# data[].attributes.body
Gender identity is how someone internally feels about their gender. This is different than our biological sex. Someone's gender identity can be different from their biological sex and may fall into a different category rather than man or woman. Sometimes we may need to unlearn old ideas to help us truly understand what gender is and what it can be.

Understanding gender identities & pronouns. The Trevor Project. (2025, February 5). https://www.thetrevorproject.org/resources/article/understanding-gender-identities-and-pronouns/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Understanding Gender Identities & Pronouns

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It’s important to remember that gender roles aren’t set in stone. Learn more about gender identities with our FAQs and supportive resources.

# data[].attributes.body
Gender expression is the way we present our gender. This can include many aspects of our appearance and behavior. Gender expression is not the same as gender identity. Someone who identifies as male may express their gender through stereotypical "female" traits. It is important to remember that these traits and roles are societally constructed and therefore they are not set in stone.

Kendra Cherry, Mse. (2023, February 14). What does gender expression mean?. Verywell Mind. https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-gender-expression-5187952

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What Is Gender Expression?

Gender expression refers to the way that a person presents their gender to the world. How a person dresses can be a form of gender expression, but it can also encompass other aspects of appearance and behavior including hairstyles, body features, interests, body language, voice, pronouns, and mannerisms.

While many people express themselves in ways that are aligned with social stereotypes related to sex and gender, other people may choose expressions that are different than what people may expect of their gender identity.

For many years, there has been an assumption that sex and gender were inextricably entwined and fixed. Today, people increasingly understand that this is not the case and that gender expression does not necessarily align with a person's biological sex.

However, in many cultures, social expectations and stereotypes for how people are expected to behave, dress, and express themselves based on their assigned sex are still quite rigid. People who express their gender in ways that do not conform to social or cultural expectations about gender may be subjected to bullying, discrimination, and harassment.

Gender Expression vs. Gender Identity

Gender is often described as having three dimensions. First is the biological or physical dimension, which refers to a person's anatomy and assigned sex at birth. Second is a person's identity, which refers to their own internal sense of gender. Finally, is expression, or how a person outwardly presents themselves and how that presentation represents and interacts with societal and cultural stereotypes about gender.

Gender expression can be influenced by a person's gender identity, but it is important to remember that these two things are not the same.

A person's gender identity is their internal experience of gender. Sometimes people have a gender identity that matches their birth sex (which is known as cisgender), but this is not always the case. A person's assigned-at-birth sex does not always align with their deeply held sense of gender identity, in which case they may be transgender.

Gender identity cannot be assumed based on a person's anatomy or appearance. Sex and gender are not the same things. While sex refers to a person's biological characteristics, gender refers to the social and cultural characteristics that are associated with aspects of masculinity, femininity, and nonbinary identities.

It is also important to distinguish between gender expression and sexual identity, which refers to who a person is sexually attracted to. How a person expresses their identity does not indicate their sexual identity. Some people with a gender expression that does not match stereotypes or expectations may identify as LGBTQ+, but others may not.

Types of Gender Expression

Gender expression often refers to how a person experiences and expresses various aspects of the male and female gender binary. Gender expression may also encompass characteristics that may be described as:

It is important to also note that these expressions are influenced by societal roles and cultural stereotypes, which means that they are not static and can shift and change over time.

Behaviors, clothing, and even body language are all social constructs that are labeled as being masculine or feminine. This binary can restrict people from expressing themselves in the way that they want for fear of negative feedback.

Some people may identify strongly with a particular gender, while others may have more neutral or mixed feelings. A person's internal sense of gender identity may also not match their external gender expression. A person who was assigned female at birth may identify as male but continue to express their gender through what are stereotypically considered feminine traits, behaviors, and roles.

One study found that gay men and bisexual cisgender women were more likely to have a gender expression different than what many people would expect based on their gender identity.

Impact of Gender Expression

People who have a gender expression that is different from what people expect based on that person's sex or gender identity may be more likely to experience bullying or other forms of intolerance and prejudice. Research suggests that people who are transgender or gender-nonconforming are more likely to face high levels of discrimination.

The expression of gender through appearance, dress, and behavior can play an important role in your identity and sense of self. However, due to discrimination, negative responses, and even the threat of violence, many people are not able to express themselves according to their gender identity. This can affect not only a person's sense of self but also their mental health and well-being.

Research has also shown that gender expression can play a role in the healthcare that people receive. Individuals whose expression of gender does not match their assigned birth sex experience more discrimination from healthcare providers, which can affect both access to and quality of care.

Tips That Can Help

If you are struggling with issues related to gender expression, there are some things you can do that may help.

Talk to a professional: Speaking to a gender-affirming mental health professional can help you explore different aspects of your identity and gender expression.

Care for yourself: Taking care of your health is important for your well-being. Find time to do things that you enjoy and work on taking small steps to ensure that you're taking care of your physical and mental health.

Look for ways to express yourself: Even if you are not ready to express your gender in the way that you would like, there are things that you can do. Experiment with different forms of gender expression in whatever way makes you feel comfortable or happy. Changing your hairstyles and wearing different clothes, for example, are ways that you can begin expressing yourself.

Find support: Having friends, family members, and mentors who understand your feelings about your gender expression can help. If the people in your life are not supportive, look for a group in your area or online.

What You Can Do

If someone you know has a gender expression that doesn't match stereotypical ideas of how men and women should appear, dress, or behave, there are things that you can do to help be a supportive friend.

Support people's gender expressions: People go through many changes in life, and that can include their sense of gender and their self-expression. You don't have to feel or experience the same things as them to be a supportive person in their life.

Be an ally: Don't be afraid to say something if you see or hear someone being treated unkindly because of their gender expression. Learning how to be an ally and an advocate can help others feel supported and understood.

Ask people what pronouns they prefer: Don't make assumptions based on how someone looks or acts. If you call someone by the wrong name or pronouns, apologize and then correct yourself going forward.

Remember that societal roles, expectations, and stereotypes about what is masculine or feminine are not static and can change across time and cultures.

A Word From Verywell

Gender expression is something that everyone has, but not everyone's expression matches what society might expect based on their assigned sex or their gender identity. This gender expression may be masculine, feminine, or androgynous, or it may even change depending on how a person is feeling at that point.

Society continues to hold stereotyped, gendered expectations for how people should express themselves, but some places, including Ontario and New York State, have passed laws designed to protect people from discrimination based upon their gender expression.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Gender expression refers to the way that a person presents their gender to the world. How a person dresses can be a form of gender expression, but it can also encompass other aspects of appearance and behavior including hairstyles, body features, interests, body language, voice, pronouns, and mannerisms. While many people express themselves in ways that are aligned with social stereotypes related to sex and gender, other people may choose expressions that are different than what people may expect of their gender identity.

# data[].attributes.body
Gendered ageism is often used to discriminate against women in the workplace. While men are considered more wise as they age, women are viewed as outdated and past their prime. On the other hand, young men are viewed as keen and fresh while young women are viewed as inexperienced and naive. These stereotypes make it difficult for women of any age to work their way up the corporate ladder, and certainly not as easily as their male counterparts can.

Diehl, A., Dzubinski, L. M., & Stephenson, A. L. (2023, June 16). Women in leadership face ageism at every age. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2023/06/women-in-leadership-face-ageism-at-every-age

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Women in Leadership Face Ageism at Every Age

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Originally, ageism was understood to be prejudice, stereotypes, and discriminatory behavior targeted at older employees. But with an increasingly diverse and multigenerational workforce, age bias now occurs across the career life cycle — especially for women. “Youngism” refers to ageism toward young…

# data[].attributes.body
Gender Roles are the way an individual is expected to act based on their gender in society. Traditional gender roles were strict and unequal rules that still impact society today. Males are expected to be strong and aggressive while females are expected to be kind and nurturing. Although these beliefs are still present, we are seeing expectations change and become less strict in society.

AMAZE Org. (n.d.). Gender Roles and Stereotypes. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ulh0DnFUGsk

# data[].attributes.body
Beauty standards are what society deems attractive and ideal and are different based on gender. These expectations are often unrealistic and can cause many individuals to struggle with body image. This video highlights the unrealistic and ever-changing expectations of the body. There has certainly been an increase in cosmetic procedures to keep up with these expectations. It is important to keep in mind, however, that beauty standards are constantly changing, as they are socially constructed.

Animation on the unrealistic beauty standards. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRiJm-Yym4g

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Animation on the unrealistic beauty standards | Supervenus - by Frédéric Doazan

# data[].attributes.body
Sexual orientation is separate from gender and is about who an individual is attracted to. This includes different types of attraction such as romantic, aromantic, sexual, and asexual. An important aspect of sexual orientation is to remember that these are all just labels. Some people may feel that they don't really fit into any of these boxes, and that's okay. Some people who don't feel that they fit into a specific box, or even if they do, might use the word "queer". This word includes a variety of sexual and gender identities that are not heterosexual and cisgender.

What is sexual orientation? | sexual orientation VS gender. Planned Parenthood. (n.d.). https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/sexual-orientation/sexual-orientation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What is sexual orientation?

Sexual orientation is about who you're attracted to and want to have relationships with. Sexual orientations include gay, lesbian, straight, bisexual, and asexual.

Sexual orientation is different from gender and gender identity.

Sexual orientation is about who you're attracted to and who you feel drawn to romantically, emotionally, and sexually. It's different than gender identity. Gender identity isn't about who you're attracted to, but about who you ARE - male, female, genderqueer, etc.

This means that being transgender (feeling like your assigned sex is very different from the gender you identify with) isn't the same thing as being gay, lesbian, or bisexual. Sexual orientation is about who you want to be with. Gender identity is about who you are.

There are a bunch of identities associated with sexual orientation:

People who're attracted to a different gender (for example, women who are attracted to men or men who are attracted to women) often call themselves straight or heterosexual.

People who're attracted to people of the same gender often call themselves gay or homosexual. Gay women may prefer the term lesbian.

People who're attracted to both men and women often call themselves bisexual.

People whose attractions span across many different gender identities (male, female, transgender, genderqueer, intersex, etc.) may call themselves pansexual or queer.

People who're unsure about their sexual orientation may call themselves questioning or curious.

People who don't experience any sexual attraction for anyone often call themselves asexual.

It's also important to note that some people don't think any of these labels describe them accurately. Some people don't like the idea of labels at all. Other people feel comfortable with certain labels and not others. It's up to you to decide how you want to label yourself, if at all.

What does queer mean?

The term queer can include a variety of sexual identities and gender identities that are anything other than straight and cisgender.

In the past, "queer" was a word used to hurt and insult people. Some people still find it offensive, particularly those who remember when that word was used in a painful way. Others now use the word with pride to identify themselves.

You may not want to refer to someone as "queer" unless you know that's how they identify themselves. When talking to someone about their sexual orientation, use the terms that they use. It's okay (and often encouraged!) to ask what labels folks prefer.

What's asexuality?

People who identify as asexual don't really feel sexual attraction towards anyone. They may think other people are physically attractive, or they may want to be in romantic relationships with people - but they're not interested in having sex or doing sexual things with other people. Asexual people sometimes use the word "ace" for short.

Asexuality has nothing to do with romantic attraction. Many asexual people feel romantically attracted to people - so they may identify as asexual, and also as gay, lesbian, bisexual, or straight. They just don't feel any desire to act on these feelings in a sexual way.

Asexual people have emotional needs just like everyone else. Some asexual people have romantic relationships, and others aren't interested in that. They get close to people or experience intimacy through ways other than sex.

There are also people who don't feel romantic attraction or want to be in romantic relationships - they may identify as aromantic. Being aromantic and being asexual are two separate things.

Some asexual people do get aroused (turned on), but they don't feel the desire to be sexual with other people. And some asexual people masturbate. But others may not feel arousal at all.

It's totally normal to go through times when you don't want to have sex, but that doesn't necessarily mean you're asexual. And asexuality is not the same thing as being celibate. Celibacy is a choice you make, and asexuality is a sexual identity - who you naturally are.

Like other sexual orientations, asexuality isn't always black and white. There's a spectrum between being sexual (having sexual attraction) and being asexual. Different people fall into different places on that spectrum. Some people who have very little sexual attraction to other people identify as gray-a. Some people who are only sexually attracted to people they're in relationships with identify as demisexual. Want to know how someone identifies? Ask them.

There is nothing "wrong" with people who are asexual, and there's no evidence to support that people are asexual because of any kind of mental health or trauma. It's actually kind of common - some research says that 1 out of 100 adults is asexual. You can find more information about asexuality at the Asexual Visibility and Education Network.

What if I don't want to be labeled?

It's okay if you don't want to be labeled. Only you can decide what sexual identity best describes you. But some people may feel that none of the common labels feel right to them.

Your sexual orientation and identity can remain the same throughout your life. Or it can vary depending on who you're attracted to, or romantically partnered or sexually active with. This is completely normal. Once you claim a label, there's no reason why it can't change as you change.

Changing how you identify doesn't mean that you're "confused." Many folks, old and young, experience changes in who they're attracted to and how they identify. This is called "fluidity."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is Sexual Orientation? | Sexual Orientation vs Gender

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Sexual orientation is about who you’re attracted to. Learn the differences between sexual orientation, gender, and gender identity.

# data[].attributes.body
Social scripts are the expectations for sexual behaviors and feelings that are created by society. These scripts impact our beliefs and attitudes towards sexual relationships. It is important to note that these scripts are not inherently wrong or right. Sometimes, however, they can be damaging and difficult to manage when individuals have different scripts or disagree with a largely accepted social script. Our social scripts impact not only our sexual experiences but our relationships as well.

Sexual scripts. Blueheart. (n.d.). https://www.blueheart.io/post/sexual-scripts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Each of us has a sexual script that has been 'written' for us by our upbringing, environment, everyday influences and existing sexual experience.

These scripts are viewed as a social construction that govern our attitudes, beliefs and sexual activity.

Sexual scripts can be both positive and negative, but there is no 'right' or 'wrong' script since the way they are written is largely out of our control.

Mismatching sexual scripts can sometimes cause problems within sexual relationships but this can be addressed with good communication and a willingness to grow together.

Most of us have a fairly good idea of what we like in bed. We know the type of people we're attracted to, the things that turn us on, and our favorite sexual positions. We're also probably aware of our general views on sex - how we feel things 'should' be done, and what we consider to be 'normal' sexual behaviors.

But we might not have an individual understanding of how our sexual attitude is governed by what's called a sexual script, and how these scripts can have a big impact on our sexual activity.

What are sexual scripts?

Sexual scripts, or Sexual Script Theory, was first introduced by sociologists John Gagnon and William Simon in their 1973 book Sexual Conduct. However, the concept has existed for probably just as long as people have been having sex!

Sexual Script Theory says that every person's sexual relationships follow a type of script which has been 'written' for them by multiple external influences, such as media, movies, culture, politics and language. These broadly fall into the categories of cultural scripts, interpersonal scripts, and the intrapsychic script (impulses within the mind).

Everybody's sexual scripting is different, and it informs each individual's attitude towards all things sex-related, including the way we feel our sexual partners should behave and respond to our sexual needs, and how we should behave in turn. Our scripts can also differ in a relational context, depending on who we are with, or where we are.

What are some examples of sexual scripts?

Our understanding of sex helps to shape our attitudes towards a host of concepts, from sexual orientation and gendered behaviors, to sexual consent and the way we get sexual satisfaction within sexual relationships.

Common sexual scripts include:

Men should be the ones to initiate sex.

Heterosexual sex is over once the man ejaculates.

Women should be coy and demure.

Female orgasms are hard to achieve.

Woman should be able to orgasm solely through penetrative sex.

It's acceptable for heterosexual men to have had many female partners, but women should be less experienced.

Sex should only take place within committed relationships.

Women are primarily driven by emotional intimacy, rather than sexual satisfaction.

These are just a handful of examples of perceived sex roles. Everybody's own sexual script will be entirely unique, guided by social context, cultural scripts, their own sexual experiences and their existing beliefs about their sexual realm.

However, some generalizations can be made. For example, common sexual scripts are typically heteronormative and related to gendered behaviors, especially in countries with strict religious or political laws. Meanwhile, younger people's sexual scripting is often quite different to older people's, because of shifting generational attitudes and more socially-progressive ways of thinking.

There's no such thing as a 'right' or 'wrong' sexual script, since they are largely written by influences outside of our individual control. But if your script is having a negative impact on your sexual relationships, it's time to take a closer look at it.

What does your sexual script look like?

Taking the time to understand your sexual script at an individual level can be hugely beneficial to your sexual satisfaction. This will give way to richer sexual experiences, greater sexual satisfaction and higher intimacy in romantic relationships even outside the bedroom.

For a start, your sexual script might be based on things you think you should want, rather than the things you really want. This is especially prevalent within heterosexual feminine sexuality, where commonly scripted sexual roles mean female participants don't feel comfortable asking for the things that make them feel good. For example, you might be curious about sexual subcultures such as role playing or BDSM, but not feel comfortable pursuing them because it's 'not the done thing' or you feel it's only for more experienced individuals.

Or, the weight of some parts of your script might already be interfering with your sexual relationships. You might feel under pressure to assume traditional gender roles. Men in heterosexual relationships might feel under pressure to last longer in bed because that's what their script says they should do. While women might abandon hope of an orgasm altogether because their script says their sexual needs are secondary to their partner's. In any case, these scripts don't make for a fulfilling time!

It's worth spending some time reflecting on your sexual script, considering whether your needs are being fulfilled and if not, why not? Could it be related to restrictions imposed by your script? For some people, many of their beliefs and attitudes will be based on things they were taught growing up which could well be outdated now, or simply downright false. So if there are any particular trigger points within your script, spend some time reading and researching them - you might be surprised at what you discover!

How do sexual scripts affect a relationship?

Two aligned sexual scripts is usually a great recipe for lovemaking. When you and your partner are on the same page in terms of what's expected, what sexual behaviors are acceptable, what's off-limits and what boundaries can be pushed (consensually, of course), then you have the safety and freedom to really boost your sexual satisfaction.

Of course, your individual scripts needn't be perfectly in sync for you to enjoy great sex with each other. Being open to trying new things, offering reassurances around potential trigger points and taking the time to learn about one another's preferences and beliefs is all part of the fun!

However, if two scripts are very mismatched, there can be problems. Sexual frustration is the big one, obviously, but conflicting scripts can cause issues within everyday life, too. One partner may feel as if they're not being heard or respected, or may experience feelings of inadequacy or shame. Some sexual scripts, especially cultural gender scripts and those related to issues around gender inequity, may influence the dynamics of the relationship outside of the bedroom. These issues can result in frustrations and resentment that can challenge even the most committed relationships.

What happens when two sexual scripts don't match up

When something doesn't feel right in a relationship, communication is vital, and dealing with a mismatch in sexual scripts is no different. Talk to your partner about your sexual lives and beliefs in a calm and non-judgmental setting. Identify the areas where you align and where there are gaps.

Next, negotiate. Which scripts do you feel it's important to keep, and which ones are constricting you? Perhaps you both hold onto particular scripts because you feel like you should, or because it will make your partner happy, when that might not be the case at all.

Of course, switching up a lifetime of beliefs and attitudes won't happen overnight, so be patient, both with each other and yourselves. Make time to check in regularly with one another to revisit how you're feeling and how things are evolving. And if things feel frustrating, remember that sex is supposed to be fun and enjoyable, and by putting in this work you'll both benefit from a better, more fulfilling relationship status both in and out of the bedroom.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Each of us has a sexual script that has been 'written' for us by our upbringing, environment, everyday influences and existing sexual experience. These scripts are viewed as a social construction that govern our attitudes, beliefs and sexual activity.

# data[].attributes.body
Heteronormativity is the belief that heterosexuality is the norm and has privilege over any other sexuality. Cisnormativity is similar, with cisgender being the norm and anything else being labeled as "different". These ideas are consistently reinforced through society and the media. These ideas can be harmful to those labeled as "different". They may often feel unrepresented and judged for not fitting into society's usual box. These assumptions often provide privilege to those who are heterosexual and cisgender and are disadvantageous to those who are not.

Heteronormativity & Cisnormativity. LGBTQ+ Primary Hub. (n.d.). https://www.lgbtqprimaryhub.com/heteronormativity-cisnormativity#:~:text=Heteronormativity%2D%20A%20discourse%20based%20on,other%20form%20of%20gender%20identity.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Heteronormativity & Cisnormativity — LGBTQ+ Primary Hub

# data[].attributes.body
Marriage Equality has been a long-time struggle in the states. In 1996, after much discourse, the Defense of Marriage Act was signed which defined marriage as between a man and a woman. In the upcoming years, same-sex marriage slowly became legal in some states. Federal marriage equality was finally granted on June 26th, 2015. Although same-sex marriage is legal today, many continue to fight against it.

The journey to marriage equality in the United States. HRC. (n.d.). https://www.hrc.org/our-work/stories/the-journey-to-marriage-equality-in-the-united-states

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Skip to Content

From gathering supporters in small towns across the country to rallying in front of the Supreme Court of the United States, we gave our all to ensure every person, regardless of whom they love, is recognized equally under the law.

A Growing Call for Equality

Efforts to legalize same-sex marriage began to pop up across the country in the 1990s, and with it challenges on the state and national levels. Civil unions for same-sex couples existed in many states but created a separate but equal standard. At the federal level, couples were denied access to more than 1,100 federal rights and responsibilities associated with the institution, as well as those denied by their given state. The Defense of Marriage Act was signed into law in 1996 and defined marriage by the federal government as between a man and woman, thereby allowing states to deny marriage equality.

New Century & New Beginnings

As the Supreme Court decision in Lawrence v. Texas struck down sodomy laws in 2003, another victory was celebrated as Massachussetts became the first state to legalize same-sex marriage via a court ruling. On the federal level, however, efforts continued to prevent equality from becoming a reality. President Bush announced his opposition to same-sex marriage while the House introduced a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as between a man and a woman.

Rising Support Signals Hope

States from coast to coast began striking down past bans and enshrining marriage equality in new laws. California famously achieved marriage equality in 2008, only to have it dismantled again by the introduction and passage of Proposition 8, a ballot initiative that updated the state constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman, that same year. The amendment later was disputed in lower level courts before making its way to the Supreme Court.

A Turning Point for Change

Only a few years after President Obama declared DOMA unconstitutional, - and instructed the Justice Department to stop defending it in court - the Supreme Court advanced marriage equality through key decisions in 2013. Hollingsworth v. Perry determined Prop. 8 lacked legal standing while United States v. Windsor deemed DOMA unconstitutional - all but paving the way to full equality.

Marriage Equality Becomes a Reality

The moment for full marriage equality finally arrived on June 26, 2015, with the Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges. In a landmark 5-4 decision, marriage equality became the law of the land and granted same-sex couples in all 50 states the right to full, equal recognition under the law.

HRC's Work Changing Hearts & Minds

HRC knew from the very beginning that the fight for marriage equality wasn't just about changing policies - it was about changing hearts and minds. People needed to hear the stories of couples and families across the country impacted by laws that failed to grant them the recognition they deserved.

Decades of Championing Equality

Nationwide marriage equality was at the forefront of HRC's work for years before public sentiment toward same-sex marriage shifted. We consistently worked with coalitions across the country to rally support on the local, state and federal levels to ensure policies were inclusive of LGBTQ+ people. In 2013, just weeks before the Supreme Court decided on integral decisions in the fight for marriage equality, HRC launched headfirst into a campaign that took on a life of its own.

Working from Coast to Coast

Across the country, HRC mobilized efforts to bring marriage equality to multiple states ahead of the eventual Supreme Court ruling in 2015. We launched one of our largest field operations in history in New York, deploying 30 full-time organizers and creating our New Yorkers for Marriage Equality campaign that would eventually lead to the state's passage of same-sex marriage in 2011. HRC also invested millions of dollars into state ballot initiatives in places like Maine, Maryland, Minnesota and Washington.

Building Coalitions

After the Supreme Court announced it would hear the two cases in 2012, we immediately began gathering coalitions to drive a national conversation. Through both the Respect for Marriage Coalition and United for Marriage coalitions, we worked with like-minded organizations to show why the time for full equality had arrived. We also positioned elected officials at all levels of government - including former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton - at the forefront of our campaign.

Our Red Logo for Equality

In response to a growing conversation on social media, we decided to unveil a new iteration of our iconic logo by turning it red and pink in the name of love. We allowed Facebook users across the digital landscape to add filters to their own profiles and express their support for equality with their own networks.

Creating a Digital Wave

The launch of our red logo took HRC's digital presence to new heights as people worldwide embraced it as a call for change. Celebrities, companies, elected officials and countless more people added the HRC red logo to their profiles to spread awareness ahead of the Supreme Court decisions.

Celebrating Our Victory

As the Supreme Court handed down landmark decisions in both 2013 and 2015, HRC was there with hundreds of supporters and thousands following online to celebrate marriage equality. Our collective efforts to affirm that love is love had finally paid off and granted same-sex couples in all 50 states the right to marry.

Our work continues.

You'll receive email updates from HRC. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Manage Your Membership

Adjust your membership details

Equality Magazine

The nation's largest-circulation LGBTQ+ magazine

Full-time positions, fellowships and internships

Press releases, corporate assets

Department contacts, membership inquiries

The Human Rights Campaign, All Rights Reserved

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Journey to Marriage Equality in the United States - HRC

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The road to nationwide marriage equality was a long one, spanning decades of United States history and culminating in victory in June 2015. Throughout the long fight for marriage equality,...

# data[].attributes.body
Research shows many disparities between LQBTQ+ people of color and white people. LGBTQ+ individuals who were people of color were consistently worse off in most areas of health, social, and economic well-being than White LGBTQ+ individuals.

Another interesting thing to note is that those who identified as women reported higher food insecurity, and unemployment, and lived in low-income households. It is important that we understand that there are many identities and roles that individuals are impacted by.

thisisloyal.com, L. |. (2022, February 25). Racial differences among LGBT adults in the US. Williams Institute. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/racial-differences-lgbt/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
LGBT well-being at the intersection of race

Using data from the Gallup Survey and the Generations and Transpop studies, this study examines whether adult LGBT people of color differ from White LGBT people in several areas of health and socioeconomic well-being.

Nearly half of LGBT people of color live in low-income households.

Findings reflect enduring patterns of disparities along the lines of race, gender, and sexuality.

Fewer adult LGBT people of color have depression compared to White LGBT people.

Visit the data interactive

Overview

This final report in the series, LGBT Well-Being at the Intersection of Race, uses data from the 2012-2017 Gallup Survey and the Generations/Transpop studies to assess whether LGBT people of color (POC) differ from White LGBT people on several areas of health and socioeconomic well-being. We find that more LGBT people of color report economic instability compared to White LGBT people on many indicators. Additionally, disparities for POC LGBT adults persist in the health domain, except for measures of depression where more White LGBT adults report having depression compared with POC LGBT adults. Further, more women of color who identify as LGBT reported living in a low-income household, and experiencing unemployment and food insecurity compared to all other groups. We also found differences in outcomes among LGBT POC on some economic and health indicators. Overall, the series of papers demonstrate that the relationship between race and LGBT status is a complicated one that differs by outcome and racialized group. Regardless of these complexities, the data point to the need for social and policy interventions that address economic and health disparities along racial, gender and LGBT statuses, separately and at their intersection.

Introduction

"No issue has proved more vexing to this nation than the issue of race."

Race is arguably the most distinguishing factor delineating the U.S. population's health,, economic state,, and freedom. Throughout the reports in this series, LGBT Well-Being at the Intersection of Race, we examine race and differences among LGBT adults by race, not as a biological characteristic, but as a social construct that has evolved in numerous ways in the U.S. in the interests of White supremacy. The previously published reports for this series provided data on the well-being of LGBT adults by racial groups in the U.S., with attention to areas in which sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) disparities may exist. Our previous analyses of whether there were differences between LGBT and non-LGBT adults within each racial group revealed a complex narrative on the role of LGBT status within racial groupings in the U.S. While White and Asian-American LGBT adults consistently fared significantly worse than their non-LGBT counterparts on economic and health indicators, the story was less consistent among other racialized groups. Those findings possibly point to the ways LGBT status varies as a driving force behind economic and health issues for racialized minority groups. This final brief in the series of reports on race and LGBT status adds to this work by synthesizing what the data show about the role of race among LGBT people in prevalence of economic, health, and social disparities.

White Privilege and LGBT Well-Being

In most domains of health and social and economic well-being, LGBT people of color (POC) fared worse than White LGBT people. The analyses of economic outcomes show a consistent advantage experienced by White LGBT people. Fewer White than POC LGBT adults reported experiencing food insecurity, unemployment, use of Medicaid for health insurance, and living in a low-income household. For example, 47% of POC LGBT adults were living in a low-income household compared to 36% of White LGBT adults. Further, more women of color who identify as LGBT reported living in a low-income household and experiencing unemployment and food insecurity compared to all other groups.

With regard to health, racial disparities among LGBT adults were identified in many domains, but not all. For example, more than a quarter (27%) of LGBT adults of color reported that their overall health was only fair or poor, compared to 22% of White LGBT adults. When looking across the specific health conditions (e.g., asthma, heart disease, diabetes, cancer), health behaviors (smoking, drinking), and stigmatized health factors (weight, disability) from the prior reports in the series, there is no consistent set of health factor differences across race among LGBT adults that may easily explain the higher percentage of fair and poor health reported by POC people.

Mental health is one domain of health outcomes in which racial minorities do not consistently fare worse than White respondents. Specifically, fewer POC LGBT adults report depression diagnoses compared to White LGBT people. This finding, particularly among Black Americans, is consistent with the general literature on racial differences in depression-while Black Americans tend to report higher levels of psychological distress than White Americans, they do not report depression diagnoses or symptoms at higher rates. Also in line with previous research, more women report experiencing depression than men, with White women reporting this most.

Diversity of Experience Among LGBT People of Color

Asian American LGBT people tend to have similar economic and often better health outcomes compared to White LGBT people, a finding that is reflected in the larger literature regardless of LGBT status. These findings also support current calls to disaggregate the data on Asian Americans and Native Hawaiians/Pacific Islanders in health and economic data reports as their experiences in the U.S. and outcomes remain very different. But there are other core differences among people of color that warrant highlighting. More American Indian and Alaskan Native (AIAN) LGBT adults report depression diagnoses than all other racialized groups. Also, among POC LGBT people, Latinx and Asian American people reported lower levels of unemployment than the other groups. Finally, AIAN and Latinx LGBT adults have among the highest rates of being uninsured for health care (see Table A2).

Source: Gallup, 2012-2017
Note: AIAN=American Indian/Alaska Native, NH/PI= Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander

Source: Gallup, 2012-2017
Note: AIAN=American Indian/Alaska Native, NH/PI= Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander

Considering Social Context when Examining Race and SOGI Disparities

As we have noted across the reports in these series, there are several core demographic and social life differences between LGBT and non-LGBT people that may be factors in the health and economic differences observed. There are similar differences in demographic and other characteristics across racial groups among LGBT people that could be relevant to understanding the impact of race on well-being. For example, more POC LGBT adults are under 30 years old, live in urban areas, and are single. Additionally, fewer POC LGBT adults have a college degree (25% vs 43%) and more report raising children (40% vs 22%) than White LGBT people. When gender differences are considered, more LGBT White men have college degrees and less of this group have children than all POC groups and White LGBT women (see Table A1).

Other social factors and experiences relevant to both health and economic well-being include experiences with employment and housing, as well chronic stress, discrimination, and victimization. In some areas, LGBT POC people fared worse than their White counterparts. For example, a higher percent of POC LGBT adults reported experiencing discrimination in the past year (78% vs 68%), a major financial crisis (35% vs 26%), and felt they were alone too much (56% vs 50%). However, both groups of LGBT adults reported relatively similar levels accounts of many other types of stressful experiences, including various forms of victimization and conflict with parents (see Table A2).

Considering LGBT Status, Race, and Intersectionality in Health and Well-Being

In this brief we demonstrated racial differences in well-being among LGBT adults-in ways that implicate the privilege of Whiteness that show differences among people of color. This report, along with the previous reports in this series demonstrating LGBT differences within racialized groups, highlight the ways sexual orientation, gender, and racial social statuses represent significant locations of inequities in the U.S. Further, findings from White LGBT Adults in the US indicate that White non-LGBT people, particularly men, report higher levels of well-being across most health and economic domains than all LGBT people. As such, the collection of reports in the series highlight evidence that White male heterosexual cisgender status remains a salient nexus of privilege.

Yet, the findings overall do not implicate a simplistic narrative of the impact of an intersectional marginalized social status on well-being. Though comparisons across the "SOGI x Race" diagonal (i.e., comparing White non-LGBT to POC LGBT) may appear to indicate a universalized intersectional oppression effect, an analysis of the many cases in which LGBT differences in well-being were small within some racial groups complicates those types of conclusions. For example, White and Black LGBT people consistently fared worse than their non-LGBT counterparts, but AAPI, AIAN and Latinx LGBT people often reported similar or better levels of economic stability and health than their non-LGBT counterparts. With regard to gender, LGBT women of color report higher rates of many mental health and economic outcomes than their male counterparts, but this is not always the case. Similar percentages of women and men of color who are LGBT report having overall poor or fair health, and all have higher than White LGBT men and women. Further, the percent of POC cisgender straight people living in a low-income household was typically higher than the percent reported by White LGBT people.

Taken together, the findings show that a focus on the ways LGBT people of color fare far worse than White non-LGBT people (the intersectional diagonal) partially masks the highly significant role that race plays among LGBT and non-LGBT people for most outcomes. It also has the potential to obscure the way LGBT status has an ever-salient role in understanding mental health disparities regardless of race. As part of informing an intersectional perspective to address inequities among oppressed groups, it is important for future research to continue highlighting the outcomes and indicators of well-being in which belonging to more than one marginalized group in the U.S. does or does not produce exponential disparities.
Download the full brief Visit the data interactive

Racial Differences Among LGBT Adults in the US

Overview

Highlights

Data Points

Brief

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Racial Differences Among LGBT Adults in the US

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
LGBT well-being at the intersection of race Using data from the Gallup Survey and the Generations and Transpop studies, this study examines whether adult LGBT people of color differ from White LGBT people in several areas of health and socioeconomic well-being. Nearly half of LGBT people of color live in low-income households.

# data[].attributes.body
Social media has grown so rapidly that we are still catching up on its impacts. We now have instant access to societal bodily expectations and preferences and they are hard to avoid. This can create an unhealthy view of ourselves if we do not fit into the ideal. It is important for us to remember that these ideals are social constructs and are always changing.

Krzymowski, J. (2025, January 2). The link between social media and body image issues among youth in the United States. Ballard Brief. https://ballardbrief.byu.edu/issue-briefs/the-link-between-social-media-and-body-image-issues-among-youth-in-the-united-states

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Link Between Social Media and Body Image Issues Among Youth in the United States - Ballard Brief

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Forty percent of teens reported that content on social media caused them to worry about their image.

# data[].attributes.body
A large aspect of heteronormativity is media representation. Most people we see in the media, whether that be characters in a movie or a book, are cisgender and heterosexual. This means that a lot of individuals have not seen people who look or identify like them in the media. This can cause individuals, especially young people to try to fit into the norm and feel confused. Representation is a large piece of acceptance and empowerment.

Johnson, Q. (2023, February 1). Media representation and heteronormativity. Gender and Sexuality. https://sites.psu.edu/civiclifegenderandsexuality/2023/02/01/media-representation-and-heteronormativity/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Growing up, a lot of people do not get to see themselves portrayed in the media that they consumed. For some, this was not seeing people who looked like them. For others, they may look like the people in the media, but other important aspects of their identity are ignored.

# data[].attributes.body
Film characters throughout the years often reflect the gender stereotypes of the time. This study found that female characters displayed less agency than males and an object of the male's desire. Male characters were less likely to portray emotions of affection than females. These stereotypes are harmful because they consistently relay strict rules for what males and females "should" be. They also can reinforce sexist beliefs and values and promote gender bias.

Lights, camera...stereotypes? film characters’ actions reflect gender bias  - USC viterbi: School of Engineering. USC Viterbi | School of Engineering. https://viterbischool.usc.edu/news/2022/12/lights-camerastereotypes-film-characters-actions-reflect-gender-bias/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
From heroes saving the day to damsels in distress crying for help, the actions that characters take in films are a central component of movie storytelling. A new study by researchers at the Signal Analysis and Interpretation Lab (SAIL) at the USC Viterbi School of Engineering shows that film characters' actions tend to reflect widespread gender stereotypes, some of which may be harmful.

Using a novel machine-learning framework, the researchers at SAIL's Center for Computational Media Intelligence have been able to identify characters' actions from scene descriptions found in movie scripts. The model analyzed over 1.2 million scene descriptions for 912 movie scripts in 31 genres produced over a period of 100+ years (from 1909-2013), identifying fifty thousand actions performed by twenty thousand characters.

Statistical analyses revealed that female characters display less agency than male characters and are more likely to be the object of other characters' gaze, drawing attention to their appearance. Male characters are less likely than female characters to portray emotion and affection.

The new research, featured in PLOS ONE, builds upon computational media intelligence that USC SAIL has previously conducted to identify bias in media along ethnic, racial and gender lines. A prior study showed that male characters have twice the amount of screen time as female characters and speak twice as often. Researchers Victor Martinez, Krishna Somandepalli and Professor Shrikanth Narayanan hoped to shed light on how characters' nonverbal behavior may communicate bias.

"Analyzing the participation and the number of women characters on screen is not enough," said Narayanan, the paper's senior author and director of the USC SAIL Lab. "Increasing their presence is important, but at the same time it's also very important to ask: How are they depicted in the story? What actions are they performing in the film? What status are they given and how are they treated by other characters? Because even if you may have many women characters, if you're making them do stereotyped actions, with less agency or merely as background characters, then the depictions can still be harmful."

A century of stereotypes

The findings of the study provide quantitative evidence of media trends with respect to gender that have long been noted in social science research:

Characters' agency: Male characters are given more agency than female characters. They are less likely to be shown "letting" other male characters do something to them.

Male gaze theory: Female characters are more likely to be "gawked" or "looked at" by other characters.

Portrayals of emotion: Male characters are less likely to "sob" or "cry." They rarely "scream," "laugh" or "smile" at other male characters.

Violence: Female characters are more likely to be the targets of aggressive actions such as "kidnap," "drug" and "hassle." However, male characters are more likely to be "shot" at with a gun.

Displays of affection: Two male characters are rarely shown on screen "kissing," "dancing" or "hugging."

Though gender roles have been in flux in American society during the century of film studied, the researchers found that some of these stereotypical patterns remained consistent across decades.

"These kinds of messages are being communicated over and over through the movies," said Victor Martinez, who executed the study as a doctoral student at USC, adding that repeated exposure can unconsciously influence people's ideas of how men and women should behave.

"Media plays an incredible role in shaping our behaviors and actions," said Narayanan. "The way a story is told can create either distorted or positive views about gender that influence people's real-life choices."

First-of-its-kind framework

The majority of efforts to study gender representations in media are qualitative, relying on labor-intensive human annotations. The study's computational innovations allowed the researchers to analyze a large sample of film scripts in a short time span.

"While humans may take months to label some of these signals, a trained machine-learning model can do this in matter of days," said Somandepalli, who also worked on the study as a doctoral student at USC.

Martinez noted that tailoring the model to recognize actions in scene descriptions posed a significant computational challenge. "The models are trained on a particular set of data, and you need to adapt them to the type of language being used in the movie scripts," he said. "This is the first study to cross that bridge."

The researchers hope that the machine-learning framework will continue to be refined. To provide other researchers with the opportunity to explore additional questions related to representations of gender, age, and/or race in media, they have made the dataset and labeling models publicly available for download.

The hope is that data generated with these tools can help media gatekeepers make more informed choices about potentially harmful onscreen portrayals.

Said Somandepalli, "Providing empirical evidence will take us beyond anecdotal evidence to influence the appropriate stakeholders to take action."

Published on December 21st, 2022

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Lights, Camera...Stereotypes? Film Characters' Actions Reflect Gender Bias - USC Viterbi | School of Engineering

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A machine-learning framework developed by USC researchers reveals a pattern of stereotyped actions by male and female characters in films over 100-year period

# data[].attributes.body
Women are disproportionately sexualized and objectified in the media. These representations promote beliefs that women's value comes from their sexual appeal. It also often leads to objectification which leads women to be seen for simply their body. Women are more likely to be shown in revealing clothes, being dominated, or being portrayed as objects or animals than men. These representations reinforce negative stereotypes about women and their role in society.

Sexualisation & Objectification of women in media. shEqual. (2023, May 25). https://shequal.com.au/sexualisation-objectification/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Sexualisation & Objectification of Women in Media - shEqual

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Contrary to popular belief, sex doesn’t sell. We need to see more women in advertising – but not sexualised and objectified. Bye, exploitation. Hello, equality.

# data[].attributes.body
Society is becoming more and more diverse, but gendered language in the media and journalism is still common. This language can be exclusionary to a large number of people who are not cisgender individuals. There are over 1 million transgender and nonbinary individuals in the U.S. Gendered language not only promotes social stigma but can make it difficult to separate gender from sex.

DeMasi, L., & Schneider, G. (2025, February 27). The exclusionary messaging of gendered language in journalism. The Objective. https://objectivejournalism.org/2022/03/exclusionary-messaging-of-gendered-language-in-journalism/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Like the rest of us who attended grade school in the United States, I grew up in classes that were divided into "girls and boys." I didn't see gender-neutral signs attached to restroom doors. I was called a "little girl" and juxtaposed with the "little boys" in my class. Eventually, we were declared young women and men. Our world makes gendered language easily accessible and understandable, the go-to choice in writing and conversation.

To consider the importance of language as it pertains to journalism feels redundant. Yet by using gendered language in reporting, we work to maintain the status quo, the binary ingrained in us for centuries through colonization and capitalist power dynamics rooted in and predicated on the existence of a duality, an "us" versus "them." In actuality, many other cultures, primarily those that are indigenous or have been colonized in some way both historically or presently, view gender as a spectrum.

Activist and educator Sally Goldner once said, "It is really important, in a world that is often very 'either/or', to remember there can be both, neither, and everything - that is, other than the 'binary' of male or female."

We're in an era of mass information and access, with an increasingly, openly diverse population, composed of a spectrum of sexuality and gender identities, from cisgender to transgender, from heterosexual to queer, and everywhere in between. That readership relies on the media for information. Because good reporting can provide encompassing and long-lasting knowledge on a topic, journalists have the power to not only report facts, but shift social, political, and economic discourse, making the language they use fraught with purpose.

As a queer freelance journalist and writer who uses they/them and she/her pronouns, I've been on both ends of the reporting chain. My work and my personhood require that I not only report stories but read them as well. My identity works to inform how I engage with journalism from who I interview to subject matter.

But despite the truth of my identity, I am still perceived as a woman by and large by society. Inversely, that helps me understand the impacts of reporting that is exclusionary because of its use of gendered language. Through that, I've taken note of the widespread lack of gender non-conforming language in the media, and how that can create a ripple effect on and off the page.

How can gendered language cause material harm?

In reporting, to not reflect the over 1 million transgender and nonbinary individuals in the United States dismisses a large portion of the U.S. population, as well as the facts of events and stories. In a field rooted in getting to the truth of the matter, relying on gendered language ignores the main principle of journalists' ethics.

"A lot of companies will pledge inclusivity but the language used on their website is still incredibly binaried," Kale O'Hara, a nonbinary doula-in-training, said. "That immediately turns nonbinary and trans folks away. You can't pledge to inclusivity in theory and not practice."

In a field rooted in getting to the truth of the matter, relying on gendered language ignores the main principle of journalists' ethics.
Liana DeMasi

That often happens in news outlets.

For instance, the title of this New York Times article, "Cannabis Use in Pregnancy May Lead to a More Anxious, Aggressive Child", seems to indicate a discussion about how the use of cannabis by pregnant people might impact their child's development.

However, the first opening words are immediately off-putting to a non-cis readership: "Children of women who use marijuana..." Not every pregnant person identifies as or is a woman, making this article feel irrelevant to non-cisgender folks who are or will be parents. Sure, the diction is exclusionary, but its impact can be more severe.

Since the topic covers cannabis use and pregnancy, a pregnant non-binary or trans person might be left without answers as to how cannabis use might affect their unborn child and how cannabis use might affect them.

"When I read an article with gendered language, especially if it's medically-related or physical, it leaves me wondering how [the topic] might impact my body," O'Hara said.

The main study referenced in the New York Times article discusses "maternal" cannabis use. "Maternal" is a binary description of a person with a uterus or someone capable of vaginal birth.

This ignores something trans and non-binary people have been talking about for years: Biology does not predetermine a person's identity.

While the study does not include a pool of subjects who are on hormones to deduce whether or not the impact of cannabis on those parents is similar or different, not every non-binary and trans person is on hormones. In other words, to make the study more inclusive, researchers could have run more diverse testing.

"[One of the driving forces in my using gendered language] was the research itself," said Melinda Wenner Moyer, the reporter who wrote the Times article. "But I suspect the biggest driver was habit. I'm actively trying to work on noticing gendered language when I see it, and correcting myself when I use it."

While Moyer could have asked the two doctors behind it about why their study pool wasn't more diverse or what they suspect the effects might be for those on hormone replacement therapy (HRT), the general usage of gender-nonspecific language can help encourage those studies. Incorporating inclusive language while discussing studies that use the opposite could serve as a call to action for the medical world at large to follow suit, both by changing their diction and including more diverse testing pools.

Either way, language could have been altered throughout the article since the study can still be spoken about in gender-neutral terms without compromising the science. Moyer went on to write a piece for , which also discussed a study that could have fallen into the same trap. However, with the help of her editors, she wrote a more inclusive piece.

"I remember having this 'aha' moment when I saw their changes," she said. "And I realized, 'Wow. I haven't been considering the implications of my word choices enough, and I really need to be doing a better, more careful job.'"

The urgency of moving away from gendered language in journalism

Whether through allyship or hiring more LGBTQ+ reporters and editors, these discrepancies can be flagged and altered. Further, ownership and an active desire to shift practices is valuable, both for readership and other journalists.

Diversifying who a reporter speaks with on a subject can also help mitigate inclusivity issues.

"If you're looking for experts to weigh in on an issue like reproductive health you'll need to be judicious about who you speak to because the majority of people will speak in gendered terms. It's frustrating, but it's not unworkable," said Ziya Jones, a Health and Wellness editor at XtraMagazine.

But making language shifts requires people to understand it's not just journalists who default to using gendered language and need to take responsibility for it, O'Hara said.

"Unless they're trans or nonbinary, doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals rarely know how to talk to me, whether about testosterone or what to expect after top surgery," they said.

Utilizing gender-inclusive language can encourage more thorough medical treatment while influencing policy and social rhetoric.

"Using gender-neutral pronouns is definitely a huge step towards challenging our internalized gender biases and being more inclusive of non-binary individuals," said Jacqui Carini, a non-binary film and television producer.

For instance, using gender-neutral language in an article about pregnancy challenges the notion that only women can get pregnant, increasing positive and healthy medical interactions, while breaking down that idea in social interactions and healthcare policy.

According to Jones, moving away from gendered language is "beyond political correctness." Properly addressing and acknowledging trans and nonbinary people can be critical to ensuring they receive the care they need.

"Speaking to and incorporating more diverse experts and sources can address a lot of the disparities that exist in talking about people, but more than that, it can work to achieve a higher healthcare standard for a lot of people," Jones said.

Gender-neutral language can also provide exposure to other lived experiences and the diversity and nuance of others' existence while educating beyond medical and policy-making fields.

O'Hara said they can seek out representative publications and reporting that best represents them, but for the rest of the cis-population who are receiving their information from mainstream publications, representation and inclusivity fall short because it is unlikely they are regularly exposed to trans and non-binary identities and experiences.

And within that, education, exposure, and safety fall short. Hate crimes are rampant in times of disinformation and discrimination. We saw the Human Rights Campaign track 2020 as the most deadly year for transgender and gender-nonconforming individuals to date. 2021 surpassed that data. More widespread usage of gender-neutral language works to make it the standard both on and off the page.

The unspoken but present inclusion of gender-neutral language in reporting holds the ability to increase LGBTQ+ visibility while correcting preconceived notions. In those same schools that divided us up by girls and boys, I remember the importance placed on the notion of tolerance. While I find tolerance to be a frivolous goal in the face of discrimination, hate crimes, and oppression, any well-meaning efforts toward it, however rooted in "political correctness," are fallible and disingenuous if not rooted in action in journalism and beyond.

While I do not fault a journalist for using gendered language in a piece, it doesn't negate a journalists' responsibility to stop using gendered language. The power of our roles comes with a certain urgency. Journalists explore and discuss the truth; in that way, our reporting reflects as well as influences the current state of affairs.

"The more we continue to use gendered language in our writing, the more we perpetuate the status quo and alienate people who are trans or non-binary," Moyer said. "We mislead the public, fuel stereotypes and exclude others."
Liana DeMasi is a fiction writer and freelance journalist living in Brooklyn, NY, with bylines in The Boston Globe, i-D Magazine, Poynter, Atmos and others. You can follow her on Twitter or Instagram @lianademasi. This piece was edited by Janelle Salanga. Copy editing by Gabe Schneider.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The exclusionary messaging of gendered language in journalism

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In a field rooted in getting to the truth of the matter, relying on gendered language ignores the main principle of journalists' ethics.