Statistics Show the Difference in Rates of Violent Crimes Against Women Committed by ‘Transwomen’ Versus Non-Transgender Males

April 7, 2015

stats

 

Surprise: There is zero statistical difference. The Transgender Law Center, HRC, GLAAD, ACLU, National Center for Transgender Equality, et al., have failed to cite a single study refuting the evidence that transgender males (“transwomen”) commit crimes against women and girls at exactly the same rate as any other males.

Several states and municipalities are considering bills designed to protect the rights of women to safety and privacy in areas of public nudity, such as restrooms and locker rooms, and areas where women are especially vulnerable to male violence, such as prisons, domestic violence shelters, mental health facilities, etc.

These bills are proposed in response to the elimination of sex-segregated spaces caused by “Gender Identity” lobbyists, who claim that biological sex is a “personal feeling” which lacks all description or objective characteristics and is unknowable to anyone but the person who “feels it”. This surprising legal attack on women’s rights has gained remarkable ground by piggy-backing onto the established political capital of the increasingly obsolete gay rights (or “LGBT”) organizations, while utilizing the financial capital of wealthy heterosexual closeted crossdressing males.

Many of these anti-women “Gender Identity” statutes were passed quickly and quietly in the guise of “equality” and “anti-discrimination” measures, and this strategy was by design:

 “We have to acknowledge that we have largely achieved our successes by flying under the radar”, (then) Transgender Law Center Director Masen Davis stated eighteen months ago, “It is a secret at Transgender Law Center and I’ll ‘come out’ today. We do a lot, really quietly. We have made some of our biggest gains: that nobody has noticed. We are very quiet and thoughtful about what we do, because we want to make sure we have the win more than we want to have the publicity. And that has been largely effective. We’re not the only one, and many organizations have done this, and we’ve been able to get a lot done. But I need to tell you that the days of doing things quietly are coming to an end. It is time to get ready for a close-up, folks.”

 That close-up, at least in regards to “Gender Identity” laws which eliminate protected spaces for women (removing the legally protected category of sex entirely and replacing it with men’s personal “feelings”) is now shining the spotlight, all right. On this guy, and this one, and this one, and these guys, and all of these.

The only long-term study of transgender outcomes concluded that “Male to Female” transsexuals retain male-pattern criminality, including crimes against women. [Long-Term Follow-Up of Transsexual Persons Undergoing Sex Reassignment Surgery: Cohort Study in Sweden http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016885]

Are all transwomen predators? Of course not: They are predators at exactly the same rates as any other males. Now that the public is starting to pay attention, that genie won’t be going back into the bottle anytime soon. What is once seen cannot be unseen. Especially when what is seen is some creepy pervert in the locker room waving his penis around in front of your kids.

Years ago, some prescient Lesbian Feminist legal strategists proposed a compromise: allowing men’s “Gender Identity” to override sex-based protections for women if those males had undergone some sort of medical or psychological treatment for “Gender Dysphoria”. They were attacked mercilessly by “Transwomen” for this suggestion. Their names were widely smeared, they were threatened with violence, stalked, their employers contacted, their home addresses published on-line and their children threatened with death. If any members of the transgender movement objected to the carnage, they did so silently.

And the suggestion that such males could perhaps be served by “Gender Neutral” areas has been widely rejected as well.  “I will pee on the floor before I use a gender-neutral bathroom”, says TransSupport.Org founder Robin Lynn Frank.

The transgender movement’s strategy continues to be:

Deny, Deny, Deny.

Silence dissent through threats and violence.

Apply slurs to feminists who prioritize the needs of women over the gender-feels of males.

Target and destroy lesbian and other women-only social events.

Censoring and No-Platforming feminist events.

“No True Transwoman” propaganda, which excludes offenders (on the basis that they don’t have “true feelings” of gender).

Etc. Etc. In short, the same “pre-spotlight” strategies that served them well in the past.

 

You can read a fascinating current discussion between the two sides of this dilemma, Feminists vs. Transgenderists, by clicking HERE. .

 

Creepy "Terf Watch" graphic. The website is for transwomen to "track" feminists, and some men, who support legal sex status for women.

Creepy “Terf Watch” graphic. The website is for transwomen to “track” feminists, and some men, who support legal sex status for women.

94 Responses to “Statistics Show the Difference in Rates of Violent Crimes Against Women Committed by ‘Transwomen’ Versus Non-Transgender Males”

    • Zemskull Says:

      Hi Gallus: I’m reminded of a 2013 pro-trans opinion piece. You’ve probably read it before: “If trans women aren’t welcome, neither am I.”

      [*link to MRA/Trans blog removed. I do not post links to MRA or trans/MRA blogs, also any site that has tried to directly harm women or my blog- GM]

      What I found particularly interesting was the writer’s first assertion, that women don’t have the right to safe spaces. Strange logic. I’d have agreed with the author if the stated opinion was that women should never assume they’re 100% safe in any situation. But the argument that women have no inherent right to hope for safety is an alarming one.

      • Jonathan (Jennifer but as I read this I'm sure trans person being here might insult you) Says:

        So you have the right to a safe place to pee but transgender people are a threat to you men are a threat to us I guess I should go to the bushes behind the public restrooms then. Or I have an idea lets make being trans illegal. Think about it it would solve this extremely dangerous situation for women and all trans people will be dead or In jail which will make many transgender exclusionary feminists very happy. Since you know I’m most likely going to rape a woman if I enter the woman’s room. I know we’re all about innocent until proven guilty but this article proves me guilty of harming women. I support the death penalty for transgender people too think about this when a trans person is arrested many times we are required to be put into solitary confinement. It would be much cheaper for the government to just kill all trans people than to endure the harm and violence we commit on the people’s check book.

  1. Oak and Ash Says:

    So math is now transphobic. Great.


  2. Thank you SO MUCH for your work, Gallus! It always comforts me when someone else does a sweet take down of manipulative bullshit like this.

    I love the quotation from Masen Davis– what a GEM! No shit they’ve been passing laws on the down low! That’s the only way to get them passed. Shhhh, people, shhhh! As a direct result, we now see a legislative backlash emerging in states like Texas and Florida. Taking a more moderate stance from the get-go (i.e., measurable legal and/or medical evidence rather than “because I said so”) would’ve been more effective and less harmful to the very people trans organizations purport to represent. They sacrificed the long view and increased collateral damages by pushing vague and overbroad statutes through legislative bodies without public discussion. Next, easily disproved statements denying male pattern violence. When will this anti-woman train-wreck end???

    My favorite part of this article, however, is:

    “I will pee on the floor before I use a gender-neutral bathroom”, says TransSupport.Org founder Robin Lynn Frank.

    Lolol! “I will commit a sex crime before I use a gender-neutral bathroom”?? Seriously? You will pee on the FLOOR?? Why is it insulting to use a gender neutral bathroom? I use them regularly. Some people are straight up UNREASONABLE. “Not my shit, not my problem.”

    • Jennifer Says:

      It should be illegal for trans people to use unisex bathrooms what prevents us from attacking the innocent mother changing her male sons diaper or the woman who was raped by a transexual (apparently we do this quite a bit). Because of this I don’t pee anywhere but my house sure I have chronic kidney stones and many other health problems because of this. But it’s what I deserve for being such a horrible insult to woman and humanity in general

  3. CKDexterHaven Says:

    One of the main arguments I’ve seen thoughtlessly thrown at feminists is ‘You’re trying to scare people into thinking all transwomen are sex offenders. It’s just like people thinking all gay men are rapists and paedophiles!’ Ummm, no, we just know M2Ts are men and will have the same rate of offending as men, that some men will use the loophole provided by transgenderism to prey upon women, that an increasing number of adult transitioners appear to motivated by sexual fetishes and fantasies and that, by asking women to override their instincts about men in their facilities, we are asking women to put sensitivity to men’s feelings above their own safety.

    It’s going to get worse. One of the main stories on the national BBC in Britain today is the massive increase in NHS referrals for transgender children in the past few years.

    BBC News Magazine

    Every single story on the television news bulletins has mentioned dresses and dolls and not one single journalist is even questioning this. Childhood has become more rigidly gendered in my lifetime. We wore primary colours and dungarees. My Disney toys were from Jungle Book, Robin Hood and Winnie the Pooh. Toys were brightly coloured and unisex. These days it’s tutus and tiaras for girls, Disney princess dolls and nail-art sets and the aisles of Toys ‘r’ Us looking like pink and blue ghettos. No wonder so many kids think they are wrong before they have the knowledge and language to express their individuality.

    • a cat Says:

      This is a brilliant point. I’m a child of the 80s and I grew up reading multicultural and feminist kids’ books, climbing trees and with a crewcut. I didn’t start getting the female expectations til I hit puberty. Nowadays I have small female relatives who get makeup daubed on them at 4 and told they are pretty princesses, The world changed.

      • Susan Says:

        Putting make up on a 4-year-old is disgusting. They shouldn’t have to deal with that shit.

        Every night before bed I remove all the black gunk around my eyes with almond oil, but it never totally comes off. I rub and pull on the delicate skin. I take the utmost care, but still my eyes water and lashes fall out. It’s awful. But I can’t stop now, because if you don’t wear make-up, you’re seen as slovenly, un-put-together and unprofessional.

        I actually would like to know what is the average age today that girls start wearing make-up. Does anyone know? I started applying makeup (poorly) when I was 15. And that wasn’t unusual at the time (a little over a decade ago.) I imagine it might be an earlier age nowadays with all of the youtube tutorials, selfies, etc.

      • Atranswidow Says:

        I totally agree about the pink and sparkly=girl theme going on in the article. I managed to grow up with out pink everything back in the 60’s. Not all parents are happy about sexist toys, thankfully. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3024547/Doctors-coats-boys-cupcake-cook-books-girls-pink-babygro-says-hate-thighs-Photos-sexist-children-s-toys-spark-outrage.html

        The description of the huge tantrum one of the children threw when he was ‘mis-gendered’ by the school-dinner lady gave me the chills. When my kids threw tantrums at that age I seem to remember that it was thought best-parenting-practice to ignore tantrums (not always easy I know). Having 5 teachers come to your rescue can only be reinforcing and empowering.

      • kesher Says:

        I had play makeup, generally clear lip gloss that was more like chapstick, starting when I was a preteen, but my mother was pretty resistant to letting me doll it up until I was an adolescent. She also resisted letting me shave my legs, and she was adamant that I not pluck my eyebrows. I didn’t start plucking my eyebrows until I was in my 20s, and I got a real job.

        I remember I wanted nail polish at a young age, and she would only let me get very light pink, which was so close to my natural nail color, it was basically unnoticeable.

    • Dogtowner Says:

      I played with dolls and trucks, wore dresses and a cowboy hat, and chased my boy neighbor up a tree. I find the move toward greater and greater gender rigidity both horrifying and fascinating, and really want to know what we can do to help girls especially realize that this crap is nonsense. I’m going to print a QUESTION GENDER bumper sticker and put it on my truck, and my RN husband has suggested a public health campaign. It would be great to get someone in public health onboard with this.

  4. Daniela Says:

    I’m a transsexual woman. I find this site and other similar ones very offensive very often, the terms used, how people refers to us. I have probably even made some offensive rage comment at some point, though I really can’t remember. And I truly and honestly apologize for that if I did.

    But I think this is really a very serious topic and I think people such as the author and others are onto something. While I still think the dangers are blown a bit out of proportion at times, there’s no other reasonable way to approach this than putting women’s safety and comfort first, in women’s spaces. And in all spaces, obviously, but even more intensely in women specific spaces.

    And of course I consider myself a woman too (something I sadly know you all disagree with), but a transsexual woman, which means though I see myself and expect others to see me and treat me as a woman for most intents and purposes of everyday life, there are also topics and situations in which how I’m different to women born with a female anatomy really matters.

    So reality being like that, there should be no argument that if we as a collective want to be accepted we should put all our efforts at being accepted, and not try to force our acceptance. First, because we are no one to force anything on anyone, let alone on women, who are the human beings that occupy the spaces we aim to be accepted in, and in many cases those spaces were created with the goal of providing intimacy and safety, and protecting them from other human beings that coincidentally, we happened to be a part of at some point in a more or less meaningful way.

    Secondly, because forcing our acceptance sends a very bad message. If something has to be forced that means it’s not being accepted. It also means we think we have some kind of right to enforce it, which is terrible, terrible, terrible, when we are talking about trans women forcing things on women.

    I, myself, use the women’s bathrooms if I judge using them will cause no one distress, either because there’s no one there, or I think they won’t have any problem with it. I still use the men’s ones from time to time, and it’s a truly unpleasant experience but I will honestly take the distress myself before unloading it upon women there. It’s crucial in my life to live and behave in a way that makes people comfortable and accepting, no matter how long it takes. It’s completely critical for me, because that’s where true acceptance comes from. It does no good to me that I take advantage from whatever law has passed last week to do something that will cause discomfort in any women around me.

    I would think this would be a no-brainer for everyone, but I see it’s not. This all smells very bad, I don’t like how things are moving and I think this will harm us, and all women, in the long run. We want to be accepted, at least socially, or as far as we can, in some spaces, both physical and social. There are people already in those spaces, and they are women.

    Are we going to force our acceptance against their will? Is that a way to gain our status among them? This is embarrassing. I think transsexual women have been using and assimilating themselves into women spaces with no remarkable trouble for decades, with the fullest respect and solidarity and without ever crossing any line. And this seemingly new wave of abundant and really weird trans women are going to put us in a really bad position when laws are passed because of them making feel women unsafe in their own places.

    I’m really upset about all this. I think many transsexual women are. And I’ve started transitioning not too long ago, so I’m not claming any kind of superior trans-ness, let alone woman-ness over anyone at all. But I will never, ever in my life act in a way that would cause that kind of distress in the other women I encounter in my life, if I can help it at all. I will go out of any bathroom if another woman there expresses her discomfort, and I will be really, really sad. And I will keep trying, in my life, to be a good person and a good woman and make it so that never happens again. And maybe such women will never see me 100% as a woman like them. But also maybe they will see, some day, that even with that, they are not disturbed by my presence in any way. This doesn’t necessarily have to include passing/fooling them, for a woman is everything more than her looks. And anyone that doesn’t act like this, well, I don’t know what kind of person that one is.

    Sorry for the very long rant. I’m getting sick of reading certain things everyday. This whole thing really disturbs me. Feel free not to allow its posting because of its length or whatever other reason.

    Thank you.

    • thebewilderness Says:

      May I suggest that you make an effort to convince men to accept you for what you are instead of expecting women to accept you for what you are not?

    • brigiddd Says:

      Daniela, you are only a handful of empathetic transwoman voices that I have heard, so I would only like to encourage you to continue to speak out so that perhaps transwomen such as yourself can take back your own movement. At present, both politically, and in the majority of social media, it is the predatory and violent, late-transitioning and heterosexual transwomen that are dominating the conversation.

      (the latter two qualities aren’t necessarily evil; they just tend to be associated with those exhibiting the former qualities)

      While as you say, unisex bathrooms can be great for someone like you who isn’t intent on violating women’s boundaries, but merely maintaining your own comfort and piece of mind and just living your life in peace — and while the transgender movement has some very powerful people (CEOs, billionaires, millionaires, etc) in its corner that could certainly help to achieve these safe spaces for transwomen — the problem is that for those individuals who are at their core, predatory with a specific intent to violate women’s boundaries, that would never be enough. If every place in the world had a unisex bathroom, they wouldn’t be satisfied until they were in the women’s, specifically because it is that validation by way of boundary violation that they crave.

      I have seen this weird duality mentioned several times where a predatory transwoman states that they have the right to use women’s spaces and if women don’t like that, then they can go make their own “ciswoman” spaces! But then women *have* done that, with conferences, festivals, discussion groups, etc. And those spaces are still targeted for destruction. And that is why so many radfems are now forced into such a defensive position, because we are told we have no right to assemble by our definition for our own comfort and piece of mind, **anywhere**, **ever**.

      I found one aspect of your comment disconcerting however. Do not tell women they are blowing the threat of male violence out of proportion, ever. Whether male violence from “cismen” or male violence from transwomen. When women talk of [typically “cis”] male violence, we are not blowing it out of proportion. We know that not all men are rapists and murderers. However we also know that 9% of men are self-admitted rapists and that 30% would do it if they could get away with it, and that all women are at some point sexually assaulted, harassed, or raped. We know not all of us will die of murder, but we know that 10 of us will be murdered in the U.S. today (nearly all by males). You have basically invoked the MRA style slogan of “not all men” with an undertone of “women are hysterical/don’t know what they’re talking about/don’t know the correct way to interpret their own reality”. Yes, we know “not all men”. And we know “not all transwomen”. But if we have no right to fear of biologically male transwomen in our restrooms, then we have equally zero right to have any fear of male “cismen” in our bathrooms. Our fear of males, both “cis” and “trans”, is rational and evidence-based. Look at it this way, do you think the current “state of emergency” in the media over murdered transwomen is being “blown out of proportion”? Because “cis” women are killed at the same rate (at a higher rate in 2014 actually).

      It was nice to hear from you. I hope those that are currently the vocal majority of the advocates of your community are the minority of the actual transgender population, and that you and your peers can speak up and reclaim your movement and make it into a movement of decency and civil rights instead of the attack on women it currently is.

    • Elaine Says:

      Thank you for your openness about yourself and your concern for the feelings of people born as women. I would like to see more individual restrooms for everyone so it wouldn’t matter what sex you were. Planet Fitness, where I exercise, allows anyone to go into whatever restroom they want. When I learned this I stopped changing there and would never take a shower there. I would feel differently about someone who had undergone a complete transition, e.g. no penis anymore and using hormones. On the other hand, I don’t want anyone hurt because they were abused for being “different,” verbally or physically. Blessings.

    • LC Says:

      Listen, @Daniela, you may have the best intentions in the world, and I appreciate that you are concerned about these laws being passed and the discomfort of the women they affect.

      The problem is, and the very reason why I first started questioning the rhetoric myself, is that the distress women feel around someone they recognize as male -is not personal-. Meaning, it’s not about you. It’s not about what you’re doing, saying, acting, where you are, who you’re with, how convincingly you pass… not personal. It’s solely because she observed, correctly, your biological sex. However much that might upset you, it’s never going to change, because you are biologically male. There’s no magical point at which a man can completely pass a woman and no woman will be able to tell. Instinct, fear, they don’t work that way. And women have every right and reason to fear men, ALL men.

      If it was personal, then you would be able to do something to change it. But human beings cannot change their sex… and it’s sad that this fact distresses some humans. Worse, though, is to convince yourself that -some day-, it’ll happen. The only way anyone can be genuinely happy is by accepting reality for what it is, and making the best of it. For the sake of your own peace of mind and that of women around you, I hope you come to terms with that.

    • serenecolour Says:

      You aren’t a woman. You are a man. You were born with a penis and nobody cares if you’re offended. This isn’t about your feelings. It’s about what is right.

  5. Daniela Says:

    I realized now my earlier comment doesn’t really address the topic of crime rates in any way. Sorry about that. I probably wanted to write all that so strongly that I got carried away.

    This part got me thinking about all this and started writing, though I know is not the central topic of the post:

    “Years ago, some prescient Lesbian Feminist legal strategists proposed a compromise: allowing men’s “Gender Identity” to override sex-based protections for women if those males…”

    • GallusMag Says:

      Your comments are on topic. Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

    • marymacha Says:

      One of the things that’s very difficult to understand about female impersonators as a whole is their inability to see reason. Obviously a substantial portion of the population will never get hoodwinked into thinking that you are really female, meaning a biological woman. MTTs know they were born male and have mostly lived most of their lives as male, assimilating the male experience and in many cases accepting it and not noticing any divergence from it until later on in life. Of course experiences can vary widely. Why is it so difficult to understand that mimicking the outer aesthetics and mannerisms of some (by no means all) women, will not a woman make? As a whole your group does not seem open to any other option other than barging down the door to all women-only space with the facetious claim that you “are women”.

      It’s possible that you do not understand. These spaces were created through LONG social struggles. Our foremothers fought for them and created them FOR US, not for you. Because of their work we can now relieve ourselves when far from home without intrusion or harassment and protected by law. Or so it was. This seems very basic and is something men took for granted for themselves long before public facilities for women were ever established. Likewise things like all-female institutions. Created for women, they let women do things like study and play sports free of male harassment and judgement. My point is that none of these things were given to us. Men did not collectively decide to grant us the vote or create schools for girls. We fought for them and suffered ostracism, harassment, rape and murder at the hands of men who did not want us to leave domestic slavery. So why should women, the biological kind, move over and make room for a population that deludes itself, often disingenuously so, conflating sexual excitation with identity; that insinuates itself into womanhood AND that can be shown to be in large part predatory?

      What is so horrible about creating a space for yourselves irrespective of everyone else? It’s what every oppressed group has done historically and continues to do. When you try to strong-arm your way into women’s space, that is your male-privilege showing. What is so horrible about being a femmy guy who likes women or a butch woman who likes men? Or is it that the gender straight-jacket is so tight that even self-mutilation and wholesale appropriation are preferable to actually deconstructing gender?

      • gchild Says:

        I too am thankful for this article. Not to malign transwomen, but to help protect female human beings. We are vulerable almost from the moment we come out of a female human being. We are made objects so it easier to rape, molest, beat, and kill us. We become ass and tits, make up and hair. Transwomen define us the same way. Not only that but they take it a step further when they demand we carve out our insides by pretending they dont exist (uterus, ovaries, etc.). So my outsides are just fuck parts, my existence is based on an idea, essence, identity that is invisible AND I am not allowed to have my organs either? And I am supposed feel comfortable alone in restrooms etc. with someone who does not see me as a human person? How can they not know this is terrifying? This is how every serial killer of women sees women!

        Marymacha,
        thanks also for reminding me that those feminists who came before us faced some of this same shit. Because trans and its supporters attacking women/feminist felt BRAND NEW to me at first. But no, its what happens when women speak up. Can you imagine? For women to even ASK for a public restroom at all was probably met with suspicion and rage. Men probably told them to stfu and stay home if they knew they would need to pee. lol.

        The battles were tough, but gains were made. How do you think we now have young women who are comfortable enough to not need or want feminism? So fancy free they make feminism “sexy” and “fun”? lmao.

      • Daniela Says:

        I am not a biological woman, we are not biological women. We can twist this in many ways and claim we are women and we are biological and then blah blah. But we you or me talk about biological women I’m almost sure that’s just a way to talk about a woman that is born a woman with all the biological and physiological realities that go with it. A female anatomy. Yes, this should be so obvious and it is in fact. I don’t have any satisfying answer to why my collective predominantly seems to disregard these facts. Along with the other facts you presented about being socialized as males and imitation of women not making us women.

        It is sad, very sad, but at this point in which I’m going through a proccess of self-examining and learning, I haven’t found a better answer than the one I see very often in sites and blogs like this one. It all boils down to men thinking they are the ones who get to say what is a woman and what is not, and enforcing it. Because they (we) have been taught through our lives that we even got a say on things like that.

        “So why should women, the biological kind, move over and make room for a population that deludes itself, often disingenuously so, conflating sexual excitation with identity; that insinuates itself into womanhood AND that can be shown to be in large part predatory?”

        Women, the biological kind, don’t have to move over, and that’s all there should be to it. To make room for the kind of people you talk about, or any other kind or trans women at all. If there is any specific institution that provides spaces, help and shelter for women where the reality of having been socialized as males and lacking the experiences many women suffer through their lives that are directly related to their biological reality doesn’t prevent us from being eligible to receive that help and shelter, and the people that run that institution along with the women that benefit from its activity agree it would not cause any trouble, then they can decide to provide for us, or for some of us.

        But that’s not our call, it’s theirs, women’s. We can work and build our own spaces, institutions that help us, shelters. We could make sure they are specially focused in dealing with our particular circumstances, just like the ones you described for women.

        My identity as a woman doesn’t depend on my access to women-only spaces by force. The irony there is truly sickening.

        “What is so horrible about being a femmy guy who likes women or a butch woman who likes men? Or is it that the gender straight-jacket is so tight that even self-mutilation and wholesale appropriation are preferable to actually deconstructing gender?”

        There’s nothing wrong with that at all, in any way. About whether something like what you call self-mutilation is preferable to deconstructing gender, I think that is an unfair question for they are not mutually exclusive. I can’t see deconstructing gender as anything but positive as a whole, given how gender is a construction that brings all the negative consequences you know, study and write about, specifically and overwhelmingly for women. But in most cases what that self-mutilation aims to fix are things inside of us, personal, and not societal. We would be comparing a fix for a personal issue to a fix for a societal issue. They are at completely different levels, and while one is desirable as a whole, the other will depend on the reality of the person that undergoes it.

      • Daniela Says:

        It’s only since a few months ago that I’ve been more closely following the direction our collective is going, and I already feel sad, stressed about this urge to force our presence and feelings or identities or whatever into society in general and women in particular. I feel bad about this.

        And this is just a thought, but I realize that’s a bit the way feminism has been fighting for, for decades. But it’s different, since those at the position of power are not willing to leave it on their own, so there was and is no other choice.

        So I don’t know why we go this route. Women, and feminists, are not the ones that occupy the position of power in this society, I don’t know why we have to approach it all this way. I can think of answers for why we try to force our way into everything when it’s pretty clear that such approach is not the only course of action. Those answers are painful to think about.

      • GallusMag Says:

        Agree. Any woman who thinks men can be reasoned with is a fool.

      • GallusMag Says:

        @gchild- “Because trans and its supporters attacking women/feminist felt BRAND NEW to me at first. But no, its what happens when women speak up. Can you imagine? For women to even ASK for a public restroom at all was probably met with suspicion and rage.”

        This is such a good point.

      • Em Says:

        marymacha@4:19

        “… conflating sexual excitation with identity … ”

        What a great way to put it! They conflate these things because they need to. That’s how they keep the fantasy going. They’re autogynephiles–they fantasize they’re women, and anything that interferes with that fantasy is a buzz kill, not to be tolerated.

        Trans is a form of sadomasochism, and interestingly they’re not the only subset of SM’ers that lives and dies by the belief that their sexual fantasy isn’t a fantasy at all. These are people who insist they’re born sexual submissives or dominants–er, excuse me, born just plain submissives or dominants, because as with trans it’s not about sex at all, you see. The most extreme of them insist they’re actually, for real, masters or slaves, and become hysterical if you call nonsense.

        It’s frightening to think what the world would be like if the “masters” and “slaves” had the political clout possessed by autogynephiles.

      • brigiddd Says:

        They know that are obviously male and that is why they are now insisting penises and testicles are “female”. They know they can’t actually change ***reality*** so they’re hoping these delusional and tyrannical semantics games will simply make this pesky reality 1) legally irrelevant and 2) impossible to even define or discuss.

        Even though I know what the words female and woman mean to myself (and to reality), outside of radfem spaces I find myself taking great convoluted efforts to make sure I’m actually communicating those concepts, because you can’t take for granted that “woman” or “female” means anything in relation to reality in the mainstream liberal social justice circles.

        Re: the need for our own bathrooms, empathizing with women does not enter the equation for most. Tales of our victimization by males will not help. Since it is that boundary violation of females in and of itself that is what they desire (not merely a safe space of their own).

  6. AreUSayingWhatUThink Says:

    I like this article, because it’s an admission that transgender bathroom bills may be found unconstitutional by virtue of right to privacy. The author’s solution is gender-neutral bathrooms, from school age on up, so we can all get used to them. He mentions menstruation a couple times. Of course, THAT’S it, we don’t want to reveal we’re menstruating to men. Certainly nothing but menstrual shame driving us ladies to not want men in our bathrooms. Just that. What else could it be? Okey-doke http://jurist.org/dateline/2015/02/brian-eisner-gender-equality.php

    • born free & female Says:

      And a judge recently found exactly that: right to privacy trumps gender feelings.

      Though be aware that this would stop being the case if more gender identity bills pass – a big part of the legal decision is that the relevant laws say “sex”.

      http://d35brb9zkkbdsd.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/SeamusJohnstonVPitt.pdf

      • AreUSayingWhatUThink Says:

        I did read the judge’s decision in that JohnstonVPitt case. The judge’s reasoning was exactly that gender identity (or being uncomfortable with one’s own genitalia, or gender confusion) does not constitute a protected class, the way that woman is a protected class. He talked about the INTENT (I think he said “plain language”) intent of Title 7 – which was for women, biological women. What was Congress’s intent – to protect WOMEN as a class against discrimination, NOT people confused about their gender, or whatever. The judge said CONGRESS has to make the determination, not the courts. The judge also pointed out with regards to sex/right to privacy, it applies to both women and men as classes.

        I feel because this country is so divided politically, and presidential elections are so close, and the Republicans control the House, there is no way your’e going to change the constitution (right to privacy) or be able to ignore legal precedent, and replace sex with gender. Half this country votes Republican!

        “Gender identity” is a fucking pile of psychobabble, without scientific support. Your FEELINGS trump biological reality? I think in the Johnston case the judge found for the plaintiff, with prejudice, I think meaning “case closed.”

        In short, I highly recommend reading the Johnston decision, I found it quite interesting, and a veritable treasure trove of prior cases of this kind. I think the Democrats had better be careful, if they get behind transgender bills, allowing access to bathrooms and locker rooms, the Republicans will EASILY peel off “independent” (Republican leaning in my opinion) voters, as well as women voters who don’t want bio males in bathroom. Call them the Yvette Cormier voters – I may never vote Republican, but I sure as hell will NOT vote for someone who is in favor of emptying WOMAN of any meaning whatsoever.

      • GallusMag Says:

        @AreUSaying- the Pitt ruling dumps any re-vamp of title VII and title IX (attempts by trans lobbyists to eliminate legal sex and replace it with “gender feels”) strictly onto the legislature. The implications are enormous.

        BTW folks can read some amazing background on this case here:

        https://gendertrender.wordpress.com/2012/04/17/transgender-couple-face-subpoena-by-feds-in-u-of-pitt-bomb-threat-case/

        The updates in comments are particularly illuminating. If I was a billionaire with money to burn I would hire someone to produce a movie about it. A cross between Blue Velvet and AutoFocus. lol.

    • kesher Says:

      To these trans-appeasing quislings, I have a vital question: How are we supposed to handle more sensitive sex-segregated areas such as shelters and prisons? Make all of them “gender neutral”? I hate these straight “allies” who parrot the trans lie that this is only about the “need to pee”. I truly believe that the misogynists in the trans movement will only be satisfied when it’s a male free-for-all in all women’s spaces, the way it is literally everywhere else.

    • Pf Says:

      This asshole has quite obviously not experienced the sexual harassment girls are regularly forced to deal with. I can only imagine the horrors this type of “gender inclusive” policy would visit on the girls forced to have anyone and everyone in the bathroom with them.

      I was literally crying and chanting “fuck you” as I read. It was bad enough that the guys at school felt no shame at harassing me in front of teachers. It was only by going into the girls locker room that I got any break from those bastards. Now this asshole wants my rapist to share a bathroom with me and other women. Hell to the power of Fuck NO!!!!

  7. Lauren Says:

    Of course the rate of criminality of the trans’women’ is equal to that of men…because they’re men. They might dress like a stereotype of a woman, might even get their penises inverted into pseudo-vaginas, but they’re still men at that most basic genetic level–the level that determines what all of us are. The trans-cult-affirming branch of the medical establishment can do all the mutilations they feel fit to do, but changing the code that makes us what we are is still (thankfully) impossible.


  8. Males who crossdress, identify as transgender, or say they are “women” offend at the same rate as other males. I put people who deny this fact in the same category as people who don’t believe that climate change is real, or think that there were really weapons of mass destruction in Iraq in 2003.

    “The only long-term study of transgender outcomes concluded that “Male to Female” transsexuals retain male-pattern criminality, including crimes against women. ”

    This was a 30 year long study that compared transsexuals (people who have undergone SRS) to random controls in the general population. While alleviating gender dysphoria, transsexuals still had higher rates of morbidity and mortality. As to crime,

    “Second, regarding any crime, male-to-females had a significantly increased risk for crime compared to female controls (aHR 6.6; 95% CI 4.1–10.8) but not compared to males (aHR 0.8; 95% CI 0.5–1.2). This indicates that they retained a male pattern regarding criminality. The same was true regarding violent crime.”

    http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016885%20

    Keep in mind that this was a 30 year study of transsexuals not transgender. For all practical purposes, there is no precise definition of transgender. Transgender is whatever people say it is at any particular point in time. Moreover, people who read this blog and take the time to understand what is really occurring know that most males who identify as transgender, or say they are “women” still have male genitalia. There is nothing to prevent any male from saying he is transgender and claiming “gender identity”. The tragic case of Christopher, “Jessica”, Hambrook who was granted access to two different women’s homeless shelters where he sexually assaulted homeless women is a perfect example of “gender identity” laws being abused.

    I know most of this has been covered before on this and other blogs, but for people new to this blog, this is Christopher, “Jessica”, Hambrook.

    http://www.torontosun.com/2014/02/15/a-sex-predators-sick-deception

    What would prevent someone like Hambrook from claiming “sincere self-reported gender identity” and demanding access to the women’s locker room at Planet Fitness?

    See this Trans* Umbrella, and notice “cross dressers”. To bolster their numbers, trans activists toss cross dressers under the special Trans* Umbrella. When cross dressers turn out to be creepy men with obvious sexual fetishes like Gregory Philip Schwartz or Russell Williams, it’s like, “No, we don’t claim them”. Are they transgender, or aren’t they? It seems that cross dressers are both transgender and not transgender at the same time. Or, it depends on the circumstances.

    http://transaustin.com/terms-and-concepts/the-trans-umbrella/#sthash.QHnOhzGw.dpuf

    (Two Spirit and Intersex are not transgender)

    How is a woman supposed to tell the difference between a cross dressing male with a sexual fetish and a harmless transwoman if they both look alike? Besides, any cross dressing male can say he is transgender at any time.

    In addition to the fact that there are far more male registered sex offenders than female sex offenders, paraphilias are more common in males. If people don’t know what paraphilias are, these are good examples.

    http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/Tutu-Clad-Assault-Suspect-Suffers-Tranvestic-Fetishism-Attorney-Gregory-Schwartz-Big-Lots–288752051.html

    Cross-dressing Russell Williams, a highly decorated Canadian Air Force colonel, was sentenced to life in prison in 2011 for 88 sex crimes including 2 counts of murder and 2 counts of sexual assault. After each of these crimes, he photographed himself in his victims’ underwear and bras. One victim who survived was subjected to a three and half hour sexual assault.

    http://www.smh.com.au/world/secret-life-of-crossdressing-killer-colonel-revealed-20101019-16rt2.html

    For some men, cross dressing is a sexual fetish. I’m not saying all men, but it definitely is true for some males. Gallus included a link to pantypopo’s blog. She should know because she was in a relationship with an autogynephile.

    • Dogtowner Says:

      “Males who crossdress, identify as transgender, or say they are “women” offend at the same rate as other males. I put people who deny this fact in the same category as people who don’t believe that climate change is real, or think that there were really weapons of mass destruction in Iraq in 2003.”

      This is why trans is the perfect metaphor for our modern world. Whatever crap resides in my head is more real than anything my five senses tell me. I don’t know how we fight this facet of modern existence except to insist upon what is real in our every interaction, to confront and challenge people and institutions that want us to believe that so-called feelings are more concrete than something we can touch, see, and hear.

      • morag99 Says:

        “I don’t know how we fight this facet of modern existence except to insist upon what is real in our every interaction, to confront and challenge people and institutions that want us to believe that so-called feelings are more concrete than something we can touch, see, and hear.”

        Yes. But, also, regarding feelings: whose feelings? Whose feelings matter so much that they can dictate how others perceive and respond to concrete reality? Certainly not the feelings of those who are being pushed aside and disenfranchised!

        Our feelings — our honest emotional responses to being dominated and silenced — are routinely pathologized (no different from the ‘old’ days), while the pathological feelings of privileged men are routinely validated and protected — even by law.

  9. Bev Jo Says:

    The surprise is that it’s not more. We are getting the rape stories, the stories of feminine 13 year old girls going to their local LGBT center for support as young Lesbians and being told they are “transmen” and should transistion by men posing as women, stories of these adult men posing as “transgender” and preying on teenaged girls at LGBT centers who are trying to be with other teenaged girls in support groups. All women who blog in defense of women only space get rape and death threats from men who insist they are women.

    I believe if there is any way to find out, we will discover that the men who claim to be women and Lesbians are more violent and dangerous.

    • Zemskull Says:

      It is possible that MTTs are more likely to be violent than the general male population. MTTs have a tendency to be narcissistic, which is a key trait of violent predators.

      • Zemskull Says:

        PS: Now that I think about it, most of the MTTs I have known have been more temperamental and combative than most men I have known. The MTTs as a group seem to be eager to argue and insult, even about issues that have nothing to do with gender.

      • kesher Says:

        Narcissists are often master manipulators though, so it’s worth considering how artificially low those crime rates may appear to be if the victims never come forward.

        It seems to me that a more accurate assessment would be to ask the MTTs themselves what crimes they’ve committed, regardless if they’ve been caught. Since even the worst predators don’t like to think of themselves as rapists, the questions would have to be couched in such a way to make them be honest — asking about “forced sex” and not calling it rape.

    • morag99 Says:

      “I believe if there is any way to find out, we will discover that the men who claim to be women and Lesbians are more violent and dangerous.”

      Agreed. I, too, have a hunch that their rates of violent crime are probably higher. Especially violent crimes against women, or sex-crimes in general (against women, children and other trans).

      • Zemskull Says:

        Kesher: You have a good point that sex crimes by MTT may be grossly underrepresented. It’s already known that all victims of sexual assault tend to be reluctant to come forward. A woman who is attacked by a man in a dress is likely to be too embarrassed to report it, especially if the setting is a pro-trans one, such as in an employee bathroom at Google.

  10. Bev Jo Says:

    Mr. Daniela says: “I think transsexual women have been using and assimilating themselves into women spaces with no remarkable trouble for decades, with the fullest respect and solidarity and without ever crossing any line.”

    Dream on. Obviously he does not have a clue about really being a woman or the oppression we suffer or he would know that women will rarely feel safe to object to who we know is a man in our restrooms. We know we are in physical danger, but also from being harassed by guards or whoever might come and is likely to side with another man.

    No “remarkable trouble?” Because women seeing him, who of course we would recognize as a man, do not scream and yell, he thinks we can’t tell?

    What “respect and solidarity?” That would mean not appropriating our identity and invading our last spaces and not even leaving women’s restrooms safe.

    Every moment he and other men identify as female is crossing the line, and I really do not believe he and other men posing as women don’t know it. They just know they are men and so come first. Who are women to object to male domination?

    • GallusMag Says:

      Men perceive women who are fearful and silent as agreeable. They truly do. Meanwhile a hush falls over the locker room. Women’s heads turn to look. Women’s eyes meet. They hurry to leave. They wait for the last woman to finish, so as not to leave her alone with him. They pretend to chat about the weather as they do so. He thinks he “passes”. He thinks the women are untroubled by his presence. He thinks it’s lovely how the women stand and chat. To him: all is well.

      • Atranswidow Says:

        ‘Men perceive women who are fearful and silent as agreeable. They truly do.’

        Never a truer word, Gallus.

        Not just in the locker room, but also in the home. We find the long blonde hair that’s fallen on the bedroom floor. He’s started cross-dressing again, better to say nothing. We don’t open his wardrobe for fear of what we may find. Pretend not to notice the black smears from the hastily removed mascara. We don’t want to rock the boat. We tell ourselves it’s OK as long as the children don’t know. He tells himself ‘she knows, she doesn’t say anything, it’s OK’.

        ‘To him; all is well’

      • Ashland Avenue Says:

        WOW, Gallus! Fuckin’ NAILED it. And you too, Atranswidow!

      • morag99 Says:

        I also want to chime in on the accuracy of this “Men perceive women who are fearful and silent as agreeable. They truly do.”

        Yes, and not just in the locker room, and in the private home, but any place where women have to interact with men and adjust/contort ourselves to fit in with their dominant ideologies and systems. Which is pretty much everywhere.

      • Bea Says:

        This study showed that lab rats become anxious in the presence of male animals, including male human researchers, but not in the presence of females. “It wasn’t just men who caused the stress spike in the rodents, but any nearby male animal, including guinea pigs, rats, cats and dogs.” This might explain why cows are more comfortable being milked by women. I don’t know of any studies on humans like this, but from an evolutionary standpoint it would make sense that all mammals would have this reaction to males. Regardless, women are conditioned to become stressed in the presence of a strange male, especially when he’s infiltrating women-only spaces, and even more so when he’s wearing a “female disguise.” Trans women will never know what it feels like to enter a women-only space as a woman.

        http://www.nature.com/news/male-researchers-stress-out-rodents-1.15106

      • morag99 Says:

        Fascinating, Bea. I’ve seen plenty of cats who react negatively to a strange male, but not to a strange female. My own cats, who are otherwise not shy, hiss and back up when my brother takes just a few steps into my place. I must be a witch, eh? And my pets are my imps?

        Ha. They know something. Or they feel it.

      • neme Says:

        And if you don’t run screaming he assumes you want to have sex with him. I think a large percentage of rapists don’t believe they are rapists because they have never seen consent and don’t pay enough attention to women’s body language to ever learn. However, like all predators, some of them are very skilled at spotting likely prey.

      • Jenni Says:

        it is not just animals that show fear when confronted with a (strange) male. babys and small children react in the same way.

        males are factually more prone to violence and everybody on this planet knows this!
        ‘women are just as bad as man’ – no, we are not!

        when we look at crime statistics we see that violent crimes are commited by men about 90% of the time.
        i once saw a documentary in which it was said that if a family dog kills a child it is in 9 out of 10 cases a male.

      • morag99 Says:

        neme wrote: “rapists don’t believe they are rapists because they have never seen consent and don’t pay enough attention to women’s body language to ever learn. However, like all predators, some of them are very skilled at spotting likely prey.”

        Yes, and sometimes the most likely and easiest prey is a toddler girl. Yet, a male judge in California decided that a man who anally raped a three-year-old isn’t such a bad guy because he didn’t stalk her; she came to him:

        “Mr. Rojano did not seek out or stalk (the victim). He was playing video games and she wandered into the garage. He inexplicably became sexually aroused but did not appear to consciously intend to harm (the victim) when he sexually assaulted her.”

        So, according to Judge Kelly, he wasn’t really a predator, right? He was just “inexplicably” sexually aroused, out of the blue, by a baby who couldn’t fight back at all.

      • Bea Says:

        Sexologist Ray Blanchard said in an interview in Vice magazine, “I proposed [autoandrophilia, or the female version of autogynephilia] simply in order not to be accused of sexism, because there are all these women who want to say women can rape too, women can be pedophiles too, women can be exhibitionists too. It’s a perverse expression of feminism, and so, I thought, let me jump the gun on this. I don’t think the phenomenon even exists.”

      • branjor Says:

        If you read the news you know that even accidental shootings committed by toddlers are almost always male toddlers.

      • morag99 Says:

        That’s a good quotation from Blanchard.

        I’ve seen this so many times, and it blows my mind when people (often other women) argue that if you don’t assert that women are also — just like men — pedophiles, rapists and murderers, then you aren’t doing feminism right.

        So stupid. As if disordered sexuality and violent acts were a masculine (read: human) accomplishment, like becoming a firefighter or an astronaut. You know, “equality” for men and women in ALL endeavours! I agree with him that it’s a “perverse expression of feminism.”

  11. WTF Is This Nonsense? Says:

    It does seem that ignorance and deceit are essential tools for pushing the trans agenda. Just like a cult. Anybody in their right mind would dismiss the whole thing pretty quickly.

    You like things that are traditionally associated with the opposite sex in your local culture? Okay. That’s fine.
    You’re magically a woman despite being the polar opposite of a female by any practical definition? That’s silly.


  12. Mr. Daniela says: “I think transsexual women have been using and assimilating themselves into women spaces with no remarkable trouble for decades, with the fullest respect and solidarity and without ever crossing any line.”

    Is this some kind of joke? Scroll up and click on some of the links that Gallus included with her article. How many examples of “respect and solidarity” do people want to see?

    Patrick Hagan appeared in court in a skirt and pink sweater.

    6′ 3″, 280 lb transwoman and martial arts expert punches woman when she questions his presence in the women’s bathroom. Woman loses 5 teeth and accrues $60,000 in medical expenses.

    “In 2006 Patrick Hagan aka Patty Lou Hagan appears in a documentary Cruel and Unusual about transwomen in the US prison system.

    Hagan says he was locked up for 5 years for getting in a bar fight, doesn’t mention that the “bar fight” was him attacking a woman and punching her teeth out for questioning his right to be in the women’s restroom.”

    https://allisonslaw.wordpress.com/2015/03/08/6-3-280-lb-transwoman-and-martial-expert-punches-woman-when-she-questions-his-presence-in-the-womens-bathroom-woman-loses-5-teeth-and-accrues-60000-in-medical-expenses/

    More examples at:

    https://allisonslaw.wordpress.com

    • michelle Says:

      oh, and a quick search of his release photo when Hagan was released from Florida prison shows anything BUT a ‘woman.’ Rather, he looked like the good ol’ boy he was when he decided to punch a woman who knew he was a male, and more importantly, knew he was a male where males should not have been.

  13. Jacob Says:

    “The only long-term study of transgender outcomes concluded that “Male to Female” transsexuals retain male-pattern criminality, including crimes against women. Are all transwomen predators? Of course not: They are predators at exactly the same rates as any other males. ”
    , let’s see what the study said: Crime rate

    Transsexual individuals were at increased risk of being convicted for any crime or violent crime after sex reassignment (Table 2); this was, however, only significant in the group who underwent sex reassignment before 1989.
    This is interesting…I wonder why only before 1989.

    • GallusMag Says:

      Yes that’s an interesting point. All “Male to Female” transsexuals retain male-pattern criminality, but the “Male to Female” transsexuals who had surgery prior to 1989 had EVEN HIGHER rates of criminal convictions than non-transgender males. MORE criminal even than other males. Very interesting Jacob. As if the male-pattern criminality retained by “Male to Female” transgenders wasn’t bad enough. WOW.

    • GallusMag Says:

      It seems that early transitioners are truly “Ultra-Violent Men” whose rates of conviction for violent crimes are more than double that of males in general. Thank you for pointing that out Jacob.

      “I wonder why only before 1989”. Good question. It could be a matter of lower conviction rates, rather than lower crime rates. For example, a 57 year old transwoman was convicted today of repeatedly raping two little girls, ages 4 and 7. He was only sentenced to sixteen years because the judge said “”Ordinarily I would consider you a dangerous person, but now you have undergone your sex change, the likelihood of repetition is ruled out.You have never once shown any remorse or sorrow for what you have done.”

      http://www.tamworthherald.co.uk/Sex-change-man-abused-young-girls-jailed-16-years/story-26584788-detail/story.html

      It is possible that criminal conviction rates for sexually violent male transgenders have decreased because of a false cultural belief that undergoing a “sex change” lowers rates of recidivism.

    • brigiddd Says:

      Could this simply be a marker of age? If a person, especially back in the day, was likely older, at least a legal adult prior to SRS, the 1989 factor could be a reflection of those people who had simply matured to adulthood and spent a significant portion of time as adults prior to the time of completion of the study (assuming 2003 – latest date in chart?).

      I can imagine simply having that extra time as an adult/older male would increase the chances of a violent crime being committed, no?

      It only says statistically significant, so violent crime could have still been committed even by younger MTTs (if this is in fact this is a reflection of age) but it just didn’t pass muster as technically/statistically “significant”.

      I didn’t read the study so forgive my ignorance if this is totally irrelevant.

      • kesher Says:

        I wonder if it might be generational, with a significant drop off in violent crime starting in the early ’90s. Related to your age of SRS hypothesis, maybe that also affects whether an MTT is criminally inclined — which generation he belongs to.

      • Jacob Blaustein Says:

        “Female-to-males, but not male-to-females, had a higher risk for criminal convictions than their respective birth sex controls.”
        Yep.

  14. GallusMag Says:

    “Comparisons of female-to-males and male-to-females, although hampered by low statistical power and associated wide confidence intervals, suggested mostly similar risks for adverse outcomes (Tables S1 and S2). However, violence against self (suicidal behaviour) and others ([violent] crime) constituted important exceptions. First, male-to-females had significantly increased risks for suicide attempts compared to both female (aHR 9.3; 95% CI 4.4–19.9) and male (aHR 10.4; 95% CI 4.9–22.1) controls. By contrast, female-to-males had significantly increased risk of suicide attempts only compared to male controls (aHR 6.8; 95% CI 2.1–21.6) but not compared to female controls (aHR 1.9; 95% CI 0.7–4.8). This suggests that male-to-females are at higher risk for suicide attempts after sex reassignment, whereas female-to-males maintain a female pattern of suicide attempts after sex reassignment (Tables S1 and S2).

    Second, regarding any crime, male-to-females had a significantly increased risk for crime compared to female controls (aHR 6.6; 95% CI 4.1–10.8) but not compared to males (aHR 0.8; 95% CI 0.5–1.2). This indicates that they retained a male pattern regarding criminality. The same was true regarding violent crime. By contrast, female-to-males had higher crime rates than female controls (aHR 4.1; 95% CI 2.5–6.9) but did not differ from male controls. This indicates a shift to a male pattern regarding criminality and that sex reassignment is coupled to increased crime rate in female-to-males. The same was true regarding violent crime.”

    http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016885%20

    • prozac. Says:

      In regards to the second link, did you read this article about how the killer arrived at the party as a woman, became enraged and turned back into a man, murdered another man then I assume at some point turned back into a woman? Someone is confused! It is confusing though, isn’t it?http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2015/06/02/stabbed-times-claims-self-defense/28384841/

      Also, have you thought about having a resource or archive of reported crimes section that is easily accessible/in the menu? My apologies if you do already but it doesn’t translate to Android, or if I’m missing it.

  15. GallusMag Says:

    October 21, 2015 at 3:57 pm EDT | by Lou Chibbaro Jr.
    Local transgender activist arrested on murder charge

    LGBT activists were startled to learn earlier this week that Prince George’s County police on Oct. 16 charged veteran transgender activist Gigi Thomas with first-degree murder for allegedly stabbing to death a 47-year-old man inside her residence in Temple Hills, Md.

    A police statement of probable cause filed in court says police were called to the address of 5712 Linda Lane in Temple Hills, where Thomas lived, about 7:50 p.m. on Thursday, Oct. 16. Upon arrival they found Devale Lamont Avery of Fort Washington suffering from multiple stab wounds to the upper body, the statement says. It says Avery was pronounced dead on the scene by emergency firefighters who also responded to the scene.
    “Primarily, it appears an argument between the suspect and victim escalated into the fatal stabbing,” a separate police statement says. “Thomas is facing a charge of first-degree murder and is being held on a no bond status at the Department of Corrections,” the statement says.

    – See more at: http://www.washingtonblade.com/2015/10/21/local-transgender-activist-arrested-on-murder-charge/#sthash.0LTyyKwo.dpuf

  16. Carol Downer Says:

    Very good article, but the hyperlink to “the only long-term study..” doesn’t work. Anecdotal evidence like newspaper articles covering some transgender outrage won’t convince a judge. Please give the reference to the study so that I can look it up. Thanks and keep up the good work. Carol Downer

    • GallusMag Says:

      Okay, Judge.😉
      Looks like PLOS One is having issues with the link to that particular study. That’s interesting. I added the study title to the text of the post in case that happens again. Meanwhile, try this one:

      Long-Term Follow-Up of Transsexual Persons Undergoing Sex Reassignment Surgery: Cohort Study in Sweden
      http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016885

    • GallusMag Says:

      Bonus:

      Multiple Paraphilic Diagnoses
      among Sex Offenders
      Gene G. Abel, MD; Judith V. Becker, PhD; Jerry Cunningham-Rathner, BA;
      Mary Mittelman, DrPH; and Joanne-L. Rouleau, PhD

      http://www.jaapl.org/content/16/2/153.full.pdf

    • Jacob Blaustein Says:

      Exactly! Anecdotal evidence is all you have and you leave context from the study: In accordance, the overall mortality rate was only significantly increased for the group operated on before 1989. However, the latter might also be explained by improved health care for transsexual persons during 1990s, along with altered societal attitudes towards persons with different gender expressions.
      It should come as no shock that as society accepts transgender people, they suffer fewer side effects of minority stress. This conclusion is supported by other recent studies (Murad 2010 and Ainsworth 2011) that found that individuals who receive treatment not only are better-off than those who didn’t but are not significantly different in daily functioning than the general population:

  17. Arla Hile Says:

    Carol Downer – familiar name. Did you once run the Feminist Women’s Health Center in LA? If so, you’re an icon.

  18. caroldowner Says:

    Hi, yes, I am part of the group that started Feminist Women’s Health Centers around the country. Most are now gone, but the Women’s Health Specialists in Northern California are still going strong and I’m on the BOD. My website womenshealthinwomenshands.org contains some of the huge amount of great info about our female bodies that woman-controlled research efforts produced. I’m putting all my efforts right now into understanding this massive attack on women’s right to our own territory. At this point, I see the undermining of women’s liberation theoretical gains on the campus as paving the way for establishment-supported and funded use of the transgender movement to regain control over females by destroying our female unity. Instead of the ACLU bringing a lawsuit against discrimination against transgender people, we need a lawsuit against any public entity that permits the invasion of our female-only spaces–and federal law does prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex–not gender identity.

  19. Sketcher Says:

    Good for you Carol. How can we get involved and how can we help?

  20. caroldowner Says:

    I do care how transgender people feel, and I want to hear about their experiences, and I will support anything that will make their lives better–as long as it is not done at expense of my rights and other female’s rights. I hope we keep talking; I especially want to hear from transgender individuals that are also trying to sort this issue out, but I have a zero tolerance level for those who call it “bigotry” for me to organize and work with my fellow women for our collective rights.

  21. caroldowner Says:

    Hi: I’m writing a piece about how feminist consciousness is negatively impacted when females have to accommodate transwomen. It’s proving to be very difficult and is taking a long time. I appreciate your statistics from Sweden. It’s a complex issue-mostly because the other side is making it complex with contradictory positions, disrespect for female rights while framing it as a rights issue. It doesn’t help that many who agree with our position do so for the wrong reasons, so one has to constantly clarify. When I’m finished, I’ll be putting it out and you’ll be the first to know.


  22. The article about the Evergreen State College is wrong. The transwoman didn’t “expose” herself. She was in the sauna with a ciswoman friend, as school policy allows. A high school student was in an area of the locker room she wan’t allowed. She happened to see the transwoman’s penis and freaked out. No one was waving dicks in anyone’s face.

    These sort of cases seem to generally be blown out of proportion by anti-trans folks. I totally understand cis women not wanting to be around dick in the locker room. That why I am waiting until after I have Sex Reassignment Surgery before I use locker rooms. But it’s important to understand that we aren’t all a bunch of pervos. If I went in the locker room I would be there for the same reason as any other women.

    From what I gather there are very few cases of people taking advantage of trans friendly laws to victimize people.

    • GallusMag Says:

      You are incorrect. The reports mention several incidents involving this man exposing himself. You have not read them, yet come up with this “excuse”. Interesting.

    • kesher Says:

      Adult women shouldn’t have to look at this pervert’s penis either. Like it or not, the privileges you demand to make yourself feel validated is at our, real women’s, expense and opens the door to perverts like Mr. Francis. It speaks volumes that you defend him.

  23. GallusMag Says:

    http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/two-frontenac-men-charged-with-rape-threatening-to-waterboard-woman/article_4ff423ef-f049-5ff6-a381-39ba6e36ae10.html

    Two Frontenac men charged with rape, threatening to ‘waterboard’ woman if she refused sex
    By Joel Currier St. Louis Post-Dispatch Sep 13, 2016 (27)
    FRONTENAC • Two Frontenac men were charged Monday with raping a woman after threatening to “waterboard” her, and recording the attack.

    Alexander Doering and Jeremiah Horsfall-Steinbrenner, both 22, of the 11100 block of South Forty Drive, were charged with first-degree rape and felonious restraint, and held in lieu of $200,000 cash-only bail.

    The woman reported to police about 7:40 a.m. Sunday that she was raped at the men’s trailer overnight after being taken there “under false pretenses.”

    Frontenac police said the woman went to the trailer to get her computer repaired.

    The charges say the suspects showed her handcuffs, a water pitcher and a towel and threatened torture unless she had sex. They also allegedly locked her out of her cellphone by changing its password.

    Doering recorded the sex on Horsfall-Steinbrenner’s cellphone, the charges say. Officials said the victim escaped after the men fell asleep.

    Frontenac police Detective Timothy Duda said the woman is at least 17. He would not say if she knew the men.

    h/t https://www.reddit.com/r/GenderCritical/


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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: