Convicted murderer arguing to be moved to women’s prison
A convicted killer who is serving a life sentence in a penitentiary for men is demanding to be transferred to a women’s prison now that she’s self-identifying as a woman.
Jamie Boulachanis recently transitioned from a man to a woman under Canadian law and will have her case heard in which Correctional Service Canada is arguing Boulachanis shouldn’t be trasferred to a women’s facility–in spite of a Federal Court order–due to public safety concerns and her ability to escape prison.
In 2016 a Montreal jury found Boulachanis, born John Boulachanis, guilty of killing 32-year-old Robert Tanguay back in 1997. For years Tanguay’s body remained hidden, buried in sandpit.
According to the Montreal Gazette, Correctional Service Canada (CSC) is cited Boulachanis history of trying to escape detention, including one case where she escaped her restraints and ran from a prison bus before being tackled by a guard in less than a minute.
“(Her) risk of escaping is considered high, as is the risk to the public if (she) escapes. She requires a high degree of surveillance and control inside penitentiaries,” CSC wrote in its challenge against the court order to move Boulachanis to a women’s jail.
In the murder trial, the courtroom was told that Boulachanis was worried Tanguay was a police informant ratting on Boulachanis and his accomplices for car thefts and other crimes they were involved in. The jury was also told that Boulachanis was sleeping with Tanguay’s wife after his disappearance.
It’s still unclear if Boulachanis has yet undergone sexual reassignment surgery, although it was scheduled for January.
Last spring a judge ruled that refusing Boulachanis a transfer to a women’s prison is “discrimination based on gender identity or expression.”
The CSC’s arguments against allowing Boulachanis to be transferred will be heard in a Montreal courthouse on Monday.
Joseph Matthew Smith, who now goes by the name Josie Smith, is a convicted baby rapist and pedophile who has molested as many as 15 children ranging in ages one to 15. Common sense would tell you that an individual as depraved as Josie would be behind bars forever, but the Iowa Attorney General’s Office disagrees. Josie is set to be released from prison because she now “identifies” as a woman and is taking estrogen medication.
Many are horrified by this story and want answers. According to the Cherokee Civil Commitment Unit for Sex Offenders, the recommendation for Smith’s release is due specifically to the fact that Smith is undergoing hormone replacement therapy and therefore no longer has a “male sex drive”. A director for the facility, it is much harder for the state to prove someone is at risk to reoffend once the individual significantly lowers their testosterone levels.
Smith began their prison sentence in 2014. In Nov. 2017, they came out as a transgender woman, began using female pronouns, and started undergoing hormone replacement therapy.
The spokesperson for the attorney general Lynn Hicks told the Storm Lake Times that “an offender’s hormone levels are an important part of substantiating an offender’s likelihood of recidivism.”
“We don’t believe we have evidence sufficient to prove Josie Smith has a significant chance of reoffending,” Hicks proclaimed.
Hicks said that Smith will be subject to “strict sex-offender reporting” requirements and insisted that the general public should not “overreact” to the release of Josie. She then went on to state, “She’ll be subject to supervision for the rest of her life.”
The precedent that this case sets for the future is worrisome. If one person can identify their way out of consequences for the crimes they committed, what is to stop others from following suit? Furthermore, it should be widely understood that perpetrators of sexual crimes don’t always attack their victims for sexual gratification. It is just as much about control and asserting power over someone weaker than them–this completely nullifies the attorney general’s point about Josie’s “male sex drive”.
Also, the manner in which estrogen affects the sex drive of male-to-female transsexuals is not complete chemical castration, as the attorney general apparently believes it is. While it does indeed lower the libido, it does not completely remove it. It also returns fully if Josie were to ever cease or pause medication. It’s unclear if the state will monitor Josie’s hormones after the release.
Regardless, the idea that Josie should be released from prison based on what the court sees as the low likelihood that Josie will offend again is nonsense. There still needs to be time served for the 15 victims whose lives were forever changed by this monster’s actions. It is baffling to think that Josie would be allowed to skip out on prison time simply because of a transgender status. One estrogen pill a day is excusing the justice that the victims and their families deserve.
As of now, the date of Josie’s release is not clear.
Counselling your child against serious health risks of changing gender not 'family violence': BC court ruling
Lawyer John Carpay is President of the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF.ca), which intervened in the BC Court of Appeal in the case of AB v. CD.
In the case of AB v. CD, the BC Court of Appeal has allowed a 15-year-old female-born minor to continue receiving puberty blockers and testosterone, which will likely lead to the irreversible destruction of the minor’s sexual function and fertility.
The Court has deemed AB to be sufficiently mature to consent to the risks of taking testosterone, about which the BC Children’s Hospital has warned: heart disease, high blood pressure, diabetes, decreased good cholesterol (HDL), increased bad cholesterol (LDL), emotional change (anger and irritability), and vaginal abrasions and tears.
The Hospital warns that the body sometimes converts testosterone to estrogen, which may increase the risks of ovarian, breast, cervical and uterine cancer. The Hospital states that the long-term effects of testosterone and puberty blockers on younger adolescents are unknown, and that the safety of testosterone is not fully understood. Girls who take puberty blockers and testosterone will develop into adults who may look and sound like men, but lack male genitalia. Even after gender re-assignment surgery, as adults they will not be able to father children. Nor will they likely be able to get pregnant and bear children, with natural female sexual maturity having been prevented. CD, who is the father of AB, is devastated.
Neither the lower courts nor the Court of Appeal have grappled with the compelling evidence showing that gender identity confusion usually goes away by itself. The vast majority of boys and girls revert to identifying with their natal sex by the time they are 18, if they are allowed to go through puberty naturally and receive appropriate encouragement and support to embrace biological reality. With psychological counseling instead of hormones and drugs, the success rate ranges from 70 percent to 90 percent, depending on which of the many studies that one relies on. This has been demonstrated by Dr. Kenneth Zucker and Dr. Susan Bradley, who ran the Child Youth and Family Gender Identity Clinic (GIC) in Toronto from 1981 to 2015, successfully treating hundreds of children struggling with gender dysphoria.
The courts have also failed to take heed of a 2011 Swedish study of 324 sex-reassigned persons (191 male-to-females, 133 female-to-males), which shows that the long-term outcome of such treatments resulted in life-long psychological trauma and increased chance of suicide. Even in a progressive and socially liberal country, the suicide rate in these patients was 19 times higher than the general population, as these individuals passed through a post-treatment period of relative happiness but then began to experience significant morbidity and regret. Across the world, a growing number of transgender adults are warning that gender re-assignment surgery has brought them inexorable misery.
Without delving into these concerns, the Court of Appeal has confirmed that deference must be given to healthcare professionals, whose decisions made under the BC Infants Act about whether minors are able to consent to particular treatments, and whether those treatments are in their best interests, are only reviewable by the courts in very limited ways. Yet many of these health practitioners are on an affirmation-only bandwagon, or are afraid to speak out against it. This ensures that many young teens are moved along a path toward transition as soon as they step into a “gender identity clinic.” Parents with serious concerns about social contagion, or other mental health concerns prompting their child’s sudden desire to transition, will find little comfort in this ruling. Hopefully a future case will put evidence of these concerns before the courts.
The small silver lining on this very dark cloud has come by way of this Court now modifying the lower court rulings that drastically restricted CD’s parental rights and his freedom of expression.
Justice Gregory Bowden of the BC Supreme Court issued an Order that CD could not attempt to persuade his female-born child to pursue any treatment other than puberty blockers and testosterone. Justice Bowden further ordered CD not to address his child by the child’s birth name, or to refer to his female-born child as “she” or “her” in any conversation with anyone. Justice Bowden went on to declare that violating these draconian measures would constitute “family violence” under BC’s Family Law Act.
The BC Court of Appeal overturned this order in part, ruling that “there was insufficient evidence in the unique circumstances here to ground a finding of family violence—that is, emotional or psychological abuse—as defined in the Family Law Act.” The Appeal Court added that Justice Bowden “raising the issue of family violence in the context of this case caused the parties to become increasingly polarized in their positions, thus exacerbating the conflict and raising the stakes in the litigation. We see none of this to be in AB’s best interests.”
The father is now once again entitled to communicate his views about the risks and dangers of AB’s current treatment to AB. The Appeal Court noted that AB is a mature minor with capacity to make medical treatment decisions, and this capacity “includes the ability to listen to opposing views.” AB’s capacity to consent does not remove all parental involvement from medical decisions: “Parents can be involved in the process of explanation, instruction and advice leading to the obtaining of the informed consent of the child. They should be involved as part of that process wherever possible.”
Regarding CD’s freedom of expression, the Appeal Court noted that “the values underlying the right to freedom of expression include finding the truth through the open exchange of ideas, which extends to protecting minority beliefs that the majority regard as wrong or false.” However, the Court also ruled that the father’s right to express his opinion publicly and to share AB’s private information to third parties “may properly be subject to constraints aimed at preventing harm to AB. The Court will not restrict “CD’s right to express his opinion in his private communications with family, close friends and close advisors, provided none of these individuals is part of or connected with the media or any public forum, and provided CD obtain assurances from those with whom he shares information or views that they will not share that information with others.”
While AB continues to receive testosterone injections, this Appeal Court ruling at least shows greater respect for freedom of expression and for parental rights than did the lower courts. But it’s a small victory in the overall context of this sad case.
A bestselling trans author’s tweet thread about abuse goes viral, then came the allegations of her own abuse
On Nov. 10, a celebrated trans author wrote a viral tweet thread that received over 100,000 likes. The thread complained about the discrepancy between successful, beautiful women, and their often abusive and unkempt male partners.
As it turns out, she may have been projecting.
The author, who writes under the pen name “Meredith Russo,” is formerly known as Meredith Stroud and Travis Lee Stroud. Her 2016 novel If I Was Your Girl received multiple awards and near-endless commendations from literary elites. On the back of the book’s success, Stroud, 32, was invited to publish an article in The New York Times on the struggles of being a transwoman. Stroud’s subsequent book, Birthday, received awards from Refinery29, Bustle and Nylon.
However, some Twitter users brought attention to a blog post from 2016 where the author’s arrest record and past relationship history were detailed, prompting the author to use block lists to squelch criticism.
“Domestic violence is insidious and slow, like the proverbial boiling frog,” Stroud’s ex-wife, Juniper Russo, said. “It’s hard to say when it all started.”
Juniper Russo alleges she was subjected to a campaign of sexual and emotional abuse at the hands of her former partner, abuse she says was so severe that the marriage culminated in a divorce in early 2015.
“We met on OKCupid in 2011 and got married in 2013,” Russo said, claiming the physical abuse started shortly after the wedding. “We had a lot of shared interests at the time, and I was naive enough to think that shared interests are the foundation of a healthy relationship.”
Russo shared disturbing details of some of the alleged abuses she suffered during her marriage to Meredith Stroud.
“When my son was born in 2014, I had severe pre-eclampsia and injuries from giving birth. I had to have major reconstructive surgery. I was extremely weak and in severe pain,” Russo said.
“Meredith was extremely abusive to me during this time, calling me a ‘feeding station, not a parent’ because breastfeeding my son was one of the only things I could do, and because I was asking [Meredith] to help with things like diapers,” Russo also alleges.
During this same time, Juniper says Stroud would tell her to commit suicide. “[Meredith] kept mocking me when I was in pain, and told me I was so useless as a parent I should just kill myself.”
Russo says she was first forced to call the police in late 2014, “[Meredith] was having an outburst. I got scared and called 911. [Meredith] took the phone from me, and was heard trying to prevent me from calling for help.”
As a result, Stroud was booked on charges of interfering with an emergency call.
Like many victims of domestic violence, Russo says she still loved and sympathized with her abuser.
“I ended up bailing [Meredith] out, and paying for the legal defense,” she said.
Russo said she often intervened to prevent Stroud from being charged with domestic abuse, noting that the police wanted to charge Stroud in Nov. 2014.
“I was always trying to protect [Meredith] because I knew men’s jail was not kind to transwomen,” Russo said. “She was always threatening suicide if she were to get arrested.” Russo continues, “Even when things were terrible, I was worried for her safety and didn’t want her to kill herself or be beaten to death in prison.”
Russo turned over 53 pages of legal documents to support her allegations.
The divorce record, which features a restraining order against Stroud, includes messages shared between the two in which Stroud admits to abusing Russo. These messages were accepted as evidence by the divorce courts.
In one series of messages from Facebook, Stroud is calmly attempting to diffuse Russo’s desire to proceed with the divorce, offering to go on medication and check into a psychiatric facility for psychosis maintenance.
In this same conversation, Russo expresses fear of Stroud eventually killing her.
In another, dramatically different text conversation, Stroud says she hopes Russo gets “run over by a f*cking truck” and demands Russo reduce child support payments.
At the time, Stroud was recorded by the court as having an income of $8,300 gross per month, having acquired a substantial six-figure advance from Flatiron Books, the publisher of Stroud’s debut novel, If I Was Your Girl. The court would later order Stroud to pay $1,068 per month.
But Russo says Stroud has not paid child support in years, and currently owes over $20,000 in back payments. In July of 2019, Russo attempted to start a GoFundMe to raise the money needed to legally compel Stroud to pay what was owed. Other than the child support arrangements, Russo did not request alimony or any other financial compensation from the seperation.
After the divorce, Russo says Stroud denigrated her in public, telling fans and followers on social media that Russo was “a TERF who had abused and left” Stroud due to her transition from male to female.
“Many trans people are the victims of violence and discrimination, so [Meredith’s] target audience found that totally relatable and credible. They had no reason to doubt her,” Russo said, noting that both she and her current wife are members of the LGBT community. Russo identifies as non-binary, while her current wife is a transwoman.
“I’ve been harassed quite a bit by Meredith’s social network. I lost a lot of friends and have been largely ostracized from our local LGBT community.” Russo says, “I’ll often be online and someone I don’t know will suddenly jump into a thread to announce I’m the TERF who ruined Meredith Russo’s life.”
Stroud continues to publicly call Russo an abuser, and claims she’s attempting to “destroy” [Stroud’s] career and finances.
The Post Millennial has reached out to Stroud as well as Flatiron-MacMillan Publishing and Stroud’s publishing agent Sarah Barley for comment. While the publishing house and agent did not respond by the time of publication, Stroud denied all allegations while calling The Post Millennial a slew of denigrating names.
When asked about her own admissions of abuse in the court document, Stroud again asserted “Either way, my response to the allegations is that I have not ever sexually or physically abused any of my sexual or romantic partners.”
Stroud claimed, at first, that she was “barred” from speaking about her relationship to her ex-wife by law. When questioned about why she had persistently made social media posts about that very subject, Stroud declined to answer before blocking the account used to contact her.
“Meredith thrives on lies and conflict, and she’s a writer, so she knows how to come up with a good story.” Russo says, “I knew when I left her that I’d become the subject of one of these stories.”
Included in the divorce and restraining order filings was an article Stroud wrote with the intention of submitting it to an LGBT magazine. The article, written as an introspective reflection on the couple’s relationship, states in detail the abuse Stroud subjected Russo to.
And despite Stroud’s public attempts to downplay the arrest, Stroud’s written account supports Russo’s claims that it was she who is responsible for jail bailout and the charges being dropped.
The document also backs Russo’s assertion that she continued to support and care for her spouse even after the repeated physical and sexual assaults, a far cry from Stroud’s claims on social media that Russo had been the abuser, and callously made Stroud homeless.
Due to Stroud’s continued public assertions that Russo is to blame, as well as the harassment from Stroud’s fans she’s received in the past as a result, Russo says she continues to fear retaliation.
Russo notes that some of the posts Stroud has made include threats of violence. From a now-deleted alternative Twitter account, Stroud posted how she wanted Russo’s friends to be “brutally killed” in the style of a violent horror movie.
“My main hope, in discussing all of this, is that the defamation against myself and my family will stop.” Russo comments, “I’ve worked so hard to rebuild my life in the five years since I left Meredith, and I’m emotionally exhausted by the fact that I’m still being defamed on a daily basis as a ‘TERF’ and abuser, and that it’s affected my family so profoundly.”
Despite everything, Juniper Russo says she does not wish ill upon her former spouse, and supports Stroud’s work in the literary world.
“I still have to believe that there’s some good inside of [Meredith] and that she’s leaving some kind of positive mark on the world. If her books have saved one single teenager from suicide, I’d consider that to outweigh the pain and trauma I’ve had to endure at her hands.” Russo continues on to note that deeply flawed people can sometimes make good art.
“It’s important to be aware that someone who creates inspiring work is not necessarily a good person, and I think it’s dangerous for anyone to look up to Meredith as a role model, or to take anything she says at face value.”
Russo concluded. “Her work, including how she presents herself and speaks of those around her, is fictional. I’d caution anyone against mistaking any of it for reality.”
No matter how many times women are hounded out of work, social groups, or organizations for saying that women are adult human females, I end up surprised each and every time. This latest shocker comes from the UK, where so much of this madness has fully taken hold. British birth coach Lynsey McCarthy Calvert was pushed out of the charity Doula UK, of which she was spokesperson, because she dared to say that “women birth all the people.”
The issue for McCarthy was that Cancer Research UK changed its advertising encouraging women to get routine pap smears, a basic gynecological exam, to advocating for the test for “everyone aged 25-64 with a cervix.”
In reaction to this, McCarthy took to Facebook, stating “I am not a ‘cervix owner’ I am not a ‘menstruator’ I am not a ‘feeling.’ I am not defined by wearing a dress and lipstick. I am a woman: an adult human female… Women birth all the people, make up half the population, but less than a third of the seats in the House of Commons are occupied by us.”
As we’ve seen so many times before, a few people got onto her feed, and made a lot of noise. They complained to McCarthy “…not only women birth children,” and took their grievance offline and into the real world where they disrupted her professional life. The complaints were that McCarthy was trans exclusive in her statements, that she was offensive.
Activists who are somehow delusional enough to believe that a woman who says she is a man and then conceives a child is a man giving birth as opposed to a woman, who imagines she is a man, having a child, sent letters detailing their offendedness.
The Board of Doula UK determined that the activists were correct and that the woman who has facilitated the birth of children on numerous occasions was incorrect. Doula UK has gone on to say that,despite McCarthy’s contention to the contrary, they had not “acquiesced” to activists or forced McCarthy out. McCarthy resigned, but it was either that or accept lies and defamation.
The only problem with ousting a woman from a pregnancy help charity for saying that “women birth all the people” is that, in fact, women do birth all the people. All the people who have ever been born on this earth since the beginning of time were gestated inside a woman’s body, and birthed from that body. Apparently it’s offensive to say so. Even if it is, it’s still true.
We’ve been at the point where it’s considered offensive to trans activists and trans people to say that only women are capable of having children via their bodies, even though they are. It’s offensive to say that women are the only ones who menstruate, even though they are. And it’s offensive to say that men can’t magically, surgically, and chemically turn into women, that women can’t turn into men, even though they can’t.
The entire thing where a few people’s hurt feelings are more important than actual facts and the right of women to speak the truth about their own bodies and the nature of reproduction continues to be baffling. More baffling is that women who know the truth, that biological sex is immutable, that gender is a lie, are afraid to speak out, afraid to challenge those men who would have us deny our bodies in favour of their made-up truth.
Women who speak out on this are silenced, and like so many other circumstances in which women are forced to believe a man’s interpretation of reality over her own, talking back only gets her hit. Whether personal or professional defamation, there is a big risk for women who refuse to be cowed into proclaiming lies as truth. It seems absurd, and trans activists deny that, but still, it keeps happening. These stories keep popping up.
It should not be shocking to anyone anymore that women who believe that women and men are distinct entities defined by their biological realities are considered bigots, phobic, or prejudiced. The more we are pushed to believe lies, the easier they are to believe, but that doesn’t make them any truer. McCarthy took a vocal stand about the fact that women are the ones who have female reproductive systems, that men do not need cervical cancer screenings because they are not, in fact, people who have a cervix.
Furthering the disconnect women have with their bodies by referring to them only as the summation of their biological parts will not help them overcome the embarrassment of seeking medical care for female only conditions. Ignoring the reality that women’s bodies are the only bodies that are capable of birthing children is cruel because women alone will still be the ones to do it.
Trans activists say that their goal is not to erase women or to deny their existence, yet with their continuing to be offended by the reality of women and their bodies, that’s exactly what they’re doing. If women can’t even maintain a medical definition, how will they access care, have considerate providers who understand the differences between male and female anatomy, or keep their children safe if we are not even able to name their bodies as their own? It doesn’t matter if it’s a kindness to ignore the fact that women birth all the people, it’s still a lie, and a dangerous one.