A new study from the University of Montana found that gay soldiers who continue to remain closeted while serving are much more vulnerable to mental health challenges, including depression, anxiety disorders, drug use, Post-traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), and attempted suicide. About 20 percent of people in the study were discharged under Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Here are some of the findings:

• The actual rate of suicide among gay, lesbian, and bisexual soldiers is 14.7 percent, compared to 0.0003 percent among the entire veteran soldier community.
• LGB servicemembers are twice as likely to develop problems with alcohol.
• LGB servicemembers are five times as likely to show signs of PTSD.
• 68.7 percent were constantly trying to conceal their sexual orientation.

Researchers argue that even with the repeal of DADT, harassment and victimization of LGB soldiers will likely continue to be a problem in the military, leading to some of these same consequences. In contrast, past studies have also shown that out employees in any workforce not only succeed more themselves, but improve the productivity of their colleagues.

Gallup has conducted an expansive survey in an attempt to determine how many people openly identify as a member of the LGBT community across the United States. While the difference between specific states was not particularly significant, research Gary Gates points out that the findings do show that states with more protections for LGBT people tend to have more out LGBT people:

In general, states where residents express more liberal views are more accepting of LGBT individuals, while socially conservative areas are less accepting. Of the 10 states and D.C. where at least 4% of respondents identified as LGBT, seven are among the most liberal states in the country. Conversely, six of 10 states with the lowest percentage of LGBT-identified adults are among the top 10 conservative states in the country.

The states with proportionally larger LGBT populations generally have supportive LGBT legal climates. With the exception of South Dakota, all of the states that have LGBT populations of at least 4% have laws that prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity and allow same-sex couples to marry, enter into a civil union, or register as domestic partners. Of the 10 states with the lowest percentage of LGBT adults, only Iowa has such laws.

With demographics, it’s always important to keep in mind that the number represents something very specific: the number of people who are willing to disclose their identity to an anonymous pollster. It doesn’t represent the number of people who are actually gay but don’t want to tell a pollster, who don’t yet know that they’re gay, who deny that they’re gay, or who don’t identify as gay but do engage in same-sex behavior.

Still, these numbers are telling. The health benefits of coming out are well documented, so in an indirect way, these results show that having laws that protect LGBT people not only protect them from discrimination, but support their mental health and well-being. Indeed, the value of such positive climates is arguably a more compelling conclusion from this study than the demographics themselves.

Here’s how the states ranked in terms of how many people identified as LGBT:
Read more

A new study confirms that coming out is good for the mental health of gays and lesbians. In fact, owning their identities may help gays and lesbians actually fare better than their heterosexual counterparts, according to Canadian researchers:

The study looked at 87 men and women of varying sexual orientations, all of whom were around 25 years old. Forty-six identified as gay, lesbian or bisexual and 41 were heterosexual. Participants were given psychological tests and provided multiple urine and saliva samples to test for various biomarkers related to stress and general health.

All of the out participants had lower stress hormone levels and fewer symptoms of depression than those who weren’t public about their sexuality. Out gay and bisexual men also had lower stress and depressive symptoms than heterosexual men.

Previous studies have found similar results, but with caveats. People who come out can develop more significant resilience, but only if they receive positive support when they do. Reactions from parents, coworkers, and peers can have a profound impact on whether gays and lesbians benefit or suffer from coming out.

High school senior Jacob Rudolph won an award from his classmates at Parsippany High School in New Jersey on Sunday for “Class Actor.” In a courageous move captured by his father for YouTube, Jacob used the opportunity to inform them that he’d been doing a lot more acting than they realized and came out as LGBT in a brief stirring speech:

RUDOLPH: Sure I’ve been in a few plays and musicals, but more importantly, I’ve been acting every single day of my life. You see, I’ve been acting as someone I’m not. Most of you see me every day. You see me acting the part of ‘straight’ Jacob, when I am in fact an LGBT teen. [...]

Unlike millions of other LGBT teens who have had to act every day to avoid verbal harassment and physical violence, I’m not going to do it anymore. It’s time to end the hate in our society and accept the people for who they are regardless of their sex, race, orientation, or whatever else may be holding back love and friendship. So take me, leave me, or move me out of the way. Because I am what I am, and that’s how I’m going to act from now on.

Watch the speech and the crowd’s incredibly positive reaction:

Jacob explained that he identifies as “LGBT,” as opposed to gay or bi specifically because he is still figuring out his identity. After his courageous speech, he felt “like this immense weight was gone. I’d been carrying it around with me for years. It affected me academically, emotionally, socially.” He also admitted to NJ.com that he’s single, adding, ”That’s not why I made the announcement, but I guess it’s a bonus.”

Last July, a 22-year-old Eagle Scout named Tim Griffin was fired from his position on the staff at Camp Winton, where he’d worked for eight years, because he was gay. Officials from the Boy Scouts of America claimed it was because of his appearance and mannerisms, but other staff at the camp confirmed it was because of his sexual orientation. That, along with numerous other manifestations of the BSA’s anti-gay policy this year, prompted Derek Nance to come out as well.

Nance is also an Eagle Scout who has worked as a program director at Mataguay Scout Ranch in Southern California for 10 years. In a video posted on YouTube on Thursday, he explains that he couldn’t bear to keep his secret from his camp family any longer:

NANCE: I am gay… I live with camp friends, I attend school with camp friends, and I go out drinking at night with camp friends, and yet I’ve had to keep part of my life secret from them. The little things are the most frustrating. For instance, I can’t giggle when a boy texts me while I’m at camp. I can’t comment on how cute an actor looked in a movie we went and saw that weekend. And I can’t share with them the emotional roller coaster everyone feels while they fall in and out of love. I’m open to all my friends and family in “real life,” but to the people I truly feel closest to, I’ve had to remain distant.

Which is why I’ve chosen this moment to open up to them, and to every other staff member of the Boy Scouts of America who is in the same position I am in. The only way we will change the Boy Scouts’ discriminatory policies is if those of us who are on the front lines representing them to thousands of scouts every single summer start engaging in some open dialogue on this issue. Lawsuits from the ACLU or “confidential reviews” by the Boy Scouts are not going to change policies. The first step to coming to an agreement on this issue is to drop the old pretenses and stereotypes and to start actually talking.

Watch Nance’s courageous video:

Nance joins a growing coalition standing up against the antiquated policy. Every instance in which the Boy Scouts maintains that it is better off without gay scouts and leaders further demonstrates how pointless the discrimination truly is.

Rev. Paul Scalia

Now that the Supreme Court will be weighing in on the issue of same-sex marriage, the Justices’ biases on the basic principles of sexual orientation are under scrutiny — none perhaps moreso than Justice Antonin Scalia. Recently, he defended his comparison between homosexuality and murder, arguing simply that either can be morally condemned. He obtusely couldn’t understand why the gay Princeton student who asked the question wasn’t convinced by his response.

Insights into Scalia’s understanding of homosexuality (or lack thereof) can perhaps be found through his son, Rev. Paul Scalia, a Catholic priest in Arlington, Virginia. The younger Scalia has worked with the Church’s Courage ministry, which promotes “chastity” for gay Catholics using principles from ex-gay therapy. He has also spoken openly on the topic, and though he’s proven quite capable of reiterating the Church’s anti-gay teachings, a 2005 article reveals just how distorted the family’s view on homosexuality may be.

Writing about labels, Rev. Scalia compares identifying as gay to other school stereotypes like “preps,” “jocks,” and “geeks,” and argues that it’s unhelpful to young people to encourage them to embrace such labels. Challenging the notion that homosexuality even exists, he tries to distinguish between having “homosexual inclinations” or identifying as “a gay,” suggesting that some kids are “just confused.” Of course, his intention is to reduce homosexuality to “behaviors,” inferring that people with same-sex orientations are simply heterosexuals inclined to a special kind of sin. His true goal with this wordplay is to find a way to justify parents’ rejecting their gay children:

Granted, the more accurate phrases do not trip easily off the tongue. But what is lost in efficiency is gained in precision. Terms such as “same-sex attractions” and “homosexual inclinations” express what a person experiences without identifying the person with those attractions. They both acknowledge the attractions and preserve the freedom and dignity of the person. With that essential distinction made, parents can better oppose the attractions without rejecting the child. And as the child matures, he will not find his identity confined to his sexuality.

Further, opposition to homosexual attractions and actions makes sense only when it is rooted in the full truth of human sexuality. Gay school groups gain approval and support partly because heterosexual unchastity (contraception, masturbation, premarital sex, adultery, and all the rest) has compromised so many. Our culture’s deliberate separation of sex from procreation has destroyed our ability to articulate a coherent explanation of sexual ethics. Parents and educators have damaged the tools that would allow them to explain why homosexual activity is wrong.

For the Scalias, moral condemnation of homosexuality is just assumed, and the consequences of that judgment are par for the course. The consequences of family rejection for LGBT youth have been thoroughly documented, but for these men, rejecting “homosexual inclination” takes priority. Rev. Scalia relies on genetic uncertainty to conclude that homosexuality is not a “fixed, inborn orientation,” even though science does not doubt that is exactly how sexual orientation presents, regardless of its causes. He seeks to reject people for something that is wholly part of who they are and how they will lead their lives, ignoring that such an approach unquestioningly deprives them of life’s most basic sources of happiness and support: a loving partner and the opportunity to raise a family.

The phenomenon of “coming out” only exists because a culture that shuns homosexuality has demanded gay invisibility. The concept of “gay pride” came about not as flamboyant flaunting, but to counter the expectation of “gay shame.” These unique aspects to gay identities reflect the consequences of condemnation, not an impetus for them. Moral condemnation is not inherent; in the court of law, it must be justified beyond tradition and religious belief. Unfortunately, it seems Justice Scalia is not interested in such intellectual justice.

Ricky Martin with Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and his wife, Yoo Soon-taek.

Ricky Martin joined the United Nations for a forum Tuesday about LGBT human rights. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon offered remarks on “Leadership in the Fight against Homophobia,” calling on world leaders to end the persecution, harassment, and discrimination against LGBT people. Martin spoke to his own challenges and how important it was to overcome them, nothing that he would come out again if it were possible:

MARTIN: If I could come out again, I would come out again, because it felt simply amazing… To all the activists that  are here today that opened the doors of light to people like me and to families like mine, thank you so much for what you’ve done — I’ve done nothing.

For many years, I lived on fear… I was hating myself, because I grew up listening to a very crooked concept: “You’re gay, you belong in Hell.” It took me a minute to come out, but when I did, it felt incredible. And that’s what I mean: I wish I could do it again. I wish I could stand in front of the cameras and talk to people that are struggling with their identity, and just let them know that it’s just beautiful. You find love, you find conventions like this where you are simply loved. [...]

Watch it:

The United Nations has been actively supporting LGBT equality through repeated calls to end the criminalization and mistreatment of people because of their sexuality or gender identity. In September, the U.N.’s Human Rights Office released a new worldwide guide to LGBT fairness and safety.

MRC's Matt Philbin

Conservative Christians — namely, the Family Research Council — originated the term* “The Gay Agenda” to create fears that the gay community was scary and going to destroy society. Now that the so-called “agenda” is gaining some serious steam, those same equality opponents are trying to downplay the significance of the LGBT community, claiming the community is too small to warrant as much attention as it receives in the media. Matt Philbin of the conservative Media Research Center explains that the major cable news networks ran 213 “homosexual-related” stories during an eight-month period, vastly over-representing a small segment of the population:

PHILBIN: The stories that the networks ran about LGBT issues seem very exorbitant, especially when you compare it to say the Catholic population of the United States, which is about 25 percent. They only ran 131 stories dealing with the Catholic Church. Clearly, the gay issues, especially gay marriage, are one of their favorite topics.

Given the Catholic Church has made fighting marriage equality one of its top priorities, there may be significant overlap between the two topics, but Philbin does not elaborate on the point. He goes on to borrow some of the National Organization for Marriage’s race-wedging talking points to suggest that the media has fabricated the “growing number” of LGBT people to compensate for no longer having a heroic civil rights struggle to cover:

PHILBIN: They impart this sort of ’60s civil rights-type spin to issues of whether or not gays can get married, when, of course, that does nothing but cheapen the actual civil rights movement and the heroes that fought for change there. This is what they see as the issue of their day.

Nobody has claimed that the number of LGBT people has grown, but the number of out and visible LGBT people surely has and probably will continue to do so. There are many important reasons to distinguish between different civil rights efforts, and one important distinction in this case is how dispersed LGBT people are by the nature of their identities. Sexual orientations and gender identities are not directly inherited, which means that LGBT people are everywhere. As cultural portrayals have multiplied and public understanding has increased, more gay and trans people have felt safe enough to come out and live openly, allowing everybody in society realize that they know or have met somebody LGBT in their lives.

The “gay agenda” is prominent for two reasons, one that reflects the past and the other the future. Looking back, the “gay agenda” is huge because conservatives propped it up as a threat to society. But as awareness grows, the reason that the fight for equality will remain significant is because LGBT people are ubiquitous and are finally developing enough acceptance to be visible in all corners of society. Conservatives want either a big, scary gay community or no visible gay community at all, but both are tropes of the past.

*Editor’s Note: The Wikipedia page for the “Homosexual Agenda” linked here happens to feature an unidentified picture of me. I was not responsible for placing it there, but I do not object to its presence.