The 98 US Candidates who want to eliminate Title IX sex-based protections for women

Geographical distribution of candidates who consider sex-based protections for women discriminatory against males.

In a remarkable letter released just days before the 2018 mid-term elections, 98 candidates declared their intention to eliminate Title IX sex-based equality protections for women, replacing the protected category of “sex” with “gender identity”- a nebulously defined legal category based on an individual’s subjective identification with a social sex role defined by adherence to sex-stereotypes.
The signatories all state that legal rights for women which mandate equality based on sex are “cruel” to males, and “unscientific”. I kid you not. You can read the full letter here:
All 98 candidates are members of the House of Representatives and are up for election on November 6. All are running as members of the Democratic Party.
It is extremely unfortunate that candidates who claim to represent the left wing see fit to haphazardly gut longstanding, hard-fought legal rights of women and girls in an ill-conceived scheme to protect the belief system of a small but wealthy and powerful minority of males who wish to identify as transgender.
The future belongs to representatives who uphold the rights of women and girls against sex-based discrimination while also protecting the rights of transgender individuals to express their beliefs. Every one of these candidates have failed at this task.
Worse, they have attempted to vastly roll back legal rights of women and girls that have been in place since 1972 in order to mandate the sexist and homophobic social sex stereotypes of “Gender Identity”.
Women and girls are discriminated against based on our sex, not on our self concept or the way we “identify”. Women and girls cannot “identify” out of sex-based discrimination, which is based on our sex. Discrimination based on sex must be acknowledged and the rights of women and girls must be protected. Every one of these candidates have failed at this task.
They are as follows:
Raul M. Grijalva
3rd District Arizona
Mark DeSaulnier
11th District California
Alan Lowenthal
47th District California
Linda T. Sanchez
38th District California
Eric Swalwell
15th District California
Salud Carbajal
24th District California
Jimmy Panetta
20th District California
Ted W. Lieu
33rd District California
Pete Aguilar
31st District California
Jimmy Gomez
34th District California
Anna G. Eshoo
18th District California
Jackie Speier
14th District California
Scott H. Peters
52nd District California
Raul Ruiz
District 36 California
Nanette Barragan
44th District California
Zoe Lofgren
19th District California
Jared Huffman
2nd District California
Mark Takano
41st District California
Ro Khanna
17th District California
Julia Brownley
26th District California
Adam Schiff
28th District California
Tony Cardenas
29th District California
Brad Sherman
30th District California
Barbara Lee
13th District California
Judy Chu
27th District California
Karen Bass
37th District California
Jared Polis
2nd District Colorado
Diana DeGette
1st District Colorado
Elizabeth H. Esty
5th Distict Connecticut
Joe Courtney
2nd District Connecticut
Rosa DeLauro
3rd District Connecticut
Lisa Blunt Rochester
At-Large District Delaware
Eleanor Holmes Norton
Non-Voting Delegate District of Columbia
Frederica Wilson
24th District Florida
Alcee Hastings
20th District Florida
Ted Deutch
22nd District Florida
Stephanie Murphy
7th District Florida
Charlie Crist
13th District Florida
Lois Frankel
21st District Florida
Debbie Wasserman Schultz
23rd District Florida
Darren Soto
9th District Florida
Hank Johnson
4th District Georgia
Colleen Hanabusa
1st District Hawaii
Tulsi Gabbard
2nd District Hawaii
Jan Schakowsky
9th District Illinois
Mike Quigley
5th District Illinois
Luis Gutierrez
4th District Illinois
Andre Carson
7th District Indiana
John Yarmuth
3rd District Kentucky
Chellie Pingree
1st District Maine
Elijah E. Cummings
7th District Maryland
Jamie Raskin
8th District Maryland
Anthony G. Brown
4th District Maryland
Joseph P. Kennedy III
4th District Massachusetts
Seth Moulton
6th District Massachusetts
Rick Nolan
8th District Minnesota
Jacky Rosen
3rd District Nevada
Ruben J. Kihuen
4th District Nevada
Dina Titus
1st District Nevada
Carol Shea Porter
1st District New Hampshire
Frank Pallone Jr.
6th District New Jersey
Donald Payne Jr.
10th District New Jersey
Donald Norcross
1st District New Jersey
Albio Sires
8th District New Jersey
Nydia M. Velaquez
7th District New York
Sean Patrick Maloney
18th District New York
Kathleen M. Rice
4th District New York
Grace Meng
6th District New York
Yvette D. Clarke
9th District New York
Jose Serrano
15th District New York
Nita M. Lowey
17th District New York
Jerry Nadler
10th District New York
Hakeem Jeffries
8th District New York
Carolyn B. Maloney
12th District New York
Adriano Espaillat
13th District New York
Brian Higgins
26th District New York
Eliot Engel
16th District New York
Paul D. Tonko
20th District New York
David E. Price
4th District North Carolina
Suzanne Bonamici
1st District Oregon
Earl Blumenauer
3rd District Oregon
Dwight Evans
2nd District Pennsylvania
Brendan F. Boyle
13th District Pennsylvania
Robert A. Brady
1st District Pennsylvania
David N. Cicilline
1st District Rhode Island
Marc Veasey
33rd District Texas
Al Green
9th District Texas
Sheila Jackson Lee
18th District Texas
Lloyd Doggett
35th District Texas
Peter Welch
At-Large District Vermont
A Donald McEachin
4th District Virginia
Donald S. Beyer
8th District Virginia
Denny Heck
10th District Washington
Pramila Jayapal
7th District Washington
Derek Kilmer
6th District Washington
Adam Smith
9th District Washington
Suzan Delbene
1st District Washington
Mark Pocan
2nd District Wisconsin


102 thoughts on “The 98 US Candidates who want to eliminate Title IX sex-based protections for women

  1. This is a goddamned shame. And that they are all DNC members is even more despicable.
    Should the land of Gilead become a reality [and in many ways,,,,the DNC is helping to expedite that event], those will be some of the names that led to a modern day version of what was thought to have been eradicated or at least neutralized in WWII. Heck, they may even end up being the colony leaders……before they are expended.

  2. It would really figure if these people pass a law gutting Title IX before passing an LGB ENDA into law. Also every district I’ve ever lived in has one of these POSes representing it. Lofgren, Eshoo, Nadler, Maloney, and Jayapal should be ashamed of themselves. I regret voting for them.

    1. If there was a bill introduced in US Congress gutting sex protections in favor of gender stereotypes, that would force a debate similar to what happened in the UK with the GRA. I would welcome that, as the gutting of sex protections has been happening on the local and state levels and through administrative actions, forestalling any open discussion of the issues or countering of genderist claims.

    2. I used to have Delbene. Probably even voted for her. So many of these women wouldn’t be where they are without title IX. Who knew the 1970’s, known best for bad fashion, would be such an idyllic and equitable era compared to the bloody 21st century?

  3. Sneaky bastards waited until late to make this public but in private they beat these 98 to a pulp to sign on — who beat them — the BIG MONEY BOURGEOIS DNC CONTRIBUTORS who use this fake issue AS PRETENSE OF PROGRESSIVITY to obscure the fact that the Democrats are TOTAL FAKE LIBERALS AND PROGRESSIVES — TOOLS OF THE NEOLIBERAL IMPERIAL DEEP STATE CENSORS which makes THEM NEOLIBERAL IMPERIAL DEEP STATE ASSASSINS. Thanks for pointing this out, I am sending it out. BEST REASON I CAN THINK OF FOR REPUBLICANS TO RETAIN CONGRESSIONAL CONTROL.

  4. Unfortunately women are fucked either way.
    If we vote democrat, then Title IX is destroyed, but Roe V Wade is preserved.
    If we vote GOP, then Title IX is preserved, but Roe V Wade is destroyed.
    This two party system sucks ass!

    1. “This two party system sucks ass!”
      True. This is why women need our own political party separate from corrupt Democrats and Republicans. If women don’t want to form our own political party, then independents can form a political party of their own. The corporate controlled two party system is destroying the U.S., and the majority of Americans know it.
      We can keep Roe V. Wade and Title IX both. Roe V. Wade isn’t so much about who is elected and who is on the Supreme Court.

    2. The Democrats will not make Title IX illegal. They don’t have control of the three branches of government. Title IX isn’t going anywhere.
      Roe v. Wade? That is a different issue and could be in jeopardy.

  5. The letter is a piece of hysteria. I doubt any of the signers have even considered the women’s side of the story. I do not see whose civil rights are being taken away. If the law just says no discrimination on the basis of sex, race, religion, sexual orientation, or gender identity, that would cover everything. There is no need to eliminate all sex based protections for women in order to do this.

  6. Wow. That letter. So hyperbolic. Claiming there is medical consensus that sex is an identity, not based on reproductive anatomy. “Counters the consensus of medical providers and scientists across the globe who have found no reliable evidence to support such a definition…” Also threw intersex people into the argument, claiming this is about their rights. Oh, and for you “women and girls who are perceived as not conforming to gender stereotypes,” which I guess is every woman here, destroying any objective measure of sex, in favor of identity, is somehow helping to protect your rights.Women in the US have no political home, only opposing strategies for eliminating our rights.

    1. Exactly what is happening in the UK. We are politically homeless. Oh, to be thirty years younger and healthy. I wish someone would step up. I know I sound like a drama queen but Armageddon isn’t going to be about nuclear war; I think it’s going to be comprised of several issues and this is one of them

  7. I’ve been on the fence this election, as a lifelong democrat who has woken up to the farce that is gender identity and how it is eroding sex-based protections for women. I did not participate in early voting because I just couldn’t bring myself to vote either Republican or Democrat. But this letter is what has finally pushed me off the fence. For the first time ever, I will vote Republican. I’m glad I waited to vote on election day rather than during early voting, because before this letter I was leaning toward voting Democratic as usual. No more. The genderists have finally pushed me over to the side of Donald Trump. I can hardly believe it. What a horrible feeling.

    1. Donald Trump and Republicans roll their buses right over women and girls themselves and in much more damaging ways. Think twice. Don’t be like one of those Progressives who think there is no difference between the Parties, then wonder how we got a Right Wing Supreme Court who will only be TOO HAPPY to gut Title IX and all sex based protections. Hand them the dynamite to do this, they will, and have a hearty belly laugh the entire time.

    2. A broken clock is right twice a day. We don’t have to consider ourselves on his side just because we agree with him on this issue.

  8. This is nothing short of scandalous.
    If this came out a month or two earlier, I guarantee the Democrats wouldn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of taking back the House.
    Title IX does not protect transvestites/crossdressers and cheaters.
    This is all because these idiot politicians have NO idea what “transgenderism” really is–and they have misplaced pity on men.
    Of course, gutting Title IX isn’t going to happen. There is plenty of time to educate Democratic politicians about what the law is about, and it isn’t about crossdressers being able to commit fraud. This is a bunch of lip service.

    1. Glad to hear.
      Will you post it here?
      I will write mine and post it.
      We all need to pick half a dozen house candidates on the.list, and
      1. Write them. Call them.
      2. Post their email, snail mail address, and phone number here, to make it easy for us to contact more or all of them.
      3. Everyone, please print out some relevant articles, such as this, and, put them in a binder, and

    2. Yes, please share when you are through?
      Its hard to know how to phrase these things, addressing ppl we ordinarily agree with and/or admire in other circumstances.
      Nobody from MY state on that list, of course!

  9. I just sent a very angry letter to my representative, Jared Huffman. We’ll see if or how he responds.

  10. Gallus, thanks for this very important information. The women on this blog have more integrity and intelligence than half the corrupt morons in Washington DC. I voted for Obama twice, but his administration was wrong to rewrite the historical meaning of “sex” under Title IX. “Sex” under Title IX clearly means biological sex. Title IX was signed into law in the 1970’s with the support of intrepid feminists, long before the words gender identity and non-binary were invented. How can sex under Title IX be both biological sex and gender identity at the same time? When is “sex” under Title IX biological sex and when is it “gender identity”. No one knows for sure, but corrupt politicians living in their own politically correct fantasy world are hell bent on shoving this down our collective throats.
    Any rational person knows that biological sex is not the same as gender identity, but this doesn’t stop politicians from forcing this nonsense on us, the common people.
    This is Title IX that politicians haven’t the time to read.
    “No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”
    Despite what some Democrats think, the female sex actually exists.
    The human species is sexually dimorphic and all mammals and primates reproduce sexually. No primate can change its sex. This is our evolutionary history. Hominids, our earliest ancestors, didn’t have “gender identities”. Yes, there are rare intersex conditions (1 – 2% of the population), but intersex is not the same as transgender. The majority of transgender identified people have no intersex disorder. Intersex (disorder of sex development) is the result of sexual reproductions, so without sexual reproduction, there would be no intersex people.
    I can see making some kind of exception for people with verifiable intersex conditions and acknowledging intersex people, but it’s ludicrous to believe that humans can change their sex.
    Male, female, and rare intersex genetic conditions can be proven scientifically with DNA testing and other medical tests, but gender identity can’t be proven one way or another. Gender identity cannot be measured and quantified. And, people can change their gender identity as many times as they choose.
    Erasing the female sex as a distinct legal class of people is the most offensive form of sex discrimination. If anyone can identify as a woman and female, then what does woman mean? Apply this reasoning to other historically oppressed groups of people and see how it works. If anyone can self-identify as Native American, then what does Native mean? If anyone can self-identify as African American, then what does being black mean? Don’t tell me that eventually some joker isn’t going to try to self-identify him or herself into some minority. Just took at Rachel Dolezal. She doesn’t have any black relatives, but she said she was black. Years ago, gendertrender had a post about a white transwoman identifying as an Asian lady. And, don’t forget the transwomen who like to identify as disabled people. Gendertrender had a post on this too. Or, trans age kinkster Stefonknee Wolscht.
    Self-identifying can’t change physical reality no matter how hard they might try. Female is an immutable human physical characteristic just like race and disability.
    If “gender identity” were a harmless political ideology, it wouldn’t matter that much. Gender identity directly conflicts with the interests of the female sex. It’s not just about bathrooms. It’s women’s locker rooms (incident at Evergreen State College, Olympia, Washington), women’s sports (Andraya Yearwood, Gabrielle Ludwig, etc. -gendertrender good source of information).
    We are seeing the destruction of women’s sports right before our very own eyes. Take time to research it. Look at the photos. This is so unfair, and then they have the gall to scream “transphobia” as if were are all bind. There are several lawsuits over biological males in women’s locker rooms. Eventually, biological males with fully intact male genitalia would be sharing the same dorm room as females.
    If you live in one of these districts, give your Congress person hell. The female sex actually exists.
    These morons make me feel dirty and disgusting having voted Democrat for twenty plus years of my life. I remember when Obama was first elected. We were all ecstatic. I went door to door asking people to vote for him. My feet were tired, and my shoes were worn out. Now, some Democrats shit on the female sex, fifty percent of the population, to appease a small minority of self-absorbed, special snowflakes.
    Women deserve better. So, give them hell.

  11. Mujeres! We can’t give up and allow this to happen without a fight! Let’s organize and start calling/writing letters to state reps, educating others about the negative implications via social media, word of mouth etc. etc.
    We can’t lose hope.

  12. Several politicians from California signed this horrid little letter. After a transwoman was charged with the cold blooded slaughter of an interracial lesbian couple and their black son in Oakland, there was total silence. Not one word from a Democrat in California or anywhere. So, a lesbian family was slaughtered in their own state, but not one word from any of these Democrats. As I type this, a transwoman, Dana Rivers, and a queer student activist, Pablo Gomez Jr., are on trial in the bay area for murder of women. Rivers is on trial for killing an interracial lesbian couple and their son, and Pablo Gomez Jr. is on trial for killing one woman and attempted murder or another woman. That is one transwoman and a queer student activist on trial for killing women, both in the bay area. Not one word from Democrats and trans/queer controlled LGBTQIAWTF+ media.
    Women need to wake the **uc up. All violent crimes committed by transwomen (biological males) against girls and women are buried by trans and queer controlled LGBTQIAWTF+++. I’m a lesbian, and I know I’m more likely to be killed by a TERF hating transwoman than a redneck. And, if it happens, it’s not going to make the news at LGBTQIAWTF+ media.
    When a transwoman (biological male) is convicted of killing, torturing, or raping women (too many examples to list here), trans activists demand that he be placed in a women’s prison. The State of California sent Richard, “Sherri”, Masbruch to a women’s prison. He tortured women with electrical wires before raping them. It’s in the court documents. Gendertrender covered it. Democrats in California are so enamored with “gender identity” that they expect taxpayers to pay for sex reassignment surgery, hormones, etc. for convicted male killers.
    Women have been on the receiving end of death threats for years, but not one word from Democrats. Google, “TERF is a”.
    I didn’t vote for Trump, and I’m not a Republican. Trans and queer activists, the people who really run the LGBTQIAWTF++, have either been spoon feeding Democrats a bunch of false information, and/or Democrats are getting a lot of money from rich old white men like James, “Jennifer”, Pritzker, Soros, etc. Rich old white men fund transgender. And, pharmaceutical companies make a ton of money selling GnRH analogues and hormones that they know are sterilizing children.

    1. Skylark Phillips,
      And there still has been no word about the brigade scumbag who committed those murders…outside of what Gallus has mentioned here. One would think that it would have garnered some notice, even in the alt press here, nothing. Which leads into this:
      Just for the hell of it, I did a little more research into the background of the police chief here, who was the deputy same in Oakland, focusing on the dates of the murder and the DPC’s time in Oakland. They coincide and if memory serves, she was involved in part of the ‘investigation’ [and that is said in quotes, because even a sight impaired cop could have done a better job], due to some major issues with management in the Oakland PD. . As we all know, this was fumbled and sadly, this DPC [who I am ashamed to say, is a female of color] is now in charge here of the Portland Police Department.
      A few months ago, there was a white brigade member who was killed in the Old Town section of Portland and the press was all over it. This goes to show who or WHAT BACKGROUND has more value in the US, if they are the victim of a crime …..and if one is a brigade member, for all intents…..they can get away with murder, if they were the perpetrator. Even if they go to jail or prison, they are still treated ‘better’ [all things considered] than those doing straight time.
      Now these 98 jackasses, poor excuses for a collection of cells want to protect the poorly designed and mostly deranged science projects. Damn shitheads….

    2. Similarly, there was no outcry from SF politicians about the horrid, violent trans museum exhibit, complete with baseball bats meant for women who disagree with gender ideology. Sexual-liberationism passing itself off as progressivism and progressives being either fooled by this or MRAs underneath the facade.

  13. These candidates should be ashamed of themselves for not standing up for biological females.

  14. There is no one running against my rep so the most I can do to protest him is not vote in that race at all. He also voted against a bill now currently before the Senate, House Bill 6729, that would help uncover human trafficking and prostitution by following the money back to the traffickers and pimps. Not shocked by this since it’s Joe Kennedy III a man from a family of men notorious for their abhorrent treatment of women.

  15. At a time when the left needs to be strategic, this is such a goddamned stupid and divisive move. It isn’t just something nebulous and meme-y like “Trans Rights Are Human Rights.” Most people know the “cruel and unscientific” definition of sex and I don’t if even strategy could override the distaste at essentially being called a “bigot” for understanding sexual reproduction.
    Save the pandering/virtue-signaling/bobbing for Pritzker Bucks for Nov 7th, guys.

  16. There are 435 members of the House of Representatives. House seats go by the population of a state. The 98 delusional Democrat signers are about 22% of the total number of representatives. Still, that is 22% too many who are too lazy to do some research. Notice how the Senate didn’t want to touch this issue with a ten foot pole.
    And, if we look at the terminology and phrases in this letter, it sounds kind of like it was written by trans activists, and probably pushed in front of politicians to sign. Since when do politicians ever take time to actually think something through. They take the special interest money, give their politically correct speeches, and leave.
    Despite what some Democrats might think, the women’s locker room issue is far from being over.
    *Women’s locker rooms in high schools and colleges:
    Normally, a male student exposing himself to female students could be construed as sexual harassment under Title IX. In the case of a transwoman with fully intake male genitalia at Evergreen State College in Olympia, Washington, all he had to do was claim gender identity.
    This is a link to the actual campus police report involving an incident in a women’s locker room. See where it says “her legs open and her male genitalia showing”. Why should girls and women have to see male genitalia in a women’s locker room? Title IX was supposed to address sexual harassment, not enable it.
    I want these Democrats to tell me what they think of “her legs open and her male genitalia showing” in a women’s locker room. And, do these Democrats think that telling a 45 year old man to keep his old white tally wacker out of the women’s locker room because girls and women don’t want to see it is just like Jim Crow?
    “This is not 1959 Alabama. We don’t call police for drinking from the wrong water fountain”. Colleen Francis
    This is another example of a fully intact male exposing himself to women in a women’s locker room. This incident happened in Canada.
    As to Title IX and biological males in women’s locker rooms, none of this is settled.
    The Bowertown decision has been appealed. This is a link to a feminist group’s amicus brief.
    “Ruling in Boyertown transgender policy case appealed”
    Of course, biological males in women’s locker rooms have resulted in quite a few lawsuits in the U.S. Some of these lawsuits have been settled or dropped, and some of them are still ongoing. The Planet Fitness lawsuit doesn’t relate specifically to Title IX, but it is still ongoing.

  17. * Women’s sports
    “As a result of Title IX, women and girls have benefited from more participation opportunities and more equitable facilities. Women who were under 10 when Title IX passed have much higher sports participation rates than women who grew up before Title IX. Fifty-five percent of the “post-Title IX” generation participated in high school sports, compared to 36% of the “pre-Title IX” generation. Because of Title IX, more women have received athletic scholarships and thus the opportunity for higher education than would have been possible otherwise. In fact, many women Olympic athletes credit Title IX for the opportunity to attend college through athletic scholarships and to participate in sports. In addition, because of Title IX the salaries of coaches for women’s teams have increased.”
    Gender identity is destroying women’s sports and turning women’s sports into a ludicrous farce. The very integrity of women’s sports is at stake. Rational people are seeing this trend in all sports and at all levels of competition. I want these 98 Democrats to scroll down and look at all the photos, do some research, and then say it’s fair. Title IX never said males and females have the same physical characteristics. It said females should not be denied opportunities based on their sex. After puberty, a male will have a significant physical advantage over a female.
    Males weigh about 15% more than females, on average. For those older than 20 years of age, males in the US have an average weight of 86.1 kg (190 lbs), whereas females have an average weight of 74 kg (163 lbs).
    On average, men are taller than women, by about 15 cm (6 inches). American males who are 20 years old or older have an average height of 176.8 cm (5 ft 10 in). The average height of corresponding females is 162 cm (5 ft 4in).
    Cardiovascular Fitness
    Athletes’ cardiovascular fitness is measured by their maximum oxygen consumption, also known as VO2max, which measures their capacity to transport and use oxygen during exercise. This is measured by calculating the point at which an athlete’s oxygen consumption remains steady despite an increase in an exercise intensity. Elite male athletes have a higher oxygen carrying capacity than women, which allows them to reach their maximum training peak earlier. This is probably due to women’s lower hemoglobin levels and men’s larger body size. Maximum oxygen consumption is directly related to body size.
    Bones and Ligaments
    Male athletes have longer and larger bones, which provide a clear mechanical advantage over female athletes. The increased articular surface and larger structure of male bones provide them with a greater leverage and a wider frame on which to support muscle. Similarly, the ligaments of female athletes are generally more lax and fragile than those of their male counterparts. This gives male athletes an advantage in sports that involve throwing, kicking and hitting, and explains the higher incidence of musculoskeletal injuries among female athletes. On the other hand, female athletes have a wider pelvis and a lower center of gravity, which provides excellent balance.
    Male athletes have a higher ratio of muscle mass to body weight, which allows for greater speed and acceleration. This explains why female speed records in running and swimming are consistently 10 percent slower than men’s, and why, on average, they have two thirds of the strength of men.
    “Transgender Sports: Men and Women Have Physical Differences That No Surgery or Hormone Treatment Can Change”
    “Kate Hall won the 100m sprint at regionals her sophomore year. But a year later, Hall was beat by Andraya Yearwood, a high school freshman. Yearwood was born male but “identifies” as female. At the time of the race, he had not undergone hormone treatment or surgery to “transition from male to female.”
    More Than Testosterone
    Much of the debate about “transgender” athletes has focused on testosterone. Consider the NCAA policy for such transgender athletes focuses only on testosterone. According to the NCAA’s policy for men transitioning to women:
    A trans female [male transitioning to a female] student-athlete being treated with testosterone suppression medication for Gender Identity Disorder or gender dysphoria and/or Transsexualism, for the purposes of NCAA competition may continue to compete on a men’s team but may not compete on a women’s team without changing it to a mixed team status until completing one calendar year of testosterone suppression treatment. (NCAA Inclusion of Transgender Student-Athletes, 2011)
    Notably, a trans male (female identifying as male) does not have to wait a year before competing on a men’s team.
    Testosterone plays a big role in athletic performance. But when we start talking about high-performance competition, especially in track and field, small variations make all the difference. These go well beyond testosterone.
    Hip Structure and Center of Mass
    Some differences can’t be changed, even with surgery and hormone treatments.
    One of the major differences between male and female runners is the hip structure along with everything attached to hip movement. It’s not just a matter of having wide or narrow hips. A key difference is the ratio between hip width and femur length. Women tend to have a greater hip width-to-femur length ratio, which leads to greater hip adduction — that is, movement toward the center of the body. This difference has a domino effect that results in small differences in joint rotation and muscle recruitment.
    In other words, men and women differ in how the lower parts of their bodies move as a coordinated wholes.
    Other Differences
    Men also tend to have more fast-twitch muscles than women. According to experts this isn’t something that can change with training. Fast-twitch muscles are what you want for sprinting because they help you explode off the starting line. They also help produce the kind of “anaerobic” energy you need for sprinting . Slow-twitch muscles are good for conserving energy. They’re the kind of muscles you want in a distance race.
    Doctors can change some things about the body. But they can’t “reformat” the body to become something else completely.
    Men also tend to have larger internal organs. This sounds like a disadvantage for sprinters, but larger lungs and heart result in more oxygen uptake. The more oxygen you can take in, the more that can be transported to your muscles. VO2max measures an athlete’s maximum oxygen uptake. It’s higher in men than it is in women, even for men and women that have the same body mass and equivalent lean muscle mass. Biologically, men have a higher VO2max, all other things being equal.
    As a result, men also tend to have a higher concentration of hemoglobin in their blood than women do. For athletes, that’s an advantage. This is why doping with EPO, a protein that increases your oxygen-carrying hemoglobin, is illegal in sports. A runner who is born male, therefore, has an advantage over most female athletes wanting to run a clean race.
    The Body Can’t Be Completely “Reformatted”
    Even with surgery, doping, and hormone treatment, you can’t change every piece of your body. The body functions as a cohesive whole. The skeletal system, the size of major internal organs, and one’s center of mass are all fundamental components of the body. We see this in athletes who use steroids. They often sustain injuries because steroids change muscle mass without changing the ligaments and tendons connected to the muscle.
    Doctors can change some things about the body. But they can’t “reformat” the body to become something else completely. A biological male is going to have the fundamental structures of a male body. That’s an inherent advantage in many sports.
    Subordinating Athletes Who are “Born Female”
    Separating men and women in sports has opened the door for many opportunities for women.
    Separating men and women in sports has opened the door for many opportunities for women. Title IX has allowed women athletes to attend college on a scholarship and compete at a high level. Women athletes have also served as role models to other women.
    Consider some of the great female runners. Joan Benoit Samuelson took gold the first year the women’s marathon was part of the Olympics. Paula Radcliff holds the women’s marathon world record. Jackie Joyner Kersee holds the best heptathlon score and the second farthest women’s long-jump. Florence Griffith Joyner, considered the fastest woman of all time, ran the women’s 100m in 10.49 and the 200m in 21.34.
    All these female athletes have made huge contributions to running. Yet even Florence Joyner’s times would not have qualified her for the men’s semi-finals. In fact, the top twenty-five fastest men in 100m have times under 10 seconds, beating Joyner’s time of 10.49.
    Of course elite athletes are by definition outside the norm. But there’s something wrong when half of the population has an inherent disadvantage. If biological males can compete against biological females, it won’t be long, especially in elite sports, before males win all the races and hold all the records.
    Women will, in effect, but pushed out of competition because they were born with female bodies. Does that make any sense? As Jeff Jacobs asks in his thoughtful article in the Hartford Courant, “What do we tell these girls? A transgender’s journey is more important than your journey?”
    Kate Hall showed grace and maturity in the face of disappointment. But how many more young women will have to say what Hall said in response to her defeat, “It’s frustrating … but that’s just the way it is now”?”

    Transgender Sports: Men and Women Have Physical Differences That No Surgery or Hormone Treatment Can Change

    This is just a partial list of biological males taking medals, athletic scholarships, and spots on women’s athletic teams. It’s in all sports. We can see the physical advantages with our own eyes. Andraya Yearwood, a muscular, well-developed male high school student, wasn’t on hormones the first he competed against girls. Two transgender identified male high school students took first and second place in both the 100 and 200 meter women’s dash.
    Women’s Track and Field:
    “Terry Miller and Andraya Yearwood dominated the competition at Connecticut’s girls track and field state championships earlier this week. Miller took 1st place in both the 100 and 200 meter dash, while Yearwood finished second in the 100. According to News 8 in Hartford, CT, both Miller and Yearwood are transgender which has some people saying that the pair had an unfair advantage.”

    Transgender Track Athlete Wins CT State Championship, Debate Ensues

    1. In 2017 Yearwood was the only male competing in girl’s track and field. This year he was joined by Terry Miller. I expect next year even more will join them.
      Connecticut has a law that requires letting students compete according to their stated gender identity. Perverse incentives are built in. There are wins awaiting them, not to mention instant fame. A big, splashy write up on Miller and Yearwood in ESPN, They are the Champions, praised them for their courage, trailblazing spirit, etc.
      On a side note, Connecticut also has a law requiring that trans-identified male prisoners be housed in the women’s section at their request. They need a some kind of certificate, but it’s a cinch to get that. Therefore, it’s probably inevitable that Connecticut will eventually house a convicted rapist with women, with the same outcome as Karen White.

  18. LOLOL
    What morons.
    I’m not suggesting that people should vote in any particular way. What I am suggesting is that as women become aware of the conflict between women’s sex-based rights and “gender identity” doctrine, candidates such as these will no longer be supported.
    This post contains basic information about candidates who support the replacement of women’s rights with “sex role” rights i.e.. Gender Identity. What the reader chooses to do with that information is entirely up to them. I can certainly envision several tacts that don’t involve voting republican. Such as educating these candidates as some in this thread have suggested or done.
    Of course to a totalitarian patriarch like Andrew Kaveney everything is black or white, with no grey areas.

    1. Also worth note: If you 100% support the rights of people who identify as trans to live their lives and express their beliefs as they see fit- you will become an “anti-trans activist” the second you stand up for women’s rights in areas where they conflict. Do make a note of it.

    2. “a threat to life on Earth” coming from someone who looks like an alien in an ill fitted human suit lmao
      I also hope it doesn’t frighten them too much to learn that not everyone is a single issue voter.

      1. “This is THE MOMENT!!! This is THE MOMENT when Feminists became a threat to LIFE ON EARTH!!!! It was the moment some blogger criticized some democrats!!!!!!
        LOLOLOLOLOL Good old Rozzie *snicker*

      2. ‘ A threat to life on earth’????? What the fuck have these assholes been reading? The script to ‘Plan 9 From Outer Space’???
        To be very blunt, these ‘people’ are more of a threat to mankind and children, than ANY person who sees through their lies, their bullshit and their neanderthal, paranoid, mentally deficient delusional statements.

      3. By Kaveney’s logic, if you’re pro-feminist, you’re pro-Trump? I mean, that makes sense given how so many women wore pink, cat-eared hats to show their support for him, right?
        Notice how whenever privileged white guys can’t get what they want, it becomes “a threat to life on Earth”–as if no one else’s life matters. Or maybe it’s veiled blackmail, as in, “Nice planet you got there–be a shame if anything happened to it.”
        Speaking of aliens, can you imagine Kaveney trying to explain “male” and “female” to a biologist from another planet?

      4. Kaveney, like most male transactivists, and many men who don’t identify as transgender, is extremely concerned with controlling women. This begins by exerting control over our thoughts, via monitoring our speech: the expression of our thoughts. The end goal of Kaveney and his movement is that women are prevented from organizing against sex-based violence, sexual harassment, sex discrimination, sexism, reproductive exploitation, sex stereotypes, heterosexism, sex inequity, and are prevented from enacting protections, harm reduction measures, scholarships, awards, recognition, meetings, organizations, lesbian events and culture, based on sex, or any acknowledgement whatsoever that women even exist as a distinct class of human beings. Mere mention of us, by us, about us, is considered verboten by Andrew Kaveney and men like him, on the grounds that men have a right to be female and barring that, eliminate the category of thing they would like to, but can never be.

      5. As if Dems are going to do anything about climate change. It’s too late, and they all know it. Republicans are holding a going out of business sale, and Democrats seem like maybe they’re looking to ameliorate some of the worst damage (until it kills us all regardless). I wonder if that’s why liberal elites in the U.S. and Europe are so migrant crazy. They’re trying to let as many in as possible before the shit hits the fan.

    3. OMG, those idiots and their blatant lies! Nowhere did you say to vote republican. I am a Canadian radical feminist and I’ve completely lost hope in what passes for a “left” up here however I still have NEVER voted conservative and I definitely never will. Leftists don’t just suddenly start opposing abortion and worker’s rights because they disagree with other leftists on gender. Radical feminists don’t suddenly start supporting Trump, a misogynist asshat famous for saying it’s okay to “grab women by the pussy” just because we disagree with democrats about gender. Honestly, trans activists are so dumb I don’t know how they can even tie their shoes.

  19. *Women’s sports continued
    Coaches, Parents Question Policy For High School Transgender Athletes
    Video of first and second place.
    Terry Miller of Bulkeley wins the 100m girls dash i. 11.72 (meet record). Andraya Yearwood of Cromwell 2nd

    How often does a female athlete start her athletic career at age 50? Gabrielle Ludwig, 6’8” 200 lbs., played on men’s teams when he was younger. All coaches have to do go out and find retired 6’8” men’s basketball players for the “women’s team”.
    Do these 98 Democrats think that this is fair, or do they believe we are all blind?
    All The Things You Can’t Deny: Title IX, Trans Women, And the Reality of ‘Neutrality’
    More information here:

    Female athletes crushed by ‘women who were once men’

    Gendertrender has a lot of information on women’s sports.
    According to 2016 changes in Olympic rules, women Olympic athletes can have a penis, and their testosterone levels can be 3 times what females naturally produce.
    “Under the previous guidelines, male athletes who wished to compete in women’s events were required to provide proof of legal gender change and evidence of surgical gonad removal followed by two years of estrogen treatments. The new guidelines do away with all of that. Under the new guidelines, any male can compete in women’s events with no legal gender change and no medical treatment whatsoever, on the basis of his declaration alone: he must declare that he believes himself to possess a “female” personality or mentality. The one caveat is that his testosterone levels must remain in the lower range of typical male levels (<10 nmol/L) for the duration of one year. Men with testosterone levels in the higher range may require medication to reduce those levels to the lower end of normal male averages. No transgender cross-sex hormonal treatment is required.”
    Normal Male Range : 9 – 38 nmol/L
    Normal Female Range : 0.5 – 2.4 nmol/L
    “Transgender athletes to be allowed to compete as the other sex in the Olympics WITHOUT having gender reassignment surgery”
    Yes, thanks to transgender activists, it’s possible that the gold, silver, and bronze medals in Olympic “women’s events” could all be won by biological males, penis and testicles intact. And, their testosterone levels could be three times what females naturally produce.

  20. I REALLY wish I could get out of California. The idea of raising kids here scares the shit out of me.
    I have female relatives who paid for college with athletic scholarships. If Title IX was gutted and they had to compete with boys when they were teenagers, they would have been screwed out of their higher education (or, at the very least, would have had a much harder time paying for it). How is it that so many female law-makers can’t see what they’re doing to us? I don’t know if they’re all in the pocket of the trans lobby or if they’re just that stupid

  21. Glad to hear.
    Will you post it here?
    I will write mine and post it.
    Huge thanks to you, GM, for your post.
    We all need to pick half a dozen house candidates on the.list, and
    1. Write them. Call them.
    2. Post their email, snail mail address, and phone number here, to make it easy for us to contact more or all of them.
    3. Everyone, please print out some relevant articles, such as this, and, and articles from the GD (gender dysphoria) Working Group, and their article defending Dr. Lisa Littman’s research, some articles about trans censorship and no platforming, maybe add some FB posters from Stop Trans Chauvanism for visual variety mixed in with the gender-critical articles, put them in a binder, and call your representatives, whether on this list or not, find one person to go with you, and make an appointment to talk to your representative(s), one at a time. Don’t say it’s about being critical of transgenderism, or they’ll likely shut down out of fear of trans bullies, and won’t see you. You might try saying it’s about the privacy.and safety rights of women and girls, or about Title IX. If you can’t find an ally locally, go alone. The.more electeds we visit, the more practiced and effective we become. Having the binder builds confidence, clarity, and is an easier way to quickly share alot of information with someone unfamiliar with a non-brigade perspective and critique. Once the binder, with lots of plastic sleeves, are in place, it’s easy to keep printing articles and adding to the collection.
    Please visit electeds who are not on this list, as well. They are all being faced with votes on tran-related issues.
    Does anyone have a rebuttal to the recent letter signed by the 1600 scientists capitulating to trans nonsense, please? If so, would you please provide a link here. Thanks all.

    1. Also take a look at what women have been doing in the UK. In particular Women’s Place UK…
      I know their 5 demands are in relation to proposed changes of the UK Gender Recognition Act, but your elected Democrat representatives need to know that this is what follows when they conflate gender identity and sex.
      Also Fair Play for Women have been wonderful in organising and informing the public…..
      What has happened in the UK is that MPs of all political persuasions have felt too intimidated to speak out.
      I wish I could do more but my personal refusal to accept the gender identity of a man i have known for over 30 years sometimes takes it’s toll. It’s been so great to see braver, younger and more eloquent women speaking out.

    2. That long thread has a number of people, including members of the intersex community, arguing cogently against the letter. (The spokesperson for the scientists blocked everyone who did, even the intersex advocates.) If I come across something better, I’ll post a link to it.
      Also, there’s this response by Satiria:

      1. All biologists know that sexual reproduction exists in mammals and primates. How can sexual reproduction exist in mammals and primates if there are no actual females and males? This is our evolutionary history. Did our earliest ancestors, the hominids, have gender identities?
        I want to scream every time intersex (disorder of sex development) is used in the same sentence as transgender. If these “scientists” don’t know that intersex (1 – 2 percent of the population) is not the same as transgender, then they really need to find another occupation. The existence of rare intersex conditions does not negate the fact that mammals and primates reproduce sexually. Without sexual reproduction, there would be no intersex people.
        Acknowledging intersex people is fine. Pretending that humans can change their sex is ludicrous.
        There was a time when tobacco companies actually went out and found some medical doctors who, for the right amount of money, would say that smoking is not harmful There are even some scientists who, for the right price, say climate change is a hoax.

      2. 1600 is honestly a piddly amount, considering the amount of scientists in the world. That list also includes students and PhD candidates and not necessarily people experienced in their fields.
        Also people like “Eric Gudz (pronouns: they/them)
        Commissioner, City of Davis in Transportation,
        Institute of Transportation Studies”

  22. I will be writing to all the reps for Maryland. Despicable. All the parents in my Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria support group, who are life-long Democrats, have left the Dems because of this.

  23. I do not understand how this letter asks for taking away women’s rights. Isn’t it currently the case that title IX protections are also available for trans women? Isn’t this letter asking to keep it that way?
    This is the first sentence: “We write to you to express our strong objection to reported efforts within your department to eliminate the rights and protections of transgender Americans”
    How does this take away women’s rights?

  24. I cringed while reading the whole way down the list because I knew Mark Pocan would
    be on the list, and sure enough, he was. It’s so irritating, especially because he’s gay. I plan to contact him, but I don’t hold out too much hope. Madison is, after all, the PC capital of the Midwest

  25. Voting Republican is a vote for earth destruction, nuclear expansion, and oligarchy, so that’s not in the picture, except at the very local level where candidates are not that distinguishable.
    Three NY Democratic Congressmen (yup, men) did not sign the letter. Joe Crowley who was just defeated after many productive years in Congress by the very progressive Occasio-Cortez represents Queens-Bronx, Gregory Meeks from Queens, and Thomas Suozzi from Nassau country, were the holdouts. Occasio-Cortez, who is “so close” to her constituency (ha), would not only have signed it, but sponsored it. The few upstate NY rural democrats, who might have easily balked at it, did sign it.

  26. I have a lot of questions for the Democrats from California who signed this letter. They have a lot of explaining to do.
    (1.) Why did every LGBTQIA media source in the U.S. bury the Dana Rivers case? And, why wasn’t Rivers charged with a hate crime for the cold blooded slaughter of an interracial lesbian couple and their son? Rivers is a straight man who transitioned in midlife. Most transwomen are heterosexual or bisexual. Rivers isn’t a gay man. Dana Rivers was part of Camp Trans that protested outside of Michigan Women’s Music Festival, a lesbian run event. So, we have a straight man with a history of protesting lesbian events, and he ends up stabbing and shooting a lesbian couple in their own home in the middle of the night. If someone was charged with killing three transwomen in one day, shooting and stabbing them to death in their own home, it would have been plastered all over every LGBTQIA media source in the U.S., if not the world.
    (2.) Why was there complete silence from Democrats in California? California Attorney General Becerra (Democrat) banned state travel to North Carolina and other states because they are transphobic, but not one word from him, or a Democrat in California, on the cold blooded slaughter of a lesbian family in their own state. Could it have to do with the fact that trans and queer control the LGBTQIA, and trans and queer controlled LGBTQIA are deeply entrenched in the Democratic Party?

    What’s Current: Trans-identified male, Dana Rivers, arrested for murder of lesbian couple & their son

    Some mainstream news sources covered this triple homicide, but not the LGBTQIA media, or any media source connected to Democrats.
    (3.) What do Democrats from California who signed this letter think of transwomen wearing “I PUNCH TERFs” shirts at the 2017 SF Pride? Do these Democrats believe that punching TERFs is what gay liberation is all about?
    (4.) What do Democrats in California, especially in the bay area, think of the Degenderettes baseball bats wrapped in barbed wire, axes, and other assorted weapons display at the SF Public Library? The SF Public Library made them get rid of their “I PUNCH TERFs” shirt with red paint resembling blood, but they got to keep their bats with barbed wire, axes, and bats.

    Degenderettes Exhibit at SFPL

    Trans activism is excusing & advocating violence against women, and it’s time to speak up

    trans dykes with baseball bats at women’s march from GenderCritical

    Tell San Francisco Public Library to Remove Exhibit of Weapons Intended to Kill Feminists
    The baseball bats, axes, and assorted weapons aren’t just for defense. And, Degenderettes don’t play baseball. The weapons are used to intimidate TERFs. Why else would they include in their display a “I PUNCH TERFs” shirt that the SF Library told them to pull down?
    In case people think no transwoman would actually use a bat or axe to attack anyone, this security video is from an actual vicious attack in which a transwoman in Australia walked into a convenience store and started swinging an axe to the heads of people.

    All the Democrats from California who signed this letter should know that women have been terrorized for years. At the same time that the Degenderettes were proudly displaying their assorted weapons (bats with barbed wire, axes, and lots and lots of bats), a transwoman who was part of Camp Trans is sitting in a jail cell in Alameda County for slaughtering a lesbian family and trying to burn down their house.
    (5.) If Dana Rivers is convicted of a bloody triple homicide of a lesbian family, do Democrats from California believe he should be housed in a women’s prison?
    (6.) Do Democrats from California think that the State of California was correct when it sent a man who tortured women with electrical wires before raping them to a women’s prison?
    Female inmates didn’t want to be housed with this sadistic rapist who tortured women before raping them.
    (7.) Do Democrats from California believe that taxpayers in their state should pay for sex reassignment surgery, hormones, etc. for convicted male murderers?
    (8.) On a different note, what do Democrats from California think of SB 219? SB 219 deals with long term care facilities in California. I’ve read it, and I even called a legislative aide. Thanks to Democrats in Sacramento, it’s now possible for anatomical males (male genitalia intact) to share a patient room in a long term care facility with females. Under SB219, males claiming gender identity don’t have to take hormones or get sex reassignment surgery.
    (b) “Gender identity” means a person’s identity based on the individual’s stated gender identity, without regard to whether the self-identified gender accords with the individual’s physical appearance, surgical history, genitalia, legal sex, sex assigned at birth, or name and sex, as it appears in medical records, and without regard to any contrary statement by any other person, including a family member, conservator, or legal representative. An individual who lacks the present ability to communicate his or her gender identity shall retain the gender identity most recently expressed by that individual.
    (a) Except as provided in subdivision (b), it shall be unlawful for a long-term care facility or facility staff to take any of the following actions wholly or partially on the basis of a person’s actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) status:
    (3) Where rooms are assigned by gender, assigning, reassigning, or refusing to assign a room to a transgender resident other than in accordance with the transgender resident’s gender identity, unless at the transgender resident’s request.
    So, do Democrats from California believe that seventy year old granny is a transphobic bigot if she doesn’t want to share a patient room with an anatomical male for months or years at a time?
    The problem with SB 219 is not sexual orientation or HIV status. As usual, hoping no one would notice, trans controlled LGBTQIA slipped in gender identity with sexual orientation.
    (9.) Why did Democrats in Sacramento intentionally ignore any and all concerns raised by women? This liberal feminist group was ignored, and Democrats in Sacramento painted the opposition to SB 219 as nothing more than a small group of bigoted religious conservatives.

    California Legislators: Protect Women’s Privacy In Long-Term Care
    (10.) Would Democrats from California take something similar to SB 219 nationwide? That is, make SB 219 federal law? Again, the issue is not HIV status or sexual orientation. Forcing elderly and disabled females to share a patient room in a long term care facility with an anatomical male violates the human rights of elderly and disabled women. There is also the issue of patient safety. Females have been raped in nursing homes.

    1. Yes they have. I know personally of at least one incident where a woman with dementia and memory issues was repeatedly assaulted by resident men in a care facility because she was a smoker and could not remember her last cig and part of her care plan was to space it out. It was later discovered the males who had access to their own ĉigs were paying her with cigarettes for blowjobs. When it was discovered, she was moved, I hope she is doing better…

  27. These are my questions for all the Democrats who signed this letter.
    (1.) Do Democrats know that women have been receiving online death and rape threats for years? It’s so common place online that it’s taken for granted. What other civil rights movement routinely threatens women with violence?
    1. Threats of violence, harassment, and abuse

    ‘TERF’ isn’t just a slur, it’s hate speech

    Recent Anti-Feminist Hate Speech
    (2.) Do Democrats know that threats to women aren’t just online anymore? In an incident in Hyde Park London, a 26 year old transwoman roughed up a 60 year old grandmother.

    Trans-identified male, Tara Wolf, convicted of assault after Hyde Park attack

    Historic Speaker’s Corner becomes site of anti-feminist silencing and violence
    (3.) Have Democrats heard of the Hambrook case in Toronto, Canada and the recent Karen White case in the UK? Do Democrats know that predatory sex offenders have used trans status to prey on women? Granted, these are rare cases, but it’s a fact that predators have used trans status as a way to prey on vulnerable women in places where they should be safe.
    The Hambrook case involved a sex offender gaining access to two different women’s homeless shelters in Toronto, Canada. He sexually assaulted homeless women in a place where they should have been safe.
    The notion that Stephen Terrence Wood (aka Karen White) has some sort of genuine “gender identity” is ludicrous. He is just a predatory part time cross dresser.
    This wasn’t a bureaucratic mix up. Prison officials knew this predator’s background, and they knew he was a fully intact male. Trans activists kept pressuring prison officials, and some predators are very adept at manipulating the system.
    (4.) Why do Democrats believe that biological males belong in women’s homeless shelters? I say Democrats because it was the Obama administration who declared that biological males should have access to women’s homeless shelters.
    Our Letter to HUD
    (5.) Could Democrats prove to me why they think a male’s gender identity is more important than a traumatized homeless woman’s PTSD? Homeless women have high rates of PTSD, victimization, and mental illness. Many homeless women are rape victims, or are fleeing domestic violence. Forcing homeless women to bunk down next to biological males could cause these vulnerable women emotional distress.
    There are several lawsuits in the U.S. over biological males in women’s homeless shelters.

    What’s Current: Homeless women sue shelter after being forced to shower with trans-identfied male
    (6.) This video is about two weeks old. It happened at a high school in Texas. Do Democrats who signed this letter really want this violent teenage boy in the same restroom or women’s locker room with their daughter? The violent boy in the red shirt can clearly be seen kicking a girl in the head as she curled up on the ground trying to protect herself. Males are physically stronger than females. Look at this video. He has male size and strength. The teenage boy in the video just started to transition, but he has the strength of a male. According to Travez Perry, a girl was saying mean and offensive things to him online. So, he went on a violent beat down spree in the high school hallway, kicking a girl in the head that was on the floor.
    Does this violent boy belong in a women’s homeless shelter? Does he belong in the women’s section of the jail?
    (7.) Do Democrats know that transwomen and cross dressing men have been convicted of killing a raping women, and transwomen (biological males) offend at the same rate as other males?
    Some crimes against women have been carried out in women’s restrooms, women’s locker rooms, and women’s homeless shelters. Males wearing dresses, wigs, etc. have been caught taking photos and videos of women in women’s restrooms.

    Man who wore Barbie costume in bathroom assault sentenced

    Reality check: No female has ever killed a transwoman. Transwomen (biological males) have been convicted of killing a lot of women.
    (8.) Can Democrats name any other civil rights movement that sterilizes children? Or, promotes “top surgery” (elective mastectomies with the surgical trimming down of areolas and nipples) for teenage girls and disabled women? There is no doubt that children are being sterilized with GnRH analogues and cross gender hormones. Some males medically transitioned at a young age, never allowed to go through puberty, have no sexual functioning. It’s basically an experiment on children.
    There are no FDA approved drugs specifically for medically transitioning people. The GnRH analogues and hormones are used as off label drugs. Yes, doctors can write off label prescriptions.
    There are too many links to list. Go to 4thWaveNow or Transgender Trend. There is no doubt that there has been a huge increase in number of children being referred to gender clinics, being medically transitioned, or identifying as transgender.

    Controversy intensifies over Littman ROGD study; petition now signed by 3700, no word from Brown University or PLoS ONE

    Puberty blockers

    Social work professor speaks out on behalf of her FtM autistic daughter

    As a Former Dean of Harvard Medical School, I Question Brown’s Failure to Defend Lisa Littman
    (9.) Could Democrats explain to me why children are being medically transitioned at an alarming rate, sterilized in the process, yet transgender activists keep pushing through laws that let any grown male claim “gender identity” without hormones or surgery? Why the push to medically transition kids, but trans activists all over the US and UK push through laws that let any grown man claim trans status without surgery or hormones. This is illogical.
    Is it possible that kids are being used as political tools for all the grown men with age play sexual fetishes and BDSM fetishes and for autogynephiles who love to play dress up? These kids aren’t viewed as a threat like Stefonknee Wolscht, and that is why they are being used. And, pharmaceutical companies make a lot of money from the GnRH analogues, and they get a life time customer.
    Trans activists are all for medically transing the heck out of kids. Hell, let’s trans them right after they are born. Grown men who have no intention of surgery or hormones are another thing.
    (10.) Do Democrats believe that an age play sexual fetish or a BDSM fetish is a civil right? I’m not saying all males claiming gender identity have a sexual fetish, but with some of these males, it’s more about the kink than anything else. People know it, but we can’t say it.
    I don’t know what the man calling himself Carlotta Sklodowska is doing now, but only months before the incident in the women’s locker room at Planet Fitness, he was going all over the internet calling himself male slut in training on a leash. It’s not like he denies it. Prior to the incident in the women’s locker room (he wasn’t even a gym member), he wasn’t on hormones and had no surgery. His main interests at this time were kink, BDSM whatever. I don’t care how people get their freak on, but is “I will be a male slut in training on a leash” a genuine self-identified gender identity.

    1. Awesome. I have a sealed ballot envelope with a vote for Pramila Jaypal for whom I have voted in the past. Upon of learning of her disregard for women’s rights I’m going to withhold my ba!lot. I’ll send Skylarks questions to Democrats on sex being erased by identity radicals.
      I’m in favor of U.S. women pushing for ERA ratification, and upholding sex-based protection for females in Title IX at national level.
      We need to get together like our UK sisters to have public convo like their “women need to talk”….public sessions.
      I just can’t vote. For Jaypal. I’ll call her office now.

      1. Omgoddess, I just spoke with young male on phone in Jaypal WADC office. “Yes, Rep Jaypal supports both women’s and trans rights”
        We need to talk, women.

        1. You don’t support women’s rights when you lobby to re-define the female sex in law as a nebulous subjective feeling that a person of either sex can have based on illegal and discriminatory sex stereotypes.

  28. There’s a guy on the list that I always disliked, and fortunately another democrat is running against his incumbent self, but this really sealed the deal on how NOT to vote for the guy! Thanks for posting this list before election day! And ENDA—well Barney Frank told the ultra leftist jerks to get LGB protected for federal jobs but idiot milli white gay men held out for the full LGB TTTTT or nothing, then of course Trump got elected, bastards…it made me really despise the LGBT —GBT mafia non-profits.

  29. Thank you so much for this, Gallus Mag! I’m still voting for our Barbara Lee, but intend to contact her to ask why on earth she is doing this. We know they are conned into thinking the trans cult are the most oppressed, but they need to finally think about the truth, and see the wonderful collection here listing the murders and attacks by men who claim to be women.
    Jackie Spier was shot several times and seriously wounded with Congressman Leo Ryan when they went to Jonestown, so she knows about cults. It’s time for her to recognize these dangerous men for what they are.

    1. Thankfully, my congress person never signed this letter and he is a Democrat. So, my Democrat congress person has my support. No one who signed this letter deserves being elected.
      I consider every woman who signed this letter a traitor to her sex. Actually, they aren’t even sure if the female sex exists.
      I did some googling. I respect the hell out of Barbara Lee because she is a strong black woman, and she opposed Bush’s war in Iraq. Unfortunately, she is bought, or brainwashed. Among the issues that she sees as important are LGBT rights. As smart as she is, she hasn’t figured out that there is no such thing as a unified LGBT because gender identity has nothing to do with sexual orientation. Barbara Lee actually scares me because she constantly conflates sex with gender identity and sexual orientation with gender identity. Transgender and queer control the LGBT. Gay men still have some power, but lesbians are only tolerated if they STFU and follow the trans agenda. Otherwise, it’s TERF death threats, and being kicked to the curb. When politicians say “LGBT”, they really mean trans and queer.
      Maybe Barbara Lee is getting money from transgender sources. Rich old white men fund transgender organizations as well as the gender clinics that sterilize kids. Rich old white men control pharmaceutical companies that pump kids full of GnRH analogues and hormones, physically stunting their growth, and sterilizing them in the process.
      This is from Barbara Lee’s website.
      LGBT Civil Rights
      “Congresswoman Lee is a founding member and a vice chair of Congressional LGBT Equality, and she is proud to stand with fellow members to continue the work of ensuring that every American is treated equally under the law no matter their race, sex, national origin, sexual orientation or gender identity. She has received numerous awards and accolades for her work in furthering the rights of those with HIV/AIDS.”
      Didn’t the slaughter of a lesbian family in Oakland happen in Barbara Lee’s district? Not one word from her, or a Democrat anywhere. Politics is the only reason Dana Rivers wasn’t charged with a hate crime. There is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that trans and queer controlled LGBT and Democrats are burying a hate crime.
      I’m sure the “Cotton Ceiling” is fine with them too. What civil rights movement tells lesbians that they are bigots for not wanting sex with male bodied person? This is exactly what the “Cotton Ceiling” does.
      What civil rights movement redefines homosexuality itself? Homosexuality is based on same sex attraction not gender identity. There is no such thing as a lesbian with a penis, or a gay man with a vagina.
      What other civil rights movement sterilizes children? Children are being sterilized based on a political ideology called gender identity. We are supposed to vote for a political party that fully supports the sterilization of children? How could they not know this is happening? The information is out there, but politicians still refuse to listen, or do some research on their own.
      What civil rights movement creates males with no sexual functioning? We are just discovering that some males medically transitioned at a young age, never allowed to go through puberty, have no sexual functioning.
      Title IX opened up opportunities for female athletes, and now that is being destroyed based on a political ideology called gender identity. We are supposed to close our eyes and pretend it’s not happening.
      What civil rights movement thinks elective mastectomies on teenage girls and disabled women is “progressive”?
      What civil rights movement tells homeless female rape survivors that they are “transphobic” bigots if they feel uncomfortable and traumatized by being forced to bunk down next to a male?
      What civil rights movement tells awkward teenage girls that they are “transphobic” bigots if they feel embarrassed undressing in front of a boy, or changing their tampon with a male sitting in the next bathroom stall?
      Gender identity will always come first because that is how trans and queer controlled LGBT operate. How crazy does their precious gender identity have to get before they wake up? Information is out there, but politicians doggedly stick to their political ideology.
      I’m not saying vote Republican. I’m not a Republican. It’s time for some new blood, and it’s time to kick out the brainwashed politicians. Get some Democrats with integrity.
      Title IX is worth saving. The female sex really exists. These politicians need to go.

      1. I think Barbara Lee is sincere and has bought the con so many Lesbians as well as other people have bought in this area, that supporting Lesbians and gay men means supporting female-hating het men in drag and self-hating women posing as male.
        Yes, same district as the triple hate crime murder. And not far from the SF Library exhibit recommending killing women, as well as the Dyke March attack.
        The problem is that she is so good about so much else, way ahead of the usual democrat. And that’s not a coincidence because it almost always is the otherwise most radical in mainstream politics supports the trans cult. I don’t get it. I figured it out in 1970.
        So I guess we will try to reach her…. Because it’s not just her, but who else works with her.

      2. Sadly her district is the California 13th…..and it includes Oakland. Hence she represents the area where a brigade member murdered that family and thanks to how they operate, may just get away with it.
        I hate to say this about Ms. Lee and others who are in the DNC, but one would think that they would see through the bullshit being thrown at them by the brigade. And contrary to what is said by their ‘leadership’, there is no…..repeat, NO comparison between any level of discrimination that those mostly melanin deprived creeps [except for those they tend to favor who are either entertainers or felons…hence, their ‘joy division’] face and those who are black….male or female…endure and continue to same. But that is the bullshit that is the mantra the brigade uses on POC politicians and congresspersons, hence getting them on their side [money comes into play as well].
        One has to wonder what will happen if after this mid-term, when the brigade really shows it’s true nature and treats those of color who supported them, like they were garbage or even crap not worthy to compost. If only because if this ‘blue wave’ does happen…and Title IX, affirmative action laws etc, are scrapped…then where are these folks left to go to????

      3. RE Barbara Lee: Isn’t Oakland a big trans stronghold? She probably could not get re-elected if she didn’t sign off…

    1. Oh well….there goes my spore theory…..
      And gee this comes on the heels of other weird crap that has been posted by the brigade in other corners. Rather that repeat any of that failed attempt at logic, what can be said is, that Goebbels is looking up from Hades and is smiling at his ‘work’ being continued.

      *****Some of the Democratic women who were elected to office this year ran against other women, which highlights an element that gets lost in cute names like Year of the Woman: “Women aren’t the same,” said Dittmar. They “come into politics with diverse viewpoints, diverse agendas, and they perform gender in diverse ways.”*****
      It’s so cute seeing a Judith Butlerite still being asked about shit. Performing gender! So retro!
      And just in time for a Spice Girls reunion, no less!

  30. I didn’t even get into the issue of crime statistics, health statistics, birth and death records, etc. State and federal agencies need clear consistent definitions. How can we track the progress of the female sex when female and woman have been rendered meaningless? What happens to data when categories of persons have no precise meaning?
    If liberal states like California are going to gather data on crime based on gender identity, then this could skew crime statistics. Criminologists have known for decades that most violent crime is committed by males. And, despite what transgender activists say, transwomen (males) offend at the same rate as other males. If a transwoman is convicted of a crime, for statistical purposes, is this considered a crime committed by a female? We could see an uptick in crimes committed by “women”, but in reality the increase in women committing crimes is the result of counting males as female.
    Health care data could become rather bazaar. For example, we could have a male with uterine cancer, or a female with an enlarged prostate. Everyone knows that some diseases are more common in males, and some diseases are more common in females. This has nothing to do with gender identity. Bacteria and viruses that cause disease don’t have gender identities either. State and federal agencies, CDC, etc. need accurate data. If a transwoman transmits HIV or a STD to a female, is this considered female to female transmission even though it’s biological male to female? How exactly would this work? Aren’t county health departments supposed to track HIV and STDs. What about the CDC? Some transmen get pregnant. Is this considered a pregnant female or male? The CDC needs accurate data because this is the only way federal agencies can measure exactly what is happening in the population.
    Some liberal states might collect crime statistics, health data, etc. based on gender identity, but other states could still use biological sex. The CDC, federal agencies, Justice Department, etc. could get conflicting data depending on which state is collecting the data. If there isn’t a consistent way of collecting data throughout the nation, then how accurate are the statistics?

  31. Gallus Mag–thanks for posting this wall of shame. I’ve been following the ballot initiative in Massachusetts on access to public accomodations, including rest rooms and changing rooms, based on gender identity, so it’s a pleasant surprise to see so few Mass. reps. on the list.
    Some of the arguments made by the TRA advocate, Kasey Suffredini, in a debate on a Boston public radio station
    ( were transparently dishonest. One example: When the conservative arguing for the other side brought up the Target study that showed a significant increase in voyeurism and other crimes after they declared all their restrooms and changing rooms gender neutral, Suffredini dismissed it by claiming it was a Canadian study. I checked on that and found that, although it was published by a Canadian organization, the data came mostly from Target stores in the U.S. She also told the audience not to look at the study but listen instead to the organization of Mass. police chiefs who had endorsed the initiative!
    In other words, don’t read about the issue and make up your own mind; just vote the way the police want. TRAs are no longer even pretending not to be totalitarians.

      1. The military & biotech industrial complexes on the w(ar)path, not disguising their imperialist intentions. So progressive!

    1. Yikes. Kara Suffredini is a very small lesbian. Interesting that she thinks she would fare better as an extraordinarily small male in male spaces with female anatomy. Hope she never gets sent to prison.

      1. I don’t know whether Suffredini thinks she’d do better in male spaces or not. The law which the ballot initiative challenges pretty much seems to allow people to choose their accomodation.
        But when I heard the debate and looked up images of Suffredini, it struck me that having a small, non-threatening TIF represent the pro-trans side was probably a deliberate strategy, because the effect would be totally different–i.e., overbearing and a little creepy–if someone like Charles Clymer or Bob Tur made the same case.
        It’s funny, although TRAs claim biological sex is irrelevant, somehow they still seem to know to use those born female to reassure the average citizen that trans people aren’t scary.

        1. I agree. Using a harmless youngish diminutive lesbian (“corrected” as heterosexual) who identifies as a pseudo-male “little person” as a public spokesperson for the actual moneyed middle-aged male autogynephiles who seek to access female spaces and inculcate sex-stereotypes into state law is a very cynical and clever tactic meant to bypass the horrible aggressive male transvestite optics of what the law is actually proposing.
          As the right-winger suggested, no one cares if she uses the men’s bathroom or if she disquises herself as male to use the male showers/locker room. It’s women, subjected to a lifetime threat of male sexual violence who don’t want to be confronted with an actual male in women’s spaces of public nudity that is the issue.

    2. Massachusetts definition of Gender Identity is very messy:
      “Gender identity” is defined as a person’s sincerely held gender-related identity, appearance, or behavior, whether or not it is different from that traditionally associated with the person’s physiology or assigned sex at birth.”
      What is Gender?
      What is a gender-related identity?
      What does that identity relate to?
      How does the state define gender related appearance?
      How does that state sanctioned gender related appearance interact with sex stereotypes?
      How does the state define gender related behavior?
      How does the state’s definition of gender related behavior serve to codify sex stereotypes into law?

      1. Where does the term “sincerely held” come up all the time?
        Oh yeah.

        What Are “Sincerely Held Religious Beliefs?” Nobody Really Knows.

        If you work backwards though, it proves that the only humans who actually EXIST — since evidently a stroke of a pen can erase people from existence — are trans and fundamentalists. Everyone else is a fiction given that being able to wield unfalsifiable “sincerity” without opposition is the ultimate proof of humanity.

        1. Transgender is absolutely a religious-type belief that should probably be protected on that basis using the same legal standard of “sincerely held belief”. Just think, trans could have their own legal holiday to observe the solemn Trans Day of Remembrance where they celebrate the fact that their murder rates are lower than that of the general public.

      2. I just love your last comment:
        GallusMag Says:
        November 6, 2018 at 9:47 pm
        Transgender is absolutely a religious-type belief that should probably be protected on that basis using the same legal standard of “sincerely held belief”. Just think, trans could have their own legal holiday to observe the solemn Trans Day of Remembrance where they celebrate the fact that their murder rates are lower than that of the general public.

      1. That’s annoying news which I missed amid the jubilation over Pressley and all the other women elected to the House. What we gain on the roundabout, we lose on the swings.

  32. The trans activists won the ballot issue in Massachusetts. It’s not a surprise. Polls were showing that they were going to win and they did. The reason for the lopsided victory (68-32%) is because there was no serious campaign by the very people who put the initiative on the ballot in the first place. This is part of a puzzling and frustrating pattern, wherein conservative forces wade into the trans issue and then fail to follow through with a real effort to win. Here is the bizarre track record:
    California – Substantial fundraising, but failure to get enough signatures to qualify for the ballot. Second attempt also failed.
    Washington – Substantial fundraising, but failure to get enough signatures to qualify for the ballot. Second attempt also failed despite their having a lot of time to get signatures.
    Montana – In this conservative state, a perfunctory effort fell far short of signatures needed to qualify
    South Dakota – Again, conservative state, but failed to qualify
    Anchorage, Alaska – Qualified for the ballot, but ran a weak, underfunded campaign. Narrow defeat
    Massachusetts – Qualified for the ballot nearly 2 years before Election Day 2018. Despite having ample time to prepare, they ran a bare-bones campaign that was completely outmatched.
    Why are these people not bringing their “A game” to the trans issue? When they attacked marriage equality or when they attack LGB rights, they spare no effort. But when it comes to defending bathroom privacy, they fail again and again, each time leaving the trans activists feeling emboldened. Obviously we don’t have any power over these conservatives, but I would hope that WoLF and Miriam Ben-Shalom and the other feminists with whom they are forming a coalition would question them about their weak efforts to date.

    1. I think the issue in Massachusetts is that most people support the rights of trans people to access public accommodations without discrimination in those areas that don’t involve sex segregated areas of public nudity/vulnerability of women. It was pretty easy for trans identified people to campaign for their reasonable right to shop in a store or go to a restaurant, for example. If the campaign could have separated out the good parts of the statute from the bad, it would have done better. Also, Massachusetts, unlike many other places with Gender Identity statutes, very wisely included an “improper purpose” clause into the public accommodations bill.
      From here:
      “Gender identity” shall mean a person’s gender-related identity, appearance or behavior, whether or not that gender-related identity, appearance or behavior is different from that traditionally associated with the person’s physiology or assigned sex at birth. Gender-related identity may be shown by providing evidence including, but not limited to, medical history, care or treatment of the gender-related identity, consistent and uniform assertion of the gender-related identity or any other evidence that the gender-related identity is sincerely held as part of a person’s core identity; provided, however, that gender-related identity shall not be asserted for any improper purpose.” [bolding by me]
      BY inserting an ‘improper purpose’ clause Massachusetts very wisely tried to anticipate and provide recourse for any unintended consequences of the new legal status (use by convicted sexual predators, etc).

      1. “It was pretty easy for trans identified people to campaign for their reasonable right to shop in a store or go to a restaurant, for example. If the campaign could have separated out the good parts of the statute from the bad, it would have done better.”
        That’s exactly what happened. In the debate to which I linked above, Kasey Suffredini said that if her fiancee called her on the way home to say they needed oregano, she wanted to be able to stop at the grocery store and buy it. No one in Massachusetts is going to refuse to sell her herbs, and I’m pretty sure any–unlikely!–refusal of service to trans people at stores or restaurants would already be covered under other statues. The legislation deliberately included the right to shop and dine out to make it harder to argue against the right of male persons to enter female changing rooms and restrooms without being associated with those who used to deny service to African-Americans.
        Also, those advocating for men to have the right to use women’s changing rooms and restrooms have cited the fact that Massachusets communities which already allow this haven’t had an uptick in sexual assaults. Two things they deliberately ignore–evidence that shows a reliable increase in voyeurism (which is not technically assault) whenever men have access to women’s spaces and the simple fact that women often change their behavior when they feel threatened. Women from Norway, which has self-ID, have said on Twitter that they and other women they know now shower and change at home rather than undress in front of men in changing rooms at the gym.
        Because women aren’t stupid, the result of these sorts of laws may well not be a noticeable rise in the incidence of sexual assault but a withdrawal of women from spaces they used to use.

      2. I never understood the so-called “improper purpose” clause b.s. Why do we have to wait for a male to enter women’s space, and then do something improper? It’s like, “Okay, males can use the women’s locker room, but don’t do anything wrong.” Do people really think an “improper purpose” cause would have worked in the Karen White incident, or in the Hambrook incident?
        “…provided, however, that gender-related identity shall not be asserted for any improper purpose.”
        By including this “improper purpose”, clause it sounds like they are admitting that some thing ‘improper’ could occur by letting males in women’s locker rooms, etc.
        “BY inserting an ‘improper purpose’ clause Massachusetts very wisely tried to anticipate and provide recourse for any unintended consequences of the new legal status (use by convicted sexual predators, etc).”
        Why are sex offenders allowed in women’s restrooms,etc.?
        And, the “improper purpose” clause doesn’t address privacy rights of women, and the psychological harm caused by forcing females to share intimate spaces with males.
        “I think the issue in Massachusetts is that most people support the rights of trans people to access public accommodations without discrimination in those areas that don’t involve sex segregated areas of public nudity/vulnerability of women. It was pretty easy for trans identified people to campaign for their reasonable right to shop in a store or go to a restaurant, for example.”
        I wasn’t aware that transgender people were being denied access to restaurants, etc. This isn’t like Jim Crow. Trans people don’t have to drink from a separate fountain, or ride in the back of the bus.
        “If the campaign could have separated out the good parts of the statute from the bad, it would have done better. ”
        This is the real problem. Trans have hella $$. In Alaska, trans outspent the opposition by an 8 to 1 margin. Where the hell are they getting all their money from? We know some of the sources like Pritzker, etc.
        In Alaska, it was $$$. In Alaska, all the $$$ gave them a 5% victory. It was awful close.
        “Even though transgender people are supposedly a persecuted minority that need civil rights, Vote No on Prop 1 out spent and out raised Alaska Family Action by around $710,000. In total, Vote No had $828,000 at its disposal. Its campaign filings reveal that a large majority of this money came from a set of lobbying groups almost from central casting: The Human Rights Campaign (HRC), Freedom for All Americans (FFAA), Planned Parenthood (PP), and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Large, federally based organizations poured money and staff into a small municipal election, all to fight ‘bathroom bills.
        Despite outspending their opponent 8 to 1, carpeting Anchorage in television ads, mailers, and phone calls, and the support of federal level political organizations, the result was only 5% in Vote No’s favor.
        That the money comes from a wide range of philanthropists: while names such as George Soros’ Open Society Foundation, Arcus (run by gay Stryker Corp heir Jon Stryker) and Tides come as little surprise to anyone following money on the center left of politics. But other names stand out: Jennifer Pritzker, (formerly Col. James Pritzker) who came out as a trans woman in 2013, through their Tawani Foundation, who outside of transgender causes, is a far-right Republican and supported Trump-supporting candidates in the 2016 election. This has come as specifically earmarked funding for gays and lesbians has declined in the same period — foundation and philanthropic funding for lesbians was a not-so-cool $4 million in 2016, despite being a far larger population than transgender people. Overall, LGBTQI+ Funders reports over $202m in total philanthropic funding for LGBTQI+ organizations in 2016, and much of this funding is simply a donation to organizations who campaign for a broad variety of issues. 39% of funding goes towards Advocacy — given the huge focus of LGBTQI+ organizations on transgender issues, they are likely getting a more disproportionate slice of the pie than the figures show. As funding specifically for gay men and lesbian women has stagnated or declined in the same period, transgender funding has increased year on year, from $3m in 2010 to $22m in 2016”.
        Expose their funding sources for what they are. Raise our own money somehow. There has to be a way to bring in money. There are millions of women across the political spectrum that are so fed up with gender identity that they would be willing to donate 5, 10, or 20$. We need a war chest. And, it takes money to go to war.
        If the opposition outspends you 8 to 1, and you lose by only a 5% margin, it tells me they can be beat.

  33. I am Canadian, but I am still interested in the results for the 98 Democrats on the list. I checked one name, Lloyd Doggett (D) Texas and he won. I also checked Christine Hallquist who was running for Governor in ?. He lost to a moderate Republican. Thank God. I wonder if the election of any of these people will change what is done legislatively.

    1. Christine Hallquist, Democratic candidate for Governor in VT. lost by around 16% to Governor Scott. I live right near the VT border but not in it, so I missed the chance to vote Republican for the first time in my life (Scott is actually one of the last liberal ones, which would have helped). Of course, the people I know from VT all voted for Hallquist.

  34. Someone tweeted this great video; JB Pritzker just elected as governor of Illinois last night, in case you hadn’t heard.
    Its amazing how silent the (so-called) lefty/SJW trans are on the rightwing military billionaire who is actually paying the freight.

    1. Yeah, it was great to get rid of Rauner in IL, but will be watching the Pritzker cousin closely. Seems likely IL may soon be subject to a heavy trans agenda…

      1. It’s my understanding, and I don’t remember who told me this, that the Pritzkers aren’t close to their trans cousin because he is right-wing. The Democrats are going to be pro-trans regardless. They have learned nothing.

        1. I remember reading an interview with James/Jennifer where he complained that Penny Pritzker didn’t properly acknowledge his stunning and brave wardrobe change and he said that they rarely spoke.

      2. The Pritzgers are a big family that sued each other, which is the case when billions of dollars are floating around.
        JB is not Jennifer. Jennifer is a right winger.

  35. Obviously not familiar with everyone on this list, but seems possible that maybe those with safe seats were recruited to sign on – e.g. Mark Pocan (WI) ran unopposed; Jan Schakowsky (IL) was always going to win handily.

  36. As the signatories of that letter obviously do not know what woman means what they obviously need is the Posie Parker treatment……..

Comments are closed.