Why Court Ordered Sex-Changes for Prisoners are Bad for Women

September 6, 2012

Robert Kosilek, Wire Killer, Life Without Parole

David E. Megarry Jr. raped female children. He raped lots of them. He started in his teens. He liked to torture them. He was locked up as a teen for multiple violent torture rapes of female children. But he got out. When he was 21 he was apprehended for abducting a ten year old girl, forcing her into his car, abducting and driving her into the woods known as Lombardi’s Grove in Milford, Mass. where he tied her up, gagged her, raped her, and left her for dead. Behind bars for child rape he got 64 infractions on his disciplinary record. He was caught making obscene phone calls to children from prison. He was found hoarding pictures of female children in his cell. At this time he decided he was transgendered. He got extensive prison tats of naked women and began wearing smuggled “female” undergarments. He started calling himself Sandy Jo: Sandy Jo Battista. In 1995 he had his name legally changed to Sandy Jo Battista from his cell at the all male Massachusetts Treatment Center for Sexually Dangerous Persons facility where he lives under civil commitment without limit of sentence due to his legal status as a “Sexually Dangerous Person”.

In 2005 “Sandy Jo”, filed suit against the Massachusetts Department of Corrections asserting his “right” for cross-sex hormones that would allow him to grow breasts. Global business law firm McDermott Will and Emory, who represent 50% of global business interests worldwide, decided to devote their required pro-bono hours to him. They brought all their power and interests to bear and devoted years and thousands of hours to representing his interest in medically acquiring superficial female sex characteristics. Last year he won his case which created precedence for the rights of male predators to access feminizing medical treatments funded by taxpayers while serving time.

Strangulation murderer and fellow Massachusetts inmate Robert Kosilek, serving life sentence without possibility of parole, paid close attention to this ruling. Kosilek had been filing multiple cases against the Department of Corrections for over a decade. Since he first murdered his wife. He did not enjoy the prison experience, and with no possibility of parole, filing lawsuits was his passion.

On May 20, 1990 Mansfield Massachucetts resident Robert Kosilek decided to kill someone. His wife. He went and got a length of wire. Then he surprised her! He took the wire and with all his might pulled it against her neck. To kill her. And he did kill her! With the wire he cut off her breathing and circulation until she was dead. Then he dragged her body outside to her car and threw her corpse into the back seat. He drove to the Emerald Square Mall at North Attleborough and abandoned the vehicle in the parking lot and took a taxi home. He waited a few hours and then, for cover, her called the police and reported her missing. Concerned husband and all. He suggested she might have been in a car accident. Police found her car and body and swung by Kosilek’s home and brought him in for questioning. “Kosilek said his wife was at work all day and had intended to stop by the mall afterwards and that he was busy at the couple’s home all day.”

But Cheryl’s son’s statement contradicted him: “Timothy McCaul, Cheryl’s 15-year-old son who lived with the couple, said that he called home for a ride around 5 p.m. and no one answered the phone.

Kosilek was questioned again, only this time he left half way through the interview and said he was getting an attorney.

Two days later, Kosilek was involved in a car crash at midnight. Officers found him in the driver’s seat dressed in women’s clothing and sent him home.”

Kosilek fled to New York State. And was there apprehended.

“On May 24, 1990, Kosilek was stopped for speeding in New Rochelle, New York, and arrested him for drunk driving.

‘You would be drunk too if the police thought you killed your wife,’ he said.

Later, at the police station, the defendant stated, ‘Look, I had a fifteen year old son and a wife. I can’t call my wife. I murdered my wife. Now, I need to call a psychiatrist now.’

He later admitted to a reporter that he and his wife got into a heated argument during the day and she had thrown boiling water in his face.

He picked up a wire and blacked out, waking up days later in the hospital.

‘Apparently, I did take her life,’ he told the reporter. ‘It was probably in self defense”

Robert had met Cheryl while he was in Drug Rehab. Cheryl was working as a volunteer counselor.

Robert Kosilek. Before sentence and after.

Kosilek was charged with first degree murder. He was sentenced to life in prison without possibility of parole in January 1993. Once he received sentence Robert decided he wanted to “become” a woman, adopting the name Michelle and began a twelve year campaign of lawsuits against the prison in several cases that went on for years and provided him with constant trips to the courthouse and media attention and press interviews where he portrayed himself as a victim.

Kosilek in various cases over the last twelve years of his incarceration won access to cross-sex cosmetic medical hormone treatment, the right to wear clothing now legally regarded and classified by federal court as appropriately sex-role stereotypical for females, make-up/face paint now regarded and classified by federal court as female appropriate, electrolysis hair removal, and annual mammograms for the breasts created by his feminizing hormone regime. He has not yet filed cases for breast implants or facial feminization surgery. In 2005 he filed a case claiming that withholding taxpayer funded feminizing cosmetic surgery violated his Eighth Amendment right of protection from cruel and unusual punishment.

Yesterday a federal judge, U.S. District Court Chief Judge Mark Wolf agreed with this premise. And he issued a precedent setting ruling for men like Kosilek and “Sandy Jo” Battista. He issued the first court-ordered tax-payer funded surgical “sex change” for a prisoner in the United States. This precedent setting ruling, while lauded by transgender activists, represents a very unfair discriminatory outcome for females. Especially female prisoners.

This ruling is extremely discriminatory against females and a source of concern for all who are concerned with equality and fairness for women. Why?

First of all, the federal court system should not be enshrining sexist stereotypes of female appearance or behavior into law. This is sexism. This is discriminatory. This is illegal. It is illegal to proscribe behaviors and appearances according to sex. It goes against title VII prohibitions against sex-role stereotyping. It is OUTRAGEOUS!

Judge Wolf’s lax and casual citing of “female clothing and make-up” is OFFENSIVE to women. It is also ILLEGAL. And it’s illegal for a reason. The reason is that such stereotypes are concretely, demonstrably, damaging to females.

Second, this judgement rests on the authority of what Judge Wolf refers to as the “Harry Benjamin Standards of Care” among psychiatric providers. Judge Wolf refers here to a set of “guidelines” issued by an organization once called “The Harry Benjamin International Dysphoria Association” which was renamed six years ago as the WPATH Standards of Care. These guidelines were rejected this year by the American Psychiatric Association who noted a complete lack of citations in WPATH guidelines and a total lack of any basis in scientific research. The APA has RENOUNCED the WPATH (Formerly HBIDA) Standard of Care Guidelines. So the psychiatric “authority” Judge Wolf bases his decision upon has been rejected in toto by the very psychiatric authority that regulates psychiatric licensing and practice in the US.

Third, all the references to Kosilek “living as a woman” and “performing” a one year “Real Life Test” in the “female role” required by WPATH guidelines. Again, this is horribly offensive to women (see point one). The notion that females due to our reproduction should have a particular “role” assigned to us by the federal government is incredibly offensive. AND ILLEGAL. But it is also absurd.

Want to see a “Real Life Test” for a woman in men’s prison? Throw a female inmate in there. HORROR. That is what you will see. HORROR. Kosilek is not “living as a woman” in men’s prison. For a federal authority to claim that a female can live for a year in men’s prison without incident IS ABSURD. Not only is it absurd, it is actually terrifying that an agent of the federal government is suggesting such a thing. If one woman can live peaceably in men’s prison why not 50? Why not make prisons co-ed, since “women” do just fine in men’s prisons. ABSURD. Yet that is the legal precedent Judge Wolf is setting. This is bad for women. Women CAN NOT survive male prison. Violence against females is overwhelmingly inflicted by males. Male prisoners are overwhelmingly incarcerated for violent acts compared to female populations. The absurdity. The utter absurdity.

Which brings me to point number four. Kosilek- the man who chokes women to death with wire as they fight for their life- is incarcerated with no hope for parole. A canny con, he wants to be transferred to women’s prison. We’ve seen this before. In the UK, rapist John Pilley was the first man to gain a legal sex change via tax-payer funding. The rapist was transferred to women’s prison as Kosilek plans. After a few years he demanded tax-payer funded reverse sex-change and transfer back to men’s. He got bored. These guys have a lifetime to play with the system. Kosilek outlines his goals in court documents: “Kosilek would much prefer to be incarcerated in the women’s prison, MCI Framingham.”

 It is an infringement on female prisoner’s eighth amendment right prohibiting cruel and unusual punishment to be housed with males who target, torture, murder, rape and assault females. We witnessed the incredible trauma inflicted on women forced to live in the same unit as Richard Masbruch, the torture-rapist electrocutioner. It is cruel and unusual punishment to force women in confinement to be subjected to male predators. Judge Wolf thinks females have a “role” to play. He thinks females have certain appropriate clothing and face-paint and that females should “live as” that sexist oppressive role and he thinks male rapists and murderers who want to inflict themselves on females should have that government enforced right. That is what his ruling states! Read it!

Women DON’T agree with his premise. In fact, we decry it as ILLEGAL and DISCRIMINATORY. We protest the federal government codifying what is female behavior, dress, and what it means to “live as” us. BEING female is “living as” female. We are not stereotypes. Males cannot “live as” us.

Even if they suffer from major mental illness as Judge Wolf states.

Another thought. ALL the articles I read on this ruling brought up tax-payer cost for superficial male cosmetic genital surgery – the cost of making a fistula between the male prostate and anus that appears like a labia/vagina externally. $20,000. Or $25,000! What has NEVER been mentioned is the cost of female to male transgender prisoners cosmetic sex surgery. That cost is approximately $100,000. And the result is similar (although since the surgery is external it can be viewed more easily). Why is this? The reason is THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A FEMALE PRISONER IN THE ENTIRE HISTORY OF THE WORLD that wants to be housed with MALE PRISONERS. EVER. EVER. EVER. There has never been a single case worldwide of a female fighting to have a “sex-change” for the “right” to be housed with men. Judge Wolf’s ruling represents a discriminatory male version of medical “rights”. NO female will EVER benefit from this ruling. Not even transgender females. Because of the profound inequity between individuals based on reproductive status- a FEDERALLY STATE-SANCTIONED INEQUITY- with males dominating and females oppressed: Judge Wolf’s ruling is as discriminatory, sexist, offensive and illegal as they come.

This ruling is a victory for those who support and celebrate sexism. For women? Not so much.

Judge Wolf’s sloppy disorganized 129 page ruling can be viewed here. Or downloaded here as a PDF file.

52 Responses to “Why Court Ordered Sex-Changes for Prisoners are Bad for Women”

  1. KittyBarber Says:

    Thank you, GM, for this in-depth analysis of a really horrible story, from the murder to the judge’s decision. Your work becomes more important every day in this country–thank you, thank you thank you.

  2. GallusMag Says:

    OH! Another messed up thing is the frequent references in the court record to Kosilek’s suicide attempts and self-harming. ALL of those incidents took place when he was in jail awaiting sentencing back in 1990. For 22 YEARS there have been no incidents of self-harm.

  3. ehungerford Says:

    I love this!!!! Thank you, Gallus. This is a beautiful example of YOU doing what YOU DO BEST.

    And for all my legal nerds: this is what an IMPROPER PURPOSE looks like.

  4. FCM Says:

    by my reading, kosilek did not even satisfy the required “living as” period. the guidelines themselves are problematic in many ways, as you say, so thats another issue, but nontheless, the court used them, and they seem to indicate (dont they?) that SRS would not be medically indicated for this man bc he never satisfied the “living as” period. you touch on this gallus, but i would like to explore this a bit further. let me know if i am reading it incorrectly.

    from the guidelines regarding the intent and purpose of the 12-month “living as” period which is a prerequisite for SRS:

    The duration of 12 months allows for a range of different life experiences and events that may
    occur throughout the year (e.g., family events, holidays, vacations, season-specific work or school
    experiences). During this time, patients should present consistently, on a day-to-day basis and
    across all settings of life, in their desired gender role.

    this context does not exist in a mens prison. in his case, his “living as” period consisted of sitting on his ass in his cell in a mens prison, with breast tissue from his hormone treatments. this is not “living like” a woman, sorry. and it also doesnt satisfy the stated purpose of the living-as period which is to experience a variety of “life experiences” across “all settings of life” as the opposite gender. think holidays with the family, traveling, etc. not only that, but he will never, ever, ever be treated like a woman, bc being in a mens prison, its known to everyone that he is, in fact, a man. so in prison cases, the “living as” period is particularly absurd bc they are literally saying that “living like” a woman is exactly the same as “living like a man pretending to be a woman” or “living like a male transsexual.” the guidelines do allow for “cultural differences” but they cannot be read to mean THAT, can they? and a mens prison is not a “culture” that way. there is NO female context in a mens prison. its not a matter of cultural DIFFERENCE, its a matter of ABSENCE. its impossible. the court glossed over this impossibility to give this man exactly what he wanted, because he wanted it, and bc the trans lobby and their lawyers are very influential. thats all.

    of course, this allegedly “female” context does not exist in womens prisons either. so lets stop that argument it its tracks (even though this is clearly where that train is headed). in fact, the guidelines seem to indicate that a 12-month period “living as” an UN-INCARCERATED FEMALE (think traveling, holidays etc) is medically indicated for incarcerated males with gender dysphoria. i guess we should just let them all out of prison then? sure, why not, its medically indicated! this entire thing is bullshit, of course. but even using the guidelines shouldve given a different result. this is an example of “give the trans everything and anything they want, regardless of the rules.”

    • GallusMag Says:

      This contention: that a man confined for life in prison in an all-male population is incapable of fulfilling the “One Year Real Life Test” recommended by WPATH guidelines- was the argument made by medical experts who testified against SRS on behalf of the DOC:

      “Osborne also testified that
      sex reassignment surgery was not medically necessary for Kosilek,
      in part because she believed that it was not possible to have the
      “real life experience” required by the Standards of Care in prison.

      However the Judge was able to easily disregard that contention because built into WPATH guidelines is the caveat that men should “do the best they can” fulfilling the requirement in cases where role compliance is problematic or impaired.

      “The credible evidence in the instant case confirmed the
      conclusion in Kosilek I that a person can have a “real life
      experience” in prison.13 For someone like Kosilek who is serving a
      sentence of life without the possibility of parole, prison is, and
      always will be, his real life
      . See 221 F. Supp. 2d at 167.

      The Standards of Care address the third possible stage of the
      treatment of gender identity disorder, surgery. They state:
      13The Seventh Version of the Standards of Care states that
      the Standards of Care in their entirety “apply to all
      transsexual, transgender, and gender nonconforming people,
      irrespective of their housing situation,” and that “[h]ealth care
      for transsexual, transgender, and gender nonconforming people
      living in an institutional environment should mirror that which
      would be available to them if they were living in a noninstitutional
      setting within the same community.” Standards of
      Care, Seventh Version at 67. Although the court did not consider
      the Seventh Version of the Standards of Care in reaching its
      conclusions, it is consistent with the court’s finding that a
      transsexual prisoner can have the required real life experience
      in prison.

      So the judge states he reached his conclusion without consulting WPATH guidelines yet he then also cites them.

      WPATH guidelines are kind of like the bible: quoted as authority when desired yet containing so many caveats and contradictions that the guidelines can be modified or disregarded at will. The whole point of WPATH is to protect medical providers (who generate income practicing cosmetic sex-role medicine) from lawsuits. As such a provider or authorizing agency would have to stray very far afield to go afoul of the guidelines. The guidelines exist to protect the industry, not vulnerable patients.

      The judge’s language here is especially offensive to women:

      “In addition, contrary to this court’s conclusion, Dr. Schmidt
      does not believe that Kosilek has had the real life experience
      required by the Standards of Care because, in his view, it is not
      possible to have the required real life experience in prison. See
      June 7, 2006 Tr. at 78-79. This is one reason that he believes that
      sex reassignment surgery has not been shown to be medically
      necessary for Kosilek. See June 7, 2006 Tr. at 79. However, as
      Drs. Kaufman and Kapila wrote, in their response to Osborne’s peer
      review of their evaluation of Kosilek, “[t]he point of having a
      [real life experience] is to provide the person with an awareness
      of what to expect in a different gender role.” Ex. 53 at 154.
      Kosilek’s real life experience living as a woman in prison provides
      him with an awareness of what to expect in a different gender role,
      as he is serving a life sentence and will never have the opportunity
      to live as a woman outside of prison. Indeed, the evidence at trial
      indicated that the prison environment has provided Kosilek with a
      an even more stringent “real life experience” test than many
      transsexuals have outside prison, because inmates are constantly
      under observation and any failure to live as a woman would be
      readily noted.
      [P90 bolding mine-GM]

      So basically the Judge ruled that a man in men’s prison has an even “more stringent” test of “female role behavior” because he is under observation and any “Failure to Live As A Woman” would be “readily observed”. (!)

      What would such a “failure” to “live as” a woman look like? The judge leaves it undefined. Shaving his head? Failing to apply the face paint/make-up the court had previously ordered? Changing his name back to Robert? Using his penis to void in a urinal? None of this is defined by the court. Or by WPATH, incidentally.

      Perhaps the “female role” that females are meant to occupy is presumed to be so commonly understood that it defies description.

      Women and feminists object to this undefined “role” being applied to us. We are protected from the imposition of such roles by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. That a federal court can assert that females have a particular role that can be performed on a “pass or fail” basis is an incredibly offensive and discriminatory premise.

      • FCM Says:

        ok then. the repulsiveness of all of that aside…the living as period for a lifer is possible, according to them, but it would be a *different* situation for a non-lifer, and it might not, in fact, be possible to do the living-as period in prison for an inmate who expected to be released at some point. IOW non-lifers might not get the SRS. yes? is this what the trans are willing to concede? of course not. they will never concede anything, ever. their goal is to get the trans whatever they want, whenever they want it, the rules be damned. so why even make the point that well, THIS guy is in for life — if its in fact completely irrelevant and they would still advocate for his SRS even if he wasnt?

        BTW this is a feedback loop isnt it? like no matter what we say, they are going to have an answer thats even more repulsive and damaging to women than the original one. and their position will carry the day, no matter what it is, so we better shut up before we make it worse for ourselves. got it.

        its notable IMO that they are saying unambiguously that they DO NOT CARE about the impossibility of a male “living as” a female, bc all they ever meant by “living as” a female was “living as a transsexual male” this whole time. they know that a male being treated like a transsexual male is the best they will ever be able to do and that all this female talk is just garbage. in the prison context, they arent even attempting to hide it.

  5. fwancis Says:

    I can’t BELIEVE there are no incarcerated women who decide to become men and are suing to be transferred into a men’s prison! Why, I don’t understand!

  6. ethicalequinox Says:

    I’d like to suggest an addendum to the standards men must meet before they “transition” into “women”.


    This is a very relevant and extremely valid point – I would like to see how they’d respond to it. Because they couldn’t.

    Excellent post yet again, GM.

  7. Sugarpuss Says:

    Yeah, these trannies are really oppressed.

    The government foots the bill for their frivolous “transformations”, but I can’t even get any assistance for basic dental care. Tell me this country’s priorities aren’t fucked up.

  8. Ave Says:

    this guy and his glasses are creepy as hell

    • Yes, all female impersonaters spook me out because despite their long hair and make-up they project an aura that is the antithesis of anything to do with a real woman, but this one’s face in particular gives me the creeps.

    • anon Says:

      I spent some time reading some of the small city “hollaback” websites, places that are lily white, etc., and it seemed like the lion’s share of the postings were creepy trans people taking pictures of people who just looked like themselves but didn’t happen to be running with a posse.

      It was like an explosion at the pot-kettle factory.

  9. Gayle Says:

    “THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A FEMALE PRISONER IN THE ENTIRE HISTORY OF THE WORLD that wants to be housed with MALE PRISONERS. EVER. EVER. EVER. There has never been a single case worldwide of a female fighting to have a “sex-change” for the “right” to be housed with men.”

    Great point.

    I’m from MA and know this story too well. Robert Kosilek is a horror of a human being. He deserves nothing.

  10. Bev Jo Says:

    Thank you so much, Gallus. Brilliant. This is so important to show the defenders of these men. How could it be more clear how much they hate us and how dangerous they are? What faces!!! They are as far opposite as real women as can be.

  11. GallusMag Says:

    Relative of woman killed by Michelle Kosilek blasts judge for making state pay for sex-change operation

    By John R. Ellement | GLOBE STAFF SEPTEMBER 06, 2012

    The niece of the woman Michelle Kosilek murdered when she was known as Robert Kosilek said Thursday she does not want Kosilek to get sex change surgery at taxpayers’ expense and that she wants the state to appeal a federal judge’s decision ordering the procedure.

    “As far as I’m concerned, he deserves nothing,’’ Laura J. Brandel said in a telephone interview. “If he wants to attempt suicide and take his own life, let him. It might sound cold to you, but it’s cold what he did to her.’’

    Brandel said her family is also working with Senator Scott Brown to somehow prevent Kosilek from getting the surgery that US District Judge Mark Wolf ruled this week is a medical necessity.

    The judge’s decision also provoked an uproar at the State House, where Senate minority leader Bruce Tarr and 49 other lawmakers sent a letter to the state correction commissioner, urging him to appeal Wolf’s ruling.

    Kosilek, now in her early 60s, was transitioning to a female identity by 1990. She murdered her wife, Cheryl, in their Mansfield home on May 20 of that year. (Under Globe policy, Kosilek is being referred to as a woman because that is the gender with which she identifies.)

    Brandel said she was furious that Wolf had ordered the state Department of Correction to pay for sex reassignment surgery for Kosilek, who strangled Brandel’s aunt with a wire, nearly beheading her.

    “I was sickened, outraged, and disgusted,’’ after learning about the order, Brandel said. “He’s a freak . . . wanting a sex change and expecting everybody to pay for it. We’ve paid enough. He got his name changed. He’s gotten his hormone treatments. He doesn’t deserve anything for what he did.’’

    Kosilek has legally changed her first name to Michelle. She has been held in a men’s prison in Norfolk while taking hormones and developing female physical qualities. In his 127-page order, Wolf wrote that the surgery is the only adequate care for the inmate’s gender identity disorder and that Correction Department doctors have prescribed the surgery.

    The letter from lawmakers to Correction Commissioner Luis S. Spencer, who is being sued because his department has custody of Kosilek, said, “Clearly, the Eighth Amendment provides important protections when a person enters our prison system, but it cannot be fairly said to require the state to accommodate every last need and want of convicted murderers.”

    The letter, signed by both Democratic and Republican lawmakers, said that giving Kosilek the surgery is an affront to the woman he murdered and to her surviving relatives. The authors also rejected Kosilek’s claim he could be harmed if not given the surgery.

    “We find such a suggestion to be unjustifiable, against the better judgment of the citizens of the state, and offensive to the family’’ of the woman he killed, the letter said.

    One of Kosilek’s attorneys, Joseph L. Sulman, said Thursday he understood why relatives of the murdered woman are opposed to Wolf’s order.

    “This is a case that requires us to separate our emotions and focus on legal principles,’’ he said. “I can’t fault anyone associated with the victim of my client’s crime to not like this outcome or want something worse than life in prison. That’s perfectly normal.’’

    But he added that Wolf’s order was well thought out and was based on the advice of medical professionals, not on arguments made by politicians.

    Sulman also said that if the Correction Department does appeal, he believes that Wolf’s order will be upheld because of the legal scholarship and detailed examination the judge has made during the more than 10 years he has sat on the case. The Correction Department said it is reviewing the judge’s decision and considering whether to appeal it.

    Brandel’s mother, Margaret Landry, was the older sister of the victim. Her mother died of breast cancer when she was 54 years old and was heartbroken by the death of her only sibling, Brandel said.

    The cost of the surgery ranges from $7,000 to more than $50,000, depending on the extent of cosmetic work, according to informational surgery and transgender websites.

    Brandel said that if Kosilek ultimately has the operation, she has hopes for what happens when the surgery begins.

    “With luck, he will die on the operating table,’’ said Brandel, who has worked in health care for 22 years. “I would never, ever wish harm on anybody but him.’’ She added, “Did he care what he did to my aunt? No, he didn’t.’’


    • anon Says:

      Awesome, lesbian marriage was legal in the early 90s! Rewriting history is so much fun.

      And seriously, he’s really old for an operation that basically results in a festering wound as the most positive of all potential outcomes. Doesn’t seem safe.

  12. living as a woman = putting on a dress and seeing whether you can deal with the grief

    • Ave Says:

      lol Andie, that’s pretty much what the whole harry benjamin standards say….it’s either how bone headed one is or how much money one has

  13. anonymous Says:

    Anyone know to whom we can send outraged letters etc? More than happy to send off a bunch. This is horrendous on every level.

  14. Bev Jo Says:

    Good for Laura Brandel to be fighting this travesty.

    I’m linking to this in our new group, Womyn-Born-Womyn Radical Feminist Warriors. There’s great awareness there even among the new feminists about how trannies are clearly men. They just could not avoid what they were seeing, in spite of the trans cult propaganda.

    Last night at a dance, I saw a trannie who has been on his own at these events, now with a woman. In spite of his height and broad shoulders, he has always tried to act demure. But this time, he was controlling the woman he danced with, bending her awkwardly backward to where she lost balance, and turning and manipulating her to where she couldn’t control her own movements. It did not flow or look like how the Lesbians dance, and the woman looked very uncomfortable with this man who was acting just like men act on a dance floor with women.

    By the way, Lesbian marriage is still not legal or close to being legal in the US. State marriage is not real marriage, just as, before 1967 (before Loving versus Virginia), inter-racial marriage was not real marriage in terms of federal rights or recognition in all states. Lesbians still do not have immigration rights with lovers or any of the legal protections that het married couples have. No matter what legal documents Lesbians might have, Lesbian-hating families can still manage to make medical decisions against comatose Lesbians and their lovers’ wishes. They can still take over the homes shared for decades, evicting lovers when a Lesbian dies — even if they’ve disowned her and haven’t seen her for years. Having as many documents as possible help, but are no guarantee of safety. I am against marriage in general, but for it so that we can simply to have the same rights as hets have. Sometimes it can mean life over death.

    I do hope these men have festering wounds that never heal. That would not begin to be justice.

  15. Noanodyne Says:

    You know what’s going to finally make a difference with this kind of sickening travesty? The excellent in-depth reporting you’re doing, Gallus. Solid, factual, highly-detailed, extensive reportage like this is what has taken down the most powerful and the most corrupt. We are beyond lucky to have you doing this on women’s behalf. The combination of your reporting and the legal work that Bess is doing will have an effect. I hope that knowing that you are doing the work that others will rely on when it comes time to make public policy and laws will help ease your exhaustion from doing that work. Though it’s not enough, thank you.

  16. Ashland Avenue Says:

    This case highlights how little our society cares for women, really. Viciously murder a woman? Why, hell yeah, we’ll STILL kowtow to your every perverted, freaky wish, even while you’re incarcerated, my good man!

    I was on a gay news site that reported this, and the comments in the comments section were overwhelmingly against it. Maybe people are starting to see the light.

    Thanks for this, GallusMag. I know tracking this shit has to be wearing you down. Please know you’re doing lesbian herstory a huge service with this site.

  17. Grackle Says:

    Horrifying. Thanks for letting us know about this and for providing links to the petitions.

  18. Ave Says:

    You may want to look at this, according to this page those who don’t support kosilek are of the patriarchy some way

    https: // inchoaterica.wordpress DOT com/2012/09/10/doing-the-patriarchys-work-and-calling-it-feminism/

  19. […] Being convicted of violence against women (Koselik) […]

  20. GallusMag Says:


    Judge: Transsexual inmate should recoup legal fees

    By Laurel J. Sweet
    Monday, September 17, 2012 – Updated 11 hours ago
    + Recent Articles + Email + Bio
    E-mail Print (179) Comments Text size Share
    Taxpayers already are on the hook for a transsexual wife killer’s sex-change operation, and now the federal judge who stuck them with that tab said in a rare weekend decision yesterday that Michelle Lynne Kosilek also is entitled to be reimbursed by the state for years of legal bills.

    The bottom line “is likely to be large,” according to the memorandum issued yesterday by U.S. District Court Chief Judge Mark L. Wolf. The amount could be disclosed as soon as Thursday — the deadline Wolf has set for Kosilek’s legal team to submit a suggested bill to the court.

    Wolf is urging lawyers for both sides to meet and try and reach a resolution that will avoid additional litigation and costs fighting his order.

    “Kosilek has prevailed on his claim that (the Department of Correction) has violated his Eighth Amendment rights (against cruel and unusual punishment) and is continuing to do so,” Wolf wrote. “Therefore, he is eligible to be awarded his reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs.”

    Attempts to reach an attorney for Kosilek yesterday were unsuccessful.

    Diane Wiffin, spokeswoman for the state Department of Correction, told the Herald, “We can’t comment. We have to review the decision.”

    Wolf yesterday put the DOC on notice that it has until Oct. 9 to let the court know whether it intends to appeal his 128-page Sept. 4 decision that Kosilek suffers from gender identity disorder and is “a man who truly believes that he is a female cruelly trapped in a male body.”

    Kosilek, 63, formerly of Mansfield, was born Robert Kosilek. He legally changed his name to Michelle Lynne Kosilek nearly 20 years ago and is living and dressing as a woman at the all-male MCI-Norfolk state prison, where he is serving life for the 1990 strangulation of his 36-year-old wife, Cheryl Kosilek. Hormone treatments have enabled him to develop breasts.

    Kosilek has survived two suicide attempts and has threatened to castrate himself over his gender distress, according to Wolf, who ruled that sex-reassignment surgery was the only remedy for Kosilek’s “serious medical need.”

    It was not immediately clear how far back Kosilek’s lawyers are eligible to recover costs and fees. He has been suing the DOC for surgery since 2000.


  21. ehungerford Says:

    “”The firms have offered to waive their fees in exchange for Miss Kosilek getting court-ordered relief without further appeal,” Cohen said Monday.”


  22. […] but not limited to dating, job prospects, and jury service.  you know, instead of counting as zero strikes like it does now.  even when he did it, and everyone knows it.  that is all. Share […]

  23. […] Like in the recent Kosilek case, Hammer contends that his desire for cosmetic surgery represents a profound form of mental illness for which there is no treatment. Er, the male lesbians partnered with other males…Ida Hammer attacking lesbians at the 2012 NYC Dyke March Share this:FacebookTwitterLike this:LikeBe the first to like this. Posted by GallusMag Filed in Gay, Lesbian, Medicine, Transgender Tags: anti-gay, Ida Hammer, MVP Health Plan, NYC Dyke March, NYC Dyke March 2012, sex change Leave a Comment » […]

  24. cg100 Says:

    This is just SO beyond absurd. First of all, why should he get special clothing & cosmetics? REAL female inmates don’t even get cosmetics or so called ‘women’s’ clothing. Nor do they get electrolysis, which is a procedure mainly used by women in the real world. If you’re a female inmate with say, a unibrow or hair on their upper lip, you just have to live with it. But he gets electroysis. And then this whole ‘cruel and unusual’ punishment thing is pretty ridiculous too. People seem to have this notion that inmates have free cable & everything’s all great, but it’s not. Usually in prisons the attitude seems to be that if it’s not literally killing you or making you die on the spot, they don’t give a fuck. For example, a woman my friend knew that had substance abuse issues. She was given nothing for her withdrawal symptoms when taken to jail, since you know, it wouldn’t kill her, & had such severe withdrawal symptoms that she had a miscarriage. But you know how they looked at it, they figured she ‘choose’ to be a drug addict & broke the law, so they had zero sympathy for her. Or a friend of mine, again, who had a substance abuse problem, went into a seizure, due to severe withdrawal, & cracked most of her upper teeth during the seizure. They just left here there, then pulled all her teeth & gave her nothing for the pain afterwards.Why is this not considered a violation of the 8th ammendment? Why were they given nothing to help with an issue that was caused by a mental disease? This is such bs. This man is just trying to cause a bunch of bs and drama. Then once he’s a so called woman, he’ll want to go to a women’s correctional facility, I bet. Ridiculous. Sorry to be longwinded, but this just really pissed me off.

  25. […] violence. Uh, not so much. Cox actually supports taxpayer funded transgender surgery for a man who nearly decapitated his wife. And Janet Mock, besides his insistence on referring to women as “fish,” he also refers […]

  26. […] Por qué los cambios de sexo ordenados por sentencia judicial son malos para las mujeres (David Megarry and Robert Kosilinks) […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: