The place I call home no longer calls me one of its own
I grew up poor, non-white, and queer, so it was never a picture-perfect place to me, but I always considered myself lucky to be here. Iowa has been a better place for people like me than other surrounding states, historically speaking.
We used to lead the charge on civil rights. In 1839, seven years before Iowa was even a state, the Territorial Supreme Court proclaimed that 'No man in this territory can be reduced to slavery.' In 1851, we became the third state to allow interracial marriage. In 1868, the Iowa Supreme Court held that 'separate' was not 'equal' and ordered Susan Clark, an African American, be admitted to the public schools. This effectively desegregated our schools 86 years before Brown v. the Board of Education. Same-sex marriage was legalized when I was 8, and sexual orientation and gender identity were added to the Iowa Civil Rights Act two years prior, in 2007.
Iowa is my home, and I used to be proud of that.
Oh how far we've fallen. I came out in 2011, 6th grade if you don't want to do the math. There was support from my family, friends, teachers, and many in my community. Sure, there was bullying, dirty looks, and the rare call to the school to complain, but I was overall accepted and safe. I always knew that a lot of people in Iowa hated me for being me, but there was rarely direct confrontation about it. Maybe that was the 'Iowa Nice' I always heard about.
In the 2022 election, Gov. Kim Reynolds was going to win, there was no question about that. But she still punched down and released an ad stating that 'Iowans know right from wrong, boys from girls.' This year, legislation has been proposed that would technically make it a felony for me in plain clothes to speak in front of children. And worst of all: Iowa is now the first state to ever remove civil rights protections from a group of people.
It is possible some of the discrimination we worry about won't actually be allowed; in reality, there will be costly legal battles, humiliation, fear, and laser-focused hatred. But all of what we are scared of is what the other side wants to be the reality. Iowa is my home, but why would I want to call a place home when lawmakers WANT me to be discriminated against — in housing, employment, wages, credit practices, public accommodations, and education?
Iowa is my home and now I have to think carefully before heading to a new restaurant, see if I can find out if the owners are allies, or take the risk of being humiliated and denied service for wearing the wrong clothes.
Why do they even want to pass laws like this when we all know it might not actually materialize in the ways they intended? Hate. That's it, that's the only reason. Hate.
It has nothing to do with protecting women. Sex is already a protected category under the Iowa Civil Rights Act. Preserving the protected status of one vulnerable population does not and should not come at the expense of another. Rather than protecting anyone, it opens the door to invasive policing of peoples' identities, and risks subjecting many to harassment and public humiliation based solely on appearances.
While we are unsure of the actual legal impacts that the Civil Rights Removal Act will bring, there are some things that we do know. According to research from The Trevor Project, anti-transgender laws cause significantly increased suicide attempts among transgender and nonbinary youth, by as much as 72%. They also found that 90% of LGBTQ+ young people said their well-being is negatively impacted due to recent politics. Iowa is my home but the lawmakers here don't care if their actions make kids like the kid I once was feel isolated and ostracized, even if it pushes them to take their own lives. So much for protecting children.
Iowa is my home, and I deserve to belong here just as much as anyone else.
Leading up to Feb. 27, the day of the final public hearing and ultimately the passage of the bill in both chambers, I was only angry. So. Incredibly. Angry. My mom would start the day by texting me to check in on how I was feeling, and later, during our almost-daily phone call, she would tell me how sorry she was that I have to deal with all of this. I was so angry about the legislation, about the people it would hurt, that I almost felt annoyed that she kept making sure I was okay.
Then, after chanting at the top of my lungs with , I went home. Mother knows best, it seems. It hit me hard. I called her and couldn't hold myself together, because I realized that not only am I angry, I am hurt.
'Mom, it hurts so bad,' I admitted. She listened, and when she replied all I could focus on was how much sadness and fear I could hear in her voice. How must she feel fearing that her son will face discrimination, legally, for living as his true self, something she always encouraged with love and support?
Iowa is my home, and I want it to be a place worth fighting for. A place that takes care of ALL of its people.
The Republican supermajorities could've put this amount of urgency and effort into passing any other legislation. They could be seeing to it that every child in this state gets a high-quality education instead of bleeding our public schools dry. They could be protecting our water, ensuring it's clean enough to drink, safe enough for us to swim in. They could be confronting the rising cancer rates, investing in health care access, making it easier — not harder — for Iowans to get the care they need. They could actually protect women by strengthening reproductive freedoms instead of stripping them away. The possibilities are endless.
They could be doing ANYTHING else, but they insist on making life harder for people like me. They insist on making an already vulnerable community a target for discrimination and hatred.
Iowa is my home, but is the future here worth fighting for?
Home is a place where you are known, where you are accepted, where you can breathe without fear. Home is where you grow, where you stumble, where you are allowed to exist fully as yourself without apology. It's not just four walls and a roof, not just a town on a map. Home is community. It's the people who show up for you, who see you, who stand beside you. Home is where you should feel protected, not persecuted. Where you should be nurtured, not pushed out.
Iowa was my home, and now I just live here.
This column first appeared on Rural Routes Substack. It is reprinted here via The Iowa Mercury and Iowa Writers' Collaborative with permission from the author.
Editor's note: Please consider subscribing to the collaborative and the authors' blogs to support their work.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
a day ago
- Miami Herald
Illinois names building after former HBCU athlete
Illinois has officially renamed one of its landmark government buildings to honor a celebrated Alabama State University (ASU) graduate and HBCU building at 115 South LaSalle Street in Chicago is now the Jesse White State of Illinois follows unanimous approval from both the Illinois House and Senate. A Ceremony Honoring a Legacy Governor J.B. Pritzker joined state officials, community leaders, and Jesse White himself for the dedication building is home to more than 15 state includes the Chicago offices of the Illinois Secretary of State and the Illinois Attorney General. From HBCU Graduate to Illinois Icon Jesse White earned his bachelor's degree from Alabama State University, an HBCU, in 1957, when it was still called Alabama State there he played both baseball and basketball, He went on to become the first African American elected Illinois Secretary of State in 1999, serving until that, White served 16 years in the Illinois House of Representatives and six years as Cook County Recorder of public service career began as a schoolteacher. Words from Jesse White "I am proud to have a State of Illinois building named in my honor," White said."I hope that the Jesse White State Building will inspire future generations of all backgrounds to serve with honor and excellence." More Than a Public Servant White's impact goes far beyond 1959, he founded the Jesse White Tumblers, an internationally known youth program that has influenced thousands of young Secretary of State, he improved customer service, modernized technology, and promoted organ and tissue donation across Illinois. His achievements are a source of pride for the HBCU community, proving that graduates of historically Black colleges and universities can rise to the highest levels of public service. Praise from Governor Pritzker Governor Pritzker called White "the longest serving Secretary of State in our history."He credited White with championing honest government and ending corrupt practices."I cannot think of a more appropriate name than the Jesse White State of Illinois Building," Pritzker said."It will serve generations and stand as a symbol of strong, effective government." Quick Facts About Jesse White Graduated from ASU, an HBCU, in African American Illinois Secretary of 24 years in the Illinois House of Representatives and as Cook County Recorder of the Jesse White Tumblers in 1959. The new name is more than a sign on a is a lasting tribute to an HBCU trailblazer whose decades of leadership, mentorship, and service have shaped the state of Illinois. The post Illinois names building after former HBCU athlete appeared first on HBCU Gameday. Copyright HBCU Gameday 2012-2025
New York Post
a day ago
- New York Post
Zohran Mamdani's $2,300 rent scandal exposes who this ‘socialist' is really looking after first —himself
Who are government-mandated rent-stabilized apartments for? Apparently well-compensated bureaucrats. Mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani is only paying $2,300 for his stabilized place in Astoria, despite making $142,000 a year as an assemblyman, plus stipends, in addition to however much his artist wife is also raking in. It's part of a long-term pattern of Mamdani scheming programs meant for less-fortunate people for his own benefit. First he's claiming to be an African American to get into college, now he's grifting on rent-stabilization that lower income people should be benefiting from. Advertisement Mamdani's rent had been pointed out for around a week before Andrew Cuomo caught on and challenged him in a Friday tweet about the matter, which attracted a staggering 33 million views on X. 5 Zohran Mamdani is under fire for only paying $2,300 a month for his rent-stabilized apartment. Getty Images 'You are actually very rich, [yet] you and your wife pay $2,300 a month, as you have bragged, for a nice apartment in Astoria,' the former governor wrote. 'I am calling on you to move out immediately and give your affordable housing back to an unhoused family who needs it.' Advertisement Cuomo inaccurately first claimed that Mamdani's home is rent-controlled (a statement he's since corrected). The one-bedroom apartment is actually rent-stabilized, as are almost half of rentals in New York City. But Cuomo is not wrong to question why Mamdani — who claims to be a champion of the lesser-fortunate — has never sought to correct why someone like him can benefit from a system that should be for low-income, housing-insecure New Yorkers first. Rent-stabilized apartments are subject to only modest annual increases in rent, as determined by the Rent Guidelines Board, and virtually guaranteed rights to lease renewal. And there are generally no income restrictions for moving into one — it's mostly a matter of luck. 5 Andrew Cuomo called for Zohran Mamdani to move out of his rent-stabilized home. @andrewcuomo/X Advertisement But shouldn't a socialist assemblyman be concerned with making sure low-income New Yorkers who need those protections most are prioritized in getting them? Apparently not so much. Mamdani has bragged about only paying $2,300 a month for rent in debates and interviews alike. He has made housing the primary pillar of his campaign, calling on New York City to freeze the rent for apartments under the provision of the government and to build 200,000 affordable housing units in the next 10 years. The question is: Who gets to benefit from these policies? Will well-off New Yorkers like Mamdani, who are unfairly occupying rent-stabilized homes, benefit from indefinite freezes? Advertisement 5 Cuomo is proposing legislation called Zohran's Law which would block wealthy tenants from accessing affordable housing. SARAH YENESEL/EPA/Shutterstock Former governor Cuomo told The Post Sunday that he's proposing new legislation, calling it Zohran's Law, which would block wealthy New Yorkers like Mamdani from accessing rent-stabilized housing. 'We're not supposed to be providing rent-stabilized apartments to the children of millionaires,' he said. Mamdani's father is a major Columbia professor, his mother an internationally renowned movie director. Cuomo is right, but he shouldn't stop there. Mamdani — who has previously called for the 'abolition of private property' — should be made to explain exactly who will benefit from his expanded affordable housing scheme. He did, after all, tell the New York Editorial Board that he's 'deeply skeptical of means testing' when asked by an interviewer whether we should 'have any way of ensuring that people who are better off who live in rent-stabilized housing don't get those benefits.' Seems like Mamdani has a very personal interest in batting down proposals for means testing. 5 Zohran Mamdani's wife, Rama Duwaji, leaving their apartment in Astoria recently. Brigitte Stelzer Advertisement 5 Mamdani was featured on The Post's cover calling on him to give up his rent-stabilized place. This scandal fits into a larger pattern in the candidate's past. It's not unlike when Mamdani, who grew up in Uganda but is of Indian descent, decided to check the 'African American' box on his application to Columbia University. Mamdani had no problem potentially benefiting from racial affirmative action — a system set up to uplift the descendants of American slaves — in the admissions process, despite quite evidently not being Black or African American. Advertisement Similarly, he seems to have no issue getting all the perks of rent-stabilization — a system set up to receive cash-strapped New Yorkers — despite being the well-compensated son of successful parents. Mamdani has a long history of identifying special-interest programs meant for others worse off than him, and then scheming them for his own benefit. Is this really the sort of leader that New Yorkers trust to roll out and dole out vast new entitlement programs?
National Geographic
5 days ago
- National Geographic
How the Confederate flag became an enduring symbol of racism
It was never the official flag of the Confederacy. But the Confederate flag has since been claimed by white supremacists and mythologized by others as an emblem of a rebellious Southern heritage. Confederate flag supporters climb Stone Mountain—the largest Confederate monument ever crafted—during a rally on August 1, 2017. They were protesting the appointment of the first African American to lead the board overseeing Stone Mountain Park, which is located in an area with centuries-old ties to the Ku Klux Klan. Rev. Abraham Mosley was appointed in 2019. Photograph by John Amis/AP Photo The Confederate flag has a complex history in the United States. Alongside the nation's growing acknowledgment of systemic racism in recent years, the flag predictably makes appearances at white supremacist gatherings. But how did the battle flag, also known as the 'Southern Cross,' come to represent the Confederacy in the first place? It's a story of rebellion, racism, and disagreement over the true history of the American Civil War. Here's the history of the flag. A lithograph from 1897 displays four prominent designs of the Confederate flag and states that the images 'help in keeping within us recollections of those who gave their lives to the 'Lost Cause,' and to perpetuate the memories and traditions of the South.' Photograph courtesy the Library of Congress Though it came to symbolize the Confederate cause, the flag was never the official symbol of the Confederate States of America. Instead, it was one of multiple banners that emerged during the brief Civil War. The CSA formed in the wake of the secession of 11 Southern states beginning in 1861. During the raid on Harper's Ferry, West Virginia, that kicked off the rebellion, members of South Carolina's militia identified themselves with a flag featuring a single white star on a dark blue background. Known as the 'Bonnie Blue flag,' the lone star was quickly picked up as a symbol of Confederate bravery. In 1862, the CSA adopted its first national flag, the 'Stars and Bars.' With a white star representing each Confederate state and three stripes, the flag riffed on the Union flag. Lithuania's timeless city On the battlefield, however, both looked similar enough to cause confusion among Confederate soldiers. The problem became tragically clear during the Civil War's first battle, First Manassas. As Confederate General Pierre Beauregard later recalled in his memoirs, he saw 'a flag which I could not distinguish … I could not tell to which army the [waving] banner belonged.' 'Friendly fire' and general disorientation caused frustration despite a victory for Confederate armies. Resolved never to inflict that type of confusion on his troops again, Beauregard asked his aide-de-camp, Confederate politician William Porcher Miles, to propose a design for a new battle flag. He came up with what is now known as the 'Confederate Battle Flag,' featuring an X-shaped cross and white stars representing each state to secede from the Union. The battle flag took hold in the public conscience. 'The flag would have meant treason' for loyal Unionists, independent historian Kevin Levin says. 'It would have been interpreted as [a symbol of] rebellion.' Meanwhile, the Southern Cross took hold in the South. It did not, however, become the CSA's official flag, though the Confederacy incorporated it in the left-hand corner of one of the three national flags it adopted over time. A symbol of segregation The Confederacy collapsed with its defeat in 1865, but its symbols retained their potency. 'There's continuity in how people understood its meaning,' says Levin. After the war, the reunified U.S. abolished slavery and attempted to confer civil rights on Black men. But that period, known as Reconstruction, ended in 1877. With its end, Southerners set to work rebuilding the segregated racial and social order they had fought a war to maintain. (Reconstruction offered a glimpse of equality for Black Americans. Why did it fail?) Part of that new social order was Jim Crow, a restrictive system of racial segregation laws that barred Black Americans from voting, education, and other civil rights. The newly founded Ku Klux Klan violently enforced this social order. Both used the Confederate battle flag to do so. At first, writes historian Gaines M. Foster for Zócalo Public Square, the battle flag was used regionally, tied to the memory of the war. By the early 20th century, it had become part of the myth of the 'Lost Cause,' whose proponents held that the Civil War was fought not to uphold slavery, but to protect Southern states from Northern aggression. The myth helped white Southerners come to terms with their defeat—and withstand the 'economic, racial, and social uncertainty' of the postwar period, writes Caroline E. Janney, a historian at the University of Virginia. It also kept the Confederate battle flag waving long after the war's end, as one of the most visible symbols of the Lost Cause. (Where did 'Jim Crow' come from?) Robed Ku Klux Klan members watch Black demonstrators march through Okolona, Mississippi, in 1978. The protesters were demanding diverse hiring and were boycotting the area's stores. A crowd of white teenagers protest school integration in Montgomery, Alabama, in 1963. Photograph by Flip Schulke, CORBIS/Corbis/Getty The flag remained largely local, but that changed in 1948 with the 'Dixiecrats,' or States' Rights Democratic Party, a racist, pro-segregation splinter party formed by Southern Democrats. They objected to the Democratic Party's adoption of a pro-civil rights platform and were dismayed when hundreds of thousands of African Americans registered to vote in Democratic primaries after the Supreme Court declared all-white primaries unconstitutional. The Dixiecrats's adoption of the Confederate battle flag as a party symbol led to a surge in the banner's popularity, and a 'flag fad' spread from college campuses to Korean War battlefields and beyond. The Southern Cross symbolized rebelliousness, historian John M. Coski writes in The Confederate Battle Flag: America's Most Embattled Emblem. But now it gained 'a more specific connotation of resistance to the civil rights movement and to racial integration.' The identification stuck, and the flag's use proliferated. 'The flag emerges as a central symbol of massive resistance during the civil rights era,' says Levin. Within decades, it was a staple for artists attempting to portray anti-establishment cool. It flew onstage with Lynyrd Skynyrd and adorned the Dukes's car on the wildly popular The Dukes of Hazzard TV show. Some claimed their use of the battle flag meant nothing more than Dixie pride and regional affiliations. But it retained its associations with hatred and racial terror, especially during the 1994 trial of white supremacist Byron De La Beckwith for the assassination of civil rights leader Medgar Evers 31 years earlier in 1963. De La Beckwith wore a pin of the battle flag daily at the trial, making it impossible to forget his racial convictions. (He was convicted of murder.) (How the assassination of Medgar Evers galvanized the civil rights movement.) As the flag resurged in popularity, so did protests against its use. One noteworthy push against the flag was the NAACP's 15-year economic boycott of South Carolina for its use of the banner. Another was Coleman v. Miller, a 1997 lawsuit filed by a Black man who alleged Georgia's use of the flag infringed on his 14th Amendment rights. Coleman ultimately lost his suit, but the suit spawned other attempts to remove the flag from the grounds of multiple state capitols. Debates about the flag and its use never disappeared, says Levin—and it comes with a new set of potential meanings for different people. 'There's an eye of the beholder element in all this,' he says. (How the U.S. Voting Rights Act was won—and why it's under fire today) There was little question about what the flag meant to Dylann Roof, a white supremacist who shot and killed nine churchgoers at the Emanual AME Church in Charleston, South Carolina, in 2015. After images of the shooter carrying Confederate battle flags emerged, multiple states bowed to pressure to remove the symbol from public spaces. Men fly a massive Confederate flag during a Black Lives Matter protest in Charleston, South Carolina, in August, 2020. Photograph by Kris Graves, National Geographic Activist and filmmaker Brittany 'Bree' Newsome climbed a 30-foot pole outside of the South Carolina state capitol to remove the Confederate flag weeks after a shooting at a predominantly Black Charleston church in 2015. Newsome was arrested, but state officials voted to remove the flag from the building the following month. Photograph by Adam Anderson, REUTERS Levin doesn't see the flag falling out of favor among extremist groups or white supremacists anytime soon. But he adds that public outcries and the social upheaval of recent years means the flag has been semi-retired, at least in official life. 'There's still an element that will embrace the Confederate flag or other Confederate symbols,' he says, 'but I think the question of whether they're appropriate has already been answered.' This story originally published on January 12, 2021. It was updated on August 8, 2025.
