When there are threats against trans rights and the climate feels so inhospitable to the very existence of marginalized communities, it can be easy for people to retreat to safe choices. Groups might argue that it’s best to hold on to something that feels secure and solid rather than draw attention by fighting for those most under attack.

But what might be claimed as small acts of safe defiance against the regime are simply complicity in disguise. We need to be fighting this endless attack on trans rights, not questioning how much we can step back with the idea that we might fight to win rights back later.

Related

CBS agreement with FCC includes hiring a “bias monitor” in “major attack” on free speech

Safe choices are what we’re seeing right now, from non-profits to the entertainment sector on a global scale. And they’ll be the death of us all.

A major LGBTQ+ charity in the United Kingdom, Stonewall, recently announced Kezia Dugdale as its new chair. With trans rights under attack by right-wing populist groups globally, it was a time for Stonewall to make a stand and help to fight back.

Dive deeper every day

Join our newsletter for thought-provoking commentary that goes beyond the surface of LGBTQ+ issues
Subscribe to our Newsletter today

Instead, Dugdale has taken the safe choice. She talked about how scary it is to be a lesbian right now, raised concerns that the right to same-sex marriage might legitimately come under attack. And she suggested we need to be less divisive and take a step back from trans rights, going as far as to express sympathy for noted anti-trans activist JK Rowling while praising her extensively. (She has since apologized for not criticizing Rowling’s behavior.)

Being less combative on trans rights might get Stonewall some credibility with Rowling and the LGB Alliance. That will come at the cost of sacrificing trans rights and the people those rights protect. Presumably, Dugdale thinks that backing down on trans rights will make it easier to spend that credibility on protecting equal marriage. But we’ve seen in the United States that once you back down on trans girls in school sports, it’s all just a walk down the road to the suggestion that marriage equality should be on the chopping block, too.

But non-profits like Stonewall aren’t alone in these safe choices that amount to backing down in the face of fascism. Media giants have been all too happy to make a safe choice instead of fighting back against the Trump administration, the anti-trans movement, and threats from the FCC. Often, without those bodies actually needed to take any action to force compliance.

Last year, Paramount happily canceled Stephen Colbert’s Late Show for “purely financial reasons” because Trump didn’t like Colbert, and Paramount wanted their merger with Skydance approved. Trump’s FCC chair (and co-author of Project 2025), Brendan Carr, then threatened ABC (owned by Disney) into pulling Jimmy Kimmel from the air after he said things Trump didn’t like. And then, in February, the FCC tried to stop Colbert from having a Democratic Senate candidate on his show.

Paramount and ABC/Disney were making safe choices. They were protecting their own investments and their own ability to make content by allowing Trump to dictate what went too far. Naturally, giving Trump that leeway is going to encourage his administration to move that line for what they think is acceptable, and free speech and other rights will be the worse for it.

Colbert and his team, to their credit, did push back when their network wouldn’t. While the network told them they couldn’t show even a picture of James Talarico on the show, they still interviewed him and directed people to watch it on YouTube, meaning it got millions of views, likely more than it would have if the FCC hadn’t threatened him. Of course, the possible consequences for Colbert, whose show ends in four weeks, are limited, but it was still the right call to push back while so many others chose safe options.

But after all of that, the FCC is still working to move that line. Republicans have been excited to be mad about trans and wider LGBTQ+ content in kids’ shows. Now, Brendan Carr has announced an inquiry into TV rating systems, with the suggestion that they should flag the inclusion of trans and non-binary characters of “the discussion or promotion of gender identity themes.” This would place the basic existence of trans people in a show on par with violence and drug use in warnings at the start of a show.

Carr’s move is the sort of thing that has come into play because networks and media companies have accommodated him with safe choices in the past. And, in all likelihood, we’ll see more safe choices in response.

Rather than have shows rated differently, companies are going to cut trans and nonbinary representation entirely. A new system won’t even need to go into effect; the announcement of intent will be enough. And trans kids will stop seeing themselves represented. And then it will be other marginalized identities that follow, including the rest of the LGBTQ+ community.

We already know that Disney will back away from LGBTQ+ representation in the face of a stiff breeze. They removed a same-sex kiss from Lightyear because of political grandstanding. They also cut a trans storyline from the show Win or Lose just because Trump won the election on an anti-trans platform. This announcement from Carr will be enough for Disney to have discussions next week and contemplate some safer choices.

Even Tucker Carlson and other old MAGA pundits are making safe choices, working to distance themselves from Trump while he slowly burns his brand and destroys the movement. But that’s not a move to champion a better way or help others. It’s saving themselves with another safe choice.

People have always made these safe choices. Executives have been happier to back a sequel or a reboot than put their money on bringing in something new. Politicians have called for incremental change on issues like climate change, where we don’t have time to waste. But these safe choices are so much more visible right now. These choices are being made in the face of the stripping away of basic rights from human beings.

Those safe choices are born out of good intentions, a desire not to rock the boat. But it will go from losing representation in media, to losing gender-affirming care across the board, and they’ll keep pushing us down the road until we’re talking about the women’s right to vote—the right-wing tradwife movement is proof that they’re already eyeing that one.

Ultimately, you have to ask: who are these choices safe for?

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