Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: Is the US funding dance plasses for male prostitutes in Hati
Executive Summary
The claim that the US is funding dance classes for male prostitutes in Haiti is unsupported by available reporting and was traced to a White House budget analysis and partisan repetition, but the specific funding language became moot when final legislation did not cut PEPFAR funds. Multiple fact-checks and reporting on US aid to Haiti find no evidence of a targeted federal program financing dance classes for male sex workers, though controversies over other USAID and PEPFAR funding cuts remain documented [1].
1. Where the Claim Originated and How It Spread — A Political Spark, Not a Documented Program
Reporting and subsequent fact-checks identify the claim’s origin in a White House budget analysis that listed various proposed rescissions and was then cited by Republican lawmakers as an example of waste. The phrasing about "$3.6 million for Haitian male prostitutes" or similar items appeared in political speeches and op-eds, notably from Senator John Kennedy, but independent verification of a program explicitly funding dance classes for male sex workers in Haiti is lacking. Fact-check articles conclude the allegation derived from budget line descriptions repurposed for political messaging, not from program-level documentation [1] [2].
2. What the Fact-Checks Found — No Evidence of a Standalone Dance-Classes Program
Fact-check investigations published in October 2025 cross-referenced the White House rescissions list, congressional text, and agency program descriptions and found no grant, contract, or program described as funding dance classes for male prostitutes in Haiti. The final Rescissions Act also did not end up cutting PEPFAR funds as initially proposed in earlier drafts, which undercuts the tangible basis for the claim. That absence in primary legislative action and program records is central to the conclusion that the specific allegation is unsubstantiated [1].
3. What Was Actually in the Budget Language — Broad, Ambiguous Descriptions
The contested White House budget analysis contained shorthand descriptions of proposed rescissions and program areas that some actors amplified into specific narratives. Those descriptions included references to small-dollar items in health, civil-society, or community outreach lines, which can encompass a wide variety of activities such as HIV prevention outreach, peer education, or livelihood programming, but do not equate to an explicit federal-funded dance-class program for sex workers. Analysts note that budget summaries often omit the detailed implementing partner-level scope that would be necessary to substantiate such a narrowly defined claim [1] [2].
4. Broader Context — USAID/PEPFAR Cuts and Their Documented Effects in Haiti
Independent reporting from earlier in 2025 documents substantial operational impacts in Haiti from cuts or freezes in US foreign assistance, including disruptions to HIV treatment and other humanitarian programs. Those consequences are real and reported: HIV treatment continuity, clinic operations, and public-health outreach in Haiti faced strain amid funding uncertainty and administrative reductions. However, those reports focus on program degradation and patient impacts rather than on funding dance classes, indicating two separate conversations — genuine aid shortfalls and an unrelated political claim [3] [4].
5. Why the Claim Persisted Politically — Messaging and Budgetary Theater
The claim persisted because it fit a potent rhetorical frame used by some lawmakers to argue for rescinding funds and cutting perceived waste. Political actors often convert line-items or budget summaries into headline-grabbing examples to rally constituencies. The result was repetition in op-eds and speeches that amplified the assertion beyond what program-level records could support. Fact-checkers flagged this pattern: the narrative served a political agenda rather than reflecting demonstrable program expenditures [2] [1].
6. Limits of the Available Evidence — What We Still Don’t Know
Publicly available sources and fact-checks reveal no hard evidence of a federal contract or grant explicitly labeled for dance instruction targeted at male sex workers in Haiti, but details of implementing partners’ small grants and community-level programming can be opaque. Donor-funded local activities sometimes include social and behavioral interventions described in broad terms, and without access to granular contracting documents it is difficult to prove a negative definitively. Still, the burden of proof rests on those asserting the specific program exists; current documentation does not meet that standard [1] [5].
7. Bottom Line for Readers — What to Believe and What Matters Next
Readers should treat the specific claim about US-funded dance classes for male prostitutes in Haiti as unproven and politically amplified, while recognizing separate, well-documented concerns about US aid reductions harming HIV and humanitarian services in Haiti. The salient facts are that budget summaries were repurposed into a contested narrative, final legislation did not enact the proposed PEPFAR cuts, and independent reporting documents real harms from broader aid contractions — all of which deserve scrutiny on their own merits [1] [4].