Language carries weight. It tells us who is seen, who is prioritized, and who gets access to resources. Since the beginning of this year, entire public programs, university offices and nonprofit proposals have shed or been forced to shed words like diversity, equity, inclusion and transgender. The shift is rhetorical, has altered how money flows, and who is recognized as deserving of public investment through the lens of the current administration.
For queer communities, particularly in North Carolina, this shift is not academic. It is survival. When words vanish, programs and budgets often follow.
Intentional Scrubbing of Words
Earlier this year, The New York Times published an interactive investigation showing how federal agencies under the current Administration systematically removed DEI-related words from their public websites. Pages once dedicated to “diversity” and “gender identity” were either erased or rewritten with neutral terms like “customer service” and “workforce readiness.” Entire sections acknowledging systemic racism or LGBTQ+ rights disappeared.
This was no accident. In January 2025, an executive order directed federal agencies to dismantle DEI offices and identity-based initiatives. What followed was a widespread digital “scrubbing” of agency websites, confirming in public view what internal memos had already made clear; language itself was intentionally being legislated. When agencies shift language, grant solicitations and reporting standards follow. The absence of “equity” in official documents signals a shrinking appetite for data collection, targeted outreach or dedicated programming.
The Impact of Legislated Language on Program Funding
The impact reaches deeply into organizations that rely on public funding. In many states, including North Carolina, public universities and community nonprofits are rewriting their applications, tailoring every word to avoid flagged terms.
Here are some of the words now widely reported as restricted or discouraged in public-facing grants and agency communications:
Diversity, Equity, Inclusion (DEI)
Equity/equitable
Allyship, anti-racism, systemic oppression
LGBTQ, transgender, nonbinary
Social justice, critical race theory
Gender identity/gender expression
Evidence-based, science-based (in certain contexts)
Female/Feminism/Woman/Women
A phrase such as “gender-affirming support for transgender youth” has been changed to politically align with “support for youth experiencing identity-related challenges.” The phrase previously used “transgender health services” now has to be changed or replaced for federal grant application purposes with something like “underserved population outreach.”
These word changes protect eligibility but erode visibility. Restating or rephrasing words does not erase the community or people in need of the services. It just erases them from the grant provider’s list of priorities and places them in their radar.
North Carolina in the Crosshairs
North Carolina has not passed restrictions as sweeping as Florida or Texas, but legislative proposals to limit DEI staffing in higher education and state agencies have gained traction. Already, UNC system schools have been instructed to review DEI-related expenditures, and some student affairs offices have been forced to scale back programs.
On campuses, LGBTQ+ resource centers have faced budget reviews and heightened scrutiny. At the nonprofit level, organizations that once leaned on “equity” framing now speak cautiously in terms of “broadening participation” or “improving student success.” The work continues, but under a cloud of uncertainty and constant recalibration.
Organizations are spending more time wordsmithing, which leads to time wasted that could otherwise be used helping individuals and families. It’s a sad time for our country when peoples’ lives and health has come down to a political game of Scrabble!
How Organizations Are Adapting
Despite mounting barriers, nonprofits, schools and agencies are finding creative strategies:
• Reframing outcomes
Instead of “closing equity gaps,” proposals highlight “increasing completion rates across student groups” or “broadening access.”
• Embedding specificity in data
Some reports avoid sensitive words in the narrative but present disaggregated outcomes in tables or appendices.
• Citing statutory requirements
Programs lean on Title VI, Title IX, and ADA compliance as justification for tracking disparities.
• Decentralizing DEI work
Training once housed in DEI offices is now carried by HR, compliance or student safety departments.
• Maintaining dual reportsOrganizations prepare one “funder-safe” version and another community-facing version that speaks directly about race, gender identity and sexuality.
These wrap-around practices keep the lights on, but they also reflect a defensive posture, and the labor of translation falls heavily on small nonprofits, which already stretched thin.
The Attack on Our Trans Community
Individuals in our trans community in North Carolina are among those most at risk from linguistic erasure. When “transgender” disappears from grant applications and federal websites, trans communities lose not just visibility but measurable pathways to funding. This comes at a time when trans youth and adults already face higher rates of homelessness, unemployment and health disparities.
Without a doubt, trans-specific services risk becoming invisible in state reporting, leaving advocates with fewer data points to argue for targeted support. Anti-trans legislators are connecting words with dollars. If they don’t see certain words, they don’t see the need.
Closing Thoughts
The battle over words is more than semantics. It’s a battle over who gets counted, resourced and recognized. The removal of DEI language from federal and state programs sends a chilling message: The needs of underrepresented communities are expendable.
But it won’t happen without a fight. Across the city of Charlotte and North Carolina, nonprofits and educators continue to adapt and protect their missions under new constraints. They may change the words, but they keep their services as available as possible.
We may have to call it “access” or “underserved.” but we know it means looking out for and advocating for “The Least of These” – individuals of color, women, the LGBTQ+ community, immigrants. Even when words fall short, the commitment stays strong.
Resources
The New York Times, “How Trump Officials Removed ‘Diversity’ and ‘Inclusion’ From Federal Websites” (Interactive, March 7, 2025).
Executive Order, January 2025: Ending federal DEI programs and offices.
North Carolina legislative proposals on higher education DEI funding (2024–2025 session).
Public reporting on state-level DEI restrictions in Florida, Texas, and other states (2023–2025).