so gay people and feminists have been working hard? good, i work alongside them - both. on every issue, not only the ones where i might possibly benefit. transgender women started the gay rights movement. i like to think that i am carrying on as part of that tradition.

although i am vicious and vile, at least in your opinion - LOL thank God! - i don't attack at will. i defend everyone's rights. i defend them against bullies who will in no uncertain terms define them.

by the way, i just came from the SLDN rally at the capital. were you there? have you ever actually done anything for anyone's rights? and why don't you at least answer my questions, even if you don't have the courage to say anything unless shrouded by a curtain of anonymity?

my name is jeri hughes. i am soooo easy to find. look me up, anytime. i will take the time to speak to you. i am unwaveringly polite. i promise not to "physically hurt " you. no one ever had to say that to susan b. anthony, or frederick douglass, or lee brewster by the way. they were all out there, putting everything on the line. they possessed the courage of their convictions. something you obviously lack. ta-ta, dear i have to go now. i have a life.

you know, that's not a bad idea, Jeri. i should write a manifesto! first good idea you've had for this whole discussion... i'll be sure to run it through the spell checker ;)

something needs to be said, clearly. ya'll who have been drinking the kool-aid need to be stood up to before you do more damage to the progress that gay folks and feminists have been working so hard to achieve and maintain in the interest of gender equality and gender expression protections.

for your information, people like you are exactly why i post anonymously. you are vicious and vile. i wouldn't put it past you to actually physically hurt those who disagree with you. you certainly verbally assault at will.

unfortunately, you're loud and aggressive in your ignorance and attempts drown out all logic and reason - most bullies are - but it doesn't make anything you say or believe actually credible, reasonable, logical, correct or beneficial.

I didn't say that transgender/transsexual folks are responsible for creating the gender stereotypes... i said that their arguments and practices (along with the arguments and practices of other narrow-minded folks) are based upon, and therefore bear responsibility for perpetuating, them and do absolutely nothing to make the world a more accepting place - less polarized by problematic and false associations attributed to gender.

my theories and experiences have not been developed internally. did you not read why i just wrote? my everyday life is adversely affected by the "advancements" advocated for by trans folks and their supporters.

basically the point is this - ideas about gender are a cultural phenomenon. I think we can both agree on this? However that does not mean that gender itself is a cultural product, and that is where we disagree. what i'm saying is, if our culture didn't have problematic definitions of what it means to be a man or masculine, that people internalize, then no one would ever "feel" like they don't meet that particular criteria (for whatever reason).

This is not to say that folks can't have plastic surgery or take hormones or do whatever they want to do to be more comfortable or happy in their bodies - for any reason, gender related or no. However, to say that it is as a result of not "being" their genetically determined gender is where the problem is. Clearly these folks have been adversely affected by problematic cultural ideologies of what it means to "be" or "express" their gender.

and i do know transgender and transsexual women and men. i have also read extensively on the subject. i hardly think that matters in our conversation, however. again, just because i don't agree with you does not mean that i am wrong.

the issue is that we have a fundamental disagreement at the premise of this argument. To me, gender is a fact determined by biology (appendages or no, there is dna that determines one's sex and thus gender - which is always dependent upon sex. those with biological conditions that do not meet said criteria for either, are the exception not the rule). Folks who believe that one's gender is simply a thought between their ears are looking to change that definition and i disagree with that and see it as far more harmful than simply expanding ideas about what it is to be male, masculine, manly or exhibit "traditionally" male characteristics. In my everyday experience, in my life, those that advocate for gender identity are in direct opposition to the principles of advocacy for gender expression. Because of those who see gender as a personal identity, i am forced to continually assert my gender - to both gays, trans folks, straight folks, all people who question me. Indeed in this very case in question, if i were to be arrested, i would be questioned as to my gender before being placed? I find that incredibly offensive. It is incredibly problematic for me and for others who don't fit the mold of what folks see as male or female. And it has gotten progessively worse as the transgender movement has been gaining political influence over the last decade.

The issue in this incarceration discussion is not one that should have anything to do with gender at all. the issue is violence in jails. that should be treated as the enemy, not gender politics. ideally all inmates should be housed in safe environments and if that cannot be accomplished in groups, then they should be placed individually and not according to any gender criteria. If you're honestly going to tell me that a "transgender" man (or a woman that expresses herself in ways that are traditionally defined as masculine or manly) is safer in a room with violent men than that person is in a room with women, you are sadly mistaken.

I know that neither of you can comprehend the notion that i was in no way implying violence in my statement about people being exposed to each other and learning from each other. I find that incredibly sad. Really, that implication of violence that you took from my statement was not intended in any way. It is the last thing that i would ever imply. Actually, if you paid attention to what i've been trying to say, my position is to work together and communicate our differences which will lead to increased understanding and decrease the polarization that is perpetuated by gender stereotypes that the transgender/transsexual folks base their arguments upon.

next, you state... "There is a simple solution to this issue: End the gender segregation practice. why are men and women separated to begin with? why aren’t we questioning that?"

this statement exhibits very little life experience, or even basic common sense. you would advocate housing women prisoners, statistically weaker and therefore more vulnerable, with lonely, dangerous, men deprived of sexual release? oooookaayyy...

you continue...."but dressing up and taking hormones and having plastic surgery does not change your gender. ever. " again, this tells me you just have no knowledge of what transgender means. you just don't know any better. and then you suggest that transgender women teach male inmates about being a "different kind of guy". as i stated before, that is just plain vicious.

you are correct in one respect. i am angry. i get that way when i hear ignorant individuals, generally bigots, espouse their wisdom on subjects that they have no knowledge of. i have years of experience and research supporting the foundation of my own opinion on this subject. and you have...what? where have you acquired this knowledge that you so freely dispense?

spell check can correct your spelling, but what you have to say is just plain, old fashioned, incorrect. in one word - wrong. and don't you worry about my reflection in the mirror. i am content with that. but you referred to me as your friend, and that was incorrect. i am no friend to ignorance, or intolerance, or small minded individuals who are willing to insult an entire community just because they have a right to free speech. i am not your friend. nothing i stated suggested violence, and the names i used in reference to you were accurate. if they displeased you, please consider them the price you pay for exercising your right to espouse nonsense.

ta-ta, dear.

you're right, my spelling wasn't perfect, but it really doesn't disprove the fact that you are an aggressive moron. In fact, though, you prove that yourself, emphatically - regardless of my spelling errors.

clearly my ideas about and faith in the capacity for more expansive human experiences, relationships and understanding are far superior to yours.

Um, the one with the sociopathic nerves? look in the mirror, my friend. the only one who has mentioned or suggested violence has been you. the one who started calling names and making unfounded accusations was you.

good luck with your narrow-minded, angry life.

if you are going to refer to me as an aggressive moron, you should first learn how to spell it. aside from that, your mistakes don't surprise me. in your case, mistakes are pretty much a given.....seriously.

i really did mean conversation and enlightenment - something you are clearly both of participating in as well as understanding.

your "theory" is as flawed as you are.

a woman is not a man because she has a male appendage. and a man is not a woman solely because he lacks one. gender is between the ears, not between the thighs. if you subscribe to the concept that there is no difference between the thought processes of men and women, science has proven that theory incorrect. there is a broad spectrum in between absolutes, but the difference does exist. those who exist within that spectrum may - or may not - identify as transgender. all are protected under the "gender identity or expression" addition to the Human rights Act of 1977.

as far as you being vicious, do you want me to believe that your statement.....

" so, men who want to be called women, go ahead! but you’re still in with them men. maybe you can teach them a thing or two about what it is to be a different kind of guy…"

....was meant to encourage theoretical discourse between male prison inmates and their transgender counterparts?
i don't think so. let me ask you something - did you enjoy torturing animals as a child?

gender expression is the only thing that matters and THAT is what we should be protecting and expanding. that is the point. and if these folks who think they "identify" as a gender other than the one that they actually are, it's because they have misguided, sexist ideas about what it "means" to be male or female. if instead everyone on both sides of this argument realized that a man is a man no matter how they feel or how they dress or who they sleep with or who they hang out with, we wouldn't be in this conversation to begin with.

my comment was not pathetic or mysogynistic or viscious. it was genuine. why is a man any less manly if he wears a dress or has plastic surgery? why can't that information be parlayed to ignorant folks who think otherwise? it's an opportunity for conversation and exposure to things that folks might not have ever been exposed to, not violence.

serious - so this issue is "silly"? i must assume that is so because it doesn't directly affect you. that it just doesn't matter? well, allow me to differ. legally. this is a matter of discrimination. just because you don't feel that it concerns your own bigoted and ignorant self, be assured that equal rights under the law are everyone's concern. those who are transgender do NOT receive equitable treatment in society or in the DOC. the LAW in the District demands that gender identity be respected, in spite of your own uninformed and ignorant conclusions concerning who is a man and who is a woman. your ignorance can be excused, but not the vicious inference that male prisoners show transgender women a "thing or two". you are a pathetic mysogynist.

to everyone - if you don't approve of your tax dollars being spent to eliminate discrimination against ANY protected minority, i highly recommend you move somewhere that appreciates bigots. in the District, the citizens and the elected officials strongly oppose all forms of bigotry. the District boasts some of the most progressive laws in the nation.

A prison policy that places transsexual and transgender women in prison with men does threaten even trans women that are white, high income, post-op, law-abiding and of course out of prison and other institutions.

The message the government sends with this policy to men in America is "If you want rape a transsexual woman, go for it boys!!! We want you to!!!"

Where do you think rapists learn that it is ok to rape transsexual women. Prison of course; or at least from buddies that went there.

Right now, the government is just getting around to the murder thing; debating whether or not trans-panic (panicing about the discovery that the woman you just had sex with is transsexual; thus make people think you are gay) is justification for it or not.

This policy also expands rape culture to chromosomal XX women or cisgender women. If any woman thinks that men who learned to rape women in prison will stop at transsexuals when they are released are naively foolish.

Rapists do not have such impulse control. Prison trained rapists will not likely find transsexual women to rape for their impulse releases when released from prison. That leaves only one other option; cisgender women.

Even if cisgender women don't get raped by released convicts; their horrible attitude and views on women are spread to other men in the communities they are released into. This obviously has a horrible impact on the sexual culture of those neighborhoods.

a man can dress like a woman all he wants, but he's still male and a man. no matter what. he should never be housed with the women in a gender-segregated environment. a woman can dress like a man all she wants, but she is still a female and a woman. she should never be housed with the men in a gender-segregated environment.

There is a simple solution to this issue: End the gender segregation practice. why are men and women separated to begin with? why aren't we questioning that?

Otherwise, if you want to avoid the possible negative or unpleasant things that could happen to you in jail, don't break the law.

transgender/transexual individuals and EVERYONE ELSE have the freedom of gender expression - they can express themselves however they want. there are no rules against men wearing dresses or women tuxedos. but dressing up and taking hormones and having plastic surgery does not change your gender. ever. so, men who want to be called women, go ahead! but you're still in with them men. maybe you can teach them a thing or two about what it is to be a different kind of guy...

Yes, everyone deserves basic human rights, unless they don't follow the law. So yes, I think prostitution is, in and of itself, a victimless crime. But at the same time I know it is against the law. So, would I break that law? No. I wouldn't and I expect others not to break it either and if they do, I expect them to take whatever they have coming. Sorry, but I’m not a turn the other cheek kind of gal.

And please spare me the sob story that is your tragic life. I’m certain I can find another child that was placed in the same situation you were and they made different CHOICES. CHOICE. No matter what, you DO have a choice. I’m not saying you have the greatest of choices all the time, but you always have one. Sometimes despite your best efforts, bad things happen to you. Things that you do not deserve. Bad things happen to me. Things that are unfair, unwarranted and just plain wrong. It makes me sad, angry, frustrated, defeated, you name it. But I know the difference between something that I have no control over and something that is the direct or indirect result of my actions.

Redemption as well as forgiveness are for everyone, but so is justice.

If social bigotry makes it hard for me to get a job, if ignorance and fear from my family push me out onto the street at 15, if "victim-less crimes like prostitution" are still criminalized, if getting a job as an ex-con is still difficult, then when, oh when, am I a allowed to be a full human being? Why do I have to earn being treated with decency? What did *I* do so wrong, when each step I took was made from a narrow band of choices, to deserve your contempt? Why aren't my choices broader? How am I supposed to dig out from under this?

And why aren't you, you who have so much liberty, so much self-determination, why aren't you holding yourself to the high standard of treating everyone as though their innate birth right is respect and compassion?

redemption is for everybody
M.

I think the reason our jails are overcrowded and the recidivism rate is so high (besides other issues such as people being incarcerated for victimless crimes such as prostitution) is that we are too concerned with criminal rights.

I can go to jail and get all the things I bust my ass to pay for now . . . room and board, food, toiletries, cable TV, health care and many others. There are people working hard every day that have less than prison inmates. When that changes, then the crime rate will go down.

So let's concern ourselves with the transgender community that obeys our country's laws and works hard every day to support themselves and their families. They deserve to share in the fruits of labor afforded a free society. They deserve basic human rights and dignity. They deserve to be able to make basic decisions about their life without having to compromise because of the laws of a society where they are a minority. Criminals do not.

The new DOC policy still provides for forced isolation in the hole, disguised under the name of "protective custody". It is still isolation...and there is an extensive history in the District of women - both natal and transgender - who have been abused by guards an inmates alike within the confines of the District's "protective custody".

As was stated in the article, a transgender woman will continue to be addressed without the use of the proper pronoun. A transgender woman is a woman. How difficult would it be to refer to a woman as "she" or "her"? Why would the DOC fight that? Because it respects an individual's gender identity. They just don't get it. That is why they still require transgender women to present as men - in direct violation of District regulation.

The DOC has failed to provide for equitable treatment for transgender prisoners to date, and unfortunately the Attorney General has failed to enforce the District regulations. Obviously, the regulations supported and passed by Distict Council do not carry much weight with AG Nickles...at the very least the new policy reflects that sentiment. At this point, I believe that the Council needs to school the AG on the sincerity of their determination to end discrimination within the District. That, of course, remains my humble opinion. I mean, after all, why not discriminate? We have a history of injustice in these United States. Why should those representatives of the citizens in the District be any better than the rest? To answer my own question, because they are. They have passed some of the most progressive legislation in the Nation. Now they need to see that it is enforced.

"Any new inmate classified as transgender will first undergo a complete “verification of the sex of the genitalia,”"

... OK, so this genitalia-based gender classification, ASIDE from being super-disrespectful and transphobic, also has the potential to be really dangerous for the woman in question. It's also kind of classist, because unsurprisingly it costs something substantial to get your genitalia worked on, even if you want to, which (it's my understanding) not all trans folks do. When I read "Transparent," by Cris Beam - which is a super good book and everybody should read it at some point - one thing that really, really stuck in my memory was her description of what jail time was like for one of the young trans ladies in her circle. Because, unsurprisingly, it is just not that safe in a dudes' prison if you have breasts. I think they had to send her to a special space for prisoners who were "high risk," and the other inmates were, like, convicted sex predators and other folks who stood a good solid chance of getting murdered in your run-of-the-mill prisons. This is a little foggy in my recollection because I don't have the book in front of me. But, in summary: yikes.