hostility to a marginalized group, and display little regard for the rights of those who are turned away. These laws undermine the central principle of nondiscrimination protections, deliberately embracing rather than pushing back against the denial of goods and services to individuals simply because of their identity or the services they need. In short, they give license to discriminate.

Addressing Discrimination on the Basis of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity

Nonetheless, people in most US states lack these protections, as neither Congress nor most state legislatures have expressly prohibited discrimination against LGBT people. At the beginning of 2018, only 19 states and the District of Columbia had explicitly prohibited discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in employment, housing, and public accommodations. In three other states, narrower protections exist. New Hampshire and Wisconsin prohibit discrimination in employment, housing, and publications based on sexual orientation, but do not prohibit discrimination based on gender identity. Utah prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in employment and housing, but not public accommodations.

With these laws, states have recognized that there is an urgent need to combat discrimination that denies people access to goods and services because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. The enactment of religious exemption laws bucks this trend, signaling a broad acceptance and even an encouragement of service providers who would discriminate against LGBT individuals.

Advances and Struggles in LGBT Equality

As public attitudes across the United States have become more favorable toward LGBT equality in recent years, LGBT people have won significant gains. The Supreme Court's decision in Obergefell, which recognized that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry, gave those who choose to marry and their families access to a range of economic and legal protections. The Obama Administration took steps to address discrimination against LGBT people, and particularly transgender people, in regulations around healthcare, housing, and education.

Religious Exemptions as a Backlash against LGBT Equality in the United States

In recent years-and particularly as marriage equality gained ground in state and federal courts-proponents of exemptions have drafted bills and filed lawsuits that would exempt people who say that their religious or moral convictions are irreconcilably at odds with what generally applicable anti-discrimination laws require of them in some circumstances. In many instances, lawmakers have proposed laws to prevent the government from denying funding, licenses, contracts, and other forms of support to service providers who discriminate based on religious or moral beliefs.

Religious Exemption Laws

Recent license-to-discriminate laws break from that tradition. They do not create a nondiscrimination rule; instead, they only create the exemption allowing discrimination to flourish. And rather than strike any kind of careful balance between assertions of religious liberty and LGBT equality or other rights and values that could be at stake, many grant a nearly unfettered license to discriminate while brushing aside the rights and freedoms of others. On both fronts, most of these laws bear no resemblance to religious exemptions that are motivated by a concern for human rights and are narrowly drawn to respect the rights of all involved.

A License to Discriminate Under State Law

The religious exemptions that have been considered or enacted by state legislatures take different forms. Some are comprehensive, providing blanket protection for entities that do not wish to provide various services to LGBT people because of their religious or moral beliefs. Others are more narrowly circumscribed, focusing particularly on adoption and foster care services and physical and mental healthcare services.

While these laws are typically characterized as exemptions, the term "exemption" is misleading. Few of the states that have enacted these laws have protections in place that prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. In most cases, states are enacting "exceptions" allowing providers to discriminate based on religion without first prohibiting anti-LGBT discrimination more generally. In this context, these laws function first and foremost as a license to discriminate, signaling that discrimination against LGBT people is acceptable in the state.

Comprehensive Exemption Laws

The most sweeping exemption law enacted to date is Mississippi's HB 1523, enacted in the first legislative session after the Supreme Court's ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges. The law specifies three protected "religious beliefs or moral convictions": "(a) [m]arriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman; (b) [s]exual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage; and (c) [m]ale (man) or female (woman) refer to an individual's immutable biological sex as objectively determined by anatomy and genetics at time of birth." It prevents the government from taking "any discriminatory action" against religious organizations or persons that discriminate in a variety of ways against LGBT individuals (and in some cases against unmarried heterosexual individuals) "consistent with a sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction." The bill explicitly protects an extraordinary range of discriminatory conduct, in spheres that range from the conduct of wedding ceremonies and the provision of wedding-related services to the hiring and firing of employees, the rental or sale of housing, child placement services, psychological counseling, fertility or transition-related healthcare, and the restriction of access to shared facilities. "Discriminatory action" is defined very broadly so as to preclude most of the avenues the government might use to sanction or withhold government support for such an organization or individual. The sponsor of the bill expressly cited the Supreme Court's decision in Obergefell and the desire to protect those who believe marriage is between one man and one woman as the motivation for the law.

Adoption and Foster Care Services

In 2003, North Dakota enacted a law stating that "[a] child-placing agency is not required to perform, assist, counsel, recommend, facilitate, refer, or participate in a placement that violates the agency's written religious or moral convictions or policies." Under the law, the state's department of human services may not deny a child-placing agency a license, grant, or contract based on such an objection.

In 2012, Virginia enacted a law establishing that "no private child-placing agency shall be required to perform, assist, counsel, recommend, consent to, refer, or participate in any placement of a child for foster care or adoption when the proposed placement would violate the agency's written religious or moral convictions or policies." The law prevents the state from sanctioning or withholding licensing or support-including contractual relationships-from agencies that refuse to participate in a "placement that violates the agency's written religious or moral convictions or policies." At the time of its passage, Senator Adam Ebbin-who opposed the law-told press that his colleagues intended the bill to shield agencies from placing children with same-sex couples. On the day a Senate subcommittee approved the religious exemption, it rejected Ebbin's bill that would have prohibited discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in adoption and foster care placement.

In 2015, Michigan enacted a law stating that "a child placing agency shall not be required to provide any services if those services conflict with, or provide any services under circumstances that conflict with, the child placing agency's sincerely held religious beliefs contained in a written policy, statement of faith, or other document adhered to by the child placing agency." The law prohibits the state or local governments from taking "adverse action" against a child placing agency because of its refusal to provide services on the basis of those religious beliefs. In addition to requiring that the child placing agency set out its beliefs in writing, the law requires agencies that decline to provide services to refer the applicant to another agency or a list of agencies maintained by the state. As the bill was under consideration, Representative Jeff Irwin, who opposed the bill, stated that "[t]he whole goal of this package is to allow agencies to discriminate against same-sex couples." Representatives of the Michigan Catholic Conference and Michigan Family Forum, who supported the bill, justified it as a preemptive move to prevent adoption and foster-care agencies from having to comply with nondiscrimination laws requiring them to serve same-sex couples.

In 2017, South Dakota enacted a law barring the state from discriminating or taking adverse action against a child placement agency because it declines "to provide any service that conflicts with, or provide any service under circumstances that conflict with a sincerely-held religious belief or moral conviction of the child-placement agency." The committee debate on the bill focused primarily on religious objections to placing children with same-sex couples. Senator Alan Solano, who co-sponsored the bill, cited the Obergefell decision and the decision by Catholic Charities to withdraw from adoption and foster care services in Massachusetts, Illinois, California, and Washington, D.C. rather than comply with nondiscrimination laws that protect same-sex couples as the motivation for the law. Solano co-wrote the bill with Catholic Social Services, an agency which only places children with heterosexual couples. Governor Dennis Daugaard signed the bill into law, voicing a hope that it would prevent individuals in a protected class from suing child welfare agencies if they were denied placement.

In 2017, Alabama enacted a law that bars the state from discriminating or taking adverse action against a child placing agency "on the basis that the child placing agency declines to make, provide, facilitate, or refer for a placement in a manner that conflicts with, or under circumstances that conflict with, the sincerely held religious beliefs of the child placing agency." As the bill was debated, Representative Rich Wingo, who sponsored the bill, told press it was necessary to ensure that child welfare agencies are not compelled to place children with same-sex parents. Representative Patricia Todd, who opposed the bill, remarked that "[t]his bill obviously came about because same-sex marriage is approved."

In 2017, Texas enacted a law that broadly protects religious objections in child welfare services, defined to include not only child placement services but also services for abused or neglected children, counseling for children or parents, and family preservation and support services. It prevents the state from discriminating or taking adverse action against providers who decline to "provide, facilitate, or refer a person for child welfare services that conflict with, or under circumstances that conflict with, the provider's sincerely held religious beliefs" or provides the children in their care with a religious education. If a provider declines to provide a service because of religious objections, the government is supposed to ensure that an alternative provider is available in that area or a nearby area. The provider is supposed to refer the applicant to another service or the list of providers on the state's website. The law specifies that child welfare agencies may not deny placements based on race, ethnicity, or national origin; Representative Joe Moody introduced an amendment to include sex, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability as protected grounds, but the legislature rejected it.

Mental and Physical Health Care

In 2016, Tennessee enacted a law that states that "[n]o counselor or therapist providing counseling or therapy services shall be required to counsel or serve a client as to goals, outcomes, or behaviors that conflict with a sincerely held religious belief of the counselor or therapist." The law states that providers who refuse services should coordinate a referral to another provider who will see the client. According to the bill's sponsor, Senator Jack Johnson, the impetus for the bill was a change in the American Counseling Association's Code of Ethics which states that counselors should "refrain from referring prospective and current clients based solely on the counselor's personally held values, attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors." In committee, Senator Jeff Yarbro noted that the public debate on the bill "has been very much focused on issues of same-sex marriage," and Senator Rusty Crowe noted that although same-sex couples can now marry, the bill could exempt religious objectors from having to counsel them. Members of the Tennessee Association of Marriage and Family Therapists testified against the bill, stating that it was unnecessary in light of established referral mechanisms within the profession and would open the door to discrimination.

The framing and scope of these exemption laws differ in many respects, but are alike in several fundamental ways. First, they are motivated to a large degree by hostility to recent advances in LGBT equality; on their face they invoke only a concern for religious liberty but the public debate around and legislative history of many of these laws show quite clearly the animus and the discriminatory intent that underpin them. Second, they permit blatantly discriminatory practices without clear limitations or meaningful safeguards. They do not strike a careful balance-or even suggest that any serious attempt was made to do so-between religious exercise and the purposes of the underlying law from which the exemption is carved out, a feature of rights-respecting approaches to religious exemptions. Third, they often show no regard whatsoever for the harms that the discrimination they legitimize might inflict on those who are turned away from a range of important services and for the nondiscrimination principle itself.

These laws are directly harmful, and they take on added importance because of the larger message they send. By enacting these laws, states send a clear signal that discrimination against LGBT people is permissible-and that message has serious consequences at a time when discrimination against LGBT people remains all too common in the United States.

Proponents of exemptions that allow for anti-LGBT discrimination have framed them in terms of religious liberty, foregrounding how these laws might exempt businesses and service providers from laws and regulations that they find objectionable. The assumption seems to be that the resulting harms to LGBT individuals, or to the core value of equality, are insubstantial. As detailed below, however, the exemptions come at a high price.

To understand the harm, it is important to look at the larger context in which such laws are being considered, including pre-existing anti-LGBT discrimination and how exemption laws can encourage such discrimination, particularly in states without nondiscrimination protections. Anti-LGBT religious exemption laws are likely to exacerbate mistreatment because, both on their face and in the political discourse that surrounds them, they tend to legitimize and signal official acceptance of discrimination against LGBT people. And by restricting the state's ability to prohibit, sanction, or even discourage discrimination, the laws undermine the core principle of nondiscrimination law: that people should not face adverse treatment simply because of who they are.

Denying Goods and Services

Already, LGBT people often face discrimination by service providers who deny them goods and services. Where discrimination against LGBT people is permitted, because nondiscrimination laws do not exist, these problems tend to be worse. The following pages describe the tangible, human impact of such discrimination-which will likely worsen as a result of religious exemption laws-on the people who bear the brunt of it.

Incidents of Refusals

In states without nondiscrimination protections, individuals told Human Rights Watch that they had been denied access to goods and services because of a provider's religious beliefs. Leiana C., a 39-year-old lesbian woman in Mississippi, recalled an incident that occurred around 2012 when she and her wife were seeking a fertility doctor:

Tanya P., a 33-year-old woman in Tennessee, recalled the difficulties she faced obtaining affirming care for her transgender daughter in 2016. To obtain identity documents for her daughter that reflected her gender identity, Tanya needed to submit a note from her daughter's doctor affirming that she was undergoing appropriate clinical treatment. At the time, her daughter was already obtaining that treatment, had socially transitioned, and was seeing a therapist. Nonetheless, her pediatrician refused to provide a letter stating that information, citing his religious beliefs:

LGBT individuals have also experienced religious refusals in child welfare services. Recently, the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan filed suit challenging the state's practice of granting contracts and funding to child welfare agencies that discriminate against same-sex couples. The suit was filed after two sets of prospective parents-Kristy and Dana Dumont and Erin and Rebecca Busk-Sutton-contacted religiously affiliated agencies in the state about adopting children from foster care and were informed the agencies did not work with same-sex couples. The Dumonts wanted to provide a foster home to an older child; they contacted the two agencies in their county that have older children eligible for foster placement and were told the agencies would not work with them as a same-sex couple. The Busk-Suttons were interested in adopting a child with special needs and were initially told by one agency that they would receive an information packet in the mail; when the packet did not arrive, they called to inquire and were told the agency does not specialize in same-sex couples. While the religiously affiliated agencies offered names of providers in neighboring counties, both couples expressed concern about traveling for the trainings and visits associated with becoming foster parents and potentially taking an older foster child or a child with special needs out of a county where they have family or are currently receiving services.

As Zawadski's case illustrates, refusals can occur in circumstances where LGBT people urgently need services and cannot readily access alternatives in the event that they are turned away.

Impacts of Refusals

When LGBT people are refused service, this discrimination has material and psychological consequences. Some individuals will obtain the good or service they sought, but will face additional costs: finding an alternative provider can require time, energy, and money, which can prove discouraging or even prohibitive.

Refusals create barriers to accessing mental and physical healthcare as well. Persephone Webb, an activist in Tennessee, noted:

Rhonda L., the mother of a transgender teenager in Tennessee, recalled how even available alternatives in the urban area could be prohibitively difficult:

Finally, even where LGBT people are ultimately able to obtain needed services elsewhere, incidents of discrimination can be psychologically traumatic and degrading. Rhonda L. said her transgender son had experienced hostility or overt religiosity from multiple healthcare professionals, including a pediatrician, dentist, gastrointestinal specialist, and pulmonologist. She described how these incidents affected him, making him unwilling to seek medical care even when it was urgently needed:

Added Harms of Religious Exemptions

As the incidents described above help illustrate, the absence of laws prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity leaves LGBT people vulnerable to mistreatment, including mistreatment motivated by moral or religious convictions. Many of the incidents above occurred prior to the introduction of religious exemption laws, but were legally permissible because the state lacked any law providing protection from discriminatory treatment.

Second, as statutory provisions, religious exemption laws can override other protections that may exist for LGBT people. In Mississippi, for example, the cities of Jackson and Magnolia have nondiscrimination laws that protect sexual orientation and gender identity; the statewide imposition of HB 1523 allows religious objectors in those cities to cite the state law excusing them from compliance. As statutory provisions, these exemptions can also override administrative policies and practices that departments of health or child welfare have adopted to combat discrimination.

Finally, interviewees emphasized that the scope of religious exemptions is poorly understood, and many people perceive these exemptions as blanket permission to discriminate based on religious beliefs. Chris Sanders, the Executive Director of the Tennessee Equality Project, suggested:

David Dinelli, an attorney with the Southern Poverty Law Center, echoed this assessment. "My observation from being in the Deep South is that it almost doesn't matter what the law says. This narrative has taken hold, and now people are doing things that in no way would be authorized by the law itself."

Discouraging Access to Services

As noted above, most states in the US do not specifically prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, and discrimination against LGBT people remains widespread. Religious exemptions not only license the kinds of refusals discussed above, but encourage people to expect and fear discrimination and adapt accordingly.

It is important to note that, while these initiatives can alleviate gaps in service, they are not a sufficient substitute for full equality under the law. Many LGBT organizations do not have the resources to compile and maintain lists of affirming providers. Where they are developed, such lists tend to be ad hoc and non-exhaustive, as they rely on providers who are known to advocates to be reliably LGBT inclusive. A provider with competency with one population-for example, adult gay men-may not be similarly equipped to serve the needs of another-for example, transgender youth. The approach is particularly limited insofar as known providers are often concentrated in urban areas, with the result that LGBT people who live in rural areas may have to travel hundreds of miles to reach a provider who they know will serve them. And because these lists typically list only a fraction of the providers in a given state, the roster of providers can be quickly overwhelmed by demand.

In Tennessee, where state law allows counselors to decline to see LGBT patients based on their religious beliefs, researchers at the University of Tennessee have studied how these refusal laws impact self-concealment and psychological distress. One researcher on the project noted:

Healthcare providers expressed concern about how fears of discrimination were affecting the mental and physical health of LGBT populations in their states. One pediatrician in Alabama observed:

Kelley Blair, who runs the Diversity Center in Oklahoma City, OK, noted a similar phenomenon for adults at her practice, which specifically caters to the LGBT community:

Harms to Dignity

The harms of religious exemptions are not limited to outright refusals or deterring LGBT people from seeking goods and services. Interviewees in states with LGBT-targeted religious exemption laws in place also emphasized the harms to dignity and stigma that the laws impose on LGBT individuals and families.

While this message could be received from those who discriminated based on their faith generally, some interviewees indicated it was particularly injurious when it was endorsed by the state:

Proponents of sweeping religious exemptions have typically couched their claims in the language of religious freedom or religious liberty. International human rights law recognizes the importance of those rights, but also elaborates their limits, particularly where their exercise threatens to negatively impact the fundamental rights of others. Not only does the United States carry obligations under international law to respect these limits and safeguards, but more broadly the jurisprudence developed under international human rights law offers sound guidance to legislators seeking to strike a careful balance between rights that seem to stand in tension with one another.

Harmonizing Equality and the Freedom of Thought, Conscience and Religion

The United States is party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which guarantees equal protection under the law as well as the freedom of thought, conscience, and religion.

Other Rights at Risk from Religious Exemptions

The religious exemptions being introduced to license discrimination in child welfare services, physical and mental healthcare, and public accommodations not only impinge upon the rights of LGBT individuals to equal treatment, they also jeopardize the enjoyment of several other rights as well.

Nondiscrimination More Broadly

While the religious exemption laws examined in this report were introduced as a result of gains that LGBT people have made in attaining nondiscrimination protections and the ability to adopt, marry, and form families under state and federal law, many of the exemptions being introduced at the state level are not limited to religious objections related to sexual orientation and gender identity. As critics have pointed out, many bills would broadly preclude states from taking action against religious objectors who operate according to their religious principles to the detriment of other groups as well, and potentially authorize forms of discrimination based on race, ethnicity, sex, religion, nationality, disability, veteran status, HIV status, and other classifications. States that enact these laws relinquish their ability to ensure that state funding and contracts support services available to all qualified recipients, and give a free pass to potentially sweeping discrimination under the color of state authority.

Right to Health

Children's Rights

To the US Congress

Enact the Equality Act or other legislation which would prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in employment, education, healthcare, housing, and public accommodations.

Enact the Do No Harm Act, which would not allow the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to be used to carve out exemptions from federal laws and protections regarding nondiscrimination, labor, children's rights, and healthcare.

Enact the Every Child Deserves a Family Act, which would prohibit child welfare agencies that receive federal financial assistance from discriminating against foster parents based on sexual orientation, gender identity, and marital status.

Reject the First Amendment Defense Act, the Child Welfare Provider Inclusion Act, and other legislation that permits discrimination against LGBT people based on a provider's asserted religious beliefs.

To the US Department of Justice

Ensure that existing conscience protections are not misused to excuse or justify discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, and other classifications.

To State Legislatures

Enact legislation prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in employment, education, healthcare, housing, adoption and foster care, and public accommodations.

Repeal religious exemptions that require the state to continue licensing, funding, or otherwise supporting providers who discriminate against others according to their beliefs.

To State Human Rights Commissions

Affirm that discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity is unacceptable and investigate incidents of discrimination based on those grounds.

Ensure that existing conscience protections are not misused to excuse or justify discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, and other classifications.

Ryan Thoreson, a researcher in the LGBT Rights Program, wrote this report based on research that he undertook from August 2017 to January 2018.

The report was reviewed by Graeme Reid, director of the LGBT Rights Program; Grace Meng, senior researcher in the US Program; Amanda Klasing, senior researcher in the Women's Rights Division; Megan McLemore, senior researcher in the Health and Human Rights Division, Chris Albin-Lackey, senior legal advisor; and Joseph Saunders, deputy program director. Production assistance was provided by MJ Movahedi, LGBT Rights Program associate, Rebecca Rom-Frank, Photo & Publications coordinator; Fitzroy Hepkins, administrative manager; and Jose Martinez, senior coordinator.

Human Rights Watch would like to thank the experts and organizations that provided information for the report, especially the American Civil Liberties Union, the Movement Advancement Project, the ACLU of Michigan, Equality Michigan, the Tennessee Equality Project, the Tennessee Transgender Political Coalition, Voices for Trans Youth, the ACLU of Mississippi, and Lighthouse Community Church.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This report documents how recent laws carve out space to discriminate against LGBT people in adoption and foster care, health care, and access to some goods and services. These laws fail to balance moral and religious objections to LGBT relationships and identities with the rights of LGBT people themselves, Human Rights Watch found.

# data[].attributes.body
The LGBTQIA+ community is a group of people who like the same sex, like both sexes, like no sexes, are transitioning, or people whose sex cannot be identified.                   L-Lesbian(female same sex relations)
G-Gay(male same sex relations)
B-Bisexual(relations with same or different sex)
T-Transexual(male transitioning into female or female transitioning into male)
Q-Queer(umbrella term for people who are not heterosexual or identify with the gender they were born with)
I- Intersex(someone who has chromosomes of both genders)
A-Asexual(No relations with any gender)
P-Pansexual(relations with any person no matter what they identify as within or outside of the community)
D-Demisexual(Similar to pansexual but only if they have a connection with that person)
(source 1)

# data[].attributes.body
-The LGBTQIA+ is discrimination is solely based on religious beliefs, and the laws made by majorities also based on religion. (source 1)

# data[].attributes.body
-"The results of this research indicate that the laws already enacted in eight states and the bills still under consideration in many more do not strike a proper balance between the freedom of religion and the equal rights of LGBT people under the law." (source 2)
-"As marriage equality became a reality, first in individual states and then nationally, lawmakers proposed allowing those with religious or moral objections to refuse or decline to provide a range of goods and services to same-sex couples." (source 2)
-"A survey conducted by the Center for American Progress in January 2017 found that one in four LGBT respondents had experienced discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity in 2016. In an amicus brief filed in late 2017, LGBT organization Lambda Legal noted it had received nearly a thousand reports of discrimination against LGBT people in public accommodations, including in reproductive services, child care, medical services, retail and service establishments, hotels, restaurants, recreational facilities, homeless shelters, transportation services, and funeral services, from 2008 to 2017." (source 2)
-"...neither Congress nor most state legislatures have expressly prohibited discrimination against LGBT people. At the beginning of 2018, only 19 states and the District of Columbia had explicitly prohibited discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in employment, housing, and public accommodations"
-"In February 2017, the Trump Administration withdrew the guidance prohibiting discrimination against transgender youth in US schools, arguing that the issue should be left to the states to resolve.[17] In July 2017, President Trump announced on Twitter that transgender people would no longer be able to serve in the US military; while a court order has allowed transgender recruits to enlist in 2018, the ban on military service remains under review by the courts." (source 2)

# data[].attributes.body
-Learn gender neutral vocabulary and terms (source 3)
-Applies to anyone that does not identify with cisgender or transgender (source 3)
-nonbinary-exclusive language is playing around with different words to use as identification such as using the letter X or Z. (source 3)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
the word 'Suffix' with a line under it. Three boxes. One Mr., one Mrs., and one Mx. Only the Mx. box is checked.

I have a job where I interact with thousands of customers every day. They know me by name and sometimes I run into them outside of work. By special nature of my work's location, I know a good half of the public transit drivers and office workers. One of these bus drivers lately has responded very positively to me coming out as nonbinary to him. This is not usually the case with a good deal of my customers. For this reason I feel strongly motivated to answer the questions he has for me the best way I can. He cares and is trying, and even if he's not perfect about it what matters to me is the clear intent behind it.

The other night he asked me the question I always have the hardest time answering: "What should I say instead of "Ma'am" or "Sir"?". I have been asked this question at least once a day, if not more, every day for the past several years of my life. This is a hard question because there isn't a simple one word answer. I would love if there just was a word like 'Ma'am' or 'Sir' I could offer in just a few seconds and make life that much easier, but the problem in English is that there isn't a word like that yet. There have been suggestions made, but none of them are in any strong sort of usage. I'd never heard of any of the potential ideas when I was looking through them, and I think that a good majority of other nonbinary trans people will also not know what you meant if you used them. This would result in more confusion over the intended outcome than make it easier. However, the driver is absolutely correct! He should not be calling a nonbinary trans person 'Ma'am' or 'Sir' unless that specific individual has clarified that is okay for them in their individual case.

So I've decided to write this piece as a collection of alternatives and an exploration of why in this one unique instance we run into difficulties with language. If you've ever met a nonbinary trans person, or want to practice appropriate language before you do, or you're working on improving because a friend or family member has come out as nonbinary ... this piece is for you! A nonbinary trans person in your life may have sent this to you in hopes that it might help, and I certainly think that it will. There are many more specific aspects of language about being a nonbinary trans person and how to talk about us, but for the most part I intend to focus on this specific question for the time being.

1. Gender Neutral Language Versus Nonbinary Exclusive Language

Gender neutral language (shortened as GNL) has existed as long as language has existed. In fact, neutral terms often come before gendered ones. Especially when language was first developing, human beings were far more likely to think of others as a "person" than as a "man" or a "woman". GNL is very important both in the perspective of de-centering masculinity and men as the origin and the default as well as being intentionally inclusive of all those who are neither men nor women. Just as 'gender non-conforming' (GNC) is a description that can apply to anyone who does not conform to gender roles - cis or trans - gender neutral language acts similarly. It's for everyone and does not inherently mean or imply nonbinary-ness. Being nonbinary is something separate from generic gender-neutrality. It is a necessary tool for anyone who uses language but especially for anyone trying to ensure they refer to the nonbinary trans people in their lives and in the world properly. However, this is not the only sort of language that exists for this purpose.

Nonbinary-exclusive language (shortened as NEL) is language that takes a newer approach to pre-existing words or concepts and combines it with other aspects to form new words and new terms created intentionally for nonbinary trans people. There are many ways people do this - I myself tend to play with words by adding the letter "X" to them for this reason - and this is why sometimes you may come across words you've never seen before. It differs from GNL because instead of relying upon terms that could apply to anyone regardless of their gender, NEL refers specifically only to nonbinary trans people in the way that men and women already get to enjoy terms positively gendered for them. Not all nonbinary trans people have an interest in NEL, because not all trans people want to be capital O Out all the time. However, it is nice and good sometimes to know that you don't have to grasp onto words that weren't really made for you like a last minute addition, and that there are exclusive terms there if you want them.

Nonbinary trans people are the inventors of our time. We're pushing language and boundaries and doing our best to decipher what feels right for us. We're a class of people that has been refused the ability to even clearly talk about ourselves for a good amount of history. All of the cultures and peoples who acknowledged us centuries ago, and who celebrated us already, were colonized and erased and murdered to the degree where recognition of us was lost to White Western Imperialism and values based in bigoted Christianity. Now we are returning to be socially recognized as society tries to undo all the damage of the past. We need these words because to be unable to understand yourself or talk about yourself accurately can be very upsetting on a personal level; but it is also confusing for those in our lives who care about us and wish to understand us better.

Both GNL and NEL are very good families to take guidance from as you work on improving your understanding of the world without the lens of "male" and "female" being the only two options obscuring your vision. They're equally good and important and essential in expanding towards equal recognition and support of nonbinary people as a separate class and state of being.

2. Examples Of Nonbinary Friendly Terms and Words

Now that we've established the two main families of nonbinary friendly language, let's form a mini-glossary of terms and words that can be used! This is just a very small sampling of a fraction of all the terms that are out there, but these are a few of the terms I feel are best to learn first. Keep in mind that every nonbinary individual is different. Not all people will like the same words. Always ask a nonbinary trans person before you call them something.
Generic Gender-Neutral Terms:
Friend, Associate, Buddy, Pal, Companion, Individual, Person, Accomplice, Colleague, Comrade, Acquaintance, Being, Someone, or Coworker.
GNL + NEL Terms For Family Roles:
Parent, Child, Sibling, Youth, Kid, Grandparent, Cousin, Relative

Nibling - Nonbinary equivalent of a Niece or Nephew. People also use Niblet for this purpose

Ren/Renny - Focusing on the 'ren' in 'Parent' to create a term similar to Mom/Mommy or Dad/Daddy. Sounds like 'wren'; the bird.

Sib/Sibler - Nonbinary equivalent of Sister/Brother and related shortened terms.
GNL + NEL Terms For Relationship Roles:
Partner, Spouse, Paramour, Lover, Date, Sweetheart, Honey, Betrothed, Significant Other, Engaged

Theyfriend - Nonbinary equivalent of Girlfriend/Boyfriend. You can use any pronoun in place of the 'they' in ' Theyfriend ' if a person uses other pronouns.

Theyspouse - Similar to ' Theyfriend '; use of pronouns as a suffix to create explicitly nonbinary terms. A spouse who is nonbinary.

Datefriend, Bothfriend, Lovefriend, Datemate - Other nonbinary terms for an individual who is dating someone and is nonbinary. Up to personal choice and preference.
Nonbinary-exclusive Terms For Person:
Enby - A shortening of the word nonbinary similar to girl/boy. Good word for a nonbinary child. Very validating word for some nonbinary people. Many nonbinary people of all ages enjoy this term, however it has a slightly feminine feel to it which can be uncomfortable for some nonbinary people. Little less than half of all nonbinary people dislike this term for multiple reasons. However, many nonbinary people do like this word. It's best to check before using it for someone. [ Not a good term for the nonbinary community at whole; it's best to just write out the whole word!]

Androgyne - A bit vintage, dating back to Victorian language for androgynous and/or intersex people. Means 'An androgynous individual'. Can be shortened to 'Andro' for a simpler term. Not all nonbinary people are androgynous, so again it's good to check. Especially for nonbinary people who lean towards the feminine side of things, this term can make them especially uncomfortable. Please be considerate and always ask before using a term for someone.

Theyperson - In following the more recent format of pronoun-based terms, a [Pronoun]person is a term interchangeable with all potential pronoun sets regardless of gender, but does allow for nonbinary-exclusive terms such as this one with less potential for misgendering or inducing dysphoria. Some nonbinary people will just prefer GNL over NEL, as intentionally outing oneself as nonbinary is not always the desire or goal for every single person.

They - While they is a pronoun used for many nonbinary people instead of she or he [Ex: Vin is a writer and they are writing this piece right now.] it is also a potential alternative term to 'enby' for a nonbinary person for those who don't want to write out 'nonbinary' every single time. The writer of this piece enjoys being referred to as 'a they', or in ways similar to 'They're a they and they'll be taking your order' etc. (They do not enjoy being referred to as an enby!) However, some nonbinary people may find this dehumanizing as women and men are not often referred to as 'a she' or 'a he' in the same fashion. As usual, depends on the needs of each individual.

3. Nonbinary Alternative To Ma'am Or Sir And How To Use It

To answer the main question that sparked this entire piece, we first have to explore and understand a different aspect of language we currently utilize. Honorifics. An honorific is a title that is placed before a person's name either to explain their rank, role, marital status, or assumed gender. You may also know your honorific under the term "suffix". All the mail you receive tends to include an honorific attached to the front of your name. Honorifics in general have also influenced a good bit of gendered language and the way we refer to other people. You've probably answered the question as to what your title, honorific, or suffix is hundreds of times. Many people don't even realize how difficult this question can be for nonbinary people when a non-gendered option is not provided.

There are multiple honorifics and titles for individuals which are gender neutral linguistically. The most common honorific is the term 'Mx.' [said like 'mix']. The x acts as a wild card, taking the usual title format of Mr and Ms, and putting in an x to remove the gender in the title. This honorific has been legally recognized by several businesses, countries, and other associations but is primarily only seen on actual paperwork in the U.K. as of this moment. Places such as Canada, Washington, California, and Oregon will likely eventually follow as they all also work towards legal recognition of nonbinary trans people. However, we are still a good ways away from 'Mx' being listed as an option everywhere.(Much less other nonbinary honorifics!) Other honorifics include: Ind., Rev., Dr., M., Misc., Mre., Msr., Myr., Pr., or Mn..

The binary-gendered honorifics we currently use are 'Mr.', 'Mrs.', 'Ms.', or 'Miss'. 'Miss' is often used in a similar way to 'Ma'am' despite doubling as an honorific, and 'Mister' is often used in a way similar to 'Sir' even though 'Ma'am' and 'Sir' are not honorifics. There is linguistic precedent to using a word that doubles as an honorific in ways similar to 'Ma'am' or 'Sir'. This is why - although it is far from perfect - I believe the best and most recognized solution to this question for the time being is to use the honorific 'Mx' in this fashion as well. I had to think about this question for nearly a month to reach what I really believe linguistically felt the most right, as well as what would the community for the most part agree upon and be comfortable with, and this is what I believe the solution to be. Below are a few examples of either way in which 'Mx' as a term can be used.

Examples:

"Paging Mx. Tanner. You are needed in Room 24." - here 'Mx' is used as an honorific.

"Excuse me Mx, just need to get past you!" - here 'Mx' is used instead of 'Ma'am' or 'Sir' without incorrectly gendering someone.

"Pardon me Mx, but I think you dropped your wallet? Yeah the ID in there says it belongs to a 'Mx. Tanner'." - here's a sentence where 'Mx' is used both as an honorific and a respectful term of address.

So there you have it. My personal recommendation for what the nonbinary equivalent of 'Ma'am' or 'Sir' could be. This could always change, but I've been thinking about this for a long time and I think for right now where I am this is what I really do want to recommend to people. A better solution might be to remove gendered forms of address altogether, but I don't know if that's a realistic request to make. Plus there are many binary trans people who rely upon binary-gendered terms to validate themselves; and I think that's equally important and worth supporting. This is likely why nonbinary trans people like me often try to provide alternatives. It's easier to start to introduce ourselves to the masses in ways that can be more quickly understood. Regardless, I hope this small collection and discussion of language has proven helpful as a springboard for understanding the reality and variation within nonbinary trans people's needs.
Vin Tanner is a nonbinary trans person running the TransStyleGuide project solo. They write and about trans issues very regularly, especially about trans language. You can donate money to them or if you're not in the US. Please email them at transstyleguide@gmail.com.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
When "Ma'am" and "Sir" Just Don't Work? Help!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I have a job where I interact with thousands of customers every day. They know me by name and sometimes I run into them outside of work. By special nature of my work's location, I know a good half of...

# data[].attributes.body
-Family NEL terms
"Nibling — Nonbinary equivalent of a Niece or Nephew. People also use Niblet for this purpose
Ren/Renny — Focusing on the ‘ren’ in ‘Parent’ to create a term similar to Mom/Mommy or Dad/Daddy.
Sib/Sibler — Nonbinary equivalent of Sister/Brother and related shortened terms." (source 3)
-Relationship NEL terms
"
Theyfriend — Nonbinary equivalent of Girlfriend/Boyfriend. You can use any pronoun in place of the ‘they’ in ‘Theyfriend’ if a person uses other pronouns.

Theyspouse — Similar to ‘Theyfriend’; use of pronouns as a suffix to create explicitly nonbinary terms. A spouse who is nonbinary.

Datefriend, Bothfriend, Lovefriend, Datemate — Other nonbinary terms for an individual who is dating someone and is nonbinary. Up to personal choice and preference." (source 3)
-General person NEL vocab
"Enby — A shortening of the word nonbinary similar to girl/boy. Good word for a nonbinary child.[...] ndrogyne — A bit vintage, dating back to Victorian language for androgynous and/or intersex people. Means ‘An androgynous individual’. Can be shortened to ‘Andro’ for a simpler term. [...]Theyperson — In following the more recent format of pronoun-based terms, a [Pronoun]person is a term interchangeable with all potential pronoun sets regardless of gender, but does allow for nonbinary-exclusive terms such as this one with less potential for misgendering or inducing dysphoria. [...]They — While they is a pronoun used for many nonbinary people instead of she or he [Ex: Vin is a writer and they are writing this piece right now.] it is also a potential alternative term to ‘enby’ for a nonbinary person for those who don’t want to write out ‘nonbinary’ every single time." (source 3)

# data[].attributes.body
-public discrimination of LGBTQIA+ community by denying them of goods, entrance, marriage in a specific place, and basic human rights. (source 1)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The fifth of seven children, Marsha was born Malcolm Michaels Jr. to Malcolm Michaels Sr. and Alberta (Claiborne) Michaels on August 24, 1945, in Elizabeth, New Jersey. Marsha was educated in the Elizabeth Public School System and graduated from Thomas A. Edison High School in 1963. After graduating high school, she enrolled in the United States Navy for a brief stint.

Marsha relocated to New York's Greenwich Village to discover herself. As a transient, she turned to prostitution to survive and soon found a like-minded community within the nightlife of the village. She found joy as a self-made drag queen of Christopher Street, infamous for her unique design and costume creation. Throughout her discovery phase, she was referred to as Malcolm, and Black Marsha before settling on Marsha P. Johnson. The "P" stands for "Pay It No Mind." Johnson quickly became a prominent fixture in the LGBTQ community serving as a "drag mother" helping homeless and struggling LGBTQ youth. Marsha was extremely successful and toured the world as a successful drag queen with the Hot Peaches.

"I was no one, nobody, from Nowheresville until I became a drag queen. That's what made me in New York, that's what made me in New Jersey, that's what made me in the world."
Marsha P. Johnson

Although Marsha struggled with mental illness, she had a profound way of putting others' needs before her own. Johnson remained in constant communication with her family and often returned home to Elizabeth in observance of the holidays. During her commute home, Marsha would invite wayward people to join her for a hot meal with her family. Marsha never visited home empty-handed, she would bring her nieces and nephews trinkets and flowers for her mother. Contrary to the belief, the family was very dear to Marsha's heart.

Her forthright nature and enduring strength led her to speak out against injustices. June 28, 1969, at the Stonewall Inn on Christopher Street, things turned violent after members of the LGBTQ community were harassed by the NYPD sixth prescient. Many eyewitnesses have identified Marsha as one of the main instigators of the uprising and thus, some have recognized her as the vanguard of the gay liberation movement in the United States.

Following the events at Stonewall, Johnson and her friend Sylvia Rivera co-founded the Street Transvestite Action Revolutionaries (STAR) and they became fixtures in the community, helping homeless transgender youth. STAR provided services including shelter to homeless LGBTQ people in New York City, Chicago, California, and England for a few years in the early 1970s but eventually disbanded.

July 6, 1992, Johnson's body was found in the Hudson River off the West Village Piers. The police ruled she had committed suicide despite claims from her friends and other members of the local community that she was not suicidal. Twenty-five years later, Victoria Cruz, a crime victim advocate of the New York City Anti-Violence Project (AVP) re-opened the case.

Johnson's story is featured in Pay It No Mind: Marsha P. Johnson (2012) and The Death and Life of Marsha P. Johnson (2017) and Happy Birthday, Marsha! (2017). Marsha is honored as a Stonewall pioneer, a drag queen, and Andy Warhol model, an actress, and a revolutionary trans activist.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The fifth of seven children, Marsha was born Malcolm Michaels Jr. to Malcolm Michaels Sr. and Alberta (Claiborne) Michaels on August 24, 1945, in Elizabeth, New Jersey. Marsha was educated in the Elizabeth Public School System and graduated from Thomas A. Edison High School in 1963.

# data[].attributes.body
Interview with Chris, Counselor at the Net

# data[].attributes.body
-Marsha P(pay it no mind) Johnson is a Transgender LGBTQIA+ activist. (source 4)
-Stonewall riots (source 4)
-Drag queen (source 4)
-Street Transvestite Action Revolutionaries (STAR) (source 4)

# data[].attributes.body
-"Lesbian – Term used to describe female-identified people attracted romantically, erotically, and/or emotionally to other female-identified people." (source 1)
-"A person emotionally, physically, and/or sexually attracted to males/men and females/women"(source 1)
-"A person who is demisexual experiences sexual attraction only when they feel a true emotional bond with another person." (source 5)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What Is a Demisexual?

A person who is demisexual experiences sexual attraction only when they feel a true emotional bond with another person. For instance, they may not feel sexually attracted to a person they randomly see at a coffee shop, but if they were to start talking to that person and form an emotional connection, they might then become sexually attracted over time.

The earliest instance of the term demisexual dates back to 2006, according to Dictionary.com. By 2008, the word 'demisexuality' had become more mainstream in the modern lexicon, likely as a result of others closely identifying with the term. Even some dating websites, such as OkCupid, allow people to select 'demisexual' when indicating their sexual orientation.

"We are now learning that being open to fluidity with respect to lifestyle and preference is the best approach," said Dr. Margaret Seide, a board-certified psychiatrist and faculty member at New York University.

An Important Distinction

While it's true that many people do want to experience an emotional connection to another person before engaging in any sort of sexual intimacy, this isn't considered the same thing as being demisexual.

The difference is that those who identify as demisexual cannot feel attracted to people they don't already have an emotional bond with or know on a deeper level. For example, a demisexual person wouldn't find themselves attracted to a famously "sexy" celebrity or even a classically attractive person on the street-in other words, they tend not to feel that same intensity or longing the way others might.

Another way to look at it: a demisexual person doesn't feel sexual attraction toward someone until they've bonded, whereas someone else might develop an emotional bond only after they've been sexually intimate.

Where Demisexuality Falls on the Sexuality Spectrum

A demisexual may only be attracted to those they have warm feelings for regardless of the gender or sexuality of that other person. In that sense, they might also consider themselves heteronormative, bisexual, gay, lesbian, queer, polyamorous, or pansexual. Regarding gender, a demisexual person might identify as male, female, trans, agender, or otherwise non-binary.

Margaret Seide, Psychiatrist

- Margaret Seide, Psychiatrist

Again, the primary difference that sets demisexuals apart from others is that they almost always (if not always) find themselves sexually attracted to a person only once they've bonded with them on a more intimate, emotional, or spiritual level. It's also worth pointing out that a person might consider themselves demisexual at one point in their lives and feel differently at another point. People are ever-evolving and fluid.

"If that seems confusing, it may be because human sexuality is not easily labeled, defined, and put into a neat category," Seide said. "With something as complex and multi-layered as human sexuality, it makes sense that one word doesn't capture someone's full experience as a sexual being."

The Difference Between Demisexual and Sapiosexual

The terms demisexual and sapiosexual are sometimes conflated. Though somewhat similar, they are actually two very different terms.

Of course, intelligence is a characteristic that you can assume about a person without knowing them at all, or knowing them only minimally. For example, a sapiosexual person can feel captivated by someone based only on finding out they are a Rhodes Scholar or a nuclear physicist. This wouldn't be in line with a demisexual, who requires more depth.

So why are the terms often merged?

"Intelligence is a quality that can be known from a distance by that person's accomplishments, but intelligence is also potentially an endearing and alluring quality that can form the basis for warmth and bonding. So, being a sapiosexual and demisexual is not the same, but not entirely separate," Seide said.

How to Know If You're Demisexual

Call it what you will: "one-night stands," "casual sex," "sex buddy relationships," or simply the concept of eventually forging an emotional bond with someone through the act of sexual intimacy-it is not unusual to have sexual relations with someone before you know them well.

"[This current-day approach to sex] is so standard that it creates the need to define behavior that differs from that with a term like demisexual," Seide said. "If you are only drawn to someone after you get to know their personality, their life story, and trust that person, you may be a demisexual."

Another way to determine if you are demisexual-or at least lean that way-is to see how you feel in certain scenarios, such as noticing if you're crestfallen after having a sexual experience with someone and they do not reciprocate with commitment or a continuation of your relationship. For example, that person might distance themselves with behavior such as ghosting, or they may simply be emotionally unavailable.

If these responses could wound you, it's possible you are demisexual. Once you know this about yourself, it's important to honor that and to also be forthright with those you engage with.

"Someone can be a 'closeted' demisexual, [as well]. By this, I mean they desperately want to fit in with the modern dating climate and be that person that can just be in the moment, go with the flow, and push themselves to have sex with someone they don't know very well," Seide said. "To be clear, it is a consensual sex act, but not in keeping with that person's deeper feelings about relationships."

How to Be Supportive of Demisexuals in Your Life

Maybe a friend casually mentioned that they identify as demisexual, or perhaps someone came to you in confidence to share this intimate detail about themselves. It could also be possible that someone you're romantically interested in has told you that they're demisexual. Whatever the case, it's important to be sensitive, accepting, and patient.

Ultimately, in our current climate where casual sex or sex by the third date feels relatively normal, it can be easy to say something like "loosen up!" or "just get on with it!" or "be spontaneous!" to someone who seems to be waiting a long time before. This isn't ideal.

"Most open-minded people would be appalled at the idea of pressuring a homosexual person to behave according to heterosexual norms. We would never tell our bisexual friend to 'pick a side,'" Seide said. "However, we might judge someone as 'uptight' when they express a desire to refrain from being sexual unless they are in a situation that includes warmth, support, and a deep friendship. Everyone should be free to respect their boundaries and decide what they are looking for and have their behavior align with that."

A Word From Verywell

Sexual identity has been, and continues to be, an ever-evolving area. This is clear when you consider the term demisexuality, which only entered the English language in 2006 but has quickly become a widely used term. If you are demisexual, you might feel like an "odd person out" in the world, but you're certainly not alone. Remember to be true to yourself.

"No one wants to be trapped in a box, including demisexuals, and the expansion of our vocabulary around sex and gender is reflective of that," Seide said. "We are slowly but surely coming away from the rigid binary terminology that plagued our discussion of human sexuality for too many years."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A person who is demisexual experiences sexual attraction only when they feel a true emotional bond with another person. For instance, they may not feel sexually attracted to a person they randomly see at a coffee shop, but if they were to start talking to that person and form an emotional connection, they might then become sexually attracted over time.

# data[].attributes.body
-"If you’re asking someone “do you identify as a man or a woman” so that you can know how to refer to them (i.e. their pronouns) is better to ask, “what are your pronouns?” "(source 6)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Our Foundational Curriculum is a designed to create a Safe Zone 101 overview workshop. We recommend this workshop for all audiences - gay, straight, queer, allied, and anywhere in between (or outside) those categories. While some of it may be old information for some, we believe that everyone, no matter their knowledge level, will get something out of the experience.

We do have exercises that can be used for more advanced/specific workshops. Just check out the explore activities tab and search under the "201" levels for more advanced activities!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Can I ask someone how they identify? (Like, about their sexual orientation or gender?) " The Safe Zone Project

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Our Foundational Curriculum is a designed to create a Safe Zone 101 overview workshop. We recommend this workshop for all audiences - gay, straight, queer, allied, and anywhere in between (or outside) those categories. While some of it may be old information for some, we believe that everyone, no matter their knowledge level, will get something out of the experience.

# data[].attributes.body
-Make sure they know that you are there to talk if they need you to (source 7)
-Stand up against harassment or discrimination against the LGBTQIA+ community (source 7)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
FIGURING IT OUT
Trying to know for sure if you're attracted to someone of the same sex can be confusing. It might take a while for you to figure it out, and there's no need to rush. Some LGBTQ people say they "felt different" since when they were young, but it took a while to think of themselves as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. If you're feeling confused, you're not alone. Sexual orientation and gender identity, like many things in life, develop over time. Don't worry if you aren't sure. And, if questions over your sexuality are making you feel depressed, anxious, or insecure, or are interfering with your life, don't be afraid to ask for help from a friend, counselor or someone else you trust. You can also speak to someone directly by calling The Trevor Project Helpline at 1-866-488-7386.

COMING OUT AND LIVING OUT
"Coming out" often means telling others you're attracted to people of the same sex; that you identify as gay, lesbian, or bisexual; or that you identify as transgender. For everyone, gay or straight, accepting and understanding sexuality is a learning experience. You might feel comfortable going through this learning process by yourself, or you might want to draw on the experiences of other people. Organizations like the Human Rights Campaign and Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG) have local chapters where you can get help from people who have gone through the same things that you're experiencing now.

You may want to start by telling someone you really trust that you are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. This might be a close friend or family member who you think will be understanding and supportive. Remember that deciding whom to come out to and when to come out is completely up to you. The most important thing is that you are honest with yourself. Click here for ten things to consider when coming out.

HELPING OUT
If you have a friend who may be struggling with their sexuality, make sure they know you are there if they need to talk about anything. But remember that you have to let a friend make decisions about their sexual orientation on their own terms and when they are ready.

If a friend or family member confides in you about their sexuality, be supportive and allow them to talk through their feelings and fears. Coming out can be a difficult process and it helps to have a strong support network.

It's all of our responsibilities to stand up against discrimination and harassment. If you have a friend who is being harassed or you see someone being treated unfairly, reach out to that individual or report it to an authority figure. It's important not to assume these issues will resolve themselves. Being bullied, mistreated or discriminated against can make it more likely someone will become distressed and engage in harmful behaviors like suicide.

If you see discrimination in your community and want to put an end to it, find ways to take action with the Human Rights Campaign and Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG).

Thanks to The Trevor Project and Reach Out USA for help with the resources and content on this page.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Figuring It Out, Coming Out and Helping Out

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
FIGURING IT OUT Trying to know for sure if you're attracted to someone of the same sex can be confusing. It might take a while for you to figure it out, and there's no need to rush.

# data[].attributes.body
-The Stonewall riot started on June 28, 1969 when Marsha P Johnson spoke out against LGBTQIA+ discrimination outside of the Stonewall inn (source 4)
-Turned violent from NYPD harassment (source 4)

# data[].attributes.headline
What role do you plain in the LGBTQIA+ community?

# data[].attributes.subject
What role do you plain in the LGBTQIA+ community?

# data[].attributes.body
"The role I play is, I'm currently a clinical mental health counselor specializing in -therapy and expressive arts therapy, and I currently work with children and adolescents who are in the school system that identify as LGBTQ+ or gender insensitive minorities, and I also work with gender nonconforming and transgender children and adolescents in my private practice of therapy." (source 8)
-Also an advocate for LGBTQ+ youth

# data[].attributes.headline
Have you faced descrimination  being apart of the LGBTQIA+ community?

# data[].attributes.subject
Have you faced descrimination  being apart of the LGBTQIA+ community?

# data[].attributes.body
-Yes
-Almost everyday
-Complicated to change gender pronouns on any legal documentation in Louisiana along with other places
-

# data[].attributes.body
According to Ms. Chris, counselor at The NET Charter High School, there is no law protecting LGBTQIA+ people from getting fired from their jobs in Louisiana (Source 8)

# data[].attributes.body
Trans youth represent the highest homeless population in the country (Source 8)

# data[].attributes.body
According to Ms. Chris, it is important to help educate people on the challenges faced by LGBTQIA+ people (Source 8)