Jordan J. Edwards on Corporate Retreat, Community Resilience, and Black Queer Advocacy

Jordan J. Edwards (He/Him/His) is the Deputy Director at The Normal Anomaly Initiative. He serves the Black, queer-plus community by expanding opportunities for sustainable employment and ensuring linkage to care services for people living with HIV and for those interested in PrEP. Jordan’s advocacy extends well beyond The Normal Anomaly. He is a Board Member of Montrose Grace Place, participates in the national Greater Than HIV campaign, and was recognized as a 2024 White House Rising Leader.

In this interview with Scott Douglas Jacobsen, Edwards talks about the challenges facing Black, queer-led organizations amid political backlash and declining corporate support. Edwards discusses how the rollback of funding, such as Target’s retreat on Pride initiatives, reveals both fragility and the presence of authentic allies. He highlights the strain on mental health, organizational sustainability, and generational gaps in advocacy strategies. Drawing on his experiences with The Normal Anomaly and national campaigns, Edwards emphasizes the importance of coalition-building, private donor engagement, and intergenerational learning in sustaining LGBTQ communities during turbulent times.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: It is helpful to see who truly stands with you. Some people have changed their public language, but they continue to act and provide support in meaningful ways. They step back from visible messaging to avoid political backlash, but still contribute through mini-grants or other funding sources. From what I observe, the visible support is what gets attacked, so that part shifts. However, the real question is: if you are not going to support me publicly, are you then directing funding to grassroots organizations that sustain the LGBTQ community and allow us to survive? 

In the current political climate, the networks are very diverse—you have people from many different backgrounds. The political environment allows some to speak out more or less, depending on the moment. Right now, we are experiencing a wave of anti-LBGTQ sentiment. What has the political backlash looked like? Specifically, how has the rollback or reduction of corporate funding and support emboldened opponents?

Jordan Edwards: I have been thinking about this in relation to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). My intersectionality as a Black and queer person allows me to see both sides. Often, we discuss how the LGBTQ community feels and how the Black community feels, but being both Black and queer puts me in a position where neither community consistently supports the other. That creates a difficult tension. For example, when Target scaled back its LGBTQ Pride merchandise in 2023 after organized backlash, it became clear that corporations can retreat under pressure. While Target’s CEO did not step down at that time, the company’s actions highlighted the fragility of corporate support. However, these moments also reveal who truly supports us and what forms of change are possible. This gives us hope as a community. If we come together, identify our allies, and support them, we can make a difference. Many people redirected their support, choosing other corporations like Costco instead of Sam’s Club, or moving away from Target to companies that maintained their commitments. By finding where the real support lies, we can drive meaningful change.

Jacobsen: Even with corporations pulling back, what about the longstanding issue of tension between Black and queer communities, especially for people living at both intersections? Did the reduction in corporate funding and public support affect that dynamic in any way, or has it remained largely the same?

Edwards: It did. The corporate withdrawal of funding did impact our communities and had some effect on our organization. I work at The Normal Anomaly Initiative, which is a Black, queer-led organization. We lost federal funding from the CDC, but in terms of corporate funding, what we noticed was that during Pride Month, corporations like Shell or Chevron—who had historically supported us—still had departments that were able to provide funding. We maintained those relationships with individuals within corporations who consistently support the LGBTQ community. That is how we have continued to engage. I know some organizations have not been able to sustain that type of impact, but that has been our experience.

Jacobsen: Was much of the original corporate support financial because they saw it as a market opportunity, in other words?

Edwards: Yes, and I would say that some corporations approach us as a way to check multiple boxes, whether that is race, gender, or sexuality. However, we have been intentional in building relationships that reveal who is genuinely for us and who will actually support us. That way, we can ensure that our partnerships truly serve our community. Because if we align with organizations that are not authentically supportive, our community will rightly ask, “How can we trust you? How can we work with you?” That is something we have been cautious about.

Jacobsen: Are there comparable cases in other advanced industrial societies? Everyone is aware of the intense backlash against LGBTQ rights in some countries—through politics or legislation—but what about societies that have the resources and institutions to fight back?

Edwards: That is a good question. I recently had a conversation about the importance of collaboration with organizations that not only provide financial support but also stand publicly with us. The question becomes: are you actively promoting the LGBTQ community, or do you lack diversity within your own team? That distinction matters. While I do not have a complete answer, the key is to evaluate whether the backing extends beyond financial support to include structural support and representation.

Jacobsen: Mental health is always a struggle, especially for people who already feel marginalized in their society. Have you seen reports of community members struggling more with mental health when there is less visibility and fewer public signals of support? For example, some events may still happen, but without major headliners or the same level of visibility.

Edwards: Yes—mental health has absolutely been affected. Members of my team have been talking more about anxiety and the importance of checking in with each other. We have seen an increased need for therapy sessions and for support in navigating daily life. For the community as a whole, the best way I can describe it is like PTSD. 

You are already fighting for basic recognition in spaces that often are not built for you, and then every time you turn on the TV or hear news out of the White House, it feels like something else is coming against you. That constant anticipation has taken a toll on mental health. Regarding events without sure headliners, we host a music festival and have had discussions about the type of headliners and sponsors we can attract. 

Some of our sponsors have included pharmaceutical companies such as Gilead and ViiV Healthcare. However, when it comes to large corporations like Amazon or Target, we have not engaged with them directly as an organization—only as individual community members navigating consumer spaces.

Jacobsen: I was recently interviewing someone in a different context—refugees who had fled war zones. Many of them had trained in professions like journalism, but now they are driving for Uber or working as plumbers or construction workers. They lost not just jobs but their professional identity and sense of purpose, which is deeply traumatizing. 

Obviously, it is not the same as war trauma, but I wonder if there is a parallel. When funding declines, people who once assumed support would be there often find themselves forced into survival jobs. Leaders of organizations and events, lacking stable funding, often drop out of advocacy altogether and transition into unrelated work to survive. Have you seen this happen in the past year?

Edwards: Absolutely, I have. Many organizations do not know how to pivot. They receive funding and build their programs entirely around what funders want, instead of centring on what they actually do well. When that specific funding disappears, they cannot adapt. For example, if an organization were entirely dependent on corporate funding for HIV testing or education, and that funding were to dry up, but testing and education were never their strengths, they would have no foundation to pivot from. I have seen organizations attempt to shift from testing to mental health initiatives or building community cohorts in order to survive. Some individuals have turned to side work—such as driving for Uber or taking up trades—because the funding they were receiving was never enough to support a living in the first place. This has only increased. Many organizations are worried about closing their doors because they lack the sustainability to pay salaries and wages. Moreover, that instability impacts both the organizations and the communities they serve, especially since many of the staff are themselves members of the communities most affected.

Jacobsen: In another interview in this series, someone in their 60s pointed out that gay, queer, and Black men have historically organized outside of mainstream spaces through grassroots work. They basically said, “We did it ourselves.” Perhaps it was not on the level of selling lemonade at a lemonade stand, but it was about self-reliance. For those who are not over 60 and who have lived in the relative equality created by that earlier generation, this seems to be their first major wake-up call. Is that the general sense being discussed?

Edwards: Yes, there is definitely a transgenerational gap. Individuals in their 50s and 60s possess a deep well of knowledge, having lived through these struggles before. Then there is my generation—I am 34—where many of us are asking, “What do we do now? How do we move? How do we create change?” 

We should have been engaging with the older generation already to learn what worked and what did not, so we could build a through line and understand how to reach our goals. My generation relies heavily on technology and social media as our tools of engagement. However, when fundraising language puts a target on us, how do we still engage effectively? 

Many people in my generation lack knowledge on how to build coalitions or networks offline, within smaller silos, or by reaching out to private donors. Wealthy individuals are willing to give, but they cannot always do so publicly due to their corporate positions. Think of people like Tim Cook or Sam Altman—reach out and connect with them. A lot of this work requires us to be in those rooms.

Jacobsen: Any final thoughts or comments?

Edwards: Yes. Recently, I was on stage at a conference with funders, including representatives from Gilead Sciences and the Elton John Foundation, alongside another individual who is a notable mogul. What they all said was, “We have been here before.” We are constantly in this cycle: we build something, it gets stripped away, and then we have to fight to rebuild. 

Moreover, while that is discouraging, the key point raised was: why are we struggling separately instead of coming together to sustain ourselves? That message is vital. Collaboration and unity are among the most crucial ways we will survive the next three years. 

Jacobsen: Thank you very much, Jordan.

Edwards: All received. Excellent—we will be in touch. Thank you.

—

Scott Douglas Jacobsen is the publisher of In-Sight Publishing (ISBN: 978-1-0692343) and Editor-in-Chief of In-Sight: Interviews (ISSN: 2369-6885). He writes for The Good Men Project, International Policy Digest (ISSN: 2332–9416), The Humanist (Print: ISSN 0018-7399; Online: ISSN 2163-3576), Basic Income Earth Network (UK Registered Charity 1177066), A Further Inquiry, and other media. He is a member in good standing of numerous media organizations.

***

If you believe in the work we are doing here at The Good Men Project and want a deeper connection with our community, please join us as a Premium Member today.

Premium Members get to view The Good Men Project with NO ADS. Need more info? A complete list of benefits is here.

—

Photo credit: Jordan J. Edwards.

The post Jordan J. Edwards on Corporate Retreat, Community Resilience, and Black Queer Advocacy appeared first on The Good Men Project.

View the full article