5/4/13

Fallon Fox responds to Bigots: I don't want to fight people who are scared of me. What Kind of Fight would that be?

Fallon Fox: “I don’t believe that a transgender fighter should have to disclose her personal medical history to other female fighters before they fight. Simply for the reason that the medical community and the scientific community has come to the consensus that post-operative transsexual fighters who have been on hormone replacement therapy and testosterone suppression, when they’re going from male to female, don’t have or haven’t been found to have any physiological advantages over other women. So, why should we have to disclose our personal medical history? There’s a lot of pain involved in having to disclose your post-transgender history, a lot of things that you might not want to disclose… so, I say no, I don’t think that we should have to disclose our information.”



Fallon Fox:“I do believe that it may deter some fighters from fighting me in the future. Some fighters have already said that they would not want to fight me. I think that’s because they’re scared, number one because I’m pretty good and, um, or they might just have a bias or they just might be a hate-filled person who doesn't want to touch me or whatever but, um, I don’t want to fight those people anyways because they’re scared and what kind of fight would that be? I want to fight someone who’s going to come after me aggressively and who wants to fight me and I want a good fight. That’s what I’m looking for in the future.”

I posted this article on the subreddit for MMA. The post has been down voted out of sight by bigots who claim there are no studies substantiating the claims by the trans community HRT levels the playing field for Male to female transgender athletes.

Ironically one of the commenter's said 'everyone' should read those reddit comments. He said that before I posted these studies. I wonder if he still wants 'everyone' to read it.

The bigots said "show me studies."

**You want actual studies? You got actual studies.**

>The Executive Board (EB) of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) confirmed the need to set up clear rules to determine the eligibility of female athletes with hyperandrogenism in female competitions, starting with the Olympic Games in London next year.

The IOC issued this press release IOC addresses eligibility of female athletes with hyperandrogenism

*hyperandrogenism* is a condition that produces abnormally high levels of testosterone in a cisgender woman resulting in what could be construed as 'unfair advantages". This condition is also associated with a transgender woman who has not undergone medical surgery and/or hormone replacement therapy(HRT).

>The International Olympic Committee (IOC) published the Stockholm Consensus Statement in 2003 (Appendix B) produced by a ad hoc (unbiased) committee. The requirement for transgender athletes to participate in the Olympics is that they have had "surgical anatomical change and hormone treatment for two years" as Fallon Fox has done.

AndNCAA policy the and studies supporting trans inclusive athletes

Yes you are a bigot is you summarily dismiss a transgender athlete claiming she has an 'unfair advantage' while purposefully ignoring scientific studies. That is an act based in bigotry.



Jones says she's going to win.

Not impressed with the transphobic announcer gleefully intentionally misgendering Fallon. Jones doesn't have the problem the idiot announcer has with understanding Fallon is a woman. Fallon, this sort of shit still happens to me at work after being their for two years if that's any consolation.







The last critical hours for Kickstarter "ASSIGNED SEX" and it's down to the wire.

ASSIGNED SEX: A DOCUMENTARY FILM by Shaun Dawson a Kickstarter documentary film, has JUST hours to go on kick Starter. As of this morning the movie needs just a few bucks to reach the $5000 goal and only a few hours left.

I am supporting this project because it will help to illuminate our wonderful transgender intercity youth's lives. You know them. The ones we read about almost daily. The ones being slaughtered by bigots, spawned by ignorance fueled hatred? It's a all or nothing with kick starter and it's all or nothing for these youth. Let them live. Please support!

Why Shaun needs our help:

Up until this point, we've funded this project completely out of our own pockets. We believe in this story that much. But, we've officially broken the bank. We need your help to raise the money necessary to keep the cameras rolling.

Here's exactly what your generous contributions will pay for:

•Sound design, sound editing, and mixing the sound
•Creating the musical score
•Procuring archival footage
•Polishing of the picture elements: color correction, titles
•Transfer to digital projection format
•Marketing and advertising for screenings in select cities
•Press and promotional materials

If you haven't been involved with something like this please give it a try. Those who have will tell you it's such a rush doing this. With your donation you become a integral part of a success when the film shows in your city. You can stand with pride. You will be able to pick us out at a screening. Many of us will be wearing an "assigned tee shirt". I will be. It is immensely rewarding supporting our community this way.





Columbia Journalism Review Slams Plain Dealer and FOX over Trans Womans Cemia Acoff Articles

The CJR headline "How not to report on a transgender victim" is spot on. The Plain Dealer's articles if let uncontested would have drop kicked journalistic standards on reporting transgender issues back twenty years.

Fox8 certainly jumped on that band wagon quick.

Fox8 in this painful exercise of transphobia revictimized Ce Ce by using male pronouns and her birth name despite being fully aware she was a transgender woman who went by the name Cemia.



However, I will have to come to defense of the Plain Dealer on one count. CJR criticized the Plain Dealer for using a mug shot of Ce Ce. I used the same picture on the planetransgender post "Plain Dealer reports the Murder of a Transgender Woman as A "Brutal Slaying" of a Oddly Dressed Man" because at that moment there were none better of her. I posted her mug shot because I wanted her murderers caught. As bad as that picture was it was all I had. I have since updated that post with a better photo of her.

I'm not implying the Plain Dealer had good intentions posting those mug shots only that they may not have had any options ether. The Plain Dealer has not updated their picture.

The rest of the CJR critique is on target particularly these paragraphs about the last article:

The second story, “Brutal slaying marks the end of Clevelander’s fight for acceptance,” at first seems like it might be better. Except that story, too, starts by identifying her as Carl, which means her fight is far from over. This is ironic, because at the end of the story an italicized note says, “This story has been edited since originally posted to bring it within the style recommended by the Associated Press involving transgender people.” I don’t know what the original said, but I do know what the AP Stylebook says, which is this:

Transgender: Use the pronoun preferred by the individuals who have acquired the physical characteristics of the opposite sex or present themselves in a way that does not correspond with their sex at birth. If that preference is not expressed, use the pronoun consistent with the way the individuals live publicly.

Instead, the story drops all pronouns and refers to Cemia as Carl, which seems like a half-hearted effort to be consistent with the AP’s recommendations.

Thankfully these article will not be accepted as status Que. They were mean spirited, hateful, malicious attacks on transgender people. Thank you Columbia Journalism Review for making this clear.





5/3/13

Coroner Report: Trans Woman Kayla Moore Od'd while being restrained By Berkeley Police


Source Berkeleyside.com "Kayla Moore died because of “acute combined drug intoxication,” according to the Alameda County Coroner’s report released today. The coroner ruled the death accidental. The 41-year old Moore stopped breathing while being taken into police custody for mental evaluation on Feb. 12 at the Gaia Building on Allston Way. She was pronounced dead at 1:34 a.m. on Feb. 13 at Alta Bates Hospital."

"The autopsy of Moore revealed 0.74 mg/L of methamphetamine and 0.34 mg/L of codeine in a blood sample, levels the coroner described as “toxic.” Additionally, the coroner identified cardiomegaly (enlarged heart) and morbid obesity. Moore weighed 347 pounds."


Many believe her death could have been avoided and in reality wasn't accidental at all. Many believe the police were pressuring the Coroners office trying to influence or delay the report. If they were, they succeeded.

A Coroners report usually only takes weeks but in extraordinary cases can take up to 6 months. It depends on the circumstances surrounding the death. It took nearly four months to produce this report precipitating numerous protests, vigils and a militant march culminating with loud protestations at the May 1st Council meeting. Did Kayla's advocates speed up the Police in depth report and the coroners report that were released just two days latter? Or was that just coincidence?





The police could have at least reached out to Kayla's family in the interim. That simple action probably would have squelched the angriest of the voices and eased the family's minds.

Read more at Berkeleyside.com



Jenny's Bridal Boutique Bigot Refuses To Let Transgender Woman Try On Wedding Gowns

Rohit Singh a transgender woman from Saskatoon was out excitedly shopping for that one perfect dress to wear on her special day and happened into Jenny's Bridal Boutique.

When she found one she wanted to try on she and her fiance were mortified when the shop's owner, Jenny Correia refused to serve her saying "....sorry we don't allow men to wear dresses here," Singh recalled to CBC News. "I said I'm not a man, I'm transgender."

When contacted Thursday by CBC News, the bridal shop owner, who declined to provide her surname, said she stands by her decision.

"To me it doesn't matter," the owner said. "He looked like a man. There was quite a few brides in the store. If you see a man trying on dresses, you're going to feel uncomfortable."

"Singh later found a red gown at My Lynh Bridal, on Idylwyld Drive North, where she described the service as excellent. Singh's marriage took place on Monday."

Krysten Hildebrand from Saskatoon posted this insightful comment by Rohit Singh's mother in law in the Jenny's Bridals google reviews: "I'm more than happy to share this, A friend of mine wrote this...."
"You may or may not know that my son was very recently married to a wonderful person, who is transgender. The reason I am sharing this is that she and my son were visiting bridal shops so she could try on dresses. At one of the shops, Jenny's Bridal Boutique (downtown on 2nd Avenue), she was not allowed to try on any of the gowns by the owner (Jenny).

I was so incensed when my son told me this I called the owner. I managed to stay calm but asked why she wouldn't serve my son's fiancee. She replied that she only serves female customers, that it is her business and she can set the rules.

I asked her she should become informed about transgender people, told her I feel this is a human rights issue (though not illegal), that she had made a wonderful young person feel bad, and that furthermore she would lose business from all the bad publicity that will follow because I work in a large organization, that I have two sisters at the U of S, and we will spread the word, so that's what I'm doing.

Even if she had been the least ashamed or apologetic, it might have been better, but she wasn't. So I am asking you to spread the word about this incident and please boycott her business--she deserves it! Oh, and the good news, my son's fiancee bought a stunning red gown at My Lynh's on Idylwyld--My Lynh is a sweetheart, has beautiful reasonably-priced dresses and is a skilled seamstress-- and was very good to her.
click here to watch video in new window 
This isn't the only instance of alleged discrimination. It has also been reported in the reviews Jenny Correia and her her staff told a woman in a wheel chair to leave because she was 'marking up the floor'. Another occasion a staff member sneered at a shopper and directed her without prompting to the discount rack making her feel about a inch high.


5/2/13

Is Blue Cross Trying To Deny SRS to a California Resident? Devil in the details



The following comment were posted on on reddit  by a reader regarding this picture.  I am not a expert on this and offer this comment for discussion..

*******

I believe that letter is intentionally trying to mislead you, by understating your rights under CA DMHC Letter 12-K[1].


I'm beginning the process of asserting my rights to medically necessary transition care. I'm posting my research and strategy, in the hopes that it may inspire others to seek the full range of care their insurers are obligated to provide.

First, let's hit the low-hanging fruit: SRS coverage. Blue Shield implies this will be excluded:

"... coverage for medical services related to gender transition will not be denied if coverage is available for those services when not related to gender transition."

Letter 12-K explicitly states SRS cannot be excluded:

Examples of EOC language that is inconsistent with the Knox-Keene Act (...) are those that seek to exclude coverage of "(1) transsexual surgery" and/or (2) "transgender or gender dysphoria conditions".

transgenderlawcenter.org's FAQ[2] on Letter 12-K agrees with this analysis:

What will be covered? Who decides?

The DMHC Director’s Letter states that medically necessary transition-related surgery and other care must be covered by health care insurance sold in California. However, if a claim is denied, what constitutes medically necessary care for a particular individual will be determined through the independent medical review process.

Now that we've established the right to SRS, let's explore what other transition-related care they can no longer deny us. To do this, let's first look at another section of Letter 12-K:

Required Action by Health Plans

1) Ensure that individuals are not denied access to medically necessary care because of the individual's gender, gender identity, or gender expression;

(...)

3) Revise all current health plan documents to remove benefit and coverage exclusions and limitations related to gender transition services;

If you add these two together, you get a very strong case that it's illegal to deny medically necessary transition services. I wish this part had zero ambiguity, but it becomes clear as day as each of us defeats insurance companies that seek to deny us this care.

Next, we consult WPATH's Medical Necessity Statement[3], for a broad list of medically necessary services:

"Medically necessary sex reassignment procedures also include complete hysterectomy, bilateral mastectomy, chest reconstruction or augmentation as appropriate to each patient (including breast prostheses if necessary), genital reconstruction (by various techniques which must be appropriate to each patient, including, for example, skin flap hair removal, penile and testicular prostheses, as necessary), facial hair removal, and certain facial plastic reconstruction as appropriate to the patient.

"Non-genital surgical procedures are routinely performed... notably, subcutaneous mastectomy in female-to-male transsexuals, and facial feminization surgery, and/or breast augmentation in male-to-female transsexuals. These surgical interventions are often of greater practical significance in the patient's daily life than reconstruction of the genitals."


"Furthermore, not every patient will have a medical need for identical procedures; clinically appropriate treatments must be determined on an individualized basis with the patient's physician."


So, the singular expert board lists a ton of services as medically necessary, and gives our physicians room to expand upon what's medically necessary for each individual, with different needs. We've already established Letter 12-K all but says medically necessary transition-related care must not be denied. Therefor, it follows that this class of care must be covered.


So, what if your insurance company pulls a Blue Shield, and still seeks to deny you care? Transgender Law Center has the answer:

What if I am denied coverage for my transition-related care?

If a patient is denied coverage, they should contact the DMHC Department of Managed Health Care’s Help Center at 1-888-466-2219 / www.HealthHelp.ca.gov

If you are covered by a PPO it is likely regulated by the Department of Insurance. Their helpline can be reached at 800-927-HELP / www.insurance.ca.gov/contact-us/

Patients should also contact Transgender Law Center’s helpline for assistance with the IMR process at 415.865.0176 x306 / www.transgenderlawcenter.org

The commenter continued explaining her plan:
I'm using all this as a basis to fight for my right to facial hair removal, which is in WPATH's medically necessary care list. More low hanging fruit. Kaiser Permanente claims this still isn't covered. They lie. I'm going to obtain advice from my Dr on how best to get this service, get it done, and then litigate reimbursement as outlined by the Transgender Law Center. Upon success, I'll post here, detailing how others can attempt to replicate my success, for this and all other medically necessary transition care.

No power in the verse can stop me. All the same, please wish me luck.

[1] Letter 12-K: http://transgenderlawcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/DMHC-Director-Letter-re-Gender-NonDiscrimination-Requirements.pdf

[2] Transgender Law Center's Letter 12-K FAQ: http://transgenderlawcenter.org/archives/4273

[3] WPATH's Medical Necessity Statement: http://www.wpath.org/medical_necessity_statement.cfm