California (USA)

AB 2501, authored by Assemblymember Susan Bonilla, would eliminate the so-called “gay panic” and “trans panic” defenses, outrageous tactics used by defendants who claim their violent acts were triggered by the victim’s sexual orientation or gender identity.  Specifically, the bill states that for purposes of determining sudden quarrel or heat of passion, the provocation was not objectively reasonable if it resulted from the delivery or, knowledge about, or potential disclosure of the victim’s or defendants’ actual or perceived “gender, gender identity, gender expression, or sexual orientation,” including circumstances in which the victim made an unwanted nonforcible romantic or sexual advance towards the defendant.

The bill is disturbing in that it allows transwomen to make “nonforcible romantic or sexual advances” towards women. Nonforcible is not defined. 

“Gender” includes a person’s gender identity and gender-related appearance and behavior regardless of whether that appearance or behavior is associated with the person’s gender as determined at birth.

Bill Text_ CA AB2501 _ 2013-2014 _ Regular Session _ Amended _ LegiScan.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “California (USA)

  1. “Gender” includes a person’s gender identity and gender-related appearance and behavior regardless of whether that appearance or behavior is associated with the person’s gender as determined at birth.”

    “The bill is disturbing in that it allows transwomen to make “nonforcible romantic or sexual advances” towards women. Nonforcible is not defined. ”

    Most people are completely in the dark as to the actual reality. A lot of transwomen:

    (1.) Still have male genitalia
    (2.) A surprisingly large number are sexually attracted to women. Indeed, many were married before they transitioned.

    We also know that the way most gender identity laws work sex reassignment surgery is essentially optional.

    Couldn’t this be sexual harassment? Under “gender identity” laws, we know that all males have to do is “identify as women”. So, a biological male could claim “gender identity” and legally sexually harass women all day. He could make crude and offensive remarks to the same woman seven days a week. Since he claims “gender identity”, it’s legal.

    “Gender” includes a person’s gender identity and gender-related appearance and behavior regardless of whether that appearance or behavior is associated with the person’s gender as determined at birth.

    This could turn into a legalized form of sexual harassment. We have already seen a legalized form of sexual harassment with middle aged men exposing their male genitalia to high school girls (Colleen Francis). There was another example in Canada where an elderly woman was embarrassed when a young transgender identified man took a shower with her.

    Homeless women in Toronto were sexually harassed and assaulted by a man who identified as transgender.

    Justice John McMahon declared Christopher Hambrook — who claimed to be a transgender woman named Jessica — was a dangerous offender”

    http://www.torontosun.com/2014/02/26/predator-who-claimed-to-be-transgender-declared-dangerous-offender.

    If any of the women that Christopher, “Jessica”, Hambrook sexually assaulted pushed him away or cursed him, Hambrook could always fall back on “gender identity” even though he is larger and stronger than the women and is still a biological male. Hambrook could repeatedly make
    “nonforcible romantic or sexual advances” towards women. Since he claims “gender identity”, it’s not sexual harassment.

    Registered sex offenders like Paul (Paula Witherspoon) could repeatedly make
    “nonforcible romantic or sexual advances” towards women, and so could other registered sex offenders by simply claiming “gender identity”.

    Like

  2. An act to amend Section 192 of the Penal Code, relating to manslaughter.

    Existing law defines voluntary manslaughter as the unlawful killing of a human being without malice upon a sudden quarrel or heat of passion.

    I think we can all agree that violence is never the answer, but we also have to look objectively at reality. I don’t condone violence and it’s abhorrent. We also can’t ignore the fact that males are usually larger and stronger than females even if he “identifies as a woman”. When males are generally larger and stronger than women, how do women defend themselves? Should women even fight back against a larger male who is threatening them?

    After I read the bill, I’m not sure whether to support it or not. Because it relates to manslaughter charges, I don’t know how to respond.

    FACT: Transgender identified males have raped and murdered women and they have molested children.

    I would like to comment on the last part of the sentence, “or if the defendant and victim dated or had a romantic or sexual relationship.” Transwoman Dana McCallum was charged with raping his estranged wife and spousal abuse. According to everything I’ve read, McCallum still had male genitalia when the alleged rapes occurred. How should biological females who are in relationships with transwomen or cross dressing males supposed to act? If he is accidentally killed during a domestic violence incident, she can’t say that he is bigger or stronger than her and still has his penis.

    If the wife of Robert, “MIchelle” Kosilek fought back, could she be alive today? Unfortunately, she would be compelled to prove that Robert wasn’t a sadistic killer after all. It was her fault for fighting this monster.

    A federal appeals court upheld Friday a landmark order that the state must provide a taxpayer-funded sex change for a transgender prisoner convicted of murder, after finding that the surgery is the only adequate care for her gender identity disorder.

    The US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in Boston backed a lower court’s decision in 2012 that the treatment is necessary and that Massachusetts officials violated the prisoner’s constitutional rights by failing to provide the surgery. It would be the first court-ordered, state-funded sex change for a prisoner in the country.

    http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/01/17/mass-appeals-court-upholds-inmate-right-sex-change-surgery/qeWDkAngsEryU7FdOEhSoN/story.html

    If the women that Katheena Soneeya (born Kenneth Hunt) fought back, would they be alive today?

    Katheena Soneeya (born Kenneth Hunt) murdered two women and is serving a life sentence in Massachusetts. One victim’s neck was slashed and her body had suffered multiple stab wounds to the chest, abdomen, and groin. There were strips of sheeting around her neck and ligature marks on her wrist. In addition to blood, water was found on the bed and in the vicinity of the body. An autopsy revealed sperm in the victim’s vagina and rectum, indicating that Hunt raped her.

    What happens when rape victims fight their attacker? Because he claims “gender identity”, women can’t refuse his advances.

    A transexual and transvestite who raped a woman face a significant jail sentence after a judge described their case as one of the worst he had seen.

    http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/Home/Transexual-and-transvestite-guilty-of-raping-woman-20012012.htm#ixzz2z6gySrdr

    A TRANSVESTITE taxi driver faces a prison term after he was convicted of raping a drunken woman in the back of his car. Qasim Anwar, 30, carried out the attack dressed in make-up, a wig, women’s clothing and high heels, Manchester Crown Court was told. A jury heard the victim had drunk so much she was virtually `comatose’ and Anwar filmed the attack on his phone.

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

    “For purposes of determining sudden quarrel or heat of passion, the provocation was not objectively
    reasonable if it resulted from the discovery of, knowledge about, or potential disclosure of the victim’s or defendant’s actual or perceived gender, gender identity, gender expression, or sexual
    orientation, including under circumstances in which the victim made an unwanted nonforcible romantic or sexual advance towards the defendant, or if the defendant and victim dated or had a romantic or sexual relationship.”

    If she discovers that the person she thought was a woman has a penis, she isn’t allowed to resist. If God forbid he is is accidentally killed when she slaps him and he trips and bangs his head, she can’t bring up his “gender identity”. Forget the fact that he still could have his penis and he is larger than she is.

    Again, violence is wrong, but I can see how women would be getting the short end of the stick on this one. Transgender identified persons already have far more rights than females. In states with gender identity laws, they are included in hate crimes legislation. I’ve always supported the inclusion of transgender identified persons in hate crimes legislation along with gay men, lesbians, and racial minorities. It’s my understanding that any act of violence against a female no matter how depraved and sadistic doesn’t fall under hate crimes legislation. Raping a female won’t result in added hate crimes charges, but if the male “identifies as a woman”, then it’s a hate crime.

    He “identifies as a woman”, still has a penis and is bigger and stronger than she is, but it doesn’t matter. He might be as crazy as Douglas, “Donna” Perry who is currently on trial for the murder of three women in Washington State, but no one can question his “gender identity”.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s