HUD proposed regulation forces homeless women and girls to bunk and bathe with men who claim to feel psychologically female: January 19 deadline for public comment

January 6, 2016

Julian Castro- Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and no friend to women and girls.

Julian Castro- Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and no friend to women and girls.

Julian Castro, the US Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (and the likely Vice Presidential running-mate of Hilary Clinton) has announced his agency’s intention to eliminate the legally protected category of sex in homeless shelters nationwide, eliminating the right of vulnerable women and girls to shower, sleep and toilet separately from homeless men.

HUD had previously issued a non-binding “guidance” document back in February 2015 suggesting that physical sex be redefined as “actual or perceived gender-related characteristics” and prohibiting those providers of homeless services who receive HUD funding from inquiring about the physical sex or sexual orientation of service recipients. Kind of a “don’t ask, don’t tell” provision. Providers were instructed to assess clients on the basis of adherence to sex-role stereotypes and make their own determination of the client’s transgender status. Those suspected of possible cross-sex identification were to be advised that the agency provides placement based on “gender-related characteristics”, and not physical sex: “where a provider is uncertain of the client’s sex or gender identity and that information matters for the determination of placement, the provider informs the client or potential client that the agency provides shelter based on the individual’s gender identity.”

HUD’s non-binding February 2015 “guidance” was similar to those recently issued by other Federal Obama administration agencies [such as the DOE’s “guidance” overturning Title IX protections for women and girls, and the DOL’s “guidance” eliminating privacy for women in workplace accommodations] which attempt to reinterpret existing protected sex categories into a cluster of unspecified psychological characteristics which the government redefines as the core human reproductive trait, overriding biology (or any other objective measure).

The proposed new rule is a modification of the previous “guidance” that HUD issued and will change federal law, officially removing sex as a protected category and creating precedent for other agencies to bypass the legislature, judiciary, and public debate in eliminating the legal category of sex under which women’s rights are protected. (HUD Secretary Julian Castro actually cites the DOE’s recent highly controversial reinterpretation of physical sex -as a subjective psychological self-perceived essence- under Title IX as the governmental authority which sets the precedent justifying his own agency’s move to elevate its internal “guidance” into federal regulation.)

Julian Castro’s new HUD rule will be the first official elimination of legal sex-based protections for private citizens under federal law by agency regulation, and homeless impoverished women in crisis- largely women of color with children, most of them survivors of male violence- are the first targets. Under this new law legal sex status will be redefined by the US government as “gender identity” defined as such:

“Gender identity means the gender with which a person identifies, regardless of the sex assigned to that person at birth.”

Biological sex will be conflated with sex-stereotypes of “appearance, behavior, expression and other gender-related characteristics” and become “perceived gender identity”:

“Perceived gender identity means the gender with which a person is perceived to identify based on that person’s appearance, behavior, expression, other gender-related characteristics, or sex assigned to the individual at birth.”

This law is designed to allow homeless males to bathe and bunk in shelters set aside for females and specifically forbids agencies to consider the rights of women and girls to bathe, bunk, and bathroom separately from men. There is no provision for “improper purpose”. There is no “right to privacy”. There are 18 references to “health and safety” issues and concerns but the source of potential dis-ease and danger is never identified:

“In deciding how to house a [transgender] victim, a recipient that provides sex-segregated housing may consider on a case-by-case basis whether a particular housing assignment would ensure the victim’s health and safety. A victim’s own views with respect to personal safety deserve serious consideration.”

“..taking health and safety concerns into consideration. A client’s or potential client’s own views with respect to personal health and safety should be given serious consideration in making the placement. For instance, if the potential client requests to be placed based on his or her sex assigned at birth, HUD assumes that the provider will place the individual in accordance with that request, consistent with health, safety, and privacy concerns.”

“..whether a particular housing assignment would ensure health and safety. It is prohibited for such a determination to be based solely on a person’s actual or perceived gender identity or on complaints of other shelter residents when those complaints are based on actual or perceived gender identity. It is likewise prohibited to deny appropriate placement based on a perceived threat to health or safety..”

“..legitimate safety concerns that may arise in any shelter, building, or facility covered by this rule.”

“..eliminate the safety risk and that has available accommodations..”

“…since it would not apply unless the facts and circumstances demonstrated a nondiscriminatory risk to health or safety that could not be eliminated or appropriately mitigated by policy adjustments and physical modifications to buildings and facilities.”

“HUD recognizes a limited exception to accommodating individuals in accordance with the individual’s gender identity when a recipient, subrecipient, owner, operator, manager, or provider identifies a legitimate safety risk that cannot be eliminated or appropriately mitigated”

“keeping a record of when a legitimate safety risk is identified.”

“accommodation is necessary to ensure health and safety. It shall be prohibited for such a determination to be based solely on a person’s actual or perceived gender identity, the complaints of other clients, beneficiaries, or employees when those complaints are based on actual or perceived gender identity, or on an actual or perceived threat to health or safety that can be mitigated in some other way that is less burdensome. In order to avoid unwarranted denials of placement in accordance with an individual’s gender identity, decisions to provide accommodations based on concern for the health and safety of the individual..”

  At no point is the nature of this “threat to health and safety” identified. Epidemic male violence is apparently not only a protected government-sanctioned institution beyond reproach but one which cannot be named. While a male or male-identified transgender client’s “own views with respect to personal safety deserve serious consideration” and his own views with respect to personal health and safety should be given serious consideration in making the placement”, women’s views with respect to their own personal safety are not only disregarded but explicitly prohibited by law: “It is likewise prohibited to deny appropriate placement based on a perceived threat to health or safety..”

Homeless males can identify as female or male and access whichever facility they prefer. Atlanta’s 600-bed Peachtree-Pine Shelter estimated that 5% of the male homeless population is transgender (using the no longer required definition: males who regularly adopt some social cues traditionally associated with females). “Women are allowed to stay in the men’s shelter — because Peachtree-Pine is not supposed to turn anyone away — but they can only stay in the lobby area overnight sitting upright in a chair, said Tony Thomas, the shelter’s spokesperson. So when given the option of sitting in a chair all night or sleeping in a cot, many transwomen will identify and “present” as male, he added.”

According to Mark “Mara” Keisling’s National Center for Trans Equality (NCTE) 49% of homeless transwomen report a history of criminal incarceration. [PDF]

Presumably this measure solely serves the desires of some men to be housed with women. Only a sociopath would suggest a female transgender (FTM) be housed among men. Toronto’s ‘Trans Communities Shelter Access Project’ claims that multiple homeless “transmen” have been gang-raped in men’s shelters: “Although a female-to-male trans person (trans man) might identify themselves as a man… the reality for many is that surgery and hormones are expensive, passing is out of reach, and men’s services are not safe for a trans man who may not pass. If an FtM has not been approved for testosterone, or had a mastectomy, (and even if he has…) then he is at risk for physical, verbal, and sexual assault in men’s dorms/ bathrooms/ and showers. There have been incidents of gang rape toward FtM’s in men’s shelters. Some FtM’s may choose to face these risks in a shelter that validates their identity… but they should not have to. There are no FtM shelters or rape crisis centers, so as men who face (or have faced) sexual assault, spousal abuse, and gender discrimination, there is, as of yet, no place better equipped to meet the needs of FtM’s than women’s services.”

As required by the Administrative Procedure Act this proposed law has been filed with the Federal Register for public comment. HUD is required to respond to issues raised by the public before adopting the law. The deadline is January 19. Comments may be submitted by mail or posted online here:

http://www.regulations.gov/#%21documentDetail;D=HUD_FRDOC_0001-4281

Comments must include the name and number of the regulation:

FR–5863–P–01 Equal Access in Accordance With an Individual’s Gender Identity in Community Planning and Development Programs

ID: HUD-2015-0104-0001

You can also view the comments that have been submitted. As of now, 30 comments have been received. 20 have been published. 14 have been discarded due to duplication via (transgender activist) mass mailing campaign. 4 are obviously duplicate mass mailers from transgender activists. 10 are yet unpublished. Only two comments mention the welfare of women and girls.

 

[bolding by me-GM]

97 Responses to “HUD proposed regulation forces homeless women and girls to bunk and bathe with men who claim to feel psychologically female: January 19 deadline for public comment”

  1. MaryMacha Says:

    Oh how they would howl if there were exclusively transgender shelters and a non-transgender man flew under the radar and got in.

  2. Toots Says:

    just submitted a comment!

  3. mercie Says:

    One of the comments is from a counselor who apparently believes her client’s trans status is keeping her from finding employment and housing, not her felon status. She’s “really harmless now,” she says.

    Well, that’s comforting.

    • Siobhan Says:

      Note the vague threat in that counselor’s comments, basically saying that she understands how a male might resort to return to a life of crime if the world won’t accommodate him as the woe-man he thinks himself to be.

      • kesher Says:

        That’s part of the trans narrative. First, that denying their “true selves” is why they resorted to crime (even horrifying violent crimes such as rape and murder). Second, that transitioning will wash their sins away. Trans allies are fools for believing this. Male criminals frequently come up with ways to fool others into believing they’ve changed. It used to be adopting Christianity; now it’s the new religion — trans.

    • Trish Says:

      I like the part where this person claims the MTT has been living a year in in a building that only sometimes has heat but also has a carbon monoxide leak. If the latter were true, the person would not need housing – at least not above ground…

  4. hearthrising Says:

    I will comment to HUD tomorrow. I need to calm down first.

  5. Siobhan Says:

    Why is my comment not appearing? I was very careful to be inoffensive.

  6. Freyja Says:

    Can someone remind me of the website that lists crimes against women committed by men in women’s clothes? (I cannot bear to call them “trans women.” They are not women of any kind.) I know someone is, or was, keeping a running list.

    This makes my blood boil.

  7. Freyja Says:

    Here is the perfect example of what these lawmakers are ignoring:

    6 foot 2 inch “transgender woman” threatens subway riders with a knife and finally attacks. Unclear if he actually stabs the man he attacks:

    NBC New York obediently ignores his true gender, since that would be mean, and report the event as an attack by a woman. Does, however, acknowledge this:

    “The suspect is described as being about 30 years old, 6 feet tall and 180 pounds. ”

    http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Subway-Slashing-Pole-Leaning-Straphanger-A-Train-Nostrand-Jay-363192831.html#comments

    Another news site digs further and gets more information, but STILL doesn’t dare state that the attacker is a “trans woman”:

    http://gothamist.com/2015/12/21/a_train_blade_attacker_video.php

    This site finally states outright the actual identity of Merci Chrisette/Chrissy Jackson/Isla/Whoever, but still piously refers to him as a woman throughout:

    http://www.queerty.com/trans-woman-has-turned-herself-in-for-attacking-passengers-on-new-york-subway-20151231

    Now this violent, evidently mentally ill man will demand to be placed among women prisoners. No one will give a fuck about the safety of the actual women prisoners.


  8. I’ve posted a comment. Thanks for making this information available and accessible.

  9. weirdward Says:

    reading through this I was already thinking about gender non conforming women and lesbians, and if they would be designated as transmen (regardless of whether they are or not) and told or encouraged to share facilities with men, where, as your research shows, they are in extreme danger of being raped and gang raped.

    Particularly concerning since we already know that lesbians are another demographic who are over-represented in the homeless population, and of those, many are young women of colour.

    • GallusMag Says:

      HUD’s proposed regulation clearly serves males only. No females- including those who identify as transgender- are served by this law in any way.

    • madeupname Says:

      EXACTLY!!!! What will happen to “butch” or gender-nonconforming women under this policy???? They’ll be forced to go to the men’s shelter? HORRIBLE.

  10. GallusMag Says:

    A few of the now-approved comments:

    Comment
    While I agree that some members of the homeless transgender community require special accommodations in services for the homeless, I’d like to express my caution in providing these accommodations at the expense of other vulnerable homeless people — women.

    Homeless women have often experienced a lifetime of violence and abuse from male people. At the time that they find themselves in need of homeless services, many of these women are escaping abuse at the hands of male partners. Meanwhile, there are many homeless males who identify as women who have past criminal histories, estimated at 49 percent by the National Center for Trans Equality. What steps is the Obama administration prepared to take to ensure that males who identify as women who have committed grievous violent crimes against women will not acquire placement in women’s homeless shelters?

    I’m also troubled by the lack of a concrete definition of what constitutes a transgender person in these new rules. If all placement in a women’s shelter takes is stated self-identity, what is to keep non-transgender males from seeking access to women’s shelters to either escape the far more violent men’s shelters or to visit violence on female residents? In Toronto, a male serial rapist claimed to be transgender and proceeded to attack women in a women’s homeless shelter. What steps is the Obama administration prepared to take to ensure male sex offenders won’t do the same in the United States? What provisions does the Obama administration propose to allow a shelter to find different accommodations for a self-declared transgender woman who is acting inappropriately toward the female residents of the shelter even before a violent crime takes place? Moreover, is the Obama administration prepared to allow women’s homeless shelters to institute new codes of conduct to ensure the female residents are not subjected to sexual harassment or unwanted displays of male nudity?

    I’ve worked with/for/among the homeless a number of times throughout my adult life, and one thing I’ve always found is that people who work consistently with the homeless know their local homeless population better than anyone. They know which homeless residents are a little off, but mostly harmless; they know which are genuinely dangerous; they would know if a homeless person they see regularly might be trying to put one over on the shelter (by, for example, “identifying” as a woman to escape the much more dangerous men’s shelter). Does the Obama administration have any interest in allowing workers at homeless shelters to pass their own judgment on whether a homeless male seeking access to the women’s shelter is 1. not a risk to women; 2. lying about his gender identity?

    Another thing I’ve learned over the years is that people who genuinely seek the best possible outcome for transgender homeless people almost invariably seek gender neutral accommodations for them. Most transgender people don’t want to displace or disrupt women. Many are in an in-between stage of transitioning where they don’t feel comfortable being placed in either the men’s or the women’s shelter. Is the Obama administration interested in creating accommodations for transgender people that protects them/shelters them? Could the administration consider proposing a rule that requires a shelter to offer accommodations to transgender people that doesn’t necessarily place them with other members of their biological sex (if the transgender person feels scared or uncomfortable with that) or with their preferred gender (if women feel scared or uncomfortable with that)?

    Long story short, is the Obama administration prepared to show any concern for the rights and safety of the most vulnerable women in the United States?

    —————————————————–
    Comment
    The physical and psychological safety of women and girls as a biological class which has been discriminated against for centuries must not be violated and compromised for the benefit of those who would abuse the vague “I feel like” definition of “gender identity” and/or “perceived gender identity”. There must be a way to balance the needs of genuine trans people and the needs and hard fought for rights of women and girls.

    First of all, there is no definition of “gender” itself. One is left to assume “gender” refers to male or female.

    Secondly to elevate “gender identity” and/or “perceived gender identity” above actual gender (male or female), that is, above biological sex, essentially erases females’ much needed protection from male aggression and violence. We do not need proof here that women are in danger of male violence on an epic and ongoing scale. That has been well substantiated.

    Thirdly, the definition of “perceived gender identity” and “gender identity” is based on stereotypes which is what the women’s rights movement has fought long and hard to dissolve. Now, you want to enshrine them into law and a law that clearly favors the male over the very real needs of females, women and girls to be safe from male aggression. (No trans women are raped by women, yet all women and trans men (as well as trans women) are raped by men.) Simply put, women and girls need protection from males, especially in vulnerable situations of housing, bathing, dressing and sleeping.

    This vague and ambiguous “feel like a woman” definition does not do provide that needed protection. There is no criteria for a proclaimed “gender identity” to be sincere. A man could “feel like a woman” one day and like a man the next. He can be fully male-bodied, penis intact, and gain entrance into female bathing, dressing and sleeping spaces just because he “feels like a woman”. This leaves femalesbiological women and girlsvulnerable to males who would demand entry into their “safe spaces” for wrongful purposes. We must not set “gender identity” over the real and imminent needs of biological women and girls for both physical and psychological safety.

    There needs to be objective criteria to determine whether a male is an “authentic” trans woman. I suggest a medical history of hormonal injections toward feminizing his body and a history of consistently living as a woman.

    I do not support FR-5863-P-01 Equal Access in Accordance With an Individual’s Gender Identity in Community Planning and Development Programs as it stands now.
    —————————————

    Comment
    As a female woman I am angered and disturbed by the eroding of women’s rights and safety these vague gender based rule changes bring about. Biological sex is immutable. Unchangeable. Gender and sex are not the same thing. Unfortunately we live in a world where women are raped, assaulted, abused, and murdered by people born male at alarming rates. So now you propose to allow “males” (how they identify Gender wise is a separate issue) access to women’s spaces. By doing so you are putting women in a vulnerable, possibly dangerous, and likely traumatic position of being forced to be housed with people of the male sex who have penises. Many of these women have been raped and/or sexually abused by someone with a penis.
    These rule changes allow any male person to identify as a “woman” and gain access to female spaces. This is wrong. If you do not expect men to take advantage of this rule change under false pretenses for their own gain, or to violate women once they have gained access to these spaces you are naive to say the least. There are already documented cases of this happening. To put the needs of a tiny minority of people (trans persons) over the needs of the majority of persons of whom 50.8% are female and of those 20% are sexual abuse and/or rape victims is a morally abbhorent.
    Also transmen (female born) persons should not be forced to be housed with males as this puts their safety in danger also and this has been well documented as well. Female sexed persons are always in danger during their lives simply by being born female and should always be given access to female spaces no matter their gender identity, but the same should not be true for male sexed persons no matter their gender identity. This is not unfair as men are in a position of power in the world and are a much much much more violent group statistically speaking.
    Perhaps a middle ground for transwomen (male sexed) persons being allowed into women’s housing/spaces should be the ability to prove one has had their penis removed (Sex Reassignment Surgery). This is the only male sexed person who should even be considered for access to female spaces. It is wrong to consider the supposed violation of rights of transpersons (a very small minority) more important than the rights and safety of women (the majority). History will not look kindly on the eroding of women’s right to safe spaces free of male genitals in the name of “fairness” to male sexed persons. Sex is biology, gender is not. The two are not the same thing.

    • Double X Marks The Spot Says:

      Thanks for posting those comments, Gallus. I hope to comment later today, and seeing what the others have already written will help me to focus my thoughts and perhaps add something that has not already been said.

  11. drycamp Says:

    OK I commented. Since I am an elderly (well, 70) woman not formally connected with any feminist organization, I cannot be tagged as some kind of activist. Anyway I was very polite.

  12. Franklin Says:

    This is real BS. I unfortunately cannot comment publicly on this rule proposal because of professional associations (long story). But here are some thoughts based on my experience with commenting on these things. Apologies if any or all of this is obvious.

    –For comments from individuals, you are going to need probably a few hundred *unique* individual comments to make any impression. Unique meaning written separately, not a form.

    –comments from organizations, especially recognized ones, carry more weight. If anyone has the time and ability, it would be worth it to reach out to organizations that could be sympathetic here. From what little I see, feminist organizations have often been captured by the trans lobby, but you can try. Conservative or religious organizations might work better. A lot of religious groups do direct work with homelessness and might have a sense of the issues here. If the ‘gender identity’ stuff violates religious beliefs that is an issue too.

    –comments from homeless services providers who have to deal with this crap directly will carry a lot of weight.

    –a powerful way to make an impression is to comment in a way that implicitly threatens a lawsuit. The analysis in the linked document regarding cost-benefit, the regulatory flexibility act, and the paperwork reduction act is perfunctory to say the least. This rule will impose a significant paperwork burden on local homeless shelters and agencies as they will have to do a written exception every time they don’t accomodate someone based on their ‘gender identity’. The proposal claims that this will affect only a few service providers and that paperwork involved (including storage of the records) will involve just 15 minutes…I doubt that.

    –If anyone does manage to get in touch with a services provider who is upset about this, encourage them to contact their Congressional representative. A letter from a Senator or Congressman, especially one on the HUD oversight committee, will make a real difference.

  13. Mya Says:

    Such kind of initiative requires research. I believe we need to make clear what it means to feel like being a woman working with conventional women.

    • GallusMag Says:

      ” …we need to make clear what it means to feel like being a woman working with conventional women.”

      I don’t know what this means.

      • Trish Says:

        And I would be concerned that creating such a definition would give people who want the world to treat their “feelz” of being female as identical to physically real sex a template to follow when trying to get their “feelz” legal status.

  14. Magdalena Z. Says:

    There are some great comments on there now from women who are clearly disturbed by this proposal. I hope they get inundated with those, I left one myself yesterday but it hasn’t show up, and I was polite and all mostly, but I have trouble walking on eggshells so I don’t know, oh well.

  15. Aine Says:

    I will certainly write about this. I think it’s important to note that quietly, on December 26, in Washington State, the state office of civil rights passed laws that make it legal for transgenders to use the bathroom, locker room, dressing room, etc., of their choice. This includes showers, women’s saunas, etc.

    All public places are included, so the law also includes all the homeless shelters for women in Washington State, which now must house biological men. So, Washington State has effectively made it possible for women who are traumatized by male violence and who are seeking shelter to be re-traumatized by having to shower, undress, and sleep next to strange men.

    http://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/law/wsr/2015/11/15-11-104.htm

    As a resident of Washington, I am frightened by these new laws, as I am not comfortable undressing around men. I also worry about young girls. There are many public pools in Seattle that kids use. If a man can use the public pool and then go use the public showers, he can be showering with girls who are under the age of 10. At what point does conscience sink in with these bureaucrats?

    I believe that at least one congressperson intends to challenge it and bring it up for consideration, since it was passed without any warning or legislative debate.

  16. anon male Says:

    I’m not an expert, but:

    The modern homeless shelter (aka gospel rescue mission whatever) is an extremely parasitic organism: what they do is entirely defined by what social services does *not* do and they rely on their despised “big government” to do the heavy lifting which enables them to do the feel good stuff and the stuff that links poverty with sin and “turning against god.”

    The problem is that social services has become parasitic in turn: try getting any help at all outside of 9-to-5 “professional” hours or on one of the federal holidays that the working class doesn’t get off. All they can do is tell you to check into an emergency room. Shelters have a ton of leverage because of that: they allow people at social services to be office workers, save a lot of public money, etc.

    I think it’s important to note that the giant Atlanta shelter cited above no longer gets HUD funding (and basically pays no water or electric bills, daring the govt. to blink in a game of chicken).

    What most shelters get from HUD, outside of a few of the biggest coastal cities (where politicians can wave HUD support around as a carrot/stick), is piddly. And for the most part, HUD’s biggest requirement is putting up two posters. Posters.

    One says “if any employee at the shelter gets arrested for drugs, you need to report all their information to all associated organizations, even ones they’ve never personally had any sort of relationship with, and make sure they never work in this city again!” The sort of thing that would make a liberal fume if they gave a shit. Fuck HUD’s drug war on minimum/low-wage workers.

    The second is the standard workplace crap about how employees can’t be fired because of race, religion, sexuality, etc…

    Except… THEY CAN. Because in most states there’s no difference (in the paperwork you file) when starting a “non-profit corporation” and a “faith based non-profit corporation,” shelters are free to be as secular or religious as they like at any given moment when either case might be more beneficial. These corporations are effectively PEOPLE and like people, they can identify however they want and religious identity is functionally the same as gender identity in its amorphous qualities.

    And because Bush and Obama doctrine has been fine with that, the average shelter is free to make employees sign morality agreements to ensure that they don’t wind up with a gay or lesbian janitor (something the white liberal boys at Salon recently snickered about because they can’t imagine ever needing a job as a janitor).

    HUD requires posters that LIE about that fact. (Woe to the employee who thinks she has rights because of the HUD poster!)

    They know or don’t care… and they certainly can’t do anything to shape shelter culture, anymore than they can require Liberty University to do this or that.

    So HUD is more of a veneer of liberal-eyed respectability politics than anything else, a mutually beneficial lie that make all parties involved look grown up and “professional”: a shelter might use its HUD relationship to land a check from a mini-Soros type who might be put off by bible thumping but ignorantly assumes that HUD guarantees a certain amount of liberalism.

    But those Soros types — or even $10K checks from Walmart and other evil businesses trying to buy back into community goodwill — tend to be minor compared to church or parish giving on a whole, funding that the shelters themselves feel more indebted to because it comes from really poor people who are trying to make a difference.

    Obviously this turn is a troubling one. It may force shelters to give up on HUD funding (although I’m willing to bet that most who run shelters haven’t even HEARD about this news yet! And won’t until Drudge Report puts it on their facebook feed), which most can afford to do because HUD funding is largely terrible.

    Or: both the shelters and HUD will politely agree to ignore each other’s true natures (as they currently do) so Americans won’t realize what a clusterfuck everything is.

    OTOH, it’s equally obvious that unlike the many, many, MANY gay and lesbian shelter workers and clients who aren’t willing to burn a homeless shelter to the ground over politics (imagining that the good done outweighs the bad by a margin), trans obviously are willing, and they pack nothing but matches.

    • kesher Says:

      I can’t say I’m particularly surprised by anything you point out here, but something I’m worried about in regards to this issue is shelters rolling over just to avoid a lawsuit. I’d like to think they’d turn away a Christopher Hambrook, but then they’d be right to assume that it’s the Hambrooks who would make the biggest stink and enlist trans activists to burn the place down.

      • anon male Says:

        That’s the point, though: they can’t sue, anymore than you can sue the pope for being the pope and doing pope things.

        HUD has zero authority to override anyone’s religion and until hipsters start funding and staffing shelters (and risk bringing bedbugs or scabbies back to their fun lofts, ruining board game night?), all of this is mostly a dog and pony show for liberal optics.

        Which leads into another wrinkle: After hurricane Katrina, evangelicals, upset that the godless FEMA and their black helicopters broke up families[tm] and shipped good fathers off to different camps than their dutiful wives and children, have really focused on moving shelters to becoming inclusive of everyone.

        Women, children, axe murderers (who have done their time), everyone, except for sex offenders who lack the charisma to explain away their crimes as a romeo/juliette thing.

        (Shelters often start to resemble MTV’s “The Real World” where everyone is playing a character type when trying to hook up with each other. This also lets churchy folks push marriage on clients who are dating — even paying for their weddings — to allow them to share a single room together as a perk for forgoing “sin” in order to inspire others to do the same because they believe that marriage solves poverty because poverty is the wages of sin.)

        Ironically, rapist-huggers (aka Restorative Justice ivy-leaguers) are also obsessed with the same idea, in general, where giving violent men responsibility/ownership over women and children makes them more manageable to the powers that be (aka “it takes a patriarchal village”); see:

        http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/12/a-home-for-unlikely-neighbors/421848/

        While co-ed stuff might not work in the shelters of the biggest coastal cities (or even the destination cities for black and latino gay “pre-trans” who bolster the cooked statistics for trans* homelessness), most cities aren’t NY, Miami, or San Francisco… or even Toronto or Portland.

        Average city is average city and while Trevor Noah and other liberals would discount those cities (where you might almost NEVER have a trans client in a shelter) and consider them politically irrelevant, FERGUSON is actually one of those boring cities in “flyover country.”

        Granted, placing trans is also an issue for smaller shelters, but typically it’s reasonable to place them in separate handicapped facilities (usually under closer supervision) because there are almost never any white autogynophiles deciding to slum it for the sake of facebook attention. Like, you can work for a decade in a shelter and count the number you’ve seen on one hand.

        So HUD’s liberal optics move here really only affects a small segment of homeless shelters. And it’s a huge effect on the women who will be so affected.

        But it’s also a lie about the extent of HUD’s own power and a misrepresentation of where homeless shelters are moving in general: but it’s not like trans activists want to admit that inclusive shelters (like general use single-occupancy bathrooms) are a good thing because then no one will care about what they’re playing at with their gender identities. Then trans just becomes another “high maintenance” marker like other mental issues.

        Again, not an expert, and I could be wrong about certain things on a macro scale. But I wouldn’t trust anyone who said they were an expert, either.

      • kesher Says:

        “there are almost never any white autogynophiles deciding to slum it for the sake of facebook attention.”

        I’ll quibble with this. I’ve encountered some homeless MTTs who certainly didn’t fit the trans IT autogynephile model, but they were not effeminate gay men either. They were profoundly mentally ill white men who seemed to think identifying as “women” would solve their problems.

        I think Jennifer Gale fit this model: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_Gale It’s worth noting that trans activists blame Austin homeless shelters for his death even though there’s no evidence he was denied shelter the night he died. When I picture a completely inappropriate MTT demanding access to women’s shelters I basically see Gale’s ugly mug.


  17. Saying this is unconscionable is an understatement. Homeless women experience significant violence and many of these vulnerable women have PTSD. Many homeless women have severe mental illness. Some are fleeing domestic violence. One of my best friends was homeless for awhile, and she was almost raped. Now, homeless women have to share sleeping quarters and bathing facilities with males. This is sick no matter how we look at it.

    Women aren’t raped by a “gender identity”. Ask any rape victim if she was raped by a “gender identity”. They are raped by males. These uber politically correct morons just don’t get it. They don’t care how much psychological pain and suffering they cause this very fragile population of women.

    Google, “homeless women” and violence, and several studies pop up. So, a five minute google search shows overwhelming evidence that homeless women experience a great deal of trauma in their fragile lives. These mindless politicians have no clue what is going in the real world.

    No Safe Place: Sexual Assault in the Lives of Homeless Women

    Lisa A. Goodman, Ph.D., Katya Fels, & Catherine Glenn, M.A. With contributions from Judy Benitez

    Homeless women who experience sexual assault may suffer from a range of emotional and physical challenges (D’Ercole & Streuning, 1990; Goodman, Saxe & Harvey, 1991; Ingram et al, 1996; Padgett & Streuning, 1992; Rayburn, Wenzel, Elliot, Hambrasoomians, Marshall, & Tucker, 2005; Salomon, Bassuk, & Huntington, 2002). In one study of homeless women who had been victimized (Browne & Bassuk, 1997; see also Bassuk, Buckner, Weinreb, Browne, Bassuk, Dawson, & Perloff, 1997) most participants reported mental health problems ranging from suicide attempts (45%) and depression (47%) to alcohol or drug dependence (45%) and posttraumatic stress disorder (39%). Other studies report similar types of psychological difficulties (e.g., Nyamathi et al., 2001; North & Smith, 1992; North, Smith & Spitznagel, 1994; Wenzel, Leake, and Gelberg, 2000).

    Childhood Sexual Abuse

    A number of studies have emphasized the correlation between childhood sexual abuse and homelessness among adult women (Bassuk and Rosenberg, 1988; Davies-Netzley & Hurlburt, & Hough, 1996; Simons & Whitbeck, 1991; Stermac & Paradis, 2001; Wenzel et al., 2004; Zugazaga, 2004). For example, one study of women seeking help from a rape/sexual assault crisis center found that childhood sexual abuse was reported by 43% of the homeless participants, compared to 24.6% of the housed participants (Stermac et al., 2004).

    Abuse by Partners

    Not surprisingly, a number of studies point to abuse–including rape–at the hands of a current or former partner, as a risk factor for homelessness among women (Toro, Bellavia, Daeschler, Owens, Wall, Passero, & Thomas, 1995). This is particularly evident for women who experience partner violence at the more severe end of the continuum, and who have been isolated by their abusers from family and friends who might have offered to help them (Baker, Cook, & Norris, 2003).

    Severe Mental Illness (SMI)

    Homeless women with serious mental illnesses such as major depression, schizophrenia, and bipolar disorder are highly vulnerable to victimization. Indeed, in one in-depth study 97% of the participants, all of whom were homeless and had a mental illness, reported experiences of violent victimization at some point in their lives (Goodman, Dutton & Harris, 1995; Goodman, Johnson, Dutton, & Harris, 1997), with an astonishing 28% reporting at least one physical or sexual assault in the month preceding the interview. Another large-scale study of 1,839 ethnically diverse, homeless women and men with mental illnesses from 15 cities across the US found that 15.3% of the women participants reported being raped in the past 2 months (Lam & Rosenheck, 1998), compared to 1.3% of the men.

    http://www.vawnet.org/applied-research-papers/print-document.php?doc_id=558

    Someone needs to sue HUD for the psychological suffering that they cause.


  18. I am mailing a 31 one page comment to HUD. I don’t know if it will make a difference, but this is outrageous. Ladies, make sure to call all your sisters, aunts, and grandmothers and tell them to get on this.

    This is to Julian Castro- Secretary of Housing and Urban Development:

    What will you say when a Christopher, “Jessica”, Hambrook incident happens in a US women’s homeless shelter? I say when because we know it’s going to happen sooner or later.For all we know, something similar to Hambrook has already occurred.

    I can’t believe I voted for Obama twice.

    • Zemskull Says:

      Hi SkyLark Phillips: Thank you for posting those statistics and also the Christopher, “Jessica”, Hambrook name, which I Googled. I wouldn’t be surprised if 98% of the general public has no idea how dire the situation for homeless women is; this blog is once again providing an important service. I will also leave comment for HUD. Thanks again.

  19. Freyja Says:

    I just looked at the comments! The ones in opposition are excellent, and I admire the women who are brave enough to put their real names. We know the boys in IT like to come after anyone who does not affirm their fantasy.

    I noticed that Twyla Tharp has commented, vigorously and bluntly, against the proposal. She’s a famous choreographer and dancer, and thus she is more exposed than most of us. I am so happy to see her comment.

    I am working on my own response, which I will make straightforward and clear. If they let you include links to other sites, I will include links to stories even the most high-minded idiot cannot ignore.

  20. drycamp Says:

    One of the most troublesome aspects of these protect-the-trans laws is the complete lack of definitions. In Houston we saw this feature as well. Just what exactly is “gender identity”? Who exactly is it whose statements about preferring to shower with women must be respected, in defiance of biology and good sense?

    The proposed HUD regulations require shelter staff persons to be governed by what the person involved says about themselves. That is, if a male presents himself for shelter and declares that his “gender identity” is female (the gender he “identifies with”) no staff person is allowed to inquire further into the matter. No medical or other certification is required. No evidence of any kind. We just take his word for it. He can be a 6’6″ longshoreman who dreamed this entire idea up this morning. If he declares that he “identifies” as a woman, he will be admitted to the women’s shelter, showers, bedrooms and everything else.

    This is a ridiculously open door to all kinds of criminal behavior. Not only will mentally ill, confused persons be housed with the opposite gender, rapists and other similar criminals will be admitted as well, on their bare assertion about “identification.”

    On this “logic” Stefonknee should be admitted to preschool. People who think they are elephants should be housed at the zoo, at public expense. The kook who thinks he is Napoleon should be issued an army and a throne. The madmen have been handed the keys to the city.

    • Biscuit Says:

      Agreed. “Stefonknee” (I feel gross just typing that) actually was allowed into a woman’s shelter in Canada. He’s abusive to women (wife and children have a restraining order against him) but that did not at all stop him from being allowed in the shelter.

      Can you imaging being a homeless woman and having to sleep next to him at a place that’s supposed to help you? Horrible! The though makes my skin crawl.

    • Branjor Says:

      On this “logic” Stefonknee should be admitted to preschool. People who think they are elephants should be housed at the zoo, at public expense. The kook who thinks he is Napoleon should be issued an army and a throne.

      And the ones who think they’re Jesus should be crucified. Hahaha, sorry I just couldn’t resist. Seriously, though, this is a foretaste of an even more advanced patriarchy than we have yet known and is a perfect example of why men can’t be allowed to stay in power.

  21. Freyja Says:

    Would a shelter be allowed to turn away a stalker or ex-boyfriend if he showed up claiming to be feeling like a traumatized woman? How many women will have to be abused again, or killed, before the gross irresponsibility of these laws is acknowledged? Oh wait. I forgot. No one gives a shit about women.

  22. Larichus Says:

    I have a sickening feeling that this could be used by abusers to locate the battered women’s shelter(s) that women have sought refuge in …


  23. I really want these cases to be challenged in the federal courts. Federal judges are appointed, not elected, and not as swayed by politics or concern for their careers.They are also not as inclined to accept illogical and circular nonsense as argument.

    • kesher Says:

      Some federal judges are concerned about politics if they’re looking for an appointment beyond where they are currently, in which case, whether the judge comes down on the side of girls’ and women’s rights depends on whether he/she is looking for an appointment from a Democrat or Republican. Any challenge in the Ninth Circuit I’m sure would come down on the side of shenis rights.

  24. Trish Says:

    The talk of “perceived” gender is ridiculous. Perception is something that is known via the senses, which would mean sight, smell, taste, touch, hearing. Actual genitals can be perceived, the homunculus (or, womanculus) that has a different gender from a person’s genitals is imperceptible.

    One of the most important basic ideas of our judicial system (and the legislation based on our judicial concepts) is that we cannot know the operation of a person’s mind. How could our government possibly demand that imagined internal genders trump actual physical genitalia?

    What’s next – gravity is just a concept?

  25. Trish Says:

    If our government is going to treat a person reporting to “feel” opposite of their physical sex – treating an intangible and unprovable claim as identical to the physical fact of other people’s actual sex, what’s next? Declare gravity optional?

    In fact, by treating a claim of feeling female as identical to being female, it would in fact actually allow the feelz to trump the fact because although men who want their “feeling like a woman” to be legally identical to being a woman would be allowed to move right into spaces where people are particularly vulnerable (asleep, undressed, using the toilet), women who don’t want to have to sleep in the same jail pod, domestic violence shelter or emergency housing with men who say they feel like women would have no recourse.


  26. If they ignore the comments they are no doubt going to get sued when the inevitable happens. Legal protections are extended to women on the basis of biological reality, not subjective experiences.

  27. drycamp Says:

    Ordinarily I “identify” as a Democrat, if only because the other alternative is, as it now seems, Donald Trump. But I’m seriously wondering about the current (Democratic) administration.

    There is definitely an agenda here. A high school proposes that the sole “trans” student use a separate bathroom; the Obama administration justice department institutes an Investigation, and seems to be requiring that this teenage boy be admitted into the girls’ bathrooms and showers and locker room without further delay. The ridiculous equal-treatment law is defeated at the polls in Houston, and the Obama administration mourns in public at that triumph of “bigotry.” And here we have this proposed HUD regulation (which is sure one of the worst written pieces of legal prose I have come across lately) which is more of the same, pushing on this agenda, pushing mentally ill men into women’s previously safe spaces.

    Why is the Obama administration so anxious to push this “trans” agenda at us? Why is it so easy for them to ignore the needs of over half the population in pursuit of this cause? What is the motivation here? It’s easy to say “sexism,” and that’s certainly correct, but that explanation doesn’t seem adequate to me.

    • kesher Says:

      The high school locker room situation gets even worse. That settlement in Illinois that the Obama administration hashed out was supposed to require the male to change outside the view of actual girls, but the administration quickly reversed course and made girls having to look at shenis some sort of “equal protection” issue.

  28. Jessica Says:

    Hey all.

    I am new here. Have been reading for a while but only just commenting today.

    I am appalled at how many feminists will turn into rape apologists in order to protect transwomen.

    Just look at this:

    “” Michael W Busch Conuly • an hour ago

    Significantly less than, actually – due to differential socialization that makes cis men the most likely demographic to assault others. So yeah?

    WithinThisMind Lila • an hour ago

    Women also get raped and assaulted in women only spaces by other women. Clearly, we need to ban lesbians from using women’s locker rooms.

    2

    Reply

    Share ›

    Avatar
    Conuly WithinThisMind • an hour ago

    It’s like she isn’t quite clear on the fact that you don’t need a penis to rape people. (And it’s even possible for somebody without a penis to rape somebody with a penis, although it’s hard to get much justice when that happens.)

    Avatar
    WithinThisMind Conuly • an hour ago

    It’s also possible for someone with a penis to rape someone without using that penis.

    I think we have a case of ‘I’m not a ______ but _______”

    Honestly, I don’t give a shit if a perfectly ‘normal’ heterosexual male is using the same restroom I am, or even sharing the same sleeping quarters I am. As long as he acts like a decent human being, everything will be fine.

    I’ve shared sleeping rooms and even a bed with male friends before and had nothing happen except two people went from tired to not tired.””

    “”Conuly • 2 minutes ago

    Lila, until you give the statistics for rape by strangers in changing rooms and bathrooms, I don’t want to read any more of your opinions on the subject.””

    ————-

    Blatant rape apology from feminists who otherwise are really really upset over rape!

    I cannot believe what I am reading.

    http://www.donotlink.com/hu7o

    They are using every rhetorical trick in the book to pretend that rape isn’t a thing, least of all by men who will lie about it!

  29. Jessica Says:

    Do new posts go into moderation?

    Mine had a link.

    Btw I am a lurker of about a month.

    • GallusMag Says:

      all posts are moderated.

      • Jessica Says:

        Ok.

        Thanks for approving my posts!

        I am so upset!

        One of the feminists, in a post that I didn’t catch, stated that one rape a year was acceptable because protecting MTT was more important than women’s safety!!!

        They make the same arguments regarding the sexual assaults in Germany. That we can’t go blaming regressive Islamists for raping women, because more harm will be done re anti-Muslim bigotry than by simply letting a few women get raped.

      • GallusMag Says:

        My god. That thread.

      • Jessica Says:

        I have dealt with them before.

        A couple of weeks ago I got them to tell me that:

        1) biological sex is a social construct

        2) prostate cancer is a *woman’s* health issue and should be treated as such

        3) pregnancy is a man’s health issue and should be treated as such

        Of course, as soon as I ask if prisons should no longer be sex segregated, they clam up and refuse to answer, which is what happened here.

        And a common argument is ‘rapists will rape, and perverts will ogle you, so why does it matter if they do it in a bathroom/locker room/domestic violence shelter ‘ etc.

      • GallusMag Says:

        I really doubt any of them are women. Looks like you stumbled upon a nest of pretendbians.

      • Jessica Says:

        They are women.

        I have been reading LJF for about of years now.

        The blogger, Libby Anne, is an ex-fundie type.

        She got internet famous when she wrote about why she is no longer pro-life.

        Most of the commenters

        1) identify as feminist

        2) come from abusive backgrounds

        Which is why their views re MTT and rape are so confounding. But, I think that they put more stock into being politically correct than actually thinking things through

        I wonder if they will ban me. They believe in a ‘safe space’, and dissenting opinions are very threatening, no matter how good the argument.

        Oh, about last week. I forgot. But yes, they claim that sex and gender are purely social constructs. So, I asked if the concepts of both sex and gender should be abolished, in order to protect trans people from discrimination. They told me that no, the concepts should not be abolished, because then trans people will be discriminated against.

        Let that sink in.

        *special snowflakes*

      • Zemskull Says:

        Jessica, welcome to the board. It was interesting what you noted about those positing prostate cancer as a women’s issue. I’ve seen MTTs on women’s internet groups trying to hush discussions about breast cancer. They really don’t care about an issue that is unlikely to affect them. They also get openly irritated by discussions of women’s gynecological issues, such as contraception and endometriosis.

    • morag99 Says:

      “They make the same arguments regarding the sexual assaults in Germany. That we can’t go blaming regressive Islamists for raping women, because more harm will be done re anti-Muslim bigotry than by simply letting a few women get raped.”

      You are right, Jessica: the arguments are exactly the same.


  30. This man was finally convicted of raping a 15 year old girl. The date on this article is January 8, 2016. Thankfully, the article says that he will be sent to a men’s prison, but I’m sure some trans organization will whine that his rights are being violated if he isn’t housed with women. It’s so Orwellian when articles refer to these males as “she”. A “she” did not sexually assault a 15 year old girl.

    Davina (David) Ayrton

    Transgender rapist is sent to male prison after being found GUILTY of raping teenage girl when she was a man

    “The court was also told that Ayrton, who has a son, was convicted of possessing indecent images of children at Bournemouth Crown Court in January 2014.

    When her defence barrister Ann-Marie Talbot asked her why she had entered guilty pleas to these charges, she replied: ‘Because I was guilty of them.’

    It was also heard that Ayrton, who has learning difficulties, confessed her crime to a support worker – something which she denied.”

    “…Ayrton told the court in her evidence that she had not undergone any physical modifications or taken any medication as part of her gender swap.”

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3390705/Transgender-rapist-sent-male-prison-GUILTY-raping-teenage-girl-man.html

    He still had all the equipment then, and he still has it now. Definitely looks like a dude with long hair.

    • Jessica Says:

      Which is funny, because on the comment thread that I just linked from Love Joy Feminism, multiple people made it very clear that TRANSWOMEN NEVER RAPE EVER.

      And that women rape just as much as men, and that you don’t need a penis to rape.

      I even linked the above article about Ayrton, and I was told that it did not apply. Not one bit. Because MTT are pure as the driven snow.

      • kesher Says:

        Of all the garbage from trans activists and trans apologists, the single thing that scares me most is the lie that MTTs are above reproach.

        At a minimum, they’re just as violent and disgusting as men, but, given the prevalence of crossdressing and trans identity among the worst of the worst sexual predators, I fear they might even be worse, as a class, than regular men.

        Meanwhile, women and girls are being instructed to conform to penis rights or *we’re* removed from the public sphere. We’re being instructed to ignore our instincts, and this is just from the trans apologist media and government. On a more individual level, women and girls are being told by trans activists and trans apologist libfems that, if an MTT rapes us, we are not to be believed. We are not to interpret what happened as rape because MTTs “don’t rape”.

        I’ve said this before, but I’ll say it again: I feel the main thing all of us need to do going forward is support women and girls and all victims of MTT offenders. Lord knows the apologists won’t.

      • Jessica Says:

        yep.

        I keep reading that thread, and one of the ‘feminists’ just made the argument that penises are nothing to be afraid of, so who cares if you are forced to see one against your will.

        I mean, by that logic, flashing should be legal, no?

        And not *one* of them has mentioned that maybe, just maybe, girls don’t want men seeing them naked.


  31. @Jessica,

    They don’t like it when their special politically correct world is threatened by something like pesky little facts.

    I hate boring regular gendertrender readers because most of this has been covered extensively on this blog before as well as other sources of information. Some women might not have seen all of this. For new readers, I’ll include just a few links and bits of information. Credit to gendertrender as the main source of information, although most of this can be found elsewhere.

    I’m not aware of one woman who has raped a transwoman (male), but it’s a fact that there are transgender registered sex offenders who have molested girls or raped women (Paul Witherspoon, Sandy Jo Battista, child rapist Ronny Darnell, cross dressing sex offender Thomas Lee Benson, etc). Richard, “Sherri”, Masbruch not only raped two women, he sadistically tortured them with electrical wires before raping them. There isn’t anything that so-called “cis gendered” men haven’t done to women that transgender identified males and cross dressing males haven’t done to women. I’m talking about from cold blooded murder (wife killer Robert, “Michelle”, Kosilek, Kenneth Hunt aka Ketheena Soneeya , etc) to helping to murder a 13 year old black girl and dumping her body in a box, and sitting the box on fire (Synthia China Blast). Currently, in Washington State transwoman Douglas “Donna” Perry is on trial for first degree murder of three women. For all we know, there could have been more women, but he is being charged with three murders. Dainty “Donna” served time on federal weapons charges because he was in possession of a pipe bomb, 49 firearms, and 20,000 rounds of ammunition. Do you really think they have special “lady brains”? They offend at the same rate as other males. There was even a 30 year study that states,

    “…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.

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

    Males identifying as transgender or “women” have raped women. In fact, there are numerous cases.

    A transexual and transvestite were found guilty of raping a woman and inflicting grievous bodily harm as well as burglary. This was in 2012, and the judge described the case as the worst he has ever seen.

    http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/Transexual-transvestite-guilty-raping-woman/story-22359000-detail/story.html

    A crossdressing cabbie was convicted of raping a woman and recording the attack on his cell phone. He was wearing makeup, wig, and a dress when he attacked the woman. The woman was so drunk she passed out. He raped her in the back seat, and even took photos of it on his cell phone.

    http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/local-news/crossdresser-cabbie-convicted-of-rape-958087

    Part of this is from one of my earlier post that appeared on this blog. Sorry for boring regular readers, but new readers need to know this information.

    It’s a fact that males dressed in wigs, skirts, and makeup, or identifying as transgender have been convicted of committing crimes in women’s restroom, locker rooms, and women’s homeless shelters. In fact, there are numerous cases. They have also murdered and raped women.

    The sexual predator Christopher, “Jessica”, Hambrook identified as transgender just long enough to gain access to two different women’s homeless shelters where he sexually assaulted homeless women. Imagine the terror that these homeless women felt. Trans activists say that Hambrook doesn’t count because he really wasn’t transgender. At the time he was assaulting women in homeless shelters he called himself “Jessica” and said he was transgender. How else would he get into the women’s homeless shelters? If he wasn’t allowed in the women’s homeless shelters, trans activists would have pitched a fit and sued.

    I see this as statistics and probability. The more that biological males have access to women’s restrooms, locker rooms, showers, women’s homeless shelters, etc. sooner or later there will be another Hambrook, Mr. Colleen Francis, or Mr. Carlotta Sklodowska incident. It’s just a matter of time. We know three things.

    (1.) There are far more male registered sex offenders than female sex offenders. Look at the crime statistics.

    Center for Sex Offender Management
    A Project of the Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice 2007

    National criminal justice statistics reveal that of all adults and juveniles who come to the attention of the authorities for sex crimes, females account for less than 10% of these cases (FBI, 2006). Specifically, arrests of women represent only 1% of all adult arrests for forcible rape and 6% of all adult arrests for other sex offenses.

    http://www.csom.org/pubs/female_sex_offenders_brief.pdf

    Females don’t rape males, or other women, anywhere near the same rate as males rape women.

    (2.) Most violent crime is committed by males, and there are more males in prison.

    This is actual Federal Bureau of Prisons statistics in the U.S. as in who is actually incarcerated by sex. Look at the graph.

    https://www.bop.gov/about/statistics/statistics_inmate_gender.jsp

    (3.) Paraphilias such as voyeurism are more common in males. I’m not saying they can’t occur in females. They are more common in males. If people aren’t sure what paraphilias are, below are a few examples.

    Tutu-Clad Assault Suspect Suffers “Transvestic Fetishism” (Google Gregory Phillip Schwartz)

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

    The defense said his transvestic fetish was caused by drug use, and this is why he got high, stole a pink Barbie outfit, and terrorized a woman in a Big Lots women’s restroom.

    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.

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

    These are cross dressing men who have committed crimes – terrorize women and murder (also several examples in links below). Even if he doesn’t commit a crime like the men in the links, a man’s sexual fetish shouldn’t give him the right to share sleeping quarters with homeless women. Since when is a sexual fetish a civil right? So he wants to be kinky? Please do it on your own time. It’s not a civil right, and stay out of the women’s homeless shelter.

    Do homeless women really want to share sleeping quarters with Stefonknee Wolscht?

    https://gendertrender.wordpress.com/2015/11/29/transwoman-stefonknee-wolscht-lives-life-as-a-six-year-old-girl/

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3356084/I-ve-gone-child-Husband-father-seven-52-leaves-wife-kids-live-transgender-SIX-YEAR-OLD-girl-named-Stefonknee.html

    Or, how about Riley Kilo the “transgender diaper enthusiast” “adult baby”, and trans porn star named Sadie Hawkins?

    http://staydiapered.com/

    How about the man in the Planet Fitness lawsuit, Carlotta Sklodowska.

    https://gendertrender.wordpress.com/tag/carlotta-sklodowska/

    This is link from a conservative website that compiled a list of crimes. Most of the people on this blog are far from conservative. At any rate, all this information is out there for anyone to dig up.

    http://nounequalrights.com/information/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/The-Threat-to-Women-and-Girls-Illustrated-1.pdf

    More links (from a woman who was married to a cross dresser):

    https://outofmypantiesnow.wordpress.com/2013/08/23/this-is-transgender/

    https://gendertrender.wordpress.com/2011/05/28/men-love-the-ladies-restroom-transgender-edition/

    Or, just scroll through some of the gendertrender older posts because there is a lot of information they don’t want people to know.

    Sorry for the long post.

    • drycamp Says:

      It makes sense to me that transgender and crossdresser males, many of whom are (at least by some definitions) mentally ill, would be more likely to commit crimes than the general population. Mental illness is usually not anyone’s fault, but it often does endanger the rest of us.

      Are such men mentally ill? Well of course that’s hard to define, but one definition of psychosis I have seen would say that psychosis consists of being “out of touch with reality.” A male who believes he is “really” a female is pretty out of touch with some basic realities, yes? So is a 50+ year old man who thinks he’s a 6 year old girl (though my personal opinion is that Wolscht is just a con man, which is something else again).

      Then we have the men who know perfectly well who and what they are, but who are prepared to lie about it to gain access to vulnerable women.

      I don’t think any of these people belong in women’s spaces in homeless shelters, and I’m puzzled that the Obama administration apparently disagrees about this.

  32. Jessica Says:

    So the pro-trans ‘feminists’ are continuing to reply to me.

    Basically, they refuse to answer ‘should intact transmen be sent to male prisons?’ by dancing around the question.

    I get answers like:

    1) what we need to do is stop ALL rapes. All rapes are bad

    2) laws that prevent male presenting men from utilizing women’s spaces will be useless because no one obsessively watches bathroom doors etc

    3) and if someone does get raped in a bathroom/shelter etc it won’t be reported, so why bother harming trans people?

    4) one rape a year is acceptable in a bathroom if it means that MTT can be free from harm

    5) there was a rape in NYC park. Should parks be gender segregated to prevent rape? No, that’s ridiculous. So why gender segregate bathrooms/change rooms/women’s shelters

    “”Predators also rape women in public parks – a recent gang rape was reported in Brownsville in NYC. Does that mean we gender segregate public parks? “”

    6) ZERO rapes will be prevented if we bar MTT from accessing women’s private spaces. ZERO. In fact, it will lead to MORE rapes if we do bar MTT from using women’s spaces.

    7) barring MTT from using women’s spaces is just like forcing black women to use black women only fountains

    8) transitioning means, according to one, and I quote:

    “Do you have any idea what ‘transitioning’ means? My son has ‘transitioned’. It means his ID and passport say he is male. He is also presenting as male, but that’s beside the point. Transitioning is not about what medical procedure anyone has had. “”

    9) “”Also, any situation where trans people might be at risk, other people might also be at risk, and the entire system needs rework. “”

    10) you’ve seen one penis you’ve seen them all, so who cares if you are forced to see one in a bathroom/changeroom/shelter

    Thanks for letting me vent. I am not responding to them, as I am all alone over there and will likely get banned if I continue. They value their ‘safe space’ to be free from bigotry. Yet, somehow, they don’t value the right of women and girls not to be perved on by MTT.

    I will point out that at no point have I EVER received a straight answer re sending transmen to men’s prisons. Re ending gender segregation in prisons period, since, by their logic, ‘genitals don’t matter and rape cannot be prevented at all’

    • KgSch Says:

      Of course you won’t get a straight answer about transmen in men’s prisons, because then they would have to admit that transmen are really just self-hating females and it would be unsafe for them to be in men’s prisons.

      Their answers are pretty disgusting, but I have learned not to expect anything different from these so-called feminists. With MTTs, it’s a hell of a lot more than one rape a year because they are even more violent than your garden variety dude because they are always in a rapist mindset of refusing to take no for an answer (as we can see how the treat women who disagree with them).

      It’s also continues to amaze me of how ignorant these women are, but that’s what happens when you don’t know your history. Separate toilets was one of the things early feminists campaigned for (and something that women in some parts of India are campaigning for) and men have been trying to take it away ever since. The point is that with sex-segregated bathrooms, if a dude follows a woman in there the police have the legal authority to kick him out and charge him with crimes. If “woman” isn’t an adult human female but instead is a figment of men’s imaginations, then there is no protection.

      I don’t blame you for not talking to them anymore, but if you really wanted to make them flip out you could give them this link: https://bevjoradicallesbian.wordpress.com/2011/03/15/bev-jo-radical-lesbian-writing/

      • Jessica Says:

        They banned me.

        Apparently I was ‘nasty’ and ‘offensive’ and anyone who is ‘arguing’ as I was is clearly a terribad bigot.

        One of the shitty male feminists said that ‘transwomen are not threat to anyone ‘right after I showed him the thing about the Toronto rapist and that dude in the UK who raped a girl then asked to be sent to a woman’s prison.

        He then changed his tune on an article about the rapes in Cologne, stating that we can’t all be blaming Muslim rapists for this, as ‘everyone has the capability to rape, including non-binary people’

        As for the legal right to evict MTT from bathrooms and changerooms, I was informed that it won’t do any good because 1) no one ever watches bathroom/changeroom doors 2) even if they did, it would be too late as all the rapes would already have occurred 3) we can’t make laws based on the hard cases, and that protecting MTT is the most important of all 4) laws exist only to punish wrongdoers, not protect potential victims from being harmed

        if anyone is interested, these are the articles where the bullshit occurred:

        http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/2016/01/sexual-assault-in-cologne-and-sexual-assault-at-home.html

        http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/2016/01/lesbian-duplex-49-an-open-thread.html

        As a final point, two MTT were nearly stoned to death in Cologne. I bet you can guess that the transactivists are ignoring it. They are going to pretend it didn’t happen, because Muslim rapists are now more oppressed than trans people.

        These are ‘feminists’, btw, who spend most of their time worrying about sexual assault. They ‘care deeply’ about women’s rights. Rights that they throw under the bus once some group that is more oppressed and whiny shows up.

        i really don’t think they give a shit about women’s rights. It’s all about virtue signalling with them.Showing that they are less bigoted than everyone else.

        i also think that they can pretend this stuff doesn’t happen because THEY are the least likely to be affected by it. So they can sit in their ivory towers and sacrifice everyone else’s body but their own!

      • Freyja Says:

        Jessica, I love your phrase “virtue signaling.” That says it so well.


  33. I just stumbled across this today. January 12, 2016

    Convicted child rapist is jailed for moving in with a mother and her son, 11, after having a sex change and hiding her evil past

    “A convicted child rapist who underwent a sex change after being jailed for assaulting an underage girl was allowed to move in with a mother and her young son after hiding her evil past.

    Transgender paedophile Kristen Lukess was made the subject of a Sexual Offences Prevention Order when she was known as Mark Turton, which banned her from living with children.

    The order was made after he was convicted of two counts of raping an underage child.

    But, after being freed from the seven-year jail term in 2008, Turton changed both his name and his gender and set up home with a mother who had no idea about her evil past.”

    These men should never be allowed to legally change their sex, and they do not belong in women’s homeless shelters. How can over crowded and under staffed homeless shelters do a complete background check on everyone? It’s not going to happen and men like Hambrook and this man will slip through the cracks. Fortunately, this man was caught violating the court orders to stay away from children.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3395888/Convicted-child-rapist-jailed-moving-mother-son-11-having-sex-change-hiding-evil-past.html

    Ban rapists and violent predators from changing legal sex.

    https://allisonslaw.wordpress.com/category/allisons-law/

  34. JoannaDW Says:

    Left a comment. Do not feel safe using my real name, but I did put a common online identifier, so if transactivists want to harass me, they can harass me on the web and not in real life.

  35. sarahsmic Says:

    I found your site recently through a gender critical forum. Thank you for posting these articles.

    I honestly find this situation kind of hopeless and upsetting. The fact that homeless women face obscene amounts of sexual abuse on the streets is entirely ignored. Instead “progressive” values insist that such a woman sleep on a cot next to a potential abuser in lipstick. I’ll write a comment in favor of women’s rights but I’m depressingly confident that this will pass through. Thank you for bringing it to attention though.

  36. pontifire Says:

    Reblogged this on men ruin everything.

  37. Jessica Says:

    Folks, have a laugh at this. I love when progressive feminists bend over backwards to please ‘women with girlpeens’

    https://archive.is/sBZ58

    Yes. Because heaven forbid anyone recognize that women are oppressed precisely because their bodies are used for the pleasure and profit of men. Men who can suddenly claim that they are oppressed because no one is recognising their girlcocks.

    This one is signalling how moral and righteous she is by shitting all over real women.


  38. Update:

    It’s January 20th, and the deadline for comments has passed. I mailed my 31 page comment priority mail a week ago. Does anyone know if this horrible proposal was approved?

  39. sparkycarol Says:

    Brilliant article. I want to support trans people, but not at the expense of others.
    When did defending the rights of women suddenly make one an intolerant trans hating Nazi?
    I’m baffled by how this rebranding occurred.

    • Jessica Says:

      What they are doing is dehumanizing and othering the ‘TERF’

      By claiming that feminists who oppoose them want to ‘genocide’ and ‘exterminate’ MTT, they can then ‘morally’ ‘justify’ their horrific treatment of women.

      These people are sociopathic narcissists.

  40. GallusMag Says:

    at Casa Ruby homeless services for “transwomen”:

    January 30, 2016 at 1:35 pm EST | by Lou Chibbaro Jr.
    Trans women charged with assault in Casa Ruby incident
    0 0 0 0 Google +0 0

    D.C. police on Jan. 27, 2016, arrested two transgender women in connection with an alleged assault of a Casa Ruby staffer. (Photo by Cliff; courtesy Wikimedia Commons)

    Two transgender women were charged with simple assault and destruction of property on Jan. 27 at the offices of the D.C. LGBT community services center Casa Ruby after they allegedly punched and threw several computer monitors at a Casa Ruby staff member.
    A D.C. police arrest affidavit says the staff member told police the two women began punching her in the face and body and tossing computer screens at her after acknowledging she had called police earlier that day because of improper behavior by one of the two alleged attackers.
    Ruby Corado, the founder and director of Casa Ruby, said the staff member is also a trans woman and the two women arrested in the incident were Casa Ruby clients.
    “It’s very sad that this was an internal thing,” Corado told the Washington Blade. “They were actually receiving housing-related services from us.”

    Added Corado: “We have a history with these two girls. They have harassed other youth clients and we issued a bar notice for them. They got barred the night before.”
    Police charging documents identify one of the two women charged in the case as Torkill Teriyaki Holcomb, 31, of Northeast D.C. The charging documents identify the other woman by her male birth name and list her age as 27. Corado said she goes by the name Janiyah Littman.
    Court records show that both women pleaded not guilty to the charges, which are listed as misdemeanors. They and their attorneys couldn’t immediately be reached for comment.

    The court records show the two were booked at the Third District police station on Jan. 27 and held overnight before being released by a D.C. Superior Court judge the next day on condition that they stay away from 2822 Georgia Ave., N.W., the address of Casa Ruby. The release conditions call for Holcomb to enter a drug treatment program and require Littman to undergo drug testing through the court pre-trial services office.

    Both have prior arrest records, according to court documents.
    The court records show that Judge Renee Raymond also ordered both women not to “assault, threaten, harass or stalk” the Casa Ruby staff member who they allegedly assaulted and Casa Ruby’s deputy director, Lourdes Ashley Hunter, the nationally known trans rights advocate.

    The charging documents say the computer monitors were destroyed when they landed on the floor after Holcomb and Littman allegedly threw them at the Casa Ruby staffer, resulting in the charge of destruction of property under $1,000 in value.
    Corado says she has receipts from the purchase of the computer monitors to show they cost more than $1,000.
    Holcomb and Littman were scheduled to return to court for a misdemeanor status hearing on Feb. 11.

    Legal name change ignored by court?
    Although D.C. police used the name Torkill Teriyaki Holcomb in the arrest affidavit they prepared for this case, the official D.C. Superior Court docket uses Holcomb’s birth name, even though records show that a Superior Court judge approved a legal name change for Holcomb in December 2012.
    The court docket was opened at the time of Holcomb’s Jan. 28 court arraignment for the Casa Ruby charges and will become the official court record of all future proceedings in the case. It lists the name Torkill Teriyaki Holcomb as an “alias.”

    The development is likely to raise concern among trans rights advocates, who have long urged government agencies to respect the wishes of trans people by using the name that reflects the gender to which they have transitioned.
    Police and prosecutors have argued that they must the legal name, which is usually the birth name, of people who are arrested to ensure they are correctly identified in police and court records.
    The Blade has made an inquiry with the Superior Court to find out whether it was a mistake or whether it was related to a court policy that Holcomb’s birth name rather than her legally changed name was used on the court’s docket.
    – See more at: https://www.washingtonblade.com/2016/01/30/trans-women-charged-with-assault-in-casa-ruby-incident/#sthash.i6TCt9xp.dpuf


  41. […] festival, and gained entry into historic women’s schools, battered women’s shelters, women’s homeless shelters, women’s Olympic sports, and women’s prisons. Aren’t there enough co-ed and […]

  42. gallus not signed in Says:

    http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2016/05/man_who_self-identified_as_a_w.html

    Man who identified as a woman was allowed in our all-women’s shelter. It was the wrong call (OPINION)


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: