Category: LGBTQIA

GLAAD calls for action in response to Meta’s continued failure to adequately moderate anti-trans hate content.

This blog originally appeared at ADVOCATE.

GLAAD is criticizing Meta for its ongoing failure to effectively moderate anti-trans content on its platforms.


Amid an intensifying debate regarding social media’s responsibility in protecting LGBTQ+ individuals, GLAAD, a leading advocate for LGBTQ+ rights and representation, has strongly rebuked Meta for its ongoing inadequacy in moderating anti-transgender hate content. The rebuke was issued on Friday following Meta’s response to a decision by its Oversight Board concerning a concerning case of anti-trans content on one of its platforms.


Roughly eight weeks ago, the Oversight Board, vested with the authority to render non-binding yet precedent-establishing judgments on content moderation across Meta’s platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and Threads, reversed the company’s initial verdict to permit a post containing hateful rhetoric targeting transgender individuals to persist online.


Meta initially deemed a Facebook post, which appeared innocuous at first glance but contained imagery and text hinting at harm directed towards a gender identity-defined group, as non-violative. However, upon reevaluation, Meta recognized the content as infringing its Hate Speech policy, which prohibits content advocating harm or suicide against individuals or groups based on protected characteristics, including gender identity.

The post in question, which encouraged harm to trans people, highlighted a broader issue of Meta’s systemic failure to enforce its community standards against anti-LGBTQ hate speech, GLAAD noted.


Meta’s response to the Oversight Board’s ruling stated that it is “assessing feasibility” for more effectively moderating content representing gender identity through symbolic imagery without depicting human figures, as reported by Meta’s Transparency Center. However, GLAAD and other LGBTQ+ advocacy organizations view this response as insufficient, emphasizing the need for tangible action, which Meta has yet to provide despite months of demands.


Jenni Olson, senior director of the GLAAD Social Media Safety Program, voiced frustration over the timing of Meta’s Friday afternoon statement, issued just before the 60-day deadline set by the Oversight Board for public responses to its rulings.

GLAAD’s concerns were previously expressed in a June 2023 open letter, co-signed by over 250 LGBTQ+ celebrities, influencers, and allies, addressed to Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and other social media leaders. The letter denounced the widespread dissemination of anti-trans hate and harmful misinformation about transgender healthcare on the company’s platforms. It underscored the tangible repercussions, such as threats against healthcare providers and patients fueled by online hate and misinformation. Despite this direct call for action, Meta has not publicly outlined a plan to tackle these systemic issues.


GLAAD’s criticism is grounded in thorough research, including insights from its 2023 Social Media Safety Index. This index assesses the policies and practices of major social media platforms concerning LGBTQ+ user safety. According to GLAAD, the report exposes deficiencies in policy enforcement and moderator training regarding LGBTQ+ content. These shortcomings contribute to an environment where anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric not only endures but flourishes.

Sarah Kate Ellis, President and CEO of GLAAD, stated in a press release, “Meta’s continuous lapses in enforcing their own policies against anti-LGBTQ, particularly anti-trans hate, are utterly unacceptable.”

Ellis added, “The company has eroded the trust of its LGBTQ users, and genuine action is needed to start rebuilding it.”

Last week in Atlanta, Righteous Torrence “Chevy” Hill, a Black transgender salon owner, was reportedly killed.

This blog originally appeared at THEM.

Friends and family have turned to social media to honor and remember his life.

This article discusses the passing of an individual who identified as Black and transgender.

Last week, Righteous Torrence “Chevy” Hill, a cherished member of Atlanta’s LGBTQ+ community, tragically lost his life. He was 35 years old.

While details surrounding Hill’s passing remain unclear, an outpouring of tributes has flooded social media platforms. Affectionately known as “Chevy” and “TK” among loved ones, Hill was the proprietor of Evollusion, a salon that aimed to provide a sanctuary where the barbershop experience transformed into a space of safety and affirmation for young Black queer individuals, as highlighted by the Atlanta-based Black trans advocacy organization, Solutions Not Punishment Collaborative (SnapCo). On March 3, the salon took to Facebook to announce Hill’s passing, expressing gratitude for the heartfelt messages and shared memories that have provided solace during this difficult time. The post read, “The kind words and shared memories make our hearts smile and ease the pain. We know the awesome person Righteous was, but seeing the place he holds in your hearts brings some joy to our difficult days.”

In an Instagram post on Tuesday, model and activist Yves Mathieu honored Hill’s memory and shed light on his life. Mathieu reflected on the challenges faced by young Black queer boys/kids in navigating the barbershop experience, noting that Hill recognized this and endeavored to create a safe space where individuals could receive both the affirming style they desired and a sense of security. Mathieu praised Hill for successfully cultivating such an environment.

On Thursday, SnapCo took to Instagram to announce Hill’s homegoing service, describing him as “a soul who radiated love and light.”

SnapCo executive director Toni Michelle stated to Them that despite the lack of details surrounding Hill’s murder, they are providing support for Hill’s friends and chosen family in Atlanta as they mourn.

“We must pledge to protect one another, and practice that commitment,” she emphasized, adding, “Gun violence is plaguing our community, and anti-trans rhetoric and legislation fuel the violence that Black and trans people face each day. We pray that justice for Chevy, as well as the people who knew and cherished him the most, will be served in our lifetime.”

Michelle concluded her statement by urging individuals to sign SnapCo’s pledge to protect Black people and trans people.

SCOTUS Will Not Hear a Case From Indiana Parents Who Lost Custody of Their Trans Child | Them

This blog originally appeared at THEM.

The Attorney General’s office of the state has stated that the child was taken out of custody due to the development of a severe eating disorder, stemming from their parents’ refusal to acknowledge the child’s transgender identity.

On Monday, the Supreme Court declined to review the appeal of two Indiana parents who lost custody of their transgender child in 2021. The parents, who hold the belief that children should be raised according to their assigned sex at birth, had their case dating back to 2019. Mary and Jeremy Cox from Anderson, Indiana, revealed that their then 14-year-old child identified as a trans girl. Despite being devout Christians, the Coxes refused to acknowledge their child’s identity, leading to prolonged conflict. Attorneys for the Department of Child Services (DCS) stated that this conflict ultimately resulted in the child developing a severe eating disorder, leading to both parents losing custody in 2021.

In 2022, the Indiana Court of Appeals upheld the decision by the Department of Child Services (DCS) to remove a child from her parents’ care. The court found that her eating disorder stemmed directly from emotional distress and lack of support at home. According to the ruling, Mary Cox made comments to her child such as “[child’s preferred name] is the bitch that killed my son.” The court concluded that a custody order was necessary to safeguard the child’s physical and emotional well-being, emphasizing that while the Coxes are entitled to their religious beliefs, they cannot exercise them in a manner that harms their child.

On Monday, the Supreme Court declined to hear the Coxes’ petition, affirming the 2022 Court of Appeals decision. The Court provided no explanation for its rejection. Attempts to obtain comment from the Indiana Attorney General’s office were unsuccessful prior to publication.

Recent studies suggest that rates of disordered eating are elevated among transgender individuals compared to cisgender people, particularly affecting trans youth aged 18-22. As noted by essayist Aerin Cho in a 2021 piece for Them, eating disorders can serve as a means of exerting control over one’s body, especially for young trans individuals facing parental reinforcement of shame and negative body image. Research also indicates a correlation between parental shaming and abuse and increased rates of eating disorders, irrespective of transgender identity.

The Coxes faced another setback in court following the failure of a bill they supported, which was grounded in arguments for parental religious freedom. The bill, HB 1407, championed by the couple, did not advance through the state legislature last year and was shelved in committee in 2023. HB 1407 aimed to affirm Indiana parents’ authority to oversee the upbringing, education, healthcare, and mental health of their children without interference from the government.

The Supreme Court’s decision coincides with the beginning of LGBTQ Health Awareness Week, organized annually by the National Coalition for LGBTQ Health. This year, the event spans from March 18 to 22. Additionally, on Monday, the Court rejected the appeal of Couy Griffin, co-founder of the right-wing activist group “Cowboys for Trump,” who was ousted from public office in New Mexico after his involvement in the failed coup attempt on January 6, 2021.

https://www.them.us/story/supreme-court-will-not-hear-case-from-parents-who-lost-custody-their-trans-child

GOP governor signs marriage law that could set the stage for a challenge to Obergefell

This blog originally appeared at LGBTQ NATION.

Ordained individuals are not obligated by law to officiate marriages that conflict with their beliefs. However, initially, there was no law mandating their involvement in such ceremonies.

Governor Bill Lee of Tennessee (R) has approved a bill affirming that individuals cannot be compelled to officiate a marriage if it conflicts with their conscience or religious convictions.

H.B. 878 specifically addresses “solemnization,” referring to the act of conducting a wedding ceremony. Under Tennessee law, those authorized to solemnize a marriage encompass religious leaders, judges, county clerks, notary publics, as well as certain mayors and legislative members.

Advocates for LGBTQ+ rights argue that the legislation aims to grant officials the ability to discriminate against LGBTQ+ couples. However, according to state Representative Monty Fritts (R), the bill’s primary House sponsor, its purpose is to prevent instances of elder abuse, where young individuals marry elderly persons to gain access to their financial assets.

When the legislation was introduced last year, there were concerns that clerks could potentially refuse to grant marriage licenses to certain couples, including same-sex couples. However, according to state Senator Mark Pody (R), the bill’s primary sponsor, it does not permit government officials to deny marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Pody has a history of advocating against LGBTQ+ rights, having previously proposed legislation to allow state officials to disregard the legalization of marriage equality by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2015, and supporting transphobic bathroom bans.

Officiant Eric A. Patton clarified that “solemnization” does not involve issuing a marriage license. He emphasized that when a clerk issues a license, they are not performing the marriage ceremony.

Critics argue that the legislation serves no purpose other than to enable discrimination, as there is currently no requirement in Tennessee for ordained individuals to officiate marriages they object to.

Patton suggested that the legislation might be an attempt to challenge marriage equality laws. He expressed concerns that the vague wording of the bill could invite lawsuits similar to those involving Kim Davis, who famously refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples in Kentucky.

Governor Lee has not issued a statement regarding his decision to sign the legislation. Previously, he signed several anti-LGBTQ+ bills, including bans on drag performances, gender-affirming care, and trans athletes participating in women’s and girls’ sports teams.

In January 2023, Governor Lee announced the rejection of $8.8 million in federal funds allocated for HIV prevention and treatment by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Some of these funds supported programs associated with transgender healthcare. This decision, made amidst pressure from right-wing media, resulted in the loss of critical federal funding for the state’s healthcare initiatives.

North Texas teacher who was removed after wearing dress to school resigns

This blog originally appeared at KERA NEWS.

This teacher wore a dress on Sprit Day, didn’t break any LISD guidelines, and got forced out of his job.

Rachmad Tjachyadi, seen here in a 2015 photo, was described as a “beloved” chemistry teacher. He announced his resignation this week after being placed on leave for wearing a dress to the school’s Spirit Day, despite not violating any district policy


Following a leave of absence prompted by wearing a dress on Spirit Day, a teacher from Hebron High School has chosen to resign.

Expressing gratitude in a letter forwarded by Lewisville ISD to KERA, Rachmad Tjachyadi thanked the Hebron Hawks community for their unwavering support during recent weeks. Tjachyadi cited love for the school and its students as the primary motivation behind the decision not to return, emphasizing that any adult disagreements overshadowing student welfare warranted stepping away.

The controversy erupted after a video surfaced on the conservative social media platform Libs of TikTok, showing the chemistry teacher in a pink dress at school. Despite a reported petition with over 20,000 signatures in support of “Mt. T,” the district confirmed there were no specific policies regarding staff attire during themed days following a thorough review.

Acknowledging the support from Lewisville ISD and the findings of the investigation, Tjachyadi highlighted the impact of external negativity on his decision. Emphasizing ownership of the decision to depart from Hebron, Tjachyadi expressed appreciation for the solidarity shown by colleagues, students, and the district.

The resignation has left uncertainty regarding potential reinstatement efforts, as demonstrated by a rally and disruption at a recent Lewisville ISD board briefing. Some protesters indicated intentions to return at the next board meeting on March 18 in support of “Mr. T.”

In a letter addressed to parents, Hebron High School principal Amy Broughton announced the school’s search for a permanent replacement for Tjachyadi. While acknowledging the difficulty of the situation, Broughton stressed the importance of respecting Tjachyadi’s decision and offering unwavering support.

A Texas university president banned drag and compared it to blackface. Students are taking the case to the Supreme Court

This blog originally appeared at YAHOO NEWS.

The university’s religious president labeled drag shows as misogynistic and drew parallels between them and blackface performances.

In Texas, a group of students has petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for an injunction permitting them to host a charitable drag show later this month. Advocated by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), Spectrum WT, an LGBTQ+ student organization, along with two of its leaders, filed a federal lawsuit last April against West Texas A&M University and President Walter Wendler, alleging infringement of their First Amendment rights. The initial lawsuit contends that Wendler and the university violated the group’s rights by prohibiting a drag performance in March 2023, intended to support The Trevor Project, which offers aid to LGBTQ+ youth contemplating suicide.

In September, a district court rejected the group’s request for an injunction. Although an appeal was lodged, oral arguments are not slated until April, potentially causing Spectrum WT to miss another planned performance.

FIRE asserted that the student drag show constitutes protected speech and criticized the university president for allowing his personal religious beliefs to unduly influence his decision to prohibit the drag show on campus. FIRE stated in a release announcing the urgent appeal, “Whether it’s a passionate political speech, a Bible study, or a drag performance, the First Amendment safeguards student organizations from public university administrators seeking to suppress speech merely because it may offend them.” The organization criticized West Texas A&M University President Walter Wendler’s actions, noting his refusal to allow Spectrum WT’s PG-13 drag show, designed to raise funds and awareness for suicide prevention, stating, “‘West Texas A&M will not host a drag show,’ and indicating disregard for the apparent legal obligation to permit the event.”

In a blog post outlining his decision, Wendler criticized drag shows as misogynistic and degrading to women. He argued, “Does a drag show preserve a single thread of human dignity? I think not,” suggesting that such performances stereotype women in exaggerated, cartoon-like forms, thereby diminishing womanhood.

Applying the plaintiffs’ free speech argument, Wendler equated students performing a racially offensive show with the concept of ‘blackface.’ He emphasized his opposition to any performance that denigrates others, stating, “I do not support any show, performance, or artistic expression which denigrates others—in this case, women—for any reason.”

While Wendler commended The Trevor Project and its objectives, labeling support for the group as “a good idea,” he advised students to refrain from attending the drag show and instead donate directly to the organization.

After Vetoing Gender-Affirming Care Ban, Ohio Gov. Signs Even Harsher Executive Order

This blog originally appeared at THEM.

Mike DeWine announced a state “emergency,” prompting the implementation of new regulations regarding transgender medical care.

Following his applauded veto of an anti-transgender bill late last year, Ohio’s Republican governor, Mike DeWine, has now issued an executive order imposing stringent limitations on gender-affirming care for both minors and adults. Despite vetoing House Bill 46 on December 29, which aimed to restrict gender-affirming care and sports participation for transgender minors, DeWine emphasized in his veto message the life-saving impact of such care, based on discussions with the trans community.

However, DeWine hinted at concerns and the necessity for action regarding various issues, directing a cautionary note toward the Republican-dominated state legislature. In anticipation of a potential override of his veto by the Ohio House, DeWine signed an executive order last Friday, imposing even stricter restrictions on gender-affirming care compared to those outlined in HB 46.

The executive order, citing an “emergency,” mandates the immediate adoption of new restrictions by the Ohio Department of Health (ODH) without standard rule-making procedures. Effective immediately, these regulations prohibit gender-affirming surgeries for individuals under 18 for a 120-day period—a duration permissible under executive order procedures.

Additionally, the order introduces draft rules necessitating a public comment period, extending beyond youth to encompass all individuals receiving transition-related medical care. Under these proposed regulations, healthcare providers must report new diagnoses of “gender-related conditions” to the ODH within 30 days and disclose details of a patient’s gender-affirming care plan. Providers are also mandated to complete new forms prior to initiating or modifying a patient’s care, including information such as age, sex assigned at birth, and specifics regarding diagnosis or treatment.

The proposed regulations additionally stipulate that the Department of Health intends to release this aggregated data to the public from January 31, 2025, arguing that non-identifying information is not considered protected health information.

TransOhio, an advocacy group, raised concerns about the executive order on social media over the weekend, urging individuals to submit feedback on the regulations to both the ODH and the Ohio Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services. The latter recently published a similarly restrictive set of proposed rules on January 5, mandating, among other provisions, that providers must engage or have contractual arrangements with board-certified psychiatrists and endocrinologists. They also necessitate the submission of a detailed detransition plan for trans patients’ treatment approval by a medical ethicist. Additionally, individuals under 21 must undergo six months of psychological counseling before commencing care.

TransOhio outlined in their suggested message to the departments that these guidelines would fundamentally alter Ohio’s operational systems, placing burdens on providers and adversely impacting patients. The organization condemned the rules as unwanted, unnecessary, and potentially unconstitutional.

LGBTQ+ Voters Are All In for Democrats, While Anti-transgender Candidates are Alienating Everyone: GLAAD

This blog originally appeared at ADVOCATE.

LGBTQ+ Americans and registered voters in general want politicians to work more on the economy and climate and less on restricting the rights of women and trans people.

A recent poll conducted by Pathfinder Opinion Research for GLAAD suggests that restrictions on transgender rights and women’s rights are unpopular even among swing voters and supporters of Donald Trump. Notably, the survey also reveals that LGBTQ+ voters exhibit high levels of motivation to participate in the upcoming election, with a strong preference for President Joe Biden. These findings, released on Thursday, stem from a national survey of registered voters carried out in late January, along with interviews specifically targeting LGBTQ+ voters.

Highlighted in a GLAAD press release, the poll underscores that a majority of all voters express opposition to candidates who frequently advocate for limiting access to healthcare and youth sports participation for transgender youth. Moreover, a resounding 81% of respondents believe that healthcare decisions for youth should be determined by parents. Regardless of their political affiliation, whether LGBTQ, registered voters, Trump supporters, or swing voters, respondents unanimously agree that politicians should prioritize addressing inflation, job creation, and healthcare costs over restrictions on women’s rights and medical care for transgender youth.

Among LGBTQ+ registered voters, 83 percent expressed certainty in voting in November, with an additional 11 percent indicating a strong likelihood of doing so. Nationally, 68 percent of LGBTQ+ likely voters favored Biden, contrasting starkly with the 15 percent in favor of Trump. This disparity was even more pronounced in swing states, where 72 percent showed support for Biden compared to only 15 percent for Trump.

Nationwide, LGBTQ+ likely voters overwhelmingly leaned towards Democratic congressional candidates, with a substantial 77 percent in favor compared to a mere 14 percent for Republicans. Similarly, in crucial U.S. Senate races, 79 percent of these voters expressed their intent to support Democrats, while only 12 percent leaned towards Republicans.

Echoing broader voter sentiments, LGBTQ+ voters emphasized economic issues as significant priorities, particularly highlighting concerns regarding inflation and job creation. Additionally, issues such as abortion rights and climate change also featured prominently on their list of priorities.

Key motivations for LGBTQ+ voters included concerns about the nation veering towards a more conservative path, potentially resulting in the appointment of further right-wing Supreme Court justices, increased restrictions on abortion and parental rights regarding transgender children, and renewed efforts to outlaw same-sex marriage.

Moreover, a summary of the findings reveals that LGBTQ+ voters highlighted significant adverse effects on their emotional well-being and personal safety stemming from the current political climate. A majority reported experiencing negative impacts on their mental health and emotional well-being, strained personal relationships, and fears for their own or their family’s safety due to the prevailing state of political discourse in the country. Additionally, nearly half reported experiencing real-world or online harassment and bullying related to politics on a regular basis.

The summary emphasizes that these factors have LGBTQ+ voters poised to participate actively in the upcoming November elections, rallying behind candidates dedicated to protecting their rights, ensuring their safety, and addressing their economic concerns.

GLAAD President and CEO Sarah Kate Ellis highlighted the significance of LGBTQ+ Americans’ readiness to influence electoral politics and advocate for equality through their voting power. She stressed that the majority of voters, regardless of orientation, reject harmful anti-LGBTQ rhetoric and prioritize pressing national issues such as inflation, abortion rights, and climate change. Ellis urged candidates, parties, strategists, and reporters to recognize the influence of the LGBTQ vote and the critical issues that demand attention, including fundamental freedoms and collective safety and well-being.

13 of the Most Batsh*t Things N.C. Republican Governor Candidate Mark Robinson Has Said

This blog originally appeared at ADVOCATE.

Explore the uncensored rhetoric of N.C. Republican Governor Candidate Mark Robinson with these 13 jaw-dropping quotes. From controversial statements to eyebrow-raising remarks, delve into the unfiltered mind of this political figure. Brace yourself for a rollercoaster ride through some of the most outrageous comments made by Mark Robinson


The North Carolina Republican nominee for governor, Mark Robinson, is known for his controversial views, including Holocaust denial and likening homosexuality to pedophilia. Despite his divisive rhetoric, Robinson secured victory in the state’s primaries, raising concerns about his extreme positions on LGBTQ+, anti-Semitism, women’s rights, and science denial.

Throughout his career, Robinson has sparked outrage with numerous inflammatory remarks, too numerous to compile comprehensively. However, a selection of his most egregious statements serves as a stark reminder of the potential implications of his candidacy for North Carolinians come November.

Joe Biden tells trans Americans in his State of the Union address: “I have your back!” – LGBTQ Nation

This blog originally appeared at LGBTQ NATION.

“Banning books — it’s wrong! Instead of erasing history, let’s make history!”

President Joe Biden’s State of the Union address told transgender Americans, “I have your back.” He also spoke against book-banning and “erasing history,” and told Congress to pass the Equality Act, legislation that would enshrine LGBTQ+ civil rights into federal law.

“Stop denying another core value of America our diversity across American life,” Biden said, about midway through his speech. “Banning books — it’s wrong! Instead of erasing history, let’s make history! I want to protect other fundamental rights! Pass the Equality Act, and my message to transgender Americans: I have your back!”

“To all the transgender Americans watching at home – especially the young people – you are so brave. I want you to know your president has your back,” he added.

In his speech, he drew a sharp distinction between the American principles of “honesty, decency, dignity, [and] equality” and the attitudes of “resentment, revenge, and retribution” harbored by “some other people my age,” subtly alluding to former President Donald Trump without directly mentioning him by name.

“I know the American story,” Biden said. “Again and again, I’ve seen the contest between competing forces in the battle for the soul of our nation: between those who want to pull America back to the past and those who want to move America into the future.”

“Not since President Lincoln and the Civil War have freedom and democracy been under assault at home as they are today,” he noted. Then, after mentioning Russian President Vladimir Putin’s continued invasion of Ukraine — something Putin has justified with anti-LGBTQ+ bigotry — Biden then mentioned the January 6, 2001 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol carried out by Trump’s followers.

“Insurrectionists stormed this very Capitol and placed a dagger at the throat of American democracy,” Biden said. “We all saw with our own eyes these insurrectionists were not patriots. They had come to stop the peaceful transfer of power and to overturn the will of the people. “

“January 6th and the lies about the 2020 election, and the plots to steal the election, posed the gravest threat to our democracy since the Civil War,” Biden continued. “But they failed. America stood strong and democracy prevailed.”

“But we must be honest,” he added, “the threat remains and democracy must be defended. My predecessor and some of you here [in Congress] seek to bury the truth of January 6th. I will not do that. This is a moment to speak the truth and bury the lies. And here’s the simplest truth: You can’t love your country only when you win.”

Acknowledging public doubts about his ability to do his job as an 81-year-old, Biden said, “In my career, I’ve been told I’m too young and I’m too old. Whether young or old, I’ve always known what endures, our North Star: The very idea of America, that we are all created equal and deserve to be treated equally throughout our lives.” 

“We’ve never fully lived up to that idea, but we’ve never walked away from it either,” he said. “And I won’t walk away from it now. I’m optimistic.”

“My fellow Americans, the issue facing our nation isn’t how old we are, it’s how old our ideas are,” he continued. “Hate, anger, revenge, retribution are among the oldest of ideas. But you can’t lead America with ancient ideas that only take us back.”

“To lead America, the land of possibilities, you need a vision for the future of what America can and should be,” he added. “Tonight you’ve heard mine. “

“Above all, I see a future for all Americans,” he concluded. “I see a country for all Americans. And I will always be a president for all Americans. Because I believe in America. I believe in you the American people….So let’s build that future together. Let’s remember who we are…. There is nothing beyond our capacity when we act together.”

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑