Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Anchorage Women's Shelter Victory

33 replies

KatvonHostileExtremist · 01/10/2019 22:48

A Women's Shelter has won it's case to only allow biological women to sleep overnight in its accommodation. This startling piece of common sense cost the city of Anchorage $100,000 as they had to pay the shelters legal fees. The story is covered by two different factions:

www.christianpost.com/news/christian-homeless-shelter-wont-be-forced-to-place-men-in-womens-area-in-anchorage.html

Verses

www.lgbtqnation.com/2019/10/christian-homeless-shelter-getting-100k-damages-turned-away-trans-woman/

Interesting how the facts get missed out of the second version eh?

OP posts:
KatvonHostileExtremist · 01/10/2019 22:51

Previous thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3477633--Alaska-Faith-based-shelter-fights-to-keep-out-transgender-women

OP posts:
littlbrowndog · 01/10/2019 23:20

Great victory

CoolCarrie · 01/10/2019 23:24

Great news, thank goodness for common sense, JY verdict should be next month, let’s dearly hope common sense and justice prevail there too.

truthisarevolutionaryact · 01/10/2019 23:26

A little bit of good news.
Now, about hospital wards for women all becoming mixed sex..... Sad

TheProdigalKittensReturn · 02/10/2019 00:22

About bloody time!

Weezol · 02/10/2019 01:27

Hallelujah! I hope this ruling is the first of many.

terfsandwich · 02/10/2019 01:51

Wow that article is so duplicitous.

I think both stories missed the fact that the transwoman in question was a violent drunken elephant in the room if I recall correctly.

AnyOldPrion · 02/10/2019 04:56

I see the TRAs are already planning their next assault on the centre that wishes to provide a safe space for homeless women away from drunk, violent men.

Anchorage Women's Shelter Victory
OneEpisode · 02/10/2019 05:51

I came on to post that comment. “It must be possible to find a trans man willing to be homeless for a night and seek shelter there.”
So just role play homeless? Just for one night? I can’t even.

HandsOffMyRights · 02/10/2019 07:05

Great news.

Those posts about "fighting harder" are exactly why we need to keep men out of female only spaces. They are incredulous!

TheProdigalKittensReturn · 02/10/2019 07:17

"We keep having to much respect"

(Turns to the camera like she's on The Office)

For real, do these people live in an alternate universe? Is it opposites day every day there?

KatvonHostileExtremist · 02/10/2019 07:26

terfsandwich I thought that.

TRA's "they turned away a transwoman to die on the cold streets!"

Reality:
"It was a cold Friday night in January when Sherrie Laurie, director of the Hope Center — a Christian homeless shelter in downtown Anchorage, Alaska — was called down to the floor to deal with a disruptive “man in a nightgown” who was “very inebriated, with a big gash down his face.” Laurie recognized the man, whom she had seen in men’s clothing before, she tells me by phone. Though the individual professes a female gender identity, he was over six feet tall and “very large.” And Laurie was in no doubt about his sex.

Laurie explained that it wouldn’t be possible for him to stay the night — he was intoxicated and in clear need of medical attention. She called him a cab to the hospital and paid the fare herself. The individual left on good terms. When he showed up the next day, Laurie explained that check-in wasn’t until 5:45 p.m. (On Saturdays during the day, the Hope Center is staffed by volunteers and therefore is only open only to those who have checked in the night before and have undergone breathalyzers and bag checks.) Again, he left without an issue.

Though the Hope Center serves both men and women during daytime hours, its overnight facilities are reserved for females only. And, then, only women who are sober and who have been determined to be non-threatening. This is owing to the vulnerability of the women the Hope Center serves. They have often come out of “extremely abusive situations,” including sex trafficking and domestic violence. Laurie recalls one time assisting a woman who had been “held captive” and whose captors had “set her backpack on fire and she was burned.” She explains that the Hope Center staff (at night, all female) are often “first responders.” Laurie says that it is “absolutely critical” that this particular service remain single-sex. The women sleep in the same room and may be in various stages of undress. “Somebody may be raped and then come right to our door,” she says.

Laurie later learned that, before being turned away from the Hope Center, the male individual was in a fight at another shelter. Surely she made the right call. But not in the eyes of the Anchorage Equal Rights Commission (AERC), an administrative agency within the municipality of Anchorage.

A week after the incident, the AERC notified Laurie that they were investigating a complaint against the Hope Center on behalf of the individual she sent to the hospital, Jessica Doe. Doe alleged that the Hope Center’s shelter was a public accommodation and had discriminated against Doe on the basis of sex and gender identity. The Hope Center disputes both claims — the shelter is a non-profit, not a public accommodation, and, besides, it did not discriminate against Doe on the basis of gender identity. Indeed, had Doe been a female identifying as a man, there would have been no issue (provided he was also sober and non-aggressive).

“At first I didn’t even think of legal stuff,” Laurie says. “I thought, Oh my, all I have to do is explain this. Because it was so clear.” But the AERC would not back down. In fact, when Laurie’s legal counsel spoke to local media about the Hope Center’s policies, the AERC filed a second discrimination complaint, alleging that these comments, too, were discriminatory. This deterred the Hope Center from making further public comments about the case and, as a result, allowed their reputation to be tarnished.

The Hope Center has served Anchorage’s homeless for 30 years. It first started offering overnight facilities in December 2015, in response to the nation’s drug crisis, which had increased the homeless population. Indeed, it was the city that initially asked the Hope Center to become an overflow shelter in response to this need. Now that same city is attempting to sue it for acting in the best interests of the women it serves. Laurie hopes she can put the incident behind her so that the Hope Center can “continue protecting these women and giving them a safe place to receive the counsel and the love and all the things that they need to get on with their life.” " from an article by Madeleine Kearnes.

So the plan to send a transman wouldn't bother them, as they allow people in on the basis of sex. As long as they are not drunk/ aggressive, no problem 🤷‍♀️

OP posts:
KatvonHostileExtremist · 02/10/2019 07:37

Here is another totally rational TRA response.

Anchorage Women's Shelter Victory
OP posts:
AncientLights · 02/10/2019 07:38

Katvon these 'protesters' clearly haven't read what this is actually about, but no surprise there. Just jump on the bandwagon. One of the comments compares trans people being 'rejected' by crisis shelters to being refused service in a bakery. Obvs impossible to slide a piece of paper between not getting your donut & coffee and not being allowed to sleep close to vulnerable, traumatised women. Idiots.

NewNameGuy · 02/10/2019 07:48

TBF a Male presenting female would be an issue too.

Why does the whole world, women especially, have to change to accommodate this small band

nettie434 · 02/10/2019 07:51

Actually I think the centre has found an acceptable compromise - services for men and women during the day, sober women only overnight.

The contrasting coverage is interesting KatvonHostileExtremist. The transgender person was drunk - so violated the centre’s policy for an overnight stay. Surely their gender expression was irrelevant?

nettie434 · 02/10/2019 07:53

Bother - pressed post too soon. Meant irrelevant in this instance.

Ereshkigal · 02/10/2019 08:26

Glad to hear this.

TheProdigalKittensReturn · 02/10/2019 08:37

The complainant had already been kicked out of another shelter for being violent and disruptive. How incredibly selfish do you have to be to then insist that that violent, disruptive person be allowed to sleep next to the most vulnerable group? Someone whose behavior can't be controlled in an environment with much less vulnerable clients and with men on staff? If the women on staff were harmed in their attempts to control that large, violent male person overnight is the city proposing to cover their medical bills, and therapy bills too if needed? Because if not maybe they should back the fuck off.

Frankly the women's shelter should have been allowed to refuse on that factor alone, risk to their staff. Women who sign up to work overnight in a shelter for sober women are not signing up to the task of managing a large, drunk or high, already known to be aggressive male individual.

Juells · 02/10/2019 08:39

So just role play homeless?
There's an obvious response to that, that'd get me banned (again :( )

Juells · 02/10/2019 08:41

Frankly the women's shelter should have been allowed to refuse on that factor alone, risk to their staff.

I can see why the case went further, though. If the case was based just on that it wouldn't solve the other issue of how shelter workers could deal with male-bodied people demanding entry.

TheProdigalKittensReturn · 02/10/2019 08:45

Like, seriously, quick poll, would you take the job as advertised, managing a group of sober women overnight and taking on responsibility for their safety? Would you still sign up if you knew that a large drunk male person might be added to the mix? What about if with that person added to the mix it was then your responsibility to not only keep yourself safe but keep all the vulnerable women the shelter was designed for safe too?

I'd take job A. I would not take job B or C because I would have no way of guaranteeing either my own safety or that of the women I was responsible for, and the idea of being stuck in that situation overnight in a place so cold that anyone running outside to get away would be in danger of death from hypothermia is horror movie material.

BernardBlacksWineIceLolly · 02/10/2019 09:06

All that time and money spent by the state to force through a policy that would directly harm women Sad

LangCleg · 02/10/2019 09:08

Job A: yes.

Job B or C: no.

nettie434 · 02/10/2019 09:39

Another poster who would take job A but not B or C. And if the centre could not get staff willing to do jobs B or C then it would risk closing.

Also worth noting that it was the AERC who took the case. Surely their job is to balance the risks of the vulnerable women in the centre overnight versus one person who was not compliant with Centre policy?