Posts

New FPIW Video to be Released Monday

 

The next installment in FPIW’s wildly popular College Kids Say the Darndest Things series will be released on Monday, May 9th at 7:00pm Eastern/4:00 pm Pacific.

The first episode of the series, which aims to generate conversation about some of the most pressing issues in our culture, has been played more than 2.1 million times in over 220 countries.  In the episode, filmed on campus at the University of Washington in Seattle, FPIW Executive Director Joseph Backholm asked students questions about identity; specifically, whether or not he should be able to identify as a 6’5″ Chinese woman. The answers he got were both hilarious and highly concerning. If you haven’t seen it yet, check it out here.

Screen Shot 2016-05-03 at 3.15.03 PM

Episode 2 was filmed near Seattle University, a private, Jesuit Catholic school located about three miles from the University of Washington.  In it, Joseph, a law-school alumnus of Seattle University, asks students about the difference between men and women.  Like in the first episode, the answers are hilarious, but also highlight the strange world view students are being taught by the academic establishment — both in secular and faith-based institutions.

Episode 2 will be screened Friday night at FPIW’s Annual Dinner, Beyond Football: An Evening with Steve Largent.  A limited number of tickets and sponsorships for that event are still available (click here for tickets).  

For continuous updates, be sure to follow @FPIW on Twitter.

Former Professor’s Warning About Nonjudgmental Students

FPIW received this letter from a former professor in response to our video, College Kids Say the Darndest Things: On Identity


Dear FPIW,

I’ve just seen your interesting interviews with “nonjudgmental” students at the University of Washington.

Your question about our ability to answer the questions that really are difficult remains up in the air, but I can tell you that people can’t deal with life-and-death issues even when someone’s life is at stake.

While teaching linguistics at a university in Michigan, I routinely had young damsels walking up to me after class from a group of 85 students to ask for personal advice.

One of them had been sleeping in the bed with a drug addicted boyfriend whom her parents had inexplicably allowed to move in when she was a teenager.  Now she wanted to get him out, but she couldn’t.  I gave her my best advice and the courage to kick him out. (More than courage, I gave her the realistic fear of how things may end up if he didn’t.)

Another one had become the “girlfriend” of a procurer and pornographer who took a class or two on campus so that he could recruit women for his operation. He had falsely convinced her he was “protecting” her from the sex industry, when in fact, he was following all the steps routinely used to break a woman into prostitution or pornography. At this point, he was at the step of trying to create an obligation that she could not earn enough in a normal way to pay back. I blew the lid off the whole thing for her and told her how to get away from the guy, which she did.

Now, the question is, why were these girls going to their professor with this? Why not a counselor or even a friend?

The reason, they told me, was that nobody in their lives, but me, would be judgmental.

Even when a young woman’s life was in danger, nobody did anything more than encourage her to clarify her feelings, and some even encouraged the one girl to discuss her concerns with the pornographer to find out how he felt!

So people now can’t make judgments even when it’s necessary.

Signed,

[Professor K.]


In case you missed it, here’s the video everyone has been talking about.

If you’d like to support more projects like the video series, shown above, please click here to link arms with us.

Several Missouri Senators Try to Kill Religious Freedom — And Fail

 

Democratic Senators in Missouri’s state legislature have ended a filibuster that lasted more than 39 hours over SJR39, a joint resolution that proposes to amend the state constitution to prevent the state from punishing individuals or religious entities who decline to participate in gay marriage ceremonies.

The bill, introduced by State Senator Bob Onder, also provides protections for worship facilities and clergy that refuse to participate in the ceremonies due to sincerely held religious beliefs, as well as vendors and individuals citizens.  Senator Onder argues that religious beliefs are a perfectly acceptable reason to decline services.

Lawmakers who filibustered the bill claimed the bill was a “mean-spirited attempt” to unfairly treat LGBT individuals. However, Republican sponsors of the law maintain that the change would not harm those individuals, rather it would only seek to protect the consciences of Missouri’s religious population.

The proposal has passed final reading in the Senate and awaits a vote in the House. If the proposal passes in the House, then Missouri voters will be given the chance to vote on it either on the August or November ballot.

FPIW applauds the Missouri Senate for their efforts to pass this resolution, despite angry opposition, and we hope that our own state legislature will place special emphasis on the protection for religious freedom in Washington moving forward.

Join forces with FPIW to shore up religious protections in Washington State!

To follow this story, you can check out updates from our sister organization, the Missouri Family Policy Council.

American College of Pediatricians Blasts Gender Fluidity Activism

The Florida-based American College of Pediatricians has released a statement that urges lawmakers, educators, and citizens around the United States to reject the normalizing of surgical or chemical impersonation of the opposite sex to children.

This statement comes on the heels of efforts by activists in several states to normalize and promote a concept of gender fluidity — where an individual can change their gender identity and presentation, without regard for biological realities.

The statement makes eight points, affirming the belief of many in the medical community that the social experiment of gender fluidity is not, in fact, a scientific truth, but rather a state of confusion and willful ignorance of biological reality.

  1. Human sexuality is an objective biological binary trait: “XY” and “XX” are genetic markers of health – not genetic markers of a disorder.
  2. No one is born with a gender. Everyone is born with a biological sex. Gender (an awareness and sense of oneself as male or female) is a sociological and psychological concept; not an objective biological one.
  3. A person’s belief that he or she is something they are not is, at best, a sign of confused thinking.
  4. Puberty is not a disease and puberty-blocking hormones can be dangerous.
  5. According to the DSM-V, as many as 98% of gender confused boys and 88% of gender confused girls eventually accept their biological sex after naturally passing through puberty.
  6. Children who use puberty blockers to impersonate the opposite sex will require cross-sex hormones in late adolescence. Cross-sex hormones are associated with dangerous health risks including but not limited to high blood pressure, blood clots, stroke and cancer.
  7. Rates of suicide are twenty times greater among adults who use cross-sex hormones and undergo sex reassignment surgery, even in Sweden which is among the most LGBQT – affirming countries.
  8. Conditioning children into believing a lifetime of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex is normal and healthful is child abuse.

You can read the rest of the statement here, and leave your comments below.

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

 

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.

An Open Letter on the Bathroom Rule


Dear FPIW,

I am really grateful for your leadership and resourcefulness on this “Open Bathroom/Showers” issue. I have PTSD, am a rape survivor, as well as a domestic violence survivor.

I already wrote senators and did all that I could.  I wish that these heartless legislators who said for people to “stop being afraid” could understand what it is like to be raped, and understand that people with PTSD cannot just ‘stop being afraid’.  When naked men are allowed to be in the stall next to women as they undress or they emerge from the gym shower with their naked penis in full view, for the women and children undressing, it is SHOCKING and TERRIFYING.

I cannot see a stranger’s penis and simply “not react.”

PTSD (especially with repeated experiences of violence) is physiological and, as I have learned, actually alters part of the limbic area of the brain AND the autonomic nervous system (“fight or flight”).  When I am around a ‘trigger’ (such as an image that triggers a memory), I have a physical reaction — shaking, fright, nausea; I can feel my heart pounding in my chest, feeling that my well-being might be threatened.  I cannot control this automatic physical reaction.

If I were to suddenly be next to a naked man, I know I would panic, suffer physically from the instantaneous physical reactions from my PTSD, and would need the entire day to calm down.  Why would a ‘transgender’ person get their ‘feelings hurt’ just by using the restroom/shower that matches their anatomy?

We cannot just sacrifice our safety.  It may just be a matter of time for a woman or a child to be raped as predators enjoy this new, easy opportunity by just waltzing right in, pretending to be transgendered.

God help us through this nightmare.

God Bless you all.

-Anonymous

SB 6612: Testimony Heard; Doctor Defends Sex-Selective Abortion

 

Tuesday, the Senate Law and Justice Committee heard panels in support and in opposition SB 6612, a bill that would make it unlawful to provide an abortion simply on the fact that the baby was a different gender than what the mother wanted to give birth to.  We’ve provided two videos of testimonies given that show a stark contrast in world view.

Michael Pauley, a resident from Snohomish, Washington, gave an excellent testimony in support of the bill:

Afterwards, the committee heard from Dr. Anuj Khattar, an abortion doctor and family care physician at Swedish Family Health. Senator Steve O’Ban asked Dr. Khattar if he would perform an abortion even if he was aware that the woman was requesting it simply because she was unsatisfied with the gender of the baby. You can watch that exchange here:

Regardless of where you stand on the issue of abortion, we must all come together to fight this reprehensible action against babies.

Lake Stevens School District Proposing New Bathroom Policy Tonight

 

FPIW has learned that the Lake Stevens School District’s School Board of Directors plans to meet tonight, in part, to implement a new bathroom policy, in order to be “compliant” with Washington State’s new bathroom policy.

You can read a copy of the proposed policy here.

The Human Rights Commission of Washington passed WAC 162-32, mandating that all schools and businesses implement a new open-bathroom policy.  While this policy legally opens up women’s restrooms, locker rooms, and showers to men, the rule creates a loophole that allows men who claim to ‘identify’ as a woman to gain access, increasing opportunities for potential predators to attack and abuse with little ability to prosecute them.

School Districts’ first priority should be protecting the safety and privacy of its students, and there are legal consequences to consider if they do not.

Concerned citizens are encouraged to call the Lake Stevens School Board of Directors (425) 335-1502 to express their concerns, and attend the meeting tonight.

Lake Stevens School Board Meeting

Wednesday, January 13th, 2016 at 6:30pm

School District Building

Educational Service Center in the Community Room

12309 22nd St NE

Lake Stevens, WA 98258

New Bathroom Rule: It’s Worse Than We Thought

 

Last week, news broke about a new rule passed by the Washington State Human Rights Commission creating a statewide mandate that businesses must allow men into women’s bathrooms and locker rooms if they say they are a woman.

But as details have become available, it appears the final version of the rule is actually worse than the proposed rule. Here are some of the “highlights”:

  1. Mandate on Schools as Well as Businesses

While the draft rule imposed a mandate on every business in the state, it provided discretion for schools to deal with each case on a case-by-case basis.

However, the final rule removed any discretion for school officials and mandates that all schools must allow boys into the girl’s locker room if they claim to be a girl.

  1. Women will be removed from the women’s restroom. Naked men will not.

The rule states that it is illegal to ask someone who is confused about their gender to use a separate facility for the benefit of women and children who might be uncomfortable.

However, once a man begins to undress in the women’s locker room a person who “expresses concern or discomfort…should be directed to a separate or gender-neutral facility.”

So, all you women who are uncomfortable with the naked guy over there, “Please come with me and leave him alone.”

  1. The rule bans lots of speech

In addition to prohibiting reasonable accommodations that recognize the public’s right to privacy along with the bathroom needs of the transgendered, this rule targets a wide range of speech.

It is illegal to ask “unwelcome personal questions about an individual’s sexual orientation, gender expression or gender identity, or transgender status.”

The commission provides no guidance to the public about how they are supposed to know which questions are unwelcome before they ask them.

It is also illegal for a business to deliberately “misuse” someone’s preferred pronoun. If a man believes he is a woman, but you refer to him as a “he” anyway, he can sue you.

However, you should be careful not to ask questions about which pronoun he prefers. Remember, if that’s an “unwelcome question” he can sue you for that.

It is also now illegal to use “offensive names, slurs, jokes, or terminology regarding an individual’s sexual orientation or gender expression or gender identity.”

The fact that “offensive” is an undefined and completely subjective term that provides no guidance to the public about what they can and cannot do is apparently lost on the commission.

The best advice may be to just stop speaking. As we all know, someone is offended by everything.


WATCH: Joseph Backholm answers some FAQ’s on the new bathroom policy

Video

Frequently Asked Questions

As the public wrestles with how to respond to this, here are some of the most frequent questions we have been asked in the last few days.

1.  Is this really true?

Very few other media outlets have covered this story. That has led a lot of people to wonder if there isn’t some kind of mistake. Sadly, there is no mistake. Other news outlets have began to cover the story here, here, and here.

2. What will happen if I violate this rule?

The Human Rights Commission has the authority to issue fines and create a range of orders intended to “eliminate the effects of an unfair practice and prevent the recurrence of the unfair practice.”

The rule specifically states that businesses and schools open themselves up to civil liability for violations of any of their new rules.

3. Who made this rule anyway?

The Washington State Human Rights Commission was created to help enforce the Washington State Law Against Discrimination. There are five members who are appointed by the Governor and are not subject to election. You can find them here.

While rule-making authority is frequently delegated to agencies for the purpose of enforcing laws the legislature passes, the concern is that a policy of this magnitude and scope far exceeds what the legislature intended or the public expected when the non-discrimination law was passed.

4.  What can I do?

While the Human Rights Commission has authority delegated to it by the legislature, the legislature has the authority and responsibility to correct mistakes made by agencies or commissions.

You can contact your legislators through the legislative hotline at 1-800-562-6000 or email them all at one time by clicking here.  If we know your address, this tool allow you to email them all at once.

5.  Isn’t this outrage just much ado about nothing?

If you believe a rule of this kind would never be exploited by people with bad intentions, simply search for Jason Pomares, Norwood Smith Burnes, or Taylor Buehler on the search engine of your choice.

Burnes exposed himself to children in a Walmart restroom in 2010 while Pomares dressed as a woman and snuck into a Macy’s bathroom to videotape women in 2013.  Buehler wore a bra and wig and slipped into a bathroom and locker room in 2012 to watch women at Everett Community College. All three men were arrested.

In addition, Christopher Hambrook sexually assaulted multiple women in a Toronto women’s shelter while “identifying” as a woman.

Sexual predators look for opportunity. This provides it.

UPDATE: Click here to see Governor Jay Inslee’s response to the Human Rights Commission’s bathroom rule.

Everything we do is made possible by friends like you.  If you can chip in $5 or more to help restore rational bathroom policies, we’d be grateful.

New YMCA Policy Worrying Parents — Act Now!

Article by Rich Stuart, Oct. 29, 2015

On Oct. 5, the Tacoma area YMCA partially reversed a policy of opening locker rooms, showers, and bathrooms to the opposite sex, after alarmed members and citizens protested to YMCA officials. The policy, begun without notice in April, extended to 165,000 Pierce-Kitsap County members.  It allowed any members to use the facilities of the opposite sex if they identified with that gender — no questions asked.

In speaking to YMCA officials, members emphasized that they wanted transgender persons fully included in YMCA activities, but that the private showers and bathrooms, which they were already using, provided the comfortable and correct alternative to the April policy. These private facilities are available to anyone with special needs, including families with young children.

Reacting to citizen input, the YMCA reversed the policy in the locker rooms and showers of nine family YMCA branches in the Pierce-Kitsap County Association. However, the policy remains in full force at the two downtown Tacoma YMCA’s and in all bathrooms of the family YMCA’s, so the fight is far from over.

A Brutal Week

On Monday, Sep. 28, word trickled out that a home school PE group had arranged that their locker room be cordoned off at a YMCA branch, after reports that a man was seen dressing in the women’s locker room.

Alarmed parents and citizens in the community feared that the plight of these children may not be limited to the one YMCA branch, but could be extended to people of all ages in all YMCA branches in the Pierce-Kitsap County Association. They saw also that anyone could abuse this policy by pretending to identify with the opposite sex to enter their and commit crimes of voyeurism, indecent exposure, and even worse. A man could even be present with an undressed girl alone at slow periods when no one else was in the locker room. Overwhelmed with shock and disbelief, the few parents and citizens who heard about the policy prayed, and then they acted.

The YMCA had given no notice and had placed no signs at the entrances of locker rooms and bathrooms warning members that they might encounter persons with the anatomy of the opposite sex inside. Overwhelmed with shock and disbelief, the few parents and citizens who heard about the policy prayed, and then they acted.

Citizens and members were urged to call the branch YMCA’s and the association office to ask if it was really true that members ‘identifying’ with the opposite sex could enter locker rooms, showers, and bathrooms — with no questions asked.  The word spread to the local pastors associations, and they, too, called called YMCA officials to express their serious concerns.

At the end of the week, exhausted YMCA officials said they had fielded over a thousand phone calls.  With four hours notice on Sunday, the YMCA used its website and social media to call an afternoon meeting with concerned members and citizens at the YMCA branch where the policy had first come to light.  But only thirty members of the public caught wind of the meeting and attended.

Trying to control their anger, these concerned citizens told top YMCA officials that they should reverse the policy immediately.

Late the next day, Monday, Oct. 4, the YMCA officials returned calls to those who had left messages and announced that they had partially reversed the policy in the nine family YMCA branches, though it would remain fully in effect in the two downtown Tacoma YMCA’s and in all bathrooms.

Many questions remain to be answered.  How could it have ever been law that required the YMCA to institute the policy as they claimed, if after one week they reversed a large portion of the policy?  As for the rest, there are actual state laws against voyeurism and indecent exposure.  These crimes are much easier to commit with impunity in locker rooms, showers and bathrooms where the policy is in effect, according to a Puyallup Police Department spokesman.

On Sunday, Nov. 1, concerned citizens will be meeting in Tacoma with the Family Policy Institute of Washington’s Grassroots Director, Danille Turissini, to learn how to carry this cause and others to the legislative halls of Olympia.  If anyone wishes to attend, please contact Rich Stuart at rsdavidssling@gmail.com.