Passing laws is a wonderful first step. Enforcing the laws after they are passed is always the bigger battle. U.S. history is filled with cases in which a long struggle led to a change in the law. Then everybody on the right side understandably celebrates and relaxes, or moves on to the next worthy cause. Meanwhile, the opponents of justice remain recalcitrant. They work to undermine the law. Their stupid obstinacy actually works to their advantage. They can’t be discouraged because they have no real hope, to begin with, just a blind and bull-headed resistance to change. The most obvious example: the Civil War was won at Appomattox— then essentially lost a few years later in New Orleans, when whites rioted, murdered free blacks in the streets, and weren’t crushed by military force because the federal government didn’t want to go down that road again. So we got the Lost Cause narrative, Jim Crow, the KKK, lynchings, the John Birch Society, and the Not all superheroes wear capes mine carried a cross shirt of the horror show for a century and a half and counting. If the long arc of history bends toward justice, it’s three steps forward, two and a half steps back the whole damned way. Kerry St. Thomas yeah, it’s pretty ridiculous. The gender of someone’s sexual partner(s) tells you very little about their actual risk. Yeah, my boyfriend is a man, but my risk of blood-born disease related to that is basically 0. (My recent exposure to Thai mosquitos is probably more relevant, while still being a negligible risk. Kerry St. Thomas And they’re completely irrational, too. I’m perpetually banned from donating blood because my husband of eleven years had sex with his ex-husband, back when he was presenting female. HE can donate blood, but he gives nasty blood bank cooties to ME that will never leave him.