logo
Under financial and political pressure, the LGBTQ+ community is ‘putting the protest back in Pride' celebrations

Under financial and political pressure, the LGBTQ+ community is ‘putting the protest back in Pride' celebrations

CNN30-03-2025
Jordan Braxton still remembers her first Pride celebration in St. Louis, when it was still a relatively small gathering of about 5,000 people asserting their identity, in a city where simply being visibly gay was an act of resistance. It was in Forest Park, tucked away from downtown, and photography was discouraged because people feared they could lose their jobs if they were identified.
Back in June of 1984, she says, Pride was more protest than parade.
As the years went on, the LGBTQ+ community earned hard fought rights, and that small gathering in the park evolved into a brigade of 30,000-plus people marching down Market Street, with floats, glitter and performers, said Braxton, who now sits on the board of St. Louis Pride.
Annual Pride celebrations across the country have become a staple of their communities, and nearly 10% of American adults now identify as LGBTQ+. With big corporations eager to provide visible financial support to the LGBTQ+ community, these celebrations have become bigger, flashier and emblazoned with company logos.
But this year, amid the Trump administration's crackdown on diversity and equity efforts and a torrent of legislative attacks on the LGBTQ+ community, Pride organizers around the nation are facing a decline in sponsorships and visible corporate support.
Scrambling to fill the gap in funding, these groups are leaning on grassroots fundraising efforts and returning to that original spirit of resistance. This year, the organizers say, simply showing up will send an important message.
'We're putting the protest back in Pride,' Braxton says.
Pride organizers in California, Colorado, Florida, Missouri, New York, Ohio and Texas told CNN they have seen corporate sponsors withdrawing from this year's Pride celebrations or reducing their contribution amounts. Some say longtime sponsors have asked to quietly contribute this year, minimizing their brand visibility at public events.
In addition to financing the flashy decorations and entertainment for Pride parades, organizers say the funding is essential for security and free entry at many events – and the community services many Pride organizations provide year-round.
St. Louis Pride is about $150,000 under its fundraising goal after losing a major sponsorship from beer giant Anheuser-Busch after a 30-year partnership, St. Louis Pride president Marty Zuniga told CNN. CNN has reached out to Anheuser-Busch for comment.
'That one was a stab in the heart,' Zuniga said.
Bud Light, which is owned by Anheuser-Busch, faced intense right-wing backlash and calls for a boycott in 2023, after a partnership with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney, who said she faced violent threats after posting an Instagram video sponsored by the brand.
San Francisco Pride organizers say they were initially down $300,000 after losing Anheuser-Busch and other major corporate sponsors. After news of the sponsorship withdrawals went public, two of those sponsors indicated they would return this year, after all, San Francisco Pride president Suzanne Ford told CNN.
The timing also complicated matters, Ford said, as budget conversations typically happen long before the event is approaching. The celebration is held annually in June.
'I think we all know what's going on, and we all know that corporations had to respond to the present circumstances with the federal government and public sentiment,' Ford said.
Luke Hartig, president of Gravity Research, advises major corporations on navigating social issues. He says the pressure companies have been under when it comes to LGBTQ+ issues has been building in recent years, citing a particularly contentious period in 2023.
There was the partnership Bud Light launched with Mulvaney that spring that resulted in a sharp decline in sales. Then Target was forced to remove some of its Pride-themed merchandise after threats were leveled at staff members in part of a volatile anti-LGBTQ+ campaign. And the Los Angeles Dodgers faced a wave of conservative backlash after hosting the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, a drag group that leads charity and activism efforts in the city.
Companies see enough of those high-profile setbacks and they start to take notice, Hartig told CNN, citing his group's research showing a 60% decrease in Pride engagement across major companies between 2023 and 2024.
'We were already seeing kind of a downward trend. Now, I think that has been accelerated because of the current administration's crackdown on DEI, its broader movement against LGBTQ rights and its seeming willingness to go after companies that might be opposed to some of its policies,' Hartig said.
He says a group of corporate executives that his group recently surveyed are particularly wary of the threat of federal DEI investigations.
Afra Afsharipour, a professor at the UC Davis School of Law, says the Trump administration may not have a legal basis to go after companies it says aren't complying with its relatively vague executive order threatening investigations for 'illegal' diversity, equity and inclusion activity. That will likely play out in the courts, she told CNN.
The Trump administration has also threatened to block mergers among companies with DEI policies.
But even if they come out of it clean, corporations likely don't want to endure a federal investigation or potential legal battle, Afsharipour noted.
'Executive orders don't have the force of law,' she said. 'At the same time, I think the calculus by the Trump administration is – and they've done this with the way that they have targeted lots of different institutions – they're just trying to scare companies.'
Whatever the reason for the decline in corporate support, one thing organizers across the country agree on: canceling Pride celebrations this year is not an option.
'I'll knock on every door in this city. We are going to find the money,' said Ford, the president of San Francisco Pride.
That may not be necessary. Meeting the more than $3 million cost of putting on the city's Pride weekend won't be easy, but Ford said she's already seen an increase in individual donations.
In fact, organizers from multiple states say they plan to make up the difference in funding with small business partnerships and grassroots funding efforts. Some of these grassroots campaigns have already raked in tens of thousands of dollars.
In Cincinnati, organizers are relying on community funding to bridge the gap created from the money they've turned down – from organizations that don't align with their mission of equality, including companies that have rolled back their DEI programs.
Cincinnati Pride chairperson Jeremy Phillippi told CNN his organization is taking a stance: 'We do not want to be associated with you, because you do not stand with our community.'
While corporate support may be waning, organizers say they aren't worried about attendance dropping. And they say it will mean that much more when their communities show up for them this Pride season.
'This is the year to show up for Pride,' Ford said. 'This year, just to come is a revolutionary act.'
CNN's Joe Sutton contributed to this report.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Inside Hakeem Jeffries' decision to filibuster Trump's big bill
Inside Hakeem Jeffries' decision to filibuster Trump's big bill

Axios

time31 minutes ago

  • Axios

Inside Hakeem Jeffries' decision to filibuster Trump's big bill

The overwhelming consensus on Capitol Hill was that House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) would only delay President Trump's "big, beautiful bill" by about an hour. As noon approached on Thursday, that expectation was shattered. Why it matters: For months, the Democratic base has been demanding their party's leaders " fight harder" and use every tool at their disposal to stymie the GOP agenda. In the eyes of many lawmakers, this is Jeffries delivering. Jeffries blasted the GOP's marquee tax and spending bill as an "immoral document," vowing to "stand up and push back against it with everything we have on behalf of the American people." As of late Thursday morning, Jeffries was on track to surpass then-Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy's (R-Calif.) record-breaking, 8-and-a-half hour speech to delay the Build Back Better vote in 2021. If Jeffries keeps speaking until 1:23pm ET, he will have set a new record. What we're hearing: One of Jeffries' central motivations, numerous Democratic sources told Axios, was to ensure that Republicans were forced to pass the bill during daylight hours and not in the dead of night. Jeffries said in his speech: "I ask the question, if Republicans were so proud of this one big, ugly bill, why did debate begin at 3:28am in the morning?" "This is about fighting for the American people ... forcing it into the daylight and telling some stories about the real impacts," House Democratic caucus chair Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.) told Axios. Zoom in: Jeffries spoke with House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) ahead of the speech to warn him about his plans, two sources familiar with the discussion told Axios on the condition of anonymity to share details of a private conversation. The House Democratic leader communicated that he was "just going to do an hour," one of the sources said, but that it "may be longer now." Another source said Jeffries made that decision "when he learned [Johnson] was going to stay all night until he got the votes." What he's saying: "Budgets are moral documents, and in our view ... budgets should be designed to lift people up," Jeffries said in his speech. "This reckless Republican budget that we are debating right now on the floor on the House of Representatives tears people down ... and every should vote 'no' against it," he said. Jeffries was consistently surrounded by dozens of House Democratic colleagues, who raucously applauded him throughout his speech. Yes, but: The Democratic leader did face a bit of frustration from his caucus for leaving even his inner circle in the dark about his plans. "No one is upset Hakeem wanted to do this, but to not tell members, 'be prepared, book multiple flights, be flexible,'" one House Democrat vented, grumbling that it is particularly hard to rebook flights around the July 4 holiday. Another House Democrat fumed that a "heads up would have been nice." Between the lines: Jeffries' marathon speech comes after Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) delivered a 25-hour filibuster in April that earned him plaudits from the Democrats' grassroots as a resistance hero. Later that month, Jeffries and Booker held a day-long sit-in on the Capitol steps in protest of Republicans' fiscal plans. The bottom line:"The base wants to see certain things and we have to show them those things, otherwise they don't believe we're fighting hard enough," another House Democrat told Axios of Jeffries' speech.

What's In Trump's Big Beautiful Bill
What's In Trump's Big Beautiful Bill

The Onion

time35 minutes ago

  • The Onion

What's In Trump's Big Beautiful Bill

President Donald Trump's budget megabill is in the House of Representatives after being narrowly passed by the Senate. Here are the key items in 'The One Big Beautiful Bill Act.' Funding for something called 'The Facility.' Smaller, phone booth–sized detention boxes on every American street corner. Coupon for 'buy two get one free' 12-packs of Coca-Cola products at ShopRite. A few new mean nicknames for Jeb Bush. A map of California inside a red circle with a cross through it. A glossy centerfold photo of a hot woman who is about to lose her health insurance. The end of treatment for those currently receiving CPR. Sen. Lisa Murkowski's world-famous moose tracks ice cream recipe. Moderate cuts to Medicaid compared to what's coming.

US foreign policy is now a one-man reality show
US foreign policy is now a one-man reality show

The Hill

timean hour ago

  • The Hill

US foreign policy is now a one-man reality show

In his second term, President Trump's excessive personalization of foreign policy has been on full display. But far from being the deft strategist he portrays, Trump has turned American diplomacy into an impulsive, self-serving spectacle. The most recent example is telling: Trump's announcement of a ceasefire between Israel and Iran blindsided even his own top officials. That a decision of such geopolitical magnitude was made without the knowledge of his senior advisors speaks volumes about his go-it-alone governing style. From suspending foreign aid to saying the U.S. should 'take over and redevelop Gaza,' Trump's uncoordinated, impulsive approach stands in sharp contrast to traditional U.S. diplomacy, which relies on strategic planning, inter-agency consensus and durable alliances. Trump's method instead favors drama, unpredictability and personal branding — often at the expense of the national interest. Trump has long treated foreign policy as theatrical performance, designed more to generate headlines than to achieve lasting outcomes. His habit of bypassing expert advice and established channels consistently undermines U.S. credibility — not just at home, but also among allies and adversaries. His approach has sown confusion within his administration and distrust abroad. Allies are left wondering whether Trump's statements reflect official policy or personal whim, and even his own Cabinet is often in the dark. Trump's foreign policy is less a coherent strategy than a string of dramatic set-pieces crafted for maximum personal visibility. Take the paradox of his recent Middle East gambit. Trump greenlit Israel's preemptive war on Iran, then ordered U.S. airstrikes on Iranian nuclear sites — facilities that are subject to International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards and are monitored under Iran's Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty commitments. After declaring victory, he touted a U.S.-brokered ceasefire as vindication of his strategy. Yet he conspicuously failed to acknowledge the crucial mediating role played by Qatar's emir, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani. It was, in fact, the Qatari ruler who negotiated the truce that ended what Trump dubbed the '12-Day War.' But for Trump, who never misses a chance to claim center stage, downplaying others' key roles is par for the course. Trump claimed that he arranged the ceasefire between India and Pakistan following their military hostilities in early May. The confrontation was triggered by an cross-border terrorist attack in Indian Kashmir on April 22 in which Islamist gunmen targeted non-Muslims, killing 26 people. India maintains that the ceasefire came about through direct bilateral talks after Pakistan requested a truce via the military hotline. But that hasn't stopped Trump from repeatedly claiming credit and lobbying for a Nobel Peace Prize. 'They should give me the Nobel Prize for Rwanda, or the Congo, or Serbia, Kosovo … The big one is India and Pakistan,' he recently declared. Ironically, Trump may believe that bombing Iran helps his case for the Nobel — a prize that, over the years, has gone to a surprising roster of militarists. Theodore Roosevelt (the champion of 'Big Stick' diplomacy), Henry Kissinger (the mastermind of the carpet-bombing of Laos and Cambodia) and Barack Obama (the serial interventionist who helped turn Libya into a failed state) all won it. Yet Trump's personalization of diplomacy brings risks that go beyond ego-driven showmanship. Major decisions made on impulse, for optics or without consulting national security professionals erode the foundations of U.S. foreign policy. They also increase the danger of strategic miscalculation. Foreign governments cannot know whether Trump's declarations reflect actual American policy or are merely the mood of the moment. By sidelining intelligence assessments and undercutting his own officials — as he did by floating regime change in Iran after his team publicly denied such intentions — Trump breeds internal disarray and external uncertainty. This policy chaos is amplified by Trump's compulsive communication style. No world leader talks more or posts more on social media. American officials are often left scrambling to explain statements they didn't anticipate, while global actors are forced to decipher whether the next move will be announced from the Situation Room or on Truth Social. The blurring of lines between national interest and personal gain further complicates matters. Increasingly, foreign policy appears to double as a mechanism for advancing private interests. In the past six months, Trump's personal wealth surged thanks to a string of cryptocurrency ventures and deals, and there is mounting evidence that the Trump family's crypto empire is influencing presidential decision-making. Consider Trump's handling of Pakistan in the wake of the Kashmir terror attack. Between the massacre and India's retaliation, Pakistan hurriedly signed a major investment deal with World Liberty Financial, a crypto firm founded by Trump and his sons before last November's election. Days later, Trump helped shield Pakistan from further Indian reprisals. Now he declares, 'I love Pakistan' — a country that harbored Osama bin Laden for years and still shelters global terrorists. In the end, Trump has reduced U.S. statecraft to spectacle. American foreign policy today looks less like the work of a global superpower and more like a one-man reality show — replete with cliffhangers, reversals, business deals and applause lines. Such theatrics may serve Trump's political ambitions, but they leave America's strategic credibility — and the international order it helped build — increasingly vulnerable. Brahma Chellaney is a geostrategist and the author of nine books, including the award-winning 'Water: Asia's New Battleground.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store