524 - From Worried to Empowered: Taking Action for Relationship Rights with Experts Diana Adams and Brett Chamberlain
Welcome back Diana and Brett!
We are so excited to welcome back Diana Adams and Brett Chamberlain back to the show to talk about relationship rights and advocacy.
Diana Adams (they/them) is an international legal leader in advocacy for queer family forms beyond the romantic dyad. Diana is the Executive Director of Chosen Family Law Center, a nonprofit advocating for diverse family structures, & runs a boutique law firm providing mediation services nationwide for those hoping to negotiate intentional or polyamorous families. Diana’s TED talk ‘Why US Laws Must Expand Beyond the Nuclear Family’ explains their expansive vision of family. Find them on all socials @DianaAdamsEsq.
Brett Chamberlin (he/him) is a social impact organizer with over a decade of leadership experience building a more just and joyous future. He is the founder and Executive Director of OPEN, the Organization for Polyamory and Ethical Non-monogamy. Prior to launching OPEN, Brett worked in the environmental movement as the Director of Community Engagement at The Story of Stuff Project and the co-founder of the Post Landfill Action Network. He lives in the California Bay Area.
LGBTQIA+ rights and protections
In the first part of this episode, we chat about LGBTQIA+ rights and protections, covering the following topics and questions:
We want to be cognizant of the fact that things are constantly in flux and changing and evolving on a daily basis. We are recording this episode in early March 2025. As of right now, where are we when it comes to LGBTQ rights, civil liberties, etc? What is being taken away, and what is currently being threatened?
Gender affirming care is being threatened even in extremely liberal states and cities. What legal recourse do people have at this point to make sure they get the care they need? Are there places or organizations people can turn to if they are facing discrimination under these new laws, or from people emboldened by Trump’s executive orders?
What can queer and trans people personally do at this moment in order to protect themselves?
What can LGBTQIA+ people be doing to prioritize their mental wellbeing during this unprecedented time?
Legislation
In the second part, Diana and Brett go into detail about specific legislative efforts:
Diana, you have had a huge hand in trying to make New York City a sanctuary city for LGBTQIA+ people. What is the progress on that, and what will this initiative do?
Brett, what sort of legislative actions is OPEN working towards during this time? Have the actions of this new administration slowed that progress or made the work that you are doing more challenging?
What sorts of resources are you planning to provide for non-monogamous people and families? Are those resources different due to the political climate we are currently in?
Non-monogamous people don’t have a huge amount of legal rights as it is, but should they be worried about additional rights being taken away just because of their relationship identities? What can they do to protect themselves?
Listener questions
We also crowdsourced some questions from our listeners to pose to Brett and Diana:
In what ways do you think the current presidential administration will affect efforts to legally legitimize non-monogamous unions and safeguard alternative families?
Can you address the intersections between the issues LGBTQIA+ people are facing right now and race?
Given that no-fault divorce is potentially on the chopping block, I’d love to hear about alternatives to marriage in terms of creating security and access to the privileges that married people enjoy.
Could the government break HIPAA and start looking at people's medical records in order to find stealth trans people? What would have to happen to make that legal?
Check out the legislative toolkit from OPEN for ways to help further local legislation in your area: harvard.turtl.co/story/polyamory-legislative-toolkit.
Download the 5 calls app to contact your representatives and hold them accountable: https://5calls.org/.
Transcript
This document may contain small transcription errors. If you find one please let us know at info@multiamory.com and we will fix it ASAP.
Jase: On this episode of the Multiamory Podcast, we're diving into how each of us can become powerful advocates for the relationships and the family structures that we believe in, while also protecting our own mental health and our well-being during challenging times. Today, we are so thrilled to welcome back two incredible change makers who are on the front lines of creating more inclusive legal and social frameworks.
In our first half, we'll speak with Diana Adams, executive director of the Chosen Family Law Center and international legal leader advocating for family structures beyond the romantic dyad. Diana will share practical wisdom about how legal advocacy is making a real difference right now and how all of us can contribute to those efforts. Then in our second half, we'll bring on Brett Chamberlain, founder and executive director of Open, the Organization for Polyamory and Ethical Non-monogamy.
Brett brings over a decade of community organizing experience, and we'll share concrete tools for how each of us can engage with local advocacy work in ways that truly move the needle and make a difference in our communities. Together, we'll explore the tangible actions that we can take to protect the relationships we cherish, expand rights for all family structures, and build communities of mutual support, all while maintaining our own well-being. If we can't take care of ourselves, it's much harder to take care of others.
This is not about doom scrolling or feeling powerless or just complaining. It's about finding your voice, your community, and your path to creating meaningful change. We're incredibly excited to have Diana and Brett on the show today. Diana Adams, thank you so much for joining us today.
Diana: I'm so glad to be with you all again.
Dedeker: What's it been like at the Chosen Family Law Center since the election?
Diana: Since the election at Chosen Family Law Center, it has been a deluge of frightened LGBTQ and polyamorous people. We have received four to five times as many inquiries as we typically do, particularly from parents who are trans or in same-sex couples, and especially from frightened trans people, and the trans, non-binary, and gender non-conforming communities of people are intentionally under threat right now. There has been so much dehumanizing rhetoric from the federal government and from some states, and that's really impacting people's psyches. It's impacting people's mental health, ability to function.
We are there to provide people with support, or people who respond to every email, even if it's just to say, "I'm so sorry you're going through that, and we're not in Montana, but here's the best resource that we have for what to do." Providing a lot of that kind of support. Chosen Family Law Center's remit is to do direct legal services for LGBTQIA+ people in New York City, New York State, and polyamorous people and people in non-nuclear families and platonic partnerships.
We're the first legal services organization to expand from working with LGBTQIA+ families to also include the polyamorous families, the non-nuclear families, and those that are queering family structures. We provide a lot of that direct services work. We've seen an upramp in that kind of work, supporting people in getting name changes and getting things in. We've put out a tremendous amount of public education information that we put out on our social media and on our website.
It's been some of the most cited information before and after the election inauguration on what's going on, the changing status of what do I do about my name change for people nationwide. We're glad to provide that kind of source of support. What we also do is connect that with the legislative advocacy, because that's something that drove me crazy as a legal services provider, where it's dealing with so many people who are under stress and are being mistreated.
I want to also be able to deal with the systemic issues of what's causing this. That's felt really powerful to be involved in reviewing potential New York state laws that would be protective for LGBTQIA+ people and non-nuclear families, as well as the laws within New York City. We were invited by the New York City Council to present to a continuing legal education class for hundreds of lawyers who work for New York City government, including and beyond the New York City Council, on what we suggest we do right now to support the communities that we serve.
The polyamorous folks, as well as the LGBTQ folks, and really did a deep dive on our research on what's been happening in terms of trans sanctuary and safety laws that have happened elsewhere, and advocated for that, and gave an analysis of which ones have been effective and which ones haven't across the country at a municipal level, and also encouraged the relationship structure and family status non-discrimination laws that we've worked on in coalition with Polyamory Legal Advocacy Coalition and OPEN and Modern Family Institute and Harvard.
It's been great to have that opportunity to provide that kind of input and be there as a legal resource. We've been deeply involved over the last month in the creation of the laws that have been proposed in New York City, which just had a hearing last Friday about trans support laws, and they would be some of the most expansive and protected in the US if they pass.
We're recording this in early March, but if you're a New York City resident, check the status, check our social media, or our website for what's going on at Chosen Family Law Center. If it hasn't passed yet and we're not celebrating, then contact your city council member and let them know it's important for you that this passes.
Dedeker: I know that we're here mostly to talk about your work and what's going on right now but this particular wave, this influx that you're talking about of fear and need and attack, I want to know how does it land on your psyche personally, even for someone who's been doing this work for a long time?
Diana: Thank you for asking that, Dedeker. I think actually, right now I am feeling grounded and purposeful. I'm in my warrior mama mode, that's like, "Leave my kids alone." I'm in mama bear. I feel that about the whole LGBTQ community right now, and feel a bit emotional talking about it because I do feel so protective. I've been really, really driven. I've been working hard, but I'm also recognizing that I'm in warrior monk mode right now, like this is an ultramarathon. I just got somatic trauma, body energetic healing work earlier today.
I am like, "I am militant about my sleep schedule and my supplements. I am taking care of myself. I am getting my own mental and physical health cared for. I'm at the gym. I'm doing all the things. I'm shutting off the technology when I should," because I recognize I can't burn out. I want to be in this. I think I actually feel fortunate that I'm able to be an activist who's contributing right now as one of many, because that gives me a positive outlet for the fear and the frustration and the grief that I feel seeing what's happening, this assault on our American democracy.
As a lawyer, I'm an attorney because I believe in our civil rights and our constitution, and that is being violated. It brings up in my body, the violation of being a trauma survivor, because this is a violation writ large on our democracy, on my country that I have made a vow to protect. I have to really take care of myself energetically so that I'll be able to keep going. I'm also feeling that it's possible for this deep activism to be joyful and to be pleasurable. It can be beautiful to be deeply engaged. Then I see that I am working really hard at improving the laws in New York City, in New York state, and supporting with direct legal supports, the clients that I can in New York.
Then I'm part of a network of LGBTQ lawyers across the country who are doing this work, and other activists, and the environmental activists, and the ones that are doing AI safety. I can see what we don't see on the news, that there's this beautiful network of so many talented and passionate people who are doing their work sometimes quietly, so that it flies under the radar because the right is right now distracted by getting sued from every angle. What happened at first was intentionally intended to frighten us. It was a campaign of flooding the zone and trying to overwhelm us, and it was really intense.
They blew their wad. They did a bunch of executive orders. 95% of all of the smart lawyers and policy people in the country are working for us on this side of the resistance. They're getting sued from every single angle. Every single city in the country has people like me who are proposing positive legislation. Every single state legislature has people like me proposing positive legislation, and they are getting absolutely worried by that avalanche. While we may not feel that when we had this continuing onslaught, there is just such a movement of positive, peaceful warriors out there. It feels really good, actually, to feel part of that.
I was able to testify last Friday about the legislation that I was part of one small part of creating in New York City, to support my community. There was a tremendous joy and pride in that, and being able to stand up in the place that is my home and speak out about that and be in community with other advocates doing the same. There's something joyful about getting to testify because it's like you get the comment section in the room.
The trolls can be really loud, but it was me and 20 other people like me who are impassioned advocates and five parents of trans-teenagers who were incredibly moving and well-spoken about, "Please, give my child medical care," and then some brilliant physicians. Then you had three neo-Nazis and four crackpots. Do you know what I mean? Who were like, "I already read the research, but probably you should listen to me instead of this doctor because it doesn't feel right."
It's actually pleasurable to like, "Let's get the comment section in the room and testify and actually pass something." That's my long answer for how I'm doing okay. Those are the ways that I'm taking care of myself, by also thinking. I think that's one self-care tool that I would share is thinking about what is the zone of what I can impact and giving yourself permission to not be tracking closely everything else.
I want to know about the big broad strokes of the headlines of what's going on, and that I am LGBTQ issues and family structure issues, New York City, and New York State. That's what I'm doing. I don't need to know every single detail of every single executive order to also mind my own space. It's also important to tell the difference between what's actually happening that's a risk versus what is a threat that's a distraction.
Ending birthright citizenship, they made a press release that was shocking and dramatic, and that's going to be in litigation for the next year. That's not actually happening right now and probably won't. It's unconstitutional. I think focusing on what's actually happening and what is actionable for me and everyone picking the way that they can make impact.
Jase: I love that you shared the importance of taking care of yourself and also the importance of focusing on where you can actually make a difference. I think that that's something that I want us to touch on a little bit, especially in the second half of the episode when we bring Brett on as well, and we can talk about some of that. I'd love to talk a little more about what you were just mentioning about the fact that I think for a normal lay person like us, it's hard to know necessarily what are the things that are real threats or real problems and what are just threats, what are things just to scare us, and then also what are the things relevant and worth focusing on, I guess.
We actually did an episode earlier this year about how this compulsion to read news headlines and the way that news headlines have evolved over the last 50 years to be much more upsetting, essentially, actually leads to us being less informed because it's all about triggering these emotional reactions instead of actually seeing the whole picture of what's going on and things like if you told someone that there's less violent crime now than there was 10 years ago, they'd say, "Bullshit. I hear about shootings every day. That can't possibly be true," even if it actually is. Things like that where we don't really get a clear picture.
Is there anything you could help provide us and our listeners with some ways to gain that perspective, even if we don't have the legal training and we're not there in the rooms understanding all of this?
Diana: I think that's a great question because I think none of us can really be keeping track of all of this. There's the risk of doom scrolling into doing nothing. Staying up all night, fighting with some guy on Facebook, and doom scrolling, neither of those things actually move the needle very much. It's great if you can change somebody's mind sometimes, but just fighting with somebody who has a completely different opinion than you, maybe they're not going to change their mind. Maybe it's not the best use of time.
I think about supporting people and thinking what are the top issues that I am concerned about and who are the people who are working on them, especially the smaller groups, because it's easy to see the large groups that have multimillion-dollar budgets. Frankly, unless you also have $1 million budget, you're not necessarily the donors that they're looking for. You could make a much bigger difference in your local area.
I'm so glad that the impact litigation organizations exist, but giving to some smaller organizations and thinking, "What are the issues I'm interested in?" For example, Chosen Family Law Center is keeping people posted nationwide with our social media and our newsletters once or twice a month on, "Here's what's going on related to the passport issues for trans-people. If you're polyamorous, if you're trans, here's important things to know. It's time to get your documents in order, or don't send your passports in. Tell your friends." These are things that are actually actionable.
Picking some smaller groups that are maybe involved in your city and state, the way that we're involved in New York, and giving them a donation. The people who are at your city council meetings trying to pass positive legislation in your city, the people who are, or the groups that are at your legislature and who are trying to pass positive laws to protect your civil rights laws in your state, who are those people, and give money to them.
I think that setting a recurring donation for two organizations, if you decide, "Okay, LGBTQ issues and climate, these are the two issues that are more local for me. The groups that are working in my state level give some recurring donations to them and follow the newsletters and actually read them a few times a month," that kind of thing is helpful. I think that finding some smaller news sources is also helpful and deciding.
I made a decision for myself that I don't need to listen to six political podcasts to hear a dissection of a terrible State of the Union address. Like, I can get the broad strokes on that and I'm good. I don't actually need to keep doing that." Giving yourself permission to think, "Is this helpful for me to learn more about this, or am I scratching at a wound because I'm scared and because I'm anxious, and it feels like I should learn more?" Maybe learning more about something isn't going to be helpful if it's not something actionable for you.
I think finding those actionable pieces and finding the news sources that can be like, "This is my news diet." I tend to do a 15-minute podcast, a news skim in the morning, and then I'm like, "Okay. Cool. Now I'm just going to read the LGBTQ organization and climate organization newsletters that I get." Whatever that is for people, I think it's really nice to find a way to focus so that we can take care of ourselves because we need people to actually engage.
These small organizations need to keep going. They are the resistance. Many of them, like Chosen Family Law Center, we're working 80 hours a week, and it's not sustainable. We need to hire more staff. There's lots of other groups like that that also need to hire more staff to keep going. Leaning in and being in support, and there'll often be local area issues you can get involved in.
As Brett and I will discuss later, city councils are actually where democracy is functioning best right now in the US, and that's a microcosm. Getting involved at a local area can feel really cathartic because you can actually be involved, you can testify, you can pass something. That, I think, is much more healing and nutritious spiritually in this difficult time than the doomscrolling.
Emily: I understand that right now, we are in an ever-changing moment. Things are constantly moving, changing, and evolving. Right now, we're recording this in March 2025. However, can you talk about, from a federal level, where we're at in terms of LGBTQ rights and legislation, civil liberties that are being taken away? Like you said, I think it is difficult to parse through the scary headlines versus what is actually happening right now that is going to affect people very soon, or that is potentially going to be on the chopping block. What are the things that we need to be looking at there?
Diana: It's very important for trans-people to recognize that it is too late to send in a passport. That is something that is actively happening right now, that when people are sending in their passports, which is federal, so it doesn't matter what state you're in, when you're sending in your passport, they're being seized if you are asking for a gender marker change, if you're asking for an X or if you've previously changed your gender marker and that's flagged in their system. Then, they are just putting them in a pile and indefinitely seizing your passport, which is terrifying.
In addition to dehumanizing language, that is intended to frighten people, it's disgusting. It's important for trans-people to recognize that, that the time to send in your passport this isn't the time. In general, the passport process right now is an absolute mess. Even if you just didn't have to apply for a passport right now, I'd skip it, also so there's room for trans people to get their things processed.
At this point, what's really happening is that there are threats about what may happen. You can't change the Constitution with an executive order. Kings give edicts and press releases about what's going to happen. That's not our system. A lot of the rest is noise and it's threats, and it's intended to frighten people. This is a fascist test about how much they can get away with. They have been met with like the full force of the nerds, which I'm proud to be part of, of civil rights lawyers suing the hell out of them, and they're absolutely not going to win unless they've stacked the federal courts so much.
We are seeing some comforting news that they're pushing to see how far they can get, and it's critically important right now that there be a flat no. Even react sometimes with the, "You're trying to frighten me," with, "You are ridiculous. I'm not afraid of you because I've got a 100,000 smart lawyers, and you are five wing nuts giving a press release that was made by AI and a law student." No, you can't overwrite the Constitution like that. We're not going to allow that to happen.
Right now, we're circling the wagons on federal law with these lawsuits, which are often being led by the ACLU, as well as Lambda Legal are doing great work right now to defend and push back at the federal level. Then, in Congress just this week, there was an attempt to not allow trans women to participate in women's sports. It was going to be incredibly invasive for American girls because they were going to allow genital inspections of girls. It was an absolutely disgusting bill, enough so that even Republicans voted against it. It did not pass in Congress.
We found the point at which Republican congresspeople develop spines, and it's, "We're going to prevent no trans woman. There's never been a case that a male predator has gone through an elaborate process to be socially harassed, to socially transition to a woman just so they can harass women in bathrooms, because unfortunately, you can just harass women all the time. We're all assault survivors out here," so that's not happening. That's a fake ruse. Coaches are actually somebody who is slightly to molest a child historically.
The idea that we're going to traumatize an entire generation of young girls, half the population, to prevent this supposed insidious issue of the 1% of the population of trans people taking over girls' sports, which has not happened. We've reached a point where even Congress, Congressional Republicans said no. That's good news. We are seeing those points of pushback of, "Okay, we're trying to toe the line for Daddy Trump and do what he says so that we keep our jobs," but like, "Come on, we're not doing that." That's good news.
Blue states are doing as much as they can to make it absolutely clear that they're going to be reaffirming city and state law. In New York state, we have an incredible Black feminist attorney general who's brilliant, Leticia James, State Attorney General Letitia James. She's incredible, and she made absolutely clear when there was the executive orders about hospitals, that New York State hospitals need to all be continuing with New York state human rights laws and civil rights laws, and we're not interrupting anybody's medical care who is trans.
We have been developing shield laws. New York state already has a shield law, and we're working on even more robust one that basically says, "We are not going to allow out-of-state or federal prosecutions of people who, for example, doctors who were doing something that is legal in New York state." This already was tested. There was a woman who was in Texas, had a telehealth appointment with a doctor in New York to get abortion medication, and Texas tried to extradite him for criminal charges. New York State said, "Absolutely not. No, no way."
The governor, Governor Hochul, went on Rachel Maddow to be like, "No, absolutely not." Attorney General Letitia James said, "Absolutely not." It felt really good to have some smart, brilliant women be like, "Not in New York." That's happening across the country. Those are the pushback kinds of pieces. I think right now, what we're trying to do is we are building fortresses around those aspects of our democracy. We need your Congressperson to be speaking up. That's one way to make impact.
I'd say one of the best ways for a lay person to make impact is that there's the 5 Calls app, and you put in where you live, they pull up who are your elected representatives, what are the issues you're interested in, and they give you a script. It's like, "Okay, call your congressperson. They're being lousy on this. Tell them what to do. Okay, here's the script, make the call. Great."
Those are ways to be involved and make sure that your congressperson is doing what they can, and then within your state, you know, being involved in protecting that democracy. Although their behavior has been terrible, right now, there's actually a tremendous amount of pushback to stand up for LGBTQ people.
Emily: Something I've been thinking about is how all of this push with so many executive orders. There's a little bit of this feeling like the current administration is trying to do this big context shift, trying to push this message of, "Oh, well, the world's changed now." Like, "It's our world now, we've changed it." I think what I'm hearing from you is this sense of, "Sure, they can wave a fake magic wand and try to create this illusion that, oh, yes, the world's changed now."
You are on the ground seeing, "No, there's still a grounded reality that we can be in where there are people who are saying no, and there's still recourse, and we're not all going to hell in a hand basket yet while we still need to be aware of the threats," but it's like, "No, we have a fighting chance here, at least." Is that the correct message?
Diana: Yes, that is a correct message. In my studies of political science and history, this is one of those nerds-will-save-us kinds of moments. In that kind of study, you see that this is part of the fascist playbook of actually trying to overwhelm people so much that they give up. Trying to make people so afraid that they give up. That's actually, and fear is one of the ways to drive that, and that's one of the reasons I think that there is such a push right now with, there's a threat against cities that are immigration, sanctuary cities, including New York, and they're threatening to arrest mayors who won't comply with ICE, but also in a misleadingly named 'no bailouts for sanctuary cities'.
What they actually mean is that immigration sanctuary cities that are going to reaffirm their city and state human rights laws. If you don't allow immigration ICE agents to come into your elementary school classrooms and pull a child out of the classroom and traumatize the entire room and have the kids go home afraid, then you're going to lose all of your federal funding for disaster relief, hospitals, public schools, domestic violence shelters, food banks, everything, all federal funding.
Jase: Jesus.
Diana: That is an active threat that they're making, and it's intended to frighten people. I think that one of the reasons that they want to pull immigrants out of elementary school classrooms is to terrify everybody into submission. That's one reason. Besides the fact that it's the right thing to do, that we need to stand up for our immigrant communities because it's intended to allow dehumanizing people and see how far they get away with that, and it's also intended to frighten us because then it's like, "Okay, if they do that to immigrant people here in New York City, would they do that to trans people? Would they do that to trans activists like me?"
It's trying to frighten people. That's exactly what happened in Germany in the 1930s. That's exactly what's happened in Italy. That's exactly what's happened across South America. This is what happens when they're trying to take over aggressively and frighten people. I think it's an incredibly important moment to stand up. One thing that I shared when I shared my training with the New York City Council and Law Department was my background as an advocate for intimate partner violence survivors. The kind of psychology there is similar to the psychology of resisting a fascist takeover.
Part of that is if someone is trying to manipulate you with money, the answer is not, "Okay, I'll give in to him just this one time," and say, "Okay, fine, I'll let you step on my boundaries to get my child support payments." No, no, no. The answer is, "I should get my child support payments, but if you're not going to give me the child support payments, I'm keeping my boundaries, and I'm going to think creatively with other supports how to get that money because I am not going to participate in this." This is the dynamic that New York City is in with the federal government, and that other cities and states are in with the federal government right now.
Actually, looking at the budget and saying, "Honestly, they're providing 10% of New York City's budget," could we be like, "Okay, hope you don't do that," but like, "All right," because it's an abusive dynamic of fear that they're trying to use against cities right now, so to the extent that we can say, "Absolutely not," I think that we should, and try to think creatively about like, "Maybe we defund the police a little bit, maybe we get creative and fund those things ourselves. Maybe we tap some of the billionaires that live in this city. We have as many millionaires as we do homeless people in New York City. Perhaps some of them would like us to have civil liberties."
I think that it's worth it to think creatively about what we can be doing at a local level because it's essential that there is that standup. You don't have to be the person who's doing that, but look around at what are the organizations and who are the elected officials who are doing that, and bolster them and give them support.
Jase: I would love to pivot just slightly to another topic that I think is relevant to anyone doing intentional relationships, especially if that's non-monogamy, polyamory, things like that, but even just people wanting to be more conscious and intentional about their monogamous relationships. Is the talk about removing no-fault divorce? How much is that a real thing versus just a threat, and what are the things that our listeners should be aware of in that area?
Diana: I've been studying the history of marriage and laws related to women and gender as it comes to marriage and family because I'm writing a book related to chosen family right now and it is jarring just how much the actual history of marriage we want to be traditional is 5,000 years of marriage being a mercenary economic arrangement for sex and economic protection and passing on inheritance and property, and that the idea of romantic love is a very new one. "This is my soulmate and this is my person for life." That's a pretty new idea.
Also, we're on 100 years of women having the right to vote in the US, and still, the rights for women around the world are still abysmally low in many places. There are still places where women don't have the right to choose when they're getting married, when they're getting divorced. The idea that rape was possible within marriage and not that you own your wife and get to have sex with her whenever you want, that is a relatively new idea about as old as me.
Italy had laws about regulating tomatoes much longer before they had laws about what you can do to a woman. We are in, actually, a very new and fragile place, not just for LGBTQIA+ rights, but also for the rights of women. I think that the threats about no-fault divorce are very serious. I think that those are very serious threats because that is intended to bring back the possibility that women can't get out of marriage as easily. That's really scary and alarming for the rights of women. That will increase rates of intimate partner violence, that will increase situations of women feeling trapped.
What no-fault divorce really is, is it's just either of you get to get out of the marriage and file for divorce without having to establish grounds. Grounds are that you have to ask the daddy state and persuade the court that your marriage was bad enough that you deserve to leave. Think about that for a minute. That is really an ownership of people, people as people-as-chattel situation. We should not doubt that the US government would be up for that.
We still have slavery in prisons. We didn't get rid of slavery, we just relegated it to prisons, and then, coincidentally, made the most of the prison population Black. I would not put it past many places to do that with no-fault divorce, and it's an incredibly dangerous encroachment of women's rights, alongside the infringement on reproductive freedom and bodily autonomy. It's another attack on bodily autonomy because if we don't have the right to get out of marriages, we also don't have bodily autonomy.
Jase: To go back to our topic from earlier, in that case, what is the way that people could get engaged with that and help to support that and take that seriously when it feels like we're powerless to do anything about it?
Diana: I would look at organizations by state if your state is considering one of those laws. I would look at organizations that are feminists that are there in that state, who are the people who are lobbying your legislators against that? Get on their newsletter, suss them out, donate money if you can, spread the word, because we need those local people, state by state, to be pushing back, because that is something that's really dangerous, and feminist organizations are absolutely aware and paying attention.
It's one of these issues that's really intersectional. If you care about bodily autonomy, you need to care about these issues for women, and you need to care about these trans issues and LGBTQIA+ issues, even if you are none of those things. It's important if we care about bodily autonomy and civil rights to track this.
Dedeker: If something like that comes to pass, then how does that change the way that you counsel people around creating marriages or creating legal relationship or family structures?
Diana: One thing that's important to note is that divorce and family are regulated state by state, and so in New York State, in California, we're going to be fine, relatively. What I worry about here are red states. It is a privilege to be able to move, and not everybody can move, but if you're a person with a womb or an LGBTQIA+ person and you live in a red state, I wouldn't continue to live there. I would keep voting there, but I would move to a place that respects your civil liberties before I would give them taxes. I would want to be in a place that would keep me safe if I could.
Many people won't have that privilege to be able to up and move, and so then it's thinking about the communities that are local that are going to be in support of you. Within New York, I would say we are going to be able to continue with same-sex marriage, we're going to be able to continue with no-fault divorce, but red states may lose both of those, and so we're going to be seeing a further division. That's really alarming because we're getting to a place of, "How do we hang together as a union when we're this far apart?"
What the federal government is really emboldening is red states, and so they're not going to be able to tell California and New York what to do to a certain extent because California and New York have budgets that won't be bullied. We're provided a small percentage of our funds from the federal government. Another tricky thing here is that when we are creating these laws that are sanctuary and shield laws by state, in part what we're saying is, "We are not going to respect the criminal prosecution from Alabama or Texas or Florida, of a person who's within our state, who's a trans parent, who's a trans activist, who's a abortion doctor. We're not going to respect your law."
Well, then, how are they going to respect our same-sex marriages when we get same-sex marriage here? We are further saying, "I'm not going to give full faith in credit as we're supposed to do constitutionally to this state, and I'm not going to give full faith in credit here. If the federal government is not providing us with the support that we want and is not giving us federal funds, are we sending them our money back?" You start to continue down this path until the point of secession, and that is really possibility.
There's a possibility for California, for example, does not have reason to be bullied financially. That's already happened, and that's already happened in Trump's first term with both California and New York, in which governors just said, "No, I'm not going to do that. What are you going to do about it?" I come from a rural working-class kind of community. I know the kind of dynamic of being the provider and having the drunk uncle. It's like, "You really can't tell me what to do because I'm providing a lot of the support here." California is that. To say it's like Alabama, who's frankly, a drunk uncle of the country that's mostly taking money. Sorry, Alabama, but like--
Dedeker: We were here first, folks.
Diana: Oh, yes. We were here first. Sorry if that's rude, but states with these giant budgets are not going to be told what to do. We're providing a lot of the tax dollars into the federal government rather than getting the funds back. That's also alarming because we don't want the country to be divided, and we don't want to have a Christian fascist nation with a military as our neighbors. Sorry, this is dark.
Emily: To continue on that trend a bit. This I know, I've been hearing from many of the political podcasts that I listen to, but people are very worried about gay marriage being on the chopping block. Is that something that we should be worried about?
Diana: Yes. I would be worried about same-sex marriage, however, basically, there's going to be a spate of Supreme Court cases related to decisions coming down related to trans medical care and whether states are allowed to opt out of it. Also, that's already been argued, we're expecting this decision this summer. There's also likely going to be some federal cases going up before the Supreme Court related to this challenging same-sex marriage intentionally.
What we're going to see then, if that happens and same-sex marriage is overturned at the Supreme Court, then it will become a state's issue. What we expect is that you would still be able to go to New York or California or Massachusetts or many of the other blue states, Connecticut, and get your same-sex marriage and go back home again and have it be recognized, we hope. It will not impact blue states' ability to continue doing that, but what it will do is it will embolden red states to be able to disallow same-sex marriage.
A number of states already have what's called a trigger law, which means they never took it off the books, it just became unconstitutional, so it doesn't count, but the day after the Supreme Court overrules it, it would come back into effect. What they don't think though, is that even in those red states, they don't think that you could get rid of same sex marriages that have already been performed. You can't unmarry somebody that's married.
Emily: That's good.
Diana: Nobody's too worried about that. I don't want people to rush into getting married if it's not the right decision for them, but if people were intending to get a same-sex marriage and are in a red state, it could be a good time to do that while we can, but there will still be creative ways of navigating this. Frankly, economics and money drives so much of this. Weddings are often the most expensive party people throw in their entire lives.
I had a polyamorous commitment ceremony, turns out just as expensive. If you want people who live in Arkansas to go to a different state and throw their $30,000 party someplace else and pay the caterers and the wedding venue and the band and da da da someplace else like, "Okay, that's really a loss for your state budget and all of the economy in your area." Even for that Machiavellian reason, I think that's a reason that some states might be reluctant to get rid of that if they're going to be accepting the same sex marriages from elsewhere anyway.
Jase: I think that means this is a good time to get into the queer catering business, just in case, if you're in one of those blue states.
Diana: Just in case.
Jase: There could be a lot of business coming in. Maybe set up packages specifically for out-of-state people to get married. That's a good idea.
Dedeker: I think the three of us talked about launching a business where the three of us will show up and officiate your wedding, all at the same time as the polyamorous representatives. Maybe it's a time to really double down on that.
Emily: Somebody from our subscriber group asked us this question, could the government break HIPAA and start looking at people's medical records in order to find stealth trans people? What would have to happen to make that legal? You touched on that slightly, or we're grazing over it. Is there anything that you can speak to regarding that?
Diana: Yes. I think that that is absolutely a possibility that we need to be concerned and cautious about. I am less worried about how they could do it legally and more worried about them just doing it anyway. We are seeing a encroachment in general with personal privacy and data. Taking away those kinds of personal privacy is one of the things that this administration is allied with.
There has already been some of that kind of behavior when people are just trying to deal with their passports and their birth certificates and do those kinds of filings. Somebody who had had a birth certificate change years ago, they had a corrected birth certificate just mailed to them that went back to their gender assigned at birth. That kind of thing is already happening.
I am absolutely concerned that there could be a look into people who are self-trans. That's, once again, if people have the privilege to be in a state that's going to protect them, great. If not, we need to support those people too. I'm doing a lot of national advocacy kinds of calls to just provide brainstorming. I hope that people in those areas can find the mutual aid and local groups that will be with you to try to protect each other and recognize that a lot of that is an intimidation technique that may not come to pass with all the things that we worry about.
I do have a lot of concerns about that, about violation of privacy and all of the data that they have about us. I think that it'd be very difficult, at this point, to hide being LGBTQIA+ or polyamorous, for that matter.
Dedeker: We may have a lot of people listening who feel concerned about what's going on, but maybe they themselves are not trans. Maybe they themselves are not some flavor of LGBTQ. Maybe they are some flavor of non-monogamous. What do those folks need to be paying attention to or feel concerned about right now?
Diana: I want to really encourage people who are polyamorous or who are engaged in consensual non-monogamy to contextualize what they're doing and consider what they're doing as part of a movement for liberation and bodily autonomy. When we think about it within that lens, it's critically important that we not allow our communities to be divided. One technique when people are really afraid and feel this pushing repression is to allow us to be pitted against each other.
Is it the union workers or the women that want reproductive rights, or the trans people, or the Black Lives Matter people? That's how they divide us. I think we are so much stronger as a political movement when we see the bridges between the work that we're doing, when we see that we're all talking about freedom from government repression infringing on our lives, safety, bodily autonomy.
It's essential that if we want to continue that for all of us, we need to look out for those who are most marginalized now. We need to think about the immigrants and the trans folks and the women who are under threat with the reproductive rights in red states, if we want our bodily autonomy, and clearly we do. Even if you're not polyamorous, if you want to live without government repression and interference and have your vibrator collection or your psychedelics, or go to Burning Man, whatever it is you want to do, if you are interested in bodily autonomy, you need to stand up about trans people right now. You need to stand up about the dehumanization of immigrants.
I see those issues as really connected. I think that those of us who have privilege need to be speaking up right now because folks who are trans, folks who are immigrants, are terrified, understandably, and are also more likely to be economically marginalized, and just figuring out how to make it through right now. If you are a White person, if you're a cis person, if you know that your rent is going to get paid this month, then we need you to be speaking up. We need you to be calling your legislatures. We need you to be using your privilege.
That's one of the reasons that I am as loud as I am because I am a White, Ivy League-educated professional, running my own business, living in New York. I have the privilege to speak out. I am a cis-presenting, non-binary, trans person. I'm a queer person, but I'm also bisexual and partner to a man. I have a lot of privilege with that as a queer person. I feel like if anybody has the spoons and the stamina to engage in a fight, it's me.
That's one of the reasons I've been so out as a polyamorous person now for 20 years, is that I knew that I had the ability to take some of the heat for that. I want to really encourage and lovingly challenge polyamorous people right now to speak up on behalf of the trans community, in particular, because our fights are interconnected.
Jase: That's a great segue to bring on our other guest for this show, Brett Chamberlin. Thank you for joining us today, Brett.
Brett: My pleasure. Glad to be here.
Jase: Again, I keep bringing it back to it's one thing to feel concerned and want to do something. I want this episode to be about what does that look like? How can we actually do that? Brett, the OPEN Organization works with a lot of different groups across the country to help actually move some of these things forward. Could we, between the two of you, talk about, like, okay, say I'm-- I'll speak for myself. I am someone who passes as straight and monogamous when I need to.
I live with Dedeker, both of us are cisgender, we're White, my rent is paid. I'm in those same categories like you're talking about. What can I do? Obviously, I can talk about it on a podcast to encourage other people to do things, but what can I personally do when I'm not a lawyer, I'm not a legislator, I'm not any of those things?
Brett: I'll talk, in a moment, about the non-monogamy-specific actions that we're inviting folks to take. Before I do, I do want to double-click on the point that Diana just made about showing up and linking arms with those intersecting and overlapping movements, because ultimately it is the same broad multi-generational project for human liberation and human autonomy.
Even before we start talking about rights and protections for non-monogamous people specifically, it's really critically important that we work on activating the non-monogamous population across the US as a movement, as a new constituency that can really meaningfully show up for those communities that are more directly in the crosshairs in this moment. I want to hit that point first.
More locally to non-monogamy, the major intervention that the coalition of which OPEN is a part, alongside groups like the Chosen Family Law Center, Polyamory Legal Advocacy Coalition, the Modern Family Institute, and the Harvard Law School LGBTQ+ Advocacy Clinic, is the advancement of municipal-level non-discrimination protections. These prohibit discrimination in a range of domains on the basis of your family or relationship structure.
Relationship structure piece obviously accounts for non-monogamy. The family structure piece picks up a number of non-normative family structures beyond the nuclear family. We're talking about multi-generational households, blended families, multi-parent families, whether or not they're all in a non-monogamous arrangement together. So far, we've seen those productions passed in two cities in Massachusetts, Cambridge, and Somerville.
We saw them passed in two more cities in 2024—Berkeley and Oakland, California. OPEN, in the coalition of which we're a part, is now working to bring those protections to even more cities across the US. We're working with grassroots leaders in San Francisco, in Seattle, Portland, and a handful of other cities principally on the West Coast. Working to spread to the Midwest back into New England. The objective here is really to help create safer cities.
As Diana was describing, their work being focused on at this time, it's really important that the cities that are committed to inclusivity and acceptance do everything they can to really establish protections for people on the basis of all of the marginalized identities held by the residents there. To support people in doing that work, I'm really thrilled that we've just published together with the coalition I named earlier, a comprehensive legislative toolkit.
The legislative process can be obtuse to people. I think folks don't necessarily know how to go about passing a local bill. Of course, they can be forgiven for that. I think quite intentionally our capacities as change-makers in society have really been flattened down to the role of consumer and the role of voter. Part of this work broadly is about empowering people to take more substantive action.
As Diana noted earlier, localizing that is a really great opportunity to really meaningfully change things. You've got a lot more power locally. This legislative toolkit really just walks people through the process step by step. How does local legislation get passed? How might you go about finding a sponsor for the bill? How can you form a coalition of supporting organizations locally to pass these productions?
Folks can find that toolkit in two places. It's at harvard.turtl.co/story/polyamory-legislative-toolkit. Again, that's harvard.turtl.co/story/polyamory-legislative-toolkit. That's where you can find it as a printable PDF. You can also find the toolkit on OPEN's website, open-love.org/legislativetoolkit. In there, you'll find just a ton of resources for that whole process, top to bottom, including template, outreach materials, call scripts, and script for meetings.
The final really cool thing is that a lot of this toolkit is completely relevant regardless of the specific intervention that you're pursuing. While it is written around these non-discrimination protections, we think that it's a resource that can be really valuable for showing up and contacting a legislator about trans protections, about defending immigrant populations in your community. We're really hoping to see that resource circulate and be an important step towards building the political capacities of the non-monogamy movement.
Jase: That's fantastic. Just for our listeners out there, if you were worried about writing all that down or typing it in right now, we're going to have all of the links that both Diana and Brett talk about on this episode in our show description for this episode, as well as at our website on the page for this episode. You can go there and get them as well. Don't worry about that. Please do take a moment to go check those out. I'm really excited to look at them myself.
Diana: I've been really glad to work on the Legislative Toolkit with Brett at OPEN and with our other coalition partners, Polyamory Legal Advocacy Coalition folks, Modern Family Institute folks. I think it's, as Brett said, empowering for people because so often people will come and say, "Hey, come pass this in my city." This is a gentle way of us saying, "How about you pass it in your city. You can pass it. It doesn't need to always be us."
I think that's actually really important, and that's a gateway for other types of activism, of realizing that, especially in a smaller city, you could just contact your city council member and be like, "Here's a model legislation, I'd like to see it passed. We give all the information. Who are the possible local groups? Contact them. This is the type of groups that might support it. See if you can contact them yourself. Here's the model email to reach out to a legislator."
I think it's really also a really powerful tool that I'm really proud of having created together to enable people to engage in their democracy and engage in democracy at a local level. From having been involved in all the different levels of the US Democracy city council levels is where it's working best right now. That's a microcosm. You can actually do some really exciting work and see a bill from start to finish at a city council. You don't have all of those forces of corruption. You don't have the big money interests as much. You can actually have citizens show up and speak up for what they want. I think that's also something that is a balm to us right now, that is hope-bringing and generating.
I see this kind of work as also a really important form of mutual aid because I spoke about the policies that are intended to protect LGBTQIA+ people from outside forces that are trying to harm them. One of the things I've been saying and presenting in New York City is great to try to protect us from outside harm, but New York City has the legacy of having been the founder of the pride movement. I didn't even realize, until I lived abroad, that pride is called Christopher Street Day in the rest of the world-
Emily: Oh, wow.
Diana: -which is so beautiful and moving. We are a beacon. We have the largest LGBTQIA+ population in the US, and we're a beacon to people from around the world. Yet 18% of LGBTQIA+ people have been homeless in New York City-- Of residents in New York City, 18% of them have been homeless here; 27%, if they are Black, have been homeless; 49% if they are also Latina.
We don't do a great job of welcoming people. It's one thing to say, "We're going to protect you from policies that take away your healthcare. Okay, but what do we do when we get here? How do we actually support you when we get here?" I think that this kind of policy about the model ordinances that we've been working on for relationship structure and family status, non-discrimination that are described in the toolkit, that is a tangible way of helping people and encouraging people to support one another. It's encouraging of local mutual aid.
Some of the tangible repercussions for that that I see as an attorney is that this would mean that you're not going to be denied renting an apartment, for example, because your family doesn't look like the right kind of family, that you're not going to have that be held against you in a child custody case, maybe, that you're not going to have that be something that's held against you from your employer.
Also, that when we change laws this way, that creates a shift in public attitudes that is more supportive of the reality that the vast majority of us are in non-nuclear families. It raises awareness every time we pass one of these laws that 82% of US adults are in some family configuration other than a couple on their first marriage, living just with kids. The vast majority of us are doing something different. Each one of those groups might feel like a minority. The single mothers and the multi-generational immigrant families and the divorced, separated co-parents that now live with a different romantic partner and the polyamorous people, we may feel like we are disparate.
Actually, when we come together, we're the vast majority, and we have some power in that it also has opened minds, as I've seen, toward greater creativity in thinking about family policy. For example, the other work that we've worked on at a municipal level has been multi-partner domestic partnership. That has, thus far, only passed in three cities in Massachusetts. We really hope that that will continue to pass. However, there is no residency requirement in being able to go and get domestic partnered in Somerville or Cambridge.
That is a really tangible way that you can strengthen a relationship. It could be a platonic relationship, it could be your polyamorous partner. Part of the beauty of this is that it doesn't matter. It's getting the government out of the business of deciding if your romantic relationship passes scrutiny. You can just declare it and go and get that, and come back to your home city, and then potentially be able to put that domestic partner on your health insurance.
It also is a family status to cross a border in a pandemic or a war to be together. It's also a family status that means you can visit each other in the hospital. Those have tangible benefits. Just the fact that we were able to pass that in Massachusetts and New Yorkers went to do that. There was a case, West 49th v. O'Neill, which was passing on a one of the coveted rent-stabilized apartments in New York City only to a family member. This person was able to pass it on to, within the realm of possibility, was a non-cohabitating polyamorous partner, could be the family member that they could pass it on to because of the fact that there was a basis in law for this happening.
Every time we pass one of these laws that has that kind of tangible effect and ripple effect on family policy, even beyond just protecting us from discrimination.
Emily: Brett, I'm curious, how has OPEN's aims or anything along the lines of what you're doing changed since this administration has come into office? Has it just been full steam ahead with all of the stuff that you were previously working on?
Brett: It's one of those things where everything has changed and everything is the same. The work continues. Certainly, after the election, many of us was feeling a real sense of panic and dread, convened an emergency meeting of our board of directors, reached out to members of our community to invite their input, which is certainly all important work to have done. It allowed us to really take a step back and consider how we want to show up in this next era.
Ultimately, the conclusion that we came to is that the work that we're doing is important for all the reasons that we've been discussing here, and the core strategy of the work is sound. At the same time, we need to recognize that we are organizing under a very different fundamental reality. The way in which we are doing that work is now shifting. Certainly, there's more attunement to the potential threats that we do see coming down the pike. Things like challenges to no-fault divorce or access to contraceptives. We've also heard a lot from our community about the desire for more in-person connection, more access to networks of mutual aid, more opportunities to build power and make change locally.
There's a real appetite. Folks are asking, "What can I do?" We've really strived to shift our strategy a little bit to create more opportunities for that in ways big and small. Small things like we're holding out a book club. We've created a new community organizer support circle so that folks that are organizing are leading communities and events in the spheres of non-monogamy, sex positivity, kink can come together, get support, exchange best practices, and build power together.
We've also relaunched our event host guide, which is a guide to starting, growing, and sustaining a in-person recurring social meetup, be that a picnic or a hike or drinks, because when people get together and make connections, not only is it possibly an opportunity to find a new partner or a roommate, but it's also an opportunity to have conversations about how we are showing up for one another.
I think that that's really the deep importance of this work. Certainly, at the surface level, ending the stigma and discrimination against non monogamous people, expanding the rights and privileges that we have access to through more affirmative rights, like plural domestic partnerships, that's very important. At a deeper level, this is about a multi-generational social transformation away from a highly atomized, highly fragmented, highly competitive society back towards one where we can be in community, where we can be in connection, where we can be in family and chosen family, and showing up for one another. That's the real beauty I see of when people get together.
It's not only an opportunity for folks to provide and receive support and just check in with one another, hold one another in our pain and our anxieties, but also to start to sow the seeds for a more human future where we look out for one another. As Diana mentioned, the hope with these tools that we're providing is that we can really scale up these initiatives. We'd like to see a thousand flowers bloom. We'd like to really give people the resources, the tools, the knowledge, the support to move these interventions forward in their communities independently. Independently, but certainly not alone.
OPEN and our coalition partners are here to help. If you are starting the process, or even just thinking about the process of moving forward with the non-discrimination protections in your city or town, we'd love to hear from you, we'd love to let you know how we can show up, how we can support, how we can offer guidance and consultation and connection with other activists in your community and nearby cities and towns.
Please feel free to reach out to us at info@open-love.org. We also have a new monthly community space that we invite folks to drop into. It's our monthly advocacy huddle, such as the great office hours where you can check in with OPEN's team and with other organizers to just chat through the process, share where you're at, and roadblocks you might be running into, and really get one-on-one directed support. You can find that space at open-love.org/rsvp/advocacy huddle or in the show notes.
Dedeker: Listening to both of you speak, I think the real pearls of wisdom that I am gathering in my clutch today is this idea of, "Don't give up. It's not over yet until it's over, so don't give up. Look small and local. Look at the people who are close to you. Don't get overwhelmed by what's happening in these broad strokes. Look around at what's close to you, who is mobilizing, who can you support, and the sense that you are not alone. That if you're able and ready to take action, there will be other people beside you ready to support you, uplift you, and keep moving things forward so we can make some actual change."
Brett: There's two more pieces I'd add to that if I may. The first is taking care of yourself. I think Diana spoke to this, and it's critically important. We have to insure our abilities to keep showing up, as we are no good to the movement, no good to the people around, if we are burned out, if we are not really taking the time to step back. Somebody told me when I was a baby activist that organizing is not a sprint, it is not a marathon, it is a relay race.
We have to ensure our ability to show up in the long run and also to be ready to pass the torch because, as I've touched on a couple times, this is a multi-generational project of liberation. The other thing I'd want to note, too, is that because it looks at a lot of different things, I think that there's a bit of a conception that advocacy necessarily looks like walking yourself to a bank door, or marching in the streets with a megaphone. Actually, advocacy could also look like starting a Skillshare or a discussion group to gather your friends together and build solidarity, build networks of mutual aid, build skills and capacities to make change.
Advocacy could look like feeding the people that are showing up to the organizing meetings, it can look like giving people rides, it can look like doing research on the back end. I really encourage people to think about where they can plug in, where you can—to use a Ken Kesey quote that I love—put your good where it will do the boast. On OPEN's blog, which you can find on our website, open-love.org/blog, I actually posted a post shortly after the US election back in November with a list of ideas for how people can show up for advocacy in a range of different domains. It's called Organizing is an Everyday Activity. I encourage people to give a look and think about what speaks to you, how can you show up.
Jase: It's always a pleasure having you on the show, Brett, and getting to hear about all the resources that you're continuing to create so that people actually feel empowered to get involved. I know, for myself personally, this has always seemed like such a daunting, overwhelming thing that, unless I'm steeped and all I'm doing is running for city council or something, that I'm powerless to actually make change or actually get involved here.
I love that OPEN has made that so much more accessible for people to actually do things, and take action, and get the support that they need to do that whether they're focus is on LGBTQ, or trans rights, or non-monogamy protections, things like that. I love it. I'm still continuing to work with my workplace on getting changes into the handbook. They've updated their hiring practices but, yes, still have to update the handbook and get that passed through legal.
I keep checking in with them and realizing that that's an area where I could make a difference and that no one was even thinking about it before I brought it up. It wasn't that they were opposed, just no one thought about it. That's directly a result of the work that OPEN and the coalition is doing. Thank you so much, Brett, for joining us today.
Brett: Thank you, all. It's always a pleasure to chat.
Jase: Diana, thank you so much for joining us today and for sharing all of your experience and wisdom.
Diana: Thank you so much to all of you for being here as advocates. It's great to be in conversation with you.