Lawsuit: Gay Inmates Placed in Solitary Confinement, Subject to Discrimination


Gay, bisexual, and transgender inmates in California filed a class action lawsuit last week against a county and its sheriff, alleging that they are kept in a segregated ward called an “Alternative Lifestyle Tank,” essentially keeping them in solitary confinement and subjecting them to regular discrimination and harassment.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California filed the lawsuit on behalf of 15 inmates of the West Valley Detention Center, located in San Bernardino County, California. All “GBT” inmates, as the lawsuit calls them, of the San Bernardino County jail system are automatically transferred to the West Valley Detention Center, where they are kept for the duration of their incarceration.

The suit makes several allegations of mistreatment on the part of the detention center, most of which are centered on one claim: that gay, bisexual, and transgender inmates are completely isolated from the general inmate population and as a result are denied access to the services, programs, and facilities offered to other inmates.

“One of the major purposes of sentencing is rehabilitation,” the suit points out. Yet, GBT inmates are given none of the opportunities for growth and development that are available to others.

Educational programming, like occupational and vocational classes, for example, are only offered to non-GBT inmates, as are drug rehabilitation programs (even when GBT inmates must participate in such programs as part of their sentence), and religious services. GBT inmates also get significantly less time to spend outside of their cells, and on a daily basis spend 22 and a half hours inside their cells, regardless of whether they are deemed a security risk. They’re also barred from participating in mental health programs.

“They are living in a locked down status without any security justification,” reads the lawsuit.

One inmate, Madison Hatfield, was transferred to the Alternative Lifestyle Tank after self-identifying as a transgender woman during the booking process following her arrest this past spring. Throughout her time in the tank, Hatfield was confined to her cell for about 23 hours every day, and was not allowed to work. As a result, Hatfield was not able to earn money or good time work credits, which could have helped her earn an early release.

The inmates also faced harassment based on their sexuality, including being called “sissies” and “freak shows.”

It’s common for gay and transgender inmates to be separated from the general population as a way to protect them from assaults and harassment, but those inmates are still able to access the same services as non-GBT individuals.

“Imposing harsher penalties just because of who they are is illegal, and it’s unconstitutional,” Melissa Goodman, an attorney with the ACLU of Southern California, told the Los Angeles Times.

The San Bernardino County jail system isn’t the only one failing to provide equal treatment to gender and sexual minorities, particularly trans people.

The Southern Poverty Law Center this year warned Georgia officials that it would face a lawsuit if it continued to deny hormone therapy to transgender inmates.

CeCe McDonald, a trans woman who was sentenced to 41 months in prison after attacking a transphobic person in self defense, recently spoke about the motivation behind the unequal treatment of trans prisoners.

“Of course they’re going to discriminate against me more because I am trans,” she said. “They create policies that they say are there to protect you when they’re really there to exclude you from everyone else and put you into your own little box. That’s what they try to do. They tried to keep me in solitary confinement.”

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

To schedule an interview with contact director of communications Rachel Perrone at rachel@rhrealitycheck.org.

Follow Nina Liss-Schultz on twitter: @NinaLisss

  • http://www.twitter.com/AhContraire AhContraire

    It’s not like everyone is in solitary confinement.

    SODOMY: MEDICALLY DANGEROUS BEHAVIOR?
    Why not have a public dialogue on the medical safety of Sodomy, gay and straight, and ask these two simple medical questions?

    That is, Doesn’t the medical community recommend that you, “Wash your hands after you go to the bathroom.”?

    Yet, now there are some in the medical community that now say it’s OK to “Sleep with the waste that gets flushed down in the toilet?” and that it’s possible to live a perfectly normal life.

    Additional, the same can be said that there are some in the medical community that now say it’s OK to “Lick the toilet bowl” and that it’s also possible to live a perfectly normal life.

    • Nessie

      Drop dead, dolt.

    • Arekushieru

      When you have piv sex, not only is a woman’s vagina close to a man’s urinary tract, but your penis is close to a WOMAN’S urinary tract. ASTONISHING that no one has ever died or been unable to live a perfectly normal life from that, no?

      Also, you have no idea how anal (OR vaginal for that matter) actually works, DO you?

      • fiona64

        Notice how the homophobes are all obsessed with male-on-male anal sex?

        • L-dan

          No kidding. And have never heard of lube…or the fact that heterosexual couples have anal sex all the time without any more problem than piv sex.

          • Nessie

            I can’t be the first person to note how the same people who say “don’t get pregnant if you don’t want a child” are so frequently against anal, oral, and other forms of sexual intercourse which can’t result in fertilization. Of course, it’s no different from them being opposed to birth control, comprehensive sex education, or any other methods proven effective at reducing abortion rates. “Pro-lifers” are hypocrites across the board.

      • http://www.twitter.com/AhContraire AhContraire

        Did you know the male urinary tract is adapted to urine?
        And did you know the female urinary tract is also adapted to urine?
        In other words, the #1 orifice of both the male and female are both used to contact with urine.

        Moreover, in toddler speak, you medical students…

        The orifice where #2 objects are expelled from has a far thinner skin than the orifice where babies come from. The orifice where babies come from also produces secretions to minimize friction and infections during baby making, also known as love making, which is very unlike the previously mentioned orifice.

        That orifice, where #2 objects are expelled from, is meant to have objects pass in one direction only, and pass very infrequently. And certainly not in two directions, in and out. And certainly not at high speed, nor with high repetitions. Yet if this happens, then that ‘thin’ skin has a tendency to tear easily, e.g. micro tears, hence, blood to feces contact, which is a medically dangerous contact.

        And by the way, the orifice where #2 objects are expelled from….was “born that way”, just in case you didn’t know.

        • Jennifer Starr

          Women don’t expel urine from their vaginas.

          • http://www.twitter.com/AhContraire AhContraire

            And your point?

          • tasteless chap

            And yours???

          • P. McCoy

            Closeted religious freak- post in Catholic Answer Forums where your ilk spills out your sex lives and problems endlessly over masturbation with an equally nutter audience. We don’t have time here to indulge your dysfunctionality.

        • tasteless chap

          So, treat people badly because you think their sex is icky.

          Whatever.

          Grow up!

          • http://www.twitter.com/AhContraire AhContraire

            “ICKY”,? You mean medically dangerous? And how does it SMELL?

            Do you think the ICKY SMELL could be used for HOMO THERAPY?
            Worth a try?

          • tasteless chap

            Having a few quacks say that gay sex is medically dangerous doesn’t make it so! Gay sex is not new. It has been around longer than Christianity. Were there any such debilitating consequences, then I’m sure there would be much literature on the topic…..literature NOT provided by anti-gay lunatics!

            So why don’t you and your obsession with gay sex just go back to self-loathing for whatever emotional anguish it is that is making you miserable that you have yet to resolve.

          • http://www.twitter.com/AhContraire AhContraire

            Rep Steve Hickey challenged the local medical community and they were pretty much SILENT.

            Notice how not a single doctor or nurse here is going to say Sodomy is medically safe.

          • tasteless chap

            Despite the lack of cheers for anal sex from the medical community, it’s still been going on for millennia….seemingly without any sort of widespread medical aberration.

            Why don’t you repurpose your lunatic crusade to fight against the global scourge of nose-picking! As it is, you’re just combining your own prejudice with some old wives’ tales to justify your hatred of a group of citizens that only want to live their lives the same as everyone else!

          • http://www.twitter.com/AhContraire AhContraire

            This time it’s called HIV and AIDS…and around 50 to 70% of the cases are gay men, where 35% of them don’t live past the age of 60.

          • Jennifer Starr

            You seem awfully obsessed with fantasizing about it.

          • http://www.twitter.com/AhContraire AhContraire

            First, don’t laugh.

            What do think Lesbians should smell as a HOMO-CURE? Perhaps what an unflushed toilet bowl smells like when licking it? Don’t you think it will be effective in making gay to act straight? This smell therapy versus the medically dangerous “licking the toilet bowl”, HPV and CANCER?

            Seriously.

          • tasteless chap

            This is you being “serious”?? That’s frightening!

          • http://www.twitter.com/AhContraire AhContraire

            If it’s frighting then that “smell” might work better than electro-shock therapy, correct?

            Seriously, it has to have a noticeable effect…the fear affect, otherwise it wouldn’t work. Very similar to like vegetarians and how they gross out at meat, but that’s not natural.

            First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. – Mahatma Gandhi

        • L-dan

          Flagged. Off topic and hateful. Not to mention juvenile. “The orifice where babies come from.” Really? Is Vagina such a horrible word?

          Just in case you don’t know, homosexual and heterosexual couples have been managing to have anal sex for centuries (lube exists, you know) without any more trouble than those engaging in penis-in-vagina intercourse.

          Did you know that penis-in-vagina variety sex contributes to a significant number of urinary tract infections? Does this mean that people should consider the act icky and avoid it out of fear?

          Did you know that your stupid obsession with anal sex being icky has nothing to do with the mistreatment mentioned in the article?

          • Arachne646

            Urinary tract infections so common that it has its own medical term: honeymoon cystitis! The p-i-v thrusting can move external fluids from the vulva into the woman’s urethra, and cause bruising with any prolonged episode of intercourse, so you should urinate afterwards to prevent UTI’s. I learned that hint from experience.

        • Arekushieru

          Didn’t address my point about vaginal and urinary tract cross contamination, of course! Oops.

          • http://www.twitter.com/AhContraire AhContraire

            The Human Body has for thousand of years been able to adapt to vaginal and urinary tract cross contamination.

    • P. McCoy

      Sorry, most gay bi men wash themselves before a lot of sex play; het sex can be unsanitary too, but the real question is unless you’re a victim of male rape, why are YOU obsessed about the sex lives of complete strangers? You religious/ secular antis are a sex obsessed bunch of nutters! Why aren’t you out feeding the hungry? Rather boring than weaving lurid sex lies.

      • http://www.twitter.com/AhContraire AhContraire

        FYI:
        (A) – “Washing AFTER sex with water”

        is not the same as

        (B) – “Washing WITH fecal material during sex”.

        Can you see the difference now?

        • P. McCoy

          Do you understand what soap, washclothes and hand held shower nozzles running with Warm water are used for? All 3 render rectal areas clean!

          You have more fecal matter in your homophobic brain than any Gay or Bi man has in or around his butt- get bent and get lost, bottom feeding closeted TROLL!

  • http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/ Stacey Burns

    A reminder about our policy regarding comments:

    “We embrace and encourage vigorous debate and civil discourse on the site, and we welcome evidence-based comments that represent diverse perspectives, as long as such comments effectively and reasonably engage debate. We reserve the right to delete, without further explanation, comments that misrepresent evidence or promote misinformation, that threaten or demean others, or undermine the civility of discussion. We reserve the right to ban users who repeatedly abuse commenting privileges.”

    Stacey Burns, forum moderator

    • Jennifer Starr

      I understand about deleting comments which violate the TOS, but I think that some comments are being deleted simply because someone flags them, and the person doing the deleting doesn’t actually look at what’s being deleted and whether it is a violation. This has happened to several regular posters here, including Goatini, HeilMary1 Plum Dumpling and Fiona64.

      • http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/ Stacey Burns

        Hi, Jennifer — We’re reviewing individual comments for name-calling, insult-trading, and ad hominem attacks, though it is entirely possibly I mistakenly deleted a comment that should have remained, and for that I apologize. We have banned one user from this site as a result of this particular thread. It is true that comment deletions can make for a jarring reading experience, and I’ll do my best to avoid that.

        • night porter

          One of fiona’s comments was deleted last week, when all she did was reply to me when I told her what Brady had said re moderation, her post was basically; “ah, well that explains it, the MRAs have been flagging our posts so that they will be deleted”

          And her post explaining that…was deleted! I don’t see *how* that could have possibly broken the TOS!

        • Jennifer Starr

          I had a post deleted just last week when an anti-choicer said that some women want to have babies and my response was. ‘No.Really?’ Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think that deletion was deserved. Sarcastic is who I often am, and if you’re telling me that’s going to get me deleted in the future I’d rather not be here. Far be it from me to tell you how to run your own site, but personally I would limit deletions to threats, extreme hate speech and spam.

        • fiona64

          We’re reviewing individual comments for name-calling, insult-trading, and ad hominem attacks

          So, can you tell me why anti-choice posts calling post-abortive women (and even some of us here who have never had an abortion) murderers, sluts, etc., remain?

          I’m keen to know. Is it only when someone “flags” the post? Because we all know that the antis (particularly the invaders from LAN) flag posts with factual information … and that more than 300 of those posts were “accidentally” deleted in bulk last week, according to your own FB page.

          I’m not going to sit quietly by and entertain blatant stupidity and accusations of criminal activity from anti-choicers. Why should I?

    • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

      Your policy regarding comments is benign neglect and occasional hysterical housecleaning. This policy sucks the big badoodie and you are raping our board because, essentially, you do not care about us.
      We would do better if you left us alone and only responded if we call you.
      Note: Some of us are donors. All of us are activists. Show some respect. We do not need you. You need us.

      • http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/ Stacey Burns

        Hi, Plum Dumpling. It’s true: we do need you, and appreciate your contributions.

        However, we’d really like to rein in the name-calling and insult-trading on the site, and have been more proactively removing the comments that violate RH Reality Check’s comment standards.

        • night porter

          Bear in mind, Stacey, that moderation on this site has been pretty lax for years, and that insult trading (in a post with factual information) is in fact something that people have gotten in the habit of – especially when dealing with particularly obstinate and dishonest pro-liars.

          Might I humbly suggest that, instead of going back and deleting every PC comment that might contain a phrase such as ‘you are stupid/ignorant/dumb and here are the FACTS’ – just make sure that the users are well AWARE of the new rules (as you are doing) and then that should clean up the site, vs deleting hundreds of past comments.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            I DO NOT FIND THE SITE DIRTY.
            And if they continue this snooty BS, I WILL BE ONE OF THE THINGS THEY CLEAN RIGHT OUT OF HERE.
            I will really miss you guys.

          • night porter

            Will miss you too Plum. I hope that RHRC does not turn into the mirror of LAN.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            That seems to be where it is going. So sorry. I love you all.

          • night porter

            Love you too.

            And at least we have SPL, and even TFA.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Love you too. Just hoping they listen to us

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Call me please if it gets better. I am bipolar. This infuriating. I will disgrace myself.

          • Jennifer Starr

            I promise I will let you know. All this censorship in the name of ‘civility’ really gets on my wick.

          • night porter

            We have a great community here – built up over years. ER has been here for 6, HM for just as long I imagine. It would be a great shame to drive away longtime supporters over too literal enforcement of the TOS.

          • night porter

            *we* are the community here. Lose us and the only commentariat that RHRC will have will be antis and MRAs

          • expect_resistance

            Yep.

          • night porter
          • expect_resistance

            Thanks.

          • expect_resistance

            I’ll see you at your website too. So it’s not goodbye forever.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            not bye forever. this site might clean up its act. and you know where to find me.

          • expect_resistance

            Me too. I hope it’s not the end.

          • Jennifer Starr

            I’m hoping. We’re regular posters, we bring traffic and donations to this site. Hopefully our opinions count for something.

          • expect_resistance

            Okay, Plum that post made me cry. For real. I love everyone here too.

          • Jennifer Starr

            (((((((hugs))))))))

          • expect_resistance

            Thanks I do need a hug right now. Big hug back at ya.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            We had a long fine time to get to know each other.

          • night porter

            I met you on Rawstory a couple of years ago and followed you to your blog. This was when you had the old format, and no disqus. Liked you from the start.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            That was awhile ago. We are penpals. I like that.

        • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

          How are you going to do that? The Antis come in with insults – egregious insults.
          When you delete their comments, our comments make no sense – we look overblown because the Antis comments cannot be seen.
          WAY TO MAKE US ALL LOOK TRIFLING AND CRAZY.
          WHOSE SIDE ARE YOU ON?
          And you have deleted perfectly acceptable comments – even inspired comments – by regulars. What was that for?
          You can enforce nothing on the Antis. But you sure are pearl clutching US and the whole board to death.
          There is a balance in doing moderation. YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THAT BALANCE IS.
          And you are covering your incompetence by telling us you are doing it for ‘THE GOOD OF EVERYONE.’
          That means, in essence, that you will be making it disappointing to everyone. The internet civility crap does nothing positive and irritates the hell out of everyone.
          NOW STOP LYING ABOUT HOW MUCH YOU CARE AND HOW CIVILIZED YOU ARE. It is disgusting. Trust women.

          • expect_resistance

            Well said Plum! Do not fix us we are not broken.

        • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

          You are a liar. If you valued my contributions, you would not be making this a place I cannot participate in anymore.

        • expect_resistance

          Why now are you trying to “rein in the name calling and insult-trading?” Like night porter said for years the site has been pretty lax at moderating. Why the change all of a sudden? I think as a member of this community for years I deserve an answer. We deserve an answer.

          • http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/ Stacey Burns

            Let me ask you this: do you think that the cogent arguments and fruitful discussions that take place on this site are enhanced by vicious name-calling?

            We take the position that all debate and comments can be productive as long as they remain civil, and would like to maintain a welcoming atmosphere.

          • night porter

            Isn’t ‘vicious name calling’ bit of an overstatement, though?

            The problem we face is that anti-choicers frequently *refuse* to argue in good faith. The regulars here do get frustrated. There are only so many times that you can present them with factual evidence, and each and every time they tell you that YOU are the idiot. People do lose their cool, and accuse the antis of being purposefully obtuse, dumb and so on. Now, I will admit that accusing people of being ‘dumbfucks’ and so on is over the top, and recently we have all reined that in, however, I would not go so far as to say that calling someone an idiot out of exasperation after you have 1) repeatedly presented them with factual information 2) they are clearly not at all interested in arguing in good faith is exactly out of line.

            And of course, we have fought fire with fire. You have no doubt seen some of the more obtsude, misogynists come here and accuse us of being baby hating sloots.

          • expect_resistance

            I agree “vicious name calling” is a little over the top.

          • L-dan

            I try to avoid the vicious name calling, but I’ll be annoyed if censorship extends to cursing in general.

          • night porter

            yeah. I mean, I see no problem with cleaning things up a little – in fact, it makes our side look better if we are calm, cool and collected.

            *However*, I think that bending over backwards to lick the butt of a hateful misogynist is going too far, especially one who is NOT interested in arguing in good faith and just wants to troll.

          • expect_resistance

            Some articles here contain “curse” words. Are RH mods going to ban that too? It just seems a bit ridiculous.

          • expect_resistance

            I think sometimes you need to get a little hostility and name calling out of the way. I think people can only rant off stupid crap for so long and then they start talking and engaging in a discussion. One of the antis who posted here and got banned, was starting to have a more civil discussion and we actually found some common ground. But that won’t happen with babysitting moderation. We survived for years without this kind of moderation from RH. We are adults and used to getting attacked from antis.

            Most often we are engaging in cogent arguments and civil discussion until we get attacked by and MRA or extreme anti. Amongst the regulars we are most certainly civil.

            Who are you bending over backwards to have a “welcoming atmosphere to?” The antis? Back in the day when they would delete comments of an anti the mod would say, “We are an unapologetically pro-choice website.” I won’t apologize for giving the antis hell. Most of us don’t say anything more “extreme” or “unwelcoming than Amanda Marcotte, and some of the other writers that use “foul” language and “four letter words” in their posts. Will you ban them too? Seems like you want us to “play nice” with the antis. I can’t do that. I won’t be nice to an oppressor. Seems like RH moderation wants to play oppressor too. I never thought I would get this lecture from a moderator here. I don’t feel welcome here anymore.

          • fiona64

            When someone’s opening gambit is to call me and my friends murderers, sluts and “tramps who need to keep their legs shut,” am I supposed to sit quietly by? Really?

            When someone posts absolute bollocks and tries to call it science, am I to sit quietly by?

            And am I to never get angry at answering the same questions over and over and over again?

            As one of my friends is wont to say, “There is a time when you have to call a spade a f***ing shovel.”

          • night porter

            Can’t upvote this nearly enough.

            Yes, you must make this a welcoming place to the people who would dehumanize you and argue in bad faith.

          • expect_resistance

            Yes yes yes! how can we remain silent? One of my favorite quotes is, “Your silence will not protect you” by Audre Lorde.

            Maybe the mods want us to be more “civil” to appear more “mainstream” or whatever. I don’t know. Maybe we should start our own site? We have the community here and we could take it on the road. Just a thought.

        • Unicorn Farm

          I’m going to add my voice to this conversation as well.

          I don’t comment as regularly as many of the posters who have been speaking to you here, nor have I been commenting for as many years. However, I have been reading this site daily- literally every day unless there is no internet access- since I was about seventeen years old, so a little more than a decade. I also read a host of others, including anti’s sites.

          It was by reading the articles on this site and reading the comments- especially the debates- that really helped form my views on reproductive justice from a young age. I learned how to formulate arguments and practice my own. I’d say that my penchant for debating reproductive rights was one of the reasons I picked law as a career. I’m certain there are other young women and men out there reading these boards who are forming opinions and developing arguments that they will apply in their every day lives and interactions with others. I would HATE to have that taken away from them. I’m a lawyer now, and I’ve been trying to contribute some of my legal perspective on reproductive justice issues both on this website and in my personal/professional life. I’d like to think that those contributions are valued. I’ll echo the others’ sentiments: Who are you trying to welcome?

          I recognize that I can get exasperated and insulting when I’m bombarded by the constant, mind-numbing stupidity of anti-choicers who come onto this board to troll, not discuss in good faith. Yeah, I can get testy when trying to talk to people who a) are literally working to take away my rights to my OWN BODY and believe I am not a full person BECAUSE I AM A WOMAN and b) who are so beneath me in logical reasoning ability that it’s like talking to navel lint. Maybe that sounds snotty, but frankly I don’t care.

          The bottom line is that you can’t expect me to bend over and play nice *all times* to some anti or some MRA who crawls onto this page to call me a slutty babykiller or any other such hate speech.

          • expect_resistance

            Completely agree. I appreciate the perspective you bring to the discussion. And “who” are they trying to welcome here?

          • night porter

            Amen.

    • night porter

      Factual pro choice comments are routinely deleted. This heavy handed, random deletion is killing the board. And deleting every comment made by anti choicers simply turns RHRC into a boring echo chamber.

      • Jennifer Starr

        And deleting every comment made by anti choicers simply turns RHRC into a boring echo chamber.

        That’s another point. I have seen comments by anti-choicers deleted when they do not violate the Terms of Service. And while I disagree with their viewpoints, I want to continue to debate with them. But lately their comments are gone before you even get to have any sort of discussion. If this site was just an echo-chamber I wouldn’t be here.

        • night porter

          Exactly. What I have adored about RHRC is the comment policy – people were, in the past, allowed to debate freely. I don’t want this to turn into the PC version of LAN, god no. That would ruin the site.

        • L-dan

          Yep. I’d like the off-topic rants killed. “the word abortion is used in this article, so it’s obviously time to have a frothing argument about why abortion is murder!” gets really old and degenerates to “you suck, no you suck more!”

          But running at least tangential to the topic? Those debates really built my own arsenal of facts and opinions, and I’d hope they continue to do that for new readers or casual visitors.

          Mr. ‘poooooopsex’ here is the former, derailing a conversation about treatment of inmates with “but they’re gross!” is a complete non-sequiter. I’m sad Disqus did away with the downvote to hide posts feature. You could still see them…or ignore them if they didn’t add to the debate.

    • fiona64

      comments that misrepresent evidence or promote misinformation,

      Anti-choice comments that do just that are remaining while pro-choice, fact-based rebuttals are being deleted.

      That’s pretty ridiculous on a reproductive justice website.

      • expect_resistance

        Yes, very ridiculous! I agree 100%

    • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

      Okay guys, I am out of here.
      We asked for better moderation and we got the Church Lady.
      No apology for mistreating us.
      This fool has no idea what happens on a reproductive justice board.
      And she is still wiping Antis comments so our comments do not make sense.
      IT SUCKS HERE NOW.
      Anybody wants to talk to me, you know where my blog is. And I will be posting on Secular ProLife blog and Crooks and Liars.
      LET ME KNOW IF THESE FOOLS CLEAN UP THEIR CENSORSHIP ACT.

      • expect_resistance

        I agree Plum.

    • expect_resistance

      Stacey – I’ve been posting here for about six years. I’m very disappointed with this new policy. I’ve met really incredible pro-choice friends here, Plum Dumpling, HeilMary, Fiona, Jennifer, Lady Black, Purrtiarchy, Arekushieru, goatini, etc. The commenters here are part of the community and now your are driving us away with these new authoritarian rules. I’m sorry but your acting the the antis. – e_r.

    • P. McCoy

      I may get dinged discussing my observations on male circumcision, but urologists do stand by it and my sex het active female friends agree on the reasons for their distates for the uncircumcised so I am not just expressing my own view. I hope in light of these facts, consideration will be taken before any deletions are made. Thank you.

      • Unicorn Farm

        No, you’re just body shaming. “Distaste for the uncircumcised?” Replace “uncircumcised” with “fat” or “disabled” and see how that feels.
        It’s one thing to talk about the medical pros and cons to circumcision, or whether its a violation of bodily autonomy, but it’s another thing to say that people’s bodies are ugly and unclean and distasteful, which ads nothing to the discussion and serves only to put people down.

        Edit- I don’t think your posts on the subject should be deleted and I promise I’m not trying to prolong this discussion, but I also don’t want to just let body shaming like this go unaddressed.

        • P. McCoy

          I hope you apply this same principle to those who consider male circumcision to be multilation, which HAS to be more “shaming” to the circumcised than my opinions about the uncircumcised.

          Otherwise you are attacking my point of view rather than allowing the ‘agree to disagree’ principle to settle what of course is a controversial issue.

          • Unicorn Farm

            “Otherwise you are attacking my point of view rather than allowing the ‘agree to disagree’ principle to settle what of course is a controversial issue.”
            Dude, no. I don’t CARE if you think uncircumcised penises are “ugly” or dirty, my problem is with you shaming.other.people’s.bodies. And yes, if someone said “dude, I’d never touch your mutilated penis! Eww!” I would call them out.
            I am not prohibiting an “agree to disagree” on a controversial issue. We are not discussing a “controversial issue.” Calling a penis ugly or dirty or mutilated is not the same thing as discussing the medical merits of circumcision or discussing the ethical question whether it’s mutilation or not (both of which are controversial). You said something rude. You said something shaming. It’s like some guy saying “man, all my bros think that fat chicks are so gross and the folds under their skin stink”, and then pretending he was trying to have a conversation on whether obesity causes health problems.

    • Unicorn Farm

      I’ve been thinking about this a little bit more; specifically, how this comment policy will actually be implemented and if it can be implemented in a meaningful way that curtails the problems that you perceive and preserves open debate.

      “We reserve the right to delete, without further explanation, comments that misrepresent evidence or promote misinformation”
      Almost every pro-life post that is made here promotes misinformation. “Baby” feels pain? Misinformation. BC is an “abortifacient”? Misinformation. Margaret Sanger is racist? Misinformation. Fetuses are persons? Misinformation. How Savita died? Misinformation. Delete them and you’ll have nothing left. What’s the point in that? Other commenters have pointed out the negative consequences of deleting all anti-choice posts, so I won’t reiterate.
      “that threaten or demean others”
      Every post telling me that my life is less valuable than an embryo demeans me as a person. Every post telling me that I must be forced to gestate against my will demeans me as a person. If you delete all these posts, there will be nothing left.
      “or undermine the civility of discussion”
      I rarely, if ever, see an anti-choicer or MRA arguing in good faith on here. Rarely. Instead, we get s*** like Rita Cranberry or whatever she’s calling her self, Max, 5X5, MRA trolls, and Lila Rose’s flying monkeys. None of their discussion is intended to be civil. If you delete all these posts, there will be nothing left.
      So if you don’t delete all these posts, what will you choose to delete, and why? It seems like you’re just going to apply the comment policy in an arbitrary manner, which isn’t cool. My opinion is that everything should stay, as long as it’s not spam, outright abusive or threatening, repeat posting (I’m looking at you, Rita), racist or contains some other slur, or contain only a personal attack on another poster.

      • expect_resistance

        This is so true! Wild applause! Thank you for taking the time to write this.

        • Unicorn Farm

          :D

      • lady_black

        I don’t even WANT to see misleading posts deleted. I want to see them DEBUNKED, thoroughly and properly. People are allowed to be mistaken. As long as it isn’t abusive or threatening, it should remain. Everyone should see the way anti-choicers demean the lives of women.

    • Unicorn Farm

      See, mods? We’ve got MRAs running all over the other threads insulting commenters. And yet, the posts remain.
      Drive away the regulars here and that’s all this website will be.

      • night porter

        Ayup.

        • Unicorn Farm

          I would love to hear Stacey’s answer, too. I just got told to “get stuffed” and called a feminist chauvinist by some tool who wandered over here out of some cave.
          Again, I don’t think that posts like this should be deleted because I believe that people *should* see what MRA trolls actually believe, but come on. Enforce the policy consistently or not at all.

          • night porter

            Yep. I think that people should be able to see the PL propaganda and then see it debunked.

            Otherwise, why have a comment section at all?

          • expect_resistance

            In case you want to have some fun, http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/oct/27/christian-rapper-jackie-hill-perry-comes-out-as-ex/.

            It was posted Monday but there are NRO regulars there (TH_Ph and Nordog) god they are stupid. I’ve never posted at that site before but I’m branching out.

          • fiona64

            Yes. How is it that Paul Elam’s flying monkeys, who do nothing but crap on the floor and spread misogyny (including rape promotion and apologia in the form of phrases like “women hold the pussy pass”), are allowed to post as they wish but if we call someone an idiot, we’re going to be censored?

            I’m keen to know.

      • expect_resistance

        I would love to hear Stacey’s answer on this.

    • expect_resistance

      I just want to add on to what Unicorn Farm said. I highly recommend you read the MRA posts at http://rhrealitycheck.org/ablc/2014/10/27/mens-rights-activists-intent-proving-absolute-worst/.

    • lady_black

      I had a reply to an anti-choicer deleted that accused him of being a rape supporter, which he certainly was for claiming women should be forced to carry pregnancy from rape. Other regular posters have had posts deleted, too. This should be a safe space, so long as TOS aren’t violated, including comments from anti-choicers that we probably disagree with, but aren’t threatening. Everyone should be allowed to see what so-called “pro-lifers” actually believe concerning the lives of women. Please… stop being so ham-handed.