A new poll shows that even a plurality of people who voted for Kamala Harris in 2024 oppose equal sports education opportunities for trans youth.

An Economist/YouGov poll asked U.S. adults if they support or oppose “allowing transgender student athletes to play on sports teams that match their gender identity, rather than the sex they were assigned at birth?” Overall, only 22% of respondents said they support it, while 67% said they opposed letting trans kids play with others of their gender.

Related

The absurdity of being Riley Gaines

Among people who voted for Harris, only 39% said they support trans student athletes, while 43% said they oppose them. The difference was more stark among people who voted for the current president; only 6% supported trans student athletes and 89% opposed.

Men (72%) were somewhat more likely to oppose trans student athletes compared to women (62%), despite how the issue is often presented as a battle for women’s rights.

Never Miss a Beat

Subscribe to our newsletter to stay ahead of the latest LGBTQ+ political news and insights.
Subscribe to our Newsletter today

People over the age of 45 were less likely to support trans student athletes than those who were younger. Meanwhile, Black and white respondents opposed trans student athletes at 66% and 68%, respectively, while Hispanic people were less opposed, at 56%.

The poll was conducted from January 23 to 26 and involved 1,684 respondents.

Part of the reason that the poll may have found such low support for trans student athletes is that it presented letting trans kids participate as their gender or as their sex assigned at birth as two equally likely possibilities, when it’s unlikely that students who have already started transitioning will participate in sports at all if they can’t participate with others of their gender. A trans girl forced to play on the boys’ team or a trans boy forced to play on the girls’ team could be outed or feel very uncomfortable in such a situation.

Moreover, the science is less conclusive when it comes to a supposed competitive advantage than many Americans believe. Trans girls who take puberty blockers and hormone therapy before they undergo male puberty haven’t been shown to be any different from cis girls in terms of sports ability, something that many people who are not informed on the issue refuse to accept, even in the face of evidence. There is currently a Supreme Court case specifically about trans student athletes in this situation, and some Supreme Court justices refused to believe experts’ testimony saying that, absent male puberty, trans girls won’t have any sort of advantage.

The degree to which having undergone male puberty and then hormone therapy provides any advantage at all is in dispute, and there isn’t much research on the topic. Some studies have even found that transitioning could give trans women a disadvantage in sports compared to cis women.

Last, polls show an increasing hostility towards trans kids playing sports ever since Republicans started a national moral panic about the issue following their losses in the 2020 election.

A 2021 Gallup Poll found that only 34% of American adults believed that trans people should be allowed to play sports on a team that matched their gender, while 62% said that trans people should be forced to play sports on teams that match their sex assigned at birth. But a 2025 Gallup Poll found less support for trans student athletes, wtih 69% opposing letting them play as their gender and 24% supporting.

A 2025 NBC News poll found that only 25% of Americans supported trans women being allowed to participate in women’s sports, while 75% opposed. That survey did not specifically ask about students.

“Sports… is one of our most emotional touch points as Americans,” nonbinary ESPN journalist Katie Barnes told LGBTQ Nation last year. “Broadly, we love sports, and we love to hate sports and hate each other because of who we root for. And you know, sports and fandom is something that is both developed through participation and also is hereditary.”

“And then when you overlay that with ideas about gender norms… where folks have feelings about the way that things should be in this world, and that is being refracted through the dual lens of gender and sport. And when you couple that with a very clear argument from those who are in favor of a restrictive policy that ‘boys shouldn’t play girls’ sports,’ well, that is going to get a lot of people going, right?”

The Economist/YouGov poll also asked people whether they thought that “society has gone too far/been about right/not gone far enough in accepting people who are transgender.” 44% thought society has gone “too far” while 30% said that society “has not gone far enough.” Men, people over 45, and Republican voters were all more likely to say that society has gone “too far.”

Subscribe to the LGBTQ Nation newsletter and be the first to know about the latest headlines shaping LGBTQ+ communities worldwide.

USA Hockey has approved a new policy that will ban transgender players from sex-segregated hockey programs, reversing its previous trans-inclusive policy.

As The New York Times’ The Athletic reports, the organization — recognized by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and the U.S. Olympic & Paralympic Committee as the governing body for organized ice hockey in the U.S. — approved its new Participation Eligibility Policy in mid-November. It’s set to take effect on April 1.

Related

A steamy gay hockey show is all the rage. This gay player says it won’t help real athletes come out.

The new policy notes that the “vast majority of USA Hockey’s programs are co-ed and not restricted by sex.” All players, regardless of their sex and gender identity, remain eligible to participate in youth hockey at all age levels and team classifications, junior hockey, and disabled hockey programs, as well as high school, prep school, and adult hockey programs that are not segregated by sex.

However, the new policy mandates that players who wish to participate in sex-segregated programs are only allowed to participate in programs that align with their sex assigned at birth.

Never Miss a Beat

Subscribe to our newsletter to stay ahead of the latest LGBTQ+ political news and insights.
Subscribe to our Newsletter today

Crucially, the policy includes an exception for trans men, who “may not play in programs restricted to females if they have undergone any male hormone therapy.”

As actor and former professional hockey player Harrison Browne noted in a recent Instagram post, the new policy effectively bans trans men on HRT from participating on both women’s and men’s teams.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Harrison Browne (@hbrowne24)

“A lot of trans men played women’s hockey their entire career, and women’s spaces are more safe for queer individuals, especially in hockey,” Browne, who recently appeared in Season 1 of Heated Rivalry, told The Athletic. “If the choice is given to play in the men’s league or not play at all, most trans men would choose not to play at all.”

As the outlet notes, Browne came out as trans in 2016 while playing in the National Women’s Hockey League, but he delayed HRT until retiring from the sport.

In his Instagram post, Browne took particular issue with the new policy’s impact on adult recreational hockey programs, or “beer leagues.”

“I’m not advocating for trans men to be able to take testosterone while playing competitive leagues,” Browne told The Athletic. “I’m talking about beer league, where the discrepancy of skill level is huge. It’s broken up into skill, and that’s the way that we should be breaking that up, in something that’s just for fun, exercise, and community. That also applies at the youth level, of just playing recreationally to gain friendships.”

According to The Athletic, USA Hockey’s Board of Directors approved the new eligibility policy in response to the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee’s recent policy change, effectively barring transgender women from competing in women’s events.

Last July, the USOPC updated its “Athlete Safety Policy,” noting that it had an “obligation to comply” with the current president’s February 2025 “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports” executive order, which threatened to rescind federal funding for organizations that allow trans women and girls to participate in women’s and girls’ sports programs. As NPR noted at the time, the USOPC sent a letter to the national governing bodies it oversees, instructing them to bring their own policies into compliance with the U.S. anti-trans order.

Subscribe to the LGBTQ Nation newsletter and be the first to know about the latest headlines shaping LGBTQ+ communities worldwide.

As part of LGBTQ Nation’s January issue, we asked readers to tell us how one year of the second Trump administration has affected their lives and what they hope LGBTQ+ leaders and allies do differently in 2026.

We received dozens of submissions and have been sharing them throughout the month.

For this post, we will be sharing the answers of queer folks of all identities who bravely gave voice to their pain and fear.

Here is what they had to say.

How has living under the second Trump administration affected you personally over the last year?

Never Miss a Beat

Subscribe to our newsletter to stay ahead of the latest LGBTQ+ political news and insights.
Subscribe to our Newsletter today

“As a transgender woman, the past year has been defined by fear, instability, and constant vigilance. The administration has actively moved to take away my medically necessary hormone therapy while simultaneously undermining basic civil rights — including legal identification, passport recognition, and even the right to safely use a restroom. I’ve spent enormous emotional energy fighting insurance denials, preparing for care interruptions, and worrying whether my existence will continue to be treated as political leverage rather than a matter of human dignity and survival.”

-AT, 60 years old, trans woman and lesbian

“My family had already moved the year prior to flee anti-trans policies in the red state we’d owned a house in, prior. When trump was elected, we used the rest of our resources to leave the country. Each move introduced significantly more precarity.”

-N Alexander, 36 years old, queer nonbinary trans man

“I hear more homophobic/transphobic things from conservative family members. I’m scared for established rights, like same sex marriage, to be taken away, especially after Roe v. Wade. I really hope there’s not another president like him when I’m older. It’s also hurt my family a lot financially.”

-Anonymous, 16 years old, bisexual and agender

“This administration makes me look at the US flag differently.  I want it to stand for everyone but I’m not sure it stands for me and folx like me.  I have had to consider things that no one should rush into but may be taken away, like surgery.  I’ve been stocking up on medication.  Some of my friends have left the country.  Preparing for the unknown is stressful.”

Ginger, 64 years old, bisexual trans woman

“It has been devastating, and eye opening. I knew this time was going to be difficult, but the experience of living through it has been nothing short of a mountain of indescribable horrors.”

-Anonymous, 25 years old, pansexual trans woman

“It has made me afraid everywhere I go that I will be shot or treated disrespectfully if I wear anything rainbow. I was actually really afraid of going to my local pride parade this year. I am very disappointed Kamala Harris did not win. I hope that it isn’t too late to take our democracy back.”

-Anonymous, 16 years old, gay

I married my husband 4 years ago. I’m afraid that this right will be taken away by the illegal SCOTUS he put in place.  Im a government contractor serving at risk young adults.  I’ve been fired and unfired twice this year, saved only by court injunctions.  I await the court decision next month if I will still have my union job.  At my workplace, I have seen draconian and hurtful anti-trans policies applied to our trans and non binary students.  I’ve seen ICE show up at work looking for students. I’ve agonized over the fear this administration is forcing over our community. It’s all personal to me.

-Josh, 45 years old, gay

“Never knowing if my marriage will be impacted; always wondering if my child is safe at school; worrying about who is watching us as a family when we’re out together in public. Makes me reimagine our entire democratic system and path forward while considering running for president myself.”

-Mariah R., 34 years old, bisexual and nonbinary

What do you hope to see from LGBTQ+ leaders and allies in 2026?

“I want to see courage backed by action — not just words. LGBTQ+ leaders and allies must aggressively defend trans healthcare, legal recognition, and bodily autonomy, and refuse to let trans people be treated as expendable or negotiable. Real unity, coordinated legal challenges, and sustained public support are essential if equality is to mean anything at all.”

-AT, 60 years old, trans woman and lesbian

“Organization. An organized resistance on every front to facism, and gentleness and mercy to the members of our own community. Empowered governments try to divide the populations they’re trying to control and destroy; resistance also means resisting that impulse and showing clear guidance on how to do that on the ground level. And above all, protect trans people. We stand together or we all fall.

-N Alexander, 36 years old, queer nonbinary trans man

“Push back against any consideration of taking away rights. Maybe more work done in Christian communities since the homophobia is so bad.”

-Anonymous, 16 years old, bisexual and agender

“We all need to keep up the good fight and take time celebrate the small victories when we get them. History tells us that the queer community is resilient and innovative and that gives me hope.”

-Ginger, 64 years old, bisexual trans woman

“Be a voice for the voiceless.”

-Anonymous, 25 years old, pansexual trans woman

“That they will stop being quiet and stand up for our rights. They (a lot of leaders) want to play moderate on the LGBTQ+ issues when we need real change. We cannot sit idly by and let (I pray to God it never comes to this) an erasure of us, whether it be of our culture or by genocide.”

-Anonymous, 16 years old, gay

“Someone who will fight fire with fire.  Leaders who inspire.  Leaders who won’t back down. Leaders who can motivate and activate our community in real time to real threats against us and our rights. I ain’t going back!”

-Josh, 45 years old, gay

“More creativity.”

-Mariah R., 34 years old, bisexual and nonbinary

Subscribe to the LGBTQ Nation newsletter and be the first to know about the latest headlines shaping LGBTQ+ communities worldwide.

Fox host Laura Ingraham is getting attention on social media for a bizarre gaffe.

She was talking with her guest about Minaj’s embrace of the president and movement to the far-right, when Ingraham brought up an issue she has with Minaj’s music.

Related

Gay couple divorced because one is a Nicki Minaj fan & the other loves Cardi B

“Conservatives, including myself, were beyond disgusted by some of her lyrics in her songs over the years,” Ingraham said. “W.A.P., I won’t say what that stands for, but-“

She then apparently was informed that “WAP” is not by Nicki Minaj.

“That’s Cardi B!” she exclaimed. “Oh, that’s how bad I am, that’s how bad I am. Thank you, Sam, I stand corrected.”

Ingraham: Nicki Minaj and Donald Trump—conservatives, including myself, were disgusted by lyrics in some of her songs over the years. WAP—I won’t say what that stands for. pic.twitter.com/BfoR9Szee3

— Acyn (@Acyn) January 29, 2026

On social media, people pointed out that Cardi B has famously had beef with MInaj in the past and is considered a strong progressive voice in the music industry, so it’s particularly ironic that Ingraham mixed up Cardi and Minaj.

We all look alike. https://t.co/rKC9l8vE0z

— Bakari Sellers (@Bakari_Sellers) January 29, 2026

Of course we have another instance of Fox News confusing one Black woman for another.In this case, it reveals that Laura Ingraham doesn't actually know that much about MAGA's new favorite rapper.www.independent.co.uk/news/world/a…

— Justin Baragona (@justinbaragona.bsky.social) 2026-01-29T16:53:52.509Z

Imagine 15 years in the game and they only remember your enemy Cardi B songs. You wore a Trump hat and they thinking about Cardi. Nicki going out sad

— Dez (@DezOnly30) January 29, 2026

Nicki throwing her career away for MAGA & they don’t even know her songs pic.twitter.com/xxk5niJAmE

— Mimi (@ENDINGYOURFAVES) January 29, 2026

WAP stands for Wrong Ass Person https://t.co/XuL5YT3ejS

— Kevin Cosgrove (@kcos194) January 29, 2026

Megyn Kelly thinks all Black women look alike https://t.co/IdXcXnzRaQ

— Trey Ferguson (@PastorTrey05) January 29, 2026

---

This article is offered exclusively to members, those who contribute monthly or annually to LGBTQ Nation.

View this article on LGBTQ Nation to learn more or log in to continue reading.

Tennessee state Rep. Monty Fritts (R), who is running for governor, has said he’d like a law to execute “those who commit an assault on the sanctity of life,” including those who assist children in securing gender-affirming medical care.

“I think we need a law in Tennessee that would allow for capital punishment for those who commit an assault on the sanctity of life,” he said in a recent conversation with Connor B., the host of the Christian Nationalist podcast Forge and Anvil.

Related

Attorney General threatens doctors with 10 years in prison for providing gender-affirming care

Insights for the LGBTQ+ community

Subscribe to our briefing for insights into how politics impacts the LGBTQ+ community and more.
Subscribe to our Newsletter today

Fritts then said he thought four things would “require” capital punishment that also “aligns with scripture.”

“I think that anyone who would try to disfigure a child through hormones or surgery, you might be eligible to capital punishment,” he said, adding, “I know that’s gonna make people’s ears ring, but that’s a gross, great sin.”

Gender-affirming surgeries are almost never performed on minors, and most major medical associations consider gender-affirming care to be the best, most effective, and essential care for the overall well-being of children with gender dysphoria. That is, Fritts is seeking to punish parents and doctors for pursuing the best-practice standard of care.

Fritts is merely echoing right-wing disinformation about gender-affirming care. The current presidential administration has used similarly horrific language, calling gender-affirming care “child genital mutilation,” “chemical castration,” and saying it involves “irreversible surgeries.” In reality, puberty blockers are reversible and do not directly cause permanent infertility – if a child stops taking them, then they undergo puberty.

Furthermore, Fritts may not realize that numerous theologians and queer-affirming churches interpret Biblical scripture as being supportive of transgender people and gender transition.

Previously, Fritts sponsored a bill that allows religious leaders, judges, county clerks, notary publics, mayors, and legislative members to refuse to “solemnize a marriage” if they object based on their “conscience or religious beliefs.” The bill became law in February 2024.

Fritts said the law is intended to stop young people from committing elder abuse by marrying old people to access their bank accounts. However, many pointed out that there is no actual reason for the law aside from granting the license to discriminate, since there is currently nothing on the books in Tennessee requiring ordained folks to officiate marriages they’re against.

Officiant Eric A. Patton explained, “Solemnization is not issuing a license. When the clerk issues you a license, it’s issuing you a license. They are not performing the marriage rites.”

Patton told WKRN in March that he believes the legislation is merely trying to test the limits of marriage equality.

“There’s nothing in the law right now that says anybody has to do any kind of marriage at all, so there’s no clarification that this bill provides,” he said. “This bill does nothing, essentially, except open the opportunity for a lawsuit… The way they have vaguely worded this is that they’re trying to invite a Kim Davis-type lawsuit to go up against Obergefell, because they’re wanting to test the marriage equality law as it stands.”

Molly Whitehorn, associate director of regional campaigns for the Human Rights Campaign, criticized the law, saying, “Let’s be clear — this bill is intended to exclude LGBTQ+ folks from equal protection under the law.” Whitehorn added that the bill could also deny marriage rights to interracial couples or any couples that a public official objects to.

Subscribe to the LGBTQ Nation newsletter and be the first to know about the latest headlines shaping LGBTQ+ communities worldwide.