Convicted sex offender seeks access to women’s locker rooms through bathroom law

Print pagePDF page

 

The battle over the Washington bathroom rule repeal just got a whole lot more interesting.

Transgender activists have sounded off in recent weeks claiming that they are being unfairly characterized by those concerned about locker room privacy and safety following the launch of the Just Want Privacy campaign.  Proponents of repealing the open bathroom rule have repeatedly said that their concern is not that the transgender community is going to harm women and children, but that it creates opportunity for those who would seek access to places they don’t belong.

Much of this debate has taken place in social media.

Seattle-based transgender rights activist Johanna Wolf has been among the most vitriolic in her responses to privacy activists, claiming that it’s only their “hatred” and “bigotry” that is trying to keep her and others out of the locker rooms and showers.

Recently we have discovered that Johanna used to be a man, Jonathan Adrian Wolf, who is a sex-offender convicted of raping a 20-year old deaf girl in Nebraska in 2006.

Why is this relevant?

Because a sex-offender is now seeking access to a woman’s locker room through this open bathroom policy.

Wolf, now identifying as a woman (view the name change document here), appears to be shocked and offended that people in Washington want to take away “her” rights to use the locker room and shower of “her” choice (caution: strong language):

johanna

Obviously, it remains true that not everyone who experiences gender dysphoria is a sex-offender or wanting to do harm.

But the fact is, this new rule would create liability for businesses who would seek to intervene in cases like this.

Despite maintaining residency in the Seattle-area, Wolf does not currently appear as a registered sex offender in the online sex-offender registry operated by the Washington State Department of Corrections or the database operated by King County.

There are already many cases of men impersonating transgender women to gain access to private places.  Now we know there are convicted sex offenders seeking access to women’s bathrooms under the same rationale.

Just in case you needed another reason to be concerned about this new bathroom rule, now you have one.

Let us know what you think about this in the comments section, below.

99 replies
  1. Ashley
    Ashley says:

    Dr Julian Abel Constantine Gojer of Toronto Convicted of Drugging and raping two woman and killing a third one with the drugs he used to render his victims unconscious before raping them. Date fall of 2000. Psychiatrist gets off with a slap on the wrist and works as a psychiatrist regardless of criminal negligence against him.

    Reply
  2. Lane Mckeever
    Lane Mckeever says:

    This does not surprise me. Target, for a number of years has been anti American on a lot of issues. There are many other stores w/ comparable goods so just don’t shop at Target. I haven’t shopped Target for a number of years after being a faithful customer. You know what I haven’t even missed them. My friends are not shopping there either so they will soon be no more.

    Reply
  3. Scott Hogan
    Scott Hogan says:

    It appears the issue here is that this person is a convicted sex offender. Why aren’t these laws targeting sex offenders instead of all transgender people? Is it because these laws already exist but unenforceable? That seems to be a bigger issue. Why all the paranoia and drama over something that ISN’T an issue?

    Reply
    • ausmboomer
      ausmboomer says:

      Of course it’s a big issue Scott Hogan. But the point here is this sex offender thinks he can stroll into a women’s shelter to rape and do his thing. How many cops do you think are out monitoring bathrooms, locker rooms and women’s shelters? Probably none. It is INDEED an issue and it will get bigger. You know why? Because it starts with one, then two, then three, and on it goes to get into the legal arena and set precedence. Anyone can claim to be a woman. One man went in a women’s restroom with a 5:00 o’cock shadow; jeans; and looked like a man. He said “oops, sorry I didni’t have my women clothes.on.” The simplest way to handle accommodating transgenders is to have single use bathrooms. Period. But to take away women’s rights to privacy, let alone the propensity (think young school girls and young women) to harm them sexually is just plain WRONG! If people can’t see this, there is something wrong with them.

      Reply
  4. Mike Arienti
    Mike Arienti says:

    This is getting out of hand. If your DNA says you are a male when you are born, you will never be a female – no matter how much makeup you wear, how many dresses you buy, how many estrogen pills you ingest, or if you’ve had your d**k removed. You do not belong in the women’s restroom if your DNA says you were born male, period!

    Reply
    • Tammy Rainey
      Tammy Rainey says:

      this is a Christian organization, right? Followers of a Messiah that modeled empathy, compassion, mercy and grace to the marginalized and the outcast, while reserving his harshest rebuke for those who were confident that their adherence to religious tradition made them better, and more favored by God, than the outcasts the Messiah ministered to.

      And yet, here you are, discussing the single most marginalized, stigmatized, shunned and derided outcasts in our society – the perfect opportunity to follow the the example of Christ – and instead you take the role of the Pharisees.

      Here are people, born with a very rare condition, which they cannot cure – only treat with the palliative measure of transition – and desperately do NOT WANT…and condition which left untreated can cause such distress as to make them prefer death to enduring it, yet when treated can cost them everything they hold dear and more because and uncaring and callous society holds a tradition that it’s “perverted” – people who need to be loved and supported more than virtually any other segment of society and many of the followers of Christ not only fail to minister to these hurting people but, indeed, work hard to instigate the very distress that drives over half of them to make an attempt on their own life.

      And not only doing that but reveling in it, glorying in it, fund raising on it.

      Never, along the way, taking a moment to LISTEN to these people, to try to understand the struggle they face, to educate yourself about the recant scientific findings which help clarify the biological nature of the condition, to consider what you would do if it were your own child affected by it, to return to Scripture and really investigate the validity of the religious tradition you worship.

      Possibly an organization which has made it one of it’s core tenets to shun, deride, and even mock these people as part of their business model has too much to lose to risk doing any of that and being forced to consider the possibility that you’re wrong. Possibly you prefer to never ask those hard questions so that, on That Day when you give an account you can claim you didn’t know.

      You might be mistaken in thinking that’s an answer He’ll be satisfied with.

      Reply
      • ausmboomer
        ausmboomer says:

        Just stop it Tammy Rainey. Hiding behind the spoken word? There are less than 1% of transgender people. There is a simple solution to this – have single use bathrooms. Get off your soapbox and start using your head. This kind of :LAW will bring out the crazies. I feel badly for transgenders and they should be accommodated. But not at the expense of women and young girls. Outrageous. Sex offenders are already doing their thing in women’s bathrooms locker rooms and even women’s shelters everywhere! It will also enter the courts (lawsuits galore) and will set precedence forever. Unbelievable. ALL political.

        Reply
      • MARY GARLAND
        MARY GARLAND says:

        WSJ link http://www.wsj.com/articles/paul-mchugh-transgender-surgery-isnt-the-solution-1402615120
        We at Johns Hopkins University—which in the 1960s was the first American medical center to venture into “sex-reassignment surgery”—launched a study in the 1970s comparing the outcomes of transgendered people who had the surgery with the outcomes of those who did not. Most of the surgically treated patients described themselves as “satisfied” by the results, but their subsequent psycho-social adjustments were no better than those who didn’t have the surgery. And so at Hopkins we stopped doing sex-reassignment surgery, since producing a “satisfied” but still troubled patient seemed an inadequate reason for surgically amputating normal organs.

        It now appears that our long-ago decision was a wise one. A 2011 study at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden produced the most illuminating results yet regarding the transgendered, evidence that should give advocates pause. The long-term study—up to 30 years—followed 324 people who had sex-reassignment surgery. The study revealed that beginning about 10 years after having the surgery, the transgendered began to experience increasing mental difficulties. Most shockingly, their suicide mortality rose almost 20-fold above the comparable nontransgender population. This disturbing result has as yet no explanation but probably reflects the growing sense of isolation reported by the aging transgendered after surgery. The high suicide rate certainly challenges the surgery prescription…At the heart of the problem is confusion over the nature of the transgendered. “Sex change” is biologically impossible. People who undergo sex-reassignment surgery do not change from men to women or vice versa. Rather, they become feminized men or masculinized women. Claiming that this is civil-rights matter and encouraging surgical intervention is in reality to collaborate with and promote a mental disorder…WSJ

        Reply
      • Barbara McFarland
        Barbara McFarland says:

        Hi Tammy So what your saying is the God made a mistake. I dont think so. He created 2 genders, male and female. Thats it! We should be concerned that these people are ill emotionally and we should focus on getting them help. All they need is the word of God in their heart and to know Jesus loves them.

        Reply
      • Posie
        Posie says:

        I don’t recall a section in the bible that said “and God did create babies boys and give them the bodies of girls because God maketh mistakes for fun and is often wrong on these fundamental issues”

        Reply
  5. Tammy Rainey
    Tammy Rainey says:

    Just wondering if anyone has asked this yet: given that there is no law, passed or proposed, that bars sex offenders from public restrooms in general…and given that most pedophiles will attack the child that’s available regardless of their (the child’s) gender…and given that you folks routinely claim there’s a strong connection between pedophilia and same sex attraction (there isn’t but i refer to the Social Conservative claims)…and given that such men even after conviction use the public men’s rooms…and given that not all such men are yet convicted…

    How is it that your finding one (or heck, two or three) convicted sex offenders who would legally be in the ladies room relate to trans-respecting laws? Even if your laws do not respect trans people’s gender identity, you have done nothing at all to prevent predators from being in the restrooms with young boys – where is your concern for THEIR safety? Sexual assault is illegal, no matter who does it or where it happens.

    VASTLY more ministers have molested young children than there are cases of children being assaulted in a public restroom…vastly more women have been raped by ministers than have been raped in public restrooms (and in both cases, I mean whether or not local law respects trans people) – yet I’m pretty sure that your group would strongly oppose segregating all ministers away from women and children for the sake of your safety, or segregating all ministers out of public restrooms just to avoid the even more increased danger there – right?

    No. And as social conservatives, I know that you do not believe that banning handgun ownership for the sake of safety is just, since it punishes the lawful gun owner for the crimes of the criminal who wouldn’t obey gun laws anyway. Why then do you support laws segregating lawful trans people for safety, which punishes the innocent trans person for the assumed crimes of sexual predators which will not respect the law in any case?

    Logically, you can’t believe both without contradicting yourself. Respectfully, your position on this issue is not well reasoned.

    Reply
  6. Cathy
    Cathy says:

    Was this guy Johanna Wolf ever found and registered as sex offender?
    Or is he still free to wander into women’s and girls restrooms / locker rooms?

    Reply
  7. JTL
    JTL says:

    Cross-posting this.

    FYI: Facebook deleted the account of the Seattle bathroom transactivist Johanna Wolf/Jonathan Wolf/Johanna Von Luck, after learning that he was convicted of raping a deaf woman in Nebraska. It’s ironic that Mark Zuckerberg has the right to keep Wolf off his social network, but the women of Washington don’t have the right to keep Wolf out of their bathrooms and locker rooms. Thank you to websites that warned women about this predator. (He doesn’t appear to have registered as a sex offender in Washington yet.)

    Reply
  8. Nathaniel Christopher
    Nathaniel Christopher says:

    So you found a transgender woman who is a registered sex offender. Congrats! Do you also propose that cisgender women should be barred from using public bathrooms? Anyways, Johanna is a friend of mine… are you going to come after me as well?

    Reply
    • Dana
      Dana says:

      There’s no such thing as a cisgender woman. There is already a term for biological adult human females and that is “women”. It does not require a qualifier.

      There’s no reason to bar women from women’s bathrooms. We actually belong there.

      Males of any “gender identity” should use the men’s room. If you feel unsafe in there, maybe you should actually solve that problem and not run away with it. There are so many transwomen on Twitter who would love to beat up the women they call “TERFs”–why not beat up male transphobes instead? I would think that would be more useful and helpful.

      Reply
    • dred
      dred says:

      Is your friend Johanna registered as a sex offender in Washington? I think the bigger issue regarding this article is that a registered sex offender changed their gender identity and is no longer listed in the sex offenders registry.

      Reply
    • Posie
      Posie says:

      The entire female population is dwarved by men in prison for sexual crimes. Criminality of men does not alter once they say they are women.

      Reply
  9. Cheryl
    Cheryl says:

    Reasonable ACCOMODATION fine. As survivor of sexual violence by men it is not okay for Trans to silence my need for privacy and woman only public facilities. I know #notalltrans harms women. But some of us women dislike being put at greater risk of exposure to heterosexual transvestite predators.

    The word is that prisons are fertile transitioning factories for inmates to garner special Trans privilege.

    Men never change their sex. Ever.

    If Trans feel suicidal, seek help. There are known co-morbidities w Trans gender dysphorias and delusions such as depression and history of their own child abuse and sexual abuse.

    If 80% of gender incongruent, whatever the H that is supposed to mean – why has the Trans demanded to expose young children to potential health risks of pubert blockers, breast binders, surgeries possibly or not, and morbid side effects of cross sex hormones.

    Gay eugenics. Who is looking out for the child who would normally grow up to be gay, homosexual. Who is looking out for them?

    Reply
    • Ashlynd
      Ashlynd says:

      What exactly would you or your child be doing in the bathroom that would give you access to the stall while a trans individual is in there peeing? I think that is the better question.

      Reply
      • Posie
        Posie says:

        Why don’t you think women and girls deserve comfort and space when you’re so ready to give it to trans people? Why do you honour their feelings but not ours?

        Reply
  10. Sarah Duncan
    Sarah Duncan says:

    After contacting the state, we were told the only way for this law to change was “for the court to hear a case, you need something called “standing.” This is a legal term used to describe any wrong doing that someone has personally or financially been negatively impacted by. Without standing, you have no case. The court doesn’t hear an issue just because people are unhappy with a policy, someone has to be harmed first.”.

    Reply
    • Louisa
      Louisa says:

      And because psychological harm of having humans-with-penises and over 50% more upper-body strength than natal women and girls in our safe spaces doesn’t count as “damage”, it is ignored. Furthermore, the legislation itself often makes any COMPLAINT about the person with a penis into a VIOLATION of the law! Even if, say, the anatomical male is intentionally and conspicuously lingering naked in the women and girls locker room for the — probable — exhibitionistic “turn-on”.

      So this effectively discourages women and girls from reporting such incidents.

      Reply
    • Sarah Duncan
      Sarah Duncan says:

      I was told the only way the law can be changed is for a victim to come forth and present a case to the courts.

      Reply
      • kim
        kim says:

        And if the woman came forward, she’d be beaten down by a society that cares little for victims. And all the transgender sex offender has to say is I’m transgender woman. What about my rights, blah, blah, blah. Well, one day that WILL happen and all the rights that transgenders want will be ripped from their hands.

        Reply
        • Ashlynd
          Ashlynd says:

          If you’re assaulted in a bathroom, you are assaulted in a bathroom. But saying you will be assaulted in a bathroom because there is a trans person is inherently flawed logic. Girls just have to pee, who are you to say they can’t do so in peace. If anyone is perpetuating assault, it’s hate speakers like you, my friend.

          Reply
        • Posie
          Posie says:

          This x 100

          Girls in New Zealand were harassed by a trans girl who was sexually provocative and lewd in their locker room. The girls were told to move and find somewhere else to change.

          Women’s sports are also suffering from losing spaces and accolades to transwomen, who weirdly have different physical strengths… almost as if they are male….

          Reply
    • Ashlynd
      Ashlynd says:

      Nightmares about what? I have nightmares, about war and crime and pink bunnies with sharp teeth, will the government pay me?

      Reply
  11. Tionico
    Tionico says:

    Has anyone reported this registered sex offender to the appropriate jurisdiction in which it now resided? Provide the nema change paperwork, the original conviction record, and the mandate it register as a sex offender.

    I find it particulary disgusting that this thing is not only abusing the insane new “law” but is openly and vigourouslyh promoting it, and railing agaisnt we who don’t like things of its kind having free access to restrooms, lockers, showers, where women are, in theory, assured of the privacy expected in such places. This thing needs to be behind bars….. has anyone checked to see if this creature has managed to get a CPL or purchase firearms? Such a felony conviction would render it “prohibited”. Its Chief Law Enforcement Officer needs to be aware of its presence and status.

    Reply
    • james bromley
      james bromley says:

      Obviously, “it” changed from he to “she” to change identity, to stay ahead of the law or to confound law enforcement with some kind of technicality that would keep “it” from registering as a sex offender.

      Reply
      • Lucy
        Lucy says:

        Actually, “it” changed to “she” because she identifies as female. I know this person; I know what she has gone through to transition to female. She has taken hormones, had her testicles removed, and has undergone years of therapy to ascertain that those changes are appropriate for her gender identity. This doesn’t make what she did right or excusable in any way, but she didn’t transition in order to avoid having to register as a sex offender. Plus, being registered is not a lifetime thing; it depends on the severity of the offense and how long ago it happened.

        Reply
        • kim
          kim says:

          I get the fact that she has worked hard to get ‘her life back together, BUT she is still a registered sexual offender. She also attacked those who were fearful of sexual offenders. I would think someone who was an offender would be leading the cause to keep the offenders out. And yet, here is this person, attacking those who long to keep out the predators, like her, calling them bigots. And here you are, standing up for her.

          you know what Lucy, I’m not that stupid. Shocking, huh?? And yes, I”m a hater. I’m a hater of predators who long to get to little kids. Now if she had been truthful and said we need to keep out predators, I’d stand with her. But because she said nothing and attacks those who long to keep out predators makes me think, she’s not legit. Again, I”m not stupid.

          Reply
        • Posie
          Posie says:

          He raped a 20 year old and got convicted. It must have been pretty bad to get a conviction.

          I would never be friends with a rapist even if they decided that their AGP fetish meant they wanted to be a woman.

          Reply
    • John Woods
      John Woods says:

      Abusing this new law? This girl has been transitioning for years now. She doesn’t even have her original downstairs equipment last anyone knew.

      Also, she’s a level 1 offender, meaning she doesn’t show up on the online database because she isn’t high enough risk to reoffend.

      And why would you think she would be even able to purchase a gun or even wants one?

      And way to call her an “it” and a “thing.” Nothing like dehumanizing speech.

      Reply
    • Pete P.
      Pete P. says:

      Instead of arm-waving so energetically, making all kinds of emphatic statements about how wrong everything is and presupposing all the chicken-little doom and gloom that is apparently really easy for you to conjure up, consider…
      How long ago was the sex crime committed? How old was the man at the time? Was a sexual offender registry in effect at that time? Was it at the national level or only in some states? After a registry was implemented, was it applicable retroactively to prior convictions? Did this particular type of crime require the perpetrator to register? Now that the person is of the opposite gender, is there really an ongoing risk that “she” would repeat the crime that “he” had committed?

      Wouldn’t it have been so much better if you had used your imagination to think of all these questions and their answers instead of rousing people with misinformation just to raise the level of hate to a frenzied level for your entertainment?

      Reply
  12. Susan
    Susan says:

    The big question is why isn’t this person on the sex offender’s list? It’s my understanding that if they don’t register that they go back to jail, there is not time limit. HE has no business being around females at all or children.

    Reply
    • Jillian Nuemyer
      Jillian Nuemyer says:

      There is actually a time limit depending on the kind of offense committed.

      Looking at the details of the offense, it was third degree sexual assault – which literally translates to touching some bodies leg without permission or something as equally small fry.

      They also, as the other person posted, not on the online database because it says on the King County SOR search website that they only list level 2 and level 3 offenders, meaning this girl is likely level 1 or went through some other means to relieve herself of having to register.

      Maybe if your hatred wouldn’t blind you to the realities of the legal system, not to mention this was ten years ago and she has never reoffened, it might make you think that she isn’t the predator all these people are making her out to be.

      Reply
      • Dana
        Dana says:

        He. We don’t actually know whether HE has ever reoffended. The system only records when they are caught, not when they offend.

        I don’t hate him. I strongly dislike him, not because he’s “trans” but because he raped a girl. I am also very, very tired of people figuratively peeing on my leg and telling me it’s raining. Enough already. Back to Biology 101 with you and keep taking it until it sinks in. Unless you’ve destroyed biology classes too.

        Reply
          • tonysam
            tonysam says:

            Sex is not an identity. Stop this gaslighting nonsense that down is up. This man is a man no matter how much mutilating surgery he has had.

  13. Marianne
    Marianne says:

    Women, even young girls have an intuition about those with a perversion that may do them harm. I hope and pray that they don’t lose this when they tell themselves they must be welcoming of this intrusion of privacy or when their mothers tell them that this perversion is normal because that’s all they feel they can say about the signs or actual intrusion.

    Reply
  14. remember alamo
    remember alamo says:

    The “legislature” needs to go back to school and take anatomy 101.
    And God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.
    Genesis 1:27
    I am really impressed these days how far off track these “legislators” “courts” and people who agree with this perverted mentality.

    Reply
    • james bromley
      james bromley says:

      The Human Rights Council of Washington State is not constitutionally allowed to make “law” and therefore their ruling has no legal basis and should be ignored. But those responsible for this ruling should be made to reap the whirlwind from anyone’s family whose daughter, wife or granddaughter becomes a victim of any pervert in a locker room or bathroom ANYWHERE IN THIS STATE. If it happens to a member of my family they can count on answering directly to me.

      Reply
  15. Jill
    Jill says:

    Transgender sex disorders are the leading indicator of criminal sexual behavior.

    This blog lists dozens of case histories of criminal acts by transwomen (not females who identify as men, but men who identify as women and/or dress as women). And it also references a comprehensive peer-reviewed study that broke down the paraphilias by type, and reached the conclusion that transsexual disorders are the single most cited paraphilia correlated to criminal sex behavior.

    https://outofmypantiesnow.wordpress.com/2013/10/28/when-is-90-not-substantially-all/

    Reply
    • Melanie
      Melanie says:

      Jill, that link you posted is so filled with lies, it’s laughable to use it as a source of reference. The majority of the cases posted in there were committed by cross-dressers/transvestites, not transgender women! So it’s bad journalism to label them as trans women when they’re not.

      For example, many stories involved men wearing simply a pair of high heels or pantyhose, but otherwise were looking like ‘men’, and yet the link labels them TW(transwoman). They’re two completely different things. So it’s wrong to label a simple cross-dresser as a trans woman. But if you want to paint all transgender people in a negative light. Then naturally, you put them all under the same category which is what that link does.

      Reply
  16. Bonnie
    Bonnie says:

    I cannot recall what state has enacted a way to rectify this insane idea of allowing anyone who “identifies” with a certain sex to have access to all bathrooms, lockerrooms, etc. of that sex. The simple solution: How a person was born, male or female, determines which facilities they are to use. Period. Simple. So, in this case of Jonathan/Johanna, would be a no-brainer… HE was born a male, still has the genitallia, therefore HE must use the facilities for MALES. OR, have all bathrooms single bathrooms (no multi stalls), thus elimating the problem all together. Yet, how would that work for gyms, spas, etc??? Problematic for sure. If WA should disregard the MAJORITY of people AND common sense and decency, I will not do any busniness in this state (tho I live in WA), but will go to Idaho for all my purchases and needs. This lunacy of liberalism/”politically correct” garbage has got to stop.

    Reply
    • Tionico
      Tionico says:

      a simple chromosome test will settle any question about any given individual. People cah pay lots of money to certain other people to make things appear as they are not, or not appear as they are. Thus an “inspection” can be meaningless. Going with the evident sex at birth is fine, but the chromosome analysis is certain.

      Reply
      • Zoe Brain
        Zoe Brain says:

        J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2008 Jan;93(1):182-9

        A 46,XY mother who developed as a normal woman underwent spontaneous puberty, reached menarche, menstruated regularly, experienced two unassisted pregnancies, and gave birth to a 46,XY daughter with complete gonadal dysgenesis.

        1 in 300 men don’t have 46,XY “male” chromosomes. Some women do. Rarely, so do the daughters they give birth to.

        Reply
  17. Kathi Cahoon
    Kathi Cahoon says:

    Interesting that the guy is a registered sex offender, but once he takes a female name, he is no longer a sex offender. How can that be? Has he figured out a way around being labeled as a sex offender? How many others have figured out the same thing.

    I don’t understand the push forcing this open bathroom agenda into law? What was the problem or injustice? Why does the government need to be in the bathroom?

    I want to maintain my privacy for my natural born gender. Those wanting to live out a fantasy need to be satisfied with a separate bathroom or use a tree, an option not available to me.

    Reply
    • Melanie
      Melanie says:

      As a trans woman. I find the fact that I could be thrown in jail, for merely using the restroom like everyone else, offensive and disturbing. That’s why people are pushing for these discriminatory bills that attack trans people under the guise of ‘safety and privacy’. There are already laws in place that would punish people who commit crimes. So there is no need for these ‘bathroom bills’. But since people are obsessing over them, that’s why it’s an issue, and why states are trying to clarify what trans people are allowed to do and not do. If people would stop pushing to discriminate against them, this wouldn’t be an issue making headlines.

      So if these discriminatory laws that attack trans people were to become law. They would not protect anyone from anything. It’s a smokescreen that people think solves a problem when it does not. Since nothing is stopping the perverts from infiltrating the restrooms right now. They’re law breakers and not going to wait around for a law to use as an excuse to commit crimes. It’s ridiculous.

      As for the person this article is about. I do find the fact that she has not registered as a sex offender since transitioning disturbing. But upon looking into it. We don’t know if she’s required to register for life or only a specific time frame.

      http://abcnews.go.com/US/LegalCenter/story?id=90201&page=1

      ” Myth No. 3 — Sex offender registration is permanent.
      Not always. Many times an offender is only required to register as a sex offender for a certain length of time. If he does not re-offend and completes his sentencing requirements in that length of time, he may no longer be required to register as a sex offender. ”

      However, she does have a great point regarding what hormones and testosterone blockers do to the male sex drive and organ. It basically kills it. So, provided she is on hormones and all. She’s not much of a threat sexually, since it’s not easy to become aroused once you lose all your testosterone. Think of it as a form of chemical castration, in which case, maybe she is reformed now? Regardless, she should still follow the law and register as an sex offender unless there was some time frame stipulated in her case depending on the offense.

      And since the majority of trans people are just people like you and I, wanting to live our lives in peace. Trying to ban them from restrooms isn’t going to help anyone at all and does nothing but bring further harm to the already fragile trans-community. So these bills are a waste of time, considering there are already laws that would punish people who commit assault or lewd acts.

      And here is a fact. You have all been in the presence of a trans person at one time or another, including the restrooms, and were not aware of it! Think about it. How could that be?

      And this article backs up the reality of what has happened in states that have passed trans inclusive laws regarding the restroom. No reported assaults at all. Much ado about nothing.

      http://mic.com/articles/114066/statistics-show-exactly-how-many-times-trans-people-have-attacked-you-in-bathrooms#.mg5H81zHY

      Reply
      • Posie
        Posie says:

        Toilets are separated by sex not gender. I find the idea that you think your comfort is more important than 50% of the population who would rather you use them men’s a sign of your male entitlement.

        Reply
  18. MidDist
    MidDist says:

    Well there you have it. A transgender who is also a sex offender, how can you trust the transgender community now? This is completely disturbing and what’s even more disturbing is that people don’t care! This is problematic here. A male, convicted sex offender who wants to use the ladies room now has free access. I said it before and i’ll say it again, there is something wrong when you let males become women. This is the result. Could be worse but then this is what the transgender community wanted all along.

    Reply
    • JohnT
      JohnT says:

      Have you ever thought of comparing the number of sex crimes committed by transgender people with the number committed by Republican Congressmen and American Baptist Ministers? They are the real danger and I can well see why some of them would want to meet a transwoman (with a vagina) in the men’s washroom or somewhere else private.

      Reply
    • Dana
      Dana says:

      Well, there are non-trans males (I don’t use the term “cis”) who are sex offenders. Why should we trust them either? ALL of them can stay out of the women’s rooms. Period. They can go aim it at a tree if they have to go that bad and have no other options. They’re trying to make us so uncomfortable we can’t use our bathrooms, so fair is fair.

      Reply
  19. Clark Kent
    Clark Kent says:

    WRONG! The issue is ALLOWING MALES WHO CLAIM TO BE FEMALES FREE ACCESS TO FEMALE BATHROOMS; NO QUESTIONS ASKED! This recently happened at a public pool in Seattle. GROW UP!

    Reply
  20. Mary
    Mary says:

    If this ruling goes thru and men enter women’s restrooms and locker rooms I fear for everyone, the father or mother of the 12 year old is going to do violence, someone is going to to die, is it not illegal to expose ones self, is it not illegal to be a flasher, is it not illegal to be a voyager, you show your short comings to me or my young people I might want to help you along with that surgery and cut it off for you . Then he/she is injured and I go to jail, this is a problem a big problem waiting to happen. If I lived in that state I am afraid I would pay men to go to the human rights center and use their women’s restroom and exposé themselves

    Reply
    • Jayne
      Jayne says:

      There are, quite literally, thousands of female sex offenders in the United States, presumably the great majority of whom use ladies washrooms or locker rooms on a regular basis. I think it is telling that groups like the Family Policy Institute and Just Want Privacy don’t seem concerned about these thousands of female sex offenders in women’s spaces, but instead seem worried about the one transgender sex offender they could find while simultaneously calling for a completely redundant ban on men in women’s spaces. These groups furthermore seem more worried about transgender women in general using female spaces than they do about keeping female predators and sex offenders out. If they are really worried about keeping women’s spaces safe for women, they would be pushing for protections for transgender women to use the ladies while trying to keep predators out. I hereby Challenge the Family Policy Institute and and Just Want Privacy to publically clarify their position once and for all on transgender women’s rights to use women’s facilities, and specifically if they support legislative protections for trans women to continue to use those facilities.

      Reply
      • Jill
        Jill says:

        You know as well as I do that the rate of violent assault against women is predominantly and overwhelmingly committed by males against females. Further, The Transgender Law Center, HRC, GLAAD, ACLU, National Center for Transgender Equality, et al., have failed to cite a single study refuting the evidence that transgender males (“transwomen”) commit crimes against women and girls at exactly the same rate as any other males.

        Reply
      • Dee
        Dee says:

        Sexual violence is overwhelmingly committed by males. Transmen are at more risk of violence in the men’s. Which is why girls and women don’t want men in their change room.

        Reply
      • Dana
        Dana says:

        Female sex offenders generally offend against males. When would they encounter a male in the women’s room if males stayed the heck out?

        By the way, lesbians aren’t a danger either. Unless it’s a man claiming to be a lesbian, they don’t go chasing us around and getting into our personal spaces and they almost never rape.

        The two situations are not the same. Men are not women. Women are not men. Women don’t offend in the same ways as men. Period.

        Reply
    • Tionico
      Tionico says:

      I thuoght a great response to the legislators (or those posing as such) to have their OWN bathrooms and locker rooms invaded by those of the gender other than the one indicated on the door. Let THEM eat the fruit of their refusal to listen to WE for whom THEY WORK.

      Reply

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] have already seen several examples of individuals exploiting policies and situations like this one. By the time YMCA staff members […]

  2. […] (Link): Convicted sex offender seeks access to women’s locker rooms through bathroom law […]

  3. […] There have been reports of men taking advantage of their lax bathroom security, including one “transgender female” with a record of sexually assaulting a handicapped young woman. Of course he (I refuse to refer to […]

  4. […] See – Convicted sex offender seeks access to women’s locker rooms […]

  5. […] on suspicion of filming people in a Chapman University bathroom – The Orange County Register Family Policy Institute of Washington | Convicted sex offender seeks access to women’s locker room… http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/l…062-story.html Read em and weep. Just a few headlines. […]

  6. […] Convicted sex offender seeks access to women’s locker rooms through bathroom law […]

  7. […] how will you protect children and women from sexual predators who on any given day may choose to self-identify as transgender just so they can gain access to […]

  8. […] called, and no one was arrested. Our friends at the Family Policy Institute of Washington also recently wrote about a convicted sex offender trying to gain access to women’s restrooms and locker […]

  9. […] Convicted sex offender seeks access to women’s locker rooms through bathroom law […]

  10. […] Convicted sex offender seeks access to women’s locker rooms through bathroom law […]

  11. […] Convicted sex offender seeks access to women’s locker rooms through bathroom law […]

  12. […] “Convicted Sex Offender Seeks Access to Women’s Locker Rooms through Bathroom Law” (02/25/2016) […]

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *