[FUCK YOU Kosilek!- GM]
[FUCK YOU Kosilek!- GM]
From the Boston Globe:
“A divided federal appeals court in Boston on Tuesday overturned a lower court’s ruling that a transgender Massachusetts prison inmate, convicted of committing a domestic murder, was entitled to taxpayer-funded sex change surgery.
The ruling by the First US Circuit Court of Appeals came after a 2012 ruling by US District Judge Mark Wolf, who ordered the surgery after finding that the state’s failure to provide it violated the inmate’s Eighth Amendment protection against cruel and unusual punishment.
In January, a three-judge panel of the appeals court upheld Wolf’s 2012 decision, but the state of Massachusetts then asked for an en banc, or full bench, review, which led to Tuesday’s ruling.
The ruling came in the case of Michelle Kosilek, who was born Robert Kosilek. Kosilek is serving a life sentence for killing her wife, Cheryl Kosilek, in 1990.
The court ruled 3-2, with Judges O. Rogeriee Thompson and William J. Kayatta Jr. filing separate dissenting opinions..
“We are faced with the question whether the [state Department of Correction’s] choice of a particular medical treatment is constitutionally inadequate,” the court said in the majority opinion.
“After carefully considering the community standard of medical care, the adequacy of the provided treatment, and the valid security concerns articulated by the DOC, we conclude that the district court erred and that the care provided to Kosilek by the DOC does not violate the Eighth Amendment,” said the opinion, which was written by Judge Juan R. Torruella.
Kosilek and the DOC — under successive administrations, both Democratic and Republican — have battled in the courts for decades over what medical treatment, clothing, makeup should be provided to deal with Kosilek’s gender identity disorder.
Wolf ruled in 2012 that the only medically appropriate treatment for Kosiliek’s condition was the surgery, which would be paid for by the state since Kosilek is a state prison inmate.
But the appeals court ruled Tuesday that Wolf had wrongly substituted his own judgment for the medical professionals, who did not unanimously endorse the surgery as the only appropriate solution for the condition that all sides acknowledged contributed to a depressed mental state and suicide attempts by Kosilek.
Wolf also went too far by “circumvent[ing] the deference owed to prison administrators’’ under federal laws when the issue is the safety of prison inmates, Torruella wrote.
“The prison administrators in this case have decades of combined experience in the management of penological institutions, and it is they, not the court, who are best situated to determine what security concerns will arise,’’ Torruella wrote.
The ruling said the DOC made a valid argument when it expressed concern about the safety of Kosilek and women prisoners he potentially could be housed with once the surgery was done.
“The DOC’s security report reflected that significant concerns would also arise from housing a formerly male inmate — with a criminal history of extreme violence against a female domestic partner — within a female prison population containing high numbers of domestic violence survivors,’’ Torruella wrote.
In a statement, Public Safety Secretary Andrea Cabral said the DOC accepts as true that Kosilek suffers from gender identity disorder diagnosis, and added that was not the issue that the latest round of Kosilek litigation was resolved by the courts on Tuesday.
“The First Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the medical and mental health care provided to Kosilek by the DOC did not violate the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constituion,’’ Cabral said in the statement.
“While we acknowledge the legitimacy of a gender identity disorder diagnosis, DOC’s appeal was based on the lower court’s significant expansion of the standard for what constitutes adequate care under the Eighth Amendment, and on substantial safety and security concerns regarding Ms. Kosilek’s post-surgery needs,’’ Cabral said in the statement.”
Read more at the link.
[Bolding by me- GM]
Read the court decision here [PDF]: http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/12-2194P2-01A.pdf
Read more about Kosilek HERE.


  1. “The ruling said the DOC made a valid argument when it expressed concern about the safety of Kosilek and women prisoners he potentially could be housed with once the surgery was done.”
    Well, praise be to God, somebody finally thought about the safety of female inmates! The whole world hasn’t gone insane after all.

    1. Amazing isn’t it? At least there’s some sense in the world.
      I followed the link to the other blog post about Kosilek. It was profoundly disturbing. Anything about a murderer is of course going to be horrible, but these deranged men who commit sadistic atrocities against women and then dress in drag and insist on being called women just disturb me in a way I can’t really describe well. It’s just fucking sick beyond words.

  2. End of the day, Kosilek is a murderer, a violent criminal. The world went wonky when some do-gooder posited that do-bad-ers have the same, the exact same human rights as everyone else. Wrong! If you do bad you get a reduced deal; you make do with less. You certainly get to be isolated from your intended prey, you sicko. Benefit of the doubt? No way.

    1. Of course “do-bad-ers” have the same human rights as everyone else. The test of human rights is that we apply them to those we dislike most. We can’t enter a jail and rape a terrorist because he is a terrorist, nor is extrajudicial execution OK because someone is a “bad guy”.
      However I don’t know anywhere where SRS is deemed a human right any more than any other form of cosmetic surgery is.

      1. No, by definition, they don’t.
        If you’re convicted of a crime, you lose many rights, including and especially the right to personal freedom. Prisoners are locked in a giant cage, afforded essentially no privacy, and are required to work, at least to help keep the prison functioning but also frequently on work detail for the state or private companies. The 13th Amendment explicitly allows an exemption for the “enslavement” of prisoners.
        Really the only explicit right prisoners retain is being free of cruel and unusual punishment.

      2. To Kesher – the UN Declaration of Human Rights already specifies that people can be charged under the law and receive penalties in accordance with said law, if these are also in accordance with the Declaration (i.e you can’t torture people, you can’t harm their families, etc etc). Depriving someone of their liberty for a specific period of time and after judicial process isn’t a breach. So no, the bad guys don’t lose any human rights by being bad.
        We have had a few cases tested by the ECHR here – the one which sticks in my mind was the right of prisoners to vote. The answer was that this is part of the judicial and punitive process and no, you cannot retain the right to vote if you are imprisoned. The judicial process of trial and imprisonment runs alongside the human rights of the prisoner, it doesn’t supercede it. So even if you really want to enter a prison and torture a particular prisoner, you can’t do – but on the other hand, the prisoner still has the right to see her family, to be free from rape, torture and attacks on her person, and to rest and hold her own opinions.

  3. This is very good news. So, I suppose it would be ungrateful for me to point out that the media are still obeying the pronoun edict?
    “The ruling came in the case of Michelle Kosilek, who was born Robert Kosilek. Kosilek is serving a life sentence for killing her wife, Cheryl Kosilek, in 1990.”
    God, I really, really hate that — ” … for killing HER wife, Cheryl Kosilek.” A “she” was not the last thing Cheryl saw before her life was ended by a woman-hating, predatory, sociopathic MALE. Erasing history, rewriting it this way, is an assault against her memory. It places the preferences of the murderer above respect for his victim.

    1. After a smile of joy, thats was the first thing I noticed. He is a HE. Calling HIM a she makes it sound like a woman murdered another. at least they put his real name right there, instead of omitting it.
      otherwise- WOO HOO.

      1. That is a REALLY good point, Roslyn. Not that I think there’s anything wrong with being a lesbian (after all, I am one), but that is not who Cheryl was. She should be allowed her identity and her truth too.

      2. That was a point mentioned in Gender Hurts, too. The women married to these selfish men get to chose between changing their view of their own sexuality or being viewed as a hateful, unsupportive bigot if they pursue divorce. And there was a show on recently featuring Janet Mock(I think?) and a transgender male trying to bully her mother into viewing her daughter as a “son.” The mother viewed herself as having raised a daughter- irrelevant. It isn’t about identity, but about a selfish minority wanting to control others.

        1. Years ago Oprah had a couple on her show where he decided to transition after they’d been married for quite a while. She stayed with him, but said they didn’t have sex because she wasn’t a lesbian. That really stood out to me, because I remember thinking even then just how selfish that was for him to change the boundaries of their marital contract. Marriage is a contract and you don’t get to change it without working that out with your partner. And poor Cheryl, to not only be horrifically murdered by the man who’d sworn to love and honor her, but to also have her very identity stolen posthumously, that’s just disgusting.

      3. Mormons posthumously baptizing Jews reminds me even more of the trans brigade transwashing historical figures. Any gender non-conforming man or woman throughout history (especially any woman who was kickass in any way) is actually trans apparently.

  4. I was in a store today that had NPR on, and they covered this.
    I smiled. Big.
    And somewhere out in the ether, I bet Cheryl did too.

    1. “”I am ecstatic. I am ecstatic,” Cheryl Kosilek’s niece, Susan Ohannessian, said. “I was basically giving up on the whole court system, but they proved me wrong. It’s a huge victory for all of us, Cheryl’s family, Cheryl, the taxpayers, everyone involved. I am glad to be able to put this behind us and now maybe we can move on.”
      “After all these years, I am so happy that he will serve his time for committing such a horrendous crime, and stop the charade and stop parading around and wasting people’s time,” Ohannessian said.”

  5. Does Kosilek suffer from anything that resembles GID or has he just learned what lies to feed doctors and therapists?

    1. When Kosilek was awaiting trial he discovered a glitch in Cheryl’s health insurance policy (under which he was still covered) that allowed him to sue for disability based on the depression caused to him by awaiting prosecution for committing murder. He won. Around sixty grand lump sum to be followed by ongoing payments, if memory serves me correctly. He spent most of this money RUNNING A CAMPAIGN FOR THE OFFICE OF SHERIFF FROM HIS JAILCELL. Had he won, he would have been in charge of the jail in which he was incarcerated. That was only the start of his incredible twenty-five-year string of jailhouse legal shenanigans.
      Both of his “suicide attempts” occurred over twenty years ago and were unwitnessed and self-reported. One attempt had him holding a plastic bag over his own head- until the bag ripped. The other “attempt” was him trying to shove a slipper down his own throat – he gagged and vomited and claims he cleaned up the mess which is why he had no proof. Read all about this and more by clicking on the link in the above post.

      1. Read all about this and more? I think not. I was sickened and disgusted by the little I did read. I am glad that the court system finally came to it’s senses.

  6. Thank you SO much, Gallus Mag, for this post. What a relief. Realized yet again with the their obeying the trans cult dictates, that he is adding to the growing list of “women” murderers. But still, wonderful.
    I can’t help but wonder if somehow your work about this had an influence. You’ve given so much important information.
    It’s so rare that no is ever possible with these men.

      1. After reading this post, I went back and read your other post on Kosilek. And I thought, damn, that is one fine post. You really did outdo yourself on that one, GM. You are an excellent writer. Thank you so much for this blog.

      2. I just want to echo everything Juliana D said. I only wish more people would discover Gallus’s writing, and the truth about the trans movement that the mainstream media isn’t interested in covering.

  7. Interesting comment below the Boston Globe story from ‘junie24’:
    “Hooray! Finally a voice of reason in this insanity! This guy is pretending he wants sex reassignment surgery so that he doesn’t have to live in the male prison population because he knows he’ll be bullied there. I know this because when I was at Woods-Mullen and then Pine Street, there was a man pretending to be transitioning to a woman because when he was at Long Island, he was harassed and bullied by the men over there. So he decided to take on the persona of a transgender while still hitting on women in both shelters and getting away with it. Whenever anyone complained about a male being in the women’s shelters, they were the ones who got in trouble because he threatened to sue. But what about my rights as a homeless woman to be a women’s shelter and safe, especially at the Women’s Inn at Pine Street?
    “So what happened? He got housing through Paul Sullivan (the permanent housing owned and run by the “non-profit” Pine Street Inn) and immediately started living as a man again. Told you!”
    So this is gender-gaming is a thing now, a powerful trump card that predatory and abusive men can play to get access to victims. Women in vulnerable circumstances are getting thrown into situations where they can’t get away from these men. If a woman in a shelter objects to the presence of a man, she’ll be the one told to leave, and then she’ll have nowhere to go but the street.

  8. Off topic?
    Cleveland Heights fraudster who sought leniency for being transgender gets 14 years
    CLEVELAND, Ohio — Darnell Nash pleaded with a federal judge for leniency Wednesday morning saying that the pressures and stresses of being transgender played a role in a scheme that bilked the U.S. government out of $360,000 in unemployment benefits.
    U.S. District Judge Donald Nugent sentenced her to more than 14 years in prison, though, saying that she didn’t deserve any leniency.
    “[It was] a very sophisticated and complicated scheme,” Nugent said, also citing Nash’s past instances of theft, fraud and violent convictions. “And that’s why the penalty is so severe in this case.”
    Nash, 29, of Cleveland Heights, pleaded guilty in August to 20 counts of mail fraud, 10 counts of wire fraud, aggravated identity theft, money laundering, and conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud.
    Investigators pointed to her as the mastermind behind a scheme to collect unemployment.
    The scheme involved the Full Circle Fund, which purported to give struggling families help getting vouchers to pay for utilities, food, childcare, credit card debt and job training.
    Nash and her counterparts stole the identities of many people who signed up for the program. They then set up fictitious companies in Ohio, California, North Carolina, Texas, Indiana and Kansas and received unemployment benefits under the stolen identities.
    On Wednesday, Nash – who also goes by the names “Slayana Berts” and “Yanna” – argued that the scheme was set up to pay for her transition and the surgery. Her sentencing memorandum, compiled by her and her attorney, tried to make a case for a lighter sentence based on the violence and discrimination that many transgender individuals receive in society.
    Nash, in a long letter to the judge and in person Wednesday, said she has undergone the same discrimination by her foster parents and fellow inmates. She also suffers from gender dysphoria, a psychological condition where a person suffers stress or depression due to a conflict between their gender identity and their biological sex.
    “That’s not a benign pathology,” Nash said. “I’ve dealt with it for years and years.”
    Richard Drucker, Nash’s attorney, said Nash has undergone facial reconstructive surgery, a shaved Adam’s apple, and breast augmentation. However, she still has to undergo more procedures to fully become a woman, he said.
    He also tried to argue, that the pain and suffering Nash has undergone as a transgender in society has fueled her criminal history, and that it would be unsafe for her to be put in with male inmates in prison – which he said was likely.
    I’m not quite sure how a Land Rover relates to transgender issues.
    “That’s just a terrible cross to bear in our society,” Drucker said.
    Assistant U.S. Attorney Kendra Klump, however, said “greed was a significant factor in this conspiracy,” and that Nash had actually devised the scheme to collect more than $1 million.
    She pointed to the money laundering count, which stemmed from Nash purchasing a Land Rover with the stolen money.
    “I’m not quite sure how a Land Rover relates to transgender issues,” Klump said.
    Nugent also rebuffed a claim made by defense attorneys that Nash’s previous convictions were nonviolent. He cited two aggravated robberies Nash committed when she was a teenager, as well as a police chase that happened after a shots fired call.
    “You have a record of theft, but you also have a record of extraordinary violence,” Nugent said.
    Klump and Nugent pointed out that the Federal Bureau of Prisons is equipped to treat those with dysphoria.
    Three others who worked with Nash, Kennard Berts, Dwayne Buchannan and Justin Davis, previously pleaded guilty to their roles in the scheme. Berts – Nash’s boyfriend whom she refers to in a letter as her husband – was sentenced to 61 months in prison. Nugent sentenced Buchannan got 54 months, while Davis got 74 months.
    All four were ordered to pay the stolen money back.
    Nash has pending charges in Pennsylvania and Alabama.
    She pleaded guilty in 2009 to attempted identity-theft charges in Summit County for her role in the Ohio Advantage Program – which was similar to the Full Circle Fund.
    She was also convicted of using a false Shaker Heights address to cast a ballot in the 2008 presidential election, registering to vote nine times under false names.

    1. It seems like the feds unapologetically follow the “you got a dick, you go to the men’s” rule, so I’m guessing/hoping Nash isn’t going to be housed with women.

  9. While you might like the outcome of this decision for political reasons it sets a very dangerous precedent but not for the reasons you might think. Legally, Appeal Courts owe deference to the trier of fact with respect to factual findings and mixed findings of fact and law. The majority in this case went through all sorts of contortions on the standard of review to permit itself to substitute its decision for the trial judge thereby ignoring it’s own precedents. This is the real issue here not whether they overturned the injunctive relief granted to Kosilek. The next time they do this to ensure their wonderful male sets of values are imposed the person before them may a female prisoner. And then they will cite this as precedent for giving to no deference to the trier of fact and trier of fact and law and you won’t like the result. So before you get all cheery, think again. The decision is legally wrong and that should concern anyone.

    1. The appeals court gave great deference to the trier of fact and still found Wolf’s decision completely biased. I guess that’s what happens when a plaintiff gets his “diagnosis” by paying out of his own pocket to fly in a dubious out of state “Energy Psychologist” (a fictional speciality) to “diagnose” him after one brief meeting, and the Judge un-critically accepts this as reliable medicine. Go figure.
      But thanks for your “concern”, sir. How about you just let us women worry about our own interests. Thanks bro.

    2. No, the decision was most emphatically NOT legally wrong.
      The State has ZERO obligation to provide cosmetic surgery to a violent male. How do we KNOW he is violent? Well, for starters, he KILLED HIS WIFE, at least in part because she objected to his playing dress-up.
      If Kosilek wanted to play slice-n-dice with his dick, then maybe he should have divorced his wife and paid for surgery out of his own pocket. Instead he elected to commit a violent criminal act, through which he forfeits the right to pursue cosmetic surgery on the State’s dime.
      And no, it is not an Eighth Amendment violation to refuse to acquiesce to a delusional murderer.

      1. I believe that what Kaethe Voherden considers legally wrong isn’t the decision to deny Kosilek SRS, but the “standards of review” – the amount of deference that higher courts are expected to give to lower courts. (Thompson, the first dissenting judge, begins his dissent with this same argument. Of course, Thompson then goes on to compare not paying for Kosilek’s weenie removal to Plessy v. Ferguson and to the internment of Japanese civilians in WWII …)

      2. The essential standard involves a rational trier of fact. The original decision was not rational. It was a decision that was wrong from the beginning and had no constitutional basis upon which to have been rendered, and accordingly it was tossed in the en banc review…

    3. As a lawyer practicing in the appellate courts, I assure you that deference to the trial court’s findings of fact is not unlimited. There is ample precedent holding that a trial court’s findings of fact are unsupported by the record and should be overturned. The appellate court’s decision is not a departure from precedent and is well within its purview.

  10. Great news! I work in an all-male correctional facility, and the new transgender policy is getting up the noses of many of the women who work here. Used to be M2T would have to have bottom surgery before being allowed to be housed with women. Now we have to put them in the female jail merely on the basis of their stated preference. One fellow went to the women’s jail, then changed his mind and is back here with the other guys. Another current inmate, (another dude who claimed to be a woman only after his initial intake) says that because he is now female, only women correctional officers are allowed to search him. “So only women’s hands are allowed to touch his body,” remarked a woman guard with eye-rolling derision, before being corrected on her pronoun use and told that she had no choice but to comply.
    The Ministry is so terrified of lawsuits and human rights complaints, they are allowing men into the women’s jail even if there isn’t a single shred of evidence that they are actually transitioning. All they have to do is make the claim.
    The Ontario Human Rights Commission seems to be unable to distinguish between a right, and a privilege. Or to be precise about it, male privilege.
    I’d mention all the transmen who want to be housed in the men’s jail, but in twenty years with the ministry, I don’t know of one single case. Funny, that.

  11. From the court documents:
    “In addition to continued mental health treatment, she [sic] was provided female, gender-appropriate clothing and personal effects, and electrolysis was performed to permanently remove her facial hair.”
    If electrolysis is a medically necessary part of being a woman, why are real women expected to pay for it out of pocket?

  12. More highlights from the ruling. Dr. Stephen Levine’s report notes that political pressures have shaped the recommendations of care for patients who report gender dysphoria:
    “WPATH [the organization that created the Standards of Care] is supportive to those who want sex reassignment surgery (SRS). . . . Skepticism and strong alternate views are not well tolerated. Such views have been known to be greeted with antipathy from the large numbers of nonprofessional adults who attend each [of] the organization’s biennial meetings. . . . The [Standards of Care are] the product of an enormous effort to be balanced, but it is not a politically neutral document. WPATH aspires to be both a scientific organization and an advocacy group for the transgendered. These aspirations sometimes conflict. The limitations of the [Standards of Care], however, are not primarily political. They are caused by the lack of rigorous research in the field.”
    Interesting to see even the courts acknowledging that the recommendation of sex reassignment isn’t driven by research showing good results, but by the desires of those who want it for themselves.

    1. And my god, the blatant politicking of dissenting judge Thompson, who states that overturning the decision: “enables correctional systems to further postpone their adjustment
      to the crumbling gender binary.”
      Durrrr…. no political agenda there, Judge Handmaiden. Gosh no. The gender binary is crumbling because people need reproductive surgeries so their genitalia matches their personalities. Crumble crumble. hahaha. Jesus.

      1. “enables correctional systems to further postpone their adjustment to the crumbling gender binary.”
        That sentence hurts my head so badly.

      2. The same judge also said that not relieving Mr. Kosilek of his pee-pee “aggrieves an already marginalized community”.
        Can you imagine a world where everything that aggrieves the trannies was illegal?

    2. A little sanity – reason – common sense – hope it grows into an avalanche…

  13. Considering how often we hear “we have to give people with GID hormones and SRS or they’ll kill themselves!”, it’s good to hear some of the experts saying otherwise. The decision quotes numerous experts saying that suicide threats make people worse candidates for surgery not better ones, and a prison administrator
    “expressed concern regarding threats of suicide being used as a means for prisoners to receive wanted benefits or concessions from staff. Finding it to be bad practice for prison administrators to give in to demands accompanied by the threat of suicide, Clarke stated that he believed the Massachusetts prison system had taken significant measures to ensure it was prepared to deal with suicidal ideation among its prison population. “

  14. The heart of the decision is that the 8th Amendment is violated when two things happen: first, the prison fails to adequately treat a serious medical needs, and second, the prison administrators must show “deliberate indifference”.
    The law requires that the treatment provided for serious medical conditions must be adequate treatment – but not necessarily ideal , and not necessarily whatever the prisoner most wants.
    As for “deliberate indifference”, prison administrators are specifically permitted to consider security concerns when denying certain courses of treatment.
    The court found that when the lower courts ruled that Kosilek was entitled to SRS, they ignored several things – for example, that the Standards of Care are meant as flexible guidelines rather than the best course of treatment for all patients. They also rather freely reinterpreted the guidelines to suit themselves, by saying that the “real-life test” of living as a woman could be satisfied by wearing women’s clothing in a male prison, rather than the variety of family, professional, and other life experiences that doctors expect patients to successfully navigate in the real-life test.
    Furthermore, the prisoners administrators did not show deliberate indifference – they consulted with multiple respected medical professionals to draw up different possible courses of treatment. Their concerns for the safety of the female inmates with whom Kosilek hoped to be housed (and for Kosilek himself) were sufficient reason to refuse him SRS. And, finally, the court found that the Department of Corrections’ concerns about prisoners using suicide threats to force authorities to comply with their demands were justified.
    In summary, Kosilek’s case failed to prove either of the required points – inadequate treatment and deliberate indifference.

  15. The court ruling even includes some creepy autogynephilia: “Kosilek’s doctors testified to the same, highlighting her ‘joy around being feminized.'”
    (Of course, the doctors interpret this as a reason to give him SRS, not as proof that he enjoys his disgusting fetish.)

  16. On the other hand, if the appeals process isnt there to challenge the veracity of lower court rulings, even precedent, on a case by case basis, then we may as well chuck the whole appeals process, or the court process in whole where these 8th amendment issues are concerned. At which point this sadistic murderous piece of shit would have been… exactly where he is. Ever consider that the court is carefully scrutinizing the factual findings?
    Your comment stinks of mansplainin, sir

    1. Meant in response to comment by Kaethe Voherden, somehow displaced from reply queue to that specific comment, just to clarify

  17. Finally, justice and common sense have prevailed.
    Gallus, thank you for keeping us up to date on wife killer Robert Kosilek. Also, kudos for the link to the decision. Kosilek has been at it for twenty years, sucking up God knows how much taxpayer money. The prison system has already bent over backwards to accommodate this convicted killer.
    @born free & female,
    I agree completely….
    From the court documents:
    “In addition to continued mental health treatment, she [sic] was provided female, gender-appropriate clothing and personal effects, and electrolysis was performed to permanently remove her facial hair.”
    If electrolysis is a medically necessary part of being a woman, why are real women expected to pay for it out of pocket?”
    Does anyone know if female inmates get taxpayer funded electrolysis? Female inmates need electrolysis to feel more feminine. That is, in line with their “gender identity”. One could argue that everyone has a “gender identity”. Therefore, it’s an injustice and violation of the 8th Amendment to deny female inmates electrolysis. If female inmates can’t get electrolysis, why should males who murder their wives and dump their bodies in an abandoned car in a parking lot get electrolysis? So, only convicted male murderers get electrolysis?
    Kosilek got taxpayer funded female hormones too. I don’t think he should be entitled to female hormones or hair removal while he sits in a men’s prison for killing his wife.
    It’s interesting to see who supported his “right” to have sex reassignment surgery at taxpayers expense while he sits in prison for the murder of his wife.
    Jennifer Levi and Bennett H. Klein, on brief for Gay & Lesbian
    Advocates & Defenders, EqualityMaine, Human Rights Campaign,
    MassEquality, Massachusetts Transgender Political Coalition,
    National Center for Transgender Equality, National Gay & Lesbian
    Task Force, and Transgender New Hampshire, amici curiae in support of appellee.
    Again, thanks Gallus for the link and up to date information.

    1. Actual female prisoners receive very poor health care. I can’t imagine it’s much better for male prisoners, except perhaps in the way that all health care is more geared toward male needs, and doctors are more likely to dismiss/ignore women’s health concerns.
      It’s a real travesty that “trans” prisoners get catered to in this way when regular prisoners are treated like dirt. “Treatment” for mentally ill prisoners is more likely abuse from guards, and pregnant women are frequently chained to their beds when giving birth. But those kinds of abuses fall under the purview of organizations like Amnesty International, which already have plenty on their plate. I’m not aware of the same kind of well-funded, issue-specific organizations looking out for the health care interests of “cis” prisoners that the ‘T’ currently enjoys from mainstream LGBT organizations.
      And I can assure you that female prisoners don’t get electrolysis. I’ll bet good money that they have to pay for their own razors (assuming those are even allowed) and sanitary products.

      1. Jonathan Magbie
        Michael Saffioti
        Phillip Okoro
        These three men were jailed on petty marijuana charges and all three men died in custody for lack of medical care. They were: a paraplegic, a guy with food allergies and a diabetic.
        And then there’s:
        Chuniece Patterson
        Nicole Guerrero
        Autumn Miller
        Ambrett Spencer
        all pregnant women who either died or lost their babies to medical neglect in jail.
        Why in the WORLD are scarce resources wasted catering to the delusions/sexual aberrations of psychopaths in the prison system when routine medical care is not provided to people convicted of petty crimes?

  18. Hi Gallus: I looked through the document, and saw passing mentions to make-up, but no specifics. I’m curious as to the specifics of that: who was funding the make-up and making delivery of it? I would have assumed now that some types of make-up would have been considered a security risk in prison because it could possibly be used to attempt drug concealment, self-harm, assault or abuse of other inmates.

    1. Other news reports have said he buys it at the prison commissary:
      “Kosilek wears female undergarments and can purchase lipstick at the prison commissary”
      Kosilek also said
      “The greatest loss is the dying I do inside a little bit every day.”
      BAWWWW, the dying he does a little every day is surely a greater loss than the life of the woman he murdered. Poor baaabyyyy. *barf*

      1. Hi born free & female: thanks for the link. I’m curious as to how many woman-born-woman inmates are interested in wearing lipstick and female undergarments on a regular basis. I’m guessing that the majority do not, except perhaps some wear lipstick when they have visitors.

      1. Thanks for the second link. I’m somewhat impressed with Kosilek’s ability to utilize cheap products to produce make-up. Rather MacGyver of him. I’m surprised that a murderer had access to those products in his cell, especially a razor.

      2. When Kosilek allegedly tried to kill himself, he couldn’t find a method effective enough to leave so much as a scratch.
        But when he wanted makeup to indulge his fetish, he found a way.

    2. Female inmates do receive underpants and sports bras. And depending on the security level of the prison they can also wear some of their own things. Makeup and such is usually available at the commissary, but you have to purchase that. Female inmates tend not to have the level of support from family that male inmates do, so they’re less likely to have money on the books. Low level security prisons do allow some inmates a little makeup, at least lip stick or gloss. Powder or foundation is more difficult for fear of contraband.

  19. Gallus, you knock it out of the park in the Kosilek article, “Into the Mind of Kosilek”. I re-read this again, and it still depresses me. The thought of this killer making an e-book and peddling it while sitting in prison for murdering his wife is utterly revolting.
    It’s so sad to see mis-informed, politically correct loonies make the following statements.
    “Sentenced to life in a men’s prison for killing her former therapist in self-defense (***self-defense may ass) , a transgendered woman battles for 20 years for gender-affirming surgery. The memoir begins with the author realizing that she is a girl at age three, and culminates in a legal victory made possible by what can only be described as Grace in action.”
    How in the holy hell is strangling someone first with a wire and then a rope “self defense”? Didn’t he nearly decapitate her? I guess saying something that hurt his feelings is “self defense”. The judge and jury didn’t buy it, and this is why he got life in prison.
    “With regard to deliberate premeditation, the evidence would permit a rational jury to infer that the defendant waited until the victim’s son was at work, that he approached his wife from behind with a wire, and strangled her by tightening the wire around her neck. With regard to extreme atrocity or cruelty, the prosecution’s expert testified that: there were multiple wounds on the victim’s body; she was strangled by a wire and then a rope; she was conscious for at least fifteen seconds after strangulation began and remained alive for three to five minutes; and there were indications of a conscious struggle. These facts amply support a finding of premeditated and deliberate murder,
    see Commonwealth v. Judge, 420 Mass. 433, 441, 650 N.E.2d 1242 (1995); Commonwealth v. Chipman, 418 Mass. 262, 269-270, 635 N.E.2d 1204 (1994); Commonwealth v. Basch, 386 Mass. 620, 622, 437 N.E.2d 200 (1982), as well as murder by extreme atrocity or cruelty, see Commonwealth v. Simmons, 419 Mass. 426, 646 N.E.2d 97 (1995); Commonwealth v. Tanner, 417 Mass. 1, 2, 627 N.E.2d 895 (1994).”
    This cowardly man: (1.) Murdered his wife in cold blood (2.) Was shrewed enough to tie the courts up for decades with lawsuit after lawsuit, costing taxpayers god knows how much money (3.) Was successful in getting taxpayer funded hormones and electrolysis (4.) Made an e-book, “Grace’s Daughter” about how he is the real victim.
    Everything that he has done has dishonored the memory of his murdered wife.
    Men who murder their wives don’t deserve the honor of being called women, and they certainly don’t deserve taxpayer funded hormone treatment, electrolysis for hair removal, or sex reassignment surgery.

      1. Those two dudes are so fucking robotic about something they claim to care about.
        “It’s just like a hip replacement! Our logic will win over the uninformed rubes who just like salacious stories about freaks, how could our cold calculation not win them over, we’re white guys on the right side of history (for a change)!”

    1. :/
      He wanted the surgery on the day- the anniversary of when he murdered her?
      WTF? That is really creepy.
      he…wanted the surgery-on the day- the anniversary of when he murdered her?
      I am glad someone stepped in and canceled it. That just sums up the rabid-trans movement by narcissistic men and their overall attitude about the existence of actual women in a continued bout to re-victimize a murder victim this long after her murdered her.- that tells you alot about him.

    2. Absolutely enraging. Look at the female interviewer. With a female neck. “There are a lot of layers to this.” No. There aren’t.

      1. does bullshit flake off in layers? If so, then there are possibly a lot of layers because there is a ton of bullshit to Robert…
        I’m guessing that comment was made in an attempt to deflect the criticisms that were bound to follow (especially with her having correctly used ‘him’ and ‘his’ at the beginning of the report.

  20. @ Morag99, I agree, and this is what angers me the most.
    “God, I really, really hate that — ” … for killing HER wife, Cheryl Kosilek.” A “she” was not the last thing Cheryl saw before her life was ended by a woman-hating, predatory, sociopathic MALE. Erasing history, rewriting it this way, is an assault against her memory. It places the preferences of the murderer above respect for his victim.”
    There are no words to properly describe how insulting it is to the entire female sex for a male who has been convicted of murdering his wife to be referred to as “she”. It’s bad enough that they steal the identity of women. Now, they murder women, and then steal the identity of women. As a female, I did not give any male permission to appropriate my identity, much less a man who was convicted of murdering his wife. Deep down, it feels like such appropriation. It’s taking something from me that I didn’t give to him. It’s difficult to put these feelings in words, but I think women understand it on almost a primal, gut level. He wasn’t born a woman and wasn’t raised as female. The marriage was man and wife. I agree with Rosyln. Why is his identity more important than hers? If Robert really was a woman, then what would that make the dead wife? The murdered wife married a woman. There is nothing wrong with being lesbian, but I don’t think that is how the murdered wife identified. Kosilek and trans* activists have really shredded and disgraced the memory of the murdered wife. To me, men who violently murder women and then claim that they are women violate the female sex twice. It’s kind of like a Nazi suddenly claiming that he is Jewish, or a member of the KKK claiming black identity.
    I could care less if Robert Kosilek likes to wear makeup or a dress. I don’t even care if he identifies as transgender. Having said this, I draw the line on him taking my female identity from me, and shamelessly dishonoring the memory of his wife. HIs attempt to portray himself as the poor, misunderstood victim by publishing an e-book while incarcerated for murdering his wife just adds insult to injury.
    On a positive note, I was pleased to read that people are finally thinking about female inmates. This is from the recent decision:
    “Bissonnette, Superintendent of MCI-Framingham, also
    testified about the security concerns she believed would arise if
    Kosilek was transferred to the all-female prison after receiving
    SRS. She explained that MCI-Framingham does not have private
    cells, save for the segregation and medical units. All women in
    the general population are required to cohabitate, and that prison
    would be unable to provide a single-occupancy cell for Kosilek.
    She also explained that Kosilek’s presence could create significant
    disruption in MCI-Framingham’s population, given that Kosilek had
    been convicted for violently murdering her wife, and that a
    significant portion of women at MCI-Framingham were victims of
    domestic abuse.”
    What they are alluding to is actually male on female violence, and I’m sure many female inmates are victims of horrific male violence in one form or another. Many of these female inmates have PTSD. Look at Kosilek. He still looks male even with female hormones.

    1. “Thanks to Pedro García Aguado, Lorena comes to understand that he shouldn’t use his transsexuality to justify his behavior”
      Dear Santa Claus, a lot of people could use a a Pedro García Aguado for Christmas. Thank you!

  21. I’ve been poking around a little bit trying to figure out how transactivists will be able to spin this. I mean, if I were an attorney and going to pick a case to try to take this to the Supreme Court, the last possible person I’d want as a client would be a guy who murdered his wife. Maybe that serial sex killer in Spokane would make a worse case. So I was interested to read how GLAD spins it. They handle it the simplest way and the way that this is so often handled: they _completely_ ignore Kosilek’s crimes. From reading this article, Kosilek could have been found guilty of jaywalking. http://sdgln.com/causes/2014/12/16/glad-appalled-appeals-court-ruling-denying-care-transgender-prisoner#sthash.17mPfi5n.NJKOgMNQ.dpbs
    I guess that’s one way to deal with his violence against women. And of course they also _completely_ ignore the concerns of the women who would have been forced to share space with him. What a surprise. I’ll keep poking around.
    Oh, I have also been looking at comments on a few regional mainstream newspapers, and the comments I’ve seen have overwhelmingly been opposed to Kosilek receiving taxpayer-funded surgeries, or being imprisoned with women.

    1. I’m glad someone else is noticing the radio silence of LGBTWTF organizations regarding the grisly details of Kosilek’s crime. They simply gloss it over. (As they do the effects of having a violent male incarcerated with women.) And we’re supposed to march in lockstep, unquestioning. Fuck that, and fuck them. And fuck Jennifer Levi.

      1. And they’re legitimizing that this is supposedly an example of murder within a “lesbian” relationship. Like hell.

  22. One more thing I just saw: when Kosilek won at a lower court, Elizabeth Warren said she disagreed with that ruling.

  23. Yes, great way to re-traumatize vulnerable women, all for the sake of catering to a violent psychopath’s pretense/fetish/delusion/whatever-it-is-its-not-a-medical-condition.

  24. Hi GallusMag,
    You probably have already seen this, but just in case I’m sending this along to you: http://ehungerford.com/?p=65
    Hungerford wrote an amazing open letter to Smith College about whether or not to admit transwomen to Smith. I’m the parent of a Smithie, and I also intend to submit a letter to the trans admission study committee, but there is no way that I can top what she wrote.
    Also, sorry if this is the wrong place to put this, but I couldn’t figure out how to submit a message to you directly.

    1. I agree, Hungerford’s letter was fantastic. I am a Wellesley graduate and they, too, have formed a committee to study admission of trans students. Hungerford’s letter says everything I want to say, and better 🙂
      The study committee at Wellesley has recommended that all in the Wellesley community read a book to understand more about transgenderism: Whipping Girl. I nearly had a stroke. I wrote to the professor running the group and she whined that the English department and Gender/Women’s studies department had recommended it. Nothing like a female-hating misogynist who HATES female-only spaces to inform a decision about a female only space.
      I’m incredibly frustrated at the tone of these conversations. I find that the only people who really care are the ones who want to immediately open doors to all transwomen, so they tend to pack the committees. I feel like others just aren’t paying attention, or have swallowed the myth that if you support the rights of lesbians and gays, then you also have to support MRA/trans destruction of female space, because they are, somehow, inextricably linked.

      1. Anyone who has their doubts but isn’t a feisty “TERF” has seen very clearly what happens when you don’t toe the line on this issue. Also, I think most nominal supporters of trans rights have the likes of Laverne Cox in mind, not, say, Justin Kilian. In that video, at least one of his supporters was clearly having doubts. I think few people realize the entitlement of trans “women” who have made zero attempt to medically, socially, or legally transition and how ugly they are in behavior and appearance.

  25. Given the choice to “die a little evry day” or to die all at once, I can imagine what choice Cheryl would have made, but then she wasn’t given a choice.
    As for the “suicide” attempts, dude was to lazy to stick his finger down his throat and produce a little “evidence” he just expected he would be believed when claiming he tried to shove a slipper down his throat? Are men never suspect? Convicted murderer brutally kills his wife and claims magical laydee brain identity and the legal system of Mass. just accepts this shit. FFS.
    This ruling, finally, against this monsters bullshit, is such a relief

  26. The brand new Sinister Wisdom has a piece by Kosilek. Yes, *that* Sinister Wisdom, the 40-year-old lesbian journal, just published a man who murdered his wife. Hasn’t anyone noticed???

      1. Sinister Wisdom 95, Winter 2015, pp. 113-115, entitled “Mutagenic Diaspora”. It’s a breathtaking piece of sociopathy that ends, “As women, as lesbians, as feminists, we are stronger and more deserving than that”.
        If Adrienne Rich were still alive, she would force the editor– Julie Enszer– to resign.

      2. No surprise. I think Sinister Wisdom is ultimately controlled by two of the Lesbians who helped bring Mr. ReeAnn Dixon into the previously Old Lesbians only organization, Old Lesbians Organizing for Change, where he has access to all members’ phone and email info. Mr. Dixon did a workshop at the conference in July at the same time as my workshop on Radical Lesbian Feminism and what to do about men now welcome in OLOC. (I and a friend were harassed by Carolyn Gage for not going to the workshop done, also at the same time, about how Lesbian Feminists owe the trannie men claiming to be Lesbians “reparations.” We were additionally harassed for refusing to speak to Mr. Dixon, who I’ve experienced as stalky and intrusive, as men so often are.)
        Elana Dykewomon had been a Separatist but with her parner Susan Levinkind are now supporting the men claiming to be Lesbians. Elana’s support of Pat Califia (bisexual Fem sadist and pornographer who now claims to be a gay man) and her connection with sado-masochism herself is another link with the trans cult culture that often is overlooked as a motive for allying with these most female-hating and Lesbian-hating men.
        It helps to know the history of some individuals in our movement to figure out how and why they shift to supporting men against Lesbians. So often there are deals we never know about, but can see evidence of. Another such deal was, I believe, when Elana escaped being held accountable or criticized for doing a glowing foreward to Julia Penelope’s last book, Dyke Culture. Julia was trashed in a surprise attack led by Caryatis Cardea at our local women’s bookstore when she came to promote her book. It was so vicious that Julia, who had edited and written many of the best books of the Lesbian Feminist movement, simply quit and said so publicly.
        But Elana escaped unscathed, with no criticism of her that I’ve ever seen or heard about. Caryatis Cardea, who had been working on Sinister Wisdom, then edited by Elana, was was soon mysteriously awarded (by Elana, with profuse apology) the honor of being forever listed in future issues of Sinister Wisdom as an editor equal to Elana. Was a deal cut to explain why Elana was not confronted for writing the foreward to Julia’s trashed anthology?
        I’m not sure who is editor now, but Elana and Susan have ultimate control. I’ve know enough Radical Lesbian Feminists who have been snubbed by Sinister Wisdom to not subscribe or read it, but this is a very upsetting development, though not really a surprise.

Comments are closed.