February 18, 2014
Christopher “Jessica” Hambrook, serial rapist, sexually assaulted and terrorized women after being placed in Toronto area Women’s Shelters
February 16, 2014
Hambrook’s fate will be decided by a judge next week as the court determines whether “she” will be deemed a chronic dangerous offender, a designation which will allow “her” to be incarcerated indefinitely.
Meanwhile, transgender activists held a public protest today in Toronto demanding that individuals like Hambrook be incarcerated with women in female facilities on the basis that they believe themselves to be “psychologically female”.
Two months ago, Canadian transgender activists protested a memorial for murdered women because Vancouver Rape Relief, which organized the event, maintains a domestic violence and rape counseling service for women that does not place female victims with males.
A senior citizen confronted with a “trans woman” in a Toronto YMCA women’s locker room who forced her to view his erect penis, and asked her “do you come here often?”- was recently told by authorities that males have an “absolute” legal right to placement in public areas traditionally sex-segregated for female safety, under new legal “Gender Identity” statutes, which override former sex-based protections for women and girls.
The elimination of women-only services and spaces where women are particularly vulnerable, such as homeless shelters, prisons, hospital bed assignment, areas of public nudity (such as locker rooms), is the primary goal of the transgender political rights movement. Also included are women’s sports, women’s colleges, women’s conferences, private women-only music festivals, lesbian events, etc.
TORONTO - A convicted sexual predator who falsely claimed to be transgender and preyed on women at two Toronto shelters could be declared a dangerous offender this month.
Christopher Hambrook — who claimed to be a transgender woman named Jessica — has attacked four vulnerable females between the ages of five and 53 in Montreal and Toronto over the past 12 years.
Justice John McMahon will decide Feb. 26 whether to declare Hambrook a dangerous offender, which carries an indefinite prison sentence.
The prosecution is asserting Hambrook, a former stripper and escort from Quebec, simply cannot control his deviant sexual urges and that locking him up indefinitely is the best way to protect the public.
Hambrook, 37, pleaded guilty in February 2013 to two counts of sexual assault and one count of criminal harassment involving two women — a deaf and homeless Quebec woman and a Toronto survivor of domestic violence — while he was living at a Dundas St. W. shelter and the Fred Victor women’s shelter in January and February 2012.
All of the victims’ names are covered by a publication ban.
Psychiatric and court records portrayed Hambrook as “hypersexual” and a sexual predator.
He couldn’t control his deviant urges, inside or outside of jail, sharing his sick sexual fantasies and irritating other inmates during a four-year prison sentence served in Quebec and Kingston.
He told grandiose lies, saying he once had a relationship with socialite Paris Hilton, earned $350,000 as an exotic dancer and that his mom died in the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
A self-described “heart breaker,” Hambrook said he’s had more than 80 male sexual partners in his lifetime, including “johns” in his prostitute days and that other inmates “made advances to him rather than vice-versa,” court heard.
After moving to Toronto in 2009, he boasted that he’d received more than 800 e-mails from old Montreal friends “begging him to come home” for sex and shopping sprees.
His latest crimes revealed a continuing trend of exploiting the vulnerable — this time women living at shelters.
The first victim, a deaf and homeless woman from Quebec, checked into the Fred Victor shelter on Jan. 8, 2012. Hambrook had been staying there as “Jessica” since Dec. 23, 2011. She was soon terrorized by Hambrook’s unwanted advances.
Hambrook wrote notes to the woman in French and learned both were smokers. Then, his notes took a creepy turn.
“He asked her if she preferred men and if she wanted a sex change. She started to feel uncomfortable around ‘Jessica’ and was nervous about her behaviour,” said Crown attorney Danielle Carbonneau, reading an agreed statement of facts when Hambrook entered his guilty plea in February 2013.
Hambrook made several unwanted sexual advances toward the woman over the next two or three days. He tried to isolate her in various rooms and she kept rebuffing him as she felt he was stalking her, court heard.
Hambrook stopped her once, grabbed her hand and placed it on his crotch. She yanked her hand away and said, “No.” Hambrook started talking about her breasts and invited her to touch his “fake breasts (he had none).” She became scared and had trouble sleeping as his room was across the hall.
The next day while she was in the shower, she noticed he was peering through the gap between the door and its frame. Hambrook vanished as soon as he realized she spotted him, court heard.
The second victim sought refuge at a Dundas St. W. shelter on Feb. 11, 2012, after suffering serious domestic abuse, court heard.
She remained there two weeks. Hambrook — who told people he was a transgender woman — was admitted there at the same time and ended up being his victim’s roommate.
Hambrook was sitting on a third-floor balcony, smoking a cigarette, when the victim went outside for a smoke. He invited her to sit beside him. When she did, he placed his hand on the bench so the woman would sit on it. She rose quickly, asking him what he was doing and he replied, “It’s a bum warmer. It’s also a boob warmer.” Troubled by his comments, she went inside.
When the victim found Hambrook was one of her three roommates, she had trouble sleeping. On Feb. 12, she left the shelter, consumed some drugs and returned to sleep.
Early on Feb. 13, she awoke to discover Hambrook standing behind her in his underwear, attempting to sexually assault her.
The victim shouted at him, demanding to know what he was doing. Hambrook “simply covered his face with his hands, said “Oops!” and started giggling, according to Carbonneau.
The woman reported the assault to police and Hambrook has been in custody since. His DNA was found on her nightwear.
Shortly after his mother died in Montreal in February 2002, Hambrook committed the first of his sex crimes by sexually assaulted a family friend’s five-year-old daughter. While on bail waiting for courts to deal with charges laid for that crime, he targeted a 27-year-old mentally challenged woman, by sexually assaulting her in his home and forcing her to smoke a joint.
Hambrook received two years in jail for each of those crimes, for a total of four years.
“He had no empathy, no remorse or understanding of his victims of his offences,” Toronto psychiatrist Dr. Treena Wilkie said in her assessment.
In childhood, Hambrook was diagnosed with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder and never made it through high school.
Wilkie diagnosed him with an anti-social personality disorder, borderline personality disorder, determined he was dependent on alcohol and drugs and had multiple sexual deviancies. He was rated as a high risk to re-offend sexually.
Hambrook was earlier assessed as suffering from bisexual pedophilia and exhibitionism.
He blamed his heavy drug use or his victims for his Montreal crimes. He stated the five-year-oldm victoim’s mother “had the hots for him” but he rejected her. The mom fabricated the crime to spite him, said Hambrook, despite pleading guilty to the crimes.
He asserted the mentally-challenged woman consented to sex.
In his psychiatric assessment, Hambrook provided conflicting information on his gender identity issue. He lied that he had been receiving hormone treatment for many years and lied that he wanted to pursue a sex change. He admitted he only dressed intermittently in women’s clothing and wanted to remain a man and have a relationship with a woman.
Psychiatric reports concluded Hambrook is not transgender.
“Mr. Hambrook’s conduct inflicted severe psychological damage on both victims,” said Carbonneau. “(They) sought refuge at Toronto women’s shelters at difficult times in their lives. They thought that they would be safe there, but instead, they were further victimized by the accused.”
December 9, 2013
I was definitely not one of the “I knew since I could think” trans people, but then again, I have always had my head in the clouds. I didn’t even begin to question my gender until 23, but looking back it makes a lot of sense.
WALL OF TEXT!
So while I don’t remember asking my parents when I would grow a penis like my brother, I do remember the fits I pitched since kindergarten over wearing formal girl clothes (my only memories from going to the opera, and my grandfather’s funeral). I also roleplayed exclusively as male (or neutral), and all of my closest stuffed animals were male by default. If chick flicks are correct, I also may have been one of the only young girls to never daydream about my wedding, and I told my mom at 11 that I never wanted babies because pregnancy grossed me out. She said I would change my mind, but I never did.
Then when I hit puberty, I wrestled with the question of “am I a lesbian?” I wrestled because it didn’t make sense – I was definitely attracted to guys, and yet all of my heroes were male. Every character in book or movie, every musician, every real life friend, that I identified with most was male (I did have close female friends as well, but they were never of the ultra-girly persuasion; and even then I preferred mixed company above all). At 15, my parents made a rule that every other Sunday at our casual-dress church, I had to wear a skirt or dress. I still remember the day some of the girls passed me a note saying how pretty I looked in my dress; they meant to make me feel good, but it made me feel terrible.
College was a happy time of doing whatever I wanted and making friends with whoever I wanted. I didn’t think about gender much. But when I got my first serious boyfriend, I was mystified by a vague sense that my being female put a limit on the love I could give; it felt as though our relationship would simply “make more sense” if I were male. Interestingly enough, I’m pretty positive to this day that he is gay. I felt this way with my second serious SO as well, and even though I love(d) him and married him, I felt deeply uncomfortable with every formal situation, including (especially..) our marriage. I didn’t feel like myself, and it made me doubt our love. Everything felt fake and off.
Soon after being married, SO and I ditched gender roles and things seemed to improve. But strange things kept cropping up – I began a collection of thrift store leather shoes, but I just knew that I didn’t like them like a girl liked them – more like how a gay man likes shoes. We talked about how we didn’t want children, and yet even though the thought of being a mother makes me want to blow my brains out, I connected with the idea of being a dad. Then, we left our religion. The archaic gender roles I had been bucking against we’re no longer there, and yet, I was surprised to find that I connected even less with being female, even when I felt free to be whatever kind of female I could dream of. Then began the depression after sex – mostly if we did light, stereotypical roleplaying. Then I just got depressed after every time we had sex, no matter the kind.
Around this time, I discovered transgenderism. At first I thought it wasn’t legitimate. Then I thought it was. Then I knew it was. The respect and admiration I had for the whole slew of male role models I had collected over the years suddenly morphed into a deep jealousy of sorts. I threw out my lingerie. Stopped wearing makeup. Started binding. Stopped shaving. Starting thinking of myself as a man, not as a woman who didn’t quite fit in, even with herself. I told my SO. I told my brother, my mom, and my best friend. The depression after sex instantly disappeared. People (and dogs!!) started thinking I was a man as well, or at the very least a lesbian.
That’s where I am now. I’ll admit that I still go back and forth on whether or not this is “real” – sometimes even in the same day. But what I do know is that I feel prouder, taller, and healthier than ever before in my life.
I’ve known I wanted to be girl for my entire life. When I was a kid and even a teenager I spent a lot of time imagining ways that would transform me into a girl. I though of everything from magic spells, aliens performing experimental surgeries, mad scientists unleashes nanobots, pills, etc. I frequently found myself imagining myself as a girl in everyday situations such as watching TV or attending school.
I started to find that I was attracted to men in my teenage years, although I still had a physical reaction to women. I didn’t want to admit that I was “gay”, so I simply told myself that I was bi. I watched nothing but lesbian porn because I knew I’d have a reaction to watching anything with a man in it, and I was scared of that. I frequently found myself putting myself in the place of the women in these pornos, and those fantasies would often lead to imaginary sex with men with me as the woman. After all, it isn’t gay to have sex with men if you’re a woman.
I should probably mention that I spent my teenage years in Alberta, which is basically Texas Junior. It’s not a very progressive province. I was scared to admit that I was attracted to men because I was bullied enough growing up with having to deal with any potential homo/trans-phobia. This attitude lead me to repress any “non-manly” feelings and desires that I had. I figured that I might be able to “fix” myself if I could only be more of a man. I also bullied my two younger brothers a lot for showing any signs femininity at all.
Towards the end of my teenage years and the beginning of my 20′s I started experimenting with new types of porn because lesbian porn simply wasn’t doing it for me anymore. I eventually found furry porn (short lived) and that lead me to futanari and “shemale” (hate that word) porn which lead me to transformation and gender-bender porn. At the same time as I was doing this I started running into significant problems academically.
I had moved half way across the country to attend university in Ottawa. I completely bombed my second and third year and ended up failing out. I simply couldn’t deal with all the problems I was having alone. I had no friends, and I constantly lied to my family over my academic status. Without anyone to push me forwards I just sort of stalled. I eventually got some help and therapy to help with my social anxiety. I was eventually able to get special permission from the university to start taking classes again. I’m now half way through my 3rd year and I’m doing much better, although things are by no means going as well as I’d like academically.
During this time I hit some real lows. I started to consider that my issues might stretch beyond simply anxiety. I also started to learn about transgenderism by coming across the occasional article/story/post/etc on Reddit. It was like everything suddenly made sense to me. I came to the conclusion that I was trans and that I wanted to pursue transition.
This realization came about 1.5 years ago. Unfortunately I had sort of let myself go due to hating just about everything about my physical appearance. I spent the next year working on losing weight and generally improving how I treated my body. I was able to drop from 200 lbs all the way to 132 lbs, giving me a BMI of 18.5. I’ve been able to fix a lot of the problems I have had with my skin and hair, although years of neglect have done their damage (stretch marks huge pores, uneven skin tone, etc). There were times during this period where I flipped back and forth between deciding to transition or not, although these were mostly caused because I’d look at myself and think that there was no hope. At one point I actually shaved my head and lost about 4 inches of hair that I really wish I had right now.
I started hormones 5 months ago and things have been much better for me since then. I still have issues that I’m working on, but overall I’ve been doing better than I ever have. My biggest concern at the moment are some of my decidedly masculine facial features (nose, brow ridge, and facial hair mostly), but I know that all of those can be fixed with surgery. I’m saving for FFS and focussing on my studies. I know that deciding to transition was the best decision of my life. I don’t even regret my previous academic and social failures because they are what led my life in the direction of transition.
October 7, 2013
June 6, 2013
This headline (with atrocious sexualized image) seen on the SOFNews website which caters to the Special Operations crowd should read:
“First Navy Seal lifestyle crossdressing sexual fetishist to maximize his retirement by embracing his hobby fulltime – not with pride, but by promoting the genderist philosophy that females are any persons, regardless of sex, who willingly conform to the sexualized, sexist, outdated stereotypes traditionally inflicted coercively and violently on humans who gestate offspring.”
But it was too long.
Chris, now “Kristin” Beck is a 46 year old twice divorced father of two now grown sons.
Christopher Todd Beck is also a lethal killing machine who retired in 2011 upon completing 13 deployments, including 7 combat deployments, in a 20 year career in the Navy SEALS, receiving a purple heart and a bronze star for valor. He now works as a consultant for U.S. Special Warfare Operations conducting “Irregular Warfare” seminars. Here is a powerpoint from one of his industry presentations (PDF.WARNING contains graphic visuals of decapitation and murder).
The US Navy announced in January its intention to integrate the all-male SEALS. Its guidelines for implementation were due to be submitted to the Secretary of the Defense May 15. Women are already attached to and deployed with SEAL teams but are ranked as “support”, and not official SEAL team members. No public release of information on whether these guidelines were submitted as scheduled has yet occurred.
Instead, on June 1 Beck in partnership with counterterrorism expert and Georgetown University Psychiatry professor Anne Speckhard have mounted a publicity campaign around a “sex-change memoir” published on the tiny Advances Press, a technical imprint devoted to, apparently, publishing Speckhard’s books on anti-abortion and counterterrorism.
According to a widely cited 2011 NGLTF survey: transgender Americans despite accessing higher education (PHD) at levels which double those of the general public, have high levels of criminality and suicidality. A whopping 20% of transgender Americans enter the US Military, versus 10% of the general public. For unknown reasons transgender Americans mainly serve in the Army and Navy.
Nearly every heterosexual male transgender activist who has headed or served on the board of an LGBT organization is a military veteran.
From ABC News:
“For years Chris had turned off his sexuality like a light switch and lived as a warrior, consumed with the battle — living basically asexual. For Chris the other SEALs were brothers and in the man’s man warrior lifestyle, even if he had wanted to entertain sexual thoughts, there really was never any time to be thinking too much about sexuality,” the book says.
June 1, 2013
May 3, 2013
Cristan Williams is a man who hates women, who hates lesbians and gays, who hates feminists most of all. He hates them because he feels they interrupt his relationship with the object of his greatest desire: His sexualized image of himself “as a woman”.
Cristan is what is known as a “Men’s Rights Advocate”. Such men believe that women prevent men from realizing their true potential. In Cristan’s case, that “potential” is his right as a man to become a sexy lady. Women get in his way because their existence- as actual female humans- interferes with the male definition of woman as “person who embodies sexualized porn stereotypes of females”.
Cristan has spent years authoring various widely unread blogs and vlogs where he posts overly-long MANifestos explaining how women, lesbians, gays, and feminists have deprived him of his entitlement to womanhood. Also trolls reddit under various names including “GroovemasterGeneral”, “Two”, and “I’mNotanMRAbut”.
He recently inherited the TransAdvocate website from retiring trans MRA Marti Abernathey. TransAdvocate is an aggregator site for anti-woman, anti-lesbian, anti-gay, anti-feminist trans bloggers. The site is entirely male except for occasional re-posts from sole token female Matt Kailey, a heterosexual “ex-fag-hag” F2T.
This hilarious exchange took place in comments on this post, and is illustrative of the total lack of awareness of actual women’s lives so prevalent in today’s trans politic. Not only is this funny (in a sad and awful way) but exposes the ignorance and disconnect from actual women’s lives and experiences that informs the “womanhood” of the sexual fetishists like Cristan who are spokesmen from the men’s transgender rights movement. Also on display in the rest of the exchange (not quoted here- hit the link for more) is the incredible mean-spiritedness of transgender males towards female reality: a reality that would destroy the male-centric entitlement and fantasy of “womanhood” if such everyday truths of female lives were ever acknowledged and respected.
Without further adieu. GH in this exchange is the sister of a Canadian transgender pioneer now profoundly disabled due to blood clots caused by his pharmaceutical estrogen “treatment”.
gh : stop this nonsense with the prefix, cis. a woman is a human being born with the reproductive capacity to reproduce, intersex people are a rare and wonderful exception. i was born a woman. pure and simple, my transsexual sister was not born a woman. she is a MtF woman. no need to address or apologize for what you are when you are born. it is the trans community that makes the addition…. the number 1 is not 2 minus 1, just 1…we get to 2 by adding. we do not get to 1 by subtracting. don’t apologize for the way you are born….
Cristan Williams : I’m guessing that you’d assert as fact that there’s no cis-privilege, amirite?
gh : so what is cis-privilege? this is not about privilege. i remember telling a friend about my brother/sister and her reaction was: who the hell wants to CHOOSE to be a woman??? sexual harassment from a young age? menstrual pain and bleeding (and embarrassments) when we are twelve? worry about birth control? pregnancy? lower pay at work? sexual harassment at work? no promotions because we need to go home to the kids? childbirth, which is a wonderful miracle but takes a toll on our mental and physical health? excessive bleeding? worries about breast and ovarian cancers? other womanly health concerns like yeast infections, std’s, aids, infertility, or fertility? sexual harassment and assault on the streets, even as we age? menopause for years, night sweats, hot flashes, depressions? sexual disinterest as we age from our lovers? rape on buses, in parks, in our homes, in public washrooms? domestic violence? the beauty industry making us feel insecure and ugly? anorexia? all of these are privileges? to you maybe….but then when a man becomes a woman she does not have to deal with the same types of problems…they are kind of edited out of the equation for you??
Cristan Williams : Cis-privilege refers to a set of unearned advantages that individuals who identify as the gender they were assigned at birth accrue solely due to having a cisgender identity. Cisgender (AKA: Cis, cissexual) is an umbrella term that encompasses a variety of people who are not transgender. For example, this term is used to refer to someone who was sexed male at birth, subjectively experiences their sex to be male, identifies as a male and expresses his identity in a manner consistent with a cultural male gender role.
gh : rubbish. this is an invented term by translobbyists…bullying in the washroom does not imply that another group enjoys a privilege…it only says that one person is bullying another. designating a washroom for example for the sole use of one sex or another, (after the fight for women to have bathrooms in certain workplaces, dining establishments, schools, etc.) does not imply that women enjoy a privilege…it was fought as a right, and won as a right….it is not beyond the advantage of most…there are men’s washrooms, so there is no special privilege….this was about equality, not privilege. this is only one example….i am never cis-gendered…i am a woman. transpeople are the “deviation” from the norm, thus are the transsexual, intersex people are not included as they have their own considerations…why have political interests muddied the waters and made this issue into a binary? priv·i·lege [priv-uh-lij, priv-lij] Show IPA noun, verb, priv·i·leged, priv·i·leg·ing. noun 1. a right, immunity, or benefit enjoyed only by a person beyond the advantages of most: the privilegesof the very rich. 2. a special right, immunity, or exemption granted to persons in authority or office to free them fromcertain obligations or liabilities: the privilege of a senator to speak in Congress without danger of a libel suit. 3. a grant to an individual, corporation, etc., of a special right or immunity, under certain conditions. 4. the principle or condition of enjoying special rights or immunities. 5. any of the rights common to all citizens under a modern constitutional government: We enjoy theprivileges of a free people.
Cristan Williams : Here’s a few real-world examples of cis-privilege:
1. You can use public restrooms without fear of verbal abuse, physical intimidation, or arrest.
2. Strangers don’t assume they can ask you what your genitals look like and how it’s possible for you have sex.
3. If you are murdered (or have any crime committed against you), your gender expression will not be used as a justification for your murder (“gay panic”) nor as a reason to coddle the perpetrators.
4. You have the ability to walk through the world and generally blend-in, not being constantly stared or gawked at, whispered about, pointed at, or laughed at because of your gender expression.
5. Strangers call you by the name you provide, and don’t ask what your “real name” [birth name] is and then assume that they have a right to call you by that name.
6. You have the ability to flirt, engage in courtship, or form a relationship and not fear that your biological status may be cause for rejection or attack, nor will it cause your partner to question their sexual orientation.
7. If you end up in the emergency room, you do not have to worry that your gender will keep you from receiving appropriate treatment, or that all of your medical issues will be seen as a result of your gender.
8. Your identity is not considered a mental pathology (“gender identity disorder” in the DSM IV) by the psychological and medical establishments.
9. You are not required to undergo an extensive psychological evaluation in order to receive basic medical care.
10. You’re able to assume that everyone you encounter will understand your identity, and not think you’re confused, misled, or hell-bound when you reveal it to them.
gh : Here are a few real-world examples of women’s experiences in the world:
1. You can’t use the public restroom without fear that a sexual predator is waiting in the stalls. If you live in the developing world, you fear going out to collect water, or using the outhouse, or taking a public bus because you fear rape.
2. Strangers come up to you, from infancy onwards, all the time, and ask to have sex with you, or wolf whistle or touch you inappropriately because you have a female body.
3. If you are murdered or have any crime against committed against you, the likelihood that the perpetrator is a close relative or friend is increased monumentally because you are a woman. You learn to trust no man.
4. You walk down the street and are victimized because you are a woman.
5. If you are like me and have a foreign name, you are constantly assumed to be a Mr., or if you are young, a Miss, or old, a Mrs., but you learn to deal with it!! Boy named Sue.
6. If you are a woman and are having a heart attack, your case is not taken seriously because you are a woman…or if you suffer from migraines that look like a stroke, you are considered by the neurologist that you are like other of his female patients to be fat, housewives with nothing better to worry about….BTW, I was having a stroke.
7. You go our on a date and because the man thinks you are flirting because you want sex, he rapes you….your sex has everything to do with it…you learn to question your sexuality, or repress it so as not to be victimized again….
8. Hysteria is/was thought to be caused by a woman’s uterus and other physical attributes. Women have been categorized as crazy for suffering the hormonal storms that accompany menstruation, childbearing, menopause….look at the so called humour industry….
9. “Mother’s little helper” aka Valium was given to women who faced the daunting task of staying to care for and cook for men in the suburbs. Maybe they need to fight for equality? We were not crazy, just victims of a paternalistic society.
10. I was told to leave the law school studies to my brothers. My identity as a strong and intellectual woman was not understood and was denigrated. I have been put down numerous times by men and women for wanting the liberation of women in the world…
Cristan Williams : Eh, Oppression Olympics? Nope. Won’t play.
“Psychopaths never quit.” – Margaret Singer
Criminal memoirs, like parole hearings, are not usually known for their authenticity, honesty, self-reflection and accurate reportage. In the criminal memoir every hapless burglar is a master thief, every two-bit hood a mob capo, every sociopath a revolutionary.
Criminal memoirs are: Jack Henry Abbott waxing bromantically to Norman Mailer about the inhumanity of his incarceration -just prior to committing another murder, serial rapist Eldridge Cleaver expounding on the act of rape as a revolutionary act, Tex Watson intoning on the redemptive power of bible-believing among guys who hang pregnant starlets alive while cutting them open.
In the Crime Memoir sub-genre of the “wrongly convicted” the tropes are even more hackneyed as the memoir essentially serves as one long desperate attempt to explain away all that blood. Kosilek’s memoir is of the sub-genre category, flavored with a heaping dose of self-pity, narcissism and sociopathy.
Most of the U.S. “Son of Sam Laws” (enacted in the wake of serial killer David Berkowitz’ attempts to sell his story for profit) have been repealed or overturned on First Amendment grounds leaving murderers free to profit from the dubious celebrity of committing horrific acts and selling them for entertainment to an audience hungry for carnage. Any of the millions of average boring bastards that murder their wives are free to offer their suddenly compelling and unique tale on any of a number of online vanity publishing sites for a few bucks. Kosilek’s memoir “Grace’s Daughter” is one of those, and it was on just such a site that I found it. Yes, I persuaded a friend to kindly give Kosilek two dollars and ninety-nine cents for a copy of his tome. For that ethical indiscretion I am sorry.
I was curious though. Slightly curious. Under three dollars curious.
There are very few reasons to subject oneself to 400-plus pages of self-serving criminal lies. Some of these reasons may include curiosity about a particular crime or crime spree. Perhaps a historic crime is so distinct that the reader longs for some insight to explain the psychology of the perpetrators or details of the era (think “Symbionese Liberation Army“ or the “Manson Family”). Maybe an author relates an inside experience of the justice system and incarceration compellingly. Perhaps the perp is just an entertaining storyteller and a fantastic writer.
Kosilek’s memoir has none of that. Men like him who brutally decapitate their loving wives are, sadly, a dime a dozen. He is a terrible writer and a bad liar. But Kosilek has one thing going for him and his memoir: A judge has issued an order forcing the populace of Massachusetts to pay upwards of $100,000 (including surgery, travel, security including 24 hour hospital guards, post-op care, follow-up appointments both surgical and endocrinological, possible revisions) so that a decapitation killer can have his genitals cosmetically refashioned into a fleshy sheath for other men to stick their dicks into. Because the murderer thinks such a procedure will make him a woman, and the murderer has threatened to be upset and/or harm himself if his delusions are not indulged (and enabled) by the legal system and the public at large.
Again, there is nothing unique about that. Plenty of people believe doctors can perform actual changes of sex, creating women out of men and vice versa. Well maybe not plenty. But lots are willing to pretend they believe, or at least go along with the idea, out of politeness or the hope that doctors and judges know what the hell they are doing. And plenty of people think the presence of a fleshy sheath that men can stick their dicks into defines the female sex.
Perhaps in reading the 103,010 word tome I would gain a new understanding of Kosilek’s savagery and rage for the woman who loved him, who married him, the one whose decapitated body he dumped like so much trash before cooking and enjoying a delicious steak dinner with the victim’s unsuspecting son in the very space he had garroted her hours before?
March 30, 2013
From the horse’s mouth: listen to one of the men leading the campaign for Medicaid funded “sex-change” surgeries. The profound sexism and belief in “sex-based personality” is a characteristic of transgender beliefs. If you want to understand transgenderism: watch this video.
March 30, 2013
Early in the day Friday March 29 the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services issued a ground-breaking announcement. For the first time since 1981, when so-called “sex-change” surgeries were declared experimental and not eligible for government covered funding, the division was considering reversing that decision. HHS declared its intention to solicit public input for thirty days prior to reversing the ban on government funded radical cosmetic surgeries which attempt to visually change the appearance of male genitals to female, and vice versa, on individuals who believe in sex-based personality theory, or who are diagnosed with gender/sex-role based mental illness.
From The Advocate:
“The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which runs the federal government’s national insurance program, is reconsidering whether or not it should cover gender reassignment surgery (often called sex reassignment surgery) for transgender people who have Medicare. It has offered the public 30 days to offer opinions on the matter. Since around 48 million people are covered by Medicare, if the agency decides to allow coverage, the change would have a significant impact on transgender people in the U.S.
The center states that it “considers all public comments, and is particularly interested in clinical studies and other scientific information relevant to the topic under review. Surgical Treatment for Gender Identity Disorder is currently noncovered under the Medicare Part A and Part B programs. The existing policy, which became effective in 1981, states that transsexual surgery is considered experimental. Please note that we are making an administrative change to the NCD title under this reconsideration to reflect current medical terminology. The new title for Section 140.3 will be Surgical Treatment for Gender Identity Disorder.”
From the Washington Examiner:
For the first time since 1981, when it dubbed sex-change operations “experimental,” Medicare has opened the door to covering transexual operations, adding to the growing list of operations that would be allowed under Obamacare.
Acting on a new request, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Servicessaid it is starting a new analysis that could lift the spending ban for sex-change operations with a goal of making a decision two days after Christmas and on the eve of Obamacare kicking in Jan. 1.
“Surgical Treatment for Gender Identity Disorder, formerly referred to as transsexual surgery in 140.3, is currently noncovered under the Medicare Part A and Part B programs. The existing policy, which became effective in 1981, states that transsexual surgery is considered experimental,” said the notice just posted on the CMS.gov site.
“Please note that we are making an administrative change to the NCD title under this reconsideration to reflect current medical terminology. The new title for Section 140.3 will be Surgical Treatment for Gender Identity Disorder,” it adds.
In supporting letters to CMS, one of the proponents claims that the experimental status of sex-change operations has long passed and that studies confirm it works. “These medical procedures and treatment protocols are not experimental: decades of both clinical experience and medical research show they are essential to achieving well-being for the transsexual patient,” said the letter.
A second letter called the federal policy discriminatory, and added that failure to get the operation by those who needed can cause death. “The net effect is a failure to treat a treatable disorder which in many cases leads to death. The discrimination (is) clearly un-American,” added the letter.“
By the end of the day the entire proposal had been retracted.
An HHS spokesman said HHS’ Departmental Appeals Board is weighing a challenge to the department’s ruling that sex-change procedures are experimental and should not be covered by Medicare and Medicaid. While that challenge works its way through the system, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has withdrawn its proposal to reconsider the coverage policy on its own.
“An administrative challenge to our 1981 Medicare national coverage determination concerning sex reassignment surgery was just filed,” a spokesperson said Friday. “This administrative challenge is being considered and working its way through the proper administrative channels. In light of the challenge, we are no longer re-opening the national coverage determination for reconsideration.”
Guess the whole “Obamacare funds free cosmetic sex-change” spin didn’t play so well. Perhaps during an economic depression where the have-nots can’t afford groceries and Medicare fails to cover eyesight and dental care -those who are hungry, going blind and losing their teeth didn’t take too kindly to paying for cosmetic surgeries for those who believe they would be happier if they looked superficially more like they had a different reproductive biology than the one they were born with.
Interesting this quote from the idiots at CMS: “”Please note that we are making an administrative change to the NCD title under this reconsideration to reflect current medical terminology. The new title for Section 140.3 will be Surgical Treatment for Gender Identity Disorder” . “Current medical terminology” which becomes obsolete in one month when the diagnosis of “Gender Identity Disorder” is eliminated in the DSM and replaced with “Gender Dysphoria”? Totally clueless.
The link to the HHS public feedback site now gives a 404/error when clicked. Very very interesting. GenderTrender will be following these developments closely as details emerge.
The Press Complaints Commission has issued its ruling following an inquiry into the Julie Burchill article. Transgenders called for the criminalization and censorship of Burchill when she described trans activists who use threats of rape and murder against feminists as “bedwetters in bad wigs”. The title of the article “Transsexuals should cut it out” referred to the ubiquitous harassment, violent threats, and bullying against feminists by transgender activists. You can read her censored article in full HERE.
Commission’s decision in the case of
Two Complainants v The Observer / The Daily Telegraph
The complainants were concerned about a comment article which responded to criticism of another columnist on social networking sites. The article had first been published by The Observer. Following The Observer’s decision to remove the article from its website, it had been republished on the website of The Daily Telegraph. The Commission received over 800 complaints about the article, which it investigated in correspondence with two lead complainants, one for each newspaper.
The complainants considered that the article contained a number of prejudicial and pejorative references to transgender people in breach of Clause 12 (Discrimination) of the Editors’ Code of Practice. They also raised concerns under Clause 1 (Accuracy) that language used by the columnist was inaccurate as well as offensive, and, furthermore that the article misleadingly suggested that the term “cis-gendered” was insulting. Additionally, concerns had been raised that the repeated use of terms of offence had breached Clause 4 (Harassment) of the Code.
The Commission first considered the complaints, framed under Clause 12, that the article had contained a number of remarks about transgender people that were pejorative and discriminatory. It noted that the Observer had accepted that these remarks were offensive, and that it had made the decision to remove the article on the basis that the language used fell outside the scope of what it considered reasonable; however, the Observer denied a breach of Clause 12 because the article had not made reference to any specific individual. Clause 12 states that newspapers “must avoid prejudicial or pejorative reference to an individual’s race, colour, religion, gender, sexual orientation or to any physical or mental illness or disability”. However, the clause does not cover references to groups or categories of people. The language used in the article did not refer to any identifiable individual, but to transgender people generally. While the Commission acknowledged the depth of the complainants’ concerns about the terminology used, in the absence of reference to a particular individual, there was no breach of Clause 12.
The Commission also considered the complaint under the terms of Clause 1, which states that “the press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information, including pictures”. Complainants had suggested that the terms used in the article to refer to transgender people were inaccurate or misleading. Whilst the Commission acknowledged this concern, it was clear from the tone of the article that these terms were being used to express an opinion. Whilst many people had found this opinion deeply distasteful and upsetting, the columnist was entitled to express her views under the terms of Clause 1(iii), so long as the statements were clearly distinguished from fact. The same was true in relation to the columnist’s assertion that the term “cis-gendered” is offensive. Viewed in the context of the article as a whole, particularly in light of the fact that the article had been deliberately identified as a comment piece, this was clearly distinguishable as an expression of her opinion about the term rather than a statement of fact about how it is perceived more broadly. This did not constitute a failure to take care over the accuracy of the article, for the purposes of Clause 1(i), and neither was there any significant inaccuracy requiring correction under the terms of Clause 1(ii). There was no breach of Clause 1.
The Commission turned to consider those concerns raised under Clause 4, which states that “journalists must not engage in intimidation, harassment or persistent pursuit”. It made clear, however, that the publication of a single comment piece was not conduct which would engage the terms of Clause 4. There was no breach of the Code.
The Commission acknowledged that the complainants found much of the article offensive. Nonetheless, the terms of the Editors’ Code of Practice do not address issues of taste and offence. The Code is designed to address the potentially competing rights of freedom of expression and other rights of individuals, such as privacy. Newspapers and magazines have editorial freedom to publish what they consider to be appropriate provided that the rights of individuals – enshrined in the terms of the Code which specifically defines and protects these rights – are not compromised. It could not, therefore, comment on this aspect of the complaint further.
Too bad, bedwetters.
[bolding by me-GM]