I find articles like this almost impossible to interpret because there's very little definition. It's not only acronym soup; the acronyms themselves are so general that there's not much going on.<p>In the UK the media often states like "Politician makes anti-X comment". The comment itself isn't published. So you end up just having to take on faith what actually occurred; you're not given the ability to judge whether the comment was hateful and dangerous, whether it was an off-colour joke that went a bit far, or whether it was totally innocuous but the journalists felt that they could spin a story out of it.<p>Anti-LGBT could mean literally anything in this context. If they're boycotting states with the death penalty for being gay, that's a lot more justifiable than boycotting states that don't allow trans activism in schools.<p>It's unfathomable to me that 17(?) states are doing anything even remotely close to the former, so what gives?